Clinical Microbiology and Infection最新文献

Scope: Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a significant global health issue, impacting both low- and middle-income countries and industrialized nations. HEV genotypes 1 and 2, primarily transmitted through contaminated water, are endemic in low- and middle-income countries, whereas genotypes 3 and 4 are zoonotically transmitted in industrialized regions. Acute HEV infection poses severe risks, particularly to pregnant women and immunocompromised individuals, whereas chronic HEV infection leads to serious complications in those with pre-existing liver disease and transplant recipients. The development of an HEV vaccine offers new prevention opportunities, though its availability and integration into global immunization programmes remain limited.

Methods: This position paper was developed by the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Viral Hepatitis Study Group through an extensive review of clinical data, safety profiles, efficacy, and immunogenicity of HEV vaccines. The study group focused particularly on high-risk and special populations, synthesizing global health insights and incorporating recommendations from the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts to formulate strategies for wider HEV vaccination use.

Questions addressed in the position paper: The position paper evaluates the efficacy and safety of HEV vaccines in both general and special populations. It identifies key barriers to the integration of HEV vaccines into routine immunization programmes, including infrastructure limitations, costs, and vaccine accessibility. The paper also proposes strategies to overcome these challenges and improve vaccine distribution. Furthermore, it addresses ways to enhance public awareness and international cooperation to promote HEV vaccination efforts globally.

Implications: European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Viral Hepatitis Study Group recommends HEV vaccination for high-risk groups, including women of childbearing age, patients with chronic liver diseases, and immunosuppressed individuals. Prioritizing investments in vaccine logistics, integrating diagnostics, and educational outreach can enhance uptake.

Objectives: The 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) has been introduced in Israel. Its public health benefit depends on its effect on mortality caused by PCV20 serotypes not present in 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) (PCV20non13). We aimed to describe invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) characteristics and case-fatality rate (CFR) among adults by serotypes.

Methods: We analysed data from the Israeli nationwide surveillance database of IPD in adults, 2009-2018. The primary outcome was in-hospital CFR within 30 days, focusing on specific serotypes. Adjusted ORs (aORs) for association between PCV20non13 serotypes and mortality were calculated using logistic regression.

Results: Overall, 3864 IPD episodes were reported, 3733 (96.6%) with known serotype, 54% (1705/3123) were in men; 54% (1997/3733) were aged ≥65 years. PCV13-IPD cases constituted 40% of all IPD and decreased during the study years. PCV20non13 and nonPCV20 serotypes constituted 26% and 34% of cases, respectively, and increased over time. The most frequent non-PCV13 serotypes detected were PCV20non13 serotypes 8 (8%), 12F (7.2%), 22F (3%), and nonPCV20 serotype 16F (5%). In-hospital CFR was 22% (698/3140). CFR for PCV13 serotype was 21.1% (265/1255); for PCV20non13, it was 16.2% (124/766); and for nonPCV20, it was 28.5% (289/1014). Among PCV20non13 serotypes compared with PCV13 serotypes, 11A was associated with higher CFR (41%, aOR 3.1, 95% CI: 1.64-5.83), whereas serotype 8 was associated with lower CFR (8%, aOR: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.3-0.8).

Discussion: PCV20non13 serotypes constituted 26% of all adult IPD in the post-PCV13 era. CFR from PCV20non13 serotype IPD was comparable with that from PCV13 serotypes. These data support the potential added benefit of PCV20 in reducing mortality from IPD, though mortality remains substantial from nonPCV20 serotypes. Future IPD-related mortality will depend on the evolution of serotype distribution over time.

Objectives: Patients' perspectives on outcomes of clinical trials are critical to the design of meaningful trials. As they are the primary recipients of treatment, it is important to focus on outcomes that are of value to the patients. We planned a study involving patients in defining and prioritizing endpoints for intervention trials for bloodstream infections.

Methods: A survey was conducted at Rambam Health Care Campus, targeting hospitalized patients over 18 years old. Participants were asked to score the importance of various outcomes on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being most important. We calculated the mean and median and dispersion measures per outcome.

Results: Seven hundred thirty-two randomly selected patients were approached; 378 were not available due to technical reasons. Of the remaining 354 approached to take the survey, 300 consented and participated in the study. The median age was 51.9 years, with 55.3% female. Death was scored as the most important outcome, whereas the length of hospital stay was the least important.

Discussion: Eliciting patient views on outcome importance was challenging but revealed key insights. Patients prioritized death, functional decline, and the development of secondary infections. Nonclinical outcomes, such as microbiological failure, were less clearly understood. Future studies should focus on clinical outcomes and include larger, more diverse patient populations to enhance the relevance of bloodstream infection trials.

Background: Maintaining access to a broad range of old and new antibiotics is increasingly difficult due to supply, market, and demand issues. Next to immediate negative consequences for individual patients and healthcare systems, antibiotic unavailability can accelerate resistance development due to unmotivated use of suboptimal broad-spectrum antibiotics.

Objectives: Although academics and policymakers agree that lack of access to antibiotics is a major public challenge, there are widely different situations of lack of access that are not always clearly identified. Therefore, this paper aims to clarify potential confusion by delving into four different types of lack of access, their specific causes, consequences, and potential solutions.

Sources: The paper builds on a narrative review of academic and policy literature about lack of access to antibiotics and potential solutions to address it.

Content: We discuss causes as well as economic and clinical consequences of four different types of antibiotic unavailability: short-term shortages, long-term shortages, deregistrations, and lack of registration. The discussion is supported by examples from Norway, Romania, and Ethiopia, three countries characterized by clearly different market sizes and ability to pay. Common causes for all types of lack access include unattractive markets, dependence on few suppliers and insufficient communication, whereas other causes are specific to one type (e.g. insufficient inventories cause short-term shortages or regulatory complexity hinders registration). Longer lack of access entails more serious clinical consequences and higher risk of resistance development, but may not correspondingly increase costs in the long-term if alternatives are identified.

Implications: It is essential to understand the type of unavailability at hand because no single solution can address all types. For instance, stockpiling addresses short-term shortages, but not long-term ones or deregistrations. However, supply chain transparency and pooled procurement are remedies that support other solutions and can cope with several types of lack of access.