Desirability of Outcome Ranking for the Management of Antimicrobial Therapy (DOOR MAT): A Framework for Assessing Antibiotic Selection Strategies in the Presence of Drug Resistance

Simplified Spectrum Score (S3) app for pathogen-agnostic antimicrobial drug spectrum ranking to assess for antimicrobial de-escalation events

Antimicrobial/antibiotic de-escalation (ADE) is a key feature of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP) that relies mainly on individual panels for determining ADE events based on subjective ranking of antibiotics' spectrum activity. The lack of consensus among ASP experts leads to reproducibility issues in the measure of this clinical outcome, making difficult to assess its real impact on patient care. The S3 score (Simplified Spectrum Score) app was developed to allow an objective ranking of antibiotics. Ranking was achieved by developing a database harboring pairs of bacteria-antibiotics for which each molecule was assigned a score based on published and clinically validated data from a recognized international committee. S3 score shows a strong correlation relationship and substantial agreement to a clinically validated spectrum score, and its framework enables any person to use it for ADE detection without assuming prior knowledge or training. In addition, its design enables regular updates and sustainability.

The Future Ain't What It Used to Be…Out With the Old…In With the Better: Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group Innovations

Clinical research networks conduct important studies that would not otherwise be performed by other entities. In the case of the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG), such studies include diagnostic studies using master protocols, controlled phage intervention trials, and studies that evaluate treatment strategies or dynamic interventions, such as sequences of empiric and definitive therapies. However, the value of a clinical research network lies not only in the results from these important studies but in the creation of new approaches derived from collaborative thinking, carefully examining and defining the most important research questions for clinical practice, recognizing and addressing common but suboptimal approaches, and anticipating that the standard approaches of today may be insufficient for tomorrow. This results in the development and implementation of new methodologies and tools for the design, conduct, analyses, and reporting of research studies. These new methodologies directly impact the studies conducted within the network and have a broad and long-lasting impact on the field, enhancing the scientific value and efficiency of generations of research studies. This article describes innovations from the ARLG in diagnostic studies, observational studies, and clinical trials evaluating interventions for the prevention and treatment of antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections.

Under the Hood: The Scientific Leadership, Clinical Operations, Statistical and Data Management, and Laboratory Centers of the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group

Developing and implementing the scientific agenda of the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG) by soliciting input and proposals, transforming concepts into clinical trials, conducting those trials, and translating trial data analyses into actionable information for infectious disease clinical practice is the collective role of the Scientific Leadership Center, Clinical Operations Center, Statistical and Data Management Center, and Laboratory Center of the ARLG. These activities include shepherding concept proposal applications through peer review; identifying, qualifying, training, and overseeing clinical trials sites; recommending, developing, performing, and evaluating laboratory assays in support of clinical trials; and designing and performing data collection and statistical analyses. This article describes key components involved in realizing the ARLG scientific agenda through the activities of the ARLG centers.

Unlocking the DOOR - how to design, apply, analyse, and interpret desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) endpoints in infectious diseases clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) outcomes, with or without response adjusted for antibiotic risk (RADAR), are increasingly used in infectious diseases randomized clinical trials (RCTs), with the advantage of being able to combine multiple clinical outcomes and antibiotic duration in a single metric. However, it remains poorly understood, and there is considerable heterogeneity in its use.

OBJECTIVES

In this scoping review, we explain how to design, use, and analyse a DOOR endpoint, and highlight several pitfalls and potential improvements that can be made to DOOR/RADAR.

SOURCES

The Ovid MEDLINE database was searched for terms related to DOOR in English-language papers published up to 31 December 2022. Papers discussing DOOR methodology and/or reporting clinical trial analyses (as either primary, secondary, or post-hoc analysis) using a DOOR outcome were included.

CONTENT

17 papers were included in the final review, of which 9 reported DOOR analyses of 12 RCTs. 8 papers discussed DOOR methodology. We synthesised information from these papers and discuss (a) How to develop a DOOR scale, (b) How to conduct a DOOR/RADAR analysis, (c) Use in clinical trials, (d) Use of alternative tiebreakers apart from RADAR, (e) Partial credit analyses, and (f) Criticisms and pitfalls of DOOR/RADAR.

IMPLICATIONS

DOOR is an important innovation for RCTs in infectious diseases. We highlight potential areas of methodological improvement for future research. There remains considerable heterogeneity in its implementation, and further collaborative efforts, with a more diverse range of perspectives, should be made to develop consensus scales for use in prospective studies.

A case–control study of infections caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae producing New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase-1: Predictors and outcomes

Introduction

Infections caused by antimicrobial-resistant bacteria are a significant cause of death worldwide, and carbapenemase-producing bacteria are the principal agents. New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase-1 producing Klebsiella pneumoniae (KP-NDM-1) is an extensively drug-resistant bacterium that has been previously reported in Mexico. Our aim was to conduct a case–control study to describe the risk factors associated with nosocomial infections caused by K. pneumoniae producing NDM-1 in a tertiary-care hospital in Mexico.

Methods

A retrospective case–control study with patients hospitalized from January 2012 to February 2018 at the Hospital Civil de Guadalajara “Fray Antonio Alcalde” was designed. During this period, 139 patients with a culture that was positive for K. pneumoniae NDM-1 (cases) and 486 patients hospitalized in the same department and on the same date as the cases (controls) were included. Data were analyzed using SPSS v. 24, and logistic regression analysis was conducted to calculate the risk factors for KP-NDM-1 infection.

Results

One hundred and thirty-nine case patients with a KP-NDM-1 isolate and 486 control patients were analyzed. In the case group, acute renal failure was a significant comorbidity, hospitalization days were extended, and significantly more deaths occurred. In a multivariate analysis of risk factors, the independent variables included the previous use of antibiotics (odds ratio, OR = 12.252), the use of a urinary catheter (OR = 5.985), the use of a central venous catheter (OR = 5.518), the use of mechanical ventilation (OR = 3.459), and the length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (OR = 2.334) as predictors of infection with NDM-1 K. pneumoniae.

Conclusion

In this study, the previous use of antibiotics, the use of a urinary catheter, the use of a central venous catheter, the use of mechanical ventilation, and ICU stay were shown to be predictors of infection with NDM-1 K. pneumoniae and were independent risk factors for infection with NDM-1 K. pneumoniae.

A Composite Endpoint for Treatment Benefit According to Patient Preference

Complex disorders usually affect multiple symptom domains measured by several outcomes. The importance of these outcomes is often different among patients. Current approaches integrate multiple outcomes without considering patient preferences at the individual level. In this paper, we propose a new composite Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR) that integrates individual level ranking of outcome importance and define a winning probability measuring the overall treatment effect. Stratified randomization can be performed based on the participants' baseline outcome rankings. A Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney U-statistic is used to average the pairwise DOOR between one treated and one control patient, considering the difference in these patients' ranking of outcome importance. We use both theoretical and empirical methods to examine the statistical properties of our method and to compare with conventional approaches. We conclude that the proposed composite DOOR properly reflects patient-level preferences and can be used in pivotal trials or comparative effectiveness trials for a patient-centered evaluation of overall treatment benefits.

Outcomes of Restricted versus Liberal Post-Operative Antibiotic Use in Patients Undergoing Appendectomy: A DOOR/RADAR Post Hoc Analysis of the EAST Appendicitis MUSTANG Study

Background: There is no consensus on the duration of antibiotic use after appendectomy. We hypothesized that restricted antibiotic use is associated with better clinical outcomes. Patients and Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis of the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) Multicenter Study of the Treatment of Appendicitis in America-Acute, Perforated, and Gangrenous (MUSTANG) study using the desirability of outcome ranking/response adjusted for duration of antibiotic risk (DOOR/RADAR) framework. Three separate datasets were analyzed based on restricted versus liberal post-operative antibiotic groups: simple appendicitis (no vs. yes); complicated appendicitis, only four days (≤24 hours vs. 4 days); and complicated appendicitis, four or more days (≤24 hours vs. ≥4 days). Patients were assigned to one of seven mutually exclusive DOOR categories RADAR ranked within each category. DOOR/RADAR score pairwise comparisons were performed between all patients. Each patient was assigned either 1, 0, or -1 if they had better, same, or worse outcomes than the other patient in the pair, respectively. The sum of these numbers (cumulative comparison score) was calculated for each patient and the group medians of individual sums were compared by Wilcoxon rank sum. Results: For simple appendicitis, the restricted group had higher median sums than the liberal group (552 [552,552] vs. -1,353 [-1,353, -1,353], p < 0.001). For both complicated appendicitis analyses, the restricted group had higher median sums than the liberal: only 4 (196 [23,196] vs. -121 [-121, -121], p < 0.02) and 4 or more (660 [484,660] vs -169 [-444,181], p < 0.001). Conclusions: Restricted post-operative antibiotic use in patients after appendectomy is a dominant strategy when considering treatment effectiveness and antibiotic exposure.

Comparing the Clinical Utility of Rapid Diagnostics for Treatment of Bloodstream Infections Using Desirability of Outcome Ranking Approach for the Management of Antibiotic Therapy (DOOR-MAT)

Decisions regarding which rapid diagnostic test (RDT) for bloodstream infections to implement remain challenging given the diversity of organisms detected by different platforms. We used the desirability of outcome ranking management of antimicrobial therapy (DOOR-MAT) as a framework to compare two RDT platforms on potential desirability of antimicrobial therapy decisions. An observational study was performed at University of Maryland Medical System comparing Verigene blood culture (BC) to GenMark Dx ePlex blood culture ID (BCID) (research use only) panels on blood cultures from adult patients. Positive percent agreement (PPA) between each RDT platform and Vitek MS was calculated for comparison of on-panel targets. Theoretical antimicrobial decisions were made based on RDT results, taking into consideration patient parameters, antimicrobial stewardship practices, and local infectious diseases epidemiology. DOOR-MAT with a partial credit scoring system was applied to these decisions, and mean scores were compared across platforms using a paired t test. The study consisted of 160 unique patients. The Verigene BC PPA was 98.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95.1 to 99.8), and ePlex BCID PPA was 98% (95% CI, 94.3 to 99.6). Among the 31 organisms not on the Verigene BC panels, 61% were identified by the ePlex BCID panels. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) DOOR-MAT score for Verigene BC was 86.8 (28.5), while that for ePlex BCID was 91.9 (23.1) (P = 0.01). Both RDT platforms had high PPA for on-panel targets. The ePlex BCID was able to identify more organisms than Verigene, resulting in higher mean DOOR-MAT scores.

The Desirability of Outcome Ranking for the Management of Antimicrobial Therapy (DOOR MAT) Reveals Improvements in the Treatment of Bloodstream Infection Caused by Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae in Patients from the Veterans Health Administration

BACKGROUND

Reductions in the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics is a cornerstone of antimicrobial stewardship. We aim to demonstrate the use of Desirability of Outcome Ranking Approach for the Management of Antimicrobial Therapy (DOOR MAT) to evaluate the treatment of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae bloodstream infection in patients from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) across a decade.

METHODS

Using electronic records, we determined empiric and definitive antibiotic treatments, clinical characteristics and 30-day mortality of subjects with monomicrobial E. coli and K. pneumoniae bloodstream infection hospitalized in VHA medical centers from 2009 to 2018. Focusing on patients treated with parenteral β-lactams and with available antibiotic susceptibility testing results, we applied a range of DOOR MAT scores that reflect the desirability of antibiotic choices according to spectrum and activity against individual isolates. We report trends in resistance and desirability of empiric and definitive antibiotic treatments.

RESULTS

During the 10-year period analyzed, resistance to expanded-spectrum cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones increased in E. coli but not in K. pneumoniae, while resistance remained unchanged to carbapenems and piperacillin-tazobactam. In 6,451 cases analyzed, we observed improvements in DOOR MAT scores consistent with de-escalation. Improvement in desirability of definitive treatment compared to empiric treatment occurred in 26% of cases, increasing from 16% in 2009 to 34% in 2018. Reductions in overtreatment were sustained and without negative impact on survival.

CONCLUSION

DOOR MAT provides a framework to assess antibiotic treatment of E. coli and K. pneumoniae bloodstream infection and can be a useful metric in antimicrobial stewardship.

Day at the Races: Comparing BioFire FilmArray Blood Culture ID Panels to Verigene Blood Culture in Gram-negative Bloodstream Infections using DOOR-MAT Analysis

Three rapid diagnostic test panels (Verigene BC-GN, BioFire BCID, and BCID 2 [RUO]) were compared using the Desirability of Outcome Ranking Management of Antimicrobial Therapy (DOOR-MAT) to evaluate potential downstream antimicrobial prescribing decisions resulting from the panels’ different organism and resistance detection. BioFire BCID 2 (RUO) had the best mean DOOR-MAT scores.