COVID-19 in vaccinated versus unvaccinated hematologic malignancy patients.

The effect of vaccination on severity of subsequent COVID-19 in patients with hematologic malignancies (HMs) is unknown. In this single-center retrospective cohort study, we found no difference in severity of COVID-19 disease in vaccinated (n = 16) versus unvaccinated (n = 54) HM patients using an adjusted multiple logistic regression model. Recent anti-B-cell therapy was associated with more severe illness.

A single center evaluation of applicant experiences in virtual interviews across eight internal medicine subspecialty fellowship programs.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, most graduate medical education (GME) training programs conducted virtual interviews for prospective trainees during the 2020-2021 application cycle. Many internal medicine (IM) subspecialty fellowship programs hosted virtual interviews for the first time with little published data to guide best practices.To evaluate how IM subspecialty fellowship applicants perceived the virtual interview day experience.We designed a 38-item questionnaire that was sent via email to applicants in eight IM subspecialty programs at a single tertiary academic medical center (University of California, San Francisco) from September-November, 2020.Seventy-five applicants completed the survey (75/244, 30.7%), including applicants from all eight fellowship programs. Most survey respondents agreed that the length of the virtual interview day (mean = 6.4 hours) was long enough to gather the information they needed (n = 65, 86.7%) and short enough to prevent fatigue (n = 55, 73.3%). Almost all survey respondents agreed that they could adequately assess the clinical experience (n = 71, 97.3%), research opportunities (n = 72, 98.6%), and program culture (n = 68, 93.2%). Of the respondents who attended a virtual educational conference, most agreed it helped to provide a sense of the program's educational culture (n = 20, 66.7%). Areas for improvement were identified, with some survey respondents reporting that the virtual interview day was too long (n = 11) or that they would have preferred to meet more fellows (n = 10).Survey respondents indicated that the virtual interview was an adequate format to learn about fellowship programs. These findings can inform future virtual interviews for GME training programs.

Virtual Interviews at Graduate Medical Education Training Programs: Determining Evidence-Based Best Practices.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the nation's health care system, including on graduate medical education (GME) training programs. Traditionally, residency and fellowship training program applications involve in-person interviews conducted on-site, with only a minority of programs offering interviews remotely via a virtual platform. However, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is anticipated that most interviews will be conducted virtually for the 2021 application cycle and possibly beyond. Therefore, GME training programs need to prepare for the transition to virtual interviews using evidence-based practices. At the University of California, San Francisco, a multidisciplinary task force was convened to review existing literature about virtual interviews and determine best practices. This article summarizes these findings, first discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the virtual interview format and then providing evidence-based best practices for GME training programs. Specifically, the authors make the following recommendations: develop a detailed plan for the interview process, consider using standardized interview questions, recognize and respond to potential biases that may be amplified with the virtual interview format, prepare your own trainees for virtual interviews, develop electronic materials and virtual social events to approximate the interview day, and collect data about virtual interviews at your own institution. With adequate preparation, the virtual interview experience can be high yield, positive, and equitable for both applicants and GME training programs.

Upper airway gene expression reveals suppressed immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 compared with other respiratory viruses.

SARS-CoV-2 infection is characterized by peak viral load in the upper airway prior to or at the time of symptom onset, an unusual feature that has enabled widespread transmission of the virus and precipitated a global pandemic. How SARS-CoV-2 is able to achieve high titer in the absence of symptoms remains unclear. Here, we examine the upper airway host transcriptional response in patients with COVID-19 (n = 93), other viral (n = 41) or non-viral (n = 100) acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs). Compared with other viral ARIs, COVID-19 is characterized by a pronounced interferon response but attenuated activation of other innate immune pathways, including toll-like receptor, interleukin and chemokine signaling. The IL-1 and NLRP3 inflammasome pathways are markedly less responsive to SARS-CoV-2, commensurate with a signature of diminished neutrophil and macrophage recruitment. This pattern resembles previously described distinctions between symptomatic and asymptomatic viral infections and may partly explain the propensity for pre-symptomatic transmission in COVID-19. We further use machine learning to build 27-, 10- and 3-gene classifiers that differentiate COVID-19 from other ARIs with AUROCs of 0.981, 0.954 and 0.885, respectively. Classifier performance is stable across a wide range of viral load, suggesting utility in mitigating false positive or false negative results of direct SARS-CoV-2 tests.

Treatment of immunocompromised COVID-19 patients with convalescent plasma.

Immunosuppressed patients such as solid organ transplant and hematologic malignancy patients appear to be at increased risk for morbidity and mortality due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Convalescent plasma, a method of passive immunization that has been applied to prior viral pandemics, holds promise as a potential treatment for COVID-19. Immunocompromised patients may experience more benefit from convalescent plasma given underlying deficits in B and T cell immunity as well as contraindications to antiviral and immunomodulatory therapy. We describe our institutional experience with four immunosuppressed patients (two kidney transplant recipients, one lung transplant recipient, and one chronic myelogenous leukemia patient) treated with COVID-19 convalescent plasma through the Expanded Access Program (NCT04338360). All patients clinically improved after administration (two fully recovered and two discharged to skilled nursing facilities) and none experienced a transfusion reaction. We also report the characteristics of convalescent plasma product from a local blood center including positive SARS-CoV-2 IgG and negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR in all samples tested. This preliminary evidence suggest that convalescent plasma may be safe among immunosuppressed patients with COVID-19 and emphasizes the need for further data on the efficacy of convalescent plasma as either primary or adjunctive therapy for COVID-19.

Clinical features, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients presenting with acute respiratory illness: A retrospective cohort study of patients with and without COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Most data on the clinical presentation, diagnostics, and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 have been presented as case series without comparison to patients with other acute respiratory illnesses. METHODS: We examined emergency department patients between February 3 and March 31, 2020 with an acute respiratory illness who were tested for SARS-CoV-2. We determined COVID-19 status by PCR and metagenomic next generation sequencing (mNGS). We compared clinical presentation, diagnostics, treatment, and outcomes. FINDINGS: Among 316 patients, 33 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2; 31 without COVID-19 tested positive for another respiratory virus. Among patients with additional viral testing (27/33), no SARS-CoV-2 co-infections were identified. Compared to those who tested negative, patients with COVID-19 reported longer symptoms duration (median 7d vs. 3d, p < 0.001). Patients with COVID-19 were more often hospitalized (79% vs. 56%, p = 0.014). When hospitalized, patients with COVID-19 had longer hospitalizations (median 10.7d vs. 4.7d, p < 0.001) and more often developed ARDS (23% vs. 3%, p < 0.001). Most comorbidities, medications, symptoms, vital signs, laboratories, treatments, and outcomes did not differ by COVID-19 status. INTERPRETATION: While we found differences in clinical features of COVID-19 compared to other acute respiratory illnesses, there was significant overlap in presentation and comorbidities. Patients with COVID-19 were more likely to be admitted to the hospital, have longer hospitalizations and develop ARDS, and were unlikely to have co-existent viral infections. FUNDING: National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Heart Lung Blood Institute, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Chan Zuckerberg Biohub, Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.

COVID-19 in Immunocompromised Hosts: What We Know So Far.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused significant morbidity and mortality for patients and stressed healthcare systems worldwide. The clinical features and outcomes of COVID-19 among immunosuppressed patients, who are at presumed risk of more severe disease but who may also have decreased detrimental inflammatory responses, are not well characterized. We review the existing literature on COVID-19 among immunocompromised populations ranging from patients with cancer and solid-organ transplant recipients to patients with HIV and those receiving immunomodulatory therapy for autoimmune disease. Patients with malignancy and solid-organ transplant recipients may be at increased risk of severe COVID-19 disease and death, whereas for those with other types of immunocompromise, current evidence is less clear. Overall, further prospective controlled studies are needed to determine the attributable risk of immunocompromising conditions and therapies on COVID-19 disease prognosis.

Clinical outcomes and serologic response in solid organ transplant recipients with COVID-19: A case series from the United States.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused significant morbidity and mortality for patients and stressed healthcare systems worldwide. The clinical features, disease course, and serologic response of COVID-19 among immunosuppressed patients such as solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, who are at presumed risk for more severe disease, are not well characterized. We describe our institutional experience with COVID-19 among 10 SOT patients, including the clinical presentation, treatment modalities, and outcomes of 7 renal transplant recipients, 1 liver transplant recipient, 1 heart transplant recipient, and 1 lung transplant recipient. In addition, we report the serologic response in SOT recipients, documenting a positive IgG response in all 7 hospitalized patients. We also review the existing literature on COVID-19 in SOT recipients to consolidate the current knowledge on COVID-19 in the SOT population for the transplant community.