Decision making in antifungal monotherapy versus combination therapy

Multicentre surveillance study on feasibility, safety and efficacy of antifungal combination therapy for proven or probable invasive fungal diseases in haematological patients: the SEIFEM real-life combo study

This multicentre observational study evaluated the feasibility, efficacy and toxicity of antifungal combination therapy (combo) as treatment of proven or probable invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) in patients with haematological malignancies. Between January 2005 and January 2010, 84 cases of IFDs (39 proven and 45 probable) treated with combo were collected in 20 Hematological Italian Centres, in patients who underwent chemotherapy or allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation for haematological diseases. Median age of patients was 34 years (range 1-73) and 37% had less than 18 years. Acute leukaemia was the most common underlying haematological disease (68/84; 81%). The phase of treatment was as follows: first induction in 21/84 (25%), consolidation phase in 18/84 (21%) and reinduction/salvage in 45/84 (54%). The main site of infection was lung with or without other sites. The principal fungal pathogens were as follows: Aspergillus sp. 68 cases (81%), Candida sp. six cases (8%), Zygomycetes four cases (5%) and Fusarium sp. four cases (5%). The most used combo was caspofungin+voriconazole 35/84 (42%), caspofungin + liposomal amphotericin B (L-AmB) 20/84 (24%) and L-AmB+voriconazole 15/84 (18%). The median duration of combo was 19 days (range 3-180). The overall response rate (ORR) was 73% (61/84 responders) without significant differences between the combo regimens. The most important factor that significantly influenced the response was granulocyte (PMN) recovery (P 0.009). Only one patient discontinued therapy (voriconazole-related neurotoxicity) and 22% experienced mild and reversible adverse events (hypokalaemia, ALT/AST increase and creatinine increase). The IFDs-attributable mortality was 17%. This study indicates that combo was both well tolerated and effective in haematological patients. The most used combo regimens were caspofungin + voriconazole (ORR 80%) and caspofungin + L-AmB (ORR 70%). The ORR was 73% and the mortality IFD related was 17%. PMN recovery during combo predicts a favourable outcome.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT00906633.

When and how to cover for fungal infections in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock

Candida species remain the most frequently isolated fungi in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Delayed antifungal therapy in these patients is a recognized risk factor for mortality. However, the diagnosis of invasive candidiasis remains difficult and is frequently delayed. Clinical scores have been proposed to assess the risk of development of invasive candidiasis or candidemia. Laboratory tools for early diagnosis are disappointing or still under development. Triazoles, polyenes, and echinocandins are the key drugs used to treat invasive candidiasis in ICU patients with similar efficacy, but very variable tolerability. The increasing incidence of fluconazole-resistant and susceptible-dose dependent strains and the safety profile of antifungal agents must be taken into account when selecting empiric therapy, frequently leading to the initial use of echinocandins in ICU patients with severe sepsis or septic shock.

Use of Antifungal Combination Therapy: Agents, Order, and Timing

Given the substantial morbidity and mortality related to invasive fungal infections, treatment with a combination of antifungal agents is often considered. A growing body of literature from in vitro studies, animal models, and clinical experience provides data evaluating this approach. This review describes combination antifungal strategies for the management of cryptococcal meningitis, invasive candidiasis, invasive aspergillosis, and rare mold infections. The potential effects that sequencing and timing have on the efficacy of such approaches are discussed, with a focus on recent clinical data in this arena.

Current status of antifungal susceptibility testing methods

Antifungal susceptibility testing is a very dynamic field of medical mycology. Standardization of in vitro susceptibility tests by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and the European Committee for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST), and current availability of reference methods constituted the major remarkable steps in the field. Based on the established minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) breakpoints, it is now possible to determine the susceptibilities of Candida strains to fluconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole, and flucytosine. Moreover, utility of fluconazole antifungal susceptibility tests as an adjunct in optimizing treatment of candidiasis has now been validated. While the MIC breakpoints and clinical significance of susceptibility testing for the remaining fungi and antifungal drugs remain yet unclear, modifications of the available methods as well as other methodologies are being intensively studied to overcome the present drawbacks and limitations. Among the other methods under investigation are Etest, colorimetric microdilution, agar dilution, determination of fungicidal activity, flow cytometry, and ergosterol quantitation. Etest offers the advantage of practical application and favorable agreement rates with the reference methods that are frequently above acceptable limits. However, MIC breakpoints for Etest remain to be evaluated and established. Development of commercially available, standardized colorimetric panels that are based on CLSI method parameters has added more to the antifungal susceptibility testing armamentarium. Flow cytometry, on the other hand, appears to offer rapid susceptibility testing but requires specified equipment and further evaluation for reproducibility and standardization. Ergosterol quantitation is another novel approach, which appears potentially beneficial particularly in discrimination of azole-resistant isolates from heavy trailers. The method is yet investigational and requires to be further studied. Developments in methodology and applications of antifungal susceptibility testing will hopefully provide enhanced utility in clinical guidance of antifungal therapy. However, and particularly in immunosuppressed host, in vitro susceptibility is and will remain only one of several factors that influence clinical outcome.

Combination antifungal therapy: what can and should we expect?

Invasive fungal infections are associated with significant morbidity and mortality among immunocompromised patients. Recent advances in antifungal development have afforded us more pharmacologic compounds to choose from when managing these fungal infections. The role of combination antifungal therapy has been well established for fungal infections such as cryptococcal meningitis. The availability of new antifungals, increased incidence of mould infections and high mortality among certain affected populations, such as hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients, has stimulated interest in the clinical use of combination antifungal therapy. In this paper, we review supporting evidence for the use of combination antifungals in the treatment of cryptococcal meningitis, invasive candidiasis, invasive aspergillosis and zygomycosis. Several controlled clinical trials have demonstrated benefits of combination antifungal approaches for patients with cryptococcal meningitis and invasive candidiasis, but variable effects when using different agents in combination have been reported. Randomized prospective studies of combination antifungal therapy in mould infections are lacking but some series provide supportive evidence for this approach. We also describe limitations of the data and these study designs, including the fact that we still need randomized controlled multicenter studies of combination antifungal therapy for mould infections. Trials in this area should be performed with efficiency and economics in mind, and could potentially use surrogate markers as end points. Therefore, we suggest future investigations of combination antifungal therapy should include a randomized, comparative trial of primary therapy for invasive aspergillosis.