Inflammatory Response Associated with West Nile Neuroinvasive Disease: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: West Nile virus (WNV) infection is a seasonal arbovirosis with the potential to cause severe neurological disease. Outcomes of the infection from WNV depend on viral factors (e.g., lineage) and host-intrinsic factors (e.g., age, sex, immunocompromising conditions). Immunity is essential to control the infection but may also prove detrimental to the host. Indeed, the persistence of high levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines is associated with the development of blood-brain barrier (BBB) damage. Due to the importance of the inflammatory processes in the development of West Nile neuroinvasive disease (WNND), we reviewed the available literature on the subject. METHODS: According to the 2020 updated PRISMA guidelines, all peer-reviewed articles regarding the inflammatory response associated with WNND were included. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-six articles were included in the data analysis and sorted into three groups (in vitro on-cell cultures, in vivo in animals, and in humans). The main cytokines found to be increased during WNND were IL-6 and TNF-α. We highlighted the generally small quantity and heterogeneity of information about the inflammatory patterns associated with WNND. CONCLUSIONS: Further studies are needed to understand the pathogenesis of WNND and to investigate the extent and the way the host inflammatory response either helps in controlling the infection or in worsening the outcomes. This might prove useful both for the development of target therapies and for the development of molecular markers allowing early identification of patients displaying an inflammatory response that puts them at a higher risk of developing neuroinvasive disease and who might thus benefit from early antiviral therapies.

Dalbavancin in Bone and Joint Infections: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Approved for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, dalbavancin (DBV) has gradually acquired over the years a role as an off-label treatment for several infections caused by Gram-positive bacteria even in other anatomical sites. Osteoarticular (OA) infections are one of the most difficult-to-treat infections and, since the absence of recommendations, clinicians use different and heterogenic DBV dosing schedule regimens for the off-label treatment of osteomyelitis, spondylodiscitis, and septic arthritis. Our aim is to systematically review the current literature to describe DBV administration schedules and their outcome in OA infections. METHODS: According to the 2020 updated PRISMA guidelines, all peer-reviewed articles regarding the use of DBV in OA infections were included. We conducted a literature search on PubMed and Cochrane Controlled Trials. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies and 450 patients were included, prevalently male (144/195, 73.8%) and diabetic (53/163, 32.5%). Overall, 280 (280/388, 72.2%) osteomyelitis, 79 (79/388, 20.4%) spondylodiscitis, and 29 (29/388, 7.5%) septic arthritis were considered. Staphylococcus aureus (164/243, 67.5%) was the most common pathogen isolated. A previous treatment failure (45/96, 46.9%) was the main reason for a switch to a long-acting antibiotic. Most patients were successfully cured with DBV (318/401, 79.3%). A source control was performed in most patients with a favourable outcome (80.4%), while MRSA was prevalently isolated in people with an unfavourable outcome (57%). While a higher percentage of success was found in people who received three doses of DBV 1 week apart (92.3%), a higher rate of treatment failure was recorded in cases of when the DBV cycle was composed of less than two or more than four doses (27.8%). CONCLUSIONS: DBV has shown to be effective as a treatment for OA infections. The most favourable outcome was found in patients receiving three doses of DBV and with an adequate surgical management prior to antibiotic treatment. Although a rigorous administration schedule does not exist, DBV is a viable treatment option in the management of OA infections.

Treatment with valacyclovir during pregnancy for prevention of congenital cytomegalovirus infection: a real-life multicenter Italian observational study.

BACKGROUND: Valacyclovir is the only treatment demonstrated to be effective for the prevention of vertical transmission of cytomegalovirus within a clinical randomized, placebo-controlled trial and has been reimbursed by the Italian National Health System since December 2020. OBJECTIVE: This study reported the results of a real-life Italian multicenter observational study on cytomegalovirus infection in pregnancy evaluating the effect of the introduction of valacyclovir in the clinical practice for the prevention of vertical transmission of cytomegalovirus. STUDY DESIGN: The outcomes of women who received valacyclovir treatment and their fetuses or newborns were compared with those of a retrospective cohort observed between 2010 and 2020 who did not receive the antiviral treatment. The inclusion criterion was the diagnosis of cytomegalovirus primary infection occurring in the periconceptional period or up to 24 weeks of gestation. The primary outcome was the transmission by the time of amniocentesis. The secondary outcomes were termination of pregnancy, transmission at birth, symptomatic infection at birth, and a composite outcome (termination of pregnancy or transmission at birth). RESULTS: A total of 447 pregnant women from 10 centers were enrolled, 205 women treated with valacyclovir (called the valacyclovir group, including 1 twin pregnancy) and 242 women not treated with valacyclovir (called the no-valacyclovir group, including 2 twin pregnancies). Valacyclovir treatment was significantly associated with a reduction of the diagnosis of congenital cytomegalovirus infection by the time of amniocentesis (weighted odds ratio, 0.39; 90% confidence interval, 0.22-0.68; P=.005; relative reduction of 61%), termination of pregnancy (weighted odds ratio, 0.36; 90% confidence interval, 0.17-0.75; P=.0021; relative reduction of 64%), symptomatic congenital cytomegalovirus infection at birth (weighted odds ratio, 0.17; 90% confidence interval, 0.06-0.49; P=.006; relative reduction of 83%). The treatment had no significant effect on the rate of diagnosis of congenital cytomegalovirus infection at birth (weighted odds ratio, 0.85; 90% confidence interval, 0.57-1.26; P=.500), but the composite outcome (termination of pregnancy or diagnosis of congenital cytomegalovirus infection at birth) occurred more frequently in the no-valacyclovir group (weighted odds ratio, 0.62; 90% confidence interval, 0.44-0.88; P=.024). Of note, the only symptomatic newborns with congenital cytomegalovirus infection in the valacyclovir group (n=3) were among those with positive amniocentesis. Moreover, 19 women (9.3%) reported an adverse reaction to valacyclovir treatment, classified as mild in 17 cases and moderate in 2 cases. Lastly, 4 women (1.9%) presented renal toxicity with a slight increase in creatinine level, which was reversible after treatment suspension. CONCLUSION: Our real-life data confirm that valacyclovir significantly reduces the rate of congenital cytomegalovirus diagnosis at the time of amniocentesis with a good tolerability profile and show that the treatment is associated with a reduction of termination of pregnancy and symptomatic congenital cytomegalovirus infection at birth.

Programmatic management of tuberculosis preventive therapy: Past, present, future.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) infection (TBI) is an emerging public health priority, involving about one-fourth of the world population. Because patients with TBI are the reservoir for TB, stopping the progression to active disease by preventive treatment is one of the main interventions needed to achieve TB elimination. As of today, the proportion of people with TBI receiving treatment is minimal at the global level, mostly because current international policies recommend systematic testing and treatment for less than 2% of infected people. PRESENT: FACTS AND GAPS: The programmatic management of TB preventive treatment involves a set of cascading interventions, of which the effectiveness is limited by the poor predictivity of diagnostic tests, the length and the potential toxicity of treatment, and the suboptimal prioritization within global policies. Partly because of this, competing priorities and the lack of adequate funding are significant barriers for scale-up, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. MONITORING AND EVALUATION: To date, there is no universal system of monitoring and evaluation for the programmatic management of TB preventive treatment elements, and just a few countries use the standard recording and reporting tools, contributing to leaving TBI a neglected condition. CONCLUSION: Better financed research and resources reallocation are essential steps to progress toward TB elimination worldwide.