Research published this week explores how doctors monitor chronic pulmonary aspergillosis, how difficult-to-treat ABPA may be managed, and how the immune system recognises fungi.
As always, these studies add to the evidence base but do not necessarily change treatment immediately.
Monitoring chronic pulmonary aspergillosis using Aspergillus IgG
A study in Chest examined how anti-Aspergillus IgG blood-test results change over time in people with chronic pulmonary aspergillosis (CPA).
Anti-Aspergillus IgG is commonly used as part of the assessment for CPA. It may also help clinicians monitor a patient, but interpreting changes can be difficult. A result may be influenced by how long someone has had the disease, when treatment started and how the disease is progressing.
The researchers looked at “time-normalised” IgG measurements. In simple terms, this means considering the antibody result alongside the length of time since diagnosis or treatment, rather than interpreting one result in isolation.
This approach may eventually help clinicians identify patterns associated with improvement, stability or progression. However, it is not a replacement for reviewing symptoms, scans, lung function and other test results together.
The study is particularly relevant because CPA often requires long-term follow-up, and there is currently no single blood test that can reliably describe everything happening in the lungs.
Switching biologics in difficult-to-treat ABPA
A case report describes the treatment of a person with refractory allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA), where treatment remained difficult despite several approaches.
ABPA is driven by an exaggerated immune response to Aspergillus in the airways. Treatment may involve corticosteroids, antifungal medication and, in some cases, biologic medicines that target specific parts of the allergic or inflammatory response.
The report focuses on the selection, discontinuation and switching of biologics. It illustrates how treatment decisions may need to be adjusted when a medicine does not provide enough benefit, causes problems, or is no longer the best option for an individual patient.
This is a case report, so it cannot show that one biologic is generally better than another. It does, however, reflect the increasingly individualised nature of ABPA treatment. Decisions may depend on asthma control, eosinophil levels, exacerbations, steroid requirements, side effects and other health conditions.
Patients should not stop or switch biologic treatment without discussing it with their clinical team.
How the immune system recognises fungal cell walls
A review in Virulence examines how the immune system detects the cell walls of human fungal pathogens.
Fungal cell walls contain structures such as β-glucans, chitin and mannans. These can be detected by specialised immune receptors. The resulting immune response may help the body control the fungus, but it can also contribute to inflammation or tissue damage.
This is relevant to aspergillosis because the immune response is central to the different forms of disease. In ABPA, the immune response is excessive and allergic. In chronic disease, the relationship between the fungus, damaged airways and the immune system is more complex. In invasive aspergillosis, weakened or disrupted immune defences may allow the fungus to grow beyond the airways.
The review is not a treatment trial, but it helps explain why exposure to the same environmental fungus does not produce the same outcome in everyone.
Other research this week
Aspergillus flavus and antifungal susceptibility
Researchers in Cameroon examined the genetic diversity and antifungal susceptibility of Aspergillus flavus collected from different environmental settings, including soil, air, crops and clinical samples.
Aspergillus flavus is an important cause of invasive aspergillosis, particularly in some parts of the world. Understanding how strains differ may help explain regional patterns of disease and antifungal resistance.
This was a geographically focused study, so the findings cannot automatically be applied to every country. It nevertheless reinforces the importance of local surveillance and susceptibility testing when resistant infection is suspected.
Amphotericin B in invasive aspergillosis
A multicentre observational study from China examined amphotericin B colloidal dispersion in people with invasive aspergillosis and haematological disease.
The study provides real-world information about the use of this formulation in a group at high risk from invasive fungal infection. However, it concerns hospital-based treatment of invasive aspergillosis and should not be confused with treatment decisions for ABPA or CPA.
The choice of antifungal depends on the type of aspergillosis, the patient’s other illnesses, kidney and liver function, drug interactions, susceptibility results and previous treatment.
New diagnostic criteria for invasive aspergillosis in COPD
A recently published international study proposes diagnostic criteria for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in people with COPD.
Invasive aspergillosis can be difficult to recognise in COPD because symptoms and scan findings may resemble a severe bacterial exacerbation or another lung problem. The authors propose combining the patient’s risk factors, imaging and results from more than one Aspergillus test.
These criteria are intended to support clinical diagnosis and research. They do not mean that a positive Aspergillus test alone proves invasive disease. Aspergillus can sometimes be detected in damaged or colonised airways without causing invasive infection.
What does this mean for patients?
The main theme this week is the move towards more individualised diagnosis and treatment.
- interpreting CPA antibody results more intelligently over time;
- tailoring ABPA treatment when the first approach is not sufficient;
- understanding why immune responses to fungi differ between people;
- monitoring antifungal resistance in different regions; and
- improving the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis in people with underlying lung disease.
None of these studies means that patients should change treatment themselves. They show how research is gradually improving the information available to clinicians when making difficult decisions.
This article summarises early or newly published research. It is for information only and is not a substitute for medical advice.
Did this page help you?
Tell us in one minute
