Invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) present an increasing global burden in immunocompromised and other seriously ill populations, including those caused by pathogens which are inherently resistant or ...less susceptible to antifungal drugs. Early diagnosis encompassing accurate detection and identification of the causative agent and of antifungal resistance is critical for optimum patient outcomes. Many molecular-based diagnostic approaches have good clinical utility although interpretation of results should be according to clinical context. Where an IFD is in the differential diagnosis, panfungal PCR assays allow the rapid detection/identification of fungal species directly from clinical specimens with good specificity; sensitivity is also high when hyphae are seen in the specimen including in paraffin-embedded tissue.
PCR assays on blood fractions have good utility in the screening of high risk hematology patients with high negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) of 94 and 70%, respectively, when two positive PCR results are obtained. The standardization, and commercialization of
PCR assays has now enabled direct comparison of results between laboratories with commercial assays also offering the simultaneous detection of common azole resistance mutations.
PCR assays are not as well standardized with the only FDA-approved commercial system (T2Candida) detecting only the five most common species; while the T2Candida outperforms blood culture in patients with candidemia, its role in routine
diagnostics is not well defined. There is growing use of Mucorales-specific PCR assays to detect selected genera in blood fractions. Quantitative real-time
PCRs have replaced microscopy and immunofluorescent stains in many diagnostic laboratories although distinguishing infection may be problematic in non-HIV-infected patients. For species identification of isolates, DNA barcoding with dual loci (ITS and
α) offer optimal accuracy while next generation sequencing (NGS) technologies offer highly discriminatory analysis of genetic diversity including for outbreak investigation and for drug resistance characterization. Advances in molecular technologies will further enhance routine fungal diagnostics.
The incidence of serious fungal infections is increasing rapidly, and yet the rate of new drugs becoming available to treat them is slow. The limited therapeutic armamentarium is a challenge for ...clinicians, because the available drugs are often toxic, expensive, difficult to administer, ineffective or a combination of all four. Given this setting, the emergence of resistance is especially concerning, and a review of the topic is timely. Here we discuss antifungal drug resistance in Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. with reference to the most commonly used first-line antifungal agents - azoles and echinocandins. We review the resistance mechanisms of the leading pathogens, how resistance can be identified in the diagnostic lab and the clinical implications of resistance once detected.
Invasive aspergillosis (IA) in haematology/oncology patients presents as primary infection or breakthrough infection, which can become refractory to antifungal treatment and has a high associated ...mortality. Other emerging patient risk groups include patients in the intensive care setting with severe respiratory viral infections, including COVID‐19. These guidelines present key diagnostic and treatment recommendations in light of advances in knowledge since the previous guidelines in 2014. Culture and histological‐based methods remain central to the diagnosis of IA. There is increasing evidence for the utility of non‐culture methods employing fungal biomarkers in pre‐emptive screening for infection, as well as for IA diagnosis when used in combination. Although azole resistance appears to be uncommon in Australia, susceptibility testing of clinical Aspergillus fumigatus complex isolates is recommended. Voriconazole remains the preferred first‐line antifungal agent for treating primary IA, including for extrapulmonary disease. Recommendations for paediatric treatment broadly follow those for adults. For breakthrough and refractory IA, a change in class of antifungal agent is strongly recommended, and agents under clinical trial may need to be considered. Newer immunological‐based imaging modalities warrant further study, while surveillance for IA and antifungal resistance remain essential to informing the relevance of current treatment recommendations.
Full text
Available for:
FZAB, GIS, IJS, KILJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, SAZU, SBCE, SBMB, UL, UM, UPUK
Summary Background Empirical treatment with antifungal drugs is often used in haematology patients at high risk of invasive aspergillosis. We compared a standard diagnostic strategy (culture and ...histology) with a rapid biomarker-based diagnostic strategy (aspergillus galactomannan and PCR) for directing the use of antifungal treatment in this group of patients. Methods In this open-label, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial, eligible patients were adults undergoing allogeneic stem-cell transplantation or chemotherapy for acute leukaemia, with no history of invasive fungal disease. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated schedule to follow either a standard diagnostic strategy (based on culture and histology) or a biomarker-based diagnostic strategy (aspergillus galactomannan and PCR) to direct treatment with antifungal drugs. Patients, were followed up for 26 weeks or until death. Masking of the use of different diagnostic tests was not possible for patients, treating physicians, or investigators. The primary endpoint was empirical treatment with antifungal drugs in the 26 weeks after enrolment (for the biomarker-based diagnostic strategy, a single postive galactomannan or PCR result was deemed insufficient to confirm invasive aspergillosis, so treatment in this context was classified as empirical). This outcome was assessed by an independent data review committee from which the study allocations were masked. Analyses were by intention to treat and included all enrolled patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrial.gov , number NCT00163722. Findings 240 eligible patients were recruited from six Australian centres between Sept 30, 2005, and Nov 19, 2009. 122 were assigned the standard diagnostic strategy and 118 the biomarker-based diagnostic strategy. 39 patients (32%) in the standard diagnosis group and 18 (15%) in the biomarker diagnosis group received empirical antifungal treatment (difference 17%, 95% CI 4–26; p=0·002). The numbers of patients who had hepatotoxic and nephrotoxic effects did not differ significantly between the standard diagnosis and biomarker diagnosis groups (hepatotoxic effects: 21 17% vs 12 10%, p=0·11; nephrotoxic effects: 52 43% vs 60 51%, p=0·20). Interpretation Use of aspergillus galactomannan and PCR to direct treatment reduced use of empirical antifungal treatment. This approach is an effective strategy for the management of invasive aspergillosis in high-risk haematology patients. Funding Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, Cancer Council New South Wales, Pfizer, Merck, Gilead Sciences.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
The requirement for antifungal susceptibility testing is increasing given the availability of new drugs, increasing populations of individuals at risk for fungal infection, and emerging ...multiresistant fungi. Rapid and accurate fungal identification remains at the forefront of laboratory efforts to guide empiric therapy. Antifungal susceptibility testing methods have greatly improved, but are subject to variation in results between methods. Careful standardization, validation, and extensive training of users is essential to ensure susceptibility results are clinically useful and interpreted appropriately. Interpretive criteria for many drugs and species are still lacking, but this will continue to evolve.
Abstract Background New antifungal agents are required to mitigate against azole-resistant Aspergillus and drug-resistant non-Aspergillus moulds. The novel orotomide, olorofim (F2G, Manchester, UK), ...has potent fungicidal activity against Aspergillus including azole-resistant Aspergillus fumigatus, Lomentospora prolificans and Scedosporium spp. Development of olorofim-specific clinical breakpoints/epidemiological cut-off values requires reliable MIC data. Objectives Determine the in vitro activity of olorofim compared with standard antifungals against mould pathogens at an Australian hospital. Materials and methods Olorofim MICs were determined for 507 clinical mould isolates using the CLSI M38-A3 standard. MICs of amphotericin B, anidulafungin, posaconazole, voriconazole and isavuconazole were obtained using Sensititre™ YeastOne YO10 and AUSNMRCI panels (Thermo-Fisher Scientific). Results A. fumigatus sensu stricto was the commonest species (33.3%) followed by L. prolificans (18.3%), Scedosporium (11.4%) and Fusarium (6%) species. Olorofim modal MICs were ≤0.25 mg/L (MIC90 0.25 mg/L) for all Aspergillus except Aspergillus Section Usti (1 mg/L); MICs for nine azole-resistant/non-wild-type A. fumigatus ranged from 0.008 to 0.125 mg/L. The MIC90 of olorofim for L. prolificans was 0.5 mg/L, 0.25–0.5 mg/L for Scedosporium spp. and 8 mg/L for the F. solani complex but with modal MICs of 0.25 and 0.008 mg/L for F. oxysporum and F. proliferatum complexes, respectively. For Verruconis gallopava (n = 10), the olorofim MIC90 was 0.06 mg/L (voriconazole MIC90 2 mg/L, isavuconazole MICs of 4–>8 mg/L). Olorofim had little activity against other dematiaceous moulds including Exophiala species. Conclusions Olorofim was highly active against Aspergillus spp. including azole-resistant A. fumigatus, L. prolificans, Scedosporium spp. and some Fusarium species with the new finding of potent activity against V. gallopava.
Mucormycosis is an uncommon, yet deadly invasive fungal infection caused by the Mucorales moulds. These pathogens are a WHO-assigned high-priority pathogen group, as mucormycosis incidence is ...increasing, and there is unacceptably high mortality with current antifungal therapies. Current diagnostic methods have inadequate sensitivity and specificity and may have issues with accessibility or turnaround time. Patients with diabetes mellitus and immune compromise are predisposed to infection with these environmental fungi, but COVID-19 has established itself as a new risk factor. Mucorales also cause healthcare-associated outbreaks, and clusters associated with natural disasters have also been identified. Robust epidemiological surveillance into burden of disease, at-risk populations, and emerging pathogens is required. Emerging serological and molecular techniques may offer a faster route to diagnosis, while newly developed antifungal agents show promise in preliminary studies. Equitable access to these emerging diagnostic techniques and antifungal therapies will be key in identifying and treating mucormycosis, as delayed initiation of therapy is associated with higher mortality.
PDF
