ABSTRACT
Background/Aims Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is the most common vasculitis in adults aged over 50 years old with the highest incidence among persons aged 70- 79. It is more commonly seen in female patients. Most cases have been reported in whites of Northern European descent. A broad range of symptoms can be reported including headache, jaw or tongue claudication, visual disturbances, PMR and other systemic features including weight loss, fever and sweats. In recent years new evidence has emerged regarding the investigation and treatment of GCA. This audit is to review the demographics, symptoms and investigations of patients who presented to the Rheumatology Department in SEHSCT with features concerning for possible GCA. Methods Retrospective collection of data from January 2020 to July 2021 using the regional Electronic Care Record NI with reference to presentations, investigation results, clinic records and follow-up letters. Results 70 patients were included (24 males and 46 females). Mean age was 72 years old. Table 1 shows the percentages of clinical symptoms reported. All patients investigated had an ESR (mean 57.8) and CRP (mean 54.1) checked. 43 patients had ANCA checked with 3 positive results. 40 patients underwent CT brain with 2 abnormalities reported unrelated to GCA. TA ultrasound was performed on one occasion with a positive result demonstrating ''halo'' sign recorded. 6 patients underwent CTPET with 3 diagnoses of LVV and 1 of PMR. 70 TAB performed with 12 positive results and 4 'suggestive' of GCA. Conclusion Our cohort of patients demonstrated demographics similar to the current global geographic trends in GCA. There are a broad range of clinical symptoms that can present in GCA, none of which are entirely specific or pathognomonic. Clinical diagnosis is based on clinical symptoms, signs and laboratory tests, each of which are imperfect markers for GCA. Our audit demonstrated that the use of additional confirmatory diagnostic tests including temporal artery ultrasound and CTPET was being under-utilized in the SEHSCT. Use of these tests may improve the diagnostic yield in this challenging condition. As a result of this audit, a quality improvement project to provide a rapid access GCA pathway is being designed. (Table Presented).
ABSTRACT
Aim In this region, the Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (SLNB) Service was established in 2018 and suspended in 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Service has resumed under interim criteria, accounting for COVID-19 constraints. Patients not fulfilling these criteria (SLNB for tumour stage pT3a or greater) had wide local excision (WLE) alone. This audit aims to examine quality of Service delivery to date, plan full-Service resumption, and generate a cohort for ongoing outcomes research. Method A prospectively collected database captured patients with tumour stage pT1b or higher. Data were analysed for demographics, tumour characteristics and outcome of Service referral, and compared to predetermined performance indicators. Results Data were collected on 410 patients, from December 2018 to April 2021;94.4% had complete datasets. Of the remaining 5.6%, none underwent SLNB. The mean age was 62 (range 12–96). 187 patients were male;220 were female. The most frequent tumour location in males was the trunk (36.0%), differing from females (41.8% lower limb). The most common tumour stage was pT2a, occurring in 34.7% (27.9% males, 40.7% females). 141 eligible patients were investigated with SLNB (18.4% positive, 75.9% negative, 5.7% failed). 7.9% were unsuitable for SLNB and 4.5% declined. The remaining 168 patients did not fulfil interim criteria for SLNB and underwent WLE. Conclusions This audit assesses Service quality and will be used to facilitate full-Service provision. Interim criteria reflect a higher rate of positive SLNB. Ongoing research investigates the rate of false negative SLNB and impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on rates of recurrent/disseminated disease.
ABSTRACT
Background : Patients (pts) with COVID-19 are reported to have increased risk of venous thromboembolism yet bleeding has been an under recognized complication. Rates of bleeding remain unexamined in all patients especially in pts with cancer and COVID-19. Aim: To estimate the incidence of bleeding complication in patients with cancer and COVID 19 Methods: The CCC19 international registry (NCT04354701) aims to investigate complications of COVID-19 in pts with cancer. Our aim was to investigate the frequency of bleeding in hospitalized adult pts with cancer andCOVID-19, enrolled between March 16, 2020 and Feb 8, 2021. The incidence of bleeding complications was captured as defined by CCC19 and included both major and non major bleeding. Associated baseline clinic-pathologic prognostic factors and outcomes such as need for mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and mortality rates were assessed Results :3849 pts met analysis inclusion criteria. Bleeding was reported in 276 (7%) pts with median age of 70years;incidence was 6.6 % in females and 7.6 % in males, 6.5% in non-Hispanic white pts, 8.2 % in non-Hispanic Black pts, and 7.8 % in Hispanic pts. 74% had solid cancer and 29% had hematologic malignancies, 33% had received anti-cancer therapy in preceding 30 days, and 8% had surgery within 4weeks. In pts taking antiplatelet or anticoagulant medications at baseline, 7.2% developed bleeding. Need for mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, 30-day mortality, and total mortality were significantly higher in those with bleeding complications compared to those without, p<0.05 Conclusion : We describe the incidence of bleeding in a large cohort of pts with cancer and COVID-19. Bleeding events were observed in those with adverse outcomes including mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, and high mortality;the overall mortality of 43% in patients with bleeding complications is especially notable. This important complication may reflect underlying COVID-19 pathophysiology as well as iatrogenic causes. [Formula presented] Disclosures: Kumar: Diagnostica Stago: Honoraria. Zon: AMAGMA AND RLZ: Consultancy, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Byeff: Pfizer, BMS, Takeda,Teva, Merck, United health: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Nagaraj: Novartis: Research Funding. Hwang: astrazaneca,Merck,bayer, Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding. McKay: Myovant: Consultancy;Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Exelixis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Calithera: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Tempus: Research Funding;Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Tempus: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Dendreon: Consultancy;Caris: Other: Serves as a molecular tumor board;Vividion: Consultancy;Sorrento Therapeutics: Consultancy;Bayer: Research Funding. Warner: Westat, Hemonc.org: Consultancy, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Connors: Pfizer: Honoraria;CSL Behring: Research Funding;Alnylam: Consultancy;Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria;takeda: Honoraria;Abbott: Consultancy. Rosovsky: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding;BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding;Inari: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Do a: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.
ABSTRACT
Using wastewater surveillance as a continuous pooled sampling technique has been in place in many countries since the early stages of the outbreak of COVID-19. Since the beginning of the outbreak, many research works have emerged, studying different aspects of viral SARS-CoV-2 DNA concentrations (viral load) in wastewater and its potential as an early warning method. However, one of the questions that has remained unanswered is the quantitative relation between viral load and clinical indicators such as daily cases, deaths, and hospitalizations. Few studies have tried to couple viral load data with an epidemiological model to relate the number of infections in the community to the viral burden. This paper proposes a stochastic wastewater-based SEIR model to showcase the importance of viral load in the early detection and prediction of an outbreak in a community. We built three models based on whether or not they use the case count and viral load data and compared their simulations and forecasting quality. Our results demonstrate that a simple SEIR model based on viral load data can reliably predict the number of infections in the future. Therefore, wastewater-based surveillance is a promising way of monitoring the spread of COVID19 and can provide city officials with timely information about the circulation of COVID-19 in the community. © 2021 IEEE.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Acute ischemic stroke patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus maybe candidates for acute revascularization treatments (intravenous thrombolysis and/or mechanical thrombectomy). Materials and Methods: We analyzed the data from 62 healthcare facilities to determine the odds of receiving acute revascularization treatments in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus infected patients and odds of composite of death and non-routine discharge with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus infected and non-infected patients undergoing acute revascularization treatments after adjusting for potential confounders. Results: Acute ischemic stroke patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection were significantly less likely to receive acute revascularization treatments (odds ratio 0.6, 95% confidence interval 0.5-0.8, p=0.0001). Among ischemic stroke patients who received acute revascularization treatments, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection was associated with increased odds of death or non-routine discharge (odds ratio 3.0, 95% confidence interval 1.8-5.1). The higher odds death or non-routine discharge (odds ratio 2.1, 95% confidence interval 1.9-2.3) with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection were observed in all ischemic stroke patients without any modifying effect of acute revascularization treatments (interaction term for death (p=0.9) or death or non-routine discharge (p=0.2). Conclusions: Patients with acute ischemic stroke patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection were significantly less likely to receive acute revascularization treatments. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection was associated with a significantly higher rate of death or non-routine discharge among acute ischemic stroke patients receiving revascularization treatments.
ABSTRACT
Background: Undiagnosed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection may be seen in acute stroke patients. Rapid screening is important to reduce exposure to medical professionals and other patients during acute assessment and treatment. Chest computed tomographic (CT) scan may be another time-sensitive option for identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection in acute stroke patients. Objective: We report our experience of incorporating chest CT scan in the initial neuroimaging protocol for evaluation of acute stroke patients. Methods: All acute stroke patients underwent chest CT scan concurrent to CT head, CT angiogram of head and neck and CT perfusion for 10 months. We identified patients who had chest CT scan findings that were suggestive of SARS-CoV-2 infection including bilateral, multilobar ground glass opacification with a peripheral or posterior distribution, and/or consolidation. All patients subsequently underwent polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing using nasopharyngeal specimen for identification of SARS-CoV-2 with contact isolation. Sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios were calculated. Results: A total of 530 consecutive acute stroke patients (mean age in years 65.6± SD;15.4;280 were men) underwent neuroimaging with concurrent chest CT scan. The chest CT scan identified findings suggestive of SARS-CoV-2 infection in 34 (6.4%) patients. Subsequent PCR testing confirmed the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in 21 of 34 patients. Among 491 patients in whom chest CT scan did not identify any findings suggestive of SARS-CoV-2 infection, 387 underwent PCR tests;PCR testing confirmed the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in 13 of 34 patients. Sensitivity and specificity of chest CT scan for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection was 61.9% and 96.2%, respectively. Positive and negative likelihood ratio of chest CT scan for detecting SARSCoV-2 infection is 16.26 and 0.39, respectively. Conclusions: Although specificity was high, the relatively low sensitivity of chest CT scan in identifying SARS-CoV-2 infection limits the value of adding this imaging to standard neuroimaging in acute stroke patients. At our institution, we have subsequently discontinued the protocol.
ABSTRACT
Objective: We report our experience of incorporating chest CT scan in the initial neuroimaging protocol for evaluation of acute stroke patients. Background: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with an increased risk for acute ischemic stroke but screening for COVID-19 based on clinical criteria or laboratory testing may be difficult in acute stroke evaluation. Chest computed tomographic (CT) scan may be another time-sensitive option for identification. of COVID-19 in such patients. Design/Methods: All acute stroke patients underwent chest CT scan concurrent to CT head, CT angiogram of head and neck and CT perfusion for 4 months. We identified patients who had chest CT scan findings that were suggestive of COVID-19 including bilateral, multilobar ground glass opacification with a peripheral or posterior distribution, and/or consolidation (mainly in the lower lobes). All patients subsequently underwent polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing of nasopharyngeal swab with contact isolation until COVID-19 could be excluded. Results: A total of 224 consecutive patients (mean age 62.12 years±SD;15.3) underwent acute stroke evaluation with a concurrent chest CT scan. The chest CT identified findings suggestive of COVID-19 in 11 (4.9%) patients. Subsequent PCR testing did not confirm the diagnosis of COVID-19 in any of the patient. Another 99 patients (44%) without any findings suggestive of COVID-19 on chest CT scan underwent PCR testing. PCR testing did not confirm the diagnosis of COVID-19 in any of the patients. Four patients (4.3%) with chest CT scan findings suggestive of COVID-19 were found to have an ischemic stroke while 7 patients (5.9%) with chest CT scan findings suggestive of COVID-19 did not have any ischemic stroke (stroke mimic). Conclusions: We found a very low yield for identifying COVID-19 in acute stroke patients by performing chest CT scan concurrent to standard acute stroke neuroimaging protocol.
ABSTRACT
Background: Immunodeficiency in patients (pts) with cancer can lead to the progression of common respiratory viral infections to lower respiratory tract disease (LRTD) with potentially high mortality. Understanding risk factors of SARS-CoV-2 related LRTD in pts with cancer is imperative for the development of preventive measures. Methods: We examined all patients aged 18 years or older with cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection reported between March 16, 2020 and February 6, 2021 in the international CCC19 registry. We examined frequency of LRTD (pneumonia, pneumonitis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or respiratory failure), demographic and clinicopathologic factors associated with LRTD, and 30-day and overall mortality in pts with and without LRTD. Results: Of 7,289 pts with a median follow-up time of 42 (21-90) days, 2187 (30%) developed LRTD. Pts of older age (65 yrs or older), male sex, pre-existing comorbidities, baseline immunosuppressants, baseline corticosteroids, and ECOG performance status of 2 or more had substantially higher rates of LRTD compared to those without these risk factors (Table). We did not observe differences in LRTD rates between pts of different racial/ethnic groups, smoking history, hypertension, obesity, cancer status, timing or type of anti-cancer therapy. LRTD was more likely in pts with thoracic malignancy (39%), hematological malignancy (39%) compared to those with other solid tumors (27%). The majority of pts (86%) had symptomatic presentation;however, 8% of pts with asymptomatic presentation developed LRTD. 30-day and overall mortality rates were significantly higher in pts with LRTD than those without LRTD (31% vs. 4% and 38% vs. 6%, P < 0.05). Conclusions: COVID-19 related LRTD rate is high and associated with worse mortality rates in pts with cancer. The majority of risk factors associated with LRTD demonstrate underlying immunodeficiency or lung structural damage as a driving force in this population. Identifying pts at high-risk for developing LRTD can help guide clinical management, improve pt outcomes, increase the cost-effectiveness of antiviral therapy, and direct future clinical trial designs for vaccine or antiviral agents. (Table Presented).
ABSTRACT
Background: COVID-19 has been associated with immune modulation that may predispose infected patients to bacterial, viral, or fungal coinfections. Due to critical illness, > 70% of patients with severe COVID-19 receive empiric antibacterial or antifungal therapy, along with standard anti-COVID-19 treatments. However, the frequency of proven or probable secondary infections is < 10%. To our knowledge, there are no studies evaluating co-infections in patients with cancer and COVID-19, a vulnerable group with multiple risk factors for co-infections. We aim to describe the prevalence of bacterial, viral, and fungal co-infections, identify risk factors for coinfection, and investigate the potential impact of co-infections on mortality, in patients with a history of cancer and COVID-19. Methods: The CCC19 registry (NCT04354701) includes patients with active or prior hematologic or invasive solid malignancies reported across academic and community sites. We captured bacterial, fungal, or viral coinfections diagnosed within ±2 weeks from diagnosis of COVID-19, identified factors associated with an increased risk of having a coinfection, and evaluated the association of coinfections with 30-day all-cause mortality. Results: We examined 6732 patients with a history of cancer and a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 reported to CCC19 by 82 sites between March 17, 2020 and February 3, 2021, with complete data on coinfection status. Median age was 65 (interquartile range: 55-75) years with 48% male, 52% non-Hispanic white, 19% non-Hispanic black, and 16% Hispanic. 5448 (81%) had solid tumors and 1466 (22%) had hematologic malignancies. Bacterial infections were reported in 823 patients (12%), including 296 Gram+ and 245 Gram- bacterial events. Documented viral (176 patients, 3%) and fungal (59 patients, 0.9%) co-infections were rare. The risk for co-infections increased with age, and they were more frequent among men, older patients, and those with diabetes, pulmonary or renal comorbid conditions, active progressive cancer, or hematologic malignancies (unadjusted P< 0.01). The frequency of reported co-infections decreased over the study period (divided into quartiles, Mantel-Haenszel P< 0.01). All-cause mortality rates were higher among those with bacterial (24% vs. 10%), viral (22% vs. 12%), and fungal (37% vs. 12%) coinfections compared to those without (unadjusted P< 0.01). Conclusions: The frequency of bacterial infections in patients with cancer and COVID-19 is relatively low. Viral and fungal co-infections are uncommon. Coinfections are associated with higher mortality rates. Several patient and tumor factors can be used for risk stratification and guide early empiric antimicrobial agent selection, which may improve clinical outcomes. These data could inform antimicrobial stewardship interventions in this tenuous patient population.
ABSTRACT
Background: Racial/ethnic minorities have disproportionately increased risk of contracting COVID-19 and experiencing severe illness;they also have worse breast cancer (BC) outcomes. COVID-19 outcomes among racial/ethnic minorities with BC are currently unknown. We sought to compare clinicopathologic characteristics and COVID-19 outcomes stratified by race/ethnicity. Methods: The COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry (NCT04354701) was used to identify patients with invasive BC and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosed in the U.S. between 2020-03-06 and 2021-02-04. The primary analysis was restricted to women who selfidentified as non-Hispanic White (NHW), nonHispanic Black (NHB), or Hispanic (H). Demographic, cancer characteristics, and COVID-19 outcomes were evaluated. COVID-19 outcomes included: hospital admission, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, death within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis and death from any cause during follow-up. Descriptive statistics were used to compare clinicopathologic characteristics and Fisher exact tests were used to compare COVID19 outcomes across the 3 racial/ethnic groups. Results: A total of 1133 patients were identified of which 1111 (98%) were women;of which 575 (52%) NHW, 243 (22%) NHB, 183 (16%) H, and 110 (10%) other/unknown. Baseline characteristics differed among racial/ethnic groups. H were younger (median age: NHW 63y;NHB 62y;H 54y) and more likely to be never smokers (NHW 62%;NHB 62%;H 78%). NHB had higher rates of obesity (NHW 40%;NHB 54%;H 46%), diabetes (NHW 16 %;NHB 32%;H 20%) and combined moderate and severe baseline COVID-19 at presentation (NHW 28%;NHB 42%;H 28%). Cancer characteristics are as shown (Table). Significant differences were observed in outcomes across racial/ethnic groups including higher rates of hospital admission (NHW 34%;NHB 49%;H 34%;P <0.001), mechanical ventilation (NHW 3%;NHB 9%;H 5%;P=0.002), 30-day mortality (NHW 6%;NHB 9%;H 4%;P=0.043) and total mortality (NHW 8%;NHB 12%;H 5%;P=0.05) among NHB compared to NHW and H. Conclusions: This is the largest study to show significant differences in COVID-19 outcomes by racial/ethnic groups of women with BC. The adverse outcomes in NHB could be due to higher moderate to severe COVID-19 at presentation and preexisting comorbidities. H did not have worse outcomes despite having more active disease and recent anti-cancer therapy, including with cytotoxic chemotherapy - potentially due to younger age and nonsmoking status. (Table Presented).
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer may be at high risk of adverse outcomes from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We analyzed a cohort of patients with cancer and coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) to identify prognostic clinical factors, including laboratory measurements and anticancer therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with active or historical cancer and a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis recorded between 17 March and 18 November 2020 were included. The primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on an ordinal scale (uncomplicated, hospitalized, admitted to intensive care unit, mechanically ventilated, died within 30 days). Multivariable regression models included demographics, cancer status, anticancer therapy and timing, COVID-19-directed therapies, and laboratory measurements (among hospitalized patients). RESULTS: A total of 4966 patients were included (median age 66 years, 51% female, 50% non-Hispanic white); 2872 (58%) were hospitalized and 695 (14%) died; 61% had cancer that was present, diagnosed, or treated within the year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Older age, male sex, obesity, cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities, renal disease, diabetes mellitus, non-Hispanic black race, Hispanic ethnicity, worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and hematologic malignancy were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Among hospitalized patients, low or high absolute lymphocyte count; high absolute neutrophil count; low platelet count; abnormal creatinine; troponin; lactate dehydrogenase; and C-reactive protein were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Patients diagnosed early in the COVID-19 pandemic (January-April 2020) had worse outcomes than those diagnosed later. Specific anticancer therapies (e.g. R-CHOP, platinum combined with etoposide, and DNA methyltransferase inhibitors) were associated with high 30-day all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical factors (e.g. older age, hematological malignancy, recent chemotherapy) and laboratory measurements were associated with poor outcomes among patients with cancer and COVID-19. Although further studies are needed, caution may be required in utilizing particular anticancer therapies. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER: NCT04354701.