Skip to main content
Medicine logoLink to Medicine
. 2016 Jun 10;95(23):e3834. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000003834

The clinical outcomes and predictive factors for in-hospital mortality in non-neutropenic patients with candidemia

Tsai-Yu Wang a, Chia-Yen Hung b, Shian-Sen Shie c, Pai-Chien Chou a, Chih-Hsi Kuo a, Fu-Tsai Chung a, Yu-Lun Lo a, Shu-Min Lin a,
Editor: Duane Hospenthal
PMCID: PMC4907665  PMID: 27281087

Abstract

Recent epidemiologic studies have showed that candidemia is an important nosocomial infection in hospitalized patients. The majority of candidemia patients were non-neutropenic rather than neutropenic status. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical outcome of non-neutropenic patients with candidemia and to measure the contributing factors for mortality. A total of 163 non-neutropenic patients with candidemia during January 2010 to December 2013 were retrospectively enrolled. The patients’ risk factors for mortality, clinical outcomes, treatment regimens, and Candida species were analyzed. The overall mortality was 54.6%. Candida albicans was the most frequent Candida species (n = 83; 50.9% of patients). Under multivariate analyses, hemodialysis (OR, 4.554; 95% CI, 1.464–14.164) and the use of amphotericin B deoxycholate (OR, 8.709; 95% CI, 1.587–47.805) were independent factors associated with mortality. In contrast, abdominal surgery (OR, 0.360; 95% CI, 0.158–0.816) was associated with a better outcome. The overall mortality is still high in non-neutropenic patients with candidemia. Hemodialysis and use of amphotericin B deoxycholate were independent factors associated with mortality, whereas prior abdominal surgery was associated with a better outcome.

Keywords: candidemia, fungus, mortality, predictive factor

1. Introduction

Recent epidemiologic studies have showed that candidemia is an important nosocomial infection in hospitalized patients.[1] Candidemia is reported to be the fourth most common blood stream infection in United States and seventh in Europe.[2,3] The high prevalence of candidemia is caused by several factors such as invasive procedures, broad-spectrum antibiotics, and prolonged survival.[4,5] In spite of the introduction of new antifungal medications during last 2 decades, the mortality rates of candidemia remained high, ranging from 37.9% to 61.8%.[610] The risk factors attributed to mortality are old age, neutropenia, abdominal surgery, total parenteral nutrition, acute renal failure, hemofiltration procedures, corticosteroids treatment, malnutrition, diabetes mellitus, malignancy, and invasive mechanical ventilation.[610]

Previous reports have showed that neutropenia is a significant risk factor for acquiring candida infection and the mortality in this subgroup is extremely high.[11] However, the majority of candidemia patients were non-neutropenic rather than neutropenic status. The percentage of non-neutropenic patients ranged from 83 to 94% in patients with candidemia.[10,12] In 2009, Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA) published their guidelines.[13] The recommendation for the first-line treatment of candidemia in non-neutropenic patients was fluconazole or echinocandin. The use of echinocandin was recommended in patients with moderate to severe illness or with recent azole exposure. However, the 2012 European Society for Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) and 2016 IDSA guidelines both recommend administration of all echinocandins in non-neutropenic patients with candidemia.[14,15] In addition, both guidelines recommend fluconazole to be the alternative therapy in this subgroup of patients. Considering the majority of patients with candidemia, the clinical outcomes of non-neutropenic patients deserve further elucidation. Although previous studies have investigated the outcomes of non-neutropenic patients with candidemia, most of the patients in these studies received amphotericin B or fluconazole therapy due to their study year.[16,17] The effects of administration of amphotericin B, fluconazole therapy, and echinocandin on clinical outcomes deserve further investigation.

The aim of this study was to determine the clinical outcome of non-neutropenic patients with candidemia. In addition, this study tried to measure the mortality-contributing factors including underlying comorbidity, intervention, and antifungal therapy.

2. Material and methods

2.1. Study population

The study retrospectively recruited patients with blood culture-confirmed Candida species from January 2010 to December 2013 in Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, a tertiary hospital in Taiwan. Patients under 18 years were excluded. The Chang Gung Medical Foundation Institutional Review Board approved the study (104-7578B) and waived the requirement for informed consent due to the retrospective nature of this study.

2.2. Study design

Each patient's medical records were reviewed to collect the clinical characteristics and laboratory results. In addition, the study analyzed the patients’ information, which included Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, mechanical ventilation, diabetes mellitus, neoplasia, ablative chemotherapy, immunosuppressive agents, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, bone marrow transplant, solid organ transplant, neutropenia, corticosteroid therapy, trauma, prior surgery, intravascular catheter, urinary catheter, total parenteral nutrition, hemodialysis, antimicrobial therapy, and distribution of Candida species.

2.3. Definitions

Candidemia was defined as patients who had at least 1 Candida-positive blood culture. Corticosteroid therapy was defined as a dose equivalent at least 0.5 mg/kg per day of prednisolone administrated for at least 7 days. Neutropenia was defined as absolute neutrophil count < 1000 cells/μL. Prior surgery was defined as patients who had undergone any surgery within 30 days preceding the onset of candidemia. In addition, hemodialysis was defined as patients received hemodialysis within 30 days preceding the onset of candidemia. Total parenteral nutrition was defined as patients receiving total parenteral nutrition for >7 days within 30-day period before the onset of candidemia.[11] Ablative chemotherapy refers to the administration of alkylating agents, at doses that will not allow autologous hematologic recovery.[18] Effective antifungal therapy was defined as the recommended dose for each antifungal was reached (at least 400 mg of fluconazole per day and 0.5 mg/kg per day of amphotericin B). Lower dose was accepted only in the case of renal impairment. Antifungal therapy administrated within 24 hours of culture was also recorded.

2.4. Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed with SPSS (version 13.0; SPSS; Chicago, IL) statistical software. Continuous variables were expressed as mean ± SEM (standard error of the mean). Student's t test was used for comparisons of normally distributed variables between 2 groups. Non-normally distributed data were compared by the Mann–Whitney test. Categorical variables were analyzed with chi-squared tests. All variables were primarily analyzed with univariate analysis. Those variables with a P value < 0.1 in the univariate analysis were then entered into the multivariate logistic regression analysis model to determine their net effects on in-hospital mortality. Odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to assess the independent contribution of prognostic factors. A P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

3. Results

3.1. Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients

A total of 169 candidemia patients were recruited during the study period. There were 6 patients with neutropenia, and 163 patients were non-neutropenic. The 163 non-neutropenic patients were enrolled for analysis. Among these non-neutropenic patients with candidemia, 89 (54.6%) died in the hospital. The baseline demographics and clinical characteristics of these patients are listed in Table 1. The mean ages of survivors and fatalities were 63.0 ± 18.3 and 69.2 ± 13.6 years, respectively. The incidence of effective antifungal therapy and antifungal therapy within 24 hours of culture were similar in both groups.

Table 1.

Demographic characteristics and risk factors.

3.1.

The source of candidemia included intravascular catheter (n = 66, 40.5%), intra-abdominal source (n = 32, 19.6%), the urinary tract (n = 11, 6.7%), other source (n = 8, 4.9%), and unknown source (n = 46, 28.2%).

3.2. Factors associated with mortality and predictive factors for mortality

Univariate analyses identified several factors associated with mortality, including the presence of ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, abdominal surgery, hemodialysis, intravascular catheter, corticosteroid therapy, and the use of amphotericin B deoxycholate (Table 1). There were 14 patients received amphotericin B therapy. All of them received amphotericin B deoxycholate. No patient received liposomal amphotericin B. Table 2 listed the results of multivariate analysis for the factors associated with mortality. Under multivariate analyses, hemodialysis (OR, 4.554; 95% CI, 1.464–14.164) and the use of amphotericin B deoxycholate (OR, 8.709; 95% CI, 1.587–47.805) were independent factors associated with mortality. In contrast, abdominal surgery (OR, 0.360; 95% CI, 0.158–0.816) seemed associated with a better outcome. The SOFA score in patients received amphotericin B deoxycholate was higher than those received other antifungal therapy (8.6 ± 0.7 vs 5.8 ± 0.5, P = 0.023).

Table 2.

Multivariate analysis of major factors associated with mortality in patients with candidemia.

3.2.

The sensitivities for predicting mortality in hemodialysis, use of amphotericin B deoxycholate, and abdominal surgery were 84.9%, 85.7%, and 45.2%, respectively (Table 3). Both hemodialysis and the use of amphotericin B deoxycholate had a good negative predictive value (93.2% and 97.3% respectively). Therefore, the absence of those features may predict the absence of mortality.

Table 3.

Performances of Independent variables for prediction of mortality in patients with candidemia.

3.2.

3.3. Distribution of Candida species

Candida albicans was the most frequent Candida species (n = 83; 50.9% of patients), followed by C tropicalis (n = 32; 19.6% of patients), C parapsilosis (n = 28; 17.2% of patients), and C glabrata (n = 15; 9.2% of patients) (Table 4). Furthermore, the presence of C tropicalis in fatalities group was 25.8%, which was significantly higher than that in the survivor group (12.2%, P = 0.029). In contrast, the presence of C parapsilosis in the fatalities group was significantly lower than the survivor group (11.2% vs 24.3%, P = 0.027). The SOFA score in the C tropicalis subgroup was higher than other species (7.9 ± 0.7 vs 5.9 ± 0.5, P = 0.045). In contrast, patients with C parapsilosis infection had a lower SOFA score than those infected with other species (1.3 ± 0.9 vs 6.6 ± 0.4, P = 0.013).

Table 4.

Candida bloodstream isolates recovered from patients.

3.3.

4. Discussion

The present study demonstrated that mortality of patients with candidemia was as high as 54.6%. Among the pathogens, C albicans (50.9%) was still the most common species in candidemia, followed by C tropocalis (19.6%). Hemodialysis and use of amphotericin B deoxycholate were independent factors for mortality. In contrast, prior abdominal surgery was associated with a better outcome.

Previous studies have demonstrated that candidemia patients who had undergone prior abdominal surgery had a lower mortality rate than those without. In addition, prior abdominal surgery is a independent predictor for survival in candidemia patients.[11] Compatible with previous evidence, our study also demonstrated that prior abdominal surgery was independently associated with survival in candidemia patients. One possible reason for association between prior abdominal surgery and a better outcome may be the rapid control of infection route by means of appropriate surgical intervention. Several reports have specifically identified the benefit of surgical procedures when deep-seated candida infection developed in the intestine.[19,20] In addition, the majority of medical patients with candidemia had underlying comorbidities. In patients with underlying comorbidities, candidemia may reflect the impairment of the immune response. Increased mortality in medical patients with candidemia may be contributed by the failure of the host immune system to control its own gut flora including Candida species.

Emergent evidence has showed that hemodialysis is a risk factor for development of candidemia.[21,22] In addition, hemodialysis is found to be independently associated with mortality in patients with candidemia.[2328] The contribution of hemodialysis to mortality may be partially explained by the high incidence of hemodialysis catheter or routes.[25,26,28] In our study, both intravenous catheter and hemodialysis were significant predictors for mortality in univariate analysis. However, only hemodialysis remains significant in predicting mortality after multivariate analysis. Thereafter, the association between hemodialysis and mortality may be better explained by the impaired immune response in patients who have received hemodialysis.

Amphotericin B deoxycholate has previously been widely used in therapy of systemic fungal infection. Amphotericin B deoxycholate has many adverse effects including fever, chills, gastrointestinal upset, electrolyte imbalance, and most importantly acute renal failure.[29] In patients received amphotericin B therapy for systemic fungal infection, when renal failure developed, the mortality rate was much higher than those without renal failure.[30] Our study also demonstrated that use of amphotericin B deoxycholate was associated with increased mortality in candidemia patients. The illness severity, indicated by the SOFA score, in patients received amphotericin B deoxycholate was higher than those received other antifungal therapy. Therefore, the association between use of amphotericin B deoxycholate and mortality may be attributed by the higher illness severity in patients received amphotericin B therapy than those received other antifungal therapy. Therefore, amphotericin B should be used with caution for patients with candidemia.

Compatible with previous study,[31] our results demonstrated that C tropicalis infection was associated with increased risk of mortality. Conversely, C parapsilosis infection was associated with lower mortality than other species. In our study, the SOFA score in the C tropicalis subgroup was higher than other species. Patients with C parapsilosis infection had lower SOFA score than those infected with other species. Therefore, the illness severity may play an important role in the difference of mortality risk among candida species. In addition, previous studies had showed that the occurrence of C parapsilosis fungemia related to long-term use of central venous catheter.[32] The central venous catheter is an easily removable source of infection. The easy removal of infection source may also contribute to the decreased mortality.

The present study is limited by its retrospective nature and relatively small sample size. Therefore, some bias in patient selection or statistic analysis may be existed in the study. To further confirm the results of the study, a prospective study with larger sample size is needed to evaluate the clinical outcomes in non-neutropenic patients with candidemia.

In conclusion, the mortality rate is still high in non-neutropenic patients with candidemia. The prevalence of non-albicans Candida species was up to 49.1%. Hemodialysis and use of amphotericin B deoxycholate were independent factors associated with mortality, whereas abdominal surgery was associated with a better outcome. In addition, the hemodialysis and the use of amphotericin B deoxycholate were effective at negatively predicting mortality rates.

Footnotes

Abbreviations: APACHE = Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation, CI = confidence intervals, ESCMID = European Society for Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, ICU = intensive care unit, IDSA = Infectious Disease Society of America, NPV = negative predictive value, OR = odds ratios, PPV = positive predictive value, SEM = standard error of the mean, SOFA = sequential organ failure assessment.

This work was supported by research grants from Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan (CMRPG 3B1331).

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

References

  • 1.Eggimann P, Garbino J, Pittet D. Epidemiology of Candida species infections in critically ill non-immunosuppressed patients. Lancet Infect Dis 2003; 3:685–702. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Edmond MB, Wallace SE, McClish DK, et al. Nosocomial bloodstream infections in United States hospitals: a three-year analysis. Clin Infect Dis 1999; 29:239–244. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Marchetti O, Bille J, Fluckiger U, et al. Fungal Infection Network of S. Epidemiology of candidemia in Swiss tertiary care hospitals: secular trends, 1991–2000. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 38:311–320. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Wey SB, Mori M, Pfaller MA, et al. Risk factors for hospital-acquired candidemia. A matched case-control study. Arch Int Med 1989; 149:2349–2353. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Cleveland AA, Harrison LH, Farley MM, et al. Declining incidence of candidemia and the shifting epidemiology of Candida resistance in two US metropolitan areas, 2008–2013: results from population-based surveillance. PloS One 2015; 10:e0120452. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Bassetti M, Righi E, Ansaldi F, et al. A multicenter study of septic shock due to candidemia: outcomes and predictors of mortality. Intensive Care Med 2014; 40:839–845. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Tortorano AM, Peman J, Bernhardt H, et al. Epidemiology of candidaemia in Europe: results of 28-month European Confederation of Medical Mycology (ECMM) hospital-based surveillance study. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2004; 23:317–322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Chen PY, Chuang YC, Wang JT, et al. Comparison of epidemiology and treatment outcome of patients with candidemia at a teaching hospital in Northern Taiwan, in 2002 and 2010. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2014; 47:95–103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Pittet D, Tarara D, Wenzel RP. Nosocomial bloodstream infection in critically ill patients. Excess length of stay, extra costs, and attributable mortality. JAMA 1994; 271:1598–1601. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Bougnoux ME, Kac G, Aegerter P, et al. Candidemia and candiduria in critically ill patients admitted to intensive care units in France: incidence, molecular diversity, management and outcome. Intensive Care Med 2008; 34:292–299. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Charles PE, Doise JM, Quenot JP, et al. Candidemia in critically ill patients: difference of outcome between medical and surgical patients. Intensive Care Med 2003; 29:2162–2169. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Leroy O, Gangneux JP, Montravers P, et al. Epidemiology, management, and risk factors for death of invasive Candida infections in critical care: a multicenter, prospective, observational study in France (2005–2006). Crit Care Med 2009; 37:1612–1618. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Pappas PG, Kauffman CA, Andes D, et al. Infectious Diseases Society of A. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of candidiasis: 2009 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48:503–535. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Cornely OA, Bassetti M, Calandra T, et al. ESCMID guideline for the diagnosis and management of Candida diseases 2012: non-neutropenic adult patients. Clin Microbiol Infect 2012; 18 Suppl 7:19–37. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Pappas PG, Kauffman CA, Andes DR, et al. Clinical practice guideline for the management of candidiasis: 2016 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2016; 62:e1–e50. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Marriott DJ, Playford EG, Chen S, et al. Determinants of mortality in non-neutropenic ICU patients with candidaemia. Crit Care 2009; 13:R115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Luzzati R, Amalfitano G, Lazzarini L, et al. Nosocomial candidemia in non-neutropenic patients at an Italian tertiary care hospital. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2000; 19:602–607. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Bacigalupo A, Ballen K, Rizzo D, et al. Defining the intensity of conditioning regimens: working definitions. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2009; 15:1628–1633. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Rutledge R, Mandel SR, Wild RE. Candida species. Insignificant contaminant or pathogenic species. Am Surg 1986; 52:299–302. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Calandra T, Bille J, Schneider R, et al. Clinical significance of Candida isolated from peritoneum in surgical patients. Lancet 1989; 2:1437–1440. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Pittet D, Monod M, Suter PM, et al. Candida colonization and subsequent infections in critically ill surgical patients. Ann Surg 1994; 220:751–758. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Michalopoulos AS, Geroulanos S, Mentzelopoulos SD. Determinants of candidemia and candidemia-related death in cardiothoracic ICU patients. Chest 2003; 124:2244–2255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.McKinnon PS, Goff DA, Kern JW, et al. Temporal assessment of Candida risk factors in the surgical intensive care unit. Arch Surg 2001; 136:1401–1408.discussion 1409. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Borzotta AP, Beardsley K. Candida infections in critically ill trauma patients: a retrospective case-control study. Arch Surg 1999; 134:657–664.discussion 664–655. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Paphitou NI, Ostrosky-Zeichner L, Rex JH. Rules for identifying patients at increased risk for candidal infections in the surgical intensive care unit: approach to developing practical criteria for systematic use in antifungal prophylaxis trials. Med Mycol 2005; 43:235–243. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Jorda-Marcos R, Alvarez-Lerma F, Jurado M, et al. Risk factors for candidaemia in critically ill patients: a prospective surveillance study. Mycoses 2007; 50:302–310. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Leon C, Ruiz-Santana S, Saavedra P, et al. A bedside scoring system (“Candida score”) for early antifungal treatment in nonneutropenic critically ill patients with Candida colonization. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:730–737. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Chow JK, Golan Y, Ruthazer R, et al. Risk factors for albicans and non-albicans candidemia in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 2008; 36:1993–1998. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Pathak A, Pien FD, Carvalho L. Amphotericin B use in a community hospital, with special emphasis on side effects. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 26:334–338. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Bates DW, Su L, Yu DT, et al. Mortality and costs of acute renal failure associated with amphotericin B therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32:686–693. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Andes DR, Safdar N, Baddley JW, et al. Impact of treatment strategy on outcomes in patients with candidemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis: a patient-level quantitative review of randomized trials. Clin Infect Dis 2012; 54:1110–1122. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Levin AS, Costa SF, Mussi NS, et al. Candida parapsilosis fungemia associated with implantable and semi-implantable central venous catheters and the hands of healthcare workers. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1998; 30:243–249. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Medicine are provided here courtesy of Wolters Kluwer Health

RESOURCES