Remdesivir and Mortality in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: The impact of remdesivir (RDV) on mortality rates in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is controversial, and the mortality effect in subgroups of baseline disease severity has been incompletely explored. The purpose of this study was to assess the association of RDV with mortality rates in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study we compared persons receiving RDV with those receiving best supportive care (BSC). Patients hospitalized between 28 February and 28 May 2020 with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection were included with the development of COVID-19 pneumonia on chest radiography and hypoxia requiring supplemental oxygen or oxygen saturation ≤94% with room air. The primary outcome was overall survival, assessed with time-dependent Cox proportional hazards regression and multivariable adjustment, including calendar time, baseline patient characteristics, corticosteroid use, and random effects for hospital. RESULTS: A total of 1138 patients were enrolled, including 286 who received RDV and 852 treated with BSC, 400 of whom received hydroxychloroquine. Corticosteroids were used in 20.4% of the cohort (12.6% in RDV and 23% in BSC). Comparing persons receiving RDV with those receiving BSC, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for death was 0.46 (.31-.69) in the univariate model (P < .001) and 0.60 (.40-.90) in the risk-adjusted model (P = .01). In the subgroup of persons with baseline use of low-flow oxygen, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for death in RDV compared with BSC was 0.63 (.39-1.00; P = .049). CONCLUSION: Treatment with RDV was associated with lower mortality rates than BSC. These findings remain the same in the subgroup with baseline use of low-flow oxygen.

Isavuconazole to prevent invasive fungal infection in immunocompromised adults: Initial experience at an academic medical centre.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical and economic outcomes associated with the use of isavuconazole as antifungal prophylaxis in high-risk immunocompromised patients. PATIENTS/METHODS: Retrospective, single-centre cohort study of patients who received isavuconazole prophylaxis. Outcomes assessed included breakthrough IFI, early discontinuation of isavuconazole for any reason and antifungal prophylaxis prescribed at discharge. The impact on inpatient drug expenditure was evaluated using current isavuconazole and posaconazole drug costs per observed isavuconazole days of therapy (DOT) during the study period. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-eight courses of isavuconazole prophylaxis were administered to 98 inpatients (2193 DOT). Relapsed/refractory acute myelogenous leukaemia was the indication for prophylaxis in over half (59.4%) of patients. Breakthrough IFI occurred in 8 (5.8%) courses. Suspected drug-related toxicities led to early discontinuation in 6 (4.3%) courses (five hepatotoxicity, one drug rash). At discharge, 24 (17.4%) courses lacked insurance coverage for isavuconazole. The formulary switch to isavuconazole prophylaxis resulted in an estimated mean drug cost savings of $128.25 per DOT relative to estimated posaconazole costs (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Isavuconazole may be an option for antifungal prophylaxis in high-risk immunocompromised adults and has the potential to produce significant inpatient drug cost savings. Further studies are needed to confirm the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of isavuconazole in this role.

Fluoroquinolone Prophylaxis Selects for Meropenem-nonsusceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa in Patients With Hematologic Malignancies and Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: In Pseudomonas aeruginosa, fluoroquinolone exposure promotes resistance to carbapenems through upregulation of efflux pumps and transcriptional downregulation of the porin OprD. Evidence of this effect among hematologic malignancy (HM) patients or hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients receiving fluoroquinolone prophylaxis for neutropenia is lacking. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated episodes of P. aeruginosa bloodstream infections in HM patients or HCT recipients over a 7-year period at our institution. We determined the association of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis at the time of infection with meropenem susceptibility of P. aeruginosa breakthrough isolates and risk factors for meropenem nonsusceptibility. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and phenotypic assessments of meropenem efflux pump activity were performed on select isolates to determine the mechanisms of meropenem resistance. RESULTS: We analyzed 55 episodes of P. aeruginosa bacteremia among 51 patients. Breakthrough bacteremia while on fluoroquinolone prophylaxis was associated with nonsusceptibility to meropenem, but not to antipseudomonal ß-lactams or aminoglycosides. The receipt of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis was independently predictive of bacteremia with a meropenem-nonsusceptible isolate. All meropenem-nonsusceptible isolates analyzed by WGS contained oprD inactivating mutations, and all meropenem-nonsusceptible isolates tested demonstrated reductions in the meropenem minimum inhibitory concentration in the presence of an efflux pump inhibitor. A phylogenetic analysis based on WGS revealed several clusters of closely related isolates from different patients. CONCLUSIONS: Fluoroquinolone prophylaxis in HM patients and HCT recipients is associated with breakthrough bacteremia with meropenem-nonsusceptible P. aeruginosa strains, likely due to both mutations increasing efflux pump activity and the epidemiology of P. aeruginosa bloodstream infections in our patient population.

Clinical Outcomes of Oral Suspension versus Delayed-Release Tablet Formulations of Posaconazole for Prophylaxis of Invasive Fungal Infections.

Posaconazole is used for prophylaxis for invasive fungal infections (IFIs) among patients with hematologic malignancies. We compared the incidence of breakthrough IFIs and early discontinuation between patients receiving delayed-release tablet and oral suspension formulations of posaconazole. This was a retrospective cohort study of patients receiving posaconazole between 1 January 2010 and 30 June 2016. We defined probable or proven breakthrough IFIs using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) criteria. Overall, 547 patients received 860 courses of posaconazole (53% received the oral suspension and 48% received the tablet); primary indications for prophylaxis were acute myeloid leukemia (69%), graft-versus-host disease (18%), and myelodysplastic syndrome (3%). There were no significant differences in demographics or indications between patients receiving the different formulations. The incidence and incidence rate of probable or proven IFIs were 1.6% and 3.2 per 10,000 posaconazole days, respectively. There was no significant difference in the rate of IFIs between suspension courses (2.8 per 10,000 posaconazole days) and tablet courses (3.7 per 10,000 posaconazole days) (rate ratio = 0.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.3 to 2.3). Of the 14 proven or probable cases of IFI, 8/14 had posaconazole serum concentrations measured, and the concentrations in 7/8 were above 0.7 µg/ml. Posaconazole was discontinued early in 15.5% of courses; however, the frequency of discontinuation was also not significantly different between the tablet (16.5%) and oral suspension (14.6%) formulations (95% CI for difference = -0.13 to 0.06). In conclusion, the incidence of breakthrough IFIs was low among patients receiving posaconazole prophylaxis and not significantly different between patients receiving the tablet formulation and those receiving the oral suspension formulation.