Antimicrobial Use Over a Four-Year Period Using Days of Therapy Measurement at a Canadian Pediatric Acute Care Hospital

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance is a concern that is challenging the ability to treat common infections. Surveillance of antimicrobial use in pediatric acute care institutions is complicated because the common metric unit, the defined daily dose, is problematic for this population.OBJECTIVE: During a four-year period in which no specific antimicrobial stewardship initiatives were conducted, pediatric antimicrobial use was quantified using days of therapy (DOT) per 100 patient days (PD) (DOT/100 PD) at the Alberta Children’s Hospital (Calgary, Alberta) for benchmarking purposes.METHODS: Drug use data for systemic antimicrobials administered on wards at the Alberta Children’s Hospital were collected from electronic medication administration records. DOT were calculated and rates were determined using 100 PD as the denominator. Changes over the surveillance period and subgroup proportions were represented graphically and assessed using linear regression.RESULTS: Total antimicrobial use decreased from 93.6 DOT/100 PD to 75.7 DOT/100 PD (19.1%) over the 2010/2011 through to the 2013/2014 fiscal years. During this period, a 20.0% increase in PD and an essentially stable absolute count of DOT (2.9% decrease) were observed. Overall, antimicrobial use was highest in the pediatric intensive care and oncology units.DISCUSSION: The exact changes in prescribing patterns that led to the observed reduction in DOT/100 PD with associated increased PD are unclear, but may be a topic for future investigations.CONCLUSION: Antimicrobial use data from a Canadian acute care pediatric hospital reported in DOT/100 PD were compiled for a four-year time period. These data may be useful for benchmarking purposes.Peer Reviewe

Unilateral Phrenic Nerve Palsy in Infants with Congenital Zika Syndrome

Since the first identification of neonatal microcephaly cases associated with congenital Zika virus infection in Brazil in 2015, a distinctive constellation of clinical features of congenital Zika syndrome has been described. Fetal brain disruption sequence is hypothesized to underlie the devastating effects of the virus on the central nervous system. However, little is known about the effects of congenital Zika virus infection on the peripheral nervous system. We describe a series of 4 cases of right unilateral diaphragmatic paralysis in infants with congenital Zika syndrome suggesting peripheral nervous system involvement and Zika virus as a unique congenital infectious cause of this finding. All the patients described also had arthrogryposis (including talipes equinovarus) and died from complications related to progressive respiratory failure

Pediatric antimicrobial stewardship practices at discharge: A national survey

We surveyed pediatric antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) site leaders within the Sharing Antimicrobial Reports for Pediatric Stewardship collaborative regarding discharge stewardship practices. Among 67 sites, 13 (19%) reported ASP review of discharge antimicrobial prescriptions. These findings highlight discharge stewardship as a potential opportunity for improvement during the hospital-to-home transition

Human PIK3R1 mutations disrupt lymphocyte differentiation to cause activated PI3Kδ syndrome 2.

Heterozygous loss-of-function (LOF) mutations in PIK3R1 (encoding phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase [PI3K] regulatory subunits) cause activated PI3Kδ syndrome 2 (APDS2), which has a similar clinical profile to APDS1, caused by heterozygous gain-of-function (GOF) mutations in PIK3CD (encoding the PI3K p110δ catalytic subunit). While several studies have established how PIK3CD GOF leads to immune dysregulation, less is known about how PIK3R1 LOF mutations alter cellular function. By studying a novel CRISPR/Cas9 mouse model and patients' immune cells, we determined how PIK3R1 LOF alters cellular function. We observed some overlap in cellular defects in APDS1 and APDS2, including decreased intrinsic B cell class switching and defective Tfh cell function. However, we also identified unique APDS2 phenotypes including defective expansion and affinity maturation of Pik3r1 LOF B cells following immunization, and decreased survival of Pik3r1 LOF pups. Further, we observed clear differences in the way Pik3r1 LOF and Pik3cd GOF altered signaling. Together these results demonstrate crucial differences between these two genetic etiologies

Randomized Trial Evaluating Clinical Impact of RAPid IDentification and Susceptibility Testing for Gram-negative Bacteremia: RAPIDS-GN.

BackgroundRapid blood culture diagnostics are of unclear benefit for patients with gram-negative bacilli (GNB) bloodstream infections (BSIs). We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial comparing outcomes of patients with GNB BSIs who had blood culture testing with standard-of-care (SOC) culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) vs rapid organism identification (ID) and phenotypic AST using the Accelerate Pheno System (RAPID).MethodsPatients with positive blood cultures with Gram stains showing GNB were randomized to SOC testing with antimicrobial stewardship (AS) review or RAPID with AS. The primary outcome was time to first antibiotic modification within 72 hours of randomization.ResultsOf 500 randomized patients, 448 were included (226 SOC, 222 RAPID). Mean (standard deviation) time to results was faster for RAPID than SOC for organism ID (2.7 [1.2] vs 11.7 [10.5] hours; P < .001) and AST (13.5 [56] vs 44.9 [12.1] hours; P < .001). Median (interquartile range [IQR]) time to first antibiotic modification was faster in the RAPID arm vs the SOC arm for overall antibiotics (8.6 [2.6-27.6] vs 14.9 [3.3-41.1] hours; P = .02) and gram-negative antibiotics (17.3 [4.9-72] vs 42.1 [10.1-72] hours; P < .001). Median (IQR) time to antibiotic escalation was faster in the RAPID arm vs the SOC arm for antimicrobial-resistant BSIs (18.4 [5.8-72] vs 61.7 [30.4-72] hours; P = .01). There were no differences between the arms in patient outcomes.ConclusionsRapid organism ID and phenotypic AST led to faster changes in antibiotic therapy for gram-negative BSIs.Clinical trials registrationNCT03218397

Multicenter interim guidance on use of antivirals for children with COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2

BackgroundAlthough coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a mild infection in most children, a small proportion develop severe or critical illness. Data describing agents with potential antiviral activity continue to expand such that updated guidance is needed regarding use of these agents in children.MethodsA panel of pediatric infectious diseases physicians and pharmacists from 20 geographically diverse North American institutions was convened. Through a series of teleconferences and web-based surveys, a set of guidance statements was developed and refined based on review of the best available evidence and expert opinion.ResultsGiven the typically mild course of COVID-19 in children, supportive care alone is suggested for most cases. For children with severe illness, defined as a supplemental oxygen requirement without need for noninvasive or invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), remdesivir is suggested, preferably as part of a clinical trial if available. Remdesivir should also be considered for critically ill children requiring invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation or ECMO. A duration of 5 days is appropriate for most patients. The panel recommends against the use of hydroxychloroquine or lopinavir-ritonavir (or other protease inhibitors) for COVID-19 in children.ConclusionsAntiviral therapy for COVID-19 is not necessary for the great majority of pediatric patients. For children with severe or critical disease, this guidance offers an approach for decision-making regarding use of remdesivir

Initial Guidance on Use of Monoclonal Antibody Therapy for Treatment of COVID-19 in Children and Adolescents

BackgroundIn November 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) provided Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA) for 2 novel virus-neutralizing monoclonal antibody therapies, bamlanivimab and REGN-COV2 (casirivimab plus imdevimab), for the treatment of mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in adolescents and adults in specified high-risk groups. This has challenged clinicians to determine the best approach to use of these products.MethodsA panel of experts in pediatric infectious diseases, pediatric infectious diseases pharmacy, pediatric intensive care medicine, and pediatric hematology from 29 geographically diverse North American institutions was convened. Through a series of teleconferences and web-based surveys, a guidance statement was developed and refined based on review of the best available evidence and expert opinion.ResultsThe course of COVID-19 in children and adolescents is typically mild and there is no high-quality evidence supporting any high-risk groups. There is no evidence for safety and efficacy of monoclonal antibody therapy for treatment of COVID-19 in children or adolescents, limited evidence of modest benefit in adults, and evidence for potential harm associated with infusion reactions or anaphylaxis.ConclusionsBased on evidence available as of December 20, 2020, the panel suggests against routine administration of monoclonal antibody therapy (bamlanivimab, or casirivimab and imdevimab), for treatment of COVID-19 in children or adolescents, including those designated by the FDA as at high risk of progression to hospitalization or severe disease. Clinicians and health systems choosing to use these agents on an individualized basis should consider risk factors supported by pediatric-specific evidence and ensure the implementation of a system for safe and timely administration that does not exacerbate existing healthcare disparities

The value of open-source clinical science in pandemic response: lessons from ISARIC

International audienc