In patients with suspected fungal infections, rapid and accurate diagnosis of IFIs is hampered by non-specific clinical manifestations and difficulties in obtaining appropriate biological samples. Traditional diagnostic methods were insensitive and the gold standard diagnostic tests (histopathologic evidence and cultures from deep tissues) needed invasive procedures in high risk patients, due to their critical conditions and concomitant severe thrombocytopenia (
20). In that case, accurate diagnosis was made by clinical and radiological data (computed tomography (CT) scan) and laboratory tests including culture, GM in serum or bronco-alveolar lavages, BDG and PCR on clinical samples of patients.
Available data show a remarkable increase in the incidence of
Candida and
Aspergillus species, the most common agents responsible for IFIs, among patients during the past decades (
1). The overall incidence of IFIs in children with malignancy or severe hematological diseases is different. The present study reported the incidence rate of IFIs in pediatric patients with onco-hematological diseases (42%), including (n = 3, 5%) proven and (n = 23, 37%) probable cases. Eighteen (29%) patients were considered as possible cases. In the study by Mor et al., 75 out of 1047 (7.2%) children hospitalized in the hematology/oncology department were diagnosed as IFIs including proven (n = 16, 21.3%), probable (n = 18, 24%) and possible (n = 41, 54.7%) cases (
2). In a recent report on the frequency of IFIs in a pediatric cohort by Watanabe et al., who retrospectively reviewed the records of 743 neutropenic episodes from 1997 to 2008, the overall frequency was 0.8% (n = 6) and frequencies of proven, probable and possible fungal infections were 0.3% (n = 2), 0.4% (n = 3) and 0.1% (n = 1), respectively (
21). The difference between the current observations and the above mentioned results may be attributed to substantial impacts of different characteristics of the study population, diagnostic methods or health care systems.
Development of reliable methods for the early diagnosis of IFIs is the most important goal in the management of the patients. Recent studies demonstrated the importance of BDG to diagnose fungal infections (
19,
22,
23). According to the current study, the sensitivity, specificity, NPV and PPV of BDG test were 92.3%, 77.7%, 85% and 87.5%, respectively. Karageorgopoulos et al. reported an overall sensitivity of 77% and a specificity of about 85%, NPV of 95% and PPV ranging from 59% to 96% in pediatric patients with hematologic disorders through a meta-analysis study (
24). Variable ranges of sensitivity and specificity of BDG among patients are largely due to the use of different cut-off values, as Ostrosky-Zeichner et al. reported that when the Glucatell assay was performed in 22 out of 163 patients with cut-off of 60 pg/mL, the sensitivity of the test was 69.9% and specificity 87.1%, but increasing the cut-off to 80 pg/mL provided a sensitivity of 64% and specificity of 92.4% (
25). Moreover, false positive results may occur during the treatment, due to the use of some immunoglobulins or contaminated albumin with fungal elements or concomitant β-lactam therapies and bacterial co-infections (
26,
27).
The diagnostic potential of circulating GM Ag to predict the development of IA is increasingly considered in patients with hematologic disorders and several studies confirmed the value of GM detection in this group (
28-
30). As indicated in the current study, GM test demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity (94.4% and 100%, respectively) with NPV and PPV of 100% and 94.7%, respectively. Hoenigl et al. evaluated the diagnostic potential of the GM test and reported the overall sensitivity, specificity, NPV and PPV of 80%, 98%, 89% and 95%, respectively, among pediatric hematologic patients with proven and probable IFIs (
30). In contrast, a recent study evaluating the
Aspergillus antigen test reported a sensitivity of 79%, specificity of 61%, NPV and PPV of 54% and 83%, respectively (
31).
The discrepancy in the results may be attributed to the possibility of concomitant use of antifungal therapy or probability of obtaining a false-negative result based on the optical density cutoff value used (optimal value was 0.5 ng/mL). False-positive results might be originated from factors such as concurrent use of some antibacterial treatments (piperacillin/tazobactam even up to five days after the cessation of treatment), concomitant administration of amoxicillin with or without clavulanate and use of various brands of milk formula and liquid nutrient supplements containing soybean protein (
32).
The other test for the sensitive detection of IFIs and fungal DNA of most fungi is PCR. Depending on the type of PCR assay, differences in DNA extraction and product detection method, the reported sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of IFIs could vary. Based on the current study data, the overall sensitivity and specificity of nested-PCR in proven and probable cases were 84.6% and 88.8%, respectively. For panfungal PCR and nested-PCR assays, these rates were reported 75%, and 92% (
31), and 80% and 81%, respectively (
33). Some studies focused on pediatric patients with hematological malignancy demonstrated a complete lack of sensitivity of PCR (
28); whilst in others sensitivities were similar to those of the current population (
8). However, given the fact that until recently there was no standardized protocol for PCR test, diversity of the designs of different studies did not allow the easy comparison of study results. Although high sensitivity and specificity were reported for PCR in the current assay, it was a technique that should be validated in further prospective studies.
5.1. Conclusions
Based on the current study data, the rate of IFIs in pediatric patients was high. Early diagnosis of infection has an important role in prognosis of the patients. Non-invasive methods such as BDG, GM, and nested-PCR tests can serve as efficient diagnostic tools in pediatric hematologic patients with suspected IFIs, especially in cases without any positive culture results. The results should be interpreted with caution and only in combination with clinical, radiological, and microbiological findings.