Triple combination therapy with two antivirals and monoclonal antibodies for persistent or relapsed SARS-CoV-2 infection in immunocompromised patients.

INTRODUCTION: Severely immunocompromised patients are at risk for prolonged or relapsed COVID-19 leading to increased morbidity and mortality. We aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of combination treatment in immunocompromised COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We included all immunocompromised patients with prolonged/relapsed COVID-19 treated with combination therapy with two antivirals (remdesivir plus nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, or molnupiravir in case of renal failure) plus, if available, anti-spike monoclonal antibodies (Mabs), between February and October 2022. The main outcomes were virological response at day 14 (negative SARS-CoV-2 swab) and virological and clinical response (alive, asymptomatic, with negative SARS-CoV-2 swab) at day 30 and the last follow-up. RESULTS: Overall, 22 patients (Omicron variant in 17/18) were included: 18 received full combination of two antivirals and Mabs and 4 received two antivirals only; in 20/22 (91%) two antivirals were nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus remdesivir. Nineteen (86%) patients had hematological malignancy, 15 (68%) had received anti-CD20 therapy. All were symptomatic; 8 (36%) required oxygen. Four patients received second course of combination treatment. Response rate at day 14, 30 and last follow-up was, respectively, 75% (15/20 evaluable), 73% (16/22) and 82% (18/22). Day 14 and 30 response rates were significantly higher when combination therapy included Mabs. Higher number of vaccine doses was associated with better final outcome. Two patients (9%) developed severe side effects: bradycardia leading to remdesivir discontinuation and myocardial infarction. CONCLUSION: Combination therapy including two antivirals (mainly remdesivir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) and Mabs was associated with high rate of virological and clinical response in immunocompromised patients with prolonged/relapsed COVID-19.

External validation of unsupervised COVID-19 clinical phenotypes and their prognostic impact.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can be classified into different clinical phenotypes based on their demographic, clinical, radiology, and laboratory features. We aimed to validate in an external cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients the prognostic value of a previously described phenotyping system (FEN-COVID-19) and to assess the reproducibility of phenotypes development as a secondary analysis. METHODS: Patients were classified in phenotypes A, B or C according to the severity of oxygenation impairment, inflammatory response, hemodynamic and laboratory tests according to the FEN-COVID-19 method. RESULTS: Overall, 992 patients were included in the study, and 181 (18%), 757 (76%) and 54 (6%) of them were assigned to the FEN-COVID-19 phenotypes A, B, and C, respectively. An association with mortality was observed for phenotype C vs. A (hazard ratio [HR] 3.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.81-5.30, p < 0.001) and for phenotype C vs. B (HR 2.20, 95% CI 1.50-3.23, p < 0.001). A non-statistically significant trend towards higher mortality was also observed for phenotype B vs. A (HR 1.41; 95% CI 0.92-2.15, p = 0.115). By means of cluster analysis, three different phenotypes were also identified in our cohort, with an overall similar gradient in terms of prognostic impact to that observed when patients were assigned to FEN-COVID-19 phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic impact of FEN-COVID-19 phenotypes was confirmed in our external cohort, although with less difference in mortality between phenotypes A and B than in the original study.

Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 can be classified into different clinical phenotypes based on their demographic, clinical, radiology, and laboratory featuresIn this study, we externally confirmed the prognostic impact of clinical phenotypes previously identified by Gutierrez-Gutierrez and colleagues in a Spanish cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and the usefulness of their simplified probabilistic model for phenotypes assignmentThis could indirectly support the validity of both phenotype's development and their extrapolation to other hospitals and countries for management decisions during other possible future viral pandemics.

Coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination in transplant recipients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination is considered one of the most promising and socioeconomically sustainable strategy to help control the pandemic and several vaccines are currently being distributed in nationwide mass immunization campaigns. Very limited data are available on benefits and risks of COVID-19 vaccination in immunocompromised patients and in particular in solid organ or hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients as they were excluded from phase III trials. This review summarizes current knowledge, international guidelines and controversies regarding COVID-19 vaccination in these vulnerable populations. RECENT FINDINGS: Various COVID-19 vaccine platforms showed good efficacy in phase III trials in the immunocompetent and there are data arising on the safety and immunogenicity of these vaccines in the immunocompromised population. SUMMARY: Transplant recipients could benefit significantly from COVID-19 vaccination, both through active immunization provided they elicit protective vaccine responses, and probably through cocooning by immunization of caregivers and healthcare personnel and thus reducing the risk of SARS-coronavirus-2 exposure. Although awaiting more data on the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines to inform potential adaptations of vaccine regimens, we strongly recommend prioritizing COVID-19 vaccination of solid and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients to decrease COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality.

Outcome of early treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with haematological disorders.

Outcome of early treatment of COVID-19 with antivirals or anti-spike monoclonal antibodies (MABs) in patients with haematological malignancies (HM) is unknown. A retrospective study of HM patients treated for mild/moderate COVID-19 between March 2021 and July 2022 was performed. The main composite end-point was treatment failure (severe COVID-19 or COVID-19-related death). We included 328 consecutive patients who received MABs (n = 120, 37%; sotrovimab, n = 73) or antivirals (n = 208, 63%; nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, n = 116) over a median of two days after symptoms started; 111 (33.8%) had non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL); 89 (27%) were transplant/CAR-T (chimaeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy) recipients. Most infections (n = 309, 94%) occurred during the Omicron period. Failure developed in 31 patients (9.5%). Its independent predictors were older age, fewer vaccine doses, and treatment with MABs. Rate of failure was lower in the Omicron versus the pre-Omicron period (7.8% versus 36.8%, p < 0.001). During the Omicron period, predictors of failure were age, fewer vaccine doses and diagnosis of acute myeloid leukaemia/myelodysplastic syndrome (AML/MDS). Independent predictors of longer viral shedding were age, comorbidities, hospital admission at diagnosis, NHL/CLL, treatment with MABs. COVID-19-associated mortality was 3.4% (n = 11). The mortality in those who developed severe COVID-19 after early treatment was 26% in the Omicron period. Patients with HM had a significant risk of failure of early treatment, even during the Omicron period, with high mortality rate.

Risk factors for a severe disease course in children with SARS-COV-2 infection following hematopoietic cell transplantation in the pre-Omicron period: a prospective multinational Infectious Disease Working Party from the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation group (EBMT) and the Spanish Group of Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (GETH) study.

Risk factors for severe SARS-Cov-2 infection course are poorly described in children following hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). In this international study, we analyzed factors associated with a severe course (intensive care unit (ICU) admission and/or mortality) in post-HCT children. Eighty-nine children (58% male; median age 9 years (min-max 1-18)) who received an allogeneic (85; 96%) or an autologous (4; 4%) HCT were reported from 28 centers (18 countries). Median time from HCT to SARS-Cov-2 infection was 7 months (min-max 0-181). The most common clinical manifestations included fever (37; 42%) and cough (26; 29%); 37 (42%) were asymptomatic. Nine (10%) children following allo-HCT required ICU care. Seven children (8%) following allo-HCT, died at a median of 22 days after SARS-Cov-2 diagnosis. In a univariate analysis, the probability of a severe disease course was higher in allo-HCT children with chronic GVHD, non-malignant disease, immune suppressive treatment (specifically, mycophenolate), moderate immunodeficiency score, low Lansky score, fever, cough, coinfection, pulmonary radiological findings, and high C-reactive protein. In conclusion, SARS-Cov-2 infection in children following HCT was frequently asymptomatic. Despite this, 10% needed ICU admission and 8% died in our cohort. Certain HCT, underlying disease, and SARS-Cov-2 related factors were associated with a severe disease course.

Improved outcomes over time and higher mortality in CMV seropositive allogeneic stem cell transplantation patients with COVID-19; An infectious disease working party study from the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation registry.

Introduction: COVID-19 has been associated with high morbidity and mortality in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HCT) recipients. Methods: This study reports on 986 patients reported to the EBMT registry during the first 29 months of the pandemic. Results: The median age was 50.3 years (min - max; 1.0 - 80.7). The median time from most recent HCT to diagnosis of COVID-19 was 20 months (min - max; 0.0 - 383.9). The median time was 19.3 (0.0 - 287.6) months during 2020, 21.2 (0.1 - 324.5) months during 2021, and 19.7 (0.1 - 383.9) months during 2022 (p = NS). 145/986 (14.7%) patients died; 124 (12.6%) due to COVID-19 and 21 of other causes. Only 2/204 (1%) fully vaccinated patients died from COVID-19. There was a successive improvement in overall survival over time. In multivariate analysis, increasing age (p<.0001), worse performance status (p<.0001), contracting COVID-19 within the first 30 days (p<.0001) or 30 - 100 days after HCT (p=.003), ongoing immunosuppression (p=.004), pre-existing lung disease (p=.003), and recipient CMV seropositivity (p=.004) had negative impact on overall survival while patients contracting COVID-19 in 2020 (p<.0001) or 2021 (p=.027) had worse overall survival than patients with COVID-19 diagnosed in 2022. Discussion: Although the outcome of COVID-19 has improved, patients having risk factors were still at risk for severe COVID-19 including death.

Case report: Sotrovimab, remdesivir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir combination as salvage treatment option in two immunocompromised patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

COVID-19 in immunocompromised patients is difficult to treat. SARS-CoV-2 interaction with the host immune system and the role of therapy still remains only partly understood. There are no data regarding the use of monoclonal antibodies and the combination of two antivirals in fighting viral replication and disease progression. We report the cases of two patients, both treated with rituximab for non-Hodgkin lymphoma and granulomatosis with polyangiitis, respectively, and both hospitalized for COVID-19 with positive SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia, who were successfully treated with a salvage combination therapy with sotrovimab, remdesivir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir.

Management of patients with lymphoma and COVID-19: Narrative review and evidence-based practical recommendations.

Patients with hematologic malignancies can be immunocompromized because of their disease, anti-cancer therapy, and concomitant immunosuppressive treatment. Furthermore, these patients are usually older than 60 years and have comorbidities. For all these reasons they are highly vulnerable to infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and have an increased risk of developing severe/critical Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared to the general population. Although COVID-19 vaccination has proven effective in reducing the incidence of severe/critical disease, vaccinated patients with lymphoma may not be protected as they often fail to develop a sufficient antiviral immune response. There is therefore an urgent need to address the management of patients with lymphoma and COVID-19 in the setting of the ongoing pandemic. Passive immunization with monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 is a currently available complementary drug strategy to active vaccination for lymphoma patients, while monoclonal antibodies and antiviral drugs (remdesivir, ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir, and molnupiravir) have proven effective in preventing the progression to severe/critical COVID-19. In this narrative review we present the most recent data documenting the characteristics and outcomes of patients with concomitant lymphoma and COVID-19. Our ultimate goal is to provide practice-oriented guidance in the management of these vulnerable patients from diagnosis to treatment and follow-up of lymphoma. To this purpose, we will first provide an overview of the main data concerning prognostic factors and fatality rate of lymphoma patients who develop COVID-19; the outcomes of COVID-19 vaccination will also be addressed. We will then discuss current COVID-19 prophylaxis and treatment options for lymphoma patients. Finally, based on the literature and our multidisciplinary experience, we will summarize a set of indications on how to manage patients with lymphoma according to COVID-19 exposure, level of disease severity and former history of infection, as typically encountered in clinical practice.

Case report: Sotrovimab, remdesivir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir combination as salvage treatment option in two immunocompromised patients hospitalized for COVID-19

COVID-19 in immunocompromised patients is difficult to treat. SARS-CoV-2 interaction with the host immune system and the role of therapy still remains only partly understood. There are no data regarding the use of monoclonal antibodies and the combination of two antivirals in fighting viral replication and disease progression. We report the cases of two patients, both treated with rituximab for non-Hodgkin lymphoma and granulomatosis with polyangiitis, respectively, and both hospitalized for COVID-19 with positive SARS-CoV-2 RNAemia, who were successfully treated with a salvage combination therapy with sotrovimab, remdesivir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir.

Healthcare Worker Study Cohort to Determine the Level and Durability of Cellular and Humoral Immune Responses after Two Doses of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination.

We prospectively studied immunological response against SARS-CoV-2 after vaccination among healthcare workers without (group A) and with previous infection (group B). The analyses were collected at T0 (before the BNT162b2), T1 (before the second dose), T2 and T6 (1 and 6 months after the second dose). For cellular immune response, the activation-induced cell marker assay was performed with CD4 and CD8 Spike peptide megapools expressed as Stimulation Index. For humoral immune response, we determined antibodies to Spike-1 and nucleocapsid protein. The linear mixed model compared specific times to T0. The CD4+ Spike response overall rate of change was significant at T1 (p = 0.038) and at T2 (p < 0.001), while decreasing at T6. For CD8+ Spike reactivity, the interaction between the time and group was significant (p = 0.0265), and the p value for group comparison was significant at the baseline (p = 0.0030) with higher SI in previously infected subjects. Overall, the anti-S Abs significantly increased from T1 to T6 compared to T0. The group B at T6 retained high anti-S titer (p < 0.001). At T6, in both groups we found a persistent humoral response and a high CD4+ T cell response able to cross recognize SARS-COV-2 variants including epsilon, even if not a circulating virus at that time.

Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies for early treatment of hospital‐acquired SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in hematologic patients

Efficacy of early treatment with anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 spike protein monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for nosocomial SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in hematologic patients is unknown. Retrospective, cohort study conducted in four Italian teaching hospitals. We included adult patients with hematologic malignancies and hospital‐acquired SARS‐CoV‐2 infection diagnosed between November 2020 and December 2021. The principal exposure variable was administration of mAbs. The primary endpoint was clinical failure dea composite outcome of mortality and/or invasive and noninvasive ventilation within 90 days from infection onset. We included 52 patients with hospital‐acquired SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Males were 29 (60%), median age was 62 (interquartile range [IQR] 48–70). Forty‐five (86%) patients were on chemotherapy or had received chemotherapy within 30 days. MAbs were administered in 19/52 (36%) patients. Clinical failure occurred in 22 (42%) patients;21% (4/19) in mAbs group versus 54% (18/33) in non‐mAbs group (p = 0.03). Other predictors of clinical failure were older age (median [IQR] 69 [61–72] versus 58 [46–66], p = 0.001), and higher Charlson comorbidity index (median [IQR], 5 [3.25‐5] versus 3 [2–5], p = 0.002). At multivariable Cox regression model, mAbs were independently associated with a significantly lower rate of clinical failure (HR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01–0.85, p = 0.01), after adjusting for confounders. In conclusion, mAbs are promising for early treatment of hematologic patients with healthcare‐related SARS‐CoV‐2 infection.

Vaccinations in patients with multiple sclerosis: a real-world, single-center experience.

Vaccines prevent infections in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Though recommendations regarding vaccinating patients with MS have been recently published, real-world data regarding vaccines' planning in patients receiving disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) for MS are missing. Our aim was, therefore, to describe vaccination coverage rates, timing-proposal and safety in real-life vaccinating patients with MS undergoing DMDs before the start of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination campaign. Patients followed at our MS-center were referred to individualized immunization-programs customized to Italian recommendations, patients' risks, immunity to exanthematic diseases, ongoing DMDs, or therapy-start urgency. Disease-activity stated the need for an essential immunization-cycle, whose core was composed by four vaccines: meningococcal-B, pneumococcal conjugated, Haemophilus influenzae B, and meningococcal-ACWY vaccines. Vaccines were administered prior to the planned DMD-start when possible, inactivated-vaccines >2 weeks and live-vaccines >4 weeks before treatment-start. Patients received a 6-months clinical-/radiological-follow-up after immunization. One-hundred and ninety-five patients were vaccinated between April 2017 and January 2021. 124/195 (63.6%) started a vaccination-program before therapy-start/-switch and 108/124 (87.1%) effectively completed immunization before new therapy-start without any delay. The time needed for immunization-conclusion reached a median of 27 (confidence interval 22) days in 2020. No increase in clinical-/radiological-activity 3-/6-months after immunization was noted. In conclusion, our study confirmed feasibility and safety of a vaccination-protocol in patients with MS whose duration resulted in a median of 27 days.

Early Clinical Experience with Molnupiravir for Mild to Moderate Breakthrough COVID-19 among Fully Vaccinated Patients at Risk for Disease Progression.

Information on the efficacy and safety of molnupiravir in daily clinical practice is very scarce. We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of fully vaccinated patients with mild to moderate breakthrough COVID-19 treated with molnupiravir between January 2022 and February 2022. Overall, 145 patients were enrolled. Their median age was 71.0 years, and 60.7% were males. The most common underlying condition was a severe cardiovascular disease (37.2%), followed by primary or acquired immunodeficiency (22.8%), and oncological/onco-hematological disease in the active phase (22.1%). At 30 days after breakthrough COVID-19 diagnosis, only 4 out of 145 patients (2.7%) required hospital admission. No patients developed severe COVID-19, were admitted to the ICU, or died during the follow-up period. Adverse events, mild in intensity, occurred in 2 patients (1.4%). Our results support the current evidence establishing positive clinical and safety outcomes of molnupiravir in fully vaccinated patients with mild or moderate breakthrough COVID-19.

Isavuconazole for COVID-19-Associated Invasive Mold Infections.

Isavuconazole is a broad-spectrum antifungal drug recently approved as a first-line treatment for invasive aspergillosis and as a first or alternative treatment for mucormycosis. The purpose of this review was to report and discuss the use of isavuconazole for the treatment of COVID-19-associated aspergillosis (CAPA), and COVID-19-associated mucormycosis (CAM). Among all studies which reported treatment of CAPA, approximately 10% of patients were reportedly treated with isavuconazole. Considering 14 identified studies that reported the use of isavuconazole for CAPA, isavuconazole was used in 40% of patients (95 of 235 treated patients), being first-line monotherapy in over half of them. We identified six studies that reported isavuconazole use in CAM, either alone or in combination therapy. Overall, isavuconazole was used as therapy in 13% of treated CAM patients, frequently as combination or sequential therapy. The use of isavuconazole in CAPA and CAM is complicated by the challenge of achieving adequate exposure in COVID-19 patients who are frequently obese and hospitalized in the ICU with concomitant renal replacement therapy (RRT) or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The presence of data on high efficacy in the treatment of aspergillosis, lower potential for drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and for subtherapeutic levels, and no risk of QT prolongation compared to other mold-active azoles, better safety profile than voriconazole, and the possibility of using an intravenous formulation in the case of renal failure are the advantages of using isavuconazole in this setting.

Recommendations for the management of COVID-19 in patients with haematological malignancies or haematopoietic cell transplantation, from the 2021 European Conference on Infections in Leukaemia (ECIL 9).

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel virus that spread worldwide from 2019 causing the Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 infection is characterised by an initial viral phase followed in some patients by a severe inflammatory phase. Importantly, immunocompromised patients may have a prolonged viral phase, shedding infectious viral particles for months, and absent or dysfunctional inflammatory phase. Among haematological patients, COVID-19 has been associated with high mortality rate in acute leukaemia, high risk-myelodysplastic syndromes, and after haematopoietic cell transplant and chimeric-antigen-receptor-T therapies. The clinical symptoms and signs were similar to that reported for the overall population, but the severity and outcome were worse. The deferral of immunodepleting cellular therapy treatments is recommended for SARS-CoV-2 positive patient, while in the other at-risk cases, the haematological treatment decisions must be weighed between individual risks and benefits. The gold standard for the diagnosis is the detection of viral RNA by nucleic acid testing on nasopharyngeal-swabbed sample, which provides high sensitivity and specificity; while rapid antigen tests have a lower sensitivity, especially in asymptomatic patients. The prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection is based on strict infection control measures recommended for aerosol-droplet-and-contact transmission. Vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 has shown high efficacy in reducing community transmission, hospitalisation and deaths due to severe COVID-19 disease in the general population, but immunosuppressed/haematology patients may have lower sero-responsiveness to vaccinations. Moreover, the recent emergence of new variants may require vaccine modifications and strategies to improve efficacy in these vulnerable patients. Beyond supportive care, the specific treatment is directed at viral replication control (antivirals, anti-spike monoclonal antibodies) and, in patients who need it, to the control of inflammation (dexamethasone, anti-Il-6 agents, and others). However, the benefit of all these various prophylactic and therapeutic treatments in haematology patients deserves further studies.

Candida auris Candidemia in Critically Ill, Colonized Patients: Cumulative Incidence and Risk Factors.

INTRODUCTION: Candida auris (C. auris) is an emerging nosocomial pathogen, and a sharp rise in cases of colonization and infection has been registered in intensive care units (ICUs) during the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The unfavorable resistance profile of C. auris and the potential high mortality of C. auris infections represent an important challenge for physicians. METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective study including all patients admitted to ICUs with isolation of C. auris in any non-sterile body site between February 20, 2020, and May 31, 2021. The primary aim of the study was to assess the cumulative incidence of C. auris candidemia in colonized patients. The secondary aim was to identify predictors of C. auris candidemia in the study population. RESULTS: During the study period, 157 patients admitted to ICUs in our hospital became colonized with C. auris; 59% of them were affected by COVID-19. Overall, 27 patients (17%) developed C. auris candidemia. The cumulative risk of developing C. auris candidemia was > 25% at 60 days after first detection of C. auris colonization. Seven patients with C. auris candidemia (26%) also developed a late recurrent episode. All C. auris blood isolates during the first occurring episode were resistant to fluconazole and susceptible to echinocandins, while 15 (56%) were resistant to amphotericin B. During late recurrent episodes, emergent resistance to caspofungin and amphotericin B occurred in one case each. In the final multivariable model, only multisite colonization retained an independent association with the development of C. auris candidemia. CONCLUSION: Candida auris candidemia may occur in up to one fourth of colonized critically ill patients, and multisite colonization is an independent risk factor for the development of candidemia. Implementing adequate infection control measures remains crucial to prevent colonization with C. auris and indirectly the subsequent development of infection.

Aspergillus-PCR in bronchoalveolar lavage - diagnostic accuracy for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA) in intensive care unit (ICU) patients is challenging, and the role of Aspergillus-PCR in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated diagnostic accuracy of Aspergillus-PCR in BAL in IPA in three different cohorts: ICU-admitted patients with COVID-19, ICU-admitted patients without COVID-19 and immunocompromised patients. METHODS: All stored available BAL samples collected from three patient groups were tested with Aspergillus-PCR (AsperGenius® ). IPA was diagnosed according to appropriate criteria for each patient group. RESULTS: We included 111 BAL samples from 101 patients: 52 (51%) patients admitted to ICU for COVID-19, 24 (24%) admitted to ICU for other reasons and 25 (25%) immunocompromised. There were 31 cases of IPA (28%). Aspergillus-PCR sensitivity was 64% (95% CI 47-79) and specificity 99% (95% CI 93-100). Aspergillus-PCR sensitivity was 40% (95%CI 19-64) in ICU COVID-19, 67% (95% CI 21-93) in non-COVID-19 ICU patients and 92% (95%CI 67-98) in the immunocompromised. The concordance between positive BAL-GM and BAL-PCR in patients with and without IPA was significantly lower in ICU patients (32%; 43% in COVID-19, 18% in non-COVID-19) than in the immunocompromised (92%), p < .001. CONCLUSIONS: Aspergillus-PCR in BAL improves the diagnostic accuracy of BAL-GM in ICU patients.