Outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with CLL: a multicenter international experience.

Given advanced age, comorbidities, and immune dysfunction, chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients may be at particularly high risk of infection and poor outcomes related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Robust analysis of outcomes for CLL patients, particularly examining effects of baseline characteristics and CLL-directed therapy, is critical to optimally manage CLL patients through this evolving pandemic. CLL patients diagnosed with symptomatic COVID-19 across 43 international centers (n = 198) were included. Hospital admission occurred in 90%. Median age at COVID-19 diagnosis was 70.5 years. Median Cumulative Illness Rating Scale score was 8 (range, 4-32). Thirty-nine percent were treatment naive ("watch and wait"), while 61% had received ≥1 CLL-directed therapy (median, 2; range, 1-8). Ninety patients (45%) were receiving active CLL therapy at COVID-19 diagnosis, most commonly Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi's; n = 68/90 [76%]). At a median follow-up of 16 days, the overall case fatality rate was 33%, though 25% remain admitted. Watch-and-wait and treated cohorts had similar rates of admission (89% vs 90%), intensive care unit admission (35% vs 36%), intubation (33% vs 25%), and mortality (37% vs 32%). CLL-directed treatment with BTKi's at COVID-19 diagnosis did not impact survival (case fatality rate, 34% vs 35%), though the BTKi was held during the COVID-19 course for most patients. These data suggest that the subgroup of CLL patients admitted with COVID-19, regardless of disease phase or treatment status, are at high risk of death. Future epidemiologic studies are needed to assess severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection risk, these data should be validated independently, and randomized studies of BTKi's in COVID-19 are needed to provide definitive evidence of benefit.

Cefpodoxime for antimicrobial prophylaxis in neutropenia: a retrospective case series.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial prophylaxis in select neutropenic patients has reduced fever, infection rates, hospital length of stay, and hospitalization rates. Guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Society of America recommend the consideration of prophylaxis with a fluoroquinolone in patients at high risk for infection after chemotherapy. The use of fluoroquinolones has been associated with many adverse events, and there is limited evidence on alternative antimicrobial prophylaxis in patients intolerant of fluoroquinolones. OBJECTIVES: Our study describes a single-center experience of cefpodoxime as an alternative to fluoroquinolones for antibacterial prophylaxis during neutropenia after chemotherapy and represents a retrospective evaluation of an oral cephalosporin in adult patients for this purpose. METHODS: This retrospective case series analyzed data from the electronic medical records of 41 patients having hematologic malignancies and given cefpodoxime for neutropenic prophylaxis. RESULTS: The rate of febrile neutropenia was 85%, with 60% culture-positive infections. Gram-positive organisms were identified in 52% of positive cultures, and gram-negative organisms represented 40% of positive cultures. Antimicrobial resistance to guideline-recommended empiric treatment regimens was not seen in breakthrough infections. CONCLUSIONS: Cefpodoxime can be utilized for prophylaxis, without adversely affecting resistance to broad-spectrum agents, and maintains a high level of appropriateness of guideline-recommended empiric regimens. This study of cefpodoxime prophylaxis in adult patients intolerant to fluoroquinolones adds to the literature of potential alternative agents for prophylaxis in neutropenic patients.