Retrospective identification of infection in the emergency department: A significant challenge in sepsis clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: This study examined three methods for retrospectively identifying infection in emergency department (ED) patients: modified objective definitions of infection (MODI) from the CDC/NHSN, physician adjudication determination of infection, and ED treating physician behavior. METHODS: This study used a subset of data from a prospective sepsis trial. We used Fleiss's Kappa to compare agreement between two physicians retrospectively adjudicating infection based on the patient's medical record, modified infection definition from the CDC/NHSN, and ED treating physician behavior. RESULTS: Overall, there was similar agreement between physician adjudication of infection and MODI criteria (Kappa=0.59) compared to having two physicians independently identify infection through retrospective chart review (Kappa=0.58). ED treating physician behavior was a poorer proxy for infection when compared to the MODI criteria (0.41) and physician adjudication (Kappa = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: Retrospective identification of infection poses a significant challenge in sepsis clinical trials. Using modified definitions of infection provides a standardized, less time consuming, and equally effective means of identifying infection compared to having multiple physicians adjudicate a patient's chart.

Assessment of a Cellular Host Response Test as a Sepsis Diagnostic for Those With Suspected Infection in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: Sepsis is a common cause of morbidity and mortality. A reliable, rapid, and early indicator can help improve efficiency of care and outcomes. To assess the IntelliSep test, a novel in vitro diagnostic that quantifies the state of immune activation by measuring the biophysical properties of leukocytes, as a rapid diagnostic for sepsis and a measure of severity of illness, as defined by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-II scores and the need for hospitalization. DESIGN SETTING SUBJECTS: Adult patients presenting to two emergency departments in Baton Rouge, LA, with signs of infection (two of four systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, with at least one being aberration of temperature or WBC count) or suspicion of infection (a clinician order for culture of a body fluid), were prospectively enrolled. Sepsis status, per Sepsis-3 criteria, was determined through a 3-tiered retrospective and blinded adjudication process consisting of objective review, site-level clinician review, and final determination by independent physician adjudicators. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 266 patients in the final analysis, those with sepsis had higher IntelliSep Index (median = 6.9; interquartile range, 6.1-7.6) than those adjudicated as not septic (median = 4.7; interquartile range, 3.7-5.9; p < 0.001), with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.89 and 0.83 when compared with unanimous and forced adjudication standards, respectively. Patients with higher IntelliSep Index had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (3 [interquartile range, 1-5] vs 1 [interquartile range, 0-2]; p < 0.001) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-II (7 [interquartile range, 3.5-11.5] vs 5 [interquartile range, 2-9]; p < 0.05) and were more likely to be admitted to the hospital (83.6% vs 48.3%; p < 0.001) compared with those with lower IntelliSep Index. CONCLUSIONS: In patients presenting to the emergency department with signs or suspicion of infection, the IntelliSep Index is a promising tool for the rapid diagnosis and risk stratification for sepsis.

Neutropenia Associated with Long-Term Ceftaroline Use.

Ceftaroline is a fifth-generation cephalosporin with potent antimicrobial activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens. Neutropenia is a rare serious adverse event for the class of cephalosporins; however, we observed several cases of severe neutropenia in our outpatient infectious disease practice believed to be associated with ceftaroline use. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of neutropenia among patients receiving ceftaroline therapy for more than 7 days. We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of patients admitted to an 800-bed regional medical center between June 2012 and December 2014 who received ceftaroline for more than 7 days to assess the incidence of developing clinically significant neutropenia. Demographic and patient care data points as well as underlying admitting and chronic diagnoses were retrospectively collected from the medical record. Clinically significant neutropenia was defined as an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) less than 1,500 cells/mm(3). Analysis was performed to determine the incidence, severity, and outcome of neutropenia following ceftaroline administration. A total of 39 patients were included in the cohort. The median duration of therapy was 27 days. Seven patients (18%) developed neutropenia while on ceftaroline therapy. Four (10%) of the neutropenic patients had an ANC of <500 cells/mm(3). The median first neutropenic day was day 17, with the median ANC nadir of 432 cells/mm(3) on day 24. We determined that extended ceftaroline infusion is associated with the development of neutropenia. We recommend obtaining a complete blood count (CBC) with differential at the onset of therapy and weekly thereafter. Should the ANC fall below 2,500 cells/mm(3), then twice-weekly CBCs should be monitored for the duration of ceftaroline therapy, and therapy should be discontinued if the ANC falls to 1,500 cells/mm(3) or less.