3ème Atelier Thématique en Hématologie (ATHEM) 22 novembre 2013 Dr S. Alfandari Médecin Référent en antibiothérapie et Hygiéniste, CH Tourcoing Infectiologue Consultant, Service des Maladies du sang, CHRU Lille www.infectio-lille.com Antifungal therapy in haematology patients: Empirical or preemptive ?
23
Embed
Antifungal therapy in haematology patients: Empirical or preemptive ?
3ème Atelier Thématique en Hématologie (ATHEM ) 22 novembre 2013. Antifungal therapy in haematology patients: Empirical or preemptive ?. Dr S. Alfandari Médecin Référent en antibiothérapie et Hygiéniste, CH Tourcoing Infectiologue Consultant, Service des Maladies du sang, CHRU Lille - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
3ème Atelier Thématique en Hématologie (ATHEM)22 novembre 2013
Dr S. AlfandariMédecin Référent en antibiothérapie et Hygiéniste, CH TourcoingInfectiologue Consultant, Service des Maladies du sang, CHRU Lillewww.infectio-lille.com
Antifungal therapy in haematology patients:Empirical or preemptive ?
Lectures: Gilead, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer Meetings: Gilead, MSD, Pfizer, Sanofi French ID society administrator:
Haematology patients with mycological evidence of IFI◦ No, that’s targeted treatment
Febrile neutropenia patients◦ Yes, but which patients ?
What treatment are we talking about ?
Standard of care since the 2002 IDSA guidelines Supporting studies ◦ Pizzo et al. AMJ 1982
50 patients with fever & 7 days broad spectrum AB randomized to AB stop/continuing AB/ AB + amphotericin B
Infections: 9/6/2◦ EORTC. AMJ 1989
132 patients with fever & 4 days AB randomized w - w/o AmB 1,5% (n=1) vs 9% IFI (n=6) No significant difference in overall mortality
Empirical antifungal therapy in febrile neutropenia patients
Three large trials: similar results - few events
Pro◦ Early IFI Rx◦ Another step in antimicrobial therapy
Might delay escalation therapy to carbapenems Psychological support: « we DO something » to treat the fever
Con◦Most patients receive unnecessary Rx: no infection/no IFI◦ Adverse events◦ Costs◦ New diagnostic tools allow for early diagnosis
Pro/con empirical AF therapy
Decreasing IFI risk in haematology patients◦ 90’s
17-25% in AML/allograft (Bodey, EJCMID 1992, Guiot CID 1994)◦ 00’s
~10% in AML (Nosary, AJH 2001, Cornely, NEJM 2007) and allograft (Ullmann, NEJM 2007) Including arms without mould-active prophylaxis from randomized trials
◦ 10’s Unfrequent event with generalized mould-active prophylaxis
<5% High antifungal costs◦ ~830000€/year (1M $) in Lille Haematology department◦ ~90% of antiinfectives costs
Why is this a hot issue ?
Empirical◦ Fever driven
Pre-emptive◦ Diagnostic driven
Biomarkers Imaging
◦ Non standardized definition: confusion risk in literature
◦ 41 (30%) with empirical criteria◦ 9 have GM Ag + and receive AF
32 Rx NOT given 10 non febrile episodes with GM Ag + treated Outcome:◦ Overall survival: 81,9%◦ 22 IFD with 3 breakthrough infections
2 non fatal candidemias One autopsy diagnosed zygomycosis (non febrile)
Galactomannan and CT-Based Preemptive Antifungal Therapy
Maertens et al CID 2005; 41:1242–50
403 allo-HSCT, Day-100 fu, randomized to AmB-L 3 mg/kg/d
A- PCR monitoring (n=196)◦ 1x PCR+ or persistent fever >5 d or pulm infiltrate:
B- Empirical antifungal therapy (n=207)◦ Persistent fever >5 d (w ou w/o PCR+) or pulm infiltrate
PCR-Based Preemptive Antifungal Therapy
Hebart et al BMT 2009;43: 553-61
PCR Empirical p
N treated 112 (57.1%) 76 (36.7%) 0.003
N proven/probable IFI 16 17 NS
N death D30 4 (1.5%) 13 (6.3%) 0.015
N total death D100 32 34 NS
Drug: AmB or AmB-L daily / CrCl Empirical arm◦ Fever driven
Pre-emptive arm◦ Pneumonia, shock, skin lesions evocative of IFI, sinusitis,
orbititis, hepatosplenic abscesses, grade 4 mucositis, ◦ Aspergillus colonization, or one GM Ag +
Multiple criteria based Preemptive Antifungal Therapy
Cordonnier et al CID 2009 48:1042–51
Multiple criteria based Preemptive Antifungal Therapy
Empirical (N=150) Preemptive (N=143) P
Fever before ATF (d) 7 13 <.01Duration of fever (d) 18.3 18.3 NSPatients with ATF % 62.7 39.2 <10-4
Days of ATF 7.4 4.5 <.01Survival 97% 95% NSProven/probable IFI 2,7% 9% <0.02
Cordonnier et al CID 2009 48:1042–51
Empirical
Pre-emptive
IFI in Pre-emptive
IFI in Empirical
Cordonnier et al, Clin Infect Dis, 2009; 48: 1042-1051
15 Days Neutropenia
Induction AML
Consolidation AMLor
Auto-HSCT
Multiple criteria based Preemptive Antifungal Therapy
Cordonnier et al CID 2009 48:1042–51
Observational study, 146 AL/auto-HSCT pts◦ 220 neutropenic episodes (NE)◦ Intensive diagnosis work-up if fever > 4d or recurrent fever
3 consecutive daily GM, chest CT, etc…◦ AF if: proven-probable-possible IFI or persistent fever + «
clinical deterioration » AF given: 48 / 159 (30.2%)◦ 84 / 159 (52.8%) if following usual guidelines
IFI Proven/probable: 14% (25% high risk patients)
Clinically driven Preemptive Antifungal Therapy
Girmenia et al., J Clin Oncol, 2010;28:667-74
Data collection 397 HM patients◦ 190 empirical (fever driven)◦ 207”pre-emptive” (imaging or mycology or non specific lab tests)
More probable/proven IFI in pre-emptive arm◦ 23.7 vs 7.4% - p<0.001
Increased IFI mortality in pre-emptive arm◦ 22.5% vs 7.1%
Limits◦ Non interventional, diagnostic work up not standardized,
candida colonization included in preemptive
Observational: Empiric versus “pre-emptive”
Pagano et al Haematologica 2011; 96:1363-70
240 AML/allo-HSCT, open label, randomized study Standard strategy:
Fever => CT scan+/-BAL Empirical AF till results then back to prophylaxis or up to targeted
Biomarker strategy: PCR/GM Ag + (or persistent fever if negative) => CT scan+/-BA Preemptive AF if typical images No AF if atypical or no CT abnormalities