Antimicrobial use and appropriateness in neutropenic fever: a study of the Hospital National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey data.

BACKGROUND: Neutropenic fever (NF) is a common complication in patients receiving chemotherapy. Judicious antimicrobial use is paramount to minimize morbidity and mortality and to avoid antimicrobial-related harms. OBJECTIVES: To use an Australian national dataset of antimicrobial prescriptions for the treatment of NF to describe antimicrobial use, prescription guideline compliance and appropriateness; and to compare these findings across different healthcare settings and patient demographics. We also aimed to identify trends and practice changes over time. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Hospital National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey (Hospital NAPS) database from August 2013 to May 2022. Antimicrobial prescriptions with a NF indication were analysed for antimicrobial use, guideline compliance and appropriateness according to the Hospital NAPS methodology. Demographic factors, hospital classifications and disease characteristics were compared. RESULTS: A total of 2887 (n = 2441 adults, n = 441 paediatric) NF prescriptions from 254 health facilities were included. Piperacillin-tazobactam was the most prescribed antimicrobial. Overall, 87.4% of prescriptions were appropriate. Piperacillin-tazobactam and cefepime had the highest appropriateness though incorrect piperacillin-tazobactam dosing was observed. Lower appropriateness was identified for meropenem, vancomycin, and gentamicin prescribing particularly in the private hospital and paediatric cohorts. The most common reasons for inappropriate prescribing were spectrum too broad, incorrect dosing or frequency, and incorrect duration. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insights into antimicrobial prescribing practices for NF in Australia. We have identified three key areas for improvement: piperacillin-tazobactam dosing, paediatric NF prescribing and private hospital NF prescribing. Findings from this study will inform the updated Australian and New Zealand consensus guidelines for the management of neutropenic fever in patients with cancer.

Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of [18F]FDG-PET/CT for investigation of persistent or recurrent neutropenic fever in high-risk haematology patients.

BACKGROUND: A recent randomised trial demonstrated [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography in combination with low-dose CT (FDG-PET/CT), compared to standard of care computed tomography (CT) imaging, positively impacted antimicrobial management and outcomes of acute leukaemia and haematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients with persistent and recurrent neutropenic fever. We conducted an economic evaluation from a healthcare perspective alongside the clinical trial. METHODS: Unit costs in Australian dollars were applied to all resources used (antimicrobials, diagnostic tests, ICU and hospital bed days). Effectiveness was measured as number of patients with antimicrobial rationalisation, 6-month mortality and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) derived from patient-reported trial-based health-related quality-of-life. Generalised linear models were used to analyse costs and outcomes. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for all outcomes and net monetary benefit (NMB) for QALYs were calculated. We performed bootstrapping with 1000 replications using the recycled predictions method. RESULTS: The adjusted healthcare costs were lower for FDG-PET/CT (mean $49,563; 95%CI 36,867, 65,133) compared to CT (mean $57,574; 95% CI 44,837, 73,347). The difference in QALYs between the two groups was small (0.001; 95% CI -0.001, 0.004). When simulated 1000 times, FDG-PET/CT was the dominant strategy as it was cheaper with better outcomes than the standard CT group in 74% of simulations. The estimated NMBs at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000 and $100,000 per QALY were positive, thus FDG-PET/CT remained cost-effective at these thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET/CT is cost effective when compared to CT for investigation of persistent/recurrent neutropenic fever in high-risk patients, providing further support for incorporation of FDG-PET/CT into clinical guidelines and funding. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03429387.

Outbreaks of Fungal Infections in Hospitals: Epidemiology, Detection, and Management.

Nosocomial clusters of fungal infections, whilst uncommon, cannot be predicted and are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Here, we review reports of nosocomial outbreaks of invasive fungal disease to glean insight into their epidemiology, risks for infection, methods employed in outbreak detection including genomic testing to confirm the outbreak, and approaches to clinical and infection control management. Both yeasts and filamentous fungi cause outbreaks, with each having general and specific risks. The early detection and confirmation of the outbreak are essential for diagnosis, treatment of affected patients, and termination of the outbreak. Environmental sampling, including the air in mould outbreaks, for the pathogen may be indicated. The genetic analysis of epidemiologically linked isolates is strongly recommended through a sufficiently discriminatory approach such as whole genome sequencing or a method that is acceptably discriminatory for that pathogen. An analysis of both linked isolates and epidemiologically unrelated strains is required to enable genetic similarity comparisons. The management of the outbreak encompasses input from a multi-disciplinary team with epidemiological investigation and infection control measures, including screening for additional cases, patient cohorting, and strict hygiene and cleaning procedures. Automated methods for fungal infection surveillance would greatly aid earlier outbreak detection and should be a focus of research.

Efficacy of a Clinical Decision Rule to Enable Direct Oral Challenge in Patients With Low-Risk Penicillin Allergy: The PALACE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Fewer than 5% of patients labeled with a penicillin allergy are truly allergic. The standard of care to remove the penicillin allergy label in adults is specialized testing involving prick and intradermal skin testing followed by an oral challenge with penicillin. Skin testing is resource intensive, limits practice to specialist-trained physicians, and restricts the global population who could undergo penicillin allergy delabeling. Objective: To determine whether a direct oral penicillin challenge is noninferior to the standard of care of penicillin skin testing followed by an oral challenge in patients with a low-risk penicillin allergy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel, 2-arm, noninferiority, open-label, multicenter, international randomized clinical trial occurred in 6 specialized centers, 3 in North America (US and Canada) and 3 in Australia, from June 18, 2021, to December 2, 2022. Eligible adults had a PEN-FAST score lower than 3. PEN-FAST is a prospectively derived and internationally validated clinical decision rule that enables point-of-care risk assessment for adults reporting penicillin allergies. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to either direct oral challenge with penicillin (intervention arm) or a standard-of-care arm of penicillin skin testing followed by oral challenge with penicillin (control arm). Main Outcome and Measure: The primary outcome was a physician-verified positive immune-mediated oral penicillin challenge within 1 hour postintervention in the intention-to-treat population. Noninferiority was achieved if a 1-sided 95% CI of the risk difference (RD) did not exceed 5 percentage points (pp). Results: A total of 382 adults were randomized, with 377 patients (median [IQR] age, 51 [35-65] years; 247 [65.5%] female) included in the analysis: 187 in the intervention group and 190 in the control group. Most patients had a PEN-FAST score of 0 or 1. The primary outcome occurred in 1 patient (0.5%) in the intervention group and 1 patient (0.5%) in the control group, with an RD of 0.0084 pp (90% CI, -1.22 to 1.24 pp). The 1-sided 95% CI was below the noninferiority margin of 5 pp. In the 5 days following the oral penicillin challenge, 9 immune-mediated adverse events were recorded in the intervention group and 10 in the control group (RD, -0.45 pp; 95% CI, -4.87 to 3.96 pp). No serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, direct oral penicillin challenge in patients with a low-risk penicillin allergy was noninferior compared with standard-of-care skin testing followed by oral challenge. In patients with a low-risk history, direct oral penicillin challenge is a safe procedure to facilitate the removal of a penicillin allergy label. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04454229.

The Who, What, When, and Where of Inpatient Direct Oral Penicillin Challenge-Implications for Health Services Implementation.

Inpatient direct oral challenge programs are increasingly deployed as part of antimicrobial stewardship initiatives to reduce the burden and impacts of penicillin allergy labels on antibiotic prescribing. Using data from a prospective, multicenter cohort inpatient penicillin allergy program, we identify the key targets for delabeling to aid health service implementation.

Study protocol: Australasian Registry of Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions (AUS-SCAR).

INTRODUCTION: Severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCAR) are a group of T cell-mediated hypersensitivities associated with significant morbidity, mortality and hospital costs. Clinical phenotypes include Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) and acute generalised exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP). In this Australasian, multicentre, prospective registry, we plan to examine the clinical presentation, drug causality, genomic predictors, potential diagnostic approaches, treatments and long-term outcomes of SCAR in Australia and New Zealand. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Adult and adolescent patients with SCAR including SJS, TEN, DRESS, AGEP and another T cell-mediated hypersensitivity, generalised bullous fixed drug eruption, will be prospectively recruited. A waiver of consent has been granted for some sites to retrospectively include cases which result in early mortality. DNA will be collected for all prospective cases. Blood, blister fluid and skin biopsy sampling is optional and subject to patient consent and site capacity. To develop culprit drug identification and prevention, genomic testing will be performed to confirm human leukocyte antigen (HLA) type and ex vivo testing will be performed via interferon-γ release enzyme linked immunospot assay using collected peripheral blood mononuclear cells. The long-term outcomes of SCAR will be investigated with a 12-month quality of life survey and examination of prescribing and mortality data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was reviewed and approved by the Austin Health Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/50791/Austin-19). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619000241134).

New approaches to management of fever and neutropenia in high-risk patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Patients receiving treatment for acute leukaemia and haematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) have prolonged neutropenia and are at high risk of neutropenic fever, with bacterial and particularly invasive fungal infections as feared complications, possessing potentially serious consequences including intensive care admission and mortality. Concerns for these serious complications often lead to long durations of broad-spectrum antimicrobial therapy and escalation to even broader therapy if fever persists. Further, the default approach is to continue neutropenic fever therapy until count recovery, leaving many patients who have long defervesced on prolonged antibiotics. RECENT FINDINGS: This article details recent progress in this field with particular emphasis on early discontinuation studies in resolved neutropenic fever and improved imaging techniques for the investigation of those with persistent neutropenic fever. Recent randomized controlled trials have shown that early cessation of empiric neutropenic fever therapy is well tolerated in acute leukaemia and autologous HCT patients who are clinically stable and afebrile for 72 h. Delineation of the best approach to cessation (timing and/or use of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis) and whether this approach is well tolerated in the higher risk allogeneic HCT setting is still required. Recent RCT data demonstrate utility of FDG-PET/CT to guide management and rationalize antimicrobial therapy in high-risk patient groups with persistent neutropenic fever. SUMMARY: Acute leukaemic and autologous HCT patients with resolved neutropenic fever prior to count recovery can have empiric therapy safely discontinued or de-escalated. There is an emerging role of FDG-PET/CT to support decision-making about antibiotic and antifungal use in high-risk persistent/recurrent neutropenic fever patients.

[18F]FDG-PET-CT compared with CT for persistent or recurrent neutropenic fever in high-risk patients (PIPPIN): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Management of neutropenic fever in high-risk haematology patients is challenging; there are often few localising clinical features, and diagnostic tests have poor sensitivity and specificity. We aimed to compare how [18F]flurodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG)-PET-CT scans and conventional CT scans affected the guidance of antimicrobial management and the outcomes of patients with persistent or recurrent neutropenic fever. METHODS: We did a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial in two tertiary referral hospitals in Australia. We recruited adults aged 18 years or older who were receiving conditioning chemotherapy for haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation or chemotherapy for acute leukaemia and had persistent (>72 h) or recurrent (new fever beyond 72 h of initial onset interspersed with >48 h defervescence) neutropenic fever. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, allergy to iodinated contrast, or estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 30 mL/min. Patients were randomly assigned by computer-generated randomisation chart (1:1) to [18F]FDG-PET-CT or conventional CT. Masking was not possible because of the nature of the investigation. Scans were done within 3 days of random assignment. The primary endpoint was a composite of starting, stopping, or changing the spectrum (broadening or narrowing) of antimicrobial therapy-referred to here as antimicrobial rationalisation-within 96 h of the assigned scan, analysed per protocol. This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03429387, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 8, 2018, and July 23, 2020, we assessed 316 patients for eligibility. 169 patients were excluded and 147 patients were randomly assigned to either [18F]FDG-PET-CT (n=73) or CT (n=74). Nine patients did not receive a scan per protocol, and two participants in each group were excluded for repeat entry into the study. 65 patients received [18F]FDG-PET-CT (38 [58%] male; 53 [82%] White) and 69 patients received CT (50 [72%] male; 58 [84%] White) per protocol. Median follow up was 6 months (IQR 6-6). Antimicrobial rationalisation occurred in 53 (82%) of 65 patients in the [18F]FDG-PET-CT group and 45 (65%) of 69 patients in the CT group (OR 2·36, 95% CI 1·06-5·24; p=0·033). The most frequent component of antimicrobial rationalisation was narrowing spectrum of therapy, in 28 (43%) of 65 patients in the [18F]FDG-PET-CT group compared with 17 (25%) of 69 patients in the CT group (OR 2·31, 95% CI 1·11-4·83; p=0·024). INTERPRETATION: [18F]FDG-PET-CT was associated with more frequent antimicrobial rationalisation than conventional CT. [18F]FDG-PET-CT can support decision making regarding antimicrobial cessation or de-escalation and should be considered in the management of patients with haematological diseases and persistent or recurrent high-risk neutropenic fever after chemotherapy or transplant conditioning. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council Centre of Research Excellence (APP1116876), Melbourne Health foundation, Gilead Research Fellowship grants supported this study.

Consensus guidelines for the diagnosis and management of invasive aspergillosis, 2021.

Invasive aspergillosis (IA) in haematology/oncology patients presents as primary infection or breakthrough infection, which can become refractory to antifungal treatment and has a high associated mortality. Other emerging patient risk groups include patients in the intensive care setting with severe respiratory viral infections, including COVID-19. These guidelines present key diagnostic and treatment recommendations in light of advances in knowledge since the previous guidelines in 2014. Culture and histological-based methods remain central to the diagnosis of IA. There is increasing evidence for the utility of non-culture methods employing fungal biomarkers in pre-emptive screening for infection, as well as for IA diagnosis when used in combination. Although azole resistance appears to be uncommon in Australia, susceptibility testing of clinical Aspergillus fumigatus complex isolates is recommended. Voriconazole remains the preferred first-line antifungal agent for treating primary IA, including for extrapulmonary disease. Recommendations for paediatric treatment broadly follow those for adults. For breakthrough and refractory IA, a change in class of antifungal agent is strongly recommended, and agents under clinical trial may need to be considered. Newer immunological-based imaging modalities warrant further study, while surveillance for IA and antifungal resistance remain essential to informing the relevance of current treatment recommendations.

Quality of inpatient antimicrobial use in hematology and oncology patients.

OBJECTIVES: To compare antimicrobial prescribing practices in Australian hematology and oncology patients to noncancer acute inpatients and to identify targets for stewardship interventions. DESIGN: Retrospective comparative analysis of a national prospectively collected database. METHODS: Using data from the 2014-2018 annual Australian point-prevalence surveys of antimicrobial prescribing in hospitalized patients (ie, Hospital National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey called Hospital NAPS), the most frequently used antimicrobials, their appropriateness, and guideline concordance were compared among hematology/bone marrow transplant (hemBMT), oncology, and noncancer inpatients in the setting of treatment of neutropenic fever and antibacterial and antifungal prophylaxis. RESULTS: In 454 facilities, 94,226 antibiotic prescriptions for 62,607 adult inpatients (2,230 hemBMT, 1,824 oncology, and 58,553 noncancer) were analyzed. Appropriateness was high for neutropenic fever management across groups (83.4%-90.4%); however, hemBMT patients had high rates of carbapenem use (111 of 746 prescriptions, 14.9%), and 20.2% of these prescriptions were deemed inappropriate. Logistic regression demonstrated that hemBMT patients were more likely to receive appropriate antifungal prophylaxis compared to oncology and noncancer patients (adjusted OR, 5.3; P < .001 for hemBMT compared to noncancer patients). Oncology had a low rate of antifungal prophylaxis guideline compliance (67.2%), and incorrect dosage and frequency were key factors. Compared to oncology patients, hemBMT patients were more likely to receive appropriate nonsurgical antibacterial prophylaxis (aOR, 8.4; 95% CI, 5.3-13.3; P < .001). HemBMT patients were also more likely to receive appropriate nonsurgical antibacterial prophylaxis compared to noncancer patients (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.9-5.0; P < .001). However, in the Australian context, the hemBMT group had higher than expected use of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis (66 of 831 prescriptions, 8%). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates why separate analysis of hemBMT and oncology populations is necessary to identify specific opportunities for quality improvement in each patient group.

The Role of In Vivo and Ex Vivo Diagnostic Tools in Severe Delayed Immune-Mediated Adverse Antibiotic Drug Reactions.

BACKGROUND: The use of in vivo and ex vivo diagnostic tools for delayed immune-mediated adverse drug reactions is currently ill defined. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the combination of skin testing and/or IFN-γ enzyme-linked immunoSpot assay (ELISpot) can aid diagnosis of these allergy phenotypes. METHODS: Patients with antibiotic-associated severe delayed immune-mediated adverse drug reaction hypersensitivity, including Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis, drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis, generalized bullous fixed drug eruption, and severe maculopapular exanthema, were prospectively recruited. In vivo testing was completed to the implicated drug(s), and ex vivo testing was performed with the patient's PBMCs stimulated with the relevant antibiotic concentrations for IFN-γ release ELISpot measurement. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients met the inclusion criteria, with DRESS (42; 51.9%) accounting for most cases. Among the 63 (78%) who had an ELISpot assay performed, 34 (54%) were positive to at least 1 implicated antibiotic (median spot-forming units/million cells, 99.5; interquartile range, 68-187), with glycopeptide being a strong predictor of positivity (adjusted odds ratio, 6.11; 95% CI, 1.74-21.42). In combination (in vivo and ex vivo), 51 (63%) of those tested were positive to an implicated antibiotic. For DRESS and severe maculopapular exanthema associated with penicillins and cephalosporins, this combination confirmed the culprit agent in 11 of the 12 cases and in 6 of 7 for DRESS associated with glycopeptides. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that using in vivo in combination with ex vivo testing can enhance the diagnostic approach in these severe phenotypes by assisting with the identification of possible culprit antibiotics.

The Penicillin Allergy Delabeling Program: A Multicenter Whole-of-Hospital Health Services Intervention and Comparative Effectiveness Study.

BACKGROUND: Penicillin allergies are associated with inferior patient and antimicrobial stewardship outcomes. We implemented a whole-of-hospital program to assess the efficacy of inpatient delabeling for low-risk penicillin allergies in hospitalized inpatients. METHODS: Patients ≥ 18 years of age with a low-risk penicillin allergy were offered a single-dose oral penicillin challenge or direct label removal based on history (direct delabeling). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients delabeled. Key secondary endpoints were antibiotic utilization pre- (index admission) and post-delabeling (index admission and 90 days). RESULTS: Between 21 January 2019 and 31 August 2019, we assessed 1791 patients reporting 2315 antibiotic allergies, 1225 with a penicillin allergy. Three hundred fifty-five patients were delabeled: 161 by direct delabeling and 194 via oral penicillin challenge. Ninety-seven percent (194/200) of patients were negative upon oral penicillin challenge. In the delabeled patients, we observed an increase in narrow-spectrum penicillin usage (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 10.51 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 5.39-20.48]), improved appropriate antibiotic prescribing (adjusted OR, 2.13 [95% CI, 1.45-3.13]), and a reduction in restricted antibiotic usage (adjusted OR, 0.38 [95% CI, .27-.54]). In the propensity score analysis, there was an increase in narrow-spectrum penicillins (OR, 10.89 [95% CI, 5.09-23.31]) and ß-lactam/ß-lactamase inhibitors (OR, 6.68 [95% CI, 3.94-11.35]) and a reduction in restricted antibiotic use (OR, 0.52 [95% CI, .36-.74]) and inappropriate prescriptions (relative risk ratio, 0.43 [95% CI, .26-.72]) in the delabeled group compared with the group who retained their allergy label. CONCLUSIONS: This health services program using a combination of direct delabeling and oral penicillin challenge resulted in significant impacts on the use of preferred antibiotics and appropriate prescribing.