Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
New Microbiol ; 47(1): 116-122, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38700893

RESUMO

Management of virological failure in heavily treatment-experienced people with multidrug-resistant (MDR) HIV infection is a serious clinical challenge. New drugs with novel mechanisms of action have recently been approved, and their use has improved the outcome of subjects with limited treatment options (LTO). In this setting, the choice of antiretroviral therapy (ART) should be tailored based on the pattern of resistance, treatment history and patients' individual characteristics. While genotypic resistance testing is the reference method for analysing residual drug susceptibility, phenotypic resistance testing can provide additional support when facing LTO. Herein, we present the case of a patient with MDR HIV-1 infection on virological failure enrolled in the PRESTIGIO Registry. The salvage ART regimen, which included drugs with novel mechanisms of action (MoA), was tailored to the patient's clinical characteristics and on the resistance pattern explored with genotypic and phenotypic investigation, allowing the achievement of viro-immunological success. The use of recently approved drugs with novel MoA, combined with an optimized background regimen, may also achieve virological suppression in people with LTO.


Assuntos
Fármacos Anti-HIV , Cobicistat , Farmacorresistência Viral Múltipla , Genótipo , Infecções por HIV , HIV-1 , Compostos Heterocíclicos com 3 Anéis , Piperazinas , Humanos , Infecções por HIV/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por HIV/virologia , Masculino , HIV-1/efeitos dos fármacos , HIV-1/genética , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fármacos Anti-HIV/uso terapêutico , Fármacos Anti-HIV/farmacologia , Compostos Heterocíclicos com 3 Anéis/uso terapêutico , Compostos Heterocíclicos com 3 Anéis/administração & dosagem , Farmacorresistência Viral Múltipla/genética , Piperazinas/uso terapêutico , Cobicistat/uso terapêutico , Cobicistat/administração & dosagem , Sulfato de Atazanavir/uso terapêutico , Rilpivirina/uso terapêutico , Piridonas/uso terapêutico , Oxazinas/uso terapêutico , Testes de Sensibilidade Microbiana , Fenótipo
2.
Expert Rev Vaccines ; 23(1): 432-444, 2024.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38517153

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Heterologous prime-boost schedules have been employed in SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, yet additional data on immunogenicity and effectiveness are still needed. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Here, we measured the immunogenicity and effectiveness in the real-world setting of the mRNA booster dose in 181 subjects who had completed primary vaccination with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2, or mRNA1273 vaccines (IMMUNO_COV study; protocol code 18,869). The spike-specific antibody and B cell responses were analyzed up to 6 months after boosting. RESULTS: After an initial slower antibody response, the heterologous ChAdOx1/mRNA prime-boost formulation elicited spike-specific IgG titers comparable to homologous approaches, while spike-specific B cells showed a higher percentage of CD21-CD27- atypical cells compared to homologous mRNA vaccination. Mixed combinations of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 elicited an immune response comparable with homologous strategies. Non-significant differences in the Relative Risk of infection, calculated over a period of 18 months after boosting, were reported among homologous or heterologous vaccination groups, indicating a comparable relative vaccine effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Our data endorse the heterologous booster vaccination with mRNA as a valuable alternative to homologous schedules. This approach can serve as a solution in instances of formulation shortages and contribute to enhancing vaccine strategies for potential epidemics or pandemics.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacina BNT162 , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinação , Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV , Pandemias , RNA Mensageiro , Adenoviridae , Anticorpos Antivirais , Anticorpos Neutralizantes
3.
J Anesth Analg Crit Care ; 4(1): 28, 2024 Apr 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38689337

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In the last decades, several adjunctive treatments have been proposed to reduce mortality in septic shock patients. Unfortunately, mortality due to sepsis and septic shock remains elevated and NO trials evaluating adjunctive therapies were able to demonstrate any clear benefit. In light of the lack of evidence and conflicting results from previous studies, in this multidisciplinary consensus, the authors considered the rational, recent investigations and potential clinical benefits of targeted adjunctive therapies. METHODS: A panel of multidisciplinary experts defined clinical phenotypes, treatments and outcomes of greater interest in the field of adjunctive therapies for sepsis and septic shock. After an extensive systematic literature review, the appropriateness of each treatment for each clinical phenotype was determined using the modified RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. RESULTS: The consensus identified two distinct clinical phenotypes: patients with overwhelming shock and patients with immune paralysis. Six different adjunctive treatments were considered the most frequently used and promising: (i) corticosteroids, (ii) blood purification, (iii) immunoglobulins, (iv) granulocyte/monocyte colony-stimulating factor and (v) specific immune therapy (i.e. interferon-gamma, IL7 and AntiPD1). Agreement was achieved in 70% of the 25 clinical questions. CONCLUSIONS: Although clinical evidence is lacking, adjunctive therapies are often employed in the treatment of sepsis. To address this gap in knowledge, a panel of national experts has provided a structured consensus on the appropriate use of these treatments in clinical practice.

4.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 11(6): ofae273, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38854388

RESUMO

Background: Meropenem-vaborbactam is a recent and promising option for the treatment of KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae (KPC-Kp) infections, including those resistant to ceftazidime-avibactam. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of observational data from 19 Italian hospitals on use and outcomes of patients treated with meropenem-vaborbactam for at least ≥24 hours for KPC-Kp infections. Crude and propensity-weighted multiple Cox regression models were performed to ascertain risk factors independently associated with 30-day mortality. Results: The cohort included 342 adults with bloodstream infections (n = 172) and nonbacteremic infections (n = 170), of which 107 were lower respiratory tract infections, 30 were complicated urinary tract infections, and 33 were infections involving other sites. Most infections (62.3%) were managed with meropenem-vaborbactam monotherapy, or in combination with at least 1 other active drug (usually fosfomycin, tigecycline, or gentamicin) (37.7%). The 30-day mortality rate was 31.6% (108/342). In multiple Cox regression model, 30-day mortality was independently associated with septic shock at infection onset, Charlson comorbidity index ≥ 3, dialysis, concomitant COVID-19, and INCREMENT score ≥ 8. Administration of meropenem-vaborbactam within 48 hours from infection onset was a negative predictor of mortality. All predictors, except administration of meropenem-vaborbactam within 48 hours, remained significant when the multiple Cox regression model was repeated after adjustment for the propensity score for receipt of combination therapy. Conclusions: Despite the limits of a retrospective study, the data derived from this multicenter cohort provide additional evidence on the efficacy of meropenem-vaborbactam in treating severe KPC-Kp infections, even when used as monotherapy.

5.
Infect Dis Ther ; 13(9): 1929-1948, 2024 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38995601

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Cefiderocol is a siderophore cephalosporin showing activity against various carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (CR-GNB). No data currently exist about real-world use of cefiderocol in terms of types of therapy (e.g., empirical or targeted, monotherapy or combined regimens), indications, and patient characteristics. METHODS: In this multicenter, prospective study, we aimed at describing the use of cefiderocol in terms of types of therapy, indications, and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Cefiderocol was administered as empirical and targeted therapy in 27.5% (55/200) and 72.5% (145/200) of cases, respectively. Overall, it was administered as monotherapy in 101/200 cases (50.5%) and as part of a combined regimen for CR-GNB infections in the remaining 99/200 cases (49.5%). In multivariable analysis, previous isolation of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii odds ratio (OR) 2.56, with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.01-6.46, p = 0.047] and previous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (OR 8.73, 95% CI 1.05-72.54, p = 0.045) were associated with administration of cefiderocol as part of a combined regimen, whereas chronic kidney disease was associated with cefiderocol monotherapy (OR 0.38 for combined regimen, 95% CI 0.16-0.91, p = 0.029). Cumulative 30-day mortality was 19.8%, 45.0%, 20.7%, and 22.7% in patients receiving targeted cefiderocol for infections by Enterobacterales, A. baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and any metallo-ß-lactamase producers, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Cefiderocol is mainly used for targeted treatment, although empirical therapies account for more than 25% of prescriptions, thus requiring dedicated standardization and guidance. The almost equal distribution of cefiderocol monotherapy and cefiderocol-based combination therapies underlines the need for further study to ascertain possible differences in efficacy between the two approaches.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA