Department of Hemato-oncology, National Cancer Institute and Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia.
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2013 Nov;68 Suppl 3:iii17-iii24. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkt391.
Timing of treatment for invasive fungal disease (IFD) is critical for making appropriate clinical decisions. Historically, many centres have treated at-risk patients prior to disease detection to try to prevent fungal colonization or in response to antibiotic-resistant fever. Many studies have indicated that a diagnostic-driven approach, using radiological tests and biomarkers to guide treatment decisions, may be a more clinically relevant and cost-effective approach. The Invasive Fungal Infections Cooperative Group of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) defined host clinical and mycological criteria for proven, probable and possible classes of IFD, to aid diagnosis. However, some patients at risk of IFD do not meet EORTC/MSG criteria and have been termed Groups B (patients with persistent unexplained febrile neutropenia) and C (patients with non-definitive signs of IFD) in a study by Maertens et al. (Haematologica 2012; 97: 325-7). Consequently, we considered the most appropriate triggers (clinical or radiological signs or biomarkers) for treatment of all patient groups, especially the unclassified B and C groups, based on our clinical experience. For Group C patients, additional diagnostic testing is recommended before a decision to treat, including repeat galactomannan tests, radiological scans and analysis of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. Triggers for stopping antifungal treatment were considered to include resolution of all clinical signs and symptoms. For Group B patients, it was concluded that better definition of risk factors predisposing patients to fungal infection and the use of more sensitive diagnostic tests are required to aid treatment decisions and improve clinical outcomes.
治疗侵袭性真菌病 (IFD) 的时机对于做出适当的临床决策至关重要。历史上,许多中心在疾病检测前就对高危患者进行治疗,以试图预防真菌定植或对抗生素耐药性发热。许多研究表明,采用放射学检查和生物标志物来指导治疗决策的诊断驱动方法可能是一种更具临床相关性和成本效益的方法。欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织/霉菌病研究组(EORTC/MSG)侵袭性真菌感染合作组定义了宿主临床和真菌学标准,用于辅助诊断确诊、可能和疑似侵袭性真菌病类别。然而,一些有 IFD 风险的患者不符合 EORTC/MSG 标准,在 Maertens 等人的研究中被归为 B 组(持续不明原因发热性中性粒细胞减少症患者)和 C 组(无明确 IFD 征象的患者)。因此,我们根据临床经验,考虑了所有患者群体(尤其是未分类的 B 组和 C 组)最适当的治疗触发因素(临床或放射学征象或生物标志物)。对于 C 组患者,建议在决定治疗前进行额外的诊断性检查,包括重复半乳甘露聚糖检测、放射学扫描和支气管肺泡灌洗液分析。停止抗真菌治疗的触发因素被认为包括所有临床症状和体征的缓解。对于 B 组患者,结论是需要更好地定义使患者易感染真菌的危险因素,并使用更敏感的诊断测试,以辅助治疗决策并改善临床结局。