95. Impact of Penetrating Trauma on Surgical Site Infection Standardized Infection Ratio (SIR) for Colon Procedures

Abstract Background Colon surgery (COLO) is one of the focus areas for the the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Hospital Inpatient Quality Reporting (IQR) Program. Standardized criteria from the National Healthcare Surveillance Network (NSHN) are used to define surgical site infections (SSI) and to assess and weight standardized risk variables, so that all organizations can be judged to the same standard. Performance is compared though use of a standardized infection ratio (SIR), which is the observed number of infections, divided by the “predicted” number of infections, given the number and type of surgeries performed. Methods A retrospective review of medical records and NHSN documentation was conducted for 778 COLO procedures that were performed at a large academic and level 1 trauma center between January 2019 and December 2020. Initial review of the data showed that the increases in SIR were primarily concentrated in trauma patients with intestinal injury and fecal spillage. SIR for adult procedures were calculated using the NHSN Complex 30-Day SSI Data for IQR Report model, which the metric used by the CMS IQR. The CDC NHSN Statistics Calculator was used to compare SIR for procedures coded as trauma and non-trauma. As a proxy for patients with penetrating trauma, SIR for patients coded as trauma who had a surgical wound class noted as dirty was compared to SIR for patients coded as trauma with surgical wound class coded as contaminated or clean-contaminated. Results For the CMS model, there was a statistically significant difference (p = 0.0003) between SIR for trauma (SIR = 3.451) and non-trauma (SIR = 1.071) procedures. There was also a statistically significant difference (p=0.0014) between trauma procedures with dirty surgical wound class (SIR = 6.608), compared to those with wounds categorized as contaminated or clean-contaminated (SIR = 2.235). NHSN Adult Complex 30 Days SIR comparison for COLO SSI with and without trauma NHSN Adult Complex 30 Days SIR comparison for trauma COLO procedures with dirty wound class description, against COLO procedures with wound class described as clean or clean-contaminated Conclusion Risk factors currently included in the model for COLO SSI may not adequately account for the increased risk from penetrating trauma with fecal spillage. Trauma and wound class should be added to the CMS IQR risk model for SIR. Disclosures Kelley M. Boston, MPH, CIC, CPHQ, FAPIC, Infection Prevention & Management Associates (Employee, Shareholder) Luis Ostrosky-Zeichner, MD, Amplyx (Consultant)Cidara (Consultant)F2G (Consultant)Gilead (Grant/Research Support, Speaker's Bureau)Pfizer (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Speaker's Bureau)Scynexis (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Viracor (Consultant)

Download Full-text

1002. Activation of the Enterococcus faecalis Cell Envelope Stress Response through the Novel MadRS System Is Associated With Increased Size of Cardiac Microlesions

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.1196 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S592-S592

Author(s):

William R Miller ◽

Kavindra V Singh ◽

Cesar A Arias

Keyword(s):

Stress Response ◽

Enterococcus Faecalis ◽

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Research Support ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Hematoxylin And Eosin ◽

The Impact ◽

Peritonitis Model

Abstract Background Enterococci are opportunistic pathogens that can present a therapeutic challenge due to the acquisition of antibiotic resistance. Our previous work has shown the MadRS stress response system plays an important role in defending the enterococcal membrane against daptomycin and antimicrobial peptides (AMP) made by the innate immune system. Strains lacking the MadR response regulator show increased susceptibility to the cathelicidn LL-37 in vitro. A change from alanine to glutamate in the sensor kinase MadS (madSA202E) leads to activation of the system and impaired killing by AMPs. In this study, we evaluated the impact of MadRS function in vivo using a mouse peritonitis model of E. faecalis (Efs) infection. Methods A laboratory strain Efs OG1RF and two derivatives, OG1RFΔmadR and OG1RFmadSA202E were included. Six mice per strain were inoculated via intraperitoneal injection of ~5x108 CFU/mL of bacteria in 50% sterile rat fecal extract, and followed for 96 hours post infection. Difference in survival between strains was determined by Mantel-Cox test. At the time of death, hearts were aseptically removed, fixed in formalin, and embedded in paraffin. Organs were bisected and sectioned, with every 4th section stained with hematoxylin and eosin (8 total sections per animal). Sections were imaged at 40x magnification, the number of lesions for each section was recorded, and lesion size was determined using imageJ. Results There was no difference in median survival between animals infected with OG1RF and OG1RFΔmadR (22.5 v 21 hours, p=0.31), OG1RF and OG1RFmadSA202E (22.5 v 24 hours, p=0.29), or OG1RFΔmadR and OG1RFmadSA202E (21 v 24 hours, p=0.13). There was a significant difference in the number and size of cardiac lesions between the strains. Mice infected with OG1RFmadSA202E had a significantly higher number of cardiac microlesions as compared to those infected with OG1RFΔmadR (Fig 1). The size of the lesions in mice infected with OG1RFmadSA202E was also significantly larger than those in OG1RF wild type (Fig 1). Figure 1. Cardiac microlesions in a mouse peritonitis model of Enterococcus faecalis infection. Mouse hearts were removed at time of animal death, placed in formalin, and embedded in paraffin. Organs were bisected, then sectioned with every 4th section stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E, 8 sections per animal). H&E stained sections were imaged at 40x magnification, the number and size of lesions was determined for 48 sections per strain. Representative cardiac microlesions (arrow) are shown for A) E. faecalis OG1RF, B) OG1RFΔmadR and C) OG1RFmadSA202E, scale bar 20 μm. D) The number of microlesions observed in each section, and E) the area of the lesions for each strain are shown above, differences in means were determined with one way ANOVA using Tukey’s test for multiple comparisons. ns, not significant. Conclusion Changes in MadRS did not impact overall survival in mice, but did alter the number and size of cardiac microlesions. Further experiments are needed to determine if these changes could adversely affect therapy or rates of relapse. Disclosures William R. Miller, MD , Entasis Therapeutics (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Merck (Grant/Research Support) William R. Miller, MD , Entasis (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Scientific Research Study Investigator; Merck (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Grant/Research Support Cesar A. Arias, M.D., MSc, Ph.D., FIDSA, Entasis Therapeutics (Grant/Research Support)MeMed Diagnostics (Grant/Research Support)Merk (Grant/Research Support)

Download Full-text

1608. Efficacy of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam for Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Infections in Multiple Urban Hospitals

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1788 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S798-S799

Author(s):

Nicolo Cabrera ◽

Truc T Tran ◽

Travis J Carlson ◽

Faris Alnezary ◽

William R Miller ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Clinical Success ◽

Significant Proportion ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Multidrug Resistant ◽

Outcome Data ◽

Research Support ◽

Gram Negative ◽

Study Investigator

Abstract Background Ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) is a novel cephalosporin/beta-lactamase inhibitor combination developed for use against multidrug-resistant (MDR) Gram-negative infections, particularly Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA). C/T is approved for complicated urinary tract and intraabdominal infections as well as hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonias. However, comprehensive clinical characterization of patients treated with C/T in non-FDA-approved indications is limited. Methods Patients ≥18 years who received C/T for ≥48 hours while hospitalized in 9 acute care centers in Houston, TX from January 2016 through September 2018 were included. Demographic, microbiologic, treatment and clinical outcome data were retrospectively collected by chart review. In patients who received multiple inpatient courses of C/T, only the first course with C/T was assessed. Results 210 patients met inclusion criteria: 58% were non-white, 35% were female and 13% were immunocompromised. Median age was 61 years (IQR, 48 to 69). Median Charlson comorbidity index was 5 (IQR, 2 to 6). At the onset of the index episode, a significant proportion of patients required intensive care unit admission (44%), mechanical ventilation (37%) and pressor support (22%). Respiratory sources were the most common (50%) followed by urine (15%). Positive cultures were documented in 93% of the cases and PA was found in 86%. Majority (95%) of PA which were MDR. C/T use was guided by susceptibility testing of the index isolate in ca. 52%. In 5.7% of cases, C/T was used to escalate therapy without any documented C/T-susceptible organism. Half (51%) of the cohort received initial dosing appropriate for renal function while 36% receiving a lower than recommended dose. Clinical success (i.e., recovery from infection-related signs and symptoms) occured in 77%. The in-hospital mortality rate in our cohort was 15% with 26 of 31 deaths deemed infection-related. Conclusion We report a large multicenter observational cohort that received C/T. A 77% clinical success with the use of C/T was documented. These data support the use of C/T in critically ill patients infected with MDR PA. Disclosures William R. Miller, MD, Entasis Therapeutics (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Merck (Grant/Research Support)Shionogi (Advisor or Review Panel member) Laura A. Puzniak, PhD, Merck (Employee) Cesar A. Arias, MD, MSc, PhD, FIDSA, Entasis Therapeutics (Scientific Research Study Investigator)MeMed (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Merck (Grant/Research Support)

Download Full-text

1510. Infant Pneumonia and Subsequent Risk of Chronic Respiratory Disorders

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1691 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S758-S759

Author(s):

Stephen I Pelton ◽

Rotem Lapidot ◽

Matthew Wasserman ◽

Melody Shaff ◽

Ahuva Hanau ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Airway Disease ◽

Research Support ◽

Recurrent Wheezing ◽

Recurrent Pneumonia ◽

Respiratory Disorders ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Study Population ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in infancy (i.e., among children aged < 2 years) may have long-term consequences for the rapidly developing lung. We examined the impact of pneumonia in infancy on subsequent respiratory health. Methods A retrospective matched-cohort design and data from Optum’s de-identified Integrated Claims-Clinical dataset (2009-2018) were employed. Study population comprised children who were hospitalized for CAP before age 2 years (“CAP patients”) as well as matched comparators without evidence of pneumonia before age 2 years (“comparison patients”). CAP patients and comparison patients were matched (fixed 1:5 ratio, without replacement) using estimated propensity scores and a nearest-neighbor approach; those with evidence of selected medical conditions (e.g., extreme prematurity, congenital diseases, respiratory diseases) before age 2 years were excluded. Study outcomes included recurrent pneumonia and a composite of asthma, recurrent wheezing, and hyperactive airway disease. Rates of study outcomes from age 2 to 5 years were estimated for all CAP and comparison patients as well as subgroups of CAP patients (and corresponding comparison patients) stratified by etiology (bacterial, viral, unspecified). Results Study population totaled 1,343 CAP patients and 6,715 comparison patients. CAP patients and comparison patients were well-balanced on their baseline characteristics and mean duration of follow-up was 757 and 729 days, respectively. Rates of chronic respiratory disorders from age 2 to 5 years were significantly higher among CAP patients versus comparison patients. Analyses of subgroups stratified by etiology demonstrated higher rates of study outcomes among CAP patients across all strata. Rates of recurrent pneumonia and a composite of asthma, recurrent wheezing, and hyperactive airway disease from age 2 to 5 years among CAP patients and matched comparison patients Conclusion Infant CAP foreshadows an increase in subsequent risk of chronic respiratory disorders. Further studies are needed to determine whether this elevated risk is due to infant pneumonia or whether infant pneumonia is a marker of at-risk children. Disclosures Stephen I. Pelton, MD, Merck vaccine (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Pfizer (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Sanofi Pasteur (Consultant, Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)Seqirus Vaccine Ltd. (Consultant) Rotem Lapidot, MD, MSCI, Pfizer (Consultant) Matthew Wasserman, MSc., Pfizer Inc. (Employee) Melody Shaff, BA, Pfizer, Inc. (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support) Ahuva Hanau, BS, Pfizer, Inc. (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support) Alexander Lonshteyn, PhD, Pfizer, Inc. (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support) Derek Weycker, PhD, Pfizer Inc. (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support)

Download Full-text

273. Comparative Effectiveness of Ampicillin in the Treatment of Enterococcus faecalis Bloodstream Infections in Patients With Cancer

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.317 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S137-S138

Author(s):

J P Sanchez ◽

German Contreras ◽

Truc T Tran ◽

Shelby Simar ◽

Blake Hanson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Kidney Injury ◽

Bloodstream Infections ◽

Definitive Treatment ◽

Cancer Center ◽

Future Research ◽

Research Support ◽

Patients With Cancer ◽

Study Investigator

Abstract Background E. faecalis (Efc) isolates are usually susceptible to ampicillin (AMP). AMP-based regimens are the standard of care for enterococcal infections, although other antibiotics are often used as definitive treatment. We thus compared outcomes of patients with cancer and Efc bacteremia treated with AMP-containing (ACR) and non-AMP-containing antibiotic regimens (NACR). Methods A multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study conducted at MD Anderson Cancer Center, Henry Ford Hospital, and Memorial Hermann Health System. Eligible patients were ≥ 18 years old, diagnosed with cancer, and had at least one Efc bloodstream isolate collected from 12/2015 to 12/2018. Patients with polymicrobial infections were excluded. Patients were divided into two groups: i) ACR and ii) NACR. ACR included patients who received AMP at any time during treatment; other antimicrobials were permitted. NACR patients did not receive AMP at any time. The primary outcome compared desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) between ACR and NACR at day 14. The DOOR consisted of six hierarchical levels: 1 - death; 2 - inpatient without microbiological cure (MC) and with acute kidney injury (AKI); 3 - inpatient without MC and without AKI; 4 - inpatient admitted with MC and with AKI; 5 - inpatient with MC and without AKI; 6 - alive and discharged. Comparison of DOORs between ACR and NACR was performed using inverse probability of treatment weighted (IPTW) ordered logistic regression. Results Seventy-one patients were included (ACR, n = 35; NACR, n = 36). No difference was seen in DOORs at day 14 between ACR and NACR (odds ratio [OR] 1.14, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.45 – 2.92, p=0.78). No difference was observed for all-cause mortality at day 14 (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.09 – 3.77, p=0.58) or day 30 (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.09 – 1.94, p=0.27). Patients treated with ACR received a lower median duration of other antibiotics at any point during treatment compared to NACR: daptomycin (2 v 4 days) vancomycin (2 v 4 days), and linezolid (1 v 2 days). Conclusion Patients with cancer and Efc bloodstream infections had similar outcomes when treated with ACR and NACR. ACR were associated with less use of broad-spectrum antimicrobials. Future research should focus on the ecologic impact of use of NACR. Disclosures Marcus Zervos, MD, Melinta Therapeutics (Grant/Research Support) Cesar A. Arias, MD, MSc, PhD, FIDSA, Entasis Therapeutics (Scientific Research Study Investigator)MeMed (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Merck (Grant/Research Support)

Download Full-text

43. A Pharmacoepidemiologic Evaluation of Echinocandin Use

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.088 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S45-S45

Author(s):

Jinhee Jo ◽

Joshua Hendrickson ◽

Anne J Gonzales-Luna ◽

Nicholas D Beyda ◽

Kevin W Garey

Keyword(s):

Hospital Admission ◽

Invasive Candidiasis ◽

Research Study ◽

Medical Center ◽

Significant Proportion ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Research Support ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Days Of Therapy

Abstract Background Invasive candidiasis (IC) is a common healthcare-associated infection. Rates of IC caused by drug-resistant Candida spp., designated by the CDC as a serious threat, are increasing, and Candida auris alone was recently added as an urgent threat. Echinocandins are guideline-preferred for the treatment of invasive candidiasis due to in vitro potency, a favorable toxicity profile, and convenient dosing. The purpose of this study was to perform a pharmacoepidemiologic analysis on patterns of echinocandin use at a large, quaternary care medical center. Methods Data reporting echinocandin use, pharmacy data, and clinical microbiologic data obtained from 2017–19 were pooled. Monthly days of therapy (DOT) per 1,000 patient days were calculated during the study period along with number of unique orders. Investigators evaluated the proportion of echinocandin-treated patients with or without positive Candida cultures; the relationship between echinocandin use and hospital admission and discharge dates was also evaluated. Results Echinocandin monthly DOT/1,000 patient days present averaged 26 (± 5) DOT and did not change appreciably during the study period. Of the patients with microbiologic evidence of Candida, 842 (51%) received echinocandin courses. Length of echinocandin therapy was significantly longer for patients with positive Candida cultures (5.5 ± 5.9 days) compared to those without positive cultures (3.9 ± 5.0 days; p< 0.001). Of 1,659 echinocandin courses evaluated, 549 courses (33%) were initiated within 2 days of hospital admission and the average time from hospital admission to echinocandin start was 9 (± 13) days. A total of 505 (24%) echinocandin courses were continued until the day of discharge. Conclusion The rate of echinocandin use did not change appreciably during the study period. A significant proportion of echinocandin courses were either started upon hospital admission or were continued until the day of discharge. Further studies to evaluate antifungal stewardship opportunities for the echinocandin pharmacologic class are warranted. Disclosures Nicholas D. Beyda, PharmD, BCPS, Astellas (Advisor or Review Panel member)Cidara (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator) Kevin W. Garey, PharMD, MS, FASHP, Merck & Co. (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)

Download Full-text

9. Evaluation of Synergy Testing Methods for Clinical Labs to Determine Susceptibility of Extensively Drug-resistant Gram-negatives to Ceftazidime/ Avibactam and Aztreonam Combination Therapy

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa417.008 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S5-S6

Author(s):

Ayesha Khan ◽

Samuel G Erickson ◽

Cedric H Pettaway ◽

Cesar A Arias ◽

William R Miller ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Combination Therapy ◽

Clinical Decision Making ◽

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Major Error ◽

Testing Methods ◽

Research Support ◽

Testing Method ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Synergy Testing

Abstract Background Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CR-PA) producing Metallo-β-lactamases (MBLs) cause severe nosocomial infections with no defined treatment. Combination therapy with ceftazidime/ avibactam (CZA) and aztreonam (ATM) is a potential option, but there is no approved, feasible, synergy testing method for clinical labs to guide clinical decision making. Here, we evaluate the performance of 4 synergy testing methods using gradient-strips or disks. Methods We used 10 representative Enterobacterales strains, namely, E. coli, K. pneumoniae, and E. cloacea, and 6 PA strains harboring MBL, GES or non-MBL enzymes (Fig 1). 4 strains were successfully treated with CZA-ATM in case reports, the rest were from the CDC AR Bank. Four synergy testing methods were evaluated, i) Disk stack (DS), ii) Disk elution (DE), iii) Gradient-strip Stack (SS), iv) Gradient-strip Cross (SX) (Fig 1). All methods were run side-by-side as per CLSI guidelines with broth microdilution (BMD) as the reference. Data is the mean of 3 replicates. Synergy is defined as a strain that is resistant (R) to ATM but drops to ≤ the susceptible (S) breakpoint (Table 1) in the presence of CZA (Fig 2). Categorical agreement (CA), very major error (VME), major error (ME), minor error (MI) were calculated across methods for CZA-ATM synergy relative to BMD. Summary of synergy testing methods evaluated CLSI Breakpoints used for this study Results All CRE with NDM and PA with GES were ATM-R, CZA-R and S to the CZA-ATM combination. PA with NDM or VIM remained R to CZA-ATM likely due to other mechanisms of resistance. CA was high for DE (100%), SS (81%, MI 19%), and SX (88%, MI 13%) but low for DS (25%, ME 54%, MI 31%). Representative strains are shown (Fig 2, Table 2). Removing PA, CA for DE, SS, and SX was 100% and 20% for DS. Representative results of strains with each synergy testing method. Representative data of strains displaying synergy (green) or no synergy (red) Conclusion Overall, DE was the most reliable method for CZA-ATM synergy testing, and could be a valuable tool in low-resource labs. SS and SX were reliable but prone to technical error. DS had the worst performance. Disks and gradient-strips had identical performance across brands. We propose an algorithm for ATM-R, CZA-R, and MBL-positive CRE, where CZA-ATM synergy testing may be beneficial to guide therapy. These methods are reliable qualitative indicators of the presence or absence of synergy. Synergy testing is not recommended for CR-PA due to complex resistance profiles. Disclosures Cesar A. Arias, M.D., MSc, Ph.D., FIDSA, Entasis Therapeutics (Scientific Research Study Investigator)MeMed (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Merck (Grant/Research Support) William R. Miller, MD, Entasis Therapeutics (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Merck (Grant/Research Support)Shionogi (Advisor or Review Panel member)

Download Full-text

120. An open-label comparative trial of SUBA-itraconazole (SUBA) versus conventional itraconazole (c-itra) for treatment of proven and probable endemic mycoses (MSG-15): a pharmacokinetic (PK) and adverse Event (AE) analysis

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.120 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S72-S72

Author(s):

Peter G Pappas ◽

Andrej Spec ◽

Marisa Miceli ◽

Gerald McGwin ◽

Rachel McMullen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Serum Levels ◽

Research Support ◽

Open Label ◽

Review Panel ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Endemic Mycoses ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background C-itra is the drug of choice for treatment of most non-CNS, non-life-threatening forms of endemic mycoses (EM), including histoplasmosis, blastomycosis, coccidioidomycosis, sporotrichosis and talaromycosis. SUBA represents a new formulation of itraconazole that utilizes nanotechnology to improve bioavailability when administered orally. SUBA is formulated as nanoparticles allowing for absorption in the small bowel while not relying on gastric acidity for optimal absorption. MSG-15 is an open-label, comparative clinical trial comparing SUBA to c-itra for the treatment of EM. Herein we report the final PK and AE profiles of these two compounds. Methods Subjects with proven and probable EM were eligible this open-label comparative study. The protocol allowed up to 14 d of prior therapy with any antifungal for this episode of EM. Subjects were randomized to receive either SUBA 130 mg po bid or c-itra 200 mg po bid for up to 6 months. Follow up occurred at 7, 14, 28, 42, 84 and 180 d post-enrollment. PK samples were obtained at 7, 14, and 42 d. Clinical assessment, including symptom assessment, AEs, overall drug tolerance, and quality of life were assessed at each visit. We used descriptive statistics for this analysis. Results 89 subjects with EM entered the trial, including 43 on SUBA and 46 on c-itra. We measured PK serum levels of itra and hydroxyl-itra at days 7, 14, and 42 and these data are depicted in Figures 1-3. There were no significant differences in these levels, including combined itra/hydroxyl-itra levels, among the two study arms. AUC for itra and hydroxyl-itra were similar for both arms. AEs as assessed at each study evaluation were also quite similar among the two study arms. Overall, any AE occurred in 74% vs 85% of SUBA and c-itra recipients, respectively (NS). Drug-related AEs occurred in 35% vs 41% of SUBA and itra recipients, respectively (NS). Most common drug-related AEs included cardiovascular (edema and hypertension), nausea and loss of appetite. Combined Itraconazole and Hydroxy-itraconazole Concentration Over Time Conclusion Compared to c-itra, SUBA demonstrates almost identical serum levels despite being dosed at roughly 60% standard dosing for c-itra (130 mg po bid vs 200 mg po bid). SUBA is slightly better tolerated than c-itra, although the specific AEs are similar. Disclosures Peter G. Pappas, MD, Astellas (Research Grant or Support)Cidara (Research Grant or Support)F2G (Consultant)Matinas (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Mayne Pharma (Research Grant or Support)Scynexis (Research Grant or Support) Andrej Spec, MD, MSCI, Mayne Pharma (Grant/Research Support) Marisa Miceli, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Advisor or Review Panel member) George R. R. Thompson III, III, MD, Amplyx (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Appili (Consultant)Astellas (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Avir (Grant/Research Support)Cidara (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)F2G (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Mayne (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Merck (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Pfizer (Advisor or Review Panel member)

Download Full-text

548. Baseline characteristics associated with clinical improvement and mortality in hospitalized patients with moderate COVID-19

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.742 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S340-S340

Author(s):

Antonella Castagna ◽

David Shu Cheong Hui ◽

Kathleen M Mullane ◽

Mamta Jain ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Improvement ◽

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Hospitalized Patients ◽

Research Support ◽

Review Panel ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Baseline Characteristics ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background Remdesivir (RDV) has been shown to shorten recovery time and was well tolerated in patients with severe COVID-19. Here we report baseline characteristics associated with clinical improvement at day (d) 14. Methods We enrolled hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, oxygen saturation >94% on room air, and radiological evidence of pneumonia. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive 5d or 10d of intravenous RDV once daily plus standard of care (SoC), or SoC only. For this analysis, patients were followed through discharge, d14, or death. Baseline demographic and disease characteristics associated with clinical improvement in oxygen support (≥2-point improvement on a 7-category ordinal scale ranging from discharge to death) were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression methods. Results 584 patients were randomized and treated (5/10d RDV, n=384; SoC: n=200). 159 (27%) were ≥65y, 227 (39%) female, 328 (61%) white, 102 (19%) Asian, and 99 (19%) Black. 252 participants (43%) were enrolled in Europe, 260 (45%) North America (NA), and 72 (12%) in Asia. Most patients (483 [83%]) were not on supplemental oxygen but required medical care at baseline. In a multivariable model, 5/10d RDV was significantly positively associated with clinical improvement (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.69, 95% CI: 1.08, 2.65; p=0.0226). Significant covariables positively associated with clinical improvement included age < 65y (p< 0.0001) and region of treatment (Europe and NA vs Asia, p< 0.0001 each; Table); other examined factors were not significantly associated with clinical improvement, including gender, race, ethnicity, baseline oxygen support, duration of symptoms and hospitalization, obesity, and baseline transaminase levels. Table 1. Conclusion In moderate COVID-19 patients, after adjusting for treatment arm, age < 65y and region (NA vs Asia; Europe vs Asia) were associated with higher rates of clinical improvement. These observations recapitulate younger age as positive prognostic factor, and highlight the differences in the impact of the pandemic globally. Disclosures Antonella Castagna, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) David Shu Cheong Hui, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Kathleen M. Mullane, DO, PharmD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator) Mamta Jain, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support)GlaxoSmithKline (Advisor or Review Panel member)Janssen (Research Grant or Support)Merck (Research Grant or Support) Massimo Galli, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees) Shan-Chwen Chang, MD, PhD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Robert H. Hyland, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Devi SenGupta, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Huyen Cao, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Hailin Huang, PhD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Anand Chokkalingam, PhD, Gilead Sciences (Employee) Anu Osinusi, MD, Gilead Sciences (Employee) Diana M. Brainard, MD, Gilead Sciences (Employee) Christoph Lübbert, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) David Chien Boon Lye, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) David Chien Boon Lye, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA Judith A. Aberg, MD, Theratechnology (Consultant) Enrique Navas Elorza, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Karen T. Tashima, MD, Bristol-Myers Squibb (Research Grant or Support)Gilead Sciences Inc. (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)GlaxoSmithKline (Research Grant or Support)Merck (Research Grant or Support)Tibotec (Research Grant or Support)Viiv Healthcare (Research Grant or Support) Mark McPhail, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator)

Download Full-text

535. Comparison of Outcomes in Patients Positive for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection After Monoclonal Antibody Therapy (MAT) with Bamlamivimab or Casirivimab-Imdevimab

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.734 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S369-S369

Author(s):

Courtney Nichols ◽

Mark Lustberg ◽

Mohammad Mahdee Sobhanie ◽

Joy Lehman ◽

Erica E Reed ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Monoclonal Antibody ◽

Research Study ◽

Hospital Admissions ◽

Antibody Therapy ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Monoclonal Antibody Therapy ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Significant Difference

Abstract Background Limited options currently exist for treatment of patients diagnosed with symptomatic coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). Monoclonal antibody therapy (MAT) has been investigated as a therapeutic option for symptomatic COVID-19 patients in the outpatient setting at high-risk for progression to severe disease based on emergency use authorization (EUA) criteria. No published studies have compared outcomes for patients treated with different MAT for COVID-19. Methods This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center to compare COVID-19-related emergency room (ER) visits, admissions, and mortality at 30 days after MAT infusion for adult patients with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 between November 16, 2020 and February 2, 2021 who received bamlanivimab versus those who received casirivimab-imdevimab. Statistical analysis used logistic regression analysis to determine the odds ratio (OR) to evaluate the relationship between patient characteristics, MAT, and outcomes. Results The cohort included 943 patients with SARS-CoV-2 who received MAT, including 658 patients who received bamlanivimab and 285 who received casirivimab-imdevimab. Outcome results between patients who received bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab showed no statistically significant difference seen in the number of COVID-19 related ER visits (3.2% vs 3.5%, p = 0.80), hospital admissions (4.6% vs 2.8%, p = 0.21), or mortality (0.5% vs 0.7%, p = 0.63). Multivariate analysis showed no statistically significant difference in outcomes between the groups when accounting for potential confounders. As reflected in the Table, chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), gender, and asthma were associated with increased COVID-19 related ER visit within 30 days of infusion and age, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, CLL, and lupus were associated with increased risk for COVID-19 related admission within 30 days of infusion. Age and obesity with body mass index greater than 35 mg/kg2 were associated with increased risk for COVID-19 related mortality at 30 days. Conclusion COVID-19 related outcomes were similar when comparing patients with COVID-19 treated with bamlanivimab versus those treated with casirivimab-imdevimab. Disclosures Mohammad Mahdee Sobhanie, M.D., Regeneron (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Regeneron (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Was a sub-investigator for Regeneron 2066 and 2069) Carlos Malvestutto, M.D., Lilly (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Regeneron Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator)ViiV Healthcare (Advisor or Review Panel member)

Download Full-text

1340. The Burden of Influenza and Rhinovirus Among Hospitalized Adults Post the COVID-19 Pandemic

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.1532 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S757-S758

Author(s):

Olivia D Reese ◽

Ashley Tippett ◽

Laila Hussaini ◽

Luis Salazar ◽

Megan Taylor ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Healthy Controls ◽

Research Support ◽

Review Panel ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Tract Infections ◽

The Impact ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background Acute respiratory tract infections (ARIs) are a significant cause of morbidity in adults. Influenza is associated with about 490,600 hospitalizations and 34,200 deaths in the US in the 2018-2019 season. The burden of rhinovirus among adults hospitalized with ARI is less well known. We compared the burden of influenza and rhinovirus from 2 consecutive winter respiratory viral seasons in hospitalized adults and healthy controls pre-COVID-19 and one season mid-COVID-19 to determine the impact of rhinovirus as a pathogen. Methods From Oct 2018 to Apr 2021, prospective surveillance of adults ≥50 years old admitted with ARI or COPD/CHF exacerbations at any age was conducted at two Atlanta hospitals. Adults were eligible if they lived within an eight-county region around Atlanta and if their symptom duration was < 14 days. In the seasons from Oct 2018 to Mar 2020, asymptomatic adults ≥50 years old were enrolled as controls. Standard of care test results were included and those enrolled contributed nasopharyngeal swabs that were tested for respiratory pathogens using BioFire® FilmArray® Respiratory Viral Panel (RVP). Results During the first two seasons, 1566 hospitalized adults were enrolled. Rhinovirus was detected in 7.5% (118) and influenza was detected in 7.7% (121). Rhinovirus was also detected in 2.2% of 466 healthy adult controls while influenza was detected in 0%. During Season 3, the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, influenza declined to 0% of ARI hospitalizations. Rhinovirus also declined (p=0.01) but still accounted for 5.1% of all ARIs screened (Figure 1). Rhinovirus was detected at a greater rate in Season 3 than in asymptomatic controls in the first 2 seasons (p=0.008). In the first two seasons, Influenza was detected in 8.6% (24/276) of those admitted to the ICU. Rhinovirus was detected in 6.1% (17/276) of those admitted to the ICU but declined to 3.1% (8/258) in Season 3. Figure 1. Percent Positive Cases of Influenza and Rhinovirus between Season 1&2 (hospitalized and healthy controls) vs Season 3 (hospitalized) Conclusion Dramatic declines occurred in influenza in adults hospitalized with ARI, CHF, or COPD in Atlanta during the COVID-19 pandemic and with enhanced public health measures. Although rhinovirus declined during the COVID-19 pandemic, it continued to be identified at a rate higher than in historical controls. Additional data are needed to understand the role of rhinovirus in adult ARI, CHF, and COPD exacerbations. Disclosures David L. Swerdlow, MD, Pfizer Vaccines (Employee) Robin Hubler, MS, Pfizer Inc. (Employee) Christina A. Rostad, MD, BioFire Inc, GSK, MedImmune, Micron, Janssen, Merck, Moderna, Novavax, PaxVax, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi-Pasteur. (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support)Meissa Vaccines (Other Financial or Material Support, Co-inventor of patented RSV vaccine technology unrelated to this manuscript, which has been licensed to Meissa Vaccines, Inc.) Larry Anderson, MD, ADVI (Consultant)Bavarian Nordic (Consultant)Novavax (Consultant)Phizer (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Sciogen (Research Grant or Support) Nadine Rouphael, MD, pfizer, sanofi, lily, quidel, merck (Grant/Research Support) Nadine Rouphael, MD, Lilly (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Emory Study PI, Grant/Research Support; Merck (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Emory study PI, Grant/Research Support; Pfizer: I conduct as co-PI the RSV PFIZER study at Emory, Research Grant; Pfizer (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Grant/Research Support, I conduct as co-PI the RSV PFIZER study at Emory; Quidel (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Emory Study PI, Grant/Research Support; Sanofi Pasteur (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Chair phase 3 COVID vaccine, Grant/Research Support Evan J. Anderson, MD, GSK (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Janssen (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member)Kentucky Bioprocessing, Inc (Advisor or Review Panel member)MedImmune (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Medscape (Consultant)Merck (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Micron (Scientific Research Study Investigator)PaxVax (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Pfizer (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Regeneron (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Sanofi Pasteur (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)

Download Full-text