• COVID-19
• Publicationsclose
• Research softwareclose
• Other research productsclose
• 2014-2023close
• Open Access close
• CZ close
• Scientia, Dipòsit d’Informació Digital del Departament de Salut close
• COVID-19 close

Background: Patients with Philadelphia-negative chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) typically incur high rates of infections and both drugs and comorbidities may modulate infection risk. Objectives: The present study aims to assess the effect of immunosuppressive agents on clinical outcomes of MPN patients affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Design: This is an observational study. Methods: We specifically searched and analyzed MPN patients collected by EPICOVIDEHA online registry, which includes individuals with hematological malignancies diagnosed with COVID-19 since February 2020. Results: Overall, 398 patients with MPN were observed for a median of 76 days [interquartile range (IQR): 19–197] after detection of SARS-CoV2 infection. Median age was 69 years (IQR: 58–77) and 183 individuals (46%) had myelofibrosis (MF). Overall, 121 patients (30%) of the whole cohort received immunosuppressive therapies including steroids, immunomodulatory drugs, or JAK inhibitors. Hospitalization and consecutive admission to intensive care unit was required in 216 (54%) and 53 patients (13%), respectively. Risk factors for hospital admission were identified by multivariable logistic regression and include exposure to immunosuppressive therapies [odds ratio (OR): 2.186; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.357–3.519], age ⩾70 years, and comorbidities. The fatality rate was 22% overall and the risk of death was independently increased by age ⩾70 years [hazard ratio (HR): 2.191; 95% CI: 1.363–3.521], previous comorbidities, and exposure to immunosuppressive therapies before the infection (HR: 2.143; 95% CI: 1.363–3.521). Conclusion: COVID-19 infection led to a particularly dismal outcome in MPN patients receiving immunosuppressive agents or reporting multiple comorbidities. Therefore, specific preventive strategies need to be tailored for such individuals. Plain language summary EPICOVIDEHA registry reports inferior outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with Philadelphia-negative chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms receiving immunosuppressive therapies. Patients with Philadelphia-negative chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) incur high rates of infections during the course of their disease. The present study was aimed at assessing which patient characteristics predicted a worse outcome of SARS-COV-2 infection in individuals with MPN. To pursue this objective, the researchers analyzed the data collected by EPICOVIDEHA, an international online registry, which includes individuals with hematological malignancies diagnosed with COVID-19 since February 2020. The database provided clinical data of 398 patients with MPN incurring COVID-19: Patients were mostly elderly (median age was 69 years); Forty-six percent of them were affected by myelofibrosis, which is the most severe MPN; Moreover, 32% were receiving immunosuppressive therapies (JAK inhibitors, such as ruxolitinib, steroids, or immunomodulatory IMID drugs, such as thalidomide) before COVID-19. Hospitalization was required in 54% of the patients, and the risk of being hospitalized for severe COVID-19 was independently predicted by Older age; Comorbidities; Exposure to immunosuppressive therapies. Overall, 22% of MPN patients deceased soon after COVID-19 and the risk of death was independently increased over twofold by Older age; Comorbidities; Exposure to immunosuppressive therapies before the infection. In conclusion, COVID-19 infection led to a particularly dismal outcome in MPN patients receiving immunosuppressive agents, including JAK inhibitors, or reporting multiple comorbidities. Therefore, specific preventive strategies need to be tailored for such individuals.

SARS-CoV-2; Hematological malignancies SARS-CoV-2; Neoplasias hematológicas SARS-CoV-2; Neoplasies hematològiques Optics COMMIT (COVID-19 Unmet Medical Needs and Associated Research Extension) COVID-19 RFP program by GILEAD Science, United States, Grant/Award Number: Project 2020-8223.

Background This study evaluated the consequences in Europe of the COVID-19 outbreak on pathology laboratories orientated toward the diagnosis of thoracic diseases. Materials and methods A survey was sent to 71 pathology laboratories from 21 European countries. The questionnaire requested information concerning the organization of biosafety, the clinical and molecular pathology, the biobanking, the workload, the associated research into COVID-19, and the organization of education and training during the COVID-19 crisis, from 15 March to 31 May 2020, compared with the same period in 2019. Results Questionnaires were returned from 53/71 (75%) laboratories from 18 European countries. The biosafety procedures were heterogeneous. The workload in clinical and molecular pathology decreased dramatically by 31% (range, 3%-55%) and 26% (range, 7%-62%), respectively. According to the professional category, between 28% and 41% of the staff members were not present in the laboratories but did teleworking. A total of 70% of the laboratories developed virtual meetings for the training of residents and junior pathologists. During the period of study, none of the staff members with confirmed COVID-19 became infected as a result of handling samples. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic has had a strong impact on most of the European pathology laboratories included in this study. Urgent implementation of several changes to the organization of most of these laboratories, notably to better harmonize biosafety procedures, was noted at the onset of the pandemic and maintained in the event of a new wave of infection occurring in Europe. Highlights • Biosafety measures used in the first wave of the COVID-19 crisis were heterogeneous in 53 European pathology laboratories. • A dramatic decrease of the workload in pathology laboratories was noted. • No case of healthcare workers contaminated with SARS-CoV-2 associated with samples handling was identified.

Abstract Background Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) may be more susceptible to COVID-19 related poor outcomes, including thrombosis and death, due to the advanced age, the presence of comorbidities, and the disease and treatment-related immune deficiency. The aim of this study was to assess the risk of thrombosis and bleeding in patients with CLL affected by severe COVID-19. Methods This is a retrospective multicenter study conducted by ERIC, the European Research Initiative on CLL, including patients from 79 centers across 22 countries. Data collection was conducted between April and May 2021. The COVID-19 diagnosis was confirmed by the real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay for SARS-CoV-2 on nasal or pharyngeal swabs. Severe cases of COVID-19 were defined by hospitalization and the need of oxygen or admission into ICU. Development and type of thrombotic events, presence and severity of bleeding complications were reported during treatment for COVID-19. Bleeding events were classified using ISTH definition. STROBE recommendations were used in order to enhance reporting. Results A total of 793 patients from 79 centers were included in the study with 593 being hospitalized (74.8%). Among these, 511 were defined as having severe COVID: 162 were admitted to the ICU while 349 received oxygen supplementation outside the ICU. Most patients (90.5%) were receiving thromboprophylaxis. During COVID-19 treatment, 11.1% developed a thromboembolic event, while 5.0% experienced bleeding. Thrombosis developed in 21.6% of patients who were not receiving thromboprophylaxis, in contrast to 10.6% of patients who were on thromboprophylaxis. Bleeding episodes were more frequent in patients receiving intermediate/therapeutic versus prophylactic doses of low-molecular-weight heparin (LWMH) (8.1% vs. 3.8%, respectively) and in elderly. In multivariate analysis, peak D-dimer level and C-reactive protein to albumin ratio were poor prognostic factors for thrombosis occurrence (OR = 1.022, 95%CI 1.007‒1.038 and OR = 1.025, 95%CI 1.001‒1.051, respectively), while thromboprophylaxis use was protective (OR = 0.199, 95%CI 0.061‒0.645). Age and LMWH intermediate/therapeutic dose administration were prognostic factors in multivariate model for bleeding (OR = 1.062, 95%CI 1.017–1.109 and OR = 2.438, 95%CI 1.023–5.813, respectively). Conclusions Patients with CLL affected by severe COVID-19 are at a high risk of thrombosis if thromboprophylaxis is not used, but also at increased risk of bleeding under the LMWH intermediate/therapeutic dose administration.

ObjectivesIn a previously published Delphi exercise the European Pediatric Dialysis Working Group (EPDWG) reported widely variable counteractive responses to COVID-19 during the first week of statutory public curfews in 12 European countries with case loads of 4–680 infected patients per million. To better understand these wide variations, we assessed different factors affecting countermeasure implementation rates and applied the capability, opportunity, motivation model of behaviour to describe their determinants.DesignWe undertook this international mixed methods study of increased depth and breadth to obtain more complete data and to better understand the resulting complex evidence.SettingThis study was conducted in 14 paediatric nephrology centres across 12 European countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.ParticipantsThe 14 participants were paediatric nephrologists and EPDWG members from 12 European centres.Main outcome measures52 countermeasures clustered into eight response domains (access control, patient testing, personnel testing, personal protective equipment policy, patient cohorting, personnel cohorting, suspension of routine care, remote work) were categorised by implementation status, drivers (expert opinion, hospital regulations) and resource dependency. Governmental strictness and media attitude were independently assessed for each country and correlated with relevant countermeasure implementation factors.ResultsImplementation rates varied widely among response domains (median 49.5%, range 20%–71%) and centres (median 46%, range 31%–62%). Case loads were insufficient to explain response rate variability. Increasing case loads resulted in shifts from expert opinion-based to hospital regulation-based decisions to implement additional countermeasures despite increased resource dependency. Higher governmental strictness and positive media attitude towards countermeasure implementation were associated with higher implementation rates.ConclusionsCOVID-19 countermeasure implementation by paediatric tertiary care centres did not reflect case loads but rather reflected heterogeneity of local rules and of perceived resources. These data highlight the need of ongoing reassessment of current practices, facilitating rapid change in ‘institutional behavior’ in response to emerging evidence of countermeasure efficacy.