Perceptions of COVID-19 Vaccination Among Organ Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Understanding COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in organ transplant recipients (OTRs) is critical given clear-albeit attenuated-benefits from vaccination. METHODS: Adult OTRs were surveyed regarding sociodemographic data, medical history, and vaccine-related values. A novel outcome variable called the Vaccine Acceptance Composite Score (VACS) was built as the average Likert score of seven domains of vaccine confidence. To examine its association with several factors and individual adherence to COVID-19 vaccine recommendations, univariable odds ratios and relative operating characteristic areas under the curve (AUC) values were calculated. RESULTS: Of 46 OTRs included, 32.6% identified as female, 13.3% as Black, and 6.77% as Hispanic or Latino/a/x. The median age was 58 years old. 93.5% of patients were kidney transplant recipients, and 63.0% previously had COVID-19. Patients were most concerned about COVID-19 vaccine-associated risks (46.3%), its potential effect on allograft (47.6%), and motives of government officials involved with vaccine policy (55.6%). Politically conservative patients were likelier to have lower VACS, whereas those who lived with someone ≥65 years old were likelier to have higher VACS. The VACS was not significantly associated with race, income, religious beliefs, comorbidities, COVID-19 history, or influenza vaccination status. Higher VACS was associated with ≥3 and ≥4 COVID-19 immunizations. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlighted political beliefs and elderly household members as correlates of vaccine acceptance among OTRs. The VACS may be a useful tool to help standardize multifaceted analyses in vaccination-focused behavioral research. In clinical practice, it could help identify individuals and groups at risk for vaccine hesitancy, who may benefit from tailored outreach and educational interventions.

Medical malpractice in organ transplantation: public allegations and key legal outcomes.

Introduction: Despite significant advances in surgical techniques and patient outcomes, organ transplantation (OT) remains fraught with legal challenges and ethical dilemmas. This study aims to address the notable gap in literature on malpractice claims specifically related to OT, providing insights into litigation trends, outcomes, and implications for medical practice and patient care. Methods: We retrospectively queried the Verdictsearch database from 1988 to 2023, and captured malpractice claims involving several organs. Data on demographics, organ types, and litigation outcomes were collected to compare compensation across different categories of malpractice and patient outcomes. Results: Out of 292 malpractice cases identified, 62 met inclusion criteria, distributed across 19 states with kidney being the most implicated organ (46.8%). Defendants prevailed in 53.2% of cases, while settlements were reached in 29.0%, and plaintiffs won in 16.1% of cases. Surgical errors and complications were the most frequent allegations, followed by medication and treatment errors. The median compensation for deceased plaintiffs was significantly higher ($1,300,000) compared to living plaintiffs at litigation initiation ($128,000). Discussion: Our study sheds light on the challenges and trends in malpractice litigation within the field of OT. By identifying key areas of concern and the influence of patient outcomes on litigation resolution, this study offers valuable insights for healthcare providers, legal practitioners, and policymakers aimed at enhancing patient safety, reducing litigation risks, and fostering a deeper understanding of the ethical and legal complexities in OT.

Oral antivirals for COVID-19 among patients with cancer.

PURPOSE: Immunocompromised individuals, such as those diagnosed with cancer, are at a significantly higher risk for severe illness and mortality when infected with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) than the general population. Two oral antiviral treatments are approved for COVID-19: Paxlovid® (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) and Lagevrio® (molnupiravir). There is a paucity of data regarding the benefit from these antivirals among immunocompromised patients with cancer, and recent studies have questioned their efficacy among vaccinated patients, even those with risk factors for severe COVID-19. METHODS: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir in preventing severe illness and death using our database of 457 patients with cancer and COVID-19 from Brown University-affiliated hospitals. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir and were compared to 45 concurrent controls who received no antiviral treatment despite being eligible to receive it. Administration of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir was associated with improved survival and lower 90-day all-cause and COVID-19-attributed mortality (p < 0.05) and with lower peak O2 requirements (ordinal odds ratio [OR] 1.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-2.56). CONCLUSION: Acknowledging the small size of our sample as a limitation, we concluded that early antiviral treatment might be beneficial to immunocompromised individuals, particularly those with cancer, when infected with SARS-CoV-2. Larger-scale, well-stratified studies are needed in this patient population.

Cytomegalovirus infection and cardiovascular outcomes in abdominal organ transplant recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Despite advancements in Cytomegalovirus (CMV) management, its impact on graft function, mortality, and cardiovascular (CV) health of organ transplant recipients (OTR) remains a significant concern. We investigated the association between CMV infection and CV events (CVE) in organ (other than heart) transplant recipients. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature search in PubMed and EMBASE, including studies that reported on CMV infection or disease and post-transplantation CVE. Studies of heart transplant recipients were excluded. RESULTS: We screened 3875 abstracts and 12 clinical studies were included in the final analysis, mainly in kidney and liver transplant recipients. A significant association was observed between CMV infection and an increased risk of CVE, with a pooled unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 1.99 (95% Confidence Intervals [CI] 1.45-2.73) for CMV infection and 1.59 (95% CI 1.21-2.10) for CMV disease. Pooled adjusted HR were 2.17 (95% CI 1.47-3.20) and 1.77 (95% CI 0.83-3.76), respectively. Heterogeneity was low (I2 = 0%) for CMV infection, suggesting consistent association across studies, and moderate-to-high for CMVdisease (I2 = 50% for unadjusted, 53% for adjusted HR). DISCUSSION: We found a significant association between CMV infection and CV risk in abdominal OTR, underscoring the importance of proactive CMV surveillance and early treatment. Future research should aim for more standardized methodologies to fully elucidate the relationship between CMV and CV outcomes, potentially informing novel preventive and therapeutic strategies that could benefit the CV health of OTR.

Progressive Multifocal Leukoencephalopathy Unmasked by Teclistamab in a Refractory Multiple Myeloma Patient.

This case report describes the development of Progressive Multifocal Leukoencephalopathy (PML) in a 72-year-old male with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), following a single dose of teclistamab amidst a COVID-19 infection. Shortly after starting teclistamab treatment, the patient developed symptoms, including fever, altered mental status, and right-sided paresis. A diagnosis of PML was confirmed through the detection of JC virus PCR in the cerebrospinal fluid. Our report emphasizes the occurrence of PML after only one dose of teclistamab and highlights teclistamab's potential for severe infectious complications, despite its promise in treating RRMM.

Dalbavancin Sequential Therapy for Gram-Positive Bloodstream Infection: A Multicenter Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: Long-acting lipoglycopeptides such as dalbavancin may have utility in patients with Gram-positive bloodstream infections (BSI), particularly in those with barriers to discharge or who require prolonged parenteral antibiotic courses. A retrospective cohort study was performed to provide further multicenter real-world evidence on dalbavancin use as a sequential therapy for Gram-positive BSI. METHODS: One hundred fifteen patients received dalbavancin with Gram-positive BSI, defined as any positive blood culture or diagnosed with infective endocarditis, from 13 centers geographically spread across the United States between July 2015 and July 2021. RESULTS: Patients had a mean (SD) age of 48.5 (17.5) years, the majority were male (54%), with many who injected drugs (40%). The most common infection sources (non-exclusive) were primary BSI (89%), skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI) (25%), infective endocarditis (19%), and bone and joint infection (17%). Staphylococcus aureus accounted for 72% of index cultures, coagulase-negative Staphylococcus accounted for 18%, and Streptococcus species in 16%. Dalbavancin started a median (Q1-Q3) of 10 (6-19) days after index culture collection. The most common regimen administered was dalbavancin 1500 mg as one dose for 50% of cases. The primary outcome of composite clinical failure occurred at 12.2%, with 90-day mortality at 7.0% and 90-day BSI recurrence at 3.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Dalbavancin may serve as a useful tool in facilitating hospital discharge in patients with Gram-positive BSI. Randomized controlled trials are anticipated to validate dalbavancin as a surrogate to current treatment standards.

Oral antivirals for COVID-19 among patients with cancer.

Purpose: Immunocompromised individuals, such as those diagnosed with cancer, are at a significantly higher risk for severe illness and mortality when infected with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) than the general population. Two oral antiviral treatments are approved for COVID-19: Paxlovid® (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) and Lagevrio® (molnupiravir). There is a paucity of data regarding the benefit from these antivirals among immunocompromised patients with cancer, and recent studies have questioned their efficacy among vaccinated patients, even those with risk factors for severe COVID-19. Methods: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir in preventing severe illness and death using our database of 457 patients with cancer and COVID-19 from Brown University-affiliated hospitals. 67 patients received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir and were compared to 56 concurrent controls who received no antiviral treatment despite being eligible to receive it. Results: Administration of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir was associated with improved survival and lower 90-day all-cause and COVID-19-attributed mortality (p<0.05) and with lower peak O2 requirements (ordinal odds ratio [OR] 1.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-2.56). Conclusion: Acknowledging the small size of our sample as a limitation, we concluded that early antiviral treatment might be beneficial to immunocompromised individuals, particularly those with cancer, when infected with SARS-CoV-2. Larger-scale, well-stratified studies are needed in this patient population.

The impact of cancer metastases on COVID-19 outcomes: A COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry-based retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 can have a particularly detrimental effect on patients with cancer, but no studies to date have examined if the presence, or site, of metastatic cancer is related to COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS: Using the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry, the authors identified 10,065 patients with COVID-19 and cancer (2325 with and 7740 without metastasis at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis). The primary ordinal outcome was COVID-19 severity: not hospitalized, hospitalized but did not receive supplemental O2, hospitalized and received supplemental O2, admitted to an intensive care unit, received mechanical ventilation, or died from any cause. The authors used ordinal logistic regression models to compare COVID-19 severity by presence and specific site of metastatic cancer. They used logistic regression models to assess 30-day all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Compared to patients without metastasis, patients with metastases have increased hospitalization rates (59% vs. 49%) and higher 30 day mortality (18% vs. 9%). Patients with metastasis to bone, lung, liver, lymph nodes, and brain have significantly higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted odds ratios [ORs], 1.38, 1.59, 1.38, 1.00, and 2.21) compared to patients without metastases at those sites. Patients with metastasis to the lung have significantly higher odds of 30-day mortality (adjusted OR, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.00) when adjusting for COVID-19 severity. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with metastatic cancer, especially with metastasis to the brain, are more likely to have severe outcomes after COVID-19 whereas patients with metastasis to the lung, compared to patients with cancer metastasis to other sites, have the highest 30-day mortality after COVID-19.

Using a commercially available assay that measures cytomegalovirus (CMV)-specific T-cell immunity to predict protection against CMV: A prospective, blinded clinical study.

The Viracor CMV-T-cell immunity Panel (TCIP) measures %CMV-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells. In this blinded clinical study, we evaluated the performance of the TCIP in predicting CMV events. Prospectively enrolled donor or recipient CMV-seropositive kidney transplant recipients (KTR) were evaluated with monthly TCIP testing until either discontinuation of valganciclovir prophylaxis or CMV DNAemia prompting treatment initiation. Also, prospectively enrolled KTR with low-level untreated DNAemia or after completion of treatment were evaluated for progression or relapse of CMV infection. Among 46 KTR, those with CMV events had significantly lower %CMV-specific CD8+ T-cells (p = 0.024), and the CMV protection ROC AUC was significant (AUC 0.78, p = 0.026). The positive predictive values of CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell positivity >0.2 % for CMV protection were: 96.3 % for CMV DNAemia prompting treatment initiation, 92.6 % for any DNAemia, 100 % for DNAemia >1000 IU/mL. The TCIP could be a useful adjunct tool in individualized management of CMV infection.

Refractory Bilateral Tubo-Ovarian Abscesses in a Patient with Iatrogenic Hypogammaglobulinemia.

Genital mycoplasmas are sexually transmitted Mollicutes with a high prevalence of urogenital tract colonization among females of reproductive age. Current guidelines recommend against routine screening for these organisms, since their role in the pathogenesis of pelvic inflammatory disease and tubo-ovarian abscesses (TOAs) remains unclear. However, genital mycoplasmas harbor pathogenic potential in immunocompromised hosts, especially patients with hypogammaglobulinemia. It is important to identify such infections early, given their potential for invasive spread and the availability of easily accessible treatments. We present a young adult female with multiple sclerosis and iatrogenic hypogammaglobulinemia, with refractory, bilateral pelvic inflammatory disease and TOAs due to Ureaplasma urealyticum, identified as a single pathogen via three distinct molecular tests. To our knowledge, this is the second case of TOAs caused by U. urealyticum in the literature, and the first diagnosed by pathogen cell-free DNA metagenomic next-generation sequencing in plasma.

Campylobacter Infection-Associated Acute Pancreatitis in a Renal Transplant Recipient.

Immunocompromised individuals (patients with cancer, diabetes, HIV/AIDS, transplant recipients) and pregnant women are at greater risk of complicated foodborne illness than the general population. Though rare, Campylobacter enteritis-associated acute pancreatitis has not been reported in an immunocompromised host to our knowledge. Herein, we describe a case of Campylobacter infection-associated pancreatitis in a renal transplant recipient. This case highlights the need for food safety education for the immunocompromised, emphasizes the role of health care providers in encouraging adherence to food safety guidelines, and stresses the need to maintain broad infectious differentials for immunocompromised patient populations, even for conditions which are not commonly associated with an infectious etiology.

COVID-19 severity and cardiovascular outcomes in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer and cardiovascular disease.

Background: Data regarding outcomes among patients with cancer and co-morbid cardiovascular disease (CVD)/cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) after SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited. Objectives: To compare Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related complications among cancer patients with and without co-morbid CVD/CVRF. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2, reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from 03/17/2020 to 12/31/2021. CVD/CVRF was defined as established CVD or no established CVD, male ≥ 55 or female ≥ 60 years, and one additional CVRF. The primary endpoint was an ordinal COVID-19 severity outcome including need for hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, intensive care unit (ICU), mechanical ventilation, ICU or mechanical ventilation plus vasopressors, and death. Secondary endpoints included incident adverse CV events. Ordinal logistic regression models estimated associations of CVD/CVRF with COVID-19 severity. Effect modification by recent cancer therapy was evaluated. Results: Among 10,876 SARS-CoV-2 infected patients with cancer (median age 65 [IQR 54-74] years, 53% female, 52% White), 6253 patients (57%) had co-morbid CVD/CVRF. Co-morbid CVD/CVRF was associated with higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted OR: 1.25 [95% CI 1.11-1.40]). Adverse CV events were significantly higher in patients with CVD/CVRF (all p<0.001). CVD/CVRF was associated with worse COVID-19 severity in patients who had not received recent cancer therapy, but not in those undergoing active cancer therapy (OR 1.51 [95% CI 1.31-1.74] vs. OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.90-1.20], pinteraction <0.001). Conclusions: Co-morbid CVD/CVRF is associated with higher COVID-19 severity among patients with cancer, particularly those not receiving active cancer therapy. While infrequent, COVID-19 related CV complications were higher in patients with comorbid CVD/CVRF. (COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium Registry [CCC19]; NCT04354701).

Impact of COVID-19 in patients on active melanoma therapy and with history of melanoma.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 particularly impacted patients with co-morbid conditions, including cancer. Patients with melanoma have not been specifically studied in large numbers. Here, we sought to identify factors that associated with COVID-19 severity among patients with melanoma, particularly assessing outcomes of patients on active targeted or immune therapy. METHODS: Using the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry, we identified 307 patients with melanoma diagnosed with COVID-19. We used multivariable models to assess demographic, cancer-related, and treatment-related factors associated with COVID-19 severity on a 6-level ordinal severity scale. We assessed whether treatment was associated with increased cardiac or pulmonary dysfunction among hospitalized patients and assessed mortality among patients with a history of melanoma compared with other cancer survivors. RESULTS: Of 307 patients, 52 received immunotherapy (17%), and 32 targeted therapy (10%) in the previous 3 months. Using multivariable analyses, these treatments were not associated with COVID-19 severity (immunotherapy OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19 - 1.39; targeted therapy OR 1.89, 95% CI 0.64 - 5.55). Among hospitalized patients, no signals of increased cardiac or pulmonary organ dysfunction, as measured by troponin, brain natriuretic peptide, and oxygenation were noted. Patients with a history of melanoma had similar 90-day mortality compared with other cancer survivors (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.62 - 2.35). CONCLUSIONS: Melanoma therapies did not appear to be associated with increased severity of COVID-19 or worsening organ dysfunction. Patients with history of melanoma had similar 90-day survival following COVID-19 compared with other cancer survivors.

Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections among patients with cancer following two and three doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines: a retrospective observational study from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium.

Background: Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections following vaccination against COVID-19 are of international concern. Patients with cancer have been observed to have worse outcomes associated with COVID-19 during the pandemic. We sought to evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with cancer who developed breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections after 2 or 3 doses of mRNA vaccines. Methods: We evaluated the clinical characteristics of patients with cancer who developed breakthrough infections using data from the multi-institutional COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19; NCT04354701). Analysis was restricted to patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosed in 2021 or 2022, to allow for a contemporary unvaccinated control population; potential differences were evaluated using a multivariable logistic regression model after inverse probability of treatment weighting to adjust for potential baseline confounding variables. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality, with key secondary endpoints of hospitalization and ICU and/or mechanical ventilation (ICU/MV). Findings: The analysis included 2486 patients, of which 564 and 385 had received 2 or 3 doses of an mRNA vaccine prior to infection, respectively. Hematologic malignancies and recent receipt of systemic anti-neoplastic therapy were more frequent among vaccinated patients. Vaccination was associated with improved outcomes: in the primary analysis, 2 doses (aOR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.44-0.88) and 3 doses (aOR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.11-0.36) were associated with decreased 30-day mortality. There were similar findings for the key secondary endpoints of ICU/MV (aOR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.45-0.82 and 0.37, 95% CI: 0.24-0.58) and hospitalization (aOR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.48-0.75 and 0.35, 95% CI: 0.26-0.46) for 2 and 3 doses, respectively. Importantly, Black patients had higher rates of hospitalization (aOR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.12-1.92), and Hispanic patients presented with higher rates of ICU/MV (aOR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.06-2.44). Interpretation: Vaccination against COVID-19, especially with additional doses, is a fundamental strategy in the prevention of adverse outcomes including death, among patients with cancer. Funding: This study was partly supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute grant number P30 CA068485 to C-YH, YS, SM, JLW; T32-CA236621 and P30-CA046592 to C.R.F; CTSA 2UL1TR001425-05A1 to TMW-D; ACS/FHI Real-World Data Impact Award, P50 MD017341-01, R21 CA242044-01A1, Susan G. Komen Leadership Grant Hunt to MKA. REDCap is developed and supported by Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research grant support (UL1 TR000445 from NCATS/NIH).

Outpatient anti-spike monoclonal antibody administration is associated with decreased morbidity and mortality among patients with cancer and COVID-19.

Patients with cancer have many comorbidities that increase their risk of death from Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Anti-spike monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) reduce the risk of hospitalization or death from COVID-19 in the general population. To our knowledge, no studies have focused on the clinical efficacy of mAbs compared to no outpatient treatment exclusively among patients with solid tumors and hematologic malignancies, who are often excluded from clinical trials. We studied patients with cancer who had COVID-19 between 11.9.2020 and 7.21.2022 and received mAbs in an outpatient setting. We compared hospitalization and mortality rates to those of patients with cancer concurrently diagnosed with COVID-19, who were eligible for mAbs, but did not receive any outpatient treatment. 63 patients received mAbs and 89 no outpatient treatment. Administration of mAbs was associated with lower 90-day hospitalization (20.6% vs. 60.7%, p <0.001), all-cause (6.3% vs. 19.1%, p 0.025) and COVID-19-attributed (3.2% vs. 14.6%, p 0.019) mortality rates, and lower peak O2 requirements (ordinal Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.33, 95% Confidence Intervals [CI] = 0.20-0.53). Administration of mAbs (aHR 0.21, p <0.001), age (≥ 60 years, adjusted Hazard Ratio [aHR] 1.86, p=0.033), and metastases (aHR 0.41, p 0.007) were independently associated with hospitalization. mAb treatment remained significantly associated with all-cause (aHR 0.27, p 0.019) and COVID-19-attributed (aHR 0.19, p 0.031) mortality, after adjustment for other factors. mAb administration was associated with improved clinical outcomes among vulnerable patients with cancer and COVID-19. With no mAbs approved currently for treatment against the prevalent circulating variants, the development of new mAbs should be a research priority.

Cutaneous Sporothrix globosa infection mimicking cryptococcosis in a patient with history of kidney transplant.

Sporotrichosis is a subacute-to-chronic infection caused by Sporothrix species, a dimorphic fungus. Virulence varies by Sporothrix species and presentation can be region dependent. The patient had a history of immunosuppression as a result of a kidney transplant, and presented with a high disease burden on histopathological examination, but responded well to itraconazole. The case suggests considering Sporothrix speciation in immunocompromised patients to best determine treatment modality and duration.

Outpatient anti-spike monoclonal antibody administration is associated with decreased morbidity and mortality among patients with cancer and COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer have many comorbidities that increase their risk of death from Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Anti-spike monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) reduce the risk of hospitalization or death from COVID-19 in the general population. To our knowledge, no studies have focused on the clinical efficacy of mAbs compared to no outpatient treatment exclusively among patients with solid tumors and hematologic malignancies, who are often excluded from clinical trials. METHODS: We studied patients with cancer who had COVID-19 between 11.9.2020 and 7.21.2022 and received mAbs in an outpatient setting. We compared hospitalization and mortality rates to those of patients with cancer concurrently diagnosed with COVID-19, who were eligible for mAbs, but did not receive any outpatient treatment. RESULTS: 63 patients received mAbs and 89 no outpatient treatment. Administration of mAbs was associated with lower 90-day hospitalization (20.6% vs. 60.7%, p<0.001), all-cause (6.3% vs. 19.1%, p=0.025) and COVID-19-attributed (3.2% vs. 14.6%, p=0.019) mortality rates, and lower peak O2 requirements (ordinal Odds Ratio [OR]=0.33, 95%Confidence Intervals [CI]=0.20-0.53). Administration of mAbs (aHR 0.21, p<0.001), age (≥ 60 years, adjusted Hazard Ratio [aHR] 1.86, p=0.033), and metastases (aHR 0.41, p=0.007) were independently associated with hospitalization. mAb treatment remained significantly associated with all-cause (aHR 0.27, p=0.019) and COVID-19-attributed (aHR 0.19, p=0.031) mortality, after adjustment for other factors. CONCLUSIONS: mAb administration was associated with improved clinical outcomes among vulnerable patients with cancer and COVID-19. With no mAbs approved currently for treatment against the prevalent circulating variants, the development of new mAbs should be a research priority.

mRNA Vaccination Decreases COVID-19-Associated Morbidity and Mortality Among Organ Transplant Recipients: A Contemporary Cohort Study.

Background: Organ transplant recipients (OTRs) are less protected from vaccination than immunocompetent hosts. Additional vaccine doses have shown increased immunogenicity. Few studies have assessed their clinical efficacy, particularly against Omicron variants, as most included patients from earlier phases of the pandemic, with higher base mortality rates. Methods: We studied adult OTRs who had coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) between 12/15/21 and 5/25/22. We compared clinical outcomes between those who had received 2 or ≥3 doses of an mRNA vaccine and concurrent unvaccinated controls. Results: Among 103 OTRs, vaccination was associated with lower 90-day mortality (unvaccinated vs 2 vs ≥3 doses: 25% vs 7% vs 3%; P = .003), hospital (unvaccinated vs 2 vs ≥3 doses: 56% vs 37% vs 27%; P = .018) and intensive care unit (ICU; unvaccinated vs 2 vs ≥3 doses: 25% vs 15% vs 3%; P = .001) admission rates, and peak O2 requirements (ordinal scale Kendall's tau b = -0.309 [lower scores, ie, O2 requirements with more vaccine doses]; P = .003). Age (age >60 years: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 7.73; P = .016; administration of antispike monoclonal antibody: aHR, 0.17; P = .042) and vaccination, especially with ≥3 doses (aHR, 0.105; P = .01), were independently associated with 90-day mortality. Black (P = .021) and Hispanic (P = .016) OTRs were underrepresented among the vaccinated, especially in the ≥3-dose group. Conclusions: Despite lower mRNA vaccine efficacy in OTRs and against Omicron variants, vaccination protects this vulnerable patient population from severe COVID-19 and death. Ethnic and racial disparities in health care have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic and warrant better community outreach efforts.