A critical view on the current use of daptomycin in Spain: The daptomise study

BACKGROUND

The Study on the Clinical Use of DAPTOMycin in Spain (DAPTOMISE Study) is a national surveillance program of daptomycin use. The objectives of this study are to evaluate the current variability in daptomycin consumption across the different hospitals and the adequacy of therapy, specially focused on underdosing.

METHODS

All adult and pediatric patients who received, at least, one dose of daptomycin in a single week in 98 institutions in Spain were included. The adequacy of daptomycin use was evaluated with respect to the indication, dosage, adjustments after microbiology results, switching to an oral agent and length of treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 615 patients received daptomycin during the study week. The prevalence use was 2.3 patients / 100,000 inhabitants per week, 12.4 patients / 1000 admissions and 9.2 Days of Therapy (DOT) / 1000 hospital stays. These rates varied between hospitals: from 0 to 13.9 patients / 100,000 inhabitants, from 0 to 76.1 patients / 1000 admissions and from 0 to 49.4 DOT / 1000 hospital stays. The most frequent infections were bacteremia (31.6 %) and skin and soft tissue infections (17.9 %). Microbiological results were available in only 65.4 % of infections. The most frequent microorganisms were Staphylococcus aureus (192 isolates, of which 87 were resistant to methicillin) and coagulase-negative staphylococci (124 isolates). A total of 136 prescriptions (22.1 %) were underdosed. Dosages < 8 mg/kg were used for 35.6 % of endovascular infections and for 26.2 % of osteoarticular infections. Overall, 57.2 % of prescriptions were not optimal in, at least, one item. Clinical cure rate was 76.1% and mortality attributable to the infection 8.1%.

CONCLUSION

This is the first registry that identifies the prevalence of use of daptomycin in Spain and shows a high variability in the consumption between the different hospitals. Daptomycin underdosing was present in more than 20 % of cases.

SARS-COV-2 Infection in People Living with HIV: Experience from a Tertiary Hospital in Madrid

Since SAR-COV-2 infection emerged and spread worldwide, little is known about its impact on people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). We performed a single-center retrospective study to describe the potential particularities and risk factors for respiratory failure (RF) in that population. This single-center retrospective study included patients infected with HIV, whose current follow-up is run in this center, above18 years of age, with diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection between March 5, 2020 and April 15, 2021. We collected data regarding HIV immunological and virological status, main epidemiological characteristics, as well as those conditions considered to potentially influence in SARS-CoV-2 evolution; and clinical, microbiological, radiological, respiratory status, and survival concerning coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We compared all that, for patients with and without RF and performed a logistic regression for suspected risk factors for RF. One hundred seventy-seven HIV patients were diagnosed from COVID-19 (mean age 53.8 years, 81.3% male). At diagnosis, 95.5% were receiving ART and 91.3% had undetectable viral load, with median CD4 count of 569 cells/μL. One hundred thirty-eight patients (78.4%) had symptoms, 44 (25%) developed RF and 53 (31%) developed bilateral pneumonia. The most commonly used treatments were: steroids (26.7%) and hydroxychloroquine (13.1%). When comparing patients with and without RF, we found statistically significant differences for 20 of the analyzed variables such as age (p < .001) and CD4 (p 0.002), and route of HIV transmission by intravenous drug users IVDU (p 0.002) were determined. In multivariate analysis, age [odds ratio (OR) 1.095] and CD4 count less than 350 cells/μL (OR 3.36) emerged as risk factor for RF. People living with HIV whose CD4 count is <350 cells are at higher risk of developing RF when infected by SARS-CoV-2.

Infective endocarditis in patients with cancer: a consequence of invasive procedures or a harbinger of neoplasm?: A prospective, multicenter cohort

The aim of the study was to draw a comparison between the characteristics of infective endocarditis (IE) in patients with cancer and those of IE in noncancer patients.Patients with IE, according to the modified Duke criteria, were prospectively included in the GAMES registry between January 2008 and February 2014 in 30 hospitals. Patients with active cancer were compared with noncancer patients.During the study period, 161 episodes of IE fulfilled the inclusion criteria. We studied 2 populations: patients whose cancer was diagnosed before IE (73.9%) and those whose cancer and IE were diagnosed simultaneously (26.1%). The latter more frequently had community-acquired IE (67.5% vs 26.4%, P < .01), severe sepsis (28.6% vs 11.1%, P = .013), and IE caused by gastrointestinal streptococci (42.9% vs 16.8%, P < .01). However, catheter source (7.1% vs 29.4%, P = .003), invasive procedures (26.2% vs 44.5%, P = .044), and immunosuppressants (9.5% vs 35.6%, P = .002) were less frequent.When compared with noncancer patients, patients with cancer were more often male (75.2% vs 67.7%, P = .049), with a higher comorbidity index (7 vs 4). In addition, IE was more often nosocomial (48.7% vs 29%) and originated in catheters (23.6% vs 6.2%) (all P < .01). Prosthetic endocarditis (21.7% vs 30.3%, P = .022) and surgery when indicated (24.2% vs 46.5%, P < .01) were less common. In-hospital mortality (34.8% vs 25.8%, P = .012) and 1-year mortality (47.8% vs 30.9%, P < .01) were higher in cancer patients, although 30-day mortality was not (24.8% vs 19.3%, P = .087).A significant proportion of cases of IE (5.6%) were recorded in cancer patients, mainly as a consequence of medical interventions. IE may be a harbinger of occult cancer, particularly that of gastrointestinal or urinary origin.

Aetiology of renal failure in patients with infective endocarditis. The role of antibiotics

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The possible renal toxicity of certain antibiotics (AB) is well known. The objective of our work is to know the possible effect of AB treatments in the development of renal failure (RF) in patients with infective endocarditis (IE).

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Collection from a national multi-centre registry of collection on renal function, both prior and its impairment, if any, during the treatment of IE and in relation to possible causative factors, including the use of AB.

RESULTS

Between 2008 and 2012, 1,853 episodes of IE reported from 26 Spanish centres were analysed. Of these, 21.6% had prior RF. They developed new RF or impairment of renal function in 38.7% of the cases. In patients with prior RF, impairment was more frequent (64 vs. 31.7%, P<.001). Overall, patients with RF were older (70.6 vs. 67 years, P<.01), had more comorbidities (Charlson index 5 vs. 4, P<.01), and IE by Staphylococcus aureus (32.1 vs. 16.5%, P<.01). Potentially nephrotoxic AB use was only associated with RF in patients without prior RF (aminoglycosides: OR=1.47 [95% CI 1.096-1.988], P=.010; aminoglycosides with vancomycin: OR=1.49 [95% CI 1.069-2.09], P=.019).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients without prior RF, the use of nephrotoxic AB is associated with impairment of renal function. In patients with RF prior to the IE episode, impairment of renal function was more frequent but appears to be more related to the severity of infection.

[Relationships with microbiology: the view from other specialties]

The major advances produced in infectious diseases, partly favored by technological development in the last few years, together with current changes in healthcare, have led to a new scenario in which, far from the control of infectious diseases, clinical microbiology has acquired an undoubted leading role. This new panorama implies collaboration among distinct health professionals within the same healthcare setting, with common and occasionally conflicting interests. Setting aside the individual differences that can be produced in the daily life of our hospitals, all health professionals should understand one another, not only because such cooperation is required for optimal patient care but also because synergistic collaboration among professions would improve professional development. Based on this principle of a multidisciplinary approach, collaboration and mutual respect, the moment seems opportune for the various professionals involved in infectious diseases (infectologists, internists, pediatricians and intensivists) to express their view of the specialty of clinical microbiology. The present article includes reflections, from a highly liberal and personal point of view, on how mutual relationships can be approached and on how greater knowledge of infectious diseases can continue to be gained in Spain. In all these reflections, the questions of where we come from and where we are going are explicit or implicit.