Search

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) has become more common in clinical settings. Correspondingly, OPAT-related publications have also increased; the objective of this paper was to summarize clinically meaningful OPAT-related publications in 2022. Seventy-five articles were initially identified with 54 being scored. The top 20 OPAT articles published in 2022 were reviewed by a group of multidisciplinary OPAT clinicians. This article provides a summary of the “top 10” OPAT publications of 2022.

As outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) becomes more common, it may be difficult to stay current with recent related publications. A group of multidisciplinary OPAT clinicians reviewed and ranked all OPAT publications published in 2021. This article provides a high-level summary of the OPAT manuscripts that were voted the “top 10” publications of 2021.

Background Advanced Practice Providers (APPs) practice throughout Infectious Disease (ID) in a variety of settings through interprofessional collaboration with physicians, pharmacists, and other team members. However, there is a paucity of specific and directed educational opportunities available for APPs within ID. In order to better understand this, we examined specific APP educational needs and how educational programs could provide high quality opportunities for APPs in ID. Methods Voluntary anonymous surveys were created in the REDCap data tool and distributed by email lists, social media, and Infectious Diseases Society of America community forums to APPs working in ID. Results Ninety-nine APPs responded to the survey (figure 1). 97% (96) of respondents were interested in APP specific ID educational opportunities. Of respondents, 76% (74) felt ID specific podcasts would be most helpful, while 86% (84) noted that access to ID clinical case conferences or self-directed, online modules would be instructive (figure 2). 91% (90) did not attend IDWeek annually due to various barriers, including lack of clinical coverage and cost associated with the conference (figure 3) despite 89% (88) receiving Continuing Education (CE) reimbursement. 64% (62) respondents were interested in future APP mentorship opportunities, from either more senior APPs or physicians. Figure 1. Geographic Distribution of Respondents, n=99 Conclusion APPs provide collaborative and specialized ID care in a variety of settings. However, continued educational needs specifically for APPs have been identified. From survey respondents, the majority of APPs did not attend IDWeek, a sentinel ID education event, citing clinical coverage and cost being significant barriers. This represents an opportunity for clinically focused educational opportunities, both at IDWeek and also through other platforms, particularly since many APPs receive CE funding from their employers. Podcasts, online lecture series, and self-study certificate programs were identified as avenues for ID teaching and also present accessible, alternative methods for training. Ultimately, as the growing APP workforce continues to provide patient care in a variety of ID settings, educational opportunities with mentorship are necessary to support them in their practice. Disclosures Steven A. Pergam, MD, MPH, Chimerix Inc. (Other Financial or Material Support, Clinical Trial)Global Life Technologies, Inc. (Grant/Research Support)Merck and Co. (Other Financial or Material Support, Clinical Trial) Steven A. Pergam, MD, MPH, Chimerix (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Clinical Trial; Global Life Technologies, Inc (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Research Grant or Support; Merck & Co. (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Scientific Research Study Investigator; Sanofi Aventis (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Other Financial or Material Support, Provided vaccines for clinical trial sponsored by the NIH

Background Acute leukemia patients are at risk for cytomegalovirus (CMV) retinitis following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, though the disease can also occur in non-transplant adult leukemia patients. Emerging data suggest a shift to pediatric-inspired chemotherapy regimens in adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) can lead to increasing cytopenias and impaired functional immunity, placing these patients at risk for this opportunistic infection. Here we describe a case of CMV retinitis in an ALL patient following a lower-intensity regimen during maintenance chemotherapy. Methods Chart review. Results A 55-year-old male with ALL presented to his optometrist with complaints of visual changes including “fogginess” and “floaters”. The patient had completed 8 cycles of dose-adjusted etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and rituximab (EPOCH-R) and achieved complete remission. He had been on maintenance chemotherapy with 6-mercaptopurine, vincristine, methotrexate, and prednisone (POMP) for 2 months at the time of symptom onset. He was referred to his local ophthalmologist who had concerns for bilateral, zone 1 CMV retinitis based on fundoscopic exam (Figure 1). Vitreous aspiration was performed and CMV DNA PCR returned positive at 1.6 million IUs/ml. Peripheral blood CMV DNA PCR was also positive at 1133 IU/ml. He was started on combination therapy with intravitreal ganciclovir injections and oral valganciclovir 900 mg twice daily (Figure 2). The patient received 14 intravitreal injections with resultant stability of his eye exam, though he remained on induction valganciclovir for 5 months due to persistent blood CMV DNAemia. Letermovir was added to help suppress his peripheral CMV DNAemia and he attained partial vision recovery. Figure 1. Fundoscopic images Conclusion CMV retinitis is an uncommon and highly morbid infection that can occur during maintenance chemotherapy in adult non-transplant ALL patients. Early identification of the disease is imperative as delay can result in blindness or further systemic CMV disease. Treatment is challenging, involving systemic and intravitreal antiviral therapy, serial ophthalmologic exams, serum CMV monitoring, and close coordination with the treating hematologist. Disclosures Michael Boeckh, MD PhD, AlloVir (Consultant)Ansun Biopharma (Grant/Research Support)Astellas (Grant/Research Support)EvrysBio (Consultant, Other Financial or Material Support, Options to acquire equity, but have not exercised them)Gilead Sciences (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)GlaxoSmithKline (Consultant)Helocyte (Consultant, Other Financial or Material Support, Options to acquire equity, but have not exercised them)Janssen (Grant/Research Support)Kyorin (Consultant)Merck (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Moderna (Consultant)Symbio (Consultant)Takeda (formerly known as Shire) (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)VirBio (Consultant, Grant/Research Support) Ryan Cassaday, MD, Amgen (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member)Kite/Gilead (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member)Merck (Grant/Research Support)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member)Seagen (Other Financial or Material Support, Spouse is employee and hold stock)Vanda Pharmaceuticals (Grant/Research Support)

Background High morbidity and mortality have been observed in patients with cancer and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, there are limited data on antimicrobial use, coinfections, and viral shedding. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients at the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 28, 2020 and June 15, 2020 to characterize antimicrobial use, coinfections, viral shedding, and outcomes within 30 days after diagnosis. Cycle threshold values were used as a proxy for viral load. We determined viral clearance, defined as 2 consecutive negative results using severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction results through July 30, 2020. Results Seventy-one patients were included with a median age of 61 years; 59% had a solid tumor. Only 3 patients had documented respiratory bacterial coinfection. Empiric antibiotics for pneumonia were prescribed more frequently early in the study period (February 29–March 28, 2020; 12/34) compared to the later period (March 29–June 15, 2020; 2/36) (P = .002). The median number of days from symptom onset to viral clearance was 37 days with viral load rapidly declining in the first 7–10 days after symptom onset. Within 30 days of diagnosis, 29 (41%) patients were hospitalized and 12 (17%) died. Each additional comorbidity was associated with 45% lower odds of days alive and out of hospital in the month following diagnosis in adjusted models. Conclusions Patients at a cancer center, particularly those with multiple comorbidities, are at increased risk of poor outcomes from COVID-19. Prolonged viral shedding is frequently observed among cancer patients, and its implications on transmission and treatment strategies warrant further study.

Background Shortages of infectious disease (ID) physicians is an identified workforce problem. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated this care gap, leaving many communities without access to an ID physician. More advanced practice providers (APPs), specifically nurse practitioners and physician assistants, work as healthcare extenders, yet are not well described in ID. Purpose Evaluate collaboration between ID physicians and APPs, and potential barriers to utilization of APPs. Methods Anonymous and voluntary surveys; one for physicians, another for APPs. We collected experience, practice setting, familiarity regarding APPs in ID, use of APPs, and perceived barriers/concerns for utilization of APPs. Discussion Nationwide, 218 ID physicians and 93 APPs in ID responded. 71% (155) of ID physicians use APPs. Of APPs, 53% (49) had > 5 years ID experience. Responses highlighted opportunities for dedicated ID education, collaboration, and clarification of practice scope. Conclusion APPs are an experienced group who provide ID care, working alongside physicians to meet ID workforce needs.

Background High morbidity and mortality has been observed with COVID-19 infection; however, there are limited data on clinical characteristics including exposures, coinfections, and antimicrobial use among cancer patients. We aimed to better characterize clinical features and outcomes in this population. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of consecutive patients at the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection by RT-PCR between February 28, 2020 and May 3, 2020. We obtained demographic and clinical data including coinfections, antimicrobial use and outcomes at 30 days after diagnosis. Results Of 60 patients reviewed, the median age was 62 years (range 22–98) and 43% were male. 34 (57%) patients had solid tumors and 16 (27%) hematologic malignancies. Breast (12%), colorectal (8%) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (8%) were the most prevalent cancers. 34 (57%) had ≥ 2 comorbidities. The majority of identified exposures were from long-term care facilities (LTCF) (27%) or household contacts (25%) (Fig 1). The most common symptoms at diagnosis were cough (72%), fevers/chills (57%), shortness of breath (38%), nasal congestion/rhinorrhea (35%), and diarrhea (30%). 18 (31%) patients were prescribed at least one course of antibiotics within 30 days of diagnosis; antibiotics were prescribed to 54% of hospitalized patients (Fig 2). 6 (10%) had a documented bacterial infection; of these, 3 were respiratory coinfections. No viral or fungal copathogens were reported. 26 (43%) patients were hospitalized, 9 (15%) admitted to intensive care, and one (2%) required mechanical ventilation. 12 (20%) died within 30 days of diagnosis (Fig 3); of these, 10 (83%) had ≥ 2 comorbidities and 8 (67%) had LTCF exposure. Conclusion COVID-19 is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in cancer patients, particularly among older age groups with multiple comorbidities and those with LTCF exposure. More than half of cases appeared to acquire SARS-CoV-2 from LTCF or household exposures, indicating need for infection prevention and family/caregiver education. Despite few documented bacterial coinfections, antibiotic use within 30 days of diagnosis was common and likely empiric due to limited diagnostics in the era of COVID-19. Disclosures Steven A. Pergam, MD, MPH, Chimerix, Inc (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Global Life Technologies, Inc. (Research Grant or Support)Merck & Co. (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Sanofi-Aventis (Other Financial or Material Support, Participate in clinical trial sponsored by NIAID (U01-AI132004); vaccines for this trial are provided by Sanofi-Aventis) Alpana Waghmare, MD, Amazon (Grant/Research Support)Amazon (Employee, Shareholder)Ansun Biopharma (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Kyorin Pharmaceuticals (Advisor or Review Panel member)

Background Advanced Practice Providers (APPs), including nurse practitioners and physician assistants, provide high quality medical care in multiple specialties by extending the physician workforce. However, within the Infectious Disease (ID) specialty, their demographics, areas of practice, and experience are not well described. To better understand this key group, we examined APP years of experience in ID, primary practice settings, and perceived practice barriers from the APP perspective. Methods We created a survey using REDCap which was distributed between 12/1/2019-1/31/2020 to APPs practicing in ID by social media, direct emails to key stakeholders, and online Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA) community forums. Results Ninety-three APPs responded to the posted survey from across the US (figure 1). Most respondents (45 [49%]) had between 2-9 years of overall experience as an APP, while 14 (15%) between 10-15 years, and 24 (26%) had >16 years of experience. Experience specifically as an ID APP varied, with the majority (56%) having 2-9 years of experience and 25% reporting >16 years of experience as an APP. Although over half of the respondents worked in an outpatient adult ID clinic, they also practiced in diverse settings and within multiple ID sub-specialties (figure 2). The other most common areas of practice included inpatient adult ID, HIV care, and outpatient parental antimicrobial therapy programs. Limited formalized ID education and misconceptions about APP scope of practice were perceived barriers to practicing in ID (figure 3). Lack of recognition as a peer amongst physician colleagues was also identified as a practice barrier. Advanced Practice Provider Survey Response by Region Advanced Practice Provider ID Practice Areas Perceived Advanced Practice Provider Barriers Conclusion Our survey results demonstrate that the APP ID workforce is an experienced provider group, both in terms of total years as an APP and years exclusively in ID, working in a large variety of ID settings in a number of geographic locations. Creation of specific and directed ID educational opportunities, along with collaborating physician support and inclusion, are identified as significant areas of improvement. The establishment of APP-specific training programs and educational courses will create more opportunities for APPs and further expand the ID workforce. Disclosures Steven A. Pergam, MD, MPH, Chimerix, Inc (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Global Life Technologies, Inc. (Research Grant or Support)Merck & Co. (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Sanofi-Aventis (Other Financial or Material Support, Participate in clinical trial sponsored by NIAID (U01-AI132004); vaccines for this trial are provided by Sanofi-Aventis)

Background Applicants entering Infectious Disease (ID) fellowships are declining and shortages of ID physicians is a challenge recognized by the clinical workforce and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA). There is increased awareness of more Advanced Practice Providers (APPs) being used within ID to expand and extend existing practices. However, little is known about APP utilization, APP clinical scope of practice, specific roles, and opportunities for education. Methods To evaluate physician perspectives on APP utilization in ID, we created an anonymous and voluntary survey using the REDCap data tool that was distributed by social media, key stakeholder emails, and IDSA online community forum between 12/1/2019-1/31/2020. In addition to collecting geographic information and the type of ID practice, participants were also surveyed about the use of APPs and any perceived barriers that may limit their use. Results 218 practicing ID physicians responded to the survey (Figure 1). 155 (71%) physicians work with APPs in their current practice (Figure 2); specifically, 56 (27%) with 1 APP, 62 (30%) with 2-4 APPs, 28 (13%) with 5-9 APPs, and 11 (5%) with > 10 APPs. Of respondents, 104 (48%) practiced at University/Medical schools, 80 (37%) in hospitals/clinics, and 28 (13%) in private practice (Table 1); most work in adult inpatient/outpatient ID. The main reasons selected by respondents for not using APPs in their practice included concerns around a lack of formal ID training 22 (15%), lack of time/lack of ability to assist with APP training 29 (20%), practice is already sufficiently staffed 19 (13%), and concern for physician revenue loss 16 (11%) (Table 1). Figure 1. Physician Responses by Region, n = 218 Figure 2. Physicians Utilizing APPs in Practice, n = 210 (*no response, 8) Table 1. Physician ID Practice Type, Setting, and Concerns Conclusion Results suggest that while collaboration between ID physicians and APPs exists to meet current needs, a lack of ID training is a limiting factor. Our findings demonstrate there is an opportunity for formal ID education and resource development both to enhance APPs clinical skills and address perceived knowledge gaps. Inclusion of APPs in the ID workforce may allow physicians to expand ID care into more resource limited areas to continue to provide high quality patient care. Disclosures Steven A. Pergam, MD, MPH, Chimerix, Inc (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Global Life Technologies, Inc. (Research Grant or Support)Merck & Co. (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Sanofi-Aventis (Other Financial or Material Support, Participate in clinical trial sponsored by NIAID (U01-AI132004); vaccines for this trial are provided by Sanofi-Aventis)