Pranoti V. Sahasrabhojane

Dr. Pranoti V. Sahasrabhojane


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

3Years (2024-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
19 September 2024 in Vaccines
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
GAGeorgios Angelidakis
Georgios Angelidakis
RCRoy F. Chemaly
Roy F. Chemaly
PSPranoti V. Sahasrabhojane
Pranoti V. Sahasrabhojane
OMOscar Morado-Aramburo
Oscar Morado-Aramburo
Ying JiangYing Jiang
Ying Jiang
EAElla J. Ariza-Heredia
Ella J. Ariza-Heredia
Patients undergoing immune effector cell therapy (IECT) are at high risk for infections. We assessed seropositivity against pneumococcus, tetanus, and diphtheria in patients before and after IECT and the patients’ response to vaccination. We enrolled patients who underwent IECT from January 2020 to March 2022. Antibody levels for diphtheria, tetanus, and pneumococcus were measured before IECT, at 1 month, and 3–6 months after. Eligible patients were vaccinated after IECT. In non-seroprotected patients, we discontinued testing. Before IECT, most patients had seroprotective antibody levels against tetanus (68/69, 99%) and diphtheria (65/69, 94%), but fewer did against pneumococcus (24/67, 36%). After IECT, all patients had seroprotective antibody levels for tetanus at 1 month (68/68) and 3–6 months (56/56). For diphtheria, 65/65 patients (100%) had seroprotective antibody levels at 1 month, and 48/53 (91%) did at 3–6 months. For pneumococcus, seroprotective antibody levels were identified in 91% (21/23) of patients at 1 month and 79% (15/19) at 3–6 months following IECT. Fifteen patients received a pneumococcal vaccine after IECT, but none achieved seroprotective response. One patient received the tetanus-diphtheria vaccine and had a seroprotective antibody response. Because some patients experience loss of immunity after IECT, studies evaluating vaccination strategies post-IECT are needed.

30 July 2025 in Antibiotics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SFSam Franklin
Sam Franklin
CRCorina Ramont
Corina Ramont
MBMaliha Batool
Maliha Batool
SMStephanie McMahon
Stephanie McMahon
PSPranoti V. Sahasrabhojane
Pranoti V. Sahasrabhojane
Jessica R. Galloway-PenaJessica R. Galloway-Pena
Jessica R. Galloway-Pena
Background: Broad-spectrum antibiotics are often used for suspected infections in patients with hematologic malignancies due to the risk of severe infections. Although antibiotic use can lead to antimicrobial resistance and microbiome dysbiosis, the effects of antibiotics on the microbiome and resistome in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) undergoing remission induction chemotherapy (RIC) are not well understood. Methods: Various statistical models were utilized to examine the effects of antibiotic administration on the microbiome and resistome over time, as well as differences in AR-infection (ARI) and colonization (ARC) by important CDC-threats in 119 AML patients. Results: A greater number of unique antibiotic classes administered correlated with a loss of unique antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) (R = −0.39, p = 0.008). Specifically, although a greater number of oxazolidinone administrations was correlated with a greater loss of diversity (R = −0.58, p < 0.001), each additional day of linezolid reduced the risk of ARC by ~30% (HR: 0.663, p = 0.047) and decreased the odds of acquiring genes predicted to confer macrolide (HR: 0.50, p = 0.026) resistance. Conclusions: The number of antibiotic administrations and the types of antibiotics used can influence the risk of antibiotic resistance gene (ARG) expansion and ARC events in AML patients undergoing RIC. While certain antibiotics may reduce microbial diversity, they are not always linked to an increase in ARGs or ARC events.