Clinical Sensitivity of the (1–3)-β-D-glucan Test for Predicting Candidemia
10.3343/alm.2023.43.4.381
- Author:
Yun Woo LEE
1
;
So Yun LIM
;
Sol JIN
;
Hye Jin PARK
;
Heungsup SUNG
;
Mi-Na KIM
;
Seongman BAE
;
Jiwon JUNG
;
Min Jae KIM
;
Sung-Han KIM
;
Sang-Oh LEE
;
Sang-Ho CHOI
;
Yang Soo KIM
;
Yong Pil CHONG
Author Information
1. Department of Infectious Diseases, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Publication Type:Brief Communication
- From:Annals of Laboratory Medicine
2023;43(4):381-385
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
The sensitivity of the (1–3)-β-D-glucan (BDG) diagnostic test for candidemia varies in different clinical settings, and its usefulness in early diagnosis of candidemia is suboptimal. We evaluated the sensitivity of the test for early candidemia prediction. All adult patients with culture-proven candidemia who underwent a serum Goldstream Fungus (1–3)-β-D-Glucan Test within seven days prior to candidemia onset at a tertiary referral hospital between January 2017 and May 2021 were included. Any-positive BDG results within seven days prior to candidemia onset were obtained in 38 out of 93 (40.9%) patients. The positive rate increased when the test was performed near the day of candidemia onset (P=0.04) but reached only 52% on the day of candidemia onset. We observed no significant differences between BDG-positive and -negative groups in terms of underlying disease, risk factors for candidemia, clinical presentation, origin of candidemia, and 30-day mortality. Candida albicans was significantly associated with positive BDG results than with all-negative BDG results (P=0.04). The Goldstream BDG test is unreliable for candidemia prediction because of its low sensitivity. Negative BDG results in patients with a high risk of invasive candidiasis should be interpreted with caution.
