Serum 1, 3-β-D-glucan (BG) is highly accurate for Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia (PJP), but only moderately accurate for diagnosing invasive fungal disease (IFD).
For PJP, a meta-analysis of studies looking at the performance of BG found a pooled sensitivity of 96%, specificity of 84% and area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) of 0.96. 1 Thus, a negative BG essentially rules out PJP.
For IFD (primarily invasive candidiasis or aspergillosis), data based on 3 separate meta-analyses came to similar conclusions with a pooled sensitivity and specificity of ~80% and AUC-ROC of ~0.89 each.1-3 In some of the studies,2,3 the sensitivity of BG for IFD was between 50% to 60% which makes it difficult to exclude IFD when BG is normal.
Remember that BG may be false-positive in a variety of situations, including patients receiving immunological preparations (eg albumin or globulins), use of membranes and filters made from cellulose in hemodialysis, and use of cotton gauze swabs/packs/pads and sponges during surgery. 1 In addition, although BG is a component of the cell wall of most fungi, there are some exceptions including Zygomycetes and cryptococci.
Bonus pearl: Did you know that BG assay is based on Limulus amoebocyte lysate, extracted from amoebocytes of horseshoe crab species? 3
If you like this post, sign up under MENU and catch future pearls right in your inbox!
- Onishi A, Sugiyama D, Kogata Y, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of serum 1,3-β-D-glucan for Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia, invasive candidiasis, and invasive aspergillosis: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Microbiol 2012;50:7-15. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22075593
- He S, Hang JP, Zhang L, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy of serum 1,3–β-D-glucan for invasive fungal infection: focus on cutoff levels. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2015;48:351-61. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25081986
- Karageogopoulos DE, Vouloumanou EK, Ntziora F, et al. β-D-glucan assay for the diagnosis of invasive fungal infections: a meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2011;52:750-69. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/52/6/750/361658/