Jessica E Morgan1,2, Hadeel Hassan3, Julia V Cockle3, Christopher Lethaby3, Beki James3, Robert S Phillips4,3. 1. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK. jem539@york.ac.uk. 2. Department of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Great George Street, Leeds, LS1 3EX, UK. jem539@york.ac.uk. 3. Department of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Great George Street, Leeds, LS1 3EX, UK. 4. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The incidence of invasive fungal disease (IFD) is rising, but its treatment in paediatric haematology and oncology patients is not yet standardised. This review aimed to critically appraise and analyse the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) that are available for paediatric IFD. METHODS: Electronic searches of MEDLINE, MEDLINE in-Process & Other non-Indexed Citations, the Guidelines International Network (GIN), guideline.gov and Google were performed and combined fungal disease (Fung* OR antifung*OR Candida* OR Aspergill*) with prophylaxis or treatment (prophyl* OR therap* OR treatment). All guidelines were assessed using the AGREE II tool and recommendations relating to prophylaxis, empirical treatment and specific therapy were extracted. RESULTS: Nineteen guidelines met the inclusion criteria. The AGREE II scores for the rigour of development domain ranged from 11 to 92 % with a median of 53 % (interquartile range 32-69 %). Fluconazole was recommended as antifungal prophylaxis in all nine of the included guidelines which recommended a specific drug. Liposomal amphotericin B was recommended in all five guidelines giving empirical therapy recommendations. Specific therapy recommendations were given for oral or genital candidiasis, invasive candida infection, invasive aspergillosis and other mould infections. CONCLUSIONS: In many areas, recommendations were clear about appropriate practice but further clarity was required, particularly relating to the decision to discontinue empirical antifungal treatment, the relative benefits of empiric and pre-emptive strategies and risk stratification. Future CPGs could consider working to published guideline production methodologies and sharing summaries of evidence appraisal to reduce duplication of effort, improving the quality and efficiency of CPGs in this area.
PURPOSE: The incidence of invasive fungal disease (IFD) is rising, but its treatment in paediatric haematology and oncology patients is not yet standardised. This review aimed to critically appraise and analyse the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) that are available for paediatric IFD. METHODS: Electronic searches of MEDLINE, MEDLINE in-Process & Other non-Indexed Citations, the Guidelines International Network (GIN), guideline.gov and Google were performed and combined fungal disease (Fung* OR antifung*OR Candida* OR Aspergill*) with prophylaxis or treatment (prophyl* OR therap* OR treatment). All guidelines were assessed using the AGREE II tool and recommendations relating to prophylaxis, empirical treatment and specific therapy were extracted. RESULTS: Nineteen guidelines met the inclusion criteria. The AGREE II scores for the rigour of development domain ranged from 11 to 92 % with a median of 53 % (interquartile range 32-69 %). Fluconazole was recommended as antifungal prophylaxis in all nine of the included guidelines which recommended a specific drug. Liposomal amphotericin B was recommended in all five guidelines giving empirical therapy recommendations. Specific therapy recommendations were given for oral or genital candidiasis, invasive candida infection, invasive aspergillosis and other mould infections. CONCLUSIONS: In many areas, recommendations were clear about appropriate practice but further clarity was required, particularly relating to the decision to discontinue empirical antifungal treatment, the relative benefits of empiric and pre-emptive strategies and risk stratification. Future CPGs could consider working to published guideline production methodologies and sharing summaries of evidence appraisal to reduce duplication of effort, improving the quality and efficiency of CPGs in this area.
Authors: Melissa C Brouwers; Michelle E Kho; George P Browman; Jako S Burgers; Francoise Cluzeau; Gene Feder; Béatrice Fervers; Ian D Graham; Jeremy Grimshaw; Steven E Hanna; Peter Littlejohns; Julie Makarski; Louise Zitzelsberger Journal: CMAJ Date: 2010-07-05 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Andreas H Groll; Elio Castagnola; Simone Cesaro; Jean-Hugues Dalle; Dan Engelhard; William Hope; Emmanuel Roilides; Jan Styczynski; Adilia Warris; Thomas Lehrnbecher Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Markus Ruhnke; Volker Rickerts; Oliver A Cornely; Dieter Buchheidt; Andreas Glöckner; Werner Heinz; Rainer Höhl; Regine Horré; Meinolf Karthaus; Peter Kujath; Birgit Willinger; Elisabeth Presterl; Peter Rath; Jörg Ritter; Axel Glasmacher; Cornelia Lass-Flörl; Andreas H Groll Journal: Mycoses Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 4.377
Authors: K M Sullivan; C A Dykewicz; D L Longworth; M Boeckh; L R Baden; R H Rubin; K A Sepkowitz Journal: Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program Date: 2001
Authors: Michelle Science; Paula D Robinson; Tamara MacDonald; Shahrad Rod Rassekh; L Lee Dupuis; Lillian Sung Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2013-11-26 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Stanley W Chapman; William E Dismukes; Laurie A Proia; Robert W Bradsher; Peter G Pappas; Michael G Threlkeld; Carol A Kauffman Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2008-06-15 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: John R Perfect; William E Dismukes; Francoise Dromer; David L Goldman; John R Graybill; Richard J Hamill; Thomas S Harrison; Robert A Larsen; Olivier Lortholary; Minh-Hong Nguyen; Peter G Pappas; William G Powderly; Nina Singh; Jack D Sobel; Tania C Sorrell Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2010-02-01 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: N Decembrino; K Perruccio; M Zecca; A Colombini; E Calore; P Muggeo; E Soncini; A Comelli; M Molinaro; B M Goffredo; S De Gregori; I Giardini; L Scudeller; S Cesaro Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2020-02-21 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Christopher C Blyth; Gabrielle M Haeusler; Brendan J McMullan; Rishi S Kotecha; Monica A Slavin; Julia E Clark Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-03-28 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Philippe Zimmermann; Benoit Brethon; Julie Roupret-Serzec; Marion Caseris; Lauriane Goldwirt; André Baruchel; Marie de Tersant Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) Date: 2022-03-19