Rivera, Christina G.

Infective endocarditis (IE) is a rare but increasingly prevalent disease with high morbidity and mortality, requiring antimicrobials and at times surgical intervention. Through the decades of healthcare professionals’ experience with managing IE, certain dogmas and uncertainties have arisen around its pharmacotherapy. The introduction of new antimicrobials and novel combinations are exciting developments but also further complicate IE treatment choices. In this review, we provide and evaluate the relevant evidence focused around contemporary debates in IE treatment pharmacotherapy, including beta-lactam choice in MSSA IE, combination therapies (aminoglycosides, ceftaroline), the use of oral antimicrobials, the role of rifamycins, and long-acting lipoglycopeptides.

Background: Beta-lactam therapeutic drug monitoring (BL TDM; drug level testing) can facilitate improved outcomes in critically ill patients. However, only 10%–20% of hospitals have implemented BL TDM. This study aimed to characterize provider perceptions and key considerations for successfully implementing BL TDM. Methods: This was a sequential mixed-methods study from 2020 to 2021 of diverse stakeholders at 3 academic medical centers with varying degrees of BL TDM implementation (not implemented, partially implemented, and fully implemented). Stakeholders were surveyed, and a proportion of participants completed semistructured interviews. Themes were identified, and findings were contextualized with implementation science frameworks. Results: Most of the 138 survey respondents perceived that BL TDM was relevant to their practice and improved medication effectiveness and safety. Integrated with interview data from 30 individuals, 2 implementation themes were identified: individual internalization and organizational features. Individuals needed to internalize, make sense of, and agree to BL TDM implementation, which was positively influenced by repeated exposure to evidence and expertise. The process of internalization appeared more complex with BL TDM than with other antibiotics (ie, vancomycin). Organizational considerations relevant to BL TDM implementation (eg, infrastructure, personnel) were similar to those identified in other TDM settings. Conclusions: Broad enthusiasm for BL TDM among participants was found. Prior literature suggested that assay availability was the primary barrier to implementation; however, the data revealed many more individual and organizational attributes, which impacted the BL TDM implementation. Internalization should particularly be focused on to improve the adoption of this evidence-based practice.

AbstractBackgroundItraconazole is the recommended first‐line treatment for mild‐to‐moderate blastomycosis and consolidation treatment of moderate‐to‐severe disease. Itraconazole is metabolised into three metabolites, including an active metabolite hydroxy‐itraconazole. Literature provides little evidence indicating whether therapeutic drug monitoring targets should be based on itraconazole parent compound alone or a sum of itraconazole and hydroxy‐itraconazole serum concentrations.ObjectivesThis study aims to compare clinical outcomes and adverse drug events (ADEs) of combined itraconazole and hydroxy‐itraconazole concentrations versus itraconazole parent compound alone in patients with blastomycosis.Patients/MethodsThis study was a retrospective cohort review of patients ≥18 years with probable or proven Blastomyces infection who received itraconazole with at least one documented serum itraconazole concentration. The primary outcome was rate of partial or complete treatment response across three patient groups: (1) Itraconazole parent compound >1.0 mcg/ml (parent), (2) parent compound <1.0 mcg/ml, but a combined itraconazole and hydroxy‐itraconazole >1.0 mcg/ml (combined) and (3) failure to achieve a combined or parent concentration >1.0 mcg/ml (subtherapeutic) for >75% of the duration of itraconazole therapy.ResultsA total of 80 patients were included (parent = 32, combined = 36, subtherapeutic = 12). No statistically significant difference was observed for rate of partial or complete treatment response (97% parent vs 94% combined, p = .99). Significantly higher mortality due to blastomycosis was observed in patients in the subtherapeutic group (0% parent vs 3% combined vs 25% subtherapeutic, p = .01).ConclusionsThis study supports an itraconazole therapeutic target combining itraconazole and hydroxy‐itraconazole >1.0 mcg/ml for blastomycosis treatment.

AbstractPurposeVancomycin area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) can be calculated using steady-state serum peak and trough concentrations; however, compared to traditional trough-only monitoring, this approach requires an additional blood sample. Recently published data demonstrated vancomycin AUC estimations using trough-only data with a volume of distribution (Vd) model incorporating age and actual body weight were reasonably accurate and precise in a veteran population. This study sought to extend these methods to a Mayo Clinic adult population.MethodsA retrospective, observational cohort of adult patients with documented steady-state vancomycin peak and trough concentrations was evaluated. Vancomycin AUCs were estimated using trough-only data, and 4 Vd models were assessed for accuracy and precision. Estimated AUCs were compared to AUCs calculated using 1-compartment intermittent infusion equations and steady-state peak and trough (“peak-trough”) data.ResultsThe study population (N = 95) was 46% female, with a median age of 59 years and a median weight of 97 kg. Using the VancoPK equation Vd = 0.29 (age in y) + 0.33 (actual weight in kg) + 11, the mean peak-trough and estimated trough-only AUC were 533 and 534, respectively, with a correlation of 0.936. The root mean square error was 47.7, meaning about 95% of AUCs were within 95 mg · h/L of peak-trough AUCs.ConclusionsAccuracy and precision of Vancomycin AUC estimations using trough-only data and the described Vd model were demonstrated in a Mayo Clinic cohort. Targeting an estimated AUC of 500 mg · h/L using the VancoPK model would likely result in an actual AUC within 400 to 600 mg · h/L.

Abstract Background URIs are the most common indication for outpatient antibiotic prescribing. Given high rates of unnecessary prescribing, these indications have been identified as a high-priority target for outpatient antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASP). Our primary objective was to evaluate the impact of a system-wide, multifaceted, outpatient ASP intervention bundle on unnecessary antibiotic prescribing for URI. Methods This quasi-experimental study was conducted from 2019 to 2021. ICD-10 codes for URIs were grouped into 3 tiers (i.e., tier I = antibiotics always indicated, tier II = sometimes, tier III = never). Encounters from 5 care specialties (i.e., family medicine, community internal medicine, express care, pediatrics, and emergency department) with a tier III URI primary ICD-10 code but without a secondary tier I or tier II code were included. COVID-19 ICD-10 codes were excluded. Interventions included construction of a prescribing data model, dissemination of clinician prescribing data and education, promotion of symptom management strategies, a patient-facing commitment poster, and a pre-populated URI order panel. Tools were designed at a system level and implemented by regional champions beginning in the 3rd quarter of 2020. The primary outcome was the rate of antibiotic prescribing, and the secondary outcome and counterbalance measure was the rate of repeat URI-related healthcare contact within 14 days. Outcomes were analyzed with chi-square with an α level of 0.05. Results A total of 147403 encounters were included. The overall antibiotic prescribing rate decreased from 24.1% to 12.3% between 2019 and 2021 (p&lt; 0.01). Significant reductions in tier III antibiotic prescribing were demonstrated for each region, care specialty, and syndrome evaluated (Table 1). A reduction in repeat healthcare contact was seen across the total cohort (9.5% in 2019 vs. 8.3% in 2021, p&lt; 0.01); decreases in repeat contact rates were observed in those not initially receiving an antibiotic (10.3% vs. 8.6%, p&lt; 0.01), but not in those who initially received an antibiotic (6.8% vs. 6.8%, p = 0.94). Tier III URI encounter level antimicrobial prescribing rates by region, care specialty, and syndrome Conclusion A multifaceted, outpatient ASP intervention bundle decreased rates of unnecessary antimicrobial prescribing without increasing rates of 14-day repeat URI-related healthcare contact. Disclosures Paschalis Vergidis, MD, AbbVie: DSMB|Cidara: Grant/Research Support|Scynexis: Grant/Research Support Evan Draper, PharmD, Gilead Foundation: Grant/Research Support Sara Ausman, PharmD, Gilead: Honoraria Christina G. Rivera, PharmD, Gilead: Grant/Research Support|Gilead: Honoraria|Insmed: Honoraria.

Abstract Background Posaconazole therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is widely utilized to assess therapeutic efficacy and safety (i.e., hepatotoxicity, QTc prolongation); however, little is known about clinical effects of very high serum posaconazole serum levels (i.e., ≥ 5000 mg/mL). Reported incidence rate of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) with posaconazole per most recent clinical trial was ∼30%. The primary objective was to compare the ADR incidence in patients with serum posaconazole levels of 3000-4999 ng/mL to ≥5000 ng/mL. Methods This retrospective cohort study included adult patients with a posaconazole serum level ≥3000 ng/mL from 1/1/2019 to 04/30/2021. The primary outcome was symptomatic ADR at time of first serum level ≥3000 ng/mL. Secondary outcomes were laboratory defined hepatoxicity, electrolyte and adrenal laboratory abnormalities, QTc changes, and dose changes in response to TDM. Patient outcomes were censored after the first serum level and were compared between groups using Fisher’s exact tests. Results Ninety patients met inclusion criteria, 80 with a level of 3000-4999 ng/mL and 10 with a level of ≥ 5000 ng/mL occurring at a median of 91 days (26-443) and 27 days (12-45) from posaconazole initiation, respectively. Majority of patients were immunocompromised (55.6% transplant recipients, 28.9% active malignancy, 5.6% other) with a split of treatment (50%) and prophylaxis (42.2%) indication. Symptomatic ADRs were very common in patients with posaconazole levels of ≥5000 ng/mL and 3000-4999 ng/mL (80% vs. 58.8%; p=0.31), primarily neurologic (49.1% overall) followed by gastrointestinal (32.7% overall). Hepatotoxicity was also common (≥5000 ng/mL 40% vs 3000-4999 ng/mL 23.4%, p=0.26). Fifty percent of patients had the posaconazole dose continued without change. Electrolytes and QTc results were similar between groups, but median overall QTc was borderline high (456 [IQR 435, 479]). Conclusion There are safety concerns for patients with serum posaconazole levels ≥3000 ng/mL. Posaconazole levels should be monitored and, importantly, dose adjusted according to serum level and patient symptoms for both treatment and prophylaxis indications. Disclosures Christina G. Rivera, PharmD, Gilead: Grant/Research Support|Gilead: Honoraria|Insmed: Honoraria.

Abstract Background Itraconazole is first-line treatment for mild-moderate blastomycosis and consolidation of moderate-severe disease. Itraconazole is metabolized to 3 metabolites, including an active metabolite hydroxy-itraconazole. The sum of itraconazole and hydroxy-itraconazole levels &gt; 1.0 mcg/mL is guideline recommended for treatment of invasive fungal infections; conversely, some experts suggest targeting a parent compound level alone &gt; 1.0 mcg/mL. This study aims to compare clinical outcomes and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of combined itraconazole and hydroxy-itraconazole levels &gt; 1.0 mcg/mL versus itraconazole parent compound alone &gt; 1.0 mcg/mL in patients with blastomycosis. Methods This study is a single-center, retrospective chart review of patients ≥ 18 years with probable or proven Blastomyces infection who received itraconazole with at least one documented serum itraconazole level. The primary outcome was rate of partial or complete treatment response in patients with a combined itraconazole and hydroxy-itraconazole level &gt; 1.0 mcg/mL versus itraconazole parent compound &gt; 1.0 mcg/mL for &gt; 75% of measured levels. ADRs attributable to itraconazole were compared between the groups. Treatment response rates and ADRs were compared between groups using two proportion z-tests. Results Total of 80 patients were included: 36 = combined itraconazole and hydroxy-itraconazole &gt; 1.0, 32 = itraconazole parent alone &gt; 1.0, 12 = 75% of all levels &lt; 1.0. No statistically significant difference was observed between groups for blastomycosis rate of partial or complete treatment response (94.3% combined vs 96.6% parent, p=0.99). Significantly higher mortality was observed in patients failing to achieve itraconazole or itraconazole/hydroxy-itraconazole &gt; 1.0 (2.8% combined vs 0% parent vs 25% neither, p=0.01). There was no significant difference in total ADRs between the three groups (p=0.56). Conclusion This limited evidence supports an itraconazole therapeutic target combining itraconazole and hydroxy-itraconazole &gt; 1.0 for blastomycosis treatment. Disclosures Paschalis Vergidis, MD, AbbVie: DSMB|Cidara: Grant/Research Support|Scynexis: Grant/Research Support Christina G. Rivera, PharmD, Gilead: Grant/Research Support|Gilead: Honoraria|Insmed: Honoraria.

Abstract Background Beta-lactam therapeutic drug monitoring (BL TDM; drug level testing) can facilitate improved outcomes in critically ill patients. Yet less than 20% of hospitals have implemented BL TDM. The purpose of this study was to characterize provider perceptions and key considerations for successful implementation of BL TDM. Methods This was a sequential mixed methods study from 2020 to 2021 of stakeholders at three academic medical centers with varying degrees of BL TDM implementation - Mayo Clinic (BL TDM not implemented), University of Florida Health Shands (partially implemented), and Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital (fully implemented). Stakeholders completed a survey to characterize their knowledge, perceptions, and experience with BL TDM. A diverse group of 30 respondents were then purposively sampled for semi-structured interviews. Results from the two strands were integrated, themes were identified, and findings were situated within implementation science frameworks. Results Among the 138 survey respondents (22% response rate), the majority were physicians (38%) and pharmacists (33%). 71% practiced in critical care and 21% in infectious diseases. The majority of respondents felt BL TDM was relevant to their practice and improved medication effectiveness and safety (Figure 1). Two implementation themes were identified: individual internalization and organizational features. Individuals needed to internalize, make sense of, and agree to BL TDM implementation which was positively influenced by repeated exposure to evidence and expertise. The process of internalization seemed more complex with BL TDM than with other antibiotics (i.e., vancomycin). Organizational considerations relevant to BL TDM implementation included adequate physical and informational infrastructure, access to trained personnel, supportive governance/leadership, and robust process and workflow development. Conclusion We found broad enthusiasm about the relevance and potential benefits of BL TDM among stakeholders. Prior literature suggested the primary barrier to implementation was assay availability, but we identified many more individual and organizational attributes which impacted the scale and spread of BL TDM. Disclosures Sara Ausman, PharmD, Gilead: Honoraria Christina G. Rivera, PharmD, Gilead: Grant/Research Support|Gilead: Honoraria|Insmed: Honoraria Jason Roberts, BPharm(Hons), PhD, FSHP, FISAC, British Society of Chemotherapy: Grant/Research Support|Cipla: Honoraria|Gilead: Advisor/Consultant|MSD: Advisor/Consultant|MSD: Honoraria|Pfizer: Board Member|Pfizer: Honoraria|Qpex: Grant/Research Support|Sandoz: Board Member|Summit: Advisor/Consultant|Wolters Kluwer: Advisor/Consultant Marc H. Scheetz, PharmD, MSc, Abbvie: Advisor/Consultant|Allecra: Grant/Research Support|Merck: Advisor/Consultant|Nevakar: Advisor/Consultant|Nevakar: Grant/Research Support|Premier Healthcare Solutions: Honoraria|Spero: Advisor/Consultant|SuperTrans Medical: Advisor/Consultant|SuperTrans Medical: Grant/Research Support|Takeda: Advisor/Consultant|Third Pole Therapeutics: Advisor/Consultant.