Drugs

, Volume 71, Issue 1, pp 11–41 | Cite as

Echinocandin Antifungal Drugs in Fungal Infections

A Comparison
  • Sharon C. -A. Chen
  • Monica A. Slavin
  • Tania C. Sorrell
Review Article

Abstract

This review compares the pharmacology, spectrum of antifungal activity, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, safety and clinical efficacy of the three licensed echinocandins: caspofungin, micafungin and anidulafungin. Echinocandins inhibit the synthesis of 1,3-β-D-glucan, an essential component of the fungal cell wall, and represent a valuable treatment option for fungal infections.

The echinocandins exhibit potent in vitro and in vivo fungicidal activity against Candida species, including azole-resistant pathogens. For all agents, strains with drug minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of ≤2 mg/mL are considered susceptible; the MIC at which 90% of isolates tested were inhibited (MIC90) values are typically <2 mg/mL but 100-fold higher MIC90 values are seen with Candida parapsilosis (1–2mg/mL) and Candida guilliermondii (1–4 mg/mL). Activity is comparable between the three agents, although limited data indicate that anidulafungin may have low MICs against C. parapsilosis and Candida glabrata strains that demonstrate elevated MICs to caspofungin and micafungin. All three drugs have good fungistatic activity against Aspergillus spp., although minimal effective concentrations of micafungin and anidulfungin are 2- to 10-fold lower than those for caspofungin. Synergistic/additive in vitro effects of echinocandins when combined with a polyene or azole have been observed.

Clinical resistance to the echinocandins is rare despite case reports of caspofungin resistance in several Candida spp. Resistance has been attributed to mutations in the FKS1 gene within two hot spot regions, leading to amino acid substitutions, mostly at position 645 (serine), yet not all FKS1 mutants have caspofungin MICs of >2mg/mL. Of the three echinocandins, the in vitro ‘paradoxical effect’ (increased growth at supra-MIC drug concentrations) is observed least often with anidulafungin.

All echinocandins have low oral bioavailability, and distribute well into tissues, but poorly into the CNS and eye. Anidulafungin is unique in that it undergoes elimination by chemical degradation in bile rather than via hepatic metabolism, has a lower maximum concentration and smaller steady state under the concentration-time curve but longer half-life than caspofungin or micafungin. In children, dosing should be based on body surface area. Daily doses of caspofungin (but not micafungin and anidulafungin) should be decreased (from 50 to 35 mg) in moderate liver insufficiency. All echinocandins display concentration-dependent fungicidal (for Candida) or fungistatic (for Aspergillus) activity. The postantifungal effect is 0.9–20 hours against Candida and <0.5 hours against Aspergillus. The echinocandins are well tolerated with few serious drug-drug interactions since they are not appreciable substrates, inhibitors or inducers of the cytochrome P450 or P-glycoprotein systems. In parallel with the greater clinical experience with caspofungin, this agent has a slightly higher potential for adverse effects/drug-drug interactions, with the least potential observed for anidulafungin. Caspofungin (but not micafungin or anidulafungin) dosing should be increased if coadministered with rifampicin and there are modest interactions of caspofungin with calcineurin inhibitors.

All three agents are approved for the treatment of oesophageal candidiasis, candidaemia and other select forms of invasive candidiasis. Only mica-fungin is licensed for antifungal prophylaxis in stem cell transplantation, whereas caspofungin is approved for empirical therapy of febrile neutro-penia. Caspofungin has been evaluated in the salvage and primary therapy of invasive aspergillosis. Combination regimens incorporating an echinocandin showing promise in the treatment of aspergillosis. However, echinocandins remain expensive to use.

References

  1. 1.
    Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ. Epidemiology of invasive candidiasis: a persistent public health problem. Clin Microbiol Rev 2007; 20: 133–63PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kontoyiannis DP, Marr KA, Park BJ, et al. Prospective surveillance for invasive fungal infections in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients, 2001–2006: overview of the Transplant-Associated Infection Surveillance Network (TRANSNET) Database. Clin Infect Dis 2010; 50: 1091–100PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Neofytos D, Horn D, Anaissie E, et al. Epidemiology and outcome of invasive fungal infection in adult haematopoetic stem cell transplant recipients: analysis of multi-centre Prospective Antifungal Therapy (PATH) Alliance registry. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48: 265–73PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen SC, Slavin M, Nguyen Q, et al. Active surveillance for candidemia, Australia. Emerg Infect Dis 2006; 12: 1508–16PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Morgan J. Global trends in candidemia: review of reports from 1995–2005. Curr Infect Dis Rep 2005; 7: 429–39PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sipsas NV, Lewis RE, Tarrand J, et al. Candidemia in patients with hematologic malignancies in the era of new antifungal agents (2001-2007). Cancer 2009; 115: 4745–52PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bates DW, Su L, Yu DT, et al. Mortality and costs of acute renal failure associated with amphotericin B therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32: 686–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zonios DI, Bennett JE. Update on azole antifungals. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2008; 29: 198–210PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brueggeman RJM, Alffenaar J-W, Bliijlevens NMA, et al. clinical relevance of the pharmacokinetic interactions of azole antifungal drugs with other coadministered agents. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48: 1441–58Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Masuerkar PS, Fountoulakis JM, Hallada TC, et al. Pneumocandins from Zalerion arboricola, II: modification of product spectrum by mutation and medium manipulation. J Antibiot (Tokyo) 1992; 45: 1867–74Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cancidas (caspofungin) [package insert]. Whitehouse Station (NJ): Merck & Co. Inc., 2009 JulGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mycamine (micafungin) [package insert]. Deerfield (IL): Astella Pharma US, Inc., 2008 JanGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eraxis (anidulafungin) [package insert]. New York (NY): Pfizer, 2009 JunGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pappas PG, Kauffman CA, Andes D, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of candidiasis: 2009 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48: 503–35PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Walsh TJ, Anaissie EJ, Denning DW, et al. Treatment of aspergillosis: clinical practice guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46: 327–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Boucher H, Groll A, Chiou C, et al. Newer systemic anti-fungal agents: pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy. Drugs 2004; 64: 1997–2020PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kauffman CA, Carver PL. Update on echinocandin anti-fungals. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2008; 29: 211–20PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sucher AJ, Chahine EB, Balcer HE, et al. Echinocandins: the newest class of antifungals. Ann Pharmacother 2009; 43: 1947–57Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Eschenauer G, DePestel DD, Carver PL. Comparison of echinocandin antifungals. Ther Clin Risk Management 2007; 3: 71–97Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Denning DW. Echinocandin antifungal drugs. Lancet 2003; 362: 1142–51PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wagner C, Graninger W, Presterl E, et al. Echinocandins: comparison of their pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and clinical applications. Pharmacology 2006; 78: 161–77PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    VandenBussche HL, Van Loo DA. A clinical review of echinocandins in pediatric patients. Ann Pharmacother 2010; 44: 166–77PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chandrasekar PH, Sobel JD. Micafungin: a new echinocandin. Clin Infect Dis 2006; 42: 1171–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Vazquez JA, Sobel JA. Anidulafungin: a novel echinocandin. Clin Infect Dis 2006; 43: 215–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mikamo H, Sato Y, Tamaya T. In vitro antifungal activity of FK463, a new water-soluble echinocandin-like lipopeptide. J Antimicrob Chemother 2000; 46: 485–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bal AM. The echinocandins: three useful choice or three too many? Int J Antimicrob Agents 2010; 35: 13–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Garcia-Effron G, Park S, Perlin DS. Correlating echinocandin MIC and kinetic inhibition of fks1 mutant glucan synthases for Candida albicans: implications for interpretive breakpoints. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53: 112–22PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wiederhold NP, Lewis II JS. The echinocandin micafungin: review of the pharmacology, spectrum of activity, clinical efficacy and safety. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2007; 8: 1155–66PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Maligie MA, Selitrennikoff CP. Cryptococcus neoformans resistance to echinocandins: (1,3)beta-glucan synthase activity is sensitive to echinocandins. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 2851–6PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    De la Torre P, Reboli AC. Anidulafungin: a new echinocandin for candidal infections. Expert Rev Infect Ther 2007; 5: 45–52Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pacetti SA, Gelone SP. Caspofungin acetate for treatment of invasive fungal infection. Ann Pharmacother 2003; 37: 90–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    CLSI. Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts. M27-A3. 3rd ed. Wayne (PA): Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute, 2008Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Arendrup MC, Garcia-Effron G, Lass-Florl C, et al. Echinocandin susceptibility testing of Candida species: comparison of EUCAST EDef 7.1 CLSI M27-A3, E test, disk diffusion, and agar dilution methods with RPMI and IsoSensitest media. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010; 54: 426–39PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rodriguez-Tudela JL, Arendrup MC, Barchiesi F, et al. EUCAST definitive document EDef 7.1: method for the determination of broth dilution MICs of antifungal agents for fermentative yeasts. Clin Microbiol Infect 2008; 14: 398–405Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chryssanthou E, Cuenca-Estrella M. Comparison of the Antifungal Susceptibility Testing Subcommittee of the European Committee on Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing proposed standard and the E-test with the NCCLS broth microdilution method for voriconazole and caspofungin susceptibility testing of yeast species. J Clin Microbiol 2002; 40: 3841–4PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wiederhold NP, Grabinski JL, Garcia-Effron G, et al. Pyrosequencing to detect mutations in FKS1 that confer reduced echinocandin susceptibility in Candida albicans. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008; 52: 4145–8PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pfaller MA, Boyken L, Hollis RJ, et al. Wild-type MIC distributions and epidemiological cutoff values (ECVs) for the echinocandins and Candida spp. J Clin Microbiol 2010; 48: 52–6PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ, Ostrosky-Zeichner L, et al. Correlation of MIC with outcome for Candida species tested against caspofungin, anidulafungin and micafungin: analysis and proposal for interpretive MIC breakpoints. J Clin Microbiol 2008; 46: 2620–9PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Reboli AC, Rotstein C, Pappas PG, et al. Anidulafungin versus fluconazole for invasive candidiasis. N Engl J Med 2007; 356: 2472–82PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Garcia-Effron G, Lee S, Park S, et al. Effect of Candida glabrata FKS1 and FKS2 mutations on echinocandin sensitivity and kinetics of 1,3-beta-D-glucan synthase: implication for the existing susceptibility breakpoint. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53: 3690–9PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Pfaller MA, Castanheira M, Diekema DJ, et al. Comparison of European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) and Etest methods with the CLSI broth microdilution method for echinocandin susceptibility testing of Candida species. J Clin Microbiol 2010; 48: 1592–9PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pfaller MA, Boyken L, Hollis RJ, et al. In vitro susceptibility of invasive isolates of Candida spp. to anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micofungin: six years of global surveillance. J Clin Microbiol 2008; 46: 150–6Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pfaller MA, Boyken L, Hollis RJ, et al. In vitro susceptibilities of Candida spp. to caspofungin: four years of global surveillance. J Clin Microbiol 2006; 44: 760–3Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Antachopoulos C, Meletiadis J, Sein T, et al. Comparative in vitro pharmacodynamics of caspofungin, micafungin, and anidulafungin against germinated and nongerminated Aspergillus conidia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008; 52: 321–8PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pfaller MA, Boyken L, Hollis RJ, et al. In vitro susceptibility of clinical isolates of Aspergillus spp. to anidulafungin, caspofungin, and micafungin: a head-to-head comparison using the CLSI M38-A2 broth microdilution method. J Clin Microbiol 2009; 47: 3323–5Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pfaller MA, Boyken L, Hollis RJ, et al. In vitro activities of anidulafungin against more than 2,500 clinical isolates of Candida spp. including 315 isolates resistant to fluconazole. J Clin Microbiol 2005; 43: 5425–7Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Forrest GN, Weekes E, Johnson JK. Increasing incidence of Candida parapsilosis candidemia with caspofungin usage. J Infect 2008; 56: 126–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Blyth CC, Chen SC, Slavin M, et al. Not just little adults: candidemia epidemiology, molecular characterisation and antifungal susceptibility in neonatal and pediatric patients. Pediatrics 2009; 123: 1360–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Wiederhold NP, Najvar L, Bocanegra R, et al. In vivo efficacy of anidulafungin and caspofungin against Candida glabrata and association with in vitro potency in the presence of sera. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007; 51: 1616–20PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Paderu P, Garcia-Effron G, Balashov S, et al. Serum differentially alters the antifungal properties of echinocandin drugs. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007; 51: 2253–6PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Zaas AK, Alexander BD. Echinocandins: role in antifungal therapy. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2005; 6: 1657–68PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ostrosky-Zeichner J, Rex JH, Pappas PG, et al. Antifungal susceptibility survey of 2000 bloodstream Candida isolates in the United States. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2003; 47: 3149–54PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Espinel-Ingroff A. In vitro antifungal activities of anidulafungin and micafungin, licensed agents and the investigational triazole posaconazole as determined by NCCLS methods for 12,052 fungal isolates: review of the literature. Rev Iberoam Micol 2003; 20: 121–36PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Ghannoum MA, Chen A, Buhari M, et al. Differential in vitro activity of anidulafungin, caspofungin and micafungin against Candida parapsilosis isolates recovered from a burn unit. Clin Microbiol Infect 2009; 15: 274–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Cota J, Carden M, Graybill JR, et al. In vitro pharmaco-dynamics of anidulafungin and caspofungin against Candida glabrata isolates, including strains with decreased caspofungin susceptibility. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006; 50: 3926–8PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Van Asbeck E, Clemons KA, Martinez M, et al. Significant differences in drug susceptibility among species in the Candida parapsilosis. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2008; 62: 106–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Ostrosky-Zeichner L, Paetznick VL, Rodriguez J, et al. Activity of anidulafungin in a murine model of Candida krusei infection: evaluation of mortality and disease burden by quantitative tissue cultures and serum (1,3)-B-D-glucan levels. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53: 1639–41PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Kartsonis NA, Killar J, Mixson L, et al. Caspofungin susceptibility testing of isolates from patients with esophageal candidiasis or invasive candidiasis: relationship of MIC to treatment outcome. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 3616–23PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Barchiesi F, Spreghini E, Tomassetti S, et al. Effects of caspofungin against Candida guilliermondii and Candida parapsilosis. Antimcirob Agents Chemother 2006; 50: 2719–27Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kim R, Khachikian D, Reboli AC. A comparative evaluation of properties and clinical efficacy of the echinocandins. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2007; 8: 1479–92PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Ikeda F, Saika T, Sato Y, et al. Antifungal activity of micafungin against Candida and Aspergillus spp. isolated from pediatric patient in Japan. Med Mycol 2009; 47: 145–8Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Douglas CM. Understanding the microbiology of the Aspergillus cell wall and the efficacy of caspofungin. Med Mycol 2006; 44 Suppl. 1: 95–9Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Bowman JC, Abruzzo GK, Flattery AM, et al. Efficacy of caspofungin against Aspergillus flavus, Aspergillus terreus, and Aspergillus nidulans. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006; 50: 420–5Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Roberts J, Schock K, Mariono S, et al. Efficacies of two new antifungal agents, the triazole ravuconazole and the echinocandin LY30366, in an experimental model of invasive aspergillosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000; 44: 3381–8PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ruiz-Cendoya M, Rodriguez MM, Marine M, et al. In vitro interactions of itraconazole and micafungin against clinically important filamentous fungi. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2008; 32: 418–20PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Petraitis V, Petraitiene R, Hope WW, et al. Combination therapy in treatment of experimental pulmonary aspergillosis: in vitro and in vivo correlations of the concentration-and dose-dependent interactions between anidulafungin and voriconazole by Bliss independence drug interaction analysis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53: 2382–91PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Demchok JP, Meletiadis J, Roilides E, et al. Comparative pharmacodynamic interaction analysis of triple combinations of capsofungin and voriconazole or ravuconazole with subinhibitory concentrations of amphotericin B against Aspergillus spp. Mycoses 2010; 53: 239–45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Kahn JN, Hsu MJ, Racine F, et al. Caspofungin susceptibility in Aspergillus and non-Aspergillus moulds: inhibition of glucan synthase and reduction of beta-D-1,3 glu-can levels in culture. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006; 50: 2214–6PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Shalit I, Shadkchan Y, Mircus G, et al. In vitro synergy of caspofungin with licensed and novel antifungal drugs against clinical isolates of Fusarium spp. Med Mycol 2009; 47: 457–62PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Ramage G, Bachmann S, Patterson TF, et al. Investigations of multidrug efflux pumps in relation to fluconazole resistance in Candida albicans biofilms. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002; 49: 973–80PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Mukherjee PK, Chandra J. Candida biofilm resistance. Drug Resist Updat 2004; 7: 301–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Kuhn DM, George T, Chandra J, et al. Antifungal susceptibility of Candida biofilms: unique efficacy of amphotericin B lipid formulations and echinocandins. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002; 46: 1773–80PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Choi HW, Shin JH, Jung SL, et al. Species-specific differences in the susceptibilities of biofilms formed by Candida bloodstream isolates to echinocandin antifungals. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007; 51: 1520–3PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Cocuaud C, Rodier MH, Daniault G, et al. Anti-metabolic activity of caspofungin against Candida albicans and Candida parapsilosis biofilms. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005; 56: 507–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Lazzeli AL, Chatuverdi AK, Pierce CG, et al. Treatment and prevention of Candida albicans biofilms with caspofungin in a novel central venous catheter murine model of candidiasis. J Antimicrob Chemother 2009; 64: 567–70Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Jacobson MJ, Piper KE, Nguyen G, et al. In vitro activity of anidulafungin against Candida albicans biofilms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008; 52: 2242–3PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Pfaller MA, Boyken L, Hollis RJ, et al. Global surveillance of in vitro activity of micafungin against Candida: a comparison with CLSI-recommended methods. J Clin Microbiol 2006; 44: 3533–8PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Pfaller MA, Diekma DJ, Gibbs DL, et al. Geographic and temporal trends in isolation and antifungal susceptibility of Candida parapsilosis: a global assessment from the ARTEMIS DISK antifungal surveillance program, 2001–2005. J Clin Microbiol 2008; 46: 842–9PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Kofteridis DP, Lewis RE, Kontoyiannis DP. Caspofungin-non-susceptible Candida isolates in cancer patients. J Antimicrob Chemother 2010; 65: 293–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Perlin DS. Resistance to echinocandin-class antifungal drugs. Drugs Res Update 2007; 10: 121–30Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Miller CD, Lomaestro BW, Park S, et al. Progressive esophagitis caused by Candida albicans with reduced susceptibility to caspofungin. Pharmacother 2006; 26: 877–80Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Pasquale T, Tomada JR, Ghannoum MA, et al. Emergence of Candida tropicalis resistant to caspofungin [letter]. J Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008; 61: 219Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Moudgal V, Little T, Boikov D, et al. Multiechinocandin-and multiazole-resistant Candida parapsilosis isolates serially obtained during therapy for prosthetic valve endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 767–9PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Krogh-Madsen M, Arendrup M, Heslet L, et al. Ampho-tericin B and caspofungin resistance to Candida glabrata isolates recovered from a critically ill patient. Clin Infect Dis 2006; 42: 938–44PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Niimi K, Monk BC, Hirai A, et al. Clinically significant micafungin resistance in Candida albicans involves modification of a glucan synthase catalytic subunit GSC1 (FKS1) allele followed by loss of heterozygosity. J Antimicrob Chemother 2010; 65: 842–52PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Balashov SV, Park S, Perlin DS. Assessing resistance to the echinocandin antifungal drug caspofungin in Candida albicans by profiling mutations in FKS1. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006; 50: 2058–63PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Pfeiffer CD, Garcia-Effron G, Zaas AK, et al. Breakthrough invasive candidiasis in patients on micafungin. J Clin Microbiol 2010; 48: 2373–80PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Park S, Kelly R, Kahn JN, et al. Specific substitutions in the echinocandin target Fks1p account for reduced susceptibility of rare laboratory and clinical Candida spp. isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 3264–73Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Cota JM, Grabinski JL, Talbert RL, et al. Increases in SLT2 expression and chitin content are associated with incomplete killing of Candida glabrata by caspofungin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008; 52: 1144–6PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Schuetzer-Muehlbauer M, Willinger B, Krapf G, et al. The Candida albicans Cdr2p ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporter confers resistance to caspofungin. Mol Microbiol 2003; 48: 225–35PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Paderu P, Park S, Perlin DS. Caspofungin uptake is mediated by a high-affinity transporter in Candida albicans. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004; 48: 3845–9PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Gardiner RE, Souteropoulos P, Park S, et al. Characterisation of Aspergillus fumigatus mutants with reduced susceptibility to caspofungin. Med Mycol 2005; 43 Suppl. 1: S299–305PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Van Duin D, Casadevall A, Nosanchuk JD. Melanisation of Cryptococcus neoformans and Histoplasma capsulatum reduces their susceptibilities to amphotericin B and caspofungin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002; 46: 3394–400PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Wiederhold NP. Paradoxical echinocandin activity: a limited in vitro phenomenon? Med Mycol 2009; 47 Suppl. 1: S369–75PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Stevens DA, White TC, Perlin DS, et al. Studies of the paradoxical effect of caspofungin at high concentrations. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2005; 51: 173–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Stevens DA, Ichinomiya M, Koshi Y, et al. Escape of Candida from caspofungin inhibition at concentrations above the MIC (paradoxical effect) accomplished by increased cell wall chitin; evidence for beta-1,6-glucan synthesis inhibition by caspofungin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006; 50: 3160–1PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Wiederhold NP, Kontoyiannis DP, Prince RA, et al. Attenuation of the activity of caspofungin at high concentrations against Candida albicans: possible role of cell wall integrity and calcineurin pathways. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 5146–8PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Chamilos G, Lewis RE, Albert N, et al. Paradoxical effect of echinocandins across Candida species in vitro: evidence for echinocandin-specific and Candida species-related differences. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007; 51: 2257–9PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Petriatiene R, Petraitis V, Groll A, et al. Antifungal efficacy of caspofungin (MK-0991) in experimental pulmonary aspergillosis in persistently neutropenic rabbits: pharmacokinetic, drug disposition, and relationship to galacto-mannan antigenemia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002; 46: 12–23Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Wiederhold NP, Kontoyiannis DP, Chi J, et al. Pharmacodynamics of caspofungin in a murine model of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis: evidence of concentration-dependent activity. J Infect Dis 2004; 190: 1464–71PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Clemons K, Espiritu M, Parmar R, et al. Assessment of the paradoxical effect of caspofungin therapy of candidiasis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006; 50: 1293–7PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Dowell JA, Stogniew M, Krause D, et al. Anidulafungin does not require dosage adjustment in subjects with varying degrees of hepatic or renal impairment. J Clin Pharmacol 2007; 47: 461–70PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Sobel JD, Bradshaw SK, Lipka CJ, et al. Caspofungin in the treatment of symptomatic candiduria. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 44: e46–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Sandhu P, Lee W, Xu X, et al. Hepatic uptake of the novel antifungal agent caspofungin. Drug Metab Dispos 2005; 33: 676–82PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Dowell JA, Stogniew M, Krause D, et al. Assessment of the safety and pharmacokinetics of anidulafungin when administered with cyclosporine. J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 45: 227–33PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Farowski F, Cornely OA, Vehreschild JJ, et al. Quantitation of azoles and echinocandins in compartments of peripheral blood by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010; 54: 1815–9PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Nicasio AM, Tessier PR, Nicolau DP, et al. Bronchopul-monary disposition of micafungin in healthy adult volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53: 1218–20PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Nguyen TH, Hoppe-Tichy T, Geiss HK, et al. Factors influencing caspofungin plasma concentrations in patients of a surgical intensive care unit. J Antimicrob Chemother 2007; 60: 100–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Gumbo T, Hiemenz J, Ma L, et al. Population pharmacokinetics of micafungin in adult patients. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2008; 60: 329–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Hebert MF, Smith HE, Marbury TC. Pharmacokinetics of micafungin in healthy volunteers, volunteers with moderate liver disease, and volunteers with renal dysfunction. J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 45: 1145–52PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Walsh TJ, Admason PC, Seibel NL, et al. Pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of caspofungin in children and adolescents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 4536–45PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Neely M, Jafri HS, Seibel NL, et al. The pharmacokinetics and safety of caspofungin in older infants and toddlers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53: 1450–6PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Seibel NL, Schwartz C, Arrieta A, et al. Safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of micafungin (FK463) in febrile neutropenic pediatric patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 3317–24PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Heresi GP, Gerstmann DR, Reed MD, et al. The pharmacokinetics and safety of micafungin, a novel echinocandin in premature infants. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2006; 25: 1110–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Hope WW, Seibel NL, Schwartz CL, et al. Population pharmacokinetics of micafungin in paediatric patients and implications for antifungal dosing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007; 51: 3714–9PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Hope WW, Smith PB, Arrieta A, et al. Population pharmacokinetics of micafungin in neonates and young infants. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010; 54: 2633–7PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Benjamin DK, Driscoll T, Seibel NL, et al. Safety and pharmacokinetics of intravenous anidulafungin in children with neutropenia at high risk for invasive fungal infections. Antimcirob Agents Chemother 2006; 50: 632–8Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Pound MW, Townsend ML, Drew RH. Echinocandin pharmacodynamics: review and clinical implications. J Antimicrob Chemother 2010; 65: 1108–18PubMedGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Ernst EJ, Roling EE, Petzold R, et al. In vivo activity of micafungin (FK-463) against Candida spp.: microdilution, time-kill and postantifungal effect studies. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002; 46: 3846–53PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Fleischhacker M, Radecke C, Schulz B, et al. Paradoxical growth effects of the echinocandins, caspofungin and micafungin, but not of anidulafungin on clinical isolates pf Candida albicans and C. dubliniensis. Eur J Clin Mcirobiol Infect Dis 2008; 27: 127–31Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Andes DR, Diekema DJ, Pfaller MA, et al. In vivo pharmacodynamics target investigation for micafungin against Candida albicans and C. glabrata in a neutropenic murine candidiasis model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008; 52: 3497–503PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Gumbo T, Drusano GL, Liu W, et al. Once-weekly micafungin therapy is as effective as daily therapy for disseminated candidiasis in mice with persistent neutropenia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007; 51: 968–74PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Petraitis V, Petraitiene R, Groll AH, et al. Comparative antifungal activities and plasma pharmacokinetics of micafungin (FK463) against disseminated candidiasis and invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in persistently neutropenic rabbits. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002; 46: 1857–69PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Lewis RE, Albert ND, Kontoyiannis DP. Comparison of the dose-dependent activity and paradoxical effect of caspofungin and micafungin in a neutropenic murine model of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. J Antimicrob Chemother 2008; 61: 1140–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Warn P, Morrissey G, Morrissey J, et al. Activity of micafungin (FK463) against an itraconazole-resistant strain of Aspergillus fumigatus and a strain of Aspergillus terreus demonstrating in vivo resistance to amphotericin B. J Antimicrob Chemother 2003; 51: 913–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Andes D, Diekema DJ, Pfaller MA, et al. In vivo pharma-codynamic characterization of anidulafungin in a neutropenic murine candidiasis model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008; 52: 539–50PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Nguyen KT, Ta P, Hoang BT, et al. Anidulafungin is fungicidal and exerts a variety of post-antifungal effects against Candida albicans, C. glabrata, C. parapsilosis and C. krusei isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53: 3347–52PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Groll AH, Mickiene D, Petraitiene R, et al. Pharmaco-kinetic and pharmacodynamic modelling of anidulafungin (LY303366): reappraisal of its efficacy in neutropenic animal models of opportunistic mycoses using optimal plasma sampling. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002; 45: 2845–55Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    Lewis RE. Pharmacodynamic implications for use of antifungal agents. Curr Opin Pharmacol 2007; 7: 491–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Ernst EJ, Kelpser ME, Pfaller MA. Postantifungal effects of echinocandins, azole, and polyene antifungal agents against Candida albicans and Cryptococcus neoformans. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000; 44: 1108–11PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Clancy CJ, Huang H, Cheng S, et al. Characterising the effects of caspofungin on Candida albicans, Candida parapsilosis, and Candida glabrata isolates by simultaneous time-kill and post-antifungal effect experiments. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006; 50: 2569–72PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Louie A, Deziel M, Liu W, et al. Pharmacodynamics of caspofungin in a murine model of systemic candidiasis: importance of persistence of caspofungin in tissues to understanding drug activity. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 5058–68PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Antachopoulos C, Meletiadis J, Sein T, et al. Concentration-dependent effects of caspofungin on the metabolic activity of Aspergillus species. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007; 51: 881–7PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Manavathu EK, Ramesh MS, Baskaran I, et al. A comparative study of the post-antifungal effect (PAFE) of amphotericin B triazoles and echinocandins on Aspergillus fumigatus and Candida albicans. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004; 53: 386–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Ikawa K, Namura K, Morikawa N, et al. Assessment of micafungin regimens by pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analysis: a dosing strategy for Aspergillus infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 2009; 64: 840–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Roberts J, Schock K, Marion S, et al. Efficacies of two new antifungal agents, the triazole ravuconazole and the echinocandin LY-303366, in an experimental model of invasive aspergillosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000; 44: 3381–8PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Ibrahim AS, Bowman JC, Avanessian V, et al. Caspofungin inhibits Rhizopus oryzae 1,3-B-D-glucan synthase, lowers burden in brain measured by quantitative PCR, and improves survival at a low but not a high dose during murine disseminated zygomycosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 721–7PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Stone JA, Migoya EM, Hickey L, et al. Potential for interaction between caspofungin and nelfinavir or rifampicin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004; 48: 4306–14PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Dowell JA, Stogniew M, Krause D, et al. Lack of pharma-cokinetic interaction between anidulafungin and tacrolimus. J Clin Pharmacol 2007; 45: 305–14Google Scholar
  140. 140.
    Dowell JA, Stogniew M, Karuse D, et al. Assessment of the safety and pharmacokinetics of anidulafungin when administered with cyclosporine. J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 45: 227–33PubMedGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Hebert ME, Townsend RW, Austin S, et al. Concomitant cyclosporine and micafungin pharmacokinetics in healthy volunteers. J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 45: 954–60PubMedGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Hebert MF, Blough DK, Townsend RW, et al. Concomitant tacrolimus and micafungin pharmacokinetics in healthy volunteers. J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 45: 1018–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    Mora-Duarte J, Betts R, Roststein C, et al. Caspofungin vs amphotericin B deoxycholate in the treatment of invasive candidiasis in neutropenic and non-neutropenic patients: a multicentre, randomised double-blind study. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 2020–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Kuse ER, Chetchotisakd P, da Cunha CA, et al. Micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for candidemia and invasive candidiasis: a phase III randomised double-blind trial. Lancet 2007; 369: 1519–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Wang W, Li Q, Hasvold L, et al. Discovery, SAR, synthesis, pharmacokinetic and biochemical characterisation of A-192411L a novel fungicidal lipopeptide-(I). Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2003; 13: 489–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  146. 146.
    Sable CA, Nguyen BV, Chodakewitz JA, et al. Safety and tolerability of caspofungin acetate in the treatment of fungal infections. Transpl Infect Dis 2002; 4: 25–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Van Burik J-AH, Ratnatharathorn V, Stephan DE, et al. Micafungin versus fluconazole for prophylaxis against invasive fungal infections during neutropenia in patients undergoing hematopoeitic stem cell transplantation. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 39: 1407–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Marr KA, Hachem R, Papanicolaou G, et al. Retrospective study of the hepatic safety profile of patients con-comitantly treated with caspofungin and cyclosporine A. Transpl Infect Dis 2004; 3: 110–6Google Scholar
  149. 149.
    Sanz-Rodriguez C, Lopez-Duarte M, Jurado M, et al. Safety of the concomitant use of capsofungin and cyclosporine A in patients with invasive fungal infections. Bone Marrow Transpl 2004; 34: 413–20Google Scholar
  150. 150.
    Red book 2009. Montvale (NJ): Thomas Reuters, 2009Google Scholar
  151. 151.
    Ascioglu S, Rex JH, de Pauw B, et al. Defining opportunistic invasive fungal infections in immunocompromised patients with cancer and hematopoietic stem cell transplants: an international consensus. Clin Infect Dis 2002; 34: 7–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Hiramatsu Y, Maeda Y, Fujii N, et al. Use of micafungin versus fluconazole for antifungal prophylaxis in neutropenic patients receiving hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Int J Hematol 2008; 88: 588–95PubMedGoogle Scholar
  153. 153.
    Chou LS, Lewis RE, Ippoliti C, et al. Caspofungin as primary antifungal prophylaxis in stem cell transplant recipients. Pharmacotherapy 2007; 27: 1644–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    Mattiuzzi GN, Alvarado G, Giles FJ, et al. Open-label, randomized comparison of itraconazole versus caspofungin for prophylaxis in patients with hematologic malignancies. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2006; 50: 143–7PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  155. 155.
    de Fabritiis P, Spagnoli A, Di Bartolomeo P, et al. Efficacy of caspofungin as secondary prophylaxis in patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation with prior pulmonary and/or systemic fungal infection. Bone Marrow Transpl 2007; 40: 245–9Google Scholar
  156. 156.
    Fortún J, Martín-Dávila P, Montejo M, et al. Prophylaxis with caspofungin for invasive fungal infections in high-risk liver transplant recipients. Transplantation 2009; 87: 424–35PubMedGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    Senn L, Eggimann P, Ksontini R, et al. Caspofungin for prevention of intra-abdominal candidiasis in high-risk surgical patients. Intensive Care Med 2009; 35: 903–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  158. 158.
    Walsh TJ, Teppler H, Donowitz GR, et al. Caspofungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy in patients with persistent fever and neutropenia. N Engl J Med 2004; 351: 1391–402PubMedGoogle Scholar
  159. 159.
    Kubiak DW, Bryar JM, McDonnell AM, et al. Evaluation of caspofungin or micafungin as empiric antifungal therapy in adult patients with persistent febrile neutropenia: a retrospective, observational, sequential cohort analysis. Clin Ther 2010; 32: 637–48PubMedGoogle Scholar
  160. 160.
    Villanueva A, Gotuzzo E, Arathoon EG, et al. A randomised double blind study of caspofungin versus fluconazole for the treatment of oesophageal candidiasis. Am J Med 2002; 113: 294–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  161. 161.
    de Wet NT, Bester AJ, Viljoen JJ, et al. A randomized, double blind, comparative trial of micafungin (FK463) vs. fluconazole for the treatment of oesophageal candidiasis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2005; 21: 899–907Google Scholar
  162. 162.
    Krause DS, Reinhardt J, Vazquez JA, et al. Phase 2, randomised dose-ranging study evaluating the safety and efficacy of anidulafungin in invasive candidiasis and candidemia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004; 48: 2021–4PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  163. 163.
    Arathoon EG, Gotuzzo E, Noriega LM, et al. Randomized, double-blind, multicenter study of caspofungin versus amphotericin B for treatment of oropharyngeal and oesophageal candidiasis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2002; 46: 451–7PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  164. 164.
    Vazquez JA, Schranz JA, Clark K, et al. A phase 2, open-label study of the safety and efficacy of intravenous anidulafungin as a treatment for azole-refractory mucosal candidiasis. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2008; 48: 304–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  165. 165.
    Betts RF, Nucci M, Talwar D, et al. A multicenter, double-blind trial of a high-dose caspofungin treatment regimen versus a standard caspofungin treatment regimen for adult patients with invasive candidiasis. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48: 1676–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
  166. 166.
    Pappas PG, Rotstein CMF, Betts RF, et al. Micafungin versus caspofungin for treatment of candidemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 45: 883–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  167. 167.
    Dignan FL, Evans SO, Ethell ME, et al. An early CT-diagnosis-based treatment strategy for invasive fungal infection in allogeneic transplant recipients using caspofungin first line: an effective strategy with low mortality. Bone Marrow Transplant 2009; 44: 51–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  168. 168.
    De Pauw B, Walsh TJ, Donnelly JP, et al. Revised definitions of invasive fungal disease from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Invasive Fungal Infections Cooperative Group and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) Consensus Group. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46: 1813–21PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  169. 169.
    Viscoli C, Herbrecht R, Akan H, et al. An EORTC phase II study of caspofungin as first-line therapy of invasive as-pergillosis in haematological patients. J Antimicrob Chemother 2009; 64: 1274–81PubMedGoogle Scholar
  170. 170.
    Herbrecht R, Maertens J, Baila L, et al. Caspofungin first-line therapy for invasive aspergillosis in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients: an European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer study. Bone Marrow Transpl 2010; 45: 1227–33Google Scholar
  171. 171.
    Maertens J, Raad I, Petrikkos G, et al., Caspofungin Salvage Aspergillosis Study Group. Efficacy and safety of caspofungin for treatment of invasive aspergillosis in patients refractory to or intolerant of conventional anti-fungal therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 39: 1563–71PubMedGoogle Scholar
  172. 172.
    Hiemenz JW, Raad II, Maertens JA, et al. Efficacy of caspofungin as salvage therapy for invasive aspergillosis compared to standard therapy in a historical cohort. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2010; 29: 1387–94PubMedGoogle Scholar
  173. 173.
    Kartsonis NA, Saah AJ, Lipka CJ, et al. Salvage therapy with caspofungin for invasive aspergillosis. J Infect 2005; 50: 196–205PubMedGoogle Scholar
  174. 174.
    Morrissey CO, Slavin MA, O’Reilly MA, et al. Caspofungin as salvage monotherapy for invasive aspergillosis in patients with haematological malignancies or following allogeneic stem cell transplantation: efficacy and concomitant cyclosporin A [published erratum appears in Mycoses 2008; 51 (2): 179]. Mycoses 2007; 50 Suppl. 1: 24–37PubMedGoogle Scholar
  175. 175.
    Maertens J, Egerer G, Shin WS, et al. Caspofungin use in daily clinical practice for treatment of invasive aspergillosis: results of a prospective observational registry. BMC Infect Dis 2010; 10: 182PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  176. 176.
    Denning DW, Marr KA, Lau WM, et al. Micafungin (FK463), alone or in combination with other systemic antifungal agents, for the treatment of acute invasive aspergillosis. J Infect 2006; 53: 337–49PubMedGoogle Scholar
  177. 177.
    Johnson MD, Perfect JR. Use of antifungal combination therapy: agents, order and timing. Curr Fungal Infect Rep 2010; 4: 87–95PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  178. 178.
    Pfizer. Anidulafungin plus voriconazole versus voriconazole for the treatment of invasive aspergillosis [Clinical Trials.govidentifier NCT00531479]. US National Institutes of Health, ClinicalTrials.gov [online]. Available from URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov [Accessed 2010 Nov 30]
  179. 179.
    Leather HL, Wingard JR. Is combination antifungal therapy for invasive aspergillosis a necessity in hematopoietic stem-cell transplant recipients? Curr Opin Infect Dis 2006; 19: 371–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  180. 180.
    Caillot D, Thiébaut A, Herbrecht R, et al. Liposomal amphotericin B in combination with caspofungin for invasive aspergillosis in patients with hematologic malignancies: a randomized pilot study (Combistrat trial). Cancer 2007; 110: 2740–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  181. 181.
    Maertens J, Glasmacher A, Herbrecht R, et al. Multicenter, noncomparative study of caspofungin in combination with other antifungals as salvage therapy in adults with invasive aspergillosis. Cancer 2006; 107: 2888–97PubMedGoogle Scholar
  182. 182.
    Rieger CT, Ostermann H, Kolb HJ, et al. A clinical cohort trial of antifungal combination therapy: efficacy and toxicity in haematological cancer patients. Ann Hematol 2008; 87: 915–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  183. 183.
    Aliff TA, Maslak PG, Jurcic JG, et al. Refractory aspergillus pneumonia in patients with acute leukaemia: successful therapy with combination caspofungin and liposomal amphotericin B. Cancer 2003; 97: 1025–32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  184. 184.
    Marr KA, Boeckh M, Carter RA, et al. Combination antifungal therapy for invasive aspergillosis. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 39: 797–802PubMedGoogle Scholar
  185. 185.
    Kontoyiannis DP, Hachem R, Lewis RE, et al. Efficacy and toxicity of caspofungin in combination with liposomal amphotericin B as primary or salvage treatment of invasive aspergillosis in patients with hematologic malignancies. Cancer 2003; 98: 292–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  186. 186.
    Singh N, Limaye AP, Forrest G, et al. Combination of voriconazole and caspofungin as primary therapy for invasive aspergillosis in solid organ transplant recipients: a prospective, multicenter, observational study. Transplantation 2006; 81: 320–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  187. 187.
    Kusuki S, Hashii Y, Yoshida H, et al. Antifungal prophylaxis with micafungin in patients treated for childhood cancer. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2009; 53: 605–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  188. 188.
    Sawada A, Sakata N, Higuchi B, et al. Comparison of micafungin and fosfluconazole as prophylaxis for invasive fungal infection during neutropenia in children undergoing chemotherapy and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation [in Japanese]. Rinsho Ketsueki 2009; 50: 1692–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  189. 189.
    Mehta PA, Vinks A, Filipovich A, et al. Alternate-day micafungin antifungal prophylaxis in pediatric patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a pharmacokinetic study. Biol Blood Marrow Transpl 2010; 16: 1458–62Google Scholar
  190. 190.
    Maertens JA, Madero L, Reilly AF, et al. A randomized, double-blind, multicenter study of caspofungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for empiric antifungal therapy in pediatric patients with persistent fever and neutropenia. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2010; 29: 415–20PubMedGoogle Scholar
  191. 191.
    Koo A, Sung L, Allen U, et al. Efficacy and safety of caspofungin for the empiric management of fever in neu-tropenic children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2007; 26: 854–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  192. 192.
    Zaoutis TE, Jafri HS, Huang LM, et al. A prospective, multicenter study of caspofungin for the treatment of documented Candida or Aspergillus infections in pediatric patients. Pediatrics 2009; 123: 877–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
  193. 193.
    Odio CM, Araya R, Pinto LE, et al. Caspofungin therapy of neonates with invasive candidiasis. Pediatr Infect Dis 2004; 23: 1093–7Google Scholar
  194. 194.
    Natarajan G, Lulic-Botica M, Rongkavilit C, et al. Experience with caspofungin in the treatment of persistent fungemia in neonates. J Perinatol 2005; 25: 770–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  195. 195.
    Groll AH, Attarbase A, Schuster FR, et al. Treatment with caspofungin in immunocompromised paediatric patient: a multicentre survey. J Antimicrob Chemother 2006; 57: 527–35PubMedGoogle Scholar
  196. 196.
    Queiroz-Telles F, Berezin E, Leverger G, et al. Micafungin versus liposomal amphotericin B for pediatric patients with invasive candidiasis: a substudy of a randomised double-blind trial. Pediatr Infect Dis 2008; 27: 820–6Google Scholar
  197. 197.
    Ostrosky-Ziechner L, Kontoyiannis D, Raffalli J, et al. International, open-label, non-comparative, clinical trial of micafungin alone and in combination for treatment of newly diagnosed and refractory Candidemia. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2005; 24: 654–61Google Scholar
  198. 198.
    Cesaro S, Giacchino M, Locatelli F, et al. Safety and efficacy of a caspofungin-based combination therapy for treatment of proven or probable aspergillosis in pediatric hematological patients. BMC Infect Dis 2007; 18(7): 28Google Scholar
  199. 199.
    Cesaro S, Toffolutti T, Messini C, et al. Safety and efficacy of caspofungin and liposomal amphotericin B, followed by voriconazole in young patients affected by refractory invasive mycosis. Eur J Hematol 2004; 73: 50–5Google Scholar
  200. 200.
    Sidhu MK, van Engen AK, Kleintjens J, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of micafungin versus caspofungin for treatment of systemic Candida infections in the UK. Curr Med Res Opin 2009; 25: 2049–59PubMedGoogle Scholar
  201. 201.
    Wingard JR, Leather HL, Wood CA, et al. Pharma-coeconomic analysis of caspofungin versus liposomal amphotericin B as empirical antifungal therapy for neu-tropenic fever. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2007; 64: 637–43PubMedGoogle Scholar
  202. 202.
    Kaskel P, Tuschy S, Wagner A, et al. Economic evaluation of caspofungin vs liposomal amphotericin B for empiric therapy of suspected systemic fungal infection in the German hospital setting. Ann Hematol 2008; 87: 311–9PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  203. 203.
    Bruynesteyn K, Gant V, McKenzie C, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of caspofungin vs. liposomal amphotericin B for treatment of suspected fungal infections in the UK. Eur J Haematol 2007; 78: 532–9Google Scholar
  204. 204.
    Zilberberg MD, Kothari S, Shorr AF. Cost-effectiveness of micafungin as an alternative to fluconazole empiric treatment of suspected ICU-acquired candidemia among patients with sepsis: a model simulation. Crit Care 2009; 13: R94PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  205. 205.
    Sohn HS, Lee T-J, Kim J, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of micafungin versus fluconazole for prophylaxis of invasive fungal infections in patients undergoing hemato-poietic stem cell transplantation in Korea. Clin Ther 2009; 31: 1105–15PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sharon C. -A. Chen
    • 1
  • Monica A. Slavin
    • 2
  • Tania C. Sorrell
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Infectious Diseases and MicrobiologyWestmead Hospital, and the University of SydneyWestmeadAustralia
  2. 2.Department of Infectious DiseasesPeter MacCallum Cancer CentreMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations