Sex-related mortality differences in young adult septic shock patients

Septic shock survival rate and host immune response are intimately interlaced. In the last years, biological and pre-clinical studies demonstrated sex-specific differences in the immune response to infection. In the hypothesis that survival rate is related to the hormonal framework, the aim of the present study was to observe sex-specific differences in 28-day mortality rate between women of childbearing potential and same-age men. This multicenter study was conducted in six Italian intensive care units (ICUs). We enrolled consecutive patients ≤ 55 years old admitted to the Intensive Care Unit from January 2011 to January 2020, who were diagnosed with septic shock at the time of ICU admission or during the ICU stay. We gathered baseline characteristics and outcomes. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality; secondary outcomes included ICU mortality, in-hospital mortality and length of stay in the ICU and in the hospital. Moreover, data from >55 years old patients were collected and analyzed. We enrolled 361 young patients with septic shock: 215 were males (60%) and 146 females (40%). While baseline and ICU characteristics were similar between the two groups, males had a higher 28-day mortality rate (39.5% vs. 29%, p = 0.035), ICU mortality rate (49% vs. 38%, p = 0.040) and hospital mortality rate (61% vs. 50%, p = 0.040) as compared to females. Findings were confirmed in patients with septic shock at ICU admission. Young adult females developed septic shock less frequently than young males, displaying a reduced mortality rate as compared to that of their same-age male counterpart. These findings may stimulate future research and therapies

Early Stepdown From Echinocandin to Fluconazole Treatment in Candidemia: A Post Hoc Analysis of Three Cohort Studies

[Background] There are no clear criteria for antifungal de-escalation after initial empirical treatments. We hypothesized that early de-escalation (ED) (within 5 days) to fluconazole is safe in fluconazole-susceptible candidemia with controlled source of infection.[Methods] This is a multicenter post hoc study that included consecutive patients from 3 prospective candidemia cohorts (2007–2016). The impact of ED and factors associated with mortality were assessed.[Results] Of 1023 candidemia episodes, 235 met inclusion criteria. Of these, 54 (23%) were classified as the ED group and 181 (77%) were classified as the non-ED group. ED was more common in catheter-related candidemia (51.9% vs 31.5%; P = .006) and episodes caused by Candida parapsilosis, yet it was less frequent in patients in the intensive care unit (24.1% vs 39.2%; P = .043), infections caused by Nakaseomyces glabrata (0% vs 9.9%; P = .016), and candidemia from an unknown source (24.1% vs 47%; P = .003). In the ED and non-ED groups, 30-day mortality was 11.1% and 29.8% (P = .006), respectively. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (odds ratio [OR], 3.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.48–10.61), Pitt score > 2 (OR, 4.39; 95% CI, 1.94–9.20), unknown source of candidemia (OR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.14–5.86), candidemia caused by Candida albicans (OR, 3.92; 95% CI, 1.48–10.61), and prior surgery (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.08–0.97) were independent predictors of mortality. Similar results were found when a propensity score for receiving ED was incorporated into the model. ED had no significant impact on mortality (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.16–1.53).[Conclusions] Early de-escalation is a safe strategy in patients with candidemia caused by fluconazole-susceptible strains with controlled source of bloodstream infection and hemodynamic stability. These results are important to apply antifungal stewardship strategies.This research forms part of an activity that has received funding from EIT Health. EIT Health is supported by the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT), a body of the European Union that receives support from the European Union´s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program. This study has been cofunded by the European Regional Development Fund. E. M.-G. (PI18/01061), P. P.-A. (“Rio Hortega” contract CM18/00132), M. F.-R. (“Miguel Servet” contract CP18/00073), and C. G.-V. (FIS PI18/01061) have received research grants from the Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo, Instituto de Salud Carlos III.Peer reviewe

A cluster of Candida krusei infections in a haematological unit

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p><it>Candida krusei </it>infections are associated with high mortality. In order to explore ways to prevent these infections, we investigated potential routes for nosocomial spread and possible clonality of <it>C. krusei </it>in a haematological unit which had experienced an unusually high incidence of cases.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We searched for <it>C. krusei </it>contamination of the hospital environment and determined the level of colonization in patients and health care workers. We also analyzed the possible association between exposure to prophylactic antifungals or chemotherapeutic agents and occurrence of <it>C. krusei</it>. The <it>C. krusei </it>isolates found were genotyped by pulsed-field electrophoresis method in order to determine possible relatedness of the cases.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Twelve patients with invasive <it>C. krusei </it>infection and ten patients with potentially significant infection or mucosal colonization were documented within nine months. We were unable to identify any exogenic source of infection or colonization. Genetic analysis of the isolates showed little evidence of clonal transmission of <it>C. krusei </it>strains between the patients. Instead, each patient was colonized or infected by several different closely related genotypes. No association between medications and occurrence of <it>C. krusei </it>was found.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Little evidence of nosocomial spread of a single <it>C. krusei </it>clone was found. The outbreak may have been controlled by cessation of prophylactic antifungals and by intensifying infection control measures, e.g. hand hygiene and cohorting of the patients, although no clear association with these factors was demonstrated.</p

Predictors of choice of initial antifungal treatment in intraabdominal candidiasis

Intraabdominal candidiasis (IAC) is the second most frequent form of invasive candidiasis, and is associated with high mortality rates. This study aims to identify current practices in initial antifungal treatment (IAT) in a real-world scenario and to define the predictors of the choice of echinocandins or azoles in IAC episodes. Secondary analysis was performed of a multinational retrospective cohort at 13 teaching hospitals in four countries (Italy, Greece, Spain and Brazil), over a 3-year period (2011\u20132013). IAC was identified in 481 patients, 323 of whom received antifungal therapy (classified as the treatment group). After excluding 13 patients given amphotericin B, the treatment group was further divided into the echinocandin group (209 patients; 64.7%) and the azole group (101 patients; 32.3%). Median APACHE II scores were significantly higher in the echinocandin group (p 0.013), but IAT did not differ significantly with regard to the Candida species involved. Logistic multivariate stepwise regression analysis, adjusted for centre effect, identified septic shock (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.54), APACHE II > 15 (aOR 1.16) and presence in surgical ward at diagnosis (aOR 1.16) as the top three independent variables associated with an empirical echinocandin regimen. No differences in 30-day mortality were observed between groups. Echinocandin regimen was the first choice for IAT in patients with IAC. No statistical differences in mortality were observed between regimens, but echinocandins were administered to patients with more severe disease. Some disagreements were identified between current clinical guidelines and prescription of antifungals for IAC at the bedside, so further educational measures are required to optimize therapies

Factors associated with the development of septic shock in patients with candidemia: A post hoc analysis from two prospective cohorts

Background: Almost one third of the patients with candidemia develop septic shock. The understanding why some patients do and others do not develop septic shock is very limited. The objective of this study was to identify variables associated with septic shock development in a large population of patients with candidemia. Methods: A post hoc analysis was performed on two prospective, multicenter cohort of patients with candidemia from 12 hospitals in Spain and Italy. All episodes occurring from September 2016 to February 2018 were analyzed to assess variables associated with septic shock development defined according to The Third International Consensus Definition for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). Results: Of 317 candidemic patients, 99 (31.2%) presented septic shock attributable to candidemia. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identifies the following factors associated with septic shock development: age > 50 years (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.03-6.41, p = 0.04), abdominal source of the infection (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.04-4.55, p = 0.04), and admission to a general ward at the time of candidemia onset (OR 0.21, 95% CI, 0.12-0.44, p = 0.001). Septic shock development was independently associated with a greater risk of 30-day mortality (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.08-4.24, p = 0.02). Conclusions: Age and abdominal source of the infection are the most important factors significantly associated with the development of septic shock in patients with candidemia. Our findings suggest that host factors and source of the infection may be more important for development of septic shock than intrinsic virulence factors of organisms

Geographical variation in therapy for bloodstream infections due to multidrug-resistant enterobacteriaceae: a post hoc analysis of the INCREMENT study

We aimed to describe regional differences in therapy for bloodstream infection (BSI) caused by extended-spectrum ?-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-E) or carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE). 1,482 patients in 12 countries were included from an observational study of BSI caused by ESBL-E or CPE. Multivariate logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for the influence of country of recruitment on empirical use of ?-lactam/?-lactamase inhibitors (BLBLI) or carbapenems, targeted use of BLBLI for ESBL-E and use of targeted combination therapy for CPE. The use of BLBLI for empirical therapy was least likely in sites from Israel (aOR 0.34, 95% CI 0.14-0.81), Greece (aOR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26-0.94) and Canada (aOR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11-0.88) but more likely in Italy (aOR 1.58, 95% CI 1.11-2.2) and Turkey (aOR 2.09, 95% CI 1.14-3.81), compared to Spain as a reference. Empirical carbapenems were more likely to be used in sites from Taiwan (aOR 1.73, 95% CI 1.03-2.92) and USA (aOR 1.89; 95% CI 1.05-3.39), and less likely in Italy (aOR 0.44, 95% CI 0.28-0.69) and Canada (aOR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01-0.74). Targeted BLBLI for ESBL-E was more likely in sites from Italy. Treatment at sites within Israel, Taiwan, Turkey and Brazil was associated with less combination therapy for CPE. Although this study does not provide precise data on the relative prevalence of ESBL-E or CPE, significant variation in therapy exists across countries even after adjustment for patient factors. A better understanding of what influences therapeutic choices for these infections will aid antimicrobial stewardship efforts.PH is supported by an Australian Postgraduate Award from the University of Queensland. The study was funded by the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad, Instituto de Salud Carlos III - co-financed by European Development Regional Fund "A way to achieve Europe" ERDF, Spanish Network for the Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD12/0015). BGG, JRB, APH and YC also received funds from the COMBACTE-CARE project (grant agreement 115620), Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI), the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) and in-kind contributions from EFPIA companies

Sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with severe or critical COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

Background: Elevated proinflammatory cytokines are associated with greater COVID-19 severity. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, in patients with severe (requiring supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula or face mask) or critical (requiring greater supplemental oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal support) COVID-19. Methods: We did a 60-day, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial at 45 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Russia, and Spain. We included adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia, who required oxygen supplementation or intensive care. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1 with permuted blocks of five) to receive intravenous sarilumab 400 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo. Patients, care providers, outcome assessors, and investigators remained masked to assigned intervention throughout the course of the study. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of two or more points (seven point scale ranging from 1 [death] to 7 [discharged from hospital]) in the modified intention-to-treat population. The key secondary endpoint was proportion of patients alive at day 29. Safety outcomes included adverse events and laboratory assessments. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04327388; EudraCT, 2020-001162-12; and WHO, U1111-1249-6021. Findings: Between March 28 and July 3, 2020, of 431 patients who were screened, 420 patients were randomly assigned and 416 received placebo (n=84 [20%]), sarilumab 200 mg (n=159 [38%]), or sarilumab 400 mg (n=173 [42%]). At day 29, no significant differences were seen in median time to an improvement of two or more points between placebo (12·0 days [95% CI 9·0 to 15·0]) and sarilumab 200 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 12·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·40]; log-rank p=0·96) or sarilumab 400 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 13·0]; HR 1·14 [95% CI 0·84 to 1·54]; log-rank p=0·34), or in proportions of patients alive (77 [92%] of 84 patients in the placebo group; 143 [90%] of 159 patients in the sarilumab 200 mg group; difference −1·7 [−9·3 to 5·8]; p=0·63 vs placebo; and 159 [92%] of 173 patients in the sarilumab 400 mg group; difference 0·2 [−6·9 to 7·4]; p=0·85 vs placebo). At day 29, there were numerical, non-significant survival differences between sarilumab 400 mg (88%) and placebo (79%; difference +8·9% [95% CI −7·7 to 25·5]; p=0·25) for patients who had critical disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 65% (55 of 84) in the placebo group, 65% (103 of 159) in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 70% (121 of 173) in the sarilumab 400 mg group, and of those leading to death 11% (nine of 84) were in the placebo group, 11% (17 of 159) were in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 10% (18 of 173) were in the sarilumab 400 mg group. Interpretation: This trial did not show efficacy of sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and receiving supplemental oxygen. Adequately powered trials of targeted immunomodulatory therapies assessing survival as a primary endpoint are suggested in patients with critical COVID-19. Funding: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals