Outcomes of patients with invasive fusariosis who undergo further immunosuppressive treatments, is there a role for secondary prophylaxis?

Summary: Background: Patients treated for invasive aspergillosis may relapse during subsequent periods of immunosuppression and should receive secondary prophylaxis. Little is known about the frequency of relapse and practices of secondary prophylaxis for invasive fusariosis (IF). Objectives: Evaluate practices of secondary prophylaxis and the frequency of relapse in patients who survived IF and were exposed to subsequent periods of immunosuppression. Methods: Multicentre retrospective study of patients with haematological malignancies who developed IF, survived the initial fungal disease period, and were exposed to subsequent periods of immunosuppression. Results: Among 40 patients, 35 received additional chemotherapy and developed neutropenia (median, 24 days; range, 4‐104), and five received glucocorticoids for the treatment of graft‐vs‐host disease. Overall, 32 patients received secondary prophylaxis (voriconazole in 24) for a median of 112 days (range, 12‐468). IF relapsed in five patients (12.5%): 2/8 (25%) not on prophylaxis and 3/32 (9.4%) receiving prophylaxis. Among 28 patients with disseminated IF, relapse occurred in 2/2 (100%) not on prophylaxis and in 3/26 (11.5%) on prophylaxis (P = 0.03). All patients who relapsed IF died. Conclusions: Patients with IF who survive the initial disease may relapse if exposed to subsequent episodes of immunosuppressive therapies. Secondary prophylaxis should be considered, especially if IF was disseminated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]