Search

IntroductionCommunity-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 analysisWe 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 disseminationEthical 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 numberClinicalTrials:NCT04158492. EudraCT: 2018-004880-29.

Introduction Methicillin-susceptibleStaphylococcus aureus(MSSA) bacteraemia is a frequent condition, with high mortality rates. There is a growing interest in identifying new therapeutic regimens able to reduce therapeutic failure and mortality observed with the standard of care of beta-lactam monotherapy. In vitro and small-scale studies have found synergy between cloxacillin and fosfomycin againstS. aureus. Our aim is to test the hypothesis that cloxacillin plus fosfomycin achieves higher treatment success than cloxacillin alone in patients with MSSA bacteraemia. Methods We will perform a superiority, randomised, open-label, phase IV–III, two-armed parallel group (1:1) clinical trial at 20 Spanish tertiary hospitals. Adults (≥18 years) with isolation of MSSA from at least one blood culture ≤72 hours before inclusion with evidence of infection, will be randomly allocated to receive either cloxacillin 2 g/4-hour intravenous plus fosfomycin 3 g/6-hour intravenous or cloxacillin 2 g/4-hour intravenous alone for 7 days. After the first week, sequential treatment and total duration of antibiotic therapy will be determined according to clinical criteria by the attending physician. Primary endpoints: (1) Treatment success at day 7, a composite endpoint comprising all the following criteria: patient alive, stable or with improved quick-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, afebrile and with negative blood cultures for MSSA at day 7. (2) Treatment success at test of cure (TOC) visit: patient alive and no isolation of MSSA in blood culture or at another sterile site from day 8 until TOC (12 weeks after randomisation). We assume a rate of treatment success of 74% in the cloxacillin group. Accepting alpha risk of 0.05 and beta risk of 0.2 in a two-sided test, 183 subjects will be required in each of the control and experimental groups to obtain statistically significant difference of 12% (considered clinically significant). Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been obtained from the Ethics Committee of Bellvitge University Hospital (AC069/18) and from the Spanish Medicines and Healthcare Product Regulatory Agency (AEMPS, AC069/18), and is valid for all participating centres under existing Spanish legislation. The results will be presented at international meetings and will be made available to patients and funders. Trial registration number The protocol has been approved by AEMPS with the Trial Registration Number EudraCT 2018-001207-37. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT03959345; Pre-results.

Introduction Bloodstream infection (BSI) due to extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacilli (ESBL-GNB) is increasing at an alarming pace worldwide. Although β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor (BLBLI) combinations have been suggested as an alternative to carbapenems for the treatment of BSI due to these resistant organisms in the general population, their usefulness for the treatment of BSI due to ESBL-GNB in haematological patients with neutropaenia is yet to be elucidated. The aim of the BICAR study is to compare the efficacy of BLBLI combinations with that of carbapenems for the treatment of BSI due to an ESBL-GNB in this population. Methods and analysis A multinational, multicentre, observational retrospective study. Episodes of BSI due to ESBL-GNB occurring in haematological patients and haematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients with neutropaenia from 1 January 2006 to 31 March 2015 will be analysed. The primary end point will be case-fatality rate within 30 days of onset of BSI. The secondary end points will be 7-day and 14-day case-fatality rates, microbiological failure, colonisation/infection by resistant bacteria, superinfection, intensive care unit admission and development of adverse events. Sample size The number of expected episodes of BSI due to ESBL-GNB in the participant centres will be 260 with a ratio of control to experimental participants of 2. Ethics and dissemination The protocol of the study was approved at the first site by the Research Ethics Committee (REC) of Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge. Approval will be also sought from all relevant RECs. Any formal presentation or publication of data from this study will be considered as a joint publication by the participating investigators and will follow the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The study has been endorsed by the European Study Group for Bloodstream Infection and Sepsis (ESGBIS) and the European Study Group for Infections in Compromised Hosts (ESGICH).