Next Article in Journal
T-2 Toxin Induces Apoptotic Cell Death and Protective Autophagy in Mouse Microglia BV2 Cells
Previous Article in Journal
The Fungal Protein Mes1 Is Required for Morphogenesis and Virulence in the Dimorphic Phytopathogen Ustilago maydis
Previous Article in Special Issue
Fatal Breakthrough Candidemia in an Immunocompromised Patient in Kuwait Due to Candida auris Exhibiting Reduced Susceptibility to Echinocandins and Carrying a Novel Mutation in Hotspot-1 of FKS1
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Invasive Fungal Infections 2021

1
Department of Microbiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi 110029, India
2
Department of Hematology, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, 20123 Rome, Italy
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Fungi 2022, 8(8), 760; https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8080760
Submission received: 18 July 2022 / Accepted: 19 July 2022 / Published: 22 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Invasive Fungal Infections 2021)
Invasive fungal infections (IFIs) represent a significant problem in a large proportion of immunocompromised individuals and critically ill patients. Over the past four decades, IFIs, such as invasive aspergillosis (IA), invasive mucormycosis, invasive candidiasis and invasive cryptococcosis, have assumed greater significance, primarily because of the increased number of patients subjected to severe immunosuppression [1]. The list of opportunistic fungi causing serious, life-threatening infection increases every year and now include yeasts other than Candida species, hyaline molds and the pigmented or phaeoid fungi. The prevalence of IFIs in transplant and hematological malignancy patients is around 8% [2]. In ICU settings, IFIs are reported to be caused by yeasts (<2%) more often than filamentous fungi (<0.5%) [3].
Because of the costs involved, there exists great disparity in the world regarding available diagnostic tests. Microscopy and cultures correlated with clinical data can aid in forming IFI diagnosis in most situations [4]. Additionally, there are constant improvements being made in diagnostics, including the detection of several biomarkers from non-invasive samples. However, it is an area that needs to be researched further as there are many existing challenges, including sample collection from patients with debilitating conditions, subclinical presentation, microscopy and culture finding correlation, time to diagnosis and cost effectiveness. A delay or misdiagnosis can impede prompt initiation of antifungal therapy, which then can lead to poor outcomes.
There are many international guidelines for IFI diagnosis (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) 2008 and 2020 [5,6]; AspICU criteria [7] for clinically suspected IA in ICUs) and treatment (Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and European Society for Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases and European Confederation of Medical Mycology (ESCMID/ECMM)) [8,9,10,11]. Their role has yet to be regularly assessed for all patient groups.
Antifungal prophylaxis or empirical therapy is often practiced. However, breakthrough IFIs have been noticed in those receiving prolonged antifungal prophylaxis, such as echinocandins in hematopoietic cell transplantation [12] and posaconazole in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients [13]. Thus, the application of prophylactic antifungals should be reviewed with the local epidemiology data to avoid any increase in acquired resistance. Additionally, there are noted interactions between azoles and the new neoplastic drugs, which should also be taken in account [14].
For invasive candidiasis, the treatment guidelines include recommendations on antifungal duration, intravascular catheters, infective foci (deep/metastatic) investigations and the correlation of clinical and microbiological outcomes [8]. The drugs of choice are echinocandins, with few exceptions [15]. However, for C. auris, combinational therapies should be explored further as this, being a nosocomial pathogen, is more difficult to treat. Overall, there has been reported resistance to fluconazole, but generally, candidemia isolates are sensitive to echinocandins and amphotericin B [8,15].
For invasive aspergillosis, the current IDSA treatment guidelines detail antifungal ancillary treatments and also the duration of treatments [10]. Voriconazole is considered as the drug of choice for primary therapy in IA (especially with cases of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis), whereas L-AMB, caspofungin and posaconazole are to be preferably used as the salvage therapy drugs. Mostly, drug resistance has been reported with azoles (itraconazole, voriconazole and posaconazole), especially in Aspergillus fumigatus, and is said to be mostly linked with increased environmental exposure to azole fungicides [16,17,18].
For Cryptococcosis, the main clinical life-threatening presentations are cryptococcal meningoencephalitis and disseminated disease; the drugs of choice are described in detail in a different set of patients based on the host factors, and the durations of therapies are also defined [19,20]. Amphotericin B (and its lipid formulations) with flucytosine is indicated as induction therapy in HIV-infected individuals, organ transplant recipients and non-HIV, non-transplant patients, with differences in dosage and duration. The maintenance and consolidation therapy is fluconazole. However, for patients with CD4 count >100 cells/µL and undetectable viral load for >3 months, a minimum of 1 year of antifungal therapy is recommended [9]. There has been resistance reported in C. neoformans var grubii strain to fluconazole [21]. However, overall, they are susceptible to new triazoles, mainly voriconazole, posaconazole and isavuconazole [19,20,21].
Invasive mucormycosis is another dangerously disseminated infection, with the most common presentation being rhino-orbital [20]. Diagnosis is extremely important in cases of mixed infections. Antifungal treatment strategies are generally associated with surgical debridement for these cases. The focus is on the roles of amphotericin B formulations, posaconazole, combination therapies and newer therapeutic approaches with isavuconazole. Identification to the genus/species level is important since Cuninghamella, Absidia and Rhizopus oryzae may be drug-resistant both in vitro and in vivo [11,22].
To summarize, there are multiple considerations that underscore the importance of understanding both the epidemiology and resistance profile of these isolates from IFI cases. They are mostly present in immunocompromised patients where treatment modalities have to be improved on the basis of an individual patient’s conditions. It is alarming as there is a significantly very high mortality rate (40–100%) associated with IFIs. There is an increasing rate of resistance to antifungal drugs for each kind of IFI, which makes treatment success even harder to achieve. In our view, the role of antifungal agents in successful IFI treatment has to be further substantiated with the incidence of drug resistance in different patient groups.
This Special Issue focuses on the latest research in IFIs with Hanai Y et al., 2021, highlighting that voriconazole trough concentrations of ≥1.0 μg/mL significantly decrease the all-cause mortality rate in adults with IFIs and Dabas Y et al., 2022, presenting a comprehensive picture with the shift in IFI epidemiology and also raising the concern of high MICs to azoles. We thank all the authors who have contributed to the Special Issue, which we are sure will be beneficial to the readership of the journal.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the authors and reviewers for their contribution to this important topic.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Pagano, L.; Busca, A.; Candoni, A.; Cattaneo, C.; Cesaro, S.; Fanci, R.; Nadali, G.; Potenza, L.; Russo, D.; Tumbarello, M.; et al. Risk stratification for invasive fungal infections in patients with hematological malignancies: SEIFEM recommendations. Blood Rev. 2017, 31, 17–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Pagano, L.; Caira, M.; Candoni, A.; Offidani, M.; Fianchi, L.; Martino, B.; Pastore, D.; Picardi, M.; Bonini, A.; Chierichini, A.; et al. The epidemiology of fungal infections in patients with hematologic malignancies: The SEIFEM-2004 study. Haematologica 2006, 91, 1068–1075. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  3. Montagna, M.T.; Caggiano, G.; Lovero, G.; De Giglio, O.; Coretti, C.; Cuna, T.; Iatta, R.; Giglio, M.; Dalfino, L.; Bruno, F.; et al. Epidemiology of invasive fungal infections in the intensive care unit: Results of a multicenter Italian survey (AURORA Project). Infection 2013, 41, 645–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Terrero-Salcedo, D.; Powers-Fletcher, M.V. Updates in laboratory diagnostics for invasive fungal infections. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2020, 58, e01487-19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. De Pauw, B.; Walsh, T.J.; Donnelly, J.P.; Stevens, D.A.; Edwards, J.E.; Calandra, T.; Pappas, P.G.; Maertens, J.; Lortholary, O.; Kauffman, C.A.; et al. Revised definitions of invasive fungal disease from the European organization for research and treatment of cancer/invasive fungal infections cooperative group and the national institute of allergy and infectious diseases mycoses study group (EORTC/MSG) consensus group. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2008, 46, 1813–1821. [Google Scholar]
  6. Donnelly, J.P.; Chen, S.C.; Kauffman, C.A.; Steinbach, W.J.; Baddley, J.W.; Verweij, P.E.; Clancy, C.J.; Wingard, J.R.; Lockhart, S.R.; Groll, A.H.; et al. Revision and update of the consensus definitions of invasive fungal disease from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and the Mycoses Study Group Education and Research Consortium. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2020, 71, 1367–1376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Blot, S.I.; Taccone, F.S.; Van den Abeele, A.M.; Bulpa, P.; Meersseman, W.; Brusselaers, N.; Dimopoulos, G.; Paiva, J.A.; Misset, B.; Rello, J.; et al. A clinical algorithm to diagnose invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in critically ill patients. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2012, 186, 56–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Pappas, P.G.; Kauffman, C.A.; Andes, D.R.; Clancy, C.J.; Marr, K.A.; Ostrosky-Zeichner, L.; Reboli, A.C.; Schuster, M.G.; Vazquez, J.A.; Walsh, T.J.; et al. Clinical practice guideline for the management of candidiasis: 2016 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2016, 62, e1–e50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Perfect, J.R.; Dismukes, W.E.; Dromer, F.; Goldman, D.L.; Graybill, J.R.; Hamill, R.J.; Harrison, T.S.; Larsen, R.A.; Lortholary, O.; Nguyen, M.H.; et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of cryptococcal disease: 2010 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2010, 50, 291–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Patterson, T.F.; Thompson III, G.R.; Denning, D.W.; Fishman, J.A.; Hadley, S.; Herbrecht, R.; Kontoyiannis, D.P.; Marr, K.A.; Morrison, V.A.; Nguyen, M.H.; et al. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of aspergillosis: 2016 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2016, 63, e1–e60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Cornely, O.; Arikan-Akdagli, S.E.V.T.A.P.; Dannaoui, E.; Groll, A.H.; Lagrou, K.; Chakrabarti, A.; Lanternier, F.; Pagano, L.I.V.I.O.; Skiada, A.; Akova, M.; et al. ESCMID and ECMM joint clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and management of mucormycosis 2013. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2014, 20, 5–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Epstein, D.J.; Seo, S.K.; Brown, J.M.; Papanicolaou, G.A. Echinocandin prophylaxis in patients undergoing haematopoietic cell transplantation and other treatments for haematological malignancies. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2018, 73 (Suppl. S1), i60–i72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Wasylyshyn, A.; Linder, K.A.; Castillo, C.G.; Zhou, S.; Kauffman, C.A.; Miceli, M.H. Breakthrough invasive fungal infections in patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Mycopathologia 2020, 185, 299–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Lindsay, J.; Teh, B.W.; Micklethwaite, K.; Slavin, M. Azole antifungals and new targeted therapies for hematological malignancy. Curr. Opin. Infect. Dis. 2019, 32, 538–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Tortorano, A.M.; Prigitano, A.; Morroni, G.; Brescini, L.; Barchiesi, F. Candidemia: Evolution of drug resistance and novel therapeutic approaches. Infect. Drug Resist. 2021, 14, 5543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Dabas, Y.; Xess, I.; Bakshi, S.; Mahapatra, M.; Seth, R. Emergence of Azole-Resistant Aspergillus fumigatus from Immunocompromised Hosts in India. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2018, 62, e02264-17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Jeanvoine, A.; Rocchi, S.; Bellanger, A.P.; Reboux, G.; Millon, L. Azole-resistant Aspergillus fumigatus: A global phenomenon originating in the environment? Méd. Mal. Infect. 2020, 50, 389–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Busca, A.; Tortorano, A.M.; Pagano, L. Reviewing the importance and evolution of fungal infections and potential antifungal resistance in haematological patients. J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist. 2015, 3, 237–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Xess, I.; Pandey, M.; Dabas, Y.; Agarwal, R.; Das, S.; Srivastava, P.; Thakur, R.; Sharma, S.; Mani, P.; Biswas, A.; et al. Multilocus sequence typing of clinical isolates of Cryptococcus from India. Mycopathologia 2021, 186, 199–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Dabas, Y.; Xess, I.; Pandey, M.; Ahmed, J.; Sachdev, J.; Iram, A.; Singh, G.; Mahapatra, M.; Seth, R.; Bakhshi, S.; et al. Epidemiology and Antifungal Susceptibility Patterns of Invasive Fungal Infections (IFIs) in India: A Prospective Observational Study. J. Fungi 2021, 8, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Rossi, S.A.; Trevijano-Contador, N.; Scorzoni, L.; Mesa-Arango, A.C.; De Oliveira, H.C.; Werther, K.; de Freitas Raso, T.; Mendes-Giannini, M.J.; Zaragoza, O.; Fusco-Almeida, A.M. Impact of Resistance to Fluconazole on Virulence and Morphological Aspects of Cryptococcus neoformans and Cryptococcus gattii Isolates. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 7, 153. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  22. Cornely, O.A.; Alastruey-Izquierdo, A.; Arenz, D.; Chen, S.C.; Dannaoui, E.; Hochhegger, B.; Hoenigl, M.; Jensen, H.E.; Lagrou, K.; Lewis, R.E.; et al. Global guideline for the diagnosis and management of mucormycosis: An initiative of the European Confederation of Medical Mycology in cooperation with the Mycoses Study Group Education and Research Consortium. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2019, 19, e405–e421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Xess, I.; Pagano, L.; Dabas, Y. Invasive Fungal Infections 2021. J. Fungi 2022, 8, 760. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8080760

AMA Style

Xess I, Pagano L, Dabas Y. Invasive Fungal Infections 2021. Journal of Fungi. 2022; 8(8):760. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8080760

Chicago/Turabian Style

Xess, Immaculata, Livio Pagano, and Yubhisha Dabas. 2022. "Invasive Fungal Infections 2021" Journal of Fungi 8, no. 8: 760. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof8080760

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop