
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Microbiol.
Sec. Infectious Agents and Disease
Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2025.1587227
The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Background Invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA) is a severe infectious disease caused by Aspergillus spp. It is associated with high mortality, particularly in immunocompromised patients, as well as in those with COVID-19 pneumonia or critically ill individuals in intensive care units (ICUs). Accurate clinical diagnosis remains a significant challenge, often resulting in missed diagnoses. Methods This study evaluated IPA inpatients diagnosed through mycological evidence and clinical criteria over 12 months. Inclusion criteria required at least one positive mycological result, including a positive culture from bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) or high-quality sputum, or a positive galactomannan antigen (GM) test.Results A total of 216 patients were diagnosed with IPA, with a mortality rate of 68.5%. Hematologic malignancies were the primary underlying condition in 33.8% of cases. Voriconazole or posaconazole was used in 45% (98/216) of patients overall, but only 26% (32/121) of nonhematologic malignancy patients received these treatments. The 28-day survival rate for patients treated with voriconazole/posaconazole was 0.776 ± 0.038, compared to 0.421 ± 0.043 for untreated patients. Median survival was 130 days (95% CI, 35.3-224.7) for treated patients versus 20 days (95% CI, 15.8-24.2) for untreated patients (p < 0.001). Biomarkers for IPA diagnosis demonstrated high diagnostic value, with area under the curve (AUC) values for GM, G, PCT, IL-6, WBC, NEU%, and D-dimer of 0.953, 0.983, 1.000, 0.999, 0.961, 0.996, and 1.000, respectively. GM levels >0.5 pg/ml had a positive predictive value of 52.9% (27/51), while positive mycological culture had a predictive value of 46.5% (33/71). Multivariable regression analysis identified several significant factors associated with in-hospital mortality: IPA (OR 7.509, 95% CI 4.227-13.339, p < 0.001), voriconazole/posaconazole treatment (OR 0.124, 95% CI 0.063-0.242, p < 0.001), ICU hospitalization (OR 5.280, 95% CI 1.549-18.002, p = 0.008), hematologic malignancy (OR 0.316, 95% CI 0.174-0.573, p < 0.001), and NEU% ≥87.25% (OR 3.409, 95% CI 1.455-7.990, p = 0.005) Conclusion Non-hematologic malignancy patients with IPA were frequently undertreated with antifungal therapy. A comprehensive diagnostic approach using biomarkers,CT, and mycological evidence is crucial. Key risk factors for mortality include lack of voriconazole/posaconazole treatment, IPA diagnosis, ICU admission, non-hematologic malignancies, and elevated NEU%.
Keywords: IPA, Clinical Characteristics, survival analysis, biomarkers, Mortality
Received: 04 Mar 2025; Accepted: 11 Apr 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Feng, Ha and song. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: yuejuan song, People's Liberation Army Joint Logistics Support Force 940th Hospital, Lanzhou, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary Material
Research integrity at Frontiers
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.