Anidulafungin Versus Micafungin in the Treatment of Candidemia in Adult Patients

• Published in: Mycopathologia (1975) Vol. 185; no. 4; pp. 653 - 664
• Main Authors: Suh, Jin Woong, Kim, Sun Bean, Yoon, Young Kyung, Sohn, Jang Wook, Kim, Min Ja, Kim, Jong Hun
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 01.08.2020; Springer; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Analysis; Anidulafungin; Antifungal agents; Biomedical and Life Sciences; Candidemia; Candidiasis; Care and treatment; Caspofungin; Comorbidity; Echinocandins; Eukaryotic Microbiology; Health aspects; Hepatotoxicity; Life Sciences; Medical centers; Medical colleges; Medical Microbiology; Medical research; Medicine, Experimental; Micafungin; Microbial Ecology; Microbiology; Mortality; Mycoses; Original; Original Article; Patients; Plant Sciences; Safety; Efficacy; Candidemia; Safety; Anidulafungin; Micafungin
• ISSN: 0301-486X; 1573-0832
• DOI: 10.1007/s11046-020-00471-8

Background Echinocandins are recommended for the treatment of invasive candidiasis and candidemia. However, there are few studies comparing anidulafungin and micafungin in terms of efficacy and safety. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety between anidulafungin and micafungin treatment for adult patients with candidemia. Methods This retrospective cohort study performed on adult candidemia patients diagnosed from January 2006 through December 2018 at a tertiary medical center. The study subjects included adult patients ≥ 19 years with candidemia who were only treated with anidulafungin or micafungin for ≥ 3 days. Clinical characteristics were collected and analyzed. Hepatotoxicity was assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 5.0. Results A total of 98 patients with candidemia were treated with anidulafungin ( n  = 52, 53.1%) or micafungin ( n  = 46, 46.9%). There were no significant differences in age, sex, source of candidemia, and comorbidities between the anidulafungin and micafungin groups. Although there were more patients with abnormal baseline liver function test (LFT) in the anidulafungin group, the rate of clinical response (51.9% vs. 46.7%), mycological response (76.9% vs. 67.4%), and mortality (30-day mortality 26.9% vs. 21.7% and 90-day mortality 78.8% vs. 73.9%) was similar between the anidulafungin and micafungin groups. Also, there was no significant difference in terms of hepatotoxicity, even among the patients with abnormal baseline LFT between the two groups. Conclusions Our results suggest that clinical efficacy and safety may be similar between anidulafungin and micafungin treatment for adult patients with candidemia.