Abstract
Despite improvements in treatment and diagnostics over the last two decades, invasive aspergillosis (IA) remains a devastating fungal disease. The number of immunocompromised patients and hence vulnerable hosts increases, which is paralleled by the emergence of a rise in IA cases. Increased frequencies of azole-resistant strains are reported from six continents, presenting a new challenge for the therapeutic management. Treatment options for IA currently consist of three classes of antifungals (azoles, polyenes, echinocandins) with distinctive advantages and shortcomings. Especially in settings of difficult to treat IA, comprising drug tolerance/resistance, limiting drug–drug interactions, and/or severe underlying organ dysfunction, novel approaches are urgently needed. Promising new drugs for the treatment of IA are in late-stage clinical development, including olorofim (a dihydroorotate dehydrogenase inhibitor), fosmanogepix (a Gwt1 enzyme inhibitor), ibrexafungerp (a triterpenoid), opelconazole (an azole optimized for inhalation) and rezafungin (an echinocandin with long half-life time). Further, new insights in the pathophysiology of IA yielding immunotherapy as a potential add-on therapy. Current investigations show encouraging results, so far mostly in preclinical settings. In this review we discuss current treatment strategies, give an outlook on possible new pharmaceutical therapeutic options, and, lastly, provide an overview of the ongoing research in immunotherapy for IA.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Invasive aspergillosis (IA) caused by Aspergillus species, remains the predominant invasive mold infection [1,2,3]. These fungi cause life-threatening diseases mainly affecting immunocompromised patients with underlying hematological disease, cancer, autoimmune diseases, as well as solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients or critically ill patients, including those with respiratory viral infections [4, 5]. The increasing number of patients at risk is accompanied by rising frequencies of fungal infections due to Aspergillus spp, as well as the more frequent affection of male patients [6,7,8,9]. Prevalence can significantly vary among geographic regions, different centers and patient populations [10,11,12]. Despite incomplete data on a global scale, reports of increasing rates of azole-resistant Aspergillus strains emerge, with Europe being central amongst others [13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21]. For example, a multicentric study from the Kyoto and Shyga region in Japan found 12.7% of studied Aspergillus fumigatus isolates to be azole-resistant [22]. A recently published report of the world health organization (WHO) on fungal pathogens recognizes invasive fungal diseases as a rising global health concern, with Aspergillus fumigatus being included into the highest critical priority group [23]. Aspergillus spp. can infect many different sites of the body, but mainly involves the respiratory tract through inhalation of conidia [24]. Therapeutic measures for IA currently consist of three antifungal drug classes, namely azoles (voriconazole, posaconazole, isavuconazole), polyenes [liposomal amphotericin-B (LAmB), amphotericin-B lipid complex (ABLC)] and echinocandins (caspofungin, anidulafungin, micafungin) [25,26,27,28]. The emergence of azole-resistance, drug–drug interactions, and toxicity, is often limiting current therapeutic approaches [12, 29,30,31]. The future looks brighter however, with a number of new antifungals in development. Some of these introduce novel mechanisms of action, and all show promising results is first clinical studies, as well as excellent in vitro activity against most human pathogenic Aspergillus spp. [32, 33]. In this review we briefly discuss the current therapy standards of IA, primarily focusing on its pulmonary manifestation. Further, we want to present the novel antifungal agents regarding their potential future use in the treatment of IA and, lastly, we want to give insights into the current development stage of immunomodulatory therapy for IA.
How it’s going
For the current treatment of IA, three classes of antifungal agents are available: Azoles, polyenes and echinocandins [34]. When IA is suspected, antifungal treatment needs to be initiated as early as possible, since delayed initiation of appropriate therapy is associated with worse outcomes [35, 36]. Pharmacokinetics and dosing regimens of current antifungal are displayed in Table 1.
Azoles
For nearly two decades, voriconazole is recommended as first-line therapy for IA [34, 35, 43]. It has shown superior results when compared to amphotericin-B deoxycholate (D-AmB) [34, 44]. In the most significant studies concerning treatment of IA, voriconazole showed about 30% overall-mortality on day 84, with reports of response rates ranging between 36% and 52.8% [44,45,46,47]. The initial use of voriconazole was associated with decreased length of hospital stay in a sub-group analysis of the TRANSNET-population [48]. In cases of disseminated diseases, it is an important agent known for its good central nervous system (CNS) and eye penetration [49, 50]. The most common side effects of voriconazole include hepatotoxicity, temporary visual disorders, phototoxic phenomena (e.g. skin rash, erythroderma), perioral excoriations, tachyarrhythmias, and psychiatric side effects such as hallucinations (often due to iv administration; reversible; may disappear during treatment or switch to oral formulation) with some of them being dose dependent [45, 51,52,53]. Due to marked drug–drug interactions [54, 55] and pharmacokinetic variability in absorption, distribution, metabolism and clearance of antifungals, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is an important tool to ensure adequate therapeutic levels [45, 54, 56]. Plasma levels of voriconazole should be controlled 2–5 days after the first dose. If levels are sufficient (between 1–1.5 and 5–6 μg/mL), they should be monitored regularly due to high intraindividual variation. At a minimum, the next measurement should be performed when a change in the patient’s condition or co-medication is observed (e.g, clinical alterations, new concurrent medication, presumed toxicity) [54, 57].
Isavuconazole is an alternative first-line agent with high tolerability and fewer side effects [34, 58, 59]. ECIL-6 guidelines state that isavuconazole is equally effective as voriconazole [35, 55]. For the treatment of mold disease, isavuconazole was non-inferior compared to voriconazole, with some benefits especially regarding pharmacokinetics, where it has shown superior accessibility and more linear pharmacokinetic properties [45]. Even in the context of limited data for target drug levels and much less variation in levels compared to voriconazole, TDM is still recommended in special clinical settings, like patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) or continuous renal replacement therapy [54, 58, 60]. Proposed thresholds vary between > 1–2.5 µg/ml for the lower limit and 4–5 µg/ml for the upper limit. Both aim to improve efficacy and safety of isavuconazole, yet further validation is needed [61,62,63,64,65].
In case of intolerance or refractory disease after 7 days of therapy with a first-line antifungal, a switch of drug class, meaning a switch from an azole to LAmB in most cases, is recommended [66, 67]. Initiation of combination therapy with e.g. an echinocandin being an alternative. In some cases with adverse events or insufficient voriconazole drug levels, also isavuconazole or posaconazole in tablet/intravenous formulation are potential alternatives [34, 54].
Regarding posaconazole, a randomized-controlled non-inferiority trial published in 2021 showed non-inferiority to voriconazole with respect to all-cause mortality, and adverse effects were less common [44]. Tablet and intravenous formulations should be used preferentially over posaconazole suspension formulations, achieving more reliable therapeutic doses [68,69,70,71]. Nevertheless, plasma concentrations of posaconazole should also be monitored, preferably on day 5 after the initiation of treatment [54, 70, 72]. Suggested plasma levels are > 0.7 µg/ml for prophylaxis and > 1 µg/ml for treatment with an upper threshold of 3.75 µg/ml [28, 73].
Indications for itraconazole are very limited, due to its poor absorption an unpredictable pharmacokinetics, but can be considered as an alternative agent in settings with restricted resources [34].
Generally, azoles can cause various drug–drug interactions. Notably, these include interactions with commonly used immuno suppressive agents such as tacrolimus, sirolimus and cyclosporine, potentially resulting in pronounced immunosuppression or toxicity [74]. Under such circumstances dose adjustment is essential. Other potential drug–drug interactions may occur together with targeted hematological therapies, antiretroviral agents, and, amongst many others, anticoagulants [75,76,77].
Polyenes
Lipid formulations of amphotericin-B such as LAmB and ABLC are recommended for second line or salvage therapy of IA. These formulations are associated with decreased levels of nephrotoxicity and are preferable in settings of liver impairment, with LAmB being considered the drug of choice since it is better tolerated than ABLC [78,79,80]. Common side effects include flush, infusion-related events (e.g. fever, chills), nephrotoxicity and hypokalemia [81]. For LAmB, nephrotoxicity can be expected in about 10–25% and hypokalemia in about 15%. As a consequence, routine monitoring of electrolytes and renal function is advised [81,82,83]. When azoles cannot be administered due to contraindications or intolerabilities, LAmB is a viable alternative [35, 82]. The AmBiLoad-Trial demonstrated that, for the treatment of IA, higher doses of LAmB (10 mg/kg per day) have no additional benefits and are associated with higher toxicity compared to standard doses (3 mg/kg per day) [35, 82]. A major benefit of polyenes is that acquired antifungal resistance has not been reported despite the drug now being used for many decades. D-AmB is no longer endorsed, due to multiple associated adverse effects, especially renal toxicity [44, 55, 78]. In exceptional situations however, it can be used when no other antifungal drugs are available [35]. D-AmB and lipid formulations are—off label—sometimes also utilized as aerosolized formulations in combination with systemic antifungal therapy [34], as well as for prophylaxis in cases of prolonged neutropenia or in lung transplant recipients [35, 84,85,86]. High drug concentrations in the airways and less systemic side effects have been reported as noticeable advantages of combined therapy [84].
Echinocandins
The echinocandins (caspofungin, anidulafungin, micafungin) are rarely used as monotherapy due to limited clinical efficacy, and therefore strongly recommended only in combination with other antifungals [34, 35]. An expert opinion published in 2015 on azole-resistant strains of Aspergillus fumigatus favor LAmB over echinocandin-monotherapy [87]. Caspofungin is known as the only echinocandin which is approved by the FDA to treat IA in the setting of salvage therapy [34, 88,89,90]. While effective against Aspergillus spp. in vitro, there is insufficient clinical data in the treatment of IA regarding micafungin and anidulafungin as monotherapy [91, 92].
Combination therapy
As first-line therapy, the combination of antifungal agents is not primarily recommended [54]. In salvage therapy however, the usage of an echinocandin together with an azole or with LAmB can be taken into consideration [34, 35, 54]. In a randomized trial, the combination of voriconazole with anidulafungin was analyzed in contrast to voriconazole as monotherapy, especially regarding safety and efficacy concerns. The mortality rates after 6 weeks of treatment, as the primary outcome, and the mortality rates after 12 weeks of therapy, in addition to mortality in subgroups and safety concerns as secondary outcome, were investigated. Mortality rate after 6 weeks was 19.3% in the group that received combination therapy and 27.5% in the monotherapy group. No statistically significant differences were observed in terms of safety and toxicity [93].
As a result, combination therapy should be utilized in specific settings such as those with (1) high azole-resistance rates [94] (2) in cases with lacking response to monotherapy (3) when the species of Aspergillus is unknown or susceptibility testing is pending (4) or when therapeutic level of voriconazole cannot be reached due to poor metabolism by concurrently administered medication. For CNS infections, combination therapy may be complicated due to concerns about antagonism between voriconazole and LAmB and the poor brain and cerebro−spinal fluid penetration of echinocandins [34, 95]. The antimetabolite flucytosine is another option, particularly in combination with LAmB for severe Cryptococcal infections (meningitis, pneumonia), difficult to treat invasive Candida infections, as well as for urogenital infections involving fluconazole-resistant C. glabrata [96]. Flucytosine has high oral bioavailability and distributes widely into tissues including the cerebro-spinal fluid. Adverse events include liver enzyme elevation and dose dependent myelosuppression [97]. LAmB induced nephrotoxicity may lead to deacreased excretion and hence increased concentrations.
Duration
The duration of therapy should be primarily guided by clinical, microbiological, and radiographic response, with an absolute minimum treatment duration of 6 weeks, while most of the patients receive treatment for at least 12 weeks [34]. Duration is further linked to the degree and foreseeable length of immunosuppression, as well as the site of disease [35]. Secondary prophylaxis for immunosuppressed patients after recovery is also highly recommended for preventing recurrence of IA, especially if patients require further immunosuppressive therapy [35]. The optimal duration of therapy is commonly determined individually.
Where it’s heading
New antifungals
Availability of only three antifungal drug classes for the treatment of IA is drastically restricting therapeutic options. Especially in settings of difficult to treat IA, comprising drug tolerance/resistance, limiting drug–drug interactions, and/or severe underlying organ dysfunction, agents with innovative mechanisms of action and beneficial pharmacokinetic properties are urgently needed. Current antifungals in the pipeline address these needs and will substantially extend and enhance treatment options for IA [32]. Pharmacokinetics of current first line agents compared to novel options are displayed in Table 1.
A representative of a new antifungal drug class (i.e. orotomide) is olorofim. It inhibits the dihydroorotate dehydrogenase, an enzyme involved in pyrimidine synthesis, and shows good activity against various Aspergillus spp. including azole-resistant strains and difficult to treat cryptic species [98]. The compound is highly protein-bound and shows excellent tissue distribution in lung, liver, kidney and brain. Although olorofim is metabolized by CYP450 enzymes and hence sensitive to CYP inhibitors/inducers, it appears to only have mild effects on CYP enzymes, which renders it an agent with low potential for drug–drug interactions [99]. It will be available as oral formulation and a promising option for IA monotherapy, particularly in settings of azole-resistant species. Most recent studies investigating the efficacy of olorofim in therapy of IA, include the OASIS-study (NCT05101187) where olorofim is compared with LAmB followed by standard of care in a Phase III, adjudicator-blinded, randomized study. Another phase IIb clinical trial investigating olorofim in invasive fungal diseases with limited treatment options including IA (NCT03583164) is currently in the final steps of its recruiting phase.
A further novel mechanism of action is introduced by fosmanogepix. By inhibiting Gwt1, an enzyme essential for anchoring mannoproteins to the fungal cell membrane and wall, fungi cannot adhere to mucosal and epithelial surfaces, which is prerequisite for colonization/infection. It has broad activity against Aspergillus spp. including azole-resistant strains and is developed as oral and IV formulation [100]. Further, in a phase II trial including 66 patients with renal insufficiency, administration of fosmanogepix neither resulted in worsening of renal function, nor was a dose adjustment required, outlining the potential safety in this setting, especially when adding fosmanogepix to LAmB [101], a combination which has shown strong synergism in animal models [100]. It could constitute a promising treatment option for IA as monotherapy or in combination with other classes when the disease is difficult to treat. The open-label AEGIS-study (NCT04240886) evaluating fosmanogepix in therapy of IA or rare mold infections was completed in May 2022 with results yet to be published.
The oral glucan synthase inhibitor ibrexafungerp has broad antifungal activity including azole-resistant and cryptic Aspergillus species [40, 102]. The mechanism of action is similar to that of echinocandins, yet the binding site differs slightly resulting in low cross-resistance. Its spectrum of activity together with favorable pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties (i.e. high tissue penetration, favorable drug–drug interaction and side effect profile) render it a valuable agent for resistant IA treatment and an alternative for oral (combination) step-down when azoles lack applicability. Furthermore, a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study investigating the safety and efficacy of the co-administration of voriconazole and ibrexafungerp in patients with invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA) (NCT03672292) is in the recruitment phase. Also the FURI-study (NCT03059992), evaluating the efficacy and safety of ibrexafungerp in refractory fungal disease (including as a combination treatment component for IA) or in patients intolerant to standard therapy, is estimated to be completed in August 2023.
Opelconazole was particularly designed for inhalation therapy (through adapted particle size) and could be a most welcome add-on in settings where systemic administration is limited due to toxicity. Opelconazole shows broad activity against Aspergillus spp. and enables high local concentrations while avoiding systemic adverse effects. Synergism has been observed with systemically administered azoles, indicating suitability for a combination approach in difficult to treat IA [103]. A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study assessing the efficacy and safety of opelconazole when added to systemic antifungal therapy in refractory IA (NCT05238116) is currently recruiting patients and is estimated to be completed in 2024 [32].
Lastly, rezafungin, a second-generation echinocandin with optimized pharmacokinetics (e.g. mean half-life of ~ 150 h after two dosages), will allow, amongst other options, outpatient therapy in combination with oral agents [42]. These could include combinations with fosmanogepix, olorofim, ibrexafungerp or conventional azoles, with data on potential synergistic/antagonistic effects needed.
Current and future treatment approaches are displayed in Fig. 1.
Immunotherapy
Incremental insight into the pathophysiology of IA starts to create traction for immunotherapy as add-on treatment or prophylaxis. Immunotherapy does not target Aspergillus in a direct way like antifungals but boosts the antifungal host response to better clear spores and/or hyphae. Possible strategies to improve antifungal immunity involve humoral (i.e., antibodies, cytokines, cytokine-blockade, checkpoint-inhibitors) or cellular approaches and vaccination.
In preclinical work and in a limited number of case reports or case series in IA, beneficial results have been seen with recombinant interferon-gamma (rIFN-γ), which increases phagocytic antifungal activity, and checkpoint-inhibitors (e.g. anti-PD-1), which counter immune cell exhaustion [104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117]. The potential of rIFN-γ has been investigated more thoroughly in the setting of prevention of IA in patients with chronic granulomatous disease specifically, and in chronic pulmonary aspergillosis [118, 119]. Likewise, mouse models and case series showed potential for granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in IA, but a randomized phase IV clinical trial could not show benefit for GM-CSF with or without granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) as prophylaxis for IA after allogeneic stem cell transplantation [109, 120,121,122,123]. Administration of other humoral innate immune agents such as pentraxin-3 (PTX3) or surfactant–protein D (SP-D) are protective in vitro and/or in mice, but their potential for treatment of IA has not been investigated yet in a clinical setting [124,125,126,127].
Allogeneic granulocyte transfusion is a conceptually interesting approach in neutropenic patients, but this technique needs further optimization as several trials were unable to show benefit regarding IA [128, 129]. T-cells currently show more promise for IA treatment. Adoptive T-cell transfer, in which a patient’s CD4 + T-cells are stimulated with Aspergillus ex vivo and then re-infused, was beneficial in allogeneic stem cell transplant recipients with IA [130]. The use of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) CD8 + T-cells, expressing an artificial T-cell receptor specific to Aspergillus, may have even more potential and recently showed encouraging results in a mouse model [131].
Positive results have been obtained in several mouse models regarding vaccination to prevent IA [132,133,134,135]. The largest issue to overcome to make vaccination a viable strategy to prevent IA is the requirement of a sufficiently working group of B- and T-cells, which is a problem in many severely immunocompromised IA patients [136]. Encouraging results were recently obtained by several groups in immunocompromised mice [137,138,139], but more work is needed before translation to the clinic.
Given the hyperinflammatory environment in the lungs of patients with influenza- or COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (IAPA or CAPA), immunotherapy results obtained in classically immunocompromised mice or EORTC/MSGERC host factor positive IA patients are not readily translatable to IAPA/CAPA patients. Interesting immunomodulatory targets deserving further investigation in IAPA and CAPA patients specifically are rIFN-γ (given that decreased interferon-gamma signaling has been identified in IAPA/CAPA patients compared to non-IAPA/CAPA severe influenza and COVID-19 patients), anakinra (anti-interleukin-1, given the hyperinflammation and probable defect in LC3-associated phagocytosis in these patients) and natural anti-Aspergillus antibodies (shown to be decreased in patients with severe influenza or COVID-19 and proven beneficial in a IAPA mouse model) [140,141,142].
Due to the lack of high-quality trials in patients with IA, none of the approaches discussed above are currently part of standard of care for IPA (except for rIFN-γ prophylaxis patients with chronic granulomatous disease) [35]. High-quality clinical trials with the most promising candidates are therefore urgently needed to enable regular evidence-based use of immunomodulation as add-on therapy in IA.
Conclusions
IA remains associated with high mortality despite improvement in therapy over the last two decades. Pharmaceutical options are currently limited with need of alternative agents, especially in the setting of salvage therapy or when azole-resistant strains are identified. Patients with IA are often multimorbid including impaired organ function limiting the use of azoles when hepatic impairment is present or the unrestrained use of LAmB in case of impaired kidney function. Further, azoles cause substantial interaction with important immunosuppressive agents such as tacrolimus, sirolimus and cyclosporine which can render management difficult and potentially result in pronounced immunosuppression or toxicity [74]. Another shortcoming of the current antifungal armamentarium is that the azoles present the only oral option for IA. While the optimal therapy duration is unknown, the Infectious Diseases Society of America recommends a minimum of 6 to 12 weeks therapy [35], which leads to organizational challenges (e.g. is a central line needed?, does the patient remain hospitalized only for IV therapy?, is an ambulant IV therapy practically possible?).
The new antifungals have the potential to complement the existing antifungal repertoire, and thereby improve patient outcomes. All novel agents appear to have an advantageous safety profile except for the need to adjust olorofim doseage when administered with strong CYP3A4 inhibitors or inducers, as well as potential opelconazole interaction with CYP3A4/5 CYP450-subenzyme, which is likely not relevant as the drug does not get absorbed from the lungs, no relevant drug–drug interactions have been observed. These circumstances nominate the new antifungals attractive options especially for SOT recipients. Furthermore, ibrexafungerp, fosmanogepix, opelconazole and olorofim can all be administered orally/via inhalation, making them suitable alternatives to azoles in the outpatient setting. Likewise, rezafungin with a once-weekly administration seems a viable option for these settings [32]. The clinical efficacy of novel antifungals for the treatment of IA still needs to be demonstrated, but first results look promising that the antifungal pipeline will provide the tools for improving the management of aspergillosis and associated upcoming challenges.
Regarding immunotherapy for IA, encouraging results have been obtained with different forms of immunotherapy in preclinical models and clinical trials including patients with pending. Different immunological backgrounds of patients at risk for aspergillosis (ranging from pronounced neutropenia to extreme hyperinflammation) will necessitate proper patient stratification to ensure tolerability and efficacy for each immunotherapeutic modality. Moreover, diagnostic immunological read-outs (e.g. measuring blood cytokines) might aid with identifying patients who could benefit from a selected immunotherapeutic. With this in mind, high-quality clinical trials in well-defined patient groups might lead to implementation of immunomodulatory prophylaxis or treatment for IA during the next decade.
To conclude, antifungal treatment of aspergillosis will likely substantially change over the next years, with new antifungals filling important gaps we are facing with current treatment options. Ultimately, the hope is that these changes will translate to better patient outcomes and survival.
References
Montagna MT, Caggiano G, Lovero G, De Giglio O, Coretti C, Cuna T, et al. Epidemiology of invasive fungal infections in the intensive care unit: results of a multicenter Italian survey (AURORA Project). Infection. 2013;41(3):645–53.
Pappas PG, Alexander BD, Andes DR, Hadley S, Kauffman CA, Freifeld A, et al. Invasive fungal infections among organ transplant recipients: results of the transplant-associated infection surveillance network (TRANSNET). Clin Infect Dis. 2010;50(8):1101–11.
Souza L, Nouer SA, Morales H, Simoes B, Solza C, Queiroz-Telles F, et al. Epidemiology of invasive fungal disease in haematologic patients. Mycoses. 2021;64(3):252–6.
Hoenigl M, Seidel D, Sprute R, Cunha C, Oliverio M, Goldman GH, et al. COVID-19-associated fungal infections. Nat Microbiol. 2022;7(8):1127–40.
Arastehfar A, Carvalho A, Houbraken J, Lombardi L, Garcia-Rubio R, Jenks JD, et al. Aspergillus fumigatus and aspergillosis: from basics to clinics. Stud Mycol. 2021;100: 100115.
Sun KS, Tsai CF, Chen SC, Chen YY, Huang WC. Correction: Galactomannan testing and the incidence of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis: a 10-year nationwide population-based study in Taiwan. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(6): e0156566.
Tarka P, Nitsch-Osuch A, Gorynski P, Tyszko P, Bogdan M, Kanecki K. Epidemiology of pulmonary aspergillosis in hospitalized patients in Poland during 2009–2016. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2019;1160:73–80.
Zilberberg MD, Nathanson BH, Harrington R, Spalding JR, Shorr AF. Epidemiology and outcomes of hospitalizations with invasive aspergillosis in the United States, 2009–2013. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;67(5):727–35.
Egger M, Hoenigl M, Thompson GR 3rd, Carvalho A, Jenks JD. Let’s talk about sex characteristics—as a risk factor for invasive fungal diseases. Mycoses. 2022;65:599–612.
Abdolrasouli A, Scourfield A, Rhodes J, Shah A, Elborn JS, Fisher MC, et al. High prevalence of triazole resistance in clinical Aspergillus fumigatus isolates in a specialist cardiothoracic centre. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2018;52(5):637–42.
Fuhren J, Voskuil WS, Boel CH, Haas PJ, Hagen F, Meis JF, et al. High prevalence of azole resistance in Aspergillus fumigatus isolates from high-risk patients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015;70(10):2894–8.
Lestrade PPA, Meis JF, Melchers WJG, Verweij PE. Triazole resistance in Aspergillus fumigatus: recent insights and challenges for patient management. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2019;25(7):799–806.
Chen Y, Lu Z, Zhao J, Zou Z, Gong Y, Qu F, et al. Epidemiology and molecular characterizations of azole resistance in clinical and environmental Aspergillus fumigatus Isolates from China. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60(10):5878–84.
Lestrade PPA, Buil JB, van der Beek MT, Kuijper EJ, van Dijk K, Kampinga GA, et al. Paradoxal trends in azole-resistant Aspergillus fumigatus in a National Multicenter Surveillance Program, the Netherlands, 2013–2018. Emerg Infect Dis. 2020;26(7):1447–55.
Macedo D, Leonardelli F, Gamarra S, Garcia-Effron G. Emergence of triazole resistance in Aspergillus spp. in Latin America. Curr Fungal Infect Rep. 2021;15(3):93–103.
Moin S, Farooqi J, Jabeen K, Laiq S, Zafar A. Screening for triazole resistance in clinically significant Aspergillus species; report from Pakistan. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2020;9(1):62.
Parent-Michaud M, Dufresne PJ, Fournier E, Folch B, Martineau C, Moreira S, et al. Prevalence and mechanisms of azole resistance in clinical isolates of Aspergillus section Fumigati species in a Canadian tertiary care centre, 2000 to 2013. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2020;75(4):849–58.
Resendiz-Sharpe A, Merckx R, Verweij PE, Maertens J, Lagrou K. Stable prevalence of triazole-resistance in Aspergillus fumigatus complex clinical isolates in a Belgian tertiary care center from 2016 to 2020. J Infect Chemother. 2021;27(12):1774–8.
Risum M, Hare RK, Gertsen JB, Kristensen L, Rosenvinge FS, Sulim S, et al. Azole resistance in Aspergillus fumigatus. The first 2-year’s data from the Danish National Surveillance Study, 2018–2020. Mycoses. 2022;65(4):419–28.
Talbot JJ, Subedi S, Halliday CL, Hibbs DE, Lai F, Lopez-Ruiz FJ, et al. Surveillance for azole resistance in clinical and environmental isolates of Aspergillus fumigatus in Australia and cyp51A homology modelling of azole-resistant isolates. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018;73(9):2347–51.
van der Linden JW, Arendrup MC, Warris A, Lagrou K, Pelloux H, Hauser PM, et al. Prospective multicenter international surveillance of azole resistance in Aspergillus fumigatus. Emerg Infect Dis. 2015;21(6):1041–4.
Tsuchido Y, Tanaka M, Nakano S, Yamamoto M, Matsumura Y, Nagao M. Prospective multicenter surveillance of clinically isolated Aspergillus species revealed azole-resistant Aspergillus fumigatus isolates with TR34/L98H mutation in the Kyoto and Shiga regions of Japan. Med Mycol. 2019;57(8):997–1003.
Parums DV. Editorial: The World Health Organization (WHO) fungal priority pathogens list in response to emerging fungal pathogens during the COVID-19 pandemic. Med Sci Monit. 2022;28: e939088.
Marr KA, Patterson T, Denning D. Aspergillosis—pathogenesis, clinical manifestations, and therapy. Infect Dis Clin N Am. 2002;16(4):875.
Husain S, Camargo JF. Invasive Aspergillosis in solid-organ transplant recipients: guidelines from the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice. Clin Transplant. 2019;33(9): e13544.
Patterson TF, Thompson GR 3rd, Denning DW, Fishman JA, Hadley S, Herbrecht R, et al. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of Aspergillosis: 2016 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;63(4):e1–60.
Tissot F, Agrawal S, Pagano L, Petrikkos G, Groll AH, Skiada A, et al. ECIL-6 guidelines for the treatment of invasive candidiasis, aspergillosis and mucormycosis in leukemia and hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients. Haematologica. 2017;102(3):433–44.
Ullmann AJ, Aguado JM, Arikan-Akdagli S, Denning DW, Groll AH, Lagrou K, et al. Diagnosis and management of Aspergillus diseases: executive summary of the 2017 ESCMID-ECMM-ERS guideline. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2018;24(Suppl 1):e1–38.
Czyrski A, Resztak M, Swiderski P, Brylak J, Glowka FK. The Overview on the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions of triazoles. Pharmaceutics. 2021;13(11):1961.
Kyriakidis I, Tragiannidis A, Munchen S, Groll AH. Clinical hepatotoxicity associated with antifungal agents. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2017;16(2):149–65.
Sewell TR, Zhu J, Rhodes J, Hagen F, Meis JF, Fisher MC, et al. Nonrandom distribution of azole resistance across the global population of Aspergillus fumigatus. MBio. 2019;10(3):e00392-e419.
Hoenigl M, Sprute R, Egger M, Arastehfar A, Cornely OA, Krause R, et al. The antifungal pipeline: fosmanogepix, ibrexafungerp, olorofim, opelconazole, and rezafungin. Drugs. 2021;81(15):1703–29.
McCarty TP, Pappas PG. Antifungal pipeline. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2021;11: 732223.
Husain S. CJF. Invasive Aspergillosis in solid-organ transplant recipients: guidelines from the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice. 2019(Special Issue: Transplant Infectious Diseases).
Patterson TF. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of Aspergillosis: 2016 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. 2016(IDSA Guideline).
Barchiesi F, Santinelli A, Biscotti T, Greganti G, Giannini D, Manso E. Delay of antifungal therapy influences the outcome of invasive aspergillosis in experimental models of infection. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016;71(8):2230–3.
Hoenigl M, Sprute R, Arastehfar A, Perfect JR, Lass-Flörl C, Bellmann R, et al. Invasive candidiasis: investigational drugs in the clinical development pipeline and mechanisms of action. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2022;31:795–812.
Wiederhold NP. Pharmacodynamics, mechanisms of action and resistance, and spectrum of activity of new antifungal agents. J Fungi (Basel). 2022;8(8):857.
Zhao M, Lepak AJ, VanScoy B, Bader JC, Marchillo K, Vanhecker J, et al. In vivo pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of APX001 against Candida spp. in a neutropenic disseminated candidiasis mouse model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(4):e02542-e2617.
Angulo DA, Alexander B, Rautemaa-Richardson R, Alastruey-Izquierdo A, Hoenigl M, Ibrahim AS, et al. Ibrexafungerp, a novel triterpenoid antifungal in development for the treatment of mold infections. J Fungi (Basel). 2022;8(11):1121.
Cass L, Murray A, Davis A, Woodward K, Albayaty M, Ito K, et al. Safety and nonclinical and clinical pharmacokinetics of PC945, a novel inhaled triazole antifungal agent. Pharmacol Res Perspect. 2021;9(1): e00690.
Sandison T, Ong V, Lee J, Thye D. Safety and pharmacokinetics of CD101 IV, a novel echinocandin, in healthy adults. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61(2):e01627-e1716.
Jenks JD, Hoenigl M. Treatment of Aspergillosis. J Fungi (Basel, Switzerland). 2018;4(3):98. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof4030098.
Herbrecht R. Voriconazole versus ampthotericin B for primary therapy of invasive aspergillosis. New Engl J Med. 2002;347:408–15.
Maertens JA. Isavuconazole versus voriconazole for primary treatment of invasive mould disease caused by Aspergillus and other filamentous fungi (SECURE): a phase 3, randomised-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2015;387:760–9.
Maertens JA, Rahav G, Lee DG, Ponce-de-León A, Ramírez Sánchez IC, Klimko N, et al. Posaconazole versus voriconazole for primary treatment of invasive aspergillosis: a phase 3, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2021;397(10273):499–509.
Denning DW, Ribaud P, Milpied N, Caillot D, Herbrecht R, Thiel E, et al. Efficacy and safety of voriconazole in the treatment of acute invasive aspergillosis. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;34(5):563–71.
Baddley JW, Andes DR, Marr KA, Kauffman CA, Kontoyiannis DP, Ito JI, et al. Antifungal therapy and length of hospitalization in transplant patients with invasive aspergillosis. Med Mycol. 2013;51(2):128–35.
Schwartz S, Reisman A, Troke PF. The efficacy of voriconazole in the treatment of 192 fungal central nervous system infections: a retrospective analysis. Infection. 2011;39(3):201–10.
Theuretzbacher U, Ihle F, Derendorf H. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile of voriconazole. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2006;45(7):649–63.
Epaulard O, Leccia MT, Blanche S, Chosidow O, Mamzer-Bruneel MF, Ravaud P, et al. Phototoxicity and photocarcinogenesis associated with voriconazole. Med Mal Infect. 2011;41(12):639–45.
Zonios DI, Gea-Banacloche J, Childs R, Bennett JE. Hallucinations during voriconazole therapy. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;47(1):e7–10.
Jin H, Wang T, Falcione BA, Olsen KM, Chen K, Tang H, et al. Trough concentration of voriconazole and its relationship with efficacy and safety: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016;71(7):1772–85.
Ullmann AJ. Diagnosis and management of Aspergillus disease: executive summary of the 2017 ESCMID-ECMM-ERS guideline. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2018;24:e1–38.
Tissot F. ECIL-6 guidelines for the treatment of invasive candidiasis, Aspergillosis and mucormycosis in leukemia and hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients. Haematologica. 2017;102:433.
Hoenigl M, Duettmann W, Raggam RB, Seeber K, Troppan K, Fruhwald S, et al. Potential factors for inadequate voriconazole plasma concentrations in intensive care unit patients and patients with hematological malignancies. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013;57(7):3262–7.
Jenks JD, Mehta SR, Hoenigl M. Broad spectrum triazoles for invasive mould infections in adults: which drug and when? Med Mycol. 2019;57(2):S168–78.
Zurl C, Waller M, Schwameis F, Muhr T, Bauer N, Zollner-Schwetz I, et al. Isavuconazole treatment in a mixed patient cohort with invasive fungal infections: outcome, tolerability and clinical implications of isavuconazole plasma concentrations. J Fungi (Basel). 2020;6(2):90.
Jenks JD, Salzer HJ, Prattes J, Krause R, Buchheidt D, Hoenigl M. Spotlight on isavuconazole in the treatment of invasive aspergillosis and mucormycosis: design, development, and place in therapy. Drug Des Dev Ther. 2018;12:1033–44.
Kriegl L, Hatzl S, Zurl C, Reisinger AC, Schilcher G, Eller P, et al. Isavuconazole plasma concentrations in critically ill patients during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2022;77(9):2500–5.
Andes D, Kovanda L, Desai A, Kitt T, Zhao M, Walsh TJ. Isavuconazole concentration in real-world practice: consistency with results from clinical trials. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(7):e00585-e618.
Furfaro E, Signori A, Di Grazia C, Dominietto A, Raiola AM, Aquino S, et al. Serial monitoring of isavuconazole blood levels during prolonged antifungal therapy. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2019;74(8):2341–6.
Gomez-Lopez A. Antifungal therapeutic drug monitoring: focus on drugs without a clear recommendation. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26(11):1481–7.
Hohl R, Bertram R, Kinzig M, Haarmeyer GS, Baumgartel M, Geise A, et al. Isavuconazole therapeutic drug monitoring in critically ill ICU patients: a monocentric retrospective analysis. Mycoses. 2022;65(7):747–52.
Risum M, Vestergaard MB, Weinreich UM, Helleberg M, Vissing NH, Jorgensen R. Therapeutic drug monitoring of isavuconazole: serum concentration variability and success rates for reaching target in comparison with voriconazole. Antibiotics (Basel). 2021;10(5):487.
Cornely OA, Hoenigl M, Lass-Florl C, Chen SC, Kontoyiannis DP, Morrissey CO, et al. Defining breakthrough invasive fungal infection-position paper of the mycoses study group education and research consortium and the European Confederation of Medical Mycology. Mycoses. 2019;62(9):716–29.
Ullmann A, Aguado JM, Arikan S, Denning D, Groll A, Lagrou K, et al. Executive summary of the 2017 ESCMID-ECMM guideline for the diagnosis and management of Aspergillus disease. Clin Microb Infect. 2018;24:e1–38.
Oh J, Kang CI, Kim SH, Huh K, Cho SY, Chung DR, et al. Antifungal prophylaxis with posaconazole tablet and oral suspension in patients with haematologic malignancy: therapeutic drug monitoring, efficacy and risk factors for the suboptimal level. Mycoses. 2020;63(1):89–94.
Stelzer D, Weber A, Ihle F, Matthes S, Ceelen F, Zimmermann G, et al. Posaconazole liquid versus tablet formulation in lung transplant recipients. Mycoses. 2018;61(3):186–94.
Lenczuk D, Zinke-Cerwenka W, Greinix H, Wolfler A, Prattes J, Zollner-Schwetz I, et al. Antifungal prophylaxis with Posaconazole delayed-release tablet and oral suspension in a real-life setting: plasma levels, efficacy and tolerability. Antimicrobial Agents Chemother. 2018;62:e02655-e2717.
Hoenigl M, Duettmann W, Raggam RB, Huber-Krassnitzer B, Theiler G, Seeber K, et al. Impact of structured personal on-site patient education on low posaconazole plasma concentrations in patients with haematological malignancies. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2014;44(2):140–4.
Prattes J, Duettmann W, Hoenigl M. Posaconazole plasma concentrations on days three to five predict steady-state levels. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60(9):5595–9.
Maertens JA, Girmenia C, Bruggemann RJ, Duarte RF, Kibbler CC, Ljungman P, et al. European guidelines for primary antifungal prophylaxis in adult haematology patients: summary of the updated recommendations from the European conference on infections in Leukaemia. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018;73(12):3221–30.
Dodds-Ashley E. Management of drug and food interactions with azole antifungal agents in transplant recipients. Pharmacotherapy. 2010;30(8):842–54.
Bruggemann RJ, Verheggen R, Boerrigter E, Stanzani M, Verweij PE, Blijlevens NMA, et al. Management of drug–drug interactions of targeted therapies for haematological malignancies and triazole antifungal drugs. Lancet Haematol. 2022;9(1):e58–72.
Purkins L, Wood N, Kleinermans D, Nichols D. Voriconazole potentiates warfarin-induced prothrombin time prolongation. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;56(1):24–9.
Vadlapatla RK, Patel M, Paturi DK, Pal D, Mitra AK. Clinically relevant drug–drug interactions between antiretrovirals and antifungals. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2014;10(4):561–80.
Hamill RJ. Amphotericin B formulations: a comparative review of efficacy and toxicity. Drugs. 2013;73(9):919–34.
Hachem RY, Boktour MR, Hanna HA, Husni RN, Torres HA, Afif C, et al. Amphotericin B lipid complex versus liposomal amphotericin B monotherapy for invasive aspergillosis in patients with hematologic malignancy. Cancer. 2008;112(6):1282–7.
Hoenigl M, Lewis R, van de Veerdonk FL, Verweij PE, Cornely OA. Liposomal amphotericin B-the future. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2022;77(2):ii21–34.
Steimbach LM, Tonin FS, Virtuoso S, Borba HH, Sanches AC, Wiens A, et al. Efficacy and safety of amphotericin B lipid-based formulations-a systematic review and meta-analysis. Mycoses. 2017;60(3):146–54.
Cornely OA, Maertens J, Bresnik M, Ebrahimi R, Ullmann AJ, Bouza E, et al. Liposomal amphotericin B as initial therapy for invasive mold infection: a randomized trial comparing a high-loading dose regimen with standard dosing (AmBiLoad trial). Clin Infect Dis. 2007;44(10):1289–97.
Ellis M, Spence D, de Pauw B, Meunier F, Marinus A, Collette L, et al. An EORTC international multicenter randomized trial (EORTC number 19923) comparing two dosages of liposomal amphotericin B for treatment of invasive aspergillosis. Clin Infect Dis. 1998;27(6):1406–12.
Monforte V, Ussetti P, López R, Gavaldà J, Bravo C, de Pablo A, et al. Nebulized liposomal amphotericin B prophylaxis for Aspergillus infection in lung transplantation: pharmacokinetics and safety. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2009;28(2):170–5.
Monforte V, Ussetti P, Gavaldà J, Bravo C, Laporta R, Len O, et al. Feasibility, tolerability, and outcomes of nebulized liposomal amphotericin B for Aspergillus infection prevention in lung transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2010;29(5):523–30.
Duckwall MJ, Gales MA, Gales BJ. Inhaled amphotericin B as Aspergillosis prophylaxis in hematologic disease: an update. Microbiol Insights. 2019;12:1178636119869937.
Verweij PE, Ananda-Rajah M, Andes D, Arendrup MC, Bruggemann RJ, Chowdhary A, et al. International expert opinion on the management of infection caused by azole-resistant Aspergillus fumigatus. Drug Resist Update. 2015;21–22:30–40.
Herbrecht R, Maertens J, Baila L, Aoun M, Heinz W, Martino R, et al. Caspofungin first-line therapy for invasive aspergillosis in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients: an European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer study. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2010;45(7):1227–33.
Cornely OA, Vehreschild JJ, Vehreschild MJ, Würthwein G, Arenz D, Schwartz S, et al. Phase II dose escalation study of caspofungin for invasive Aspergillosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011;55(12):5798–803.
Viscoli C, Herbrecht R, Akan H, Baila L, Sonet A, Gallamini A, et al. An EORTC phase II study of caspofungin as first-line therapy of invasive aspergillosis in haematological patients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2009;64(6):1274–81.
Enoch DA, Idris SF, Aliyu SH, Micallef C, Sule O, Karas JA. Micafungin for the treatment of invasive aspergillosis. J Infect. 2014;68(6):507–26.
Cappelletty D, Eiselstein-McKitrick K. The echinocandins. Pharmacotherapy. 2007;27(3):369–88.
Marr KA, Schlamm HT, Herbrecht R, Rottinghaus ST, Bow EJ, Cornely OA, et al. Combination antifungal therapy for invasive aspergillosis: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(2):81–9.
Schauwvlieghe AFAD, de Jonge N, van Dijk K, Verweij PE, Bruggemann RJ, Biemond BJ, et al. The diagnosis and treatment of invasive aspergillosis in Dutch haematology units facing a rapidly increasing prevalence of azole-resistance. A nationwide survey and rationale for the DB-MSG 002 study protocol. Mycoses. 2018;61:656–64.
Marx J, Welte R, Gasperetti T, Moser P, Beer R, Ortler M, et al. Anidulafungin and micafungin concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid and in cerebral cortex. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2020;64(7):e00275-e320.
Johnson MD. Antifungals in clinical use and the pipeline. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2021;35(2):341–71.
Vermes A, Guchelaar HJ, Dankert J. Flucytosine: a review of its pharmacology, clinical indications, pharmacokinetics, toxicity and drug interactions. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2000;46(2):171–9.
Georgacopoulos O, Nunnally NS, Ransom EM, Law D, Birch M, Lockhart SR, et al. In vitro activity of novel antifungal olorofim against filamentous fungi and comparison to eight other antifungal agents. J Fungi (Basel). 2021;7(5):378.
Kirchhoff L, Dittmer S, Buer J, Rath PM, Steinmann J. In vitro activity of olorofim (F901318) against fungi of the genus, Scedosporium and Rasamsonia as well as against Lomentospora prolificans, Exophiala dermatitidis and azole-resistant Aspergillus fumigatus. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020;56(3): 106105.
Gebremariam T, Gu Y, Alkhazraji S, Youssef E, Shaw KJ, Ibrahim AS. The combination treatment of fosmanogepix and liposomal Amphotericin B is superior to monotherapy in treating experimental invasive mold infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2022;66(7): e0038022.
Pappas PKB, Vazquez JA, Oren I, Rahav G, Aoun M, Bulpa P, Ben-Ami R, Ferrer R, McCarty TP, Thompson GR III, Barbat S, Wedel P, Oborska I, Schlamm HT, Hodges M. Clinical safety and efficacy of novel antifungal, fosmanogepix, in the treatment of candidemia: results from a phase 2 proof of concept trial. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2020;7:1.
Rivero-Menendez O, Soto-Debran JC, Cuenca-Estrella M, Alastruey-Izquierdo A. In Vitro activity of ibrexafungerp against a collection of clinical isolates of aspergillus, including cryptic species and Cyp51A mutants, using EUCAST and CLSI methodologies. J Fungi (Basel). 2021;7(3):232.
Colley T, Sehra G, Daly L, Kimura G, Nakaoki T, Nishimoto Y, et al. Antifungal synergy of a topical triazole, PC945, with a systemic triazole against respiratory Aspergillus fumigatus infection. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):9482.
Cenci E, Mencacci A, Fe d’Ostiani C, Del Sero G, Mosci P, Montagnoli C, et al. Cytokine- and T helper-dependent lung mucosal immunity in mice with invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. J Infect Dis. 1998;178(6):1750–60.
Hebart H, Bollinger C, Fisch P, Sarfati J, Meisner C, Baur M, et al. Analysis of T-cell responses to Aspergillus fumigatus antigens in healthy individuals and patients with hematologic malignancies. Blood. 2002;100(13):4521–8.
Brieland JK, Jackson C, Menzel F, Loebenberg D, Cacciapuoti A, Halpern J, et al. Cytokine networking in lungs of immunocompetent mice in response to inhaled Aspergillus fumigatus. Infect Immun. 2001;69(3):1554–60.
Chai LY, van de Veerdonk F, Marijnissen RJ, Cheng SC, Khoo AL, Hectors M, et al. Anti-Aspergillus human host defence relies on type 1 T helper (Th1), rather than type 17 T helper (Th17), cellular immunity. Immunology. 2010;130(1):46–54.
Ellis M, Watson R, McNabb A, Lukic ML, Nork M. Massive intracerebral aspergillosis responding to combination high dose liposomal amphotericin B and cytokine therapy without surgery. J Med Microbiol. 2002;51(1):70–5.
Bandera A, Trabattoni D, Ferrario G, Cesari M, Franzetti F, Clerici M, et al. Interferon-gamma and granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor therapy in three patients with pulmonary aspergillosis. Infection. 2008;36(4):368–73.
Armstrong-James D, Teo IA, Shrivastava S, Petrou MA, Taube D, Dorling A, et al. Exogenous interferon-gamma immunotherapy for invasive fungal infections in kidney transplant patients. Am J Transplant. 2010;10(8):1796–803.
Estrada C, Desai AG, Chirch LM, Suh H, Seidman R, Darras F, et al. Invasive aspergillosis in a renal transplant recipient successfully treated with interferon-gamma. Case Rep Transplant. 2012;2012: 493758.
Mezidi M, Belafia F, Nougaret S, Pageaux GP, Conseil M, Panaro F, et al. Interferon gamma in association with immunosuppressive drugs withdrawal and antifungal combination as a rescue therapy for cerebral invasive Aspergillosis in a liver transplant recipient. Minerva Anestesiol. 2014;80(12):1359–60.
Delsing CE, Gresnigt MS, Leentjens J, Preijers F, Frager FA, Kox M, et al. Interferon-gamma as adjunctive immunotherapy for invasive fungal infections: a case series. BMC Infect Dis. 2014;14:166.
Vu CTB, Thammahong A, Yagita H, Azuma M, Hirankarn N, Ritprajak P, et al. Blockade Of PD-1 attenuated postsepsis aspergillosis via the activation of IFN-γ and the dampening of IL-10. Shock. 2020;53(4):514–24.
Wurster S, Robinson P, Albert ND, Tarrand JJ, Goff M, Swamydas M, et al. Protective activity of programmed cell death protein 1 blockade and synergy with caspofungin in a murine invasive pulmonary aspergillosis model. J Infect Dis. 2020;222(6):989–94.
Serris A, Ouedrani A, Uhel F, Gazzano M, Bedarida V, Rouzaud C, et al. Case report: immune checkpoint blockade plus interferon-γ add-on antifungal therapy in the treatment of refractory covid-associated pulmonary Aspergillosis and cerebral mucormycosis. Front Immunol. 2022;13: 900522.
Lukaszewicz AC, Venet F, Boibieux A, Lherm M, Devigne B, Monneret G. Nivolumab and interferon-γ rescue therapy to control mixed mould and bacterial superinfection after necrotizing fasciitis and septic shock. Med Mycol Case Rep. 2022;37:19–22.
Colombo SAP, Hashad R, Denning DW, Kumararatne DS, Ceron-Gutierrez L, Barcenas-Morales G, et al. Defective interferon-gamma production is common in chronic pulmonary Aspergillosis. J Infect Dis. 2022;225(10):1822–31.
Monk EJM, Harris C, Döffinger R, Hayes G, Denning DW, Kosmidis C. Interferon gamma replacement as salvage therapy in chronic pulmonary aspergillosis: effects on frequency of acute exacerbation and all-cause hospital admission. Thorax. 2020;75(6):513–6.
Kasahara S, Jhingran A, Dhingra S, Salem A, Cramer RA, Hohl TM. Role of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor signaling in regulating neutrophil antifungal activity and the oxidative burst during respiratory fungal challenge. J Infect Dis. 2016;213(8):1289–98.
Abu Jawdeh L, Haidar R, Bitar F, Mroueh S, Akel S, Nuwayri-Salti N, et al. Aspergillus vertebral osteomyelitis in a child with a primary monocyte killing defect: response to GM-CSF therapy. J Infect. 2000;41(1):97–100.
Boots RJ, Paterson DL, Allworth AM, Faoagali JL. Successful treatment of post-influenza pseudomembranous necrotising bronchial aspergillosis with liposomal amphotericin, inhaled amphotericin B, gamma interferon and GM-CSF. Thorax. 1999;54(11):1047–9.
Wan L, Zhang Y, Lai Y, Jiang M, Song Y, Zhou J, et al. Effect of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor on prevention and treatment of invasive fungal disease in recipients of allogeneic stem-cell transplantation: a prospective multicenter randomized phase IV trial. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(34):3999–4006.
Garlanda C, Hirsch E, Bozza S, Salustri A, De Acetis M, Nota R, et al. Non-redundant role of the long pentraxin PTX3 in anti-fungal innate immune response. Nature. 2002;420(6912):182–6.
D’Angelo C, De Luca A, Zelante T, Bonifazi P, Moretti S, Giovannini G, et al. Exogenous pentraxin 3 restores antifungal resistance and restrains inflammation in murine chronic granulomatous disease. J Immunol. 2009;183(7):4609–18.
Gaziano R, Bozza S, Bellocchio S, Perruccio K, Montagnoli C, Pitzurra L, et al. Anti-Aspergillus fumigatus efficacy of pentraxin 3 alone and in combination with antifungals. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004;48(11):4414–21.
Wong SSW, Dellière S, Schiefermeier-Mach N, Lechner L, Perkhofer S, Bomme P, et al. Surfactant protein D inhibits growth, alters cell surface polysaccharide exposure and immune activation potential of Aspergillus fumigatus. Cell Surf. 2022;8: 100072.
Price TH, Bowden RA, Boeckh M, Bux J, Nelson K, Liles WC, et al. Phase I/II trial of neutrophil transfusions from donors stimulated with G-CSF and dexamethasone for treatment of patients with infections in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Blood. 2000;95(11):3302–9.
Seidel MG, Peters C, Wacker A, Northoff H, Moog R, Boehme A, et al. Randomized phase III study of granulocyte transfusions in neutropenic patients. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2008;42(10):679–84.
Perruccio K, Tosti A, Burchielli E, Topini F, Ruggeri L, Carotti A, et al. Transferring functional immune responses to pathogens after haploidentical hematopoietic transplantation. Blood. 2005;106(13):4397–406.
Seif M, Kakoschke TK, Ebel F, Bellet MM, Trinks N, Renga G, et al. CAR T cells targeting Aspergillus fumigatus are effective at treating invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in preclinical models. Sci Transl Med. 2022;14(664):eabh1209.
Cenci E, Mencacci A, Bacci A, Bistoni F, Kurup VP, Romani L. T cell vaccination in mice with invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. J Immunol. 2000;165(1):381–8.
Ito JI, Lyons JM, Hong TB, Tamae D, Liu YK, Wilczynski SP, et al. Vaccinations with recombinant variants of Aspergillus fumigatus allergen Asp f 3 protect mice against invasive aspergillosis. Infect Immun. 2006;74(9):5075–84.
Bozza S, Clavaud C, Giovannini G, Fontaine T, Beauvais A, Sarfati J, et al. Immune sensing of Aspergillus fumigatus proteins, glycolipids, and polysaccharides and the impact on Th immunity and vaccination. J Immunol. 2009;183(4):2407–14.
Liu M, Machová E, Neščáková Z, Medovarská I, Clemons KV, Martinez M, et al. Vaccination with mannan protects mice against systemic aspergillosis. Med Mycol. 2012;50(8):818–28.
Lauruschkat CD, Einsele H, Loeffler J. Immunomodulation as a therapy for Aspergillus infection: current status and future perspectives. J Fungi (Basel). 2018;4(4):137.
Wang Y, Wang K, Masso-Silva JA, Rivera A, Xue C. A heat-killed cryptococcus mutant strain induces host protection against multiple invasive mycoses in a murine vaccine model. MBio. 2019;10(6):e02145-e2219.
Rayens E, Rabacal W, Kang SE, Celia BN, Momany M, Norris KA. Vaccine-induced protection in two murine models of invasive pulmonary Aspergillosis. Front Immunol. 2021;12:670578.
Fernandes CM, Normile TG, Fabri J, Brauer VS, de Sraujo GR, Frases S, et al. Vaccination with live or heat-killed Aspergillus fumigatus ΔsglA conidia fully protects immunocompromised mice from invasive Aspergillosis. MBio. 2022;13(5):e0232822.
Feys S, Gonçalves SM, Khan M, Choi S, Boeckx B, Chatelain D, et al. Lung epithelial and myeloid innate immunity in influenza-associated or COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis: an observational study. Lancet Respir Med. 2022;10(12):1147–59.
Sarden N, Sinha S, Potts KG, Pernet E, Hiroki CH, Hassanabad MF, et al. A B1a-natural IgG-neutrophil axis is impaired in viral- and steroid-associated aspergillosis. Sci Transl Med. 2022;14(674):eabq6682.
Tappe B, Lauruschkat CD, Strobel L, Pantaleón García J, Kurzai O, Rebhan S, et al. COVID-19 patients share common, corticosteroid-independent features of impaired host immunity to pathogenic molds. Front Immunol. 2022;13: 954985.
Acknowledgements
SF acknowledges PhD fellowship funding from Research Foundation Flanders (FWO, grant number 11M6922N).
Funding
Open access funding provided by Medical University of Graz. The figure was created with Biorender.com.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
SF received travel grants from Pfizer. MH received research funding from Gilead, Astellas, MSD, Mundipharma, Euroimmune, Scynexis, F2G and Pfizer. All other authors declare no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Handling Editor: Sarah DelliŠre.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Boyer, J., Feys, S., Zsifkovits, I. et al. Treatment of Invasive Aspergillosis: How It’s Going, Where It’s Heading. Mycopathologia 188, 667–681 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11046-023-00727-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11046-023-00727-z