Quasiexperimental intervention study protocol to optimise the use of new antibiotics in Spain: the NEW_SAFE project

Introduction Ceftaroline, tedizolid, dalbavancin, ceftazidime-avibactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam are novel antibiotics used to treat infections caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens (MDR). Their use should be supervised and monitored as part of an antimicrobial stewardship programme (ASP). Appropriate use of the new antibiotics will be improved by including consensual indications for their use in local antibiotic guidelines, together with educational interventions providing advice to prescribers to ensure that the recommendations are clearly understood. Methods and analysis This study will be implemented in two phases. First, a preliminary historical cohort (2017-2019) of patients from 13 Andalusian hospitals treated with novel antibiotics will be analysed. Second, a quasiexperimental intervention study will be developed with an interrupted time-series analysis (2020-2021). The intervention will consist of an educational interview between prescribers and ASP leaders at each hospital to reinforce the proper use of novel antibiotics. The educational intervention will be based on a consensus guideline designed and disseminated by leaders after the retrospective cohort data have been analysed. The outcomes will be acceptance of the intervention and appropriateness of prescription. Incidence of infection and colonisation with MDR organisms as well as incidence ofClostridioides difficileinfection will also be analysed. Changes in prescription quality between periods and the safety profile of the antibiotics in terms of mortality rate and readmissions will also be measured. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval will be obtained from the Andalusian Coordinating Institutional Review Board. The study is being conducted in compliance with the protocol and regulatory requirements consistent with International Council of Harmonisation E6 Good Clinical Practice and the ethical principles of the latest version of the Declaration of Helsinki. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated at national and international conferences

Quasiexperimental intervention study protocol to optimise the use of new antibiotics in Spain: the NEW_SAFE project

[Introduction] Ceftaroline, tedizolid, dalbavancin, ceftazidime-avibactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam are novel antibiotics used to treat infections caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens (MDR). Their use should be supervised and monitored as part of an antimicrobial stewardship programme (ASP). Appropriate use of the new antibiotics will be improved by including consensual indications for their use in local antibiotic guidelines, together with educational interventions providing advice to prescribers to ensure that the recommendations are clearly understood.[Methods and analysis] This study will be implemented in two phases. First, a preliminary historical cohort (2017–2019) of patients from 13 Andalusian hospitals treated with novel antibiotics will be analysed. Second, a quasiexperimental intervention study will be developed with an interrupted time-series analysis (2020–2021). The intervention will consist of an educational interview between prescribers and ASP leaders at each hospital to reinforce the proper use of novel antibiotics. The educational intervention will be based on a consensus guideline designed and disseminated by leaders after the retrospective cohort data have been analysed. The outcomes will be acceptance of the intervention and appropriateness of prescription. Incidence of infection and colonisation with MDR organisms as well as incidence of Clostridioides difficile infection will also be analysed. Changes in prescription quality between periods and the safety profile of the antibiotics in terms of mortality rate and readmissions will also be measured.[Ethics and dissemination] Ethical approval will be obtained from the Andalusian Coordinating Institutional Review Board. The study is being conducted in compliance with the protocol and regulatory requirements consistent with International Council of Harmonisation E6 Good Clinical Practice and the ethical principles of the latest version of the Declaration of Helsinki. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated at national and international conferences.[Trial registration number] NCT03941951; Pre-results.The study is funded by the Consejería de Salud, Junta de Andalucía, grant PI-0077-2018. The investigators also receive funds for research from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Subdirección General de Redes y Centros de Investigación Cooperativa, Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades, Spanish Network for Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD16/0016/0001) through the Plan Nacional de I+D+ i 2013‐2016, cofinanced by European Development Regional Fund “A way to achieve Europe”, Operative program Intelligent Growth 2014‐2020

Combination of Tocilizumab and Steroids to Improve Mortality in Patients with Severe COVID-19 Infection : A Spanish, Multicenter, Cohort Study

We aimed to determine the impact of tocilizumab use on severe COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 19) pneumonia mortality. We performed a multicentre retrospective cohort study in 18 tertiary hospitals in Spain from March to April 2020. Consecutive patients admitted with severe COVID-19 treated with tocilizumab were compared to patients not treated with tocilizumab, adjusting by inverse probability of the treatment weights (IPTW). Tocilizumab's effect in patients receiving steroids during the 48 h following inclusion was analysed. During the study period, 506 patients with severe COVID-19 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Among them, 268 were treated with tocilizumab and 238 patients were not. Median time to tocilizumab treatment from onset of symptoms was 11 days [interquartile range (IQR) 8-14]. Global mortality was 23.7%. Mortality was lower in patients treated with tocilizumab than in controls: 16.8% versus 31.5%, hazard ratio (HR) 0.514 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.355-0.744], p < 0.001; weighted HR 0.741 (95% CI 0.619-0.887), p = 0.001. Tocilizumab treatment reduced mortality by 14.7% relative to no tocilizumab treatment [relative risk reduction (RRR) 46.7%]. We calculated a number necessary to treat of 7. Among patients treated with steroids, mortality was lower in those treated with tocilizumab than in those treated with steroids alone [10.9% versus 40.2%, HR 0.511 (95% CI 0.352-0.741), p = 0.036; weighted HR 0.6 (95% CI 0.449-0.804), p < 0.001] (interaction p = 0.094). These results show that survival of patients with severe COVID-19 is higher in those treated with tocilizumab than in those not treated and that tocilizumab's effect adds to that of steroids administered to non-intubated patients with COVID-19 during the first 48 h of presenting with respiratory failure despite oxygen therapy. Randomised controlled studies are needed to confirm these results. European Union electronic Register of Post-Authorization Studies (EU PAS Register) identifier, EUPAS34415 The online version of this article (10.1007/s40121-020-00373-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Risk factors for unfavorable outcome and impact of early post-transplant infection in solid organ recipients with COVID-19: A prospective multicenter cohort study

The aim was to analyze the characteristics and predictors of unfavorable outcomes in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) with COVID-19. We conducted a prospective observational cohort study of 210 consecutive SOTRs hospitalized with COVID-19 in 12 Spanish centers from 21 February to 6 May 2020. Data pertaining to demographics, chronic underlying diseases, transplantation features, clinical, therapeutics, and complications were collected. The primary endpoint was a composite of intensive care unit (ICU) admission and/or death. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the factors associated with these unfavorable outcomes. Males accounted for 148 (70.5%) patients, the median age was 63 years, and 189 (90.0%) patients had pneumonia. Common symptoms were fever, cough, gastrointestinal disturbances, and dyspnea. The most used antiviral or host-targeted therapies included hydroxychloroquine 193/200 (96.5%), lopinavir/ritonavir 91/200 (45.5%), and tocilizumab 49/200 (24.5%). Thirty-seven (17.6%) patients required ICU admission, 12 (5.7%) suffered graft dysfunction, and 45 (21.4%) died. A shorter interval between transplantation and COVID-19 diagnosis had a negative impact on clinical prognosis. Four baseline features were identified as independent predictors of intensive care need or death: advanced age, high respiratory rate, lymphopenia, and elevated level of lactate dehydrogenase. In summary, this study presents comprehensive information on characteristics and complications of COVID-19 in hospitalized SOTRs and provides indicators available upon hospital admission for the identification of SOTRs at risk of critical disease or death, underlining the need for stringent preventative measures in the early post-transplant period

Effectiveness of Fosfomycin for the Treatment of Multidrug-Resistant Escherichia coli Bacteremic Urinary Tract Infections

IMPORTANCE The consumption of broad-spectrum drugs has increased as a consequence of the spread of multidrug-resistant (MDR) Escherichia coli. Finding alternatives for these infections is critical, for which some neglected drugs may be an option. OBJECTIVE To determine whether fosfomycin is noninferior to ceftriaxone or meropenem in the targeted treatment of bacteremic urinary tract infections (bUTIs) due to MDR E coli. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This multicenter, randomized, pragmatic, open clinical trial was conducted at 22 Spanish hospitals from June 2014 to December 2018. Eligible participants were adult patients with bacteremic urinary tract infections due to MDR E coli; 161 of 1578 screened patients were randomized and followed up for 60 days. Data were analyzed in May 2021. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized 1 to 1 to receive intravenous fosfomycin disodium at 4 g every 6 hours (70 participants) or a comparator (ceftriaxone or meropenem if resistant; 73 participants) with the option to switch to oral fosfomycin trometamol for the fosfomycin group or an active oral drug or pa renteral ertapenem for the comparator group after 4 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was clinical and microbiological cure (CMC) 5 to 7 days after finalization of treatment; a noninferiority margin of 7% was considered. RESULTS Among 143 patients in the modified intention-to-treat population (median [IQR] age, 72 [62-81] years; 73 [51.0%] women), 48 of 70 patients (68.6%) treated with fosfomycin and 57 of 73 patients (78.1%) treated with comparators reached CMC (risk difference, -9.4 percentage points; 1-sided 95% CI, -21.5 to infinity percentage points; P = .10). While clinical or microbiological failure occurred among 10 patients (14.3%) treated with fosfomycin and 14 patients (19.7%) treated with comparators (risk difference, -5.4 percentage points; 1-sided 95% CI. -infinity to 4.9; percentage points; P = .19), an increased rate of adverse event-related discontinuations occurred with fosfomycin vs comparators (6 discontinuations [8.5%] vs 0 discontinuations; P = .006). In an exploratory analysis among a subset of 38 patients who underwent rectal colonization studies, patients treated with fosfomycin acquired a new ceftriaxone-resistant or meropenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria at a decreased rate compared with patients treated with comparators (0 of 21 patients vs 4 of 17 patients [23.5%]; 1-sided P = .01). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study found that fosfomycin did not demonstrate noninferiority to comparators as targeted treatment of bUTI from MDR E coli; this was due to an increased rate of adverse event-related discontinuations. This finding suggests that fosfomycin may be considered for selected patients with these infections

Clinical and Ecological Impact of an Educational Program to Optimize Antibiotic Treatments in Nursing Homes (PROA-SENIOR): A Cluster, Randomized, Controlled Trial and Interrupted Time-Series Analysis

[Background] Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) are recommended in nursing homes (NHs), although data are limited. We aimed to determine the clinical and ecological impact of an ASP for NHs.[Methods] We performed a cluster, randomized, controlled trial and a before–after study with interrupted time-series analyses in 14 NHs for 30 consecutive months from July 2018 to December 2020 in Andalusia, Spain. Seven facilities implemented an ASP with a bundle of 5 educational measures (general ASP) and 7 added 1-to-1 educational interviews (experimental ASP). The primary outcome was the overall use of antimicrobials, calculated monthly as defined daily doses (DDD) per 1000 resident days (DRD).[Results] The total mean antimicrobial consumption decreased by 31.2% (−16.72 DRD; P = .045) with respect to the preintervention period; the overall use of quinolones and amoxicillin–clavulanic acid dropped by 52.2% (P = .001) and 42.5% (P = .006), respectively; and the overall prevalence of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) decreased from 24.7% to 17.4% (P = .012). During the intervention period, 12.5 educational interviews per doctor were performed in the experimental ASP group; no differences were found in the total mean antimicrobial use between groups (−14.62 DRD; P = .25). Two unexpected coronavirus disease 2019 waves affected the centers increasing the overall mean use of antimicrobials by 40% (51.56 DRD; P < .0001).[Conclusions] This study suggests that an ASP for NHs appears to be associated with a decrease in total consumption of antimicrobials and prevalence of MDROs. This trial did not find benefits associated with educational interviews, probably due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.[Clinical Trials Registration] NCT03543605.Peer reviewe

Assessing the impact on intestinal microbiome and clinical outcomes of antibiotherapy optimisation strategies in haematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients: study protocol for the prospective multicentre OptimBioma study

Introduction: Haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is a life-saving treatment for a number of haematological diseases. Graft versus host disease (GVHD) is its main complication and hampers survival. There is strong evidence that intestinal microbiota diversity of the recipient may increase the risk of GVHD worsening survival. Antibiotic regimens used during the early phase of the transplant may influence clinical outcomes by reducing intestinal microbiota diversity. Present guidelines of European Conference on Infections in Leukaemia exhort to optimising antibiotic use in haematological patients including HSCT recipients. The present study aims to investigate if, in HSCT recipients, the optimisation of antibacterial use may preserve intestinal microbiota composition reducing the incidence and severity of acute GVHD and improving relevant clinical outcomes. Methods and analysis: This is a prospective longitudinal observational study of two cohorts of HSCT recipients: (1) the intervention cohort includes patients treated in centres in which a predefined strategy of antibiotherapy optimisation is implemented, with the objective of optimising and reducing antibiotic administration according to clinical criteria and (2) the control cohort includes patients treated in centres in which a classic permissive strategy of antibiotic prophylaxis and treatment is used. Adult patient receiving a first HSCT as a treatment for any haematological condition are included. Clinical variables are prospectively recorded and up to five faecal samples are collected for microbiota characterisation at prestablished peritransplant time points. Patients are followed since the preconditioning phase throughout 1-year post-transplant and four follow-up visits are scheduled. Faecal microbiota composition and diversity will be compared between both cohorts along with acute GVHD incidence and severity, severe infections rate, mortality and overall and disease-free survival. Ethics and dissemination: The study was approved between 2017 and 2018 by the Ethical Committees of participant centres. Study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and national and international scientific conferences

Factors associated with recruitment success in the phase 2a study of aztreonam–avibactam development programme: a descriptive qualitative analysis among sites in Spain

Objective Successful clinical trials are subject to recruitment. Recently, the REJUVENATE trial, a prospective phase 2a open-label, single-arm interventional clinical trial conducted within the Innovative Medicines Initiative-supported Combatting Bacterial Resistance in Europe-Carbapenem Resistance project, was published, with 85% of the recruitment performed in Spain. We analysed the recruitment success in this trial by establishing a model of recruitment practice. Methods A descriptive qualitative study was performed from May 2016 to October 2017 at 10 participating Spanish centres. Data were extracted from: (1) feasibility questionnaires to assess the centre’s potential for patient enrolment; (2) delegation of responsibility records; (3) pre-screening records including an anonymised list of potentially eligible and (4) screening and enrolment records. A descriptive analysis of the features was performed by the participating centre. Pearson’s and Spearman’s correlation coefficients were calculated to determine factors of recruitment success. Results The highest recruitment rate was observed in Hospitals 3 and 6 (58.8 and 47.0 patients per month, respectively). All the study teams were multidisciplinary with a median of 15 members (range: 7–22). Only Hospitals 3, 5 and 6 had dedicated nursing staff appointed exclusively to this study. Moreover, in those three hospitals and in Hospital 9, the study coordinator performed exclusive functions as a research planner, and did not assume these functions for the other hospitals. The univariate analysis showed a significant association between recruitment success and months of recruitment (p=0.024), number of staff (p<0.001), higher number of pharmacists (p=0.005), infectious disease specialists (p<0.001), the presence of microbiologist in the research team (p=0.018) and specifically dedicated nursing staff (p=0.036). Conclusions The existence of broad multidisciplinary teams with staff dedicated exclusively to the study as well as the implementation of a well-designed local patient assessment strategy were the essential optimisation factors for recruitment success in Spain

Randomised, open-label, non-inferiority clinical trial on the efficacy and safety of a 7-day vs 14-day course of antibiotic treatment for uncomplicated enterococcal bacteraemia: the INTENSE trial protocol

Introduction Enterococcus spp is responsible for 8%–15% of total bacteraemias with an associated global mortality around 23%–30%. Regarding the clinical management of enterococcal bacteraemia, the evidence on the duration of antibiotic treatment is scarce and the studies do not discriminate between complicated and uncomplicated bacteraemia.Methods The INTENSE study is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, pragmatic, phase-IV clinical trial to demonstrate the non-inferiority of a 7-day vs 14-day course for the treatment of uncomplicated enterococcal bacteraemia and incorporating the early switching to oral antibiotics when feasible. The primary efficacy endpoint is the clinical cure at day 30±2 after the end of the treatment. Secondary endpoints will include the rate of relapse or infective endocarditis, length of stay, duration of intravenous therapy, Clostridioides difficile infection and the evaluation of the safety of both treatment arms through the recording and analysis of adverse events. For a 6% non-inferiority margin and considering a 5% withdrawal rate, 284 patients will be included.Analysis The difference in proportions with one-sided 95% CIs will be calculated for the clinical cure rate using the control group as reference. For secondary categorical endpoints, a similar analysis will be performed and Mann-Whitney U-test will be used to compare median values of quantitative variables. A superiority analysis applying the response adjusted for days of antibiotic risk will be performed if there were incidents in recruitment; will allow obtaining results with 194 patients recruited.Ethics and dissemination The study has obtained the authorisation from the Spanish Regulatory Authority, the approval of the ethics committee and the agreement of the directors of each centre. Data will be published in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration number NCT05394298

Colistin versus meropenem in the empirical treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia (Magic Bullet study): an investigator-driven, open-label, randomized, noninferiority controlled trial. Critical Care. 2019 Nov 23:383

Background: Colistin is recommended in the empirical treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) with a high prevalence of carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacilli (CR-GNB). However, the efficacy and safety of colistin are not well defined. Methods: A multicenter prospective randomized trial conducted in 32 European centers compared the efficacy and safety of colistin (4.5 million unit loading dose followed by a maintenance dose of 3 million units every 8 h) versus meropenem (2 g every 8 h), both in combination with levofloxacin (500 mg every 12 h) for 7-14 days in patients with late VAP. Between May 2012 and October 2015, 232 patients were randomly assigned to the 2 treatment groups. The primary endpoint was mortality at 28 days after randomization in the microbiologically modified intention-to-treat (mMITT) population. Secondary outcomes included clinical and microbiological cure, renal function at the end of the treatment, and serious adverse events. The study was interrupted after the interim analysis due to excessive nephrotoxicity in the colistin group; therefore, the sample size was not achieved. Results: A total of 157 (67.7%) patients were included in the mMITT population, 36 of whom (22.9%) had VAP caused by CR-GNB. In the mMITT population, no significant difference in mortality between the colistin group (19/82, 23.2%) and the meropenem group (19/75, 25.3%) was observed, with a risk difference of - 2.16 (- 15.59 to 11.26, p = 0.377); the noninferiority of colistin was not demonstrated due to early termination and limited number of patients infected by carbapenem-resistant pathogens. Colistin plus levofloxacin increased the incidence of renal failure (40/120, 33.3%, versus 21/112, 18.8%; p = 0.012) and renal replacement therapy (11/120, 9.1%, versus 2/112, 1.8%; p = 0.015). Conclusions: This study did not demonstrate the noninferiority of colistin compared with meropenem, both combined with levofloxacin, in terms of efficacy in the empirical treatment of late VAP but demonstrated the greater nephrotoxicity of colistin. These findings do not support the empirical use of colistin for the treatment of late VAP due to early termination.Funded by the Seventh Framework Program of the European Commission. Magic Bullet grant agreement number 278232.Ye