Clinical Microbiology Reviews最新文献

SUMMARYAlthough Scedosporium species and Lomentospora prolificans are uncommon causes of invasive fungal diseases (IFDs), these infections are associated with high mortality and are costly to treat with a limited armamentarium of antifungal drugs. In light of recent advances, including in the area of new antifungals, the present review provides a timely and updated overview of these IFDs, with a focus on the taxonomy, clinical epidemiology, pathogenesis and host immune response, disease manifestations, diagnosis, antifungal susceptibility, and treatment. An expansion of hosts at risk for these difficult-to-treat infections has emerged over the last two decades given the increased use of, and broader population treated with, immunomodulatory and targeted molecular agents as well as wider adoption of antifungal prophylaxis. Clinical presentations differ not only between genera but also across the different Scedosporium species. L. prolificans is intrinsically resistant to most currently available antifungal agents, and the prognosis of immunocompromised patients with lomentosporiosis is poor. Development of, and improved access to, diagnostic modalities for early detection of these rare mold infections is paramount for timely targeted antifungal therapy and surgery if indicated. New antifungal agents (e.g., olorofim, fosmanogepix) with novel mechanisms of action and less cross-resistance to existing classes, availability of formulations for oral administration, and fewer drug-drug interactions are now in late-stage clinical trials, and soon, could extend options to treat scedosporiosis/lomentosporiosis. Much work remains to increase our understanding of these infections, especially in the pediatric setting. Knowledge gaps for future research are highlighted in the review.

SUMMARYSince the emergence of COVID-19 in 2020, an unprecedented range of therapeutic options has been studied and deployed. Healthcare providers have multiple treatment approaches to choose from, but efficacy of those approaches often remains controversial or compromised by viral evolution. Uncertainties still persist regarding the best therapies for high-risk patients, and the drug pipeline is suffering fatigue and shortage of funding. In this article, we review the antiviral activity, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, and safety of COVID-19 antiviral therapies. Additionally, we summarize the evidence from randomized controlled trials on efficacy and safety of the various COVID-19 antivirals and discuss unmet needs which should be addressed.

SUMMARYViral infections during pregnancy are associated with significant adverse perinatal and fetal outcomes. Pregnancy is a unique immunologic and physiologic state, which can influence control of virus replication, severity of disease, and vertical transmission. The placenta is the organ of the maternal-fetal interface and provides defense against microbial infection while supporting the semi-allogeneic fetus via tolerogenic immune responses. Some viruses, such as cytomegalovirus, Zika virus, and rubella virus, can breach these defenses, directly infecting the fetus and having long-lasting consequences. Even without direct placental infection, other viruses, including respiratory viruses like influenza viruses and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, still cause placental damage and inflammation. Concentrations of progesterone and estrogens rise during pregnancy and contribute to immunological adaptations, placentation, and placental development and play a pivotal role in creating a tolerogenic environment at the maternal-fetal interface. Animal models, including mice, nonhuman primates, rabbits, and guinea pigs, are instrumental for mechanistic insights into the pathogenesis of viral infections during pregnancy and identification of targetable treatments to improve health outcomes of pregnant individuals and offspring.

SUMMARYThe emergence and worldwide dissemination of SARS-CoV-2 required both urgent development of new diagnostic tests and expansion of diagnostic testing capacity on an unprecedented scale. The rapid evolution of technologies that allowed testing to move out of traditional laboratories and into point-of-care testing centers and the home transformed the diagnostic landscape. Four years later, with the end of the formal public health emergency but continued global circulation of the virus, it is important to take a fresh look at available SARS-CoV-2 testing technologies and consider how they should be used going forward. This review considers current use case scenarios for SARS-CoV-2 antigen, nucleic acid amplification, and immunologic tests, incorporating the latest evidence for analytical/clinical performance characteristics and advantages/limitations for each test type to inform current debates about how tests should or should not be used.

SUMMARYThe World Health Organisation's 2022 AWaRe Book provides guidance for the use of 39 antibiotics to treat 35 infections in primary healthcare and hospital facilities. We review the evidence underpinning suggested dosing regimens. Few (n = 18) population pharmacokinetic studies exist for key oral AWaRe antibiotics, largely conducted in homogenous and unrepresentative populations hindering robust estimates of drug exposures. Databases of minimum inhibitory concentration distributions are limited, especially for community pathogen-antibiotic combinations. Minimum inhibitory concentration data sources are not routinely reported and lack regional diversity and community representation. Of studies defining a pharmacodynamic target for ß-lactams (n = 80), 42 (52.5%) differed from traditionally accepted 30%-50% time above minimum inhibitory concentration targets. Heterogeneity in model systems and pharmacodynamic endpoints is common, and models generally use intravenous ß-lactams. One-size-fits-all pharmacodynamic targets are used for regimen planning despite complexity in drug-pathogen-disease combinations. We present solutions to enable the development of global evidence-based antibiotic dosing guidance that provides adequate treatment in the context of the increasing prevalence of antimicrobial resistance and, moreover, minimizes the emergence of resistance.

SUMMARYThis narrative review and meta-analysis summarizes a broad evidence base on the benefits-and also the practicalities, disbenefits, harms and personal, sociocultural and environmental impacts-of masks and masking. Our synthesis of evidence from over 100 published reviews and selected primary studies, including re-analyzing contested meta-analyses of key clinical trials, produced seven key findings. First, there is strong and consistent evidence for airborne transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other respiratory pathogens. Second, masks are, if correctly and consistently worn, effective in reducing transmission of respiratory diseases and show a dose-response effect. Third, respirators are significantly more effective than medical or cloth masks. Fourth, mask mandates are, overall, effective in reducing community transmission of respiratory pathogens. Fifth, masks are important sociocultural symbols; non-adherence to masking is sometimes linked to political and ideological beliefs and to widely circulated mis- or disinformation. Sixth, while there is much evidence that masks are not generally harmful to the general population, masking may be relatively contraindicated in individuals with certain medical conditions, who may require exemption. Furthermore, certain groups (notably D/deaf people) are disadvantaged when others are masked. Finally, there are risks to the environment from single-use masks and respirators. We propose an agenda for future research, including improved characterization of the situations in which masking should be recommended or mandated; attention to comfort and acceptability; generalized and disability-focused communication support in settings where masks are worn; and development and testing of novel materials and designs for improved filtration, breathability, and environmental impact.

SUMMARYGiven the importance of gut microbial homeostasis in maintaining health, there has been considerable interest in developing innovative therapeutic strategies for restoring gut microbiota. One such approach, fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), is the main "whole gut microbiome replacement" strategy and has been integrated into clinical practice guidelines for treating recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection (rCDI). Furthermore, the potential application of FMT in other indications such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), metabolic syndrome, and solid tumor malignancies is an area of intense interest and active research. However, the complex and variable nature of FMT makes it challenging to address its precise functionality and to assess clinical efficacy and safety in different disease contexts. In this review, we outline clinical applications, efficacy, durability, and safety of FMT and provide a comprehensive assessment of its procedural and administration aspects. The clinical applications of FMT in children and cancer immunotherapy are also described. We focus on data from human studies in IBD in contrast with rCDI to delineate the putative mechanisms of this treatment in IBD as a model, including colonization resistance and functional restoration through bacterial engraftment, modulating effects of virome/phageome, gut metabolome and host interactions, and immunoregulatory actions of FMT. Furthermore, we comprehensively review omics technologies, metagenomic approaches, and bioinformatics pipelines to characterize complex microbial communities and discuss their limitations. FMT regulatory challenges, ethical considerations, and pharmacomicrobiomics are also highlighted to shed light on future development of tailored microbiome-based therapeutics.

SUMMARYEnterococci are a diverse group of Gram-positive bacteria that are typically found as commensals in humans, animals, and the environment. Occasionally, they may cause clinically relevant diseases such as endocarditis, septicemia, urinary tract infections, and wound infections. The majority of clinical infections in humans are caused by two species: Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis. However, there is an increasing number of clinical infections caused by non-faecium non-faecalis (NFF) enterococci. Although NFF enterococcal species are often overlooked, studies have shown that they may harbor antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes and virulence factors that are found in E. faecium and E. faecalis. In this review, we present an overview of the NFF enterococci with a particular focus on human clinical manifestations, epidemiology, virulence genes, and AMR genes.

SUMMARYImplant-associated infections (IAIs) pose serious threats to patients and can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. These infections may be difficult to diagnose due, in part, to biofilm formation on device surfaces, and because even when microbes are found, their clinical significance may be unclear. Despite recent advances in laboratory testing, IAIs remain a diagnostic challenge. From a therapeutic standpoint, many IAIs currently require device removal and prolonged courses of antimicrobial therapy to effect a cure. Therefore, making an accurate diagnosis, defining both the presence of infection and the involved microorganisms, is paramount. The sensitivity of standard microbial culture for IAI diagnosis varies depending on the type of IAI, the specimen analyzed, and the culture technique(s) used. Although IAI-specific culture-based diagnostics have been described, the challenge of culture-negative IAIs remains. Given this, molecular assays, including both nucleic acid amplification tests and next-generation sequencing-based assays, have been used. In this review, an overview of these challenging infections is presented, as well as an approach to their diagnosis from a microbiologic perspective.