febrile

febrile

Episode #57 – Fun-Gals Just Want to Have Fun: Antifungal with SIDP Breakpoints

57 Cover Art OPT

Summary

Drs. Jillian Hayes and Erin McCreary join for this crossover episode of Febrile & SIDP Breakpoints!

Table of Contents

Credits

Host: Sara Dong

Guests: Jillian Hayes, Erin McCreary

Writing/Producing/Editing/Cover Art: Sara Dong

Infographics: Sara Dong

Our Guests

Jillian Hayes, PharmD, BCIDP

Dr. Hayes is an infectious diseases and antimicrobial stewardship clinical pharmacist at Duke University Hospital in Durham, NC. She obtained her Doctor of Pharmacy degree from the greatest university in the world, the University of South Carolina (go gamecocks), and completed her residency at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. She is an active member of the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists, currently serving as the vice chair of the Publications and Podcasts Committee. Her interests within infectious diseases include antimicrobial stewardship in transitions of care, incorporation of trainees into antimicrobial stewardship, and resident wellness and mentoring.

Erin McCreary, PharmD, BCPS, BCIDP

Dr. McCreary is an infectious diseases pharmacist serving as the Director of Infectious Diseases Improvement and Clinical Research Innovation for UPMC health system and a Clinical Assistant Professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine. She obtained her Doctor of Pharmacy degree from the actual greatest university in the world, Auburn University (war eagle), and completed residency at the University of Wisconsin. She hosts Breakpoints, the SIDP podcast and serves on the SIDP Executive Board. Her research focuses on infectious diseases in immunocompromised hosts, gram-negative resistance, and antimicrobial stewardship implementation science.

Culture

Jillian mentioned the nostalgic joy/excitement from Disney Channel crossovers of the past!  In addition, she loves to dance and hopes to one day be on Dancing with the Stars 🙂

 

Erin is a proud mother of an 18 month old golden retriever named Nora.  She also mentioned being born in Thailand and how her family culture/art is often Thai despite the fact that she is Icelandic.  Lastly, she loves being on the water.

Consult Notes

Case Summary

This case was a bit of “make your own adventure” to discuss various points related to antifungals, but the initial patient stem was a 50 year old with renal transplant who presented with fever, cough, and chest pain

Key Points

Let’s start with a quick note on empiric antifungal therapy

We discussed what factors impact micafungin dosing, especially obesity

  • In general, Erin emphasized that echinocandins are safe and well tolerated!!
  • Echinocandins demonstrate drug exposure – efficacy relationships, and the maximum concentration/minimal inhibitory concentration ratio (Cmax/MIC) and area under the concentration-time curve/MIC ratio (AUC/MIC) are proposed PK/PD markers for clinical response
  • Micafungin may require dosing adjustments based on:
      • MIC of specific Candida spp
      • Weight of patient
      • Age (but we aren’t addressing pediatric dosing in this episode since its an adult case)
      • Critical illness (hypoalbuminemia decreases AUC by 30%)
      • No adjustment required with hepatic or renal impairment
  • We focused on obesity and critical illness during this episode
  • Obesity
  •  

Next up we discussed antifungal therapy in setting of ECMO. Here are some of the considerations that Jillian explained

  • Drugs can get sequestered in the ECMO circuit itself: they bind to the tubing, the oxygenator, which leads to decreased serum concentrations
      • Drugs with higher protein binding often see more sequestration
  • Volume of distribution is important
      • The circuit provides a large surface area / volume of distrbution
      • These patients are typically getting a ton of fluid resuscitation (which even independent of ECMO, will increase volume of distribution)
      • Endothelial activation and leaky capillaries also increase the volume of distribution
  • Higher lipophilicity = ↑extraction from circuit
  • In addition, these patients often will have hepatic dysfunction or require renal replacement therapy, which would also affect drug exposure

Erin briefly spoke about specific antifungal therapy while on ECMO

Some additional resources/references:

AZOLE TIME! There will be a summary from Erin’s masterclass on azoles in the graphics! In addition, here are some other references

Agent

Ashok et al. (10.1007/s12281-022-00430-4)

Chau et al. (10.1111/imj.15587)

Kably et al. (10.1097/FTD.0000000000000952)

 

Itraconazole

Treatment:

Routine for treatment irrespective of formulation

Prophylaxis:

Capsules – Routine for prophylaxis

Solution – Routine for prophylaxis

SUBA-Itra – Selected cases at risk of low exposure (e.g. DDIs)

Other:

TDM for patients who initiate/discontinue interacting med, undergo a formulation change, or demonstrate lack of response or sign of toxicity

Ranges:

Treatment – >1-1.5 mg/L

Prophylaxis – >0.25-0.5 mg/L

Toxicity – 3-5 mg/L

Timing:

5-7 days (loading dose); troughs

10-14 days (no loading dose); troughs

Thereafter, every 1-2 weeks once steady state achieved

Indication:

To ensure adequate absorption; therapeutic concentration

 

Treatment:

Routine for treatment irrespective of formulations

Prophylaxis:

Capsules – Routeine for prophylaxis

Solution – Routine for prophylaxis

SUBA-Itra – Recommended in selected cases at risk of low exposure (e.g. DDIs, GI complications, and young children)

Ranges:

Treatment – 1-4 mg/L (HPLC) (AII for efficacy, BIII for toxicity)

Prophylaxis – 0.5-4 mg/L (HPLC) (AII for efficacy, BIII for toxicity)

Timing:

5-7 days (loading dose); troughs

10-14 days (no loading dose); troughs

Adjustment:

–               If subtx, increase dose by 25-50%

–               If taking capsules, also consider switch to solution or SUBA-Itra

–               Ensure capsule taken with food, avoid H2RA/PPIs

–               Ensure solution on empty stomach

“ITZ TDM is still recommended, but the benefit-to-risk ratio for prolonged prophylaxis in CF is a matter of debate.”

 

TDM Recommendation:

>0.5-1 mg/L (various references)

Voriconazole

Treatment:

Routine for treatment irrespective of formulation

Prophylaxis:

Limited evidence for routine TDM in prophylaxis

Ranges:

Treatment – >1.7-2 mg/L; >2 mg/L if high risk, poor prognosis, bulky disease

Prophylaxis – not established

Toxicity – 4-6 mg/L; routine LFT monitoring and for clinical signs of neurotoxicity recommended

Timing:

Within 2-5 days of initiating therapy

Repeat at 3-5 days may be warranted in: Critical illness, suspected treatment failure, DDIs, or change in dosing

Indication:

To detect therapeutic and toxic concentrations

 

Treatment:

Routine for treatment

Prophylaxis:

Recommended for prophylaxis

Ranges:

Treatment – 1-5.5 mg/L (AII); CNS infection, bulky disease, multifocal infection > 2 mg/L (BIII)

Prophylaxis – 1-5.5 mg/L (AII)

Timing:

2-5 days; trough

Adjustments:

–               0.0–0.49 mg/L: increase by 50%

–               0.5–0.99 mg/L: increase by 25%

–               1.0–5.5 mg/L: no change

–               > 5.5 mg/L and asymptomatic: decrease dose by 25%

–               > 5.5 mg/L with drug-related toxicities: hold one dose and decrease subsequent doses by 50%

“VRZ is the most challenging. There is a large consensus that the drug must be detectable with a trough level .1 mg/L, but contradictory findings have been reported concerning the upper range for trough level. In patients with normal hepatic function, outside the loading dose period, in the absence of significant metabolic inhibition, trough levels .4 mg/L (the peak value established after the PK exploitation of pivotal trials) is unlikely to be achieved with the standard 200 mg ·2 dose. Moreover, safety issues limit the maintenance of high exposures and doses in clinical practice.367–369 The 1-5.5-6 mg/L trough target recommended on the basis of weak evidence is frequently applied as a 1–4 mg/L target, resulting, in clinical practice, in a median or average trough exposure of 1–3 mg/L.”

 

TDM Recommendation

1-2 to 4-6 mg/L (various references)

Posaconazole

Treatment:

Routine for treatment (not required for intravenous)

Prophylaxis:

Suspension– Routine for prophylaxis

Tablets – Selected cases at risk for low exposure

Intravenous – Not required

Ranges:

Treatment – >1-1.25 mg/L

Prophylaxis – >0.5 mg/L

Toxicity – > 4 mg/L associated with PIPH

Timing:

7 days

Indication:

To ensure adequate absorption; therapeutic conecntration

 

Treatment:

Routine for treatment irrespective of formulations

Prophylaxis:

Suspension – Routine for prophylaxis

Tablets – Recommended for selected cases at risk of low exposure (e.g. DDIs, GI complications, young children)

Ranges:

Treatment – > 1 mg/L (AII)

Prophylaxis – > 0.5 (AII for susp.; BII for tabs)

Timing:

After 5-7 days; troughs preferred, untimed concentrations usable given steady serum concentration over time

Early monitoring (e.g. day 2) may be predictive of steady-state concentration

Adjustments:

Suspension:

Prophylaxis: if subtherapeutic, increase to 200 mg four times daily or 300 mg three times daily

Treatment: if subtherapeutic, increase to 400 mg three times daily

Ensure patient taking suspension with food and/or acidic beverage, and avoid H2 antagonists and proton pump inhibitors

Switch to modified-release formulation if patient can swallow tablets

Tablets:

If subtherapeutic, increase to 400 mg daily

Consider administering with high fat meal if previously taken tablets in fasted state

Intravenous:

No data

“PSZ TDM is recommended, especially in curative situations. However, even recent recommendations refer to initial exposure achieved with the oral suspension and do not consider the new tablet formulation. In cases of prophylaxis, the low rate of events limits the demonstration of a clinically relevant threshold. The initial 0.5 or 0.7 mg/L threshold seems appropriate and the question as to whether less than 300 mg can be used with tablets is justified.”

 

TDM Recommendation

> 1 mg/L (various references)

Fluconazole

Treatment: Consider in select circumstances for IFD treatment:

–               Critical illness

–               Renal replacement

–               CNS infection

–               Treatment failure

Ranges:

Efficacy – Trough of 10-15 mg/L (or AUC/MIC > 50). However, not well elucidated.

Toxicity – Threshold not well established. 

Timing:

Optimal timing unclear

We recommend against routine TDM of fluconazole (Not recommended, Level II evidence).”

 

 

Table:

Timing/Ranges:

None specified

 

Considerations:

May be utilised in certain clinical circumstances for IFD treatment (e.g. critically ill patients with sepsis, patients with altered renal function, sanctuary site infections such as CNS, treatment failure or concerns for medication noncompliance)

There is no major new insight regarding TDM for 5FC, FCZ, AmB, and echinocandins. […] The usual targets for FCZ are consistent over time, but the low level of recommendation for TDM raises a number of issues, particularly in cases of IV administration, impaired renal function, and ICU settings.

TDM Recommendation:

10-15 mg/mL (PMID: 32026399, 32535150)

Isavuconazole

Treatment: Consider in select circumstances for IFD treatment:

–               Critical illness

–               Renal replacement

–               CNS infection

–               Treatment failure

–               GVHD

–               ECMO

–               Obesity

Ranges:

Efficacy – Not well elucidated.

Toxicity – 5 mg/L, not consistently demonstrated. 

Timing:

Single trough once steady state has been achieved (2-3 weks); value of repeat testing unclear

“No significant relationship was identified between drug exposure and mortality, clinical responses, overall response or safety outcomes in the SECURE study. However, interindividual variation exists and one trial has demonstrated exposure-related gastrointestinal side-effects, with increased incidence for steady-state concentrations between 4.87 and 5.13 mg/L.”

mrda

Table:

“No”

“ISZ TDM is not generally recommended. However, ISZ use is frequently based on particular clinical features identified as beneficial by TDM.”

 

TDM Recommendation:

> 1 mg/L (PMID: 32535150)

Color Legend: Ashok et al. “Table 1. Azoles with most evidence for TDM”; Ashok et al. “Table 2. Azoles with emerging evidence for therapeutic drug monitoring”;

Some additional resources that I like as well

Check out table 1 for a quick review of spectrum of activity for systemic antifungal agents: Nett JE, Andes DR. Antifungal Agents: Spectrum of Activity, Pharmacology, and Clinical Indications. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2016;30(1):51-83. doi:10.1016/j.idc.2015.10.012

I would draw your attention to Figure 7 with concentrations of various antifungals in tissue and body fluids, a great reference!!  Felton T, Troke PF, Hope WW. Tissue penetration of antifungal agents. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2014;27(1):68-88. doi:10.1128/CMR.00046-13

Goal

Listeners will be able to understand the adjustment of antifungal agents doses in clinical scenarios such as obesity and critical illness

Learning Objectives

After listening to this episode, listeners will be able to:

  • Describe how micafungin dosing is impacted in obesity and critical illness
  • Discuss use of amphotericin in setting of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation
  • Compare and contrast azole antifungal agents in spectrum of activity and adverse effects

Disclosures

Our guests (Jillian Hayes, Erin McCreary) as well as Febrile podcast and hosts report no relevant financial disclosures

Citation

Hayes, J., McCreary, E., Dong, S. “#57 – Fun-Gals Just Want to have Fun: Antifungals with SIDP Breakpoints”. Febrile: A Cultured Podcast. https://player.captivate.fm/episode/bae6e35c-b909-493a-b9e5-6a909b1c5b92

Transcript

Scroll to Top