This prospective noninterventional study evaluated whether antifungal susceptibility data (MIC) provided for Candida clinical isolates on the basis of recently established breakpoints are taken into account by clinicians to guide their treatment decision making process, and assessed the response in MIC- and non-MIC-based treatment groups. During a six month period, the usage of systemic antifungals was recorded in detail and compared with mycological data (Candida species and MICs) in candidemia patients. Patients were assigned to a susceptible or resistant infection group based on European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) breakpoints; treatment decisions were under the professional discretion of the treating physicians. 123 patients were evaluated with Candida albicans accounting for 59%, Candida glabrata for 19%, Candida parapsilosis for 15%, Candida tropicalis for 4% and Candida krusei for 3%. Antifungal treatment correlated with species and MICs in 80% (n = 99 patients), high MICs and species-dependent guideline recommendations were ignored in 20% (n = 24 patients); the overall outcome of candidemia cases in our study population was excellent, as by day 14, all patients were cleared from fungal blood stream infection (mean 5.6 days, range 2-12). The current variability in antifungal usage and the delay in initiating appropriate therapy indicate a need for antifungal stewardship to improve the management of invasive fungal infections.
Keywords: Candida species; MIC; antifungal susceptibility testing; clinical breakpoints; in vitro versus in vivo outcome.