ABSTRACT
Background: Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) may be more susceptible to COVID-19 related poor outcomes, including thrombosis and death, due to the advanced age, the presence of comorbidities, and the disease and treatment-related immune deficiency. In this retrospective multicenter study, conducted by ERIC, the European Research Initiative on CLL, we assessed the risk of thrombosis and bleeding in patients with CLL affected by severe COVID-19.Methods: The study included patients from 79 centers across 22 countries. Data collection was conducted between April and May 2021.Results: A total of 793 patients from 79 centers were included in the study with 593 being hospitalized (74.8%). Among these, 518 were defined as having severe COVID: 162 were admitted to the ICU while 356 received oxygen supplementation outside the ICU. Most patients (90%) were receiving thromboprophylaxis. During COVID-19 treatment, 8.8% developed a thromboembolic event, while 4.8% experienced bleeding. Thrombosis developed in 20.5% of patients who were not receiving thromboprophylaxis, but only in 8.1% of patients who were on thromboprophylaxis. Bleeding episodes were more frequent in patients receiving intermediate/therapeutic versus prophylactic doses of low-molecular-weight heparin (LWMH) (11.1% vs. 4.2%, respectively) and in elderly. In multivariate analysis, peak D-dimer level was a poor prognostic factor for thrombosis occurrence (OR=1.020, 95%CI 1.006‒1.033), while thromboprophylaxis use was protective (OR=0.194, 95%CI 0.061‒0.614). Age and LMWH intermediate/therapeutic dose administration were prognostic factors in multivariate model for bleeding (OR=1.055, 95%CI 1.013-1.103 and OR=2.490, 95%CI 1.044-5.935, respectively). Conclusions: Patients with CLL affected by severe COVID-19 are at a high risk of thrombosis if thromboprophylaxis is not used, but also at increased risk of bleeding under the LMWH intermediate/therapeutic dose administration.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are at high risk of mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The optimal management of AML patients with COVID-19 has not been established. Our multicenter study included 388 adult AML patients with COVID-19 diagnosis between February 2020 and October 2021. The vast majority were receiving or had received AML treatment in the prior 3 months. COVID-19 was severe in 41.2% and critical in 21.1% of cases. The chemotherapeutic schedule was modified in 174 patients (44.8%), delayed in 68 and permanently discontinued in 106. After a median follow-up of 325 days, 180 patients (46.4%) had died. Death was attributed to COVID-19 (43.3%), AML (26.1%) or to a combination of both (26.7%). Active disease, older age, and treatment discontinuation were associated with death, whereas AML treatment delay was protective. Seventy-nine patients had a simultaneous AML and COVID-19 diagnosis, with an improved survival when AML treatment could be delayed. Patients with COVID-19 diagnosis between January and August 2020 had a significantly lower survival. COVID-19 in AML patients was associated with a high mortality rate and modifications of therapeutic algorithms. The best approach to improve survival was to delay AML treatment.
Subject(s)
COVID-19ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged researchers and policy makers to identify public safety measures forpreventing the collapse of healthcare systems and reducingdeaths. This narrative review summarizes the available evidence on the impact of social distancing measures on the epidemic and discusses the implementation of these measures in Brazil. Articles on the effect of social distancing on COVID-19 were selected from the PubMed, medRXiv and bioRvix databases. Federal and state legislation was analyzed to summarize the strategies implemented in Brazil. Social distancing measures adopted by the population appear effective, particularly when implemented in conjunction with the isolation of cases and quarantining of contacts. Therefore, social distancing measures, and social protection policies to guarantee the sustainability of these measures, should be implemented. To control COVID-19 in Brazil, it is also crucial that epidemiological monitoring is strengthened at all three levels of the Brazilian National Health System (SUS). This includes evaluating and usingsupplementary indicators to monitor the progression of the pandemic and the effect of the control measures, increasing testing capacity, and making disaggregated notificationsand testing resultstransparentand broadly available.
A pandemia de COVID-19 tem desafiado pesquisadores e gestores a encontrar medidas de saúde pública que evitem o colapso dos sistemas de saúde e reduzam os óbitos. Esta revisão narrativa buscou sistematizar as evidências sobre o impacto das medidas de distanciamento social na epidemia de COVID-19 e discutir sua implementação no Brasil. Foram triados artigos sobre o efeito do distanciamento social na COVID-19 no PubMed, medRXiv e bioRvix, e analisados atos do poder público nos níveis federal e estadual para sumarizar as estratégias implementadas no Brasil. Os achados sugerem que o distanciamento social adotado por população é efetivo, especialmente quando combinado ao isolamento de casos e à quarentena dos contatos. Recomenda-se a implementação de medidas de distanciamento social e de políticas de proteção social para garantir a sustentabilidade dessas medidas. Para o controle da COVID-19 no Brasil, é imprescindível que essas medidas estejam aliadas ao fortalecimento do sistema de vigilância nos três níveis do SUS, que inclui a avaliação e uso de indicadores adicionais para monitorar a evolução da pandemia e o efeito das medidas de controle, a ampliação da capacidade de testagem, e divulgação ampla e transparente das notificações e de testagem desagregadas.