PURPOSE OF REVIEW We review the performance of culture-independent diagnostic tests (CIDTs), including β-D-glucan (BDG), polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and T2Candida, in diagnosing invasive candidiasis, their potential roles in patient… Click to show full abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW We review the performance of culture-independent diagnostic tests (CIDTs), including β-D-glucan (BDG), polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and T2Candida, in diagnosing invasive candidiasis, their potential roles in patient management, and unintended consequences of testing. RECENT FINDINGS In a recent multicenter trial, T2Candida was 90% sensitive and 98% specific for diagnosing candidemia. A new study provided the first data for T2Candida in diagnosing deep-seated candidiasis, demonstrating sensitivity/specificity of 45%/96%. Two studies showed that ongoing T2Candida-positivity is associated with poor prognosis. In several studies, serum BDG and T2Candida, targeted to patients at-risk for invasive candidiasis, were useful in guiding treatment decisions and antifungal stewardship. A randomized, multicenter trial of BDG-guided empiric antifungal treatment is underway among critically ill patients. PCR performance was highly variable for candidemia and deep-seated candidiasis in recent studies. CIDT results may overstate bloodstream infections, according to current National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) definitions. SUMMARY BDG and T2Candida are nearing prime-time status in the clinic. To be useful, testing must be directed to carefully chosen patients and specific clinical questions. Candida PCR is limited by a need for standardized methodologies and commercial assays. NHSN definitions of bloodstream infections must be revised in the era of CIDTs.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.