Decoding the historical tale: COVID-19 impact on haematological malignancy patients-EPICOVIDEHA insights from 2020 to 2022.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic heightened risks for individuals with hematological malignancies due to compromised immune systems, leading to more severe outcomes and increased mortality. While interventions like vaccines, targeted antivirals, and monoclonal antibodies have been effective for the general population, their benefits for these patients may not be as pronounced. Methods: The EPICOVIDEHA registry (National Clinical Trials Identifier, NCT04733729) gathers COVID-19 data from hematological malignancy patients since the pandemic's start worldwide. It spans various global locations, allowing comprehensive analysis over the first three years (2020-2022). Findings: The EPICOVIDEHA registry collected data from January 2020 to December 2022, involving 8767 COVID-19 cases in hematological malignancy patients from 152 centers across 41 countries, with 42% being female. Over this period, there was a significant reduction in critical infections and an overall decrease in mortality from 29% to 4%. However, hospitalization, particularly in the ICU, remained associated with higher mortality rates. Factors contributing to increased mortality included age, multiple comorbidities, active malignancy at COVID-19 onset, pulmonary symptoms, and hospitalization. On the positive side, vaccination with one to two doses or three or more doses, as well as encountering COVID-19 in 2022, were associated with improved survival. Interpretation: Patients with hematological malignancies still face elevated risks, despite reductions in critical infections and overall mortality rates over time. Hospitalization, especially in ICUs, remains a significant concern. The study underscores the importance of vaccination and the timing of COVID-19 exposure in 2022 for enhanced survival in this patient group. Ongoing monitoring and targeted interventions are essential to support this vulnerable population, emphasizing the critical role of timely diagnosis and prompt treatment in preventing severe COVID-19 cases. Funding: Not applicable.

The mortality of COVID-19 in CML patients from 2020 until 2022: results from the EPICOVIDEHA survey.

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been an overall improvement in patient mortality. However, haematological malignancy patients continue to experience significant impacts from COVID-19, including high rates of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and mortality. In comparison to other haematological malignancy patients, individuals with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) generally have better prognosis. This study, conducted using a large haematological malignancy patient database (EPICOVIDEHA), demonstrated that the majority of CML patients experienced mild infections. The decline in severe and critical infections over the years can largely be attributed to the widespread administration of vaccinations and the positive response they elicited. Notably, the mortality rate among CML patients was low and exhibited a downward trend in subsequent years. Importantly, our analysis provided confirmation of the effectiveness of vaccinations in CML patients.

Molnupiravir compared to nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for COVID-19 in high-risk patients with haematological malignancy in Europe. A matched-paired analysis from the EPICOVIDEHA registry.

INTRODUCTION: Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir are antivirals used to prevent progression to severe SARS-CoV-2 infections and decrease hospitalisation and mortality rates. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was authorised in Europe in December 2021, whereas molnupiravir is not yet licensed in Europe as of February 2022. Molnupiravir may be an alternative to nirmatrelvir/ritonavir because it is associated with fewer drug-drug interactions and contraindications. A caveat for molnupiravir is the mode of action induces viral mutations. Mortality rate reduction with molnupiravir was less pronounced than that with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in patients without haematological malignancy. Little is known about the comparative efficacy of the two drugs in patients with haematological malignancy at high-risk of severe COVID-19. Thus, molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were compared in a cohort of patients with haematological malignancies. METHODS: Clinical data from patients treated with molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir/ritonavir monotherapy for COVID-19 were retrieved from the EPICOVIDEHA registry. Patients treated with molnupiravir were matched by sex, age (±10 years), and severity of baseline haematological malignancy to controls treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. RESULTS: A total of 116 patients receiving molnupiravir for the clinical management of COVID-19 were matched to an equal number of controls receiving nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. In each of the groups, 68 (59%) patients were male; with a median age of 64 years (interquartile range [IQR] 53-74) for molnupiravir recipients and 64 years (IQR 54-73) for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir recipients; 56.9% (n=66) of the patients had controlled baseline haematological malignancy, 12.9% (n=15) had stable disease, and 30.2% (n=35) had active disease at COVID-19 onset in each group. During COVID-19 infection, one third of patients from each group were admitted to hospital. Although a similar proportion of patients in the two groups were vaccinated (molnupiravir n=77, 66% vs. nirmatrelvir/ritonavir n=87, 75%), more of those treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir had received four vaccine doses (n=27, 23%) compared with those treated with molnupiravir (n=5, 4%) (P<0.001). No differences were detected in COVID-19 severity (P=0.39) or hospitalisation (P=1.0). No statistically significant differences were identified in overall mortality rate (P=0.78) or survival probability (d30 P=0.19, d60 P=0.67, d90 P=0.68, last day of follow up P=0.68). Deaths were either attributed to COVID-19, or the infection was judged by the treating physician to have contributed to death. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalisation and mortality rates with molnupiravir were comparable to those with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in high-risk patients with haematological malignancies and COVID-19. Molnupiravir is a plausible alternative to nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for COVID-19 treatment in patients with haematological malignancy.

Multi-site pre-therapeutic biopsies demonstrate genetic heterogeneity in patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is a heterogeneous disease, both regarding clinical presentation, response to treatment and outcome. Recently, subclassification of DLBCL based on mutational profile has been suggested, and next generation sequencing (NGS) analysis may be relevant as part of the diagnostic workflow. This will, however, often be based on analysis of one tumor biopsy. Here, we present a prospective study where multi-site sampling was performed prior to treatment in patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL. Two spatially different biopsies from 16 patients were analyzed using NGS with an in-house 59-gene lymphoma panel. In 8/16 (50%) patients, mutational differences were found between the two biopsy sites, including differences in TP53 mutational status. Our data indicate that a biopsy from the extra-nodal site may represent the most advanced clone, and an extra-nodal biopsy should be preferred for analysis, if safely accessible. This will help ensure a standardized stratification and treatment decision.

Bone marrow biopsy can be omitted in the diagnostic workup of CNS lymphoma of DLBCL origin: a population-based retrospective study in the PET-CT era.

Currently, bone marrow (BM) biopsy (BMB) is recommended in the initial staging of patients with the presumed primary central nervous system (CNS) lymphoma (PCNSL). However, the added value of BMB in the era of positron emission tomography (PET-CT) has been challenged in other lymphoma subtypes. We analyzed BM findings in patients with biopsy-proven CNS lymphoma and a negative PET-CT scan for disease outside CNS. A comprehensive Danish population-based registry search was performed to identify all patients with CNS lymphoma of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) histology with available BMB results and staging PET-CT without systemic lymphoma. A total of 300 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of them, 16% had a previous history of lymphoma, while 84% were diagnosed with PCNSL. None of the patients had DLBCL in the BM. A minority (8.3%) had discordant BMB findings, mainly low-grade histologies that did not influence treatment choice in any case. In conclusion, the risk of overlooking concordant BM infiltration in patients with CNS lymphoma of DLBCL histology and negative PET-CT scan is negligible. As we did not find any patient with DLBCL in the BMB, our results suggest that BMB can be safely omitted in the diagnostic workup in patients with CNS lymphoma and a negative PET-CT.

Passive pre-exposure immunization by tixagevimab/cilgavimab in patients with hematological malignancy and COVID-19: matched-paired analysis in the EPICOVIDEHA registry.

Only few studies have analyzed the efficacy of tixagevimab/cilgavimab to prevent severe Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and related complications in hematologic malignancies (HM) patients. Here, we report cases of breakthrough COVID-19 after prophylactic tixagevimab/cilgavimab from the EPICOVIDEHA registry). We identified 47 patients that had received prophylaxis with tixagevimab/cilgavimab in the EPICOVIDEHA registry. Lymphoproliferative disorders (44/47, 93.6%) were the main underlying HM. SARS-CoV-2 strains were genotyped in 7 (14.9%) cases only, and all belonged to the omicron variant. Forty (85.1%) patients had received vaccinations prior to tixagevimab/cilgavimab, the majority of them with at least two doses. Eleven (23.4%) patients had a mild SARS-CoV-2 infection, 21 (44.7%) a moderate infection, while 8 (17.0%) had severe infection and 2 (4.3%) critical. Thirty-six (76.6%) patients were treated, either with monoclonal antibodies, antivirals, corticosteroids, or with combination schemes. Overall, 10 (21.3%) were admitted to a hospital. Among these, two (4.3%) were transferred to intensive care unit and one (2.1%) of them died. Our data seem to show that the use of tixagevimab/cilgavimab may lead to a COVID-19 severity reduction in HM patients; however, further studies should incorporate further HM patients to confirm the best drug administration strategies in immunocompromised patients.

Erratum: Author Correction: Early stimulated immune responses predict clinical disease severity in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/s43856-022-00178-5.].

Early stimulated immune responses predict clinical disease severity in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Background: The immune pathogenesis underlying the diverse clinical course of COVID-19 is poorly understood. Currently, there is an unmet need in daily clinical practice for early biomarkers and improved risk stratification tools to help identify and monitor COVID-19 patients at risk of severe disease. Methods: We performed longitudinal assessment of stimulated immune responses in 30 patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We used the TruCulture whole-blood ligand-stimulation assay applying standardized stimuli to activate distinct immune pathways, allowing quantification of cytokine responses. We further characterized immune cell subsets by flow cytometry and used this deep immunophenotyping data to map the course of clinical disease within and between patients. Results: Here we demonstrate impairments in innate immune response pathways at time of COVID-19 hospitalization that are associated with the development of severe disease. We show that these impairments are transient in those discharged from hospital, as illustrated by functional and cellular immune reconstitution. Specifically, we identify lower levels of LPS-stimulated IL-1ß, and R848-stimulated IL-12 and IL-17A, at hospital admission to be significantly associated with increasing COVID-19 disease severity during hospitalization. Furthermore, we propose a stimulated immune response signature for predicting risk of developing severe or critical COVID-19 disease at time of hospitalization, to validate in larger cohorts. Conclusions: We identify early impairments in innate immune responses that are associated with subsequent COVID-19 disease severity. Our findings provide basis for early identification of patients at risk of severe disease which may have significant implications for the early management of patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Three doses of BNT162b2 COVID-19 mRNA vaccine establish long-lasting CD8+ T cell immunity in CLL and MDS patients.

Patients with hematological malignancies are prioritized for COVID-19 vaccine due to their high risk for severe SARS-CoV-2 infection-related disease and mortality. To understand T cell immunity, its long-term persistence, and its correlation with antibody response, we evaluated the BNT162b2 COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-specific immune response in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and myeloid dysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients. Longitudinal analysis of CD8+ T cells using DNA-barcoded peptide-MHC multimers covering the full SARS-CoV-2 Spike-protein (415 peptides) showed vaccine-specific T cell activation and persistence of memory T cells up to six months post-vaccination. Surprisingly, a higher frequency of vaccine-induced antigen-specific CD8+ T cells was observed in the patient group compared to a healthy donor group. Furthermore, and importantly, immunization with the second booster dose significantly increased the frequency of antigen-specific CD8+ T cells as well as the total number of T cell specificities. Altogether 59 BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine-derived immunogenic responses were identified, of which 23 established long-term CD8+ T cell memory response with a strong immunodominance for NYNYLYRLF (HLA-A24:02) and YLQPRTFLL (HLA-A02:01) epitopes. In summary, we mapped the vaccine-induced antigen-specific CD8+ T cells and showed a booster-specific activation and enrichment of memory T cells that could be important for long-term disease protection in this patient group.

SARS-CoV-2 genome-wide T cell epitope mapping reveals immunodominance and substantial CD8+ T cell activation in COVID-19 patients.

T cells are important for effective viral clearance, elimination of virus-infected cells and long-term disease protection. To examine the full-spectrum of CD8+ T cell immunity in COVID-19, we experimentally evaluated 3141 major histocompatibility (MHC) class I-binding peptides covering the complete SARS-CoV-2 genome. Using DNA-barcoded peptide-MHC complex (pMHC) multimers combined with a T cell phenotype panel, we report a comprehensive list of 122 immunogenic and a subset of immunodominant SARS-CoV-2 T cell epitopes. Substantial CD8+ T cell recognition was observed in COVID-19 patients, with up to 27% of all CD8+ lymphocytes interacting with SARS-CoV-2-derived epitopes. Most immunogenic regions were derived from open reading frame (ORF) 1 and ORF3, with ORF1 containing most of the immunodominant epitopes. CD8+ T cell recognition of lower affinity was also observed in healthy donors toward SARS-CoV-2-derived epitopes. This pre-existing T cell recognition signature was partially overlapping with the epitope landscape observed in COVID-19 patients and may drive the further expansion of T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Importantly the phenotype of the SARS-CoV-2-specific CD8+ T cells, revealed a strong T cell activation in COVID-19 patients, while minimal T cell activation was seen in healthy individuals. We found that patients with severe disease displayed significantly larger SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell populations compared to patients with mild diseases and these T cells displayed a robust activation profile. These results further our understanding of T cell immunity to SARS-CoV-2 infection and hypothesize that strong antigen-specific T cell responses are associated with different disease outcomes.