Cargando…

591. Comparison of Fluconazole to Other Antifungal Agents in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND: Invasive fungal infections (IFI) are adverse complications of allogeneic and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) with significant mortality and morbidity. Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) have addressed the optimal anti-fungal prophylaxis regimen. However, the con...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cheng, Ce, Chineke, Iloabueke, McBride, Ali, Recio-Boiles, Alejandro, Ainapurapu, Lakshmi Saritha, Sun, Chenyu, Vennelaganti, Niharika
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8644891/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofab466.789
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Invasive fungal infections (IFI) are adverse complications of allogeneic and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) with significant mortality and morbidity. Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) have addressed the optimal anti-fungal prophylaxis regimen. However, the consensus for an anti-fungal prophylaxis regimen has remained elusive. Hence, we performed a meta-analysis of currently available RCTs comparing the efficacy of fluconazole vs. other antifungal agents including voriconazole, micafungin, and itraconazole in the endpoint of preventing IFI. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials were retrieved from PubMed, according to our inclusion criteria. The relative risk (RR), hazard risk (HR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. A random effect or fixed-effect model was used to calculate the pooled HR, based on heterogeneity. All statistical analyses were performed using RevMan software and R Core Team, and all p-values were two-tailed, and the significance level was 0.05. RESULTS: Ten RCTs were selected involving 2654 pts. Our results showed fluconazole is statistically inferior to other agents that include voriconazole, micafungin, and itraconazole with regards to the endpoint of a lower incidence of IFI (RR: 1.05; 95%CI: 1.02, 1.08; p=0.0002, I(2)=5%). However, subgroup analysis showed no statistical difference between fluconazole vs. other agents to prevent breakthrough proven IFI (HR: 0.76; 95%CI: 0.47, 1.23; p=0.27, I(2)=0%). Our subgroup analysis further showed that other agent’s group might have a superior role in preventing aspergillus compared with fluconazole (HR: 0.64; 95%CI: 0.44, 0.94; p=0.02, I(2)=0%), but no significant advantages over fluconazole for candidiasis (HR: 0.96; 95%CI: 0.45, 2.07; p=0.92, I(2)=0%). Successful Rate Without Incidence of IFI [Image: see text] Figure 1. Successful Rate Without Incidence of IFI Proven IFI vs. Suspected IFI [Image: see text] Figure 2. Proven IFI vs. Suspected IFI Candidiasis vs. Aspergillus [Image: see text] Figure 3. Candidiasis vs. Aspergillus CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis yield data that suggests fluconazole might be inferior to other agents in preventing IFI in all intent to treat patients undergoing HSCT. However, fluconazole is non-inferior in preventing proven IFI and candidiasis IFI based on our results. Thus, we continue to recommend fluconazole in selected patients who require anti-fungal prophylaxis. More RCTs are needed in the future to demonstrate the drug of choice for anti-fungal prophylaxis and address patient selection characteristics. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures