Search

Objectives: Hematological malignancy (HM) patients treated with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies are at higher risk for severe COVID-19. A previous single-center study showed worse outcomes in patients treated with obinutuzumab compared to rituximab. We examined this hypothesis in a large international multicenter cohort., Methods: We included HM patients from 15 centers, from five countries treated with anti-CD20, comparing those treated with obinutuzumab (O-G) to rituximab (R-G) between December 2021 and June 2022, when Omicron lineage was dominant., Results: We collected data on 1048 patients. Within the R-G (n = 762, 73%), 191 (25%) contracted COVID-19 compared to 103 (36%) in the O-G. COVID-19 patients in the O-G were younger (61 ± 11.7 vs. 64 ± 14.5, p = 0.039), had more indolent HM diagnosis (aggressive lymphoma: 3.9% vs. 67.0%, p < 0.001), and most were on maintenance therapy at COVID-19 diagnosis (63.0% vs. 16.8%, p < 0.001). Severe-critical COVID-19 occurred in 31.1% of patients in the O-G and 22.5% in the R-G. In multivariable analysis, O-G had a 2.08-fold increased risk for severe-critical COVID-19 compared to R-G (95% CI 1.13-3.84), adjusted for Charlson comorbidity index, sex, and tixagevimab/cilgavimab (T-C) prophylaxis. Further analysis comparing O-G to R-G demonstrated increased hospitalizations (51.5% vs. 35.6% p = 0.008), ICU admissions (12.6% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.042), but the nonsignificant difference in COVID-19-related mortality (n = 10, 9.7% vs. n = 12, 6.3%, p = 0.293)., Conclusions: Despite younger age and a more indolent HM diagnosis, patients receiving obinutuzumab had more severe COVID-19 outcomes than those receiving rituximab. Our findings underscore the need to evaluate the risk-benefit balance when considering obinutuzumab therapy for HM patients during respiratory viral outbreaks., (© 2024 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: This study sought to correlate the SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody response level to the BNT162b2 (Pfizer BioNTech) mRNA vaccine after the first and second doses with the reported adverse events., Methods: This cohort study examined the adverse events profiles of people vaccinated with BNT162b2 in our institute between late 2020 and May 2021. Adverse events, age, and sex were reported using an electronic questionnaire, and their SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody levels were retrieved from the hospital database., Results: Between 20 December 2020 and 31 May 2021, the adverse events questionnaire was completed by 9700 individuals who received the first vaccine dose and 8321 who received the second dose. After the first and second doses, the average antibody levels were 62.34 AU/mL (mean 4-373) and 188.19 AU/mL (mean 20-392), respectively. All of the adverse events, except local pain, were more common after the second vaccine dose. Multivariate analysis showed that after the first vaccine dose, female sex and younger age (but not IgG titres) were associated with a higher probability of adverse events (OR 2.377, 95% CI, 1.607-3.515, p = 0.000; OR 0.959, 95% CI, 0.944-0.977, p £0.000; OR 1.002, 95% CI, 0.995-1.008, p £0.601; respectively); however, all three parameters were associated with the incidence of adverse events after the second dose (OR 2.332, 95% CI, 1.636-3.322, p = 0.000; OR 0.984, 95% CI, 0.970-0.999, p £0.039; OR 1.004, 95% CI, 1.001-1.007, p £0.022; respectively)., Discussion: Adverse events are significantly more common after the second BNT162b2 vaccine dose than after the first dose. We found an association between sex, age, and SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody titre with the incidence of adverse events., (Copyright © 2022 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron strain emergence raised concerns that its enhanced infectivity is partly due to altered spread/contamination modalities. We therefore sampled high-contact surfaces and air in close proximity to patients who were verified as infected with the Omicron strain, using identical protocols applied to sample patients positive to the original or Alpha strains. Cumulatively, for all 3 strains, viral RNA was detected in 90 of 168 surfaces and 6 of 49 air samples (mean cycle threshold [Ct]=35.2±2.5). No infective virus was identified. No significant differences in prevalence were found between strains., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest None declared., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Patients with lymphoma, especially those treated with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, suffer high COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality. The goal of this study was to assess the ability of lymphoma patients to generate a sufficient humoral response after two injections of BNT162b2 Pfizer vaccine and to identify factors influencing the response. Antibody titers were measured with the SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant (Abbott ) assay in blood samples drawn from lymphoma patients 4 2 weeks after the second dose of vaccine. The cutoff for a positive response was set at 50 AU/mL. Positive serological responses were observed in 51% of the 162 patients enrolled in this cross-sectional study. In a multivariate analysis, an interval of <12 months between the last anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody dose and the second vaccine dose (odds ratio=31.3 [95% confidence interval: 8.4-116.9], P<0.001) and presence of active lymphoma (odds ratio=4.2 (95% confidence interval: 2.1- 8.2), P=0.006) were identified as negative response predictors. The rate of seropositivity increased from 3% in patients vaccinated within 45 days after the last monoclonal antibody administration to 80% in patients vaccinated >1 year after this therapy. The latter percentage was equal to that of patients never exposed to monoclonal antibodies. In conclusion, lymphoma patients, especially those recently treated with anti- CD20 monoclonal antibodies, fail to develop sufficient humoral response to BNT162b2 vaccine. While a serological response is not the only predictor of immunity, its low level could make this population more vulnerable to COVID-19, which implies the need for a different vaccination schedule for such patients.

Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to worldwide vaccination development efforts. In December 2020 the Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine was approved in the United States. This study describes the first BNT162b2 vaccine dose effect on a large cohort., Methods: This retrospective study examined first vaccine dose effect on serology and investigated the associations between seroconversion and age or sex., Results: Serological blood tests were performed on 1898 participants following first vaccine dose; 81% were tested on day 21, before receiving the second dose (mean age 47.5 ± 12.45; median 47.7, range 18-90). Positive serology was found in 92.7% of day 21 tests. Overall positivity was 86.8%, with rates increasing from 2.5% within 1-14 days to 89.8% (14-20 days), 92.7% (21 days), and 95.9% (>21 days). Mean antibody levels 21 days after first dose were 64.3 ± 33.01 AU/ml, (range 15-373 AU/ml, median 61 AU/ml). Seropositivity was greater in females than males (88.3%. vs 83.3% respectively, p < 0.001; OR1.515; 95% CI 1.152-1.994). Older age > 60 years was associated with decreased likelihood of seropositivity (p < 0.001; OR 0.926; 95% CI 0.911-0.940). Longer time between first vaccination and serology tests was associated with increased likelihood for seropositivity (p < 0.001; OR 1.350; 95% CI 1.298-1.404)., Conclusions: The high seroconversion rate following first BNT162b2 dose among individuals < 60 may justify delayed delivery of the second dose, potentially help relieve the worldwide vaccination supply shortage, enable vaccination of twice this population within a shorter period, and ultimately reduce COVID-19 contagion., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the Israeli government strategy initially focused on containment. The Ministry of Health mandated isolation of COVID-19 patients in hospitals and instructed healthcare institutions to make necessary arrangements. As the second Israeli hospital to establish a COVID-19 department, this article describes our experience in its rapid establishment, while maintaining normal medical center activities., Setting: Establishing the COVID-19 department involved planning, set-up, and implementations phases, each one based on knowledge available regarding the pandemic and established medical standards for isolation and protection of patients and staff. Wherever possible, new innovative technologies were utilized to provide maximum protection for both patients and staff, together with special online training that was developed for medical teams., Results: A COVID-19 department was successfully established on the hospital campus, remote from other ongoing patient activities. A novel methodology of disease-adapted medicine was implemented successfully among the department's medical staff, who underwent training tailored to expected clinical scenarios. The COVID-19 department is receiving patients, with no contamination of medical personnel to date. A recent survey of COVID-19 patients revealed a very high patient satisfaction rate., Conclusion: Based on the experience described herein and lessons learned, the hospital is preparing for a potential large-scale COVID-19 wave, aimed at full readiness through utilization of a fortified underground emergency hospital to treat up to 900 COVID-19 patients, and establishment of versatile in-hospital infrastructure for quick conversion from standard conditions to COVID-19 appropriate conditions.

COVID-19 exerts deleterious cardiopulmonary effects, leading to a worse prognosis in the most affected. This retrospective multi-center observational cohort study aimed to analyze the trajectories of key vitals amongst hospitalized COVID-19 patients using a chest-patch wearable providing continuous remote patient monitoring of numerous vital signs. The study was conducted in five COVID-19 isolation units. A total of 492 COVID-19 patients were included in the final analysis. Physiological parameters were measured every 15 min. More than 3 million measurements were collected including heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, cardiac output, cardiac index, systemic vascular resistance, respiratory rate, blood oxygen saturation, and body temperature. Cardiovascular deterioration appeared early after admission and in parallel with changes in the respiratory parameters, showing a significant difference in trajectories within sub-populations at high risk. Early detection of cardiovascular deterioration of COVID-19 patients is achievable when using frequent remote patient monitoring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]