David L. Swerdlow

Bio: David L. Swerdlow is an academic researcher from Pfizer. The author has contributed to research in topics: Population & Vaccination. The author has an hindex of 70, co-authored 204 publications receiving 23973 citations. Previous affiliations of David L. Swerdlow include Centers for Disease Control and Prevention & University of California, Berkeley.

Botulinum Toxin as a Biological Weapon: Medical and Public Health Management

Abstract: ObjectiveThe Working Group on Civilian Biodefense has developed consensus-based recommendations for measures to be taken by medical and public health professionals if botulinum toxin is used as a biological weapon against a civilian population.ParticipantsThe working group included 23 representatives from academic, government, and private institutions with expertise in public health, emergency management, and clinical medicine.EvidenceThe primary authors (S.S.A. and R.S.) searched OLDMEDLINE and MEDLINE (1960–March 1999) and their professional collections for literature concerning use of botulinum toxin as a bioweapon. The literature was reviewed, and opinions were sought from the working group and other experts on diagnosis and management of botulism. Additional MEDLINE searches were conducted through April 2000 during the review and revisions of the consensus statement.Consensus ProcessThe first draft of the working group's consensus statement was a synthesis of information obtained in the formal evidence-gathering process. The working group convened to review the first draft in May 1999. Working group members reviewed subsequent drafts and suggested additional revisions. The final statement incorporates all relevant evidence obtained in the literature search in conjunction with final consensus recommendations supported by all working group members.ConclusionsAn aerosolized or foodborne botulinum toxin weapon would cause acute symmetric, descending flaccid paralysis with prominent bulbar palsies such as diplopia, dysarthria, dysphonia, and dysphagia that would typically present 12 to 72 hours after exposure. Effective response to a deliberate release of botulinum toxin will depend on timely clinical diagnosis, case reporting, and epidemiological investigation. Persons potentially exposed to botulinum toxin should be closely observed, and those with signs of botulism require prompt treatment with antitoxin and supportive care that may include assisted ventilation for weeks or months. Treatment with antitoxin should not be delayed for microbiological testing.

Hospitalized patients with 2009 H1N1 influenza in the United States, April-June 2009.

Abstract: BACKGROUND During the spring of 2009, a pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus emerged and spread globally. We describe the clinical characteristics of patients who were hospitalized with 2009 H1N1 influenza in the United States from April 2009 to mid-June 2009. METHODS Using medical charts, we collected data on 272 patients who were hospitalized for at least 24 hours for influenza-like illness and who tested positive for the 2009 H1N1 virus with the use of a real-time reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction assay. RESULTS Of the 272 patients we studied, 25% were admitted to an intensive care unit and 7% died. Forty-five percent of the patients were children under the age of 18 years, and 5% were 65 years of age or older. Seventy-three percent of the patients had at least one underlying medical condition; these conditions included asthma; diabetes; heart, lung, and neurologic diseases; and pregnancy. Of the 249 patients who underwent chest radiography on admission, 100 (40%) had findings consistent with pneumonia. Of the 268 patients for whom data were available regarding the use of antiviral drugs, such therapy was initiated in 200 patients (75%) at a median of 3 days after the onset of illness. Data suggest that the use of antiviral drugs was beneficial in hospitalized patients, especially when such therapy was initiated early. CONCLUSIONS During the evaluation period, 2009 H1N1 influenza caused severe illness requiring hospitalization, including pneumonia and death. Nearly three quarters of the patients had one or more underlying medical conditions. Few severe illnesses were reported among persons 65 years of age or older. Patients seemed to benefit from antiviral therapy.

Global Burden of Shigella Infections: Implications for Vaccine Development and Implementation of Control Strategies

Abstract: Few studies provide data on the global morbidity and mortality caused by infection with Shigella spp.; such estimates are needed, however, to plan strategies of prevention and treatment. Here we report the results of a review of the literature published between 1966 and 1997 on Shigella infection. The data obtained permit calculation of the number of cases of Shigella infection and the associated mortality occurring worldwide each year, by age, and (as a proxy for disease severity) by clinical category, i.e. mild cases remaining at home, moderate cases requiring outpatient care, and severe cases demanding hospitalization. A sensitivity analysis was performed to estimate the high and low range of morbid and fatal cases in each category. Finally, the frequency distribution of Shigella infection, by serogroup and serotype and by region of the world, was determined. The annual number of Shigella episodes throughout the world was estimated to be 164.7 million, of which 163.2 million were in developing countries (with 1.1 million deaths) and 1.5 million in industrialized countries. A total of 69% of all episodes and 61% of all deaths attributable to shigellosis involved children under 5 years of age. The median percentages of isolates of S. flexneri, S. sonnei, S. boydii, and S. dysenteriae were, respectively, 60%, 15%, 6%, and 6% (30% of S. dysenteriae cases were type 1) in developing countries; and 16%, 77%, 2%, and 1% in industrialized countries. In developing countries, the predominant serotype of S. flexneri is 2a, followed by 1b, 3a, 4a, and 6. In industrialized countries, most isolates are S. flexneri 2a or other unspecified type 2 strains. Shigellosis, which continues to have an important global impact, cannot be adequately controlled with the existing prevention and treatment measures. Innovative strategies, including development of vaccines against the most common serotypes, could provide substantial benefits.

Epidemiology of Escherichia coli O157:H7 outbreaks, United States, 1982-2002.

Abstract: Escherichia coli O157:H7 causes 73,000 illnesses in the United States annually. We reviewed E. coli O157 outbreaks reported to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to better understand the epidemiology of E. coli O157. E. coli O157 outbreaks (>2 cases of E. coli O157 infection with a common epidemiologic exposure) reported to CDC from 1982 to 2002 were reviewed. In that period, 49 states reported 350 outbreaks, representing 8,598 cases, 1,493 (17%) hospitalizations, 354 (4%) hemolytic uremic syndrome cases, and 40 (0.5%) deaths. Transmission route for 183 (52%) was foodborne, 74 (21%) unknown, 50 (14%) person-to-person, 31 (9%) waterborne, 11 (3%) animal contact, and 1 (0.3%) laboratory-related. The food vehicle for 75 (41%) foodborne outbreaks was ground beef, and for 38 (21%) outbreaks, produce.

Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012.

Abstract: Objective:To provide an update to the “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock,” last published in 2008.Design:A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at ke

Foodborne Illness Acquired in the United States—Major Pathogens

Abstract: Estimates of foodborne illness can be used to direct food safety policy and interventions. We used data from active and passive surveillance and other sources to estimate that each year 31 major pathogens acquired in the United States caused 9.4 million episodes of foodborne illness (90% credible interval [CrI] 6.6–12.7 million), 55,961 hospitalizations (90% CrI 39,534–75,741), and 1,351 deaths (90% CrI 712–2,268). Most (58%) illnesses were caused by norovirus, followed by nontyphoidal Salmonella spp. (11%), Clostridium perfringens (10%), and Campylobacter spp. (9%). Leading causes of hospitalization were nontyphoidal Salmonella spp. (35%), norovirus (26%), Campylobacter spp. (15%), and Toxoplasma gondii (8%). Leading causes of death were nontyphoidal Salmonella spp. (28%), T. gondii (24%), Listeria monocytogenes (19%), and norovirus (11%). These estimates cannot be compared with prior (1999) estimates to assess trends because different methods were used. Additional data and more refined methods can improve future estimates.

Risk Factors Associated With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and Death in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pneumonia in Wuhan, China

Abstract: Importance Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an emerging infectious disease that was first reported in Wuhan, China, and has subsequently spread worldwide. Risk factors for the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 pneumonia have not yet been well delineated. Objective To describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who developed acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) or died. Design, Setting, and Participants Retrospective cohort study of 201 patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital in China between December 25, 2019, and January 26, 2020. The final date of follow-up was February 13, 2020. Exposures Confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia. Main Outcomes and Measures The development of ARDS and death. Epidemiological, demographic, clinical, laboratory, management, treatment, and outcome data were also collected and analyzed. Results Of 201 patients, the median age was 51 years (interquartile range, 43-60 years), and 128 (63.7%) patients were men. Eighty-four patients (41.8%) developed ARDS, and of those 84 patients, 44 (52.4%) died. In those who developed ARDS, compared with those who did not, more patients presented with dyspnea (50 of 84 [59.5%] patients and 30 of 117 [25.6%] patients, respectively [difference, 33.9%; 95% CI, 19.7%-48.1%]) and had comorbidities such as hypertension (23 of 84 [27.4%] patients and 16 of 117 [13.7%] patients, respectively [difference, 13.7%; 95% CI, 1.3%-26.1%]) and diabetes (16 of 84 [19.0%] patients and 6 of 117 [5.1%] patients, respectively [difference, 13.9%; 95% CI, 3.6%-24.2%]). In bivariate Cox regression analysis, risk factors associated with the development of ARDS and progression from ARDS to death included older age (hazard ratio [HR], 3.26; 95% CI 2.08-5.11; and HR, 6.17; 95% CI, 3.26-11.67, respectively), neutrophilia (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.09-1.19; and HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.17, respectively), and organ and coagulation dysfunction (eg, higher lactate dehydrogenase [HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.44-1.79; and HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.11-1.52, respectively] and D-dimer [HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; and HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04, respectively]). High fever (≥39 °C) was associated with higher likelihood of ARDS development (HR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.11-2.84) and lower likelihood of death (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21-0.82). Among patients with ARDS, treatment with methylprednisolone decreased the risk of death (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.20-0.72). Conclusions and Relevance Older age was associated with greater risk of development of ARDS and death likely owing to less rigorous immune response. Although high fever was associated with the development of ARDS, it was also associated with better outcomes among patients with ARDS. Moreover, treatment with methylprednisolone may be beneficial for patients who develop ARDS.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock, 2012

Abstract: To provide an update to the “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock,” last published in 2008. A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Recommendations were classified into three groups: (1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; (2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and (3) pediatric considerations. Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 h after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 h of the recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 h of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1B); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement is based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥65 mmHg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of (a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or (b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7–9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a Pao 2/Fio 2 ratio of ≤100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 h) for patients with early ARDS and a Pao 2/Fi o 2 180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 h after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 h of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5–10 min (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven “absolute”’ adrenal insufficiency (2C). Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.