Al Diab Al Azzawi Mohammad, Abdat Wejdan, Alhamed Arina, Alhothali Amjad Salman A, Alsheikh Razan Shukr, Almajed Hind Mohammed, Alhamdi Sultan Ibrahim S, Alshahrani Norah Nasser A, Eltayeb Abdalla Osman
Faculty of Medicine, The National Ribat University, Khartoum, Sudan.
General practitioner, King Salman medical city, Madinah, Saudi Arabia.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2025 Nov;113(3):116994. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2025.116994. Epub 2025 Jul 5.
Severe fungal infection known as invasive candidiasis primarily impacts critically ill alongside immunocompromised patients with high mortality and long hospital stays and creates substantial healthcare expenses. Echinocandins constitute the current standard first-line treatment for invasive candidiasis, with caspofungin being among the most widely used agents, caspofungin is used to treat invasive candidiasis but requires daily intravenous administration, and its pharmacokinetics may vary between patients. A new generation echinocandin antifungal drug called Rezafungin demonstrates an extended half-life through which medical personnel can administer treatment only once per week to improve patient adherence and minimize healthcare costs. This review aimed to compare rezafungin and caspofungin to evaluate their efficacy and safety, and to explore whether rezafungin's pharmacokinetics offer clinical advantages.
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing rezafungin and caspofungin for invasive candidiasis in adults. Studies were selected based on predefined PICOS criteria and sourced from PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. After removing duplicates using Rayyan, four eligible trials involving adult patients were included. Data on efficacy and safety outcomes were extracted. Risk of bias was assessed using ROB 2, and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 to calculate risk ratios with 95 % confidence intervals.
Four RCT with 677 patients included in our systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between rezafungin and caspofungin in key outcomes. Global cure at day 14 was similar between the two groups (RR = 1.04, 95 % CI: 0.90-1.20, p = 0.45), as were the rates subgroup anaylsis of blood culture negativity at 24 and 48 h and mycological eradication, and safety outcomes such as, Patients with ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event, abdominal pain, hypokalemia, acute kidney injury, septic shock, and all-cause mortality at day 30.
Rezafungin is noninferior to caspofungin in the treatment of invasive candidiasis, offering equivalent efficacy and safety outcomes. Its once-weekly dosing regimen presents potential advantages in terms of improved patient adherence and reduced healthcare resource utilization. Future research should focus on larger, more diverse populations and longer follow-up durations to further elucidate the long-term benefits and cost-effectiveness of rezafungin.
严重真菌感染即侵袭性念珠菌病主要影响危重症患者以及免疫功能低下患者,死亡率高、住院时间长,并产生大量医疗费用。棘白菌素是目前侵袭性念珠菌病的标准一线治疗药物,卡泊芬净是使用最广泛的药物之一,卡泊芬净用于治疗侵袭性念珠菌病,但需要每日静脉给药,且其药代动力学在患者之间可能存在差异。一种名为瑞扎芬净的新一代棘白菌素类抗真菌药物具有较长的半衰期,医护人员每周只需给药一次,以提高患者的依从性并降低医疗成本。本综述旨在比较瑞扎芬净和卡泊芬净,评估它们的疗效和安全性,并探讨瑞扎芬净的药代动力学是否具有临床优势。
我们对比较瑞扎芬净和卡泊芬净治疗成人侵袭性念珠菌病的随机对照试验进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。根据预先定义的PICOS标准选择研究,并从PubMed、Scopus、Embase、Web of Science和Cochrane图书馆获取资料。使用Rayyan去除重复项后,纳入了四项涉及成年患者的符合条件的试验。提取了疗效和安全性结果的数据。使用ROB 2评估偏倚风险,并使用RevMan 5.4进行荟萃分析,以计算95%置信区间的风险比。
我们的系统评价和荟萃分析纳入了四项随机对照试验,共677例患者。汇总分析显示,瑞扎芬净和卡泊芬净在关键结局方面无统计学显著差异。两组在第14天的总体治愈率相似(RR = 1.04,95% CI:0.90 - 1.20,p = 0.45),24小时和48小时血培养转阴率、真菌清除率的亚组分析以及安全性结局,如≥1次治疗中出现的不良事件、腹痛、低钾血症、急性肾损伤、感染性休克和第30天的全因死亡率等方面也相似。
瑞扎芬净在治疗侵袭性念珠菌病方面不劣于卡泊芬净,疗效和安全性相当。其每周一次的给药方案在提高患者依从性和减少医疗资源利用方面具有潜在优势。未来的研究应侧重于更大、更多样化的人群以及更长的随访时间,以进一步阐明瑞扎芬净的长期益处和成本效益。