Utility of 1,3 β-d-Glucan Assay for Guidance in Antifungal Stewardship Programs for Oncologic Patients and Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

Progress on nonculture based diagnostic tests for invasive mould infection

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review describes the current status of diagnosing invasive mould disease and Pneumocystis pneumonia using nonconventional diagnostics methods.

RECENT FINDINGS

There has been significant development in the range of nonculture mycological tests. Lateral flow tests (LFTs) for diagnosing aspergillosis complement galactomannan ELISA testing, and LFTs for other fungal diseases are in development. Rapid and low through-put B-D-Glucan assays increase access to testing and there has been significant progress in the standardization/development of molecular tests. Despite this, no single perfect test exists and combining tests (e.g., antigen and molecular testing) is likely required for the optimal diagnosis of most fungal diseases.

SUMMARY

Based on established clinical performance few mycological tests can be used alone for optimal diagnosis of fungal disease (FD) and combining tests, including classical approaches is the preferred route for confirming and excluding disease. Next-generation sequencing will likely play an increasing role in how we diagnose disease, but optimization, standardization and validation of the entire molecular process is needed and we must consider how host biomarkers can stratify risk. Given the burden of FD in low- and medium-income countries, improved access to novel but more so existing diagnostic testing is critical along with simplification of testing processes.

Promoting antifungal stewardship through an antifungal multidisciplinary team in a paediatric and adult tertiary centre in the UK

Background

Invasive fungal infections (IFIs) present significant challenges, especially among immunocompromised patients, with associated high morbidity, mortality and significant economic impact. Diagnostic difficulties and the emergence of antifungal resistance necessitates enhanced antifungal stewardship (AFS) efforts.

Methods

We report outcomes from a review of our multidisciplinary approach to AFS, based in a 1300-bed teaching hospital in the South-West of England. Retrospectively reviewing all adult and paediatric cases over 12 months in 2022, we investigated demographics, diagnosis, antifungal therapy and adherence to AFS advice, including clinical, mycological, financial and teamwork metrics. Data were extracted from our AFS database, supported by pharmacy records.

Results

The AFS multidisciplinary team (MDT) reviewed 111 patients, with 30 day and 1 year mortality of 22.7% and 35.4%, respectively. IFIs classified as proven accounted for 26%, with fungal pathogens identified in 36.3% of cases. Antifungal consumption (by 25.1%) and expenditure (by 59.9%) decreased from 2018 to 2022. The AFS MDT issued 324 recommendations, with a 93% acceptance rate.

Conclusions

Our approach to AFS, centred around a weekly MDT, demonstrated improvements in IFI management, antifungal consumption and cost-efficiency. This single-centre study highlights the value of a comprehensive, collaborative approach to AFS involving experts in mycology, infection, radiology, antifungal therapies and clinical teams. The programme's success in paediatric and adult populations and the near-universal acceptance of its recommendations show its potential as a model for replication. It represents a model for enhancing patient care and AFS practices, with future directions aimed at expanding service reach and the integration of further rapid diagnostic modalities.

The Impact of Antifungal Stewardship on Clinical and Performance Measures: A Global Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) have been proposed as an opportunity to optimize antifungal use. The antifungal resistance is a significant and emerging threat. The literature on antifungal stewardship (AFS) and its influence on performance and clinical outcome measures is scarce. This study aimed to examine global evidence of the impact of AFS on patients and performance measures.

METHODS

The "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses" (PRISMA) was used for the flow of identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion. PubMed and MEDLINE were searched using the term ''antifungal stewardship'' on 15 February 2023. Search terms included antifungal stewardship, antimicrobial stewardship, candida, candidemia, candiduria, and invasive fungal disease. Of the 1366 records, 1304 were removed since they did not describe an antifungal stewardship intervention. Among the 62 full texts assessed, 21 articles were excluded since they were non-interventional studies and did not include the outcome of interest. Thus, 41 articles were eligible for systematic review. Eligible studies were those that described an AFS program and evaluated clinical or performance measures.

RESULTS

Of the 41 included studies, the primary performance measure collected was antifungal consumption (22 of 41), and mortality (22 of 41), followed by length of stay (11 of 41) and cost (9 of 41). Most studies were single-center, quasi-experimental, with varying interventions across studies. The principal finding from most of the studies in this systematic review is a reduction in mortality expressed in different units and the use of antifungal agents (13 studies out of 22 reporting mortality). Antifungal consumption was significantly blunted or reduced following stewardship initiation (10 of 22). Comparing studies was impossible due to a lack of standard units, making conducting a meta-analysis unfeasible, which would be a limitation of our study.

CONCLUSION

It has been shown that AFS interventions may improve antifungal consumption and other performance measures. According to available published studies, antifungal consumption and mortality appear to be the possible performance measures to evaluate the impact of AFS.

Missed Opportunities for Antifungal Stewardship during the COVID-19 Era

Significant increases in antibacterial use were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, subsequent analyses found this increase in antibiotic use to be excessive in comparison with the relatively low rates of bacterial coinfection. Although patients who are critically ill with COVID-19 may be at an increased risk for pulmonary aspergillosis, antifungal use in these populations remained underreported, particularly in later phases of the pandemic. This single-center, population-level cohort analysis compares the monthly use rates of mold-active antifungal drugs in the medical intensive care unit during April 2019-March 2020 (baseline) with those during April 2020-November 2022. The antifungal drugs included in the analysis were liposomal amphotericin B, anidulafungin, isavuconazonium, posaconazole, and voriconazole. We found that during 2020-2022, the usage of antifungal drugs was not significantly different from baseline for all included agents except isavuconazonium, which was used significantly more (p = 0.009). There were no changes in diagnostic modalities between the two time periods. The reported prevalence of and mortality from COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) may have resulted in higher rates of prescribing antifungal drugs for critically ill patients with COVID-19. Antimicrobial stewardship programs should develop and apply tools to facilitate more effective and appropriate antifungal use.

The role of diagnostics-driven antifungal stewardship in the management of invasive fungal infections: a systematic literature review

Antifungal stewardship (AFS) programs are key to optimizing antifungal use and improving outcomes in patients with invasive fungal infections. Our systematic literature review evaluated the impact of diagnostics in AFS programs by assessing performance and clinical measures. Most eligible studies were from Europe and the United States (n = 12/17). Diagnostic approaches included serum β-1–3-D-glucan test (n/N studies, 7/17), galactomannan test (4/17), computed tomography scan (3/17), magnetic resonance (2/17), matrix-assisted laser desorption and ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS; 2/17), polymerase chain reaction (1/17), peptide nucleic acid fluorescent in situ hybridization (PNA-FISH) assay (1/17), and other routine methods (9/17). Time to species identification decreased significantly using MALDI-TOF and PNA-FISH (n = 2). Time to targeted therapy and length of empiric therapy also decreased (n = 3). Antifungal consumption decreased by 11.6%–59.0% (7/13). Cost-savings ranged from 13.5% to 50.6% (5/10). Mortality rate (13/16) and length of stay (6/7) also decreased. No negative impact was reported on patient outcomes. Diagnostics-driven interventions can potentially improve AFS measures (antifungal consumption, cost, mortality, and length of stay); therefore, AFS implementation should be encouraged.

Antifungal drug resistance: an update

The number of antifungal classes is small, and resistance is becoming a much more frequent problem. Much greater emphasis needs to be placed on susceptibility testing and antifungal stewardship. Such efforts demonstrably improve survival and overall clinical outcomes. Positively diagnosing a fungal infection with laboratory markers often allows antibacterial therapy to be stopped (ie, anti-tuberculous therapy in chronic pulmonary aspergillosis or antibiotics other than cotrimoxazole in Pneumocystis pneumonia), contributing to antimicrobial resistance control generally. Non-culture based diagnostics for fungal disease are transformational in terms of sensitivity and speed, but only occasionally identify antifungal resistance.

Improving management and antimicrobial stewardship for bacterial and fungal infections in hospitalized patients with COVID-19

SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2) infection is being one of the most significant challenges of health care systems worldwide. Bacterial and fungal infections in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are uncommon but consumption of antibiotics and antifungals has increased dramatically during the ongoing pandemic resulting in increased selective pressure for global antimicrobial resistance. Nosocomial bacterial superinfections appear to be more frequent than community-acquired coinfections, particularly among patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and those receiving immunosuppressive treatment. Fungal infections associated with COVID-19 might be missed or misdiagnosed. Existing and new antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes can be utilized directly in COVID-19 pandemic and are urgently needed to contain the high rates of misdiagnosis and antimicrobial prescription. The aim of this review is to describe the role of bacterial and fungal infections and possible strategies of AMS to use in daily practice for optimal management of COVID-19.

The Current State of Antifungal Stewardship in Immunocompromised Populations

Inappropriate antifungal use is prevalent and can lead to drug-resistant fungi, expose patients to adverse drug events, and increase healthcare costs. While antimicrobial stewardship programs have traditionally focused on antibiotic use, the need for targeted antifungal stewardship (AFS) intervention has garnered interest in recent years. Despite this, data on AFS in immunocompromised patient populations is limited. This paper will review the current state of AFS in this complex population and explore opportunities for multidisciplinary collaboration.