Sequential or Combination Treatments as Rescue Therapies in Immunocompromised Patients with Persistent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in the Omicron Era: A Case Series.

Prolonged SARS-CoV-2 infections are widely described in immunosuppressed patients, but safe and effective treatment strategies are lacking. We aimed to outline our approach to treating persistent COVID-19 in patients with immunosuppression from different causes. In this case series, we retrospectively enrolled all immunosuppressed patients with persistent SARS-CoV-2 infections treated at our centers between March 2022 and February 2023. Patients received different sequential or combination regimens, including antivirals (remdesivir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, or molnupiravir) and/or monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) (tixagevimab/cilgavimab or sotrovimab). The main outcome was a complete virological response (negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal swabs) at the end of treatment. Fifteen patients were included as follows: eleven (11/15; 73%) with hematological disease and four (4/15; 27%) with recently diagnosed HIV/AIDS infection. Six patients (6/15; 40%) received a single antiviral course, four patients (4/15; 27%) received an antiviral and mAbs sequentially, and two patients (13%) received three lines of treatment (a sequence of three antivirals or two antivirals and mAbs). A combination of two antivirals or one antiviral plus mAbs was administered in three cases (3/15, 20%). One patient died while still positive for SARS-CoV-2, while fourteen (14/15; 93%) tested negative within 16 days after the end of treatment. The median time to negativization since the last treatment was 2.5 days. Both sequential and combination regimens used in this study demonstrated high efficacy and safety in the high-risk group of immunosuppressed patients.

Real-Life Experience of Continuously Infused Ceftolozane/Tazobactam in Patients with Bronchiectasis and Multidrug-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infection in the Outpatient Setting.

(1) Background: Ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) is a novel ß-lactam/ß-lactamase inhibitor with excellent activity against the multidrug-resistant (MDR) P. aeruginosa. Continuous infusion (CI) dosing allows the optimization of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) properties of ß-lactam antibiotics and may support patients' treatment as outpatients. (2) Methods: Adult patients receiving their entire course of C/T as a CI in the outpatient setting were retrospectively included in the study. The primary outcome evaluated was clinical resolution. The secondary outcomes evaluated were PK/PD target attainment (ƒT > 4 × MIC) and microbiologic clearance at the end of treatment. Therapeutic drug monitoring to assess C/T concentration was performed. (3) Results: Three patients were enrolled in the study and received 9 g of C/T in CI every 24 h. One patient received an additional course of antimicrobial therapy due to disease exacerbation six months after initial treatment, accounting for four evaluated treatments. The primary outcome was achieved in 3/4 treatments and the secondary outcome was achieved in 4/4 and 3/3, respectively. In all patients, free ceftolozane concentrations were >10 times higher than the EUCAST breakpoint (4 mg/L). (4) Conclusions: Elastomeric infusion of C/T delivered in CI can be an effective and convenient way to treat acute diseases caused by MDR-P. aeruginosa, avoid hospital admission, and contribute to infection control strategies. Despite the small number of enrolled patients, clinical and microbiological results support this strategy.

On the SARS-CoV-2 "Variolation Hypothesis": No Association Between Viral Load of Index Cases and COVID-19 Severity of Secondary Cases.

Background: Emerging evidence supports the "variolation hypothesis" in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), but the derivative idea that the viral load of index cases may predict disease severity in secondary cases could be unsubstantiated. We assessed whether the prevalence of symptomatic infections, hospitalization, and deaths in household contacts of 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) cases differed according to the SARS-CoV-2 PCR cycle threshold (Ct) from nasal-pharyngeal swab at diagnosis of linked index cases. Methods: Cross-sectional study on household contacts of COVID-19 cases randomly sampled from all the infections diagnosed in March at our Microbiology Laboratory (Amedeo di Savoia, Turin). Data were retrospectively collected by phone interviews and from the Piedmont regional platform for COVID-19 emergency. Index cases were classified as high (HVl) and low viral load (LVl) according to two exploratory cut-offs of RdRp gene Ct value. Secondary cases were defined as swab confirmed or symptom based likely when not tested but presenting compatible clinical picture. Results: One hundred thirty-two index cases of whom 87.9% symptomatic and 289 household contacts were included. The latter were male and Caucasian in 44.3 and 95.8% of cases, with a median age of 34 years (19-57). Seventy-four were swab confirmed and other 28 were symptom based likely secondary cases. Considering both, the contacts of HVl and LVl did not differ in the prevalence of symptomatic infections nor COVID-19-related hospitalization and death. No difference in median Ct of index cases between symptomatic and asymptomatic, hospitalized and not hospitalized, or deceased and survived secondary cases was found. Negative findings were confirmed after adjusting for differences in time between COVID-19 onset and swab collection of index cases (median 5 days) and after removing pediatric secondary cases. Conclusions: The amount of SARS-CoV-2 of the source at diagnosis does not predict clinical outcomes of linked secondary cases. Considering the impelling release of assays for SARS-CoV-2 RNA exact quantification, these negative findings should inform clinical and public health strategies on how to interpret and use the data.

Diagnostic SARS-CoV-2 Cycle Threshold Value Predicts Disease Severity, Survival, and Six-Month Sequelae in COVID-19 Symptomatic Patients.

To date, there is no severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-(SARS-CoV-2)-specific prognostic biomarker available. We assessed whether SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold (Ct) value at diagnosis could predict novel CoronaVirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity, clinical manifestations, and six-month sequelae. Hospitalized and outpatient cases were randomly sampled from the diagnoses of March 2020 and data collected at 6 months by interview and from the regional database for COVID-19 emergency. Patients were stratified according to their RNA-dependent-RNA-polymerase Ct in the nasopharyngeal swab at diagnosis as follows: Group A ≤ 20.0, 20.0 < group B ≤ 28.0, and Group C > 28.0. Disease severity was classified according to a composite scale evaluating hospital admission, worst oxygen support required, and survival. Two hundred patients were included, 27.5% in Groups A and B both, 45.0% in Group C; 90% of patients were symptomatic and 63.7% were hospitalized. The median time from COVID-19 onset to swab collection was five days. Lethality, disease severity, type, and number of signs and symptoms, as well as six-month sequelae distributed inversely among the groups with respect to SARS-CoV-2 Ct. After controlling for confounding, SARS-CoV-2 Ct at diagnosis was still associated with COVID-19-related death (p = 0.023), disease severity (p = 0.023), number of signs and symptoms (p < 0.01), and presence of six-month sequelae (p < 0.01). Early quantification of SARS-CoV-2 may be a useful predictive marker to inform differential strategies of clinical management and resource allocation.