Purpose: To provide summarization of the most significant infectious diseases (ID) pharmacotherapy articles published in peer-reviewed literature in 2022. Summary: Members of the Houston Infectious Diseases Network (HIDN) nominated notable articles providing significant contributions to ID pharmacotherapy in 2022. Article nominations included those pertaining to general ID, as well as those including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) pharmacotherapy. A total of 71 articles were nominated by HIDN. Members: 68 articles pertaining to general ID pharmacotherapy and 3 articles focusing on HIV/AIDS. To aid selection of the most these most notable articles of 2022, a survey was created and distributed to members of the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists (SIDP). Of the 153 SIDP members who participated in the survey, there were 128 recorded votes for the top 10 general ID pharmacotherapy articles and 30 votes recorded for the top HIV/AIDS article. The most notable publications are summarized. Conclusion: Post pandemic significant advances in antimicrobial stewardship and infectious disease states continues to occur in a world recently focused on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic. Continuous growth in publication of ID-related articles over the past year lends towards the aims of this review to aid clinicians in remaining current on key practice-changing ID pharmacotherapy publications from 2022.
YehRFKuperKMCoyleEA, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2007. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2008;65(22):e72-e79.
2.
KuperKMHirschEBTamVH. Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2008. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2009;66(19):1726-1734.
3.
PalmerHRCottreauJMGareyKW, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2009. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2010;67(15):e34-e42.
4.
HirschEBCottreauJMIkwuagwuJO, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2010. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2011;68(21):2075-2085.
5.
TranTTBeydaNDBiehleLR, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2011. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2012;69(19):1671-1681.
6.
BowersDRHunterASJacobsDM, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2012. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2013;70(21):1930-1940.
7.
HunterASGuervilDJPerezKK, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2013. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2014;71(22):1974-1988.
8.
PheKCadleRMGuervilDJ, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2014. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2015;72(16):1380-1392.
9.
BabicJTSofjanABabinM, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2015. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2017;74(4):238-252.
10.
FongGSkoglundEWPheK, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2016. J Pharm Pract. 2018;31(5):469-480.
11.
SkoglundEWDotsonKMDempseyCJ, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2017. J Pharm Pract. 2019;32(5):534-545.
12.
BorjanJGonzales-LunaAJCarlsonTJ, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2018. J Pharm Pract. 2019;32(5):546-557.
13.
HendricksonJASpitznogleSLGonzales-LunaAJ, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2019. J Pharm Pract. 2021;34(5):800-813.
14.
EubankTAZaidanNAlnezaryFS, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2020. J Pharm Pract. 2021;27:089719002110404.
15.
NguyenNChuaHCDrakeT, et al.Significant publications on infectious diseases pharmacotherapy in 2021. J Pharm Pract. 2022;19:089719002211283.
16.
JarvisJNLawrenceDSMeyaDB, et al.Single-dose liposomal amphotericin B treatment for cryptococcal meningitis. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(12):1109-1120.
17.
Howard-AndersonJDaiWYahavD, et al.A desirability of outcome ranking analysis of a randomized clinical trial comparing seven versus Fourteen Days of antibiotics for uncomplicated gram-negative bloodstream infection. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2022;9(6):ofac140.
18.
MoehringRWYarringtonMEWarrenBG, et al.Evaluation of an opt-out protocol for antibiotic de-escalation in patients with suspected sepsis: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2023;76(3):433-442.
19.
ThadenJTCantrellSDagherM, et al.Association of follow-up blood cultures with mortality in patients with gram-negative bloodstream infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(9):e2232576.
20.
TammaPDKomarowLGeL, et al.Clinical impact of ceftriaxone resistance in Escherichia coli bloodstream infections: a multicenter prospective cohort study. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2022;9(11):ofac572.
21.
KayeKSMarchaimDThamlikitkulV, et al.Colistin monotherapy versus combination therapy for carbapenem-resistant organisms. NEJM Evid. 2023;2(1):4.
22.
VeveMPMercuroNJSangiovanniRJSantarossaMPatelN. Prevalence and predictors of Pseudomonas aeruginosa among hospitalized patients with diabetic foot infections. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2022;9(7):ofac297.
23.
FeuerstadtPLouieTJLashnerB, et al.SER-109, an oral microbiome therapy for recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(3):220-229.
24.
VenugopalanVCasausDKainzL, et al.Use of therapeutic drug monitoring to characterize cefepime‐related neurotoxicity. Pharmacother J Hum Pharmacol Drug Ther. 2023;43(1):6-14.
25.
ChuangYCWangJTYangJL, et al.The combination of daptomycin with β-lactam antibiotics is more effective than daptomycin alone for vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium bloodstream infection. J Infect Public Health. 2022;15(12):1396-1402.
26.
ChoiSHCesarASnowTACSaleemNArulkumaranNSingerM. Efficacy of doxycycline for mild-to-moderate community-acquired pneumonia in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Infect Dis. 2023;76(4):683-691.
27.
YoshimuraJYamakawaKOhtaY, et al.Effect of gram stain–guided initial antibiotic therapy on clinical response in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia: the GRACE-VAP randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(4):e226136.
28.
AlegriaWMariniBLGreggKSBixbyDLPerissinottiANagelJ. Early antibiotic discontinuation or de-escalation in high-risk patients with AML with febrile neutropenia and prolonged neutropenia. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2022;20(3):245-252.
29.
KayeKSBelleyABarthP, et al.Effect of cefepime/enmetazobactam vs piperacillin/tazobactam on clinical cure and microbiological eradication in patients with complicated urinary tract infection or acute pyelonephritis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2022;328(13):1304.
30.
KellerSCCosgroveSEMillerMATammaP. A framework for implementing antibiotic stewardship in ambulatory care: lessons learned from the agency for healthcare research and quality safety program for improving antibiotic use. Antimicrob Steward Healthc Epidemiol. 2022;2(1):e109.
31.
HeffernanAJSimeFBLimSMS, et al.Pharmacodynamics of ceftriaxone for the treatment of methicillin‐susceptible Staphylococcus aureus: is it a viable treatment option?Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2022;59(3):106537.
32.
FossePEBrinkmanKMBrinkHMConnerCEAdenJKGiancolaSE. Comparing outcomes among outpatients treated for pyelonephritis with oral cephalosporins versus first-line agents. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2022;59(4):106560.
33.
KoodaKCanterburyEBellolioF. Impact of pharmacist-led antimicrobial stewardship on appropriate antibiotic prescribing in the emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Emerg Med. 2022;79(4):374-387.
34.
MohamedABennettNPloetzJAragonLKennedyKBoydS. Ceftriaxone versus cefazolin for the treatment of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2022;60(3):106632.
35.
BuckleyMSKomerdeljIAD’AlessioPA, et al.Vancomycin with concomitant piperacillin/tazobactam vs. cefepime or meropenem associated acute kidney injury in the critically ill: a multicenter propensity score-matched study. J Crit Care. 2022;67:134-140.
36.
Delany-MoretlweSHughesJPBockP, et al.Cabotegravir for the prevention of HIV-1 in women: results from HPTN 084, a phase 3, randomised clinical trial. Lancet. 2022;399(10337):1779-1789.
37.
ChountaVSnedecorSJWuSVan de VeldeN. Indirect comparison of 48-week efficacy and safety of long-acting cabotegravir and rilpivirine maintenance every 8 weeks with daily oral standard of care antiretroviral therapy in participants with virologically suppressed HIV-1-infection. BMC Infect Dis. 2022;22(1):428.
38.
O’HalloranJASahrmannJParra-RodriguezL, et al.Integrase Strand transfer Inhibitors are associated with incident diabetes mellitus in people with human immunodeficiency virus. Clin Infect Dis. 2022;75(12):2060-2065. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciac355.
39.
HendersonHINapravnikSKosorokMR, et al.Predicting risk of multidrug-resistant enterobacterales infections among people with HIV. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2022;9(10):ofac487. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofac487.
40.
Control and Prevention (U.S). Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States, 2019. CDC.gov: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (U.S.); 2019.
41.
SmithJRBarberKERautAAboutalebMSakoulasGRybakMJ. β-Lactam combinations with daptomycin provide synergy against vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015;70(6):1738-1743.
42.
TRUVADA- Emtricitabine and Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Tablet, Film Coated. Package Insert. Gilead.com: Gilead Sciences, Inc; 2004.
CelumCLDelany‐MoretlweSBaetenJM, et al.HIV pre‐exposure prophylaxis for adolescent girls and young women in Africa: from efficacy trials to delivery. J Int AIDS Soc. 2019;22(S4):25298.
45.
VellozaJKhozaNScorgieF, et al.The influence of HIV‐related stigma on PrEP disclosure and adherence among adolescent girls and young women in HPTN 082: a qualitative study. J Int AIDS Soc. 2020;23(3):25463
46.
MarrazzoJMRamjeeGRichardsonBA, et al.Tenofovir-based preexposure prophylaxis for HIV infection among African women. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(6):509-518.
47.
BalkusJEBrownEPalaneeT, et al.An empiric HIV risk scoring tool to Predict HIV-1 acquisition in African women. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 1999. 2016;72(3):333-343.
48.
GuhAYMuYWinstonLG, et al.Trends in U.S. Burden of Clostridioides difficile infection and outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(14):1320-1330.
49.
DubberkeEROlsenMA. Burden of Clostridium difficile on the healthcare system. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;55(suppl_2):S88-S92.
50.
TheriotCMYoungVB. Interactions between the gastrointestinal microbiome and Clostridium difficile. Annu Rev Microbiol. 2015;69:445-461.
51.
TariqRPardiDSBartlettMGKhannaS. Low cure rates in controlled trials of Fecal microbiota transplantation for recurrent Clostridium difficile infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis. 2019;68(8):1351-1358.
52.
DeFilippZBloomPPTorres SotoM, et al.Drug-resistant E. coli bacteremia transmitted by fecal microbiota transplant. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(21):2043-2050.
ZhangYSaint FleurAFengH. The development of live biotherapeutics against Clostridioides difficile infection towards reconstituting gut microbiota. Gut Microb. 2022;14(1):2052698.
55.
von DachEAlbrichWCBrunelAS, et al.Effect of C-reactive protein–guided antibiotic treatment duration, 7-day treatment, or 14-day treatment on 30-day clinical failure rate in patients with uncomplicated gram-negative bacteremia: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;323(21):2160.
56.
YahavDFranceschiniEKoppelF, et al.Seven versus 14 days of antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated gram-negative bacteremia: a noninferiority randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2019;69(7):1091-1098
57.
MolinaJMontero-MateosEPraena-SegoviaJ, et al.Seven-versus 14-day course of antibiotics for the treatment of bloodstream infections by Enterobacterales: a randomized, controlled trial. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2022;28(4):550-557.
58.
EvansSRRubinDFollmannD, et al.Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) and response adjusted for duration of antibiotic risk (RADAR). In: RAWeinstein, ed. Clin Infect Dis. 2015;61:800-806.
59.
DoernbergSBTranTTTTongSYC, et al.Good studies evaluate the disease while great studies evaluate the patient: development and application of a desirability of outcome ranking endpoint for Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2019;68(10):1691-1698.
60.
SeptimusEJ. Antimicrobial resistance. Med Clin North Am. 2018;102(5):819-829.
61.
RajasinghamRGovenderNPJordanA, et al.The global burden of HIV-associated cryptococcal infection in adults in 2020: a modelling analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2022;22(12):1748-1755.
62.
RajasinghamRSmithRMParkBJ, et al.Global burden of disease of HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis: an updated analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2017;17(8):873-881.
63.
BicanicTBottomleyCLoyseA, et al.Toxicity of amphotericin B deoxycholate-based induction therapy in patients with HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(12):7224-7231.
64.
TenfordeMWGertzAMLawrenceDS, et al.Mortality from HIV‐associated meningitis in sub‐Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Int AIDS Soc. 2020;23(1):25416.
65.
LawrenceDSYoussoufNMolloySF, et al.AMBIsome therapy induction optimisatioN (AMBITION): high dose AmBisome for cryptococcal meningitis induction therapy in sub-Saharan Africa: study protocol for a phase 3 randomised controlled non-Inferiority trial. Trials. 2018;19(1):649.
66.
Guidelines for Diagnosing, Preventing and Managing Cryptococcal Disease Among Adults, Adolescents and Children Living with HIV. World Health Organization. 2022. AccessedFebruary 27, 2023. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK581832/
67.
van DuinDLokJJEarleyM, et al.Colistin versus ceftazidime-Avibactam in the treatment of infections due to carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;66(2):163-171.
68.
PaulMDaikosGLDurante-MangoniE, et al.Colistin alone versus colistin plus meropenem for treatment of severe infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria: an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18(4):391-400.
69.
Durante-MangoniESignorielloGAndiniR, et al.Colistin and rifampicin compared with colistin alone for the treatment of serious infections due to extensively drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii: a multicenter, randomized clinical trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;57(3):349-358.
70.
AydemirHAkdumanDPiskinN, et al.Colistin vs the combination of colistin and rifampicin for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii ventilator-associated pneumonia. Epidemiol Infect. 2013;141(6):1214-1222.
71.
TsujiBTPogueJMZavasckiAP, et al.International consensus guidelines for the optimal use of the polymyxins: endorsed by the American college of clinical pharmacy (ACCP), European society of clinical microbiology and infectious diseases (ESCMID), infectious disease society of America (IDSA), International society for anti‐infective pharmacology (ISAP), society of critical care medicine (SCCM), and society of infectious diseases pharmacists (SIDP). Pharmacother J Hum Pharmacol Drug Ther. 2019;39(1):10-39.
72.
TammaPDAitkenSLBonomoRAMathersAJvan DuinDClancyCJ. Infectious diseases society of America 2022 guidance on the treatment of extended-spectrum β-lactamase producing Enterobacterales (ESBL-E), carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa with difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR- P. aeruginosa ). Clin Infect Dis. 2022;75(2):187-212.
73.
TammaPDAitkenSLBonomoRAMathersAJvan DuinDClancyCJ. Infectious diseases society of America guidance on the treatment of AmpC β-lactamase–producing Enterobacterales, carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii , and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2022;74(12):2089-2114.
74.
ImYKangDKoRE, et al.Time-to-antibiotics and clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis and septic shock: a prospective nationwide multicenter cohort study. Crit Care. 2022;26(1):19.
75.
IDSA Sepsis Task Force, KalilACGilbertDNWinslowDLMasurHKlompasM. Infectious diseases society of America (IDSA) POSITION STATEMENT: why IDSA did not endorse the surviving sepsis campaign guidelines. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;66(10):1631-1635.
76.
RheeCChiotosKCosgroveSE, et al.Infectious diseases society of America position paper: recommended revisions to the National severe sepsis and septic shock early management bundle (SEP-1) sepsis quality measure. Clin Infect Dis. 2021;72(4):541-552.
77.
PakyzALOrndahlCMJohnsA, et al.Impact of the centers for medicare and medicaid services sepsis core measure on antibiotic Use. Clin Infect Dis. 2021;72(4):556-565.
78.
AndersonDJMoehringRWParishA, et al.The impact of centers for medicare & medicaid services SEP-1 core measure Implementation on antibacterial utilization: a retrospective multicenter longitudinal cohort study with Interrupted time-Series analysis. Clin Infect Dis. 2022;75(3):503-511.
79.
JerniganJAHatfieldKMWolfordH, et al.Multidrug-resistant bacterial infections in U.S. hospitalized patients, 2012-2017. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(14):1309-1319.
80.
RozwandowiczMBrouwerMSMFischerJ, et al.Plasmids carrying antimicrobial resistance genes in Enterobacteriaceae. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018;73(5):1121-1137.
81.
Rodríguez-BañoJAlcaláJCCisnerosJM, et al.Community infections caused by extended-spectrum β-lactamase–producing Escherichia coli. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(17):1897.
82.
SchwaberMJNavon-VeneziaSKayeKSBen-AmiRSchwartzDCarmeliY. Clinical and economic impact of bacteremia with extended- spectrum-beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006;50(4):1257-1262.
83.
SchwaberMJCarmeliY. Mortality and delay in effective therapy associated with extended-spectrum -lactamase production in Enterobacteriaceae bacteraemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2007;60(5):913-920.
84.
TumbarelloMSanguinettiMMontuoriE, et al.Predictors of mortality in patients with bloodstream infections caused by extended-spectrum-β-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae: importance of inadequate initial antimicrobial treatment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007;51(6):1987-1994.
85.
TumbarelloMSpanuTSanguinettiM, et al.Bloodstream infections caused by extended-spectrum-β-lactamase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae : risk factors, molecular epidemiology, and clinical outcome. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006;50(2):498-504.
86.
BonineNGBergerAAltincatalA, et al.Impact of Delayed appropriate antibiotic therapy on patient outcomes by antibiotic resistance status from serious gram-negative bacterial infections. Am J Med Sci. 2019;357(2):103-110.
87.
ClemmonsABYoungHNBlandCM, et al.Incidence and utility of follow-up blood cultures in cancer patients with gram-negative bacteremia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2021;101(2):115444.
88.
GiannellaMPascaleRPancaldiL, et al.Follow-up blood cultures are associated with improved outcome of patients with gram-negative bloodstream infections: retrospective observational cohort study. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26(7):897-903.
89.
WiggersJBXiongWDanemanN. Sending repeat cultures: is there a role in the management of bacteremic episodes? (SCRIBE study). BMC Infect Dis. 2016;16(1):286.
90.
MaskarinecSAParkLPRuffinF, et al.Positive follow-up blood cultures identify high mortality risk among patients with Gram-negative bacteraemia. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26(7):904-910.
91.
AmiparaRWindersHRJustoJABookstaverPBKohnJAl-HasanMN. Impact of follow up blood cultures on outcomes of patients with community-onset gram-negative bloodstream infection. EClinicalMedicine. 2021;34:100811.
92.
PayneLEGagnonDJRikerRR, et al.Cefepime-induced neurotoxicity: a systematic review. Crit Care. 2017;21(1):276.
93.
LamSGomolinIH. Cefepime neurotoxicity: case report, pharmacokinetic considerations, and literature review. Pharmacotherapy. 2006;26(8):1169-1174.
94.
LauCMarriottDGouldMAndresenDReuterSEPenmJ. A retrospective study to determine the cefepime-induced neurotoxicity threshold in hospitalized patients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2020;75(3):718-725.
95.
AppaAAJainRRakitaRMHakimianSPottingerPS. Characterizing cefepime neurotoxicity: a systematic review. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2017;4(4):ofx170.
Al-ShaerMHRubidoECherabuddiKVenugopalanVKlinkerKPeloquinC. Early therapeutic monitoring of β–lactams and associated therapy outcomes in critically ill patients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2020;75(12):3644-3651.
98.
VenugopalanVHamzaMSantevecchiB, et al.Implementation of a β-lactam therapeutic drug monitoring program: experience from a large academic medical center. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2022;79(18):1586-1591.
99.
LipskyBABerendtARCorniaPB, et al.2012 infectious diseases society of America clinical practice guideline for the Diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot Infectionsa. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54(12):e132-e173.
100.
SaltogluNSurmeSEzirmikE, et al.The effects of antimicrobial resistance and the compatibility of initial antibiotic treatment on clinical outcomes in patients with diabetic foot infection. Int J Low Extrem Wounds.2023;22(2):283-290.
101.
LipskyBA. Diabetic foot infections: current treatment and delaying the ‘post-antibiotic era’: treating diabetic foot infections. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2016;32:246-253.
