Ceftazidime-Avibactam Improves Outcomes in High-Risk Neutropenic Patients with Klebsiella pneumoniae Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales Bacteremia.

Few studies have evaluated the efficacy of ceftazidime-avibactam (CA) for Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales bacteremia (KPC-PEB) in high-risk neutropenic patients. This is a prospective multicenter observational study in high-risk neutropenic patients with multi-drug resistant Enterobacterales bacteremia. They were compared according to the resistance mechanism and definitive treatment provided: KPC-CPE treated with CA (G1), KPC-CPE treated with other antibiotics (G2), and patients with ESBL-producing Enterobacterales bacteremia who received appropriate definitive therapy (G3). Thirty-day mortality was evaluated using a logistic regression model, and survival was analyzed with Kaplan-Meier curves. A total of 238 patients were included: 18 (G1), 52 (G2), and 168 (G3). Klebsiella spp. (60.9%) and Escherichia coli (26.4%) were the Enterobacterales most frequently isolated, and 71% of the bacteremias had a clinical source. The resistance profile between G1 and G2 was colistin 35.3% vs. 36.5%, amikacin 16.7% vs. 40.4%, and tigeclycline 11.1% vs. 19.2%. The antibiotics prescribed in combination with G2 were carbapenems, colistin, amikacin, fosfomycin, tigecycline, and fluoroquinolones. Seven-day clinical response in G1 vs. G2 vs. G3 was 94.4% vs. 42.3% vs. 82.7%, respectively (p < 0.001). Thirty-day overall mortality in G1 vs. G2 vs. G3 was 22.2% vs. 53.8% vs. 11.9%, respectively (p < 0.001), and infection-related mortality was 5.5% vs. 51.9% vs. 7.7% (p < 0.001). The independent risk factors for mortality were Pitt score > 4: OR 3.63, 95% CI, 1.18-11.14 (p = 0.025) and KPC-PEB treated with other antibiotics: OR 8.85, 95% CI, 2.58-30.33 (p = 0.001), while 7-day clinical response was a protective factor for survival: OR 0.02, 95% CI, 0.01-0.08 (p < 0.001). High-risk neutropenic patients with KPC-CPE treated with CA had an outcome similar to those treated for ESBL-producing Enterobacterales, with higher 7-day clinical response and lower overall and infection-related mortality than those treated with other antibiotics. In view of these data, CA may be considered the preferred therapeutic option for KPC-PEB in high-risk neutropenic patients.

Development of a Clinical Score to Stratify the Risk for Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales Bacteremia in Patients with Cancer and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

Identifying the risk factors for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) bacteremia in cancer and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) patients would allow earlier initiation of an appropriate empirical antibiotic treatment. This is a prospective multicenter observational study in patients from 12 centers in Argentina, who presented with cancer or hematopoietic stem-cell transplant and developed Enterobacterales bacteremia. A multiple logistic regression model identified risk factors for CRE bacteremia, and a score was developed according to the regression coefficient. This was validated by the bootstrap resampling technique. Four hundred and forty-three patients with Enterobacterales bacteremia were included: 59 with CRE and 384 with carbapenem-susceptible Enterobacterales (CSE). The risk factors that were identified and the points assigned to each of them were: ≥10 days of hospitalization until bacteremia: OR 4.03, 95% CI 1.88-8.66 (2 points); previous antibiotics > 7 days: OR 4.65, 95% CI 2.29-9.46 (2 points); current colonization with KPC-carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales: 33.08, 95% CI 11.74-93.25 (5 points). With a cut-off of 7 points, a sensitivity of 35.59%, specificity of 98.43%, PPV of 77.7%, and NPV of 90.9% were obtained. The overall performance of the score was satisfactory (AUROC of 0.85, 95% CI 0.80-0.91). Finally, the post-test probability of CRE occurrence in patients with none of the risk factors was 1.9%, which would virtually rule out the presence of CRE bacteremia.

Proposal of a clinical score to stratify the risk of multidrug-resistant gram-negative rods bacteremia in cancer patients

ABSTRACT Introduction: Multidrug-resistant gram-negative rods (MDR GNR) represent a growing threat for patients with cancer. Our objective was to determine the characteristics of and risk factors for MDR GNR bacteremia in patients with cancer and to develop a clinical score to predict MDR GNR bacteremia. Material and Methods: Multicenter prospective study analyzing initial episodes of MDR GNR bacteremia. Risk factors were evaluated using a multiple logistic regression (forward-stepwise selection) analysis including variables with a p < 0.10 in univariate analysis. Results: 394 episodes of GNR bacteremia were included, with 168 (42.6 %) being MDR GNR. Five variables were identified as independent risk factors: recent antibiotic use (OR = 2.8, 95 % CI 1.7-4.6, p = 0.001), recent intensive care unit admission (OR = 2.9, 95 % CI 1.1-7.8, p = 0.027), hospitalization ≥ 7 days prior to the episode of bacteremia (OR = 3.5, 95 % CI 2-6.2, p = 0.005), severe mucositis (OR = 5.3, 95 % CI 1.8-15.6, p = 0.002), and recent or previous colonization/infection with MDR GNR (OR = 2.3, 95 % CI 1.2-4.3, p = 0.028). Using a cut-off value of two points, the score had a sensitivity of 66.07 % (95 % CI 58.4-73.2 %), a specificity of 77.8 % (95 % CI 71.4-82.7 %), a positive predictive value of 68 % (95 % CI 61.9-73.4 %), and a negative predictive value of 75.9 % (95 % CI 71.6-79.7 %). The overall performance of the score was satisfactory (AUROC 0.78; 95 % CI 0.73-0.82). In the cases with one or none of the risk factors identified, the negative likelihood ratio was 0.18 and the post-test probability of having MDR GNR was 11.68 %. Conclusions: With the growing incidence of MDR GNR as etiologic agents of bacteremia in cancer patients, the development of this score could be a potential tool for clinicians.

Proposal of a clinical score to stratify the risk of multidrug-resistant gram-negative rods bacteremia in cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Multidrug-resistant gram-negative rods (MDR GNR) represent a growing threat for patients with cancer. Our objective was to determine the characteristics of and risk factors for MDR GNR bacteremia in patients with cancer and to develop a clinical score to predict MDR GNR bacteremia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Multicenter prospective study analyzing initial episodes of MDR GNR bacteremia. Risk factors were evaluated using a multiple logistic regression (forward-stepwise selection) analysis including variables with a p<0.10 in univariate analysis. RESULTS: 394 episodes of GNR bacteremia were included, with 168 (42.6 %) being MDR GNR. Five variables were identified as independent risk factors: recent antibiotic use (OR=2.8, 95 % CI 1.7-4.6, p=0.001), recent intensive care unit admission (OR=2.9, 95 % CI 1.1-7.8, p=0.027), hospitalization ≥ 7 days prior to the episode of bacteremia (OR=3.5, 95 % CI 2-6.2, p=0.005), severe mucositis (OR=5.3, 95 % CI 1.8-15.6, p=0.002), and recent or previous colonization/infection with MDR GNR (OR=2.3, 95 % CI 1.2-4.3, p=0.028). Using a cut-off value of two points, the score had a sensitivity of 66.07 % (95 % CI 58.4-73.2 %), a specificity of 77.8 % (95 % CI 71.4-82.7 %), a positive predictive value of 68 % (95 % CI 61.9-73.4 %), and a negative predictive value of 75.9 % (95 % CI 71.6-79.7 %). The overall performance of the score was satisfactory (AUROC 0.78; 95 % CI 0.73-0.82). In the cases with one or none of the risk factors identified, the negative likelihood ratio was 0.18 and the post-test probability of having MDR GNR was 11.68 %. CONCLUSIONS: With the growing incidence of MDR GNR as etiologic agents of bacteremia in cancer patients, the development of this score could be a potential tool for clinicians.

Pandemic 2009 Influenza A (H1N1) virus infection in cancer and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients; a multicenter observational study.

BACKGROUND: During March 2009 a novel Influenza A virus emerged in Mexico. We describe the clinical picture of the pandemic Influenza A (H1N1) Influenza in cancer patients during the 2009 influenza season. METHODS: Twelve centers participated in a multicenter retrospective observational study of cancer patients with confirmed infection with the 2009 H1N1 Influenza A virus (influenza-like illness or pneumonia plus positive PCR for the 2009 H1N1 Influenza A virus  in respiratory secretions). Clinical data were obtained by retrospective chart review and analyzed.  RESULTS: From May to August 2009, data of 65 patients were collected. Median age was 51 years, 57 % of the patients were female. Most patients (47) had onco-hematological cancers and 18 had solid tumors. Cancer treatment mainly consisted of chemotherapy (46), or stem cell transplantation (SCT) (16). Only 19 of 64 patients had received the 2009 seasonal Influenza vaccine. Clinical presentation included pneumonia (43) and upper respiratory tract infection (22). Forty five of 58 ambulatory patients were admitted. Mechanical ventilation was required in 12 patients (18%). Treatment included oseltamivir monotherapy or in combination with amantadine for a median of 7 days. The global 30-day mortality rate was 18%. All 12 deaths were among the non-vaccinated patients. No deaths were observed among the 19 vaccinated patients. Oxygen saturation <96% at presentation was a predictor of mortality (OR 19.5; 95%CI: 2.28 to 165.9). CONCLUSIONS: In our cancer patient population, the pandemic 2009 Influenza A (H1N1) virus was associated with high incidence of pneumonia (66%), and 30-day mortality (18.5%). Saturation <96% was significantly associated with death. No deaths were observed among vaccinated patients.