Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a complex disorder for which currently there is no accepted definition. Having a uniform standard for diagnosing and classifying AKI would enhance our ability to manage these patients. Future clinical and translational research in AKI will require collaborative networks of investigators drawn from various disciplines, dissemination of information via multidisciplinary joint conferences and publications, and improved translation of knowledge from pre-clinical research. We describe an initiative to develop uniform standards for defining and classifying AKI and to establish a forum for multidisciplinary interaction to improve care for patients with or at risk for AKI. Members representing key societies in critical care and nephrology along with additional experts in adult and pediatric AKI participated in a two day conference in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, in September 2005 and were assigned to one of three workgroups. Each group's discussions formed the basis for draft recommendations that were later refined and improved during discussion with the larger group. Dissenting opinions were also noted. The final draft recommendations were circulated to all participants and subsequently agreed upon as the consensus recommendations for this report. Participating societies endorsed the recommendations and agreed to help disseminate the results. The term AKI is proposed to represent the entire spectrum of acute renal failure. Diagnostic criteria for AKI are proposed based on acute alterations in serum creatinine or urine output. A staging system for AKI which reflects quantitative changes in serum creatinine and urine output has been developed. We describe the formation of a multidisciplinary collaborative network focused on AKI. We have proposed uniform standards for diagnosing and classifying AKI which will need to be validated in future studies. The Acute Kidney Injury Network offers a mechanism for proceeding with efforts to improve patient outcomes.

Acute Kidney Injury Network: report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury

Summary Background Since December, 2019, Wuhan, China, has experienced an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 have been reported but risk factors for mortality and a detailed clinical course of illness, including viral shedding, have not been well described. Methods In this retrospective, multicentre cohort study, we included all adult inpatients (≥18 years old) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from Jinyintan Hospital and Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital (Wuhan, China) who had been discharged or had died by Jan 31, 2020. Demographic, clinical, treatment, and laboratory data, including serial samples for viral RNA detection, were extracted from electronic medical records and compared between survivors and non-survivors. We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression methods to explore the risk factors associated with in-hospital death. Findings 191 patients (135 from Jinyintan Hospital and 56 from Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital) were included in this study, of whom 137 were discharged and 54 died in hospital. 91 (48%) patients had a comorbidity, with hypertension being the most common (58 [30%] patients), followed by diabetes (36 [19%] patients) and coronary heart disease (15 [8%] patients). Multivariable regression showed increasing odds of in-hospital death associated with older age (odds ratio 1·10, 95% CI 1·03–1·17, per year increase; p=0·0043), higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (5·65, 2·61–12·23; p Interpretation The potential risk factors of older age, high SOFA score, and d-dimer greater than 1 μg/mL could help clinicians to identify patients with poor prognosis at an early stage. Prolonged viral shedding provides the rationale for a strategy of isolation of infected patients and optimal antiviral interventions in the future. Funding Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences; National Science Grant for Distinguished Young Scholars; National Key Research and Development Program of China; The Beijing Science and Technology Project; and Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development.

Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study

To provide an update to “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012”. A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable. The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions. Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with 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 these critically ill patients with high mortality.

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs00134-017-4683-6.pdf

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

Objective:To provide an update to “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012.”Design:A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016.

Purpose
The LUX-Lung 3 study investigated the efficacy of chemotherapy compared with afatinib, a selective, orally bioavailable ErbB family blocker that irreversibly blocks signaling from epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR/ErbB1), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2/ErbB2), and ErbB4 and has wide-spectrum preclinical activity against EGFR mutations. A phase II study of afatinib in EGFR mutation-positive lung adenocarcinoma demonstrated high response rates and progression-free survival (PFS).

Patients and Methods
In this phase III study, eligible patients with stage IIIB/IV lung adenocarcinoma were screened for EGFR mutations. Mutation-positive patients were stratified by mutation type (exon 19 deletion, L858R, or other) and race (Asian or non-Asian) before two-to-one random assignment to 40 mg afatinib per day or up to six cycles of cisplatin plus pemetrexed chemotherapy at standard doses every 21 days. The primary end point was PFS by independent review. Secondary end points included tumor response, overall survival, adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

Results
A total of 1,269 patients were screened, and 345 were randomly assigned to treatment. Median PFS was 11.1 months for afatinib and 6.9 months for chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.78; P = .001). Median PFS among those with exon 19 deletions and L858R EGFR mutations (n = 308) was 13.6 months for afatinib and 6.9 months for chemotherapy (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.65; P = .001). The most common treatmentrelated adverse events were diarrhea, rash/acne, and stomatitis for afatinib and nausea, fatigue, and decreased appetite for chemotherapy. PROs favored afatinib, with better control of cough, dyspnea, and pain.

Conclusion
Afatinib is associated with prolongation of PFS when compared with standard doublet chemotherapy in patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma and EGFR mutations.

Phase III study of afatinib or cisplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations

Taponamiento cardíaco como manifestación clínica inicial de un carcinoma no microcítico de pulmón

Over the past decades, the advent of targeted and biological therapies has revolutionized the management of cancer and autoimmune, hematological and inflammatory conditions. Although a large amount of information is now available on the risk of opportunistic infections associated with some of these agents, the evidence regarding the susceptibility to bacterial infections is more limited. Biological agents have been shown to entail a variable risk of bacterial infections in pivotal randomized clinical trials and post-marketing studies. Recommendations on risk minimization strategies and therapeutic interventions are therefore scarce and often based on expert opinion, with only a few clear statements for some particular agents (i.e. meningococcal vaccination for patients receiving eculizumab). In the present review the available information regarding the incidence of and risk factors for bacterial infection associated with the use of different groups of biological agents is summarized according to their mechanisms of action, and recommendations based on this evidence are provided. Additional information coming from clinical research and real-world studies is required to address unmet questions in this emerging field. La introducción de terapias dirigidas y biológicas ha revolucionado a lo largo de las últimas décadas el tratamiento del cáncer y de las enfermedades autoinmunes, hematológicas e inflamatorias. Si bien existe abundante información acerca del exceso de riesgo de infección oportunista vinculado a algunos de estos agentes, la evidencia disponible sobre el riesgo de infección bacteriana específicamente es más limitada. En el marco de los ensayos clínicos pivotales y de estudios poscomercialización se ha demostrado un riesgo variable de infección bacteriana asociada al uso de terapias biológicas. Por ese motivo las recomendaciones para su minimización y abordaje terapéutico son escasas, y a menudo basadas en la opinión de expertos, con tan solo algunos escenarios de alto riesgo claramente establecidos para ciertos agentes (como la recomendación de vacunación anti-meningocócica en pacientes tratados con eculizumab). En la presente revisión se actualiza la información disponible respecto a la incidencia de infección bacteriana relacionada con las diferentes familias terapéuticas según su mecanismo de acción y sus factores de riesgo, aportándose igualmente algunas recomendaciones basadas en esta evidencia. Se requieren más estudios de investigación clínica en vida real para aclarar las preguntas sin resolver en este novedoso campo. 

Is there a real risk of bacterial infection in patients receiving targeted and biological therapies?

Metástasis en músculo esquelético como presentación inicial de un carcinoma no microcítico de pulmón

Tuberculosis ósea multifocal que simula un sarcoma de partes blandas

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has profoundly impacted liver transplant (LT) activity across the world, with notable decreases in the number of donations and procedures in most Western countries, in particular throughout the first wave. The cumulative incidence of COVID-19 in LT recipients (with estimates ranging from 0.34% to 1.56%) appears to be at least comparable to that observed for the general population. Clinical and radiological features at presentation are also similar to non-transplant patients. The risk of death among LT recipients requiring hospital admission is high (from 12% to 19%), although some authors have suggested that overall mortality may be actually lower compared to the general non-transplant population. It is likely that these poor outcomes may be mainly influenced by the older age and higher comorbidity burden of LT recipients, rather than by the transplant status itself. In fact, it has been hypothesized that post-transplant immunosuppression would exert a protective role, with special focus on tacrolimus-containing regimens. There is scarce evidence to guide the optimal management of post-transplant COVID-19 and the use of antiviral or immunomodulatory therapies, although both clinical practice and guidelines support the dose reduction or withdrawal of anti-proliferative agents such as mofetil mycophenolate. Preliminary reports suggest that the antibody response to messenger RNA vaccines is significantly impaired as compared to non-immunocompromised individuals, in line with other transplant populations. Finally, it is foreseeable that the future will be conditioned by the emerging variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 with increased transmissibility among LT recipients.

Mario Fernández-Ruiz

Papers

Taponamiento cardíaco como manifestación clínica inicial de un carcinoma no microcítico de pulmón

Is there a real risk of bacterial infection in patients receiving targeted and biological therapies?

Metástasis en músculo esquelético como presentación inicial de un carcinoma no microcítico de pulmón

Tuberculosis ósea multifocal que simula un sarcoma de partes blandas

Coronavirus disease 2019 in liver transplant patients: Clinical and therapeutic aspects.