Isavuconazole Versus Voriconazole as the First-line Therapy for Solid Organ Transplant Recipients With Invasive Aspergillosis: Comparative Analysis of 2 Multicenter Cohort Studies.

BACKGROUND: Isavuconazole (ISA) and voriconazole (VORI) are recommended as the first-line treatment for invasive aspergillosis (IA). Despite theoretical advantages of ISA, both triazole agents have not been compared in solid organ transplant recipients. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of 2 retrospective multicenter cohorts of solid organ transplant recipients with invasive fungal disease (the SOTIS [Solid Organ Transplantation and ISavuconazole] and DiasperSOT [DIagnosis of ASPERgillosis in Solid Organ Transplantation] studies). We selected adult patients with proven/probable IA that were treated for ≥48 h with ISA (n = 57) or VORI (n = 77) as first-line therapy, either in monotherapy or combination regimen. The primary outcome was the rate of clinical response at 12 wk from the initiation of therapy. Secondary outcomes comprised 12-wk all-cause and IA-attributable mortality and the rates of treatment-emergent adverse events and premature treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: Both groups were comparable in their demographics and major clinical and treatment-related variables. There were no differences in the rate of 12-wk clinical response between the ISA and VORI groups (59.6% versus 59.7%, respectively; odds ratio [OR], 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49-2.00). This result was confirmed after propensity score adjustment (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.32-2.05) and matching (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.31-2.04). All-cause and IA-attributable mortality were also similar. Patients in the ISA group were less likely to experience treatment-emergent adverse events (17.5% versus 37.7%; P = 0.011) and premature treatment discontinuation (8.8% versus 23.4%; P = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Front-line treatment with ISA for posttransplant IA led to similar clinical outcomes than VORI, with better tolerability and higher treatment completion.

Isavuconazole for the Treatment of Invasive Mold Disease in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Multicenter Study on Efficacy and Safety in Real-life Clinical Practice.

BACKGROUND: Isavuconazole has theoretical advantages over other mold-active triazoles for the treatment of invasive aspergillosis and mucormycosis after solid organ transplantation (SOT). The available clinical experience, nevertheless, is scarce. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study including all adult SOT recipients with proven or probable invasive mold disease (IMD) that received isavuconazole for ≥24 h as first-line or salvage therapy at 10 Spanish centers between September 2017 and November 2021. The primary efficacy outcome was clinical response (complete or partial resolution of attributable symptoms and findings) by weeks 6 and 12. Safety outcomes included the rates of treatment-emergent adverse events and premature isavuconazole discontinuation. RESULTS: We included 81 SOT recipients that received isavuconazole for a median of 58.0 days because of invasive aspergillosis (n = 71) or mucormycosis (n = 10). Isavuconazole was used as first-line (72.8%) or salvage therapy due because of previous treatment-emergent toxicity (11.1%) or refractory IMD (7.4%). Combination therapy was common (37.0%), mainly with an echinocandin or liposomal amphotericin B. Clinical response by weeks 6 and 12 was achieved in 53.1% and 54.3% of patients, respectively, and was more likely when isavuconazole was administered as first-line single-agent therapy. At least 1 treatment-emergent adverse event occurred in 17.3% of patients, and 6.2% required premature discontinuation. Daily tacrolimus dose was reduced in two-thirds of patients by a median of 50.0%, although tacrolimus levels remained stable throughout the first month of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Isavuconazole is a safe therapeutic option for IMD in SOT recipients, with efficacy comparable to other patient groups.

First-line eradication rates comparing two shortened non-bismuth quadruple regimens against Helicobacter pylori: an open-label, randomized, multicentre clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: Helicobacter pylori eradication remains a challenge. Non-bismuth-based quadruple regimens (NBQR) have shown high eradication rates (ER) elsewhere that need to be locally confirmed. The objective of this study was to compare the first-line ER of a hybrid therapy (20 mg of omeprazole twice daily and 1 g of amoxicillin twice daily for 10 days, adding 500 mg of clarithromycin twice daily and 500 mg of metronidazole every 8 h for the last 5 days; OA-OACM) with that of a 10 day concomitant regimen consisting of taking all four drugs twice daily every day (including 500 mg of metronidazole every 12 h; OACM). A 10 day arm with standard triple therapy (OAC; 20 mg of omeprazole/12 h, 1 g of amoxicillin/12 h and 500 mg of clarithromycin/12 h) was included. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred consecutive patients were randomized (1: 2: 2) into one of the three following regimens: (i) OAC (60); (ii) OA-OACM (120); and (iii) OACM (120). Eradication was generally confirmed by a [(13)C]urea breath test at least 4 weeks after the end of treatment. Adverse events and compliance were assessed. EudraCT: 2011-006258-99. RESULTS: ITT cure rates were: OAC, 70.0% (42/60) (95% CI: 58.3-81.7); OA-OACM, 90.8% (109/120) (95% CI: 85.6-96.0); and OACM, 90.0% (107/119) (95% CI: 84.6-95.4). PP rates were: OAC, 72.4% (42/58) (95% CI: 60.8-84.1); OA-OACM, 93.9% (108/115) (95% CI: 89.5-98.3); and OACM, 90.3% (102/113) (95% CI: 84.8-95.8). Both NBQR significantly improved ER compared with OAC (P < 0.01), but no differences were seen between them. Mean compliance was elevated [98.0% (SD = 9.8)] with no differences between groups. There were more adverse events in the quadruple arms (OACM, 65.8%; OA-OACM, 68.6%; OAC, 46.6%; P < 0.05), but no significant differences between groups in terms of severity were seen. CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid and concomitant regimens show good ER against H. pylori infection with an acceptable safety profile. They clearly displace OAC as first-line regimen in our area.

Efficacy of adalimumab in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis: A retrospective study of 100 patients in daily practice.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in biologic naïve versus non-biologic naïve psoriasis patients. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter study of patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis treated uninterruptedly with adalimumab between 6 and 36 months. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients (52 men, 48 women; mean age 45.5 years; 90% plaque-type psoriasis) were included. Previous treatments included biologics in 53 and non-biologic modalities in 47. The mean (SD) start Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score was 15.9 (11.1) (range 2-55). The median follow-up was 18 months (interquartile range 10-24 months). Sixteen weeks after the start of treatment, 94% of the patients presented PASI 75 response, 76% PASI 90, and 39% were in complete remission (PASI 100). Similar findings were obtained in the groups of biologic naïve and non-biologic naive patients. At the final visit, around 37% in all groups were in complete remission. At the end of the study, 74 patients continued treatment with adalimumab (43 [91.5%] in the biologic naïve group and 31 [58.5%] in the non-biologic naïve group, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: This study confirms the efficacy and safety of adalimumab for moderate-to-severe psoriasis without differences between biologic naïve and non-naïve patients.

Computerized physician order entry-based system to prevent HBV reactivation in patients treated with biologic agents: the PRESCRIB project.

UNLABELLED: Computerized physician order entry (CPOE) applications are widely used to prevent medical errors. In our center, a CPOE system has been in use since 2009 on both the inpatient and outpatient levels. A new and simple alert was introduced in the CPOE system to notify healthcare providers of the potential risk of viral reactivation when prescribing biological therapies, thereby facilitating the request for a serological profile (hepatitis B surface antigen [HBsAg], anti-HBc, and anti-HBs) in patients who have not had these tests. Between May 2012 and May 2013, a total of 1,076 patients undergoing biological treatment were included in the implementation of the CPOE in our hospital, resulting in the identification of 4 HBsAg-positive and 69 anti-HBc-positive/HBsAg-negative patients, two of them with positive viral loads. Since the implementation of this alert system, over 90% of patients who were prescribed a biological drug (BD) have undergone serological screening to detect hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. The use of the alert system has increased the screening rate from less than 50% to 94% for HBsAg and from less than 30% to 85% for anti-HBc in patients for whom a BD is prescribed. Six patients received prophylactic antiviral therapy. No patient had HBV reactivation. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the feasibility of implementing a CPOE system that has allowed our hospital to increase the rate of HBV screening. Its use has facilitated the identification of patients at high risk for HBV reactivation and permitted physicians to prescribe prophylactic measures according to current guidelines.