Pediatric Antifungal Prescribing Patterns Identify Significant Opportunities to Rationalize Antifungal Use in Children

Abstract Background Systemic antifungals (AF) and surgery are the cornerstone of therapy for burn-related fungal infections. Multiple AFs were introduced in the last decade with broader spectrum and improved safety profiles, but use in burn patients has yet to be thoroughly described. Here we evaluate 15 years of AF prescribing patterns in a burn intensive care unit (BICU). Methods We included all US Army Institute of Surgical Research BICU patients who received > 1 dose of AF from 2004-18. First we sought to describe overall AF prescribing. Clinical features, mortality and AF use (including in combination) from 2004-8 (T1), 2009-2013 (T2), 2014-18 (T3) were compared. Results Between 2004-18, 361 patients with a median total body surface area (TBSA) of 45% (IQR: 25-60) received AF. Median duration of hospital stay prior to and duration of initial AF (AF1) were 13.5 (IQR: 7-22) and 4 days (IQR: 2-9), respectively. Patients prescribed AF had a median of 2 (IQR 1-3) different AFs. AF1 was most commonly fluconazole [FLC; n=141 (39%)], amphotericin [AMB; n=62 (17%)] and voriconazole [VRC; n=55 (15%)]. Of those who survived, (N=233) AF1 was AMB, 40 (17.2%); FLC, 102 (43.8%); itraconazole, 1 (0.4%); VRC, 35 (15%); posaconazole (POS), 6 (2.6%); isavuconazole (ISA), 4 (1.7%); caspofungin (CAS), 7 (3%); micafungin (MFG), 28 (12%), VRC/AMB, 8 (3.4%); FLC/AMB, 0; FLC/CSP, 1 (0.4%); and VCR/MFG 1 (0.4%). AF1 use differed across T1, T2, and T3 (Table). Notably, there was shift towards use of POS, ISA, and MFG. The use of AF1 combination therapy differed across T1, T2, and T3 (p = 0.002). 200 patients had a second AF (AF2) prescribed at a median of 4.15 days (IQR 1.1-12.5) after AF1 for a median duration of 5.3 days (IQR 2-9.7). AF2 were most commonly VRC (n=54, 27%), AMB (n =46, 23%) and FLC (n=44, 22%). There were no differences in AF2 over time. Table. Clinical characteristics and antifungal use by five year increments Conclusion AF use evolved to include echinocandins and broader spectrum triazoles and decreased use of AMB as part of AF1. However, AF2 remained most commonly VRC, AMB, and FLC. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Download Full-text

1136. Antifungal Prescribing Patterns among Hospitalized Children in the United States: Are There Opportunities for Antifungal Stewardship?

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1000 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽

pp. S404-S404

Author(s):

Lourdes Eguiguren ◽

Laura Bio ◽

Brian R Lee ◽

Jason Newland ◽

Adam Hersh ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Combination Therapy ◽

The United States ◽

Marrow Transplant ◽

Antifungal Prophylaxis ◽

Prescribing Patterns ◽

Receive Combination Therapy ◽

Hospitalized Children ◽

Antifungal Stewardship ◽

Prevalence Survey ◽

Antifungal Use

Abstract Background Antifungal stewardship may help reduce the toxicity, cost, and emergence of resistance related to inappropriate antifungal use. A better understanding of antifungal prescribing patterns, particularly in high-risk, high-utilization populations, is needed to guide appropriate stewardship interventions. We analyzed antifungal prescribing characteristics, including the indications for use and differences between oncology/bone marrow transplant (Onc/BMT) and non-Onc/BMT patients, using a multi-center national cohort of hospitalized children. Methods We analyzed antifungal prescribing data from 32 hospitals that participated in the SHARPS Antibiotic Resistance, Prescribing, and Efficacy among Children (SHARPEC) study, a point prevalence survey conducted quarterly between June 2016 and December 2017. We included inpatients <18 years of age with an active order for a systemic antifungal agent and evaluated the patient and antifungal characteristics. In the Onc/BMT group, we classified antifungal prescribing by indication and compared the proportion of antifungal prescriptions in each category based on antifungal class, route of administration, and use of combination therapy. Results Six percent (2,095/34,927) of patients received a total of 2,207 antifungal prescriptions. Fifty-eight percent (1,291/2,207) of antifungal prescriptions were for Onc/BMT patients. Among patients prescribed an antifungal, those with an Onc/BMT diagnosis were older, received broader-spectrum agents, and were more likely to receive combination therapy (Table 1). The majority of antifungal use in the Onc/BMT group was for prophylaxis, with significant variation in the rate and choice of prophylactic antifungal prescribing across hospitals (Figure 1). Combination antifungal use was common among Onc/BMT patients receiving targeted therapy (Table 2). Conclusion The majority of antifungal use among hospitalized children is for patients with an Onc/BMT diagnosis and the patterns of antifungal utilization in this population appear to differ significantly from non-Onc/BMT patients. Based on the variation observed in this nationwide cohort, potential stewardship targets include the rate and type of antifungal prophylaxis and the use of combination therapy in Onc/BMT patients. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Download Full-text