Evaluation of clinical and microbiological factors related to mortality in patients with Gram-negative bacterial infections treated with ceftazidime-avibactam: A prospective multicentric cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and microbiological risk factors associated with mortality in patients treated with ceftazidime-avibactam for carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacterial infections. METHODS: This multicentric prospective cohort study included hospitalized adult patients with a microbiologically confirmed infection treated with ceftazidime-avibactam for ≥48 hours. The clinical and microbiological risk factors for 30-day mortality were evaluated using a Cox regression model. RESULTS: Of the 193 patients evaluated from the five tertiary hospitals, 127 were included in the study. Thirty-five patients (27.6%) died within 30 days. Infections with AmpC beta-lactamase-carrying bacteria were independently related to 30-day mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-4.84, P < 0.01) after adjusting for time from infection to antimicrobial prescription (P = 0.04). Further, these bacterial infections were also related to higher in-hospital mortality (aHR 2.17, 95% CI 1.24-3.78, P < 0.01). Only one patient developed resistance to ceftazidime-avibactam during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with ceftazidime-avibactam had worse clinical outcomes in patients with infections with bacteria with chromosomally encoded AmpC beta-lactamase. However, these findings should be confirmed in future studies.

Colistin versus polymyxin B for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae bloodstream infections.

BACKGROUND: To assess the effectiveness of colistin (administered as colistimethate sodium-CMS) and polymyxin B (PMB) for the treatment of bloodstream infections (BSIs) caused by carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort included hospitalized adult patients with CRKP BSIs from a single tertiary-care hospital. A univariate analysis comparing CMS and PMB groups was carried out and an inverse-probability propensity score (IPPS) was created. An IPPS-adjusted Cox regression model for 30-day mortality was performed including covariates potentially associated with mortality. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients with CRKP BSI (87 were KPC-producing isolates) were included. The 30-day mortality was 42.0 %:17/46 (38.8 %) and 25/54 (44.6 %) patients of CMS and PMB groups, respectively, P = 0.54 (incidence rate, 18.9 and 21.7/1000 patients-day in CMS and PMB groups, respectively, P = 0.62). No statistically significant difference in 30-day mortality rate was observed in a model adjusted for Pitt bacteremia score, high-risk primary site and IPPS, which included age, intensive care unit admission, minimal inhibitory concentration, previous colonization by CRKP, diabetes mellitus, malignancy, neutropenia, meropenem use before BSI, adjuvant therapy with meropenem and amikacin, and time to start polymyxin. Acute kidney injury (AKI) occurred in 52.0 % of patients, with no significant differences between groups (47.8 % and 57.4 % for CMS and PMB, respectively, P = 0.83). In-hospital mortality was 47,7 % and 50.0 % in CMS and PMB groups, respectively, P = 0.82. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in 30-day mortality and AKI rates among patients with CRKP BSI treated with PMB or CMS.

Application of ventilator-associated events (VAE) in ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) notified in Brazil (IMPACTO MR-PAV): a protocol for a cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Certain criteria for ventilator-associated events (VAE) definition might influence the type of an event, its detection rate and consequently the resource expenditure in intensive care unit. The Impact of Infections by Antimicrobial-Resistant Microorganisms - Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia (IMPACTO MR-PAV) aims to evaluate the incidence and diagnostic accuracy of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) using the current criteria for VAP surveillance in Brazil versus the VAE criteria defined by the US National Healthcare Safety Network-Center for Diseases Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study will be conducted in around 15 centres across Brazil from October 2022 to December 2023. Trained healthcare professionals will collect data and compare the incidence of VAP using both the current criteria for VAP surveillance in Brazil and the VAE criteria defined by the CDC. The accuracy of the two criteria for identifying VAP will also be analysed. It will also characterise other events associated with mechanical ventilation (ventilator-associated condition, infection-related ventilator-associated complication) and adjudicate VAP reported to the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (ANVISA) using current epidemiological diagnostic criteria. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board under the number 52354721.0.1001.0070. The study's primary outcome measure will be the incidence of VAP using the two different surveillance criteria, and the secondary outcome measures will be the accuracy of the two criteria for identifying VAP and the adjudication of VAP reported to ANVISA. The results will contribute to the improvement of VAP surveillance in Brazil and may have implications for other countries that use similar criteria. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05589727; Clinicaltrials.gov.

The II Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 Joint Guidelines of the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia and Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia.

OBJECTIVE: To update the recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: Experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Twenty-one recommendations were generated, including strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen and conditional recommendations for the use of tocilizumab and baricitinib for patients on supplemental oxygen or on noninvasive ventilation and anticoagulants to prevent thromboembolism. Due to suspension of use authorization, it was not possible to make recommendations regarding the use of casirivimab + imdevimab. Strong recommendations against the use of azithromycin in patients without suspected bacterial infection, hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, and lopinavir + ritonavir and conditional recommendations against the use of ivermectin and remdesivir were made. CONCLUSION: New recommendations for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were generated, such as those for tocilizumab and baricitinib. Corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are still recommended, the latter with conditional recommendation. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource economy.

The II Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 Joint Guidelines of the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia and Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia / II Diretrizes Brasileiras para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 Diretriz conjunta da Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia e Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia

ABSTRACT Objective: To update the recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: Experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results: Twenty-one recommendations were generated, including strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen and conditional recommendations for the use of tocilizumab and baricitinib for patients on supplemental oxygen or on noninvasive ventilation and anticoagulants to prevent thromboembolism. Due to suspension of use authorization, it was not possible to make recommendations regarding the use of casirivimab + imdevimab. Strong recommendations against the use of azithromycin in patients without suspected bacterial infection, hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, and lopinavir + ritonavir and conditional recommendations against the use of ivermectin and remdesivir were made. Conclusion: New recommendations for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were generated, such as those for tocilizumab and baricitinib. Corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are still recommended, the latter with conditional recommendation. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource economy.

RESUMO Objetivo: Atualizar as recomendações para embasar as decisões para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. Métodos: A elaboração desta diretriz foi feita por especialistas, incluindo representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas. O método utilizado para o desenvolvimento rápido de diretrizes baseou-se na adoção e/ou adaptação de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) e contou com o apoio da plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. Resultados: Chegaram-se a 21 recomendações, incluindo recomendações fortes quanto ao uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar e recomendações condicionais para o uso de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe, em pacientes com oxigênio suplementar ou ventilação não invasiva, e de anticoagulantes, para prevenção de tromboembolismo. Devido à suspensão da autorização de uso, não foi possível fazer recomendações para o tratamento com casirivimabe + imdevimabe. Foram feitas recomendações fortes contra o uso de azitromicina em pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana, hidroxicloroquina, plasma convalescente, colchicina e lopinavir + ritonavir, além de recomendações condicionais contra o uso de ivermectina e rendesivir. Conclusão: Foram criadas novas recomendações para o tratamento de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19, como as recomendações de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe. Ainda são recomendados corticosteroides e profilaxia contra tromboembolismo, esta em caráter condicional. Vários medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes e não devem ser usados, no intuito de proporcionar o melhor tratamento segundo os princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover a economia de recursos.

Erratum: Evaluation of the characteristics of infection prevention and control programs and infection control committees in Brazilian hospitals: A countrywide cross-sectional study - CORRIGENDUM.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1017/ash.2023.136.].

Development and validation of an LC-MS/MS method to quantify ceftaroline in microdialysate samples from plasma and brain: Application to a preclinical pharmacokinetic investigation.

A bioanalytical LC-MS/MS method was developed and validated to determine ceftaroline in microdialysate samples from plasma and brain. Ceftaroline was separated using a C18 column and a mobile phase consisting of water and acetonitrile, both with 5 mM of ammonium formate and acid formic 0.1%, eluted as gradient. Ceftaroline was monitored using electrospray ionization operating on positive mode (ESI+) monitoring the transition 604.89 > 209.3 m/z. The method showed linearity in the concentration range of 0.5-500 ng/mL for brain microdialysate and 0.5-2500 ng/mL for plasma microdialysate with coefficients of determination ≥0.997. The inter-and intra-day precision, the accuracy, and the stability of the drug in different conditions were in accordance with the acceptable limits determined by international guidelines. Plasma pharmacokinetics and brain distribution of the drug were carried out after intravenous administration of 20 mg/kg of ceftaroline to male Wistar rats. The estimated geometric mean (geometric coefficient of variation) area under the curve (AUC0-∞) was 4.68 (45.8%) mg·h/L and 1.20 (54.2%) mg·h/L for plasma and brain, respectively, resulting in a brain exposure of about 33% (AUCfree brain/AUCfree plasma). The results indicate that ceftaroline presents good penetration in the brain when considering free plasma and free brain concentrations.

Evaluation of the characteristics of infection prevention and control programs and infection control committees in Brazilian hospitals: A countrywide cross-sectional study.

Objective: Data are scarce regarding hospital infection control committees and compliance with infection prevention and control (IPC) recommendations in Brazil, a country of continental dimensions. We assessed the main characteristics of infection control committees (ICCs) on healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) in Brazilian hospitals. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in ICCs of public and private hospitals distributed across all Brazilian regions. Data were collected directly from the ICC staff by completing an online questionnaire and during on-site visits through face-to-face interviews. Results: In total, 53 Brazilian hospitals were evaluated from October 2019 to December 2020. All hospitals had implemented the IPC core components in their programs. All centers had protocols for the prevention and control of ventilator-associated pneumonia as well as bloodstream, surgical site, and catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Most hospitals (80%) had no budget specifically allocated to the IPC program; 34% of the laundry staff had received specific IPC training; and only 7.5% of hospitals reported occupational infections in healthcare workers. Conclusions: In this sample, most ICCs complied with the minimum requirements for IPC programs. The main limitation regarding ICCs was the lack of financial support. The findings of this survey support the development of strategic plans to improve IPCs in Brazilian hospitals.

Large hospital-wide outbreak of Paenibacillus spp pseudobacteremia associated with contaminated nonsterile gloves.

We report a large, hospital-wide outbreak of pseudobacteremia by Paenibacillus spp. In total, 139 patients presented at least 1 positive blood culture during a 13-month period. Microbiological experiments indicated that contaminated nonsterile gloves were associated with the pseudobacteremia episodes. The outbreak was resolved by discontinuing the use of the involved brand.

Association between acute disease severity and one-year quality of life among post-hospitalisation COVID-19 patients: Coalition VII prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: To assess the association between acute disease severity and 1-year quality of life in patients discharged after hospitalisation due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study nested in 5 randomised clinical trials between March 2020 and March 2022 at 84 sites in Brazil. Adult post-hospitalisation COVID-19 patients were followed for 1 year. The primary outcome was the utility score of EuroQol five-dimension three-level (EQ-5D-3L). Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events, and new disabilities in instrumental activities of daily living. Adjusted generalised estimating equations were used to assess the association between outcomes and acute disease severity according to the highest level on a modified ordinal scale during hospital stay (2: no oxygen therapy; 3: oxygen by mask or nasal prongs; 4: high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy or non-invasive ventilation; 5: mechanical ventilation). RESULTS: 1508 COVID-19 survivors were enrolled. Primary outcome data were available for 1156 participants. At 1 year, compared with severity score 2, severity score 5 was associated with lower EQ-5D-3L utility scores (0.7 vs 0.84; adjusted difference, - 0.1 [95% CI - 0.15 to - 0.06]); and worse results for all-cause mortality (7.9% vs 1.2%; adjusted difference, 7.1% [95% CI 2.5%-11.8%]), major cardiovascular events (5.6% vs 2.3%; adjusted difference, 2.6% [95% CI 0.6%-4.6%]), and new disabilities (40.4% vs 23.5%; adjusted difference, 15.5% [95% CI 8.5%-22.5]). Severity scores 3 and 4 did not differ consistently from score 2. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients who needed mechanical ventilation during hospitalisation have lower 1-year quality of life than COVID-19 patients who did not need mechanical ventilation during hospitalisation.

IMPACTO-MR: um estudo brasileiro de plataforma nacional para avaliar infecções e multirresistência em unidades de terapia intensiva / IMPACTO-MR: a Brazilian nationwide platform study to assess infections and multidrug resistance in intensive care units

RESUMO Objetivo: Descrever o IMPACTO-MR, um estudo brasileiro de plataforma nacional em unidades de terapia intensiva focado no impacto das infecções por bactérias multirresistentes relacionadas à assistência à saúde. Métodos: Descrevemos a plataforma IMPACTO-MR, seu desenvolvimento, critérios para seleção das unidades de terapia intensiva, caracterização da coleta de dados, objetivos e projetos de pesquisa futuros a serem realizados na plataforma. Resultados: Os dados principais foram coletados por meio do Epimed Monitor System® e consistiram em dados demográficos, dados de comorbidades, estado funcional, escores clínicos, diagnóstico de internação e diagnósticos secundários, dados laboratoriais, clínicos e microbiológicos e suporte de órgãos durante a internação na unidade de terapia intensiva, entre outros. De outubro de 2019 a dezembro de 2020, 33.983 pacientes de 51 unidades de terapia intensiva foram incluídos no banco de dados principal. Conclusão: A plataforma IMPACTO-MR é um banco de dados clínico brasileiro de unidades de terapia intensiva focado na pesquisa do impacto das infecções por bactérias multirresistentes relacionadas à assistência à saúde. Essa plataforma fornece dados para o desenvolvimento e pesquisa de unidades de terapia intensiva individuais e ensaios clínicos observacionais e prospectivos multicêntricos.

ABSTRACT Objective: To describe the IMPACTO-MR, a Brazilian nationwide intensive care unit platform study focused on the impact of health care-associated infections due to multidrug-resistant bacteria. Methods: We described the IMPACTO-MR platform, its development, criteria for intensive care unit selection, characterization of core data collection, objectives, and future research projects to be held within the platform. Results: The core data were collected using the Epimed Monitor System® and consisted of demographic data, comorbidity data, functional status, clinical scores, admission diagnosis and secondary diagnoses, laboratory, clinical, and microbiological data, and organ support during intensive care unit stay, among others. From October 2019 to December 2020, 33,983 patients from 51 intensive care units were included in the core database. Conclusion: The IMPACTO-MR platform is a nationwide Brazilian intensive care unit clinical database focused on researching the impact of health care-associated infections due to multidrug-resistant bacteria. This platform provides data for individual intensive care unit development and research and multicenter observational and prospective trials.

Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Probability of Target Attainment of Ceftaroline in Brain and Soft Tissues.

Ceftaroline, approved to treat skin infections and pneumonia due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), has been considered for the treatment of central nervous system (CNS) infections. A population pharmacokinetic (popPK) model was developed to describe ceftaroline soft tissue and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) distributions and investigate the probability of target attainment (PTA) of the percentage of the dosing interval that the unbound drug concentration exceeded the MIC (%fT>MIC) to treat MRSA infections. Healthy subjects' plasma and microdialysate concentrations from muscle and subcutaneous tissue following 600 mg every 12 h (q12h) and q8h and neurosurgical patients' plasma and CSF concentrations following single 600-mg dosing were used. Plasma concentrations were described by a two-compartment model, and tissue concentrations were incorporated as three independent compartments linked to the central compartment by bidirectional transport (clearance in [CLin] and CLout). Apparent volumes were fixed to physiological interstitial values. Healthy status and body weight were identified as covariates for the volume of the central compartment, and creatinine clearance was identified for clearance. The CSF glucose concentration (GLUC) was inversely correlated with CLin,CSF. Simulations showed a PTA of >90% in plasma and soft tissues for both regimens assuming an MIC of 1 mg/L and a %fT>MIC of 28.8%. Using the same target, patients with inflamed meninges (0.5 < GLUC ≤ 2 mmol/L) would reach PTAs of 99.8% and 97.2% for 600 mg q8h and q12h, respectively. For brain infection with mild inflammation (2 < GLUC ≤ 3.5 mmol/L), the PTAs would be reduced to 34.3% and 9.1%, respectively. Ceftaroline's penetration enhanced by meningeal inflammation suggests that the drug could be a candidate to treat MRSA CNS infections.

Impact of rhinovirus on hospitalization during the COVID-19 pandemic: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although the clinical course of the COVID-19 in adults has been extensively described, the impact of the co-detection of SARS-CoV-2 and rhinovirus on severity outcomes is not understood. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the risk of hospitalization of outpatients with COVID-19 with and without the co-detection of rhinovirus in southern Brazil. Secondarily, such risk was also compared between all individuals with COVID-19 and those with single rhinovirus infection. STUDY DESIGN: Outpatients (>18 years) with acute signs of cough, fever, or sore throat were prospectively enrolled at two emergency departments from May to September 2020. Sample collection was performed to detect SARS-CoV-2 and other 20 respiratory pathogens. Participants were followed for 28 days through telephone interviews. RESULTS: 1,047 participants were screened and 1,044 were included. Of these, 4.9% were lost during follow-up, and 993/1,044 (95.1%) were included in severity-related analysis. Rhinovirus was the most prevalent pathogen (25.0%, 248/993), followed by SARS-CoV-2 (22.6%, 224/993), with coinfection of these two viruses occurring in 91/993 (9.2%) participants. The risk of COVID-19-related hospitalizations were not different between individuals with and without co-detection of rhinovirus (9.9% vs. 7.6%, respectively, P = 0.655). Conversely, subjects with COVID-19 had a higher hospitalization risk than single rhinovirus infection (8.3 vs 0.4%, respectively, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The co-detection of SARS-CoV-2 and rhinovirus did not change the risk of hospitalizations in adults. Furthermore, COVID-19 was more severe than single rhinovirus infection.

Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Joint guideline of Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia. / Diretrizes Brasileiras para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19: Diretriz conjunta da Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia e Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia.

OBJECTIVE: Several therapies are being used or proposed for COVID-19, and many lack appropriate evaluations of their effectiveness and safety. The purpose of this document is to develop recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: A group of 27 experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Sixteen recommendations were generated. They include strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen, the use of anticoagulants at prophylactic doses to prevent thromboembolism and the nonuse of antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of tocilizumab in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using oxygen due to uncertainties regarding the availability of and access to the drug. Strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, lopinavir + ritonavir and antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection and also conditional recommendations against the use of casirivimab + imdevimab, ivermectin and rendesivir were made. CONCLUSION: To date, few therapies have proven effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and only corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are recommended. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and promote economical resource use.

OBJETIVOS: Há diversas terapias sendo utilizadas ou propostas para a COVID-19, muitas carecendo de apropriada avaliação de efetividade e segurança. O propósito deste documento é elaborar recomendações para subsidiar decisões sobre o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. MÉTODOS: Um grupo de 27 membros, formado por especialistas, representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas, integra essa diretriz. Foi utilizado o método de elaboração de diretrizes rápidas, tomando por base a adoção e/ou a adaptação de recomendações a partir de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT), apoiadas pela plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. RESULTADOS: Foram geradas 16 recomendações. Entre elas, estão recomendações fortes para o uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar, para o uso de anticoagulantes em doses de profilaxia para tromboembolismo e para não uso de antibacterianos nos pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana. Não foi possível fazer uma recomendação quanto à utilização do tocilizumabe em pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 em uso de oxigênio, pelas incertezas na disponibilidade e de acesso ao medicamento. Foi feita recomendação para não usar azitromicina, casirivimabe + imdevimabe, cloroquina, colchicina, hidroxicloroquina, ivermectina, lopinavir/ ritonavir, plasma convalescente e rendesivir. CONCLUSÃO: Até o momento, poucas terapias se provaram efetivas no tratamento do paciente hospitalizado com COVID-19, sendo recomendados apenas corticosteroides e profilaxia para tromboembolismo. Diversos medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes, devendo ser descartados, de forma a oferecer o melhor tratamento pelos princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover economia de recursos não eficazes.

Brazilian guidelines for the treatment of outpatients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. A joint guideline of the Brazilian Association of Emergency Medicine (ABRAMEDE), Brazilian Medical Association (AMB), Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery (SBACV), Brazilian Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology (SBGG), Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI), Brazilian Society of Family and Community Medicine (SBFMC), and Brazilian Thoracic Society (SBPT).

BACKGROUND: Several therapies have been used or proposed for the treatment of COVID-19, although their effectiveness and safety have not been properly evaluated. The purpose of this document is to provide recommendations to support decisions about the drug treatment of outpatients with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: A panel consisting of experts from different clinical fields, representatives of the Brazilian Ministry of Health, and methodologists (37 members in total) was responsible for preparing these guidelines. A rapid guideline development method was used, based on the adoption and/or adaptation of recommendations from existing international guidelines combined with additional structured searches for primary studies and new recommendations whenever necessary (GRADE-ADOLOPMENT). The rating of quality of evidence and the drafting of recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Ten technologies were evaluated, and 10 recommendations were prepared. Recommendations were made against the use of anticoagulants, azithromycin, budesonide, colchicine, corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine alone or combined with azithromycin, ivermectin, nitazoxanide, and convalescent plasma. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of monoclonal antibodies in outpatients, as their benefit is uncertain and their cost is high, with limitations of availability and implementation. CONCLUSION: To date, few therapies have demonstrated effectiveness in the treatment of outpatients with COVID-19. Recommendations are restricted to what should not be used, in order to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource savings by aboiding ineffective treatments.

Diretrizes Brasileiras para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19: Diretriz conjunta da Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia e Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia / Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Joint guideline of Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia

Há diversas terapias sendo utilizadas ou propostas para a COVID-19, muitas carecendo de apropriada avaliação de efetividade e segurança. O propósito deste documento é elaborar recomendações para subsidiar decisões sobre o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. Métodos: Um grupo de 27 membros, formado por especialistas, representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas, integra essa diretriz. Foi utilizado o método de elaboração de diretrizes rápidas, tomando por base a adoção e/ou a adaptação de recomendações a partir de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT), apoiadas pela plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. Resultados: Foram geradas 16 recomendações. Entre elas, estão recomendações fortes para o uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar, para o uso de anticoagulantes em doses de profilaxia para tromboembolismo e para não uso de antibacterianos nos pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana. Não foi possível fazer uma recomendação quanto à utilização do tocilizumabe em pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 em uso de oxigênio, pelas incertezas na disponibilidade e de acesso ao medicamento. Foi feita recomendação para não usar azitromicina, casirivimabe + imdevimabe, cloroquina, colchicina, hidroxicloroquina, ivermectina, lopinavir/ ritonavir, plasma convalescente e rendesivir. Conclusão: Até o momento, poucas terapias se provaram efetivas no tratamento do paciente hospitalizado com COVID-19, sendo recomendados apenas corticosteroides e profilaxia para tromboembolismo. Diversos medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes, devendo ser descartados, de forma a oferecer o melhor tratamento pelos princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover economia de recursos não eficazes.

Several therapies are being used or proposed for COVID-19, and many lack appropriate evaluations of their effectiveness and safety. The purpose of this document is to develop recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: A group of 27 experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results: Sixteen recommendations were generated. They include strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen, the use of anticoagulants at prophylactic doses to prevent thromboembolism and the nonuse of antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of tocilizumab in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using oxygen due to uncertainties regarding the availability of and access to the drug. Strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, lopinavir + ritonavir and antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection and also conditional recommendations against the use of casirivimab + imdevimab, ivermectin and rendesivir were made. Conclusion: To date, few therapies have proven effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and only corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are recommended. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and promote economical resource use.

Genomic Surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 Lineages Indicates Early Circulation of P.1 (Gamma) Variant of Concern in Southern Brazil.

The SARS-CoV-2 P.1 lineage emerged in Amazonas (AM), North Brazil and its evolution has been dynamically reported associated with increased transmissibility and/or immune evasion. Here, we evaluated the lineages circulating in 29 cities in Rio Grande do Sul (RS), Southern Brazil between March 2020 and May 2021 and investigated the genetic events associated with the emergence of the P.1. A total of 202 oro/nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 specimens from patients during routine hospital care were submitted to whole-genome sequencing. Phylogenetic and Bayesian Evolutionary Analyses of the P.1 lineage were carried out to determine the relationship between sequences from RS and AM and dated their common ancestor and origin. One hundred six (53%) sequences were assigned as P.1 and most carried the 22 lineage-defining mutations. All the P.1 sequences included other important mutations, such as P314L and R203K/G204R, and revealed a high genetic diversity in the phylogenetic tree. The time-scaled inference suggests that the oldest P.1 sequences from different Brazilian states share a ancestor with those from AM, but the origin of some sequences from RS is unknown. Further, the common ancestor of sequences from RS is dated to mid-June/July 2020, earlier than those previously reported from AM. Our results demonstrate that there is a high degree of genetic diversity among P.1 sequences, which suggests a continuous evolution and community spread of the virus. Although the first P.1 outbreak was reported in AM, the lineage was associated with multiple introductory events and had already been circulating in Southern Brazil prior to November 2020. IMPORTANCE The SARS-CoV-2 P.1 lineage is associated with increased transmissibility and/or immune evasion and presents a dynamic evolution in Brazil. The significance of our research relies in the fact that we evaluated the SARS-CoV-2 lineages circulating in Southern Brazil between March 2020 and May 2021. This evaluation allowed us to detect the genetic events associated with the emergence of the P.1 and its sublineages. This study is important because we were able to establish that the common ancestor of P.1 sequences from Rio Grande do Sul, Southern Brazil, is dated of mid-June/July 2020, earlier than the P.1 sequences previously reported from Amazonas (AM) state. Noteworthy, the high degree of genetic diversity among P.1 sequences found in this study suggests a continuous evolution and community spread of the virus. Moreover, the oldest P.1 sequences from different Brazilian states share a ancestor with those from AM.

Diagnostic accuracy of a SARS-CoV-2 rapid test and optimal time for seropositivity according to the onset of symptoms.

Point-of-care serological tests for SARS-CoV-2 have been used for COVID-19 diagnosis. However, their accuracy over time regarding the onset of symptoms is not fully understood. We aimed to assess the accuracy of a point-of-care lateral flow immunoassay (LFI). Subjects, aged over 18 years, presenting clinical symptoms suggestive of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection were tested once by both nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal RT-PCR and LFI. The accuracy of LFI was assessed in periodic intervals of three days in relation to the onset of symptoms. The optimal cut-off point was defined as the number of days required to achieve the best sensitivity and specificity. This cut-off point was also used to compare LFI accuracy according to participants' status: outpatient or hospitalized. In total, 959 patients were included, 379 (39.52%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 with RT-PCR, and 272 (28.36%) tested positive with LFI. LFI best performance was achieved after 10 days of the onset of symptoms, with sensitivity and specificity of 84.9% (95%CI: 79.8-89.1) and 94.4% (95%CI: 91.0-96.8), respectively. Although the specificity was similar (94.6% vs. 88.9%, p = 0.051), the sensitivity was higher in hospitalized patients than in outpatients (91.7% vs. 82.1%, p = 0.032) after 10 days of the onset of symptoms. Best sensitivity of point-of-care LFI was found 10 days after the onset of symptoms which may limit its use in acute care. Specificity remained high regardless of the number of days since the onset of symptoms.