Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
1.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2023 Mar 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2324942

ABSTRACT

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.

2.
Br J Haematol ; 201(4): 628-639, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2272144

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hematologic Diseases , Hematologic Neoplasms , Humans , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Hematologic Neoplasms/complications , Hematologic Neoplasms/therapy , Antibodies, Monoclonal , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use
4.
J Community Health ; 47(5): 800-805, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1899237

ABSTRACT

Diagnosing people living with chronic viral hepatitis is challenging due to the absence of symptoms as long as liver decompensated cirrhosis come out. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the prevalence of HBV and/or HCV infections in a non-selected population, hospitalised for SARS-CoV-2 infection in a tertiary care hospital in Northern Italy. During the study period 1,429 patients were admitted to hospital for SARS-CoV-2 infection, serologic tests for HBV and/or HCV were available for 382 (27%) patients and 3 were excluded due to their previous known serologic status. Among 379 patients, 235 (62%) were male, median age was 70 years (range 21-103), 360 (95%) were Caucasian. Among them, 372/379 (98%) were screened for HBsAg, 320/379 (84%) for HBcAb. HBsAg was positive in 2/372 (0.5%, 95% CI 0.0006-0.02) patients (only in one HBV-DNA was performed that was negative), while HBcAb was found positive in 55/320 (17%, 95% CI 0.13-0.22). Among 370/379 (98%) patients screened for HCV, 11/370 (3%, 95% CI 0.02-0.05) had positive HCV-Ab. Five out of 11 (45%) were tested for HCV-RNA that resulted positive in two patients (0.5%, 95% CI 0.0006-0.02). Considering this data, even though the screening was performed in only 27% of study population, a tailored screening in people with known risk factors for hepatitis might be preferable to universal screening in low prevalence areas. Also a prompt diagnostic workout should begin in case of clinical or laboratory suspicion of hepatitis and in those starting immunosuppressive treatments.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hepatitis C , Hepatitis, Viral, Human , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , DNA, Viral , Female , Hepatitis B Antibodies , Hepatitis B Surface Antigens , Hepatitis B virus , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , RNA , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
5.
Chemosphere ; 299: 134373, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1748141

ABSTRACT

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is leading to an increase of the global production of plastics since the use of personal protective equipment (PPEs, i.e. gloves, gowns, masks, packaging items), has become mandatory to prevent the spread of the virus. Plastic breaks down into micro/nano particles due to physical or chemical or biological actions into environment. Due to small dimensions, ubiquitous and persistent nature, the plastic particles represent a significant threat to ecosystems and can entry into food chains. Among the plastic polymers used for PPEs, polystyrene is less studied regarding its eco-geno-toxicity. This study aims to investigate acute, chronic and subchronic effects of the microplastic polystyrene beads (PS-MP, size 1.0 µm) on three freshwater species, the alga Raphidocelis subcapitata, the rotifer Brachionus calyciflorus, the crustacean Ceriodaphnia dubia and the benthic ostracod Heterocypris incongruens. Furthermore, the potential genotoxicity and the ROS production due to the PS-MP were also determined in C. dubia. Results revealed that the acute effects occurred at concentrations of PS-MP in the order of dozens of mg/L in B. calyciflorus and C. dubia and hundreds of mg/L in H. incongruens. Regarding long-term toxicity, increasing chronic effects with EC50s in the order of units (C. dubia), hundreds (B. calyciflorus) and thousands (R. subcapitata) of µg/L were observed. Both for acute and chronic/sub chronic toxicity, daphnids were more sensitive to polystyrene than ostracods. Moreover, when C. dubia neonates were exposed to the PS-MP, alterations in genetic material as well as the production of ROS occurred, starting from concentrations in the order of units of µg/L, probably due to inflammatory responses. At last, the risk quotient (RQ) as a measure of risk posed by PS-MPs in freshwater environment, was calculated obtaining a value of 7.2, higher than the threshold value of 1.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Rotifera , Water Pollutants, Chemical , Animals , Aquatic Organisms , Ecosystem , Fresh Water , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Microplastics/toxicity , Pandemics , Plastics/toxicity , Polystyrenes/toxicity , Reactive Oxygen Species , Water Pollutants, Chemical/analysis , Water Pollutants, Chemical/toxicity
6.
Mycoses ; 65(4): 411-418, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1685386

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis , Aspergillus/genetics , Bronchoalveolar Lavage , Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid , COVID-19/diagnosis , Critical Illness , Galactose , Humans , Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis/diagnosis , Mannans/analysis , Polymerase Chain Reaction , Sensitivity and Specificity
7.
Ann Med ; 53(1): 1779-1786, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462157

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: An unexpected high prevalence of enterococcal bloodstream infection (BSI) has been observed in critically ill patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The primary objective was to describe the characteristics of ICU-acquired enterococcal BSI in critically ill patients with COVID-19. A secondary objective was to exploratorily assess the predictors of 30-day mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients with ICU-acquired enterococcal BSI. RESULTS: During the study period, 223 patients with COVID-19 were admitted to COVID-19-dedicated ICUs in our centre. Overall, 51 episodes of enterococcal BSI, occurring in 43 patients, were registered. 29 (56.9%) and 22 (43.1%) BSI were caused by Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium, respectively. The cumulative incidence of ICU-acquired enterococcal BSI was of 229 episodes per 1000 ICU admissions (95% mid-p confidence interval [CI] 172-298). Most patients received an empirical therapy with at least one agent showing in vitro activity against the blood isolate (38/43, 88%). The crude 30-day mortality was 42% (18/43) and 57% (4/7) in the entire series and in patients with vancomycin-resistant E. faecium BSI, respectively. The sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score showed an independent association with increased mortality (odds ratio 1.32 per one-point increase, with 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.66, p = .021). CONCLUSIONS: The cumulative incidence of enterococcal BSI is high in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Our results suggest a crucial role of the severity of the acute clinical conditions, to which both the underlying viral pneumonia and the enterococcal BSI may contribute, in majorly influencing the outcome.KEY MESSAGESThe cumulative incidence of enterococcal BSI is high in critically ill patients with COVID-19.The crude 30-day mortality of enterococcal BSI in critically ill patients with COVID-19 may be higher than 40%.There could be a crucial role of the severity of the acute clinical conditions, to which both the underlying viral pneumonia and the enterococcal BSI may contribute, in majorly influencing the outcome.


Subject(s)
Bacteremia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Enterococcus faecalis , Enterococcus faecium , Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections/epidemiology , Mortality , Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci , Aged , Bacteremia/microbiology , Critical Illness , Female , Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections/microbiology , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Microbial Sensitivity Tests , Middle Aged , Organ Dysfunction Scores , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Antibiotics (Basel) ; 10(7)2021 Jun 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1288790

ABSTRACT

A single-center cross-sectional study was conducted to describe the use of ceftaroline in a large teaching hospital in Northern Italy, during a period also including the first months of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The primary objective was to describe the use of ceftaroline in terms of indications and characteristics of patients. A secondary objective was to describe the rate of favorable clinical response in patients with bloodstream infections (BSI) due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA-BSI) receiving ceftaroline. Overall, 200 patients were included in the study. Most of them had COVID-19 (83%, 165/200) and were hospitalized in medical wards (78%, 155/200). Included patients with COVID-19 pneumonia were given empirical ceftaroline in the suspicion of bacterial co-infection or superinfection. Among patients with MRSA-BSI, ceftaroline was used as a first-line therapy and salvage therapy in 25% (3/12) and 75% (9/12) of cases, respectively, and as a monotherapy or in combination with daptomycin in 58% (7/12) and 42% (5/12) of patients, respectively. A favorable response was registered in 67% (8/12) of patients. Improving etiological diagnosis of bacterial infections is essential to optimize the use of ceftaroline in COVID-19 patients. The use of ceftaroline for MRSA-BSI, either as a monotherapy or in combination with other anti-MRSA agents, showed promising rates of favorable response.

10.
J Nephrol ; 34(1): 173-183, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-834119

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of kidney involvement during SARS-CoV-2 infection has been reported to be high. Nevertheless, data are lacking about the determinants of acute kidney injury (AKI) and the combined effect of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and AKI in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We collected data on patient demographics, comorbidities, chronic medications, vital signs, baseline laboratory test results and in-hospital treatment in patients with COVID-19 consecutively admitted to our Institution. Chronic kidney disease was defined as eGFR < 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2 or proteinuria at urinalysis within 180 days prior to hospital admission. AKI was defined according to KDIGO criteria. The primary and secondary outcomes were the development of AKI and death. RESULTS: Of 777 patients eligible for the study, acute kidney injury developed in 176 (22.6%). Of these, 79 (45%) showed an acute worsening of a preexisting CKD, and 21 (12%) required kidney replacement therapy. Independent associates of AKI were chronic kidney disease, C-reactive protein (CRP) and ventilation support. Among patients with acute kidney injury, 111 died (63%) and its occurrence increased the risk of death by 60% (HR 1.60 [95% IC 1.21-2.49] p = 0.002) independently of potential confounding factors including hypertension, preexisting kidney damage, and comorbidities. Patients with AKI showed a significantly higher rate of deaths attributed to bleeding compared to CKD and the whole population (7.5 vs 1.5 vs 3.5%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Awareness of kidney function, both preexisting CKD and development of acute kidney injury, may help to identify those patients at increased risk of death.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury/mortality , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/mortality , Acute Kidney Injury/therapy , Acute Kidney Injury/virology , Aged , COVID-19/therapy , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Prevalence , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/therapy , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/virology , Renal Replacement Therapy , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Survival Rate
11.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 26(11): 1537-1544, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-764424

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To describe clinical characteristics, management and outcome of individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); and to evaluate risk factors for all-cause in-hospital mortality. METHODS: This retrospective study from a University tertiary care hospital in northern Italy, included hospitalized adult patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 between 25 February 2020 and 25 March 2020. RESULTS: Overall, 317 individuals were enrolled. Their median age was 71 years and 67.2% were male (213/317). The most common underlying diseases were hypertension (149/317; 47.0%), cardiovascular disease (63/317; 19.9%) and diabetes (49/317; 15.5%). Common symptoms at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis included fever (285/317; 89.9%), shortness of breath (167/317; 52.7%) and dry cough (156/317; 49.2%). An 'atypical' presentation including at least one among mental confusion, diarrhoea or nausea and vomiting was observed in 53/317 patients (16.7%). Hypokalaemia occurred in 25.8% (78/302) and 18.5% (56/303) had acute kidney injury. During hospitalization, 111/317 patients (35.0%) received non-invasive respiratory support, 65/317 (20.5%) were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and 60/317 (18.5%) required invasive mechanical ventilation. All-cause in-hospital mortality, assessed in 275 patients, was 43.6% (120/275). On multivariable analysis, age (per-year increase OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.04-1.10; p < 0.001), cardiovascular disease (OR 2.58; 95% CI 1.07-6.25; p 0.03), and C-reactive protein levels (per-point increase OR 1.009; 95% CI 1.004-1.014; p 0.001) were independent risk factors for all-cause in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 mainly affected elderly patients with predisposing conditions and caused severe illness, frequently requiring non-invasive respiratory support or ICU admission. Despite supportive care, COVID-19 remains associated with a substantial risk of all-cause in-hospital mortality.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Cause of Death , Clinical Laboratory Techniques , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
12.
PLoS One ; 15(8): e0237831, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-725099

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to respiratory failure due to severe immune response. Treatment targeting this immune response might be beneficial but there is limited evidence on its efficacy. The aim of this study was to determine if early treatment of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia with tocilizumab and/or steroids was associated with better outcome. METHODS: This observational single-center study included patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who were not intubated and received either standard of care (SOC, controls) or SOC plus early (within 3 days from hospital admission) anti-inflammatory treatment. SOC consisted of hydroxychloroquine 400mg bid plus, in those admitted before March 24th, also darunavir/ritonavir. Anti-inflammatory treatment consisted of either tocilizumab (8mg/kg intravenously or 162mg subcutaneously) or methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg for 5 days or both. Failure was defined as intubation or death, and the endpoints were failure-free survival (primary endpoint) and overall survival (secondary) at day 30. Difference between the groups was estimated as Hazard Ratio by a propensity score weighted Cox regression analysis (HROW). RESULTS: Overall, 196 adults were included in the analyses. They were mainly male (67.4%), with comorbidities (78.1%) and severe COVID-19 pneumonia (83.7%). Median age was 67.9 years (range, 30-100) and median PaO2/FiO2 200 mmHg (IQR 133-289). Among them, 130 received early anti-inflammatory treatment with: tocilizumab (n = 29, 22.3%), methylprednisolone (n = 45, 34.6%), or both (n = 56, 43.1%). The adjusted failure-free survival among tocilizumab/methylprednisolone/SOC treated patients vs. SOC was 80.8% (95%CI, 72.8-86.7) vs. 64.1% (95%CI, 51.3-74.0), HROW 0.48, 95%CI, 0.23-0.99; p = 0.049. The overall survival among tocilizumab/methylprednisolone/SOC patients vs. SOC was 85.9% (95%CI, 80.7-92.6) vs. 71.9% (95%CI, 46-73), HROW 0.41, 95%CI: 0.19-0.89, p = 0.025. CONCLUSION: Early adjunctive treatment with tocilizumab, methylprednisolone or both may improve outcomes in non-intubated patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.


Subject(s)
Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Methylprednisolone/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antimalarials/administration & dosage , Antimalarials/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Darunavir/therapeutic use , Female , Follow-Up Studies , HIV Protease Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/administration & dosage , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Male , Methylprednisolone/administration & dosage , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
14.
J Geriatr Oncol ; 11(8): 1190-1198, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-650323

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic poses a barrier to equal and evidence-based management of cancer in older adults. The International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) formed a panel of experts to develop consensus recommendations on the implications of the pandemic on several aspects of cancer care in this age group including geriatric assessment (GA), surgery, radiotherapy, systemic treatment, palliative care and research. Age and cancer diagnosis are significant predictors of adverse outcomes of the COVID-19 infection. In this setting, GA is particularly valuable to drive decision-making. GA may aid estimating physiologic reserve and adaptive capability, assessing risk-benefits of either providing or temporarily withholding treatments, and determining patient preferences to help inform treatment decisions. In a resource-constrained setting, geriatric screening tools may be administered remotely to identify patients requiring comprehensive GA. Tele-health is also crucial to ensure adequate continuity of care and minimize the risk of infection exposure. In general, therapeutic decisions should favor the most effective and least invasive approach with the lowest risk of adverse outcomes. In selected cases, this might require deferring or omitting surgery, radiotherapy or systemic treatments especially where benefits are marginal and alternative safe therapeutic options are available. Ongoing research is necessary to expand knowledge of the management of cancer in older adults. However, the pandemic presents a significant barrier and efforts should be made to ensure equitable access to clinical trials and prospective data collection to elucidate the outcomes of COVID-19 in this population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Geriatric Assessment , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/therapy , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Consensus , Geriatrics/standards , Humans , Medical Oncology/standards , Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Neoplasms/surgery , Palliative Care/methods , Pandemics , Risk Assessment , Societies, Medical
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL