Prior to 1981, treatment options for invasive fungal infections were limited and associated with significant toxicities. The introduction of ketoconazole marked the beginning of an era of dramatic improvements over previous therapies for non-life-threatening mycosis. After nearly a decade of use, ketoconazole was quickly replaced by the triazoles fluconazole and itraconazole due to significant improvements in pharmacokinetic profile, spectrum of activity and safety. The triazoles posaconazole and voriconazole followed, and were better known for their further extended spectrum, specifically against emerging mold infections. With the exception of fluconazole, the triazoles have been plagued with significant inter- and intrapatient pharmacokinetic variability and all possess significant drug interactions. Azoles currently in development appear to combine an in vitro spectrum of activity comparable to voriconazole and posaconazole with more predictable pharmacokinetics and fewer adverse effects.

Despite recent advances in both diagnosis and prevention, the incidence of invasive fungal infections continues to rise. Available antifungal agents to treat invasive fungal infections include polyenes, triazoles, and echinocandins. Unfortunately, individual agents within each class may be limited by spectrum of activity, resistance, lack of oral formulations, significant adverse event profiles, substantial drug–drug interactions, and/or variable pharmacokinetic profiles. Isavuconazole, a second-generation triazole, was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in March 2015 and the European Medicines Agency in July 2015 for the treatment of adults with invasive aspergillosis (IA) or mucormycosis. Similar to amphotericin B and posaconazole, isavuconazole exhibits a broad spectrum of in vitro activity against yeasts, dimorphic fungi, and molds. Isavuconazole is available in both oral and intravenous formulations, exhibits a favorable safety profile (notably the absence of QTc prolongation), and reduced drug–drug interactions (relative to voriconazole). Phase 3 studies have evaluated the efficacy of isavuconazole in the management of IA, mucormycosis, and invasive candidiasis. Based on the results of these studies, isavuconazole appears to be a viable treatment option for patients with IA as well as those patients with mucormycosis who are not able to tolerate or fail amphotericin B or posaconazole therapy. In contrast, evidence of isavuconazole for invasive candidiasis (relative to comparator agents such as echinocandins) is not as robust. Therefore, isavuconazole use for invasive candidiasis may initially be reserved as a step-down oral option in those patients who cannot receive other azoles due to tolerability or spectrum of activity limitations. Post-marketing surveillance of isavuconazole will be important to better understand the safety and efficacy of this agent, as well as to better define the need for isavuconazole serum concentration monitoring.

The introduction of several new antifungals has significantly expanded both prophylaxis and treatment options for invasive fungal infections (IFIs). Relative to amphotericin B deoxycholate, lipid-based formulations of amphotericin B have significantly reduced the incidence of nephrotoxicity, but at a significant increase in drug acquisition cost. Newer, broad-spectrum triazoles (notably voriconazole and posaconazole) have added significantly to both the prevention and treatment of IFIs, most notably Aspergillus spp. (with voriconazole) and the treatment of some emerging fungal pathogens. Finally, a new class of parenteral antifungals, the echinocandins, is employed most frequently against invasive candidal infections. While the role of these newer agents continues to evolve, this review summarizes the activity, safety and clinical applications of agents most commonly employed in the treatment of IFIs.

Invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) remain a major cause of morbidity and mortality in allogeneic stem cell transplant (SCT) recipients. While the most common pathogens are Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp., the incidence of infections caused by non-albicans Candida species as well as molds such as Zygomycetes has increased. For many years, amphotericin B deoxycholate (AMB-D) was the only available antifungal for the treatment of IFDs. Within the past decade, there has been a surge of new antifungal agents developed and added to the therapeutic armamentarium. Lipid-based formulations of amphotericin B provide an effective and less nephrotoxic alternative to AMB-D. Voriconazole has now replaced AMB-D as first choice for primary therapy of invasive aspergillosis (IA). Another extended-spectrum triazole, posaconazole, also appears to be a promising agent in the management of zygomycosis, refractory aspergillosis, and for prophylaxis. Members of the newest antifungal class, the echinocandins, are attractive agents in select infections due to their safety profile, and are a more attractive option compared to AMB-D as initial treatment for invasive candidiasis and (based on one study) challenge fluconazole for superiority in management with this mycoses. However, challenges do exist among these newer agents in very high-risk individuals like allogeneic SCT recipients, which may include adverse drug events, drug-drug interactions, variability in oral absorption, and availability of alternative formulations. The addition of newer agents has also stimulated interest in the potential application of combination therapy in serious, life-threatening infections. However, adequate studies are not available for most IFDs; thus, the clinical use of combination therapy is not evidenced based on most cases and preciseness in its use is uncertain. Finally, therapeutic drug monitoring of select antifungals (notably posaconazole and voriconazole) may play an increasing role due to significant interpatient variability in serum concentrations after standard doses.