Cargando…
2119. Matched-Paired Analysis of Patients Treated for Invasive Mucormycosis—Standard Treatment vs. Posaconazole New Formulations (MoveOn)
BACKGROUND: Current first-line (first) antifungal treatment for invasive mucormycosis (IM) consists of liposomal amphotericin B (AMB). Salvage (SAL) treatment options are limited and often based on posaconazole oral suspension (POSsusp). However, with the approval of posaconazole new formulations (P...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6809098/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1799 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Current first-line (first) antifungal treatment for invasive mucormycosis (IM) consists of liposomal amphotericin B (AMB). Salvage (SAL) treatment options are limited and often based on posaconazole oral suspension (POSsusp). However, with the approval of posaconazole new formulations (POSnew), patients could benefit from improved pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability. Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of POSnew as first-line and SAL treatments for IM. METHODS: We performed a case-matched analysis with proven or probable IM patients from the FungiScope® Registry. 1st-POSnew and 1st-AMB+POSnew cases were matched with 1st-AMB-based treatment controls, and SAL-POSnew cases were matched with SAL-POSsusp controls. Each case was matched with up to three controls based on severity, hematological/oncological malignancy, surgery and/or renal dysfunction. RESULTS: Five patients receiving first-line POSnew alone, 18 receiving first-line POSnew combined with AMB, and 22 receiving salvage POSnew were identified. By day 42, favorable response was reported for 80.0% (n = 4/5) of patients receiving first-line POSnew, for 27.8% (n = 5/18) receiving first-line POSnew plus AMB, and for 50.0% (n = 11/22) receiving salvage POSnew. Day-42 all-cause mortality of patients receiving POSnew was lower compared with mortality in their respective controls (20.0% (n = 1/5) in 1st-POSnew vs. 53.3% (n = 8/15) in 1st-AMB; 33.3% (n = 6/18) in 1st-AMB+POSnew vs. 52.0% (n = 26/50) in 1st-AMB; 0.0% (n = 0/22) in SAL-POSnew vs. 4.4% (n = 2/45) in SAL-POSsusp). CONCLUSION: In the observed patients, POSnew was effective in terms of treatment response and-associated mortality of IM. POSnew may be an alternative for the treatment of IM. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. |
---|