Should patients with acute myeloid leukemia treated with venetoclax-based regimens receive antifungal prophylaxis?

Abstract

Invasive fungal disease (IFD) is a major complication in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) receiving intensive induction chemotherapy, and the use of anti-mold prophylaxis is considered standard of care. On the other hand, the use of anti-mold prophylaxis in AML patients receiving less-intensive venetoclax-based regimens is not well established, basically because the incidence of IFD may not be high enough to justify primary antifungal prophylaxis. Furthermore, dose adjustments in venetoclax are needed because of drug interactions with azoles. Finally, the use of azoles is associated with toxicity, including liver, gastrointestinal and cardiac (QT prolongation) toxicity. In a setting of low incidence of invasive fungal disease, the number needed to harm would be higher than the number needed to treat. In this paper we review the risk factors for IFD in AML patients receiving intensive chemotherapeutic regimens, the incidence and risk factors for IFD in patients receiving hypomethylating agents alone, and in patients receiving less-intensive venetoclax-based regimens. We also discuss potential problems with the concomitant use of azoles, and present our perspective on how to manage AML patients receiving venetoclax-based regimens without primary antifungal prophylaxis.