MSG-15: Super-Bioavailability Itraconazole Versus Conventional Itraconazole in the Treatment of Endemic Mycoses-A Multicenter, Open-Label, Randomized Comparative Trial.

Background: Invasive fungal disease caused by dimorphic fungi is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Super-bioavailability itraconazole (SUBA-itra) is a novel antifungal agent with pharmacokinetic advantages over currently available formulations. In this prospective comparative study, we report the outcomes of patients with endemic fungal infections (histoplasmosis, blastomycosis, coccidioidomycosis, and sporotrichosis). Methods: This open-label randomized trial evaluated the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics SUBA-itra compared with conventional itraconazole (c-itra) treatment for endemic fungal infections. An independent data review committee determined responses on treatment days 42 and 180. Results: Eighty-eight patients were enrolled for IFD (SUBA-itra, n = 42; c-itra, n = 46) caused by Histoplasma (n = 51), Blastomyces (n = 18), Coccidioides (n = 13), or Sporothrix (n = 6). On day 42, clinical success was observed with SUBA-itra and c-itra on day 42 (in 69% and 67%, respectively, and on day 180 (in 60% and 65%). Patients treated with SUBA-itra exhibited less drug-level variability at days 7 (P = .03) and 14 (P = .06) of randomized treatment. The concentrations of itraconazole and hydroxyitraconazole were comparable between the 2 medications (P = .77 and P = .80, respectively). There was a trend for fewer adverse events (AEs; 74% vs 87%, respectively; P = .18) and serious AEs (10% vs 26%; P = .06) in the SUBA-itra-treated patients than in those receiving c-itra. Serious treatment-emergent AEs were less common in SUBA-itra-treated patients (12% vs 50%, respectively; P < .001). Conclusions: SUBA-itra was bioequivalent, well tolerated, and efficacious in treating endemic fungi, with a more favorable safety profile than c-itra. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT03572049.

Impact of Baseline and Week 2 and Week 4 Posttransplant CMV Cell-Mediated Immunity on Risk of CMV Infections and Mortality in Recipients of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant.

Background: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a common opportunistic infection after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT). We explored whether a change in CMV cell-mediated immunity during the first month after transplant predicts the risk of development of CMV infection and all-cause mortality. Methods: This follow-up analysis is based on data from the REACT study, a multicenter prospective observational study of recipients of alloHCT who were CMV-seropositive. Production of interferon γ following ex vivo stimulation with CMV antigens IE1 (immediate early 1) and pp65 (phosphoprotein 65) was assessed by CMV ELISPOT assay at baseline and 2 and 4 weeks after transplant. Clinically significant CMV infection (CS-CMVi) was defined as CMV viremia and/or disease necessitating antiviral therapy. We evaluated the impact of CMV CMI changes on the risk of CS-CMVi and post transplant mortality. Results: The analysis included 226 recipients of alloHCT with CMV cell-mediated immunity data at baseline and 2 and/or 4 weeks after transplant. CS-CMVi occurred in 64 patients (28%). On Cox regression analyses, independent predictors of CS-CMVi included a negative Δ change from baseline to week 2 of pp65 spot counts (hazard ratio, 3.65 [95% CI, 1.65-8.04]; P = .001) to week 4 of IE1 spot counts (hazard ratio, 2.79 [95% CI, 1.46-5.35]; P = .002), anti-thymocyte globulin conditioning regimen, type of transplant, female sex, and corticosteroid use. Kaplan-Meir analysis showed a significant association of a negative IE1 change from baseline to week 4 and increased all-cause mortality after transplant (log rank test = 0.041). Conclusions: A decrease in CMV-specific T-cell responses during the first month after transplant may predict CS-CMVi and is associated with all-cause mortality in recipients of alloHCT.

A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Comparator-Controlled Study to Evaluate Safety, Tolerability, and Immunogenicity of V114, a 15-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine, in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients (PNEU-STEM).

BACKGROUND: Individuals who receive allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (allo-HCT) are immunocompromised and at high risk of pneumococcal infections, especially in the months following transplant. This study evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of V114 (VAXNEUVANCE; Merck, Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA), a 15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV), when given to allo-HCT recipients. METHODS: Participants received 3 doses of V114 or PCV13 (Prevnar 13; Wyeth LLC) in 1-month intervals starting 3-6 months after allo-HCT. Twelve months after HCT, participants received either PNEUMOVAX 23 or a fourth dose of PCV (if they experienced chronic graft vs host disease). Safety was evaluated as the proportion of participants with adverse events (AEs). Immunogenicity was evaluated by measuring serotype-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) and opsonophagocytic activity (OPA) geometric mean titers (GMTs) for all V114 serotypes in each vaccination group. RESULTS: A total of 274 participants were enrolled and vaccinated in the study. The proportions of participants with AEs and serious AEs were generally comparable between intervention groups, and the majority of AEs in both groups were of short duration and mild-to-moderate intensity. For both IgG GMCs and OPA GMTs, V114 was generally comparable to PCV13 for the 13 shared serotypes, and higher for serotypes 22F and 33F at day 90. CONCLUSIONS: V114 was well tolerated in allo-HCT recipients, with a generally comparable safety profile to PCV13. V114 induced comparable immune responses to PCV13 for the 13 shared serotypes, and was higher for V114 serotypes 22F and 33F. Study results support the use of V114 in allo-HCT recipients. Clinical Trials Registration. clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03565900) and European Union at EudraCT 2018-000066-11.

Initial analysis of viral dynamics and circulating viral variants during the mRNA-1273 Phase 3 COVE trial.

The mRNA-1273 vaccine for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) demonstrated 93.2% efficacy in reduction of symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections in the blinded portion of the Phase 3 Coronavirus Efficacy (COVE) trial. While mRNA-1273 demonstrated high efficacy in prevention of COVID-19, including severe disease, its effect on the viral dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infections is not understood. Here, in exploratory analyses, we assessed the impact of mRNA-1273 vaccination in the ongoing COVE trial (number NCT04470427) on SARS-CoV-2 copy number and shedding, burden of disease and infection, and viral variants. Viral variants were sequenced in all COVID-19 and adjudicated COVID-19 cases (n = 832), from July 2020 in the blinded part A of the study to May 2021 of the open-label part B of the study, in which participants in the placebo arm started to receive the mRNA-1273 vaccine after US Food and Drug Administration emergency use authorization of mRNA-1273 in December 2020. mRNA-1273 vaccination significantly reduced SARS-CoV-2 viral copy number (95% confidence interval) by 100-fold on the day of diagnosis compared with placebo (4.1 (3.4-4.8) versus 6.2 (6.0-6.4) log10 copies per ml). Median times to undetectable viral copies were 4 days for mRNA-1273 and 7 days for placebo. Vaccination also substantially reduced the burden of disease and infection scores. Vaccine efficacies (95% confidence interval) against SARS-CoV-2 variants circulating in the United States during the trial assessed in this post hoc analysis were 82.4% (40.4-94.8%) for variants Epsilon and Gamma and 81.2% (36.1-94.5%) for Epsilon. The detection of other, non-SARS-CoV-2, respiratory viruses during the trial was similar between groups. While additional study is needed, these data show that in SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals, vaccination reduced both the viral copy number and duration of detectable viral RNA, which may be markers for the risk of virus transmission.

American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy Series: #5-Management of Clostridioides difficile Infection in Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients.

The Practice Guidelines Committee of the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy partnered with its Transplant Infectious Disease Special Interest Group to update its 2009 compendium-style infectious disease guidelines for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). A completely new approach was taken with the goal of better serving clinical providers by publishing each standalone topic in the infectious disease series as a concise format of frequently asked questions (FAQ), tables, and figures. Adult and pediatric infectious disease and HCT content experts developed and then answered FAQs and finalized topics with harmonized recommendations that were made by assigning an A through E strength of recommendation paired with a level of supporting evidence graded I through III. This fifth guideline in the series focuses on Clostridioides difficile infection with FAQs that address the prevalence, incidence, clinical features, colonization versus infection, clinical complications, diagnostic considerations, pharmacological therapies for episodic or recurrent infection, and the roles of prophylactic antibiotics, probiotics, and fecal microbiota transplantation.

Remdesivir Versus Standard-of-Care for Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection: An Analysis of 28-Day Mortality.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and has been shown to shorten time to recovery and improve clinical outcomes in randomized trials. METHODS: This was the final day 28 comparative analysis of data from a phase 3, randomized, open-label study comparing 2 remdesivir regimens (5 vs 10 days, combined for this analysis [remdesivir cohort]) and a real-world retrospective longitudinal cohort study of patients receiving standard-of-care treatment (nonremdesivir cohort). Eligible patients, aged ≥18 years, had confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), oxygen saturation ≤94% on room air or required supplemental oxygen, with pulmonary infiltrates. Propensity score matching (up to 1:10 ratio) was used to ensure comparable populations. We assessed day 14 clinical recovery (determined using a 7-point ordinal scale) and day 28 all-cause mortality (coprimary endpoints). RESULTS: A total of 368 (remdesivir) and 1399 (nonremdesivir) patients were included in the matched analysis. The day 14 clinical recovery rate was significantly higher among the remdesivir versus the nonremdesivir cohort (65.2% vs 57.1%; odds ratio [OR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-1.90; P = 0.002). The day 28 mortality rate was significantly lower in the remdesivir cohort versus the nonremdesivir cohort (12.0% vs 16.2%; OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47-.95; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir was associated with significantly higher rates of day 14 clinical recovery, and lower day 28 mortality, compared with standard-of-care treatment in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. These data, taken together, support the use of remdesivir to improve clinical recovery and decrease mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Changes in Intravenous Immunoglobulin Usage for Hypogammaglobulinemia After Implementation of a Stewardship Program.

PURPOSE: Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is used to replenish immunoglobulins in hypogammaglobulinemia (HG) caused by hematologic malignancies (HM) or their treatment (autologous stem-cell transplantation [ASCT] and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy [CAR-T]), in an effort to reduce the risk of infections. However, there is limited evidence to support this use, and IVIG supplies are limited and shortages are common. METHODS: An IVIG stewardship program (ISP) was implemented with the following requirements for IVIG administration: immunoglobulin G (IgG) level < 400 mg/dL (corrected for paraprotein) for post-ASCT and post-CAR-T patients, or IgG < 400 mg/dL with a history of a bacterial infection within the preceding 3 months for those with HM. Comparisons of the amount of IVIG administered, the incidence of infections, and the use of antimicrobials were performed between the 3 months before ISP and the 3 months after ISP. RESULTS: IVIG administered for HG decreased from 4,902 g in 86 patients before ISP to 1,777 g in 55 patients after ISP, a cost savings of $44,700. Adherence to ISP guidelines was 80%. Compared with before ISP, patients who stopped receiving IVIG after ISP had lower nadir IgG, fewer infections/patient-months, less antimicrobial usage, and a lower hospitalization rate for infection; no deaths occurred. Compared with before ISP, patients receiving IVIG after ISP had lower predose IgG and fewer infections/patient-months; the antibiotic usage, hospitalization rate for infection, and deaths from infection remained stable. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first ISP to lead to a dramatic decrease in IVIG usage with high adherence, primarily by selecting out patients at low risk of infection after IVIG discontinuation. Such an ISP is replicable and warrants adoption.

Cording in Disseminated Mycobacterium chelonae Infection in an Immunocompromised Patient.

Cording is a phenomenon in which acid fast bacilli grow in parallel and was previously used as a means of presumptive microscopic identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (TB). However, this process has been shown in multiple other nontuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) species. Here we present the case of an immunocompromised adult who presented with wrist pain, weight loss, and cough. A positron emission tomography scan showed uptake in the right ulna, multiple soft tissue sites, and the left lung. Biopsies and cultures were obtained from multiple sites, and the patient was ultimately diagnosed with disseminated Mycobacterium chelonae infection. The organism showed cording in culture. As seen in this patient, cording may occur in multiple NTM species and is not reliable as the sole indicator of the presence of TB.

Remdesivir Use in the Setting of Severe Renal Impairment: A Theoretical Concern or Real Risk?

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir (RDV) is US FDA approved for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but not recommended in severe renal impairment (SRI, Creatinine clearance <30mL/min or requiring renal replacement therapy). Few studies have evaluated RDV in patients with SRI. METHODS: Hospitalized patients who received RDV between 1 May 2020 and 31 October 2020 were analyzed in a retrospective chart review. We compared incident adverse events (AEs) in patients with and without SRI, including hepatotoxicity, nephrotoxicity, any reported AE, mortality, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of a total of 135 patients, 20 had SRI. Patients with SRI were significantly older (70 vs 54 years, P = .0001). The incidence of possible AEs was 30% among those with SRI vs 11% without (P = .06). Liver function test (LFT) elevations occurred in 10% vs 4% (P = .28), and serum creatinine (SCr) elevations in 27% vs 6% (P = .02) of patients with SRI vs without, respectively. LFT and SCr elevations were not attributed to RDV in either group. Mortality and length of stay were consistent with historical controls. CONCLUSIONS: RDV AEs occurred infrequently and overall were not significantly different between those with and without SRI. While more of patients with SRI experienced SCr elevations, 3 (75%) patients had acute kidney injury prior to RDV. The use of RDV in this small series of patients with SRI appeared to be relatively safe, and the potential benefit outweighed the theoretical risk of liver or renal toxicity. Additional studies are needed to confirm this finding.

Effect of Remdesivir vs Standard Care on Clinical Status at 11 Days in Patients With Moderate COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Remdesivir demonstrated clinical benefit in a placebo-controlled trial in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but its effect in patients with moderate disease is unknown. Objective: To determine the efficacy of 5 or 10 days of remdesivir treatment compared with standard care on clinical status on day 11 after initiation of treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, open-label trial of hospitalized patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and moderate COVID-19 pneumonia (pulmonary infiltrates and room-air oxygen saturation >94%) enrolled from March 15 through April 18, 2020, at 105 hospitals in the United States, Europe, and Asia. The date of final follow-up was May 20, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive a 10-day course of remdesivir (n = 197), a 5-day course of remdesivir (n = 199), or standard care (n = 200). Remdesivir was dosed intravenously at 200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg/d. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was clinical status on day 11 on a 7-point ordinal scale ranging from death (category 1) to discharged (category 7). Differences between remdesivir treatment groups and standard care were calculated using proportional odds models and expressed as odds ratios. An odds ratio greater than 1 indicates difference in clinical status distribution toward category 7 for the remdesivir group vs the standard care group. Results: Among 596 patients who were randomized, 584 began the study and received remdesivir or continued standard care (median age, 57 [interquartile range, 46-66] years; 227 [39%] women; 56% had cardiovascular disease, 42% hypertension, and 40% diabetes), and 533 (91%) completed the trial. Median length of treatment was 5 days for patients in the 5-day remdesivir group and 6 days for patients in the 10-day remdesivir group. On day 11, patients in the 5-day remdesivir group had statistically significantly higher odds of a better clinical status distribution than those receiving standard care (odds ratio, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.09-2.48; P = .02). The clinical status distribution on day 11 between the 10-day remdesivir and standard care groups was not significantly different (P = .18 by Wilcoxon rank sum test). By day 28, 9 patients had died: 2 (1%) in the 5-day remdesivir group, 3 (2%) in the 10-day remdesivir group, and 4 (2%) in the standard care group. Nausea (10% vs 3%), hypokalemia (6% vs 2%), and headache (5% vs 3%) were more frequent among remdesivir-treated patients compared with standard care. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with moderate COVID-19, those randomized to a 10-day course of remdesivir did not have a statistically significant difference in clinical status compared with standard care at 11 days after initiation of treatment. Patients randomized to a 5-day course of remdesivir had a statistically significant difference in clinical status compared with standard care, but the difference was of uncertain clinical importance. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04292730.

Needles in a haystack: Extremely rare invasive fungal infections reported in FungiScopeⓇ-Global Registry for Emerging Fungal Infections.

OBJECTIVES: Emerging invasive fungal infections (IFI) have become a notable challenge. Apart from the more frequently described fusariosis, lomentosporiosis, mucormycosis, scedosporiosis, and certain dematiaceae or yeasts, little is known about extremely rare IFI. METHODS: Extremely rare IFI collected in the FungiScopeⓇ registry were grouped as Dematiaceae, Hypocreales, Saccharomycetales, Eurotiales, Dermatomycetes, Agaricales, and Mucorales. RESULTS: Between 2003 and June 2019, 186 extremely rare IFI were documented in FungiScopeⓇ. Dematiaceae (35.5%), Hypocreales (23.1%), Mucorales (11.8%), and Saccharomycetales (11.3%) caused most IFI. Most patients had an underlying malignancy (38.7%) with acute leukemia accounting for 50% of cancers. Dissemination was observed in 26.9% of the patients. Complete or partial clinical response rate was 68.3%, being highest in Eurotiales (82.4%) and in Agaricales (80.0%). Overall mortality rate was 29.3%, ranging from 11.8% in Eurotiales to 50.0% in Mucorales. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians are confronted with a complex variety of fungal pathogens, for which treatment recommendations are lacking and successful outcome might be incidental. Through an international consortium of physicians and scientists, these cases of extremely rare IFI can be collected to further investigate their epidemiology and eventually identify effective treatment regimens.

Immunogenicity of Inactivated Varicella Zoster Vaccine in Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Recipients and Patients With Solid or Hematologic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In phase 3 trials, inactivated varicella zoster virus (VZV) vaccine (ZVIN) was well tolerated and efficacious against herpes zoster (HZ) in autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HSCT) recipients and patients with solid tumor malignancies receiving chemotherapy (STMc) but did not reduce HZ incidence in patients with hematologic malignancies (HMs). Here, we describe ZVIN immunogenicity from these studies. METHODS: Patients were randomized to ZVIN or placebo (4 doses). Immunogenicity was assessed by glycoprotein enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (gpELISA) and VZV interferon (IFN)-γ enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assay in patients receiving all 4 doses without developing HZ at the time of blood sampling. RESULTS: Estimated geometric mean fold rise ratios (ZVIN/placebo) by gpELISA and IFN-y ELISPOT ~28 days post-dose 4 were 2.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.53-2.67) and 5.41 (95% CI, 3.60-8.12) in auto-HSCT recipients; 1.88 (95% CI, 1.79-1.98) and 2.10 (95% CI, 1.69-2.62) in patients with STMc; and not assessed and 2.35 (95% CI, 1.81-3.05) in patients with HM. CONCLUSIONS: ZVIN immunogenicity was directionally consistent with clinical efficacy in auto-HSCT recipients and patients with STMc even though HZ protection and VZV immunity were not statistically correlated. Despite a lack of clinical efficacy in patients with HM, ZVIN immunogenicity was observed in this population. Immunological results did not predict vaccine efficacy in these 3 populations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01229267, NCT01254630.

Remdesivir for 5 or 10 Days in Patients with Severe Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is an RNA polymerase inhibitor with potent antiviral activity in vitro and efficacy in animal models of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). METHODS: We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial involving hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, oxygen saturation of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air, and radiologic evidence of pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive intravenous remdesivir for either 5 days or 10 days. All patients received 200 mg of remdesivir on day 1 and 100 mg once daily on subsequent days. The primary end point was clinical status on day 14, assessed on a 7-point ordinal scale. RESULTS: In total, 397 patients underwent randomization and began treatment (200 patients for 5 days and 197 for 10 days). The median duration of treatment was 5 days (interquartile range, 5 to 5) in the 5-day group and 9 days (interquartile range, 5 to 10) in the 10-day group. At baseline, patients randomly assigned to the 10-day group had significantly worse clinical status than those assigned to the 5-day group (P = 0.02). By day 14, a clinical improvement of 2 points or more on the ordinal scale occurred in 64% of patients in the 5-day group and in 54% in the 10-day group. After adjustment for baseline clinical status, patients in the 10-day group had a distribution in clinical status at day 14 that was similar to that among patients in the 5-day group (P = 0.14). The most common adverse events were nausea (9% of patients), worsening respiratory failure (8%), elevated alanine aminotransferase level (7%), and constipation (7%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe Covid-19 not requiring mechanical ventilation, our trial did not show a significant difference between a 5-day course and a 10-day course of remdesivir. With no placebo control, however, the magnitude of benefit cannot be determined. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; GS-US-540-5773 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04292899.).

Exploratory Evaluation of Bezlotoxumab on Outcomes Associated With Clostridioides difficile Infection in MODIFY I/II Participants With Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is reportedly higher and the cure rate lower in individuals with cancer vs those without cancer. An exploratory post hoc analysis of the MODIFY I/II trials (NCT01241552/NCT01513239) investigated how bezlotoxumab affected the rate of CDI-related outcomes in participants with cancer. METHODS: Participants received a single infusion of bezlotoxumab (10 mg/kg) or placebo during anti-CDI antibacterial treatment. A post hoc analysis of CDI-related outcomes was conducted in subgroups of MODIFY I/II participants with and without cancer. RESULTS: Of 1554 participants in the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population, 382 (24.6%) were diagnosed with cancer (bezlotoxumab 190, placebo 192). Of participants without cancer, 591 and 581 received bezlotoxumab and placebo, respectively. In the placebo group, initial clinical cure (ICC) was achieved by fewer cancer participants vs participants without cancer (71.9% vs 83.1%; absolute difference, -11.3%; 95% CI, -18.6% to -4.5%); however, CDI recurrence (rCDI) rates were similar in cancer (30.4%) and noncancer (34.0%) participants. In participants with cancer, bezlotoxumab treatment had no effect on ICC rate compared with placebo (76.8% vs 71.9%), but resulted in a statistically significant reduction in rCDI vs placebo (17.8% vs 30.4%; absolute difference, -12.6%; 95% CI, -22.5% to -2.7%). CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of participants with cancer enrolled in MODIFY I/II, the rate of rCDI in bezlotoxumab-treated participants was lower than in placebo-treated participants. Additional studies are needed to confirm these results. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: MODIFY I (NCT01241552), MODIFY II (NCT01513239).

A Phase 2b, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled Multicenter Study Evaluating Antiviral Effects, Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of Presatovir in Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients with Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection of the Lower Respiratory Tract.

BACKGROUND: Presatovir significantly reduced nasal viral load, signs, and symptoms of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection in a human challenge study. We evaluated presatovir in hematopoietic-cell transplant (HCT) recipients with RSV lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI). METHODS: Patients with confirmed RSV in upper and lower respiratory tract and new chest X-ray abnormalities were randomized (1:1), stratified by supplemental oxygen and ribavirin use, to receive oral presatovir 200 mg or placebo every 4 days for 5 doses. The primary endpoint was time-weighted average change in nasal RSV viral load through day 9. Secondary endpoints included supplemental oxygen-free days, incident respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation, and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: From January 31, 2015, to March 20, 2017, 60 patients from 17 centers were randomized (31 presatovir, 29 placebo); 59 received study treatment (50 allogeneic, 9 autologous HCT). In the efficacy population (29 presatovir, 28 placebo), presatovir treatment did not significantly reduce time-weighted average change in viral load (-1.12 vs -1.09 log10 copies/mL; treatment difference -0.02 log10 copies/mL, 95% confidence interval: -.62, .57; P = .94), median supplemental oxygen-free days (26 vs 28 days, P = .84), incident respiratory failure (10.3 vs 10.7%, P = .98), or all-cause mortality (0 vs 7.1%, P = .19) versus placebo. Adverse events were similar between arms (presatovir 80%, placebo 79%). Resistance-associated substitutions in RSV fusion protein emerged in 6/29 presatovir-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Presatovir treatment was well tolerated in HCT patients with RSV LRTI but did not improve virologic or clinical outcomes versus placebo. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02254421; EudraCT, #2014-002475-29.

A Phase 2, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Presatovir for the Treatment of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Upper Respiratory Tract Infection in Hematopoietic-Cell Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Hematopoietic-cell transplant (HCT) recipients are at risk for severe respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection. We evaluated the RSV fusion inhibitor presatovir in a randomized, double-blind, Phase II trial in HCT recipients with RSV upper respiratory tract infections. METHODS: Patients were stratified by lymphopenia (<200/µL) and ribavirin use; were randomized, stratified by lymphopenia (<200/µL) and ribavirin use, to receive oral presatovir at 200 mg or a placebo on Days 1, 5, 9, 13, and 17, and were followed through Day 28. The coprimary efficacy endpoints were the time-weighted average change in the nasal RSV viral load between Days 1 and 9 and the proportion of patients developing lower respiratory tract complications (LRTCs) through Day 28. RESULTS: From 23 January 2015 to 16 June 2017, 189 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (96 to presatovir and 93 to the placebo). Presatovir treatment, compared with the placebo treatment, did not significantly affect (prespecified α = 0.01) a time-weighted average decline in the RSV viral load from Day 1 to 9 (treatment difference, -0.33 log10 copies/mL; 95% confidence interval [CI] -.64 to -.02 log10 copies/mL; P = .040) or the progression to LRTC (11.2% vs 19.5%, respectively; odds ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, .22-1.18; P = .11). In a post hoc analysis among patients with lymphopenia, presatovir decreased LRTC development by Day 28 (2/15 [13.3%] vs 9/14 [64.3%], respectively; P = .008), compared with the placebo. Adverse events were similar for patients receiving presatovir and the placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Presatovir had a favorable safety profile in adult HCT recipients with RSV but did not achieve the coprimary endpoints. Exploratory analyses suggest an antiviral effect among patients with lymphopenia. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02254408; EUDRA-CT#2014-002474-36.

Safety and efficacy of inactivated varicella zoster virus vaccine in immunocompromised patients with malignancies: a two-arm, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients who are immunocompromised because of malignancy have an increased risk of herpes zoster and herpes zoster-related complications. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of an inactivated varicella zoster virus (VZV) vaccine for herpes zoster prevention in patients with solid tumour or haematological malignancies. METHODS: This phase 3, two-arm, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial with an adaptive design was done in 329 centres across 40 countries. The trial included adult patients with solid tumour malignancies receiving chemotherapy and those with haematological malignancies, either receiving or not receiving chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive four doses of VZV vaccine inactivated by γ irradiation or placebo approximately 30 days apart. The patients, investigators, trial site staff, clinical adjudication committee, and sponsor's clinical and laboratory personnel were masked to the group assignment. The primary efficacy endpoint was herpes zoster incidence in patients with solid tumour malignancies receiving chemotherapy, which was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (defined as all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of inactivated VZV vaccine or placebo). The primary safety endpoint was serious adverse events up to 28 days after the fourth dose in patients with solid tumour malignancies receiving chemotherapy. Safety endpoints were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of inactivated VZV vaccine or placebo and had follow-up data. This trial is registered (NCT01254630 and EudraCT 2010-023156-89). FINDINGS: Between June 27, 2011, and April 11, 2017, 5286 patients were randomly assigned to receive VZV vaccine inactivated by γ irradiation (n=2637) or placebo (n=2649). The haematological malignancy arm was terminated early because of evidence of futility at a planned interim analysis; therefore, all prespecified haematological malignancy endpoints were deemed exploratory. In patients with solid tumour malignancies in the modified intention-to-treat population, confirmed herpes zoster occurred in 22 of 1328 (6·7 per 1000 person-years) VZV vaccine recipients and in 61 of 1350 (18·5 per 1000 person-years) placebo recipients. Estimated vaccine efficacy against herpes zoster in patients with solid tumour malignancies was 63·6% (97·5% CI 36·4 to 79·1), meeting the prespecified success criterion. In patients with solid tumour malignancies, serious adverse events were similar in frequency across treatment groups, occurring in 298 (22·5%) of 1322 patients who received the vaccine and in 283 (21·0%) of 1346 patients who received placebo (risk difference 1·5%, 95% CI -1·7 to 4·6). Vaccine-related serious adverse events were less than 1% in each treatment group. Vaccine-related injection-site reactions were more common in the vaccine group than in the placebo group. In the haematological malignancy group, VZV vaccine was well tolerated and estimated vaccine efficacy against herpes zoster was 16·8% (95% CI -17·8 to 41·3). INTERPRETATION: The inactivated VZV vaccine was well tolerated and efficacious for herpes zoster prevention in patients with solid tumour malignancies receiving chemotherapy, but was not efficacious for herpes zoster prevention in patients with haematological malignancies. FUNDING: Merck & Co, Inc.

Management of Clostridioides (formerly Clostridium) difficile infection (CDI) in solid organ transplant recipients: Guidelines from the American Society of Transplantation Community of Practice.

These updated guidelines from the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice address the prevention and management of Clostridium difficile infection in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. Clostridioides (formerly Clostridium) difficile infection (CDI) is among the most common hospital acquired infections. In SOT recipients, the incidence of CDI varies by type and number or organs transplanted. While a meta-analysis of published literature found the prevalence of postoperative CDI in the general surgical population to be approximately 0.51%, the prevalence of CDI that is seen in the solid organ transplant population ranges from a low of 3.2% in the pancreatic transplant population to 12.7% in those receiving multiple organ transplants. There are no randomized, controlled trials evaluating the management of CDI in the SOT population. Herein is a review and summary of the currently available literature that has been synthesized into updated treatment guidelines for the management of CDI in the SOT population.

A Randomized, Placebo-controlled Trial of Fidaxomicin for Prophylaxis of Clostridium difficile-associated Diarrhea in Adults Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

Background: Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) is common during hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. We evaluated fidaxomicin for prevention of CDAD in HSCT patients. Methods: In this double-blind study, subjects undergoing HSCT with fluoroquinolone prophylaxis stratified by transplant type (autologous/allogeneic) were randomized to once-daily oral fidaxomicin (200 mg) or a matching placebo. Dosing began within 2 days of starting conditioning or fluoroquinolone prophylaxis and continued until 7 days after neutrophil engraftment or completion of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis/clinically-indicated antimicrobials for up to 40 days. The primary endpoint was CDAD incidence through 30 days after study medication. The primary endpoint analysis counted confirmed CDAD, receipt of CDAD-effective medications (for any indication), and missing CDAD assessment (for any reason, including death) as failures; this composite analysis is referred to as "prophylaxis failure" to distinguish from the pre-specified sensitivity analysis, which counted only confirmed CDAD (by toxin immunoassay or nucleic acid amplification test) as failure. Results: Of 611 subjects enrolled, 600 were treated and analyzed. Prophylaxis failure was similar in fidaxomicin and placebo recipients (28.6% vs 30.8%; difference 2.2% [-5.1, 9.5], P = .278). However, most failures were due to non-CDAD events. Confirmed CDAD was lower in fidaxomicin vs placebo recipients (4.3% vs 10.7%; difference 6.4% [2.2, 10.6], P = .0014). Drug-related adverse events occurred in 15.0% of fidaxomicin recipients and 20.0% of placebo recipients. Conclusions: While no difference was demonstrated between arms in the primary analysis, results of the sensitivity analysis demonstrated that fidaxomicin significantly reduced the incidence of CDAD in HSCT recipients. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT01691248.

Definitions of Resistant and Refractory Cytomegalovirus Infection and Disease in Transplant Recipients for Use in Clinical Trials.

Despite advances in preventive strategies, cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains a major complication in solid organ and hematopoietic cell transplant recipients. CMV infection may fail to respond to commercially available antiviral therapies, with or without demonstrating genotypic mutation(s) known to be associated with resistance to these therapies. This lack of response has been termed "resistant/refractory CMV" and is a key focus of clinical trials of some investigational antiviral agents. To provide consistent criteria for future clinical trials and outcomes research, the CMV Resistance Working Group of the CMV Drug Development Forum (consisting of scientists, clinicians, regulatory officials, and industry representatives from the United States, Canada, and Europe) has undertaken establishing standardized consensus definitions of "resistant" and "refractory" CMV. These definitions have emerged from the Working Group's review of the available virologic and clinical literature and will be subject to reassessment and modification based on results of future studies.