Panel stacking is a threat to consensus statement validity.

Consensus statements can be very influential in medicine and public health. Some of these statements use systematic evidence synthesis but others fail on this front. Many consensus statements use panels of experts to deduce perceived consensus through Delphi processes. We argue that stacking of panel members towards one particular position or narrative is a major threat, especially in absence of systematic evidence review. Stacking may involve financial conflicts of interest, but non-financial conflicts of strong advocacy can also cause major bias. Given their emerging importance, we describe here how such consensus statements may be misleading, by analysing in depth a recent high-impact Delphi consensus statement on COVID-19 recommendations as a case example. We demonstrate that many of the selected panel members and at least 35% of the core panel members had advocated towards COVID-19 elimination (zero-COVID) during the pandemic and were leading members of aggressive advocacy groups. These advocacy conflicts were not declared in the Delphi consensus publication, with rare exceptions. Therefore, we propose that consensus statements should always require rigorous evidence synthesis and maximal transparency on potential biases towards advocacy or lobbyist groups to be valid. While advocacy can have many important functions, its biased impact on consensus panels should be carefully avoided.

One Health-Its Importance in Helping to Better Control Antimicrobial Resistance.

Approaching any issue from a One Health perspective necessitates looking at the interactions of people, domestic animals, wildlife, plants, and our environment. For antimicrobial resistance this includes antimicrobial use (and abuse) in the human, animal and environmental sectors. More importantly, the spread of resistant bacteria and resistance determinants within and between these sectors and globally must be addressed. Better managing this problem includes taking steps to preserve the continued effectiveness of existing antimicrobials such as trying to eliminate their inappropriate use, particularly where they are used in high volumes. Examples are the mass medication of animals with critically important antimicrobials for humans, such as third generation cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones, and the long term, in-feed use of antimicrobials, such colistin, tetracyclines and macrolides, for growth promotion. In people it is essential to better prevent infections, reduce over-prescribing and over-use of antimicrobials and stop resistant bacteria from spreading by improving hygiene and infection control, drinking water and sanitation. Pollution from inadequate treatment of industrial, residential and farm waste is expanding the resistome in the environment. Numerous countries and several international agencies have now included a One Health Approach within their action plans to address antimicrobial resistance. Necessary actions include improvements in antimicrobial use, better regulation and policy, as well as improved surveillance, stewardship, infection control, sanitation, animal husbandry, and finding alternatives to antimicrobials.

Antimicrobial Resistance: a One Health Perspective.

One Health is the collaborative effort of multiple health science professions to attain optimal health for people, domestic animals, wildlife, plants, and our environment. The drivers of antimicrobial resistance include antimicrobial use and abuse in human, animal, and environmental sectors and the spread of resistant bacteria and resistance determinants within and between these sectors and around the globe. Most of the classes of antimicrobials used to treat bacterial infections in humans are also used in animals. Given the important and interdependent human, animal, and environmental dimensions of antimicrobial resistance, it is logical to take a One Health approach when addressing this problem. This includes taking steps to preserve the continued effectiveness of existing antimicrobials by eliminating their inappropriate use and by limiting the spread of infection. Major concerns in the animal health and agriculture sectors are mass medication of animals with antimicrobials that are critically important for humans, such as third-generation cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones, and the long-term, in-feed use of medically important antimicrobials, such as colistin, tetracyclines, and macrolides, for growth promotion. In the human sector it is essential to prevent infections, reduce over-prescribing of antimicrobials, improve sanitation, and improve hygiene and infection control. Pollution from inadequate treatment of industrial, residential, and farm waste is expanding the resistome in the environment. Numerous countries and several international agencies have included a One Health approach within their action plans to address antimicrobial resistance. Necessary actions include improvements in antimicrobial use regulation and policy, surveillance, stewardship, infection control, sanitation, animal husbandry, and alternatives to antimicrobials. WHO recently has launched new guidelines on the use of medically important antimicrobials in food-producing animals, recommending that farmers and the food industry stop using antimicrobials routinely to promote growth and prevent disease in healthy animals. These guidelines aim to help preserve the effectiveness of antimicrobials that are important for human medicine by reducing their use in animals.

World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines on use of medically important antimicrobials in food-producing animals.

Background: Antimicrobial use in food-producing animals selects for antimicrobial resistance that can be transmitted to humans via food or other transmission routes. The World Health Organization (WHO) in 2005 ranked the medical importance of antimicrobials used in humans. In late 2017, to preserve the effectiveness of medically important antimicrobials for humans, WHO released guidelines on use of antimicrobials in food-producing animals that incorporated the latest WHO rankings. Methods: WHO commissioned systematic reviews and literature reviews, and convened a Guideline Development Group (GDG) of external experts free of unacceptable conflicts-of-interest. The GDG assessed the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, and formulated recommendations using a structured evidence-to-decision approach that considered the balance of benefits and harms, feasibility, resource implications, and impact on equity. The resulting guidelines were peer-reviewed by an independent External Review Group and approved by the WHO Guidelines Review Committee. Results: These guidelines recommend reductions in the overall use of medically important antimicrobials in food-producing animals, including complete restriction of use of antimicrobials for growth promotion and for disease prevention (i.e., in healthy animals considered at risk of infection). These guidelines also recommend that antimicrobials identified as critically important for humans not be used in food-producing animals for treatment or disease control unless susceptibility testing demonstrates the drug to be the only treatment option. Conclusions: To preserve the effectiveness of medically important antimicrobials, veterinarians, farmers, regulatory agencies, and all other stakeholders are urged to adopt these recommendations and work towards implementation of these guidelines.

Does Lyme disease exist in Australia?

There is no convincing evidence that classic Lyme disease occurs in Australia, nor is there evidence that the causative agent, Borrelia burgdorferi, is found in Australian animals or ticks. Lyme disease, however, can be acquired overseas but diagnosed in Australia; most people presenting with laboratory-confirmed Lyme disease in Australia were infected in Europe. Despite the lack of evidence that Lyme disease can be acquired in Australia, growing numbers of patients, their supporters, and some politicians demand diagnoses and treatment according to the protocols of the "chronic Lyme disease" school of thought. Antibiotic therapy for chronic "Lyme disease-like illness" can cause harm to both the individual (eg, cannula-related intravenous sepsis) and the broader community (increased antimicrobial resistance rates). Until there is strong evidence from well performed clinical studies that bacteria present in Australia cause a chronic debilitating illness that responds to prolonged antibiotics, treating patients with "Lyme disease-like illness" with prolonged antibiotic therapy is unjustified, and is likely to do much more harm than good.

World Health Organization Ranking of Antimicrobials According to Their Importance in Human Medicine: A Critical Step for Developing Risk Management Strategies to Control Antimicrobial Resistance From Food Animal Production.

Antimicrobial use in food animals selects for antimicrobial resistance in bacteria, which can spread to people. Reducing use of antimicrobials-particularly those deemed to be critically important for human medicine-in food production animals continues to be an important step for preserving the benefits of these antimicrobials for people. The World Health Organization ranking of antimicrobials according to their relative importance in human medicine was recently updated. Antimicrobials considered the highest priority among the critically important antimicrobials were quinolones, third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins, macrolides and ketolides, and glycopeptides. The updated ranking allows stakeholders in the agriculture sector and regulatory agencies to focus risk management efforts on drugs used in food animals that are the most important to human medicine. In particular, the current large-scale use of fluoroquinolones, macrolides, and third-generation cephalosporins and any potential use of glycopeptides and carbapenems need to be addressed urgently.

Community-onset Staphylococcus aureus Surveillance Programme annual report, 2012.

In 2012, the Australian Group on Antimicrobial Resistance (AGAR) conducted a community-onset period-prevalence survey of clinical Staphylococcus aureus isolated from hospital outpatients and general practice patients including nursing homes, long term care facilities and hospice patients. Day surgery and dialysis patients were excluded. Twenty-nine medical microbiology laboratories from all state and mainland territories participated. Isolates were tested by Vitek2® (AST-P612 card). Results were compared with previous AGAR community surveys. Nationally, the proportion of S. aureus that were methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) increased significantly from 11.5% in 2000 to 17.9% in 2012 (P<0.0001). Resistance to the non-ß-lactam antimicrobials varied between regions. No resistance was detected to vancomycin, teicoplanin or linezolid. Resistance in methicillin susceptible S. aureus was rare apart from erythromycin (12.8%) and was absent for vancomycin, teicoplanin, linezolid and daptomycin. The proportion of S. aureus characterised as health care-associated MRSA (HA-MRSA) was 5.1%. Three HA-MRSA clones were characterised, with 72.9% and 26.4% of HA-MRSA classified as ST22-IV [2B] (EMRSA-15) and ST239-III [3A] (Aus-2/3 EMRSA) respectively. Multi-clonal community-associated MRSA (CA-MRSA) accounted for 12.5% of all S. aureus. Regional variation in resistance in MRSA was primarily due to the differential distribution of the 2 major HA-MRSA clones; ST239-III [3A] (Aus-2/3 EMRSA), which is resistant to multiple non-ß-lactam antimicrobials, and ST22-IV [2B] (EMRSA-15), which is resistant to ciprofloxacin and typically erythromycin. Although the majority of CA-MRSA were non-multi-resistant, a significant expansion of Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL) positive CA-MRSA clones has occurred nationally. The mean age of patients (31.7 years, 95% CI 28.9-34.5) with a PVL positive CA-MRSA infection was significantly lower (P<0.0001), than the mean age of patients with a PVL negative CA-MRSA infection (55.7 years, 95% CI 50.7-60.6). This shift in the molecular epidemiology of MRSA clones in the Australian community will potentially increase the number of young Australians with skin and soft tissue infections requiring hospitalisation.

A major reduction in hospital-onset Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia in Australia-12 years of progress: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) is a serious cause of morbidity and mortality. This longitudinal study describes significant reductions in hospital-onset SAB (HO-SAB) in Australian hospitals over the past 12 years. METHODS: An observational cohort study design was used. Prospective surveillance of HO-SAB in 132 hospitals in Australia was undertaken. Aggregated data from all patients who acquired HO-SAB was collected (defined as 1 or more blood cultures positive for S. aureus taken from a patient who had been admitted to hospital for >48 hours). The primary outcome was the incidence of HO-SAB, including both methicillin-resistant (MRSA) and methicillin-susceptible (MSSA) S. aureus strains. RESULTS: A total of 2733 HO-SAB cases were identified over the study period, giving an aggregate incidence of 0.90 per 10 000 patient-days (PDs) (95% confidence interval [CI], .86-.93). There was a 63% decrease in the annual incidence, from 1.72 per 10 000 PDs in 2002 (95% CI, 1.50-1.97) to 0.64 per 10 000 PDs (95% CI, .53-.76) in 2013. The mean reduction per year was 9.4% (95% CI, -8.1% to -10.7%). Significant reductions in both HO-MRSA (from 0.77 to 0.18 per 10 000 PDs) and HO-MSSA (from 1.71 to 0.64 per 10 000 PDs) bacteremia were observed. CONCLUSIONS: There was a major and significant reduction in incidence of HO-SAB caused by both MRSA and MSSA in Australian hospitals since 2002. This reduction coincided with a range of infection prevention and control activities implemented during this time. It suggests that national and local efforts to reduce the burden of healthcare-associated infections have been very successful.

Australian Staphylococcus aureus Sepsis Outcome Programme annual report, 2013.

From 1 January to 31 December 2013, around Australia 26 institutions around Australia participated in the Australian Staphylococcal Sepsis Outcome Programme (ASSOP). The aim of ASSOP 2013 was to determine the proportion of Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (SAB) isolates in Australia that are antimicrobial resistant, (with particular emphasis on susceptibility to methicillin) and to characterise the molecular epidemiology of the isolates. Overall 19.1% of the 2,010 SAB episodes were methicillin resistant, which is significantly higher than that reported in most European countries. Although the SAB 30-day all cause mortality appears to be decreasing in Australia, methicillin-resistant SAB associated mortality remains high (20.1%) and was significantly higher than methicillin-sensitive SAB associated mortality (13%) (P< 0.0001). With the exception of the ß-lactams and erythromycin, antimicrobial resistance in methicillin sensitive S. aureus remains rare. However, in addition to the ß-lactams, approximately 50% of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) were resistant to erythromycin and ciprofloxacin and approximately 20% were resistant to co-trimoxazole, tetracycline and gentamicin. Linezolid, daptomycin and teicoplanin resistance was detected in a small number of S. aureus isolates. Resistance to vancomycin was not detected. Resistance was largely attributable to 2 healthcare associated MRSA clones; ST22-IV [2B] (EMRSA-15) and ST239-III [3A] (Aus-2/3 EMRSA). ST22-IV [2B] (EMRSA-15) has now become the predominant healthcare associated clone in Australia. Approximately 60% of methicillin-resistant SAB were due to community associated clones. Although polyclonal, almost 50% of community associated clones were characterised as ST93-IV [2B] (Queensland CA-MRSA) and ST1-IV [2B] (WA1). CA-MRSA, in particular the ST45-V [5C2&5] (WA84) clone, has acquired multiple antimicrobial resistance determinants including ciprofloxacin, erythromycin, clindamycin, gentamicin and tetracycline. As CA-MRSA is well established in the Australian community, it is important antimicrobial resistance patterns in community and healthcare associated SAB is monitored as this information will guide therapeutic practices in treating S. aureus sepsis.

Antimicrobial susceptibility of Staphylococcus aureus and molecular epidemiology of meticillin-resistant S. aureus isolated from Australian hospital inpatients: Report from the Australian Group on Antimicrobial Resistance 2011 Staphylococcus aureus Surveillance Programme.

The Australian Group on Antimicrobial Resistance (AGAR) performs regular multicentre period prevalence studies to monitor changes in antimicrobial resistance. In 2011, 29 laboratories in Australia participated in the national surveillance of Staphylococcus aureus resistance. The survey only included unique isolates from clinical specimens collected ≥48h after hospital admission. MRSA accounted for 30.3% of S. aureus isolates. MRSA resistance to ciprofloxacin, erythromycin, tetracycline, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, gentamicin and clindamycin (constitutive resistance) varied considerably between regions. Resistance to non-ß-lactam antimicrobials was uncommon in MSSA, with the exception of erythromycin. Regional variation in resistance was due to the differential distribution of MRSA clones between regions. The proportion of S. aureus genetically characterised as healthcare-associated MRSA (HA-MRSA) was significantly lower in this survey (18.2%) compared with the 2005 survey (24.2%) (P<0.0001). Although four HA-MRSA clones were characterised, 98.8% of HA-MRSA were classified as either ST22-MRSA-IV [2B] (EMRSA-15) or ST239-MRSA-III [3A] (Aus-2/3 EMRSA). Multiclonal community-associated MRSA (CA-MRSA) increased markedly from 6.5% in 2005 to 11.7% of all S. aureus in 2011 (P<0.0001). Although the proportion of MRSA resistant to non-ß-lactam antimicrobials has decreased nationally, the proportion of S. aureus that are MRSA has remained stable. This is primarily due to non-multiresistant CA-MRSA becoming more common in Australian hospitals at the expense of the long-established multiresistant ST239-MRSA-III [3A] (Aus-2/3 EMRSA). Given hospital outbreaks of CA-MRSA are thought to be extremely rare, it is most likely that patients colonised at admission with CA-MRSA have become infected with the colonising strain during their hospital stay.

Australian Group on Antimicrobial Resistance Hospital-onset Staphylococcus aureus Surveillance Programme annual report, 2011.

In 2011, the Australian Group on Antimicrobial Resistance (AGAR) conducted a period-prevalence survey of clinical Staphylococcus aureus isolated from hospital inpatients. Twenty-nine microbiology laboratories from all states and mainland territories participated. Specimens were collected more than 48 hours post-admission. Isolates were tested by Vitek2® antimicrobial susceptibility card (AST-P612 card). Nationally, the proportion of S. aureus that were methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) was 30.3%; ranging from 19.9% in Western Australia to 36.8% in New South Wales/Australian Capital Territory. Resistance to the non-ß-lactam antimicrobials was common except for rifampicin, fusidic acid, high-level mupirocin and daptomycin. No resistance was detected for vancomycin, teicoplanin or linezolid. Antibiotic resistance in methicillin susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) was rare apart from erythromycin (13.2%) and there was no resistance to vancomycin, teicoplanin or linezolid. Inducible clindamycin resistance was the norm for erythromycin resistant, clindamycin intermediate/susceptible S. aureus in Australia with 90.6% of MRSA and 83.1% of MSSA with this phenotype having a positive double disc diffusion test (D-test). The proportion of S. aureus characterised as being healthcare-associated MRSA (HA-MRSA) was 18.2%, ranging from 4.5% in Western Australia to 28.0% in New South Wales/Australian Capital Territory. Four HA-MRSA clones were characterised and 98.8% of HA-MRSA isolates were classified as either ST22-IV [2B] (EMRSA-15) or ST239-III [3A] (Aus-2/3 EMRSA). Multiclonal community-associated MRSA (CA-MRSA) accounted for 11.7% of all S. aureus. In Australia, regional variation in resistance is due to the differential distribution of MRSA clones between regions, particularly for the major HA-MRSA clone, ST239-III [3A] (Aus-2/3 EMRSA), which is resistant to multiple non-ß-lactam antimicrobials.