Biomedical subjects

P Lewis White

Publications and source records attributed to P Lewis White.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Diagnostic performance of panfungal PCR on tissue specimens for the diagnosis of invasive fungal diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the Fungal PCR Initiative (FPCRI).

UNLABELLED: Invasive fungal diseases are difficult to diagnose because of the limited sensitivity of culture. Panfungal PCR amplicon sequencing assays (targeting ribosomal RNA, such as 18S, 28S, ITS) are recommended for fungal identification in histopathology samples showing fungal elements. However, data describing its overall performance and consistency are lacking. This systematic literature review and meta-analysis assessed the performance of panfungal PCR on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) and non-fixed (fresh or frozen) tissue samples. A systematic literature search was performed to include studies reporting the use of panfungal PCR for fungal identification in FFPE or non-fixed tissue samples. PCR sensitivity and specificity were assessed using the reference standard of histopathology showing fungal elements. Quality assessment was performed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Pooled estimates were obtained using random-effects meta-analysis. Twenty-eight studies were included. In FFPE samples (18 studies, 852 samples), sensitivity and specificity were 75.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 59.2-86.6) and 93.5% (70.2-98.9), respectively. Sensitivity in non-fixed samples (13 studies, 207 samples) was 86.5% (74.7-93.3), while specificity could not be assessed (insufficient data). Comparative analyses showed a significantly higher sensitivity of panfungal PCR over culture (88.2%; 76-94.7 vs 52.2%; 39-65, P = 0.001). Sub-analyses could not demonstrate the superiority of one PCR target over another due to limited data. Panfungal PCR exhibited adequate sensitivity and good specificity in FFPE samples. Sensitivity was even higher in non-fixed samples and largely superior to culture. Nevertheless, large interstudy variability was observed, warranting interlaboratory studies to define the optimal PCR target and standardized protocols. IMPORTANCE: Invasive fungal diseases are difficult to diagnose because of the low sensitivity of culture. Panfungal PCRs are widely used for fungal identification in tissue specimens but suffer from heterogeneous procedures and performance. This meta-analysis shows an acceptable sensitivity (75.4% and 86.5% in fixed and non-fixed samples, respectively) and good specificity (93.5%) of panfungal PCR, supporting its use, not only on histopathology-positive fixed samples but also in non-fixed samples concomitantly with other diagnostic tools (cultures and fungal-specific PCRs if available). These results provide a strong basis for further standardization of panfungal PCR techniques via interlaboratory assays to assess reproducibility and optimize analytical protocols. CLINICAL TRIALS: This study is registered with PROSPERO as CRD42023461148.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Antifungal treatment strategies and their impact on resistance development in clinical settings.

Invasive fungal diseases, particularly among immunocompromised patients, represent a growing clinical challenge due to limited therapeutic options, diagnostic delays and escalating antifungal resistance. Fungal pathogens employ diverse resistance mechanisms, including genetic mutations of antifungal target enzymes, biofilm formation, efflux pump overexpression and reduced drug penetration, which compromise the efficacy of clinically available antifungal classes. This review explores antifungal treatment modalities and evaluates approaches to mitigate resistance development. Advanced diagnostics and therapeutic drug monitoring are pivotal for enabling timely, targeted therapies and personalizing treatment plans, thus minimizing reliance on broad-spectrum agents. New antifungal agents, such as rezafungin, olorofim and fosmanogepix, along with long-acting and advanced formulations plus combination regimens, show substantial promise for managing resistance and improving treatment outcomes. Additionally, the development of immunotherapies and antifungal vaccines offers new avenues for bolstering host defences against fungal pathogens. Addressing antifungal resistance demands a multifaceted 'One Health' approach that integrates robust diagnostics, antifungal stewardship (AFS), precision medicine and collaborative global efforts. By advancing drug formulations, enhancing diagnostic tools and implementing forward-thinking AFS practices, the healthcare community can better tackle the escalating burden of fungal infections and deliver improved patient outcomes.

Antifungal Agents↗

PubMed2025

Global guideline for the diagnosis and management of candidiasis: an initiative of the ECMM in cooperation with ISHAM and ASM.

Candida species are the predominant cause of fungal infections in patients treated in hospital, contributing substantially to morbidity and mortality. Candidaemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis primarily affect patients who are immunocompromised or critically ill. In contrast, mucocutaneous forms of candidiasis, such as oral thrush and vulvovaginal candidiasis, can occur in otherwise healthy individuals. Although mucocutaneous candidiasis is generally not life-threatening, it can cause considerable discomfort, recurrent infections, and complications, particularly in patients with underlying conditions such as diabetes or in those taking immunosuppressive therapies. The rise of difficult-to-treat Candida infections is driven by new host factors and antifungal resistance. Pathogens, such as Candida auris (Candidozyma auris) and fluconazole-resistant Candida parapsilosis, pose serious global health risks. Recent taxonomic revisions have reclassified several Candida spp, potentially causing confusion in clinical practice. Current management guidelines are limited in scope, with poor coverage of emerging pathogens and new treatment options. In this Review, we provide updated recommendations for managing Candida infections, with detailed evidence summaries available in the appendix.

Humans↗