Post-CART-T Cell Infection: Etiology, pathogenesis, and therapeutic approaches.

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy targeting CD-19 has revolutionized the treatment of refractory B-cell malignancies. However, patients undergoing this therapy face an increased risk of infections due to compromised immune function, lymphodepleting chemotherapy, hospitalization, and therapy-related complications such as cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome. Patients with systemic corticosteroid use, low immunoglobulin levels, and severe CRS, are at higher risk of infection. This review article highlights the spectrum of infections encountered in CAR T cell therapy, including bacterial, viral, and fungal infections. Following consensus guidelines for vaccination and immunoglobulin replacement is recommended. Clear criteria for antibiotic usage and vaccinating household members against respiratory viruses are crucial. Understanding the risk factors, spectrum of infections, and implementing appropriate prophylactic measures are essential to optimize outcomes in patients undergoing CAR T cell therapy. By prioritizing infection prevention strategies, healthcare professionals can effectively improve patient care.

Experience with the use of siltuximab in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

OBJECTIVE: The study aims to describe characteristics and clinical outcome of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection that received siltuximab according to a protocol that aimed to early block the activity of IL-6 to avoid the progression of the inflammatory flare. METHODS: Retrospective review of the first 31 patients with SARS-CoV-2 treated with siltuximab, in Hospital Clinic of Barcelona or Hospital Universitario Salamanca, from March to April 2020 with positive polymerase-chain reaction (PCR) from a nasopharyngeal swab. RESULTS: The cohort included 31 cases that received siltuximab with a median (IQR) age of 62 (56-71) and 71% were males. The most frequent comorbidity was hypertension (48%). The median dose of siltuximab was 800 mg ranging between 785 and 900 mg. 7 patients received siltuximab as a salvage therapy after one dose of tocilizumab. At the end of the study, a total of 26 (83.9) patients had been discharged alive and the mortality rate was 16.1% but only 1 out of 24 that received siltuximab as a first line option (4%). CONCLUSIONS: Siltuximab is a well-tolerated alternative to tocilizumab when administered as a first line option in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia within the first 10 days from symptoms onset and high C-reactive protein.

Real-life use of remdesivir in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: Controversial results on remdesivir efficacy have been reported. We aimed to report our real-life experience with the use of remdesivir from its availability in Spain. METHODS: We performed a descriptive study of all patients admitted for ≥48 hours with confirmed COVID-19 who received remdesivir between the 1st of July and the 30th of September 2020. RESULTS: A total of 123 patients out of 242 admitted with COVID-19 at our hospital (50.8%) received remdesivir. Median age was 58 years, 61% were males and 56.9 % received at least one anti-inflammatory treatment. No adverse events requiring remdesivir discontinuation were reported. The need of intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation and 30-days mortality were 19.5%, 7.3% and 4.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In our real-life experience, the use of remdesivir in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was associated with a low mortality rate and good safety profile.

Predictors of multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in neutropenic patients with bloodstream infection.

OBJECTIVES: To assess risk factors for multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (MDR-PA) infection in neutropenic patients. METHODS: Single-centre retrospective analysis of consecutive bloodstream infection (BSI) episodes (2004-2017, Barcelona). Two multivariate regression models were used at BSI diagnosis and P. aeruginosa detection. Significant predictors were used to establish rules for stratifying patients according to MDR-PA BSI risk. RESULTS: Of 661 Gram-negative BSI episodes, 190 (28.7%) were caused by P. aeruginosa (70 MDR-PA). Independent factors associated with MDR-PA among Gram-negative organisms were haematological malignancy (OR 3.30; 95% CI 1.15-9.50), pulmonary source of infection (OR 7.85; 95% CI 3.32-18.56), nosocomial-acquired BSI (OR 3.52; 95% CI 1.74-7.09), previous antipseudomonal cephalosporin (OR 13.66; 95% CI 6.64-28.10) and piperacillin/tazobactam (OR 2.42; 95% CI 1.04-5.63), and BSI occurring during ceftriaxone (OR 4.27; 95% CI 1.15-15.83). Once P. aeruginosa was identified as the BSI aetiological pathogen, nosocomial acquisition (OR 7.13; 95% CI 2.87-17.67), haematological malignancy (OR 3.44; 95% CI 1.07-10.98), previous antipseudomonal cephalosporin (OR 3.82; 95% CI 1.42-10.22) and quinolones (OR 3.97; 95% CI 1.37-11.48), corticosteroids (OR 2.92; 95% CI 1.15-7.40), and BSI occurring during quinolone (OR 4.88; 95% CI 1.58-15.05) and ß-lactam other than ertapenem (OR 4.51; 95% CI 1.45-14.04) were independently associated with MDR-PA. Per regression coefficients, 1 point was assigned to each parameter, except for nosocomial-acquired BSI (3 points). In the second analysis, a score >3 points identified 60 (86.3%) out of 70 individuals with MDR-PA BSI and discarded 100 (84.2%) out of 120 with non-MDR-PA BSI. CONCLUSIONS: A simple score based on demographic and clinical factors allows stratification of individuals with bacteraemia according to their risk of MDR-PA BSI, and may help facilitate the use of rapid MDR-detection tools and improve early antibiotic appropriateness.

Prophylaxis of mould infections.

Invasive fungal infection continues to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality in haematological patients. Antifungal prophylaxis in these patients has remarkably increased survival since its introduction. In recent years, new antifungals have been on the rise, being more effective and having less toxicity than previous ones. Nonetheless, the number of patients at risk of fungal infection has also been increasing due to the continuous appearance of new immunosuppressive treatments. As a result of such, we face a changing situation that requires constant updating.