Rebound Phenomenon After Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in High-Risk Persons.

In a cohort of 483 high-risk patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for COVID-19, 2 patients (0.4%) required hospitalization by day 30. Four patients (0.8%) experienced rebound of symptoms, which were generally mild, at a median of 9 days after treatment, and all resolved without additional COVID-19-directed therapy.

Diagnostic delay in pulmonary blastomycosis: a case series reflecting a referral center experience.

PURPOSE: The diagnosis of pulmonary blastomycosis is usually delayed because of its non-specific presentation. We aimed to assess the extent of diagnostic delay in hospitalized patients and detect the step in the diagnostic process that requires the most improvement. METHODS: Adult patients diagnosed with pulmonary blastomycosis during a hospital admission between January 2010 through November 2021 were eligible for inclusion. Patients who did not have pulmonary involvement and who were diagnosed before admission were excluded. Demographics and comorbid conditions, specifics of disease presentation, and interventions were evaluated. The timing of the diagnosis, antifungal treatment, and patient outcomes were noted. Descriptive analytical tests were performed. RESULTS: A total of 43 patients were diagnosed with pulmonary blastomycosis during their admissions. The median age was 47 years, with 13 (30%) females. Of all patients, 29 (67%) had isolated pulmonary infection, while 14 (33%) had disseminated disease, affecting mostly skin and musculoskeletal system. The median duration between the initial symptoms and health care encounters was 4 days, and the time to hospital admission was 9 days. The median duration from the initial symptoms to the diagnosis was 20 days. Forty patients (93%) were treated with empirical antibacterials before a definitive diagnosis was made. In addition, corticosteroid treatment was empirically administered to 15 patients (35%) before the diagnosis, with indications such as suspicion of inflammatory processes or symptom relief. In 38 patients (88%), the first performed fungal diagnostic test was positive. Nineteen patients (44%) required admission to the intensive care unit, and 11 patients (26%) died during their hospital stay. CONCLUSION: There was a delay in diagnosis of patients with pulmonary blastomycosis, largely attributable to the lack of consideration of the etiological agent. Novel approaches to assist providers in recognizing the illness earlier and trigger evaluation are needed.

Body temperature and infection in critically ill patients on continuous kidney replacement therapy.

PURPOSE: Continuous kidney replacement therapy (CKRT) is an increasingly common intervention for critically ill patients with kidney failure. Because CKRT affects body temperature, detecting infections in patients on CKRT is challenging. Understanding the relation between CKRT and body temperature may facilitate earlier detection of infection. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed adult patients (≥ 18 years) admitted to the intensive care unit at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, from December 1, 2006, through November 31, 2015, who required CKRT. We summarized central body temperatures for these patients according to the presence or absence of infection. RESULTS: We identified 587 patients who underwent CKRT during the study period, of whom 365 had infections, and 222 did not have infections. We observed no statistically significant differences in minimum (P = .70), maximum (P = .22), or mean (P = .55) central body temperature for patients on CKRT with infection vs. those without infection. While not on CKRT (before CKRT initiation and after cessation), all three body temperature measurements were significantly higher in patients with infection than in those without infection (all P < .02). CONCLUSION: Body temperature is insufficient to indicate an infection in critically ill patients on CKRT. Clinicians should remain watchful for other signs, symptoms, and indications of infection in patients on CKRT because of expected high infection rates.

In patients with COVID-19 receiving IMV or ECMO, adding baricitinib to usual care reduced all-cause mortality.

SOURCE CITATION: Ely EW, Ramanan AV, Kartman CE, et al. Efficacy and safety of baricitinib plus standard of care for the treatment of critically ill hospitalised adults with COVID-19 on invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: an exploratory, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Respir Med. 2022;10:327-36. 35123660.

Comparable Outcomes for Bebtelovimab and Ritonavir-Boosted Nirmatrelvir Treatment in High-Risk Patients With Coronavirus Disease-2019 During Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 BA.2 Omicron Epoch.

The effectiveness of bebtelovimab in real-world settings has not been assessed. In this retrospective cohort study of 3607 high-risk patients, bebtelovimab was used more commonly than nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among older patients, immunosuppressed patients, and those with multiple comorbid conditions. Despite its use in patients with multiple comorbid conditions, the rate of progression to severe disease after bebtelovimab (1.4% [95% confidence interval, 1.2%-1.7%]) was not significantly different from that for nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment (1.2% [.8%-1.5%]). Our findings support the emergency use authorization of bebtelovimab for treatment of COVID-19 during the Omicron epoch dominated by BA.2 and subvariants.

Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Treatment and Management of Patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: There are many pharmacologic therapies that are being used or considered for treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with rapidly changing efficacy and safety evidence from trials. OBJECTIVE: Develop evidence-based, rapid, living guidelines intended to support patients, clinicians, and other healthcare professionals in their decisions about treatment and management of patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In March 2020, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel of infectious disease clinicians, pharmacists, and methodologists with varied areas of expertise to regularly review the evidence and make recommendations about the treatment and management of persons with COVID-19. The process used a living guideline approach and followed a rapid recommendation development checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. A systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted at regular intervals. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. RESULTS: Based on the most recent search conducted on May 31, 2022, the IDSA guideline panel has made 30 recommendations for the treatment and management of the following groups/populations: pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis, ambulatory with mild-to-moderate disease, hospitalized with mild-to-moderate, severe but not critical, and critical disease. As these are living guidelines, the most recent recommendations can be found online at: https://idsociety.org/COVID19guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: At the inception of its work, the panel has expressed the overarching goal that patients be recruited into ongoing trials. Since then, many trials were done which provided much needed evidence for COVID-19 therapies. There still remain many unanswered questions as the pandemic evolved which we hope future trials can answer.

Lessons Learned from Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Therapies: Critical Perspectives From the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) COVID-19 Treatment Guideline Panel.

Despite the challenges of the pandemic, there has been substantial progress with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) therapies. Pivotal COVID-19 trials like SOLIDARITY, RECOVERY, and ACCT-1 were rapidly conducted and data disseminated to support effective therapies. However, critical shortcomings remain on trial conduct, dissemination and interpretation of study results, and regulatory guidance in pandemic settings. The lessons that we learned have implications for both the current pandemic and future emerging infectious diseases. There is a need for establishing and standardizing clinical meaningful outcomes in therapeutic trials and for targeting defined populations and phenotypes that will most benefit from specific therapies. Standardized processes should be established for rapid and critical data review and dissemination to ensure scientific integrity. Clarity around the evidence standards needed for issuance of both emergency use authorization (EUA) and biologic license application (BLA) should be established and an infrastructure for executing rapid trials in epidemic settings maintained.

Therapeutic Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) During Pandemics: Double-edged Swords.

Given the urgent need for treatments during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, the US Food and Drug Administration issued emergency use authorizations (EUAs) for multiple therapies. In several instances, however, these EUAs were issued before sufficient evidence of a given therapy's efficacy and safety were available, potentially promoting ineffective or even harmful therapies and undermining the generation of definitive evidence. We describe the strengths and weaknesses of the different therapeutic EUAs issued during this pandemic. We also contrast them to the vaccine EUAs and suggest a framework and criteria for an evidence-based, trustworthy, and publicly transparent therapeutic EUA process for future pandemics.

Imported Haycocknema perplexum Infection, United States1.

We report an imported case of myositis caused by a rare parasite, Haycocknema perplexum, in Australia in a 37-year-old man who had progressive facial, axial, and limb weakness, dysphagia, dysphonia, increased levels of creatine kinase and hepatic aminotransferases, and peripheral eosinophilia for 8 years. He was given extended, high-dose albendazole.

Outcomes of bebtelovimab and sotrovimab treatment of solid organ transplant recipients with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 during the Omicron epoch.

BACKGROUND: Solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) are at high-risk for severe infection from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Anti-spike monoclonal antibodies are currently utilized under emergency use authorization to prevent hospitalization in high-risk individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including SOTRs. However, clinical data for bebtelovimab, the sole currently available anti-spike monoclonal antibody for COVID-19, is limited. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult SOTRs diagnosed with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 from January 2022 through May 2022 who received either bebtelovimab or sotrovimab. The primary outcome was COVID-19-related hospitalization within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. Data were analyzed with Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Among 361 SOTRs, 92 (25.5%) received bebtelovimab and 269 (74.5%) received sotrovimab. The most common organ transplant was a kidney (42.4%). SOTRs who received bebtelovimab had a higher proportion who had received a booster SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose and had received their last vaccination dose more recently. Eleven (3.0%) SOTRs were hospitalized, and rates of hospitalization were similar between monoclonal antibody groups (3.3% versus 3.0%; p > .99). Three patients required admission to an intensive care unit, all of who received sotrovimab. Four (1.1%) patients died within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis, two from each group. CONCLUSIONS: SOTRs with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who received bebtelovimab had similar rates of COVID-19-related hospitalization as those who received sotrovimab. While differences in vaccination rates and viral subvariants could act as confounders, bebtelovimab appears to be of similar effectiveness as sotrovimab.

Mass Spectrometric Analysis of Urine from COVID-19 Patients for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Viral Antigen and to Study Host Response.

SARS-CoV-2 infection has become a major public health burden and affects many organs including lungs, kidneys, the liver, and the brain. Although the virus is readily detected and diagnosed using nasopharyngeal swabs by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), detection of its presence in body fluids is fraught with difficulties. A number of published studies have failed to detect viral RNA by RT-PCR methods in urine. Although microbial identification in clinical microbiology using mass spectrometry is undertaken after culture, here we undertook a mass spectrometry-based approach that employed an enrichment step to capture and detect SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein directly from urine of COVID-19 patients without any culture. We detected SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein-derived peptides from 13 out of 39 urine samples. Further, a subset of COVID-19 positive and COVID-19 negative urine samples validated by mass spectrometry were used for the quantitative proteomics analysis. Proteins with increased abundance in urine of SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals were enriched in the acute phase response, regulation of complement system, and immune response. Notably, a number of renal proteins such as podocin (NPHS2), an amino acid transporter (SLC36A2), and sodium/glucose cotransporter 5 (SLC5A10), which are intimately involved in normal kidney function, were decreased in the urine of COVID-19 patients. Overall, the detection of viral antigens in urine using mass spectrometry and alterations of the urinary proteome could provide insights into understanding the pathogenesis of COVID-19.

Reducing Broad-Spectrum Antimicrobial Use in Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Reduce AMMO Study.

BACKGROUND: The use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in critically ill adults is increasing. There are currently no guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis. We analyzed 7 years of prophylactic antimicrobial use across 3 time series for patients on ECMO at our institution in the development, improvement, and streamlining of our ECMO antimicrobial prophylaxis protocol. METHODS: In this quasi-experimental interrupted time series analysis, we evaluated the impact of an initial ECMO antimicrobial prophylaxis protocol, implemented in 2014, on antimicrobial use and National Healthcare Safety Network-reportable infection rates. Then, following a revision and streamlining of the protocol in November 2018, we reevaluated the same metrics. RESULTS: Our study population included 338 intensive care unit patients who received ECMO between July 2011 and November 2019. After implementation of the first version of the protocol, we did not observe significant changes in antimicrobial use or infection rates in these patients; however, following revision and streamlining of the protocol, we demonstrated a significant reduction in broad-spectrum antimicrobial use for prophylaxis in patients on ECMO without any evidence of a compensatory increase in infection rates. CONCLUSIONS: Our final protocol significantly reduces broad-spectrum antimicrobial use for prophylaxis in patients on ECMO. We propose a standard antimicrobial prophylaxis regimen for patients on ECMO based on current evidence and our experience.Summary: There are no guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis in patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). A rational approach employing concepts of antimicrobial stewardship can drive logical antimicrobial selection for prophylaxis in patients on ECMO without adversely impacting outcomes.

The Association of Platelet Decrease Following Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy Initiation and Increased Rates of Secondary Infections.

OBJECTIVES: Thrombocytopenia is common in critically ill patients treated with continuous renal replacement therapy and decreases in platelets following continuous renal replacement therapy initiation have been associated with increased mortality. Platelets play a role in innate and adaptive immunity, making it plausible that decreases in platelets following continuous renal replacement therapy initiation predispose patients to development of infection. Our objective was to determine if greater decreases in platelets following continuous renal replacement therapy correlate with increased rates of secondary infection. DESIGN: Retrospectivecohort analysis. SETTING: This study uses a continuous renal replacement therapy database from Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN), a tertiary academic center. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients who survived until ICU discharge and were on continuous renal replacement therapy for less than 30 days were included. A subgroup analysis was also performed in patients with thrombocytopenia (platelets < 100 × 103/µL) at continuous renal replacement therapy initiation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary predictor variable was a decrease in platelets from precontinuous renal replacement therapy levels of greater than 40% or less than or equal to 40%, although multiple cut points were analyzed. The primary outcome was infection after ICU discharge, and secondary endpoints included post-ICU septic shock and post-ICU mortality. Univariable, multivariable, and propensity-adjusted analyses were used to determine associations between the predictor variable and the outcomes. RESULTS: Among 797 eligible patients, 253 had thrombocytopenia at continuous renal replacement therapy initiation. A greater than 40% decrease in platelets after continuous renal replacement therapy initiation was associated in the multivariable-adjusted models with increased odds of post-ICU infection in the full cohort (odds ratio, 1.49; CI, 1.02-2.16) and in the thrombocytopenia cohort (odds ratio, 2.63; CI, 1.35-5.15) cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Platelet count drop by greater than 40% following continuous renal replacement therapy initiation is associated with an increased risk of secondary infection, particularly in patients with thrombocytopenia at the time of continuous renal replacement therapy initiation. Further research is needed to evaluate the impact of both continuous renal replacement therapy and platelet loss on subsequent infection risk.

Healthcare disparities among anticoagulation therapies for severe COVID-19 patients in the multi-site VIRUS registry.

Here we analyze hospitalized andintensive care unit coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patient outcomes from the international VIRUS registry (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04323787). We find that COVID-19 patients administered unfractionated heparin but not enoxaparin have a higher mortality-rate (390 of 1012 = 39%) compared to patients administered enoxaparin but not unfractionated heparin (270 of 1939 = 14%), presenting a risk ratio of 2.79 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [2.42, 3.16]; p = 4.45e-52). This difference persists even after balancing on a number of covariates including demographics, comorbidities, admission diagnoses, and method of oxygenation, with an increased mortality rate on discharge from the hospital of 37% (268 of 733) for unfractionated heparin versus 22% (154 of 711) for enoxaparin, presenting a risk ratio of 1.69 (95% CI: [1.42, 2.00]; p = 1.5e-8). In these balanced cohorts, a number of complications occurred at an elevated rate for patients administered unfractionated heparin compared to patients administered enoxaparin, including acute kidney injury, acute cardiac injury, septic shock, and anemia. Furthermore, a higher percentage of Black/African American COVID patients (414 of 1294 [32%]) were noted to receive unfractionated heparin compared to White/Caucasian COVID patients (671 of 2644 [25%]), risk ratio 1.26 (95% CI: [1.14, 1.40]; p = 7.5e-5). After balancing upon available clinical covariates, this difference in anticoagulant use remained statistically significant (311 of 1047 [30%] for Black/African American vs. 263 of 1047 [25%] for White/Caucasian, p = .02, risk ratio 1.18; 95% CI: [1.03, 1.36]). While retrospective studies cannot suggest any causality, these findings motivate the need for follow-up prospective research into the observed racial disparity in anticoagulant use and outcomes for severe COVID-19 patients.

D-index as a marker of bloodstream infections in patients with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Neutropenia is a risk factor for development of infections; however, the direct effect of neutropenia on development of bloodstream infection (BSI) is not known. D-index, which is area between the neutrophil time curve and a neutrophil count of 0.5 × 109 /L, incorporates the combined effect of severity and duration of neutropenia. We aimed to evaluate whether D-index can be used as a marker for BSI in patients with allogeneic stem cell transplantation. METHOD: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2015. The primary outcome measure was the development of BSI within 30 days of transplantation. RESULTS: A total of 714 patients were included in the study of whom 101 developed BSI. Patients with BSI had a significantly higher median D-index value compared with patients who did not have BSI (4990 vs. 3570, P < .001). As a marker, the performance of the D-index was similar to that of the duration of profound neutropenia (P = .18) and significantly better than the total duration of neutropenia (P = .001). CONCLUSION: The D-index performed better than the total duration of neutropenia as a marker for BSI in patients with allogeneic stem cell transplantation. There was no difference between D-index and, a more easily calculable indicator, duration of profound neutropenia.

COVID-19 Mortality Prediction From Deep Learning in a Large Multistate Electronic Health Record and Laboratory Information System Data Set: Algorithm Development and Validation.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus and has strikingly heterogeneous clinical manifestations, with most individuals contracting mild disease but a substantial minority experiencing fulminant cardiopulmonary symptoms or death. The clinical covariates and the laboratory tests performed on a patient provide robust statistics to guide clinical treatment. Deep learning approaches on a data set of this nature enable patient stratification and provide methods to guide clinical treatment. OBJECTIVE: Here, we report on the development and prospective validation of a state-of-the-art machine learning model to provide mortality prediction shortly after confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Mayo Clinic patient population. METHODS: We retrospectively constructed one of the largest reported and most geographically diverse laboratory information system and electronic health record of COVID-19 data sets in the published literature, which included 11,807 patients residing in 41 states of the United States of America and treated at medical sites across 5 states in 3 time zones. Traditional machine learning models were evaluated independently as well as in a stacked learner approach by using AutoGluon, and various recurrent neural network architectures were considered. The traditional machine learning models were implemented using the AutoGluon-Tabular framework, whereas the recurrent neural networks utilized the TensorFlow Keras framework. We trained these models to operate solely using routine laboratory measurements and clinical covariates available within 72 hours of a patient's first positive COVID-19 nucleic acid test result. RESULTS: The GRU-D recurrent neural network achieved peak cross-validation performance with 0.938 (SE 0.004) as the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. This model retained strong performance by reducing the follow-up time to 12 hours (0.916 [SE 0.005] AUROC), and the leave-one-out feature importance analysis indicated that the most independently valuable features were age, Charlson comorbidity index, minimum oxygen saturation, fibrinogen level, and serum iron level. In the prospective testing cohort, this model provided an AUROC of 0.901 and a statistically significant difference in survival (P<.001, hazard ratio for those predicted to survive, 95% CI 0.043-0.106). CONCLUSIONS: Our deep learning approach using GRU-D provides an alert system to flag mortality for COVID-19-positive patients by using clinical covariates and laboratory values within a 72-hour window after the first positive nucleic acid test result.

Statins as an adjunctive therapy for COVID-19: the biological and clinical plausibility.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that causes the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has infected millions of individuals and has claimed hundreds of thousands of human lives worldwide. Patients with underlying cardiovascular conditions are at high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection, and COVID-19 patients have high incidence of cardiovascular complications such as acute cardiac injury, arrhythmias, heart failure, and thromboembolism. The disease has no approved proven effective therapy and hence repurposing of existing approved drugs has been considered as the fastest treatment approach. Statins have been shown to exhibit lipid lowering dependent and independent cardiovascular protective effects as well as favorable effects in various other pathophysiological states. These beneficial properties of statins are a result of their multiple pleotropic effects that include, anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, antithrombotic and antimicrobial properties. In this review, we provide a comprehensive description of the mechanisms of the pleotropic effects of statins, the relevant pre-clinical and clinical data pertinent to their role in infections and acute lung injury, the possible cardiovascular benefits of statins in COVID-19, and the implications of the therapeutic potential of statins in COVID-19 disease. We conclude with the rationale for conducting randomized controlled trials of statins in COVID-19 disease.

Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis is not Significantly Linked to COVID-19 Vaccines or Non-COVID Vaccines in a Large Multi-State Health System.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of COVID-19 vaccines and non-COVID-19 vaccines with cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST). MATERIALS AND METHOD: We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 771,805 vaccination events across 266,094 patients in the Mayo Clinic Health System between 01/01/2017 and 03/15/2021. The primary outcome was a positive diagnosis of CVST, identified either by the presence of a corresponding ICD code or by an NLP algorithm which detected positive diagnosis of CVST within free-text clinical notes. For each vaccine we calculated the relative risk by dividing the incidence of CVST in the 30 days following vaccination to that in the 30 days preceding vaccination. RESULTS: We identified vaccination events for all FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines including Pfizer-BioNTech (n = 94,818 doses), Moderna (n = 36,350 doses) and Johnson & Johnson - J&J (n = 1,745 doses). We also identified vaccinations events for 10 common FDA-approved non-COVID-19 vaccines (n = 771,805 doses). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence rate of CVST in 30-days before and after vaccination for any vaccine in this population. We further found the baseline CVST incidence in the study population between 2017 and 2021 to be 45 to 98 per million patient years. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world evidence-based study finds that CVST is rare and is not significantly associated with COVID-19 vaccination in our patient cohort. Limitations include the rarity of CVST in our dataset, a relatively small number of J&J COVID-19 vaccination events, and the use of a population drawn from recipients of a SARS-CoV-2 PCR test in a single health system.

Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Treatment and Management of Patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: There are many pharmacologic therapies that are being used or considered for treatment of COVID-19. There is a need for frequently updated practice guidelines on their use, based on critical evaluation of rapidly emerging literature. OBJECTIVE: Develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support patients, clinicians and other health-care professionals in their decisions about treatment and management of patients with COVID-19. METHODS: IDSA formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel of infectious disease clinicians, pharmacists, and methodologists with varied areas of expertise. Process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. RESULTS: The IDSA guideline panel agreed on 7 treatment recommendations and provided narrative summaries of other treatments undergoing evaluations. CONCLUSIONS: The panel expressed the overarching goal that patients be recruited into ongoing trials, which would provide much needed evidence on the efficacy and safety of various therapies for COVID-19, given that we could not make a determination whether the benefits outweigh harms for most treatments.

Cefepime is Associated with Acute Encephalopathy in Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Acute encephalopathy (AE) is a common complication of critical illness and is associated with increased short and long-term mortality. In this study, we evaluated the role of cefepime in causing AE. METHODS: Retrospective case-control study involving consecutive patients enrolled in the intensive care units (ICUs) of Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN between July 1, 2004 and December 31, 2015. AE was defined by the presence of delirium or depressed level of consciousness in the absence of deep sedation. Controls were identified as patients not developing AE and were matched by propensity score for age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, 24-h Apache III score and invasive ventilation use. RESULTS: The total number of eligible ICU admissions during our study period was 152,999. AE was present in 57,726 (37.7%) with a median AE duration of 17 (interquartile range [IQR] 4.0-51.8) hours. We matched 14,645 cases with AE with the same number of controls. Cefepime was used in 1241 (4.2%) patients and its use was associated with greater incidence of AE [713 (4.9%) vs 528 (3.6%), p < 0.001] and duration [unit estimate 0.73; (95% CI 0.542-0.918)]. On multivariate analysis, cefepime was associated with an increased likelihood of AE after controlling for shock, midazolam infusion and acute kidney injury [OR 1.24 (95% CI 1.10-1.27)]. These associations were also present after controlling for prior chronic kidney disease. CONCLUSION: The use of cefepime is associated with increased likelihood and duration of AE. These associations are stronger among patients with impaired renal function, but can also occur in patients without renal impairment.