A case report of treatment of a streptococcal brain abscess with ceftobiprole supported by the measurement of drug levels in the cerebrospinal fluid.

In this paper, we describe the case of a patient admitted to our hospital because of a brain abscess due to Streptococcus intermedius. The management of brain abscess is challenging given the limited potential drug options with effective penetration into both the central nervous system and the abscess capsule to achieve adequate therapeutic concentrations. Due to the high anti-streptococcal activity of ceftobiprole and the availability of ceftobiprole therapeutic drug monitoring in our hospital, we decided to treat the patient with ceftobiprole. To maximize the antimicrobial effect of ceftobiprole, we chose a prolonged intravenous infusion, and we monitored its concentrations in both plasma and cerebrospinal fluid.

Ampicillin and Ceftobiprole Combination for the Treatment of Enterococcus faecalis Invasive Infections: "The Times They Are A-Changin".

BACKGROUND: Enterococcus faecalis is responsible for a large variety of severe infections. This study is a case series reporting our experience in the treatment of E. faecalis invasive infections with ampicillin in combination with ceftobiprole (ABPR). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all the medical records of patients admitted to the University Hospital of Udine from January to December 2020 with a diagnosis of infective endocarditis or primary or non-primary complicated or uncomplicated bacteremia caused by E. faecalis. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were included in the final analysis. The clinical success rate was very high, accounting for 81% of patients, and microbiological cure was obtained in 86% of patients. One relapse was recorded in one patient who did not adhere to the partial oral treatment prescribed. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) was always performed for ampicillin and ceftobiprole, and serum concentrations of both drugs were compared to the MICs of the different enterococcal isolates. CONCLUSIONS: ABPR is a well-tolerated antimicrobial regimen with anti-E. faecalis activity. TDM can help clinicians optimize medical treatments to achieve the best possible efficacy with fewer side effects. ABPR might be a reasonable option for the treatment of severe invasive infections caused by E. faecalis due to the high level of enterococcal penicillin-binding protein (PBP) saturation.

Exploratory data on the clinical efficacy of monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant of concern.

Background: Recent in-vitro data have shown that the activity of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) varies according to the variant of concern (VOC). No studies have compared the clinical efficacy of different mAbs against Omicron VOC. Methods: The MANTICO trial is a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical efficacy of early treatments with bamlanivimab/etesevimab, casirivimab/imdevimab, and sotrovimab in outpatients aged 50 or older with mild-to-moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection. As the patient enrolment was interrupted for possible futility after the onset of the Omicron wave, the analysis was performed according to the SARS-CoV-2 VOC. The primary outcome was coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) progression (hospitalisation, need of supplemental oxygen therapy, or death through day 14). Secondary outcomes included the time to symptom resolution, assessed using the product-limit method. Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox proportional hazard model were used to assess the association with predictors. Log rank test was used to compare survival functions. Results: Overall, 319 patients were included. Among 141 patients infected with Delta, no COVID-19 progression was recorded, and the time to symptom resolution did not differ significantly between treatment groups (Log-rank Chi-square 0.22, p 0.90). Among 170 patients infected with Omicron (80.6% BA.1 and 19.4% BA.1.1), two COVID-19 progressions were recorded, both in the bamlanivimab/etesevimab group, and the median time to symptom resolution was 5 days shorter in the sotrovimab group compared with the bamlanivimab/etesevimab and casirivimab/imdevimab groups (HR 0.53 and HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.36-0.77 and 95% CI 0.30-0.67, p<0.01). Conclusions: Our data suggest that, among adult outpatients with mild-to-moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection due to Omicron BA.1 and BA.1.1, early treatment with sotrovimab reduces the time to recovery compared with casirivimab/imdevimab and bamlanivimab/etesevimab. In the same population, early treatment with casirivimab/imdevimab may maintain a role in preventing COVID-19 progression. The generalisability of trial results is substantially limited by the early discontinuation of the trial and firm conclusions cannot be drawn. Funding: This trial was funded by the Italian Medicines Agency (Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco, AIFA). The VOC identification was funded by the ORCHESTRA (Connecting European Cohorts to Increase Common and Effective Response to SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic) project, which has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement number 101016167. Clinical trial number: NCT05205759.

Post-COVID-19 syndrome and humoral response association after 1 year in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe the impact of vaccination and the role of humoral responses on post-COVID-19 syndrome 1 year after the onset of SARS coronavirus type 2 (CoV-2). METHODS: This prospective study was conducted through interviews to investigate post-COVID-19 syndrome 6 and 12 months after disease onset in all adult in- and outpatients with COVID-19 at Udine Hospital (March-May 2020). Vaccination status and two different serological assays to distinguish between response to vaccination (receptor-binding domain (RBD) SARS-CoV-2 IgG) and/or natural infection (non-RBD-SARS-CoV-2 IgG) were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 479 patients (52.6% female; mean age: 53 years) were interviewed 13.5 months (standard deviation: 0.6 months) after acute infection. Post-COVID-19 syndrome was observed in 47.2% of patients (n = 226) after 1 year. There were no significant differences in the worsening of post-COVID-19 symptoms (22.7% vs. 15.8%; p = 0.209) among vaccinated (n = 132) and unvaccinated (n = 347) patients. The presence of non-RBD SARS-CoV-2 IgG induced by natural infection showed a significant association with post-COVID-19 syndrome (OR: 1.35; 95% CI, 1.11-1.64; p = 0.003), and median non-RBD SARS-CoV-2 IgG titres were significantly higher in long haulers than in patients without symptoms (22 kAU/L (interquartile range, 9.7-37.2 kAU/L) vs. 14.1 kAU/L (interquartile range, 5.4-31.3 kAU/L); p = 0.009) after 1 year. In contrast, the presence of RBD SARS-CoV-2 IgG was not associated with the occurrence of post-COVID-19 syndrome (>2500 U/mL vs. 0.9-2500 U/mL; OR: 1.36; 95% CI, 0.62-3.00; p = 0.441), and RBD SARS-CoV-2 IgG titres were similar in long haulers as in patients without symptoms (50% values > 2500 U/mL vs. 55.6% values > 2500 U/mL; p = 0.451). DISCUSSION: The SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is not associated with the emergence of post-COVID-19 symptoms more than 1 year after acute infection. The persistence of high serological titre response induced by natural infection, but not vaccination, may play a role in long-haul COVID-19.