Healthcare Impact

Undetected Candida: deadly, costly and overtreated

Candida is the fourth leading hospital-acquired bloodstream infection, and with a mortality rate of 40%,the most lethal. A fact that has not changed in decades despite the growing use of empiric antifungal therapy.

Candida is also a tremendous burden to the healthcare system. A typical patient with a Candida infection averages 40 days in the hospital,2 including nine days in intensive care,3 resulting in an average cost per hospital stay of over $130,000 per patient.2

Before the T2Candida Panel, all FDA-cleared Candida detection required a blood culture to determine the Candida species and start appropriate therapy – and blood culture results take 2 to 6 days and miss 40%4 of Candida infections.

Rapid diagnostics: save lives, lower costs and reduce resistance

Unlike blood culture detection, the T2Candida Panel provides species-specific results direct from whole blood in an average of 4.3 hours versus 2 to 6 days.  

According to clinical studies, the ability to obtain a species-specific positive test result on day zero can have substantial benefits:

T2-Saves-Lives-Chart-4.21.15

  • Candida mortality can be reduced from 40% to 11% if appropriately treated within 12 hours of presentation of symptoms3,5

  • Rapid appropriate therapy decreases the average cost of care by approximately $30,000 per patient6

    • 3.3 days reduced in ICU7

    • 5.5 days reduced in general ward7

Now the only reason to treat patients for Candida will be because they actually have it

Many hospitals initiate antifungals such as Caspofungin or Micafungin, empirically while waiting for blood culture based diagnostic results. It is estimated that 40% of high-risk, symptomatic patients are on this empiric therapy for 1 to 15 days, whether or not they even have a Candida infection8. 

A rapid negative test result from the T2Candida Panel can enable physicians to stop unnecessary antifungal treatment which saves money, reduces toxicity to the patient and lowers the risk of antimicrobial resistance in the hospital.

……………………………………….

1. Parkins, M. D., Sabuda, D. M., Elsayed, S., & Laupland, K. B. (2007). Adequacy of empirical antifungal therapy and effect on outcome among patients with invasive Candida species infections. Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 60(3), 613-618.
2. Gagne, J. J., Breitbart, R. E., Maio, V., et. al. (2006). Costs associated with candidemia in a hospital setting. P and T, 31(10), 586.
3. Morrell, M., Fraser, V. J., and Kollef, M. H. (2005). Delaying the empiric treatment of Candida bloodstream infection until positive blood culture results are obtained: a potential risk factor for hospital mortality. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 49(9), 3640-3645.
4. Pfaller, M.A, Wolk, D.M, Lowery, T.J. (2015). T2MR and T2Candida: novel technology for the rapid diagnosis of candidemia and invasive candidiasisFuture microbiology, doi:10.2217/fmb.15.111
5. Garey, K. W., Rege, M., Pai, M. P., et. al. (2006). Time to initiation of fluconazole therapy impacts mortality in patients with candidemia: a multi-institutional study. Clinical infectious diseases, 43(1), 25-31.
6. Arnold, H. M., Micek, S. T., Shorr, A. F., et al. (2009). Hospital resource utilization and costs of inappropriate treatment of candidemia. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine, 179, A2476.
7. Arnold, H. M., Micek, S. T., Shorr, A. F., et al. (2010). Hospital resource utilization and costs of inappropriate treatment of candidemia. Pharmacotherapy: the journal of human pharmacology and drug therapy, 30(4), 361-368.
8. Aitken S.L., Beyda N.D., Shah D.N., et al. Clinical practice patterns in hospitalized patients at risk for invasive candidiasis: role of antifungal stewardship programs in an era of rapid diagnostics. Annals of pharmacotherapy, 48(6), 683-690.