. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 May 27.

Published in final edited form as: Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2011;2011:374–376. doi: 10.1182/asheducation-2011.1.374

Table 1.

Evidence for the use of broader antifungal prophylaxis agents in childhood AML

Study	Design	N	Median age, y (range)	Diagnosis	Objective	Outcome
Torres et al⁹	PC	127	43 (2–74)	AML or SCT	To determine safety and efficacy of voriconazole	72.9% without proven, probable, or suspected fungal infection
Ito et al¹⁰	RCT	218	53 (16–80) 58 (16–80)	AML or MDS	To demonstrate non-inferiority of itraconazole compared with fluconazole	Itraconazole group: 4 possible, 0 probable IFI Fluconazole group: 8 possible, 3 probable IFI
Cornely et al¹¹	RCT	602	53 (13–82) 53 (13–81)	AML or MDS	To compare safety and efficacy of posaconazole to fluconazole or itraconazole	Posaconazole group: 2% IFI Fluconazole or itraconazole group: 8% IFI

PC indicates prospective cohort; SCT, stem cell transplantation for leukemia; and MDS, myelodysplastic syndrome.