Oral versus intravenous antibiotics for bone and joint infection

BACKGROUND The management of complex orthopedic infections usually includes a prolonged course of intravenous antibiotic agents. We investigated whether oral antibiotic therapy is noninferior to intravenous antibiotic therapy for this indication. METHODS We enrolled adults who were being treated for bone or joint infection at 26 U.K. centers. Within 7 days after surgery (or, if the infection was being managed without surgery, within 7 days after the start of antibiotic treatment), participants were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous or oral antibiotics to complete the first 6 weeks of therapy. Follow-on oral antibiotics were permitted in both groups. The primary end point was definitive treatment failure within 1 year after randomization. In the analysis of the risk of the primary end point, the noninferiority margin was 7.5 percentage points. RESULTS Among the 1054 participants (527 in each group), end-point data were available for 1015 (96.3%). Treatment failure occurred in 74 of 506 participants (14.6%) in the intravenous group and 67 of 509 participants (13.2%) in the oral group. Missing end-point data (39 participants, 3.7%) were imputed. The intention-to-treat analysis showed a difference in the risk of definitive treatment failure (oral group vs. intravenous group) of −1.4 percentage points (90% confidence interval [CI], −4.9 to 2.2; 95% CI, −5.6 to 2.9), indicating noninferiority. Complete-case, per-protocol, and sensitivity analyses supported this result. The between-group difference in the incidence of serious adverse events was not significant (146 of 527 participants [27.7%] in the intravenous group and 138 of 527 [26.2%] in the oral group; P=0.58). Catheter complications, analyzed as a secondary end point, were more common in the intravenous group (9.4% vs. 1.0%). CONCLUSIONS Oral antibiotic therapy was noninferior to intravenous antibiotic therapy when used during the first 6 weeks for complex orthopedic infection, as assessed by treatment failure at 1 year. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research; OVIVA Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN91566927. opens in new tab.

Frequency of Missed Cases of Probable Acute West Nile Virus (WNV) Infection when Testing for WNV RNA Alone or WNV Immunoglobulin M Alone▿

To estimate the frequency of missed cases of acute West Nile virus (WNV) infection if only WNV RNA or immunoglobulin M (IgM) testing is requested, we measured IgM in specimens negative for RNA and vice versa. Whereas 6 (5.5%) of 110 RNA-negative sera were IgM positive, only 3 (1.0%) of 299 IgM-negative sera were RNA positive (P < 0.05). Similarly, 11 (7.8%) of 141 RNA-negative cerebrospinal fluid specimens (CSF) were IgM positive, but 0 (0%) of 118 IgM-negative CSF were RNA positive (P < 0.05). WNV infections may be missed if only RNA or IgM testing is requested, with a higher frequency of missed cases if only RNA testing is requested

Recombinant vesicular stomatitis vaccine against Nipah virus has a favorable safety profile: Model for assessment of live vaccines with neurotropic potential.

Nipah virus (NiV) disease is a bat-borne zoonosis responsible for outbreaks with high lethality and is a priority for vaccine development. With funding from the Coalition of Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), we are developing a chimeric vaccine (PHV02) composed of recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) expressing the envelope glycoproteins of both Ebola virus (EBOV) and NiV. The EBOV glycoprotein (GP) mediates fusion and viral entry and the NiV attachment glycoprotein (G) is a ligand for cell receptors, and stimulates neutralizing antibody, the putative mediator of protection against NiV. PHV02 is identical in construction to the registered Ebola vaccine (Ervebo) with the addition of the NiV G gene. NiV ephrin B2 and B3 receptors are expressed on neural cells and the wild-type NiV is neurotropic and causes encephalitis in affected patients. It was therefore important to assess whether the NiV G alters tropism of the rVSV vector and serves as a virulence factor. PHV02 was fully attenuated in adult hamsters inoculated by the intramuscular (IM) route, whereas parental wild-type VSV was 100% lethal. Two rodent models (mice, hamsters) were infected by the intracerebral (IC) route with graded doses of PHV02. Comparator active controls in various experiments included rVSV-EBOV (representative of Ebola vaccine) and yellow fever (YF) 17DD commercial vaccine. These studies showed PHV02 to be more neurovirulent than both rVSV-EBOV and YF 17DD in infant animals. PHV02 was lethal for adult hamsters inoculated IC but not for adult mice. In contrast YF 17DD retained virulence for adult mice inoculated IC but was not virulent for adult hamsters. Because of the inconsistency of neurovirulence patterns in the rodent models, a monkey neurovirulence test (MNVT) was performed, using YF 17DD as the active comparator because it has a well-established profile of quantifiable microscopic changes in brain centers and a known reporting rate of neurotropic adverse events in humans. In the MNVT PHV02 was significantly less neurovirulent than the YF 17DD vaccine reference control, indicating that the vaccine will have an acceptable safety profile for humans. The findings are important because they illustrate the complexities of phenotypic assessment of novel viral vectors with tissue tropisms determined by transgenic proteins, and because it is unprecedented to use a heterologous comparator virus (YF vaccine) in a regulatory-enabling study. This approach may have value in future studies of other novel viral vectors