Combination Antifungal Therapy for Invasive Aspergillosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Invasive aspergillosis (IA) is associated with poor outcomes in patients with hematologic malignancies (HMs) and hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Small studies suggest a role for combination antifungal therapy. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of voriconazole and anidulafungin compared with voriconazole monotherapy for treatment of IA. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00531479). SETTING: 93 international sites. PATIENTS: 454 patients with HM or HCT and suspected or documented IA were randomly assigned to treatment with voriconazole and anidulafungin or placebo. Primary analysis was done in the modified intention-to-treat population of 277 patients in whom IA was confirmed. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was 6-week mortality; secondary outcomes included 12-week mortality, mortality in major subgroups, and safety measures. RESULTS: Mortality rates at 6 weeks were 19.3% (26 of 135) for combination therapy and 27.5% (39 of 142) for monotherapy (difference, -8.2 percentage points [95% CI, -19.0 to 1.5]; P = 0.087). Secondary mortality outcomes favored combination therapy. Multivariable regression analysis suggested that maximum galactomannan value, Karnofsky score, and baseline platelet count had prognostic significance. Most patients (218 of 277 [78.7%]) had IA diagnosis established by radiographic findings and maximum galactomannan positivity. In a post hoc analysis of this dominant subgroup, 6-week mortality was lower in combination therapy than monotherapy (15.7% [17 of 108] vs. 27.3% [30 of 110]; difference, -11.5 percentage points [CI, -22.7 to -0.4]; P = 0.037). Safety measures, including hepatotoxicity, were not different. LIMITATIONS: Mortality at 6 weeks was higher than expected, and the difference in mortality was lower than expected, which reduced power to detect a treatment effect. Enrollment was restricted to patients with HM or HCT, which limited generalizability. CONCLUSION: Compared with voriconazole monotherapy, combination therapy with anidulafungin led to higher survival in subgroups of patients with IA. Limitations in power preclude definitive conclusions about superiority. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Pfizer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".