Comparing the safety and efficacy of voriconazole versus posaconazole in the prevention of invasive fungal infections in high-risk patients with hematological malignancies.

Invasive fungal infection (IFI) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised cancer patients. New triazole-based antifungal agents have been recommended for IFI prophylaxis in these patients. This retrospective study compared the safety and efficacy of voriconazole and posaconazole as prophylaxis in patients with hematological malignancies (HM), who were admitted to The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center between January 2014 and August 2015, and who were started on single antifungal prophylaxis consisting of either voriconazole or posaconazole. A total of 200 patients with hematological malignancy were evaluated, the majority of whom had acute myeloid leukemia (AML) (67%). Baseline characteristics, including malignancy status and neutropenia status, were comparable in the two groups. The duration of prophylaxis was similar in the two groups, with medians of 46 days for voriconazole and 48 days for posaconazole. There was no significant difference in breakthrough IFIs between the two groups (3% vs. 0%, P = 0.25). Adverse events occurred in 65% of the voriconazole group vs. 78% of the posaconazole group (P = 0.08). Symptomatic adverse events were more common for voriconazole than for posaconazole (6% vs. 0%, P = 0.03). Eleven patients discontinued voriconazole and seven patients discontinued posaconazole due to adverse events. All-cause mortality was similar in the two groups. Both agents were effective in preventing IFI in hematological malignancy, with comparable all-cause mortality rates. Symptomatic adverse events were significantly more common in the voriconazole group, whereas liver function test abnormality was more common in the posaconazole group.