Rivera, Christina G.

Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) has been widely used in clinical practice for many decades because of its associated cost savings, reductions in inpatient hospital days, and decreases in hospital-associated infections. Despite this long history, evolving practice patterns and new drug delivery devices continue to present challenges as well as opportunities for clinicians when designing appropriate outpatient antimicrobial regimens. One such change is the increasing use of extended and continuous infusion (CI) of antimicrobials to optimize the achievement of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic targets. Elastomeric devices are also becoming increasingly popular in OPAT, including for the delivery of CI. In this article, we review the clinical evidence for CI in OPAT, as well as practical considerations of patient preferences, cost, and antimicrobial stability.

Intravenous push (IVP) antimicrobial administration refers to rapid bolus infusion of medication. This drug delivery method offers improved patient convenience, superior patient and nursing satisfaction, and cost savings when used in outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT). Antimicrobial agents must demonstrate optimal physiochemical and pharmacologic characteristics, as well as sufficient syringe stability, to be administered in this manner. Additionally, impacts on medication tolerability, patient safety, and effectiveness must be considered. This narrative review summarizes the available data and practical implications of IVP administration of antimicrobials in the OPAT setting.

Antimicrobial therapy is an essential practice within medicine. Over the last 4 years, complex outpatient antimicrobial therapy (COpAT) with oral antimicrobials has become a rapidly developing area of practice and is non-inferior to outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) in certain infectious syndromes. Currently, the available literature does not describe the implementation of oral antimicrobials within the current outpatient antimicrobial therapy process. Throughout this article, the authors present a review of current literature, a proposed definition of COpAT and offer methods readers can utilize to implement an integrated COpAT/OPAT program with oral antimicrobial-specific monitoring within their current practice.

Background: Data are controversial regarding nephrotoxicity risk with vancomycin plus piperacillin–tazobactam (VPT) compared to vancomycin alone or in combination with other beta-lactams (BLs) in acute care use. Furthermore, data are lacking on the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) with long-term use of VPT including outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT). Methods: This retrospective study included 826 adult patients on an intravenous vancomycin plus BL for ⩾2 weeks, including cefepime, piperacillin/tazobactam, ertapenem, or meropenem, from August 2017 to January 2022. The primary outcome was incidence of AKI. Univariate and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were conducted to adjust for confounding variables. A secondary analysis based on the propensity score (PS)-matched cohort was performed. Results: AKI occurred in 14.4% of patients in the VPT group ( n = 15/104) compared to 5.5% in the other BL group ( n = 40/722) ( p < 0.001). Average time to AKI from start of combination therapy was 9.4 (1.7–12.0) days in the VPT group and 10.9 (5–22.7) days in the other BL group ( p = 0.20). The median duration of vancomycin and BL in the overall cohort was approximately 1 month. Beyond BL selection, patient characteristics were not associated with AKI other than the receipt of concomitant acyclovir [hazard ratio (HR) 2.48 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.33–4.65), p = 0.004]. In the PS-matched cohort, AKI occurred in 14.4% of patients in the VPT group ( n = 15/104) and 5.3% in the other BL group ( n = 11/208) ( p = 0.006). Receipt of VPT [HR: 2.55 (1.36–4.78), p = 0.004] and acyclovir [HR: 2.38 (1.19–4.74), p = 0.014) remained significantly associated with AKI in the multivariable model. Conclusion: Clinicians should exercise caution when using VPT for >2 weeks, including in the OPAT setting, even when no renal dysfunction is observed during the initial week of combination therapy.

Abstract Posaconazole therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is widely utilized to assess therapeutic efficacy and safety; however, clinical effects of very high serum concentrations are unknown. A retrospective review of 90 patients receiving posaconazole for treatment or prophylaxis of invasive fungal infections with serum concentrations ≥3000 ng/mL from 1/1/2019 to 4/30/2021 evaluated the incidence and type of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Symptomatic ADRs were very common in patients with posaconazole concentrations of ≥5000 ng/mL and 3000–4999 ng/mL (80% vs. 58.8%; P = 0.31). Posaconazole TDM should be performed for both treatment and prophylaxis indications and dose decrease for serum concentrations &gt;3000 ng/mL should be considered.

AbstractBackgroundIn the management of Gram‐negative bloodstream infection (GN‐BSI), short antimicrobial courses have been increasingly demonstrated to be non‐inferior to prolonged therapy, with lower risk of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and emergence of multi‐drug resistant (MDR) organisms. However, immunocompromised hosts were excluded from these studies. We investigated outcomes of short (≤10 days), intermediate (11–14 days), and prolonged (≥15 days) antimicrobial durations for GN‐BSI in neutropenic patients.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted on neutropenic patients with monomicrobial GN‐BSI between 2018 and 2022. The primary outcome was a composite of all‐cause mortality and microbiologic relapse within 90 days after therapy completion. The secondary outcome was a composite of 90‐day CDI and development of MDR‐GN bacteria. Cox regression analysis with propensity score (PS) adjustment was used to compare outcomes between the three groups.ResultsA total of 206 patients were classified into short (n = 67), intermediate (n = 81), or prolonged (n = 58) duration. Neutropenia was predominantly secondary to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (48%) or hematologic malignancy (35%). The primary sources of infection included intra‐abdominal (51%), vascular catheter (27%), and urinary (8%). Most patients received definitive therapy with cefepime or carbapenem. No significant difference in the primary composite endpoint was observed for intermediate versus short (PS‐adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.89; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.39–2.03) or prolonged versus short therapy (PS‐aHR 1.20; 95% CI 0.52–2.74). There was no significant difference in the secondary composite endpoint of CDI or MDR‐GN emergence.ConclusionOur data suggest that short antimicrobial courses had comparable 90‐day outcomes as intermediate and prolonged regimens for GN‐BSI among immunocompromised patients with neutropenia. image

AbstractBeta‐lactam therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) can improve precision dosing and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients, but has not been implemented widely in the United States. Mayo Clinic recently implemented a beta‐lactam TDM program. This single‐center experience forms the basis of the manuscript which outlines practical considerations involved with beta‐lactam TDM implementation, including the pharmacist's role as a leader. Our implementation effort focused on three primary domains. First, we aimed to ensure a supportive organizational infrastructure. Early leadership engagement by the pharmacist‐led core team facilitated advocacy for the clinical need, allocation of resources, and assay development. Second, core clinical workflows were developed that addressed the preferred patient population for use, desirable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic targets, and the preferred sampling strategy. Clinical tools to guide pharmacists in interpreting the results (e.g., pharmacokinetics calculator) and documenting decisions were developed. Third, stakeholders were offered repeated exposure to evidence and expertise to facilitate understanding and application of the new practice. This act of ‘individual internalization’ seems to be uniquely important to beta‐lactam TDM implementation compared with the implementation of other antimicrobial TDM programs. Educational strategies and supportive materials that were developed were focused on providing substantive and varied information tailored to the stakeholders' role in the process. For pharmacists, this included both clinical and operational considerations. A continuous improvement plan to support management of the process was instituted to address necessary updates and changes that inevitably emerged. In summary, the described approach to implementation of a pharmacist‐led beta‐lactam TDM program could be used as a roadmap to aid other institutions that aim to develop such a program.

Abstract Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) has become more common in clinical settings. Correspondingly, OPAT-related publications have also increased; the objective of this article was to summarize clinically meaningful OPAT-related publications in 2022. Seventy-five articles were initially identified, with 54 being scored. The top 20 OPAT articles published in 2022 were reviewed by a group of multidisciplinary OPAT clinicians. This article provides a summary of the “top 10” OPAT publications of 2022.

Objective: Our study aimed to assess the impact of pharmacogenomic panel testing in people with HIV (PWH). Design: Prospective, observational intervention assessment Methods: One hundred PWH were provided a comprehensive pharmacogenomic panel during routine care visits within the HIV specialty clinic of a large academic medical center. The panel determined the presence of specific genetic variants that could predict response or toxicity to commonly prescribed antiretroviral therapy (ART) and non-ART medications. An HIV specialty pharmacist reviewed the results with participants and the care team. The pharmacist (1) recommended clinically actionable interventions based on the participants’ current drug therapy, (2) assessed for genetic explanations for prior medication failures, adverse effects, or intolerances, and (3) advised on potential future clinically actionable care interventions based on individual genetic phenotypes. Results: Ninety-six participants (median age 53 years, 74% white, 84% men, 89% viral load <50 copies/ml) completed panel testing, yielding 682 clinically relevant pharmacogenomic results (133 major, 549 mild–moderate). Ninety participants (89 on ART) completed follow-up visits with 65 (72%) receiving clinical recommendations based on current medication profiles. Of the 105 clinical recommendations, 70% advised additional monitoring for efficacy or toxicity, and 10% advised alteration of drug therapy. Panel results offered explanation for prior ART inefficacy in one participant and ART intolerance in 29%. Genetic explanation for non-ART toxicity was seen in 21% of participants, with genetic contributors to inefficacy of non-ART therapy identified in 39% of participants. Conclusion: Preliminary data in a small cohort of PWH demonstrates benefit of routine pharmacogenomic panel testing.

Abstract Introduction During the early phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), remdesivir was only approved for hospitalized patients. Our institution developed hospital‐based, outpatient infusion centers for selected hospitalized patients with COVID‐19 who had clinical improvement to allow for early dismissal. The outcomes of patients who transitioned to complete remdesivir in the outpatient setting were examined. Methods Retrospective study of all hospitalized adult patients with COVID‐19 who received at least one dose of remdesivir from November 6, 2020, to November 5, 2021, at one of the Mayo Clinic hospitals. Results Among 3029 hospitalized patients who received treatment with remdesivir for COVID‐19, the majority (89.5%) completed the recommended 5‐day course. Among them, 2169 (80%) patients completed treatment during hospitalization, whereas 542 (20.0%) patients were dismissed to complete remdesivir in outpatient infusion centers. Patients who completed the treatment in the outpatient setting had lower odds of death within 28 days (aOR 0.14, 95% CI 0.06–0.32, p < 0.001). However, their rate of subsequent hospital encounters within 30 days was higher (aHR 1.88, 95% CI 1.27–2.79, p = 0.002). Among patients treated with remdesivir only in the inpatient setting, the adjusted odds of death within 28 days were significantly higher among those who did not complete the 5‐day course of remdesivir (aOR 2.07, 95% CI 1.45–2.95, p < 0.001). Conclusions This study describes the clinical outcomes of a strategy of transitioning remdesivir therapy from inpatient to outpatient among selected patients. Mortality was lower among patients who completed the 5‐day course of remdesivir.