Banerjee, Ritu

Importance Novel blood culture diagnostics provide rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) results for bacteria causing bloodstream infections (BSIs) but have unclear clinical impact. Objective To evaluate clinical outcomes of blood culture testing using a rapid AST method compared with standard AST in patients with BSIs caused by gram-negative bacilli in regions with high prevalence of antimicrobial resistance. Design, Setting, and Participants Open-label randomized clinical trial that enrolled participants from December 2023 to May 2025 (final follow-up, June 18, 2025) at 7 medical centers in Greece (n = 2), India (n = 1), Israel (n = 3), and Spain (n = 1). Hospitalized patients (adults and children) with BSIs caused by gram-negative bacilli were eligible. Statistical analysis was conducted from August 2025 to January 2026. Intervention Patients were randomized to undergo blood culture evaluation using rapid, phenotypic AST directly from positive blood cultures plus standard susceptibility testing (n = 413) vs standard susceptibility testing alone (n = 437). Local antimicrobial stewardship teams reviewed all patients and provided treatment recommendations. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was a desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) at day 30, with 3 categories (alive without deleterious events, alive with deleterious events, and death). The difference between rapid and standard testing was summarized as the probability that the DOOR outcomes were more desirable in the rapid testing group. Superiority was concluded if the lower limit of the 95% CI exceeded 50%. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, length of hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, acquisition of hospital-acquired infections, time to effective antibiotic therapy within 3 days, and time to antibiotic escalation or deescalation within 3 days. Results Of the 899 patients randomized, 850 were included in the primary outcome analysis (median [IQR] age, 72 [21] years; 43% female). The probability that DOOR outcomes were more favorable in the rapid testing group was 48.8% (95% CI, 45.3%-52.4%). Median time to effective antibiotic therapy was not different between the groups in the as-randomized population. Median time to antibiotic escalation or deescalation was faster in the rapid testing group by 14 hours (95% CI, 6-22) in the as-randomized population. There were no differences between the groups in other secondary outcomes. In the prespecified subgroup with carbapenem-resistant infections, median time to effective therapy was 9.5 hours in the rapid testing group vs 28 hours in the standard testing group (difference, −18 hours [95% CI, −42 to 6]). Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with gram-negative bacilli BSIs, rapid blood culture AST was not superior to standard testing by DOOR. When considered with other efficacy and safety outcomes, these findings may help inform the use of rapid susceptibility testing in clinical practice. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06174649

Abstract Background Ceftriaxone-resistant Escherichia coli infections are increasingly common, partially because of the emergence of E. coli sequence type 131 (ST131), including its subclade C2/H30Rx, which produce extended-spectrum β-lactamases. Methods A prospective cohort including 14 US sites, which enrolled monomicrobial ceftriaxone-resistant and susceptible E. coli bloodstream infection (BSI) cases in a 1:1 ratio, was used to compare ST131 versus non-ST131 E. coli BSI, with specific attention to E. coli ST131 C2/H30Rx. Desirability of outcome ranking was determined at 30 days after infection onset. Results This analysis included 282 patients with E. coli BSI; 43% (121/282) were E. coli ST131 and 23% (66/282) belonged to the C2/H30Rx subclade. Resistance to ceftriaxone was present in 79% (96/121) ST131, 86% (57/66) E. coli ST131 C2/H30Rx, and 27% (43/161) E. coli non-ST131. Compared to patients with non-ST131 E. coli BSI, patients with ST131 BSI were older (median 70 years, [Q1 62, Q3 76] years vs 65 years, [51, 74]; P = .005) and more often admitted from long-term care facilities (21/121 [17%] vs 7/161 [4%], P < .001). Overall and empiric carbapenem use was more frequent in the treatment of patients with ST131 BSI compared with non-ST131 BSI (overall 89/121 [74%] vs 50/161 [31%]; empiric: 58/121 [48%] vs 31/161 [19%], P < .001). Desirability of outcome ranking outcomes were similar between groups. Conclusions Most ceftriaxone-resistant E. coli from US patients with E. coli BSI belong to ST131, particularly E. coli ST131 C2/H30Rx, serving as an important driver of carbapenem use.

Abstract Background Intestinal colonization with carbapenem-resistant organisms (CRO) may be considered to inform empiric antibiotic selection for symptomatic infection. However, it is unclear how often gut colonizing CRE isolates are related to bloodstream isolates in hospitalized patients with bacteremia, especially in areas with high CRO prevalence. Minimum spanning tree of isolate relatedness Isolates and corresponding patient number (P1-P6) and rectal (R) or blood (B) specimen are noted within circles and allelic differences are numerated on linking lines between the circles. Group 1 and 3 isolates are possibly related to each other. Created with BioRender.com. Methods Patients with paired K. pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing K. pneumoniae isolates cultured from surveillance rectal specimens and clinically collected blood specimens collected within 1-8 days of each other between 2019-2023 were identified at 3 Greek hospitals. Isolates were frozen and shipped to a reference laboratory in the U.S for whole genome sequencing (WGS) using Illumina MiSeq. Assembly and core genome multilocus sequence typing (cgMLST) analysis were performed with Ridom SeqSphere+ software. Isolate relatedness was based on the total number of allelic differences between each isolate: < 15, related; 16-50, possibly related; ≥ 51, unrelated. Results One hundred eight paired isolates were identified from 54 unique patients; 6 pairs and 12 total isolates underwent cgMLST. In 5 of 6 pairs (83%), the rectal isolate was collected prior to the bloodstream isolate. Rectal and bloodstream isolates were related to one another in 5 of 6 (83%) pairs and were unrelated in 1 pair. Two pairs collected from 2 distinct patients admitted to the same intensive care unit (patients 2 and 3, Figure) were possibly related (16-50 allelic differences) to each other. Conclusion In this pilot evaluation conducted in a setting of high CRO prevalence, KPC-producing K. pneumoniae isolated from paired rectal and blood specimens from individual patients were often related to each other, suggesting that intestinal colonization by this organism could inform empiric antibiotic treatment for bacteremia. Two patients from the same hospital unit had isolates that were possibly related, suggesting within hospital transmission. WGS is a powerful tool that can inform clinical and infection control practices. WGS of the remaining K. pneumoniae pairs and additional Acinetobacter baumannii pairs is ongoing. Disclosures Robin Patel, MD, I already disclosed so please pull from disclosure for other abstracts: Advisor/Consultant|I already disclosed so please pull from disclosure for other abstracts: Grant/Research Support|I already disclosed so please pull from disclosure for other abstracts: Honoraria

Abstract Background Morbidity from bacteremia may be exacerbated by inadequate initial antibiotic therapy. This concern however may lead to hesitance to de-escalate while awaiting pathogen identification and susceptibility results. We performed a randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of a strategy for rapid pathogen and resistance detection directly from positive blood culture bottles (BCBs) using a rapid multiplex PCR (rmPCR) complemented with a rapid phenotypic screen (RPS) for extended-spectrum beta-lactamases and carbapenemases in a setting with moderate to high levels of antimicrobial resistance where routine direct-from-BCB disk diffusion susceptibility testing was in place Methods Patients with positive BCBs were randomized to 2 arms: 1) Standard BCB processing (including direct from BCB disk diffusion susceptibility testing - control, n=419) with antimicrobial stewardship (AS); or 2) rmPCR/RPS with AS (rmPCR/RPS, n=425). The primary outcome was time from positive blood culture result to prescription of an effective or optimal antibiotic regimen. An effective antibiotic regimen was defined as one active against the detected pathogen(s); an optimal antibiotic regimen was defined as an effective regimen which was also the most narrow spectrum and targeted one, as recommended by institutional guidelines. Mortality was analyzed as a secondary outcome. Results True bacteremia was identified in 658 patients (n=329 in both arms); 597 were monomicrobial (405 with aerobic or facultative anaerobic Gram negatives rods [AGNR]) and 61 polymicrobial (41 harboring AGNR). Time from BCB Gram stain to prescription of an effective antibiotic was 9.9 versus 3.2 hours in the control and rmPCR/RPS groups, respectively (p=0.58) and time from Gram stain to prescription of an optimal antibiotic regimen was 41.6 versus 29.4 hours in the two groups, respectively (p < 0.001). 14-day mortality was 7.6% versus 4.3% (p = 0.069) and 30-day mortality was 11.2% versus 8.8% (p=0.30) in the two groups, respectively. Conclusion Compared to control methods which included direct-from-BCB disk diffusion susceptibility testing, an intervention comprising rmPCR/RPS with AS applied to positive blood cultures improved time to optimal therapy but not time to effective therapy or mortality. Disclosures Shawn Vasoo, MBBS, MRCP, D(ABP), D(ABIM) (Inf Dis), FRCPath, bioMerieux: In-kind, for this study|Rosco Diagnostica: In-kind, for this study Robin Patel, MD, a patent on Bordetella pertussis/parapertussis PCR issued, a patent on a device/method for sonication with royalties paid by Samsung to Mayo Clinic, a: See above|MicuRx Pharmaceuticals and BIOFIRE: Grant/Research Support|PhAST, Day Zero Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Sysmex, DEEPULL DIAGNOSTICS, S.L., Netflix, Oxford Nanopore Technologies and CARB-X: Advisor/Consultant|Up-to-Date and the Infectious Diseases Board Review Course.: Honoraria Paul Tambyah, MBBS (S'pore), Diplomate, American Board of Internal Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Moderna: Grant/Research Support|Sanofi-Pasteur: Grant/Research Support

ABSTRACT In this secondary analysis of 386 subjects with Gram-negative bacteremia enrolled in the RAPIDS GN trial, rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing had a greater benefit on the management of bacteremia caused by antibiotic-resistant compared to antibiotic-susceptible isolates, especially for Escherichia coli, Klebsiella species , and Proteus species. IMPORTANCE Rapid blood culture diagnostics are costly, and their use has not demonstrated clear clinical benefit for patients with Gram-negative sepsis, possibly because prior trials did not enroll sufficient numbers of patients with antibiotic-resistant infections. This analysis of patients with sepsis previously enrolled in a randomized controlled clinical trial demonstrates that rapid susceptibility testing of bacteria from blood cultures had the greatest impact for patients with antibiotic-resistant infections. Specifically, after rapid testing results were reported, patients infected with resistant bacteria received appropriate antibiotic therapy more quickly than patients with susceptible bacteria. These findings highlight the need to evaluate blood culture diagnostics in areas with high antibiotic resistance where these diagnostics are likely to have the greatest impact.

Abstract Background Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) are an urgent public health threat in the United States. Objective Describe the clinical and molecular epidemiology of CRE in a multicenter pediatric cohort. Methods CRACKLE-1 and CRACKLE-2 are prospective cohort studies with consecutive enrollment of hospitalized patients with CRE infection or colonization between 24 December 2011 and 31 August 2017. Patients younger than age 18 years and enrolled in the CRACKLE studies were included in this analysis. Clinical data were obtained from the electronic health record. Carbapenemase genes were detected using polymerase chain reaction and whole-genome sequencing. Results Fifty-one children were identified at 18 healthcare system study sites representing all U.S. census regions. The median age was 8 months, with 67% younger than age 2 years. Median number of days from admission to culture collection was 11. Seventy-three percent of patients had required intensive care and 41% had a history of mechanical ventilation. More than half of children had no documented comorbidities (Q1, Q3 0, 2). Sixty-seven percent previously received antibiotics during their hospitalization. The most common species isolated were Enterobacter species (41%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (27%), and Escherichia coli (20%). Carbapenemase genes were detected in 29% of isolates tested, which was lower than previously described in adults from this cohort (61%). Thirty-four patients were empirically treated on the date of culture collection, but only 6 received an antibiotic to which the CRE isolate was confirmed susceptible in vitro. Thirty-day mortality was 13.7%. Conclusions CRE infection or colonization in U.S. children was geographically widespread, predominantly affected children younger than age 2 years, associated with significant mortality, and less commonly caused by carbapenemase-producing strains than in adults.

Abstract Background The RAPIDS GN trial, a prospective randomized controlled trial, showed that rapid blood culture antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) led to faster antibiotic therapy changes compared to standard of care (SOC) testing for Gram negative bacteremia (Banerjee et al, Clin Infect Dis (2021) 73:e39-e46). A secondary analysis of the data was conducted to assess impact of rapid testing on appropriateness of antibiotic spectrum by pathogen and resistance profile. Empiric treatment (0 to 2 h post randomization) among subjects with antibiotic-susceptible isolates of monomicrobial, on-panel Gram negative species (N = 320). For this analysis subjects from both SOC and rapid testing groups were included. Black: Excluded from treatment definition if subjects received no antibiotics, antibiotics without susceptibility results reported, or only an aminoglycoside, azithromycin, penicillin, rifaximin, or atovaquone. Antibiotic treatment appropriateness for antibiotic-susceptible Escherichia coli, and Klebsiella and Proteus isolates (N= 240) by time after randomization and treatment arm. Black: Excluded from treatment definition if subjects received no antibiotics, antibiotics without susceptibility results reported, or only an aminoglycoside, azithromycin, penicillin, rifaximin, or atovaquone. AXDX, rapid susceptibility testing group. Methods Subjects enrolled in the RAPIDS GN trial who had blood cultures with monomicrobial Gram negative bacilli that were “on-panel” for the rapid test were included. Antibiotics administered from randomization (0 h) through 52 h were evaluated. Antibiotic therapy was classified based on SOC AST as: undertreatment (antibiotic to which the blood isolate was resistant), appropriate treatment (narrowest spectrum antibiotic to which the blood isolate was susceptible), and overtreatment [overly broad-spectrum antibiotic(s) based on blood isolate AST]. Antibiotic-resistant isolates were defined as 3rd generation cephalosporin non-susceptible or carbapenem-resistant isolates. Antibiotic treatment appropriateness for antibiotic-resistant (3rd generation cephalosporin non-susceptible or carbapenem-resistant) Escherichia coli, and Klebsiella and Proteus isolates (N= 50) by time after randomization and treatment arm. Black: Excluded from treatment definition if subjects received no antibiotics, antibiotics without susceptibility results reported, or only an aminoglycoside, azithromycin, penicillin, rifaximin, or atovaquone. AXDX, rapid susceptibility testing group. Results 388/448 (87%) subjects were included (197 SOC, 191 rapid). Among susceptible isolates, between 0 through 2 h post-randomization (before AST results), overtreatment was more common for Escherichia coli, and Klebsiella and Proteus species than for other species (72% vs. 41%, p ≤0.001; Fig 1). Among 290 E. coli, Klebsiella and Proteus isolates, treatment appropriateness improved with time after randomization in both SOC and rapid testing groups. The proportion with appropriate treatment was higher in the rapid testing group than the SOC group at all time points after 24 h post-randomization and differed by resistance. Overtreatment was common for susceptible isolates while undertreatment was common for resistant isolates (Fig. 2 and 3). Among resistant isolates, by 52 h post-randomization undertreatment decreased to 15% in the rapid testing group but only 35% in the SOC group (Fig 3). Conclusion In the RAPIDS GN trial, rapid AST had the greatest benefit on management of antibiotic-resistant E. coli, Klebsiella, and Proteus bacteremia. These findings can inform antibiotic stewardship and design of future blood culture diagnostic trials. Disclosures Ritu Banerjee, MD, Ph.D, bioMerieux: Grant/Research Support|bioMerieux: company is providing partial support for an ongoing trial unrelated to submitted abstract Sarah B. Doernberg, MD, MAS, Basilea: Clinical events committee/adjudication committee participation|F2G: Grant/Research Support|Genentech: Advisor/Consultant|Gilead: Grant/Research Support|Janssen/J+J: Advisor/Consultant|Pfizer: Grant/Research Support|Regeneron: Grant/Research Support|Shinogi: Clinical events committee/adjudication committee participation Robin Patel, MD, Abbott Laboratories: Advisor/Consultant|Adaptive Phage Therapeutics: Grant/Research Support|Adaptive Phage Therapeutics: Mayo Clinic has a royalty-bearing know-how agreement and equity in Adaptive Phage Therapeutics.|BIOFIRE: Grant/Research Support|CARB-X: Advisor/Consultant|ContraFect: Grant/Research Support|Day Zero Diagnostics: Advisor/Consultant|HealthTrackRx: Advisor/Consultant|Mammoth Biosciences: Advisor/Consultant|Netflix: Advisor/Consultant|Oxford Nanopore Technologies: Advisor/Consultant|PhAST: Advisor/Consultant|See details: Patent on Bordetella pertussis/parapertussis PCR issued, a patent on a device/method for sonication with royalties paid by Samsung to Mayo Clinic|See details: continued, patent on an anti-biofilm substance issued|TenNor Therapeutics Limited: Grant/Research Support|Torus Biosystems: Advisor/Consultant|Trellis Bioscience, Inc.: Advisor/Consultant

Abstract Clinical research networks conduct important studies that would not otherwise be performed by other entities. In the case of the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG), such studies include diagnostic studies using master protocols, controlled phage intervention trials, and studies that evaluate treatment strategies or dynamic interventions, such as sequences of empiric and definitive therapies. However, the value of a clinical research network lies not only in the results from these important studies but in the creation of new approaches derived from collaborative thinking, carefully examining and defining the most important research questions for clinical practice, recognizing and addressing common but suboptimal approaches, and anticipating that the standard approaches of today may be insufficient for tomorrow. This results in the development and implementation of new methodologies and tools for the design, conduct, analyses, and reporting of research studies. These new methodologies directly impact the studies conducted within the network and have a broad and long-lasting impact on the field, enhancing the scientific value and efficiency of generations of research studies. This article describes innovations from the ARLG in diagnostic studies, observational studies, and clinical trials evaluating interventions for the prevention and treatment of antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections.

AbstractIn this overview, we describe important contributions from the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG) to patient care, clinical trials design, and mentorship while outlining future priorities. The ARLG research agenda is focused on 3 key areas: gram-positive infections, gram-negative infections, and diagnostics. The ARLG has developed an innovative approach to clinical trials design, the desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR), which uses an ordinal measure of global outcome to assess both benefits and harms. DOOR was initially applied to observational studies to determine optimal dosing of vancomycin for methicillin-resistant Staphylcococcus aureus bacteremia and the efficacy of ceftazidime-avibactam versus colistin for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales infection. DOOR is being successfully applied to the analysis of interventional trials and, in collaboration with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for use in registrational trials. In the area of diagnostics, the ARLG developed Master Protocol for Evaluating Multiple Infection Diagnostics (MASTERMIND), an innovative design that allows simultaneous testing of multiple diagnostic platforms in a single study. This approach will be used to compare molecular assays for the identification of fluoroquinolone-resistant Neisseria gonorrhoeae (MASTER GC) and to compare rapid diagnostic tests for bloodstream infections. The ARLG has initiated a first-in-kind randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in participants with cystic fibrosis who are chronically colonized with Pseudomonas aeruginosa to assess the pharmacokinetics and antimicrobial activity of bacteriophage therapy. Finally, an engaged and highly trained workforce is critical for continued and future success against antimicrobial drug resistance. Thus, the ARLG has developed a robust mentoring program targeted to each stage of research training to attract and retain investigators in the field of antimicrobial resistance research.

Abstract The advancement of infectious disease diagnostics, along with studies devoted to infections caused by gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria, is a top scientific priority of the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG). Diagnostic tests for infectious diseases are rapidly evolving and improving. However, the availability of rapid tests designed to determine antibacterial resistance or susceptibility directly in clinical specimens remains limited, especially for gram-negative organisms. Additionally, the clinical impact of many new tests, including an understanding of how best to use them to inform optimal antibiotic prescribing, remains to be defined. This review summarizes the recent work of the ARLG toward addressing these unmet needs in the diagnostics field and describes future directions for clinical research aimed at curbing the threat of antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections.