Prospective trial finds nystatin mouthwash effective prophylaxis for pulmonary invasive fungal infections that originate in the throat of patients with hematologic malignancies

Antifungal Prophylaxis After Lung Transplantation: Where Are We Now?

BACKGROUND

Lung transplantation is an important treatment option for various end-stage lung diseases. However, survival remains limited due to graft rejection and infections. Despite that fungal infections are frequent and carry a bad prognosis, there is currently no consensus on efficacy, optimal drug, route, or duration of antifungal prophylaxis. This narrative review summarizes current strategies for antifungal prophylaxis after lung transplantation.

METHODS

English language articles in Embase, Pubmed, UptoDate, and bibliographies were used to assess the efficacy and safety of available antifungal agents for prophylaxis in adult lung transplant recipients.

RESULTS

Overall, there are limited high-quality data. Universal prophylaxis is more widely used and may be preferable over targeted prophylaxis. Both formulations of inhaled amphotericin B and systemic azoles are effective at reducing fungal infection rates, yet with their own specific advantages and disadvantages. The benefit of combination regimens has yet to be proven. Considering the post-transplant timing of the onset of fungal infections, postoperative prophylaxis during the first postoperative months seems indicated for most patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on existing literature, universal antifungal prophylaxis with inhaled amphotericin B and systemic voriconazole for at least 3-6 mo after lung transplantation may be advisable, with a slight preference for amphotericin B because of its better safety profile.

Primary prophylaxis of invasive fungal infections in patients with haematological malignancies: 2017 update of the recommendations of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society for Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO)

Immunocompromised patients are at high risk of invasive fungal infections (IFI), in particular those with haematological malignancies undergoing remission-induction chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and recipients of allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCT). Despite the development of new treatment options in the past decades, IFI remains a concern due to substantial morbidity and mortality in these patient populations. In addition, the increasing use of new immune modulating drugs in cancer therapy has opened an entirely new spectrum of at risk periods. Since the last edition of antifungal prophylaxis recommendations of the German Society for Haematology and Medical Oncology in 2014, seven clinical trials regarding antifungal prophylaxis in patients with haematological malignancies have been published, comprising 1227 patients. This update assesses the impact of this additional evidence and effective revisions. Our key recommendations are the following: prophylaxis should be performed with posaconazole delayed release tablets during remission induction chemotherapy for AML and MDS (AI). Posaconazole iv can be used when the oral route is contraindicated or not feasible. Intravenous liposomal amphotericin B did not significantly decrease IFI rates in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) patients during induction chemotherapy, and there is poor evidence to recommend it for prophylaxis in these patients (CI). Despite substantial risk of IFI, we cannot provide a stronger recommendation for these patients. There is poor evidence regarding voriconazole prophylaxis in patients with neutropenia (CII). Therapeutic drug monitoring TDM should be performed within 2 to 5 days of initiating voriconazole prophylaxis and should be repeated in case of suspicious adverse events or of dose changes of interacting drugs (BIItu). General TDM during posaconazole prophylaxis is not recommended (CIItu), but may be helpful in cases of clinical failure such as breakthrough IFI for verification of compliance or absorption.