Suspected adverse events following immunization against SARS-CoV2 in a university hospital in 2021: Observational study.

AIM: Vaccination against SARS-CoV2 has been proposed as a fundamental element for the control of the pandemic. This study aimed to describe the suspected adverse reactions (ADR) reported by vaccinated hospital workers. METHODS: A descriptive study of suspected ADR was conducted between January and March 2021. The suspected ADR were identified using a specifically designed electronic form and spontaneous reporting. Data were also collected regarding the characteristics of the professionals, vaccine administered, severity, and outcome of ADR. RESULTS: 8169 professionals received 2 doses of SARS-CoV2 vaccine (6672 Comirnaty® and 1497 Spikevax®) and 894 reports of suspected ADR were reported (762 for Comirnaty® and 132 for Spikevax®), resulting in a cumulative ADR incidence of 10.94% (95%CI: 10.27-11.62). The majority of ADR were reported only after the second dose, 497 (56.2%), while 211 (23.6%) were reported only after the first dose and 186 (21%) after both doses. The symptoms were mostly mild, did not require medical assistance, and disappeared within approximately 3 days. One hundred and seventeen professionals had a history of COVID-19 infection. These studies reported, statistically significant, more suspected ADR after the first dose (42.7%) than those with no history of COVID-19 (20.7%). Among professionals, more ADR occurred after the first dose with the Spikevax® vaccine (41.6%) than with the Comirnaty® vaccine (20.5%). CONCLUSION: The majority of suspected ADR reported were described in the summary of product characteristics (SmPC). Professionals with a history of COVID-19 reported more suspected ADR after the first dose than did those without a history.

Multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase IV-III study to evaluate the efficacy of cloxacillin plus fosfomycin versus cloxacillin alone in adult patients with methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia: study protocol for the SAFO trial.

INTRODUCTION: Methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) bacteraemia is a frequent condition, with high mortality rates. There is a growing interest in identifying new therapeutic regimens able to reduce therapeutic failure and mortality observed with the standard of care of beta-lactam monotherapy. In vitro and small-scale studies have found synergy between cloxacillin and fosfomycin against S. aureus. Our aim is to test the hypothesis that cloxacillin plus fosfomycin achieves higher treatment success than cloxacillin alone in patients with MSSA bacteraemia. METHODS: We will perform a superiority, randomised, open-label, phase IV-III, two-armed parallel group (1:1) clinical trial at 20 Spanish tertiary hospitals. Adults (≥18 years) with isolation of MSSA from at least one blood culture ≤72 hours before inclusion with evidence of infection, will be randomly allocated to receive either cloxacillin 2 g/4-hour intravenous plus fosfomycin 3 g/6-hour intravenous or cloxacillin 2 g/4-hour intravenous alone for 7 days. After the first week, sequential treatment and total duration of antibiotic therapy will be determined according to clinical criteria by the attending physician.Primary endpoints: (1) Treatment success at day 7, a composite endpoint comprising all the following criteria: patient alive, stable or with improved quick-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, afebrile and with negative blood cultures for MSSA at day 7. (2) Treatment success at test of cure (TOC) visit: patient alive and no isolation of MSSA in blood culture or at another sterile site from day 8 until TOC (12 weeks after randomisation).We assume a rate of treatment success of 74% in the cloxacillin group. Accepting alpha risk of 0.05 and beta risk of 0.2 in a two-sided test, 183 subjects will be required in each of the control and experimental groups to obtain statistically significant difference of 12% (considered clinically significant). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Ethics Committee of Bellvitge University Hospital (AC069/18) and from the Spanish Medicines and Healthcare Product Regulatory Agency (AEMPS, AC069/18), and is valid for all participating centres under existing Spanish legislation. The results will be presented at international meetings and will be made available to patients and funders. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The protocol has been approved by AEMPS with the Trial Registration Number EudraCT 2018-001207-37. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03959345; Pre-results.

Methylprednisolone Pulses Plus Tacrolimus in Addition to Standard of Care vs. Standard of Care Alone in Patients With Severe COVID-19. A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Introduction: Severe lung injury is triggered by both the SARS-CoV-2 infection and the subsequent host-immune response in some COVID-19 patients. Methods: We conducted a randomized, single-center, open-label, phase II trial with the aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of methylprednisolone pulses and tacrolimus plus standard of care (SoC) vs. SoC alone, in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. The primary outcome was time to clinical stability within 56 days after randomization. Results: From April 1 to May 2, 2020, 55 patients were prospectively included for subsequent randomization; 27 were assigned to the experimental group and 28 to the control group. The experimental treatment was not associated with a difference in time to clinical stability (hazard ratio 0.73 [95% CI 0.39-1.37]) nor most secondary outcomes. Median methylprednisolone cumulative doses were significantly lower (360 mg [IQR 360-842] vs. 870 mg [IQR 364-1451]; p = 0.007), and administered for a shorter time (median of 4.00 days [3.00-17.5] vs. 18.5 days [3.00-53.2]; p = 0.011) in the experimental group than in the control group. Although not statistically significant, those receiving the experimental therapy showed a numerically lower all-cause mortality than those receiving SoC, especially at day 10 [2 (7.41%) vs. 5 (17.9%); OR 0.39 (95% CI 0.05-2.1); p = 0.282]. The total number of non-serious adverse events was 42 in each the two groups. Those receiving experimental treatment had a numerically higher rate of non-serious infectious adverse events [16 (38%) vs. 10 (24%)] and serious infectious adverse events [7 (35%) vs. 3 (23%)] than those receiving SoC. Conclusions: The combined use of methylprednisolone pulses plus tacrolimus, in addition to the SoC, did not significantly improve the time to clinical stability or other secondary outcomes compared with the SoC alone in severe COVID-19. Although not statistically significant, patients receiving the experimental therapy had numerically lower all-cause mortality than those receiving SoC, supporting recent non-randomized studies with calcineurin inhibitors. It is noteworthy that the present trial had a limited sample size and several other limitations. Therefore, further RCTs should be done to assess the efficacy and safety of tacrolimus to tackle the inflammatory stages of COVID-19. Clinical Trial Registration: Identifier [NCT04341038/EudraCT: 2020-001445-39].