Implementation and outcomes of beta-lactam allergy management protocol at a comprehensive cancer center.

PURPOSE: Beta-lactam allergy (BLA) is associated with increased broad-spectrum antibiotic (Br-ABX) use and worse clinical outcomes. We evaluated our hospital-wide BLA protocol (BLA-P) that used following categories: intolerance, low-risk, and high-risk. METHODS: Hospitalized adult patients with listed BLA during 10/2021-12/2022 were eligible. Exclusions were critically ill, surgical, hospice or comfort care, or non-verbal patients. Assessment was counted each time a pharmacist evaluated BLA. Interventions were no further action (high-risk allergy, patient refusal, unstable clinical status), updated allergy label, or delabeled. Delabeling was done either based on antibiotic history (direct-delabeling), or via test-dose challenge for low-risk patients. Br-ABX usage was compared in the unique delabeled patients: the empiric antibiotic use 90 days post-delabeling versus pre-delabeling using McNemar test (SPSS). RESULTS: A total of 700 assessments in 631 patients were identified. 441 assessments in 377 patients (median 63 years-old, 41% male, 50% hematological cancer) met inclusion criteria. The assessments revealed 9% intolerance, 55% low-risk, 23% high-risk and 13% unknown reaction. Interventions resulted in no further action 7%, updated label 72%, and delabeling 21%. 65% of the delabeling was via direct-delabeling and 35% test-dose challenge. Among patients who received a test-dose challenge, 36/36(97%) had no documented allergic reactions, and 1/26(3%) developed a mild rash. The use of aztreonam (pre-delabeling 28% vs. post-delabeling 1.2%, p < 0.001) and meropenem (13% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.022) significantly decreased while cefepime (24% vs. 50%, p = 0.001) and piperacillin-tazobactam (3.7% vs. 22%, p < 0.001) increased after delabeling. CONCLUSION: BLA-P led to 21% delabeling, which resulted in increased preferred Br-ABX and decrease in aztreonam/meropenem use among delabeled patients.

Multidisciplinary approach in diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19-associated mucormycosis: a description of current reports.

Background: We reviewed the epidemiology, risk factors, pathophysiology, and clinical presentations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated mucormycosis (CAM), then discussed the importance of rapid diagnosis and treatment facilitated by multidisciplinary approach. Main body: India has reported world's highest number of CAM cases where Rhizopus arrhizus was the most predominant etiology. CAM caused by Rhizopus microsporus was the most common from the rest of the world. Multiple risk factors for CAM were identified including diabetes mellitus, inappropriate corticosteroid use, COVID-19-related hypoxia, and lung damage.Rhino-orbito-cerebral mucormycosis (ROCM) accounted for almost 90% of CAM in India while 64% of global cases were ROCM. Less than 10% of CAM from India were pulmonary while the rest of the world reported 21% of pulmonary CAM.CAM is diagnosed by confirmed SARS-CoV2 infection along with clinical, radiological, histopathological, and/or microbiological evidence of mucormycosis. In patients with risks of CAM and associated symptoms, CT or MRI are recommended. If ROCM is suspected, endoscopy and biopsy are recommended. If pulmonary CAM is suspected, tissue biopsies, nasal samples, or bronchoalveolar lavage is recommended with histopathological exams.Early diagnosis, surgical, and pharmaceutical interventions are key to treat mucormycosis. Upon diagnosis, antifungal therapy with liposomal amphotericin B (IV) is considered first-line of therapy. Alternatively, posaconazole (PO/IV) or isavuconazole (PO/IV) can be used. Conclusion: Treating CAM requires a multidisciplinary approach for early diagnosis and prompt initiation of interventions to maximize patient's chance of survival.

Characteristics of procalcitonin in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and clinical outcomes of antibiotic use stratified by procalcitonin levels.

We examined the characteristics of pro-calcitonin (PCT) in hospitalized COVID-19 patients (cohort 1) and clinical outcomes of antibiotic use stratified by PCT in non-critically ill patients without bacterial co-infection (cohort 2). Retrospective reviews were performed in adult, hospitalized COVID-19 patients during March-May 2020. For cohort 1, we excluded hospital transfers, renal disease and extra-pulmonary infection without isolated pathogen(s). For cohort 2, we further excluded microbiologically confirmed infection, 'do not resuscitate ± do not intubate' status, and intensive care unit (ICU). For cohort 1, PCT was compared between absent/low-suspicion and proven bacterial co-infections. Factors associated with elevated PCT and sensitivity/specificity/PPV/NPV of PCT cutoffs for identifying bacterial co-infections were explored. For cohort 2, clinical outcomes including mechanical ventilation within 5 days (MV5) were compared between the antibiotic and non-antibiotic groups stratified by PCT ≥ 0.25 µg/L. Nine hundred and twenty four non-ICU and 103 ICU patients were included (cohort 1). The median PCT was higher in proven vs. absent/low-suspicion of bacterial co-infection. Elevated PCT was significantly associated with proven bacterial co-infection, ICU status and oxygen requirement. For PCT ≥ 0.25 µg/L, sensitivity/specificity/PPV/NPV were 69/65/6.5/98% (non-ICU) and 75/33/8.6/94% (ICU). For cohort 2, 756/1305 (58%) patients were included. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the antibiotic and non-antibiotic groups except PCT ≥ 0.25 µg/L (antibiotic:non-antibiotic = 59%:24%) and tocilizumab use (antibiotic:non-antibiotic = 5%:2%). 23% (PCT < 0.25 µg/L) and 58% (PCT ≥ 0.25 µg/L) received antibiotics. Antibiotic group had significantly higher rates of MV5. COVID-19 severity inferred from ICU status and oxygen requirement as well as the presence of bacterial co-infections were associated with elevated PCT. PCT showed poor PPV and high NPV for proven bacterial co-infections. The use of antibiotics did not show improved clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients with PCT ≥ 0.25 µg/L outside of ICU when bacterial co-infections are of low suspicion.

Prospective CYP2C19-Guided Voriconazole Prophylaxis in Patients With Neutropenic Acute Myeloid Leukemia Reduces the Incidence of Subtherapeutic Antifungal Plasma Concentrations.

A risk mitigation strategy was implemented to determine if a higher prophylactic voriconazole dosage in patients with CYP2C19 rapid metabolizer neutropenic acute myeloid leukemia (AML) reduces the incidence of subtherapeutic trough concentrations. Patients with AML (n = 263) were preemptively genotyped for CYP2C19*2, *3, and *17 alleles as part of a single-center prospective, interventional, quality improvement study. CYP2C19 rapid metabolizers (CYP2C19*1/*17) were recommended to receive interventional voriconazole 300 mg twice daily, ultrarapid metabolizers (CYP2C19*17/*17) were recommended to avoid voriconazole, and all others received the standard prophylactic dosage of 200 mg twice daily. In this real-world setting, 202 patients (76.8%) were prescribed prophylactic voriconazole, and of these patients 176 (87.1%) received CYP2C19-guided prophylactic dosing. Voriconazole trough concentrations were obtained for 41 of the 58 (70.7%) CYP2C19 rapid metabolizers prescribed prophylactic voriconazole. Interventional voriconazole resulted in higher plasma trough concentrations (median 2.7 µg/mL) compared with the standard prophylactic dosage (median 0.6 µg/mL; P = 0.001). Subtherapeutic concentrations were avoided in 83.8% of CYP2C19 rapid metabolizers receiving interventional dosage compared to 46.2% receiving standard dosage (P = 0.02). CYP2C19 genotyping to preemptively guide prophylactic voriconazole dosing is feasible and may be a potential strategy for reducing the risk of subtherapeutic trough concentrations that potentiate breakthrough fungal infections.

Infectious Risks and Complications in Adult Leukemic Patients Receiving Blinatumomab.

BACKGROUND: Blinatumomab is an anti-CD19 immunotherapy approved for relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) with significantly increased survival rate. While blinatumomab showed lower rates of infection, neutropenia and mucosal barrier injury versus chemotherapy, its infection risks are not well described. METHODS: All patients who received blinatumomab for ≥ seven days at an academic cancer center from May 2015 to April 2017 were included. Patient characteristics pertinent to infectious risks and complications were examined. RESULTS: Twenty patients with refractory (25%), relapsed (70%), or remitted (5%) B-ALL who received a total of 35 cycles were included. Ten of the 35 cycles were interrupted, none of which were due to infections. Twenty-six infections (n) were observed with lower respiratory (9), gastrointestinal (6) and bacteremia (5) being most common. Compared to patients without nodular, possible mold pneumonia (n=16), patients with nodular pneumonia (n=4) had significantly lower baseline absolute neutrophil count (ANC) (2319 v. 208/µL, p=0.011). There were no differences in baseline characteristics including ANC between bacteremic and non-bacteremic patients. One patient was discharged with no antibacterial prophylaxis since ANC recovered to >500cells/µL, but developed Pseudomonal bacteremia within a week with ANC ~100cells/µL. CONCLUSION: Despite blinatumomab's relatively modest myelosuppression and the lack of mucotoxicity, host factors (e.g., duration and degree of neutropenia/lymphopenia) play a key role and should be considered when choosing anti-microbial prophylaxis. In relapsed/refractory disease, the ANC should be monitored closely post blinatumomab since neutropenia can unexpectedly develop after treatment which may be compounded by the underlying disease and recent chemotherapy effects.