Fluconazole for the treatment of candidiasis: 15 years experience

References

• Singh N. Invasive mycoses in organ transplant recipients: controversies in prophylaxis and management. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 45(6), 749–755 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bennett JE. Mandell JL, Bennett JE Introduction to mycoses. In: Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases, 5th edition., Dolin R (Eds). Churchill Livingstone, PA, USA, 2654–2656 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Beck Sague CM, Jarvis WR. Secular trends in the epidemiology of nosocomial fungal infection in the United States, 1980-1990. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. J. Infect. Dis. 167, 1247–1251 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guiot HF, Fibbe WE, van't Wout JW. Risk factors for fungal infection in patients with malignant hematologic disorders: implications for empirical therapy and prophylaxis. Clin. Infect. Dis. 18,525–532 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wey SB, Mori M, Pfaller MA, et al. Risk factors for hospital-acquired candidemia. A matched case-control study. Arch. Intern. Med. 149,2349–2353 (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfaller MA, Jones RN, Doern GV, et al. National surveillance of nosocomial bloodstream infection due to Candida albicans: frequency of occurrence and antifungal susceptibility in the SCOPE program. Diagn. Microbial Infect. Dis. 31, 327–332 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pappas PG, Rex JH, Sobel JD, et al Practice guidelines for the treatment of candidiasis. Clin. Infect. Dis. 38(2), 161–189 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wingard JR, Merz WG, RinaMi MG, et al. Increase in Candida krusei infection among patients with bone marrow transplantation and neutropenia treated prophylactically with fluconazole. N Engl J. Med. 325, 1274–1277 (1991).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abi-Said D, Anaissie E, Uzun O, et al. The epidemiology of hematogenous candidiasis caused by different Candidia species. Clin. Infect. Dis. 24,1122–1128 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Komshian SV, Uwaydah AK, Sobel JD. Fungemia caused by Candidia spp. and Turolopsis glabrata in the hospitalized patient: frequency, characteristics and evaluation of factors influencing outcome. Rev. Infect. Dis. 11,379–390(1989).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pfaller MA. Nosocomial candidiasis: emerging species, reservoirs and modes.Clin. Infect. Dis. 22, S89—S94 (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Fidel PL Jr, Vazquez JA, Sobel JD. Candida glabrata: review of epidemiology, pathogenesis and clinical disease with comparison to C. albi cans. Clin. Microbial. Rev. 12,80–96 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sobel JD. Vaginitis. N Engl J. Med. 337, 1896–1903 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darouiche RO. Oropharyngeal and esophageal candidiasis in immunocompromised patients: treatment issues. Clin. Infect. Dis. 26,259–274 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sobel JD. Treatment of vaginal candida infection. Exp. Opin. Pharmacother. 3(8), 1059–1065 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fotos PG, Lilly JP. Clinical management of oral and perioral candidosis. Dermatol. Clin. 14(2), 273–280 (1996).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Minamoto GY, Rosenberg AS. Fungal infections in patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. Med. Clin. North Am. 81(2), 381–409 (1997).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Epstein JB, Polsky B. Oropharyngeal candidiasis: a review of its clinical spectrum and current therapies. Clin. Ther. 20(1), 40–57 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maddux MS, Barriere SL. A review of complications of amphotericin therapy: recommendation for prevention and management. Drug Intell. Clin. Pharm. 14,177–181 (1980).
   Google Scholar
• Saag MS, Dismukes WE. Azole antifungal agents: emphasis on new triazoles. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 32,1–8 (1988).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grant SM, Clissold SR Fluconazole: a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic potential in superficial and systemic mycoses. Drugs 39,877–916 (1990).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goa KL, Barradell LB. Fluconazole. An update of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic use in major superficial and systemic mycoses in immunocompromised patients. Drugs 50, 658–690 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Como JA, Dismukes WE. Oral azole drugs as systemic antifungal therapy. N Engl. J. Med. 330,263–272 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevens DA. The new generation of antifungal drugs. Eur. J. Clin. Microbial Infect. Dis. 7,732–735 (1988).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blum RA, d'Andrea DT, Fiorentino BM, et al. Increased gastric pH and the bioavailability of fluconazole and ketoconazole. Ann. Intern. Med. 114(9), 755–757 (1991).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brammer KW, Farrow PR, Faulkner JK. Pharmacokinetics and tissue penetration of fluconazole (UK-49,858) in humans. Rev. Infect. Dis. 12, S318—S326 (1990).
   Google Scholar
• Drew RH, Perfect JR, Gallis HA. Use of fluconazole in a patient with documented malabsoportion of ketoconazole. Clin. Pharm. 7,622–623 (1988).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ebden P, Neill P, Farrow PR. Sputum levels of fluconazole in humans. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 33, 963–964. (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tucker RM, Williams PL, Arathoon EG, et al. Pharmacokinetics of fluconazole in cerebrospinal fluid and serum in human coccidoidal meningitis. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 32,369–373. (1988).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foulds G, Wajszczuk C, Weidler DJ, et al. Steady-state parenteral kinetics of fluconazole in man. Ann. 1VY Acad. Sci. 544,427-430 (1988).
   Google Scholar
• Debruyne D. Clinical pharmacokinetics of fluconazole in superficial and systemic mycoses. Clin. Pharmacoki net. 33,52–77 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh TJ, Pizzo A. Treatment of systemic fungal infections: recent progress and current problems. Eur. J. Clin. Microbial Infect. Dis. 7, 460–475 (1988).
   Google Scholar
• Humphrey MJ, Jevons S, Tarbit MH. Pharmacokinetic evaluation of UK-49,858, a metabolically stable triazole antifungal agent, in animals and humans. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 28, 648–653 (1985).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dudley MN. Clinical pharmacology of fluconazole. Pharmacotherapy 10(Suppl.), 141–145 (1990).
   Google Scholar
• Rex JH, Cooper WG Jr, Men JN, et al. Antifungal susceptibility testing: practical aspects and current challenges. Clin. Microbial Rev. 14,643–658 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cameron ML, Schell WA, Bruch S, et al. Correlation of in vitro fluconazole resistance of Candida isolates in relation to therapy and symptoms of individuals seropositive for human immunodeficiency virus Type I. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 37,2449–2453 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Annaissie EF, Karyotakis NC, Hachem R, et al Correlation between in vitro and in vivoactivity of antifungal agents against Candidia spp.J Infect. Dis. 170,384–389 (1994).
   Google Scholar
• National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Reference method for broth dilution antifitngal susceptibiliot testing of yeasts; approved standard M27-A. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, Wayne, PA, USA, (1997).
   Google Scholar
• Ramani R, Chaturvedi V. Proficiency testing program for clinical laboratory performing antifungal susceptibility testing of pathogenic yeast species. J. Clin. Mircobial 41,1143–1146 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Morace G, Amato G, Bistoni F, et al. Multicenter comparative evaluation of six commercial systems and the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards M27-A broth microdilution method for fluconazole susceptibility testing of Candida spp. J. Clin. Microbial. 40, 2953–2958 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostrosky-Zeichner L, Rex JH, Pappas PG, et al. Antifungal susceptibility survey of 2000 bloodstream Candida isolates in the United States. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 47(10), 3149–3154 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Rogers TE, Galgiani JN. Activity of fluconazole (UK 49,858) and ketoconazole against Candidia albicans in vitro and in vivo. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 30,418–422 (1986).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price MF, LaRocco MT, Gentry LO. Fluconazole susceptibilities of Candida spp. and distribution of species recovered from blood cultures over a 5-year period. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 38, 1422–1424 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohkawa M, Tokunaga S, Takashima M, et al. In vitro susceptibility testing of Candida isolates from clinical specimens to four antifungal agents. Chemotherapy 36,396–402 (1990).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morace G, Manzara S, Dettori G. In vitro susceptibility of 119 yeast isolates to fluconazole, 5-fluorocytosine, amphotericin B and ketoconazole. Chemotherapy 37,23–31 (1991).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin E, Parras P, del Carmen Lozano M. In vitro susceptibility of 245 yeast isolates to amphotericin B, 5-fluorocytosine, ketoconazole, fluconazole and itraconazole. Chemotherapy 38,335–339 (1992).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dermoumi H. In vitro susceptibility of fungal isolates of clinically important specimens to itraconazole, fluconazole and amphotericin B. Chemotherapy 40,92–98 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arias A, Arevalo MP, Andreu A, et al. In vitro susceptibility of 545 isolates of Candida spp. to four antifungal agents. Mycoses 37,285–289 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfaller MA, Messer SA, Gee S, et al. In vitro susceptibilities of Candida dubliniensis isolates tested against the new triazole and echinocandin antifungal agents. J. Clin. Microbia. 37(3), 870–872 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Espinel-Ingroff A, Pfaller M, Messer SA, et al. Multicenter comparison of the Sensititre YeastOne colorimetric antifungal panel with the NCCLS M27-A2 reference method for testing new antifungal agents against clinical isolates of Candida spp. J. Clin. Microbial 42(2), 718–721 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Hughes CE, Beggs WH. Action of fluconazole (UK-49,858) in relation to other systemic antifungal azoles. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 19,171–174 (1987).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klepser ME, Wolfe EJ, Jones RN, et al. Antifungal pharmacodynamic characteristics of fluconazole and amphotericin B tested against Candida albicans. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 41, 1392–1395 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess DS, Hastings RW, Summers KK, et al. Pharmacodynamics of fluconazole, itraconazole and amphotericin B against Candida albicans. Diag Microbial Infect. Dis. 36,13–18 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Louie A, Drusano GL, Banerjee P, et al. Pharmacodynamics of fluconazole in a murine model of systemic candidiasis. Antimicrob. Agents. Chemother. 42, 1105–1109 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andes D, van Ogtrop M. Characterization and quantitation of the pharmacodynamics of fluconazole in a neutropenic murine disseminated candidiasis infection model. Antimicrob. Agents. Chemother. 43, 2116–2120 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Etten EWMden Heuvel-de Groot C, Bakker-Woudenberg SJM , can. Efficacies of amphotericin B-desoxycholate (Fungizone), liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) and fluconazole in the treatment of systemic candidosis in immunocompetent and leucopenic mice. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 32,723–739 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh TJ, Aoki S, Mechinaud F, et al. Effects of preventive, early and late antifungal chemotherapy with fluconazole in different granulocytopenic models of experimental disseminated candidiasis. J. Infect. Dis. 161,755–760 (1990).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cacciapuoti A, Loebengerg D, Parmegiani R, et al Comparison of SCH-39304, fluconazole and ketoconazole for the treatment of systemic infections in mice. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 36,64–67 (1992).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bannatyne RI, Cheng PC, Fong IW Comparison of the efficacies of cilofungin, fluconazole and amphotericin B in the treatment of systemic Candidia albicans infection in the neutropenic mouse. Infection 20,168–170 (1992).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Richardson K, Brammer KW, Marriott MS, et al. Activity of UK-49,858, a bis-triazole derivative, against experimental infections with Candidia albicans and Trichophyton mentagrophytes. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 27(5), 832–835 (1985).
   Google Scholar
• Sobel JD. Treatment of vaginal candida infections. Exp. Opin. Pharmacother. 3(8), 1059–1065 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sobel JD, Faro S, Force RW, et al. Vulvovaginal candidiasis: epidemiologic, diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol 178(2), 203–211 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• Haefner HK. Current evaluation and management of vulvovaginitis. Clin. Obstet. Gynecol 42(2), 184–195 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clinical Effectiveness Group. National guideline for the management of vulvovaginal candidiasis. Sex. Transm. Infect. 75\(Suppl. 1), S19—S20 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Tooley PJ. Patient and doctor preferences in the treatment of vaginal candidiasis. Practitioner 229,655–662 (1985).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Edelman DA, Grant S. One-day therapy for vaginal candidiasis. A review. J. Reprod. Med. 44,543–547 (1999).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sobel JD, Kapernick PS, Zervos M, et al. Treatment of complicated Candida vaginitis: comparison of single and sequential doses of fluconazole. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol 185(2), 363–369 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sobel JD. Management of patients with recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis. Drugs 63(11), 1059–1066 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schuman P, Capps L, Peng G, et al. Weekly fluconazole for the prevention of mucosal candidiasis in women with HIV infection. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Terry Beirn Community Programs for Clinical Research on AIDS. Ann. Intern. Med. 126(9), 689–696 (1997).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vazquez JA, Sobel JD. Mucosal candidiasis. Infect. Dis. Clin. North Am. 16(4), 793–820 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vazquez JA. Options for the management of mucosal candidiasis in patients with AIDS and HIV infection. Pharmacotherapy 19(1), 76–87 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darouiche RO. Oropharyngeal and esophageal candidiasis in immunocompromised patients: treatment issues. Clin. Infect. Dis. 26,259–274 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein JB, Polsky B. Oropharyngeal candidiasis: a review of its clinical spectrum and current therapies. Clin. The,: 20(1), 40–57 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• Gtaybill JR, Vazques J, Datouiche RO, et al Itraconazole oral solution: a novel and effective treatment for oropharyngeal candidiasis in HIV/AIDS patients. Am. J. Med 104,33–39 (1998).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Powderly WG, Mayer KH, Perfect JR Diagnosis and treatment of oropharyngeal candidiasis in patients infected with HIV: a critical reassessment. AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses 15,1405–1412 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vazquez JA. Invasive oesophageal candidiasis: current and developing treatment options. Drugs. 63(10), 971–989 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Arathoon EG, Gotuzzo E, Noriega LM, et al Randomized, double-blind, multicenter study of caspofungin versus amphotericin B for treatment of oropharyngeal and esophageal candidiases. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 46(2), 451-457(2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ally R, Schurmann D, Kreisel W, et al A randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter trial of voriconazole and fluconazole in the treatment of esophageal candidiasis in immunocompromised patients. Clin. Infict. Dis. 33(9), 1447–1454 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rex JH, Bennett JE, Sugar AM, et al A randomized trial comparing fluconazole with amphotericin B for the treatment of candidemia in patients without neutropenia. Candidemia Study Group and the National Institute. N Engl J Med. 331(20), 1325–1330 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• •First adequately designed clinical trial to demonstrate comparable efficacy of fluconazole to amphotericin B for the treatment of candidemia and was the impetus for its dominance as antifungal therapy for candidiasis infections today.
   Google Scholar
• Phillips P, Shafran S, Garber G, et al. Multicenter randomized trial of fluconazole versus amphotericin B for treatment of candidemia in non-neutropenic patients. Canadian Candidemia Study Group. Eur Clin. Microbial Infict. Dis. 16(5), 337–345 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anaissie EJ, Rex JH, Uzun O, et al Predictors of adverse outcome in cancer patients with candidemia. Am. J Med 104,238–245 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen MH, Peacock JE, Tanner DC, et al Therapeutic approaches in patients with candidemia: evaluation in a multicenter, prospective, observational study. Arch. Intern. Med 155,2429–2435 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rex JH, Pappas PG, Karchmer AW, et al A randomized and blinded multicenter trial of high-dose fluconazole plus placebo versus fluconazole plus amphotericin B as therapy for candidemia and its consequences in non-neutropenic subjects. Clin. Infict. Dis. 36(10), 1221–1228 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• •Large clinical study that produced the first clinical data demonstrating the potential of combination antifungal therapy when previous in vitro and in vivo studies had suggested mixed results.
   Google Scholar
• Van Burik J, Ratanatharathorn V, Lipton J, et al. Randomized, double-blind trial of micafungin versus fluconazole for the prophylaxis of invasive fungal infections in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplant, NIAID/BAMSG Protocol 46. 41st Interscience Conference Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Am. Soc. Microbial (2001) (Abstract M1238).
   Google Scholar
• Walsh T, Sable C, Depauw B, et al. A randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial of caspofungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy of persistently febrile neutropenic patients. 41st Interscience Conference Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Am. Soc. Microbial (2001) (Abstract M1761).
   Google Scholar
• Edwards DE. International conference for the development of a consensus on the management and prevention of severe candidal infections. Clin. Infect. Dis. 25, 43–59 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winston DJ, Hathorn JW, Schuster MG, et al. A multicenter, randomized trial of fluconazole versus amphotericin B for empiric antifungal therapy of febrile neutropenic patients with cancer. Am. J. Med. 108(4), 282–289 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warnock DW. Fungal infections in neutropenia: current problems and chemotherapeutic control. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 41(Suppl. D), 95–105 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• Malik IA, Moid I, Aziz Z, et al. A randomized comparison of fluconazole with amphotericin B as empiric antifungal agents in cancer patients with prolonged fever and neutropenia. Am. J. Med. 105, 478–483 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eggimann P, Francioli P, Bille J, et al. Fluconazole prophylaxis prevents intra-abdominal candidiasis in high-risk surgical patients. Crit. Care. Med. 27(6), 1066–1072 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winston DJ, Pakrasi A, Busuttil RW. Prophylactic fluconazole in liver transplant recipients. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ann. Intern. Med. 131(10), 729–737 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garbino J, Lew DP, Romand JA, et al. Prevention of severe Candida infections in nonneutropenic, high-risk, critically ill patients: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients treated by selective digestive decontamination. Intensive Care Med. 28(12), 1708–1717 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pelz RK, Hendrix CW, Swoboda SM, et al. Double-blind placebo-controlled trial of fluconazole to prevent candidal infections in critically-ill surgical patients. Ann. Surg. 233(4), 542–548 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• •Adequately designed clinical trial that demonstrated the impact of fluconazole on the prevention of significant fungal infections in the critically ill surgical patient.
   Google Scholar
• Cuttner J, Troy KM, Fumaro L, et al. Clotrimazole treatment for prevention of oral candidiasis in patients with acute leukemia undergoing chemotherapy. Results of a double-blind study. Am. J. Med. 81,771–774 (1986).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• DeGregorio MW, Lee WMF, Ries CA. Candida infections in patients with acute leukemia: ineffectiveness of nystatin prophylaxis and relationship between oropharyngeal and systemic candidiasis. Cancer 50,2780–2784 (1982).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodman JL, Winston DJ, Greenfield RA, et al. A controlled trial of fluconazole to prevent fungal infection in patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation. N Engl J. Med. 326, 845–851 (1992).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• •First adequately designed trial that demonstrated significant prevention of candidiasis with prophylactic use of fluconazole in patients at high risk of fungal infections including bone marrow transplant recipients.
   Google Scholar
• Slavin MA, Osborne B, Adams R, et al. Efficacy and safety of fluconazole prophylaxis for fungal infections after bone marrow transplantation — a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. J. Infect. Dis. 171,1545–1552 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar