Are Echinocandins Superior in Efficacy to Azoles?

Choice and duration of antifungal prophylaxis and treatment in high-risk haematology patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to summarize available guidelines as well as the emerging evidence for the prevention and treatment of invasive fungal diseases in high-risk haematology patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Primary mould-active prophylaxis is the strategy used in many centres to manage the risk of invasive fungal disease in high-risk haematology patients, and posaconazole remains the antifungal of choice for most of these patients. Data on the use of other antifungals for primary prophylaxis, including isavuconazole, are limited. There is considerable interest in identifying a strategy that would limit the use of mould-active agents to the patients who are the most likely to benefit from them. In this regard, a recent trial demonstrated that the preemptive strategy is noninferior to the empiric strategy. For primary treatment of invasive aspergillosis, two randomized trials found isavuconazole and posaconazole to be noninferior to voriconazole. Isavuconazole does not appear to require therapeutic drug monitoring.

SUMMARY

Prophylaxis and treatment of invasive fungal diseases in high-risk haematology patients is a rapidly evolving field. Critical clinical questions remain unanswered, especially regarding the management of suspected invasive fungal diseases breaking through mould-active prophylaxis, and the duration of antifungal therapy for invasive mould infections.

Comparative effectiveness of amphotericin B, azoles and echinocandins in the treatment of candidemia and invasive candidiasis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND + OBJECTIVES: The echinocandins, amphotericin B preparations, voriconazole and fluconazole are approved for the treatment of invasive candidiasis, though it remains unclear which agent is most effective. In order to answer this question, we performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis of the randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which evaluated these agents in comparison.

METHODS

Four electronic databases were searched from database inception to 8 October 2020. RCTs comparing triazoles, echinocandins or amphotericin B for the treatment of invasive candidiasis or candidemia were included. Random effect Bayesian network meta-analysis methods were used to compare treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs met inclusion criteria. Of the 3528 patients included from these trials, 1531 were randomised to receive an echinocandin, 944 to amphotericin B and 1053 to a triazole. For all forms of invasive candidiasis, echinocandins were associated with the highest rate of treatment success when compared to amphotericin B (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.04-1.92) and the triazoles (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.35-2.51). Rank probability analysis favoured echinocandins as the most effective choice 98% of the time. Overall survival did not significantly differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with invasive candidiasis, echinocandins had the best clinical outcomes and should remain the first-line agents in the treatment of invasive candidiasis.