Background: Invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) remain important causes of morbidity and mortality. The consensus definitions of the Infectious Diseases Group of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and the Mycoses Study Group have been of immense value to researchers who conduct clinical trials of antifungals, assess diagnostic tests, and undertake epidemiologic studies. However, their utility has not extended beyond patients with cancer or recipients of stem cell or solid organ transplants. With newer diagnostic techniques available, it was clear that an update of these definitions was essential. Methods: To achieve this, 10 working groups looked closely at imaging, laboratory diagnosis, and special populations at risk of IFD. A final version of the manuscript was agreed upon after the groups’ findings were presented at a scientific symposium and after a 3-month period for public comment. There were several rounds of discussion before a final version of the manuscript was approved. Results: There is no change in the classifications of “proven,” “probable,” and “possible” IFD, although the definition of “probable” has been expanded and the scope of the category “possible” has been diminished. The category of proven IFD can apply to any patient, regardless of whether the patient is immunocompromised. The probable and possible categories are proposed for immunocompromised patients only, except for endemic mycoses. Conclusions: These updated definitions of IFDs should prove applicable in clinical, diagnostic, and epidemiologic research of a broader range of patients at high-risk.

The epidemiology of invasive candidiasis has evolved in recent years, warranting a review of the changes and the implications for current and future diagnosis and treatment. The overall burden of invasive candidiasis remains high, particularly in the expanding populations of patients at risk of opportunistic infection, such as the elderly or immunosuppressed. Progressive shifts from Candida albicans to non-albicans Candida spp. have been observed globally. The recent emergence of novel, multiresistant species, such as Candida auris, amplifies the call for vigilance in detection and advances in treatment. Among the current treatment options, fluconazole is still widely used throughout the world. Increased resistance to fluconazole, both acquired and naturally emerging, has been observed. Resistance to echinocandins is presently low but this may change with increased use. Improvement of diagnostic techniques and strategies, development of international surveillance networks and implementation of antifungal stewardship programmes represent major challenges for a better epidemiological control of invasive candidiasis.

Background. Invasive fungal infections (IFIs) are life-threatening complications in patients with hemato-oncological malignancies, and early diagnosis is crucial for outcome. The compound 1,3-β-D-glucan (BG), a cell wall component of most fungal species, can be detected in blood during IFI. Four commercial BG antigenemia assays are available (Fungitell, Fungitec-G, Wako, and Maruha). This meta-analysis from the Third European Conference on Infections in Leukemia (ECIL-3) assessed the performance of BG assays for the diagnosis of IFI in hemato-oncological patients. Methods. Studies reporting the performance of BG antigenemia assays for the diagnosis of IFI (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and Mycoses Study Group criteria) in hemato-oncological patients were identified. The analysis was focused on high-quality cohort studies with exclusion of case-control studies. Meta-analysis was performed by conventional meta-analytical pooling and bivariate analysis. Results. Six cohort studies were included (1771 adult patients with 414 IFIs of which 215 were proven or probable). Similar performance was observed among the different BG assays. For the cutoff recommended by the manufacturer, the diagnostic performance of the BG assay in proven or probable IFI was better with 2 consecutive positive test results (diagnostic odds ratio for 2 consecutive vs one single positive results, 111.8 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 38.6–324.1] vs 16.3 [95% CI, 6.5–40.8], respectively; heterogeneity index for 2 consecutive vs one single positive results, 0% vs 72.6%, respectively). For 2 consecutive tests, sensitivity and specificity were 49.6% (95% CI, 34.0%–65.3%) and 98.9% (95% CI, 97.4%–99.5%), respectively. Estimated positive and negative predictive values for an IFI prevalence of 10% were 83.5% and 94.6%, respectively. Conclusions. Different BG assays have similar accuracy for the diagnosis of IFI in hemato-oncological patients. Two consecutive positive antigenemia assays have very high specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. Because sensitivity is low, the test needs to be combined with clinical, radiological, and microbiological findings.