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

AIM

Invasive candidiasis is the most common fungal infection in patients attending health services and is associated with high mortality rates and prolonged hospital stay. The aim of this review was to evaluate and compare efficacy and safety of antifungal agents for the treatment of candidemia.

METHODS

A systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA), surface under the cumulative ranking analysis (SUCRA) and stochastic multicriteria acceptability analyses (SMAA) was 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=3632) were analysed. There were no significant differences between therapies for the efficacy outcomes; however, caspofungin (50-150 mg), rezafungin (200-400 mg) and micafungin (100-150 mg) had higher rates of clinical and mycological responses (SUCRA overall response >60%) and were considered the most promising therapies. Fluconazole (400 mg) rated worst for overall response (17%). Rezafungin (200-400 mg) and micafungin (100 mg) were associated with lower discontinuation rates (<40%). Conventional amphotericin B (0.6-0.7 mg/kg) was more likely to be discontinued (odds ratio [OR] 0.08; 95% credibility interval [CrI] 0.00-0.95 vs. caspofungin 150 mg) and may impair liver function (87%).

CONCLUSION

Echinocandins are recommended as first-line treatments for invasive candidiasis following a priority order of caspofungin then micafungin. Rezafungin, an echinocandin under development, 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.