Zhang, Sean X.

SUMMARY Antibody and antigen detection assays continue to play a significant role in the diagnosis of dimorphic fungal pathogens, including Blastomyces dermatitidis complex, Coccidioides immitis/posadasii , Paracoccidioides species, Histoplasma species , Sporothrix species, and Talaromyces marneffei . The performance characteristics of serologic and antigen detection assays for these pathogens are variable, however, influenced by multiple factors, including sample type, disease presentation, patient immunostatus, and timing of specimen collection relative to symptom onset. As a result, there is a need for a centralized document summarizing the accuracy of currently available antibody and antigen detection assays for each of these agents, including discussion of individual assay nuances and caveats that should be considered by clinicians and laboratorians alike. In addition, this review provides expert recommendations for the utilization and interpretation of serologic and antigen detection assays for these dimorphic pathogens.

ABSTRACT Medically important pathogenic fungi invade vertebrate tissue and are considered primary when part of their nature life cycle is associated with an animal host and are usually able to infect immunocompetent hosts. Opportunistic fungal pathogens complete their life cycle in environmental habitats or occur as commensals within or on the vertebrate body, but under certain conditions can thrive upon infecting humans. The extent of host damage in opportunistic infections largely depends on the portal and modality of entry as well as on the host’s immune and metabolic status. Diseases caused by primary pathogens and common opportunists, causing the top approximately 80% of fungal diseases [D. W. Denning, Lancet Infect Dis, 24:e428–e438, 2024, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(23)00692-8 ], tend to follow a predictive pattern, while those by occasional opportunists are more variable. For this reason, it is recommended that diseases caused by primary pathogens and the common opportunists are named after the etiologic agent, for example, histoplasmosis and aspergillosis, while this should not be done for occasional opportunists that should be named as [causative fungus] [clinical syndrome], for example, Alternaria alternata cutaneous infection. The addition of a descriptor that identifies the location or clinical type of infection is required, as the general name alone may cover widely different clinical syndromes, for example, “rhinocerebral mucormycosis.” A list of major recommended human and animal disease entities (nomenclature) is provided in alignment with their causative agents. Fungal disease names may encompass several genera of etiologic agents, consequently being less susceptible to taxonomic changes of the causative species, for example, mucormycosis covers numerous mucormycetous molds.

ABSTRACT The rapid pace of name changes of medically important fungi is creating challenges for clinical laboratories and clinicians involved in patient care. We describe two sources of name change which have different drivers, at the species versus the genus level. Some suggestions are made here to reduce the number of name changes. We urge taxonomists to provide diagnostic markers of taxonomic novelties. Given the instability of phylogenetic trees due to variable taxon sampling, we advocate to maintain genera at the largest possible size. Reporting of identified species in complexes or series should where possible comprise both the name of the overarching species and that of the molecular sibling, often cryptic species. Because the use of different names for the same species will be unavoidable for many years to come, an open access online database of the names of all medically important fungi, with proper nomenclatural designation and synonymy, is essential. We further recommend that while taxonomic discovery continues, the adaptation of new name changes by clinical laboratories and clinicians be reviewed routinely by a standing committee for validation and stability over time, with reference to an open access database, wherein reasons for changes are listed in a transparent way.

Invasive infections with emerging yeasts such asGeotrichum,Saprochaete/Magnusiomyces, Trichosporon, and other species are associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Due to the rarity and heterogeneity of these yeasts, medical mycology has lacked guidance in critical areas affecting patient management.

Invasive mold infections caused by molds other than Aspergillus spp. or Mucorales are emerging. The reported prevalences of infection due to these rare fungal pathogens vary among geographic regions, driven by differences in climatic conditions, susceptible hosts, and diagnostic capabilities.

Background. There is no consensus guidance on when to reinitiate Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) prophylaxis in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients at increased risk. The 2019 American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice (AST IDCOP) guidelines suggested to continue or reinstitute PJP prophylaxis in those receiving intensified immunosuppression for graft rejection, cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, higher dose of corticosteroids, or prolonged neutropenia. Methods. A literature search was conducted evaluating all literature from existence through April 22, 2020, using MEDLINE and EMBASE. (The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews registration number: CRD42019134204). Results. A total of 30 studies with 413 276 SOT recipients were included. The following factors were associated with PJP development: acute rejection (pooled odds ratio [pOR], 2.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.69-3.26); study heterogeneity index [I2] = 23.4%), CMV-related illnesses (pOR, 3.14; 95% CI, 2.30-4.29; I2 = 48%), absolute lymphocyte count <500 cells/mm3 (pOR, 6.29; 95% CI, 3.56-11.13; I2 = 0%), BK polyomavirus-related diseases (pOR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.22-5.49; I2 = 0%), HLA mismatch ≥3 (pOR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.06-3.17; I2 = 0%), rituximab use (pOR, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.82-5.04; I2 = 0%), and polyclonal antibodies use for rejection (pOR, 3.92; 95% CI, 1.87-8.19; I2 = 0%). On the other hand, sex, CMV mismatch, interleukin-2 inhibitors, corticosteroids for rejection, and plasmapheresis were not associated with developing PJP. Conclusions. PJP prophylaxis should be considered in SOT recipients with lymphopenia, BK polyomavirus-related infections, and rituximab exposure in addition to the previously mentioned risk factors in the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice guidelines.