SALMANTON-GARCIA, Jon, Danila SEIDEL, Philipp KOEHLER, Sibylle C. MELLINGHOFF, Raoul HERBRECHT, Nikolai KLIMKO, Zdeněk RÁČIL, Iker FALCES-ROMERO, Paul INGRAM, Angel BENITEZ-PENUELA, Jose RODRIGUEZ, Guillaume DESOUBEAUX, Aleksandra BARAC, Carolina GARCIA-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 and J. Janne VEHRESCHILD. Matched-paired analysis of patients treated for invasive mucormycosis: standard treatment versus posaconazole new formulations (MoveOn). Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. OXFORD: Oxford University Press, 2019, vol. 74, No 11, p. 3315-3327. ISSN 0305-7453. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkz344.
Other formats:   BibTeX LaTeX RIS
Basic information
Original name Matched-paired analysis of patients treated for invasive mucormycosis: standard treatment versus posaconazole new formulations (MoveOn)
Authors SALMANTON-GARCIA, Jon (276 Germany), Danila SEIDEL (276 Germany), Philipp KOEHLER (276 Germany), Sibylle C. MELLINGHOFF (276 Germany), Raoul HERBRECHT (250 France), Nikolai KLIMKO (643 Russian Federation), Zdeněk RÁČIL (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), Iker FALCES-ROMERO (724 Spain), Paul INGRAM (40 Austria), Angel BENITEZ-PENUELA (170 Colombia), Jose RODRIGUEZ (170 Colombia), Guillaume DESOUBEAUX (250 France), Aleksandra BARAC (688 Serbia), Carolina GARCIA-VIDAL (724 Spain), Martin HOENIGL (840 United States of America), Sanjay R. MEHTA (840 United States of America), Matthew P. CHENG (124 Canada), Galina KLYASOVA (643 Russian Federation), Werner J. HEINZ (276 Germany), Nousheen IQBAL (586 Pakistan), Robert KRAUSE (40 Austria), Helmut OSTERMANN (276 Germany), Olaf PENACK (276 Germany), Enrico SCHALK (276 Germany), Donald C. SHEPPARD (124 Canada), Birgit WILLINGER (40 Austria), Hilmar WISPLINGHOFF (276 Germany) and J. Janne VEHRESCHILD (276 Germany, guarantor).
Edition Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, OXFORD, Oxford University Press, 2019, 0305-7453.
Other information
Original language English
Type of outcome Article in a journal
Field of Study 30303 Infectious Diseases
Country of publisher United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Confidentiality degree is not subject to a state or trade secret
WWW URL
Impact factor Impact factor: 5.439
RIV identification code RIV/00216224:14110/19:00112622
Organization unit Faculty of Medicine
Doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkz344
UT WoS 000498167700027
Keywords in English LIPOSOMAL AMPHOTERICIN-B; MYCOSES STUDY-GROUP; TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS; EUROPEAN-ORGANIZATION; TABLET FORMULATION; FUNGAL-INFECTIONS; ORAL TABLET; PHARMACOKINETICS; THERAPY; SAFETY
Tags 14110212, rivok
Tags International impact, Reviewed
Changed by Changed by: Mgr. Tereza Miškechová, učo 341652. Changed: 20/1/2020 12:42.
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 (R) 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.
PrintDisplayed: 20/7/2024 12:23