The Current State of Antifungal Stewardship in Immunocompromised Populations

Antifungal Stewardship in Invasive Fungal Infections, a Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Invasive fungal infections (IFI) are a group of life-threatening diseases associated with significant morbidity, mortality and high healthcare costs. Some modern management programs known as AFS (antifungal stewardship programs) have now been developed. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the different declinations of antifungal stewardship programs (AFPs).

METHODS

Articles were systematically reviewed using the PRISMA checklist 2020. EMBASE and MEDLINE/PubMED were searched using the term "antifungal stewardship" (2012-2022 data) on 2 January 2023. Eligible studies were those that described an AFS and included an intervention, performance evaluation and outcome measures.

RESULTS

A total of 22/796 studies were included. Approximately two-thirds (16) were published between 2018 and 2022. 16 (72.7%) stated a minimal complete AFS team. 12 (54.5%) adopted a non-compulsory AFS approach, 6(27.3%) had an Educational AFS and 4(18.2%) a compulsory AFS. Cost analyses of 12 studies showed a decrease for 7 (31.8%) compared to an increase for 5 (22.7%). In terms of outcomes, 18 studies showed a lower (10;45.5%) or the same (8;36.4%) pre-post intervention mortality rate.

CONCLUSION

AFS programs seem to be related to lower costs and better outcomes and should thus be implemented in tandem with antimicrobial stewardship programs.

Antimicrobial Stewardship Teams in Veterans Affairs and Nonfederal Hospitals in the United States: A National Survey of Antimicrobial Stewardship Practices

In a cross-sectional survey of US acute care hospitals, antimicrobial stewardship programs were present in most Veterans Affairs and nonfederal hospitals but varied in team composition, scope, and impact. Diagnostic stewardship was common across hospitals. Veterans Affairs hospitals had increased reach in outpatient settings. Telestewardship remains an opportunity in all hospital systems.

Antifungal stewardship: the Latin American experience

Antifungal stewardship is a critical component of healthcare management that focuses on optimizing the use of antifungal medications to improve patient outcomes, minimize resistance, and reduce healthcare costs.  In resource-limited settings, the prevalence of fungal infections remains a significant health concern, often exacerbated by factors such as compromised immune systems, inadequate diagnostic capabilities, and limited access to antifungal agents. This paper reviews the current state of antifungal stewardship practices in developing countries, addressing the unique socioeconomic and healthcare landscape.

Using Behavior Change Theory to Identify Drivers and Barriers for Antifungal Treatment Decisions: A Case Study in a Large Teaching Hospital in the East of England, UK

INTRODUCTION

Antifungal stewardship (AFS) programs are recognized to contribute to optimizing antifungal prescribing for treatment and prophylaxis. However, only a small number of such programs are implemented. Consequently, evidence on behavioral drivers and barriers of such programs and learnings from existing successful AFS programs is limited. This study aimed to leverage a large AFS program in the UK and derive learnings from it. The objective was to (a) investigate the impact of the AFS program on prescribing habits, (a) use a Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) based on the COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation for Behavior) to qualitatively identify drivers and barriers for antifungal prescribing behaviors across multiple specialties, and (c) semiquantitatively investigate trends in antifungal prescribing habits over the last 5 years.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews and a semiquantitative online survey were conducted across hematology, intensive care, respiratory, and solid organ transplant clinicians at Cambridge University Hospital. The discussion guide and survey used were developed to identify drivers of prescribing behavior, based on the TDF.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 21/25 clinicians. Qualitative outcomes demonstrated that the AFS program was effective in supporting optimal antifungal prescribing practices. We found seven TDF domains influencing antifungal prescribing decisions-five drivers and two barriers. The key driver was collective decision-making among the multidisciplinary team (MDT) while key barriers were lack of access to certain therapies and fungal diagnostic capabilities. Furthermore, over the last 5 years and across specialties, we observed an increasing tendency for prescribing to focus on more targeted rather than broad-spectrum antifungals.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the basis for linked clinicians' prescribing behaviors for identified drivers and barriers may inform interventions on AFS programs and contribute to consistently improving antifungal prescribing. Collective decision-making among the MDT may be leveraged to improve clinicians' antifungal prescribing. These findings may be generalized across specialty care settings.

Antifungal stewardship: What we need to know

Antimicrobial stewardship refers to a well-coordinated program which promotes the scientific and rational use of antimicrobials, reduces the chances of drug resistance and improves patient outcomes. A comprehensive English language literature search was done across multiple databases (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane) for the period 1990-2022, revealing a large volume of reports of growing resistance to established antifungal therapies, against a backdrop of irrational and unscientific prescriptions. As a result of this, antifungal stewardship, a new kid on the block, has recently garnered attention. This review article is an attempt to summarise the basic concept of stewardship programs, highlighting the dire need to implement the same in the present situation of antifungal resistance and treatment failure.

Antifungal stewardship in solid organ transplantation

BACKGROUND

Antifungal stewardship (AFS) has emerged as an important component of quality in managing invasive fungal infections (IFIs), and cost-benefit calculations suggest regular training in AFS is well worth the effort.

METHODS

This review will discuss the most common IFIs in solid organ transplantation (SOT)-recipients, how to diagnose them, and current recommendations for antifungal treatment and prophylaxis before demonstrating key takeaway points of AFS in this high-risk population.

RESULTS

Effective AFS starts before a patient is admitted for SOT, through education and regular interactions of the interdisciplinary clinical team involved in patient management, considering local factors such as epidemiological data and knowledge of diagnostic options including local turnaround times. Understanding the spectrum of antifungal agents, their efficacy and safety profiles, and pharmacokinetics, as well as duration of therapy is hereby essential. The most frequent IFIs in SOT recipients are caused by Candida species, followed by Aspergillus species, both with increasing resistance rates. Diagnosis of IFI can be challenging due to unspecific clinical presentation and difficult interpretation of microbiological findings and biomarkers. Prophylactic strategies, such as those for invasive aspergillosis in lung transplantation or invasive candidiasis (IC) in certain liver transplant settings, as well as the selection of the appropriate therapeutic agents require detailed knowledge on the pharmacokinetics and drug-drug interactions of antifungals.

CONCLUSIONS

Here in this review, we address what constitutes good AFS in this heterogeneous field of solid organ transplant recipients.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Inappropriate Use of Non-Culture-Based Fungal Assays: Implication for Diagnostic Stewardship

Background

Non-culture-based fungal assays (NCBFAs) have been used increasingly to help diagnose invasive fungal diseases. However, little is known about inappropriate use of NCBFAs. We aimed to investigate inappropriate use of NCBFAs in a tertiary academic hospital.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent testing with beta-D glucan (BDG) between January and March 2018 or with galactomannan antigen (GMA) or cryptococcal antigen (CRAG) between January and June 2018. Testing was deemed appropriate if the clinical presentation was compatible with a fungal infection and there was a predisposing host factor at the time of ordering. We compared patients with appropriate and inappropriate use of NCBFAs using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results

Four hundred seventy patients (BDG, 394; GMA, 138; CRAG, 164) met inclusion criteria and were evaluated. About 80% of NCBFAs were deemed inappropriate. Ordering by transplant medicine physicians, repetitions of the test, the absence of predisposing factors for fungal infections, and the absence of recommendations from infectious diseases consultants were associated with an increased risk of inappropriate NCBFA use.

Conclusions

We found that a large proportion of NCBFAs were deemed inappropriate. There is an opportunity for diagnostic stewardship to reduce avoidable fungal testing among patients at low risk for fungal infection.