ABSTRACT
The world has been affected badly by Covid-19 in 2020. Taiwan, fortunately, has not been that badly affected by the virus. However, there are questions surrounding how the pandemic has impacted Taiwanese food banks so far and whether Taiwanese food banks have experienced any crisis caused by the pandemic or gained momentum owing to the relatively safer circumstances. Based on practices, interviews, and questionnaires, this research aims to answer them. The results show most food banks were more or less impacted by the coronavirus between February and early May. The majority of food banks reported an increase in the recipients of their help and did not report a shortage of volunteers. In 2020, more food banks have been established and many existing food banks have expanded their services. Food Banking is gaining popularity and recognition in Taiwan. © 2023 Author(s).
ABSTRACT
As COVID-19 has been prevalent around the world in recent years, many studies about monitoring and predicting the spread of disease have been conducted in various fields including geography. However, little research has been devoted to infectious disease prediction modeling that adopts constantly changing travel behavior patterns during epidemics. This is due to the limited methodologies to investigate spatio-temporal change in travel behaviors at large-scale and the difficulty in interpreting massive and diverse travel patterns. This study suggests an effective disease surveillance method based on cluster analysis to identify change in travel behaviors during the pandemic by implementing space-time cluster analysis. The results show that K-means++ well represent dynamic changes in travel behaviors at daily scale, whereas retrospective space-time scan statistics have the advantage of detecting travel behavior changes in each period at large spatial scale. Those results could inform decision makers to establish guidelines on travel behavior to curb individual contacts under potential future pandemic. © 2023 Korean Society of Surveying. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to explore how the new virtual learning environment has influenced apparel and textiles students' learning experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study aimed to explore 1) the positive and negative effects of the new virtual learning environment on academic learning, 2) students' perceptions of online learning tools and 3) students' perceptions in regard to their employment prospects after graduation and their career in the apparel industry. The results revealed that motivation was a major factor that influenced students to engage in learning in a virtual learning environment. Students found synchronous lectures, guest speakers, and recordings of synchronous lectures to be effective and enhance their sense of social belonging and their motivation. Students also perceived that the job market would be more competitive, and they were underprepared for employment. Suggestions are made for instructors to help increase students' motivation to learn in a virtual environment. © 2023 The Textile Institute and Informa UK Ltd.
ABSTRACT
The Interdisciplinary Cardiac Arrest Research Review (ICARE) group was formed in 2018 to conduct an annual search of peer-reviewed literature relevant to cardiac arrest. Now in its fourth year, the goals of this review are to highlight annual updates on clinically relevant and impactful clinical and population-level studies in the interdisciplinary world of cardiac arrest research from 2021. To achieve these goals, a search of PubMed using keywords related to clinical research in cardiac arrest was conducted. Titles and s were screened for relevance and sorted into seven categories: Epidemiology & Public Health;Prehospital Resuscitation;In-Hospital Resuscitation & Post-Arrest Care;Prognostication & Outcomes;Pediatrics;Interdisciplinary Guidelines;and Coronavirus disease 2019. Screened manuscripts underwent standardized scoring of methodological quality and impact by reviewer teams lead by a subject matter expert editor. Articles scoring higher than 99t h per-centile by category were selected for full critique. Systematic differences between editors' and reviewers' scores were assessed using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. A total of 4,730 articles were identified on initial search;of these, 1,677 were scored after screening for relevance and deduplication. Compared to the 2020 ICARE review, this represents a relative increase of 32% and 63%, respectively. Ultimately, 44 articles underwent full critique. The leading category was In-Hospital Resuscitation, representing 41% of fully reviewed articles, followed by Pre-hospital Resuscitation (20%) and Interdisciplinary Guidelines (16%). In conclusion, several clinically relevant studies in 2021 have added to the evidence base for the management of cardiac arrest patients including implementation and incorporation of resuscitation systems, technology, and quality improvement programs to improve resuscitation. © 2023 Tehran University of Medical Sciences.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Telemedicine has become a popular option to provide speech-language pathology (SLP) services during the COVID-19 global pandemic. We sought to systematically review the literature to evaluate patient satisfaction with telemedicine vs in-person visits for SLP services. Method(s): A systematic review was performed in Embase, MEDLINE, AMED, and Scopus databases. Search terms included variations of speech-language pathology, telemedicine, and video. The initial search yielded 549 studies. Of these studies, 37 met criteria for full-text screening. Inclusion criteria included (1) age >18 years and (2) patient satisfaction as an outcome measure. Case reports were excluded. Result(s): Twenty-nine studies met inclusion criteria;8 studies used validated satisfaction questionnaires, 17 used nonvalidated questionnaires, and 4 used qualitative interviews. Of the 29 studies, 3 were randomized controlled trials (RCT). Of the 26 non-RCTs, 24 reported >50% overall satisfaction with televisits. Six studies evaluated patient preference for inperson vs televisits;all studies reported >50% of patients having no preference. Eleven studies evaluated willingness to reengage in telemedicine, and all reported that >50% of patients were willing to reengage with telemedicine. Of the RCTs, 2 used the same validated survey, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Treatment Satisfaction- General (FACIT-TS-G), for patients undergoing posttreatment laryngectomy and swallow rehabilitation therapy. Both studies revealed that patients rated televisits with significantly higher satisfaction for the overall results of therapy (P<.02). A third of the RCTs, which focused on patients with chronic stuttering, found telemedicine was more frequently described as extremely convenient (P=.018). Conclusion(s): Although most studies evaluating patient satisfaction with SLP interventions via telemedicine reported greater than 50% overall satisfaction, there was frequent use of nonvalidated measures of patient satisfaction (17 of 29). Use of validated measures is warranted for evaluating patient satisfaction.
ABSTRACT
Background: Patients (pts) with thoracic cancers have a high rate of hospitalization and death from COVID-19. Smoking has been associated with increased risk for severe COVID-19. However, there is limited data evaluating the impact of smoking recency on COVID-19 severity in pts with cancer. We aimed to characterize the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 based on the recency of smoking in pts with thoracic cancers (TC) and all other cancers (OC). Methods: Adult pts with cancer and lab-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 and smoking history recorded in the CCC19 registry (NCT0435470) were included. Pts were stratified by cancer type (TC or OC) and further stratified into subgroups based on the recency of smoking cessation: current smoker;former smokers who quit < 1 yr. ago;1-5 yr. ago;6-10 yr. ago;quit > 10 yr. ago;and never smoker. 30-day all-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were any hospitalization;hospitalization with supplemental O2;ICU admission;and mechanical ventilation. Results: From January 2020 to December 2021, 752 pts from TC group and 8,291 pts from OC group met the inclusion criteria. 78% of patients in TC group ever smoked compared to 36% patients in the OC group. In both groups, the majority of never-smokers were females (70% and 60% in TC and OC respectively). The burden of smoking and the rate of pulmonary comorbidities (PC) was higher in the TC group (PC 22-69%) compared to OC group (PC 12-26%) across all smoking strata. Overall, 30-day all-cause mortality was 21% and 11% in pts with TC and OC respectively. Former smokers who quit < 1 year ago in TC group had the highest rate of mortality and severe COVID-19 outcomes. However, in the OC group, there was no consistent trend of higher mortality or severe COVID-19 outcomes in specific subgroups based on smoking recency. Conclusions: To our knowledge this is the largest study evaluating the effect of granular phenotypes of smoking recency on COVID-19 outcomes in pts with cancer. Recent smokers who quit < 1 year ago in TC group had the highest rate of mortality and severe COVID-19. Further analysis exploring the factors (e.g., smoking pack years) associated with severe outcomes in this subgroup is planned.
ABSTRACT
Background: Most patients with cancer and COVID-19 will survive the acute illness. The longer-term impacts of COVID-19 on patients with cancer remain incompletely described. Methods: Using COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry data thru 12/31/2021, we examined outcomes of long-term COVID-19 survivors with post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC aka “long COVID”). PASC was defined as having recovered w/ complications or having died w/ ongoing infection 90+ days from original diagnosis;absence of PASC was defined as having fully recovered by 90 days, with 90+ days of follow-up. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 re-infection and records with low quality data were excluded. Results: 858 of 3710 of included patients (23%) met PASC criteria. Median follow-up (IQR) for PASC and recovered patients was 180 (98-217) and 180 (90-180) days, respectively. The PASC group had a higher rate of baseline comorbidities and poor performance status (Table). Cancer types, status, and recent anticancer treatment were similar between the groups. The PASC group experienced a higher illness burden, with more hospitalized (83% vs 48%);requiring ICU (29% vs 6%);requiring mechanical ventilation (17% vs 2%);and experiencing co-infections (19% vs 8%). There were more deaths in the PASC vs recovered group (8% vs 3%), with median (IQR) days to death of 158 (120-272) and 180 (130-228), respectively. Of these, 9% were attributed to COVID-19;15% to both COVID-19 and cancer;15% to cancer;and 23% to other causes. Conversely, no deaths in the recovered group were attributed to COVID-19;57% were attributed to cancer;and 24% to other causes (proximal cause of death unknown/missing in 38% and 19%, respectively). Cancer treatment modification was more common in the recovered group (23% vs 18%). Conclusions: Patients with underlying comorbidities, worse ECOG PS, and more severe acute SARS-CoV-2 infection had higher rates of PASC. These patients suffered more severe complications and incurred worse outcomes. There was an appreciable rate of death in both PASC and non-PASC, with cancer the dominant but not only cause in fully recovered patients. Further study is needed to understand what factors drive PASC, and whether longer-term cancer-specific outcomes will be affected.
ABSTRACT
Background: Despite mitigation and treatment strategies, COVID-19 continues to negatively impact patients (pts) with cancer. Identifying factors that remain consistently associated with morbidity and mortality is critical for risk identification and care delivery. Methods: Using CCC19 registry data through 12/31/2021 we report clinical outcomes (30-day case fatality rate [CFR], mechanical ventilation use (MV), intensive care unit admission (ICU), and hospitalization) in adult pts with cancer and laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2, stratified by patient, cancer, and treatment-related factors. Results: In this cohort of 11,417 pts (with 4% reported vaccination prior to COVID-19), 55% required hospitalization, 15% ICU, 9% MV, and 12% died. Overall outcome rates remained similar for 2020 and 2021 (Table). Hydroxychloroquine was utilized in 11% and other anti-COVID-19 drugs (remdesivir, tocilizumab, convalescent plasma, and/or steroids) in 30%. Higher CFRs were observed in older age, males, Black race, smoking (14%), comorbidities (pulmonary [17%], diabetes mellitus [16%], cardiovascular [19%], renal [21%]), ECOG performance status 2+ (31%), co-infection (25%), especially fungal (35%), and initial presentation with severe COVID-19 (48%). Pts with hematologic malignancy, active/ progressing cancer status, or receiving systemic anti-cancer therapy within 1-3 months prior to COVID-19 also had worse CFRs. CFRs were similar across anti-cancer modalities. Other outcomes (ICU, MV, hospitalization) followed similar distributions by pt characteristics. Conclusions: Unfavorable outcome rates continue to remain high over 2 years, despite fewer case reports in 2021 owing to multiple factors (e.g., pandemic dynamics, respondent fatigue, overwhelmed healthcare systems). Pts with specific socio-demographics, performance status, comorbidities, type and status of cancer, immunosuppressive therapies, and COVID-19 severity at presentation experienced worse COVID-19 severity;and these factors should be further examined through multivariable modeling. Understanding epidemiological features, patient and cancer-related factors, and impact of anti-COVID-19 interventions can help inform risk stratification and interpretation of results from clinical trials.
ABSTRACT
Background: Patients with cancer have worse outcomes from COVID-19 infection. However, the specific impact of COVID-19 on patients with (HNC) is largely unknown. The COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) maintains an international registry (NCT04354701) aimed to investigate the clinical course and complications of COVID-19 in patients with cancer. Here, we report severity of COVID-19 and its complications among HNC patients. Methods: The CCC19 registry was queried for patients with HNC and laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The co-primary outcomes were severity of COVID-19 illness on an ordinal scale (0: no complications;1: hospitalized, no oxygen (O2);2: hospitalized, required O2;3: ICU admission;4: mechanical ventilation (MV);5: death), and severity of complications (mild, moderate, serious). The outcomes were further stratified by demographics, recent treatment (systemic vs local;surgery, radiation (RT) vs systemic), treatment intent (palliative vs curative), and cancer status (remission, responding, stable, progressing). Results: From March 2020 to December 2021, 356 HNC patients were identified. Median age was 65 (interquartile range 58-74), 29% were female, 56% were white, 67% were former or current smokers, 20% had a BMI >30, 15% had an ECOG performance status >2, and 57% had >2 comorbidities. 154 (43%) had no complications, 61 (17%) were hospitalized without O2, 135 (38%) were hospitalized with O2, 50 (14%) required ICU, 32 (9%) required MV, and 74 (21%) died. 88 (25%) had mild, 59 (17%) had moderate, and 132 (37%) had serious complications. 33% of patients who received systemic therapy and 30% who received RT within 3 mo prior to COVID-19 diagnosis died. Mortality was higher in patients receiving palliative when compared to curative intent treatment (44% vs 16%). In addition, 50% of patients with actively progressing cancer, and 45% who had serious complications died. Importantly, 37 (n=12 palliative systemic therapy and n=25 local therapy) patients had a treatment delay due to COVID-19 diagnosis. Conclusions: Our study is the largest cohort to date describing COVID-19 outcomes in HNC patients and suggest a high rate of mortality even in those receiving local and curative intent treatment. Variables stratified by COVID-19 severity. Note: Ordinal levels 3 and 4 not shown due to small case numbers.
ABSTRACT
Background: Limited information exists regarding the severity of short-term outcomes among patients with gynecologic cancer who are infected with SARS-CoV-2. Methods: Patients with gynecologic cancer and laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified from the international CCC19 registry. We estimated odds ratios (OR) from ordinal logistic regression for associations with severity of COVID-19 outcomes, defined from least to most severe as hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admittance, mechanical ventilation, and 30-day mortality. Results: Of 842 patients identified, 48% had endometrial cancer, 24% had ovarian cancer, 22% had cervical cancer, and 6% had dual primary/other gynecologic cancers. The majority were from the United States (86%), most were non-Hispanic White (46%), and the median age was 62 years (IQR 52-72). The majority were diagnosed with localized disease (68%);only 18 (2%) and 15 (2%) were fully or partially vaccinated, respectively. In the 3 months prior to COVID-19, 36% had any cancer treatment, with chemotherapy the most common (23%). When diagnosed with COVID-19, most patients were in remission (50%), while 37% had active disease, including 22% with metastatic disease. Most patients presented with typical COVID-19 symptoms (76%);few had a poor ECOG performance status (PS ≥2, 14%). Outcomes included hospitalization (50%), ICU admittance (12%), mechanical ventilation (8%), and death within 30 days of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (10%). In unadjusted models, increasing age (OR: 1.03 1.02-1.04) and Black race (OR 1.91, 1.31-2.77) were associated with increased severity of COVID-19 outcomes. Compared to patients in remission for ≥5 years, those with progressive disease had increased severity (OR 1.88, 1.25-2.82), while those in remission for < 5 years or with stable disease had decreased severity of COVID-19 outcomes (OR 0.55, 0.39-0.76). In multivariable models that included adjustment for age, race, and cancer status, additional factors associated with increased COVID-19 outcome severity included cardiac (OR 1.57, 1.13-2.19) and renal (OR 2.00, 1.33-3.00) comorbidities, an ECOG PS ≥2 (OR 5.15, 3.21-8.27), having pneumonia or pneumonitis (OR 4.08, 2.94-5.66), venous thromboembolism (OR 4.67, 2.49-8.75), sepsis (OR 14.2, 9.05-22.1), or a co-infection within ±2 weeks of SARS-CoV-2 (OR: 4.40, 2.91-6.65);asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with decreased severity of outcomes (OR: 0.25, 0.16-0.38). The overall case fatality rate was 15.7%. Conclusions: Patients with gynecologic cancer experience significant morbidity and mortality related to infection with SARS-CoV-2. Age, race, cancer status, co-morbidities, and COVID-19 complications were associated with more severe COVID-19 outcomes, along the continuum from least to most, of hospitalization, ICU admittance, mechanical ventilation, and 30-day mortality.
ABSTRACT
Background:Symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 primary vaccination among patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are generally similar to the general population,although symptoms after the second dose are more frequent and severe than after the first dose.Postvaccination symptoms after a 3rd mRNA vaccine dose in the predominantly immune-compromised IBD population is unknown.Methods:Adults with IBD participating in the prospective Coronavirus Risk Associations and Longitudinal Evaluation in IBD (CORALE-IBD) vaccine registry who received a 3rd mRNA vaccine dose were asked to complete a detailed symptom survey 1 week after vaccination.Symptoms were assessed across 11 organ systems,and graded as mild,moderate,or severe,or requiring hospitalization.“Severe+” referred to those with severe symptoms or who required hospitalization.We stratified by age (<or> 50 years) given prior distinct symptom profiles after dose 2 (D2).We also evaluated whether severe+ symptoms after D2 predicted severe+ symptoms after dose 3 (D3).Results:We included 524 participants (70% female, mean age 45 years) who received a 3rd mRNA vaccine through October 11, 2021.Most had Crohn's disease (71%), and 89% were on biologic therapies.Most (58%) had received primary vaccination with BNT562b2,and only 3.5% reported prior COVID infection at the time of initial vaccination.Overall, 97% of subjects received a 3rd dose with the same mRNA vaccine as in their initial series with the remainder receiving the other mRNA vaccine type.No participants received a 3rd dose with the Ad26.CoV.2 (J&J) vaccine. Overall, 41% reported symptoms after a 3rd dose,with symptoms generally more frequent and severe among those <55 years (Table).The most frequent postvaccination symptom was injection site pain (39%).Common systemic symptoms included fatigue/malaise (34%),headache (23%),and muscle, bone or joint symptoms (13%).These were all less frequent after D3 than after D2 (Figure).Gastrointestinal symptoms were reported by 8.8%, which was slightly more frequent than after D2 (7.8%).Among those with postvaccination symptoms, the proportion with severe symptoms after D3 was lower than D2 for fatigue/ malaise, headache, dizziness and lightheadedness, fever/chills, and rheumatologic symptoms, but was slightly higher than D2 for gastrointestinal symptoms.Severe+ symptoms were seen in 17% after D2 and in 14% after D3. Of those with severe+ symptoms after D2, 34% had severe+ symptoms after D3.In contrast, about 22% had severe+ symptoms after D3 but did not report severe+ symptoms after D2.Conclusion:The frequency and severity of symptoms after a 3rd mRNA vaccine dose are generally similar or lower than those after a second dose.Furthermore, prior severe+ symptoms after D2 do not necessarily predict severe+ symptoms after D3. Further evaluation of postvaccination gastrointestinal symptoms in this population is warranted. (Figure Presented) (Table Presented)
ABSTRACT
Background: Vaccine-induced protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection is predominantly mediated by humoral immunity;protection against disease progression is primarily determined by cellular immunity. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have high rates of post-vaccination anti-Spike IgG [IgG(S)] seroconversion, but postvaccination immune responses relative to non-IBD controls have not been well described. We aimed to assess post-vaccination humoral (antibody) and cellular (T-cell) responses in IBD relative to healthcare worker (HCW) controls. Methods: We evaluated IBD patients enrolled in a US registry referred from 26 centers at 2, 8, and 16 weeks after completing 2 doses of SARSCoV- 2 mRNA vaccination and compared results to non-IBD non-immunosuppressed HCW participating in a parallel study. We analyzed plasma antibodies to the receptor binding domain of the viral spike protein using the SARS-CoV-2 IgG-II assay (Abbott Labs, Abbott Park, IL);IgG(S) > 50 AU/mL was defined as positive. Those with prior COVID were excluded. We also performed T-cell clonal analysis by T-cell receptor (TCR) immunosequencing at 8 weeks (Adaptive Biotechnologies, Seattle, WA). The breadth (number of unique sequences to a given protein) and depth (relative abundance of all the unique sequences to a given protein) of the T-cell clonal response were quantified using reference datasets. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex and vaccine type. Results: Overall, 1805 subjects were included (IBD n=1074 (65% Crohn's disease, 35% ulcerative colitis);HCW n=731). Age and sex were similar between both cohorts;Hispanic ethnicity and Asian race were less common among IBD than HCW (Table). Vaccine type included BNT162b2 (Pfizer) (75% of IBD, 98% of HCW) and the remainder mRNA-1274 (Moderna). IBD treatments included anti- TNF (46%), other biologics (33%), other immune suppressing therapy (9%), and no immune suppression (12%). Postvaccination antibody levels were lower among IBD than HCW both before and after adjusting for vaccine type (p<0.0001 each timepoint;Figure). After further restricting the IBD cohort to those on no immune-suppressive therapies, antibodies remained lower in IBD vs HCW at 2w (p=0.008) and 8w (p<0.0001), but not 16w (p=0.07). Among 321 subjects with available whole cell samples at 8 weeks (IBD n=163, HCW =158), Spikespecific TCR responses were similar between IBD and HCW for both clonal breadth and depth in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses;sub-analyses of those on biologics yielded similar results. Conclusion: Patients with IBD have dampened humoral responses, but similar cellular responses, after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination relative to HCW. These findings suggest a potentially greater risk of infection, but not of disease progression, among those with IBD, and should be considered to help guide booster dosing strategies for the IBD population. (Figure Presented) (Figure Presented) Figure: Post-vaccination immune responses: (A) Antibody responses are lower in IBD relative to non-IBD healthcare workers at 2, 8, and 16 weeks (p<0.0001 at each timepoint). In contrast, post-vaccination Spike-specific T-cell receptor clonal breadth (B1) and clonal depth (B2) at 8 weeks are similar in IBD compared to healthcare workers.
ABSTRACT
The inevitable shift towards online learning due to the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic triggered a strong need to assess students using shorter exams whilst ensuring reliability. This study explores a data-centric approach that utilizes feature importance to select a discriminative subset of questions from the original exam. Furthermore, the discriminative question subset’s ability to approximate the students exam scores is evaluated by measuring the prediction accuracy and by quantifying the error interval of the prediction. The approach was evaluated using two real-world exam datasets of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) and Exame Nacional do Ensino Médio (ENEM) exams, which consist of student response data and the corresponding the exam scores. The evaluation was conducted against randomized question subsets of sizes 10, 20, 30 and 50. The results show that our method estimates the full scores more accurately than a baseline model in most question sizes while maintaining a reasonable error interval. The encouraging evidence found in this paper provides support for the strong potential of the on-going study to provide a data-centric approach for exam size reduction. © 2021, Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
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
Introduction: In the SARS-CoV2 mRNA vaccine trials, post-vaccination gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms were reported in 10-20% of participants. These symptoms could be perceived as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) flare which could lead to patient anxiety, and unnecessary tests or treatment. We aimed to assess GI symptoms after SARS-CoV2 mRNA vaccination in patients with IBD relative to non-IBD healthcare workers (HCW). Methods: We assessed GI symptoms in adults with IBD and HCW at baseline and after each dose of a SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine. We analyzed patient-reported IBD-specific disease activity (PRO2) after each dose (stool frequency (SF) and rectal bleeding for ulcerative colitis (UC), SF and abdominal pain for Crohn's disease (CD)). We also compared the frequency, severity, and duration of postvaccination GI symptoms in IBD patients compared to HCW. Severity was defined by impact on daily activities (mild, did not interfere;moderate, some interference;severe, prevented routine activity;extreme, required hospitalization). Severe and extreme were combined and designated as severe+. Duration was classified as<2 days, 2-7 days, or>7 days. Results: Post-vaccination GI symptoms were assessed after dose 1 (D1) (1391 IBD, 933 HCW) and dose 2 (D2) (1271 IBD, 884 HCW) (Table). About 60% of IBD and>99% of HCW received the BNT162b vaccine (Pfizer);the remainder received mRNA-1273 (Moderna). New GI symptoms after D1 were more frequent among IBD than HCW (6.0% vs 2.9%, p=0.001) but not after D2 (12.1% vs 12.7%, p=NS). Relative to HCW, IBD patients reported more diarrhea (3.8% vs. 1% (p<0.001) after D1 and 7.5% vs 4.2% (p=0.003) after D2) and abdominal pain (2.2% vs. 0.4% (p=0.001) after D1 and 6.2% vs 3% (p=0.002) after D2). Severe1 symptoms were noted in 1.5% IBD and 0.3% HCW (p=NS) after D1 and in 3.3% IBD and 0.1% HCW (p<0.001) after D2 (Figure 1). Longer GI symptom duration was more common in IBD than HCW after D1 (2.1% vs 0.5%, p=0.002) and D2 (5.4% vs. 2.1%, p<0.001). Among 423 CD and 300 UC patients with PRO2 data, 71%, 68%, and 65% of CD and 86%, 86%, and 83% of UC were in clinical remission at baseline, after D1, and after D2, respectively. Conclusion: The frequency of GI symptoms in IBD was greater than HCW after D1, but similar after D2. More severe and longer duration of GI symptoms were noted in a small number of IBD patients. Reassuringly, the mRNA vaccines do not seem to increase the risk of a disease flare in the vast majority of IBD patients.