Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic antifungal agents for candidemia: a systematic review with network meta-analysis and multicriteria acceptability analyses

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Domingos, Eric L.
Data de Publicação: 2022
Outros Autores: Vilhena, Raquel O., Santos, Josiane M., Fachi, Mariana M., Böger, Beatriz, Adam, Livia M., Tonin, Fernanda, Pontarolo, Roberto
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.21/14716
Resumo: Aim: Invasive candidiasis is the main fungal infection in patients attending health services and is associated with high mortality rates and prolonged hospital stay. We aimed to comparatively evaluate the efficacy and safety of antifungal agents for treating candidemia. Methods: A systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA), the surface under the cumulative ranking analysis (SUCRA), and stochastic multicriteria acceptability analyses (SMAA) were performed (PROSPERO-CRD42020149264). Searches were conducted in PubMed and Scopus (Nov-2021). Randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of oral antifungals (any dose or regimen) on mycological cure, discontinuation rates, and adverse events were included. Results: Overall, 13 trials (n=3,632) were analysed. No significant differences among therapies were found for the efficacy outcomes; however, caspofungin (50-150 mg), rezafungin (200-400mg), and micafungin (100-150 mg) were considered the most promising therapies, leading to higher rates of both clinical and mycological responses (SUCRA overall response over 60%). Fluconazole (400 mg) was rated as the last option for overall response (17%). Rezafungin (200-400mg) and micafungin (100 mg) were associated with lower discontinuation rates (<40%); conventional amphotericin B (0.6-0.7mg/kg) was more likely to be discontinued (OR 0.08 [95% CrI 0.00-0.95] vs. caspofungin 150 mg) and may impair liver function (87%). Conclusion: Echinocandins should be listed as first-line treatments for invasive candidiasis following a priority order of caspofungin and micafungin. Rezafungin, an under-development echinocandin, represents a potential option that should be further investigated. Azoles and liposomal amphotericin B can be used as second-line treatments in cases of fungal resistance or hypersensitivity.
id RCAP_9efdc8a38fa84734bbb5114074e0d024
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.ipl.pt:10400.21/14716
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic antifungal agents for candidemia: a systematic review with network meta-analysis and multicriteria acceptability analysesAntifungal agentsInvasive candidiasisInvasive fungal infectionMeta-analysisSystematic reviewAim: Invasive candidiasis is the main fungal infection in patients attending health services and is associated with high mortality rates and prolonged hospital stay. We aimed to comparatively evaluate the efficacy and safety of antifungal agents for treating candidemia. Methods: A systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA), the surface under the cumulative ranking analysis (SUCRA), and stochastic multicriteria acceptability analyses (SMAA) were performed (PROSPERO-CRD42020149264). Searches were conducted in PubMed and Scopus (Nov-2021). Randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of oral antifungals (any dose or regimen) on mycological cure, discontinuation rates, and adverse events were included. Results: Overall, 13 trials (n=3,632) were analysed. No significant differences among therapies were found for the efficacy outcomes; however, caspofungin (50-150 mg), rezafungin (200-400mg), and micafungin (100-150 mg) were considered the most promising therapies, leading to higher rates of both clinical and mycological responses (SUCRA overall response over 60%). Fluconazole (400 mg) was rated as the last option for overall response (17%). Rezafungin (200-400mg) and micafungin (100 mg) were associated with lower discontinuation rates (<40%); conventional amphotericin B (0.6-0.7mg/kg) was more likely to be discontinued (OR 0.08 [95% CrI 0.00-0.95] vs. caspofungin 150 mg) and may impair liver function (87%). Conclusion: Echinocandins should be listed as first-line treatments for invasive candidiasis following a priority order of caspofungin and micafungin. Rezafungin, an under-development echinocandin, represents a potential option that should be further investigated. Azoles and liposomal amphotericin B can be used as second-line treatments in cases of fungal resistance or hypersensitivity.ElsevierRCIPLDomingos, Eric L.Vilhena, Raquel O.Santos, Josiane M.Fachi, Mariana M.Böger, BeatrizAdam, Livia M.Tonin, FernandaPontarolo, Roberto2022-06-20T14:50:08Z2022-082022-08-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.21/14716engDomingos EL, Vilhena RO, Santos JM, Fachi MM, Böger B, Adam LM, Tonin FS, et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic antifungal agents for candidemia: a systematic review with network meta-analysis and multicriteria acceptability analyses. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2022;60(2):106614.10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2022.106614info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-08-03T10:11:16Zoai:repositorio.ipl.pt:10400.21/14716Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T20:22:28.478409Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic antifungal agents for candidemia: a systematic review with network meta-analysis and multicriteria acceptability analyses
title Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic antifungal agents for candidemia: a systematic review with network meta-analysis and multicriteria acceptability analyses
spellingShingle Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic antifungal agents for candidemia: a systematic review with network meta-analysis and multicriteria acceptability analyses
Domingos, Eric L.
Antifungal agents
Invasive candidiasis
Invasive fungal infection
Meta-analysis
Systematic review
title_short Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic antifungal agents for candidemia: a systematic review with network meta-analysis and multicriteria acceptability analyses
title_full Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic antifungal agents for candidemia: a systematic review with network meta-analysis and multicriteria acceptability analyses
title_fullStr Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic antifungal agents for candidemia: a systematic review with network meta-analysis and multicriteria acceptability analyses
title_full_unstemmed Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic antifungal agents for candidemia: a systematic review with network meta-analysis and multicriteria acceptability analyses
title_sort Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic antifungal agents for candidemia: a systematic review with network meta-analysis and multicriteria acceptability analyses
author Domingos, Eric L.
author_facet Domingos, Eric L.
Vilhena, Raquel O.
Santos, Josiane M.
Fachi, Mariana M.
Böger, Beatriz
Adam, Livia M.
Tonin, Fernanda
Pontarolo, Roberto
author_role author
author2 Vilhena, Raquel O.
Santos, Josiane M.
Fachi, Mariana M.
Böger, Beatriz
Adam, Livia M.
Tonin, Fernanda
Pontarolo, Roberto
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv RCIPL
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Domingos, Eric L.
Vilhena, Raquel O.
Santos, Josiane M.
Fachi, Mariana M.
Böger, Beatriz
Adam, Livia M.
Tonin, Fernanda
Pontarolo, Roberto
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Antifungal agents
Invasive candidiasis
Invasive fungal infection
Meta-analysis
Systematic review
topic Antifungal agents
Invasive candidiasis
Invasive fungal infection
Meta-analysis
Systematic review
description Aim: Invasive candidiasis is the main fungal infection in patients attending health services and is associated with high mortality rates and prolonged hospital stay. We aimed to comparatively evaluate the efficacy and safety of antifungal agents for treating candidemia. Methods: A systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA), the surface under the cumulative ranking analysis (SUCRA), and stochastic multicriteria acceptability analyses (SMAA) were performed (PROSPERO-CRD42020149264). Searches were conducted in PubMed and Scopus (Nov-2021). Randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of oral antifungals (any dose or regimen) on mycological cure, discontinuation rates, and adverse events were included. Results: Overall, 13 trials (n=3,632) were analysed. No significant differences among therapies were found for the efficacy outcomes; however, caspofungin (50-150 mg), rezafungin (200-400mg), and micafungin (100-150 mg) were considered the most promising therapies, leading to higher rates of both clinical and mycological responses (SUCRA overall response over 60%). Fluconazole (400 mg) was rated as the last option for overall response (17%). Rezafungin (200-400mg) and micafungin (100 mg) were associated with lower discontinuation rates (<40%); conventional amphotericin B (0.6-0.7mg/kg) was more likely to be discontinued (OR 0.08 [95% CrI 0.00-0.95] vs. caspofungin 150 mg) and may impair liver function (87%). Conclusion: Echinocandins should be listed as first-line treatments for invasive candidiasis following a priority order of caspofungin and micafungin. Rezafungin, an under-development echinocandin, represents a potential option that should be further investigated. Azoles and liposomal amphotericin B can be used as second-line treatments in cases of fungal resistance or hypersensitivity.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-06-20T14:50:08Z
2022-08
2022-08-01T00:00:00Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10400.21/14716
url http://hdl.handle.net/10400.21/14716
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Domingos EL, Vilhena RO, Santos JM, Fachi MM, Böger B, Adam LM, Tonin FS, et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic antifungal agents for candidemia: a systematic review with network meta-analysis and multicriteria acceptability analyses. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2022;60(2):106614.
10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2022.106614
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799133496776589312