Kaposi sarcoma and vertebral involvement in people with HIV: a case report and systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Kaposi Sarcoma (KS) has been historically associated with HIV, especially in people with advanced immunosuppression. Its prevalence decreased over time, but management remains difficult especially when the diagnosis is late and there is a visceral involvement. Bone localization, and particularly the vertebral one, is rare. We herein present a case of vertebral localizations of KS and performed a review literature to assess demographic, clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes in people with HIV. METHODS: The systematic review was carried out by following the PRISMA guidelines and registering the protocol in PROSPERO database (n. registration: CRD42024548626). We included all cases of vertebral localizations of KS from January 1rst 1981 to December 31rst, 2023. RESULTS: Twenty-two cases, including ours, were ever reported in people with HIV, mostly males (95.4%), with a median age of 35 years (IQR: 32-44), median CD4+ T cell count of 80 cell/mm3 (IQR 13-111), 31.8% with high HIV viral load. Five people received HIV and KS diagnosis simultaneously. In all cases, but one, there were multiple sites involved. Most spine lesions were localized at thoracic and lumbar levels (59.1%), causing pathological fractures in 2 cases. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy were performed in 50% and 18.2% cases, respectively. 22.7% persons died, stability and improvement/disease regression were reported for 13.6% and 22.7% persons, respectively, while 9.9% had a significant disease progression and a person was lost to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Despite progresses in treatment, late presentation of KS, especially with spine involvement may have a poor prognosis. More efforts are needed to promote access to HIV testing, especially when indicating conditions are present.

Risk of hospitalization and sequelae in patients with COVID-19 treated with 3-day early remdesivir vs. controls in the vaccine and Omicron era: A real-life cohort study.

Recently, a benefit from administration of a 3-day course of early remdesivir (ER) in the outpatients' setting was reported. However, real-life data on its use is scarce. Therefore, we explored the ER clinical outcome in our outpatients' s cohort, compared to untreated controls. We included all patients who were prescribed ER from February to May 2022 and followed them up for 3 months and compared patients who received treatment with untreated controls. In the two groups the following outcomes were investigated: hospitalization and mortality rate, time of negativization and symptom's resolution, and postacute coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) syndrome prevalence. Overall, 681 patients were analyzed, mostly females (53.6%), and with a median age of 66 years (interquartile range: 54-77), 316 (46.4%) patients received ER, and 365 (53.6%) did not receive antiviral treatment (control group). Overall, 8.5% patients eventually required oxygen support, 8.7% were hospitalized for COVID-19, and 1.5% died. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunization and ER (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.049 [0.015; 0.16], p < 0.001) independently reduced hospitalization risk. ER was significantly associated with a shorter duration of SARS-CoV-2 positivity at nasopharyngeal swabs (aß -8.15 [-9.21; -7.09], p < 0.001) and of symptoms (aß -5.11 [-5.82; -4.39], p < 0.001), and with lower rate of COVID-19 sequelae compared to control group (aOR: 0.18 [0.10; 0.31], p < 0.001). Even in the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and Omicron era, in patients at high risk of developing severe disease, ER demonstrated to have a good safety profile and to significantly reduce the risk of disease progression and COVID-19 sequelae compared to untreated controls.

Molnupiravir and Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir: Tolerability, Safety, and Adherence in a Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Molnupiravir (MOL) and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NIR) were recently approved for the early treatment of COVID-19, but real-life data on tolerability, safety, and adverse events (AEs) are still scarce. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study including all patients who were prescribed MOL and NIR at the Infectious Diseases Unit of Padua University Hospital, between January and May 2022. Demographic, clinical, and safety variables were recorded. RESULTS: We included 909 patients, 48.3% males and 95.2% vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. The median age was 73 (IQR: 62-82) years. MOL and NIR were prescribed in 407 (44.8%) and 502 (55.2%) patients, respectively. Overall, 124/909 (13.6%) patients experienced any AEs following antivirals intake: 98/124 (79%) patients reporting adverse events presented grade 1 AEs, 23/124 (18.5%) grade 2 AEs and 3 (2.5%) grade 3 AEs. Treatment discontinuation was recorded in 4.8% of patients. AEs were significantly higher in women, in patients treated with NIR compared to MOL and in people who were not vaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: In our real-life setting, AEs were higher than those reported by clinical trials, and were particularly associated with NIR use and with not being vaccinated. Further analyses are needed to better assess safety of oral antivirals and to define which patient's profile may benefit most from MOL and NIR.

Exploratory data on the clinical efficacy of monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant of concern.

Background: Recent in-vitro data have shown that the activity of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) varies according to the variant of concern (VOC). No studies have compared the clinical efficacy of different mAbs against Omicron VOC. Methods: The MANTICO trial is a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical efficacy of early treatments with bamlanivimab/etesevimab, casirivimab/imdevimab, and sotrovimab in outpatients aged 50 or older with mild-to-moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection. As the patient enrolment was interrupted for possible futility after the onset of the Omicron wave, the analysis was performed according to the SARS-CoV-2 VOC. The primary outcome was coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) progression (hospitalisation, need of supplemental oxygen therapy, or death through day 14). Secondary outcomes included the time to symptom resolution, assessed using the product-limit method. Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox proportional hazard model were used to assess the association with predictors. Log rank test was used to compare survival functions. Results: Overall, 319 patients were included. Among 141 patients infected with Delta, no COVID-19 progression was recorded, and the time to symptom resolution did not differ significantly between treatment groups (Log-rank Chi-square 0.22, p 0.90). Among 170 patients infected with Omicron (80.6% BA.1 and 19.4% BA.1.1), two COVID-19 progressions were recorded, both in the bamlanivimab/etesevimab group, and the median time to symptom resolution was 5 days shorter in the sotrovimab group compared with the bamlanivimab/etesevimab and casirivimab/imdevimab groups (HR 0.53 and HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.36-0.77 and 95% CI 0.30-0.67, p<0.01). Conclusions: Our data suggest that, among adult outpatients with mild-to-moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection due to Omicron BA.1 and BA.1.1, early treatment with sotrovimab reduces the time to recovery compared with casirivimab/imdevimab and bamlanivimab/etesevimab. In the same population, early treatment with casirivimab/imdevimab may maintain a role in preventing COVID-19 progression. The generalisability of trial results is substantially limited by the early discontinuation of the trial and firm conclusions cannot be drawn. Funding: This trial was funded by the Italian Medicines Agency (Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco, AIFA). The VOC identification was funded by the ORCHESTRA (Connecting European Cohorts to Increase Common and Effective Response to SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic) project, which has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement number 101016167. Clinical trial number: NCT05205759.