Citations

Over the recent years, the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) has evolved very rapidly and a large number of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) are now available. However, most DMTs are associated with adverse events, the most frequent of which being infections. Consideration of all DMT-associated risks facilitates development of risk mitigation strategies. An international focused workshop with expert-led discussions was sponsored by the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS) and was held in April 2021 to review our current knowledge about the risk of infections associated with the use of DMTs for people with MS and NMOSD and corresponding risk mitigation strategies. The workshop addressed DMT-associated infections in specific populations, such as children and pregnant women with MS, or people with MS who have other comorbidities or live in regions with an exceptionally high infection burden. Finally, we reviewed the topic of DMT-associated infectious risks in the context of the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Herein, we summarize available evidence and identify gaps in knowledge which justify further research.

AbstractModern fluoroscopes used for image guidance have become quite complex. Adding to this complexity are the many regulatory and accreditation requirements that must be fulfilled during acceptance testing of a new unit. Further, some of these acceptance tests have pass/fail criteria, whereas others do not, making acceptance testing a subjective and time‐consuming task. The AAPM Task Group 272 Report spells out the details of tests that are required and gives visibility to some of the tests that while not yet required are recommended as good practice. The organization of the report begins with the most complicated fluoroscopes used in interventional radiology or cardiology and continues with general fluoroscopy and mobile C‐arms. Finally, the appendices of the report provide useful information, an example report form and topics that needed their own section due to the level of detail.

Aims Fungal and mycobacterial periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) are rare events. Clinicians are wary of missing these diagnoses, often leading to the routine ordering of fungal and mycobacterial cultures on periprosthetic specimens. Our goal was to examine the utility of these cultures and explore a modern bacterial culture technique using bacterial blood culture bottles (BCBs) as an alternative. Methods We performed a retrospective review of patients diagnosed with hip or knee PJI between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2019, at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, USA. We included patients aged 18 years or older who had fungal, mycobacterial, or both cultures performed together with bacterial cultures. Cases with positive fungal or mycobacterial cultures were reviewed using the electronic medical record to classify the microbiological findings as representing true infection or not. Results There were 2,067 episodes of PJI diagnosed within the study period. A total of 3,629 fungal cultures and 2,923 mycobacterial cultures were performed, with at least one of these performed in 56% of episodes (n = 1,157). Test positivity rates of fungal and mycobacterial cultures were 5% (n = 179) and 1.2% (n = 34), respectively. After a comprehensive review, there were 40 true fungal and eight true mycobacterial PJIs. BCB were 90% sensitive in diagnosing true fungal PJI and 100% sensitive in detecting rapidly growing mycobacteria (RGM). Fungal stains were performed in 27 true fungal PJI but were only positive in four episodes (14.8% sensitivity). None of the mycobacterial stains was positive. Conclusion Routine fungal and mycobacterial stains and cultures should not be performed as they have little clinical utility in the diagnosis of PJI and are associated with significant costs. Candida species and RGM are readily recovered using BCB. More research is needed to predict rare non- Candida fungal and slowly growing mycobacterial PJI that warrant specialized cultures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(1):53–58.

See article on pages 284–290 in this issue.

Abstract Background The multiplex gastrointestinal pathogen panel (GIP) is a convenient and quick diagnostic test for determining the infectious etiology of diarrhea. It identifies several of the most common pathogens associated with gastroenteritis. However, it is expensive, and test results may not impact care, given that several of the pathogens in the panel are managed expectantly. We describe our experience with a diagnostic stewardship initiative to resolve the overuse of this testing method. Methods We performed a pre/post study of GIPs ordered for inpatients 18 years old and older from December 19, 2018, to December 18, 2020, at Mayo Clinic hospital in Rochester, Minnesota. GIP orders for inpatients were limited to the first 72 hours of hospitalization starting December 19, 2019. Orders after 72 hours were encouraged to be changed to Clostridioides difficile NAAT testing or sent to an infectious disease provider to override on a case-by-case basis. Our hospitals used BioFire® FilmArray® Gastrointestinal Panel (BioFire Diagnostics, Salt Lake City, Utah). Results A total of 2,641 GIPs were performed during the study period. There were 1,568 GIPs (3.3/100 hospitalizations) in the pre-intervention period compared to 1,073 (2.6/100 hospitalizations) post-intervention, representing a drop of 21.2%. The most common pathogen detected was C. difficile (toxin A/B) (48.8%, n=402), followed by norovirus (17.5%, n=144). The overall test positivity rate was 27.9% (n=736). The test positivity rate decreased 1.8% from 28.6% (n=448) to 26.8% (n=288) after the restriction (p=0.33). The proportion of C. difficile among all pathogens detected increased from 48.5% to 49.7% (p=0.67). Table 1. Pre- and Post-Intervention Test Positivity Rate of Specific Pathogens in GIP Conclusion Our study showed that restricting the ordering of GIP to the first 72 hours of hospitalization and directing providers to standalone C. difficile NAAT testing resulted in a reduction of GIPs performed. There were marginal changes in the test positivity rate of GIP. A limitation of our study is that the timing of post-intervention coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic, which had unpredictable effects on hospital practice and patient admissions. Ideally, future quality improvement projects should increase the test positivity of pathogens other than C. difficile while lowering the GIP use in diagnosing C. difficile colitis. Disclosures John C. O'Horo, Sr., MD, MPH, Bates College and Elsevier Inc (Consultant)

Abstract Background Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) is appropriate for select acute postoperative and hematogenous periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). However, the optimal duration of antimicrobial therapy in patients treated with DAIR has not been defined. Therefore, we aimed to identify the ideal duration of parenteral and oral antibiotics after DAIR. Methods We performed a retrospective study of patients >18 years of age with hip or knee PJI managed with DAIR between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2018, at Mayo Clinic. PJI was defined using criteria adapted from the International Consensus Meeting on PJI. The outcome was defined as either PJI recurrence or unplanned reoperation due to infection. Joint-stratified Cox proportional hazards regression models with time-dependent covariates were used to assess nonlinear effects of antibiotic duration. Hazard ratios were computed based on prespecified time points for comparison, whereas p-values represented the overall effect across the entire range of durations. Results There were 247 unique episodes of PJI in 237 patients during the study period. Parenteral antibiotics were given in 99.2% of cases (n=245). This was followed by chronic oral antibiotic suppression in 92.2% (n=226) with a median duration of 2.2 years (1.0-4.1). DAIR failed in 65 cases over a median follow-up of 4.4 years, with a 5-year cumulative incidence of 28.1%. After adjustment for risk factors, there was no significant association between duration of parenteral antibiotics and treatment failure (p=0.203), with no difference between four versus six weeks (HR 1.11; 95% CI 0.71-1.75) (Figure 1). However, both use and longer duration of oral antibiotic therapy was associated with a lower risk of failure (p=0.006). To account for the possibility that this association was driven by results during early follow-up, conditional analyses at one- and two-year follow-up were performed. Both showed a significantly lower risk for a longer duration of antibiotics (Figure 2). Figure 1. Time-Dependent Analysis of Parenteral Antibiotic Duration Figure 2. Time-Dependent Analysis of Oral Antibiotic Suppression Duration Conclusion After DAIR, efficacy from four weeks of parenteral antibiotics was no different from six weeks when followed by chronic oral antibiotic suppression. Our results could not establish an optimal duration but suggested that continuing suppression portends a lower risk of failure of DAIR. Disclosures Elie Berbari, MD, Uptodate.com (Other Financial or Material Support, Honorary unrelated to this work) Matthew P. Abdel, MD, Stryker and AAOS Board of Directors (Board Member, Other Financial or Material Support, Royalties) Aaron J. Tande, MD, UpToDate.com (Other Financial or Material Support, Honoraria for medical writing)

Abstract Background Increasing use of deep brain stimulation (DBS) over the past 20 years is paralleled by a rise in DBS infections. There is a paucity of data on the diagnosis, management, and outcomes in such infections. We describe our center’s experience with DBS infections. Methods Adults ( >18 years) diagnosed with DBS associated infection between January 1, 2000 and May 1, 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Data on patient demographics, clinical presentation, microbiology, and management was collected. Results Seventy cases were identified (table 1). The mean age at diagnosis was 58.9 ± 16.5 years. The bulk were free of comorbidities. Parkinson’s disease and essential tremors were the most common indications for DBS placement. The median time from implantation to infection was 4 months [IQR 1,24]. The neurotransmitter and extension wires were the most frequently infected parts. A microbiological diagnosis was made in 89% of cases, 47% of which were polymicrobial. The most commonly identified organisms were Staphylococcus aureus, Cutibacterium acnes, and coagulase-negative staphylococci. For patients with deep infection, 71% had complete device extraction, 20% partial extraction, and 9% device retention; clinical cure at 3 months occurred in 97%, 64% and 100%, respectively (figure 1). On the other hand, 93% of patients with superficial infection had device retention; cure at 3 months was seen in 64% (figure 2). Suppressive oral antibiotics were rarely used, 45% of patients with partial extraction and 26% with device retention. DBS was reimplanted in 71% of patients after complete extraction and led to reinfection in 30% at 1 year follow up. Median time to reimplantation was 2.7 months. All patients who failed at 3 months in the partial extraction and device retention cohorts subsequently underwent complete device removal leading to clinical cure sustained at 1 year follow up. Conclusion All patients who had complete extraction achieved clinical cure at 3-months follow-up, while high failure rates occurred in those with device retention. Most infections were polymicrobial and predominantly caused by gram-positive pathogens. Thirty percent of patients with re-implantation after complete device extraction developed re-infection within 1 year. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Abstract Introduction Tafasitamab is a humanized, Fc-modified, anti-CD19 monoclonal antibody (mAb) shown to enhance antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity and phagocytosis. It is approved by the FDA under accelerated approval (July 2020) in combination with lenalidomide (LEN) for treatment of relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL) in adult patients ineligible for autologous stem cell transplantation. To evaluate if newly diagnosed DLBCL patients would also benefit from this regimen, this Phase Ib study (First-MIND; NCT04134936) was designed to first assess the safety and tolerability of tafasitamab ± LEN in addition to rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (R-CHOP) in newly diagnosed DLBCL patients. Methods Eligible patients were ≥18 years old, with treatment-naïve DLBCL, international prognostic index (IPI) 2-5 and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0-2. Patients with known double- or triple-hit and transformed lymphoma were excluded. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either six 21-day [D] cycles of R-CHOP (R-CHO, D1; P, D1-5) + tafasitamab (12 mg/kg IV, D1, 8, 15) (Arm A) or R-CHOP + tafasitamab + LEN (25 mg orally, D1-10) (Arm B). Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and venous thromboembolism prophylaxis was mandatory. The primary safety endpoint was incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs); secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), positron emission tomography (PET)-complete response (CR) rate, and partial response (PR) rate at end of treatment (EOT). Tumor measurements by PET/CT or PET/MRI at EOT were performed according to Lugano 2014 criteria within 6±2 weeks after Day 21 of the last treatment cycle the patient started. Results From December 2019 to August 2020, 83 patients were screened in nine countries across 34 sites in Europe and the US; 66 were randomized (Arm A, n=33; Arm B, n=33). Data cut-off for this analysis: 13 March 2021. Median age was 64.5 years (range 20-86). Many patients had high-risk disease: IPI 2: 24/66 (36.4%), IPI 3: 29/66 (43.9%), IPI 4: 11/66 (16.7%), IPI 5: 2/66 (3.0%); ECOG PS ≥2: 6/66 (9.1%). Most patients had Stage III/IV disease 62/66 (93.9%); 29/66 (43.9%) had bulky disease. All patients experienced at least one TEAE. The most frequent Grade ≥3 TEAEs by system organ class were blood and lymphatic disorders (81.8% patients overall), experienced by 24 patients (72.7%) in Arm A and 30 patients (90.9%) in Arm B. Grade ≥3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 19/33 (57.6%) and 4/33 (12.1%) (Arm A), and 28/33 (84.8%) and 12/33 (36.4%) (Arm B) patients, respectively; Grade ≥3 febrile neutropenia was experienced by 6/33 (18.2%) patients in each arm. Grade ≥3 infusion-related reactions to both rituximab and tafasitamab occurred in no patients in Arm A and one patient (3.0%) in Arm B, and 7/33 (21.2%) (Arm A) and 9/33 (27.3%) (Arm B) patients had a Grade ≥3 infection and/or infestation (Figure 1). Serious TEAEs occurred in 14/33 (42.4%) patients in Arm A and 17/33 (51.5%) patients in Arm B. Two out of 33 (6.1%) and one out of 33 (3.0%) patients discontinued study treatment due to TEAEs in Arms A and B, respectively. There were four deaths unrelated to tafasitamab and/or LEN (COVID-19 pneumonia, sepsis, and urosepsis). The average relative dose intensity of R-CHOP in each cycle was maintained in both arms. ORR at EOT was observed in 25/33 patients (75.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 57.7-88.9) in Arm A and 27/33 patients (81.8%; 95% CI: 64.5-93.0) in Arm B. Conclusion These data suggest that both regimens are tolerable and do not impair dosing and scheduling of R-CHOP. Toxicities were similar to those expected with R-CHOP with or without LEN. With tumor follow-up still ongoing, the ORR at EOT suggests that patients with treatment-naïve DLBCL may achieve clinically meaningful efficacy tafasitamab and LEN in addition to standard treatment. A Phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial will assess efficacy and safety of R-CHOP + tafasitamab + LEN vs R-CHOP in newly diagnosed patients with high intermediate and high risk DLBCL, and is currently recruiting (frontMIND study; NCT04824092). Funding: MorphoSys AG. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Belada: Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; MorphoSys AG: Consultancy, Research Funding; Debiopharm Group: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Archigen Biotech: Research Funding; Reddys: Research Funding. André: Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Roche: Other: Travel/accomodation/expenses, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Travel/accomodation/expenses; AbbVie: Other: Travel/accomodation/expenses. Pérez Persona: Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel, Speakers Bureau; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Other: Support for attending meetings and/or travel, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy. Staber: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Trneny: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Celgene: Consultancy; 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, General Hospital in Prague: Current Employment; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Portola: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Honoraria. Brackertz: MorphoSys AG: Current Employment. Shah: MorphoSys AG: Current Employment. Sporchia: MorphoSys AG: Current Employment. Burke: MorphoSys: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Kymera: Consultancy; X4 Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; SeaGen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Kura: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Nowakowski: Celgene, NanoString Technologies, MorphoSys: Research Funding; Celgene, MorphoSys, Genentech, Selvita, Debiopharm Group, Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. OffLabel Disclosure: Tafasitamab is a humanized Fc-modified cytolytic CD19 targeting monoclonal antibody. In combination with lenalidomide (LEN), it received accelerated approval in July 2020 for adult patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) not otherwise specified (NOS), including arising from lowâ€'grade lymphoma, who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Following FDA approval, we are now evaluating the safety and efficacy of tafasitamab in combination with LEN as an add-on to first-line therapy with R-CHOP in newly diagnosed patients with DLBCL.