Back to Authors

Larimore, Kelly

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5590-622X

Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic in Florida

Citations 3

Understanding Daptomycin Resistance Mechanisms and Treatment Challenges in Enterococcus faecium Infection: A Case Series
Nair-Collins, Sangeeta, Godart, Gabriel A. , Patel, Nipakumari , Yadav, Vidit , Larimore, Kelly , Chitale, Rohit , Durvasula, R, Oring, Justin , Godart, Gabriel , LeGout, Jordan D. , Oring, Justin

Antibiotics | February 26, 2026 | Volume: 15 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 243

10.3390/antibiotics15030243 Get It

Daptomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (DRE) poses an increasing therapeutic challenge, particularly in immunocompromised patients and solid organ transplant recipients. Surveillance data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicate that approximately 6.5% of E. faecium isolates are daptomycin-resistant, underscoring the need for heightened clinical vigilance, particularly for prompt identification and treatment. In this case series, three patients with advanced liver disease, including two status post orthotopic liver transplantation, are described who developed DRE during treatment for bloodstream infection. These cases illustrate the dynamic nature of antimicrobial susceptibility under daptomycin exposure and highlight the contributions of persistent source control issues, intravascular infection, and altered host factors to treatment failure. All patients were successfully managed by escalating to combination therapy with high-dose daptomycin and ceftaroline, alongside appropriate source control. This series emphasizes the importance of periodic susceptibility reassessment during daptomycin therapy and cautions clinicians against assuming sustained susceptibility in patients with prolonged bacteremia or complex infections. Early recognition of evolving resistance and timely therapeutic adjustment may improve outcomes in this high-risk population.
Candida krusei Empyema: A Lung Transplant Case and Systematic Review of the Literature
Karatela, Shifa , Nair-Collins, Sangeeta, Godart, Gabriel , Peacock, M. A., Larimore, Kelly , Cuthbert, Kristin, Munipalli, Bala , Chitale, Rohit , Durvasula, Ravi, Oring, Justin , Peacock, Mary Ann, Godart, Gabriel A. , Karatela, Shifa , Oring, Justin , Peacock, Mary Ann

Journal of Fungi | October 15, 2025 | Volume: 11 | Issue: 10 | Pages: 735

10.3390/jof11100735 Get It

Candida krusei empyema is a rare but serious manifestation of invasive candidiasis, characterized by intrinsic resistance to fluconazole, biofilm formation, and high mortality, with limited case-level data to inform management. This review aims to systematically identify and synthesize all reported English-language cases of Candida krusei empyema from January 2005 to June 2025 using PubMed, ScienceDirect, OVID MEDLINE, and Gale OneFile and perform descriptive analysis on them. Screening, data extraction, and eligibility assessment were performed, and those articles not clearly meeting eligibility criteria were reviewed by additional reviewers with consensus resolution. Seven publications (six individual cases and two cohorts) were included. We additionally describe the clinical course, management, and outcome of a 70-year-old bilateral lung transplant patient who developed persistent C. krusei empyema despite optimized antifungal therapy. Patients ranged from 11 to 74 years of age (median 62.5 years). Predisposing factors included esophageal perforation (n = 4), post-transplant hemorrhage (n = 1), community-acquired empyema (n = 1), and thoracic surgery (n = 1). Empiric fluconazole was switched to caspofungin (3/4), with others receiving amphotericin B, voriconazole, or combination therapy. Source control varied: chest tube drainage (n = 3), percutaneous catheter (n = 3), and surgical decortication (n = 2). Mortality was 14.3% (1/7). In the absence of clear guidelines and robust literature, the management approach remains heterogeneous. Optimal care requires early recognition, aggressive multimodal antifungal therapy, and effective source control tailored to patient risk. Standardized antifungal protocols and larger case series are needed to guide clinicians in managing this challenging infection.
Establishing best practices in measles, mumps, and rubella serologic screening for kidney transplant candidates
Ramakrishna, Jahanavi M. , Brumble, Lisa , Larimore, Kelly , Wadei, Hani M. , Libertin, Claudia R. , Larimore, Kelly L, Jarmi, Tambi , Libertin, Claudia , Wadei, Hani M

Transplant Infectious Disease | November 28, 2020 | Volume: 23 | Issue: 3 | Pages: No page available

10.1111/tid.13529 Get It

AbstractOptimizing immunity against vaccine‐preventable diseases improves outcomes in kidney transplant (KT) patients (Arora et al,World J Transplant, 2019, 9:1; Sester et al,Transplant Rev, 2008, 22:274; Fishman,N Engl J Med, 2007, 357:2601). The American Society for Transplantation (AST) Clinical Practice Guidelines advises that serologic screening for measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) be conducted for all KT candidates, since live‐attenuated vaccines are contraindicated post‐transplantation (Malinis et al,Clin Transplant, 2019, 33:e13548). Our team at Mayo Clinic Florida (MCF) conducted a quality improvement (QI) initiative to establish a best MMR screening and immunizations clinical practice in KT candidates using a Plan‐Do‐Study‐Act (PDSA) model. By retrospective chart review of all KT candidates evaluated at our institution from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2017, baseline data determining the rate of MMR serologic screening was established. PDSA cycles were implemented to adopt protocol‐driven testing for MMR serologies, immunization documentation, and vaccination in cases of seronegativity to any of the three MMR viruses in all pre‐KT candidates. Two PDSA cycles were completed in 4 months. The study population totaled 447 patients (baseline n = 283, PDSA 1 n = 61, PDSA 2 n = 103). Baseline data showed that 83% (n = 235) of pre‐KT candidates received infectious disease consultation (IDC). Complete MMR (all three viruses) serological screening in KT candidates improved from baseline 3.9%‐87.4% post‐PDSA cycle 2 (P < .001). Necessary immunizations per AST guidelines were ordered in only 41.1% (n = 23) of the control cohort vs 100% (n = 12) and 96.9% (n = 31) of PDSA cycles 1 and 2, respectively (P < .001). The data reflect significant practice improvements in MMR screening and immunization rates among KT candidates by using protocol‐driven orders combined with our pre‐existing IDCs.