ObjectivesTo analyse the effectiveness of dalbavancin (DBV) in clinical practice as consolidation therapy in patients with bloodstream infection (BSI) and/or infective endocarditis (IE) produced by gram-positive cocci (GPC), as well as its safety and pharmacoeconomic impact.MethodsA multicentre, observational and retrospective study was conducted of hospitalised patients with IE and/or BSI produced by GPC who received at least one dose of DBV. Clinical response was assessed during hospitalization, at 3 months and at 1 year.ResultsEighty-three patients with median age of 73 years were enrolled; 73.5% were male; 59.04% had BSI and 49.04% IE (44.04% prosthetic valve IE, 32.4% native IE, 23.5% pacemaker lead). The most frequently isolated microorganism was Staphylococcus aureus in BSI (49%) and coagulase-negative staphylococci in IE (44.1%). All patients with IE were clinically cured in hospital; at 12 months, there was 2.9% loss to follow-up, 8.8% mortality unrelated to IE, and 2.9% therapeutic failure rate. The percentage effectiveness of DBV to treat IE was 96.7%. The clinical cure rate for BSI was 100% during hospital stay and at 3 months; there were no recurrences or deaths during the follow-up. No patient discontinued treatment for adverse events. The saving in hospital stay was 636 days for BSI (315,424.20€) and 557 days for IE (283,187.45€).ConclusionsDBV is an effective consolidation antibiotic therapy in clinically stabilized patients with IE and/or BSI. It proved to be a cost-effective treatment, reducing the hospital stay, thanks to the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile of this drug.

NCT02159599.

Background We aimed to determine whether daptomycin plus fosfomycin provides higher treatment success than daptomycin alone for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia and endocarditis. Methods A randomized (1:1) phase III superiority, open-label, and parallel group clinical trial of adult inpatients with MRSA bacteremia was conducted at 18 Spanish hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 10 mg of daptomycin intravenously per kilogram daily plus 2 g of fosfomycin intravenously every six hours, or 10 mg of daptomycin intravenously per kilogram daily. Primary endpoint was treatment success six weeks after the end of therapy. Results Of 167 patients randomized, 155 completed the trial and were assessed for the primary endpoint. Treatment success at six weeks after the end of therapy was achieved in 40 of 74 patients who received daptomycin plus fosfomycin and in 34 of 81 patients who were given daptomycin alone (54.1% vs. 42.0%; relative risk: 1.29, 95%CI 0.93 to 1.8, p=0.135). At six weeks, daptomycin plus fosfomycin was associated with lower microbiologic failure (0 vs. 9 patients, p=0.003) and lower complicated bacteremia (16.2% vs. 32.1%; p=0.022). Adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation occurred in 13 of 74 patients (17.6%) receiving daptomycin plus fosfomycin, and in four of 81 patients (4.9%) receiving daptomycin alone (p=0.018). Conclusion Daptomycin plus fosfomycin provided 12% higher rate of treatment success than daptomycin alone, but this difference did not reach statistical significance. This antibiotic combination prevented microbiological failure and complicated bacteremia, but it was more often associated with adverse events.

Anal squamous cell carcinoma is the most frequent virus-related non-AIDS-defining neoplasia among HIV-infected individuals, especially MSM. The objectives of this study were to analyze the effectiveness of the quadrivalent HPV (qHPV) vaccine to prevent anal ≥ high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (≥HSILs), external ano-genital lesions (EAGLs), and infection by qHPV vaccine genotypes in HIV+ MSM, and to study the immunogenicity of the vaccine and risk factors for ≥ HSILs. This study is nested within a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the qHPV vaccine, which enrolled participants between May 2012 and May 2014, with a 48-month follow-up. A vaccine or placebo was administered at 0, 2, and 6 months, and vaccine antibody titers were evaluated at 7, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months. Data were gathered at 12, 24, 36, and 48 months on sexual habits, CD4/CD8 cell/counts, HIV viral load, and the results of cytology (Thin Prep® Pap Test), HPV PCR genotyping (Linear Array HPV Genotyping Test), and high-resolution anoscopy (Zeiss 150 fc© colposcope). The study included 129 patients (mean age of 38.8 years, 40 [31%] with a history of AIDS, 119 [92.2%] receiving ART, and 4 [3.3%] with virological failure), 66 (51.2%) in vaccine arm and 63 (48.4%) in placebo arm. The vaccine and placebo groups did not differ in ≥ HSILs (14.1 vs. 13.1%, respectively, p = 0.98) or EAGL (11.1 vs. 6.8%, p = 0.4) rates during follow-up; however, a protective effect against HPV 6 was observed during the first year of follow-up in the vaccine versus placebo group (7.5% vs. 23.4%; p = 0.047). A between-arm difference (p = 0.0001) in antibodies against qHPV vaccine genotypes was observed at 7 months (76.9% in vaccine arm vs. 30.2% in placebo arm), 12 months (68.1% vs. 26.5%), 24 months (75% vs. 32.5%), 36 months (90% vs. 24.4%), and 48 months (87.2% vs. 30%). Finally, the factor associated with the risk of anal ≥ HSIL onset during the four-year follow-up was the receipt of the last dose of the vaccine less than 6 months earlier in comparison to those vaccinated for a longer period (82.4% vs. 17.6% (OR 0.869 [95% CI, 0.825–0.917]). Vaccine and placebo arms did not significantly differ in ≥ HSIL or EAGL rates or in protection against infection by HPV genotype vaccine except for HPV6 at 12 months after the first dose. A long-lasting immune response was observed in almost all the vaccinated men. The main protective factor against ≥ HSIL was to have completed the vaccination regimen more than 6 months earlier.

Severe infection and its evolution to sepsis are becoming more prevalent every day and are among the leading causes of critical illness and mortality. Proper management is crucial to improve prognosis. This document addresses three essential points that have a significant impact on this objective: a) early recognition of patients with sepsis criteria, b) identification of those patients who suffer from an infection and have a high risk of progressing to sepsis, and c) adequate selection and optimization of the initial antimicrobial treatment.