Search

Remdesivir is the only antiviral approved for lower respiratory tract infection produced by SARS-CoV-2. The main objective of this study was to determine the mortality rate, readmissions, mean hospital stay, need for higher levels of oxygen support, and adverse effect-induced abandonment rate in hospitalized patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and treated with remdesivir (RDSV). The secondary objective was to determine mortality-related risk factors in these patients. The study included a prospective cohort of patients admitted to a third level Spanish hospital between July 5, 2020 and February 3, 2021 for COVID-19 diagnosed by SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction and/or antigen test and treated with RDSV. Remdesivir was received by 185 patients (69.7% males) with a mean age of 62.5 years, median Charlson index of 3 (interquartile range [IQR]: 1–4), and median ambient air oxygen saturation of 91% (IQR: 90–93); 61.6% of patients had hyper-inflammatory syndrome at admission. Median time with symptoms before RDSV treatment was 5 days (IQR: 3–6) and the median hospital stay was 10 days (IQR: 7–15); 19 patients (10.3%) died after a median stay of 13.5 days (IQR: 9.7–24 days), 58 patients (12.9%) were admitted to ICU, 58 (31.4%) needed higher levels of oxygen support, 0.5% abandoned the treatment due to adverse effects, and there were no readmissions. The only mortality-related factor was the need for higher levels of oxygen support (odds ratio 12.02; 95% confidence interval 2.25–64.2). All studied patients were admitted to hospital with a diagnosis of COVID-19 and in respiratory failure, needing initial low-flow oxygen support, and all received RDSV within 1 week of symptom onset. The percent mortality was lower in these patients than was observed in all patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to our center (10.3% vs 20.3%, respectively). Despite receiving RDSV, 1 in 3 patients needed higher levels of oxygen support, the sole mortality-related factor.

Tedizolid has demonstrated its efficacy and safety in clinical trials; however, data concerning its tolerability in long-term treatments are scarce. The aim of the study was to assess the indications and to describe the long-term safety profile of tedizolid. A multicentric retrospective study of patients who received tedizolid for more than 6 days was conducted. Adverse events (AEs) were identified from patients' medical records and laboratory data. The World Health Organization causality categories were used to discern AEs that were probably associated with tedizolid. Eighty-one patients, treated with tedizolid 200 mg once daily for a median (interquartile range [IQR]) duration of 28 (14 to 59) days, were included; 36 (44.4%) had previously received linezolid. The most common reasons for selecting tedizolid were to avoid linezolid potential toxicities or interactions (53.1%) or due to previous linezolid-related toxicities (27.2%). The most common indications were off-label, including prosthetic joint infections, osteomyelitis, and respiratory infections (77.8%). Overall, 9/81 patients (11.1%) experienced a probably associated AE. Two patients (2.5%) developed gastrointestinal disorders, 1 (1.2%) developed anemia, and 6 developed thrombocytopenia (7.4%) after a median (IQR) duration of treatment of 26.5 (17 to 58.5) days. Four (5%) patients discontinued tedizolid due to AEs. Among 23 patients with chronic renal failure (CRF), the rate of myelotoxicity was 17.4%, and only 8.7% had to stop tedizolid; 20 out of 22 with previous linezolid-associated toxicity had no AE. Long-term tedizolid treatments had good tolerance with rates of gastrointestinal AE and hematological toxicity lower than those reported with linezolid, particularly in patients with CRF and in those with a history of linezolid-associated toxicity.

Dolutegravir (DTG) has shown effectiveness in combination with rilpivirine in with experience of antiretroviral therapy (ART) and with 3TC in naïve patients (GEMINI trial). The main objectives of this real-life study were to analyze the effectiveness and safety of 3TC plus DTG in virologically suppressed HIV-1 patients and to conduct a pharmacoeconomic analysis. We conducted an observational, retrospective and multicenter study of HIV+ patients pretreated for at least 6 months with ART that was then simplified to 3TC + DTG for any reason. We gathered data on viral loads (VLs) during exposure to the DT, calculating the rate with VL < 50 copies/mL at week 48, and on associated adverse effects. The 177 HIV+ patients were collected, 77.4% male, with average age of 48.5 years and mean count of 252.2cell/μL CD4+ nadir lymphocytes; 96.6% had VL < 50 copies/mL and 674 cells/μL CD4+ lymphocytes. Median time since HIV diagnosis was 15 years, and median ART duration was 13 years, and 34.5% of patients were on mono- or dual-therapy before the switch. At week 48, 82.4% of patients had VL < 50 cop/μL using an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, 89.6% according to mITT, and 96.7% according to Per-Protocol analysis. 3.3% patients had virological failure (VF). These effectiveness data and costs were compared with those for 2 reference triple therapies (DTG/ABC/3TC and EVG/cobi/FTC/TAF) in a cost minimization analysis, showing cost savings with administration of DTG+3TC (2741 €/year vs DTG/ABC/3TC and 4164 €/year vs EVG/cobi/FTC/TAF) and in a cost-effectiveness analysis, finding the DT to be the most cost-effective approach (ICER = −548 vs DTG/ABC/3TC and ICER = −4,627€ vs EVG/cobi/FTC/TAF) The combination of 3TC with DTG appears to be a safe and effective option for the simplification of ART in pretreated and virologically stable HIV-positive patients, being cost-effective and offering the same effectiveness as the triple therapy it replaces.

ObjectivesTo analyse the effectiveness of dalbavancin (DBV) in clinical practice as consolidation therapy in patients with bloodstream infection (BSI) and/or infective endocarditis (IE) produced by gram-positive cocci (GPC), as well as its safety and pharmacoeconomic impact.MethodsA multicentre, observational and retrospective study was conducted of hospitalised patients with IE and/or BSI produced by GPC who received at least one dose of DBV. Clinical response was assessed during hospitalization, at 3 months and at 1 year.ResultsEighty-three patients with median age of 73 years were enrolled; 73.5% were male; 59.04% had BSI and 49.04% IE (44.04% prosthetic valve IE, 32.4% native IE, 23.5% pacemaker lead). The most frequently isolated microorganism wasStaphylococcus aureusin BSI (49%) and coagulase-negative staphylococci in IE (44.1%). All patients with IE were clinically cured in hospital; at 12 months, there was 2.9% loss to follow-up, 8.8% mortality unrelated to IE, and 2.9% therapeutic failure rate. The percentage effectiveness of DBV to treat IE was 96.7%. The clinical cure rate for BSI was 100% during hospital stay and at 3 months; there were no recurrences or deaths during the follow-up. No patient discontinued treatment for adverse events. The saving in hospital stay was 636 days for BSI (315,424.20€) and 557 days for IE (283,187.45€).ConclusionsDBV is an effective consolidation antibiotic therapy in clinically stabilized patients with IE and/or BSI. It proved to be a cost-effective treatment, reducing the hospital stay, thanks to the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile of this drug.