Cited by 63Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityFungal Infections and StudiesOcular Infections and Treatments

Optimizing antifungal choice and administration

Open access
Andes, David·2013·Current Medical Research and Opinion

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The antifungal armamentarium includes a number of drug classes and agents within each class. Successful IFI management depends on optimal matching of drug choice with the individual patient and causative pathogen, and maximizing effectiveness of the selected drug through appropriate dosing and toxicity management. OBJECTIVE: This review is intended to provide a brief overview of key factors involved in optimizing antifungal choice and administration for patients with invasive fungal infections (IFIs). FINDINGS: Antifungals differ in spectrum of activity, and these differences are critical when selecting the antifungal most likely to provide success for a patient with an IFI. When the species has not yet been identified, an analysis of regional epidemiology and risk factors can provide clues as to the most likely pathogen. For severely immunocompromised patients, a fungicidal agent may be preferred over a fungistatic agent, although more research is needed in this area. Triazoles, particularly itraconazole and posaconazole, exhibit great interpatient pharmacokinetic variability related to absorption. Steps can be taken to maximize absorption when using these agents. Voriconazole concentration is affected by polymorphisms in the major metabolic enzyme, cytochrome P450 2C19. Triazoles, and to a lesser extent other antifungals, are also subject to drug-drug interactions, which needs to be considered when selecting a particular antifungal agent for use in a severely ill patient on polypharmacy. Therapeutic drug monitoring may be a useful adjunct for patients receiving itraconazole, voriconazole, or posaconazole. When the IFI involves a pharmacologically protected site, such as the central nervous system (CNS) or eye, 5-fluorocytosine, fluconazole, or voriconazole are generally preferred. Echinocandin penetration is typically inadequate for IFIs of the CNS or eye. Antifungal agents also differ in their toxicity profiles, and these issues also need to be considered and managed when making an antifungal choice. CONCLUSION: Successful management of IFIs relies in part on the accurate selection of an antifungal agent for the infection. Drug characteristics can help in the selection of drug therapy. These characteristics include the drug's spectrum of activity, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, toxicity profile, and distribution to the infection site. Matching the drug profile to the patient and fungal species contribute to optimal management of infection.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1185/03007995.2012.761135

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Lortholary O, Desnos-Ollivier M, Sitbon K, et al. Recent exposure to caspo- fungin or fluconazole influences the epidemiology of candidemia: a prospec- tive multicenter study involving 2441 patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2011;55:532-8
  2. Lewis RE. Antifungal drug monitoring. Curr Fungal Infect Rep 2010;4:158-67
  3. Smith J, Safdar N, Knasinski V, et al. Voriconazole therapeutic drug monitor- ing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006;50:1570-2

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Andes, D.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
Andes, David
Venue
Current Medical Research and Opinion
Published
2013-04
Volume
29
Issue
sup4
Pages
13-18
ISSN
  • 0300-7995 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-4877
OpenAlex
W1982268275
Cited by
63
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 2
FWCI
1.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Medical Research and Opinion (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Fungal Infections and Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ocular Infections and Treatments
Keywords
invasive fungal infections, antifungal agents, antifungal dosing, triazoles, voriconazole, itraconazole, posaconazole, echinocandins, drug-drug interactions, CYP2C19, pharmacokinetic variability, therapeutic drug monitoring, immunocompromised patients, antifungal toxicity, fungal eye infection, fluconazole, 5-fluorocytosine
MeSH terms
Antifungal Agents, Aryl Hydrocarbon Hydroxylases, Central Nervous System, Humans, Intestinal Absorption, Mycoses, Polymorphism, Genetic, Critical Illness, Drug Monitoring, Cytochrome P-450 CYP2C19

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review