RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There are limited data on clinical outcomes associated with the use of bebtelovimab for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among cancer patients. We aimed to define the clinical characteristics and outcomes among patients receiving bebtelovimab as part of the COVID-19 therapeutics program at our cancer center. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of immunosuppressed adult patients who received bebtelovimab at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center between March 2022, and November 2022. We reviewed medical records to capture the date of the first positive COVID-19 test, clinical characteristics, outcomes, and follow-up COVID-19 testing for 60 days after the first positive. Persistent infection was defined as a positive test beyond day 30; these patients were reviewed beyond day 60. RESULTS: Among 93 patients who received bebtelovimab, 64 (69%) had hematologic malignancy. Sixty-nine (74%) patients received bebtelovimab within 2 days after diagnosis. Two (2%) patients were hospitalized, none required ICU care, and one patient died on day 52; although it is unknown if death was directly related to COVID-19. Ten (11%) patients had persistent COVID-19 infection; of these, four received additional COVID-19 therapy with either nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or remdesivir, and five out of six patients with sequencing data available had spike protein mutations associated with bebtelovimab resistance. CONCLUSION: A coordinated systems-based approach led to prompt initiation of bebtelovimab within two days of testing positive in most patients. We observed few hospitalizations or deaths. Persistent infection was noted in 11% of patients with four requiring additional therapies, highlighting a need for novel strategies to manage immunosuppressed patients.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Neutralizantes , COVID-19 , Neoplasias , Adulto , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Teste para COVID-19 , Infecção Persistente , Estudos Retrospectivos , Neoplasias/complicações , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
Nearly half the patients identified as having health care facility-onset Clostridioides difficile infections on a hematopoietic cell transplant unit had an alternative clinical explanation for diarrhea, including conditioning regimen toxicity or other medications. Our study supports that targeted diagnostic stewardship interventions should be explored and that additional risk-adjustments considered for facilities with oncology hematopoietic cell transplant wards in the National Healthcare Safety Network LabID Clostridioides difficile infection standardized infection ratio model.
Assuntos
Clostridioides difficile , Infecções por Clostridium , Infecção Hospitalar , Transplante de Células-Tronco Hematopoéticas , Humanos , Transplante de Células-Tronco Hematopoéticas/efeitos adversos , Infecções por Clostridium/epidemiologia , Pacientes , Instalações de Saúde , Infecção Hospitalar/diagnóstico , Infecção Hospitalar/prevenção & controle , Infecção Hospitalar/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: US hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) recipients have a low prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), but if latently infected they are at risk for progression to active tuberculosis. At our center, all HCT recipients underwent LTBI testing pretransplant by tuberculin skin testing (TST) until 2013 when we implemented a targeted screening program. Our objective was to assess the utility of our screening program that incorporated a pretransplant LTBI questionnaire to target TST and QuantiFERON TB Gold (QFT) testing. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of HCT recipients undergoing first transplant from 2014 to 2016. Patients with positive, indeterminate, and a subset with negative QFT results underwent electronic medical record (EMR) review to assess TST results and risk factors for LTBI. RESULTS: Among 1290 eligible recipients, 457 (35%) had at least 1 risk factor for LTBI on the pretransplant questionnaire; nonwhites were more likely to undergo LTBI testing (Pâ <â .0001). Overall, 16 of 1290 (1.2%) had at least 1 positive LTBI test. Of those screened by QFT, 14 of 457 (3%) were positive and 52 (11%) were indeterminate. Among those undergoing EMR review, 123 of 267 (46%) had TST records; 4 of 123 (3%) positive by both TST and QFT, and 2 (2%) by TST alone. Two or more risk factors were reported among the majority of LTBI-positive patients (15 of 16 [94%]). All patients with at least 1 positive test for LTBI (nâ =â 16) were evaluated, and 11 of 16 (69%) were recommended to receive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating a pretransplant LTBI questionnaire allowed for an approximate 65% reduction in LTBI testing when compared with universal testing among this low prevalence population.