Current microbiological testing approaches and documented infections at febrile neutropenia onset in patients with hematologic malignancies.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to identify infection etiology in febrile neutropenia (FN) is vital. This study explores different microbiological approaches and their impact on diagnosing infections in patients with hematologic malignancies and FN. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis conducted at the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona details microbiological testing strategies used to diagnose infections at FN onset between January 2020 and July 2022. RESULTS: A total of 4520 microbiological tests were ordered in 462 FN episodes, achieving a 10% test positivity rate, with 200 (43.3%) episodes showing microbiological documentation of infection. Blood cultures (40.4%), non-culture blood tests (21.2%), and respiratory tract samples (16.2%) were the most requested. Blood cultures exhibited the highest (16.9%) test positivity rates, whereas non-culture blood tests showed the lowest (3.3%). Bacterial infections were present in 149 of 462 (32.3%) FN episodes. Viral infections (66 of 462, 14.3%)-notably, respiratory viruses-were also frequent. Mortality rate at 60 days was 9.1%; documented infections were associated with a higher risk (15%). CONCLUSIONS: In the current landscape of antimicrobial diagnostics, our findings revealed the highest reported rate of microbiologically documented infections at FN onset. Bacterial infections are common; however, our data reiterate the significance of viral infections in causing fever. Optimizing FN management during respiratory viral infections remains a challenge for antimicrobial de-escalation. The low positivity rates observed in certain diagnostic tests emphasize the need for cost-effective diagnostic stewardship.

Safety and Immunogenicity of a Recombinant Protein RBD Fusion Heterodimer Vaccine against SARS-CoV-2: preliminary results of a phase 1-2a dose-escalating, randomized, double-blind clinical trial.

BackgroundWe report safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of a recombinant protein RBD-fusion heterodimeric vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 (PHH-1V). MethodsA dose-escalation, phase 1-2a, randomized clinical trial was performed in Catalonia, Spain. Each cohort had one safety sentinel that received PHH-1V vaccine of the corresponding dose, and remaining participants were randomly assigned to receive PHH-1V formulations [10{micro}g (n=5), 20{micro}g (n=10), 40{micro}g (n=10)] or control BNT162b2 (n=5). Two intramuscular doses (0-21 days) were administered. Primary endpoint was solicited events 7 days after each vaccination and secondary-exploratory endpoints were humoral and cellular immunogenicity. Findings30 young healthy adults were enrolled, thirteen were female. Vaccines were safe, well tolerated. The most common solicited events for all groups were tenderness and pain at the site of injection. The proportion of subjects with at least one reported local and/or systemic solicited adverse events (AE) after first or second vaccine dose were lowest in PHH-1V (n=21, 84%) than control group (n=5, 100%). AE were mild to moderate, and no severe AE nor AE of special interest were reported. All participants had a >4-fold change at day 35 in total binding antibodies from baseline. Variants of concern (VOC) alpha, beta, delta and gamma were evaluated using a SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus-based neutralization assay. All groups had a significant geometric mean fold rise (p<.0001) at day 35 against all studied VOC. Similar results were obtained when a full replicative virus neutralization assay was carried out. InterpretationPHH-1V was safe, well tolerated, and induced robust humoral responses. These data support further exploration of PHH-1V in larger studies. FundingHIPRA ClinicalTrials.gov IdentifierNCT05007509 Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed up until August 1, 2021, with the terms "SARS-CoV-2", "COVID-19" and "vaccine". We initially identified 12,952 results but when added the terms "clinical trial" and "variants" this number decreased to 50. Of these references twelve were clinical trials, and although several vaccines were under development, and the ones that were already approved for administration in the general population described the neutralization effect to the different circulating variants of concern, we could not find any reference to a vaccine developed using variants of concern instead of ancestral Wuhan strain. Added value of this studyTo the best of our knowledge, our study is the first clinical trial to assess the effect as a primary series of a recombinant protein receptor-binding domain fusion heterodimer PHH-1V vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 not including the ancestral strain in its composition. This vaccine contains RBD from B{middle dot}1{middle dot}351 (beta) and B{middle dot}1{middle dot}1{middle dot}7 (alpha) variants and is co-formulated with an oil-in-water adjuvant emulsion. In this first-in-human randomized clinical trial, two doses of the SARS-CoV-2 PHH-1V vaccine in a range of 10 to 40 {micro}g/dose were safe and well-tolerated and induced robust humoral immune responses to different circulating variants of concern, including alpha (B1{middle dot}1{middle dot}7), beta (B{middle dot}1{middle dot}351), delta (B{middle dot}1{middle dot}617{middle dot}2) and gamma (P{middle dot}1). Additionally, the PHH-1V 40{micro}g dose vaccine elicited moderated cellular immune responses, particularly to variants of concern alpha and delta. Implications of all the available evidenceThese findings indicate that the recombinant protein receptor-binding domain fusion heterodimer vaccine PHH-1V is safe and immunogenic. Phase 2b and Phase 3 clinical trials are ongoing to further investigate its safety and protective efficacy as heterologous booster.

Safety and immunogenicity of the protein-based PHH-IV compared to BNT162b2 as a heterologous SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccine in adults vaccinated against COVID-19: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority phase IIb trial.

Background: A SARS-CoV-2 protein-based heterodimer vaccine, PHH-1V, has been shown to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy young adults in a first-in-human, Phase I/IIa study dose-escalation trial. Here, we report the interim results of the Phase IIb HH-2, where the immunogenicity and safety of a heterologous booster with PHH-1V is assessed versus a homologous booster with BNT162b2 at 14, 28 and 98 days after vaccine administration. Methods: The HH-2 study is an ongoing multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, double-blind, non-inferiority Phase IIb trial, where participants 18 years or older who had received two doses of BNT162b2 were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive a booster dose of vaccine -either heterologous (PHH-1V group) or homologous (BNT162b2 group)- in 10 centres in Spain. Eligible subjects were allocated to treatment stratified by age group (18-64 versus [≥]65 years) with approximately 10% of the sample enrolled in the older age group. The primary endpoints were humoral immunogenicity measured by changes in levels of neutralizing antibodies (PBNA) against the ancestral Wuhan-Hu-1 strain after the PHH-1V or the BNT162b2 boost, and the safety and tolerability of PHH-1V as a boost. The secondary endpoints were to compare changes in levels of neutralizing antibodies against different variants of SARS-CoV-2 and the T-cell responses towards the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein peptides. The exploratory endpoint was to assess the number of subjects with SARS-CoV-2 infections [≥]14 days after PHH-1V booster. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05142553. Findings: From 15 November 2021, 782 adults were randomly assigned to PHH-1V (n=522) or BNT162b2 (n=260) boost vaccine groups. The geometric mean titre (GMT) ratio of neutralizing antibodies on days 14, 28 and 98, shown as BNT162b2 active control versus PHH-1V, was, respectively, 1.68 (p<0.0001), 1.31 (p=0.0007) and 0.86 (p=0.40) for the ancestral Wuhan-Hu-1 strain; 0.62 (p<0.0001), 0.65 (p<0.0001) and 0.56 (p=0.003) for the Beta variant; 1.01 (p=0.92), 0.88 (p=0.11) and 0.52 (p=0.0003) for the Delta variant; and 0.59 (p=<0.0001), 0.66 (p<0.0001) and 0.57 (p=0.0028) for the Omicron BA.1 variant. Additionally, PHH-1V as a booster dose induced a significant increase of CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells expressing IFN-{gamma} on day 14. There were 458 participants who experienced at least one adverse event (89.3%) in the PHH-1V and 238 (94.4%) in the BNT162b2 group. The most frequent adverse events were injection site pain (79.7% and 89.3%), fatigue (27.5% and 42.1%) and headache (31.2 and 40.1%) for the PHH-1V and the BNT162b2 groups, respectively. A total of 52 COVID-19 cases occurred from day 14 post-vaccination (10.14%) for the PHH-1V group and 30 (11.90%) for the BNT162b2 group (p=0.45), and none of the subjects developed severe COVID-19. Interpretation: Our interim results from the Phase IIb HH-2 trial show that PHH-1V as a heterologous booster vaccine, when compared to BNT162b2, although it does not reach a non-inferior neutralizing antibody response against the Wuhan-Hu-1 strain at days 14 and 28 after vaccination, it does so at day 98. PHH-1V as a heterologous booster elicits a superior neutralizing antibody response against the previous circulating Beta and Delta SARS-CoV-2 variants, as well as the currently circulating Omicron BA.1. Moreover, the PHH-1V boost also induces a strong and balanced T-cell response. Concerning the safety profile, subjects in the PHH-1V group report significantly fewer adverse events than those in the BNT162b2 group, most of mild intensity, and both vaccine groups present comparable COVID-19 breakthrough cases, none of them severe. Funding: HIPRA SCIENTIFIC, S.L.U.

Development of a severity of disease score and classification model by machine learning for hospitalized COVID-19 patients

BACKGROUNDEfficient and early triage of hospitalized Covid-19 patients to detect those with higher risk of severe disease is essential for appropriate case management. METHODSWe trained, validated, and externally tested a machine-learning model to early identify patients who will die or require mechanical ventilation during hospitalization from clinical and laboratory features obtained at admission. A development cohort with 918 Covid-19 patients was used for training and internal validation, and 352 patients from another hospital were used for external testing. Performance of the model was evaluated by calculating the area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity. RESULTSA total of 363 of 918 (39.5%) and 128 of 352 (36.4%) Covid-19 patients from the development and external testing cohort, respectively, required mechanical ventilation or died during hospitalization. In the development cohort, the model obtained an AUC of 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 0.87) for predicting severity of disease progression. Variables ranked according to their contribution to the model were the peripheral blood oxygen saturation (SpO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) ratio, age, estimated glomerular filtration rate, procalcitonin, C-reactive protein, updated Charlson comorbidity index and lymphocytes. In the external testing cohort, the model performed an AUC of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.81 to 0.85). This model is deployed in an open source calculator, in which Covid-19 patients at admission are individually stratified as being at high or non-high risk for severe disease progression. CONCLUSIONSThis machine-learning model, applied at hospital admission, predicts risk of severe disease progression in Covid-19 patients.

Tocilizumab is associated with reduction of the risk of ICU admission and mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection

BackgroundIn some patients the immune response triggered by SARS-CoV-2 is unbalanced, presenting an acute respiratory distress syndrome which in many cases requires intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The limitation of ICU beds has been one of the major burdens in the management worldwide; therefore, clinical strategies to avoid ICU admission are needed. ObjectiveWe aimed to describe the influence of tocilizumab on the need of transfer to ICU or death in non-critically ill patients. MethodsA retrospective study of 171 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection that did not qualify as requiring transfer to ICU during the first 24h after admission to a conventional ward, were included. The criteria to receive tocilizumab was radiological impairment, oxygen demand or an increasing of inflammatory parameters, however, the ultimate decision was left to the attending physician judgement. The primary outcome was the need of ICU admission or death whichever came first. Results77 patients received tocilizumab and 94 did not. The tocilizumab group had less ICU admissions (10.3% vs. 27.6%, P= 0.005) and need of invasive ventilation (0 vs 13.8%, P=0.001). In multivariable analysis, tocilizumab remained as a protective variable (OR: 0.03, CI 95%: 0.007-0{middle dot}1, P=0.0001) of ICU admission or death. ConclusionTocilizumab in the early stages of the inflammatory flare, could reduce ICU admissions and mechanical ventilation use. The mortality rate of 10.3% among patients receiving tocilizumab appears to be lower than other reports. Clinical implicationOur results suggest that tocilizumab administered to non-critically ill patients could reduce ICU admissions and mortality. Capsule summaryTocilizumab administered to non-critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection in the early stages of the inflammatory flare, could reduce an important number of ICU admissions and mechanical ventilation use.