RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Candidemia is a common opportunistic infection causing substantial morbidity and mortality. Because of an increasing proportion of non-albicans Candida species and rising antifungal drug resistance, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) changed treatment guidelines in 2016 to recommend echinocandins over fluconazole as first-line treatment for adults with candidemia. We describe candidemia treatment practices and adherence to the updated guidelines. METHODS: During 2017-2018, the Emerging Infections Program conducted active population-based candidemia surveillance at 9 US sites using a standardized case definition. We assessed factors associated with initial antifungal treatment for the first candidemia case among adults using multivariable logistic regression models. To identify instances of potentially inappropriate treatment, we compared the first antifungal drug received with species and antifungal susceptibility testing (AFST) results from initial blood cultures. RESULTS: Among 1835 patients who received antifungal treatment, 1258 (68.6%) received an echinocandin and 543 (29.6%) received fluconazole as initial treatment. Cirrhosis (adjusted odds ratio = 2.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-3.29) was the only underlying medical condition significantly associated with initial receipt of an echinocandin (versus fluconazole). More than one-half (nâ =â 304, 56.0%) of patients initially treated with fluconazole grew a non-albicans species. Among 265 patients initially treated with fluconazole and with fluconazole AFST results, 28 (10.6%) had a fluconazole-resistant isolate. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of patients with candidemia were initially treated with fluconazole, resulting in potentially inappropriate treatment for those involving non-albicans or fluconazole-resistant species. Reasons for nonadherence to IDSA guidelines should be evaluated, and clinician education is needed.
Asunto(s)
Candidemia , Adulto , Antifúngicos/uso terapéutico , Candida , Candidemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Candidemia/epidemiología , Equinocandinas/uso terapéutico , Fluconazol/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Pruebas de Sensibilidad Microbiana , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Espera VigilanteRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: As new hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapies emerge, only 1%-12% of individuals are screened in the US for HCV infection. Presently, HCV screening trends are unknown. METHODS: We utilized the Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States' (KPMAS) data repository to investigate HCV antibody screening between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2012. We identified the proportion screened for HCV and 5-year cumulative incidence of screening, the screening positivity rate, the provider types performing HCV screening, patient-level factors associated with being screened, and trends in screening over time. RESULTS: There were 444,594 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 15.8% of the cohort was ever screened for HCV. Adult primary care and obstetrics and gynecology providers performed 75.9% of all screening. The overall test positivity rate was 3.8%. Screening was more frequent in younger age groups (P <.0001) and those with a documented history of illicit drug use (P <.0001). Patients with missing drug use history (46.7%) were least likely to be screened (P <.0001). While the rate of HCV screening increased in the later years of the study among those enrolled in KPMAS 2009-2012, only 11.8% were screened by the end of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Screening for HCV is increasing but remains incomplete. Targeting screening to those with a history of injection drug will not likely expand screening, as nearly half of patients have no documented drug use history. Routine screening is likely the most effective approach to expand HCV screening.