Abstract
Vulvovaginal candidiasis is a common infection associated most often with the overgrowth of the fungal species
Introduction
Vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) is a fungal infection characterized by inflammation of the vulval and vaginal epithelium. Up to 75% of women will have at least one episode of VVC in their lifetime, most often during their reproductive years.1,2 Recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis (RVVC) is defined as ⩾3 symptomatic acute episodes of VVC within a 12-month span.
3
The objective of this literature review is to expand clinical knowledge on the status of and challenges in diagnosis and management of RVVC for health care professionals in the United States; searches in major databases including PubMed and Cochrane Library were conducted using the search terms: “recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis; treatment recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis (and/or RVVC); diagnosis recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis (and/or RVVC); and management recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis (and/or RVVC).”
Burden of RVVC
Although most women report a duration of RVVC of 1–2 years, some women have recurrent infections for 4–5 years, or even for decades. 3 In addition to the discomfort of and limitations due to symptoms, women with RVVC report significantly reduced quality of life 2 and debilitating negative psychosocial effects. 5 Women with RVVC have reported increased stress and decreased self-esteem and confidence 2 and are more likely to suffer from clinical depression. 6 In qualitative interviews, women with RVVC reported high levels of anxiety and fear regarding social interactions and dating and avoidance of sexual activity. 6
RVVC also imposes a substantial economic burden: these same women rated managing out-of-pocket costs for doctor visits and treatment as one of the top burdens of the disease. 6 In the United States, the total annual insurer and out-of-pocket costs for outpatient VVC treatment was estimated at US$368 million for 2017 7 ; the estimated annual economic impact of RVVC in the United States in 2010 from lost work hours was US$1 billion.2,4,8
Factors contributing to recurrence in RVVC
Although still not fully understood, multiple factors are thought to contribute to the pathogenesis of RVVC.
Research is ongoing into genetic and immune-related host factors that may contribute to the development or duration of RVVC. The epithelium of the vagina acts as the first barrier to foreign organisms.
9
When an RVVC infection occurs, patterns on
Recurrence can also result from developed resistance to antifungal treatment, usually due to prolonged or repeated use of a single agent.
11
Given the increased accessibility of over-the-counter (OTC) antifungal therapy, some strains of
Clinical challenges in diagnosis of RVVC
The substantial psychosocial and economic burdens faced by women with RVVC, and the increasing prevalence and mycologic complexity of vulvovaginal fungal infection, make prompt, accurate, and comprehensive testing for and diagnosis of acute VVC and RVVC critical to formulating informed clinical strategies.
Diagnosis of RVVC
Because
Although the most common causative pathogen in VVC is
Diagnosis of VVC (Figure 1) should include microscopy of vaginal discharge, a fungal culture, or other tests such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to identify the presence and species of yeast(s).
15
Microscopy of vaginal discharge by wet preparation (saline, 10% potassium hydroxide) for the presence of budding yeasts, pseudohyphae, or hyphae is a commonly used, rapid method to confirm a suspected VVC infection.
15
Limitations of microscopy include low (40%−70%) sensitivity
3
and less ability to identify certain species, such as

Fungal culture is considered as the reference standard for the diagnosis of VVC and should be undertaken for women displaying symptoms suspicious for VVC infection but with negative microscopy and normal vaginal pH. 15 Commercial tests, such as PCR, are increasingly being utilized, as they often have faster turnaround than culture 16 ; however, many PCR tests are not US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved. Clinicians choosing PCR for diagnosis should be familiar with the performance characteristics of the specific test being utilized. 15
VVC is classified as uncomplicated or complicated.
14
Uncomplicated VVC is defined by the presence of all of the following: mild-to-moderate symptoms,
RVVC is diagnosed when a woman has had ⩾3 symptomatic acute VVC episodes in a 12-month span (Figure 1), with symptom-free periods between episodes.
3
In women with a history of RVVC (identified by their medical history or medical record), new symptomatic episodes should not be diagnosed empirically. A diagnostic workup, including fungal culture, should be performed to confirm the diagnosis and identify the causative species, including less-common species, such as
Testing to determine whether isolates are susceptible or resistant to a variety of antifungal agents should also be performed in women with RVVC, to inform antimycotic agent treatment selection and duration of the treatment. 12 Development of azole-resistant infection may be suspected in women who do not respond to standard treatment regimens or who experience breakthrough symptoms despite compliant long-term fluconazole maintenance therapy. 11 Although breakthrough infections are still relatively rare (usually < 5% of patients), in vitro susceptibility testing can be useful in selecting subsequent treatment.11,18
Self-diagnosis of VVC and RVVC
Although not guidelines recommended, 16 women who have symptoms associated with VVC may skip consultation with a doctor and instead self-diagnose and self-treat with OTC preparations. 3 Studies have shown, however, that women often base self-diagnosis on nonspecific symptoms and without a full understanding of the variety of vaginal conditions that can cause similar symptoms. 6 Even in women who previously had a clinically diagnosed acute VVC infection, only one-third correctly self-diagnosed a subsequent VVC infection. 6 Women who reported having self-diagnosed an infection were less likely to report symptom relief compared with women who were diagnosed by a physician: 57% versus 84%, respectively. 19 In women who have chosen to self-diagnose, clinical evaluation and testing is recommended if symptoms persist or recur in less than 2 months. 15
Clinical challenges in therapeutic management of RVVC
The Infectious Diseases Society of America, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have all published treatment guidelines for VVC and RVVC.15–17 There is a variety of prescription and OTC agents, both topical and oral, that can be used to treat uncomplicated acute VVC (Supplemental Appendix 1). Mycologic cure 16 and symptom relief are achieved in 90% of women with uncomplicated acute VVC who complete their therapeutic regimen. 15 Choice of therapeutic regimen for uncomplicated VVC can be individualized based on patient preference, convenience, cost, and history of response or adverse reaction to previous treatment. 16
Treatment recommendations for RVVC are shown in Table 1. The treatment regimen is dependent on causative yeast(s)/
Recommended treatment regimens for RVVC.
Abbreviations: ACOG: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; CDC: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; IDSA: Infectious Diseases Society of America; RVVC: recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis; VVC: vulvovaginal candidiasis.
A landmark RVVC treatment study using an induction regimen of fluconazole (three 150 mg doses at 72 h intervals) followed by weekly maintenance doses of 150 mg of fluconazole for 6 months was shown to reduce symptoms and recurrences. 21 An alternative maintenance regimen of 200 mg doses of fluconazole weekly for 2 months, then every 2 weeks for 4 months, followed by once-monthly 200 mg doses for another 6 months has also been assessed.22,23 Maintenance therapy for RVVC is rarely curative; it is intended to suppress rather than eradicate the causative yeast. 24 Although symptom resolution is achieved in ~90% of women with RVVC who undergo ⩾6 months of maintenance therapy,16,21,22 up to 50% will have a recurrence after the termination of maintenance therapy. 13
Long-term use of fluconazole has risks, including an FDA pregnancy warning.
25
Repeated use of fluconazole also increases risk for the development of resistant strains.13,18,26 Treating azole-resistant vaginitis constitutes a major clinical challenge for providers, given the current paucity of alternative antimycotic agents.
11
Suggested regimens for azole-resistant
Treatment of NAC-species RVVC can also be clinically challenging. Treatment failure on standard recommended regimens is common, as some NAC strains are inherently resistant to the azole drug class, have acquired resistance mechanisms,
8
or have low susceptibility to commonly used antifungal agents,
27
all of which complicates therapeutic management of NAC-species RVVC.
8
Alternative treatment options are limited because, as with azole-resistant strains, the current armamentarium of antifungal agents active against NAC strains is limited.
12
Suggested therapeutic options for
The use of adjuvant probiotic supplements for the treatment of VVC and RVVC is still being investigated to determine clinical benefit. A 2017 Cochrane review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using probiotics in addition to conventional antifungal treatment regimens for VVC in nonpregnant women showed increased short-term clinical and mycological cure rates and a reduced short-term relapse rate. 28 Trials of women with RVVC were not included in this meta-analysis, however, and the evidence level was considered low/very low. 28 Findings from ongoing and future RCTs with standardized methodologies, larger sample sizes, and longer follow-up periods are needed to determine the true benefit of adjuvant probiotics for treatment of VVC or RVVC. 28 Probiotics are not currently recommended in any US-based treatment recommendations or guidelines.
Treatment innovations for RVVC
More-effective and safer therapeutic options are critically needed to ease the physical symptoms and psychosocial burden of RVVC and provide additional treatment options for resistant-strain and NAC-species infections. Several promising therapeutic options are on the horizon.
Oteseconazole (previously VT-1161, Mycovia Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Durham, North Carolina) is a novel oral agent recently approved by the FDA for RVVC.
29
It has demonstrated potent antifungal activity against clinical isolates of
Ibrexafungerp (formerly SCY-078; SCYNEXIS Inc., Jersey City, New Jersey) is an oral 1,3-β-D-glucan synthase inhibitor 32 that is FDA approved to treat acute VVC. 33 A Phase 3 study (NCT04029116) is underway to evaluate the efficacy of oral ibrexafungerp in preventing recurrent VVC episodes in participants with RVVC. 34
A fungal immunotherapeutic vaccine (NDV-3A, NovaDigm Therapeutics, Grand Forks, North Dakota) was evaluated in a Phase 2 double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial (NCT01926028). 35 In a post hoc analysis, NDV-3A significantly reduced the frequency of symptomatic VVC episodes in women younger than 40 years with RVVC. 34
Conclusion
This review provides an overview of the burden and potential risk factors for RVVC and best practices for diagnosing acute VVC and RVVC. Treatment of RVVC has inherent clinical challenges because of the complexity of its pathophysiology and the increasing number of NAC-species and azole-resistant infections. Due to differences in diagnostic and management guidelines for RVVC internationally, this review focused on US-based guidelines and US FDA-approved treatments.
Supplemental Material
sj-docx-1-smo-10.1177_20503121221115201 – Supplemental material for Clinical challenges in diagnosis and treatment of recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis
Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-smo-10.1177_20503121221115201 for Clinical challenges in diagnosis and treatment of recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis by Chemen M Neal and Mark G Martens in SAGE Open Medicine
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
Under the direction of the authors, Susan A. Leon, PhD, and Tam M. Nguyen-Cao, PhD, CMPP, of Claritas Scientific LLC provided medical writing services and Ann D. Bledsoe Bollert, MA, CMPP, of Y-Axis Editorial provided editorial services.
Author contributions
C.M.N. and M.G.M. were involved in the conception of the work, were involved in drafting and revising the article for intellectual content, approved the final version for publication, and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Mycovia Pharmaceuticals, Inc. was not involved in the development of this article.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: C.M.N. and M.G.M. have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the article. They worked independently from Mycovia Pharmaceuticals, Inc. to develop this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Medical writing support for this article was funded by Mycovia Pharmaceuticals Inc., the manufacturer of oteseconazole.
Supplemental material
Supplemental material for this article is available online.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
