Search

Abstract We assessed whether multiplex real-time PCR plus conventional microbiological testing is safe and more effective than conventional microbiological testing alone for reducing antibiotic use in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). In this randomised trial, we recruited adults hospitalised with CAP at four Spanish hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo either multiplex real-time PCR in non-invasive respiratory samples plus conventional microbiological testing or conventional microbiological testing alone. The primary endpoint was antibiotic use measured by days of antibiotic therapy (DOT). Between February 20, 2020, and April 24, 2023, 242 patients were enrolled; 119 were randomly assigned to multiplex real-time PCR plus conventional microbiological testing and 123 to conventional microbiological testing alone. All but one of the patients allocated to multiplex real-time PCR plus conventional microbiological testing underwent PCR, which was performed in sputum samples in 77 patients (65.2%) and in nasopharyngeal swabs in 41 (34.7%). The median DOT was 10.04 (IQR 7.98, 12.94) in the multiplex PCR plus conventional microbiological testing group and 11.33 (IQR 8.15, 16.16) in the conventional microbiological testing alone group (difference −1.04; 95% CI, −2.42 to 0.17; p = 0.093). No differences were observed in adverse events and 30-day mortality. Our findings do not support the routine implementation of multiplex real-time PCR in the initial microbiological testing in hospitalised patients with CAP. Clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT04158492.

Abstract Background Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remains a leading cause of death worldwide, and hypoalbuminemia is associated with worse outcomes. However, it remains uncertain whether albumin administration could have any beneficial effects. We aim to assess whether the administration of albumin in hypoalbuminemic patients with CAP increases the proportion of clinically stable patients at day 5 compared with the standard of care alone. Methods This is a trial protocol for a superiority, non-blinded, multicenter, randomized, phase 3, interventional controlled clinical trial. The primary endpoint will be the proportion of clinical stable patients at day 5 (intention to treat), defined as those with stable vital signs for at least 24 h. The secondary endpoints will be time to clinical stability, duration of intravenous and total antibiotic treatment, length of hospital stay, intensive care unit admission, duration of mechanical ventilation and vasopressor treatment, adverse events, readmission within 30 days, and all-cause mortality. The trial has been approved by the Spanish Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency. The investigators commit to publish the data in peer-reviewed journals within a year of the study completion date. Subjects will be recruited from three Spanish hospitals over a planned enrolment period of 2 years. A follow-up visit will be performed 1 month after discharge. We have estimated the need for a sample size of 360 patients at a two-sided 5% alpha-level with a power of 80% based on intention to treat. Eligible participants must be hospitalized, hypoalbuminemic (≤ 30 g/L), non-immunosuppressed, adults, and diagnosed with CAP. They will be randomly assigned (1:1) to receive standard care plus albumin (20 g in 100 mL) every 12 h for 4 days or standard care alone. Discussion If this randomized trial confirms the hypothesis, it should lead to a change in current clinical practice for the management of hypoalbuminemic patients with CAP. Trial registration European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT) 2018-003117-18 . Registered on 12 April 2019. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04071041 . Registered on 27 August 2019

Introduction: Severe lung injury is triggered by both the SARS-CoV-2 infection and the subsequent host-immune response in some COVID-19 patients.Methods: We conducted a randomized, single-center, open-label, phase II trial with the aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of methylprednisolone pulses and tacrolimus plus standard of care (SoC) vs. SoC alone, in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. The primary outcome was time to clinical stability within 56 days after randomization.Results: From April 1 to May 2, 2020, 55 patients were prospectively included for subsequent randomization; 27 were assigned to the experimental group and 28 to the control group. The experimental treatment was not associated with a difference in time to clinical stability (hazard ratio 0.73 [95% CI 0.39–1.37]) nor most secondary outcomes. Median methylprednisolone cumulative doses were significantly lower (360 mg [IQR 360–842] vs. 870 mg [IQR 364–1451]; p = 0.007), and administered for a shorter time (median of 4.00 days [3.00–17.5] vs. 18.5 days [3.00–53.2]; p = 0.011) in the experimental group than in the control group. Although not statistically significant, those receiving the experimental therapy showed a numerically lower all-cause mortality than those receiving SoC, especially at day 10 [2 (7.41%) vs. 5 (17.9%); OR 0.39 (95% CI 0.05–2.1); p = 0.282]. The total number of non-serious adverse events was 42 in each the two groups. Those receiving experimental treatment had a numerically higher rate of non-serious infectious adverse events [16 (38%) vs. 10 (24%)] and serious infectious adverse events [7 (35%) vs. 3 (23%)] than those receiving SoC.Conclusions: The combined use of methylprednisolone pulses plus tacrolimus, in addition to the SoC, did not significantly improve the time to clinical stability or other secondary outcomes compared with the SoC alone in severe COVID-19. Although not statistically significant, patients receiving the experimental therapy had numerically lower all-cause mortality than those receiving SoC, supporting recent non-randomized studies with calcineurin inhibitors. It is noteworthy that the present trial had a limited sample size and several other limitations. Therefore, further RCTs should be done to assess the efficacy and safety of tacrolimus to tackle the inflammatory stages of COVID-19.Clinical Trial Registration: Identifier [NCT04341038/EudraCT: 2020-001445-39].

Introduction Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) continues to be a major health problem worldwide and is one of the main reasons for prescribing antibiotics. However, the causative agent is often not identified, resulting in antibiotic overtreatment, which is a key driver of antimicrobial resistance and adverse events. We aim to test the hypothesis that comprehensive molecular testing, compared with routine microbiological testing, would be effective in reducing antibiotic use in patients with CAP.Methods and analysis We will perform a randomised, controlled, open-label clinical trial with two parallel groups (1:1) at two tertiary hospitals between 2020 and 2022. Non-severely immunosuppressed adults hospitalised for CAP will be considered eligible. Patients will be randomly assigned to receive either the experimental diagnosis (comprehensive molecular testing plus routine microbiological testing) or standard diagnosis (only microbiological routine testing). The primary endpoint will be antibiotic consumption measured as days of antibiotic therapy per 1000 patient-days. Secondary endpoints will be de-escalation to narrower antibiotic treatment, time to switch from intravenous to oral antibiotics, days to reaching an aetiological diagnosis, antibiotic-related side effects, length of stay, days to clinical stability, intensive care unit admission, days of mechanical ventilation, hospital readmission up to 30 days after randomisation and death from any cause by 48 hours and 30 days after randomisation. We will need to include 440 subjects to be able to reject the null hypothesis that both groups have equal days of antibiotic therapy per 1000 patient-days with a probability >0.8.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been obtained from the Ethics Committee of Bellvitge Hospital (AC028/19) and from the Spanish Medicines and Medical Devices Agency, and it is valid for all participating centres under existing Spanish legislation. Results will be presented at international meetings and will be made available to patients, their caregivers and funders.Trial registration number ClinicalTrials: NCT04158492. EudraCT: 2018-004880-29.

ObjetivesThe aim of this study was to identify CMV drug resistance mutations (DRM) in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with suspected resistance comparing next-generation sequencing (NGS) with Sanger sequencing and assessing risk factors and the clinical impact of resistance.MethodsUsing Sanger sequencing as the reference method, we prospectively assessed the ability of NGS to detect CMV DRM in the UL97 and UL54 genes in a nationwide observational study from September 2013 to August 2016.ResultsAmong 44 patients recruited, 14 DRM were detected by Sanger in 12 patients (27%) and 20 DRM were detected by NGS, in 16 (36%). NGS confirmed all the DRM detected by Sanger. The additional six mutations detected by NGS were present in ConclusionsNGS showed a higher yield than Sanger sequencing for detecting CMV resistance mutations in SOT recipients. The presence of DRM detected by NGS was independently associated with longer antiviral treatment.