Cefiderocol-Based versus Colistin-Based Regimens for Severe Carbapenem-Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii Infections: A Propensity Score-Weighted, Retrospective Cohort Study during the First Two Years of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: A large increase in multi-drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii, especially carbapenem-resistant strains, occurred during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic, posing important challenges in its treatment. Cefiderocol appeared to be a good option for the treatment of Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CR-Ab), but to date, the guidelines and evidence available are conflicting. METHODS: We retrospectively included a group of patients with CR-Ab infections (treated with colistin- or cefiderocol-based regimens) at Padua University Hospital (August 2020-July 2022) and assessed predictors of 30-day mortality, and differences in microbiological and clinical treatment. To evaluate the difference in outcomes, accounting for the imbalance in antibiotic treatment allocation, a propensity score weighting (PSW) approach was adopted. RESULTS: We included 111 patients, 68% males, with a median age of 69 years (IQR: 59-78). The median duration of antibiotic treatment was 13 days (IQR:11-16). In total, 60 (54.1%) and 51 (45.9%) patients received cefiderocol- and colistin-based therapy, respectively. Notably, 53 (47.7%) patients had bloodstream infections, while 58 (52.3%) had pneumonia. Colistin was combined in 96.1%, 80.4%, and 5.8% of cases with tigecycline, meropenem, and fosfomycin, respectively. Cefiderocol was combined in 13.3%, 30%, and 18.3% of cases with fosfomycin, tigecycline, and meropenem, respectively. At the baseline, the two treatment groups significantly differed in age (patients treated with colistin were significantly older), the prevalence of diabetes and obesity (more frequent in the group treated with colistin), length of stay (longer in the group receiving cefiderocol), and type of infection (BSI were more frequent in the group receiving cefiderocol). The proportion of patients who developed acute kidney injury was significantly higher in the colistin group. By using PSW, no statistically significant differences emerged for mortality or clinical and microbiological cure between the two groups. No independent predictors were detected for hospital mortality or clinical cure, while for the length of stay, the only selected predictor was age, with a non-linear effect (p-value 0.025 for non-linearity) on the prolongation of hospital stay of 0.25 days (95% CI 0.10-0.39) at increasing ages (calculated over the IQR). CONCLUSIONS: Cefiderocol treatment did not differ in terms of main outcomes and safety profile from colistin-based regimens. More prospective studies with a larger number of patients are required to confirm our results.

Interleukin-62/lymphocyte as a proposed predictive index for COVID-19 patients treated with monoclonal antibodies.

In a convenience sample of 93 patients treated with monoclonal antibodies (moAbs) against SARS-CoV-2, the interleukin-62/lymphocyte count ratio (IL-62/LC) was able to predict clinical worsening both in early stages of COVID-19 and in oxygen-requiring patients. Moreover, we analysed 18 most at-risk patients with asymptomatic or mild disease treated with both moAbs and antiviral treatment and found that only 2 had clinical progression, while patients with a similar risk were reported to have an unfavourable outcome in most cases from recent data. In only one of our 18 patients, clinical progression was attributable to COVID-19, and in the other cases, clinical progression was observed despite IL-62/LC being above the risk cut-off. In conclusion, IL-62/LC may be a valuable method to identify patients requiring more aggressive treatments both in earlier and later stages of the disease; however, most at-risk patients can be protected from clinical worsening by combining moAbs and antivirals, even if levels of the IL-62/LC biomarker are lower than the risk cut-off.

Risk of hospitalization and sequelae in patients with COVID-19 treated with 3-day early remdesivir vs. controls in the vaccine and Omicron era: A real-life cohort study.

Recently, a benefit from administration of a 3-day course of early remdesivir (ER) in the outpatients' setting was reported. However, real-life data on its use is scarce. Therefore, we explored the ER clinical outcome in our outpatients' s cohort, compared to untreated controls. We included all patients who were prescribed ER from February to May 2022 and followed them up for 3 months and compared patients who received treatment with untreated controls. In the two groups the following outcomes were investigated: hospitalization and mortality rate, time of negativization and symptom's resolution, and postacute coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) syndrome prevalence. Overall, 681 patients were analyzed, mostly females (53.6%), and with a median age of 66 years (interquartile range: 54-77), 316 (46.4%) patients received ER, and 365 (53.6%) did not receive antiviral treatment (control group). Overall, 8.5% patients eventually required oxygen support, 8.7% were hospitalized for COVID-19, and 1.5% died. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunization and ER (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.049 [0.015; 0.16], p < 0.001) independently reduced hospitalization risk. ER was significantly associated with a shorter duration of SARS-CoV-2 positivity at nasopharyngeal swabs (aß -8.15 [-9.21; -7.09], p < 0.001) and of symptoms (aß -5.11 [-5.82; -4.39], p < 0.001), and with lower rate of COVID-19 sequelae compared to control group (aOR: 0.18 [0.10; 0.31], p < 0.001). Even in the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and Omicron era, in patients at high risk of developing severe disease, ER demonstrated to have a good safety profile and to significantly reduce the risk of disease progression and COVID-19 sequelae compared to untreated controls.

Molnupiravir and Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir: Tolerability, Safety, and Adherence in a Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Molnupiravir (MOL) and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NIR) were recently approved for the early treatment of COVID-19, but real-life data on tolerability, safety, and adverse events (AEs) are still scarce. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study including all patients who were prescribed MOL and NIR at the Infectious Diseases Unit of Padua University Hospital, between January and May 2022. Demographic, clinical, and safety variables were recorded. RESULTS: We included 909 patients, 48.3% males and 95.2% vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. The median age was 73 (IQR: 62-82) years. MOL and NIR were prescribed in 407 (44.8%) and 502 (55.2%) patients, respectively. Overall, 124/909 (13.6%) patients experienced any AEs following antivirals intake: 98/124 (79%) patients reporting adverse events presented grade 1 AEs, 23/124 (18.5%) grade 2 AEs and 3 (2.5%) grade 3 AEs. Treatment discontinuation was recorded in 4.8% of patients. AEs were significantly higher in women, in patients treated with NIR compared to MOL and in people who were not vaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: In our real-life setting, AEs were higher than those reported by clinical trials, and were particularly associated with NIR use and with not being vaccinated. Further analyses are needed to better assess safety of oral antivirals and to define which patient's profile may benefit most from MOL and NIR.

Lessons learned and implications of early therapies for coronavirus disease in a territorial service centre in the Calabria region: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and antivirals have been approved for early therapy of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), however, in the real-life setting, there are difficulties to prescribe these therapies within few days from symptom onset as recommended, and effectiveness of combined use of these drugs have been hypothesised in most-at-risk patients (such as those immunocompromised) but data supporting this strategy are limited. METHODS: We describe the real-life experience of SARS-CoV-2 antivirals and/or monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and focus on the hospitalisation rate due to the progression of COVID-19. Clinical results obtained through our risk-stratification algorithm and benefits achieved through a strategic proximity territorial centre are provided. We also report a case series with an in-depth evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 genome in relationship with treatment strategy and clinical evolution of patients. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-eight patients were analysed; 94/288 (32.6%) patients were treated with mAb monotherapy, 171/288 (59.4%) patients were treated with antivirals, and 23/288 (8%) patients received both mAbs and one antiviral drug. Haematological malignancies were more frequent in patients treated with combination therapy than in the other groups (p = 0.0003). There was a substantial increase in the number of treated patients since the opening of the centre dedicated to early therapies for COVID-19. The provided disease-management and treatment appeared to be effective since 98.6% patients recovered without hospital admission. Moreover, combination therapy with mAbs and antivirals seemed successful because all patients admitted to the hospital for COVID-19 did not receive such therapies, while none of the most-at-risk patients treated with combination therapy were hospitalized or reported adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: A low rate of COVID-19 progression requiring hospital admission was observed in patients included in this study. The dedicated COVID-19 proximity territorial service appeared to strengthen the regional sanitary system, avoiding the overwhelming of other services. Importantly, our results also support early combination therapy: it is possible that this strategy reduces the emergence of escape mutants of SARS-CoV-2, thereby increasing efficacy of early treatment, especially in immunocompromised individuals.

Is the Pendulum of Antimicrobial Drug Resistance Swinging Back after COVID-19?

The COVID-19 pandemic may have had an effect on antimicrobial resistance. We compared the prevalence of ESKAPE multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacterial infections in COVID-19 affected/unaffected patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) or infectious disease units at the "Mater Domini" University Hospital of Catanzaro between 1 March 2020 and 31 July 2021. Moreover, an analysis of MDR rates in ICU comparing the pre-pandemic period with the pandemic period was performed, and the possible consequence on in-hospital mortality was explored. One hundred and eighty-four ESKAPE isolates were analyzed from 362 SARS-CoV-2 positive and 199 negative patients. In total, 116 out of 171 Gram-negative isolates were classified as MDR, and a higher frequency was observed in COVID-19 compared with non-COVID-19 patients (74.2% vs. 60.3%; p = 0.052). A higher rate of MDR ESKAPE bacteria was observed in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU compared with COVID-19 unaffected patients admitted to the same ward in 2019 (88% vs. 80.4%; p = 0.186). Acinetobacter baumannii was the main pathogen in COVID-19 patients (58.7%), where it was the most frequent cause of bloodstream infection with the highest mortality rate (68.7%). Increase in MDR appeared to be associated with COVID-19 but only in the ICU setting. Acinetobacter baumannii was associated with the risk of death, indicating the importance of implementing infection control measures urgently.

Clinical characteristics and predictors of mortality associated with COVID-19 in elderly patients from a long-term care facility.

Since December 2019, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has spread from China all over the world and many COVID-19 outbreaks have been reported in long-term care facilities (LCTF). However, data on clinical characteristics and prognostic factors in such settings are scarce. We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study to assess clinical characteristics and baseline predictors of mortality of COVID-19 patients hospitalized after an outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a LTCF. A total of 50 patients were included. Mean age was 80 years (SD, 12 years), and 24/50 (57.1%) patients were males. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 32%. At Cox regression analysis, significant predictors of in-hospital mortality were: hypernatremia (HR 9.12), lymphocyte count < 1000 cells/µL (HR 7.45), cardiovascular diseases other than hypertension (HR 6.41), and higher levels of serum interleukin-6 (IL-6, pg/mL) (HR 1.005). Our study shows a high in-hospital mortality rate in a cohort of elderly patients with COVID-19 and hypernatremia, lymphopenia, CVD other than hypertension, and higher IL-6 serum levels were identified as independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. Given the small population size as major limitation of our study, further investigations are necessary to better understand and confirm our findings in elderly patients.

Oxygen therapy via high flow nasal cannula in severe respiratory failure caused by Sars-Cov-2 infection: a real-life observational study.

The worldwide spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) in March 2020. According to clinical studies carried out in China and Italy, most patients experience mild or moderate symptoms; about a fifth of subjects develop a severe and critical disease, and may suffer from interstitial pneumonia, possibly associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and death.In patients who develop respiratory failure, timely conventional oxygen therapy through nasal catheter plays a crucial role, but it can be used only in mild forms. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) support or non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) are uncomfortable, and require significant man-machine cooperation. Herein we describe our experience of five patients with COVID-19, who were treated with high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) after failure of CPAP or NIV, and discuss the role of HFNC in COVID-19 patients. Our findings suggest that HFNC can be used successfully in selected patients with COVID-19-related ARDS.The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.