Background Invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) remain important causes of morbidity and mortality. The consensus definitions of the Infectious Diseases Group of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and the Mycoses Study Group have been of immense value to researchers who conduct clinical trials of antifungals, assess diagnostic tests, and undertake epidemiologic studies. However, their utility has not extended beyond patients with cancer or recipients of stem cell or solid organ transplants. With newer diagnostic techniques available, it was clear that an update of these definitions was essential. Methods To achieve this, 10 working groups looked closely at imaging, laboratory diagnosis, and special populations at risk of IFD. A final version of the manuscript was agreed upon after the groups’ findings were presented at a scientific symposium and after a 3-month period for public comment. There were several rounds of discussion before a final version of the manuscript was approved. Results There is no change in the classifications of “proven,” “probable,” and “possible” IFD, although the definition of “probable” has been expanded and the scope of the category “possible” has been diminished. The category of proven IFD can apply to any patient, regardless of whether the patient is immunocompromised. The probable and possible categories are proposed for immunocompromised patients only, except for endemic mycoses. Conclusions These updated definitions of IFDs should prove applicable in clinical, diagnostic, and epidemiologic research of a broader range of patients at high-risk.

No abstract

The epidemiology of invasive candidiasis has evolved in recent years, warranting a review of the changes and the implications for current and future diagnosis and treatment. The overall burden of invasive candidiasis remains high, particularly in the expanding populations of patients at risk of opportunistic infection, such as the elderly or immunosuppressed. Progressive shifts from Candida albicans to non-albicans Candida spp. have been observed globally. The recent emergence of novel, multiresistant species, such as Candida auris, amplifies the call for vigilance in detection and advances in treatment. Among the current treatment options, fluconazole is still widely used throughout the world. Increased resistance to fluconazole, both acquired and naturally emerging, has been observed. Resistance to echinocandins is presently low but this may change with increased use. Improvement of diagnostic techniques and strategies, development of international surveillance networks and implementation of antifungal stewardship programmes represent major challenges for a better epidemiological control of invasive candidiasis.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: To face the current COVID-19 pandemic, diagnostic tools are essential. It is recommended to use real-time RT-PCR for RNA viruses in order (a) to perform a rapid and accurate diagnostic, (b) to guide patient care and management and (c) to guide epidemiological strategies. Further studies are warranted to define the role of serological diagnosis and a possible correlation between serological response and prognosis. Objectives: The aim was to guide clinical microbiologists in the use of these diagnostic tests and clinicians in the interpretation of their results. Sources: A search of literature was performed through PubMed and Google Scholar using the keywords SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnosis, SARS-CoV-2 immune response, SARS-CoV-2 serology/ antibody testing, coronavirus diagnosis. Content: The present review discusses performances, limitations and use of current and future diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2. Implications: Real-time RT-PCR remains the reference method for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. On the other hand, notwithstanding its varying sensitivity according to the time of infection, serology represents a valid asset (a) to try to solve possible discrepancies between a highly suggestive clinical and radiological presentation and negative RT-PCR, (b) to solve discrepancies between different PCR assays and (c) for epidemiological purposes.

Different BG assays have similar accuracy for the diagnosis of IFI in hemato-oncological patients. Two consecutive positive antigenemia assays have very high specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. Because sensitivity is low, the test needs to be combined with clinical, radiological, and microbiological findings.

BG antigenemia is superior to Candida score and colonization indexes and anticipates diagnosis of blood culture-negative IAC. This proof-of-concept observation in strictly selected high-risk surgical ICU patients deserves investigation of BG-driven preemptive therapy.