Search

Background: Listeria monocytogenes-associated endovascular infections are not well characterized.Methods: Retrospective study of 71 culture-proven cases reported to the French National Reference Center for Listeria from 1993 to 2018.Results: Seventy-one cases were identified: 42 with vascular aneurysms/prosthetic infections, 27 with endocarditis, 2 with both. Fifty-eight were men (82%); median age was 75 years [46-92]; 93% reported co-morbidities (66/71), including 50% with immunosuppressive conditions. Vascular infections consisted of infected aneurysms (68%) or prosthetic graft infections (32%); vascular rupture was reported in 25/42 (60%). Tissue samples grew L. monocytogenes in 98% (43/44) and blood cultures in 64% (27/42). Endocarditis cases involved prosthetic or native valves or intracardiac devices in respectively 62% (18/29), 28% (8/29) and 10% (3/29). Infected valves were aortic (62%, 16/26), mitral (31%, 8/26) or both (8%, 2/26); 38% patients required surgery; 45% displayed heart failure; 17% had concomitant neurolisteriosis. In-hospital mortality in vascular infections was 12% (5/42) and 41% (12/29) for Lm-associated endocarditis.Conclusions: Endovascular listeriosis is a rare but severe infection. It manifests as vascular infections and endocarditis, mostly in older patients with vascular or cardiac valve prosthetic devices and co-morbidities. Mortality in Lm-associated endocarditis is twice higher than with other pathogens, requiring prompt recognition and treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Long COVID has been recognized since early 2020, but its definition is not unanimous, which complicates epidemiological assessments. This study estimated the prevalence of long COVID based on several definitions and severity thresholds in the adult population of mainland France and examined variations according to sociodemographic and infection characteristics. A cross-sectional survey using random sampling was conducted in August–November 2022. Participants declaring SARS-CoV-2 infection were assessed for infection dates and context, post-COVID symptoms (from a list of 31, with onset time, daily functioning impact, and alternative diagnosis), and perceived long COVID. Long COVID prevalence was estimated according to the WHO, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, United States National Centre for Health Statistics, and United Kingdom Office for National Statistics definitions. Of 10 615 participants, 5781 (54.5%) reported SARS-CoV-2 infection, with 123–759 (1.2–13.4%) having long COVID, depending on the definition. The prevalence of WHO post-COVID condition (PCC) was 4.0% (95% CI: 3.6–4.5) in the overall population and 8.0% (95% CI: 7.0–8.9) among infected individuals. Among the latter, the prevalence varied from 5.3% (men) to 14.9% (unemployed) and 18.6% (history of hospitalization for COVID-19). WHO-PCC overlapped poorly with other definitions (kappa ranging from 0.18 to 0.59) and perceived long COVID (reported in only 43% of WHO-PCC). Regardless of its definition, long COVID remains a significant burden in the French adult population that deserves surveillance, notably for forms that strongly impact daily activities. More standardized definitions will improve integrated surveillance of, and better research on, long COVID. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Intravenous benzylpenicillin is the gold-standard treatment for neurosyphilis, but it requires prolonged hospitalisation. Ceftriaxone is a possible alternative treatment, the effectiveness of which remains unclear. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of ceftriaxone compared with benzylpenicillin in the treatment of neurosyphilis.Methods: We did a retrospective multicentre study including patients with neurosyphilis who were treated at one of eight tertiary care centres in France, from Jan 1, 1997, to Dec 31, 2017. We defined neurosyphilis as positive treponemal and non-treponemal tests and at least one of otic syphilis, ocular syphilis, either neurological symptom with a positive result on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)-VDRL or CSF-PCR tests, or more than five leukocytes in a CSF cell count. Patients with neurosyphilis were identified from the medical information department database of each centre and assigned to one of two groups on the basis of the initial treatment received (ie, benzylpenicillin group or ceftriaxone group). The primary outcome was the overall clinical response (ie, proportion of patients with a complete or partial response) 1 month after treatment initiation. The secondary endpoints were proportions of patients with a complete response at 1 month and serological response at 6 months, and length of hospital stay.Findings: Of 365 patients with a coded diagnosis of neurosyphilis in one of the eight care centres during 1997-2017, 208 were included in this study (42 in the ceftriaxone group and 166 in the benzylpenicillin group). The mean age of patients was 44·4 years (SD 13·4), and 193 (93%) were men. We observed 41 instances of overall clinical response (98%) in the ceftriaxone group versus 125 (76%) in the benzylpenicillin group (crude odds ratio [OR] 13·02 [95% CI 1·73-97·66], p=0·017). After propensity score weighting, overall clinical response rates remained different between the groups (OR 1·22 [95% CI 1·12-1·33], p<0·0001). 22 (52%) patients in the ceftriaxone group and 55 (33%) in the benzylpenicillin group had a complete response (crude OR 2·26 [95% CI 1·12-4·41], p=0·031), with no significant difference after propensity score weighting (OR 1·08 [95% CI 0·94-1·24], p=0·269). Serological response at 6 months did not differ between the groups (21 [88%] of 24 in the ceftriaxone group vs 76 [82%] of 93 in the benzylpenicillin group; crude OR 1·56 [95% CI 0·42-5·86], p=0·50), whereas hospital stay was shorter for patients in the ceftriaxone group than for those in the benzylpenicillin group (mean 13·8 days [95% CI 12·8-14·8] vs 8·9 days [5·7-12·0], p<0·0001). No major adverse effects were reported in either group.Interpretation: Our results suggest that ceftriaxone is similarly effective to benzylpenicillin for the treatment of neurosyphilis, potentially decreasing the length of hospital stay. Randomised, controlled trials should be done to confirm these results.Funding: None. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To examine the association between trust in different sources of information on COVID-19 at the beginning of the pandemic and the burden of incident persistent symptoms. This prospective study used data from the SAPRIS and SAPRIS-Sérologie surveys nested in the French CONSTANCES population-based cohort. Trust in different information sources was measured between April 6 and May 4, 2020. Persistent symptoms that emerged afterwards were self-reported between December 2020 and January 2021. The associated psychological burden was measured with the somatic symptom disorder B criteria scale (SSD-12). The analyses were adjusted for gender, age, education, income, self-rated health, SARS-CoV-2 serology tests, and self-reported COVID-19. Among 20,985 participants [mean age (SD), 49.0 years (12.7); 50.2% women], those with higher trust in government/journalists at baseline had fewer incident persistent symptoms at follow-up (estimate (SE) for one IQR increase: −0.21 (0.03), p < 0.001). Participants with higher trust in government/journalists and medical doctors/scientists were less likely to have ≥1 symptom (odds ratio (95% confidence interval) for one IQR increase: 0.87 (0.82–0.91) and 0.91 (0.85–0.98), respectively). Among 3372 participants (16.1%) who reported ≥1 symptom, higher trust in government/journalists and medical doctors/scientists predicted lower SSD-12 scores (−0.39 (0.17), p = 0.02 and − 0.85 (0.24), p < 0.001, respectively), whereas higher trust in social media predicted higher scores in those with lower trust in government/journalists (0.90 (0.34), p = 0.008). These associations did not depend upon surrogate markers of infection with SARS-CoV-2. Trust in information sources on COVID-19 may be associated with incident persistent symptoms and associated psychological burden, regardless of infection with SARS-CoV-2. • Trust in different information sources on COVID-19 was assessed early in the pandemic. • The burden of incident persistent symptoms was assessed seven to ten months later. • Trust in doctors/scientists and government/journalists predicted a lower burden. • Trust in social media sources interacted with trust in government/journalists. • Associations did not depend upon surrogate markers of infection with SARS-CoV-2. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To determine whether hydroxychloroquine decreases the risk of adverse outcome in patients with mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at high risk of worsening. We conducted a multicentre randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial evaluating hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 patients with at least one of the following risk factors for worsening: need for supplemental oxygen, age ≥75 years, age between 60 and 74 years and presence of at least one co-morbidity. Severely ill patients requiring oxygen therapy >3 L/min or intensive care were excluded. Eligible patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 800 mg hydroxychloroquine on day 0 followed by 400 mg per day for 8 days or a placebo. The primary end point was a composite of death or start of invasive mechanical ventilation within 14 days following randomization. Secondary end points included mortality and clinical evolution at days 14 and 28, and viral shedding at days 5 and 10. The trial was stopped after 250 patients were included because of a slowing down of the pandemic in France. The intention-to-treat population comprised 123 and 124 patients in the placebo and hydroxychloroquine groups, respectively. The median age was 77 years (interquartile range 58–86 years) and 151/250 (60.4%) patients required oxygen therapy. The primary end point occurred in 9/124 (7.3%) patients in the hydroxychloroquine group and 8/123 (6.5%) patients in the placebo group (relative risk 1.12; 95% CI 0.45–2.80). The rates of positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests at days 5 and 10 were 72.8% (75/103) and 57.1% (52/91) in the hydroxychloroquine group, versus 73.0% (73/100) and 56.6% (47/83) in the placebo group, respectively. No difference was observed between the two groups in any of the other secondary end points. In this underpowered trial involving mainly older patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, patients treated with hydroxychloroquine did not experience better clinical or virological outcomes than those receiving the placebo. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04325893 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04325893). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To assess the effectiveness of corticosteroids on outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia requiring oxygen without mechanical ventilation. We used routine care data from 51 hospitals in France and Luxembourg to assess the effectiveness of corticosteroids at 0.8 mg/kg/day eq. prednisone (CTC group) versus standard of care (no-CTC group) among adults 18–80 years old with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia requiring oxygen without mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was intubation or death by day 28. In our main analysis, characteristics of patients at baseline (i.e. time when patients met all inclusion criteria) were balanced by using propensity-score inverse probability of treatment weighting. Among the 891 patients included in the analysis, 203 were assigned to the CTC group. Use of corticosteroids was not significantly associated with risk of intubation or death by day 28 (weighted hazard ratio (wHR) 0.92, 95%CI 0.61–1.39) nor cumulative death rate (wHR 1.03, 95%CI 0.54–1.98). However, use of corticosteroids was associated with reduced risk of intubation or death by day 28 in the prespecified subgroups of patients requiring oxygen ≥3 L/min (wHR 0.50, 95%CI 0.30–0.85) or C-reactive protein level ≥100 mg/L (wHR 0.44, 95%CI 0.23–0.85). The number of hyperglycaemia events was higher for patients with corticosteroids than for those without, but the number of infections was similar. We found no association between the use of corticosteroids and intubation or death in the broad population of patients 18–80 years old, with COVID-19, hospitalized in settings non intensive care units. However, the treatment was associated with a reduced risk of intubation or death for patients with ≥3 L/min oxygen or C-reactive protein level ≥100 mg/L at baseline. Further research is needed to confirm the right timing for corticosteroids in patients with COVID-19 requiring oxygen only. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Mycobacterium marinum disseminated infections occur rarely in immunocompromised patients. • Treatment of M. marinum infections requires a prolonged multi-drug regimen. • Side effects and drug–drug interaction are frequent with a concomitant regimen. • Bedaquiline may be an alternative treatment for M. marinum infections. Disseminated Mycobacterium marinum infections occur rarely, in immunocompromised patients. Treatment with a prolonged multi-drug regimen exposes patients to drug–drug interactions and side effects. We report a case of disseminated M. marinum infection in a 54-year-old renal transplant, HIV-infected woman. Manifestations of the infection were cutaneous and subcutaneous nodules, mediastinal lymph nodes and left pulmonary infiltrate. Empirical treatment for non-tuberculous mycobacteria was initiated with rifabutin, ethambutol and azithromycin. After identifying M. marinum in sputum, due to unfavourable clinical evolution and severe drug-related adverse events, treatment was changed to doxycycline and rifabutin. Digestive and haematologic side effects motivated a change in antimycobacterial treatment to a combination of moxifloxacin and bedaquiline. Tolerance was satisfactory, and the patient was cured after 12 months of treatment. We report (to the authors' knowledge) the first case of disseminated M. marinum infection successfully treated with a bedaquiline-containing regimen. Bedaquiline could be an alternative to recommended antimicrobial regimens in cases of non-tuberculous mycobacterial disease, including M. marinum infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Increased rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) have been reported among men who have sex with men. We aimed to assess whether post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) with doxycycline could reduce the incidence of STIs.Methods: All participants attending their scheduled visit in the open-label extension of the ANRS IPERGAY trial in France (men aged 18 years or older having condomless sex with men and using pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus emtricitabine) were eligible for inclusion in this open-label randomised study. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) at a central site to take a single oral dose of 200 mg doxycycline PEP within 24 h after sex or no prophylaxis. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of a first STI (gonorrhoea, chlamydia, or syphilis) during the 10-month follow-up. The cumulative probability of occurrence of the primary endpoint was estimated in each group with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. The primary efficacy analysis was done on the intention-to-treat population, comprising all randomised participants. All participants received risk-reduction counselling and condoms, and were tested regularly for HIV. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01473472.Findings: Between July 20, 2015, and Jan 21, 2016, we randomly assigned 232 participants (n=116 in the doxycycline PEP group and n=116 in the no-PEP group) who were followed up for a median of 8·7 months (IQR 7·8-9·7). Participants in the PEP group used a median of 680 mg doxycycline per month (IQR 280-1450). 73 participants presented with a new STI during follow-up, 28 in the PEP group (9-month probability 22%, 95% CI 15-32) and 45 in the no-PEP group (42%, 33-53; log-rank test p=0·007). The occurrence of a first STI in participants taking PEP was lower than in those not taking PEP (hazard ratio [HR] 0·53; 95% CI 0·33-0·85; p=0·008). Similar results were observed for the occurrence of a first episode of chlamydia (HR 0·30; 95% CI 0·13-0·70; p=0·006) and of syphilis (0·27; 0·07-0·98; p=0·047); for a first episode of gonorrhoea the results did not differ significantly (HR 0·83; 0·47-1·47; p=0·52). No HIV seroconversion was observed, and 72 (71%) of all 102 STIs were asymptomatic. Rates of serious adverse events were similar in the two study groups. Gastrointestinal adverse events were reported in 62 (53%) participants in the PEP group and 47 (41%) in the no-PEP group (p=0·05).Interpretation: Doxycycline PEP reduced the occurrence of a first episode of bacterial STI in high-risk men who have sex with men.Funding: France Recherche Nord & Sud Sida-HIV Hépatites (ANRS) and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]