Objectives

To provide a basis for clinical management decisions in Purpureocillium lilacinum infection.

Methods

Unpublished cases of invasive P. lilacinum infection from the FungiScope® registry and all cases reported in the literature were analysed.

Results

We identified 101 cases with invasive P. lilacinum infection. Main predisposing factors were haematological and oncological diseases in 31 cases (30.7%), steroid treatment in 27 cases (26.7%), solid organ transplant in 26 cases (25.7%), and diabetes mellitus in 19 cases (18.8%). The most prevalent infection sites were skin (n = 37/101, 36.6%) and lungs (n = 26/101, 25.7%). Dissemination occurred in 22 cases (21.8%). Pain and fever were the most frequent symptoms (n = 40/101, 39.6% and n = 34/101, 33.7%, respectively). Diagnosis was established by culture in 98 cases (97.0%). P. lilacinum caused breakthrough infection in 10 patients (9.9%). Clinical isolates were frequently resistant to amphotericin B, whereas posaconazole and voriconazole showed good in vitro activity. Susceptibility to echinocandins varied considerably. Systemic antifungal treatment was administered in 90 patients (89.1%). Frequently employed antifungals were voriconazole in 51 (56.7%) and itraconazole in 26 patients (28.9%). Amphotericin B treatment was significantly associated with high mortality rates (n = 13/33, 39.4%, P = <0.001). Overall mortality was 21.8% (n = 22/101) and death was attributed to P. lilacinum infection in 45.5% (n = 10/22).

Conclusions

P. lilacinum mainly presents as soft-tissue, pulmonary or disseminated infection in immunocompromised patients. Owing to intrinsic resistance, accurate species identification and susceptibility testing are vital. Outcome is better in patients treated with triazoles compared with amphotericin B formulations.

Background

Patients with hematological malignancies (HM) are at high risk of mortality from SARS-CoV-2 disease 2019 (COVID-19). A better understanding of risk factors for adverse outcomes may improve clinical management in these patients. We therefore studied baseline characteristics of HM patients developing COVID-19 and analyzed predictors of mortality.

Methods

The survey was supported by the Scientific Working Group Infection in Hematology of the European Hematology Association (EHA). Eligible for the analysis were adult patients with HM and laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 observed between March and December 2020.

Results

The study sample includes 3801 cases, represented by lymphoproliferative (mainly non-Hodgkin lymphoma n = 1084, myeloma n = 684 and chronic lymphoid leukemia n = 474) and myeloproliferative malignancies (mainly acute myeloid leukemia n = 497 and myelodysplastic syndromes n = 279). Severe/critical COVID-19 was observed in 63.8% of patients (n = 2425). Overall, 2778 (73.1%) of the patients were hospitalized, 689 (18.1%) of whom were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Overall, 1185 patients (31.2%) died. The primary cause of death was COVID-19 in 688 patients (58.1%), HM in 173 patients (14.6%), and a combination of both COVID-19 and progressing HM in 155 patients (13.1%). Highest mortality was observed in acute myeloid leukemia (199/497, 40%) and myelodysplastic syndromes (118/279, 42.3%). The mortality rate significantly decreased between the first COVID-19 wave (March-May 2020) and the second wave (October-December 2020) (581/1427, 40.7% vs. 439/1773, 24.8%, p value < 0.0001). In the multivariable analysis, age, active malignancy, chronic cardiac disease, liver disease, renal impairment, smoking history, and ICU stay correlated with mortality. Acute myeloid leukemia was a higher mortality risk than lymphoproliferative diseases.

Conclusions

This survey confirms that COVID-19 patients with HM are at high risk of lethal complications. However, improved COVID-19 prevention has reduced mortality despite an increase in the number of reported cases.