Search

Invasive aspergillosis (IA) is an acute infection affecting patients who are immunocompromised, as a result of receiving chemotherapy for malignancy, or immunosuppressant agents for transplantation or autoimmune disease. Whilst criteria exist to define the probability of infection for clinical trials, there is little evidence in the literature or clinical guidelines on when to change antifungal treatment in patients who are receiving prophylaxis or treatment for IA. To try and address this significant gap, an advisory board of experts was convened to develop criteria for the management of IA for use in designing clinical trials, which could also be used in clinical practice. For primary treatment failure, a change in antifungal therapy should be made: (i) when mycological susceptibility testing identifies an organism from a confirmed site of infection, which is resistant to the antifungal given for primary therapy, or a resistance mutation is identified by molecular testing; (ii) at, or after, 8 days of primary antifungal treatment if there is increasing serum galactomannan, or galactomannan positivity in serum, or bronchoalveolar lavage fluid when the antigen was previously undetectable, or there is sudden clinical deterioration, or a new clearly distinct site of infection is detected; and (iii) at, or after, 15 days of primary antifungal treatment if the patient is clinically stable but with ≥2 serum galactomannan measurements persistently elevated compared with baseline or increasing, or if the original lesions on CT or other imaging, show progression by >25% in size in the context of no apparent change in immune status.

BackgroundInvasive fungal diseases (IFDs) remain important causes of morbidity and mortality. The consensus definitions of the Infectious Diseases Group of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and the Mycoses Study Group have been of immense value to researchers who conduct clinical trials of antifungals, assess diagnostic tests, and undertake epidemiologic studies. However, their utility has not extended beyond patients with cancer or recipients of stem cell or solid organ transplants. With newer diagnostic techniques available, it was clear that an update of these definitions was essential.MethodsTo achieve this, 10 working groups looked closely at imaging, laboratory diagnosis, and special populations at risk of IFD. A final version of the manuscript was agreed upon after the groups' findings were presented at a scientific symposium and after a 3-month period for public comment. There were several rounds of discussion before a final version of the manuscript was approved.ResultsThere is no change in the classifications of "proven," "probable," and "possible" IFD, although the definition of "probable" has been expanded and the scope of the category "possible" has been diminished. The category of proven IFD can apply to any patient, regardless of whether the patient is immunocompromised. The probable and possible categories are proposed for immunocompromised patients only, except for endemic mycoses.ConclusionsThese updated definitions of IFDs should prove applicable in clinical, diagnostic, and epidemiologic research of a broader range of patients at high-risk.

Background This meta-analysis examines the comparative diagnostic performance of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for the diagnosis of Pneumocystis pneumonia (PCP) on different respiratory tract samples, in both human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and non-HIV populations. Methods A total of 55 articles met inclusion criteria, including 11 434 PCR assays on respiratory specimens from 7835 patients at risk of PCP. QUADAS-2 tool indicated low risk of bias across all studies. Using a bivariate and random-effects meta-regression analysis, the diagnostic performance of PCR against the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer–Mycoses Study Group definition of proven PCP was examined. Results Quantitative PCR (qPCR) on bronchoalveolar lavage fluid provided the highest pooled sensitivity of 98.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 96.8%–99.5%), adequate specificity of 89.3% (95% CI, 84.4%–92.7%), negative likelihood ratio (LR−) of 0.014, and positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of 9.19. qPCR on induced sputum provided similarly high sensitivity of 99.0% (95% CI, 94.4%–99.3%) but a reduced specificity of 81.5% (95% CI, 72.1%–88.3%), LR− of 0.024, and LR+ of 5.30. qPCR on upper respiratory tract samples provided lower sensitivity of 89.2% (95% CI, 71.0%–96.5%), high specificity of 90.5% (95% CI, 80.9%–95.5%), LR− of 0.120, and LR+ of 9.34. There was no significant difference in sensitivity and specificity of PCR according to HIV status of patients. Conclusions On deeper respiratory tract specimens, PCR negativity can be used to confidently exclude PCP, but PCR positivity will likely require clinical interpretation to distinguish between colonization and active infection, partially dependent on the strength of the PCR signal (indicative of fungal burden), the specimen type, and patient population tested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This overview of reviews (i.e., an umbrella review) is designed to reappraise the validity of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses related to the performance of Aspergillus PCR tests for the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis in immunocompromised patients. The methodological quality of the SRs was assessed using the AMSTAR-2 checklist; the quality of the evidence (QOE) within each SR was appraised following the GRADE approach. Eight out of 12 SRs were evaluated for qualitative and quantitative assessment. Five SRs evaluated Aspergillus PCR on bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BAL) and three on blood specimens. The eight SRs included 167 overlapping reports (59 evaluating PCR in blood specimens, and 108 in BAL), based on 107 individual primary studies (98 trials with a cohort design, and 19 with a case−control design). In BAL specimens, the mean sensitivity and specificity ranged from 0.57 to 0.91, and from 0.92 to 0.97, respectively (QOE: very low to low). In blood specimens (whole blood or serum), the mean sensitivity ranged from 0.57 to 0.84, and the mean specificity from 0.58 to 0.95 (QOE: low to moderate). Across studies, only a low proportion of AMSTAR-2 critical domains were unmet (1.8%), demonstrating a high quality of methodological assessment. Conclusions. Based on the overall methodological assessment of the reviews included, on average we can have high confidence in the quality of results generated by the SRs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An editorial focuses on two studies regarding the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis (IA) using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) on plasma and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid. It discusses the findings of these studies, emphasizing the improved accuracy of PCR in plasma compared to traditional tests like galactomannan. It also explores the challenges and questions raised by the studies, particularly in the context of the current definitions and classification criteria for IA.

Background Empiric antifungal therapy is considered the standard of care for high-risk neutropenic patients with persistent fever. The impact of a preemptive, diagnostic-driven approach based on galactomannan screening and chest computed tomography scan on demand on survival and on the risk of invasive fungal disease (IFD) during the first weeks of high-risk neutropenia is unknown. Methods Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients were randomly assigned to receive caspofungin empirically (arm A) or preemptively (arm B), while receiving fluconazole 400 mg daily prophylactically. The primary end point of this noninferiority study was overall survival (OS) 42 days after randomization. Results Of 556 patients recruited, 549 were eligible: 275 in arm A and 274 in arm B. Eighty percent of the patients had AML or MDS requiring high-dose chemotherapy, and 93% of them were in the first induction phase. At day 42, the OS was not inferior in arm B (96.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 93.8%–98.3%) when compared with arm A (93.1%; 95% CI, 89.3%–95.5%). The rates of IFDs at day 84 were not significantly different, 7.7% (95% CI, 4.5%–10.8%) in arm B vs 6.6% (95% CI, 3.6%–9.5%) in arm A. The rate of patients who received caspofungin was significantly lower in arm B (27%) than in arm A (63%; P <.001). Conclusions The preemptive antifungal strategy was safe for high-risk neutropenic patients given fluconazole as prophylaxis, halving the number of patients receiving antifungals without excess mortality or IFDs. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT01288378; EudraCT 2010-020814-27. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fungal PCR has undergone considerable standardization and, together with the availability of commercial assays, external quality assessment schemes, and extensive performance validation data, is ready for widespread use for the screening and diagnosis of invasive fungal disease (IFD). Drawing on the experience and knowledge of the leads of the various working parties of the Fungal PCR initiative, this review will address general considerations concerning the use of molecular tests for the diagnosis of IFD, before focusing specifically on the technical and clinical aspects of molecular testing for the main causes of IFD and recent technological developments. For infections caused by Aspergillus, Candida, and Pneumocystis jirovecii, PCR testing is recommended, and combination with serological testing will likely enhance the diagnosis. For other IFD (e.g. mucormycosis), molecular diagnostics represent the only non-classical mycological approach toward diagnoses, and continued performance validation and standardization have improved confidence in such testing. The emergence of antifungal resistance can be diagnosed, in part, through molecular testing. Next-generation sequencing has the potential to significantly improve our understanding of fungal phylogeny, epidemiology, pathogenesis, mycobiome/microbiome, and interactions with the host, while identifying novel and existing mechanisms of antifungal resistance and novel diagnostic/therapeutic targets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Invasive aspergillosis (IA) is an acute infection affecting patients who are immunocompromised, as a result of receiving chemotherapy for malignancy, or immunosuppressant agents for transplantation or autoimmune disease. Whilst criteria exist to define the probability of infection for clinical trials, there is little evidence in the literature or clinical guidelines on when to change antifungal treatment in patients who are receiving prophylaxis or treatment for IA. To try and address this significant gap, an advisory board of experts was convened to develop criteria for the management of IA for use in designing clinical trials, which could also be used in clinical practice. For primary treatment failure, a change in antifungal therapy should be made: (i) when mycological susceptibility testing identifies an organism from a confirmed site of infection, which is resistant to the antifungal given for primary therapy, or a resistance mutation is identified by molecular testing; (ii) at, or after, 8 days of primary antifungal treatment if there is increasing serum galactomannan, or galactomannan positivity in serum, or bronchoalveolar lavage fluid when the antigen was previously undetectable, or there is sudden clinical deterioration, or a new clearly distinct site of infection is detected; and (iii) at, or after, 15 days of primary antifungal treatment if the patient is clinically stable but with ≥2 serum galactomannan measurements persistently elevated compared with baseline or increasing, or if the original lesions on CT or other imaging, show progression by >25% in size in the context of no apparent change in immune status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]