449. Performance of the Brighton Case Definition for Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C) Among a Large Single Center Cohort

Abstract Background Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C) is a rare, life-threatening, hyperinflammatory condition presumed to follow SARS-CoV-2 infection. Whether MIS-C can also follow SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is not clear, making MIS-C an adverse event of special interest following immunization. Monitoring for post-vaccine MIS-C is complicated by the clinical overlap of MIS-C with numerous other inflammatory conditions including Kawasaki Disease, toxic shock syndrome, and viral myocarditis. A case definition for MIS-C was recently created with the Brighton Collaboration (BC). We aimed to determine the performance of the BC MIS-C case definition among a large, single-center MIS-C cohort. Methods Retrospective review was performed for the first 100 MIS-C cases at our institution (May 2020-February 2021). All cases met the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) case definition. Data on age, presentation, laboratory results and cardiac studies were collected and used to determine cases that fulfilled the BC case definition for MIS-C (see figure). Case Definition: Definite Case Results Of 100 children (age < 21 years) diagnosed with MIS-C using the CDC case definition, 93 patients also fulfilled the BC definition. All 100 patients had elevated laboratory markers of inflammation and positive SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. However, 1 patient was excluded for significant respiratory symptoms (pulmonary hemorrhage), 5 were excluded due to only 1 clinical feature, and an additional patient was excluded for having none of the measures of disease activity. Among the 93 patients fulfilling the revised case definition, 88 (95%) met criteria for a definite case. Five of the 93 patients (5%) were considered probable cases, 1 reported only 1 day of fever and 4 had only 1 measure of disease activity. Conclusion The original case definitions for MIS-C were created rapidly following the first emerging reports of this hyperinflammatory state. Knowledge of the varied clinical presentations of this disorder has grown substantially. Modification of the case definition to include features truly representative of MIS-C will allow for more precise diagnosis in the face of conditions which mimic MIS-C, and for accurate and reliable monitoring for adverse events following immunization. Disclosures Flor M. Munoz, MD, Biocryst (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Gilead (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Meissa (Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)Moderna (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)Pfizer (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)Virometix (Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)

Download Full-text

673. Updated CLSI Ciprofloxacin Breakpoints from a Multicenter Assessment for Enterobacterales, Salmonella spp. and Pseudomonas aeruginosa Using MicroScan Dried Gram Negative MIC Panels

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.866 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S391-S391

Author(s):

Maria M Traczewski ◽

Denise Beasley ◽

Amanda Harrington ◽

Sharon DesJarlais ◽

Omai Garner ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Reference Panel ◽

Broth Microdilution ◽

Salmonella Spp ◽

Research Personnel ◽

Gram Negative ◽

Material Support ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Support Research

Abstract Background Updated US FDA/CLSI ciprofloxacin breakpoints were evaluated against data from a multicenter clinical study with Enterobacterales, Salmonella spp. and P. aeruginosa on a MicroScan Dried Gram-negative MIC (MSDGN) Panel. MIC results were compared to results obtained with frozen broth microdilution panels prepared according to CLSI methodology. Methods MSDGN panels were evaluated at three clinical sites by comparing MIC values obtained using the MSDGN panels to MICs utilizing a CLSI broth microdilution reference panel. Data from the combined phases of efficacy and challenge included 803 Enterobacterales, Salmonella spp. and P. aeruginosa clinical isolates tested using the turbidity and Prompt® methods of inoculation. To demonstrate reproducibility, a subset of 12 organisms were tested on MSDGN panels at each site during reproducibility. MSDGN panels were incubated at 35 ± 1ºC and read on the WalkAway System, the autoSCAN-4 instrument, and visually. Read times for the MSDGN panels were at 16-20 hours. Frozen reference panels were prepared and read according to CLSI methodology. FDA and CLSI breakpoints (µg/mL) used for interpretation of MIC results were: Enterobacterales ≤ 0.25 S, 0.5 I, ≥ 1 R; Salmonella spp. ≤ 0.06 S, 0.12-0.5 I, ≥ 1 R; P. aeruginosa ≤ 0.5 S, 1 I, ≥ 2 R. Results Essential and categorical agreement was calculated compared to frozen reference panel results. Results for isolates tested during efficacy and challenge with Prompt inoculation and manual read are as follows: Conclusion Ciprofloxacin MIC results for Enterobacterales, Salmonella spp., and P. aeruginosa obtained with the MSDGN panel correlate well with MICs obtained using frozen reference panels using updated FDA/CLSI interpretive criteria in this multicenter study. * PROMPT® is a registered trademark of 3M Company, St. Paul, MN USA. BEC, the stylized logo and the BEC product and service marks mentioned herein are trademarks or registered trademarks of Beckman Coulter, Inc. in the US and other countries. Disclosures Maria M. Traczewski, BS MT (ASCP), Beckman Coulter (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Denise Beasley, BS, Beckman Coulter (Other Financial or Material Support, Research personnel) Amanda Harrington, PhD, Beckman Coulter (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Sharon DesJarlais, BS, Beckman Coulter (Other Financial or Material Support, Research personnel) Omai Garner, PhD, D(ABMM), Beckman Coulter (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Christine Hastey, PhD, Beckman Coulter (Employee) Regina Brookman, BS, Beckman Coulter (Employee) Zabrina Lockett, MS, Beckman Coulter (Employee) Jennifer Chau, PhD, Beckman Coulter (Employee)

Download Full-text

LB1. Remdesivir for the Treatment of High-Risk Non-Hospitalized Individuals With COVID-19: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.1642 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S806-S807

Author(s):

Joshua A Hill ◽

Roger Paredes ◽

Carlos Vaca ◽

Jorge Mera ◽

Brandon J Webb ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Research Support ◽

Review Panel ◽

Double Blind ◽

Material Support ◽

Double Blind Placebo ◽

Study Investigator

Abstract Background Remdesivir (RDV) is a potent nucleotide prodrug inhibitor of the SARS-CoV-2 RNA-dependent RNA polymerase that has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of patients hospitalized with moderate to severe COVID-19. This Phase 3 (GS-US-540–9012) double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared the efficacy and safety of 3 days of RDV to standard of care in non-hospitalized, high-risk participants with confirmed COVID-19. Table 1. COVID-19 related hospitalization or death, COVID-19 related medically attended visits or death, and Treatment Emergent Adverse Events Methods Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive intravenous (IV) RDV (200 mg on day 1, 100 mg on days 2 to 3) or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was composite COVID-19 hospitalization or all-cause death by day 28 and compared using Cox proportional hazards model with baseline stratification factors as covariates. The primary safety endpoint was proportion of participants with treatment-emergent adverse events. Study enrollment was terminated early for administrative reasons in light of the evolving pandemic. Results 562 patients underwent randomization and started their assigned treatment (279, RDV; 283, placebo). Baseline demographics and characteristics were balanced across arms. Overall, 52% were male, 44% were Hispanic/Latino ethnicity and 30% were ≥ 60 years old. The most common comorbidities were diabetes mellitus (62%), obesity (56%; median BMI, 30.7), and hypertension (48%). Median baseline SARS-CoV-2 RNA nasopharyngeal viral load was 6.2 log10 copies/mL. Treatment with RDV significantly reduced COVID-19 hospitalization or all-cause death by day 28 (HR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.03 – 0.59; p = 0.008; Table 1) compared to placebo. Participants receiving RDV also had significantly lower risk for COVID-19-related medically attended visits or all-cause death by day 28 compared to placebo (HR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.07 – 0.56; p = 0.002; Table 1). No deaths occurred in either arm by day 28. There was no difference between arms in time-weighted average change in nasopharyngeal viral loads from baseline up to day 7. The proportion of patients with AEs was similar between arms (Table 1); the most common AEs in the RDV arm were nausea (11%), headache (6%), and diarrhea (4%). Conclusion A 3-day course of IV RDV was safe, well tolerated and highly effective at preventing COVID-19 related hospitalization or death in high-risk non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Disclosures Joshua A. Hill, MD, Allogene (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Consultant; Allovir (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Consultant, Grant/Research Support; Amplyx (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Consultant; Covance/CSL (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Consultant; CRISPR (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Consultant; Gilead (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Consultant, Grant/Research Support; Karius: Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator; Medscape (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Consultant; Octapharma (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Consultant; OptumHealth (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Consultant; Takeda (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator Roger Paredes, MD, PhD, Gilead Sciences, Inc (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member) Carlos Vaca, MD, Gilead Sciences, Inc (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Jorge Mera, MD, Gilead Sciences, Inc (Consultant, Study Investigator (payment to employer not self)) Gilberto Perez, MD, Gilead Sciences, Inc (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Godson Oguchi, MD, Gilead Sciences, Inc (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Pablo Ryan, MD PhD, Gilead Sciences, Inc (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member) Jan Gerstoft, MD, Gilead Sciences, Inc (Other Financial or Material Support, Study Investigator (payment to employer)) Michael Brown, FRCP PhD, Gilead Sciences, Inc (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Investigator for numerous remdesivir trials (employer received compensation)) Morgan Katz, MD, MHS, Roche (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Advisor or Review Panel member; Skinclique (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Consultant Gregory Camus, PhD, Gilead Sciences (Employee, Shareholder) Danielle P. Porter, PhD, Gilead Sciences (Employee, Shareholder) Robert H. Hyland, DPhil, Gilead Sciences, Inc (Shareholder, Other Financial or Material Support, Employee during the conduct of this trial) Shuguang Chen, PhD, Gilead Sciences, Inc (Employee, Shareholder) Kavita Juneja, MD, Gilead Sciences, Inc (Employee) Anu Osinusi, MD, Gilead Sciences, Inc (Employee, Shareholder) Frank Duff, MD, Gilead Sciences, Inc (Employee, Shareholder) Robert L. Gottlieb, MD, Eli Lilly (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member)Gilead Sciences (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Other Financial or Material Support, Gift in kind to Baylor Scott and White Research Institute for NCT03383419)GSK (Advisor or Review Panel member)Johnson and Johnson (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Kinevant (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Roche/Genentech (Scientific Research Study Investigator)

Download Full-text

548. Convalescent Plasma in Hospitalized Pediatric and Obstetric patients with COVID-19

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.747 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S376-S376

Author(s):

Saki Ikeda ◽

Eduardo Benzi ◽

Lisa Hensch ◽

Sridevi Devaraj ◽

Shiu-Ki Rocky Hui ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Pediatric Patients ◽

Research Study ◽

High Titer ◽

Serum Antibody ◽

Laboratory Data ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Published Data ◽

Material Support ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Antibody Levels

Abstract Background Published data on COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) use in children and obstetric patients is limited. We describe a single-center experience of hospitalized patients who received CCP for acute COVID-19. Methods We performed a retrospective review of children 0-18-years-old and pregnant patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed acute COVID-19 who received CCP from March 1st, 2020 to March 1st, 2021. Clinical and laboratory data were collected to assess the safety of CCP administration. Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 were measured before and at various timepoints post CCP transfusion. Correlation between SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin administered versus the SARS-CoV-2 anti-Spike immunoglobulin response in patient serum was assessed. Results Twenty-two children and 10 obstetric patients were eligible. 12 pediatric and 8 obstetric patients had moderate disease and 10 pediatric and 2 obstetric patients had severe disease. 5 pediatric patients died. 18/37 (48.6%) CCP units that were measured met FDA criteria for a high IgG titer. There were no complications with transfusion based on CDC, NHSN Biovigilance Component: Hemovigilance Module Surveillance Protocol. Two pediatric patients had fevers a few hours after CCP with low suspicion for a transfusion reaction. Median SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike antibody levels of pediatric patients post-transfusion for 0-7 days was 80.6AU/mL (range: 2-1070), 8-21 days was 180AU/mL (range: 12-661) and >21 days was 210AU/mL (range: 4.1-1220). For obstetric patients, post-transfusion antibody levels were only obtained 0-7 days post-transfusion with median 45AU/mL (range: 9.5-100). High-titer CCP showed a positive correlation with rise in patient immunoglobulin levels only in the obstetric patients but not in pediatric patients. Conclusion CCP was administered safely to our moderately to severely ill pediatric and obstetric patients. Among pediatric patients, the median serum antibody level increased over time after transfusion and suggested that CCP did not interfere with the endogenous antibody production. Antibody dose of high-titer CCP correlated with post-transfusion response in only obstetric patients. Randomized trials in pediatric and obstetric patients are needed to further understand how to dose CCP and evaluate efficacy. Disclosures Jun Teruya, MD, PhD, Apelo Consulting Pvt. Ltd (Consultant)Hemosonics (Other Financial or Material Support, Honorarium) Flor M. Munoz, MD, Biocryst (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Gilead (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Meissa (Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)Moderna (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)Pfizer (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)Virometix (Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)

Download Full-text

1178. Sustained Vaccine Effectiveness Against Influenza-Associated Hospitalization in Children: Evidence from the New Vaccine Surveillance Network, 2015-2016 Through 2019-2020

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.1371 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S681-S682

Author(s):

Leila C Sahni ◽

Eric A Naioti ◽

Samantha M Olson ◽

Angela P Campbell ◽

Marian G Michaels ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Influenza Vaccine ◽

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Onset Date ◽

Research Support ◽

Review Panel ◽

Material Support ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background Adult studies have demonstrated intra-season declines in influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) with increasing time since vaccination; however, data in children are limited. Methods We conducted a prospective, test-negative study of children ages 6 months through 17 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illness at 7 pediatric medical centers each season in the New Vaccine Surveillance Network during the 2015-2016 through 2019-2020 influenza seasons. Cases were children with an influenza-positive molecular test; controls were influenza-negative children. Controls were matched to cases by illness onset date using 3:1 nearest neighbor matching. We estimated VE [100% x (1 – odds ratio)] by comparing the odds of receipt of ≥ 1 dose of influenza vaccine ≥ 14 days before the onset of illness that resulted in hospitalization among influenza-positive children to influenza-negative children. Changes in VE over time between vaccination date and illness onset date during each season were estimated using multivariable logistic regression models. Results Of 8,430 hospitalized children (4,781 [57%] male; median age 2.4 years), 4,653 (55%) received ≥ 1 dose of influenza vaccine. On average, 48% and 85% of children were vaccinated by the end of October and December, respectively. Influenza-positive cases (n=1,000; 12%) were less likely to be vaccinated than influenza-negative controls (39% vs. 61%, p< 0.001) and overall VE against hospitalization was 53% (95% CI: 46%, 60%). Pooling data across 5 seasons, the odds of any influenza-associated hospitalization increased 0.96% (95% CI: -0.76%, 2.71%) per week with a corresponding weekly decrease in VE of 0.45% (p=0.275). Odds of hospitalization with time since vaccination increased 0.66% (95% CI: -0.76%, 2.71%) per week in children ≤ 8 years (n=3,084) and 2.16% (95% CI: -1.68%, 6.15%) per week in children 9-17 years (n=771). No significant differences were observed by virus subtype or lineage. Figure 1. Declines in influenza VE over time from 2015-2016 through 2019-2020, overall (a) and by age group (b: ≤ 8 years; c: 9-17 years) Conclusion We observed minimal intra-season declines in VE against influenza-associated hospitalization in U.S. children. Vaccination following Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices guidelines and current timing of vaccine receipt is the best strategy for prevention of influenza-associated hospitalization in children. Disclosures Marian G. Michaels, MD, MPH, Viracor (Grant/Research Support, performs assay for research study no financial support) John V. Williams, MD, GlaxoSmithKline (Advisor or Review Panel member, Independent Data Monitoring Committee)Quidel (Advisor or Review Panel member, Scientific Advisory Board) Elizabeth P. Schlaudecker, MD, MPH, Pfizer (Grant/Research Support)Sanofi Pasteur (Advisor or Review Panel member) Natasha B. Halasa, MD, MPH, Genentech (Other Financial or Material Support, I receive an honorarium for lectures - it’s a education grant, supported by genetech)Quidel (Grant/Research Support, Other Financial or Material Support, Donation of supplies/kits)Sanofi (Grant/Research Support, Other Financial or Material Support, HAI/NAI testing) Natasha B. Halasa, MD, MPH, Genentech (Individual(s) Involved: Self): I receive an honorarium for lectures - it’s a education grant, supported by genetech, Other Financial or Material Support, Other Financial or Material Support; Sanofi (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Grant/Research Support, Research Grant or Support Janet A. Englund, MD, AstraZeneca (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)GlaxoSmithKline (Research Grant or Support)Meissa Vaccines (Consultant)Pfizer (Research Grant or Support)Sanofi Pasteur (Consultant)Teva Pharmaceuticals (Consultant) Christopher J. Harrison, MD, GSK (Grant/Research Support)Merck (Grant/Research Support)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support) Flor M. Munoz, MD, Biocryst (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Gilead (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Meissa (Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)Moderna (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)Pfizer (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)Virometix (Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)

Download Full-text

860. A Proposed Standard for Hospital Bioaerosol Monitoring in Avoiding Nosocomial Mould Infections

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1049 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S469-S470

Author(s):

Garret T Seiler ◽

Luis Ostrosky-Zeichner ◽

Lance Ferguson ◽

Kelly Boston ◽

Mike Grant ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Fungal Infections ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Quality Standard ◽

Exposure Limits ◽

Material Support ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Airborne Contamination ◽

The Mean ◽

Particle Counts

Abstract Background Recent nosocomial outbreaks of mould infections have been linked to bioaerosols. Active and passive environmental sampling is a primary method of quantifying airborne contamination in the hospital, but currently there are no standardized Occupational Exposure Limits (OELs) for the avoidance of nosocomial infections. Methods Between March 2016 and December 2019, 186 post-construction/post-cleaning air samples were collected to measure particle counts based on defined size criteria Lighthouse handheld Particle Counter) and viable air fungal cultures (Anderson single stage N6 Viable Particulate Sampler) across wards of a 1,082 bed hospital in Houston, Texas, and compared with outdoor controls. Areas were cleared for occupancy if the ≤ 0.3micron particle counts were reduced by the expected efficacy of the HVAC unit and if indoor fungi airborne concentrations in CFU/m³ were also reduced or did not exceed the outdoor ambient reference levels for each separate day of site assessment. Results The mean counts of particles ≤ 0.3microns were as follows: floors 37,427.50 (-32% reduction), operating rooms 8,163.88 (95% reduction), OR sterile core 15,001.31 (89% reduction), ICU 7,640.15 (93% reduction), radiology suites 1,046.25 (97% reduction), and outpatient areas 17,891.58 (82% reduction). The table indicates the reported mean density (CFU/m³) data and species of fungi isolated in viable bioaerosol samples, 13 of which matched outdoor reference isolates. The mean density of outdoor cultures was 292.37 compared to all indoor units 24.53 (91.61% reduction), floors 25.44 (91.3% reduction), ICUs 28.19 (90.4% reduction), radiology suites 22.5 (92.3% reduction), and ORs 12.79 (95.6% reduction). During this time, no nosocomial fungal infections or outbreaks were documented for the institution. Table 1: Mean Density (cfu/mm3) of Fungal Species per Location Conclusion An indoor air quality standard comprised of particle count data reduced by the expected efficacy of the operating HVAC unit and also existing indoor viable fungi in units of CFU/m³ that did not exceed the outdoor reference could potentially be correlated with avoidance of nosocomial mould infections. Disclosures Luis Ostrosky-Zeichner, MD, Amplyx (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Astellas (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Other Financial or Material Support, Non-branded educational speaking)Biotoscana (Consultant, Other Financial or Material Support, Non-branded educational speaking)Cidara (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)F2G (Consultant)Gilead (Consultant)Mayne (Consultant)Octapharma (Consultant)Pfizer (Other Financial or Material Support, Non-branded educational speaking)Scynexis (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Stendhal (Consultant)Viracor (Consultant)

Download Full-text

468. Delayed Mortality Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients Hospitalized for Covid-19: An International Multicenter Study

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.667 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S336-S337

Author(s):

Madeleine R Heldman ◽

Olivia S Kates ◽

Robert M Rakita ◽

Erika D Lease ◽

Ajit P Limaye ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Research Study ◽

Organ Transplant ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Solid Organ Transplant ◽

Solid Organ ◽

Transplant Recipients ◽

Material Support ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

Abstract Background Studies of solid organ transplant recipients (SOTr) hospitalized for Covid-19 have focused on short-term outcomes with approximately 30 days of follow-up time. Intermediate-term mortality and associated risk factors for intermediate-term death have not previously been reported. Methods Using data from a multi-center registry, we assessed mortality by 90 days among SOTr hospitalized for Covid-19 between 3/1/2020 and 12/31/2020. Multivariable Cox-proportional hazard models were used to compare risk factors for mortality by 28 and 90 days. Covariates were selected a priori based on known predictors of death in SOTr hospitalized for Covid-19. All patients were followed for 90 days or were censored at the time of death or last clinical contact, if this occurred prior to day 90 after diagnosis. Results Among SOTr hospitalized for Covid-19, 198/979 (20%) died within 90 days of diagnosis and 37/198 (19%) of deaths occurred between days 29 and 90. Risk factors for mortality by day 90 days included age >65 years (1.8, 95% CI 1.3-2.4, P< 0.001), lung transplant (compared to non-lung) (1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.4, P=0.02), chronic lung disease (2.2, 95% CI 1.5-3.4, P=0.002) and heart failure (1.9, 95% CI 1.2-2.9), which were similar to risk factors reported for 28-day mortality (Table 1). Diagnosis during the second half of 2020 (6/20-12/31/20) was associated with lower mortality by 28 days (aHR 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-1.0, P=0.03) compared to diagnosis during the early half of 2020 (3/1-6/19/20); however, mortality by 90 days was similar in the late and early time periods (aHR 0.9, 95% CI 0.7-1.2, P=0.54). Obesity and mTOR inhibitor use were also associated with death by 28 but not 90 days. Kaplan-Meier survival curves by time period of diagnosis are shown in Figure 1. Table 1. Multivariable Cox-Proportional Hazard Model for Mortality at 28 and 90-days Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients Hospitalized for Covid-19 (N=979) Figure 1. Survival among SOT recipients hospitalized for Covid-19 by diagnosis time period Vertical tick marks represent censored cases. Early 2020 refers to cases diagnosed between March 1 and June 19, 2020 and late 2020 refers to cases diagnosed between June 20 and December 31, 2020. Conclusion Approximately 20% of deaths among SOTr hospitalized for Covid-19 occurred between days 29 and 90. Future investigations are required to discern the mechanism(s) for the improvement in early, but not late, mortality among SOTr with Covid-19 during the course of the pandemic. Disclosures Madeleine R. Heldman, MD, Cigna Lifesource (Other Financial or Material Support, Speaking honoraria)Thermo Fisher Scientific (Other Financial or Material Support, Speaking honoraria) Olivia S. Kates, MD, Merk (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Ajit P. Limaye, MD, astellas (Scientific Research Study Investigator)CTI (Scientific Research Study Investigator)GSK (Consultant)Johnson&Johnson (Other Financial or Material Support, Adjudication Committee)merck (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)moderna (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Novartis (Other Financial or Material Support, DMC member)Novo Nordisk (Consultant)

Download Full-text

667. Multicenter Assessment of Enterobacterales, Salmonella spp. and Pseudomonas aeruginosa Using Updated CLSI Levofloxacin Breakpoints on MicroScan Dried Gram Negative MIC Panels

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.860 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S388-S389

Author(s):

Omai Garner ◽

Maria M Traczewski ◽

Denise Beasley ◽

Amanda Harrington ◽

Sharon DesJarlais ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Reference Panel ◽

Broth Microdilution ◽

Salmonella Spp ◽

Research Personnel ◽

Gram Negative ◽

Material Support ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Support Research

Abstract Background Data from a multicenter clinical study with Enterobacterales, Salmonella spp. and P. aeruginosa on a MicroScan Dried Gram-negative MIC (MSDGN) Panel was evaluated with updated US FDA/CLSI levofloxacin breakpoints. MIC results were compared to results obtained with frozen broth microdilution panels prepared according to CLSI methodology. Methods A total of 839 Enterobacterales, Salmonella spp. and P. aeruginosa clinical isolates were tested at three clinical sites in efficacy and challenge combined. MSDGN panels were evaluated with turbidity and Prompt® methods of inoculation. MIC values obtained from the MSDGN panels were compared to MICs utilizing a CLSI broth microdilution reference panel. To assess reproducibility, a subset of 15 organisms were tested on MSDGN panels at each site. MSDGN panels were incubated at 35 ± 1ºC and read on the WalkAway System, the autoSCAN-4 instrument, and visually. Read times for the MSDGN panels were at 16-20 hours. Frozen reference panels were prepared and read according to CLSI methodology. FDA and CLSI breakpoints (µg/mL) used for interpretation of MIC results were: Enterobacterales ≤ 0. 5 S, 1 I, ≥ 2 R; Salmonella spp. ≤ 0.12 S, 0.25-1 I, ≥ 2 R; P. aeruginosa ≤ 1 S, 2 I, ≥ 4 R. Results Essential and categorical agreement were calculated compared to frozen reference panel results. Results for isolates tested during efficacy and challenge with Prompt inoculation and manual read are as follows: Conclusion Levofloxacin MIC results for Enterobacterales, Salmonella spp., and P. aeruginosa obtained with the MSDGN panel correlate well with MICs obtained using frozen reference panels using updated FDA/CLSI interpretive criteria in this multicenter study. * PROMPT® is a registered trademark of 3M Company, St. Paul, MN USA. BEC, the stylized logo and the BEC product and service marks mentioned herein are trademarks or registered trademarks of Beckman Coulter, Inc. in the US and other countries. Disclosures Omai Garner, PhD, D(ABMM), Beckman Coulter (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Maria M. Traczewski, BS MT (ASCP), Beckman Coulter (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Denise Beasley, BS, Beckman Coulter (Other Financial or Material Support, Research personnel) Amanda Harrington, PhD, Beckman Coulter (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Sharon DesJarlais, BS, Beckman Coulter (Other Financial or Material Support, Research personnel) Christine Hastey, PhD, Beckman Coulter (Employee) Regina Brookman, BS, Beckman Coulter (Employee) Zabrina Lockett, MS, Beckman Coulter (Employee) Jennifer Chau, PhD, Beckman Coulter (Employee)

Download Full-text

73. Geographical Disparities in Clinical Outcomes of Severe COVID-19 Patients Treated with Remdesivir

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.383 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S167-S167

Author(s):

George Diaz ◽

Jose Ramon Arribas ◽

Philip A Robinson ◽

Anna Maria Cattelan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Clinical Status ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Ordinal Scale ◽

Research Support ◽

Review Panel ◽

Material Support ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background Remdesivir (RDV), a RNA polymerase inhibitor with potent in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, is the only treatment with demonstrated efficacy in shortening the duration of COVID-19. Here we report regional differences in clinical outcomes of severe COVID-19 patients treated with RDV, as part of an open-label, randomized phase-3 trial establishing RDV treatment duration. Methods Hospitalized patients with oxygen saturation ≤94%, a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR in the past 4 days and radiographic evidence of pneumonia were randomized 1:1 to receive 5d or 10d of intravenous RDV. We compared d14 clinical outcomes of patients from different geographical areas, as measured by mortality rates, change in clinical status from baseline (BL) on a 7-point ordinal scale and change in O2 requirements from BL. Based on previous analyses in compassionate use data showing region as an important predictor of outcome, Italy was examined separately from other regions. Results 397 patients were treated with RDV, of which 229 (58%) were in the US, 77 (19%) Italy, 61 (15% in Spain), 12 (3%) Republic of Korea, 9 (2%) Singapore, 4 (1%) Germany, 4 (1%) Hong Kong and 1 (< 1%) Taiwan. BL clinical status was worse in Italy compared to other regions (72% vs 17% requiring high-flow oxygen delivery or higher), and Italian patients were more likely to be male than patients from other regions (69% vs 63%). Overall results showed 5d RDV was as effective as 10d. Mortality at d14 was higher in Italy (18%) compared to all other countries except Italy (7%). Similarly, clinical improvement at d14, measured as ≥2-point increase in the ordinal scale, was lower in Italian patients (39%) compared to all other countries combined (64%). (Fig.1). Figure 1. Change from Baseline in Clinical Status (measured on a 7-point Ordinal Scale) at d14. Conclusion Overall, our results demonstrate significant geographical differences in the clinical course of severe COVID-19 patients treated with RDV. We observed worse outcomes, such as increased mortality and lower rate of clinical improvement, in patients from Italy compared to other regions. Disclosures George Diaz, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA Jose Ramon Arribas, MD, Alexa (Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Janssen (Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Merck (Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Viiv Healthcare (Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees) Jose Ramon Arribas, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA Philip A. Robinson, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA Anna Maria Cattelan, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA 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) Owen Tak-Yin Tsang, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Owen Tak-Yin Tsang, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA Yao-Shen Chen, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Yao-Shen Chen, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA Devi SenGupta, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Elena Vendrame, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA Christiana Blair, MS, Gilead Sciences (Employee, Shareholder) Anand Chokkalingam, PhD, Gilead Sciences (Employee) Anu Osinusi, MD, Gilead Sciences (Employee) Diana M. Brainard, MD, Gilead Sciences (Employee) Bum Sik Chin, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Bum Sik Chin, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA Christoph Spinner, MD, AbbVie (Advisor or Review Panel member, Other Financial or Material Support, Travel)Bristol-Myers Squibb (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member, Other Financial or Material Support, Travel)Gilead Sciences Inc. (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Other Financial or Material Support, Travel)Janssen (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member, Other Financial or Material Support, Travel)MSD (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member, Other Financial or Material Support, Travel)Viiv Healthcare (Grant/Research Support, Advisor or Review Panel member, Other Financial or Material Support, Travel) Gerard J. Criner, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Regeneron (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Gerard J. Criner, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA Jose Muñoz, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA David Chien Boon Lye, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) David Chien Boon Lye, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA Robert L. Gottlieb, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator)

Download Full-text

985. Impact of Age and Medical Comorbidities on Renal Outcomes in the DISCOVER Trial

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1171 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S521-S521

Author(s):

Eric Daar ◽

Jason Brunetta ◽

Eric Cua ◽

Jason Flamm ◽

David Asmuth ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Study Drug ◽

Medical Comorbidity ◽

Research Support ◽

Material Support ◽

Medical Comorbidities ◽

Study Investigator ◽

History Of ◽

Conference Attendance

Abstract Background In DISCOVER, emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (F/TAF) was noninferior to F/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) for preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in men who have sex with men and transgender women, with a superior renal laboratory profile. The differential impact of F/TAF and F/TDF on renal parameters among older individuals and those with medical comorbidities is unknown. Methods DISCOVER randomized participants 1:1 to daily blinded F/TAF or F/TDF. We examined renal outcomes at week 48 including estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) by Cockcroft-Gault, β2 microglobulin (M):Creatinine (Cr) and retinol binding protein (RBP):Cr ratios (markers of proximal renal tubular function), and discontinuations due to investigator reported study drug-related renal adverse events (AEs). Results Median age was 34 years (yrs)(range 18-76), with 12.5% vs 10.9% < 25yrs, 12.2% vs 14.4% ≥ 50yrs, and 1.1% vs 0.9% > 65yrs for F/TAF and F/TDF, respectively. The prevalence of medical comorbidities at baseline were; eGFR < 90mL/min= 9.1% vs 9.3%, diabetes= 2.9% vs 3.3%, and hypertension= 10.5 vs 11.1%, for F/TAF and F/TDF, respectively. eGFR changes by age category and medical comorbidity status are found in the Table. Forty participants had study drug-related renal AEs; 14 with F/TAF and 26 with F/TDF. Of these, 25% were > 50yrs, 20% had baseline eGFR < 90mL/min, 7.5% had history of diabetes, and 22.5% had history of hypertension. β2M:Cr and RBP:Cr changes were more favorable in participants receiving F/TAF, with greater magnitude of difference in older participants (data not shown). Table. Conclusion The DISCOVER trial allows for a large single variable comparison of the two tenofovir prodrugs in the absence of underlying HIV infection and in the absence of third antiretroviral agents. F/TAF was associated with favorable changes in renal biomarkers regardless of age or medical comorbidity. Participants ≥50yrs or with comorbidities were proportionately more likely to develop study drug related renal AEs, but these were present in the minority of cases. Disclosures Eric Daar, MD, BMS (Consultant)Gilead Sciences Inc. (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Janssen (Consultant)Merck (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Teva (Consultant)Theratechnology (Consultant)Viiv Healthcare (Consultant, Grant/Research Support) Jason Brunetta, MD, AbbVie (Consultant)Gilead Sciences Inc. (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Speaker’s Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support, Conference attendance sponsorship)Janssen (Other Financial or Material Support, Conference attendance sponsorship)Merck (Consultant, Speaker’s Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support, Conference attendance sponsorship)Viiv Healthcare (Consultant, Speaker’s Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support, Conference attendance sponsorship) Eric Cua, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) David Asmuth, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Christoph C. Carter, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Yongwu Shao, PhD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Pamela Wong, MPH, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Ramin Ebrahimi, MSc, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Moupali Das, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Diana M. Brainard, MD, Gilead Sciences (Employee) Amanda Clarke, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Other Financial or Material Support, Conference attendance sponsorship)Viiv Healthcare (Consultant, Other Financial or Material Support, Conference travel sponsorship)

Download Full-text

557. Impact of Concomitant Hydroxychloroquine Use on Safety and Efficacy of Remdesivir in Moderate COVID-19 Patients

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.751 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S343-S344

Author(s):

Jose Ramon Arribas ◽

Arun J Sanyal ◽

Alex Soriano ◽

Bum Sik Chin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Recovery Rate ◽

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Covariate Adjustment ◽

Review Panel ◽

Material Support ◽

Study Investigator ◽

The Impact ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background Remdesivir (RDV) has been shown to shorten recovery time and was well tolerated in patients with severe COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine (HQN) is an experimental treatment for COVID-19. Effects of coadministration of HQN with RDV have not been studied and are relevant given the long half-life (~22 days) of HQN. We report the impact of concomitant HQN and RDV use on clinical outcomes and safety in patients with moderate COVID-19. 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. We compared patients on concomitant HQN (HQNpos) vs not (HQNneg). Clinical recovery was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards. Covariate adjustment included age, sex, race, region, symptom duration, oxygen support status and obesity. Recovery and adverse events (AEs) were assessed through death, discharge, or d14. Results Of 584 patients, 199 (34%) received HQN (5d RDV: n=57 [30%]; 10d RDV, n=49 [25%]; SoC: n=93 [47%]). Through median follow-up of 13d (range 1-41d), HQNpos patients on 5d or 10d RDV had a lower recovery rate (adjusted HR [95% CI] 0.78 [0.59, 1.03], p=0.09) with longer median time to recovery (8 vs 6 days) compared to HQNneg. HQNpos compared to HQNneg patients in 5d RDV showed a trend of reduced recovery rate (HR: 0.69 [0.45,1.04], p=0.080); such an effect was not observed in 10d RDV or SoC (Table 1). More HQNpos than HQNneg patients had AEs in RDV (5/10d) or SoC arms evaluated separately, and all arms combined. This difference was significant for AEs and SAEs for all arms combined after covariate adjustment (Table 2). Table 1. Table 2. Conclusion In moderate COVID-19 patients, concomitant HQN may delay recovery on RDV and showed no impact on recovery with SoC alone. The AE profile of HQNpos patients was worse than that observed for HQNneg patients, regardless of RDV treatment. Disclosures Jose Ramon Arribas, MD, Alexa (Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Janssen (Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Merck (Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Viiv Healthcare (Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker’s Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees) Jose Ramon Arribas, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA Arun J. Sanyal, MD, AbbVie (Consultant)Akarna (Shareholder)Amarin (Consultant)Ardelyx (Consultant)Astra Zeneca (Consultant, Research Grant or Support)Boehringer (Consultant)Bristol Myers Squibb (Research Grant or Support)Conatus (Consultant)Cumberland (Research Grant or Support)Durect (Shareholder)Elsevier (Other Financial or Material Support, Royalties)Exhalenz (Shareholder)Fibrogen (Consultant)Genfit (Shareholder)Gilead Sciences Inc. (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support)Haemoshear (Shareholder)Indalo (Shareholder)Intercept (Research Grant or Support)Jannsen (Consultant)Lilly (Consultant)Malinckrodt (Research Grant or Support)Merck (Research Grant or Support)Nimbus (Consultant)Nitto Denko (Consultant)Novartis (Consultant)Pfizer (Consultant)Salix (Consultant)Sanyal Biotechnology (Employee, Shareholder, Other Financial or Material Support, President)Shire (Research Grant or Support)Takeda (Consultant)Tiziana (Shareholder)Tobira (Consultant)UptoDate (Other Financial or Material Support, Royalties)Zafgen (Consultant) Bum Sik Chin, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Bum Sik Chin, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA Shirin Kalimuddin, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Stefan Schreiber, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Emon Elboudwarej, PhD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Yuan Tian, PhD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Robert H. Hyland, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Devi SenGupta, MD, 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