Search

Background: There was a reported increase in the antimicrobial consumption in hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic, accompanied by an increase in infections due to multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria., Methods: This retrospective time series study from intensive care units in Buenos Aires examined changes in antibiotic consumption (defined daily doses/1000 patients/day), the incidence of Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) and the mechanism of resistance. Antibiotics were categorised into group 1 (agents against MDR GNB) and group 2 (agents against non-MDR infections). Bacteriological samples included respiratory samples and blood cultures. Periods were divided into pre-pandemic (July 2019 to March 2020) and pandemic (April 2020 to March 2022). Correlation coefficients (r) were analysed and the Mann-Whitney test was performed to compare both periods., Results: During the study period, GNB incidence, group 1 antibiotic consumption and resistance mechanisms increased, whereas antibiotics decreased in group 2. A significant positive correlation was seen between the consumption of antibiotics in group 1 and the incidence of GNB (r = 0.63; P < 0.001) and resistance (r = 0.52; P = 0.002). Significant differences were found between pre-pandemic and pandemic periods regarding the medians of group 1 consumption (520 [408-570] vs. 753 [495-851] DDD/1000 patients/day; P = 0.029), incidence of GNB (12 [10-13] vs. 43 [25-52.5] cases/month; P < 0.001) and resistance mechanisms (5 [4-8] vs. 17 [10-25] cases/month; P < 0.001), extended-spectrum beta lactamases (2 [1-2] vs. 6 [3-8] cases/month; P < 0.001) and metallo-beta-lactamases (0 [0-0] vs. 6 [1.75-8.5] cases/month; P < 0.001)., Conclusion: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the rise in GNB incidence and the amount of resistance mechanisms significantly correlated with the increase in consumption of agents against MDR strains., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd and International Society of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.)

Background: Lack of specific definitions of clinical characteristics, disease severity, and risk and preventive factors of post-COVID-19 syndrome (PCS) severely impacts research and discovery of new preventive and therapeutics drugs., Methods: This prospective multicenter cohort study was conducted from February 2020 to June 2022 in 5 countries, enrolling SARS-CoV-2 out- and in-patients followed at 3-, 6-, and 12-month from diagnosis, with assessment of clinical and biochemical features, antibody (Ab) response, Variant of Concern (VoC), and physical and mental quality of life (QoL). Outcome of interest was identification of risk and protective factors of PCS by clinical phenotype, setting, severity of disease, treatment, and vaccination status. We used SF-36 questionnaire to assess evolution in QoL index during follow-up and unsupervised machine learning algorithms (principal component analysis, PCA) to explore symptom clusters. Severity of PCS was defined by clinical phenotype and QoL. We also used generalized linear models to analyse the impact of PCS on QoL and associated risk and preventive factors. CT registration number: NCT05097677., Findings: Among 1796 patients enrolled, 1030 (57%) suffered from at least one symptom at 12-month. PCA identified 4 clinical phenotypes: chronic fatigue-like syndrome (CFs: fatigue, headache and memory loss, 757 patients, 42%), respiratory syndrome (REs: cough and dyspnoea, 502, 23%); chronic pain syndrome (CPs: arthralgia and myalgia, 399, 22%); and neurosensorial syndrome (NSs: alteration in taste and smell, 197, 11%). Determinants of clinical phenotypes were different (all comparisons p < 0.05): being female increased risk of CPs, NSs, and CFs; chronic pulmonary diseases of REs; neurological symptoms at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis of REs, NSs, and CFs; oxygen therapy of CFs and REs; and gastrointestinal symptoms at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis of CFs. Early treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection with monoclonal Ab (all clinical phenotypes), corticosteroids therapy for mild/severe cases (NSs), and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (CPs) were less likely to be associated to PCS (all comparisons p < 0.05). Highest reduction in QoL was detected in REs and CPs (43.57 and 43.86 vs 57.32 in PCS-negative controls, p < 0.001). Female sex (p < 0.001), gastrointestinal symptoms (p = 0.034) and renal complications (p = 0.002) during the acute infection were likely to increase risk of severe PCS (QoL <50). Vaccination and early treatment with monoclonal Ab reduced the risk of severe PCS (p = 0.01 and p = 0.03, respectively)., Interpretation: Our study provides new evidence suggesting that PCS can be classified by clinical phenotypes with different impact on QoL, underlying possible different pathogenic mechanisms. We identified factors associated to each clinical phenotype and to severe PCS. These results might help in designing pathogenesis studies and in selecting high-risk patients for inclusion in therapeutic and management clinical trials., Funding: The study received funding from the Horizon 2020 ORCHESTRA project, grant 101016167; from the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMw), grant 10430012010023; from Inserm, REACTing (REsearch & ACtion emergING infectious diseases) consortium and the French Ministry of Health, grant PHRC 20-0424., Competing Interests: AT received a grant from the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw) (grant number 10430012010023). JG received funding from ViiV Healthcare, Gilead Sciences, Theratechnologies, Astra-Zeneca, and Merck, all outside this study. MG received funding for lectures at educational events from Pfizer, Shionogi, MSD, Menarini, and Gilead, all outside this study. All other authors have nothing to declare., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Background: Variation in the approaches taken to contain the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic at country level has been shaped by economic and political considerations, technical capacity, and assumptions about public behaviours. To address the limited application of learning from previous pandemics, this study aimed to analyse perceived facilitators and inhibitors during the pandemic and to inform the development of an assessment tool for pandemic response planning., Methods: A cross-sectional electronic survey of health and non-health care professionals (5 May - 5 June 2020) in six languages, with respondents recruited via email, social media and website posting. Participants were asked to score inhibitors (-10 to 0) or facilitators (0 to +10) impacting country response to COVID-19 from the following domains - Political, Economic, Sociological, Technological, Ecological, Legislative, and wider Industry (the PESTELI framework). Participants were then asked to explain their responses using free text. Descriptive and thematic analysis was followed by triangulation with the literature and expert validation to develop the assessment tool, which was then compared with four existing pandemic planning frameworks., Results: 928 respondents from 66 countries (57% health care professionals) participated. Political and economic influences were consistently perceived as powerful negative forces and technology as a facilitator across high- and low-income countries. The 103-item tool developed for guiding rapid situational assessment for pandemic planning is comprehensive when compared to existing tools and highlights the interconnectedness of the 7 domains., Conclusions: The tool developed and proposed addresses the problems associated with decision making in disciplinary silos and offers a means to refine future use of epidemic modelling., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors completed the ICMJE Unified Competing Interest form (available upon request from the corresponding author), and declare no other conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 by the Journal of Global Health. All rights reserved.)

Objectives/purpose: The costs attributable to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) remain theoretical and largely unspecified. Current figures fail to capture the full health and economic burden caused by AMR across human, animal, and environmental health; historically many studies have considered only direct costs associated with human infection from a hospital perspective, primarily from high-income countries. The Global Antimicrobial Resistance Platform for ONE-Burden Estimates (GAP-ON€) network has developed a framework to help guide AMR costing exercises in any part of the world as a first step towards more comprehensive analyses for comparing AMR interventions at the local level as well as more harmonized analyses for quantifying the full economic burden attributable to AMR at the global level., Methods: GAP-ON€ (funded under the JPIAMR 8th call (Virtual Research Institute) is composed of 19 international networks and institutions active in the field of AMR. For this project, the Network operated by means of Delphi rounds, teleconferences and face-to-face meetings. The resulting costing framework takes a bottom-up approach to incorporate all relevant costs imposed by an AMR bacterial microbe in a patient, in an animal, or in the environment up through to the societal level., Results: The framework itemizes the epidemiological data as well as the direct and indirect cost components needed to build a realistic cost picture for AMR. While the framework lists a large number of relevant pathogens for which this framework could be used to explore the costs, the framework is sufficiently generic to facilitate the costing of other resistant pathogens, including those of other aetiologies., Conclusion: In order to conduct cost-effectiveness analyses to choose amongst different AMR-related interventions at local level, the costing of AMR should be done according to local epidemiological priorities and local health service norms. Yet the use of a common framework across settings allows for the results of such studies to contribute to cumulative estimates that can serve as the basis of broader policy decisions at the international level such as how to steer R&D funding and how to prioritize AMR amongst other issues. Indeed, it is only by building a realistic cost picture that we can make informed decisions on how best to tackle major health threats.

Background: The World Health Organization Essential Medicines List (WHO-EML) includes 'access' antibiotics, judged essential to treat common infections. The European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Study Group for Antimicrobial Stewardship defined a list of 'forgotten' antibiotics, some old and often off-patent antibiotics, which have particular value for specific indications., Objective: To investigate which WHO-EML 'access' and 'forgotten' antibiotics are approved at national level in a sample of low- to middle-income countries (LMICs)., Methods: The Scientific Committee used a consensus procedure to select 26 WHO-EML 'access' and 15 'forgotten' antibiotics. Paediatric formulations were explored for 14 antibiotics. An internet-based questionnaire was circulated to 40 LMIC representatives. Antibiotics were defined as approved if an official drug regulatory agency and/or the national ministry of health licensed their use, making them, at least theoretically, available on the market., Results: Twenty-eight LMICs (11 in Africa, 11 in Asia and six in America) were surveyed. Nine WHO-EML 'access' antibiotics (amoxicillin, ampicillin, benzylpenicillin, ceftriaxone, clarithromycin, ciprofloxacin, doxycycline, gentamicin and metronidazole) were approved in all countries, and all 26 'access' antibiotics were approved in more than two-thirds of countries. Among the 15 'forgotten' antibiotics, only one was approved in more than two-thirds of countries. The median number of approved antibiotics per country was 30 (interquartile range 23-35). Six of 14 paediatric formulations (amoxicillin, amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, oral antistaphylococcal penicillin, cotrimoxazole, erythromycin and metronidazole) were approved in more than two-thirds of countries., Conclusions: WHO-EML 'access' antibiotics and the most frequently used formulations for paediatrics were approved in the vast majority of the 28 surveyed LMICs. This was not the case for many of the 'forgotten' antibiotics, despite their important role, particularly in areas with high prevalence of multi-drug-resistant bacteria., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The causes of antibiotic resistance are complex and include human behaviour at many levels of society; the consequences affect everybody in the world. Similarities with climate change are evident. Many efforts have been made to describe the many different facets of antibiotic resistance and the interventions needed to meet the challenge. However, coordinated action is largely absent, especially at the political level, both nationally and internationally. Antibiotics paved the way for unprecedented medical and societal developments, and are today indispensible in all health systems. Achievements in modern medicine, such as major surgery, organ transplantation, treatment of preterm babies, and cancer chemotherapy, which we today take for granted, would not be possible without access to effective treatment for bacterial infections. Within just a few years, we might be faced with dire setbacks, medically, socially, and economically, unless real and unprecedented global coordinated actions are immediately taken. Here, we describe the global situation of antibiotic resistance, its major causes and consequences, and identify key areas in which action is urgently needed., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Infections caused by multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli are increasingly challenging to manage in hospitals and long term-care facilities worldwide. As the therapeutic options are limited, the International Society of Chemotherapy in collaboration with the Asia-Pacific Society of Clinical Microbiology and Immunology organised a consensus conference as part of the 13th Asia-Pacific Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infection. A panel of international experts from Europe, the Americas and Asia were convened to discuss the issues of therapeutic options for the management of these difficult-to-treat pathogens., (Copyright © 2013 International Society for Chemotherapy of Infection and Cancer. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Polymyxins (polymyxin B and colistin) are older bactericidal antibiotics that are increasingly used to treat infections caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) Gram-negative bacteria. However, dosing and clinical use of these drugs vary widely. This survey was undertaken to reveal how polymyxins are used worldwide. Data were collected through a structured online questionnaire consisting of 24 questions regarding colistin usage patterns and indications as well as colistin dosage for adult patients. The questionnaire was disseminated in 2011 to relevant experts worldwide and was completed by 284 respondents from 56 different countries. Respondents from 11/56 countries (20%) had no access to colistin; 58/284 respondents (20.4%) reported that in 2010 they experienced that colistin was not available when needed. Formulations of polymyxins used were reported as: colistimethate sodium (48.6%); colistin sulfate (14.1%); both (1.4%); polymyxin B (1.4%); and unknown. Intravenous formulations were used by 84.2%, aerosolised or nebulised colistin by 44.4% and oral colistin for selective gut decontamination by 12.7%. Common indications for intravenous colistin were ventilator-associated pneumonia, sepsis and catheter-related infections with MDR Gram-negative bacteria. Only 21.2% of respondents used a colistin-loading dose, mainly in Europe and North America. This survey reveals that the majority of respondents use colistin and a few use polymyxin B. The survey results show that colistin is commonly underdosed. Clear guidance is needed on indications, dosing and antibiotic combinations to improve clinical outcomes and delay the emergence of resistance. Colistin should be considered a last-resort drug and its use should be controlled. International guidelines are urgently needed.