Anticoagulation in cancer patients with atrial fibrillation and grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia.

INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation or flutter (AF) is prevalent in cancer patients. Many of these patients have an indication for anticoagulation (AC) but are also at risk for developing chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia. There are scarce data regarding management of AC and risk of bleeding and thrombosis in cancer patients with AF and thrombocytopenia. AIM: To assess anticoagulation management and incidence of bleeding and arterial thromboembolism (ATE) in cancer patients with AF and grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia (platelets <50 × 109/L). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study included adults with active cancer, grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia and AF with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 1. Patients were stratified according to AC discontinuation (No-AC) or continuation (Continue-AC) when platelets dropped below 50 × 109/L and followed for 30 days. The study outcomes were ATE (ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack or systemic emboli) and major bleeding. Cox proportional hazards model was used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) with death as a competing risk (Fine and Gray model). RESULTS: The cohort included 131 patients; 90 in the No-AC group and 41 in the Continue-AC group. Patient characteristics were balanced between the groups. The 30-day cumulative incidence of ATE was 2 % [95 % CI 0.4 %-7 %] in the No-AC group and 2 % [0.2 %-11 %] in the Continue-AC group (HR 0.92 [95 % CI 0.09-9.88]). The 30-day cumulative incidence of major bleeding was 7.8 % [95 % CI 3.40 %-14.52 %] and 2.44 % [95 % CI 0.18 %-11.22 %] in the No-AC and Continue-AC groups, respectively (HR 3.29 [95 % CI 0.42-26.04]). CONCLUSIONS: The high rate of bleeding and low rate of ATE in thrombocytopenic cancer patients with AF suggests that holding AC during time-limited periods may be a reasonable approach.

Outcomes of vaccinated versus unvaccinated COVID-19 patients in Israel during the Omicron and Delta waves—A retrospective cohort study / Resultados de pacientes con COVID-19 vacunados vs. no vacunados en Israel durante las olas de ómicron y delta: Un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo

Introduction Initiation of global vaccination significantly reduced the morbidity and mortality of COVID-19. During the Omicron wave, approximately 70% of the Israeli adult population was fully vaccinated, but the efficacy of the vaccine was questioned. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients admitted to the COVID-19 departments in Rabin Medical Center, during the Delta wave and the Omicron wave. Patients were matched in the 2 waves using the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method and risk for mechanical ventilation and 30-day all-cause mortality was assessed. Results Vaccination had a significant effect on 30-day mortality in the Delta and Omicron waves with adjusted OR of 0.35 (0.17–0.70) and 0.5 (0.27–0.95) respectively. Nonetheless, the rate of mechanical ventilation was similar between the groups with OR of 0.75 (0.52–1.09) and 0.64 (0.40–1.01). Vaccination status did not change the length of admission in both waves. Conclusion We observed a decreased risk for 30-day mortality among vaccinated patients during the Delta and Omicron waves in Israel. This association, even though consistent, was of a lesser magnitude during the Omicron wave (AU)

Introducción La iniciación de la vacunación global redujo significativamente la morbilidad y la mortalidad de la COVID-19. Durante la ola de ómicron, aproximadamente 70% de la población adulta israelí estaba completamente vacunada, pero se cuestionó la eficacia de la vacuna. Métodos Realizamos un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo de todos los pacientes adultos ingresados en los departamentos de COVID-19 en el Centro Médico Rabin, durante las olas de delta y ómicron. Los pacientes fueron emparejados en las dos olas utilizando el método de ponderación inversa de probabilidad de tratamiento (IPTW) y se evaluó el riesgo de ventilación mecánica y la mortalidad por todas las causas a los 30 días. Resultados La vacunación tuvo un efecto significativo en la mortalidad a los 30 días en las olas de delta y ómicron con odds ratio (OR) ajustadas de 0,35 (0,17-0,70) y 0,5 (0,27-0,95), respectivamente. Sin embargo, la tasa de ventilación mecánica fue similar entre los grupos con OR de 0,75 (0,52-1,09) y 0,64 (0,40-1,01). El estado de vacunación no cambió la duración del ingreso en ambas olas.Conclusión Observamos un menor riesgo de mortalidad a los 30 días entre los pacientes vacunados durante las olas de delta y ómicron en Israel. Esta asociación, aunque constante, fue de menor magnitud durante la ola de ómicron (AU)

Outcomes of vaccinated versus unvaccinated COVID-19 patients in Israel during the Omicron and Delta waves-A retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Initiation of global vaccination significantly reduced the morbidity and mortality of COVID-19. During the Omicron wave, approximately 70% of the Israeli adult population was fully vaccinated, but the efficacy of the vaccine was questioned. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients admitted to the COVID-19 departments in Rabin Medical Center, during the Delta wave and the Omicron wave. Patients were matched in the 2 waves using the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method and risk for mechanical ventilation and 30-day all-cause mortality was assessed. RESULTS: Vaccination had a significant effect on 30-day mortality in the Delta and Omicron waves with adjusted OR of 0.35 (0.17-0.70) and 0.5 (0.27-0.95) respectively. Nonetheless, the rate of mechanical ventilation was similar between the groups with OR of 0.75 (0.52-1.09) and 0.64 (0.40-1.01). Vaccination status did not change the length of admission in both waves. CONCLUSION: We observed a decreased risk for 30-day mortality among vaccinated patients during the Delta and Omicron waves in Israel. This association, even though consistent, was of a lesser magnitude during the Omicron wave.

External Validity of a Randomized Controlled Trial on Duration of Antibiotics for the Treatment of Gram-Negative Bacteremia.

INTRODUCTION: Reports regarding the external validity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are scarce. We aimed to assess the population external validity of an investigator-initiated RCT on the duration of antibiotics for the treatment of Gram-negative bacteremia by comparing patients included in the RCT to patients that were not included in the trial. METHODS: Hospitalized patients with Gram-negative bacteremia were recruited into an RCT and randomized to receive 7 or 14 days of covering antibiotic therapy in Israel and Italy from 2013 to 2017. In a concomitant observational study, RCT participants were compared with patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria but were not included in the trial due to participation in other trials, discharge before approached by researchers, refusal to participate, or unwillingness of the treating physician to allow participants' recruitment. RESULTS: Six hundred and four RCT patients were compared with 613 nonincluded patients. Almost 50% of nonincluded patients (288/613) were dependent on others for activities of daily living at baseline compared to 37.7% of RCT participants (228/604). Dementia was nearly 2-fold more frequent in nonincluded patients than those included (5.9% [36/613] versus 3.6% [22/604], p = 0.07). Patients who were not included in the RCT were more likely to acquire their infection in the hospital (53.3% [327/613] versus 29.1% [176/604], p < 0.001). The primary composite outcome of mortality, clinical failure, readmissions, or extended hospitalization at 90 days occurred in 353 of 613 nonincluded patients (57.6%) compared to 299 of 604 RCT participants (49.6%), p = 0.005. However, on multivariate analysis noninclusion in the RCT was not an independent risk factor for clinical failure and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: RCTs, even with broad eligibility criteria, do not represent the whole spectrum of patients and leave out a population with more severe illness for whom the evidence is lacking.

Assessing the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on mortality: a population-based, matched case-control study.

OBJECTIVES: Estimating the isolated effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the risk of mortality is challenging. We aimed to determine whether COVID-19 was associated with high rates of mortality independently of age, sex and underlying disorders. METHODS: A population-based, matched, case-control study of adults insured by Clalit Health Services was performed. Cases were defined as patients who died of all causes between July and December 2020. Each case was matched in a ratio of 1:1 with a living control based on age, sex and co-morbidities. An unconditional logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for mortality. RESULTS: A total of 2874 patients who died were successfully matched with 2874 living controls. The prevalence of COVID-19 was higher among the patients who died than among the controls (13.5% [387/2874] vs. 4% [115/2874], respectively; OR, 3.73; 95% CI, 3.01-4.63; p < 0.001). A significantly increased odds of mortality was also observed in patients with COVID-19 without underlying diseases (OR, 3.67; 95% CI, 2.58-5.23) and in patients with COVID-19 and underlying diseases (OR, 3.77; 95% CI, 2.87-4.94). A multi-variate logistic analysis showed that COVID-19 (OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.07-3.77), low socio-economic status (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.02-1.82), dementia (OR, 2.50; 95% CI, 2.10-3.01), smoking (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.13-1.63) and an interaction variable of age >80 years and COVID-19 (OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.14-4.54) were independent risk factors for mortality, whereas influenza vaccination and high body mass index were associated with lower rates of mortality. CONCLUSION: Testing positive for COVID-19 increased the risk of death three folds, regardless of underlying disorders. These results emphasize the effect of COVID-19 on mortality during the early period of the COVID-19 outbreak, when no vaccines or effective therapeutics were available.

Underrepresentation of women in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although regulatory changes towards correcting the underrepresentation of women in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) occurred (National Institutes of Health 1994), concerns exist about whether an improvement is taking place. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the inclusion rates of women in recent RCTs and to explore the potential barriers for the enrollment of women. METHODS: RCTs published in 2017 examining any type of intervention in adults were searched in PubMed and Cochrane Library. The following predefined medical fields were included: cardiovascular diseases, neoplasms, endocrine system diseases, respiratory tract diseases, bacterial and fungal infections, viral diseases, digestive system diseases, and immune system diseases. Studies were screened independently by two reviewers, and an equal number of studies was randomly selected per calendric month. The primary outcome was the enrollment rate of women, calculated as the number of randomized women patients divided by the total number of randomized patients. Rates were weighted by their inverse variance; statistical significance was tested using general linear models (GLM). RESULTS: Out of 398 RCTs assessed for eligibility, 300 RCTs were included. The enrollment rate of women in all the examined fields was lower than 50%, except for immune system diseases [median enrollment rate of 68% (IQR 46 to 81)]. The overall median enrollment rate of women was 41% (IQR 27 to 54). The median enrollment rate of women decreased with older age of the trials' participants [mean age of trials' participants ≤ 45 years: 47% (IQR 30-64), 46-55 years: 46% (IQR 33-58), 56-62 years: 38% (IQR 27-50), ≥ 63 years: 33% (IQR 20-46), p < 0.001]. Methodological quality characteristics showed no significant association with the enrollment rates of women. Out of the 300 included RCTs, eleven did not report on the number of included women. There was no significant difference between these studies and the studies included in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Women are being inadequately represented, in the selected medical fields analyzed in our study, in recent RCTs. Older age is a potential barrier for the enrollment of women in clinical trials. Low inclusion rates of elderly women might create a lack of crucial knowledge in the adverse effects and the benefit/risk profile of any given treatment. Factors that might hinder the participation of women should be sought and addressed in the design of the study.

Predicting In-Hospital Antibiotic Use in the Medical Department: Derivation and Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: The rise of multi-drug-resistant pathogens and nosocomial infections among hospitalized patients is partially attributed to the increased use of antibiotic therapy. A prediction model for in-hospital antibiotic treatment could be valuable to target preventive strategies. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study, including patients admitted in 2018 to medical departments and not treated with antibiotics during the first 48 h. Data available at hospital admission were used to develop a logistic model to predict the probability of antibiotic treatment during hospitalization. The performance of the model was evaluated in two independent validation cohorts. RESULTS: In the derivation cohort, antibiotic treatment was initiated in 454 (8.1%) out of 5592 included patients. Male gender, lower functional capacity, prophylactic antibiotic treatment, medical history of atrial fibrillation, peripheral vascular disease, solid organ transplantation, chronic use of a central venous catheter, urinary catheter and nasogastric tube, albumin level, mental status and vital signs at presentation were identified as predictors for antibiotic use during hospitalization and were included in the prediction model. The area under the ROC curve (AUROC) was 0.72 (95% CI 0.70-0.75). In the highest probability group, the percentage of antibiotic treatment was 18.2% (238/1,307). In the validation cohorts, the AUROC was 0.73 (95% CI 0.68-0.77) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.72-0.78). In the highest probability group, the percentage of antibiotic treatment was 12.5% (66/526) and 20.7% (244/1179) of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our prediction model performed well in the validation cohorts and was able to identify a subgroup of patients at high risk for antibiotic treatment.

Diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care tests in acute community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care tests could be essential in differentiating bacterial and viral acute community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections and driving antibiotic stewardship in the community. OBJECTIVES: To assess diagnostic test accuracy of point-of-care tests in community settings for acute community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections. DATA SOURCES: Multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Open Gray) from inception to 31 May 2021, without language restrictions. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Diagnostic test accuracy studies involving patients at primary care, outpatient clinic, emergency department and long-term care facilities with a clinical suspicion of acute community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections. The comparator was any test used as a comparison to the index test. In order not to limit the study inclusion, the comparator was not defined a priori. ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS: Four investigators independently extracted data, rated risk of bias, and assessed the quality using QUADAS-2. METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: The measures of diagnostic test accuracy were calculated with 95% CI. RESULTS: A total of 421 studies addressed at least one point-of-care test. The diagnostic performance of molecular tests was higher compared with that of rapid diagnostic tests for all the pathogens studied. The accuracy of stand-alone signs and symptoms or biomarkers was poor. Lung ultrasound showed high sensitivity and specificity (90% for both) for the diagnosis of bacterial pneumonia. Rapid antigen-based diagnostic tests for influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, human metapneumovirus, and Streptococcus pneumoniae had sub-optimal sensitivity (range 49%-84%) but high specificity (>80%). DISCUSSION: Physical examination and host biomarkers are not sufficiently reliable as stand-alone tests to differentiate between bacterial and viral pneumonia. Lung ultrasound shows higher accuracy than chest X-ray for bacterial pneumonia at emergency department. Rapid antigen-based diagnostic tests cannot be considered fully reliable because of high false-negative rates. Overall, molecular tests for all the pathogens considered were found to be the most accurate.

Inadequate reporting of participants eligible for randomized controlled trials - A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: to characterize randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that did not report the overall number of participants assessed for eligibility and to identify factors associated with higher enrollment rates. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs in several pre-defined fields in internal medicine. We randomly extracted 360 articles that were published in 2017. Trials that reported numbers of assessed for eligibility patients were compared with those who did not. Recruitment rates were calculated in order to investigate whether they were associated with trial characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 360 RCTs were included. Only 2-thirds of the trials (242/360) reported the number of patients assessed for eligibility. Trials reporting eligibility data had better methodology, reported on the tested hypothesis, included a placebo arm, evaluated soft outcomes, published their findings in higher impact journals and recruited a higher number of randomized patients than those who did not. Recruitment rates in 225 (62.5%) trials enabling their calculation, were significantly higher in trials sponsored by industry, conducted in multiple centers and countries, including inpatients, tested non-inferiority hypothesis, included a placebo arm, and evaluated surrogate outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting of participant eligibility continues to be scarce. Inadequate reporting was associated with poor methodological characteristics in trials.

Predictors of Readmission Following Discharge of Patients With Gram-Negative Bacteremia: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Short-term readmission is an important outcome reflecting the poor trajectory of sepsis survivors. The aim of this study was to identify the major risk factors for 30-day readmission among patients with gram-negative bacteremia. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study including all consecutive adults hospitalized in the medical departments in a referral hospital in Israel with gram-negative bacteremia between 2011 and 2020, who were discharged alive. Predictors for 30-day readmission were investigated, considering death after discharge as a competing event. Cephalosporin resistance was our predictor of interest. Subdistribution hazard ratios (HRs) of the cumulative incidence function were investigated using the Fine and Gray multivariable competing-risk regression model. The prediction models were cross-validated using the k-fold method. RESULTS: Among 2196 patients surviving hospitalization with gram-negative bacteremia, the mean age was 70 ± 16 years and 432 (19.6%) were readmitted within 30 days. Variables associated with readmission hazards were Arab ethnicity, active malignancy, conditions requiring immunosuppression, anxiolytics or hypnotics, anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy, discharge with a nasogastric tube, higher predischarge heart rate, duration of antibiotic therapy during hospitalization, and bacteremia caused by cephalosporin-resistant bacteria (HR, 1.23 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .99-1.52]). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for this model was 75.5% (95% CI, 71.3%-79.1%). In secondary models, cephalosporin resistance, inappropriate empirical antibiotic treatment, and lower predischarge albumin were significantly associated with readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Thirty-day readmissions among patients with gram-negative bacteremia surviving the index admission were high. Readmission was related to comorbidities and infections caused by multidrug-resistant infections.Main point: Among 2196 adults surviving hospitalization with gram-negative bacteremia, 432 (19.6%) were rehospitalized within 30 days. Comorbidities, inappropriate empirical antibiotic treatment, bacteremia caused by cephalosporin-resistant bacteria, predischarge heart rate, and albumin were associated with readmissions.

[NEUROLOGIC COMPLICATIONS AROUND THE DIAGNOSIS OF KIKUCHI-FUJIMOTO DISEASE: A RARE PRESENTATION OF THE DISEASE OR A HINT OF AN ADDITIONAL DIAGNOSIS?]

INTRODUCTION: Neurologic symptoms are an extremely rare presentation of Kikuchi-Fujimoto disease. We report a case of a young female patient diagnosed with Kikuchi-Fujimoto disease, presenting with neurologic symptoms compatible with aseptic meningitis, along with radiographic findings which improved with steroidal treatment. Despite the rarity of these findings, they were reported as part of the disease manifestation, however, since Kikuchi-Fujimoto disease is associated with other diseases, such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), other diagnoses cannot be ruled out.

Nucleic acid amplification tests on respiratory samples for the diagnosis of coronavirus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Management and control of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) relies on reliable diagnostic testing. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for the diagnosis of coronavirus infections. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Open Grey and conference proceeding until May 2019. PubMed and medRxiv were updated for COVID-19 on 31st August 2020. STUDY ELIGIBILITY: Studies were eligible if they reported on agreement rates between different NAATs using clinical samples. PARTICIPANTS: Symptomatic patients with suspected upper or lower respiratory tract coronavirus infection. METHODS: The new NAAT was defined as the index test and the existing NAAT as reference standard. Data were extracted independently in duplicate. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. Confidence regions (CRs) surrounding summary sensitivity/specificity pooled by bivariate meta-analysis are reported. Heterogeneity was assessed using meta-regression. RESULTS: Fifty-one studies were included, 22 of which included 10 181 persons before COVID-19 and 29 including 8742 persons diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The overall summary sensitivity was 89.1% (95%CR 84.0-92.7%) and specificity 98.9% (95%CR 98.0-99.4%). Nearly all the studies evaluated different PCRs as both index and reference standards. Real-time RT PCR assays resulted in significantly higher sensitivity than other tests. Reference standards at high risk of bias possibly exaggerated specificity. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of studies evaluating SARS-COV-2 were 90.4% (95%CR 83.7-94.5%) and 98.1% (95%CR 95.9-99.2), respectively. SARS-COV-2 studies using samples from the lower respiratory tract, real-time RT-PCR, and tests targeting the N or S gene or more than one gene showed higher sensitivity, and assays based on reverse transcriptase loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP), especially when targeting only the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) gene, showed significantly lower sensitivity compared to other studies. CONCLUSIONS: Pooling all studies to date shows that on average 10% of patients with coronavirus infections might be missed with PCR tests. Variables affecting sensitivity and specificity can be used for test selection and development.