Invasive Scedosporium spp. and Lomentospora prolificans infections are an emerging threat in immunocompromised and occasionally in healthy hosts. Scedosporium spp. is intrinsically resistant to most, L. prolificans to all the antifungal drugs currently approved, raising concerns about appropriate treatment decisions. High mortality rates of up to 90% underline the need for comprehensive diagnostic workup and even more for new, effective antifungal drugs to improve patient outcome. For a comprehensive analysis, we identified cases of severe Scedosporium spp. and L. prolificans infections from the literature diagnosed in 2000 or later and the FungiScope V R registry. For 208 Scedosporium spp. infections solid organ transplantation (n ¼ 58, 27.9%) and for 56 L. prolificans infection underlying malignancy (n ¼ 28, 50.0%) were the most prevalent risk factors. L. prolificans infections frequently presented as fungemia (n ¼ 26, 46.4% versus n ¼ 12, 5.8% for Scedosporium spp.). Malignancy, fungemia, CNS and lung involvement predicted worse outcome for scedosporiosis and lomentosporiosis. Patients treated with voriconazole had a better overall outcome in both groups compared to treatment with amphotericin B formulations. This review discusses the epidemiology, prognostic factors, pathogen susceptibility to approved and investigational antifungals, and treatment strategies of severe infections caused by Scedosporium spp. and L. prolificans.

Saprochaete and Geotrichum spp. are rare emerging fungi causing invasive fungal diseases in immunosuppressed patients and scarce evidence is available for treatment decisions. Among 505 cases of rare IFD from the FungiScope registry, we identified 23 cases of invasive infections caused by these fungi reported from 10 countries over a 12-year period. All cases were adults and previous chemotherapy with associated neutropenia was the most common co-morbidity. Fungaemia was confirmed in 14 (61%) cases and deep organ involvement included lungs, liver, spleen, central nervous system and kidneys. Fungi were S. capitata (n=14), S. clavata (n=5), G. candidum (n=2) and Geotrichum spp. (n=2). Susceptibility was tested in 16 (70%) isolates. All S. capitata and S. clavata isolates with the exception of one S. capitata (MIC 4 mg/L) isolate had MICs>32 mg/L for caspofungin. For micafungin and anidulafungin, MICs varied between 0.25 and >32 mg/L. One case was diagnosed postmortem, 22 patients received targeted treatment, with voriconazole as the most frequent first line drug. Overall mortality was 65% (n=15). Initial echinocandin treatment was associated with worse outcome at day 30 when compared to treatment with other antifungals (amphotericin B ± flucytosine, voriconazole, fluconazole and itraconazole) (P=.036). Echinocandins are not an option for these infections.

Isavuconazole is the active component of the new azole antifungal agent BAL8557, which is entering phase III clinical development. This study was conducted to compare the in vitro activities of isavuconazole and five other antifungal agents against 296 Candida isolates that were recovered consecutively from blood cultures between 1995 and 2004 at a tertiary care university hospital. Microdilution testing was done in accordance with CLSI (formerly NCCLS) guideline M27-A2 in RPMI-1640 MOPS (morpholinepropanesulfonic acid) broth. The antifungal agents tested were amphotericin B, flucytosine, fluconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole, and isavuconazole. C. albicans was the most common species, representing 57.1% of all isolates. There was no trend found in favor of non-Candida albicans species over time. In terms of MIC 50 s, isavuconazole was more active (0.004 mg/liter) than amphotericin B (0.5 mg/liter), itraconazole (0.008 mg/liter), voriconazole (0.03 mg/liter), flucytosine (0.125 mg/liter), and fluconazole (8 mg/liter). For isavuconazole, MIC 50 s/MIC 90 s ranged from 000.2/0.004 mg/liter for C. albicans to 0.25/0.5 mg/liter for C. glabrata. Two percent of isolates (C. glabrata and C. krusei) were resistant to fluconazole; C. albicans strains resistant to fluconazole were not detected. There were only two isolates with MICs for isavuconazole that were >0.5 mg/liter: both were C. glabrata isolates, and the MICs were 2 and 4 mg/liter, respectively. In conclusion, isavuconazole is highly active against Candida bloodstream isolates, including fluconazole-resistant strains. It was more active than itraconazole and voriconazole against C. albicans and C. glabrata and appears to be a promising agent against systemic Candida infections.Over the past two decades, the incidence of Candida bloodstream infections has increased dramatically (3, 15), primarily due to the increase in the number of at-risk patients. Mortality rates associated with systemic Candida infections remain high (1, 4). Several Candida spp., such as C. glabrata and C. krusei, exert reduced susceptibility to fluconazole, the first available triazole antifungal agent (8). Recently, a new generation of triazoles, including posaconazole, voriconazole, ravuconazole, and isavuconazole, has been developed. As a prodrug, BAL8557 is the water-soluble triazole precursor suitable for oral and intravenous administration (11). In vitro, the active moiety isavuconazole shows broad-spectrum activity against all major opportunistic fungi (e.g., Candida, Cryptococcus, Aspergillus, Absidia, Rhizopus, and Rhizomucor species) and the dimorphic fungi (13,16). In rat models, the active drug is highly effective against systemic candidiasis and disseminated Aspergillus flavus infection (14).In this study, we compared the in vitro activity of isavuconazole with those of fluconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole, amphotericin B, and flucytosine against 296 clinical isolates of Candida spp. from bloodstream infections. (Table 1). All isolates were identified to the species level b...

No abstract

No abstract

Over the past decade, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) have become one of the most challenging problems in infectious diseases. Fast and accurate detection of carbapenem resistance is crucial for guiding the treatment of the individual patient as well as for instituting proper infection control measures to limit the spread of the organism. Currently there are no consensus recommendations for screening, detection and confirmation of CRE either on the clinical or the laboratory side. In infection control, data from controlled intervention studies is largely missing and most recommendations have been deduced from outbreak situations. From the available limited evidence, infection control guidelines have been developed in most countries at national, regional and hospital levels. The aim of this review is to summarize the currently available laboratory methods and infection control options.

No abstract

This article is an abridged version of the AWMF mould guideline “Medical clinical diagnostics of indoor mould exposure” presented in April 2016 by the German Society of Hygiene, Environmental Medicine and Preventive Medicine (Gesellschaft für Hygiene, Umweltmedizin und Präventivmedizin, GHUP), in collaboration with the above-mentioned scientific medical societies, German and Austrian societies, medical associations and experts. Indoor mould growth is a potential health risk, even if a quantitative and/or causal relationship between the occurrence of individual mould species and health problems has yet to be established. Apart from allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) and mould-caused mycoses, only sufficient evidence for an association between moisture/mould damage and the following health effects has been established: allergic respiratory disease, asthma (manifestation, progression and exacerbation), allergic rhinitis, hypersensitivity pneumonitis (extrinsic allergic alveolitis), and increased likelihood of respiratory infections/bronchitis. In this context the sensitizing potential of moulds is obviously low compared to other environmental allergens. Recent studies show a comparatively low sensitizing prevalence of 3–10% in the general population across Europe. Limited or suspected evidence for an association exist with respect to mucous membrane irritation and atopic eczema (manifestation, progression and exacerbation). Inadequate or insufficient evidence for an association exist for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, acute idiopathic pulmonary hemorrhage in children, rheumatism/arthritis, sarcoidosis and cancer. The risk of infection posed by moulds regularly occurring indoors is low for healthy persons; most species are in risk group 1 and a few in risk group 2 (Aspergillus fumigatus, A. flavus) of the German Biological Agents Act (Biostoffverordnung). Only moulds that are potentially able to form toxins can be triggers of toxic reactions. Whether or not toxin formation occurs in individual cases is determined by environmental and growth conditions, above all the substrate. In the case of indoor moisture/mould damage, everyone can be affected by odour effects and/or mood disorders. However, this is not a health hazard. Predisposing factors for odour effects can include genetic and hormonal influences, imprinting, context and adaptation effects. Predisposing factors for mood disorders may include environmental concerns, anxiety, condition, and attribution, as well as various diseases. Risk groups to be protected particularly with regard to an infection risk are persons on immunosuppression according to the classification of the German Commission for Hospital Hygiene and Infection Prevention (Kommission für Krankenhaushygiene und Infektionsprävention, KRINKO) at the Robert Koch- Institute (RKI) and persons with cystic fibrosis (mucoviscidosis); with regard to an allergic risk, persons with cystic fibrosis (mucoviscidosis) and patients with bronchial asthma should be protected.The rational diagnos...