Vancomycin (VCM) and daptomycin (DAP) are standard therapies for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia, despite concerns regarding clinical utility and growing resistance. Linezolid (LZD) affords superior tissue penetration to VCM or DAP and has been successfully used as salvage therapy for persistent MRSA bacteremia, indicating its utility as a first-choice drug against MRSA bacteremia. In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared the effectiveness and safety of LZD with VCM, teicoplanin (TEIC), or DAP in patients with MRSA bacteremia. We evaluated all-cause mortality as the primary effectiveness outcome, clinical and microbiological cure, hospital length of stay, recurrence, and 90-day readmission rates as secondary effectiveness outcomes, and drug-related adverse effects as primary safety outcomes. We identified 5328 patients across 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 1 pooled analysis of 5 RCTs, 1 subgroup analysis (1 RCT), and 5 case-control and cohort studies (CSs). Primary and secondary effectiveness outcomes were comparable between patients treated with LZD versus VCM, TEIC, or DAP in RCT-based studies and CSs. There was no difference in adverse event incidence between LZD and comparators. These findings suggest that LZD could be a potential first-line drug against MRSA bacteremia as well as VCM or DAP.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of nafamostat combined with favipiravir for the treatment of COVID-19. We conducted a multicenter, randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel assignment study in hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned to receive favipiravir alone (n = 24) or nafamostat with favipiravir (n = 21). The outcomes included changes in the World Health Organization clinical progression scale score, time to improvement in body temperature, and improvement in oxygen saturation (SpO₂). There was no significant difference in the changes in the clinical progression scale between nafamostat with favipiravir and favipiravir alone groups (median, -0.444 vs -0.150, respectively; least-squares mean difference, -0.294; P = 0.364). The time to improvement in body temperature was significantly shorter in the combination group (5.0 days; 95% confidence interval, 4.0-7.0) than in the favipiravir group (9.0 days; 95% confidence interval, 7.0-18.0; P =0.009). The changes in SpO₂ were greater in the combination group than in the favipiravir group (0.526% vs -1.304%, respectively; least-squares mean difference, 1.831; P = 0.022). No serious adverse events or deaths were reported, but phlebitis occurred in 57.1% of the patients in the combination group. Although our study showed no differences in clinical progression, earlier defervescence, and recovery of SpO₂ were observed in the combination group.

Case 1: A 71-year-old man was admitted to our hospital with progressive fever and dyspnea, which had developed three days after the onset of COVID-19. Initial chest computed tomography (CT) revealed a pulmonary lesion consistent with a secondary bacterial infection. Streptococcus pyogenes was isolated from cultures of primary sputum collected from the endotracheal tube, and identified as the causative microorganism. Case 2: A 91-year-old man was transferred to our hospital with severe hypotension, which had developed nine days after the onset of COVID-19. A chest CT revealed pericardial effusion and pericardiocentesis yielded purulent fluid. S. pyogenes was isolated from the fluid specimens and was identified as the causative microorganism of the secondary bacterial pericarditis. Isolates from both patients were subsequently identified as M1 UK-lineage S. pyogenes via genetic analysis. This report implicates COVID-19 as a potential risk factor for severe M1UK UK infection via the respiratory tract. (c) 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. This is an open access article under the CC BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )

This retrospective cohort study investigated the effects of an initially reduced linezolid dosing regimen in hemodialysis patients through therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Patients were divided into two groups depending on their initial dose of linezolid (standard dose of 600 mg every 12 h or initially reduced dose of 300 mg every 12 h/600 mg every 24 h). The cumulative incidence rates of thrombocytopenia and severe thrombocytopenia were compared between both groups using the Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test. Eleven episodes of 8 chronic hemodialysis patients were included; 5 were in the initially reduced-dose group. Thrombocytopenia developed in 81.8% of patients. The cumulative incidence rates of thrombocytopenia and severe thrombocytopenia in the initially reduced-dose group were significantly lower than in the standard-dose group (p < 0.05). At the standard dose, the median linezolid trough concentration (C_min) just before hemodialysis was 49.5 mg/L, and C_min at the reduced doses of 300 mg every 12 h and 600 mg every 24 h were 20.6 mg/L and 6.0 mg/L, respectively. All five episodes underwent TDM in the standard-dose group required dose reduction to 600 mg per day. Our findings indicate that initial dose reduction should be implemented to reduce the risk of linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia among hemodialysis patients.

Objective: This study aimed to determine the frequency of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in serum and its association with the clinical severity of COVID-19. Methods: An analytical cross-sectional study was performed in a single tertiary care hospital and included consecutive patients with confirmed COVID-19. The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia and the strength of its association with clinical severity variables, including required oxygen supplementation, ICU admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital mortality, were examined. Results: Fifty-six patients were included in the study. The median age was 54.5 years, and individuals with RNAemia were older than those without detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA in serum (78 vs. 50 years; P = .0013). RNAemia was detected in 19.6% of patients (11/56) and in 1.0% (1/25), 50.0% (6/12), and 100.0% (4/4) of moderate, severe, and critically ill cases, respectively. Patients with RNAemia required more frequent oxygen supplementation (90.0% vs. 13.3%; P < .0001) and ICU admission (81.8% vs. 6.7%; P < .0001) and required invasive mechanical ventilation (27.3% vs. 0.0%; P < .0001). Among patients with RNAemia, the median viral loads of NP swabs that were collected around the same time as the serum were significantly higher in critically ill cases (5.4 Log ₁₀ copies/μL [IQR: 4.2–6.3]) than in moderate–severe cases (2.6 Log ₁₀ copies/μL [1.1–4.5]; P =.030) and were significantly higher in nonsurvivor cases (6.2 Log ₁₀ copies/μL [IQR: 6.0–6.5]) than in survivor cases (3.9 Log ₁₀ copies/μL [1.6–4.6]; P =.045). Conclusions: This study demonstrated a relatively high proportion of SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia and an association between RNAemia and clinical severity. Moreover, among the patients with RNAemia, the viral loads of NP swabs were correlated with severity and mortality, thus suggesting the potential utility of combining serum testing with NP tests as a prognostic indicator for COVID-19 with a higher quality than each separate test.

The objective of the present study was to develop a method to measure tedizolid (TZD) concentration for studying target concentration intervention, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of TZD. We established a high-performance liquid chromatography-fluorescence detector assay to measure the TZD concentration in serum for clinical application. Chromatographic separation was carried out on a 5 μm octadecyl silane hypersil column 150 mm × 4.6 mm. The mobile phase consisted of 0.1 M phosphoric acid and methanol (60:40, pH 7.0). Detection was performed at 300 nm and 340 nm for the excitation and emission wavelengths, respectively. The average retention times of TZD and the internal standard were 12.9 and 8.8 min, respectively. High linearity was exhibited over a concentration range of 0.025 to 10.0 μg/mL for TZD (R ² > 0.999). The intra- and inter-assay accuracies of TZD were 99.2% to 107.0% and 99.2% to 107.7%, respectively. The lower limit of quantitation and the lower limit of detection for TZD measurement were 0.025 and 0.01 μg/mL, respectively. The extraction recoveries of TZD were 100.4% to 114.1%. The high-performance liquid chromatography method developed in this study could separate the analytes with a single eluent (isocratic system), within a total run time of 15 min. Both TZD and IS were well separated, without interference from the peaks. Sharp peaks were observed in the chromatograms; problems such as double peaks, shoulder peaks, and broadened peaks were not observed. The proposed method showed acceptable analytical performance and could be used to evaluate serum TZD concentrations in patients.