Antifungal use and therapeutic monitoring of plasma concentrations of itraconazole in heart and lung transplantation patients

The Impact of Antifungal Prophylaxis in Lung Transplant Recipients

Rationale: Many lung transplant centers prescribe antifungal medications after transplantation to prevent invasive fungal infections (IFIs); however, the effectiveness of antifungal prophylaxis at reducing the risk of all-cause mortality or IFI has not been established.Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the effect of antifungal prophylaxis on all-cause mortality and IFI in lung transplant patients.Methods: Using administrative claims data, we identified adult patients who underwent lung transplantation between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2018. Propensity score analysis using inverse probability treatment-weighting approach was used to balance the differences in baseline characteristics between those receiving antifungal prophylaxis and those not receiving antifungal prophylaxis. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compare rates of all-cause mortality and IFI in both groups.Results: We identified 662 lung transplant recipients (LTRs) (387 received prophylaxis and 275 did not). All-cause mortality was significantly lower in those receiving antifungal prophylaxis compared with those not receiving antifungal prophylaxis (event rate per 100 person-years, 8.36 vs. 19.49; hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.71; P = 0.003). Patients receiving antifungal prophylaxis had a lower rate of IFI compared with those not receiving prophylaxis (event rate per 100 person-years, 14.94 vs. 22.37; hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-1.05; P = 0.079), but did not reach statistical significance.Conclusions: In this real-world analysis, antifungal prophylaxis in LTRs was associated with reduced all-cause mortality compared with those not receiving antifungal prophylaxis. Rates of IFI were also lower in those receiving prophylaxis, but this was not statistically significant in our primary analysis.

Comparing posaconazole and itraconazole for antifungal prophylaxis in critically ill lung transplant recipients: Efficacy and plasma concentrations

BACKGROUND

Posaconazole and itraconazole are commonly used for systemic antifungal prophylaxis after lung transplantation. The aim of this study on critically ill lung transplant recipients was to assess the rate of adequate plasma concentrations and the frequency of fungal-induced transitions from antifungal prophylaxis to therapy after the administration of either posaconazole or itraconazole for systemic prophylaxis.

METHODS

Critically ill lung transplant recipients with postoperative posaconazole or itraconazole prophylaxis and therapeutic drug monitoring from February 2016 to November 2019 were retrospectively included in the study. Positive fungal cultures or Aspergillus antigen tests resulting in a transition from antifungal prophylaxis to therapy were analyzed from the first day of prophylaxis until 7 days after the last sample for each patient. Adequate plasma concentrations were defined as ≥500 µg/L for itraconazole and ≥700 µg/L for posaconazole.

RESULTS

Two hundred seventy-five samples from 73 patients were included in the analysis. Overall, 60% of the posaconazole and 55% of the itraconazole concentrations were subtherapeutic. Administration of posaconazole suspension resulted significantly (P < .01) more often in subtherapeutic concentrations than tablets (68% vs 10%). Patients treated with posaconazole showed less positive fungal records resulting in a transition from prophylaxis to therapy than patients treated with itraconazole (10% vs 33%, P-value: .029). The detection of a fungal pathogen was not associated with the measured plasma concentrations or the achievement of the target concentrations.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that posaconazole should be used instead of itraconazole for systemic prophylaxis in critically ill lung transplant recipients.

Antifungal prophylaxis in lung transplant recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

No consensus exists regarding optimal strategy for antifungal prophylaxis following lung transplant.

OBJECTIVE

To review data regarding antifungal prophylaxis on the development of fungal infections.

STUDY SELECTION/APPRAISAL

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus for eligible articles through December 10, 2019. Observational or controlled trials published after January 1, 2001, that pertained to the prevention of fungal infections in adult lung recipients were reviewed independently by two reviewers for inclusion.

METHODS

Of 1702 articles screened, 24 were included. Data were pooled using random effects model to evaluate for the primary outcome of fungal infection. Studies were stratified by prophylactic strategy, medication, and duration (short term < 6 months and long term ≥ 6 months).

RESULTS

We found no difference in the odds of fungal infection with universal prophylaxis (49/101) compared to no prophylaxis (36/93) (OR 0.76, CI: 0.03-17.98; I2  = 93%) and preemptive therapy (25/195) compared to universal prophylaxis (35/222) (OR 0.91, CI: 0.06-13.80; I2  = 93%). The cumulative incidence of fungal infections within 12 months was not different with nebulized amphotericin (0.08, CI: 0.04-0.13; I2  = 87%) compared to systemic triazoles (0.07, CI: 0.03-0.11; I2  = 21%) (P = .65). Likewise, duration of prophylaxis did not impact the incidence of fungal infections (short term: 0.11, CI: 0.05-0.17; I2  = 89%; long term: 0.06, CI: 0.03-0.08; I2  = 51%; P = .39).

CONCLUSIONS

We have insufficient evidence to support or exclude a benefit of antifungal prophylaxis.

Antifungal prophylaxis in lung transplant: A survey of United States' transplant centers

BACKGROUND

Antifungal prophylaxis strategies for lung transplant recipients vary without consensus or standard of care. Our current study aims to identify antifungal prophylaxis practices in the United States.

METHODS

From November 29, 2018, to February 15, 2019, we emailed surveys to medical directors of adult lung transplant centers. An alternate physician representative was approached if continued non-response after three survey attempts. Descriptive statistics were used to report findings.

RESULTS

Forty-four of 62 (71.0%) eligible centers responded. All Organ Procurement and Transplantation Networks were represented. Only four (9.1%) centers used pre-transplant prophylaxis for prevention of tracheobronchitis (3 of 4) and invasive fungal disease (4 of 4). Thirty-nine of forty (97.5%) centers used post-transplant prophylaxis: 36 (90.0%) universal and 3 (7.5%) pre-emptive/selective prophylaxis. Most centers used nebulized amphotericin with a systemic agent (26 of 36, 72.2%). Thirty-two of thirty-six (88.9%) centers continued universal prophylaxis beyond the hospital setting. Duration of prophylaxis ranged from the post-transplant hospitalization to lifelong with most centers (25 of 36, 69.4%) discontinuing prophylaxis 6 months or less post-transplant.

CONCLUSION

Most United States' lung transplant centers utilize a universal prophylaxis with nebulized amphotericin and a systemic triazole for 6 months or less post-transplant. Very few centers use pre-transplant antifungal prophylaxis.

Trough concentration of itraconazole and its relationship with efficacy and safety: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives

The optimum trough concentration of itraconazole for clinical response and safty is controversial. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the optimum trough concentration of itraconazole and evaluate its relationship with efficacy and safety.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Clinical-Trials.gov, and three Chinese literature databases (CNKI, WanFang, and CBM). We included observational studies that compared clinical outcomes below or above the trough concentration cut-off value which we set as 0.25, 0.5, and 1.0 mg/L. The efficacy outcomes were rate of successful treatment, rate of prophylaxis failure and invasive fungal infection (IFI)-related mortality. The safety outcomes included incidents of hepatotoxicity and other adverse events.

Results

The study included a total of 29 studies involving 2,346 patients. Our meta-analysis showed that compared with itraconazole trough concentrations (C_trough) of ≥0.25 mg/L, levels of <0.25 mg/L significantly increased the incidence of IFI for prophylaxis (RR =3.279, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.73–6.206). Moreover, the success rate of treatment decreased significantly at a cut-off level of 0.5 mg/L (RR =0.396, 95% CI 0.176–0.889). An itraconazole trough level of 1.0 mg/L was associated with hepatotoxicity and other adverse events in a review of many studies.

Conclusion

An itraconazole trough concentration of 0.25 mg/L should be considered as the lower threshold for prophylaxis, and a target concentration of 0.5 mg/L should be the lower limit for effective treatment. A trough level of 1.0 mg/L is associated with increased hepatotoxicity and other adverse events (using High Performance Liquid Chromatography [HPLC]).

Progress in Definition, Prevention and Treatment of Fungal Infections in Cystic Fibrosis

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a chronic lethal multi-system condition; however, most of the morbidity and mortality is dependent on the status of the respiratory system. Progressive respiratory decline is mediated by chronic infection and inflammation, punctuated by important acute events known as pulmonary exacerbations which can lead to accelerated decline. The main bacterial species causing infections include Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, Haemophilus influenzae and Achromobacter xylosoxidans. In addition to bacteria, fungi are detected in a significant number of patients. The impact of fungal colonization of the airways is still not completely elucidated, but an increasing body of evidence suggests an important role for moulds and yeasts. Although fungal infections are rare, fungi can cause severe pneumonia requiring appropriate targeted treatment. The most common fungi in respiratory samples of patients with CF are Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus terreus and Scedosporium species for filamentous fungi, and yeasts such as Candida albicans and Candida glabrata. Therapeutic strategies depend on the detected fungus and the underlying clinical status of the patient. The antifungal therapy can range from a simple monotherapy up to a combination of three different drugs. Treatment course may be indicated in some patients for two weeks and in others for up to six months, and in rare cases even longer. New antifungal drugs have been developed and are being tested in clinical studies offering the hope of therapeutic alternatives to existing drugs. Identifying relevant risk factors and diagnostic criteria for fungal colonization and infection is crucial to enabling an adequate prevention, diagnosis and treatment.

Comparing Azole Plasma Trough Levels in Lung Transplant Recipients: Percentage of Therapeutic Levels and Intrapatient Variability

BACKGROUND

This study compared therapeutic azole plasma trough levels (APL) of the azole antimycotics itraconazole (ITR), voriconazole (VOR), and posaconazole (POS) in lung transplant recipients and analyzed the influencing factors. In addition, intrapatient variability for each azole was determined.

METHODS

From July 2012 to July 2015, 806 APL of ITR, VOR, posaconazole liquid (POS-Liq), and posaconazole tablets (POS-Tab) were measured in 173 patients of the Munich Lung Transplantation Program. Therapeutic APL were defined as follows: ITR, ≥700 ng/mL; VOR, 1000-5500 ng/mL; and POS, ≥700 ng/mL (prophylaxis) and ≥1000 ng/mL (therapy).

RESULTS

VOR and POS-Tab reached the highest number of therapeutic APL, whereas POS-Liq showed the lowest percentage (therapy: ITR 50%, VOR 70%, POS-Liq 38%, and POS-Tab 82%; prophylaxis: ITR 62%, VOR 85%, POS-Liq 49%, and POS-Tab 76%). Risk factors for subtherapeutic APL of all azoles were the azole dose (ITR, P < 0.001; VOR, P = 0.002; POS-Liq, P = 0.006) and age over 60 years (ITR, P = 0.003; VOR, P = 0.002; POS-Liq, P = 0.039; POS-Tab, P < 0.001). Cystic fibrosis was a significant risk factor for subtherapeutic APL for VOR and POS-Tab (VOR, P = 0.002; POS-Tab, P = 0.005). Double lung transplantation (LTx) was significantly associated with less therapeutic APL for VOR and POS-Liq (VOR, P = 0.030; POS-Liq, P < 0.001). Concomitant therapy with 80 mg pantoprazole led to significantly fewer therapeutic POS APL as compared to 40 mg (POS-Liq, P = 0.015; POS-Tab, P < 0.001). VOR displayed the greatest intrapatient variability (46%), whereas POS-Tab showed the lowest (32%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that VOR and POS-Tab achieve the highest percentage of therapeutic APL in patients with LTx; POS-Tab showed the lowest intrapatient variability. APL are significantly influenced by azole dose, age, cystic fibrosis, type of LTx, and comedication with proton-pump inhibitors. Considering the high number of subtherapeutic APL, therapeutic drug monitoring should be integrated in the post-LTx management.

Complications of invasive mycoses in organ transplant recipients

INTRODUCTION

Opportunistic mycoses remain a significant complication in organ recipients. Areas covered: This review is an evidence-based presentation of current state-of-knowledge and our perspective on recent developments in the field Expert commentary: Invasive fungal infections are associated with reduced allograft and patient survival, increase in healthcare resource utilization, and newly appreciated but largely unrecognized immunologic sequelae, such as immune reconstitution syndrome. Given adverse outcomes associated with established infections, prophylaxis is a widely used strategy for the prevention of these infections. Currently available biomarkers that detect circulating fungal cell wall constituents i.e., galactomannan and 1, 3-β-D-glucan have not proven to be beneficial as screening tools for employing targeted prophylaxis or as diagnostic assays in this patient population. However, subsets of patients at risk for opportunistic fungal infections can be identified based on clinically identifiable characteristics or events. Preventive strategies targeted towards these patients are a rational approach for optimizing outcomes.

Lung transplantation for cystic fibrosis: results, indications, complications, and controversies

Survival in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) has improved dramatically over the past 30 to 40 years, with mean survival now approximately 40 years. Nonetheless, progressive respiratory insufficiency remains the major cause of mortality in CF patients, and lung transplantation (LT) is eventually required. Timing of listing for LT is critical, because up to 25 to 41% of CF patients have died while awaiting LT. Globally, approximately 16.4% of lung transplants are performed in adults with CF. Survival rates for LT recipients with CF are superior to other indications, yet LT is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality (∼50% at 5-year survival rates). Myriad complications of LT include allograft failure (acute or chronic), opportunistic infections, and complications of chronic immunosuppressive medications (including malignancy). Determining which patients are candidates for LT is difficult, and survival benefit remains uncertain. In this review, we discuss when LT should be considered, criteria for identifying candidates, contraindications to LT, results post-LT, and specific complications that may be associated with LT. Infectious complications that may complicate CF (particularly Burkholderia cepacia spp., opportunistic fungi, and nontuberculous mycobacteria) are discussed.

Therapeutic drug monitoring for triazoles: A needs assessment review and recommendations from a Canadian perspective

Invasive fungal infections cause significant morbidity and mortality in patients with concomitant underlying immunosuppressive diseases. The recent addition of new triazoles to the antifungal armamentarium has allowed for extended-spectrum activity and flexibility of administration. Over the years, clinical use has raised concerns about the degree of drug exposure following standard approved drug dosing, questioning the need for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Accordingly, the present guidelines focus on TDM of triazole antifungal agents. A review of the rationale for triazole TDM, the targeted patient populations and available laboratory methods, as well as practical recommendations based on current evidence from an extended literature review are provided in the present document.

Antifungal prophylaxis in pediatric lung transplantation: an international multicenter survey

Fungal infections create a significant risk to pediatric lung transplant recipients. However, no international consensus guidelines exist for fungal infection prevention strategies. It was the aim to describe the current strategies of antifungal prophylaxis in pediatric lung transplant centers. A self-administered, web-based survey on current practices to prevent fungal infection was circulated to centers within the IPLTC. Twenty-one (88%) IPLTC centers participated, predominantly from Europe and the US. More than 50% of respondents perform adult and pediatric lung transplant operations. Twenty-four percent use universal prophylaxis, 28% give prophylaxis to all patients but stratify the antifungal coverage based on pretransplant risk, and 48% target prophylaxis to only the children with CF or pretransplantation fungal colonization. Commonly, centers aim to target Aspergillus and Candida infection. Monotherapy with either voriconazole or inhaled amphotericin B is used in the majority of centers. Institutions utilize prophylactic therapy for variable time periods (40% 3-6 months; 30% ≥12 months). Alternative drugs were prescribed for lack of tolerance, toxicity, or positive surveillance culture. TDM (itraconazole/voriconazole) was used in 86% of centers. The survey revealed a wide range of antifungal prophylaxis strategies as current international practice in pediatric lung transplant recipients.

Dried blood spot analysis suitable for therapeutic drug monitoring of voriconazole, fluconazole, and posaconazole

Invasive aspergillosis and candidemia are important causes of morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised and critically ill patients. The triazoles voriconazole, fluconazole, and posaconazole are widely used for the treatment and prophylaxis of these fungal infections. Due to the variability of the pharmacokinetics of the triazoles among and within individual patients, therapeutic drug monitoring is important for optimizing the efficacy and safety of antifungal treatment. A dried blood spot (DBS) analysis was developed and was clinically validated for voriconazole, fluconazole, and posaconazole in 28 patients. Furthermore, a questionnaire was administered to evaluate the patients' opinions of the sampling method. The DBS analytical method showed linearity over the concentration range measured for all triazoles. Results for accuracy and precision were within accepted ranges; samples were stable at room temperature for at least 12 days; and different hematocrit values and blood spot volumes had no significant influence. The ratio of the drug concentration in DBS samples to that in plasma was 1.0 for voriconazole and fluconazole and 0.9 for posaconazole. Sixty percent of the patients preferred DBS analysis as a sampling method; 15% preferred venous blood sampling; and 25% had no preferred method. There was significantly less perception of pain with the DBS sampling method (P = 0.021). In conclusion, DBS analysis is a reliable alternative to venous blood sampling and can be used for therapeutic drug monitoring of voriconazole, fluconazole, and posaconazole. Patients were satisfied with DBS sampling and had less pain than with venous sampling. Most patients preferred DBS sampling to venous blood sampling.