Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft tissue infections: 2014 update by the infectious diseases society of America.

A panel of national experts was convened by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) to update the 2005 guidelines for the treatment of skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs). The panel's recommendations were developed to be concordant with the recently published IDSA guidelines for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections. The focus of this guideline is the diagnosis and appropriate treatment of diverse SSTIs ranging from minor superficial infections to life-threatening infections such as necrotizing fasciitis. In addition, because of an increasing number of immunocompromised hosts worldwide, the guideline addresses the wide array of SSTIs that occur in this population. These guidelines emphasize the importance of clinical skills in promptly diagnosing SSTIs, identifying the pathogen, and administering effective treatments in a timely fashion.

Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft tissue infections: 2014 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

A panel of national experts was convened by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) to update the 2005 guidelines for the treatment of skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs). The panel's recommendations were developed to be concordant with the recently published IDSA guidelines for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections. The focus of this guideline is the diagnosis and appropriate treatment of diverse SSTIs ranging from minor superficial infections to life-threatening infections such as necrotizing fasciitis. In addition, because of an increasing number of immunocompromised hosts worldwide, the guideline addresses the wide array of SSTIs that occur in this population. These guidelines emphasize the importance of clinical skills in promptly diagnosing SSTIs, identifying the pathogen, and administering effective treatments in a timely fashion.

Central venous catheter care for the patient with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline.

PURPOSE: To develop an evidence-based guideline on central venous catheter (CVC) care for patients with cancer that addresses catheter type, insertion site, and placement as well as prophylaxis and management of both catheter-related infection and thrombosis. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library (1980 to July 2012) identified relevant articles published in English. RESULTS: The overall quality of the randomized controlled trial evidence was rated as good. There is consistency among meta-analyses and guidelines compiled by other groups as well. RECOMMENDATIONS: There is insufficient evidence to recommend one CVC type or insertion site; femoral catheterization should be avoided. CVC should be placed by well-trained providers, and the use of a CVC clinical care bundle is recommended. The use of antimicrobial/antiseptic-impregnated and/or heparin-impregnated CVCs is recommended to decrease the risk of catheter-related infections for short-term CVCs, particularly in high-risk groups; more research is needed. The prophylactic use of systemic antibiotics is not recommended before insertion. Data are not sufficient to recommend for or against routine use of antibiotic flush/lock therapy; more research is needed. Before starting antibiotic therapy, cultures should be obtained. Some life-threatening infections require immediate catheter removal, but most can be treated with antimicrobial therapy while the CVC remains in place. Routine flushing with saline is recommended. Prophylactic use of warfarin or low-molecular weight heparin is not recommended, although a tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) is recommended to restore patency to occluded catheters. CVC removal is recommended when the catheter is no longer needed or if there is a radiologically confirmed thrombosis that worsens despite anticoagulation therapy.

Low-dose total body irradiation and fludarabine conditioning for HLA class I-mismatched donor stem cell transplantation and immunologic recovery in patients with hematologic malignancies: a multicenter trial.

HLA-mismatched grafts are a viable alternative source for patients without HLA-matched donors receiving ablative hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), although their use in reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) or nonmyeloablative (NMA) conditioning HCT has been not well established. Here, we extended HCT to recipients of HLA class I-mismatched grafts to investigate whether NMA conditioning can establish stable donor engraftment. Fifty-nine patients were conditioned with fludarabine (Flu) 90 mg/m(2) and 2 Gy total body irradiation (TBI), followed by immunosuppression with cyclosporine (CsA) 5.0 mg/kg twice a day and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) 15 mg/kg 3 times a day for transplantation of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF)-mobilized peripheral blood stem cells (PBSCs) from related (n = 5) or unrelated donors (n = 54) with 1 antigen +/- 1 allele HLA class I mismatch or 2 HLA class I allele mismatches. Sustained donor engraftment was observed in 95% of the evaluable patients. The incidence of grade II-IV acute and extensive chronic graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD, cGVHD) was 69% and 41%, respectively. The cumulative probability of nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was 47% at 2 years. Two-year overall and progression-free survival (OS, PFS) was 29% and 28%, respectively. NMA conditioning with Flu and low-dose TBI, followed by HCT using HLA class I-mismatched donors leads to successful engraftment and long-term survival; however, the high incidence of aGVHD and NRM needs to be addressed by alternate GVHD prophylaxis regimens.

Five-year follow-up of patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia treated with allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation after nonmyeloablative conditioning.

PURPOSE: We reported encouraging early results of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) after nonmyeloablative conditioning in 64 patients who had advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Here, we have extended the follow-up to a median of 5 years and have included data on an additional 18 patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-two patients, age 42 to 72 years, who had fludarabine-refractory CLL were conditioned with 2 Gy total-body irradiation alone or combined with fludarabine followed by HCT from related (n = 52) or unrelated (n = 30) donors. RESULTS: Complete remission (CR) and partial remission were achieved in 55% and 15% of patients, respectively. Higher CR rates were noted after unrelated HCT (67% v 48%). The 5-year incidences of nonrelapse mortality (NRM), progression/relapse, overall survival, and progression-free survival were 23%, 38%, 50%, and 39%, respectively. Among 25 patients initially reported in CR, 8% relapsed and 8% died as a result of NRM, whereas 84% have remained alive and in CR. Among 14 responding patients who were tested and who had molecular eradication of their disease, two died as a result of NRM, two relapsed, and 10 have remained negative. At 5 years, 76% of living patients were entirely well, whereas 24% continued to receive immunosuppression for chronic graft-versus-host disease; the median performance status in each group was 100% and 90%, respectively. Lymphadenopathy > or = 5 cm, but not cytogenetic abnormalities at HCT, predicted relapse. In a risk-stratification model, patients who had lymphadenopathy less than 5 cm and no comorbidities had a 5-year OS of 71%. CONCLUSION: Nonmyeloablative HCT resulted in a median survival of 5 years for patients who had fludarabine-refractory CLL with sustained remissions and in the continued resolution of chronic graft-versus-host disease in surviving patients.

Reduced-intensity conditioning followed by allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for adult patients with myelodysplastic syndrome and myeloproliferative disorders.

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is the only curative strategy for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and myeloproliferative disorders (MPD). We report the results of 148 patients (median age = 59 years old) with de novo MDS (n = 40), acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) after antecedent MDS/MPD (n = 49), treatment-related MDS (t-MDS) (n = 25), MPD (n = 27), and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) (n = 7) who underwent allogeneic HCT using a conditioning regimen of low-dose total body irradiation (TBI) alone (200 cGy) on day 0 (n = 5) or with the addition of fludarabine (Flu) 30 mg/m(2)/day on days -4 to -2 (n = 143). Postgrafting immunosuppression consisted of cyclosporine and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF). Seventy-five patients (51%) received an allograft from a matched related donor (MRD), and 73 patients (49%) were recipients of unrelated donor (URD) grafts. There was no significant difference in the incidence of acute (gr II-IV) and chronic extensive graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD, cGVHD) between the recipients of related and unrelated donor grafts. By day +28, 75% of patients demonstrated mixed T cell chimerism. Graft rejection was seen in 15% of patients. With a median follow-up of 47 (range: 6-89) months, the 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) are both 27% for all patients, with a relapse incidence of 41%. The 3-year RFS for the patients with de novo MDS, AML after antecedent MDS/MPD, t-MDS, MPD, and CMML were 22%, 20%, 29%, 37%, and 43%, respectively, and the 3-year OS was 20%, 23%, 27%, 43%, and 43%, respectively. The 3-year nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was 32%. Factors associated with a lower risk of relapse were the development of extensive cGVHD and having a low risk or intermediate-1 risk International Prognostic Score for the de novo MDS patients. Nonmyeloablative HCT confers remissions in patients who otherwise were not eligible for conventional HCT but for whom relapse is the leading cause of treatment failure.

Nonmyeloablative allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in relapsed, refractory, and transformed indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Few effective treatment options exist for chemotherapy-refractory indolent or transformed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). We examined the outcome of nonmyeloablative allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-two patients with indolent or transformed NHL were treated with allogeneic HCT from related (n = 34) or unrelated (n = 28) donors after conditioning with 2 Gy of total-body irradiation with or without fludarabine. Nine unrelated donors were mismatched for >/= one HLA antigen. Sixteen patients had histologic transformation before HCT. Twenty patients (32%) had progressive disease after previous high-dose therapy with autologous HCT. Median age was 54 years, and patients had received a median of six lines of treatment before HCT. Median follow-up time after HCT was 36.6 months. RESULTS: At 3 years, the estimated overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 52% and 43%, respectively, for patients with indolent disease, and 18% and 21%, respectively, for patients with transformed disease. Patients with indolent disease and related donors (n = 26) had 3-year estimated OS and PFS rates of 67% and 54%, respectively. The incidences of grade 2 to 4 acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), grade 3 and 4 acute GVHD, and extensive chronic GVHD were 63%, 18%, and 47%, respectively. Among survivors, the median Karnofsky performance status at last follow-up was 85%. CONCLUSION: Nonmyeloablative allogeneic HCT can produce durable disease-free survival in patients with relapsed or refractory indolent NHL, even in this relatively elderly and heavily pretreated cohort. Outcomes were particularly good in patients with untransformed disease and related donors, whereas patients with transformed disease did poorly. Long-term survivors reported good overall functional status.

Extended mycophenolate mofetil and shortened cyclosporine failed to reduce graft-versus-host disease after unrelated hematopoietic cell transplantation with nonmyeloablative conditioning.

We previously reported data from 103 patients with hematologic malignancies (median age 54 years) who received peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) grafts from HLA-matched unrelated donors after nonmyeloablative conditioning and were given postgrafting immunosuppression consisting of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF; administered from day 0 until day +40 with taper through day +96) and cyclosporine (CSP; given from day -3 to day +100, with taper through day 180) (historical patients). The incidences of grade II-IV acute and extensive chronic graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD, cGVHD) were 52% and 49%, respectively, and the 1-year probabilities of relapse, nonrelapse mortality (NRM), and progression-free survival (PFS) were 26%, 18%, and 56%, respectively. Here, we treated 71 patients with hematologic malignancies (median age 56 years) with unrelated PBSC grafts and investigated whether postgrafting immunosuppression with an extended course of MMF, given at full dosing until day +150 and then tapered through day +180, and a shortened course of CSP, through day +80, would promote tolerance induction and reduce the incidence of GVHD (current patients). We observed 77% grade II-IV aGVHD and 45% extensive cGVHD (P=.03, and P=.43, respectively, in current compared to historical patients). The 1-year probabilities of relapse, NRM, and PFS were 23%, 29%, and 47%, respectively (P=.89, P=.02, and P=.08 compared to the historical patients). We conclude that postgrafting immunosuppression with extended MMF and shortened CSP failed to decrease the incidence of GVHD among unrelated PBSC recipients given nonmyeloablative conditioning.

Relapse risk in patients with malignant diseases given allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation after nonmyeloablative conditioning.

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) after nonmyeloablative conditioning for hematologic malignancies depends on graft-versus-tumor effects for eradication of cancer. Here, we estimated relapse risks according to disease characteristics. Between 1997 and 2006, 834 consecutive patients (median age, 55 years; range, 5-74 years) received related (n = 498) or unrelated (n = 336) HCT after 2 Gy total body irradiation alone (n = 171) or combined with fludarabine (90 mg/m(2); n = 663). Relapse rates per patient year (PY) at risk, corrected for follow-up and competing nonrelapse mortality, were calculated for 29 different diseases and stages. The overall relapse rate per PY was 0.36. Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and multiple myeloma (MM) in remission (CR), low-grade or mantle cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) (CR + partial remission [PR]), and high-grade NHL-CR had the lowest rates (0.00-0.24; low risk). In contrast, patients with advanced myeloid and lymphoid malignancies had rates of more than 0.52 (high risk). Patients with lymphoproliferative diseases not in CR (except Hodgkin lymphoma and high-grade NHL) and myeloid malignancies in CR had rates of 0.26-0.37 (standard risk). In conclusion, patients with low-grade lymphoproliferative disorders experienced the lowest relapse rates, whereas patients with advanced myeloid and lymphoid malignancies had high relapse rates after nonmyeloablative HCT. The latter might benefit from cytoreductive treatment before HCT.

Viral infections in patients with hematological malignancies.

Viral infections are important causes of morbidity and mortality for patients with a hematological malignancy. However, the true incidence and consequences of viral infections for these patients who undergo conventional nontransplant therapy are poorly defined. The difference in incidence and outcome of viral infections among patient groups is wide, but dependent upon the intensity and duration of T-cell-mediated immune suppression. Infections caused by cytomegalovirus (CMV), herpes simplex virus (HSV), varicella-zoster virus (VZV), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), parainfluenza viruses and influenza viruses have been intensely studied, yet newly recognized aspects of these viral infections including late CMV infection; the emergence of new viral pathogens (human herpesvirus-6, BK virus, adenovirus, and human metapneumovirus); the development of molecular diagnostic techniques, and the potential of new agents for viral prophylaxis (maribavir), or preemptive therapy (valganciclovir) form the basis of this review. Well-designed prospective studies are needed to better clarify the spectrum of these viral infections and develop effective prevention and treatment strategies. Yet the increased use of agents like alemtuzumab that induce profound T-cell depletion demands that we develop a better understanding of viral infections that occur in patients with hematological malignancy who receive nontransplant therapy.

2006 update of recommendations for the use of white blood cell growth factors: an evidence-based clinical practice guideline.

PURPOSE: To update the 2000 American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on the use of hematopoietic colony-stimulating factors (CSF). UPDATE METHODOLOGY: The Update Committee completed a review and analysis of pertinent data published from 1999 through September 2005. Guided by the 1996 ASCO clinical outcomes criteria, the Update Committee formulated recommendations based on improvements in survival, quality of life, toxicity reduction and cost-effectiveness. RECOMMENDATIONS: The 2005 Update Committee agreed unanimously that reduction in febrile neutropenia (FN) is an important clinical outcome that justifies the use of CSFs, regardless of impact on other factors, when the risk of FN is approximately 20% and no other equally effective regimen that does not require CSFs is available. Primary prophylaxis is recommended for the prevention of FN in patients who are at high risk based on age, medical history, disease characteristics, and myelotoxicity of the chemotherapy regimen. CSF use allows a modest to moderate increase in dose-density and/or dose-intensity of chemotherapy regimens. Dose-dense regimens should only be used within an appropriately designed clinical trial or if supported by convincing efficacy data. Prophylactic CSF for patients with diffuse aggressive lymphoma aged 65 years and older treated with curative chemotherapy (CHOP or more aggressive regimens) should be given to reduce the incidence of FN and infections. Current recommendations for the management of patients exposed to lethal doses of total body radiotherapy, but not doses high enough to lead to certain death due to injury to other organs, includes the prompt administration of CSF or pegylated G-CSF.

Ciprofloxacin plus piperacillin compared with tobramycin plus piperacillin as empirical therapy in febrile neutropenic patients. A randomized, double-blind trial.

BACKGROUND: Therapy with an aminoglycoside and a beta-lactam remains common empirical therapy for febrile neutropenic patients. Concerns of aminoglycoside-induced ototoxicity and nephrotoxicity have led to studies of alternate regimens. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether ciprofloxacin-piperacillin is equivalent to tobramycin-piperacillin as empirical therapy for neutropenic fever. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind multicenter trial. SETTING: Seven U.S. university-affiliated hospitals and one private research center. PATIENTS: Febrile (temperature >/= 38 degrees C), neutropenic (neutrophil level < 1 x 10(9) cells/L) hospitalized patients who had leukemia, lymphoma, or solid tumors, or were undergoing bone marrow transplantation. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received piperacillin, 50 mg/kg of body weight intravenously every 4 hours, and ciprofloxacin, 400 mg intravenously every 8 hours, or tobramycin, 2 mg/kg intravenously every 8 hours. MEASUREMENTS: Success was defined as resolution of infection and previously positive cultures without the need to give additional antimicrobial agents. RESULTS: 543 febrile episodes were evaluated, of which 471 were clinically evaluable (234 in the ciprofloxacin-piperacillin group and 237 in the tobramycin-piperacillin group). Success rates in the ciprofloxacin-piperacillin group (63 of 234 febrile episodes) and tobramycin-piperacillin group (52 of 237 episodes) were similar (27% vs. 22%, respectively; difference, 5.0 percentage points [95% CI, -2.3 to 12.8 percentage points]), as was survival (96.2% of patients receiving ciprofloxacin-piperacillin versus 94.1% of patients receiving tobramycin-piperacillin; difference, 2.1 percentage points [CI, -2.2 to 6.4 percentage points]). Additions to the initial antimicrobial regimen were the most common reason for treatment failure in both groups (accounting for 67% of failures in the ciprofloxacin-piperacillin group and 72% in the tobramycin-piperacillin group; difference, 5.0 percentage points [CI, -13.8 to 3.7 percentage points]). Fevers resolved faster in patients receiving ciprofloxacin-piperacillin than in patients receiving tobramycin-piperacillin (mean, 5 vs. 6 days) (P = 0.005). No significant differences in adverse events or toxicity were noted (P = 0.083). CONCLUSION: Ciprofloxacin-piperacillin is as safe and effective as tobramycin-piperacillin for empirical therapy of neutropenic fever.