Background In this study we evaluated the incidence of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis among intubated patients with critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and evaluated different case definitions of invasive aspergillosis. Methods Prospective, multicentre study on adult patients with microbiologically confirmed COVID-19 receiving mechanical ventilation. All included participants underwent screening protocol for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis with bronchoalveolar lavage galactomannan and cultures performed on admission at 7 days and in case of clinical deterioration. Cases were classified as coronavirus associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) according to previous consensus definitions. The new definition was compared with putative invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (PIPA). Results A total of 108 patients were enrolled. Probable CAPA was diagnosed in 30 (27.7%) of patients after a median of 4 (2-8) days from intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Kaplan-Meier curves showed a significant higher 30-day mortality rate from ICU admission among patients with either CAPA (44% vs 19%, p= 0.002) or PIPA (74% vs 26%, p<0.001) when compared with patients not fulfilling criteria for aspergillosis. The association between CAPA [OR 3.53 (95%CI 1.29-9.67), P=0.014] or PIPA [OR 11.60 (95%CI 3.24-41.29) p<0.001] with 30-day mortality from ICU admission was confirmed even after adjustment for confounders with a logistic regression model. Among patients with CAPA receiving voriconazole treatment (13 patients, 43%) A trend toward lower mortality (46% vs 59% p=0.30) and reduction of galactomannan index in consecutive samples was observed. Conclusion We found a high incidence of CAPA among critically ill COVID-19 patients and that its occurrence seems to change the natural history of disease

Maintenance over time of C(min) between 2 and 7 mg/L and/or of AUC₂₄ between 160 and 300 mg/L · h may be helpful in improving safety outcomes while retaining appropriate efficacy in adult patients receiving prolonged linezolid treatment.

The objective of the present retrospective observational study carried out in patients receiving a standard dosage of linezolid and undergoing routine therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) was to assess the interindividual variability in plasma exposure, to identify the prevalence of attainment of optimal pharmacodynamics, and to define if an intensive program of TDM may be warranted in some categories of patients.

Objectives We aimed to develop and validate a risk score to predict severe respiratory failure (SRF) among patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Methods We performed a multicentre cohort study among hospitalized (>24 hours) patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from 22 February to 3 April 2020, at 11 Italian hospitals. Patients were divided into derivation and validation cohorts according to random sorting of hospitals. SRF was assessed from admission to hospital discharge and was defined as: Sp o 2 <93% with 100% Fi o 2 , respiratory rate >30 breaths/min or respiratory distress. Multivariable logistic regression models were built to identify predictors of SRF, β-coefficients were used to develop a risk score. Trial Registration NCT04316949 . Results We analysed 1113 patients (644 derivation, 469 validation cohort). Mean (±SD) age was 65.7 (±15) years, 704 (63.3%) were male. SRF occurred in 189/644 (29%) and 187/469 (40%) patients in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. At multivariate analysis, risk factors for SRF in the derivation cohort assessed at hospitalization were age ≥70 years (OR 2.74; 95% CI 1.66–4.50), obesity (OR 4.62; 95% CI 2.78–7.70), body temperature ≥38°C (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.30–2.29), respiratory rate ≥22 breaths/min (OR 3.75; 95% CI 2.01–7.01), lymphocytes ≤900 cells/mm 3 (OR 2.69; 95% CI 1.60–4.51), creatinine ≥1 mg/dL (OR 2.38; 95% CI 1.59–3.56), C-reactive protein ≥10 mg/dL (OR 5.91; 95% CI 4.88–7.17) and lactate dehydrogenase ≥350 IU/L (OR 2.39; 95% CI 1.11–5.11). Assigning points to each variable, an individual risk score (PREDI-CO score) was obtained. Area under the receiver-operator curve was 0.89 (0.86–0.92). At a score of >3, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were 71.6% (65%–79%), 89.1% (86%–92%), 74% (67%–80%) and 89% (85%–91%), respectively. PREDI-CO score showed similar prognostic ability in the validation cohort: area under the receiver-operator curve 0.85 (0.81–0.88). At a score of >3, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were 80% (73%–85%), 76% (70%–81%), 69% (60%–74%) and 85% (80%–89%), respectively. Conclusion PREDI-CO score can be useful to allocate resources and prioritize treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Delta-SUVmax provided a higher sensitivity and specificity for identifying responders. SUV2 provided comparable sensitivity, but significantly lower specificity. CRP level performed less well for identifying responders. There was no significant difference in the global performance of the two tests (delta-SUVmax AUC and delta-CRP AUC). However, the higher sensitivity of delta-SUVmax for the early identification of responders may have an important clinical impact in guiding antibiotic therapy especially in patients with a noninformative CRP test at diagnosis.