Incidence and Mortality of COVID-19-Associated Invasive Fungal Infections Among Critically Ill Intubated Patients: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

Background: An association between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated invasive fungal infections (CAIFIs) and high mortality among intubated patients has been suggested in previous research. However, some of the current evidence was derived from small case series and multicenter studies conducted during different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined the incidence of CAIFIs and their associated mortality using a large, multicenter COVID-19 database built throughout the pandemic. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) database collected from 76 medical centers in the United States between January 2020 and August 2022. Patients were 18 years or older and intubated after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. The primary outcomes were incidence and all-cause mortality at 90 days. To assess all-cause mortality, we fitted Cox proportional hazard models after adjusting for confounders via inverse probability weighting. Results: Out of the 4 916 229 patients with COVID-19 diagnosed during the study period, 68 383 (1.4%) met our cohort definition. The overall incidence of CAIFI was 2.80% (n = 1934/68 383). Aspergillus (48.2%; n = 933/1934) and Candida (41.0%; n = 793/1934) were the most common causative organisms. The incidence of CAIFIs associated with Aspergillus among patients who underwent BAL was 6.2% (n = 83/1328). Following inverse probability weighting, CAIFIs caused by Aspergillus (hazard ratio [HR], 2.0; 95% CI, 1.8-2.2) and Candida (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.5-1.9) were associated with increased all-cause mortality. Systemic antifungals reduced mortality in 17% of patients with CAIFI with Aspergillus and 24% of patients with CAIFI with Candida. Conclusions: The incidence of CAIFI was modest but associated with higher 90-day all-cause mortality among intubated patients. Systemic antifungals modified mortality.

Description of Cryptococcosis Following SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Disease Survey Through the Mycosis Study Group Education and Research Consortium (MSG-19).

BACKGROUND: Invasive fungal infections have been described throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Cryptococcal disease after infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been reported in several isolated case reports and 1 larger case series. We sought to describe cryptococcal infections following SARS-CoV-2 through establishing a database to investigate underlying risk factors, disease manifestations, and outcomes. METHODS: We created a crowdsourced call for cases solicited through the Mycoses Study Group Education and Research Consortium, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Emerging Infectious Diseases Network, and infectious diseases Twitter groups. Data were collected in a web-based and secure REDCap survey without personal identifiers. RESULTS: Sixty-nine cases were identified and submitted by 29 separate institutional sites. Cryptococcosis was diagnosed a median of 22 days (interquartile range, 9-42 days) after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Mortality among those with available follow-up was 72% (26/36) for the immunocompetent group and 48% (15/31) for the immunocompromised group (likelihood ratio, 4.01; P = .045). We observed a correlation between disease manifestation (central nervous system infection, proven/probable disseminated disease, and respiratory) and mortality (P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: The mortality rate of 59% for patients with cryptococcosis following SARS-CoV-2 is higher than that of modern Cryptococcus cohorts. There was an association between immunocompromised status and cryptococcal disease manifestations as well as mortality. Moreover, our series emphasizes the need for clinical and laboratory assessment of opportunistic infections beyond 30 days when concerning symptoms develop.

Abatacept, Cenicriviroc, or Infliximab for Treatment of Adults Hospitalized With COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Immune dysregulation contributes to poorer outcomes in COVID-19. Objective: To investigate whether abatacept, cenicriviroc, or infliximab provides benefit when added to standard care for COVID-19 pneumonia. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled clinical trial using a master protocol to investigate immunomodulators added to standard care for treatment of participants hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. The results of 3 substudies are reported from 95 hospitals at 85 clinical research sites in the US and Latin America. Hospitalized patients 18 years or older with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 14 days and evidence of pulmonary involvement underwent randomization between October 2020 and December 2021. Interventions: Single infusion of abatacept (10 mg/kg; maximum dose, 1000 mg) or infliximab (5 mg/kg) or a 28-day oral course of cenicriviroc (300-mg loading dose followed by 150 mg twice per day). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to recovery by day 28 evaluated using an 8-point ordinal scale (higher scores indicate better health). Recovery was defined as the first day the participant scored at least 6 on the ordinal scale. Results: Of the 1971 participants randomized across the 3 substudies, the mean (SD) age was 54.8 (14.6) years and 1218 (61.8%) were men. The primary end point of time to recovery from COVID-19 pneumonia was not significantly different for abatacept (recovery rate ratio [RRR], 1.12 [95% CI, 0.98-1.28]; P = .09), cenicriviroc (RRR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.86-1.18]; P = .94), or infliximab (RRR, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.99-1.28]; P = .08) compared with placebo. All-cause 28-day mortality was 11.0% for abatacept vs 15.1% for placebo (odds ratio [OR], 0.62 [95% CI, 0.41-0.94]), 13.8% for cenicriviroc vs 11.9% for placebo (OR, 1.18 [95% CI 0.72-1.94]), and 10.1% for infliximab vs 14.5% for placebo (OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.39-0.90]). Safety outcomes were comparable between active treatment and placebo, including secondary infections, in all 3 substudies. Conclusions and Relevance: Time to recovery from COVID-19 pneumonia among hospitalized participants was not significantly different for abatacept, cenicriviroc, or infliximab vs placebo. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04593940.

The salivary and nasopharyngeal microbiomes are associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection and disease severity.

Emerging evidence suggests the oral and upper respiratory microbiota may play important roles in modulating host immune responses to viral infection. As the host microbiome may be involved in the pathophysiology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), we investigated associations between the oral and nasopharyngeal microbiome and COVID-19 severity. We collected saliva (n = 78) and nasopharyngeal swab (n = 66) samples from a COVID-19 cohort and characterized the microbiomes using 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing. We also examined associations between the salivary and nasopharyngeal microbiome and age, COVID-19 symptoms, and blood cytokines. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection status, but not COVID-19 severity, was associated with community-level differences in the oral and nasopharyngeal microbiomes. Salivary and nasopharyngeal microbiome alpha diversity negatively correlated with age and were associated with fever and diarrhea. Oral Bifidobacterium, Lactobacillus, and Solobacterium were depleted in patients with severe COVID-19. Nasopharyngeal Paracoccus was depleted while nasopharyngeal Proteus, Cupravidus, and Lactobacillus were increased in patients with severe COVID-19. Further analysis revealed that the abundance of oral Bifidobacterium was negatively associated with plasma concentrations of known COVID-19 biomarkers interleukin 17F and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1. Our results suggest COVID-19 disease severity is associated with the relative abundance of certain bacterial taxa.

The Geographic Distribution of Dimorphic Mycoses in the United States for the Modern Era.

BACKGROUND: The dimorphic mycoses (DMs) of the United States-Histoplasma, Coccidioides, and Blastomyces-commonly known as endemic mycoses of North America (in addition to Paracoccidioides) are increasingly being diagnosed outside their historical areas of endemicity. Despite this trend, the maps outlining their geographic distributions have not been updated in more than half a century using a large, nationwide database containing individual-patient-level data. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of >45 million Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries from 1 January 2007 through 31 December 2016. Diagnoses of histoplasmosis, coccidioidomycosis, and blastomycosis were defined by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth/10th Revision, codes. The primary outcome was the incidence of histoplasmosis, coccidioidomycosis, and blastomycosis for each US county. Clinically meaningful thresholds for incidence were defined as 100 cases/100 000 person-years for histoplasmosis and coccidioidomycosis and 50 cases/100 000 person-years for blastomycosis. RESULTS: There were 79 749 histoplasmosis, 37 726 coccidioidomycosis, and 6109 blastomycosis diagnoses in unique persons from 2007-2016 across 3143 US counties. Considering all US states plus Washington, DC, 94% (48/51) had ≥1 county above the clinically relevant threshold for histoplasmosis, 69% (35/51) for coccidioidomycosis, and 78% (40/51) for blastomycosis. CONCLUSIONS: Persons with histoplasmosis, coccidioidomycosis, and blastomycosis are diagnosed in significant numbers outside their historical geographic distributions established >50 years ago. Clinicians should consider DM diagnoses based on compatible clinical syndromes with less emphasis placed on patients' geographic exposure. Increased clinical suspicion leading to a subsequent increase in DM diagnostic testing would likely result in fewer missed diagnoses, fewer diagnostic delays, and improved patient outcomes.

Novel agents in the treatment of invasive fungal infections in solid organ transplant recipients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Recipients of solid organ transplants (SOTs) suffer a significant burden of invasive fungal infections (IFIs). The emergence of drug-resistant fungi and toxicities of currently used antifungal agents as well as drug-drug interactions with immunosuppressants make their treatment challenging. This review discusses selected novel antifungal agents in the development pipeline that can currently be used through clinical trials or may be commercially available in the near future. RECENT FINDINGS: These agents in development have novel pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, expanded spectra of activity and excellent safety profiles. SUMMARY: The properties of novel antifungal agents have the potential to expand the therapeutic options for IFIs in recipients of SOTs.

Creation and Internal Validation of a Clinical Predictive Model for Fluconazole Resistance in Patients With Candida Bloodstream Infection.

Background: Fluconazole is recommended as first-line therapy for candidemia when risk of fluconazole resistance (fluc-R) is low. Lack of methods to estimate resistance risk results in extended use of echinocandins and prolonged hospitalization. This study aimed to develop a clinical predictive model to identify patients at low risk for fluc-R where initial or early step-down fluconazole would be appropriate. Methods: Retrospective analysis of hospitalized adult patients with positive blood culture for Candida spp from 2013 to 2019. Multivariable logistic regression model was performed to identify factors associated with fluc-R. Stepwise regression was performed on bootstrapped samples to test individual variable stability and estimate confidence intervals (CIs). We used receiver operating characteristic curves to assess performance across the probability spectrum. Results: We identified 539 adults with candidemia and 72 Candida isolates (13.4%) were fluc-R. Increased risk of fluc-R was associated with older age, prior bacterial bloodstream infection (odds ratio [OR], 2.02 [95% CI, 1.13-3.63]), myelodysplastic syndrome (OR, 3.09 [95% CI, 1.13-8.44]), receipt of azole therapy (OR, 5.42 [95% CI, 2.90-10.1]) within 1 year of index blood culture, and history of bone marrow or stem cell transplant (OR, 2.81 [95% CI, 1.41-5.63]). The model had good discrimination (optimism-corrected c-statistic 0.771), and all of the selected variables were stable. The prediction model had a negative predictive value of 95.7% for the selected sensitivity cutoff of 90.3%. Conclusions: This model is a potential tool for identifying patients at low risk for fluc-R candidemia to receive first-line or early step-down fluconazole.

Infliximab for Treatment of Adults Hospitalized with Moderate or Severe Covid-19.

Background: Immune dysregulation contributes to poorer outcomes in severe Covid-19. Immunomodulators targeting various pathways have improved outcomes. We investigated whether infliximab provides benefit over standard of care. Methods: We conducted a master protocol investigating immunomodulators for potential benefit in treatment of participants hospitalized with Covid-19 pneumonia. We report results for infliximab (single dose infusion) versus shared placebo both with standard of care. Primary outcome was time to recovery by day 29 (28 days after randomization). Key secondary endpoints included 14-day clinical status and 28-day mortality. Results: A total of 1033 participants received study drug (517 infliximab, 516 placebo). Mean age was 54.8 years, 60.3% were male, 48.6% Hispanic or Latino, and 14% Black. No statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint was seen with infliximab compared with placebo (recovery rate ratio 1.13, 95% CI 0.99-1.29; p=0.063). Median (IQR) time to recovery was 8 days (7, 9) for infliximab and 9 days (8, 10) for placebo. Participants assigned to infliximab were more likely to have an improved clinical status at day 14 (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.05-1.66). Twenty-eight-day mortality was 10.1% with infliximab versus 14.5% with placebo, with 41% lower odds of dying in those receiving infliximab (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.90). No differences in risk of serious adverse events including secondary infections. Conclusions: Infliximab did not demonstrate statistically significant improvement in time to recovery. It was associated with improved 14-day clinical status and substantial reduction in 28- day mortality compared with standard of care. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04593940 ).

Hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: An individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Results from observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have led to the consensus that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) are not effective for COVID-19 prevention or treatment. Pooling individual participant data, including unanalyzed data from trials terminated early, enables more detailed investigation of the efficacy and safety of HCQ/CQ among subgroups of hospitalized patients. METHODS: We searched ClinicalTrials.gov in May and June 2020 for US-based RCTs evaluating HCQ/CQ in hospitalized COVID-19 patients in which the outcomes defined in this study were recorded or could be extrapolated. The primary outcome was a 7-point ordinal scale measured between day 28 and 35 post enrollment; comparisons used proportional odds ratios. Harmonized de-identified data were collected via a common template spreadsheet sent to each principal investigator. The data were analyzed by fitting a prespecified Bayesian ordinal regression model and standardizing the resulting predictions. RESULTS: Eight of 19 trials met eligibility criteria and agreed to participate. Patient-level data were available from 770 participants (412 HCQ/CQ vs 358 control). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. We did not find evidence of a difference in COVID-19 ordinal scores between days 28 and 35 post-enrollment in the pooled patient population (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% credible interval, 0.76-1.24; higher favors HCQ/CQ), and found no convincing evidence of meaningful treatment effect heterogeneity among prespecified subgroups. Adverse event and serious adverse event rates were numerically higher with HCQ/CQ vs control (0.39 vs 0.29 and 0.13 vs 0.09 per patient, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this individual participant data meta-analysis reinforce those of individual RCTs that HCQ/CQ is not efficacious for treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients.

Management of Histoplasmosis by Infectious Disease Physicians.

Background: The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines for the management of histoplasmosis were last revised 15 years ago. Since those guidelines were compiled, new antifungal treatment options have been developed. Furthermore, the ongoing development of immunomodulatory therapies has increased the population at increased risk to develop histoplasmosis. Methods: An electronic survey about the management practices of histoplasmosis was distributed to the adult infectious disease (ID) physician members of the IDSA's Emerging Infections Network. Results: The survey response rate was 37% (551/1477). Only 46% (253/551) of respondents reported seeing patients with histoplasmosis. Regions considered endemic had 82% (158/193) of physicians report seeing patients with histoplasmosis compared to 27% (95/358) of physicians in regions not classically considered endemic (P < 0.001). Most ID physicians follow IDSA treatment guidelines recommending itraconazole for acute pulmonary (189/253 [75%]), mild-moderate disseminated (189/253 [75%]), and as step-down therapy for severe disseminated histoplasmosis with (232/253 [92%]) and without (145/253 [57%]) central nervous system involvement. There were no consensus recommendations observed for survey questions regarding immunocompromised patients. Conclusions: Though there are increased reports of histoplasmosis diagnoses outside regions classically considered endemic, a majority of ID physicians reported not seeing patients with histoplasmosis. Most respondents reported adherence to IDSA guidelines recommending itraconazole in each clinical situation. New histoplasmosis guidelines need to reflect the growing need for updated general guidance, particularly for immunocompromised populations.

Attributable Mortality of Candida Bloodstream Infections in the Modern Era: A Propensity Score Analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study quantifies the mortality attributable to Candida bloodstream infections (BSI) in the modern era of echinocandins. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to Barnes Jewish Hospital, a 1368-bed tertiary care academic hospital, in Saint Louis, Missouri, from 1 February 2012 to 30 April 2019. We identified 626 adult patients with Candida BSI that were frequency-matched with 6269 control patients that had similar Candida BSI risk-factors. The 90-day all-cause mortality attributable to Candida BSI was calculated using three methods-propensity score matching, matching by inverse weighting of propensity score, and stratified analysis by quintile. RESULTS: The 90-day crude mortality was 42.4% (269 patients) for Candida BSI cases and 17.1% (1083 patients) for frequency-matched controls. Following propensity score-matching, the attributable risk difference for 90-day mortality was 28.4% with hazard ratio (HR) of 2.12 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.98-2.25, P < .001). In the stratified analysis, the risk for mortality at 90 days was highest in patients in the lowest risk quintile to develop Candida BSI (hazard ratio [HR] 3.13 (95% CI, 2.33-4.19). Patients in this lowest risk quintile accounted for 81(61%) of the 130 untreated patients with Candida BSI. Sixty-nine percent of untreated patients (57/83) died versus 35% of (49/127) of treated patients (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with Candida BSI continue to experience high mortality. Mortality attributable to Candida BSI was more pronounced in patients at lowest risk to develop Candida BSI. A higher proportion of these low-risk patients went untreated, experienced higher mortality, and should be the target of aggressive interventions to ensure timely, effective treatment.

Hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: An individual participant data meta-analysis.

Background: Results from observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have led to the consensus that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) are not effective for COVID-19 prevention or treatment. Pooling individual participant data, including unanalyzed data from trials terminated early, enables more detailed investigation of the efficacy and safety of HCQ/CQ among subgroups of hospitalized patients. Methods: We searched ClinicalTrials.gov in May and June 2020 for US-based RCTs evaluating HCQ/CQ in hospitalized COVID-19 patients in which the outcomes defined in this study were recorded or could be extrapolated. The primary outcome was a 7-point ordinal scale measured between day 28 and 35 post enrollment; comparisons used proportional odds ratios. Harmonized de-identified data were collected via a common template spreadsheet sent to each principal investigator. The data were analyzed by fitting a prespecified Bayesian ordinal regression model and standardizing the resulting predictions. Results: Eight of 19 trials met eligibility criteria and agreed to participate. Patient-level data were available from 770 participants (412 HCQ/CQ vs 358 control). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. We did not find evidence of a difference in COVID-19 ordinal scores between days 28 and 35 post-enrollment in the pooled patient population (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% credible interval, 0.76-1.24; higher favors HCQ/CQ), and found no convincing evidence of meaningful treatment effect heterogeneity among prespecified subgroups. Adverse event and serious adverse event rates were numerically higher with HCQ/CQ vs control (0.39 vs 0.29 and 0.13 vs 0.09 per patient, respectively). Conclusions: The findings of this individual participant data meta-analysis reinforce those of individual RCTs that HCQ/CQ is not efficacious for treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients.

A randomized controlled trial of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG on antimicrobial-resistant organism colonization.

OBJECTIVE: Alteration of the colonic microbiota following antimicrobial exposure allows colonization by antimicrobial-resistant organisms (AROs). Ingestion of a probiotic, such as Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG), could prevent colonization or infection with AROs by promoting healthy colonic microbiota. The purpose of this trial was to determine the effect of LGG administration on ARO colonization in hospitalized patients receiving antibiotics. DESIGN: Prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial of LGG versus placebo among patients receiving broad-spectrum antibiotics. SETTING: Tertiary care center. PATIENTS: In total, 88 inpatients receiving broad-spectrum antibiotics were enrolled. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to receive 1 capsule containing 1×1010 cells of LGG twice daily (n = 44) or placebo (n = 44), stratified by ward type. Stool or rectal-swab specimens were collected for culture at enrollment, during admission, and at discharge. Using selective media, specimens were cultured for Clostridioides difficile, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp (VRE), and antibiotic-resistant gram-negative bacteria. The primary outcome was any ARO acquisition. Secondary outcomes included loss of any ARO if colonized at enrollment, and acquisition or loss of individual ARO. RESULTS: ARO colonization prevalence at study enrollment was similar (LGG 39% vs placebo 39%). We detected no difference in any ARO acquisition (LGG 30% vs placebo 33%; OR,1.19; 95% CI, 0.38-3.75) nor for any individual ARO acquisition. There was no difference in the loss of any ARO (LGG 18% vs placebo 24%; OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.27-7.68) nor for any individual ARO. CONCLUSION: LGG administration neither prevented acquisition of ARO nor accelerated loss of ARO colonization.

Assessment of serological assays for identifying high titer convalescent plasma.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by the largest mobilization of therapeutic convalescent plasma (CCP) in over a century. Initial identification of high titer units was based on dose-response data using the Ortho VITROS IgG assay. The proliferation of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 serological assays and non-uniform application has led to uncertainty about their interrelationships. The purpose of this study was to establish correlations and analogous cutoffs between multiple serological assays. METHODS: We compared the Ortho, Abbott, Roche, an anti-spike (S) ELISA, and a virus neutralization assay. Relationships relative to FDA-approved cutoffs under the CCP emergency use authorization were identified in convalescent plasma from a cohort of 79 donors from April 2020. RESULTS: Relative to the neutralization assay, the spearman r value of the Ortho Clinical, Abbott, Roche, anti-S ELISA assays was 0.65, 0.59, 0.45, and 0.76, respectively. The best correlative index for establishing high-titer units was 3.87 signal-to-cutoff (S/C) for the Abbott, 13.82 cutoff index for the Roche, 1:1412 for the anti-S ELISA, 1:219 by the neutralization assay, and 15.9 S/C by the Ortho Clinical assay. The overall agreement using derived cutoffs compared to a neutralizing titer of 1:250 was 78.5% for Abbott, 74.7% for Roche, 83.5% for the anti-S ELISA, and 78.5% for Ortho Clinical. DISCUSSION: Assays based on antibodies against the nucleoprotein were positively associated with neutralizing titers and the Ortho assay, although their ability to distinguish FDA high-titer specimens was imperfect. The resulting relationships help reconcile results from the large body of serological data generated during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Clinical predictive models of invasive Candida infection: A systematic literature review.

Clinical predictive models (CPM) serve to identify and categorize patients into risk categories to assist in treatment and intervention recommendations. Predictive accuracy and practicality of models varies depending on methods used for their development, and should be evaluated. The aim of this study was to summarize currently available CPM for invasive candidiasis, analyze their performance, and assess their suitability for use in clinical decision making. We identified studies that described the construction of a CPM for invasive candidiasis from PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Cochrane Library databases, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Data extracted included: author, data source, study design, recruitment period, characteristics of study population, outcome types, predictor types, number of study participants and outcome events, modelling method, and list of predictors used in the final model. Calibration and discrimination in the derivative datasets were used to assess the performance of each model. Ten articles were identified in our search and included for full text review. Five models were developed using data from ICUs, and five models included all hospitalized patients. The findings of this review highlight the limitations of currently available models to predict invasive candidiasis, including lack of generalizability, difficulty in everyday clinical use, and overly optimistic performance. There are significant concerns regarding predictive performance and usability in every day practice of existing CPM to predict invasive candidiasis.

Clinical predictive models may assist in early identification of patients at risk for invasive candidiasis to initiate appropriate treatment. The findings of this systematic review highlight the limitations of currently available models to predict invasive candidiasis.

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines induce persistent human germinal centre responses.

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-based vaccines are about 95% effective in preventing COVID-191-5. The dynamics of antibody-secreting plasmablasts and germinal centre B cells induced by these vaccines in humans remain unclear. Here we examined antigen-specific B cell responses in peripheral blood (n = 41) and draining lymph nodes in 14 individuals who had received 2 doses of BNT162b2, an mRNA-based vaccine that encodes the full-length SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) gene1. Circulating IgG- and IgA-secreting plasmablasts that target the S protein peaked one week after the second immunization and then declined, becoming undetectable three weeks later. These plasmablast responses preceded maximal levels of serum anti-S binding and neutralizing antibodies to an early circulating SARS-CoV-2 strain as well as emerging variants, especially in individuals who had previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2 (who produced the most robust serological responses). By examining fine needle aspirates of draining axillary lymph nodes, we identified germinal centre B cells that bound S protein in all participants who were sampled after primary immunization. High frequencies of S-binding germinal centre B cells and plasmablasts were sustained in these draining lymph nodes for at least 12 weeks after the booster immunization. S-binding monoclonal antibodies derived from germinal centre B cells predominantly targeted the receptor-binding domain of the S protein, and fewer clones bound to the N-terminal domain or to epitopes shared with the S proteins of the human betacoronaviruses OC43 and HKU1. These latter cross-reactive B cell clones had higher levels of somatic hypermutation as compared to those that recognized only the SARS-CoV-2 S protein, which suggests a memory B cell origin. Our studies demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-based vaccination of humans induces a persistent germinal centre B cell response, which enables the generation of robust humoral immunity.

Long-Term Mortality after Histoplasma Infection in People with HIV.

Histoplasmosis is a common opportunistic infection in people with HIV (PWH); however, no study has looked at factors associated with the long-term mortality of histoplasmosis in PWH. We conducted a single-center retrospective study on the long-term mortality of PWH diagnosed with histoplasmosis between 2002 and 2017. Patients were categorized into three groups based on length of survival after diagnosis: early mortality (death < 90 days), late mortality (death ≥ 90 days), and long-term survivors. Patients diagnosed during or after 2008 were considered part of the modern antiretroviral therapy (ART) era. Insurance type (private vs. public) was a surrogate indicator of socioeconomic status. Out of 54 PWH infected with histoplasmosis, overall mortality was 37%; 14.8% early mortality and 22.2% late mortality. There was no statistically significant difference in survival based on the availability of modern ART (p = 0.60). Insurance status reached statistical significance with 38% of survivors having private insurance versus only 8% having private insurance in the late mortality group (p = 0.05). High mortality persists despite the advent of modern ART, implicating a contribution from social determinants of health, such as private insurance. Larger studies are needed to elucidate the role of these factors in the mortality of PWH.