Secondary invasive fungal infection in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Invasive fungal infections (IFIs) have been identified as a complication in patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To date, there are few US studies examining the excess humanistic and economic burden of IFIs on hospitalised COVID-19 patients. OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the incidence, risk factors, clinical and economic burden of IFIs in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the United States. PATIENTS/METHODS: Data from adult patients hospitalised with COVID-19 during 01 April 2020-31 March 2021 were extracted retrospectively from the Premier Healthcare Database. IFI was defined either by diagnosis or microbiology findings plus systemic antifungal use. Disease burden attributable to IFI was estimated using time-dependent propensity score matching. RESULTS: Overall, 515,391 COVID-19 patients were included (male 51.7%, median age: 66 years); IFI incidence was 0.35/1000 patient-days. Most patients did not have traditional host factors for IFI such as hematologic malignancies; COVID-19 treatments including mechanical ventilation and systemic corticosteroid use were identified as risk factors. Excess mortality attributable to IFI was estimated at 18.4%, and attributable excess hospital costs were $16,100. CONCLUSIONS: Invasive fungal infection incidence was lower than previously reported, possibly due to a conservative definition of IFI. Typical COVID-19 treatments were among the risk factors identified. Furthermore, diagnosis of IFIs in COVID-19 patients may be complicated because of the several non-specific shared symptoms, leading to underestimation of the true incidence rate. The healthcare burden of IFIs was significant among COVID-19 patients, including higher mortality and greater cost.

Race and ethnicity: Risk factors for fungal infections?

Racial and ethnic identities, largely understood as social rather than biologic constructs, may impact risk for acquiring infectious diseases, including fungal infections. Risk factors may include genetic and immunologic differences such as aberrations in host immune response, host polymorphisms, and epigenomic factors stemming from environmental exposures and underlying social determinants of health. In addition, certain racial and ethnic groups may be predisposed to diseases that increase risk for fungal infections, as well as disparities in healthcare access and health insurance. In this review, we analyzed racial and ethnic identities as risk factors for acquiring fungal infections, as well as race and ethnicity as they relate to risk for severe disease from fungal infections. Risk factors for invasive mold infections such as aspergillosis largely appear related to environmental differences and underlying social determinants of health, although immunologic aberrations and genetic polymorphisms may contribute in some circumstances. Although black and African American individuals appear to be at high risk for superficial and invasive Candida infections and cryptococcosis, the reasons for this are unclear and may be related to underling social determinants of health, disparities in access to healthcare, and other socioeconomic disparities. Risk factors for all the endemic fungi are likely largely related to underlying social determinants of health, socioeconomic, and health disparities, although immunologic mechanisms likely play a role as well, particularly in disseminated coccidioidomycosis.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Cryptococcosis among Patients with and without COVID-19.

The effect of COVID-19 on the risk and prognosis of cryptococcosis is unclear. We compared the characteristics and outcomes of cryptococcosis in patients with and without COVID-19. Patients 18 years and older with cryptococcosis were identified from TriNetX and separated into two cohorts based on a diagnosis of COVID-19 within 3 months of the index diagnosis of cryptococcosis. Differences examined between groups included comorbidities, immunosuppressive medications, ED visits, hospitalizations, ICU admissions, mechanical ventilation, and deaths. The propensity score matching was performed based on demographics and comorbidities. Of the 6998 patients with cryptococcosis included, 4.4% (n = 306) had COVID-19 prior to cryptococcosis. Mortality was higher in patients with COVID-19 compared to those without COVID-19 (14% vs. 11%, p = 0.032). Additionally, those with COVID-19 were older (55.2 ± 14.4 vs. 51.9 ± 15.2 years, p < 0.001) with higher rates of transplant (29% vs. 13%, p < 0.001), neoplastic disease (37% vs. 21%, p < 0.001), chronic kidney disease (42% vs. 18%, p < 0.001), or diabetes (35% vs. 19%, p < 0.001) but not HIV (30% vs. 31%, p = 0.618). Glucocorticoid use was more common in those with COVID-19 (52% vs. 27%, p < 0.001). More patients with COVID-19 required ED visits (29% vs. 23%, p = 0.025) and ICU admission (18% vs. 11%, p < 0.001). After propensity score matching, patients with COVID-19 had higher rates of neoplastic disease, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and glucocorticoid use but did not experience worse outcomes compared to those without COVID-19. Patients with COVID-19 who developed cryptococcosis had independently higher rates of comorbidities and glucocorticoid use but similar outcomes, including death, versus those without COVID-19.

Cryptococcosis among hospitalised patients with COVID-19: A multicentre research network study.

It is unclear if there is an association between COVID-19 and cryptococcosis. Therefore, this study aimed to describe the clinical features, risk factors, and outcomes associated with cryptococcosis in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. The objectives of this study were to determine the incidence of and examine factors associated with cryptococcosis after a diagnosis of COVID-19. We used TriNetX to identify and sort patients 18 years and older hospitalised with COVID-19 into two cohorts based on the presence or absence of a diagnosis of cryptococcosis following diagnosis of COVID-19. Outcomes of interest included the incidence of cryptococcosis following the diagnosis of COVID-19 as well as the proportion of patients in each group who had underlying comorbidities, received immunomodulatory therapy, required ICU admission or mechanical ventilation (MV), or died. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for confounding. Among 212,479 hospitalised patients with COVID-19, 65 developed cryptococcosis. The incidence of cryptococcosis following COVID-19 was 0.022%. Patients with cryptococcosis were more likely to be male and have underlying comorbidities. Among cases, 32% were people with HIV. Patients with cryptococcosis were more likely to have received tocilizumab (p < .0001) or baricitinib (p < .0001), but not dexamethasone (p = .0840). ICU admission (38% vs 29%), MV (23% vs 11%), and mortality (36% vs 14%) were significantly higher among patients with cryptococcosis. Mortality remained elevated after adjusted propensity score matching. Cryptococcosis occurred most often in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who had traditional risk factors, comparable to findings in patients without COVID-19. Cryptococcosis was associated with increased ICU admission, MV, and mortality.

Coronavirus Disease 2019–Associated Invasive Fungal Infection

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can become complicated by secondary invasive fungal infections (IFIs), stemming primarily from severe lung damage and immunologic deficits associated with the virus or immunomodulatory therapy. Other risk factors include poorly controlled diabetes, structural lung disease and/or other comorbidities, and fungal colonization. Opportunistic IFI following severe respiratory viral illness has been increasingly recognized, most notably with severe influenza. There have been many reports of fungal infections associated with COVID-19, initially predominated by pulmonary aspergillosis, but with recent emergence of mucormycosis, candidiasis, and endemic mycoses. These infections can be challenging to diagnose and are associated with poor outcomes. The reported incidence of IFI has varied, often related to heterogeneity in patient populations, surveillance protocols, and definitions used for classification of fungal infections. Herein, we review IFI complicating COVID-19 and address knowledge gaps related to epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of COVID-19–associated fungal infections.

The Antifungal Pipeline: Fosmanogepix, Ibrexafungerp, Olorofim, Opelconazole, and Rezafungin.

The epidemiology of invasive fungal infections is changing, with new populations at risk and the emergence of resistance caused by the selective pressure from increased usage of antifungal agents in prophylaxis, empiric therapy, and agriculture. Limited antifungal therapeutic options are further challenged by drug-drug interactions, toxicity, and constraints in administration routes. Despite the need for more antifungal drug options, no new classes of antifungal drugs have become available over the last 2 decades, and only one single new agent from a known antifungal class has been approved in the last decade. Nevertheless, there is hope on the horizon, with a number of new antifungal classes in late-stage clinical development. In this review, we describe the mechanisms of drug resistance employed by fungi and extensively discuss the most promising drugs in development, including fosmanogepix (a novel Gwt1 enzyme inhibitor), ibrexafungerp (a first-in-class triterpenoid), olorofim (a novel dihyroorotate dehydrogenase enzyme inhibitor), opelconazole (a novel triazole optimized for inhalation), and rezafungin (an echinocandin designed to be dosed once weekly). We focus on the mechanism of action and pharmacokinetics, as well as the spectrum of activity and stages of clinical development. We also highlight the potential future role of these drugs and unmet needs.

Investigation of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission from two patients to healthcare workers identifies close contact but not airborne transmission events.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the pattern of transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during 2 nosocomial outbreaks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with regard to the possibility of airborne transmission. DESIGN: Contact investigations with active case finding were used to assess the pattern of spread from 2 COVID-19 index patients. SETTING: A community hospital and university medical center in the United States, in February and March, 2020, early in the COVID-19 pandemic. PATIENTS: Two index patients and 421 exposed healthcare workers. METHODS: Exposed healthcare workers (HCWs) were identified by analyzing the electronic medical record (EMR) and conducting active case finding in combination with structured interviews. Healthcare coworkers (HCWs) were tested for COVID-19 by obtaining oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal specimens, and RT-PCR testing was used to detect SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Two separate index patients were admitted in February and March 2020, without initial suspicion for COVID-19 and without contact or droplet precautions in place; both patients underwent several aerosol-generating procedures in this context. In total, 421 HCWs were exposed in total, and the results of the case contact investigations identified 8 secondary infections in HCWs. In all 8 cases, the HCWs had close contact with the index patients without sufficient personal protective equipment. Importantly, despite multiple aerosol-generating procedures, there was no evidence of airborne transmission. CONCLUSION: These observations suggest that, at least in a healthcare setting, most SARS-CoV-2 transmission is likely to take place during close contact with infected patients through respiratory droplets, rather than by long-distance airborne transmission.

A Community-transmitted Case of Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (SARS) Due to SARS-CoV-2 in the United States.

This is the first known community transmission case of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in the United States, with significant public health implications. Diagnosis of COVID-19 is currently confirmed with PCR based testing of appropriate respiratory samples. Given the absence of travel or known exposure history, this patient did not meet the criteria for testing according to CDC guidelines at the time of her presentation. Since this case, any patient with severe disease (eg, ARDS or pneumonia) requiring hospitalization without an explanatory diagnosis can be tested even if no clear source of exposure is identified. While influencing national health policies for revising screening criteria, this case also highlighted significant knowledge gaps in diagnosis and treatment and a desperate need for early, widespread, fast and cheap testing for COVID-19.

Education of Infectious Diseases Fellows During the COVID-19 Pandemic Crisis: Challenges and Opportunities.

One of the many challenges that has befallen the Infectious Diseases and Graduate Medical Education communities during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is the maintenance of continued effective education and training of the future leaders of our field. With the remarkable speed and innovation that has characterized the responses to this pandemic, educators everywhere have adapted existing robust and safe learning environments to meet the needs of our learners. This paper will review distinct aspects of education and training of the Infectious Diseases fellows we believe the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted most, including mentoring, didactics, and wellness. We anticipate that several strategies developed in this context and described herein will help to inform training and best practices during the pandemic and beyond.