Ostrosky‐Zeichner, Luis

Importance Treatment for cognitive dysfunction due to postacute sequelae of long COVID (ie, symptoms of fatigue, malaise, weakness, confusion that persist beyond 12 weeks after an initial COVID infection) remains a significant unmet need. Objective To test evidence-based rehabilitation strategies for improving cognitive symptoms in persons with long COVID. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a 5-arm, multicenter, randomized clinical trial of 3 remotely delivered interventions conducted between August 17, 2023, and June 10, 2024. The study took place at 22 trial sites and included the screening of individuals with cognitive long COVID. Interventions Participants were randomized to 1 of 5 arms: adaptive computerized cognitive training (BrainHQ [Posit Science]), cognitive-behavioral rehabilitation involving both group and individual counseling sessions (PASC-Cognitive Recovery [PASC-CoRE]) paired with BrainHQ, and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) paired with BrainHQ. Two comparator arms were included as follows: unstructured computer puzzles and games (active comparator) and sham tDCS paired with BrainHQ. The interventions occurred 5 times per week over 10 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures Cognitive and behavioral in-person assessments were performed at baseline, midintervention, at the end of intervention, and 3 months after the end of the intervention. The primary outcome measure was the modified Everyday Cognition Scale 2 (ECog2) completed at the end of the intervention compared to the baseline visit based on participant self-report looking back over the prior 7 days. Results A total of 378 individuals were screened, from which there were 328 participants (median [IQR] age, 48.0 [37.0-58.0] years; 241 female [73.5%]; race: 15 Asian [4.6%], 47 Black [14.3%], and 235 White [71.6%]; ethnicity: 52 Hispanic [15.9%]). None of the 3 active interventions demonstrated benefits on the modified ECog2 in the intention-to-treat population by the end of the intervention period. The adjusted differences in mean change were 0.0 (95% CI, −0.2 to 0.2) for BrainHQ vs active comparator, 0.1 (95% CI, −0.1 to 0.3) for PASC-CoRE + BrainHQ vs active comparator, 0.0 (95% CI, −0.2 to 0.2) for tDCS-active + BrainHQ vs tDCS-sham + BrainHQ, and 0.1 (95% CI, −0.1 to 0.3) for PASC-CoRE + BrainHQ vs BrainHQ alone. Secondary participant-reported outcomes and neuropsychological tests showed no differential benefits for any treatment arm. All 5 arms demonstrated some improvements over time on the modified ECog2 and on secondary outcomes. There were no serious adverse events attributable to the interventions. Conclusions and Relevance This phase 2 randomized clinical trial failed to demonstrate differential benefits for online cognitive training, a structured cognitive rehabilitation program, and tDCS for cognitive long COVID. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05965739 .

ABSTRACT Medically important pathogenic fungi invade vertebrate tissue and are considered primary when part of their nature life cycle is associated with an animal host and are usually able to infect immunocompetent hosts. Opportunistic fungal pathogens complete their life cycle in environmental habitats or occur as commensals within or on the vertebrate body, but under certain conditions can thrive upon infecting humans. The extent of host damage in opportunistic infections largely depends on the portal and modality of entry as well as on the host’s immune and metabolic status. Diseases caused by primary pathogens and common opportunists, causing the top approximately 80% of fungal diseases [D. W. Denning, Lancet Infect Dis, 24:e428–e438, 2024, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(23)00692-8 ], tend to follow a predictive pattern, while those by occasional opportunists are more variable. For this reason, it is recommended that diseases caused by primary pathogens and the common opportunists are named after the etiologic agent, for example, histoplasmosis and aspergillosis, while this should not be done for occasional opportunists that should be named as [causative fungus] [clinical syndrome], for example, Alternaria alternata cutaneous infection. The addition of a descriptor that identifies the location or clinical type of infection is required, as the general name alone may cover widely different clinical syndromes, for example, “rhinocerebral mucormycosis.” A list of major recommended human and animal disease entities (nomenclature) is provided in alignment with their causative agents. Fungal disease names may encompass several genera of etiologic agents, consequently being less susceptible to taxonomic changes of the causative species, for example, mucormycosis covers numerous mucormycetous molds.

ABSTRACT The rapid pace of name changes of medically important fungi is creating challenges for clinical laboratories and clinicians involved in patient care. We describe two sources of name change which have different drivers, at the species versus the genus level. Some suggestions are made here to reduce the number of name changes. We urge taxonomists to provide diagnostic markers of taxonomic novelties. Given the instability of phylogenetic trees due to variable taxon sampling, we advocate to maintain genera at the largest possible size. Reporting of identified species in complexes or series should where possible comprise both the name of the overarching species and that of the molecular sibling, often cryptic species. Because the use of different names for the same species will be unavoidable for many years to come, an open access online database of the names of all medically important fungi, with proper nomenclatural designation and synonymy, is essential. We further recommend that while taxonomic discovery continues, the adaptation of new name changes by clinical laboratories and clinicians be reviewed routinely by a standing committee for validation and stability over time, with reference to an open access database, wherein reasons for changes are listed in a transparent way.

Abstract Background Invasive fungal infections have been described throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Cryptococcal disease after infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been reported in several isolated case reports and 1 larger case series. We sought to describe cryptococcal infections following SARS-CoV-2 through establishing a database to investigate underlying risk factors, disease manifestations, and outcomes. Methods We created a crowdsourced call for cases solicited through the Mycoses Study Group Education and Research Consortium, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Emerging Infectious Diseases Network, and infectious diseases Twitter groups. Data were collected in a web-based and secure REDCap survey without personal identifiers. Results Sixty-nine cases were identified and submitted by 29 separate institutional sites. Cryptococcosis was diagnosed a median of 22 days (interquartile range, 9–42 days) after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Mortality among those with available follow-up was 72% (26/36) for the immunocompetent group and 48% (15/31) for the immunocompromised group (likelihood ratio, 4.01; P = .045). We observed a correlation between disease manifestation (central nervous system infection, proven/probable disseminated disease, and respiratory) and mortality (P = .002). Conclusions The mortality rate of 59% for patients with cryptococcosis following SARS-CoV-2 is higher than that of modern Cryptococcus cohorts. There was an association between immunocompromised status and cryptococcal disease manifestations as well as mortality. Moreover, our series emphasizes the need for clinical and laboratory assessment of opportunistic infections beyond 30 days when concerning symptoms develop.

ABSTRACT ME1111 is a novel small molecule antifungal agent under development for the topical treatment of onychomycosis. Standardization of the susceptibility testing method for this candidate antifungal is needed. Toward this end, 8 independent laboratories determined the interlaboratory reproducibility of ME1111 susceptibility testing. In addition, we subsequently identified 2 strains as quality control (QC) isolates for the method. In the reproducibility study, 5 blinded clinical strains each of Trichophyton rubrum , Trichophyton mentagrophytes , and Epidermophyton floccosum were tested, while the QC study tested 6 blinded T. rubrum or T. mentagrophytes ATCC strains. Testing was performed in frozen microtiter panels according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) M38-A2 methodology. In the reproducibility study, 9 of 15 clinical strains showed interlaboratory agreement of >90% at the 80% inhibition endpoint, with a range of agreement of 76.2% to 100%. In the QC study, 4 of the 6 ATCC strains showed interlaboratory agreement of >90%. ME1111 demonstrated excellent interlaboratory agreement when tested against dermatophytes. Based on this data, the CLSI Subcommittee on Antifungal Susceptibility Tests approved the susceptibility testing of ME1111 against dermatophytes according to M38-A2 methodology, which stipulates RPMI 1640 as the test medium, an inoculum size of 1 to 3 × 10 3 CFU/ml, and an incubation time and temperature of 96 h at 35°C. The MIC endpoint should be 80% inhibition compared with the growth control. T. rubrum ATCC MYA-4438 and T. mentagrophytes ATCC 28185 were selected as QC isolates, with an acceptable range of 0.12 to 1 μg/ml for the two strains.