Bacterial and viral upper and lower airways infection in people with cystic fibrosis in stable condition

Background: Bacterial and viral airway infections are adverse factors for prognosis in people with cystic fibrosis (CF). The role of viral infections is unclear. Proper microbiological follow-up is essential, and the correlation between upper (UAW) and lower airway (LAW) microbiology may be important for lung disease management. We aim to evaluate airway microbiology in patients in stable clinical condition. Method(s): Between September 2021 and March 2022 in the Florence CF center, 144 nasal lavage-throat swab paired samples were collected from 72 clinically stable people with CF not chronically colonized by Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The study enrolled 59 children (median age 9, range 2-16) and 13 adults (median age 28, range 18-59). LAW specimens (72)were sampled as throat swab and UAWspecimens (72)were randomly collected by nasal lavage with two methods-Mainz (44) or Ryno-set (28). We performed conventional microbiological analyses on all samples. To screen for respiratory viruses, multiplex polymerase chain reaction (BioFire FilmArray RP 2.1 Plus) was performed. Respiratory symptoms and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) valueswere evaluated for all patients. Result(s): Twenty-one (29%) patients tested positive for at least one virus in UAW and LAW specimens. The most frequently identified viruses were human rhinovirus or enterovirus (22%) and respiratory syncytial virus (6%). Two (3%) patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Concordance between sampling methods for viral detection in UAW and LAW specimens was observed in 59 paired samples (82%), including 40 patients with no viral infections and 19 virus positive for both samples. Discordance was described in 13 subjects;10 of 13 did not show viral infection in nasal lavage. Twenty-one percent of positive nasal lavage was performed using Ryno-set and 36% using the Mainz approach. The prevalent bacteriumwas Staphylococcu aureus in UAW (53%) and LAW (69%) cultures, followed by Enterobacteriaceae (UAW 8%, LAW 6%), methicillin-resistant S. aureus (UAW 7%, LAW 6%), P. aeruginosa (UAW 4%, LAW 6%), and other clinically relevant gram-negative bacteria such as Achromobacter xylosoxidans, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, and Ochrobactrum anthropi (UAW 7%, LAW 13%). Nasal lavage performed with Ryno-set tested positive in 72% of patients, and 64% of Mainz lavage were positive. Mainz nasal lavage showed different S. aureus and P. aeruginosa isolations (48% and 5%, respectively) than the samples collected with Ryno-set technique (61% and 4%, respectively). Concordance between sampling methods for bacterial detection in UAW and LAW was the same with the two methods (53%). Bacterial and viral infections were found in UAWand LAWof stable people with CF, but no clinical correlation was observed. Conclusion(s): The two methods of UAW lavage had slight differences in performance. Virus infection appeared to be less prevalent than bacterial infection in UAWand LAW.We did not find correlations between presence of viruses and respiratory symptoms, but further investigation is needed for a better understanding of the clinical role of viral infection in people with CF.Copyright © 2022, European Cystic Fibrosis Society. All rights reserved

THE ROLE OF HOUSEHOLD SENTIMENTS AND EXPECTATIONS DURING THE COVID-19 CRISIS: EVIDENCE FROM THE SPECIAL SURVEY OF ITALIAN HOUSEHOLDS

We study the role played by household expectations on own economic prospects and sentiments on general economic conditions in shaping their actual and planned consumption behavior. Using data from the Special Survey of Italian Households collected by the Banca d'Italia, we implement a latent class analysis to cluster households into homogeneous groups based on their sentiments. Then, we study the relation between these clusters and household expectations with consumption and saving behavior. Our results show that sentiments and expectations are not statistically related to shopping behavior during the pandemic. On the other hand, they are significant determinants of consumption plans and expected savings. In particular, pessimistic households are more likely to plan a reduction in consumption in the near future;nonetheless, they are less likely to expect positive savings in the 12-month period following the interview. The share of pessimistic households decreases throughout 2021, and if we impute consumption expenditure levels from an external source we find that the share of aggregate consumption of pessimistic households is low. Overall, our results suggest that this group of households may play a limited role in affecting the overall economic situation in the future. © SOCIETÀ EDITRICE IL MULINO.

Effects of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on attendance at the cystic fibrosis centre and the definition of the microbiological status of cystic fibrosis patients in Tuscany

Objectives: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the consequent lockdown periods have profoundly changed the health habits of patients. The fear of the viral infection as well as the reorganisation of staff within the health services due to the pandemic caused a drop in patients’ attendance at CF centres. This resulted in a decrease in cultures performed, on which the definition of microbiological status is based. The ECFS definition of patients’ microbiological status (mainly the definition of chronic P. aeruginosa infection) is based on the modified Leeds criteria (>50% of the samples positive, at least 4 samples collected) or significantly raised anti-Pa antibodies. Following the different lockdown periods imposed in Tuscany in 2020 (March 9th – May 18th) we verified: • the number of outpatient visits to the Centre • the number of cultures performed compared with previous years • compliance with the criteria suggested by disease registries/standards of care for the definition of chronic infection • the utility of anti-Pa serology in the correct definition of chronic Pain the epidemic context Methods: Retrospective study on data regarding outpatient examinations, number of cultures performed and serology tests. Results: Outpatients’ attendance at the Centre (2020) [Table presented] % of patients with at least 4 cultures performed yearly. [Table presented] In 2020 we observed a significant reduction (p <0.05) in the mean number of cultures per patient and in the percentage of patients who performed at least 4 cultures. During 2020, 108 (29.2%) patients with fewer than 4 cultures performed Pa serology, 25 (23.1%) tested positive, completing the definition required by the ECFS. Conclusions: The SARS-CoV-2 infection caused a drop in patients’ attendance at the centre, compromising the correct definition of Pa chronic infection based on the number of cultures. In the pandemic context, serology could be a useful complementary test to correctly fulfill the ECFS definition. Funding: Regione Toscana K38

Efficacy and Safety of Front-Line Venetoclax and Rituximab (VenR) for the Treatment of Young Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia and an Unfavorable Biologic Profile. Preliminary Results of the Gimema Study ‘Veritas‘

Fixed-duration treatment with venetoclax (Ven), a highly selective Bcl-2 inhibitor combined with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, showed high efficacy inducing high rates of deep responses with undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD) in patients with previously treated and untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The efficacy and safety of the Ven and rituximab (VenR) combination have been investigated in a multicenter, prospective study of the GIMEMA group that included young patients with previously untreated CLL (LLC 1518, VERITAS, NCT03455517). The primary endpoint of this study was the CR rate assessed according to the iwCLL criteria. Inclusion criteria were: treatment requirement per iwCLL criteria, age ≤65 years, cumulative Illness rating scale score ≤6, creatinine clearance ≥30 mL/min, and an unfavorable biologic profile with IGHV unmutated and or TP53 disruption. Treatment consisted of the Ven dose ramp-up (from 20 to 400 mg daily, during 5-weeks) followed by Ven 400 mg daily, combined with R for six 28-day courses (375 mg/m2, course 1;500 mg/m2, courses 2-6). Patients continued with Ven single agent, 400 mg daily, until month 13. Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) prophylaxis measures included hydration, allopurinol, or rasburicase. All patients received Pneumocystis Jirovecii prophylaxis. G-CSF was given in patients with recurrent and severe granulocytopenia. Adverse events (AEs) were graded according to the CTCAE criteria v.5, TLS events were classified according to Howard's criteria. Response was assessed at months 7 and 15 and included clinical examination, PB evaluation, BM aspirate, BM biopsy, and CT scan. MRD was checked centrally in the PB and BM by a 6/4-color flow-cytometry assay with a sensitivity of at least 10-4 according to the internationally standardized European Research Initiative on CLL. Quantitative MRD results assessed by flow-cytometry were categorized as uMRD (uMRD4;<10-4), intermediate MRD, or high MRD (≥10-2). MRD was further evaluated by allele-specific oligonucleotide PCR with a sensitivity up to 10-5 in the PB and BM of patients who showed uMRD4 by flow-cytometry. During the follow-up, MRD was monitored every 6 months. Between October 2018 and May 2020, 77 patients with CLL were included in this study. Two patients were off study before the start of treatment (withdrawal of consent, 1;Covid-19 infection, 1) and were not included in the analysis. The median age was 53.5 years (range 38-65). Binet stage B/C was present in 84% of patients, increased beta-2 microglobulin in 41%. Seventy-one (96%) of patients were IGHV unmutated, while 3 (4%) were IGHV mutated and showed TP53 mutation (Table 1). At the data cutoff of June 30, 2020, 65 (87%) patients completed the ramp-up phase. The planned 400 mg dose of Ven was reached within 5 weeks in 78.5% of patients. Response was assessed in 34 patients at the end of the VenR combination therapy. A response was achieved by 32 (94%) patients. Responses included 20 (59%) CRs, 1 CRi (3%) and 11 (32%) PRs due to residual enlarged nodes (median maximum size, 1.9 cm). Treatment failure due to toxicity was recorded in 2 (6%) patients. Overall, a response with uMRD4 by flow-cytometry in the PB was observed in 26 (76.5%) cases, and in the PB and BM, in 17 (50.0%). The rates of patients with CR and uMRD4 by flow-cytometry in the PB, and both in the PB and BM, were 44%, and 35%, respectively (Table 2). No detectable disease by PCR, both in the PB and BM, was observed in 4 (12%) patients. With a median follow-up of 4.5 months from the start of therapy, no patient has progressed or died. Fifty-three percent of patients were hospitalized during the first seven days of the Ven ramp-up phase. A transient laboratory TLS was observed in 3 patients. Treatment was discontinued after the first dose of Ven in 1 patient with evidence of laboratory TLS associated with severe neurologic toxicity due to the concomitant administration of fentanyl. Selected grade ≥3 AEs included neutropenia in 10 patients (ramp-up phase, 5) and neutropenic fever in 4. Gra e ≥3 infection was recorded in 3 patients and was the reason for treatment discontinuation in 1 who developed COVID-19 pneumonia. In conclusion, the preliminary results of this study demonstrate the high efficacy of the front-line VenR combination, which resulted in a high proportion of CRs and responses with uMRD4 in young patients with CLL and an unfavorable biologic profile. [Formula presented] Disclosures: Mauro: Astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Jannsen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Octopharma: Consultancy. Reda: Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Trentin: Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau;Shire: Honoraria;Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Octapharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Coscia: Shire: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding;Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Sportoletti: Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Laurenti: Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Gaidano: Astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Sunesys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Marasca: Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Shire: Honoraria;Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Murru: Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Rigolin: Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Scarfo: Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;AstraZeneca: Honoraria;Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Marchetti: Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisor committees;Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Levato: Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Galieni: Celgene: Honoraria;Takeda: Honoraria;AbbVie: Honoraria;Janssen: Honoraria. Liberati: Verastem: Research Funding;Onconova: Research Funding;Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding;Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding;Pfizer: Research Funding;Karyopharm: Research Funding;Morphosys: Research Funding;Novartis: Research Funding;GSK: Research Funding;Incyte: Honoraria;Oncopeptides: Research Funding;Takeda: Research Funding. Molica: Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Visentin: Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, SpeakersBureau;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Vitale: Janssen: Honoraria. Del Giudice: Janssen: Other: grant for meeting participation;Tolero: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Roche: Other: grant for meeting partecipation;AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cuneo: Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Astra Zeneca: Honoraria;Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Foà: Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Incyte: Speakers Bureau;Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau;Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Novartis: Speakers Bureau;Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Telehealth practice among health centers during the COVID-19 pandemic - United States, July 11-17, 2020

Telehealth is a promising approach to promoting access to care and can facilitate public health mitigation strategies and help prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory illnesses, while supporting continuity of care. Although CMS's change of its telehealth provisions enabled health centers to expand telehealth by aligning guidance and leveraging federal resources, sustaining expanded use of telehealth services might require additional policies and resources. During 11-17 July, 2020, 963 (95.4%) of 1,009 Health Resources and Services Administration-funded health centers that responded to a voluntary weekly survey reported providing telehealth services. Health centers in urban areas were more likely to provide >30% of visits virtually than were those in rural areas. Compared with health centers that reported full staffing capacity, the prevalence of reporting >30% telehealth visits was 22% higher among those reporting 5% staff absence and was 63% higher among health centers reporting 10% staff absence. No association was detected between the percentage of telehealth visits and PPE shortages for the week following the survey (the week ending July 24), nor was an association found between the percentage of telehealth visits and the change in the number of weekly visits from 2019.

Prevalence of Diabetes and Hypertension and Their Associated Risks for Poor Outcomes in Covid-19 Patients.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) has affected millions of people and may disproportionately affect those with hypertension and diabetes. Because of inadequate methods in published systematic reviews, the prevalence of diabetes and hypertension and associated risks of poor outcomes in Covid-19 patients are unknown. We searched databases from December 1, 2019, to April 6, 2020, and selected observational peer-reviewed studies in English of patients with Covid-19. Independent reviewers extracted data on study participants, interventions, and outcomes and assessed risk of bias, and the certainty of evidence. We included 65 (15 794 participants) observational studies at moderate to high risk of bias. Overall prevalence of diabetes and hypertension was 12% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10-15; n = 12 870; I 2: 89%), and 17% (95% CI, 13-22; n = 12 709; I 2: 95%), respectively. In severe Covid-19, the prevalence of diabetes and hypertension were 18% (95% CI, 16-20; n = 1099; I 2: 0%) and 32% (95% CI, 16-54; n = 1078; I 2: 63%), respectively. Unadjusted relative risk for intensive care unit admission and mortality were 1.96 (95% CI, 1.19-3.22; n = 8890; I 2: 80%; P = .008) and 2.78 (95% CI, 1.39-5.58; n = 2058; I 2: 75%; P = .0004) for diabetics; and 2.95 (95% CI, 2.18-3.99; n = 1737; I 2: 0%; P < .001) and 2.39 (95% CI, 1.54-3.73; n = 3107; I 2: 66%; P < .001) for hypertensives. Neither diabetes (1.50; 95% CI, 0.90-2.50; n = 1991; I 2: 74%; P = .119) nor hypertension (1.48; 95% CI, 0.99-2.23; n = 2023; I 2: 69%; P = .058) was associated with severe Covid-19. In conclusion, the risk of intensive care unit admission and mortality for patients with diabetes or hypertension who developed Covid-19 is increased compared with those without these comorbidities. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020176582.

Ageism against older adults in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: an integrative review

OBJECTIVE: To report the main results of studies on prejudice, stereotyping, and age-based discrimination (ageism) in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This is an integrative review of the literature on ageism in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, conducted between May and June 2020, with data collected from the following databases: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE/PubMed), Web of Science (Thompson Reuters), Scopus (Elsevier Science), Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (Lilacs) and Scientific Eletronic Library Online (SciELO). RESULTS: Twenty-one publications addressing ageism during the pandemics, its origins, consequences, and ethical and political implications were analyzed. All publications were theoretical with a critical/reflexive approach, being 90,5% opinion articles (n = 19) and 9,5% research (n = 2). The main findings indicate criticisms regarding resources allocation and intensive care based exclusively on age. The results also highlight the impacts of social isolation, the use of technologies and social media, and intergenerational relationships within the COVID-19 scenario. CONCLUSION: According to most publications, although ageism has always been present, it became more evident during the COVID-19 pandemic as a form of discrimination against older adults. "Ageist" discourses may exert a negative influence in older adults' lives, causing severe social and psychological impacts.