It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Background
Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) remains a major health problem in the United States. The IDSA guidelines recommend using stool toxin assay as part of a multistep algorithm rather than nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) alone. However, the clinical significance of toxin negative tests remains a subject of debate. We performed a prospective study in our institution to describe clinical outcomes of CDI based on the results of the stool toxin assay.
Methods
Our laboratory utilizes a 2-step algorithm, using glutamate dehydrogenase plus detection of toxin B by enzyme immunoassay (EIA) arbitrated by NAAT for testing stool samples submitted for C. difficile testing. The study was conducted between January and December 2017. Patients diagnosed with CDI based on laboratory results were divided into two groups based on toxin B assay results. Shotgun metagenomics was performed directly on stool specimens using Illumina NextSeq in a subset of patients. Chart reviews were performed to assess clinical outcomes. Our primary outcome was incidence of severe CDI and 30-day mortality.
Results
A total of 2,823 samples were submitted to the laboratory for testing for suspected CDI. Three hundred thirty-eight samples in 290 discrete patients were considered positive using the two step algorithm. Whole genome sequencing was performed on samples from 57 patients (Figure 1). Clinical outcome data were available for 53 patients. Thirty percent were on active chemotherapy. Thirty-four patients were toxin B positive (group 1), 19 were toxin B negative (group 2) by EIA. Hospital onset disease was seen in 10 (27%) of patients in group 1 vs. 7 (37%) in group 2 (P = 0.57). Thirty-day mortality was 3% in toxin positive vs. 5% in toxin negative groups (P = 0.67). Severe CDI was seen in 14 (41%) in group 1 vs. 8 (42%) in group 2 (P = 0.94). NAP 1 strain was detected in 10.5% of patients in group 2. Percentage of C. difficile reads on sequencing in fecal samples in group 1 (0.17%) was not significantly different from group 2 (0.24%) (P = 0.70, Figure 2).
Conclusion
In our cohort, detection of C. difficile toxin in stool samples was not associated with increased severity of disease. Our cohort has a higher prevalence of patients on active chemotherapy than previously studied cohorts.
Bioburden of C. difficile was not significantly different in toxin positive and negative disease.
Disclosures
All authors: No reported disclosures.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Myeloma Institute, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas
2 Division of Hematology Oncology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas
3 Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas
4 Internal Medicine, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas
5 Division of Infectious Diseases, UAMS, Little Rock, Arkansas
6 Department of Pathology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas