Clinical efficacy and safety of primary antifungal prophylaxis with posaconazole versus fluconazole in allogeneic blood hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients—A retrospective analysis of a single medical center in Taiwan

Background/Purpose The efficacy and safety of posaconazole compared to fluconazole as antifungal prophylaxis in patients receiving allogeneic blood hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) during the early neutropenic phase without graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) was uncertain. Methods The medical records of allo-HSCT recipients from a single institution, who received oral fluconazole (from January 2005 to June 2011) or oral posaconazole (from June 2011 to December 2013) during the early neutropenic phase (until engraftment), were retrospectively reviewed. Results There were 52 allo-HSCT recipients, two of whom were younger than 18 years of age. Twelve cases received posaconazole and 40 cases received fluconazole as primary antifungal prophylaxis. The two groups had similar transplant characteristics, conditioning, and GVHD prophylaxis regimens. The fluconazole group had a higher risk for development of invasive fungal infections within 90 days after allo-HSCT (43% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.039). Kaplan–Meier analysis indicated that the cumulative incidence of invasive fungal infection for 90 days after allo-HSCT was higher in the fluconazole group (log rank test, p = 0.047). Early discontinuation of antifungal prophylaxis for intolerance was significantly lower in the posaconazole group (8.3% vs. 50%, p = 0.017). Both groups had similar rates of impaired liver function. Conclusion Analysis of primary fungal prophylaxis during the early neutropenic phase following allo-HSCT indicated that posaconazole was more effective and was better tolerated than fluconazole. Both drugs had similar safety profiles.