Revista Espanola De Quimioterapia最新文献

Objective: Microscopic examination of the intestinal parasites, from the patient's concentrated feces, has a lower sensitivity when compared to molecular diagnostic techniques. Therefore, the objective of this study has been to compare both techniques, as well as to evaluate whether there is a correlation between the microscopic examination and the threshold cycles (Ct) obtained for Blastocystis hominis.

Methods: Retrospective study of the samples received in the Microbiology laboratory during September 2021. The MiniParasep SF® concentration test was performed for microscopic visualization and then PCR was performed with the Seegene AllplexTM Parasite Assay panel.

Results: A 27% (n=74) of the samples were positive by molecular diagnosis, with a total of 87 parasites detected. 53% (n=39) were women with a mean age of 47 ± 24 years. In 76% (n=56) of the cases the service of origin was Primary Care. The most frequently found parasite was B. hominis, 85% (n=64), followed by Dientamoeba fragilis 20% (n=15) and Giardia lamblia 11% (n=8). Co-infection by two parasites was detected in 13 cases (B. hominis + D. fragilis in 6 cases, and B. hominis + G. lamblia in 7 cases). In the microscopic diagnosis, 9.5% (n=26) positivity was obtained. The most frequently found parasite was B. hominis, 84% (n=23), followed by G. lamblia, which was seen in three cases by microscopy. D. fragilis was not seen in any case. Coinfection of B. hominis + G. lamblia was observed in one sample.

Conclusions: Techniques for molecular diagnosis of intestinal parasites are fast, reliable and more sensitive than microscopic techniques, improving microbiological diagnosis and quality of care.

Objective: Extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB) has raised a great threat to human health globally, especially in developing countries. The objective of the present study is to collate and contrast the proportions of treatment outcome in the previously published XDR-TB articles.

Methods: By considering inclusion criteria and search engines, a total of 22 articles were enrolled.

Results: Our findings revealed that the overall favorable treatment outcome was 24.04%. From the cohort of enrolled studies 19.76% (397) and 43.35% (871) patients were cured and died respectively. In 90.9% of enrolled articles, the investigators performed drug-susceptibility testing at the baseline. The overall treatment outcome was improved by the use of new drugs (linezolid, bedaquiline, ciprofloxacin, clofazimine) in the treatment regimen of XDR-TB showing linezolid and bedaquiline better results i.e. 59.44 and 78.88%, respectively. Moreover, use of antiretroviral treatment in XDR-TB patients with HIV infection have not shown any significant difference in the treatment outcome.

Conclusions: XDR-TB treatment success can be achieved by implying standardized definitions, upgraded diagnostic procedures, and novel drugs.

We do not know the precise figure for solid organ tumors diagnosed each year in Spain and it is therefore difficult to calculate whether there has been a decrease in cancer diagnoses as a consequence of the pandemic. Some indirect data suggest that the pandemic has worsened the stage at which some non-hematological neoplasms are diagnosed. Despite the lack of robust evidence, oncology patients seem more likely to have a poor outcome when they contract COVID-19. The antibody response to infection in cancer patients will be fundamentally conditioned by the type of neoplasia present, the treatment received and the time of its administration. In patients with hematological malignancies, the incidence of infection is probably similar or lower than in the general population, due to the better protective measures adopted by the patients and their environment. The severity and mortality of COVID-19 in patients with hematologic malignancies is clearly higher than the general population. Since the immune response to vaccination in hematologic patients is generally worse than in comparable populations, alternative methods of prevention must be established in these patients, as well as actions for earlier diagnosis and treatment. Campaigns for the early diagnosis of malignant neoplasms must be urgently resumed, post-COVID manifestations should be monitored, collaboration with patient associations is indisputable and it is urgent to draw the right conclusions to improve our preparedness to fight against possible future catastrophes.

Objective: This study aimed to identify the common barriers leading to delayed initial management, microbiological diagnosis, and appropriate empirical antimicrobial treatment in sepsis.

Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed by the application of a population-based survey. Four different surveys were designed, targeting the healthcare personnel located in main hospital areas [emergency department (SEMES); infectious diseases and clinical microbiology-microbiological diagnosis (SEIMC-M); intensive care and infectious diseases, (SEMICYUC-GTEIS); and infectious diseases and clinical microbiology-clinical diagnosis, (SEIMC-C)].

Results: A total of 700 valid surveys were collected from June to November 2019: 380 (54.3%) of SEMES, 127 (18.1%) of SEIMC-M, 97 (13.9%) de SEMICYUC-GTEIS and 96 (13.7%) of SEIMC-C, in 270 hospitals of all levels of care. The qSOFA score was used as a screening tool. The most used biomarker was procalcitonin (n=92, 39.8%). The sepsis code was implemented in 157 of 235 participating centers (66.2%), particularly in tertiary level hospitals. The mean frequency of contaminated blood cultures was 8.9% (8.7). In 85 (78.7%) centers, positive results of blood cultures were available within the first 72 hours and were communicated to the treating physician effectively by phone or e-mail in 76 (81.7%) cases. The main reason for escalating treatment was clinical deterioration, and the reason for de-escalating antimicrobials was significantly different between the specialties. Quality indicators were not frequently monitored among the different participating centers.

Conclusions: There are significant barriers that hinder adequate management processes in sepsis in Spanish hospitals.

Objective: Recent research suggests that the use of antibiotics could reduce the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors, in addition to other well-known factors. It could be due to gut microbiota modification, which impact over the immune system response. However, the information available so far is contradictory. The objective of this research was to clarify whether antibiotic use influences efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors treatments in non-small cell lung cancer patients in clinical practice.

Methods: Therefore, a retrospective observational study was designed. Use of antibiotics among patients treated with atezolizumab, pembrolizumab or nivolumab was assessed within 2 months of checkpoint inhibitors treatments initiation.

Results: A total of 140 patients were included, mostly men, with good performance status (ECOG 0-1), all of them previously treated with chemotherapy. An antibiotic prescription was identified in 31% of these patients, mainly fluoroquinolones or beta-lactams. The most frequent indication was respiratory infection. Both progression-free survival and overall survival were lower for patients treated with anti-infective drugs, although this difference was not statistically significant.

Conclusions: More studies are needed to draw conclusions about the impact of antibiotics on the efficacy of immunotherapy.