Changing Patterns of Bloodstream Infections in the Community and Acute Care Across 2 Coronavirus Disease 2019 Epidemic Waves: A Retrospective Analysis Using Data Linkage.

BACKGROUND: We examined community- and hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (BSIs) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and non-COVID-19 patients across 2 epidemic waves. METHODS: We analyzed blood cultures of patients presenting to a London hospital group between January 2020 and February 2021. We reported BSI incidence, changes in sampling, case mix, healthcare capacity, and COVID-19 variants. RESULTS: We identified 1047 BSIs from 34 044 blood cultures, including 653 (62.4%) community-acquired and 394 (37.6%) hospital-acquired. Important pattern changes were seen. Community-acquired Escherichia coli BSIs remained below prepandemic level during COVID-19 waves, but peaked following lockdown easing in May 2020, deviating from the historical trend of peaking in August. The hospital-acquired BSI rate was 100.4 per 100 000 patient-days across the pandemic, increasing to 132.3 during the first wave and 190.9 during the second, with significant increase in elective inpatients. Patients with a hospital-acquired BSI, including those without COVID-19, experienced 20.2 excess days of hospital stay and 26.7% higher mortality, higher than reported in prepandemic literature. In intensive care, the BSI rate was 421.0 per 100 000 intensive care unit patient-days during the second wave, compared to 101.3 pre-COVID-19. The BSI incidence in those infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 Alpha variant was similar to that seen with earlier variants. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic have impacted the patterns of community- and hospital-acquired BSIs, in COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. Factors driving the patterns are complex. Infection surveillance needs to consider key aspects of pandemic response and changes in healthcare practice.

ACE2-Fc fusion protein overcomes viral escape by potently neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern.

COVID-19, an infectious disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, emerged globally in early 2020 and has remained a serious public health issue. To date, although several preventative vaccines have been approved by FDA and EMA, vaccinated individuals increasingly suffer from breakthrough infections. Therapeutic antibodies may provide an alternative strategy to neutralize viral infection and treat serious cases; however, the clinical data and our experiments show that some FDA-approved monoclonal antibodies lose function against COVID-19 variants such as Omicron. Therefore, in this study, we present a novel therapeutic agent, SI-F019, an ACE2-Fc fusion protein whose neutralization efficiency is not compromised, but actually strengthened, by the mutations of dominant variants including Omicron. Comprehensive biophysical analyses revealed the mechanism of increased inhibition to be enhanced interaction of SI-F019 with all the tested spike variants, in contrast to monoclonal antibodies which tended to show weaker binding to some variants. The results imply that SI-F019 may be a broadly useful agent for treatment of COVID-19.

ACE2-Fc fusion protein overcomes viral escape by potently neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern

COVID-19, an infectious disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, emerged globally in early 2020 and has remained a serious public health issue. To date, although several preventative vaccines have been approved by FDA and EMA, vaccinated individuals increasingly suffer from breakthrough infections. Therapeutic antibodies may provide an alternative strategy to neutralize viral infection and treat serious cases;however, the clinical data and our experiments show that some FDA-approved monoclonal antibodies lose function against COVID-19 variants such as Omicron. Therefore, in this study, we present a novel therapeutic agent, SI–F019, an ACE2-Fc fusion protein whose neutralization efficiency is not compromised, but actually strengthened, by the mutations of dominant variants including Omicron. Comprehensive biophysical analyses revealed the mechanism of increased inhibition to be enhanced interaction of SI–F019 with all the tested spike variants, in contrast to monoclonal antibodies which tended to show weaker binding to some variants. The results imply that SI–F019 may be a broadly useful agent for treatment of COVID-19. Graphical Image 1

Bacteraemia variation during the COVID-19 pandemic; a multi-centre UK secondary care ecological analysis.

BACKGROUND: We investigated for change in blood stream infections (BSI) with Enterobacterales, coagulase negative staphylococci (CoNS), Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Staphylococcus aureus during the first UK wave of SARS-CoV-2 across five London hospitals. METHODS: A retrospective multicentre ecological analysis was undertaken evaluating all blood cultures taken from adults from 01 April 2017 to 30 April 2020 across five acute hospitals in London. Linear trend analysis and ARIMA models allowing for seasonality were used to look for significant variation. RESULTS: One hundred nineteen thousand five hundred eighty-four blood cultures were included. At the height of the UK SARS-CoV-2 first wave in April 2020, Enterobacterales bacteraemias were at an historic low across two London trusts (63/3814, 1.65%), whilst all CoNS BSI were at an historic high (173/3814, 4.25%). This differed significantly for both Enterobacterales (p = 0.013), CoNS central line associated BSIs (CLABSI) (p < 0.01) and CoNS non-CLABSI (p < 0.01), when compared with prior periods, even allowing for seasonal variation. S. pneumoniae (p = 0.631) and S. aureus (p = 0.617) BSI did not vary significant throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly fewer than expected Enterobacterales BSI occurred during the UK peak of the COVID-19 pandemic; identifying potential causes, including potential unintended consequences of national self-isolation public health messaging, is essential. High rates of CoNS BSI, with evidence of increased CLABSI, but also likely contamination associated with increased use of personal protective equipment, may result in inappropriate antimicrobial use and indicates a clear area for intervention during further waves.

The utility of a local multidisciplinary working group to oversee the establishment of rapidly evolving standards of care and to support trial recruitment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first identified in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. The first analyses of cases described high numbers of critically ill patients requiring intensive care admission with significant late inflammatory features. By the time the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection were diagnosed in the UK, a wide range of drugs were under consideration and it became clear that the input of clinicians covering all organ systems (in particular, infectious diseases, haematology, rheumatology, renal medicine and intensive care) and of expert specialist pharmacists was necessary at the local level. Thus, an expert multidisciplinary (MDT) group within our organisation was convened to offer a standardised approach and robust clinical governance for the treatment of COVID-19 patients admitted to our hospitals and rapidly develop standards of care as evidence evolved. This commentary explores the methods and mechanisms for creating an MDT COVID-19 treatment working group which are applicable to any hospital likely to admit and care for high numbers of COVID-19 patients and demonstrates how the structure and governance of the group allowed for rapid adoption of both dexamethasone and tocilizumab into standard of care as data became available.

Supervised machine learning to support the diagnosis of bacterial infection in the context of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Bacterial infection has been challenging to diagnose in patients with COVID-19. We developed and evaluated supervised machine learning algorithms to support the diagnosis of secondary bacterial infection in hospitalized patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Inpatient data at three London hospitals for the first COVD-19 wave in March and April 2020 were extracted. Demographic, blood test and microbiology data for individuals with and without SARS-CoV-2-positive PCR were obtained. A Gaussian Naive Bayes, Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Artificial Neural Network were trained and compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCROC). The best performing algorithm (SVM with 21 blood test variables) was prospectively piloted in July 2020. AUCROC was calculated for the prediction of a positive microbiological sample within 48 h of admission. RESULTS: A total of 15 599 daily blood profiles for 1186 individual patients were identified to train the algorithms; 771/1186 (65%) individuals were SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive. Clinically significant microbiology results were present for 166/1186 (14%) patients during admission. An SVM algorithm trained with 21 routine blood test variables and over 8000 individual profiles had the best performance. AUCROC was 0.913, sensitivity 0.801 and specificity 0.890. Prospective testing on 54 patients on admission (28/54, 52% SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive) demonstrated an AUCROC of 0.960 (95% CI: 0.90-1.00). CONCLUSIONS: An SVM using 21 routine blood test variables had excellent performance at inferring the likelihood of positive microbiology. Further prospective evaluation of the algorithms ability to support decision making for the diagnosis of bacterial infection in COVID-19 cohorts is underway.

Bacterial and Fungal Coinfection in Individuals With Coronavirus: A Rapid Review To Support COVID-19 Antimicrobial Prescribing.

BACKGROUND: To explore and describe the current literature surrounding bacterial/fungal coinfection in patients with coronavirus infection. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched using broad-based search criteria relating to coronavirus and bacterial coinfection. Articles presenting clinical data for patients with coronavirus infection (defined as SARS-1, MERS, SARS-CoV-2, and other coronavirus) and bacterial/fungal coinfection reported in English, Mandarin, or Italian were included. Data describing bacterial/fungal coinfections, treatments, and outcomes were extracted. Secondary analysis of studies reporting antimicrobial prescribing in SARS-CoV-2 even in absence of coinfection was performed. RESULTS: 1007 abstracts were identified. Eighteen full texts reporting bacterial/fungal coinfection were included. Most studies did not identify or report bacterial/fungal coinfection (85/140; 61%). Nine of 18 (50%) studies reported on COVID-19, 5/18 (28%) on SARS-1, 1/18 (6%) on MERS, and 3/18 (17%) on other coronaviruses. For COVID-19, 62/806 (8%) patients were reported as experiencing bacterial/fungal coinfection during hospital admission. Secondary analysis demonstrated wide use of broad-spectrum antibacterials, despite a paucity of evidence for bacterial coinfection. On secondary analysis, 1450/2010 (72%) of patients reported received antimicrobial therapy. No antimicrobial stewardship interventions were described. For non-COVID-19 cases, bacterial/fungal coinfection was reported in 89/815 (11%) of patients. Broad-spectrum antibiotic use was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Despite frequent prescription of broad-spectrum empirical antimicrobials in patients with coronavirus-associated respiratory infections, there is a paucity of data to support the association with respiratory bacterial/fungal coinfection. Generation of prospective evidence to support development of antimicrobial policy and appropriate stewardship interventions specific for the COVID-19 pandemic is urgently required.