Multidrug resistance, inappropriate empiric treatment and hospital mortality in Acinetobacter baumannii pneumonia and sepsis

Background: The relationship between multidrug resistance (MDR), inappropriate empiric therapy (IET), and mortality among patients with Acinetobacter baumannii (AB) remains unclear. We examined it using a large U.S. database. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Premier Research database (2009–2013) of 175 U.S. hospitals. We included all adult patients admitted with pneumonia or sepsis as their principal diagnosis, or as a secondary diagnosis in the setting of respiratory failure, along with antibiotic administration within 2 days of admission. Only culture-confirmed infections were included. Resistance to at least three classes of antibiotics defined multidrug-resistant AB (MDR-AB). We used logistic regression to compute the adjusted relative risk ratio (RRR) of patients with MDR-AB receiving IET and IET’s impact on mortality. Results: Among 1423 patients with AB infection, 1171 (82.3 %) had MDR-AB. Those with MDR-AB were older (63.7 ± 15.4 vs. 61.0 ± 16.9 years, p = 0.014). Although chronic disease burden did not differ between groups, the MDR-AB group had higher illness severity than those in the non-MDR-AB group (intensive care unit 68.0 % vs. 59. 5 %, p < 0.001; mechanical ventilation 56.2 % vs. 42.1 %, p < 0.001). Patients with MDR-AB were more likely to receive IET than those in the non-MDR-AB group (76.2 % MDR-AB vs. 13.8 % non-MDR-AB, p < 0.001). In a regression model, MDR-AB strongly predicted receipt of IET (adjusted RRR 5.5, 95 % CI 4.0–7.7, p < 0.001). IET exposure was associated with higher hospital mortality (adjusted RRR 1.8, 95 % CI 1.4–2.3, p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this large U.S. database, the prevalence of MDR-AB among patients with AB infection was > 80 %. Harboring MDR-AB increased the risk of receiving IET more than fivefold, and IET nearly doubled hospital mortality

Inflammation Aggravates Disease Severity in Marfan Syndrome Patients

BACKGROUND: Marfan syndrome (MFS) is a pleiotropic genetic disorder with major features in cardiovascular, ocular and skeletal systems, associated with large clinical variability. Numerous studies reveal an involvement of TGF-beta signaling. However, the contribution of tissue inflammation is not addressed so far. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Here we showed that both TGF-beta and inflammation are up-regulated in patients with MFS. We analyzed transcriptome-wide gene expression in 55 MFS patients using Affymetrix Human Exon 1.0 ST Array and levels of TGF-beta and various cytokines in their plasma. Within our MFS population, increased plasma levels of TGF-beta were found especially in MFS patients with aortic root dilatation (124 pg/ml), when compared to MFS patients with normal aorta (10 pg/ml; p = 8x10(-6), 95% CI: 70-159 pg/ml). Interestingly, our microarray data show that increased expression of inflammatory genes was associated with major clinical features within the MFS patients group; namely severity of the aortic root dilatation (HLA-DRB1 and HLA-DRB5 genes; r = 0.56 for both; False Discovery Rate(FDR) = 0%), ocular lens dislocation (RAET1L, CCL19 and HLA-DQB2; Fold Change (FC) = 1.8; 1.4; 1.5, FDR = 0%) and specific skeletal features (HLA-DRB1, HLA-DRB5, GZMK; FC = 8.8, 7.1, 1.3; FDR = 0%). Patients with progressive aortic disease had higher levels of Macrophage Colony Stimulating Factor (M-CSF) in blood. When comparing MFS aortic root vessel wall with non-MFS aortic root, increased numbers of CD4+ T-cells were found in the media (p = 0.02) and increased number of CD8+ T-cells (p = 0.003) in the adventitia of the MFS patients. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: In conclusion, our results imply a modifying role of inflammation in MFS. Inflammation might be a novel therapeutic target in these patients

Global surveillance of cancer survival 1995-2009: analysis of individual data for 25,676,887 patients from 279 population-based registries in 67 countries (CONCORD-2)

BACKGROUND: Worldwide data for cancer survival are scarce. We aimed to initiate worldwide surveillance of cancer survival by central analysis of population-based registry data, as a metric of the effectiveness of health systems, and to inform global policy on cancer control. METHODS: Individual tumour records were submitted by 279 population-based cancer registries in 67 countries for 25·7 million adults (age 15-99 years) and 75,000 children (age 0-14 years) diagnosed with cancer during 1995-2009 and followed up to Dec 31, 2009, or later. We looked at cancers of the stomach, colon, rectum, liver, lung, breast (women), cervix, ovary, and prostate in adults, and adult and childhood leukaemia. Standardised quality control procedures were applied; errors were corrected by the registry concerned. We estimated 5-year net survival, adjusted for background mortality in every country or region by age (single year), sex, and calendar year, and by race or ethnic origin in some countries. Estimates were age-standardised with the International Cancer Survival Standard weights. FINDINGS: 5-year survival from colon, rectal, and breast cancers has increased steadily in most developed countries. For patients diagnosed during 2005-09, survival for colon and rectal cancer reached 60% or more in 22 countries around the world; for breast cancer, 5-year survival rose to 85% or higher in 17 countries worldwide. Liver and lung cancer remain lethal in all nations: for both cancers, 5-year survival is below 20% everywhere in Europe, in the range 15-19% in North America, and as low as 7-9% in Mongolia and Thailand. Striking rises in 5-year survival from prostate cancer have occurred in many countries: survival rose by 10-20% between 1995-99 and 2005-09 in 22 countries in South America, Asia, and Europe, but survival still varies widely around the world, from less than 60% in Bulgaria and Thailand to 95% or more in Brazil, Puerto Rico, and the USA. For cervical cancer, national estimates of 5-year survival range from less than 50% to more than 70%; regional variations are much wider, and improvements between 1995-99 and 2005-09 have generally been slight. For women diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2005-09, 5-year survival was 40% or higher only in Ecuador, the USA, and 17 countries in Asia and Europe. 5-year survival for stomach cancer in 2005-09 was high (54-58%) in Japan and South Korea, compared with less than 40% in other countries. By contrast, 5-year survival from adult leukaemia in Japan and South Korea (18-23%) is lower than in most other countries. 5-year survival from childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia is less than 60% in several countries, but as high as 90% in Canada and four European countries, which suggests major deficiencies in the management of a largely curable disease. INTERPRETATION: International comparison of survival trends reveals very wide differences that are likely to be attributable to differences in access to early diagnosis and optimum treatment. Continuous worldwide surveillance of cancer survival should become an indispensable source of information for cancer patients and researchers and a stimulus for politicians to improve health policy and health-care systems