Evidence Hub

Multifocal Intracranial Cryptococcoma with Treatment Resistance, Recurrence, and Mortality: A Case Report and Literature Review

Masashi Higashino, Eiji Kurihara, Ryuichi Kuroda, Satoshi Inoue, T. Lee, Takashi Mizowaki, Takayuki Nakasho, Daiki Tanabe et al.

NMC Case Report Journal, 2025

1 citation

Abstract

Intracranial cryptococcoma is an uncommon manifestation of central nervous system cryptococcosis. Imaging commonly shows ring-enhancing lesions that resemble malignant tumors radiologically. Early diagnosis and extended antifungal treatment are crucial for decreasing morbidity and enhancing outcomes. Treatment typically involves a minimum of six weeks of induction therapy, followed by 6-18 months of maintenance therapy. Limited information is available on the complete clinical progression in cases where remission is not attained with initial treatment. A 66-year-old immunocompetent man presented with ten ring-enhancing lesions in the brain parenchyma and an infiltrative lesion in the lungs. Complete resection of the largest lesion in the left frontal lobe confirmed a histopathological diagnosis of cryptococcoma. Despite receiving eight weeks of induction therapy with liposomal amphotericin B and oral flucytosine, exceeding standard recommendations, the lesions only partially regressed, failing to achieve complete remission. Fluconazole maintenance therapy was initiated. At five months, lesion recurrence was observed. Induction therapy was resumed for three weeks, followed by a switch back to fluconazole. However, the patient's level of consciousness deteriorated, making oral medication impossible. The patient died 15 months after the initiation of antifungal treatment. Cryptococcoma is a critical diagnostic complication. When chest imaging findings are not characteristic of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free