Gut Microbiome Disruption Following SARS-CoV-2: A Review.

COVID-19 has been associated with having a negative impact on patients' gut microbiome during both active disease and in the post-acute phase. In acute COVID-19, rapid alteration of the gut microbiome composition was observed, showing on one side a reduction in beneficial symbionts (e.g., Roseburia, Lachnospiraceae) and on the other side an increase in opportunistic pathogens such as Enterococcus and Proteobacteria. Alpha diversity tends to decrease, especially initially with symptom onset and hospital admission. Although clinical recovery appears to align with improved gut homeostasis, this process could take several weeks, even in mild infections. Moreover, patients with COVID-19 post-acute syndrome showed changes in gut microbiome composition, with specific signatures associated with decreased respiratory function up to 12 months following acute disease. Potential treatments, especially probiotic-based therapy, are under investigation. Open questions remain on the possibility to use gut microbiome data to predict disease progression and on potential confounders that may impair result interpretation (e.g., concomitant therapies in the acute phase; reinfection, vaccines, and occurrence of novel conditions or diseases in the post-acute syndrome). Understanding the relationships between gut microbiome dynamics and disease progression may contribute to better understanding post-COVID syndrome pathogenesis or inform personalized treatment that can affect specific targets or microbiome markers.

How to tailor recommendations on the treatment of multi-drug resistant Gram-negative infections at country level integrating antibiotic stewardship principles within the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT framework.

Promoting the optimal use of antibiotics through evidence-based recommendations should be regarded as a crucial step in the global fight against antimicrobial resistance. Within this scope, several guidelines and guidance documents for antibiotic therapy have been published in recent years. All documents underline the limitations of existing evidence and remark on the need for tailoring recommendations at the national level, based on local epidemiology, availability of diagnostics and drugs, and antimicrobial stewardship principles. The GRADE-ADOLOPMENT methodology is an evidence-based methodology that allows the adoption, adaptation, and update of existing recommendations to specific settings without performing de novo systematic reviews and grading of the evidence. However, procedures to integrate this evidence with stewardship principles, countries' surveillance data, and capacity in terms of diagnostics and antibiotics' availability have never been defined. This Personal View provides the first example of a country's calibration of international evidence-based guidance documents on treating infections caused by multidrug-resistant bacteria. A panel of experts convened by the Italian Medicine Agency (AIFA) used the GRADE methodology for systematically extracting and evaluating 100 recommendations on the treatment of infections due to multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria from 11 guidance documents and 24 systematic reviews. The ADOLOPMENT procedure was used to calibrate the existing recommendations to the national context, leading to the adoption of 64, the adaptation of 27, and the rejection of nine recommendations. We discuss the technical details of the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT application, the calibration process, and the human resources required to support such an effort. This Personal View also covers the challenges of integrating antibiotic stewardship principles in evidence-based recommendations for treating infections with very limited therapeutic and diagnostic options. The details presented here could support the easy transferability of the methodology to other countries and settings, particularly where the incidence of antibiotic-resistant infections is high.

Risk factors for colonization with multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria and Clostridioides difficile in Long Term Care Facilities (LTCFs) residents: the evidence from 27 facilities in a high endemic setting.

Introduction: Residency in LTCFs increases the likelihood of colonization with multidrug resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GNB). We assessed the prevalence and risk factors for enteric colonization by III-generation cephalosporins-resistant and carbapenem-resistant (CR) GNB in a large group of LTCFs in a high endemic setting. We also assessed the prevalence and risk factors for C. difficile colonization. Methods: A point prevalence survey with rectal screening (RS) was conducted in 27 LTCFs in north Italy. Epidemiological and clinical variables on the survey day, history of hospitalization and surgery within one year, and antibiotics within three months, were collected. The presence of III-generation cephalosporin resistant and CR GNB was assessed using a selective culture on chromogenic medium and PCR for carbapenemase detection. The presence of C. difficile was assessed using ELISA for GDH and RT-PCR to identify toxigenic strains. Multi-variable analyses were performed using two-level logistic regression models. Results: In the study period 1947 RSs were performed. The prevalence of colonization by at least one GNB resistant to III-generation cephalosporin was 51% (E. coli 65%, K. pneumoniae 14% of isolates). The prevalence of colonization by CR GNB was 6%. 6% of all isolates (1150 strains) resulted in a carbapenem-resistant K. pneumoniae, and 3% in a carbapenem-resistant E. coli. KPC was the most frequent carbapenemase (73%) identified by PCR, followed by VIM (23%). The prevalence of colonization by C. difficile was 11.7%. The presence of a medical device (OR 2.67) and previous antibiotic use (OR 1.48) were significantly associated with III-generation cephalosporin resistant GNB colonization. The presence of a medical device (OR 2.67) and previous hospitalization (OR 1.80) were significantly associated with CR GNB. The presence of a medical device (OR 2.30) was significantly associated with C. difficile colonization. Main previously used antibiotic classes were fluoroquinolones (32% of previously treated subjects), III-generation cephalosporins (21%), and penicillins (19%). Conclusion: Antimicrobial stewardship in LTCFs is a critical issue, being previous antibiotic treatment a risk factor for colonization by MDR-GNB. The prevalence of colonization by III-generation cephalosporin and CR GNB among LTCF residents also underlines the importance to adhere to hand hygiene indications, infection prevention and control measures, and environmental hygiene protocols, more achievable than rigorous contact precautions in this type of social setting.

Impact of COVID-19 and Antibiotic Treatments on Gut Microbiome: A Role for Enterococcus spp.

OBJECTIVE: Several studies showed the substantial use of antibiotics and increased risk of antimicrobial resistant infections in patients with COVID-19. The impact of COVID-19-related treatments and antibiotics on gut dysbiosis has not been clarified. DESIGN: The prospective cohort study included hospitalized COVID-19 patients (April-December 2020). The gut microbiome composition was analysed by 16S sequencing. The gut diversity and changes in opportunistic bacteria (OBs) or symbionts were analysed according to clinical parameters, laboratory markers of disease progression, type of non-antibiotic COVID-19 treatments (NACT) and type, WHO AWaRe group, and duration of antibiotic therapy (AT). RESULTS: A total of 82 patients (mean age 66 ± 13 years, 70% males) were enrolled. The relative abundance of Enterococcus was significantly correlated with duration of hospitalization, intensive care unit stay, O2 needs, and D-dimer, ferritin, and IL-6 blood levels. The presence of Enterococcus showed the highest number of correlations with NACT, AT, and AT + NACT (e.g., hydroxychloroquine ± lopinavir/ritonavir) and increased relative abundance with AWaRe Watch/Reserve antibiotics, AT duration, and combinations. Abundance of Dorea, Agathobacter, Roseburia, and Barnesiella was negatively correlated with AT and corticosteroids use. Patients with increased IL-6, D-dimer, and ferritin levels receiving AT were more likely to show dysbiosis with increased abundance of Enterococcus and Bilophila bacteria and decreased abundance of Roseburia compared with those not receiving AT. CONCLUSION: Microbiome diversity is affected by COVID-19 severity. In this context, antibiotic treatment may shift the gut microbiome composition towards OBs, particularly Enterococcus. The impact of treatment-driven dysbiosis on OBs infections and long-term consequences needs further study to define the role of gut homeostasis in COVID-19 recovery and inform targeted interventions.

Determinants of persistence of symptoms and impact on physical and mental wellbeing in Long COVID: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Residual symptoms can be detected for several months after COVID-19. To better understand the predictors and impact of symptom persistence we analyzed a prospective cohort of COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Patients were followed for 9 months after COVID-19 onset. Duration and predictors of persistence of symptoms, physical health and psychological distress were assessed. RESULTS: 465 patients (54% males, 51% hospitalized) were included; 37% presented with at least 4 symptoms and 42% complained of symptom lasting more than 28 days. At month 9, 20% of patients were still symptomatic, showing mainly fatigue (11%) and breathlessness (8%). Hospitalization and ICU stay vs. non-hospitalized status increased the median duration of fatigue of 8 weeks. Age > 50 years (OR 2.50), ICU stay (OR 2.35), and presentation with 4 or more symptoms (OR 2.04) were independent predictors of persistence of symptoms at month 9. A total of 18% of patients did not return to optimal pre-COVID physical health, while 19% showed psychological distress at month 9. Hospital admission (OR 2.28) and persistence of symptoms at day 28 (OR 2.21) and month 9 (OR 5.16) were independent predictors of suboptimal physical health, while female gender (OR 5.27) and persistence of symptoms at day 28 (OR 2.42) and month 9 (OR 2.48) were risk factors for psychological distress. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced age, ICU stay and multiple symptoms at onset were more likely to suffer from long-term symptoms, which had a negative impact on both physical and mental wellbeing. This study contributes to identify the target populations and Long COVID consequences for planning long-term recovery interventions.

Short-cycle therapy in HIV-infected adults: rilpivirine combination 4 days on/3 days off therapy.

BACKGROUND: Short-cycle therapy (SCT) is the administration of ART for 4 or 5 consecutive days a week, followed by 3 or 2 days off therapy. Its benefits include improving patient satisfaction and reducing ART toxicity and costs. METHODS: In this observational study we included HIV-infected adults with a three-drug ART containing rilpivirine, a history of long-term virological suppression and no evidence of resistance to previous drug regimens. Patients switched to a SCT of 4 days on/3 days off and were followed for 48 weeks with regular check-ups. The primary outcome was virological suppression; secondary outcomes were changes in CD4+ cells and rilpivirine plasma concentration, the occurrence of adverse events and resistance in the case of failure, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: At week 48 no virological failure was observed, with a virological suppression rate of 30/30 (100%). Three patients switched back to continuous therapy for other reasons, with an overall success rate of SCT of 30/33 (90.9%, 95% CI = 81.24% to 100%). The CD4+ mean value increased by +64 cells/mm3 (95% CI = -59 to +187 cells/mm3; P = 0.052). No adverse events were observed and the mean total score in the satisfaction questionnaire was 57.7/60 (96.22%). Rilpivirine plasma concentration was below the efficacy threshold in 71.3% of the samples, suggesting that the patients' characteristics, more than the drug's pharmacokinetics, played a role in maintaining virological suppression. CONCLUSIONS: SCT with rilpivirine-containing regimens could be an effective alternative to continuous therapy in selected HIV-infected patients with previous long-term virological suppression.

Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM antibody detection with a lateral flow immunoassay test.

The dramatic impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection on the worldwide public health has elicited the rapid assessment of molecular and serological diagnostic methods. Notwithstanding the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection is based on molecular biology approaches including multiplex or singleplex real time RT-PCR, there is a real need for affordable and rapid serological methods to support diagnostics, and surveillance of infection spreading. In this study, we performed a diagnostic accuracy analysis of COVID-19 IgG/IgM rapid test cassette lateral flow immunoassay test (LFIA) assay. To do so, we analyzed different cohorts of blood samples obtained from 151 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay positive patients (group 1) and 51 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay negative patients (group 2) in terms of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and likelihood ratios. In addition, we challenged LFIA with plasma from 99 patients stored during 2015-2017 period. Our results showed that this LFIA detected SARS-CoV-2 IgM and/or IgG in 103 out of 151 (68.21%) samples of group 1, whereas no IgM and/or IgG detection was displayed both in the group 2 and in pre-pandemic samples. Interestingly, IgM and/or IgG positivity was detected in 86 out of 94 (91.49%) group 1 samples collected after 10 days from symptoms onset whereas only 17 out of 57 of group 1 samples obtained before day 10 were positive to SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies. We also compared the performance of this LFIA test with respect to other four different LFIA assays in 40 serum samples from multiplex RT-PCR positive individuals. Within the limits of the study size, the results demonstrated that COVID-19 IgG/IgM rapid test cassette LFIA assay displayed valid performance in IgM and IgG detection when compared with the other four LFIA assays. Hence, this approach might be considered as an alternative point-of-care procedure for SARS-CoV-2 serological investigation.