Ceftazidime-Avibactam Improves Outcomes in High-Risk Neutropenic Patients with Klebsiella pneumoniae Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales Bacteremia.

Few studies have evaluated the efficacy of ceftazidime-avibactam (CA) for Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales bacteremia (KPC-PEB) in high-risk neutropenic patients. This is a prospective multicenter observational study in high-risk neutropenic patients with multi-drug resistant Enterobacterales bacteremia. They were compared according to the resistance mechanism and definitive treatment provided: KPC-CPE treated with CA (G1), KPC-CPE treated with other antibiotics (G2), and patients with ESBL-producing Enterobacterales bacteremia who received appropriate definitive therapy (G3). Thirty-day mortality was evaluated using a logistic regression model, and survival was analyzed with Kaplan-Meier curves. A total of 238 patients were included: 18 (G1), 52 (G2), and 168 (G3). Klebsiella spp. (60.9%) and Escherichia coli (26.4%) were the Enterobacterales most frequently isolated, and 71% of the bacteremias had a clinical source. The resistance profile between G1 and G2 was colistin 35.3% vs. 36.5%, amikacin 16.7% vs. 40.4%, and tigeclycline 11.1% vs. 19.2%. The antibiotics prescribed in combination with G2 were carbapenems, colistin, amikacin, fosfomycin, tigecycline, and fluoroquinolones. Seven-day clinical response in G1 vs. G2 vs. G3 was 94.4% vs. 42.3% vs. 82.7%, respectively (p < 0.001). Thirty-day overall mortality in G1 vs. G2 vs. G3 was 22.2% vs. 53.8% vs. 11.9%, respectively (p < 0.001), and infection-related mortality was 5.5% vs. 51.9% vs. 7.7% (p < 0.001). The independent risk factors for mortality were Pitt score > 4: OR 3.63, 95% CI, 1.18-11.14 (p = 0.025) and KPC-PEB treated with other antibiotics: OR 8.85, 95% CI, 2.58-30.33 (p = 0.001), while 7-day clinical response was a protective factor for survival: OR 0.02, 95% CI, 0.01-0.08 (p < 0.001). High-risk neutropenic patients with KPC-CPE treated with CA had an outcome similar to those treated for ESBL-producing Enterobacterales, with higher 7-day clinical response and lower overall and infection-related mortality than those treated with other antibiotics. In view of these data, CA may be considered the preferred therapeutic option for KPC-PEB in high-risk neutropenic patients.

Development of a Clinical Score to Stratify the Risk for Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales Bacteremia in Patients with Cancer and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

Identifying the risk factors for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) bacteremia in cancer and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) patients would allow earlier initiation of an appropriate empirical antibiotic treatment. This is a prospective multicenter observational study in patients from 12 centers in Argentina, who presented with cancer or hematopoietic stem-cell transplant and developed Enterobacterales bacteremia. A multiple logistic regression model identified risk factors for CRE bacteremia, and a score was developed according to the regression coefficient. This was validated by the bootstrap resampling technique. Four hundred and forty-three patients with Enterobacterales bacteremia were included: 59 with CRE and 384 with carbapenem-susceptible Enterobacterales (CSE). The risk factors that were identified and the points assigned to each of them were: ≥10 days of hospitalization until bacteremia: OR 4.03, 95% CI 1.88-8.66 (2 points); previous antibiotics > 7 days: OR 4.65, 95% CI 2.29-9.46 (2 points); current colonization with KPC-carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales: 33.08, 95% CI 11.74-93.25 (5 points). With a cut-off of 7 points, a sensitivity of 35.59%, specificity of 98.43%, PPV of 77.7%, and NPV of 90.9% were obtained. The overall performance of the score was satisfactory (AUROC of 0.85, 95% CI 0.80-0.91). Finally, the post-test probability of CRE occurrence in patients with none of the risk factors was 1.9%, which would virtually rule out the presence of CRE bacteremia.

Consenso de inmunizaciones en adultos con enfermedades reumáticas inflamatorias crónicas autoinmunes / Consensus on immunizations in adults with autoimmune chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases

Aumento del riesgo de infecciones prevenibles y sus complicaciones en pacientes con enfermedades reumáticas inflamatorias crónicas (ERICA), con y sin tratamiento con inmunosupresores (IS), y beneficios de la vacunación.

[Primary antifungal prophylaxis in oncohematological patients: who, when, and with what?] / Profilaxis antifúngica primaria en pacientes oncohematológicos: ¿a quiénes, cuándo y con qué?

Invasive fungal infections (IFI) are among the main infectious complications in patients with hematological malignancies and with hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), causing high morbidity and mortality and significantly increasing the healthcare cost and hospital stay. The epidemiology of IFIs has changed in recent decades, with filamentous fungi, particularly Aspergillus spp., being the main etiological agents. There are multiple risk factors for having an IFI; however, the most important are profound and prolonged neutropenia and severe cellular immunodeficiency. For this reason, the population at greatest risk is made up of patients with acute leukemias, myelodysplasias and allogeneic HSCT with graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) treated with corticosteroids. Numerous randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses have shown that primary antifungal prophylaxis (AFP) significantly reduces the incidence of IFI, particularly those caused by Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp., IFI-related mortality, and overall mortality in some group of patients. Likewise, in high-risk patients, where a high incidence of IFI is expected, it is a cost-effective strategy. Several antifungals have demonstrated clinical benefit. They can be used as a AFP strategy in different settings, presenting advantages and disadvantages that must be taken into account in each case. For this, national and international scientific societies have issued recommendations for the indication of AFP. Aspects related to the different antifungals' clinical efficacy are analyzed considering the population at risk, the potential disadvantages, timing, and form of administration.

Las infecciones fúngicas invasoras (IFI) constituyen una de las principales complicaciones infecciosas en pacientes oncohematológicos y con trasplante de células progenitoras hematopoyéticas (TCPH), ocasionando alta morbimortalidad e incrementando significativamente los costos de atención y la estadía hospitalaria. La epidemiología de las IFI ha cambiado en las últimas décadas, siendo los hongos filamentosos, particularmente Aspergillus spp., los principales agentes etiológicos. Existen múltiples factores de riesgo para una IFI; pero la neutropenia profunda y prolongada, y la inmunodeficiencia celular severa siguen siendo los más importantes. Por este motivo, la población de mayor riesgo la constituyen los pacientes con leucemias agudas, mielodisplasias y TCPH alogénicos con enfermedad injerto contra huésped (EICH), en tratamiento con corticoides. Numerosos ensayos clínicos aleatorizados y metaanálisis han demostrado que la profilaxis antifúngica primaria (PAF) reduce significativamente la incidencia de IFI, tanto de aquellas causadas por Candida spp. como por Aspergillus spp., la mortalidad relacionada a IFI y la mortalidad global en algunos grupos de pacientes. Asimismo, en enfermos de alto riesgo, en donde se espera una incidencia de IFI elevada, es una estrategia costo-efectiva. Varios antifúngicos han demostrado beneficio clínico y pueden utilizarse como estrategia de PAF en diferentes escenarios, presentando ventajas y desventajas que deben ser tenidas en cuenta al momento de indicar una PAF. Para esto, sociedades científicas nacionales e internacionales, han emitido recomendaciones de indicación de PAF. Se analizan los aspectos relacionados con la eficacia clínica de los diferentes antifúngicos según la población de riesgo, las potenciales desventajas, momento y forma de administración.

Profilaxis antifúngica primaria en pacientes oncohematológicos: ¿a quiénes, cuándo y con qué? / Primary antifungal prophylaxis in oncohematological patients: who, when, and with what?

Resumen Las infecciones fúngicas invasoras (IFI) constituyen una de las principales complicaciones infecciosas en pacientes oncohematológicos y con trasplante de células progenitoras hematopoyéticas (TCPH), ocasionando alta morbimortalidad e incrementando significativamente los costos de atención y la estadía hos pitalaria. La epidemiología de las IFI ha cambiado en las últimas décadas, siendo los hongos filamentosos, particularmente Aspergillus spp., los principales agentes etiológicos. Existen múltiples factores de riesgo para una IFI; pero la neutropenia profunda y prolongada, y la inmunodeficiencia celular severa siguen siendo los más importantes. Por este motivo, la población de mayor riesgo la constituyen los pacientes con leucemias agudas, mielodisplasias y TCPH alogénicos con enfermedad injerto contra huésped (EICH), en tratamiento con corticoides. Numerosos ensayos clínicos aleatorizados y metaanálisis han demostrado que la profilaxis antifúngica primaria (PAF) reduce significativamente la incidencia de IFI, tanto de aquellas causadas por Candida spp. como por Aspergillus spp., la mortalidad relacionada a IFI y la mortalidad global en algunos grupos de pacientes. Asimismo, en enfermos de alto riesgo, en donde se espera una incidencia de IFI elevada, es una estrategia costo-efectiva. Varios antifúngicos han demostrado beneficio clínico y pueden utilizarse como estrategia de PAF en diferentes escenarios, presentando ventajas y desventajas que deben ser tenidas en cuenta al momento de indicar una PAF. Para esto, sociedades científicas nacionales e internacionales, han emitido recomendaciones de indicación de PAF. Se analizan los aspectos relacionados con la eficacia clínica de los diferentes antifúngicos según la población de riesgo, las potenciales desventajas, momento y forma de administración.

Abstract Invasive fungal infections (IFI) are among the main infectious complications in patients with hema tological malignancies and with hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), causing high morbidity and mortality and significantly increasing the healthcare cost and hospital stay. The epidemiology of IFIs has changed in recent decades, with filamentous fungi, particularly Aspergillus spp., being the main etiological agents. There are multiple risk factors for having an IFI; however, the most important are profound and prolonged neutropenia and severe cellular immunodeficiency. For this reason, the population at greatest risk is made up of patients with acute leukemias, myelodysplasias and allogeneic HSCT with graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) treated with cortico steroids. Numerous randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses have shown that primary antifungal prophylaxis (AFP) significantly reduces the incidence of IFI, particularly those caused by Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp., IFI-related mortality, and overall mortality in some group of patients. Likewise, in high-risk patients, where a high incidence of IFI is expected, it is a cost-effective strategy. Several antifungals have demonstrated clinical benefit. They can be used as a AFP strategy in different settings, presenting advantages and disadvantages that must be taken into account in each case. For this, national and international scientific societies have issued recom mendations for the indication of AFP. Aspects related to the different antifungals' clinical efficacy are analyzed considering the population at risk, the potential disadvantages, timing, and form of administration.

Proposal of a clinical score to stratify the risk of multidrug-resistant gram-negative rods bacteremia in cancer patients

ABSTRACT Introduction: Multidrug-resistant gram-negative rods (MDR GNR) represent a growing threat for patients with cancer. Our objective was to determine the characteristics of and risk factors for MDR GNR bacteremia in patients with cancer and to develop a clinical score to predict MDR GNR bacteremia. Material and Methods: Multicenter prospective study analyzing initial episodes of MDR GNR bacteremia. Risk factors were evaluated using a multiple logistic regression (forward-stepwise selection) analysis including variables with a p < 0.10 in univariate analysis. Results: 394 episodes of GNR bacteremia were included, with 168 (42.6 %) being MDR GNR. Five variables were identified as independent risk factors: recent antibiotic use (OR = 2.8, 95 % CI 1.7-4.6, p = 0.001), recent intensive care unit admission (OR = 2.9, 95 % CI 1.1-7.8, p = 0.027), hospitalization ≥ 7 days prior to the episode of bacteremia (OR = 3.5, 95 % CI 2-6.2, p = 0.005), severe mucositis (OR = 5.3, 95 % CI 1.8-15.6, p = 0.002), and recent or previous colonization/infection with MDR GNR (OR = 2.3, 95 % CI 1.2-4.3, p = 0.028). Using a cut-off value of two points, the score had a sensitivity of 66.07 % (95 % CI 58.4-73.2 %), a specificity of 77.8 % (95 % CI 71.4-82.7 %), a positive predictive value of 68 % (95 % CI 61.9-73.4 %), and a negative predictive value of 75.9 % (95 % CI 71.6-79.7 %). The overall performance of the score was satisfactory (AUROC 0.78; 95 % CI 0.73-0.82). In the cases with one or none of the risk factors identified, the negative likelihood ratio was 0.18 and the post-test probability of having MDR GNR was 11.68 %. Conclusions: With the growing incidence of MDR GNR as etiologic agents of bacteremia in cancer patients, the development of this score could be a potential tool for clinicians.

Proposal of a clinical score to stratify the risk of multidrug-resistant gram-negative rods bacteremia in cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Multidrug-resistant gram-negative rods (MDR GNR) represent a growing threat for patients with cancer. Our objective was to determine the characteristics of and risk factors for MDR GNR bacteremia in patients with cancer and to develop a clinical score to predict MDR GNR bacteremia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Multicenter prospective study analyzing initial episodes of MDR GNR bacteremia. Risk factors were evaluated using a multiple logistic regression (forward-stepwise selection) analysis including variables with a p<0.10 in univariate analysis. RESULTS: 394 episodes of GNR bacteremia were included, with 168 (42.6 %) being MDR GNR. Five variables were identified as independent risk factors: recent antibiotic use (OR=2.8, 95 % CI 1.7-4.6, p=0.001), recent intensive care unit admission (OR=2.9, 95 % CI 1.1-7.8, p=0.027), hospitalization ≥ 7 days prior to the episode of bacteremia (OR=3.5, 95 % CI 2-6.2, p=0.005), severe mucositis (OR=5.3, 95 % CI 1.8-15.6, p=0.002), and recent or previous colonization/infection with MDR GNR (OR=2.3, 95 % CI 1.2-4.3, p=0.028). Using a cut-off value of two points, the score had a sensitivity of 66.07 % (95 % CI 58.4-73.2 %), a specificity of 77.8 % (95 % CI 71.4-82.7 %), a positive predictive value of 68 % (95 % CI 61.9-73.4 %), and a negative predictive value of 75.9 % (95 % CI 71.6-79.7 %). The overall performance of the score was satisfactory (AUROC 0.78; 95 % CI 0.73-0.82). In the cases with one or none of the risk factors identified, the negative likelihood ratio was 0.18 and the post-test probability of having MDR GNR was 11.68 %. CONCLUSIONS: With the growing incidence of MDR GNR as etiologic agents of bacteremia in cancer patients, the development of this score could be a potential tool for clinicians.

[Refractory colitis by Clostridium difficile treated with fecal microbiota transplant]. / Colitis refractaria por Clostridium difficile tratada con trasplante de microbiota fecal.

Clostridium difficile infection is an increasingly recognized cause of diarrhea in inpatients, frequently associated to high mortality. Vancomycin is the treatment of choice for all Clostridium difficile- associated diarrheas, with different degrees of severity. However, some patients develop refractory forms to that treatment and there are no alternative antibiotic schemes recommended for these cases. Fecal microbiota transplantation has been shown to be successful in a series of cases of severe diarrhea associated with this organism. We present a case of refractory C. difficile infection successfully treated with fecal microbiota transplantation.

La diarrea por Clostridium difficile es reconocida de manera creciente en pacientes hospitalizados y se asocia con alta mortalidad. La vancomicina por vía enteral es el tratamiento antibiótico recomendado para las diferentes formas, incluso las más graves. Sin embargo, un grupo pequeño de pacientes desarrolla formas refractarias a ese tratamiento y no existen esquemas antibióticos alternativos recomendados para estos casos. El trasplante de microbiota fecal ha demostrado ser exitoso en una serie de casos de diarrea grave asociada a este microorganismo. Presentamos un caso de diarrea refractaria por C. difficile que fue tratada con éxito con una infusión de microbiota fecal.

Colitis refractaria por Clostridium difficile tratada con trasplante de microbiota fecal / Refractory colitis by Clostridium difficile treated with fecal microbiota transplant

La diarrea por Clostridium difficile es reconocida de manera creciente en pacientes hospitalizados y se asocia con alta mortalidad. La vancomicina por vía enteral es el tratamiento antibiótico recomendado para las diferentes formas, incluso las más graves. Sin embargo, un grupo pequeño de pacientes desarrolla formas refractarias a ese tratamiento y no existen esquemas antibióticos alternativos recomendados para estos casos. El trasplante de microbiota fecal ha demostrado ser exitoso en una serie de casos de diarrea grave asociada a este microorganismo. Presentamos un caso de diarrea refractaria por C. difficile que fue tratada con éxito con una infusión de microbiota fecal.

Clostridium difficile infection is an increasingly recognized cause of diarrhea in inpatients, frequently associated to high mortality. Vancomycin is the treatment of choice for all Clostridium difficile- associated diarrheas, with different degrees of severity. However, some patients develop refractory forms to that treatment and there are no alternative antibiotic schemes recommended for these cases. Fecal microbiota transplantation has been shown to be successful in a series of cases of severe diarrhea associated with this organism. We present a case of refractory C. difficile infection successfully treated with fecal microbiota transplantation.

Pandemic 2009 Influenza A (H1N1) virus infection in cancer and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients; a multicenter observational study.

BACKGROUND: During March 2009 a novel Influenza A virus emerged in Mexico. We describe the clinical picture of the pandemic Influenza A (H1N1) Influenza in cancer patients during the 2009 influenza season. METHODS: Twelve centers participated in a multicenter retrospective observational study of cancer patients with confirmed infection with the 2009 H1N1 Influenza A virus (influenza-like illness or pneumonia plus positive PCR for the 2009 H1N1 Influenza A virus  in respiratory secretions). Clinical data were obtained by retrospective chart review and analyzed.  RESULTS: From May to August 2009, data of 65 patients were collected. Median age was 51 years, 57 % of the patients were female. Most patients (47) had onco-hematological cancers and 18 had solid tumors. Cancer treatment mainly consisted of chemotherapy (46), or stem cell transplantation (SCT) (16). Only 19 of 64 patients had received the 2009 seasonal Influenza vaccine. Clinical presentation included pneumonia (43) and upper respiratory tract infection (22). Forty five of 58 ambulatory patients were admitted. Mechanical ventilation was required in 12 patients (18%). Treatment included oseltamivir monotherapy or in combination with amantadine for a median of 7 days. The global 30-day mortality rate was 18%. All 12 deaths were among the non-vaccinated patients. No deaths were observed among the 19 vaccinated patients. Oxygen saturation <96% at presentation was a predictor of mortality (OR 19.5; 95%CI: 2.28 to 165.9). CONCLUSIONS: In our cancer patient population, the pandemic 2009 Influenza A (H1N1) virus was associated with high incidence of pneumonia (66%), and 30-day mortality (18.5%). Saturation <96% was significantly associated with death. No deaths were observed among vaccinated patients.

Guías de recomendaciones de prevención de infecciones en pacientes que reciben modificadores de la respuesta biológica / Recomendations for the prevention of infections in patients receiving biologic response modifiers

El creciente interés ante el uso de modificadores de la respuesta biológica, en todas las disciplinas, motivó la revisión del tema y la discusión con la comunidad científica analizando el tema. En el presente documento desarrollaremos los agentes más importantes tales como anti-TNF, anti-citoquinas, bloqueadores de la señal coestimulada, bloqueadores de las moléculas de adhesión, bloqueadores de la proliferación de linfocitos, deplecionadores de linfocitos T y B; enfocado a los cuidados, monitoreos, quimioprofilaxis y vacunación necesaria ante cada agente en especial para evitar infecciones en este grupo de pacientes

The growing interest for the use of biological drugs, in all disciplines,led the review of the literature and discussion with the scientific com-munity analyzing this issue. This paper deals with the most importantagents such as anti-TNF, anti-cytokines, blockers of the co-stimulat-ed signal, blockers of adhesion molecules, blockers of the prolifera-tion of lymphocytes, agents against T and B lymphocytes. We wouldfocuse on daily care, monitoring, chemoprophylaxis and vaccinationrequired for each particular agent to prevent infections in this groupof patients

Guías de recomendaciones de prevención de infecciones en pacientes que reciben modificadores de la respuesta biológica / Recomendations for the prevention of infections in patients receiving biologic response modifiers

El creciente interés ante el uso de modificadores de la respuesta biológica, en todas las disciplinas, motivó la revisión del tema y la discusión con la comunidad científica analizando el tema. En el presente documento desarrollaremos los agentes más importantes tales como anti-TNF, anti-citoquinas, bloqueadores de la señal coestimulada, bloqueadores de las moléculas de adhesión, bloqueadores de la proliferación de linfocitos, deplecionadores de linfocitos T y B; enfocado a los cuidados, monitoreos, quimioprofilaxis y vacunación necesaria ante cada agente en especial para evitar infecciones en este grupo de pacientes(AU)

The growing interest for the use of biological drugs, in all disciplines,led the review of the literature and discussion with the scientific com-munity analyzing this issue. This paper deals with the most importantagents such as anti-TNF, anti-cytokines, blockers of the co-stimulat-ed signal, blockers of adhesion molecules, blockers of the prolifera-tion of lymphocytes, agents against T and B lymphocytes. We wouldfocuse on daily care, monitoring, chemoprophylaxis and vaccinationrequired for each particular agent to prevent infections in this groupof patients(AU)

[Chronic meningococcemia]. / Meningococcemia crónica.

Chronic meningococcemia is an unfrequent clinical picture within the spectrum of infections produced by Neisseria meningitidis. It is classically characterized by fever, skin lesions and joint involvement, usually without meningeal involvement, and with blood culture growth of the responsible bacteria. It generally affects previously healthy young people. It is unknown why these patients, unlike patients with Neisseria meningitidis's acute meningitis and with acute meningococcemia, can survive without complications during weeks, in abscence of an useful antibiotic treatment. It has been hypothesized that owing to high susceptibility to beta-lactam antibiotics of Neisseria meningitidis, many cases may be treated inadvertently. We describe a case of chronic meningococcemia in a young woman who presented a classical clinical picture, not recognized initially.

Meningococcemia crónica / Chronic menigococcemia

La meningococcemia crónica es una forma clínica infrecuente dentro del espectro de infecciones producido por Neisseria meningitidis. Clásicamente esta forma clínica se caracteriza por fiebre, lesiones cutáneas, compromiso articular, y desarrollo en hemocultivo de la bacteria responsable, habitualmente con ausencia de compromiso meníngeo. Generalmente afecta a adultos jóvenes previamente sanos. Se desconoce la razón por la cual estos pacientes, a diferencia de los que presentan meningitis aguda por Neisseria meningitidis y meningococcemia aguda, pueden sobrevivir sin complicaciones durante semanas en ausencia de tratamiento antibiótico útil. Se ha planteado que debido a la alta sensibilidad de esta bacteria a los antibióticos beta-lactámicos, muchos casos podrían ser tratados inadvertidamente. Describimos un caso de meningococcemia crónica en una mujer joven que presenta un cuadro clásico no reconocido inicialmente.

Chronic meningococcemia is an unfrequent clinical picture within the spectrum of infections produced by Neisseria meningitidis. It is classically characterized by fever, skin lesions and joint involvement, usually without meningeal involvement, and with blood culture growth of the responsible bacteria. It generally affects previously healthy young people. It is unknown why these patients, unlike patients with Neisseria meningitidis’s acute meningitis and with acute meningococcemia, can survive without complications during weeks, in abscence of an useful antibiotic treatment. It has been hypothesized that owing to high susceptibility to beta-lactam antibiotics of Neisseria meningitidis, many cases may be treated inadvertently. We describe a case of chronic meningococcemia in a young woman who presented a classical clinical picture, not recognized initially.