Cargando…

2116. Comparative Effectiveness of Amphotericin B, Azoles, and Echinocandins in the Treatment of Candidemia and Invasive Candidiasis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend the use of echinocandins, amphotericin B or fluconazole for the treatment of invasive candidiasis and candidemia. The objective of our study was to compare these agents through a systematic review of the literature and network meta-analysis of randomized cont...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Demir, Koray K, Butler-Laporte, Guillaume, Lee, Todd C, Cheng, Matthew P
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6808766/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1796
_version_ 1783461815981703168
author Demir, Koray K
Butler-Laporte, Guillaume
Lee, Todd C
Cheng, Matthew P
author_facet Demir, Koray K
Butler-Laporte, Guillaume
Lee, Todd C
Cheng, Matthew P
author_sort Demir, Koray K
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend the use of echinocandins, amphotericin B or fluconazole for the treatment of invasive candidiasis and candidemia. The objective of our study was to compare these agents through a systematic review of the literature and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. METHODS: Three electronic databases (Medline, PubMed, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) were searched from database inception to January 1 2019. Randomized controlled trials that compared triazoles, echinocandins and/or amphotericin B (either in lipid formulation or deoxycholate form) for the treatment of invasive candidiasis or candidemia were included. Among included studies, treatment success was collected as the primary outcome and was assessed by a random effect network meta-analysis using Bayesian estimation methods. A sensitivity analysis was performed for all patients with candidemia. RESULTS: Eleven randomized controlled trials met the study inclusion criteria. Of the 2,475 patients included from these trials, 684 received an echinocandin, 855 received amphotericin B and 936 received a triazole. Echinocandins were associated with the highest rate of treatment success when compared with amphotericin B (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.02–1.93) and the triazoles (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.32–2.51). Similarly, in the pre-specified analysis of candidemic patients, echinocandins were also more effective overall than amphotericin B (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.84–1.87) and triazoles (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.16–2.44). Patients treated with triazoles had a lower rate of treatment success than amphotericin B in the overall (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.60–1.01) and candidemia sensitivity analyses (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56–1.01) Rank probability analysis favored echinocandins as the most effective treatment choice 98% of the time. CONCLUSION: In our meta-analysis comparing treatment strategies for severe Candida infections, the echinocandins had the highest rate of treatment success compared with both amphotericin B and triazoles. Echinocandins should be considered as first-line agents in the treatment of invasive candidiasis and candidemia. Further research is needed to determine the minimum duration of echinocandin treatment prior to using step-down therapy. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6808766
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68087662019-10-28 2116. Comparative Effectiveness of Amphotericin B, Azoles, and Echinocandins in the Treatment of Candidemia and Invasive Candidiasis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis Demir, Koray K Butler-Laporte, Guillaume Lee, Todd C Cheng, Matthew P Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend the use of echinocandins, amphotericin B or fluconazole for the treatment of invasive candidiasis and candidemia. The objective of our study was to compare these agents through a systematic review of the literature and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. METHODS: Three electronic databases (Medline, PubMed, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) were searched from database inception to January 1 2019. Randomized controlled trials that compared triazoles, echinocandins and/or amphotericin B (either in lipid formulation or deoxycholate form) for the treatment of invasive candidiasis or candidemia were included. Among included studies, treatment success was collected as the primary outcome and was assessed by a random effect network meta-analysis using Bayesian estimation methods. A sensitivity analysis was performed for all patients with candidemia. RESULTS: Eleven randomized controlled trials met the study inclusion criteria. Of the 2,475 patients included from these trials, 684 received an echinocandin, 855 received amphotericin B and 936 received a triazole. Echinocandins were associated with the highest rate of treatment success when compared with amphotericin B (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.02–1.93) and the triazoles (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.32–2.51). Similarly, in the pre-specified analysis of candidemic patients, echinocandins were also more effective overall than amphotericin B (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.84–1.87) and triazoles (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.16–2.44). Patients treated with triazoles had a lower rate of treatment success than amphotericin B in the overall (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.60–1.01) and candidemia sensitivity analyses (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56–1.01) Rank probability analysis favored echinocandins as the most effective treatment choice 98% of the time. CONCLUSION: In our meta-analysis comparing treatment strategies for severe Candida infections, the echinocandins had the highest rate of treatment success compared with both amphotericin B and triazoles. Echinocandins should be considered as first-line agents in the treatment of invasive candidiasis and candidemia. Further research is needed to determine the minimum duration of echinocandin treatment prior to using step-down therapy. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6808766/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1796 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Abstracts
Demir, Koray K
Butler-Laporte, Guillaume
Lee, Todd C
Cheng, Matthew P
2116. Comparative Effectiveness of Amphotericin B, Azoles, and Echinocandins in the Treatment of Candidemia and Invasive Candidiasis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
title 2116. Comparative Effectiveness of Amphotericin B, Azoles, and Echinocandins in the Treatment of Candidemia and Invasive Candidiasis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
title_full 2116. Comparative Effectiveness of Amphotericin B, Azoles, and Echinocandins in the Treatment of Candidemia and Invasive Candidiasis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr 2116. Comparative Effectiveness of Amphotericin B, Azoles, and Echinocandins in the Treatment of Candidemia and Invasive Candidiasis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed 2116. Comparative Effectiveness of Amphotericin B, Azoles, and Echinocandins in the Treatment of Candidemia and Invasive Candidiasis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
title_short 2116. Comparative Effectiveness of Amphotericin B, Azoles, and Echinocandins in the Treatment of Candidemia and Invasive Candidiasis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
title_sort 2116. comparative effectiveness of amphotericin b, azoles, and echinocandins in the treatment of candidemia and invasive candidiasis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6808766/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1796
work_keys_str_mv AT demirkorayk 2116comparativeeffectivenessofamphotericinbazolesandechinocandinsinthetreatmentofcandidemiaandinvasivecandidiasisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT butlerlaporteguillaume 2116comparativeeffectivenessofamphotericinbazolesandechinocandinsinthetreatmentofcandidemiaandinvasivecandidiasisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT leetoddc 2116comparativeeffectivenessofamphotericinbazolesandechinocandinsinthetreatmentofcandidemiaandinvasivecandidiasisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT chengmatthewp 2116comparativeeffectivenessofamphotericinbazolesandechinocandinsinthetreatmentofcandidemiaandinvasivecandidiasisasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis