Long-Term Impact of an Educational Antimicrobial Stewardship Program on Management of Patients with Hematological Diseases.

Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) in hematological patients are especially relevant. However, information about ASPs in this population is scarce. For 11 years, we quarterly assessed antimicrobial consumption and incidence and death rates of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bloodstream infections (BSI) in the hematology Department. Healthcare activity indicators were also monitored yearly. We performed an interrupted time-series analysis. Antimicrobials showed a sustained reduction with a relative effect of -62.3% (95% CI -84.5 to -40.1) nine years after the inception of the ASP, being especially relevant for antifungals (relative effect -80.4%, -90.9 to -69.9), quinolones (relative effect -85.0%, -102.0 to -68.1), and carbapenems (relative effect -68.8%, -126.0 to -10.6). Incidence density of MDR BSI remained low and stable (mean 1.10 vs. 0.82 episodes per 1000 occupied bed days for the pre-intervention and the ASP period, respectively) with a quarterly percentage of change of -0.3% (95% CI -2.0 to 1.4). Early and late mortality of MDR BSI presented a steady trend (quarterly percentage of change -0.7%, 95% CI -1.7 to 0.3 and -0.6%, 95% CI -1.5 to 0.3, respectively). Volume and complexity of healthcare activity increased over the years. The ASP effectively achieved long-term reductions in antimicrobial consumption and improvements in the prescription profile, without increasing the mortality of MDR BSI.

Allocation to Matched Related or Unrelated Donor Results in Similar Clinical Outcomes without Increased Risk of Failure to Proceed to Transplant among Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Retrospective Analysis from the Time of Transplant Approval.

Clinical outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) from unrelated donors (URDs) approach those of matched related donor (MRD) transplants in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Yet, available data fail to account for differences in pretransplantation outcomes between these donor selection strategies. In this regard, URD allo-HSCT is associated with longer waiting times to transplantation, potentially resulting in higher probabilities of failure to reach transplant. We retrospectively analyzed 108 AML patients accepted for first allo-HSCT from the time of approval to proceed to transplant. Fifty-eight (54%) patients were initially allocated to MRD, while URD search was initiated in 50 (46%) patients. Time to transplant was longer in patients allocated to a URD when compared with patients assigned to an MRD (median 142 days versus 100 days; p < .001). Forty-three of 58 (74%) patients in the MRD group and 35 of 50 (70%) patients in the URD group underwent transplantation (odds ratio [OR], 1.22; p = .63). Advanced disease status at the time of allo-HSCT approval was the only predictor of failure to reach transplantation in the multivariate analysis (OR, 4.78; p = .001). Disease progression was the most common cause of failure to reach allo-HSCT (66.7%) in both the MRD and URD groups. With a median follow-up from transplantation of 14.5 (interquartile range, 5 to 29) months, the 2-year estimate of overall survival (OS) from allo-HSCT was 46% in the MRD group and 57% in the URD group (p = .54). There were no differences in OS according to donor type allocation in the multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 1.01; p = .83). When including patients from the time of transplant approval, 2-year OS was 39% in the MRD group versus 42% in the URD group. Our study suggests that allocation of AML patients to URDs may result in comparable clinical outcomes to MRD assignment without a significant increase in the risk of failure to reach transplant.