Coronavirus Disease 2019-Associated Pulmonary Aspergillosis: A Noninvasive Screening Model for Additional Diagnostics.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) is likely underdiagnosed, and current diagnostic tools are either invasive or insensitive. Methods: A retrospective study of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 admitted to 5 Johns Hopkins hospitals between March 2020 and June 2021 was performed. Multivariable logistic regression was used for the CAPA prediction model building. Performance of the model was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: In the cohort of 832 patients, 98 (11.8%) met criteria for CAPA. Age, time since intubation, dexamethasone for COVID-19 treatment, underlying pulmonary circulatory diseases, human immunodeficiency virus, multiple myeloma, cancer, or hematologic malignancies were statistically significantly associated with CAPA and were included in the CAPA prediction model, which showed an AUC of 0.75 (95% confidence interval, .70-.80). At a screening cutoff of ≥0.085, it had a sensitivity of 82%, a specificity of 51%, a positive predictive value of 18.6%, and a negative predictive value of 95.3%. (The CAPA screening score calculator is available at www.transplantmodels.com). Conclusions: We developed a CAPA risk score as a noninvasive tool to aid in CAPA screening for patients with severe COVID-19. Our score will also identify a group of patients who are unlikely to have CAPA and who therefore need not undergo additional diagnostics and/or empiric antifungal therapy.

Invasive fungal infections after respiratory viral infections in lung transplant recipients are associated with lung allograft failure and chronic lung allograft dysfunction within 1 year.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory viral infections (RVI) are associated with chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) and mortality in lung transplant recipients (LTRs). However, the prevalence and impact of secondary invasive fungal infections (IFIs) post RVIs in LTRs have not been investigated. METHODS: We performed a single center retrospective study including LTRs diagnosed with 5 different respiratory viral pathogens between January 2010 to May 2021 and evaluated their clinical outcomes in 1 year. The risk factors of IFIs were evaluated by logistic regression. The impact of IFIs on CLAD stage progression/death was examined by Cox regression. RESULTS: A total of 202 RVI episodes (50 influenza, 31 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2, 30 metapneumovirus, 44 parainfluenza, and 47 respiratory syncytial virus) in 132 patients was included for analysis. Thirty-one episodes (15%) were associated with secondary IFIs, and 27 occurred in LTRs with lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI; 28% from 96 LRTI episodes). Aspergillosis was the most common IFI (80%). LTRs with IFIs had higher disease severity during RVI episodes. In multivariable analysis, RVI with LTRI was associated with IFI (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)] of 7.85 (2.48-24.9). Secondary IFIs were associated with CLAD stage progression/death after accounting for LRTI, pre-existing CLAD, intensive care unit admission, secondary bacterial pneumonia and underlying lung diseases pre-transplant with adjusted hazard ratio (95%CI) of 2.45 (1.29-4.64). CONCLUSIONS: This cohort demonstrated 15% secondary IFI prevalence in LTRs with RVIs. Importantly, secondary IFIs were associated with CLAD stage progression/death, underscoring the importance of screening for fungal infections in this setting.

Outcomes of SOT Recipients With COVID-19 in Different Eras of COVID-19 Therapeutics.

BACKGROUND: Few reports have focused on newer coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) therapies (remdesivir, dexamethasone, and convalescent plasma) in solid organ transplant recipients; concerns had been raised regarding possible adverse impact on allograft function or secondary infections. METHODS: We studied 77 solid organ transplant inpatients with COVID-19 during 2 therapeutic eras (Era 1: March-May 2020, 21 patients; and Era 2: June-November 2020, 56 patients) and 52 solid organ transplant outpatients. RESULTS: In Era 1, no patients received remdesivir or dexamethasone, and 4 of 21 (19.4%) received convalescent plasma, whereas in Era 2, remdesivir (24/56, 42.9%), dexamethasone (24/56, 42.9%), and convalescent plasma (40/56, 71.4%) were commonly used. Mortality was low across both eras, 4 of 77 (5.6%), and rejection occurred in only 2 of 77 (2.8%) inpatients; infections were similar in hypoxemic patients with or without dexamethasone. Preexisting graft dysfunction was associated with greater need for hospitalization, higher severity score, and lower survival. Acute kidney injury was present in 37.3% of inpatients; renal function improved more rapidly in patients who received remdesivir and convalescent plasma. Post-COVID-19 renal and liver function were comparable between eras, out to 90 d. CONCLUSIONS: Newer COVID-19 therapies did not appear to have a deleterious effect on allograft function, and infectious complications were comparable.

Diagnosis and Antifungal Prophylaxis for COVID-19 Associated Pulmonary Aspergillosis.

The COVID-19 pandemic has redemonstrated the importance of the fungal-after-viral phenomenon, and the question of whether prophylaxis should be used to prevent COVID-19-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA). A distinct pathophysiology from invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA), CAPA has an incidence that ranges from 5% to 30%, with significant mortality. The aim of this work was to describe the current diagnostic landscape of CAPA and review the existing literature on antifungal prophylaxis. A variety of definitions for CAPA have been described in the literature and the performance of the diagnostic tests for CAPA is limited, making diagnosis a challenge. There are only six studies that have investigated antifungal prophylaxis for CAPA. The two studied drugs have been posaconazole, either a liquid formulation via an oral gastric tube or an intravenous formulation, and inhaled amphotericin. While some studies have revealed promising results, they are limited by small sample sizes and bias inherent to retrospective studies. Additionally, as the COVID-19 pandemic changes and we see fewer intubated and critically ill patients, it will be more important to recognize these fungal-after-viral complications among non-critically ill, immunocompromised patients. Randomized controlled trials are needed to better understand the role of antifungal prophylaxis.

Immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) have a diminished immune response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines. Risk factors for an impaired immune response are yet to be determined. We aimed to summarize the COVID-19 vaccine immunogenicity and to identify factors that influence the humoral immune response in patients with MM. Two reviewers independently conducted a literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane library, and Clinicaltrials.gov from existence until 24 May 24 2022. (PROSPERO: CRD42021277005). A total of 15 studies were included in the systematic review and 5 were included in the meta-analysis. The average rate (range) of positive functional T-lymphocyte response was 44.2% (34.2%-48.5%) after 2 doses of messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines. The average antispike antibody response rates (range) were 42.7% (20.8%-88.5%) and 78.2% (55.8%-94.2%) after 1 and 2 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, respectively. The average neutralizing antibody response rates (range) were 25% (1 study) and 62.7% (53.3%-68.6%) after 1 and 2 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, respectively. Patients with high-risk cytogenetics or receiving anti-CD38 therapy were less likely to have a humoral immune response with pooled odds ratios of 0.36 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.18, 0.69), I2 = 0% and 0.42 (95% CI, 0.22, 0.79), I2 = 14%, respectively. Patients who were not on active MM treatment were more likely to respond with pooled odds ratio of 2.42 (95% CI, 1.10, 5.33), I2 = 7%. Patients with MM had low rates of humoral and cellular immune responses to the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal doses of vaccines and evaluate the use of monoclonal antibodies for pre-exposure prophylaxis in this population.

Immunogenicity and Risk Factors Associated With Poor Humoral Immune Response of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines in Recipients of Solid Organ Transplant: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Recipients of solid organ transplant (SOT) experience decreased immunogenicity after COVID-19 vaccination. Objective: To summarize current evidence on vaccine responses and identify risk factors for diminished humoral immune response in recipients of SOT. Data Sources: A literature search was conducted from existence of database through December 15, 2021, using MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Study Selection: Studies reporting humoral immune response of the COVID-19 vaccines in recipients of SOT were reviewed. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently extracted data from each eligible study. Descriptive statistics and a random-effects model were used. This report was prepared following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Data were analyzed from December 2021 to February 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The total numbers of positive immune responses and percentage across each vaccine platform were recorded. Pooled odds ratios (pORs) with 95% CIs were used to calculate the pooled effect estimates of risk factors for poor antibody response. Results: A total of 83 studies were included for the systematic review, and 29 studies were included in the meta-analysis, representing 11 713 recipients of SOT. The weighted mean (range) of total positive humoral response for antispike antibodies after receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was 10.4% (0%-37.9%) for 1 dose, 44.9% (0%-79.1%) for 2 doses, and 63.1% (49.1%-69.1%) for 3 doses. In 2 studies, 50% of recipients of SOT with no or minimal antibody response after 3 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine mounted an antibody response after a fourth dose. Among the factors associated with poor antibody response were older age (mean [SE] age difference between responders and nonresponders, 3.94 [1.1] years), deceased donor status (pOR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.53-0.83]; I2 = 0%), antimetabolite use (pOR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.14-0.29]; I2 = 70%), recent rituximab exposure (pOR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.07-0.61]; I2 = 0%), and recent antithymocyte globulin exposure (pOR, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.15-0.71]; I2 = 0%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the rates of positive antibody response in solid organ transplant recipients remained low despite multiple doses of mRNA vaccines. These findings suggest that more efforts are needed to modulate the risk factors associated with reduced humoral responses and to study monoclonal antibody prophylaxis among recipients of SOT who are at high risk of diminished humoral response.

Coronavirus Disease 2019-Associated Pulmonary Aspergillosis in Mechanically Ventilated Patients.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) occurs in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Risks and outcomes remain poorly understood. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of mechanically ventilated adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to 5 Johns Hopkins hospitals was conducted between March and August 2020. CAPA was defined using composite clinical criteria. Fine and Gray competing risks regression was used to analyze clinical outcomes and, multilevel mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression was used to compare longitudinal disease severity scores. RESULTS: In the cohort of 396 people, 39 met criteria for CAPA. Patients with CAPA were more likely than those without CAPA to have underlying pulmonary vascular disease (41% vs 21.6%, respectively; P = .01), liver disease (35.9% vs 18.2%; P = .02), coagulopathy (51.3% vs 33.1%; P = .03), solid tumors (25.6% vs 10.9%; P = .02), multiple myeloma (5.1% vs 0.3%; P = .03), and corticosteroid exposure during the index admission (66.7% vs 42.6%; P = .005), and had lower body mass indexes (median, 26.6 vs 29.9 [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared]; P = .04). Patients with CAPA had worse outcomes, as measured by ordinal severity of disease scores, requiring longer time to improvement (adjusted odds ratio, 1.081.091.1; P < .001), and advancing in severity almost twice as quickly (subhazard ratio, 1.31.82.5; P < .001). They were intubated twice as long as those without CAPA (subhazard ratio, 0.40.50.6; P < .001) and had longer hospital stays (median [interquartile range], 41.1 [20.5-72.4) vs 18.5 [10.7-31.8] days; P < .001). CONCLUSION: CAPA is associated with poor outcomes. Attention to preventive measures (screening and/or prophylaxis) is warranted in people with high risk of CAPA.

Impact of COVID-19 on Lung Allograft and Clinical Outcomes in Lung Transplant Recipients: A Case-control Study.

BACKGROUND: The impacts of COVID-19 on lung allograft function, rejection, secondary infection, and clinical outcomes in lung transplant recipients (LTRs) remain unknown. METHODS: A 1:2 matched case-control study was performed to evaluate rehospitalization, lung allograft function, and secondary infections up to 90 d after COVID-19 diagnosis (or index dates for controls). RESULTS: Twenty-four LTRs with COVID-19 (cases) and 48 controls were identified. Cases and controls had similar baseline characteristics and lung allograft function. LTRs with COVID-19 had higher incidence of secondary bacterial infection (29.2% versus 6.3%, P = 0.008), readmission (29.2% versus 10.4%, P = 0.04), and for-cause bronchoscopy (33.3% versus 12.5%, P = 0.04) compared with controls. At d 90, mortality in cases versus controls was 8.3% versus 2.1% (P = 0.21), incidence of invasive fungal infections in cases versus controls was 20.8% versus 8.3% (P = 0.13) and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) decline ≥10% from baseline occurred in 19% of cases versus 12.2% of controls (P = 0.46). No acute cellular rejection, acute antibody-mediated rejection, or new donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies were observed among cases or controls within 90 d post index date. CONCLUSIONS: We found LTRs with COVID-19 were at risk to develop secondary infections and rehospitalization post COVID-19, compared with controls. While we did not observe post viral acute cellular rejection or antibody-mediated rejection, further studies are needed to understand if LTRs with COVID-19 who did not recover baseline lung function within 90 d have developed chronic lung allograft dysfunction stage progression.

Inpatient COVID-19 outcomes in solid organ transplant recipients compared to non-solid organ transplant patients: A retrospective cohort.

Immunosuppression and comorbidities might place solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients at higher risk from COVID-19, as suggested by recent case series. We compared 45 SOT vs. 2427 non-SOT patients who were admitted with COVID-19 to our health-care system (March 1, 2020 - August 21, 2020), evaluating hospital length-of-stay and inpatient mortality using competing-risks regression. We compared trajectories of WHO COVID-19 severity scale using mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression, adjusting for severity score at admission. SOT and non-SOT patients had comparable age, sex, and race, but SOT recipients were more likely to have diabetes (60% vs. 34%, p < .001), hypertension (69% vs. 44%, p = .001), HIV (7% vs. 1.4%, p = .024), and peripheral vascular disorders (19% vs. 8%, p = .018). There were no statistically significant differences between SOT and non-SOT in maximum illness severity score (p = .13), length-of-stay (sHR: 0.9 1.11.4 , p = .5), or mortality (sHR: 0.1 0.41.6 , p = .19), although the severity score on admission was slightly lower for SOT (median [IQR] 3 [3, 4]) than for non-SOT (median [IQR] 4 [3-4]) (p = .042) Despite a higher risk profile, SOT recipients had a faster decline in disease severity over time (OR = 0.76 0.810.86 , p < .001) compared with non-SOT patients. These findings have implications for transplant decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic, and insights about the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on immunosuppressed patients.