Implementation and outcomes of beta-lactam allergy management protocol at a comprehensive cancer center.

PURPOSE: Beta-lactam allergy (BLA) is associated with increased broad-spectrum antibiotic (Br-ABX) use and worse clinical outcomes. We evaluated our hospital-wide BLA protocol (BLA-P) that used following categories: intolerance, low-risk, and high-risk. METHODS: Hospitalized adult patients with listed BLA during 10/2021-12/2022 were eligible. Exclusions were critically ill, surgical, hospice or comfort care, or non-verbal patients. Assessment was counted each time a pharmacist evaluated BLA. Interventions were no further action (high-risk allergy, patient refusal, unstable clinical status), updated allergy label, or delabeled. Delabeling was done either based on antibiotic history (direct-delabeling), or via test-dose challenge for low-risk patients. Br-ABX usage was compared in the unique delabeled patients: the empiric antibiotic use 90 days post-delabeling versus pre-delabeling using McNemar test (SPSS). RESULTS: A total of 700 assessments in 631 patients were identified. 441 assessments in 377 patients (median 63 years-old, 41% male, 50% hematological cancer) met inclusion criteria. The assessments revealed 9% intolerance, 55% low-risk, 23% high-risk and 13% unknown reaction. Interventions resulted in no further action 7%, updated label 72%, and delabeling 21%. 65% of the delabeling was via direct-delabeling and 35% test-dose challenge. Among patients who received a test-dose challenge, 36/36(97%) had no documented allergic reactions, and 1/26(3%) developed a mild rash. The use of aztreonam (pre-delabeling 28% vs. post-delabeling 1.2%, p < 0.001) and meropenem (13% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.022) significantly decreased while cefepime (24% vs. 50%, p = 0.001) and piperacillin-tazobactam (3.7% vs. 22%, p < 0.001) increased after delabeling. CONCLUSION: BLA-P led to 21% delabeling, which resulted in increased preferred Br-ABX and decrease in aztreonam/meropenem use among delabeled patients.

Efficacy and safety of extended duration letermovir prophylaxis in recipients of haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation at risk of cytomegalovirus infection: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In a pivotal phase 3 trial of cytomegalovirus prophylaxis with letermovir for up to 100 days after allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT), 12% of participants developed clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection after letermovir was discontinued. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of extending the duration of letermovir prophylaxis for clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection from 100 days to 200 days following HSCT. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial at 32 sites in six countries (France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK, and the USA). Cytomegalovirus­seropositive HSCT recipients (aged ≥18 years) who had received letermovir prophylaxis for up to 100 days following HSCT and who remained at high risk of late clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection (with no previous history of clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection, defined as initiation of pre-emptive therapy for documented cytomegalovirus viraemia, onset of cytomegalovirus end-organ disease, or both) were eligible. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either an additional 100 days (ie, a total of 200 days; letermovir group) of oral or intravenous letermovir 480 mg once daily, adjusted to 240 mg once daily for participants on cyclosporin A, or 100 days of a placebo comparator for letermovir (ie, a total of 100 days of letermovir; placebo group), following HSCT. Randomisation was done using a central interactive response technology system, stratified by study centre and haploidentical donor (yes or no). Participants, investigators, and sponsor personnel were masked to the treatment allocation. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants from randomisation to week 28 (200 days after HSCT) with clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection, analysed using the full analysis set population (ie, those who received at least one dose of study intervention). Safety was analysed in all participants as treated (ie, those who received at least one dose according to the study intervention they were assigned to). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03930615, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between June 21, 2019, and March 16, 2022, 255 patients were screened for eligibility and 220 (86%) were randomly assigned (145 [66%] in the letermovir group and 75 [34%] in the placebo group). Between randomisation and week 28, four (3%) of 144 participants in the letermovir group and 14 (19%) of 74 in the placebo group developed clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection (treatment difference -16·1% [95% CI -25·8 to -6·5]; p=0·0005). The most common adverse events among participants in the letermovir group versus the placebo group were graft-versus-host disease (43 [30%] vs 23 [31%]), diarrhoea (17 [12%] vs nine [12%]), nausea (16 [11%] vs 13 [18%]), pyrexia (13 [9%] vs nine [12%]), and decreased appetite (six [4%] vs nine [12%]). The most frequently reported serious adverse events were recurrent acute myeloid leukaemia (six [4%] vs none) and pneumonia (three [2%] vs two [3%]). No deaths were considered to be drug-related by the investigator. INTERPRETATION: Extending the duration of letermovir prophylaxis to 200 days following HSCT is efficacious and safe in reducing the incidence of late clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection in patients at risk. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC.

Cost-Effectiveness of Plasma Microbial Cell-Free DNA Sequencing When Added to Usual Care Diagnostic Testing for Immunocompromised Host Pneumonia.

INTRODUCTION: Immunocompromised host pneumonia (ICHP) is an important cause of morbidity and mortality, yet usual care (UC) diagnostic tests often fail to identify an infectious etiology. A US-based, multicenter study (PICKUP) among ICHP patients with hematological malignancies, including hematological cell transplant recipients, showed that plasma microbial cell-free DNA (mcfDNA) sequencing provided significant additive diagnostic value. AIM: The objective of this study was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of adding mcfDNA sequencing to UC diagnostic testing for hospitalized ICHP patients. METHODS: A semi-Markov model was utilized from the US third-party payer's perspective such that only direct costs were included, using a lifetime time horizon with discount rates of 3% for costs and benefits. Three comparators were considered: (1) All UC, which included non-invasive (NI) and invasive testing and early bronchoscopy; (2) All UC & mcfDNA; and (3) NI UC & mcfDNA & conditional UC Bronch (later bronchoscopy if the initial tests are negative). The model considered whether a probable causative infectious etiology was identified and if the patient received appropriate antimicrobial treatment through expert adjudication, and if the patient died in-hospital. The primary endpoints were total costs, life-years (LYs), equal value life-years (evLYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per QALY. Extensive scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted. RESULTS: At a price of $2000 (2023 USD) for the plasma mcfDNA, All UC & mcfDNA was more costly ($165,247 vs $153,642) but more effective (13.39 vs 12.47 LYs gained; 10.20 vs 9.42 evLYs gained; 10.11 vs 9.42 QALYs gained) compared to All UC alone, giving a cost/QALY of $16,761. NI UC & mcfDNA & conditional UC Bronch was also more costly ($162,655 vs $153,642) and more effective (13.19 vs 12.47 LYs gained; 9.96 vs 9.42 evLYs gained; 9.96 vs 9.42 QALYs gained) compared to All UC alone, with a cost/QALY of $16,729. The PSA showed that above a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY, All UC & mcfDNA was the preferred scenario on cost-effectiveness grounds (as it provides the most QALYs gained). Further scenario analyses found that All UC & mcfDNA always improved patient outcomes but was not cost saving, even when the price of mcfDNA was set to $0. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the evidence available at the time of this analysis, this CEA suggests that mcfDNA may be cost-effective when added to All UC, as well as in a scenario using conditional bronchoscopy when NI testing fails to identify a probable infectious etiology for ICHP. Adding mcfDNA testing to UC diagnostic testing should allow more patients to receive appropriate therapy earlier and improve patient outcomes.

Clinical Utility of Plasma Microbial Cell-Free DNA Sequencing Among Immunocompromised Patients With Pneumonia.

Background: Plasma microbial cell-free DNA (mcfDNA) sequencing can establish the etiology of multiple infectious syndromes by identifying microbial DNA in plasma. However, data are needed to define the clinical scenarios where this tool offers the highest clinical benefit. Methods: We conducted a prospective multicenter observational study that evaluated the impact of plasma mcfDNA sequencing compared with usual care testing among adults with hematologic malignancies. This is a secondary analysis of an expanded cohort that evaluated the clinical utility of plasma mcfDNA sequencing across prespecified and adjudicated outcomes. We examined the percentage of participants for whom plasma mcfDNA sequencing identified a probable cause of pneumonia or clinically relevant nonpneumonia infection. We then assessed potential changes in antimicrobial therapy based on plasma mcfDNA sequencing results and the potential for early mcfDNA testing to avoid bronchoscopy and its associated adverse events. Results: Of 223 participants, at least 1 microbial detection by plasma mcfDNA sequencing was adjudicated as a probable cause of pneumonia in 57 (25.6%) and a clinically relevant nonpneumonia infection in 88 (39.5%). A probable cause of pneumonia was exclusively identified by plasma mcfDNA sequencing in 23 (10.3%) participants. Antimicrobial therapy would have changed for 41 (18.4%) participants had plasma mcfDNA results been available in real time. Among the 57 participants with a probable cause of pneumonia identified by plasma mcfDNA sequencing, bronchoscopy identified no additional probable cause of pneumonia in 52 (91.2%). Conclusions: Plasma mcfDNA sequencing could improve management of both pneumonia and other concurrent infections in immunocompromised patients with suspected pneumonia.