The Future of Fungal Infection Diagnosis: Balancing Sensitivity and Specificity

by

Introduction

One of the most important tasks in clinical medicine is the accurate diagnosis of even invasive fungal diseases. As the medical fraternity evolves with time in its understanding of infections, the necessity for true and fastidious tests, sensitive in nature, has never been more pressing. In diseases like IPA and COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis, diagnostic tools should strike the right balance between sensitivity and specificity. At best, in fact, it would be an optimal difference in terms of life or death: overly explorative tests may lead to possible overtreatment, and if not sensitive enough, very important interventions may be delayed. The present paper gives a current snapshot of the scenery of fungal infection diagnosis, the challenges faced, and the future directions that might be looked toward to optimize the diagnostic strategy.

Current State in the Diagnosis of Fungal Infections

Fungal infections have been linked to significant morbidity and mortality rates, especially in immunocompromised patients. Invasive fungal infections, particularly aspergillosis, candidiasis, and mucormycosis, are extremely challenging to diagnose, as useful symptoms are absent and the diagnostic arsenal is suboptimal.

Within the principles of the porous diagnosis of fungal infections are tests for the detection of fungal antigens in body fluids. As an example, serum and BALF galactomannan testing is practically one of the diagnostic pillars of IPA. Even these tests are not free from challenges, though. The sensitivity and specificity of GM assays differ markedly with the cut-off values used and the population tested. For instance, in a study evaluating Euroimmune Aspergillus antigen ELISA for the diagnosis of IPA, the sensitivity and specificity of BALF GM at an optimal cut-off value were 90% and 96%, respectively. Despite these high figures, false positives are still a challenge, more so in patients on certain antibiotics or those whose dietary factors would likely affect the test results.

This has made the diagnosis of fungal infections more challenging. COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis has been defined as having a predominant secondary disease due to the increase in critically ill patients, especially those receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. The clinical presentation of CAPA commonly coincides with that of severe COVID-19; therefore, if symptoms and imaging cannot easily be differentiated, it’s difficult to distinguish the two.

Moreover, the traditional fungal diagnostic techniques, including blood tests, are usually not sensitive enough during the early stages of CAPA. By the time they become positive, the infection could have advanced so far that the mortality was over 80%, even if on antifungal therapy. This has resulted in recommendations for early treatment based on mycological evidence from BALF samples, although with less than absolute specificity. However, such a strategy opens the way for overtreatment and the potential dangers of drug-related side effects.

There’s seemingly a demand for equilibrium about the identification of CAPA. On one hand, the clinicians need to know absolutely that, at the fastest possible identification, they are not overlooking the CAPA cases that might lead to fatality if left untreated. On the other hand, they should avoid overtreatment that might, in fact, increase the risk for the patient without providing adequate benefit to the concerned individual.

Yearwise Publication Trend on “fungal infection”

Find publication trends on relevant topics

The Role of Mycological Testing in Prognosis and Treatment

Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid has become a very important sample in the diagnosis of fungal infection, particularly with the occurrence of CAPA. The prognostic impact of BALF galactomannan results and Aspergillus culture has been widely explored, and recent evidence showed these mycological tests could be surrogate markers of survival in a critically ill COVID-19 cohort.

In a post hoc analysis of a multinational trial, BALF GM positivity combined with Aspergillus culture positivity was associated with increased 90-day mortality in COVID-19 patients. This highlights the need for a combination of mycological criteria to identify a high-risk population for mortality and guide treatment decisions.

However, the challenge with these tests is the sensitivity-versus-specificity balancing act. A combination of several mycological criteria can increase sensitivity to the diagnosis of CAPA but also increase the possibility of false positives, mostly in non-immune patients who might not have a high risk of developing invasive fungal infections. This thus calls for further studies, which are directed at fine-tuning these diagnostic tools and establishing more precise criteria that define cases of true CAPA.

Advances in Diagnosis Technologies

Sensitivity and specificity refer to the future of the diagnosis of fungal infections. Molecular diagnostics Advancements in molecular diagnosis, in particular quantitative PCR, may help add precision to the diagnosis of fungal infection by direct demonstration of fungal DNA from clinical samples. Recent studies have shown that Af-qPCR holds some potential for differentiating between true positives and false positives, particularly when applied in combination with other diagnostic markers.

The integration of these digital tools into techniques, such as LFA, with automated readers can potentially change the landscape in which CAPA and other diagnoses of fungal infections are undertaken. These methods offer rapid point-of-care testing that can give the clinician timely results and thus enable them to make more informed treatment decisions. In a multicenter study, the IMMY Aspergillus Galactomannan LFA performed well for the diagnosis of CAPA, particularly with respiratory samples. This test had only model sensitivity with serum samples, underscoring the fact that these technologies are in active development.

Recent Publications on “fungal infection”

Find publications on relevant topics

The Way Forward: Individualized Diagnosis and Therapy

With the increasing number of diagnostic challenges posed by fungal infections, it is becoming more and more recognized that individualized diagnosis and personalized treatments are taking place in medicine. It now includes the use of advanced diagnostic tools and considering individual patient factors, including important immune status and other risks.

Panels of biomarkers that combine multiple diagnostic methods could also be utilized for the personalized diagnosis of infection status for a patient. For example, the combination of various biomarkers, including GM testing and Af-qPCR methods, would increase the accuracy of CAPA diagnosis, thereby significantly reducing the threat of false positives. Further, the development of new biomarkers to distinguish whether colonization or infection is present would be helpful for clinicians in the optimization of treatment, and it may reduce overtreatment with an associated better outcome for the patients.

In addition, with such individualized therapy, possible incorporation of targeted antifungal therapies on the basis of the currently available data on the actual pathogen found and the risk factors of the individual patient would be possible. It may include combination therapies, as has been observed in recent studies in synergism of the antifungal drugs with novel therapies like humanized antibodies.

Conclusion

The future of the diagnosis of fungal infection involves a fine balance between sensitivity and specificity to optimize patient outcomes.  As changing diagnostic technologies progress further, the medical fraternity must remain awake and give chase to those appropriate, adequate, and personalized diagnostic strategies for their patients. Implementation of such in the clinical setting shall go a long way toward enhancing the diagnosis and treatment of fungal infections, saving lives, or reducing the effects of these deadly diseases.

References

  1. Egger, M., Hoenigl, M., Thompson Iii, G.R., Carvalho, A. and Jenks, J.D., 2022. Let’s talk about sex characteristics—as a risk factor for invasive fungal diseases. Mycoses, 65(6), pp.599-612.
  2. Egger, M., Bussini, L., Hoenigl, M. and Bartoletti, M., 2022. Prevalence of COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis: critical review and conclusions. Journal of Fungi, 8(4), p.390.
  3. Egger, M., Penziner, S., Dichtl, K., Gornicec, M., Kriegl, L., Krause, R., Khong, E., Mehta, S., Vargas, M., Gianella, S. and Porrachia, M., 2022. Performance of the Euroimmun Aspergillus antigen ELISA for the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. Journal of clinical microbiology, 60(4), pp.e00215-22.
  4. Giacobbe, D.R., Prattes, J., Wauters, J., Dettori, S., Signori, A., Salmanton-García, J., Maertens, J., Bourgeois, M., Reynders, M., Rutsaert, L. and Van Regenmortel, N., 2022. Prognostic impact of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid galactomannan and aspergillus culture results on survival in COVID-19 intensive care unit patients: a post hoc analysis from the european confederation of medical mycology (ECMM) COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis study. Journal of clinical microbiology, 60(4), pp.e02298-21.
  5. Dellière, S., Dudoignon, E., Voicu, S., Collet, M., Fodil, S., Plaud, B., Chousterman, B., Bretagne, S., Azoulay, E., Mebazaa, A. and Dépret, F., 2022. Combination of mycological criteria: a better surrogate to identify COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis patients and evaluate prognosis?. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 60(3), pp.e02169-21.
  6. Feys, S., Almyroudi, M.P., Braspenning, R., Lagrou, K., Spriet, I., Dimopoulos, G. and Wauters, J., 2021. A visual and comprehensive review on COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA). Journal of Fungi, 7(12), p.1067.
  7. Driemeyer, C., Falci, D.R., Hoenigl, M., Cornely, O.A., Chakrabarti, A., Gangneux, J.P., Segal, E., Jürna-Ellam, M., Matos, T., Meis, J.F. and Perfect, J.R., 2022. The current state of clinical mycology in Eastern and South-Eastern Europe. Medical Mycology, 60(4), p.myac017.

Top Experts on “fungal infection“