Promoting cross-regional collaboration in antimicrobial stewardship: Findings of an infectious diseases working group survey in Arab countries of the Middle East.

Abstract Background Antimicrobial resistance is a significant global issue that presents an increasing threat to patients' wellbeing. Although a global concern, the emergence of multi-drug resistant organisms is of particular significance in the Middle East. In recent years, this region has seen an alarming increase in antimicrobial resistance presenting a major challenge to physicians managing various infectious diseases. Methods A Working Group comprising experts in infectious diseases from Arab countries of Middle East assembled to review similarities and differences in antimicrobial practices and management of multi-drug resistant organisms across the region and assess the barriers to achieving cross-regional collaboration. The Working Group conducted an anonymous online survey to evaluate current practice and understanding of management of multi-drug resistant organisms across the region. Results A total of 122 physicians from Arab countries of the Middle East responded to the survey. Their responses demonstrated heterogeneity between countries in awareness of local epidemiology, management of multi-drug resistant organisms and antimicrobial stewardship practices. The Working Group recognized similarities and differences in the management of multi-drug resistant organisms across the region, and these were validated by the data collected in the survey. Overall, the similarities across the region reflect several key issues that can have an impact on the management of multi-drug resistant organisms and the prevention of antimicrobial resistance. Conclusions This paper highlights the urgency of addressing antimicrobial resistance in Arab countries of the Middle East. The Working Group identified key barriers to effective management which may guide the development of future coherent strategies to promote effective antimicrobial stewardship in the region. Here, we outline a call to action for the region, with a need to focus on training and education, capacity building, infrastructure, regional research, and regional surveillance

Epidemiology and Outcome of Fungemia in a Cancer Cohort of the Infectious Diseases Group (IDG) of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC 65031)

In a prospective cohort study of 145 030 admissions of cancer patients from 13 European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer centers fungemia occurred in 0.23%. Candida albicans was the predominant pathogen. Fungemia was associated with substantial mortality. Antifungal prophylaxis and remission of cancer predicted better surviva

Epidemiology, Species Distribution, Antifungal Susceptibility and Outcome of Nosocomial Candidemia in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Italy

Candida is an important cause of bloodstream infections (BSI), causing significant mortality and morbidity in health care settings. From January 2008 to December 2010 all consecutive patients who developed candidemia at San Martino University Hospital, Italy were enrolled in the study. A total of 348 episodes of candidaemia were identified during the study period (January 2008–December 2010), with an incidence of 1,73 episodes/1000 admissions. Globally, albicans and non-albicans species caused around 50% of the cases each. Non-albicans included Candida parapsilosis (28.4%), Candida glabrata (9.5%), Candida tropicalis (6.6%), and Candida krusei (2.6%). Out of 324 evaluable patients, 141 (43.5%) died within 30 days from the onset of candidemia. C. parapsilosis candidemia was associated with the lowest mortality rate (36.2%). In contrast, patients with C. krusei BSI had the highest mortality rate (55.5%) in this cohort. Regarding the crude mortality in the different units, patients in Internal Medicine wards had the highest mortality rate (54.1%), followed by patients in ICU and Hemato-Oncology wards (47.6%)

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.This study was funded by a research grant from the Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo, Instituto de Salud Carlos III [FIS PI15/00744], European Regional Development Fund (ERDF); CGV is a recipient of an INTENSIFICACIÓ Grant from the “Strategic plan for research and innovation in health-PERIS 2016-2020” and forms part of the Fungi CLINIC Research group (AGAUR-Project 2017SGR1432 of the Catalan Health Agency)

Efficacy and safety of reparixin in patients with severe covid-19 Pneumonia. A phase 3, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled study

Introduction: Polymorphonuclear cell influx into the interstitial and bronchoalveolar spaces is a cardinal feature of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), principally mediated by interleukin-8 (IL-8). We sought to determine whether reparixin, a novel IL-8 pathway inhibitor, could reduce disease progression in patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: In this Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study, hospitalized adult patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia were randomized 2:1 to receive oral reparixin 1200 mg three times daily or placebo for up to 21 days or until hospital discharge. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 28, with key secondary endpoints being the proportion of patients free of respiratory failure at Day 60, incidence of intensive care unit (ICU) admission by Day 28 and time to recovery by Day 28. Results: Of 279 patients randomized, 182 received at least one dose of reparixin and 88 received placebo. The proportion of patients alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 28 was similar in the two groups {83.5% versus 80.7%; odds ratio 1.63 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75, 3.51]; p = 0.216}. There were no statistically significant differences in the key secondary endpoints, but a numerically higher proportion of patients in the reparixin group were alive and free of respiratory failure at Day 60 (88.7% versus 84.6%; p = 0.195), fewer required ICU admissions by Day 28 (15.8% versus 21.7%; p = 0.168), and a higher proportion recovered by Day 28 compared with placebo (81.6% versus 74.9%; p = 0.167). Fewer patients experienced adverse events with reparixin than placebo (45.6% versus 54.5%), most mild or moderate intensity and not related to study treatment. Conclusions: This trial did not meet the primary efficacy endpoints, yet reparixin showed a trend toward limiting disease progression as an add-on therapy in COVID-19 severe pneumonia and was well tolerated. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04878055, EudraCT: 2020-005919-51