• Something wrong with this record ?

The impact of anti-mould prophylaxis on Aspergillus PCR blood testing for the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis

M. Cruciani, PL. White, C. Mengoli, J. Löffler, CO. Morton, L. Klingspor, D. Buchheidt, J. Maertens, WJ. Heinz, TR. Rogers, B. Weinbergerova, A. Warris, DEA. Lockhart, B. Jones, C. Cordonnier, JP. Donnelly, RA. Barnes, Fungal PCR Initiative

. 2021 ; 76 (3) : 635-638. [pub] 20210211

Language English Country Great Britain

Document type Journal Article

Persistent link   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc21026078

Grant support
MR/N006364/2 Medical Research Council - United Kingdom

BACKGROUND: The performance of the galactomannan enzyme immunoassay (GM-EIA) is impaired in patients receiving mould-active antifungal therapy. The impact of mould-active antifungal therapy on Aspergillus PCR testing needs to be determined. OBJECTIVES: To determine the influence of anti-mould prophylaxis (AMP) on the performance of PCR blood testing to aid the diagnosis of proven/probable invasive aspergillosis (IA). METHODS: As part of the systematic review and meta-analysis of 22 cohort studies investigating Aspergillus PCR blood testing in 2912 patients at risk of IA, subgroup analysis was performed to determine the impact of AMP on the accuracy of Aspergillus PCR. The incidence of IA was calculated in patients receiving and not receiving AMP. The impact of two different positivity thresholds (requiring either a single PCR positive test result or ≥2 consecutive PCR positive test results) on accuracy was evaluated. Meta-analytical pooling of sensitivity and specificity was performed by logistic mixed-model regression. RESULTS: In total, 1661 (57%) patients received prophylaxis. The incidence of IA was 14.2%, significantly lower in the prophylaxis group (11%-12%) compared with the non-prophylaxis group (18%-19%) (P < 0.001). The use of AMP did not affect sensitivity, but significantly decreased specificity [single PCR positive result threshold: 26% reduction (P = 0.005); ≥2 consecutive PCR positive results threshold: 12% reduction (P = 0.019)]. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to its influence on GM-EIA, AMP significantly decreases Aspergillus PCR specificity, without affecting sensitivity, possibly as a consequence of AMP limiting the clinical progression of IA and/or leading to false-negative GM-EIA results, preventing the classification of probable IA using the EORTC/MSGERC definitions.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc21026078
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20211026133226.0
007      
ta
008      
211013s2021 xxk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1093/jac/dkaa498 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)33374010
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxk
100    1_
$a Cruciani, M $u Azienda ULSS 9 Scaligera, Verona, Italy
245    14
$a The impact of anti-mould prophylaxis on Aspergillus PCR blood testing for the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis / $c M. Cruciani, PL. White, C. Mengoli, J. Löffler, CO. Morton, L. Klingspor, D. Buchheidt, J. Maertens, WJ. Heinz, TR. Rogers, B. Weinbergerova, A. Warris, DEA. Lockhart, B. Jones, C. Cordonnier, JP. Donnelly, RA. Barnes, Fungal PCR Initiative
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: The performance of the galactomannan enzyme immunoassay (GM-EIA) is impaired in patients receiving mould-active antifungal therapy. The impact of mould-active antifungal therapy on Aspergillus PCR testing needs to be determined. OBJECTIVES: To determine the influence of anti-mould prophylaxis (AMP) on the performance of PCR blood testing to aid the diagnosis of proven/probable invasive aspergillosis (IA). METHODS: As part of the systematic review and meta-analysis of 22 cohort studies investigating Aspergillus PCR blood testing in 2912 patients at risk of IA, subgroup analysis was performed to determine the impact of AMP on the accuracy of Aspergillus PCR. The incidence of IA was calculated in patients receiving and not receiving AMP. The impact of two different positivity thresholds (requiring either a single PCR positive test result or ≥2 consecutive PCR positive test results) on accuracy was evaluated. Meta-analytical pooling of sensitivity and specificity was performed by logistic mixed-model regression. RESULTS: In total, 1661 (57%) patients received prophylaxis. The incidence of IA was 14.2%, significantly lower in the prophylaxis group (11%-12%) compared with the non-prophylaxis group (18%-19%) (P < 0.001). The use of AMP did not affect sensitivity, but significantly decreased specificity [single PCR positive result threshold: 26% reduction (P = 0.005); ≥2 consecutive PCR positive results threshold: 12% reduction (P = 0.019)]. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to its influence on GM-EIA, AMP significantly decreases Aspergillus PCR specificity, without affecting sensitivity, possibly as a consequence of AMP limiting the clinical progression of IA and/or leading to false-negative GM-EIA results, preventing the classification of probable IA using the EORTC/MSGERC definitions.
650    12
$a aspergilóza $x diagnóza $x prevence a kontrola $7 D001228
650    _2
$a Aspergillus $x genetika $7 D001230
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a invazivní mykotické infekce $7 D000072742
650    _2
$a mannany $7 D008351
650    _2
$a metaanalýza jako téma $7 D015201
650    _2
$a polymerázová řetězová reakce $7 D016133
650    _2
$a senzitivita a specificita $7 D012680
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a White, P L $u Public Health Wales, Cardiff, UK
700    1_
$a Mengoli, C $u University of Padua, Padua, Italy
700    1_
$a Löffler, J $u University of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Morton, C O $u Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia
700    1_
$a Klingspor, L $u Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
700    1_
$a Buchheidt, D $u Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany
700    1_
$a Maertens, J $u Department of Microbiology, Immunology, and Transplantation, KULeuven, Leuven, Belgium
700    1_
$a Heinz, W J $u University of Wuerzburg, Wuerzburg, Germany
700    1_
$a Rogers, T R $u Trinity College Dublin, St James's Hospital Campus, Dublin, Ireland
700    1_
$a Weinbergerova, B $u Department of Internal Medicine - Haematology and Oncology, Masaryk University and University Hospital Brno, Brno, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Warris, A $u MRC Centre for Medical Mycology, University of Exeter, UK
700    1_
$a Lockhart, D E A $u University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
700    1_
$a Jones, B $u Institute of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, University of Glasgow, UK
700    1_
$a Cordonnier, C $u Hopital Henri Mondor, Creteil, France
700    1_
$a Donnelly, J P $u University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a Barnes, R A $u Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff, UK
710    2_
$a Fungal PCR Initiative
773    0_
$w MED00002514 $t The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy $x 1460-2091 $g Roč. 76, č. 3 (2021), s. 635-638
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33374010 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20211013 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20211026133232 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1714941 $s 1146585
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2021 $b 76 $c 3 $d 635-638 $e 20210211 $i 1460-2091 $m Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy $n J Antimicrob Chemother $x MED00002514
GRA    __
$a MR/N006364/2 $p Medical Research Council $2 United Kingdom
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20211013
Back

Find record

Citation metrics

Archiving options