718. Posaconazole Versus Standard of Care for Treatment of Invasive Mold Infections

Abstract

Abstract Background Invasive mold infections (IMIs) including Aspergillus spp. are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised patients. Voriconazole is recommended as first line treatment for primary IA. Liposomal amphotericin B and isavuconazole are also recommended alternative therapies. Posaconazole has activity against mold species including those not covered by voriconazole, is available as an IV and oral formulation with a distinct adverse effect profile making it a potential effective alternative for treatment. This study investigated the clinical outcomes of treatment of invasive mold infections (IMIs) with posaconazole compared to standard of care (voriconazole, isavuconazole, liposomal amphotericin B). Methods A retrospective, single center, cohort study was completed to evaluate patients with IMIs treated with posaconazole versus those treated with standard of care therapy. Medication orders for posaconazole or standard of care therapy between January 2012 and December 2020 were identified from a clinical data repository. Only patients with antifungal orders with a listed indication for “treatment of fungal infection” were included. Data collected for each group included baseline demographics, underlying conditions, site of infection, type of mold, therapeutic drug monitoring and classification of IMI. Results A total of 120 patients met inclusion criteria, with 35 patients in the posaconazole group and 85 patients in the SOC group. Baseline characteristics were similar except for increased severe neutropenia in the posaconazole group (p< 0.0001), more probable IMIs in the SOC group (p=0.009) and more possible IMIs in the posaconazole group (p=0.043). In the posaconazole group 37.1% (13/35) of patients were treatment experienced vs. 29.4% (25/85) of patients in the SOC group. More patients achieved a complete/partial response in the SOC group compared to the posaconazole group (p=0.0001) and more patients experienced treatment failure in the posaconazole group (p=0.01). A higher proportion of patients experienced adverse effects in the SOC group compared to the posaconazole group (p=0.0001). Conclusion Posaconazole was not as effective as SOC in treating invasive mold infections but patients experienced comparatively fewer adverse events. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures