Prevalence and clinical implications of bloodstream infections in intensive care patients with or without burn injury: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: Severe burn injuries are often accompanied by infections and associated with high morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to compare the prevalence and clinical impact of bacteremia between patients receiving intensive care with and without burns. METHODS: This single-center retrospective cohort study at the University Hospital Vienna, Austria, analyzed blood cultures from intensive care unit (ICU) patients with and without burns (2012-2022) to assess the prevalence of bacteremia, the associated pathogen distribution and the 60-day all-cause mortality. RESULTS: In 1170 ICU patients, 303 with burns and 867 without, the prevalence of bacteremia was similar among patients with at least one blood culture (31/157 [19.7%] versus 44/213 [20.7%], OR [95%CI] = 0.95 [0.57-1.57]). Burn patients exhibited a significantly higher frequency of microbiological sampling (51.5% versus 24.5%, p < 0.001), resulting in a higher overall prevalence of bacteremia (10.2% versus 5.1%, p = 0.002). 16.2% of all identified pathogens were multidrug-resistant (MDR). The 60-day all-cause mortality was higher in patients with MDR pathogens than in patients without bacteremia (41.7% versus 10.6%, p = 0.026). CONCLUSION: Bacteremia prevalence was similar in burn and non-burn patients, with high rates of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative pathogens. The 60-day all-cause mortality was significantly higher in patients with MDR pathogens than in patients without bacteremia.

Association of prediabetes with clinical outcomes in patients with chronic coronary syndrome: a post hoc analysis of the ISCHEMIA and ISCHEMIA-CKD trials.

BACKGROUND: There is conflicting evidence whether prediabetes is associated with adverse clinical outcomes in patients with chronic coronary syndrome. We aimed to assess the effect of prediabetes in patients with chronic coronary syndrome on clinical outcomes. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of data from the ISCHEMIA and ISCHEMIA-CKD trials, including patients with chronic coronary syndrome determined by coronary computed tomography angiography or exercise-stress testing. Participants were assigned to the normoglycemia group (HbA1c < 5.7% [< 39 mmol/mol]), prediabetes group (HbA1c 5.7-6.4% [40-47 mmol/mol]), or diabetes group (HbA1c ≥ 6.5% [≥ 48 mmol/mol]). The primary end point of this study was all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints included major adverse cardiovascular events and composites thereof. RESULTS: Overall, the primary endpoint all-cause mortality occurred in 330 (8.4%) of 3910 patients over a median follow-up time of 3.1 years (IQR 2.1-4.1). The primary endpoint all-cause mortality occurred in 37 (5.2%) of 716 patients in the normoglycemia group, in 63 (6.9%) of 911 in the prediabetes group, and in 230 (10.1%) of 2283 in the diabetes group. In the covariate-adjusted Cox model analysis, the estimated adjusted HR (aHR) in the prediabetes group as compared with the normoglycemia group was 1.45 (95%CI, 0.95-2.20). The aHR in the diabetes group as compared with the normoglycemia group was 1.84 (95%CI, 1.29-2.65). Prediabetes, compared with normoglycemia, was associated with an increased risk of stroke (aHR, 3.44, 95%CI, 1.15-10.25). Subgroup analyses suggested an increased risk of all-cause death associated with prediabetes in males and patients under 65 years. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic coronary syndrome, diabetes but not prediabetes was associated with significantly increased risk of all-cause death within a median follow-up period of 3.1 years. Trial Registration NCT01471522, BioLINCC ID 13936.

Immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 booster vaccination: A population-based clinical trial to identify the best vaccination strategy.

BACKGROUND: Various SARS-CoV-2 variants of concerns (VOCs) characterized by higher transmissibility and immune evasion have emerged. Despite reduced vaccine efficacy against VOCs, currently available vaccines provide protection. Population-based evidence on the humoral immune response after booster vaccination is crucial to guide future vaccination strategies and in preparation for imminent COVID-19 waves. METHODS: This multicenter, population-based cohort study included 4697 individuals ≥18 years of age who received a booster vaccination. Antibody levels against SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain (RBD) and neutralizing antibodies against wild-type (WT) virus and Omicron variants were assessed at baseline (day of booster vaccination) and after four weeks. Safety was evaluated daily within the first week using a participant-completed electronic diary. Antibody levels were compared across different vaccination strategies, taking into account individual host factors. RESULTS: Our main model including 3838 participants revealed that individuals who received a booster with mRNA-1273 compared to BNT162b2 vaccine had a significantly higher increase (95 %CI) in anti-RBD-antibody levels (37,707 BAU/mL [34,575-40,839] vs. 27,176 BAU/mL [26,265-28,087]), and of neutralization levels against WT (1,681 [1490-1872] vs. 1141 [1004-1278] and Omicron variant (422 [369-474] vs. 329 [284-374]). Neutralizing antibody titres highly correlated with anti-RBD antibodies, with neutralizing capacity 4.4 fold higher against WT compared to Omicron. No differences in safety were found between the two booster vaccines. CONCLUSION: Our study underlines the superiority of a booster vaccination with mRNA-1273, independent of the primary vaccination and therefore provides guidance on the vaccination strategy.

Pharmacokinetics of isavuconazole at different target sites in healthy volunteers after single and multiple intravenous infusions.

BACKGROUND: Invasive aspergillosis is a severe fungal infection that affects multiple organ systems including the CNS and the lungs. Isavuconazole, a novel triazole antifungal agent, has demonstrated promising activity against Aspergillus spp. However, data on the penetration of isavuconazole into the CNS and ELF and intracellular accumulation remain limited. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective single-centre pharmacokinetic (PK) study in 12 healthy volunteers. Subjects received seven doses of 200 mg isavuconazole to achieve an assumed steady-state. After the first and final infusion, plasma sampling was conducted over 8 and 12 h, respectively. All subjects underwent one lumbar puncture and bronchoalveolar lavage, at either 2, 6 or 12 h post-infusion of the final dose. PBMCs were collected in six subjects from blood to determine intracellular isavuconazole concentrations at 6, 8 or 12 h. The AUC/MIC was calculated for an MIC value of 1 mg/L, which marks the EUCAST susceptibility breakpoint for Aspergillus fumigatus and Aspergillus flavus. RESULTS: C max and AUC0-24h of isavuconazole in plasma under assumed steady-state conditions were 6.57 ±â€Š1.68 mg/L (mean ±â€ŠSD) and 106 ±â€Š32.1 h·mg/L, respectively. The average concentrations measured in CSF, ELF and in PBMCs were 0.07 ±â€Š0.03, 0.94 ±â€Š0.46 and 27.1 ±â€Š17.8 mg/L, respectively. The AUC/MIC in plasma, CSF, ELF and in PBMCs under steady-state conditions were 106 ±â€Š32.1, 1.68 ±â€Š0.72, 22.6 ±â€Š11.0 and 650 ±â€Š426 mg·h/L, respectively. CONCLUSION: Isavuconazole demonstrated moderate penetration into ELF, low penetrability into CSF and high accumulation in PBMCs. Current dosing regimens resulted in sufficient plasma exposure in all subjects to treat isolates with MICs ≤ 1 mg/L.

Phase I dose-escalation study to assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of an inhaled recombinant human ACE2.

Background: APN01 is a soluble recombinant human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (rhACE2), a key player in the renin-aldosterone-angiotensin system (RAAS). In clinical studies, APN01 was administered intravenously only, so far. The aim of this study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05065645) was to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of inhaled APN01. Methods: This was a phase I, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study. Inhalation was conducted via a nebuliser over 15 min in three single ascending dose (SAD) cohorts (n=24) and two multiple ascending dose (MAD) cohorts (n=16: every 12 h for 7 days). Doses in the SAD cohort were 1.25, 2.5 and 5 mg·mL-1; doses in the MAD cohort were 2.5 and 5 mg·mL-1. Safety (including adverse events (AEs), laboratory findings and lung function results), PK and PD data were assessed. Results: In the SAD and MAD cohorts, treatment-related AEs were slightly more frequent in the active treatment group than in the placebo group. AEs were mild to moderate, with no dose-limiting toxicities. No clinically relevant changes in lung function and laboratory results were observed. The mean maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) values after single and multiple doses of 5 mg·mL-1 APN01 were 1.88 and 6.61 ng·mL-1, respectively. Among the PD variables, significance was found for ACE2 and angiotensin 1-5. Conclusions: The application of aerosolised APN01 is safe and well tolerated after single and multiple doses. By achieving a high local concentration in the lungs and low systemic bioavailability, inhaled rhACE2 may present a therapeutic option in ACE2-related diseases.

Community-acquired and hospital-acquired bacterial co-infections in patients hospitalized with Covid-19 or influenza: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Bacterial co-infections are believed to be less frequent in patients with Covid-19 than influenza, but frequencies varied between studies. METHODS: This single-center retrospective, propensity score-matched analysis included adult patients with Covid-19 or influenza admitted to normal-care wards between 02/2014 and 12/2021. Covid-19 cases were propensity score matched to influenza cases at a 2:1 ratio. Community-acquired and hospital-acquired bacterial co-infections were defined as positive blood or respiratory cultures ≤ 48 h or > 48 h after hospital admission, respectively. The primary outcome was comparison of community-acquired and hospital-acquired bacterial infections between patients with Covid-19 and influenza in the propensity score-matched cohort. Secondary outcomes included frequency of early and late microbiological testing. RESULTS: A total of 1337 patients were included in the overall analysis, of which 360 patients with Covid-19 were matched to 180 patients with influenza. Early (≤ 48 h) microbiological sampling was performed in 138 (38.3%) patients with Covid-19 and 75 (41.7%) patients with influenza. Community-acquired bacterial co-infections were found in 14 (3.9%) of 360 patients with Covid-19 and 7 (3.9%) of 180 patients with influenza (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.3-2.7). Late (> 48 h) microbiological sampling was performed in 129 (35.8%) patients with Covid-19 and 74 (41.1%) patients with influenza. Hospital-acquired bacterial co-infections were found in 40 (11.1%) of 360 patients with Covid-19 and 20 (11.1%) of 180 patients with influenza (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.5-1.8). CONCLUSION: The rate of community-acquired and hospital-acquired bacterial co-infections was similar in hospitalized Covid-19 and influenza patients. These findings contrast previous literature reporting that bacterial co-infections are less common in Covid-19 than influenza.

Efficacy and Safety of Corticosteroid Therapy for Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression of Randomized, Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. In the present study, we aimed to assess the effect of corticosteroids on all-cause mortality in patients hospitalized with CAP. METHODS: For this meta-analysis and meta-regression, we conducted a systematic search of trials that evaluated the effect of corticosteroid therapy in patients hospitalized with CAP through March 2023. We included randomized, controlled trials, comparing adjunctive corticosteroid therapy with the standard of care alone for treatment of patients hospitalized with CAP and reporting all-cause mortality. We excluded retrospective analyses, observational data, and trial protocols. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 30 days after hospital admission. The safety analysis included the frequency of adverse events and steroid-associated adverse events. RESULTS: The literature search identified 35 713 citations, of which 15 studies and 3367 patients were eligible for the final analysis. The all-cause mortality at 30 days was significantly lower in the corticosteroid group (104 of 1690, 6.15%) than in the control group (152 of 1677, 9.06%; risk ratio [RR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], .53 to .85; P = .001; I2 = 0%). In 9 studies (2549 patients) that reported the occurrence of adverse events, corticosteroid therapy was not associated with an increased risk of developing any adverse event compared with standard care (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, .65 to 1.24; P = .5; I2 = 88%). CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive systemic corticosteroid therapy in patients hospitalized with CAP was associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality by day 30. The benefits were more pronounced in patients with severe pneumonia.

Association between reactogenicity and immunogenicity after BNT162b2 booster vaccination: a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: A weak correlation between symptom severity and antibody levels after primary immunization against COVID-19 has already been shown. This study aimed to describe the association between reactogenicity and immunogenicity after booster vaccination. METHODS: This secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study included 484 healthcare workers who received a booster vaccination with BNT162b2. Anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) antibodies were assessed at baseline and 28 days after booster vaccination. Side effects were graded (none, mild, moderate, or severe) and reported daily for 7 days after booster vaccination. Spearman correlation coefficient (rho) was used to determine the correlations between the severity of each symptom and anti-RBD levels before vaccination and 28 days after. The Bonferroni method was used to adjust p values for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: Most of the 484 participants reported at least one local (451 [93.2%]) or systemic (437 [90.3%]) post-booster symptom. No correlations between the severity of local symptoms and antibody levels were found. Except for nausea, systemic symptoms showed weak but statistically significant correlations with 28-day anti-RBD levels (fatigue [rho = 0.23, p < 0.01], fever [rho = 22, p < 0.01], headache [rho = 0.15, p 0.03], arthralgia [rho = 0.2, p < 0.01], myalgia [rho = 0.17, p < 0.01]). There was no association between post-booster symptoms and pre-booster antibody levels. DISCUSSION: This study showed only a weak correlation between the severity of systemic post-booster symptoms and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels at 28 days. Therefore, self-reported symptom severity cannot be used to predict immunogenicity after booster vaccination.

Early Bacterial Coinfections in Patients Admitted to the ICU With COVID-19 or Influenza: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Previous findings suggest that bacterial coinfections are less common in ICU patients with COVID-19 than with influenza, but evidence is limited. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the rate of early bacterial coinfections in ICU patients with COVID-19 or influenza. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective propensity score matched cohort study. We included patients admitted to ICUs of a single academic center with COVID-19 or influenza (January 2015 to April 2022). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was early bacterial coinfection (i.e., positive blood or respiratory culture within 2 d of ICU admission) in the propensity score matched cohort. Key secondary outcomes included frequency of early microbiological testing, antibiotic use, and 30-day all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Out of 289 patients with COVID-19 and 39 patients with influenza, 117 (n = 78 vs 39) were included in the matched analysis. In the matched cohort, the rate of early bacterial coinfections was similar between COVID-19 and influenza (18/78 [23%] vs 8/39 [21%]; odds ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.42-3.45; p = 0.82). The frequency of early microbiological testing and antibiotic use was similar between the two groups. Within the overall COVID-19 group, early bacterial coinfections were associated with a statistically significant increase in 30-day all-cause mortality (21/68 [30.9%] vs 40/221 [18.1%]; hazard ratio, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.01-3.32). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Our data suggest similar rates of early bacterial coinfections in ICU patients with COVID-19 and influenza. In addition, early bacterial coinfections were significantly associated with an increased 30-day mortality in patients with COVID-19.

Endovascular thrombectomy with or without intravenous thrombolysis in large-vessel ischemic stroke: A non-inferiority meta-analysis of 6 randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether thrombectomy alone is non-inferior to thrombectomy with intravenous thrombolysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large-vessel occlusion. PURPOSE: To perform a comprehensive, trial-level data, non-inferiority meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing endovascular thrombectomy with and without intravenous thrombolysis in patients with ischemic stroke due to large-vessel occlusion of anterior circulation. METHODS: The prespecified primary efficacy outcome was functional independence, defined as a modified Rankin scale (mRS)score of 0 to 2 at 90 days. The two prespecified non-inferiority margins were risk differences of -10% and - 5%. The study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022361110) and conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: Six trials were included in this analysis (DIRECT-MT, DEVT, SKIP, MR CLEAN-NO IV, DIRECT-SAFE and SWIFT DIRECT) comprising a total of 2334 patients. Functional independence at 90 days was achieved by 570 (49·0%) of 1164 patients in the thrombectomy alone group and 595 (50·9%) of 1170 patients in the thrombectomy with thrombolysis group (pooled risk difference - 0·02, [95% CI -0·06-0·02]). Combined thrombectomy and thrombolysis were associated with significantly higher rates of successful reperfusion (pooled risk ratio 0·96 [95% CI, 0·93-0·99], p = 0·006) but at the expense of a significantly increased risk of overall - but not symptomatic - intracranial haemorrhage (pooled risk ratio 0·87 [95% CI, 0·77-0·98], p = 0·02). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with a combined treatment approach, thrombectomy alone was non-inferior at -10% non-inferiority margin, but not at a - 5% inferiority margin for functional independence. Current evidence cannot exclude clinically important differences between the two treatment approaches.

Pulmonary Aspergillosis in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) is a life-threatening fungal infection that mainly affects critically ill patients. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence and clinical outcomes of putative CAPA in critically ill COVID-19 patients. This retrospective observational cohort study included 181 cases from 5 ICUs at Vienna General Hospital between January 2020 and April 2022. Patients were diagnosed with putative CAPA according to the AspICU classification, which included a positive Aspergillus culture in a bronchoalveolar lavage sample, compatible signs and symptoms, and abnormal medical imaging. The primary outcome was adjusted 60-day all-cause mortality from ICU admission in patients with vs. without putative CAPA. Secondary outcomes included time from ICU admission to CAPA diagnosis and pathogen prevalence and distribution. Putative CAPA was identified in 35 (19.3%) of 181 COVID-19 patients. The mean time to diagnosis was 9 days. Death at 60 days occurred in 18 of 35 (51.4%) patients with CAPA and in 43 of 146 (29.5%) patients without CAPA (adjusted HR (95%CI) = 2.15 (1.20-3.86, p = 0.002). The most frequently isolated Aspergillus species was Aspergillus fumigatus. The prevalence of putative pulmonary aspergillosis in critically ill COVID-19 patients was high and was associated with significantly higher mortality.

Individualized antimicrobial dose optimization: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic drug monitoring and Model-informed precision dosing allow dose individualization to increase drug effectivity and reduce toxicity. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the available evidence on the clinical efficacy of individualized antimicrobial dosing optimization. METHODS: Data sources: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from database inception to 11 November 2022. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Published peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials. PARTICIPANTS: Human subjects aged ≥18 years receiving an antibiotic or antifungal drug. INTERVENTIONS: Patients receiving individualized antimicrobial dose adjustment. ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS: Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: The primary outcome was the risk of mortality. Secondary outcomes included target attainment, treatment failure, clinical and microbiological cure, length of stay, treatment duration, and adverse events. Effect sizes were pooled using a random-effects model. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed by inconsistency testing (I2). RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis (1241 participants; n = 624 in the individualized antimicrobial dosing group and n = 617 in the control group). Individualized antimicrobial dose optimization was associated with a numerical decrease in mortality (risk ratio [RR] = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.71-1.05), without reaching statistical significance. Moreover, it was associated with significantly higher target attainment rates (RR = 1.41; 95% CI, 1.13-1.76) and a significant decrease in treatment failure (RR = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54-0.92). Individualized antimicrobial dose optimization was associated with improvement, but not significant in clinical cure (RR = 1.33; 95% CI, 0.94-1.33) and microbiological outcome (RR = 1.25; CI, 1.00-1.57), as well as with a significant decrease in the risk of nephrotoxicity (RR = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.31-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrated that target attainment, treatment failure, and nephrotoxicity were significantly improved in patients who underwent individualized antimicrobial dose optimization. It showed an improvement in mortality, clinical cure or microbiological outcome, although not significant.

Reduced immunogenicity of BNT162b2 booster vaccination in combination with a tetravalent influenza vaccination: results of a prospective cohort study in 838 health workers.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the immunogenicity and safety of BNT162b2 booster vaccination with and without a tetravalent influenza vaccine. METHODS: A prospective, open-label cohort study on immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 booster vaccination with or without a tetravalent influenza vaccine was performed. Eight hundred thirty-eight health care workers were included in the following study arms: BNT162b2 booster-only, influenza-vaccine-only or combination of both. Levels of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor binding domain, and haemagglutinin inhibition tested for four different influenza strains (A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2), B/Victoria, B/Yamagata) were measured at the time of vaccination and 4 weeks later. RESULTS: After 4 weeks, median (interquartile range) levels of antibodies against the receptor binding domain of the viral spike (S) protein and relative change from baseline were high in individuals who received BNTb162b2 booster vaccination only (absolute: 16 600 [10 980-24 360] vs. 12 630 [8198-18 750] BAU/mL [p < 0.0001]; relative increase: 49% [23.6-95.3] vs. 40% [21.9-80.6] [p 0.048]; booster-only n = 521 vs. combination-arm n = 229 respectively). Results were confirmed after matching for sex, age, body mass index, baseline antibody levels and vaccine compound received for primary immunization (absolute: 13 930 [10 610-22 760] vs. 12 520 [8710-17 940]; [p 0.031]; relative increase: 55.7% [27.8-98.5] vs. 42.2% [22.9-74.5]; p 0.045). Adverse events were almost identical in the booster-only and the combination-arm, but numerically low in the influenza arm (525/536 [97.9%] vs. 235/240 [97.9%] vs. 26/33 [78.8 %]). DISCUSSION: Although no safety concerns occurred, our study provides evidence on reduced immunogenicity of a BNT162b2 booster vaccination in combination with a tetravalent influenza vaccine. Further studies investigating new influenza variants as well as potential differences vaccine effectiveness are needed.

Effect of the human endotoxin challenge on tedizolid tissue penetration.

The effects of the human endotoxin challenge on tissue pharmacokinetics are unknown. In the present study, we aimed to assess the effect of the endotoxin challenge on interstitial fluid pharmacokinetics of tedizolid in healthy volunteers using intramuscular microdialysis. Eight healthy male subjects were treated with 200 mg of tedizolid phosphate for 6 days. On Day 6, an intravenous bolus of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) (2 ng/kg body weight) was administered. LPS infusion did not affect plasma pharmacokinetics of tedizolid. In contrast, following LPS infusion, median muscle tissue fAUC (0.83 [0.75-1.15] vs. 1.14 [1.11-1.43] mg × h/L, P = .0078) and muscle tissue fCmax (0.15 [0.14-0.19] vs. 0.19 [0.18-0.24] mg/L, P = .0078) were significantly increased by 38% and 24%, respectively. The human endotoxin challenge was associated with increased tissue concentrations of tedizolid, without affecting its plasma concentration-time profile. The human endotoxin challenge combined with microdialysis may be used to investigate the influence of systemic inflammation on tissue pharmacokinetics.

Multiparametric Prediction Models for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccine Selection: Results of a Comparative Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: An understanding vaccine-dependent effects on protective and sustained humoral immune response is crucial to planning future vaccination strategies against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: In this multicenter, population-based, cohort study including 4601 individuals after primary vaccination against COVID-19 ≥ 4 months earlier we compared factors associated with residual antibody levels against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) across different vaccination strategies (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or ChAdOx1). RESULTS: Our main model including 3787 individuals (2 × BNT162b2, n = 2271; 2 × mRNA-1273, n = 251; 2 × ChAdOx1, n = 1265), predicted significantly lower levels of anti-RBD antibodies after 6 months in individuals vaccinated with ChAdOx1 (392.7 binding antibody units per milliliter [BAU/mL]) compared with those vaccinated with BNT162b2 (1179.5 BAU/mL) or mRNA-1273 (2098.2 BAU/mL). Vaccine-dependent association of antibody levels was found for age with a significant predicted difference in BAU/ml per year for BNT162b2 (-21.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], -24.7 to -18.3) and no significant association for mRNA-1273 (-4.0; 95% CI, -20.0 to 12.1) or ChAdOx1 (1.7; 95% CI, .2 to 3.1). The predicted decrease over time since full immunization was highest in mRNA-1273 (-23.4; 95% CI, -31.4 to -15.4) compared with BNT162b2 (-5.9; 95% CI, -7 to -4.8). CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed population-based evidence of vaccine-dependent effects of age and time since full immunization on humoral immune response. Findings underline the importance of individualized vaccine selection, especially in elderly individuals.

Comparison of pharmacokinetics and stability of generics of cefepime, linezolid and piperacillin/tazobactam with their respective originator drugs: an intravenous bioequivalence study in healthy volunteers.

OBJECTIVES: The efficacy and quality of generic antibacterial drug formulations are often questioned by both healthcare specialists and patients. Therefore, the present study investigated the interchangeability of generic drugs with their originators by comparing bioequivalence parameters and stability data of generic cefepime, linezolid and piperacillin/tazobactam with their respective originator drugs. METHODS: In this open-label, randomized, crossover bioequivalence study, three groups of 12 healthy volunteers each received a single intravenous infusion of either 2 g of cefepime or 4.5 g of piperacillin/tazobactam and two generic formulations, or 600 mg of linezolid and one generic formulation. Plasma sampling was performed, with a 5 day washout period between study days. Stability was tested by storing reconstituted generic and originator products according to their own storage specifications and those of the comparator products. All concentrations were measured by LC-MS. RESULTS: Similar ratios of generic/originator (90% CI) Cmax were observed for Cefepime-MIP/Maxipime [93.7 (88.4-99.4)], Cefepime Sandoz/Maxipime [95.9 (89.1-103.2)], Linezolid Kabi/Zyvoxid [104.5 (91.1-119.9)], Piperacillin Kabi/Tazobac [95.9 (90.4-101.7)], Piperacillin Aurobindo/Tazobac [99.7 (84.9-104.7)], Tazobactam Kabi/Tazobac [93.4 (87.4-99.8)] and Tazobactam Aurobindo/Tazobac [97.4 (89.7-105.8)]. Accordingly, similar ratios of AUC0-t were observed for Cefepime-MIP/Maxipime [91.1 (87.6-94.8)], Cefepime Sandoz/Maxipime [97.9 (92.5-103.5)], Linezolid Kabi/Zyvoxid [99.7 (93.3-106.6)], Piperacillin Kabi/Tazobac [92.2 (88.3-96.3)], Piperacillin Aurobindo/Tazobac [99.9 (97.0-102.8)], Tazobactam Kabi/Tazobac [91.4 (86.4-96.7)] and Tazobactam Aurobindo/Tazobac [98.8 (94.3-103.6)]. Stable and similar concentrations were measured for all contiguous substances, regardless of storage conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with their respective originator drugs, generic cefepime, linezolid and piperacillin/tazobactam met the predetermined bioequivalence criteria. All formulations were stable under the storage conditions of their respective comparators.