Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
11 result(s) for "Harris-Brown, Tiffany"
Sort by:
Reporting of pre-enrolment screening with randomized clinical trials: A small item that could impact a big difference
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), when conducted using ethical and transparent methods, become the ultimate standard for producing evidence-based knowledge in the field of medical research. We sought to determine the proportion of RCTs in which the number of screened patients is reported, and also to ascertain what predicted efficient screening (i.e., a high number of screened participants being enrolled). Thirty-five RCTs from the Journals Clinical Infectious Diseases and The Lancet Infectious Diseases were reviewed from the time period of January 2012 to July 2013 using standardised criteria. From the 35 RCTs, 9 of 35 (26%) did not report the number of patients screened prior to recruitment. From the 26 studies that reported this screening figure, 10,215 (47%; range: 2-98%) of the screened participants (21,862) were subsequently enrolled. About 18.3% of those screened and not enrolled, met inclusion and exclusion criteria yet did not wish to participate in an RCT. Studies performed in developed countries and pediatric populations were more likely to have low rates of enrolment compared with the screened population although there was no statistical significance to these associations (P = 0.2 for both variables). Many reports of RCTs do not report screening figures, even though these add useful information about the feasibility of future trials.
Investigator-Driven Randomised Controlled Trial of Cefiderocol versus Standard Therapy for Healthcare-Associated and Hospital-Acquired Gram-negative Bloodstream Infection: Study protocol (the GAME CHANGER trial): study protocol for an open-label, randomised controlled trial
Background Increasing rates of antibiotic resistance in Gram-negative organisms due to the presence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL), hyperproduction of AmpC enzymes, carbapenemases and other mechanisms of resistance are identified in common hospital- and healthcare-associated pathogens including Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii . Cefiderocol is a novel siderophore cephalosporin antibiotic with a catechol moiety on the 3-position side chain. Cefiderocol has been shown to be potent in vitro against a broad range of Gram-negative organisms, including carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) and multi-drug-resistant (MDR) P. aeruginosa and A. baumannii . Recent clinical data has shown cefiderocol to be effective in the setting of complicated urinary tract infections and nosocomial pneumonia, but it has not yet been studied as treatment of bloodstream infection. Methods This study will use a multicentre, open-label non-inferiority trial design comparing cefiderocol and standard of care antibiotics. Eligible participants will be adult inpatients who are diagnosed with a bloodstream infection with a Gram-negative organism on the basis of a positive blood culture result where the acquisition meets the definition for healthcare-associated or hospital-acquired. It will compare cefiderocol with the current standard of care (SOC) antibiotic regimen according to the patient’s treating clinician. Eligible participants will be randomised 1:1 to cefiderocol or SOC and receive 5–14 days of antibiotic therapy. Trial recruitment will occur in at least 20 sites in ten countries (Australia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Turkey and Greece). The sample size has been derived from an estimated 14 day, all-cause mortality rate of 10% in the control group, and a non-inferiority margin of 10% difference in the two groups. A minimum of 284 patients are required in total to achieve 80% power with a two-sided alpha level of 0.05. Data describing demographic information, risk factors, concomitant antibiotics, illness scores, microbiology, multidrug-resistant organism screening, discharge and mortality will be collected. Discussion With increasing antimicrobial resistance, there is a need for the development of new antibiotics with broad activity against Gram-negative pathogens such as cefiderocol. By selecting a population at risk for multi-drug-resistant pathogens and commencing study treatment early in the clinical illness (within 48 h of index blood culture) the trial hopes to provide guidance to clinicians of the efficacy of this novel agent. Trial registration The GAME CHANGER trial is registered under the US National Institute of Health ClinicalTrials.gov register, reference number NCT03869437 . Registered on March 11, 2019.
Differences in antimicrobial resistance gene abundance and microbial diversity of the gut microbiome in patients on antibiotics enrolled in a clinical trial
Background: Understanding how the gut microbiome adapts on exposure to individual antibiotics, with respect to antimicrobial resistance gene (ARG) enrichment, is important. Objectives: To characterise the changes that occur in the gut microbiome of patients enrolled in an antibiotic clinical trial and to propose methods in which to embed gut microbiome analysis into clinical trials. Design: This was a prospective cohort study of hospitalised patients who were successfully enrolled and randomised into two clinical trials between January 2021 to December 2021. Methods: Adult patients admitted to the hospital with a bloodstream infection have been randomised to receive either benzylpenicillin, ampicillin, cefazolin, ceftriaxone, piperacillin-tazobactam or meropenem at a single institution. Faecal specimens were collected at enrolment and every second day until discharge. Each specimen underwent DNA sequencing to determine microbial diversity and ARG abundance. Results: Ten patients (including six females) were included. DNA concentration and sampling quality were markedly lower for rectal swabs compared to stool samples. Relative abundance of Enterococcus faecium was increased in individual patients where treatment included ampicillin, meropenem and piperacillin-tazobactam. Piperacillin-tazobactam also increased the abundance of key beta-lactamase genes (blaSHV-100, blaOXA-392, blaCMY-18). Ampicillin increased the abundance of blaTEM-1A. There were no extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) or carbapenemase genes detected in our study. The presence of key anaerobes such as Clostridium and Bifidobacterium species appeared to play an important role in colonisation resistance of E. faecium and Clostridioides difficile. Conclusion: Differential changes in anaerobic bacterial genera on exposure to antibiotics may be a key determinant of colonisation resistance. The pre-analytical phase of microbiome analysis is a critical factor in data quality and interpretation.
Multicentre randomised double-blind placebo controlled trial of combination vancomycin and cefazolin surgical antibiotic prophylaxis: the Australian surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (ASAP) trial
IntroductionResistant Gram-positive organisms, such as methicillin-resistant staphylococci, account for a significant proportion of infections following joint replacement surgery. Current surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis guidelines recommend the use of first-generation or second-generation cephalosporin antibiotics, such as cefazolin. Cefazolin, however, does not prevent infections due to these resistant organisms; therefore, new prevention strategies need to be examined. One proposed strategy is to combine a glycopeptide antibiotic with cefazolin for prophylaxis. The clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of this combination therapy compared with usual therapy, however, have not been established.Methods and analysisThis randomised, double-blind, parallel, superiority, placebo-controlled, phase 4 trial will compare the incidence of all surgical site infections (SSIs) including superficial, deep and organ/space (prosthetic joint) infections, safety and cost-effectiveness of surgical prophylaxis with cefazolin plus vancomycin to that with cefazolin plus placebo. The study will be performed in patients undergoing joint replacement surgery. In the microbiological sub-studies, we will examine the incidence of SSIs in participants with preoperative staphylococci colonisation (Sub-Study 1) and incidence of VRE acquisition (Sub-Study 2). The trial will recruit 4450 participants over a 4-year period across 13 orthopaedic centres in Australia. The primary outcome is the incidence of SSI at 90 days post index surgery. Secondary outcomes include the incidence of SSI according to joint and microorganism and other healthcare associated infections. Safety endpoints include the incidence of acute kidney injury, hypersensitivity reactions and all-cause mortality. The primary and secondary analysis will be a modified intention-to-treat analysis consisting of all randomised participants who undergo eligible surgery. We will also perform a per-protocol analysis.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol was reviewed and approved by The Alfred Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/18/Alfred/102) on 9 July 2018. Study findings will be disseminated in the printed media, and learnt forums.Trial registration numberACTRN12618000642280
Trial of Vancomycin and Cefazolin as Surgical Prophylaxis in Arthroplasty
In this double-blind, randomized trial, vancomycin was added to cefazolin as surgical prophylaxis for arthroplasty. Surgical-site infections occurred in 4.5% of vancomycin recipients and 3.5% of placebo recipients.
Meropenem Versus Piperacillin-Tazobactam for Definitive Treatment of Bloodstream Infections Caused by AmpC β-Lactamase–Producing Enterobacter spp, Citrobacter freundii, Morganella morganii, Providencia spp, or Serratia marcescens: A Pilot Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (MERINO-2)
Abstract Background Carbapenems are recommended treatment for serious infections caused by AmpC-producing gram-negative bacteria but can select for carbapenem resistance. Piperacillin-tazobactam may be a suitable alternative. Methods We enrolled adult patients with bloodstream infection due to chromosomal AmpC producers in a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Patients were assigned 1:1 to receive piperacillin-tazobactam 4.5 g every 6 hours or meropenem 1 g every 8 hours. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of death, clinical failure, microbiological failure, and microbiological relapse at 30 days. Results Seventy-two patients underwent randomization and were included in the primary analysis population. Eleven of 38 patients (29%) randomized to piperacillin-tazobactam met the primary outcome compared with 7 of 34 patients (21%) in the meropenem group (risk difference, 8% [95% confidence interval {CI}, –12% to 28%]). Effects were consistent in an analysis of the per-protocol population. Within the subcomponents of the primary outcome, 5 of 38 (13%) experienced microbiological failure in the piperacillin-tazobactam group compared to 0 of 34 patients (0%) in the meropenem group (risk difference, 13% [95% CI, 2% to 24%]). In contrast, 0% vs 9% of microbiological relapses were seen in the piperacillin-tazobactam and meropenem arms, respectively. Susceptibility to piperacillin-tazobactam and meropenem using broth microdilution was found in 96.5% and 100% of isolates, respectively. The most common AmpC β-lactamase genes identified were blaCMY-2, blaDHA-17, blaCMH-3, and blaACT-17. No ESBL, OXA, or other carbapenemase genes were identified. Conclusions Among patients with bloodstream infection due to AmpC producers, piperacillin-tazobactam may lead to more microbiological failures, although fewer microbiological relapses were seen. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02437045. Among patients with bloodstream infection due to AmpC-producing Enterobacterales, no difference in clinical and microbiological efficacy was observed between piperacillin-tazobactam and meropenem. More microbiological failures occurred in the piperacillin-tazobactam group, although fewer relapses were seen. A larger trial is required.
Meropenem versus piperacillin-tazobactam for definitive treatment of bloodstream infections due to ceftriaxone non-susceptible Escherichia coli and Klebsiella spp (the MERINO trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Background Gram-negative bacteria such as Escherichia coli or Klebsiella spp. frequently cause bloodstream infections. There has been a worldwide increase in resistance in these species to antibiotics such as third generation cephalosporins, largely driven by the acquisition of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase or plasmid-mediated AmpC enzymes. Carbapenems have been considered the most effective therapy for serious infections caused by such resistant bacteria; however, increased use creates selection pressure for carbapenem resistance, an emerging threat arising predominantly from the dissemination of genes encoding carbapenemases. Recent retrospective data suggest that beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations, such as piperacillin-tazobactam, may be non-inferior to carbapenems for the treatment of bloodstream infection caused by extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producers, if susceptible in vitro . This study aims to test this hypothesis in an effort to define carbapenem-sparing alternatives for these infections. Methods/Design The study will use a multicentre randomised controlled open-label non-inferiority trial design comparing two treatments, meropenem (standard arm) and piperacillin-tazobactam (carbapenem-sparing arm) in adult patients with bacteraemia caused by E. coli or Klebsiella spp. demonstrating non-susceptibility to third generation cephalosporins. Recruitment is planned to occur in sites across three countries (Australia, New Zealand and Singapore). A total sample size of 454 patients will be required to achieve 80% power to determine non-inferiority with a margin of 5%. Once randomised, definitive treatment will be for a minimum of 4 days, but up to 14 days with total duration determined by treating clinicians. Data describing demographic information, antibiotic use, co-morbid conditions, illness severity, source of infection and other risk factors will be collected. Vital signs, white cell count, use of vasopressors and days to bacteraemia clearance will be recorded up to day 7. The primary outcome measure will be mortality at 30 days, with secondary outcomes including days to clinical and microbiological resolution, microbiological failure or relapse, isolation of a multi-resistant organism or Clostridium difficile infection. Trial registration The MERINO trial is registered under the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR), reference number: ACTRN12613000532707 (registered 13 May 2013) and the US National Institute of Health ClinicalTrials.gov register, reference number: NCT02176122 (registered 24 June 2014).
The Potential Role of Social Media Platforms in Community Awareness of Antibiotic Use in the Gulf Cooperation Council States: Luxury or Necessity?
The increasing emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a serious public health issue. Increasing the awareness of the general public about appropriate antibiotic use is a key factor for combating this issue. Several public media campaigns worldwide have been launched; however, such campaigns can be costly and the outcomes are variable and difficult to assess. Social media platforms, including Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, are now frequently utilized to address health-related issues. In many geographical locations, such as the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) States (Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, and Bahrain), these platforms are becoming increasingly popular. The socioeconomic status of the GCC states and their reliable communication and networking infrastructure has allowed the penetration and scalability of these platforms in the region. This might explain why the Saudi Ministry of Health is using social media platforms alongside various other media platforms in a large-scale public awareness campaign to educate at-risk communities about the recently emerged Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV). This paper discusses the potential for using social media tools as cost-efficient and mass education platforms to raise awareness of appropriate antibiotic use in the general public and in the medical communities of the Arabian Peninsula.
Understanding implementability in clinical trials: a pragmatic review and concept map
Background The translation of evidence from clinical trials into practice is complex. One approach to facilitating this translation is to consider the ‘implementability’ of trials as they are designed and conducted. Implementability of trials refers to characteristics of the design, execution and reporting of a late-phase clinical trial that can influence the capacity for the evidence generated by that trial to be implemented. On behalf of the Australian Clinical Trials Alliance (ACTA), the national peak body representing networks of clinician researchers conducting investigator-initiated clinical trials, we conducted a pragmatic literature review to develop a concept map of implementability. Methods Documents were included in the review if they related to the design, conduct and reporting of late-phase clinical trials; described factors that increased or decreased the capacity of trials to be implemented; and were published after 2009 in English. Eligible documents included systematic reviews, guidance documents, tools or primary studies (if other designs were not available). With an expert reference group, we developed a preliminary concept map and conducted a snowballing search based on known relevant papers and websites of key organisations in May 2019. Results Sixty-five resources were included. A final map of 38 concepts was developed covering the domains of validity, relevance and usability across the design, conduct and reporting of a trial. The concepts drew on literature relating to implementation science, consumer engagement, pragmatic trials, reporting, research waste and other fields. No single resource addressed more than ten of the 38 concepts in the map. Conclusions The concept map provides trialists with a tool to think through a range of areas in which practical action could enhance the implementability of their trials. Future work could validate the strength of the associations between the concepts identified and implementability of trials and investigate the effectiveness of steps to address each concept. ACTA will use this concept map to develop guidance for trialists in Australia. Trial registration This review did not include health-related outcomes and was therefore not eligible for registration in the PROSPERO register.