Individual and institutional predisposing factors of MRSA surgical site infection and outcomes-a retrospective case-control-study in 14 European high-volume surgical centres.

Objectives: To assess incidence rates of surgical site infections (SSI) by MRSA and to determine related factors and clinical outcome compared to MSSA, including country-specific, institutional and patient determinants. Patients and methods: We performed a subgroup analysis of the Europe-wide SALT (NCT03353532) study population with MRSA SSI from 14 centres in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK. Results: An overall MRSA SSI incidence of 0.06% (n = 104) was found in 178 903 patients undergoing invasive surgery in 2016. Frequently observed comorbidities were chronic cardiovascular disease, diabetes and solid tumours. Compared to the overall MRSA SSI incidence, incidence rates were significantly higher in Spain (58 of 67 934 cases) and lower in Germany (16 of 46 443 cases; both P < 0.05). Centres with antibiotic stewardship (ABS) and infectious disease (ID) consultation programmes (n = 3/14) had lower MRSA rates (17 of 43 556 cases versus 61 of 83 048 cases, P < 0.05). In bivariate analyses, MRSA SSI patients were significantly older, had higher BMI and more comorbidities compared to MSSA (P < 0.05 each). Surgery performed between 6:00 and 12:00 pm led to higher MRSA proportions among S. aureus SSI (17 of 104 cases versus 62 of 640 cases, P < 0.05). Conclusions: This study shows low overall and country-specific incidence rates of MRSA SSI in Europe. We could show significant differences between countries as well as between centres with established ABS and ID consultation programmes were observed. The number of those programmes seems too small against this background.

Primary prophylaxis of invasive fungal diseases in patients with haematological malignancies: 2022 update of the recommendations of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society for Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO).

Patients with haematological malignancies (HM) are at high risk of developing invasive fungal disease (IFD) with high morbidity and attributable mortality. We reviewed data published until September 2021 to update the 2017 antifungal prophylaxis recommendations of the German Society of Haematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO). The strong recommendation to administer antifungal prophylaxis in patients with HM with long-lasting neutropenia, i.e. <500 cells/µL for >7 days remains unchanged. Posaconazole remains the drug of choice for mould-active prophylaxis in these patients. Novel treatment options in HM, such as CAR-T-cell treatment or novel targeted therapies for acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) were considered, however, data are insufficient to give general recommendations for routine antifungal prophylaxis in these patients. Major changes regarding specific recommendations compared to the 2017 edition are the now moderate instead of mild support for the recommendations of isavuconazole and voriconazole. Furthermore, published evidence on micafungin allows recommending it at moderate strength for its use in HM. For the first time we included recommendations for non-pharmaceutical measures regarding IFD, comprising the use of high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters, smoking, measures during construction work and neutropenic diets. We reviewed the impact of antifungal prophylaxis with triazoles on drug-drug interactions with novel targeted therapies that are metabolized via cytochrome p450 where triazoles inhibit CYP3A4/5. The working group recommends reducing the dose of venetoclax when used concomitantly with strong CYP3A4 inhibiting antifungals. Furthermore, we reviewed data on the prophylactic use of novel antifungal agents. Currently there is no evidence to support their use in a prophylactic setting in clinical practice.

[Management of infection in immunocompromised patients]. / Infektionsmanagement bei Immunsupprimierten.

The number of immunosuppressed patients continues to increase worldwide. The main reasons are the demographic development and improved long-term survival, also for patients under immunosuppression. A major cause of hospitalization and mortality among these patients are infections. Their management, including prevention and adequate treatment, plays a crucial role in survival and quality of life, but also with regard to economic factors.Infection management in immunocompromised patients faces new challenges today. Not only the increasing number, but also new groups of patients at risk and an increasingly aging and comorbid population pose problems for the treating physicians. While cancer medicine is no longer determined solely by radiotherapy and chemotherapy, new targeted substances are playing an increasingly important role. In addition, new targeted substances complicate adequate infection prophylaxis due to potential interactions. The worldwide increase in antibiotic-resistant pathogens complicates treatment of bacterial infections, which is associated with increased mortality, especially in the immunocompromised patient population. Further, the disruption of the microbiome shows negative antibiotic-associated effects. Hence the reasonable use of anti-infectives in prophylaxis and therapy is of great importance.There are many recommendations and guidelines for clinicians regarding the management of infections in immunocompromised patients. Overlaps of infectiology, hygiene as well as hematology and oncology sometimes lead to different recommendations. This article provides an overview of the currently existing evidence and guidelines for infection management in immunosuppressed patients.

[Management of infections in patients with cancer]. / Infektionsmanagement in der Hämatologie und Onkologie: Verantwortungsvoller Einsatz von Antiinfektiva.

Patients with cancer are at increased risk of infection due to disease-associated or therapy-induced immunosuppression. Taking into account globally increasing antimicrobial resistance rates and negative effects associated with antibiotic treatments, the effective, appropriate and guideline-conform use of anti-infectives must be promoted in this clinical setting. The application of antibacterial prophylaxis should be limited to high-risk patients. Infection diagnostics and therapeutic strategies differ depending on the extent of expected immunosuppression and the patient's individual risk factors.

Association between the dietary regimen and infection-related complications in neutropenic high-risk patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Many haematology/oncology departments still provide a germ-free diet for neutropenic patients (neutropenic diet, ND) to minimise pathogen exposure, even though evidence on benefits is missing. We analysed the effects of a standard diet (SD) in neutropenic high-risk patients with cancer while focussing on infection-related outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Based on the Cologne Cohort of Neutropenic Patients, we conducted a propensity score-matched case-control study in haematological/oncological patients with a period of neutropenia longer than five days treated at our department between January 2004 and December 2012 (implementation of SD in January 2008). We assessed the association between an SD and selected infection-related end-points in an adjusted multivariable regression model and time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: In total, 2086 neutropenic episodes (1043 per diet group) were included into analysis. The median days of neutropenia were 9 (interquartile range 7-16). The adjusted multivariable model revealed no association between the SD and severity and persistence of fever, death within 28 days, antibiotic treatment and weight loss >3 kg and a non-significant adjusted association between SD and duration of antibiotic treatment and blood stream infections. There was a significant association between SD and incidence of diarrhoea (odds ratio [OR], 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-0.68; P < 0.001), nausea (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.43-0.66; P < 0.001) and weight loss >1 kg (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.89-0.98; P = 0.002) with fewer events in SD than in the ND group. The hazard ratios of SD for the analysed end-points were non-significant. CONCLUSION: In our study, the implementation of an SD for high-risk neutropenic patients with cancer was safe regarding infection-related end-points.

Primary prophylaxis of bacterial infections and Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in patients with hematologic malignancies and solid tumors: 2020 updated guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (AGIHO/DGHO).

Hematologic and oncologic patients with chemo- or immunotherapy-related immunosuppression are at substantial risk for bacterial infections and Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PcP). As bacterial resistances are increasing worldwide and new research reshapes our understanding of the interactions between the human host and bacterial commensals, administration of antibacterial prophylaxis has become a matter of discussion. This guideline constitutes an update of the 2013 published guideline of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO). It gives an overview about current strategies for antibacterial prophylaxis in cancer patients while taking into account the impact of antibacterial prophylaxis on the human microbiome and resistance development. Current literature published from January 2012 to August 2020 was searched and evidence-based recommendations were developed by an expert panel. All recommendations were discussed and approved in a consensus conference of the AGIHO prior to publication. As a result, we present a comprehensive update and extension of our guideline for antibacterial and PcP prophylaxis in cancer patients.

First results of the "Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2-Infected Patients (LEOSS)".

PURPOSE: Knowledge regarding patients' clinical condition at severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection is sparse. Data in the international, multicenter Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2-Infected Patients (LEOSS) cohort study may enhance the understanding of COVID-19. METHODS: Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, enrolled in the LEOSS cohort study between March 16, 2020, and May 14, 2020, were analyzed. Associations between baseline characteristics and clinical stages at diagnosis (uncomplicated vs. complicated) were assessed using logistic regression models. RESULTS: We included 2155 patients, 59.7% (1,287/2,155) were male; the most common age category was 66-85 years (39.6%; 500/2,155). The primary COVID-19 diagnosis was made in 35.0% (755/2,155) during complicated clinical stages. A significant univariate association between age; sex; body mass index; smoking; diabetes; cardiovascular, pulmonary, neurological, and kidney diseases; ACE inhibitor therapy; statin intake and an increased risk for complicated clinical stages of COVID-19 at diagnosis was found. Multivariable analysis revealed that advanced age [46-65 years: adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.73, 95% CI 1.25-2.42, p = 0.001; 66-85 years: aOR 1.93, 95% CI 1.36-2.74, p < 0.001; > 85 years: aOR 2.38, 95% CI 1.49-3.81, p < 0.001 vs. individuals aged 26-45 years], male sex (aOR 1.23, 95% CI 1.01-1.50, p = 0.040), cardiovascular disease (aOR 1.37, 95% CI 1.09-1.72, p = 0.007), and diabetes (aOR 1.33, 95% CI 1.04-1.69, p = 0.023) were associated with complicated stages of COVID-19 at diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The LEOSS cohort identified age, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and male sex as risk factors for complicated disease stages at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, thus confirming previous data. Further data regarding outcomes of the natural course of COVID-19 and the influence of treatment are required.

Central venous catheter-related infections in hematology and oncology: 2020 updated guidelines on diagnosis, management, and prevention by the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO).

Cancer patients frequently require central venous catheters for therapy and parenteral nutrition and are at high risk of central venous catheter-related infections (CRIs). Moreover, CRIs prolong hospitalization, cause an excess in resource utilization and treatment cost, often delay anti-cancer treatment, and are associated with a significant increase in mortality in cancer patients. We therefore summoned a panel of experts by the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) and updated our previous guideline on CRIs in cancer patients. After conducting systematic literature searches on PubMed, Medline, and Cochrane databases, video- and meeting-based consensus discussions were held. In the presented guideline, we summarize recommendations on definition, diagnosis, management, and prevention of CRIs in cancer patients including the grading of strength of recommendations and the respective levels of evidence. This guideline supports clinicians and researchers alike in the evidence-based decision-making in the management of CRIs in cancer patients.

Bridging antifungal prophylaxis with 50 mg or 100 mg micafungin in allogeneic stem cell transplantation: A retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Fluconazole or posaconazole is a standard of care in antifungal prophylaxis for patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). However, many patients need to interrupt standard prophylaxis due to intolerability, drug-drug interactions, or toxicity. Micafungin has come to prominence for these patients. However, the optimal biological dose of micafungin stays unclear. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy of micafungin as antifungal prophylaxis in HSCT patients. Micafungin was applied as bridging in patients who were not eligible to receive oral posaconazole. Micafungin was either given at a dose of 100 mg or 50 mg SID. RESULTS: A total of 173 patients received micafungin prophylaxis, 62 in the 100 mg and 111 in the 50 mg dose group. The incidence of probable or proven breakthrough IFDs during the observation period was one in the 100 mg and one in the 50 mg group. Fungal-free survival after 100 days was 98% and 99% (P = .842), and overall survival after 365 days was 60% and 63% (P = .8) respectively. In both groups, micafungin was well tolerated with no grade 3 or 4 toxicities. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective analysis, which was not powered to detect non-inferiority, micafungin is effective and complements posaconazole as fungal prophylaxis in HSCT.