Matched-paired analysis of patients treated for invasive mucormycosis: Standard treatment versus posaconazole new formulations (MoveOn)

  • Jon Salmanton-García
  • , Danila Seidel
  • , Philipp Koehler
  • , Sibylle C. Mellinghoff
  • , Raoul Herbrecht
  • , Nikolai Klimko
  • , Zdeněk Ráčil
  • , Iker Falces-Romero
  • , Paul Ingram
  • , Miguel Ángel Benítez-Peñuela
  • , José Yesid Rodríguez
  • , Guillaume Desoubeaux
  • , Aleksandra Barać
  • , Carolina García-Vidal
  • , Martin Hoenigl
  • , Sanjay R. Mehta
  • , Matthew P. Cheng
  • , Galina Klyasova
  • , Werner J. Heinz
  • , Nousheen Iqbal
  • Robert Krause, Helmut Ostermann, Olaf Penack, Enrico Schalk, Donald C. Sheppard, Birgit Willinger, Hilmar Wisplinghoff, J. Janne Vehreschild, Oliver A. Cornely, Maria J.G.T. Vehreschild

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

42 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: First-line antifungal treatment for invasive mucormycosis (IM) consists of liposomal amphotericin B. Salvage treatment options are limited and often based on posaconazole oral suspension. With the approval of posaconazole new formulations, patients could benefit from improved pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability. Objectives: Our aim was to assess the effectiveness of posaconazole new formulations for IM treatment. Methods: We performed a case-matched analysis with proven or probable IM patients from the FungiScope® Registry. First-line posaconazole new formulations (1st-POSnew) and first-line amphotericin B plus posaconazole new formulations (1st-AMB+POSnew) cases were matched with first-line amphotericin B-based (1st-AMB) treatment controls. Salvage posaconazole new formulations (SAL-POSnew) cases were matched with salvage posaconazole oral suspension (SAL-POSsusp) controls. Each case was matched with up to three controls (based on severity, haematological/oncological malignancy, surgery and/or renal dysfunction). Results: Five patients receiving 1st-POSnew, 18 receiving 1st-AMB+POSnew and 22 receiving SAL-POSnew were identified. By day 42, a favourable response was reported for 80.0% (n=4/5) of patients receiving 1st-POSnew, for 27.8% (n=5/18) receiving 1st-AMB+POSnew and for 50.0% (n=11/22) receiving SAL-POSnew. Day 42 all-cause mortality of patients receiving posaconazole new formulations was lower compared with controls [20.0% (n=1/5) in 1st-POSnew versus 53.3% (n=8/15) in 1st-AMB; 33.3% (n=6/18) in 1st-AMB+POSnew versus 52.0% (n=26/50) in 1st-AMB; and 0.0% (n=0/22) in SAL-POSnew versus 4.4% (n=2/45) in SAL-POSsusp]. Conclusions: Posaconazole new formulations were effective in terms of treatment response and associated mortality of IM. While posaconazole new formulations may be an alternative for treatment of IM, the limited sample size of our study calls for a cautious interpretation of these observations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3315-3327
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
Volume74
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2019

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Matched-paired analysis of patients treated for invasive mucormycosis: Standard treatment versus posaconazole new formulations (MoveOn)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this