The aim of this study is to compare the curative effect of empirical with diagnostic-driven (pre-emptive) therapy of voriconazole in severe aplastic anaemia patients (SAAs) with invasive fungal disease (IFD) after intensive immunosuppressive therapy (IST). Patients undergoing voriconazole antifungal therapy were randomized to empirical therapy group and diagnostic-driven therapy group. Empirical therapy group accounted for 48.5% of all cases, and diagnostic-driven therapy group accounted for 51.5%. The morbidity of IFD (probable and proven cases) was slightly increased in diagnostic-driven therapy group compared with empirical therapy group (P > 0.05). The total effective rate was 62.1%. The effective rate in empirical therapy group was 78.1%, which was significantly increased compared with diagnostic-driven therapy group (47.1%) (P < 0.05). This value was especially significant in possible IFD cases (P < 0.05). The efficacy of possible IFD cases in empirical therapy group was the best (84%) followed by the probable and proven cases in empirical therapy group (57.1%). In diagnostic-driven therapy group, the efficacy of possible IFD cases was 50%, and the efficacy of probable and proven cases was only 37.5%. The difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) is the key anti-infection factor. The efficacy of patients whose ANC ˂ 0.1 × 109/L was 39.28%, which was significantly reduced compared with that of patients whose ANC ≥ 0.1 × 109/L (78.95%) (P < 0.05). This finding was especially obvious in diagnostic-driven therapy group. As empirical therapy is superior to diagnostic-driven therapy, we recommend that empirical therapy should be started for high-risk patients, and efforts should be made to definitively diagnose the disease.
Keywords: Diagnostic-driven therapy; Empirical therapy; Invasive fungal disease; Pre-emptive therapy; Severe aplastic anaemia; Voriconazole.