A novel highly bio‐available itraconazole formulation (SUBA®‐Itraconazole) for anti‐fungal prophylaxis in lung transplant recipients
- 16 February 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Transplant Infectious Disease
- Vol. 23 (4), e13587
- https://doi.org/10.1111/tid.13587
Abstract
Antifungal prophylaxis remains a mainstay of lung transplantation, given invasive fungal infection is a common and serious complication after lung transplantation. Choice of systemic agent to prevent invasive fungal infection varies between centres and funding of agents remains challenging. Our centre has recently changed from posaconazole to a highly bioavailable formulation of itraconazole (SUBA®‐itraconazole) at substantially reduced cost, but safety and toxicity require further assessment. A retrospective study of lung transplant patients receiving systemic antifungal prophylaxis from December 2016 through December 2019 following change from posaconazole to itraconazole as standard practice. 150 patients with lung transplants were managed in this time period, with 88 (59%) receiving at least 1 mold‐active triazole during the study period. 48 (58%) of these patients received SUBA®‐itraconazole; 68 (82%) received posaconazole and 10 (12%) received voriconazole. The average cost per patient during the study period was significantly lower on SUBA®‐itraconazole (mean $1,548/patient/6 month course) than posaconazole (mean $16,921.35/patient/6 month course). Target trough concentrations for prophylaxis of itraconazole >0.5 mg/L and posaconazole >0.7 mg/L were achieved on empiric dosing in 49% and 68% respectively. Overall trough itraconazole (0.50 vs 1.12 mg/L, p < 0.001) and posaconazole (1.37 vs 2.10 mg/L p < 0.001) concentrations were significantly lower in patients with cystic fibrosis. Calcineurin inhibitor dose changes on introduction or cessation were similar for SUBA®‐itraconazole and posaconazole. Breakthrough invasive fungal infection and toxicity were rare. SUBA®‐itraconazole is well tolerated, associated with rare breakthrough invasive fungal infection, and lower cost. Prospective studies following general introduction are required to determine long‐term safety, tolerability and efficacy.Keywords
This publication has 42 references indexed in Scilit:
- The International Thoracic Organ Transplant Registry of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation: Thirty-sixth adult lung and heart–lung transplantation Report—2019; Focus theme: Donor and recipient size matchThe Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 2019
- Invasive Fungal Infection After Lung Transplantation: Epidemiology in the Setting of Antifungal ProphylaxisClinical Infectious Diseases, 2019
- Lung transplant: the Western Australian experienceInternal Medicine Journal, 2018
- Fungal Infections After Lung TransplantationClinics in Chest Medicine, 2017
- Is universal antifungal prophylaxis mandatory in adults after lung transplantation? A review and meta‐analysis of observational studiesClinical Transplantation, 2016
- ICU Care Before and After Lung TransplantationSocial psychiatry. Sozialpsychiatrie. Psychiatrie sociale, 2016
- Lung transplantation at DukeJournal of Thoracic Disease, 2016
- The 2015 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation Guidelines for the management of fungal infections in mechanical circulatory support and cardiothoracic organ transplant recipients: Executive summaryThe Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 2016
- Cost of Invasive Fungal Infections in the Era of New Diagnostics and Expanded Treatment OptionsPharmacotherapy: The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug Therapy, 2012
- Invasive Fungal Infections among Organ Transplant Recipients: Results of the Transplant‐Associated Infection Surveillance Network (TRANSNET)Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2010