Asemoloye Micheal Dare Factors which greatly limits the generation of fungal vaccines are,

1. Human commensal nature of fungi,

2. Capacity of fungi to establish clinical latency (Candida, Cryptococcus etc.),

3. Potential high costs in preparing the vaccines,

4. Mostly immunocompromised individuals are susceptible to fungal infections,

5. Vaccine against commensal organisms ( Candida, etc.) becomes a challenge as autoimmunity against the organism develops.

Despite these factors, many fungal vaccines are in development stages.

Due to the diverse weaponry of Fungi (Production of Toxins & Extracellular enzymes), it is very easy to kill the pathogen by vaccination but it is nearly difficult to detoxify the toxins produced in the host.

Ironically, the increased mortality rate from fungal attack is as a result of toxin production.

Note: I stand corrected, There are very limited vaccines against toxins

Why?

According to the Chinese proverb, you can only use poison to cure poison. Toxins are poisonous & as such a panacea to remedy the situation is to inject the host with a calculated amount of a counter poison of equal potency. Therefore, introducing the wrong poison into a healthy host during vaccination will kill the host long before the fungus or its toxin infect the host.

Actually quite a few are being tested or have been developed, see: Article Fungal vaccines, mechanism of actions and immunology: A comp...

Think one of the problems would be that serious invasive fungal diseases occur in immunocompromised patients, so immunity is severely impaired anyway.

Thanks for your reply Norman van Rhijn

@Dr Peter Etaware thanks for this reply, do we then say science is still lacking in vaccine development for fungal pathogens?

Along with the other thoughtful answers, it would be a matter of incentives and economics. If the at-risk group of immunocompromised and other patients is relatively small, incremental costs may be too high and the financial risk too great for a company to take on the manufacturing and sales of a vaccine. Immunological response in the very targeted groups for this may also be poor.

It is more difficult and less economic profitable to research on this field

@Dr Michael Asemoloye

Thank you for identifying this very important aspect of clinical therapy that has not yet been fully addressed by medical experts.

Back to your question: Honestly speaking, the question you should have raised is

- are there available antidotes for all possible fungal toxins? Or are we still lacking in the knowledge or technology or technicality or even raw materials (natural or synthetic) to produce a broad-spectrum antidote that can neutralize all manner of fungal toxins?

After all said and done, the development of vaccines for fungal infections will just be like "the icing on the cake"

Note:

Toxigenic fungi produce toxins when their lives are threatened (by competition, drugs or vaccines, shortage of food supply, space or antagonistic reaction by the host immune system) or when they are about to die.

That is why most available fungal vaccines are perceived by the medical world as being less effective!!!!

Therefore, it is very pertinent for scientists to develop a broad-spectrum clinical therapy (drugs or vaccines) that will kill the fungal pathogens & simultaneously neutralize the toxins produced thereafter.

PS: This is just an hypothetical panacae to the problem raised by Dr Michael Asemoloye

Dr Peter Etaware thanks for your valuable contributions, you seems to stress more importance on toxins associated with pathogenic fungi but do you you think all pathogenic fungi produce toxins?

@Prof. Dr. Luis Rodrigo thank you, that must be coming from experience

Dr Norman van Rhijn and Prof. Irving Steinberg thanks for your contributions

In terms of quantitative and human health impact, they are less relevant than the related to bacteria and virus infections

@Dr Michael Asemoloye

Not at all!!!!!!

But the most clinically important cases of fungal infections are closely associated with toxicosis.....well, viewing the issue for the economic aspect, I would agree with Prof. Dr. Luis Rodrigo.

But nonetheless, all diseases are medically important & equal level of attention should be given to each & every one of them to avoid future pandemic situations just like the coronaviruses are threatening human existence today.......If only little attention was dedicated to the coronaviruses some 50yrs back in time, then there would have not been severe species mutation & leap across the species barriers!!!!!

The same is applicable for fungi....I don't know what prompted this discussion BUT I strongly think there is a strong indication of future disaster if the current lack of quality vaccines for fungal disease is not addressed....

Just like Prof. Dr. Luis Rodrigo said "Fungal infection are less relevance to the medical world compared to bacterial or viral infections", What if the situation changes tomorrow?

I agree with @ Dr Peter Etaware .. i do believe that fungal infections are more difficult to threat as compared to bacterial or viral infects and this otherwise neccessitates attention on this topic

this attitude is changing positively in last years

There are several reasons for this, one of which is that its severity and severity are far less than those of viral and bacterial infections, which is why fungal infections are relatively less important.

Neither of the two. Scientists are working tirelessly to develop effective vaccines against fungal infections. However, according to reports, there are challenges engaged in different stages of clinical trials hence, their non-approval by the United States Food and Drug Administration

@ Olumayowa M Olowe thanks for your valuable contribution... @ A.K. Azad I think i disagree with you especially your use of 'severity' .. I also disagree with many others saying that fungal infections are less important, many fungi cause severe evasive diseases which are very difficult to treat.

Dear Dr. Dare,

in addition to the reasons listed so far such as, for example, that "the most clinically important cases of fungal infections are closely associated with toxicosis", I note that mycotoxicoses can not be fought with a vaccine, as they do not cause responses by the immune system, also because mycotoxins are not proteins.

Best regards

@Alessandra Ricelli thanks for your valuable contribution @Maama Maama i dont understand your response here

Fungal diseases are neglected world wide. Modern medical education is western oriented. Medical microbiology , taught in medical education, is mostly bacteriology, a little virology; and scanty knowledge on Medical Mycology. Western world temperate climate is not conducive to fungal infections. Most research in medical mycology is done by Western workers. But they do not get mycoses cases which are prevalent in the tropical regions of the world. In the tropical regions there is dearth of health care professionals well versed on mycoses. Therefore, mycoses are often misdiagnosed and subject to medical errors leading to prolonged morbidity of the disease or even death or loss of limb.

Mycoses pose no epidemics not to think of pandemics. So there is no need to develop any vaccine. Therefore fungal diseases are neglected by the policy makers.

Most mycoses can be treated with drugs. However medical errors do occur often.

Check the following article,

"Fungal vaccines, mechanism of actions and immunology: A comprehensive review"

Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy

Volume 109, January 2019, Pages 333-344

thanks for your contributions @Pofs Anisetti Thammayya and Packiaraj Jeyachandran Manohari

Asemoloye Micheal Dare Factors which greatly limits the generation of fungal vaccines are,

1. Human commensal nature of fungi,

2. Capacity of fungi to establish clinical latency (Candida, Cryptococcus etc.),

3. Potential high costs in preparing the vaccines,

4. Mostly immunocompromised individuals are susceptible to fungal infections,

5. Vaccine against commensal organisms ( Candida, etc.) becomes a challenge as autoimmunity against the organism develops.

Despite these factors, many fungal vaccines are in development stages.

Thanks Abhishek Dharm Singh

Agree with Abhishek Dharm Singh that only immunocompromised individuals are susceptible to fungal infections.

For most people, microorganisms like fungi and bacteria are the prey of our immunity, and they provide all the essential nutrition needed for our body:

Article Animals in a bacterial world, a new imperative for the life sciences

So it is actually not wise to eliminate these microorganisms from the surface of our body, it will inevitably cause malnutrition by eliminate them.

Abhishek Dharm Singh It is absolutely wrong in saying "human commensal nature of fungi". The source of the fungal infection in almost all cases, except dermatophytosis, is soil containing plant and animal debris. Any fungus, including commensals like Candida and others, can invade tissues of compromised or debilitated patients where immune mechanisms are abrogated. Fungi can grow on any substrate which is suitable food for fungi.

You are ignorant in saying "Mostly compromised individuals are susceptible to fungal infections. Compromised individuals whose immune mechanism is abrogated are susceptible to any fungus, of outside the body or from environment . Compromised patients are a good substrate for growth of invasive fungi.

Most of us are ignorant of nature of fungal infections. This is obviously due to NEGLECT OF FUNGAL DISEASES.

Fungal infections are generally very difficult to treat because, unlike bacteria, fungi are eukaryotes. Antibiotics only target prokaryotic cells, whereas compounds that kill fungi also harm the eukaryotic animal host.

Currently, there are no immunotherapeutic or vaccines approved for the treatment or prevention of fungal infections. Several candidates are in the preclinical stage of development and two vaccines against Candida spp.

Only, a single dose of an investigational fungal vaccine, NDV-3A, was safe and reduced episodes of recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis, or RVVC, in women up to 1 year after vaccination, according to results of a phase 2 trial.

here below is the evidence

I don-t know the final answer , but may be included several theories such as lack of interest of researchers, of the industry or the economical reasons perhaps....