Pharyngeal Co-Infections with Monkeypox Virus and Group A Streptococcus, United States, 2022.

We report 2 cases of pharyngeal monkeypox virus and group A Streptococcus co-infection in the United States. No rash was observed when pharyngitis symptoms began. One patient required intubation before mpox was diagnosed. Healthcare providers should be aware of oropharyngeal mpox manifestations and possible co-infections; early treatment might prevent serious complications.

Auxora vs. placebo for the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia: a randomized-controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Calcium release-activated calcium (CRAC) channel inhibitors block proinflammatory cytokine release, preserve endothelial integrity and may effectively treat patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: CARDEA was a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the addition of Auxora, a CRAC channel inhibitor, to corticosteroids and standard of care in adults with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Eligible patients were adults with ≥ 1 symptom consistent with COVID-19 infection, a diagnosis of COVID-19 confirmed by laboratory testing using polymerase chain reaction or other assay, and pneumonia documented by chest imaging. Patients were also required to be receiving oxygen therapy using either a high flow or low flow nasal cannula at the time of enrolment and have at the time of enrollment a baseline imputed PaO2/FiO2 ratio > 75 and ≤ 300. The PaO2/FiO2 was imputed from a SpO2/FiO2 determine by pulse oximetry using a non-linear equation. Patients could not be receiving either non-invasive or invasive mechanical ventilation at the time of enrolment. The primary endpoint was time to recovery through Day 60, with secondary endpoints of all-cause mortality at Day 60 and Day 30. Due to declining rates of COVID-19 hospitalizations and utilization of standard of care medications prohibited by regulatory guidance, the trial was stopped early. RESULTS: The pre-specified efficacy set consisted of the 261 patients with a baseline imputed PaO2/FiO2≤ 200 with 130 and 131 in the Auxora and placebo groups, respectively. Time to recovery was 7 vs. 10 days (P = 0.0979) for patients who received Auxora vs. placebo, respectively. The all-cause mortality rate at Day 60 was 13.8% with Auxora vs. 20.6% with placebo (P = 0.1449); Day 30 all-cause mortality was 7.7% and 17.6%, respectively (P = 0.0165). Similar trends were noted in all randomized patients, patients on high flow nasal cannula at baseline or those with a baseline imputed PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 100. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were less frequent in patients treated with Auxora vs. placebo and occurred in 34 patients (24.1%) receiving Auxora and 49 (35.0%) receiving placebo (P = 0.0616). The most common SAEs were respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS: Auxora was safe and well tolerated with strong signals in both time to recovery and all-cause mortality through Day 60 in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Further studies of Auxora in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia are warranted. Trial registration NCT04345614.

Anchoring on COVID-19: A Case Report of Human Granulocytic Anaplasmosis Masquerading as COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Human granulocytic anaplasmosis (HGA) is caused by Anaplasma phagocytophilum and transmitted through the deer tick. Most cases are mild and can be managed as an outpatient, but rare cases can produce severe symptoms. CASE REPORT: A 43-year-old male presented with severe respiratory distress mimicking coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Labs and imaging were consistent with COVID-19; however, polymerase chain reaction was negative twice. Peripheral smear revealed inclusion bodies consistent with HGA. CONCLUSION: Human granulocytic anaplasmosis is an uncommon diagnosis and rarely causes severe disease. Recognition of unique presentations can aid in quicker diagnosis, especially when mimicking presentations frequently seen during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Auxora for the Treatment of Patients With Acute Pancreatitis and Accompanying Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome: Clinical Development of a Calcium Release-Activated Calcium Channel Inhibitor.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety of Auxora in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP), systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), and hypoxemia, and identify efficacy endpoints to prospectively test in future studies. METHODS: This phase 2, open-label, dose-response study randomized patients with AP, accompanying SIRS, and hypoxemia (n = 21) to receive low-dose or high-dose Auxora plus standard of care (SOC) or SOC alone. All patients received pancreatic contrast-enhanced computed tomography scans at screenings, day 5/discharge, and as clinically required 90 days postrandomization; scans were blinded and centrally read to determine AP severity using computed tomography severity index. Solid food tolerance was assessed at every meal and SIRS every 12 hours. RESULTS: The number of patients experiencing serious adverse events was not increased with Auxora versus SOC alone. Three (36.5%) patients with moderate AP receiving low-dose Auxora improved to mild AP; no computed tomography severity index improvements were observed with SOC. By study end, patients receiving Auxora better tolerated solid foods, had less persistent SIRS, and had reduced hospitalization versus SOC. CONCLUSIONS: The favorable safety profile and patient outcomes suggest Auxora may be an appropriate early treatment for patients with AP and SIRS. Clinical development will continue in a randomized, controlled, blinded, dose-ranging study.

Auxora versus standard of care for the treatment of severe or critical COVID-19 pneumonia: results from a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Calcium release-activated calcium (CRAC) channel inhibitors stabilize the pulmonary endothelium and block proinflammatory cytokine release, potentially mitigating respiratory complications observed in patients with COVID-19. This study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of Auxora, a novel, intravenously administered CRAC channel inhibitor, in adults with severe or critical COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: A randomized, controlled, open-label study of Auxora was conducted in adults with severe or critical COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive three doses of once-daily Auxora versus standard of care (SOC) alone. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of Auxora. Following FDA guidance, study enrollment was halted early to allow for transition to a randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled study. RESULTS: In total, 17 patients with severe and three with critical COVID-19 pneumonia were randomized to Auxora and nine with severe and one with critical COVID-19 pneumonia to SOC. Similar proportions of patients receiving Auxora and SOC experienced ≥ 1 adverse event (75% versus 80%, respectively). Fewer patients receiving Auxora experienced serious adverse events versus SOC (30% versus 50%, respectively). Two patients (10%) receiving Auxora and two (20%) receiving SOC died during the 30 days after randomization. Among patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia, the median time to recovery with Auxora was 5 days versus 12 days with SOC; the recovery rate ratio was 1.87 (95% CI, 0.72, 4.89). Invasive mechanical ventilation was needed in 18% of patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia receiving Auxora versus 50% receiving SOC (absolute risk reduction = 32%; 95% CI, - 0.07, 0.71). Outcomes measured by an 8-point ordinal scale were significantly improved for patients receiving Auxora, especially for patients with a baseline PaO2/FiO2 = 101-200. CONCLUSIONS: Auxora demonstrated a favorable safety profile in patients with severe or critical COVID-19 pneumonia and improved outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. These results, however, are limited by the open-label study design and small patient population resulting from the early cessation of enrollment in response to regulatory guidance. The impact of Auxora on respiratory complications in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia will be further assessed in a planned randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04345614 . Submitted on 7 April 2020.

The Minnesota mobile extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation consortium for treatment of out-of-hospital refractory ventricular fibrillation: Program description, performance, and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: We describe implementation, evaluate performance, and report outcomes from the first program serving an entire metropolitan area designed to rapidly deliver extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO)-facilitated resuscitation to patients with refractory ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia (VF/VT) out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). METHODS: This observational cohort study analyzed consecutive patients prospectively enrolled in the Minnesota Mobile Resuscitation Consortium's ECMO-facilitated resuscitation program. Entry criteria included: 1) adults (aged 18-75), 2) VF/VT OHCA, 3) no return of spontaneous circulation following 3 shocks, 4) automated cardiopulmonary resuscitation with a Lund University Cardiac Arrest System (LUCAS™), and 5) estimated transfer time of < 30 min. The primary endpoint was functionally favorable survival to hospital discharge with Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) 1 or 2. Secondary endpoints included 3-month functionally favorable survival, program benchmarks, ECMO cannulation rate, and safety. Essential program components included emergency medical services, 3 community ECMO Initiation Hospitals with emergency department ECMO cannulation sites and 24/7 cardiac catheterization laboratories, a 24/7 mobile ECMO cannulation team, and a single, centralized ECMO intensive care unit. FINDINGS: From December 1, 2019 to April 1, 2020, 63 consecutive patients were transported and 58 (97%) met criteria and were treated by the mobile ECMO service. Mean age was 57 ± 1.8 years; 46/58 (79%) were male. Program benchmarks were variably met, 100% of patients were successfully cannulated, and no safety issues were identified. Of the 58 patients, 25/58 (43% [CI:31-56%]) were both discharged from the hospital and alive at 3 months with CPC 1 or 2. INTERPRETATION: This first, community-wide ECMO-facilitated resuscitation program in the US demonstrated 100% successful cannulation, 43% functionally favorable survival rates at hospital discharge and 3 months, as well as safety. The program provides a potential model of this approach for other communities. FUNDING: The Helmsley Charitable Trust.

Appropriateness of Cardiac Troponin Testing: Insights from the Use of TROPonin In Acute coronary syndromes (UTROPIA) Study.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to examine the appropriateness of cardiac troponin (cTn) testing among patients with cTn increases. METHODS: This is a planned secondary analysis of the Use of TROPonin In Acute coronary syndromes (UTROPIA, NCT02060760) observational cohort study. Appropriateness of cTn testing was adjudicated for emergency department patients with cTn increases >99th percentile and analyzed using both contemporary and high-sensitivity (hs) cTnI assays according to sub-specialty, diagnoses, and symptoms. RESULTS: Appropriateness was determined from 1272 and 1078 adjudication forms completed for 497 and 422 patients with contemporary and hs-cTnI increases, respectively. Appropriateness of cTnI testing across adjudication forms was 71.5% and 72.0% for cTnI and hs-cTnI, respectively. Compared with emergency physicians, cardiologists were less likely to classify cTnI orders as appropriate (cTnI: 79% vs 56%, P < .0001; hs-cTnI: 82% vs 51%, P < .0001). For contemporary cTnI, appropriateness of 95%, 70%, and 39% was observed among adjudication forms completed by cardiologists for type 1 myocardial infarction, type 2 myocardial infarction, and myocardial injury, respectively; compared with 90%, 86%, and 71%, respectively, among emergency physicians. Similar findings were observed using hs-cTnI. Discordance in appropriateness adjudication forms occurred most frequently in cases of myocardial injury (62% both assays) or type 2 myocardial infarction (cTnI 31%; hs-cTnI 23%). CONCLUSIONS: Marked differences exist in the perception of what constitutes appropriate clinical use of cTn testing between cardiologists and emergency physicians, with emergency physicians more likely to see testing as appropriate across a range of clinical scenarios. Discordance derives most often from cases classified as myocardial injury or type 2 myocardial infarction.

Type 1 and 2 Myocardial Infarction and Myocardial Injury: Clinical Transition to High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin I.

BACKGROUND: Studies addressing patients with type 2 myocardial infarction and myocardial injury, including the impact of using high-sensitivity (hs) cardiac troponin (cTn) assays on their incidence are needed. METHODS: Ours is a prospective, observational US cohort study. Consecutive emergency department patients with serial cTnI measurements were studied. Outcomes included 180-day mortality and major adverse cardiac events, including 2-year follow-up for those with myonecrosis. RESULTS: Among 1640 patients, using a contemporary cTnI assay, 30% (n = 497) had ≥1 cTnI >99th percentile, with 4.7% (n = 77), 8.5% (n = 140), and 17% (n = 280) classified as type 1 myocardial infarction, type 2 myocardial infarction, and myocardial injury, respectively. Compared with patients without myonecrosis, 180-day mortality was higher for type 2 myocardial infarction (4% vs 13%, P < .0001) (adjusted hazard ratio 2.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-4.8; P = .0005) and myocardial injury (4% vs 11%, P < .0001) (adjusted hazard ratio 1.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-3.0; P = .02), both with mortality >20% at 2 years. Predictors of 2-year mortality for type 2 myocardial infarction included age, congestive heart failure, and beta-blockers. Relative to the contemporary cTnI assay, hs-cTnI had less myonecrosis (30% vs 26%, P = .003) and acute myocardial infarction (13.2% vs 10.8%, P = .032), including fewer type 2 myocardial infarctions (8.5% vs 6.3, P = .01), with no difference in myocardial injury (17% vs 15%, P = .1). CONCLUSIONS: cTnI increases are encountered in approximately a third of patients, the majority due to nonatherothrombotic conditions. Compared with patients without myonecrosis, type 2 myocardial infarction and myocardial injury have worse short-term outcomes, with mortality rates >20% at 2 years. hs-cTnI assay does not lead to more myocardial injury or infarction.

Diagnostic Performance of High Sensitivity Compared with Contemporary Cardiac Troponin I for the Diagnosis of Acute Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: We examined the diagnostic performance of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) vs contemporary cTnI with use of the 99th percentile alone and with a normal electrocardiogram (ECG) to rule out acute myocardial infarction (MI) and serial changes (deltas) to rule in MI. METHODS: We included consecutive patients presenting to a US emergency department with serial cTnI onclinical indication. Diagnostic performance for acute MI, including MI subtypes, and 30-day outcomes were examined. RESULTS: Among 1631 patients, MI was diagnosed in 12.9% using the contemporary cTnI assay and in 10.4% using the hs-cTnI assay. For ruling out MI, contemporary cTnI ≤99th percentile at 0, 3, and 6 h and a normal ECG had a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.5% (95% CI, 98.6-100) and a sensitivity of 99.1% (95% CI, 97.4-100) for diagnostic and safety outcomes. Serial hs-cTnI measurements ≤99th percentile at 0 and 3 h and a normal ECG had an NPV and sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 100-100) for diagnostic and safety outcomes. For ruling in MI, contemporary cTnI measurements had specificities of 84.4% (95% CI, 82.5-86.3) at presentation and 78.7% (95% CI, 75.4-82.0) with serial testing at 0, 3, and 6 h, improving to 89.2% (95% CI, 87.1-91.3) by using serial cTnI changes (delta, 0 and 6 h) >150%. hs-cTnI had specificities of 86.9% (95% CI, 85.1-88.6) at presentation and 85.7% (95% CI, 83.5-87.9) with serial testing at 0 and 3 h, improving to 89.3% (95% CI, 87.3-91.2) using a delta hs-cTnI (0 and 3 h) >5 ng/L. CONCLUSIONS: hs-cTnI and contemporary cTnI assays are excellent in ruling out MI following recommendations predicated on serial testing and the 99th percentile with a normal ECG. For ruling in MI, deltas improve the specificity. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02060760.

Discordance between ICD-Coded Myocardial Infarction and Diagnosis according to the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: International Classification of Diseases (ICD) coding is the standard diagnostic tool for healthcare management. At present, type 2 myocardial infarction (T2MI) classification by the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction (MI) remains ignored in the ICD system. We determined the concordance for the diagnosis of MI using ICD-9 coding vs the Universal Definition. METHODS: Cardiac troponin I (cTnI) was measured by both contemporary (cTnI) and high-sensitivity (hs-cTnI) assays in 1927 consecutive emergency department (ED) patients [Use of TROPonin In Acute coronary syndromes (UTROPIA) cohort] who had cTnI ordered on clinical indication. All patients were adjudicated using both contemporary and hs-cTnI assays. The Kappa index and McNemar test were used to assess concordance between ICD-9 code 410 and type 1 MI (T1MI) and type 2 MI (T2MI). RESULTS: Among the 249 adjudicated MIs using the contemporary cTnI, only 69 (28%) were ICD-coded MIs. Of 180 patients not ICD coded as MI, 34 (19%) were T1MI and 146 (81%) were T2MI. For the ICD-coded MIs, 79% were T1MI and 21% were T2MI. A fair Kappa index, 0.386, and a McNemar difference of 0.0892 (P < 0.001) were found. Among the 207 adjudicated MIs using the hs-cTnI assay, 67 (32%) were ICD coded as MI. Of the 140 patients not ICD coded as MI, 27 (19%) were T1MI and 113 (81%) were T2MI. For the ICD-coded MIs, 85% were T1MI and 15% T2MI. A moderate Kappa index, 0.439, and a McNemar difference of 0.0674 (P < 0.001) were found. CONCLUSIONS: ICD-9-coded MIs captured only a small proportion of adjudicated MIs, primarily from not coding T2MI. Our findings emphasize the need for an ICD code for T2MI.