4.7 Article

Unusual Neisseria species as a cause of infection in patients taking eculizumab

期刊

JOURNAL OF INFECTION
卷 78, 期 2, 页码 113-118

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2018.10.015

关键词

Eculizumab; Bacteremia; Nonpathogenic Neisseria; Neisseria mucosa; Neisseria cinerea; Neisseria subflava

资金

  1. Intramural CDC HHS [CC999999] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Non-meningococcal, non-gonococcal Neisseria spp. are typically commensal and rarely cause invasive disease. Eculizumab is a terminal complement inhibitor that increases susceptibility to meningococcal disease, but data on disease caused by typically-commensal Neisseria spp. are lacking. This series describes postmarketing reports of typically-commensal Neisseria spp. disease in patients receiving eculizumab. Methods: We searched the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) and medical literature for reports of commensal Neisseria spp. disease in patients receiving eculizumab, from eculizumab U.S. approval (2007) through January 31, 2018. Results: We identified seven FAERS reports (including one case also reported in the literature) of non-meningococcal, non-gonococcal Neisseria disease, including N. sicca (mucosa)/subflava (n=2), N. cinerea (n=2), N. sicca (mucosa) (n=1), N. mucosa (n =1, with concurrent alpha-hemolytic Streptococcus bacteremia), and N. flavescens (subflava) (n =1). Four cases had sources of patient immunosuppression in addition to eculizumab. Three patients had sepsis (n = 2) or septic shock (n = 1). Five patients were bacteremic. All patients were hospitalized; the infections resolved with antibiotics. Conclusions: Our search identified seven cases of disease from typically commensal Neisseria spp. in eculizumab recipients. These findings suggest that any Neisseria spp. identified from a normally sterile site in an eculizumab recipient could represent true infection warranting prompt treatment. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The British Infection Association.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据