A research agenda on the management of intra-abdominal candidiasis: results from a consensus of multinational experts.

INTRODUCTION: intra-abdominal candidiasis (IAC) may include Candida involvement of peritoneum or intra-abdominal abscess and is burdened by high morbidity and mortality rates in surgical patients. Unfortunately, international guidelines do not specifically address this particular clinical setting due to heterogeneity of definitions and scant direct evidence. In order to cover this unmet clinical need, the Italian Society of Intensive Care and the International Society of Chemotherapy endorsed a project aimed at producing practice recommendations for the management of immune-competent adult patients with IAC. METHODS: A multidisciplinary expert panel of 22 members (surgeons, infectious disease and intensive care physicians) was convened and assisted by a methodologist between April 2012 and May 2013. Evidence supporting each statement was graded according to the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infection Diseases (ESCMID) grading system. RESULTS: Only a few of the numerous recommendations can be summarized in the Abstract. Direct microscopy examination for yeast detection from purulent and necrotic intra-abdominal specimens during surgery or by percutaneous aspiration is recommended in all patients with nonappendicular abdominal infections including secondary and tertiary peritonitis. Samples obtained from drainage tubes are not valuable except for evaluation of colonization. Prophylactic usage of fluconazole should be adopted in patients with recent abdominal surgery and recurrent gastrointestinal perforation or anastomotic leakage. Empirical antifungal treatment with echinocandins or lipid formulations of amphotericin B should be strongly considered in critically ill patients or those with previous exposure to azoles and suspected intra-abdominal infection with at least one specific risk factor for Candida infection. In patients with nonspecific risk factors, a positive mannan/antimannan or (1→3)-ß-D-glucan (BDG) or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test result should be present to start empirical therapy. Fluconazole can be adopted for the empirical and targeted therapy of non-critically ill patients without previous exposure to azoles unless they are known to be colonized with a Candida strain with reduced susceptibility to azoles. Treatment can be simplified by stepping down to an azole (fluconazole or voriconazole) after at least 5-7 days of treatment with echinocandins or lipid formulations of amphotericin B, if the species is susceptible and the patient has clinically improved. CONCLUSIONS: Specific recommendations were elaborated on IAC management based on the best direct and indirect evidence and on the expertise of a multinational panel.

Evaluation of the clinical sensitivity for the quantification of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA in plasma: Comparison of the new COBAS TaqMan HIV-1 with three current HIV-RNA assays--LCx HIV RNA quantitative, VERSANT HIV-1 RNA 3.0 (bDNA) and COBAS AMPLICOR HIV-1 Monitor v1.5.

The COBAS TaqMan HIV-1 test (Roche Diagnostics) was compared with the LCx HIV RNA quantitative assay (Abbott Laboratories), the Versant HIV-1 RNA 3.0 (bDNA) assay (Bayer) and the COBAS Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor v1.5 test (Roche Diagnostics), using plasma samples of various viral load levels from HIV-1-infected individuals. In the comparison of TaqMan with LCx, TaqMan identified as positive 77.5% of the 240 samples versus 72.1% identified by LCx assay, while their overall agreement was 94.6% and the quantitative results of samples that were positive by both methods were strongly correlated (r=0.91). Similarly, in the comparison of TaqMan with bDNA 3.0, both methods identified 76.3% of the 177 samples as positive, while their overall agreement was 95.5% and the quantitative results of samples that were positive by both methods were strongly correlated (r=0.95). Finally, in the comparison of TaqMan with Monitor v1.5, TaqMan identified 79.5% of the 156 samples as positive versus 80.1% identified by Monitor v1.5, while their overall agreement was 95.5% and the quantitative results of samples that were positive by both methods were strongly correlated (r=0.96). In conclusion, the new COBAS TaqMan HIV-1 test showed excellent agreement with other widely used commercially available tests for the quantitation of HIV-1 viral load.

Comparison of three current viral load assays for the quantitation of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA in plasma.

The LCx HIV RNA quantitative assay (Abbott Laboratories, Delkenheim, Germany) was compared with the Versant HIV-1 RNA 3.0 (bDNA) assay (Bayer, Tarrytown, NY) and the COBAS Amplicor HIV-1 Monitor v1.5 test (Roche Diagnostics, Branchburg, NJ), using plasma samples of various viral load levels from HIV-1-infected patients. Considering the lower limit of the linear range of 50 copies/ml of both assays, the detection range of the LCx was 127/151 (84.1%) versus the 131/151 (86.8%) of the bDNA 3.0 assay, while overall agreement between the two assays was 93.4% (141/151). LCx and bDNA 3.0 results were found to be strongly correlated (r = 0.96). The fitted regression line was described by the equation log10(LCx copies/ml) = 0.05 + 1.06 x log10(bDNA 3.0 copies/ml) with 95% CI for the estimated slope and intercept at 1.01, 1.12 and -0.16, 0.26, respectively. Similarly, the detection range of the LCx was 115/148 (77.7%) versus the 128/148 (86.5%) of the Monitor v1.5 test. A 91.2% concordance (135/148) was observed between these two assays at a cut-off of 50 copies/ml. LCx and Monitor v1.5 results were highly correlated (r = 0.96). The fitted regression line was described by the equation log10(LCx copies/ml) = 0.06 + 1.03 x log(10)(Monitor v1.5 copies/ml) with 95% CI for the estimated slope and intercept at 0.97, 1.09 and -0.16, 0.28, respectively.