Direct Identification of Microbes in Positive Blood Cultures
Transcription
Direct Identification of Microbes in Positive Blood Cultures
Direct Identification of Microbes in Positive Blood Cultures APHL Teleconference 6/18/2013 Donna M. Wolk, MHA, Ph.D., D(ABMM) System Director, Clinical Microbiology Department of Laboratory Medicine, Geisinger Health Systems Professor, College of Pharmacy/Science, Wilkes University 1 Faculty Disclosure The following disclosures of personal financial relationships with commercial interests within the last 12 months as relative to this presentation Research Contracts: Accelerate, AdvanDx, Biofire, MDC, MicroPhage Speaker: AdvanDx, Qiagen Consultant: Abbott Molecular, Accelerate, Cepheid 2 Objectives 1. Identify the key laboratory challenges for detection of bloodstream infections 2. Describe and discuss strategies to improve the identification and treatment of bloodstream pathogens 3 3 Laboratory Challenges for Detection of Bloodstream Infection (BSI) Laboratories play a key role. 4 Gradient of Disease 1. Bacteremia/Bloodstream Infection (BSI) 2. Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) 3. Sepsis: SIRS plus a culture-documented infection 4. Severe Sepsis: Sepsis plus >1 organ dysfunction 5. Septic Shock • • Hypotension (despite fluid resuscitation) plus Hypoperfusion (may include, but are not limited to lactic acidosis, oliguria, or an acute alteration in mental status.) 6. Death Infection 5 SIRS Sepsis Severe Sepsis Septic Shock Death BSI & Sepsis Can be Difficult to Diagnose Wolk, 2010, Clin. Microbiol. Newsletter Vol. 32: and 32:6 Bacteremia Fungemia, Parasitemia, Viremia, Other Infection 6 SEPSIS Burns, Trauma, Pancreatitis, Other SIRS Severe Inflammatory Response Syndrome BSIs are Common and Increasing • Sepsis is 10th leading cause of death in U.S.2 • Condition w/ highest increase (2001-2007)1 – 97% more $12.3B 675,000 342,500 $4.5B • Mortality – Bacteremia/Candidemia 1 14% (community) 34% (HAI) Higher in fragile pops. 7 1.AHRQ News and Numbers, June 9, 2010. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. http://www.ahrq.gov/news/nn/nn060910.htm 2. Angus DC, et al. Crit Care Med. 2001;29(7):1303-1310 3.Diekema et al. J Clin Microbiol. 2003 Aug;41(8):3655-60 4. Angus DC, et al. Crit Care Med. 2001;29(7):1303-1310. Disease Progresses Quickly Improvements are Needed Endothelial Inflammation Pathogen Infection Dysfunction Host HOST Response RESPONSE Coagulation/ Other 8 Fibrinolysis 1 • Loss of homeostasis 2 • Organ dysfunction 3 • Death 8 “UNTIL A CURE FOR SEPSIS IS FOUND, EARLY DETECTION IS THE SUREST HOPE FOR SURVIVAL” …THE SEPSIS ALLIANCE Rapid Antibiotic Therapy (Rx) Saves Lives Kumar A. et al., Crit Care Med 2006, 34:1286 Dellinger RP, et al. 2008. Crit Care Med 2008;36:296‐327. Jaeschke RZ, et al Pol Arch Med 2008;118:92‐95. Kollef MH, et al Chest 1999;115:462‐474. Garnacho‐Montero J, et al, Crit Care Med 2003;31:2742‐2751. Valles J, et al, J Infect 2008;56:27‐34. 9 9 Broad-spectrum Rx May Require De-escalation • Re-evaluate daily to… –Optimize efficacy –Avoid toxicity –Prevent resistance –Minimize costs • Discontinue broad spectrum Rx w/in 3 - 5 d Sharma, S. and Kumar, A. 2008 Clin Chest Med, 29(4) Deresinski, S., CID 2007:45 (Suppl 3),S177 10 Antiobiotic Vigilance Actionable Results Microbiology Laboratory, Pharmacy, Physicians Focus on Antimicrobial De-escalation and Antimicrobial Stewardship 11 Dx Microbiology Drives Antibiotic Deescalation Results to ID Pharmacy Rapid Testing 12 Tier One Rapid Testing on Positive Blood Culture Broth 13 Mortality increased by 19.2% if > 1 hr , (Ave. 3.3 hr) n = 99 (p < 0.05) 14 Barenfanger et al. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008 Dec;130(6):870‐6 14 Blood Culture Gram’s Stain Dilemmas? 15 Gram-positive cocci in clusters (GPCC) Gram-pos. cocci pairs & chains (GPCPC) Gram-negative rods (GNR) Yeast S. aureus vs CoNS Infection vs Contamination E. faecalis E. faecium VRE S. pneumoniae P. aeruginosa K. pneumoniae E. coli Other GNR C. albicans C. parapsilosis C. glabrata Other Candida MIC Creep Vanc vs High Dose Vanc Daptomycin Linezolid Ampicillin Ceftriaxone Vancomycin Daptomycin Linezolid Pseudomonal Rx Ceftriaxone Cefepime Pip-Tazo Imipenem Ertapenem Fluconazole IV Fluconazole PO Echinocandin Amphotericin B Courtesy AdvanDx Rapid Phenotypic Methods Most are Pre-CLIA Few publications statistically address impact 16 16 S. aureus ID, Direct Tube Coagulase Test (DTCT) • Positive Agreement (PA) • 4hr DTCT unless specified • • • • • 64% PA, (Qian et al, 2007, J Clin Microbiol) 85% PA, (Chapin et al, 2003 J Clin Microbiol) 92% PA, 2hr. ( Cook et al, 1997, J Clin Path) 96% PA, (Sterm et al 2008, Clin Microbiol Infect) 96.8% PA (95% CI 81.5 - 99.8) n = 47,(Carey et al, 2008, J Clin Path) • 100% PA w/ 1:10 saline dilution of blood culture broth (Varrettas, et al, 2005, J. Clin Microbiol) • False Negative = 1 - % Positive Agreement (PA) • False Positive Risk is Low • S. intermedius and S. hyicus (animal strains) are positive by the tube test (generally a delayed reaction) 17 Oxoid PBP2’ Latex Agglutination • N = 25, small sample size • Heaping loop of growth from film on subculture • Results emailed to ID Pharmacist • 100 % agreement with oxacillin MIC • 17% of positives, Rx switched due to rapid test, either broaden or narrow the Rx coverage Marlowe, 2002. et al, Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 18 Direct Thermonuclease Test • Thermonuclease agar • Toluidine blue dye: blue when complexed with DNA; Pink zone when DNA breaks down to nucleotides • Accurate when compared to DTCT Kaplan, 2003 Eur Med Health Journ • Some CoNS can destroy dye w/out denaturing DNA • No outcome studies 19 Direct Pneumoslide • BD BBL™ Pneumoslide™ Test for Streptococcus pneumoniae • 32/32 from positive broth aliquot • No outcome studies • 20 Davis et al, 1992, DMID Examples, Direct Vitek and Phoenix Two Recent Publications • 95.8% correct ID n = 136/142 • 2.8% error for Abx • Munoz-Davila, 2011 Eur J. Clin Micro Inf % Agreement w/ Ref Std Gram Neg Gram Pos Vitek 2 100 75 BD Phoenix 92.3 43.7 Gherardi et al, 2012 JCM 21 Impact Studies Vitek 1 or 2 (low n) • Decreased Abx dose/patient by 6 d, p = 0.02 Kerremans et al, 2008, JAAC • Direct Testing reduced report time, 48 hr to 8.8 hr • Direct method significantly more likely to result in change to Rx than routine method Trenholme et al, 1989, J Clin Microbiol • No change in impact variables, with dayshift only Bruins et al, 2005, Eur J Clin Microbiol Inf Dis 22 Molecular Methods PNA FISH 23 Fluorescence from Probe bound to rRNA in Bacteria Fix Slide, Hybridize, Wash/Mount, Read w/ Fluorescent Scope 97-100% sensitivity and specificity per insert BacT/Alert, Bactec, or TREK E. faecalis (green) Non-faecalis enterococci (red) T.A.T.= 1.5 Hr H.O.T. = 12min. 24 24 Enterococcus spp., Reduction in Mortality/Costs E. faecalis/OE PNA FISH • E. faecium – Decreased 30 d mortality from 45% to 26%, p = 0.04 – Savings $20,000/yr Forrest, et. al 2008, Antimicrob Agents Chemother 25 Staphylococcus spp., Reduction Mortality/Costs/LOS S. aureus/CNS PNA FISH® • Staphylococcus spp. – 80% reduction in ICUrelated mortality – 53% overall reduction – Median saved $19,441/ patient Ly et, al, 2008. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 4(3):637-40 – Vancomycin days reduced, 4.8 to 2.5 d, p=0.06 – LOS decreased from 6 to 4d/case, p < 0.05 Forrest et al JAAC, 2006 26 Early indications – requires lab and pharmacy to work with clinicians for intervention (Holtzman, C. et al, Jan 2011, J Clin Microbiol) Candida: Reduction in Mortality/Costs C. albicans/C. glabrata PNA FISH® • C. albicans • Decreased 30 d mortality (26% vs. 45%; p = 0.04) • Decreased capsofungin usage from 8.7 to 3.2 d • Savings $61,348/patient Forrest, G. N. et. al 2006, J Clin Microbiol 27 UAMC Experience: E. faecalis /OE PNA FISH® GPC Pairs and Chains, 262 PNA FISH of Total n = 460 28 Gamage et al, 2011 ICAAC Abstract D-1302b UAMC Experience: Candida spp. C. albicans/C. glabrata PNA FISH® 82 PNA FISH of Total n= 125 Gamage et al, 2011 ICAAC Abstract D-1302b 29 Others Reports of Shortened Length of Stay PNA FISH vs. Conventional Methods 33 7 days 26 11 1. Candida (All) 2 days 9 2. Staphylococci (All) Control Group 1) 2) 3) 4) 30 9 2 days 7 3. CoNS (All) PNA FISH Virgina Mason Medical Center: Poster C 2563. ASM 2011. New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. Orlando Regional Medical Center: Poster 1023. IDSA 2010. San Diego, California, USA. Washington Hospital Center: Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2008 Jun;4(3):637-40. University of Maryland Medical Center: J Antimicrob Chemother. 2006 Jul; 58(1): 154-8. 6 2 days 4 4. CoNS (Contamination) Molecular Methods Real-time PCR 31 GeneXpert® MRSA/SA detection • Avoids false + from vestigial SCCmec cassette, n=406 – – – – MRSA: 98.3% pos. agreement; 99.4% negative agreement MRSA LOD = UCL 128 CFU/Sample* SA 100% pos agreement, 98.6% neg. agreement SA LOD = UCL 57 CFU/Sample* • FYI: BC Flags pos. at ~ 1.2 × 108 (Marlowe et al, JCM 2003); Subculture still ? more sensitive @ < 30 -3,000/mL 32 Deliver + answers from sample in < 50 min. *Wolk, et. al, 2009. J Clin Microbiol NOTE: LDT if charcoal or resin bottles GeneXpert® MSSA Bacteremia Intervention Decreased Vancomycin Use, LOS, Costs • Multivariable regression (n=156) – Mean de-escalation time: empiric vancomycin cefazolin/nafcillin = 1.7 days shorter (p = 0.002) – Mean LOS = 6.2 days shorter (p = 0.07) – Mean hospital costs = $21,387 less (p = 0.02) Bauer et al. CID 2010 33 Some LDTs, PCR for S. aureus • Nguyen et al, 2010 • Vancomycin therapy was de-escalated more often to targeted therapy after intervention 73.4% vs. 47.7% • Stellrecht et al, 2009, ICAAC • Median vancomycin/MSSA infxn. reduced, 4 to 2 g • Hallin et al, JCM, 2003 • 25% benefited from a modification of Abx therapy based on the PCR (low n) 34 BD GeneOhm StaphSR assay Accuracy study 35 • Grobner et al, 2009, JCM – No outcome studies – Detection of S. aureus and MRSA – MSSA (n = 90); MRSA (n = 45) – MSSA sensitivity/specificity: 95% CI’s (96.0 to 100% / 82.4 to 100%) – MRSA 95.6% sensitive (95% CI, 84.9 to 99.5%), 95.3% specific (95% CI, 86.9 to 99.0%) – 5 discrepant results • presence of methicillin-susceptible, revertant MRSA strains (3/45) • MRSA strains that were not detected (2/45) QuickFISH Technology • Proprietary PNA probe/quencher technology • Unique probe/quencher complexes allow for: – Fluorescence signal in the presence of target rRNA – Fast hybridization; No Wash; 20min, < 5min H.O.T. Fluorophore Deck, MK et al, J Clin Microbiol, eprint 4/4/2012 PNA Probe Sequence S. aureus Sensitivity very good Specificity ok Quencher 36 QuickFISH – One Decision Point Sepsis: Empiric Rx Rx Change Blood Cultures Critical Values Call 16-24 Hrs Microbiology 37 Gram stain Pathogen ID (Positive BC) (QuickFISH) BioFire FilmArray BCID 38 FilmArray BCID 39 FilmArray BCID 40 • • • • • • • • • Gram Positive Bacteria Staphylococcus spp. Staphylococcus aureus Enterococcus spp. Streptococcus pneumoniae Streptococcus spp. Streptococcus agalactiae Streptococcus pyogenes Listeria monocytogenes • • • • • • Fungi Candida albicans Candida krusei Candida glabrata Candida parapsilosis Candida tropicalis • • • Gram Negative Bacteria Acinetobacter baumanii Enterobacteriaceae – – – – – – • • • • Enterobacter cloacae Escherichia coli Klebsiella oxytoca Klebsiella pneumoniae Proteus spp. Serratia marcescens Haemophilus influenzae Haemophilus influenzae?typeable Neisseria meningitidis Pseudomonas aeruginosa Antibiotic Resistance Genes • mecA (methicillin resistance) • vanA/B (vancomycin resistance) • blaKPC (carbapenam resistance) Nanosphere BC-GP Assay 41 Species US/FDA-Cleared BC-GP assay Staphylococcus aureus x Staphylococcus epidermidis x Staphylococcus lugdunensis x Streptococcus anginosus Group x Streptococcus agalactiae x Streptococcus pneumoniae x Streptococcus pyogenes x Enterococcus faecalis x Enterococcus faecium x Genus Staphylococcus spp. x Streptococcus spp. x Micrococcus spp. Listeria spp. x Resistance 42 mecA x vanA x vanB x Nanosphere Verigene® Reader and Processor SP Nanosphere, BC-GP Assay • Linoj et al, JCM 2013. 51(4) 1188-1192 – N= 203 VersaTrek bottles – 92% agreement for identification – 96% agreement for resistance – 6/25 polymicrobial infections not detected • Wojewoda et al, 2013 JCM Apr 17 – Agreement 94.6% – 40% correct for S. pneumoniae – Van A good – 3 mec results from non S. aureus non S. epi 43 Other Technologies of Interest BC Bottles and Whole Blood 44 MicroPhage KeyPath™ MRSA/MSSA Blood Culture Test 45 MicroPhage KeyPath™ MRSA/MSSA Blood Culture Test FDA cleared, 5 hours 46 mecA PNA FISH • ECCMID 2012, Preliminary Data • mRNA target • Bactec™ and BacT/Alert™ bottles, 2 hr TAT • 100% for MRSA for n=18 • 100% for MSSA n=72 • Missed MRCoNS (delayed expression?) 47 Matrix Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization (MALDI) Bruker Daltonics MALDI BioTyper (TM) bioMérieux = Vitek MS Measure and compare high abundance proteins 48 Bruker SepsiTyper Hopkins, Brown, UA ASM Poster, 2012 49 UA/JHH/RI Hospital Study Sepsityper 381 samples JHH n=226, Bactec Brown n=155, TREK 34 mixed organism samples excluded ------------------------------------------------------------347 single-organism samples (45 species by conventional methods) 230 gram-positive bacteria 103 gram-negative bacteria 14 yeasts 50 Median time from BC + to extraction was 4.3 h Results UA/JHH/RI, n=347 n Agreed with Conventional Discordant 51 275 9 No Reliable ID 16 Insufficient protein 47 Vlek et al, PLoS One, 2012 • Direct MALDI-TOF Improves Appropriateness of Antibiotic Treatment of Bacteremia • 11.3% increase in the patients w/ appropriate Rx 24 hours after blood culture positive • (75.3% vs 64.0% (p = 0.01). 52 Strategy for Rapid ID/Susceptibility • Tested Gram-Negative Bacteria from Positive Blood Cultures – Bruker MALDI Biotyper coupled w/ rapid susceptibility testing (BD Phoenix) • Wimmer, et al, JCM 2012 53 MRSASelect and SASelect (BioRad) for Staphylococci Schweizer et al. Comparative effectiveness of nafcillin or cefazolin versus vancomycin in methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. BMC Infectious Diseases 2011 11:279. 54 MRSASelect and SASelect agar. • UA 484 BC, off-label practice of 12 hour identification • Chromogenic agars examined after 12 and 24 hours of incubation at 35°C in non-CO2 • Equivalent performance vs. traditional ID – Sensitivity 99.8%, specificity 100%, agreement 99.8% • Prevalence of SA was 18.5% (47.4% of these MRSA) (overall prevalence15.7% MRSA, 22.1% MSSA) • The LOD for MRSASelect was 5 cfu/mL 55 • One false negative with a treated MRSA Other Technologies of Interest BC Bottles • Pyrosequencing Jordan et al, 2005, J Clin Microbiol Jordan et al, 2009, J Clin Microbiol Quiles-Melero et al, 2011, Eur J. Clin Micro Inf • PCR electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry (PCR/ESI-MS) Kaleta, E.J., et al . 2011. J. Clin. Microbiol., 49(1), 345-353. Kaleta, E.J., Clark, A.E., et al, 2011 Clin. Chem. 57(7), 1-11 56 Tier Two Emerging Technologies Directly from Whole Blood No interventional studies to date 57 Directly from Whole Blood? • • • • Roche LightCyler® SeptiFast Molzyme Universal Microbe Detection Next Generation Sequencing ??? Ion Torrent Sequencing ??? • Extraction Technologies will be key o 10ml extraction (Molzyme Qiagen, ABI, etc) 58 NEW: From whole blood in ~ 3 hours T2 Bacteria T2 Candida 59 The T2 Magnetic Resonance (T2MR®) • Measure dynamics of water • Direct detection of biomarkers in complex samples such as whole blood, plasma, serum, sputum and urine • Wide range of analyte types, including pathogens, genomics, proteins, smallmolecule immunochemistry and hemostasis measurements. 60 60 BACcel™ Diagnostic Platform Next generation antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods 61 Track Individual Clones Acinetobacter 2 divisions Computer-imposed cell mass contours (color ellipsoids) Pseudomonas 2 divisions 62 Summary Highlights • BSIs challenge clinical laboratories to provide integrated care • More evidence-based studies are needed to assess cost-benefit of rapid testing • Early indications – requires lab and pharmacy to work with clinicians for intervention (Holtzman, C. et al, Jan 2011, J. Clin. Microbiol.) • Take care with implementation of emerging technology – More development of the databases is needed – Standardization to obtain comparable results – Develop practice guidelines/algorithms for clinicians/pharmacists 63 The Future CDC/ASM Laboratory Medicine Best Practices (LMBP) https://www.futurelabmedicine.org/ 64 Acknowledgements 65 • IDRC: Desiree Johnson, Andrew Clark, Dulini Gamage, Joseph Marano, Elizabeth Ingram, Erica Isaacs, Sharon Hooven, Daniel Olson • Wysocki Research Group: Dr. Vicki Wysocki, Erin Johnson (NIH BCP Training Grant) • UMC: Wanda Petty, Lorraine Franco, Ellen Tuttle, Laurel Burnham, Bruce Anderson Katie Mathias • University of Geneva Hospital: Jacques Schrenzel, Abdessalam Cherkaoui Questions? Questions [email protected] Advancing diagnostics….saving lives Heal • Teach • Discover • Serve 66