Use of Cefiderocol in the Management of Children With Infection or Colonization With Multi-drug Resistant Gram-negative Bacteria: A Retrospective, Single-center Case Series.

Cefiderocol, a novel siderophore cephalosporin, represents a treatment option for infections with multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria, of which rates are rising worldwide. Clinical data on its use in children is limited. In our pediatric case series, the largest reported to date, cefiderocol seems safe and well tolerated, with more favorable clinical outcomes when compared to the literature reviewing adult cases.

Clinical Features, Immunological Characteristics, and Treatment Outcomes of Campylobacter spp. Infections in Patients With Common Variable Immunodeficiency.

BACKGROUND: Campylobacter infection usually causes a self-limited clinical illness lasting 5 to 7 days, resolving without antimicrobial treatment in immunocompetent subjects. However, an inadequate immune response can lead to a prolonged and severe disease requiring antibiotics and more aggressive therapeutic approaches. OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively describe Campylobacter spp. infections in patients with common variable immunodeficiency (CVID). METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 14 CVID patients with Campylobacter infection and 95 CVID controls attending the immunology clinic at a large tertiary hospital was assessed. Immunological, clinical, and microbiological parameters were measured with median follow-up over 20 years in both cohorts. Patients were treated according to a novel algorithm for Campylobacter in antibody-deficient patients. RESULTS: Campylobacter patients had a higher proportion of CD21lowCD38low and transitional B cells (median 38.0% vs 14.2% and 5.4% vs 3.2%) and lower long-term average CD19+ B cells (median 0.06 vs 0.18 × 109/L) and CD4+ T cells (0.41 vs 0.62 × 109/L) in comparison with the controls. Similarly, Campylobacter patients showed a decline in B cells (median 0.02 vs 0.14 × 109/L), CD4+ T cells (0.33 vs 0.59 × 109/L), CD8+ T cells (0.26 vs 0.62 × 109/L), and natural killer cells (0.08 vs 0.18 × 109/L) over time. Antimicrobial resistance, especially to macrolides and fluoroquinolones, was common. Bacterial clearance with associated clinical improvement was obtained after a median of 20 and 113 days for acute Campylobacter (resolution within 3 mo of onset) and chronic Campylobacter (>3 mo) infections, respectively. Seven received first-line treatment (azithromycin or chloramphenicol), 4 second-line (neomycin), and 3 third-line (combination of tigecycline, chloramphenicol, and ertapenem; 1 received gentamicin owing to resistance to carbapenems). CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights immunological and clinical characteristics of recurrent Campylobacter infections in patients with CVID. Our treatment algorithm was successful and should be evaluated in a larger cohort.

Comparison of endoscopic sinus sampling versus intracranial sampling for microbiological diagnosis of intracranial infection in children: a case series and literature review.

INTRODUCTION: Intracranial infection is often associated with contiguous sinus infection, with Streptococcus intermedius being the most common pathogen. Microbiological assessment is possible via sinus or intracranial sampling. While a sinus approach is minimally invasive, it is not clear whether this yields definitive microbiological diagnosis leading to optimized antimicrobial therapy and avoidance of intracranial surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected electronic departmental database identified patients between 2019 and 2022. Further demographic and microbiological information was obtained from electronic patient records and laboratory management systems. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were identified with intracranial subdural and/or epidural empyema and concurrent sinus involvement during the 3-year study period. The median age of onset was 10 years with a slight male predominance (55%). All patients had intracranial sampling with 15 patients undergoing sinus sampling in addition. Only 1 patient (7%) demonstrated identical organism(s) grown from both samples. Streptococcus intermedius was the most common pathogen in intracranial samples. Thirteen patients (42%) had mixed organisms from their intracranial cultures and 57% of samples undergoing bacterial PCR identified additional organisms, predominantly anaerobes. Sinus samples had a significant addition of nasal flora and Staphylococcus aureus which was rarely grown from intracranial samples. Of concern, 7/14 (50%) of sinus samples did not identify the main intracranial pathogen diagnosed on intracranial culture and additional PCR. Literature review identified 21 studies where sinus drainage was used to treat intracranial empyemas, with only 6 authors reporting concurrent microbiology results. This confirmed our cohort to be the largest comparative study in the current literature. No center has observed a greater than 50% concordance in microbiological diagnoses. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic sinus surgery may have therapeutic benefit, but it is not an appropriate approach for microbiological diagnosis in pediatric subdural empyemas. High rates of contaminating nasal flora can lead to misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment. Routine addition of 16S rRNA PCR to intracranial samples is recommended.

Favipiravir, lopinavir-ritonavir, or combination therapy (FLARE): A randomised, double-blind, 2 × 2 factorial placebo-controlled trial of early antiviral therapy in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Early antiviral treatment is effective for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) but currently available agents are expensive. Favipiravir is routinely used in many countries, but efficacy is unproven. Antiviral combinations have not been systematically studied. We aimed to evaluate the effect of favipiravir, lopinavir-ritonavir or the combination of both agents on Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral load trajectory when administered early. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a Phase 2, proof of principle, randomised, placebo-controlled, 2 × 2 factorial, double-blind trial of ambulatory outpatients with early COVID-19 (within 7 days of symptom onset) at 2 sites in the United Kingdom. Participants were randomised using a centralised online process to receive: favipiravir (1,800 mg twice daily on Day 1 followed by 400 mg 4 times daily on Days 2 to 7) plus lopinavir-ritonavir (400 mg/100 mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 200 mg/50 mg 4 times daily on Days 2 to 7), favipiravir plus lopinavir-ritonavir placebo, lopinavir-ritonavir plus favipiravir placebo, or both placebos. The primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 viral load at Day 5, accounting for baseline viral load. Between 6 October 2020 and 4 November 2021, we recruited 240 participants. For the favipiravir+lopinavir-ritonavir, favipiravir+placebo, lopinavir-ritonavir+placebo, and placebo-only arms, we recruited 61, 59, 60, and 60 participants and analysed 55, 56, 55, and 58 participants, respectively, who provided viral load measures at Day 1 and Day 5. In the primary analysis, the mean viral load in the favipiravir+placebo arm had changed by -0.57 log10 (95% CI -1.21 to 0.07, p = 0.08) and in the lopinavir-ritonavir+placebo arm by -0.18 log10 (95% CI -0.82 to 0.46, p = 0.58) compared to the placebo arm at Day 5. There was no significant interaction between favipiravir and lopinavir-ritonavir (interaction coefficient term: 0.59 log10, 95% CI -0.32 to 1.50, p = 0.20). More participants had undetectable virus at Day 5 in the favipiravir+placebo arm compared to placebo only (46.3% versus 26.9%, odds ratio (OR): 2.47, 95% CI 1.08 to 5.65; p = 0.03). Adverse events were observed more frequently with lopinavir-ritonavir, mainly gastrointestinal disturbance. Favipiravir drug levels were lower in the combination arm than the favipiravir monotherapy arm, possibly due to poor absorption. The major limitation was that the study population was relatively young and healthy compared to those most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: At the current doses, no treatment significantly reduced viral load in the primary analysis. Favipiravir requires further evaluation with consideration of dose escalation. Lopinavir-ritonavir administration was associated with lower plasma favipiravir concentrations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04499677 EudraCT: 2020-002106-68.

Treatment of chronic or relapsing COVID-19 in immunodeficiency.

BACKGROUND: Patients with some types of immunodeficiency can experience chronic or relapsing infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). This leads to morbidity and mortality, infection control challenges, and the risk of evolution of novel viral variants. The optimal treatment for chronic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unknown. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to characterize a cohort of patients with chronic or relapsing COVID-19 disease and record treatment response. METHODS: We conducted a UK physician survey to collect data on underlying diagnosis and demographics, clinical features, and treatment response of immunodeficient patients with chronic (lasting ≥21 days) or relapsing (≥2 episodes) of COVID-19. RESULTS: We identified 31 patients (median age 49 years). Their underlying immunodeficiency was most commonly characterized by antibody deficiency with absent or profoundly reduced peripheral B-cell levels; prior anti-CD20 therapy, and X-linked agammaglobulinemia. Their clinical features of COVID-19 were similar to those of the general population, but their median duration of symptomatic disease was 64 days (maximum 300 days) and individual patients experienced up to 5 episodes of illness. Remdesivir monotherapy (including when given for prolonged courses of ≤20 days) was associated with sustained viral clearance in 7 of 23 clinical episodes (30.4%), whereas the combination of remdesivir with convalescent plasma or anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAbs resulted in viral clearance in 13 of 14 episodes (92.8%). Patients receiving no therapy did not clear SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 can present as a chronic or relapsing disease in patients with antibody deficiency. Remdesivir monotherapy is frequently associated with treatment failure, but the combination of remdesivir with antibody-based therapeutics holds promise.

Early antiviral treatment in outpatients with COVID-19 (FLARE): a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this trial is to assess whether early antiviral therapy in outpatients with COVID-19 with either favipiravir plus lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir alone, or favipiravir alone, is associated with a decrease in viral load of SARS-CoV-2 compared with placebo. TRIAL DESIGN: FLARE is a phase IIA randomised, double-blind, 2x2 factorial placebo-controlled, interventional trial. PARTICIPANTS: This trial is being conducted in the United Kingdom, with Royal Free Hospital, London as the lead site. Participants are non-hospitalised adults with highly suspected COVID-19 within the first 5 days of symptom onset, or who have tested positive with SARS-CoV-2 causing COVID-19 within the first 7 days of symptom onset, or who are asymptomatic but tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 for the first time within the last 48 hours. Inclusion criteria are as follows: 1. Any adult with the following: Symptoms compatible with COVID-19 disease (Fever >37.8°C on at least one occasion AND either cough and/ or anosmia) within the first 5 days of symptom onset (date/time of enrolment must be within the first 5 days of symptom onset) OR ANY symptoms compatible with COVID-19 disease (may include, but are not limited to fever, cough, shortness of breath, malaise, myalgia, headache, coryza) and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 within the first 7 days of symptom onset) (date/time of enrolment must be within the first 7 days of symptom onset) OR no symptoms but tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 within the last 48 hours (date/time of test must be within 48 hours of enrolment) 2. Male or female aged 18 years to 70 years old inclusive at screening 3. Willing and able to take daily saliva samples 4. Able to provide full informed consent and willing to comply with trial-related procedures Exclusion criteria are as follows: 1. Known hypersensitivity to any of the active ingredients or excipients in favipiravir and matched placebo, and in lopinavir/ritonavir and matched placebo (See Appendix 2) 2. Chronic liver disease at screening (known cirrhosis of any aetiology, chronic hepatitis (e.g. autoimmune, viral, steatohepatitis), cholangitis or any known elevation of liver aminotransferases with AST or ALT > 3 X ULN)* 3. Chronic kidney disease (stage 3 or beyond) at screening: eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73m2 * 4. HIV infection, if untreated, detectable viral load or on protease inhibitor therapy 5. Any clinical condition which the investigator considers would make the participant unsuitable for the trial 6. Concomitant medications known to interact with favipiravir and matched placebo, and with lopinavir/ritonavir and matched placebo, and carry risk of toxicity for the participant 7. Current severe illness requiring hospitalisation 8. Pregnancy and/ or breastfeeding 9. Eligible female participants of childbearing potential and male participants with a partner of childbearing potential not willing to use highly effective contraceptive measures during the trial and within the time point specified following last trial treatment dose. 10. Participants enrolled in any other interventional drug or vaccine trial (co-enrolment in observational studies is acceptable) 11. Participants who have received the COVID-19 vaccine *Considering the importance of early treatment of COVID-19 to impact viral load, the absence of known chronic liver/ kidney disease will be confirmed verbally by the participant during pre-screening and Screening/Baseline visit. Safety blood samples will be collected at Screening/Baseline visit (Day 1) and test results will be examined as soon as they become available and within 24 hours. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Participants will be randomised 1:1:1:1 using a concealed online minimisation process into one of the following four arms: Arm 1: Favipiravir + Lopinavir/ritonavir Oral favipiravir at 1800mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 400mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7 PLUS lopinavir/ritonavir at 400mg/100mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 200mg/50mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7. Arm 2: Favipiravir + Lopinavir/ritonavir placebo Oral favipiravir at 1800mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 400mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7 PLUS lopinavir/ritonavir matched placebo at 400mg/100mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 200mg/50mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7. Arm 3: Favipiravir placebo + Lopinavir/ritonavir Oral favipiravir matched placebo at 1800mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 400mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7 PLUS lopinavir/ritonavir at 400mg/100mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 200mg/50mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7. Arm 4: Favipiravir placebo + Lopinavir/ritonavir placebo Oral favipiravir matched placebo at 1800mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 400mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7 PLUS lopinavir/ritonavir matched placebo at 400mg/100mg twice daily on Day 1, followed by 200mg/50mg four (4) times daily from Day 2 to Day 7. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is upper respiratory tract viral load at Day 5. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Percentage of participants with undetectable upper respiratory tract viral load after 5 days of therapy Proportion of participants with undetectable stool viral load after 7 days of therapy Rate of decrease in upper respiratory tract viral load during 7 days of therapy Duration of fever following commencement of trial medications Proportion of participants with hepatotoxicity after 7 days of therapy Proportion of participants with other medication-related toxicity after 7 days of therapy and 14 days post-randomisation Proportion of participants admitted to hospital with COVID-19 related illness Proportion of participants admitted to ICU with COVID-19 related illness Proportion of participants who have died with COVID-19 related illness Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis of favipiravir Exploratory: Proportion of participants with deleterious or resistance-conferring mutations in SARS-CoV-2 RANDOMISATION: Participants will be randomised 1:1:1:1 using a concealed online minimisation process, with the following factors: trial site, age (≤ 55 vs > 55 years old), gender, obesity (BMI <30 vs ≥30), symptomatic or asymptomatic, current smoking status (Yes = current smoker, No = ex-smoker, never smoker), ethnicity (Caucasian, other) and presence or absence of comorbidity (defined as diabetes, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease (including previous myocardial infarction), other heart disease (arrhythmia and valvular heart disease), asthma, COPD, other chronic respiratory disease). BLINDING (MASKING): Participants and investigators will both be blinded to treatment allocation (double-blind). NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): 240 participants, 60 in each arm. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 4.0 dated 7th January 2021. Date of first enrolment: October 2020. Recruitment is ongoing, with anticipated finish date of 31st March 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The FLARE trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, trial identifying number NCT04499677 , date of registration 4th August 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Norovirus infection in primary immune deficiency.

Norovirus is acknowledged to be a leading cause of acute gastroenteritis worldwide, and its importance as a cause of chronic infection in immune deficient hosts is increasingly recognised. Current evidence suggests that a coordinated response of innate immune mechanisms, CD8+ cytotoxicity and a humoral response, with CD4+ orchestration, is necessary for norovirus clearance. We explain how primary immune deficiency impairs these host defences and predisposes to chronic infection, associated with protracted diarrhoea, weight loss, and requirement for parenteral nutrition. The mucosal villous atrophy frequently seen in norovirus infection appears to be immune mediated, suggesting that some functional immune response is required in order for chronic norovirus infection to become symptomatic in primary immune deficiency. We provide a comprehensive summary of published cases of norovirus infection in patients with primary immune deficiency. Spontaneous viral clearance has been described; however, the majority of reported cases have had prolonged and severe illness. Treatment strategies are discussed in detail. Approaches that have been tried in patients with primary immune deficiency include exclusion diets, enteral and intravenous immunoglobulins, breast milk, immunosuppressants, ribavirin, and nitazoxanide. To date, only ribavirin has been used with apparent success to achieve clearance of chronic norovirus in primary immune deficiency, and randomised controlled trials are needed to evaluate a number of promising therapies that are discussed.