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.

Performance of Clostridioides difficile infection severity scores and risk factors related to 30-day all-cause mortality in patients with cancer.

PURPOSE: There are currently no standard definitions for assessing the severity of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) in cancer patients. We evaluated the performance of scoring systems for severity and analyzed risk factors for mortality in a cancer cohort. METHODS: We conducted an observational study in patients with cancer and CDI. We calculated the incidence of hospital-onset (HO-CDI) and community-onset health-care facility associated (CO-HCFA-CDI) episodes. We classified severity using five prognostic scales and calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV), and negative predictive values (NPV) for mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. In addition, multivariate regression was performed to assess variables associated with mortality. RESULTS: The HO-CDI and CO-HCFA-CDI incidence rates were 3.7 cases/10,000 patient-days and 1.9 cases/1,000 admissions, respectively. ESCMID criteria showed the higher sensitivity (97%, 95% CI; 85-100%) and NPV (98%, 95% CI; 85-100%), while ATLAS (≥ 6 points) had the highest specificity (95%, 95% CI; 90-98%) for 30-day all-cause mortality; similar performance was observed for ICU admission. Characteristics associated with fatal outcome were neutropenia (≤ 100 cells/ml) (aOR; 3.03, 95% CI; 1.05-8.74, p = 0.040), male gender (aOR; 2.90, 95% CI; 1.08-7.80, p = 0.034), high serum creatinine (aOR; 1.71, 95% CI; 1.09-2.70, p = 0.020), and albumin (aOR; 0.17, 95% CI; 0.07-0.42, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Some of the current scales may not be appropriate to discriminate severity in patients with cancer. The variables in this study associated with unfavorable outcomes could be evaluated in prospective studies to develop prognostic scores that identify susceptible patients, especially in immunocompromised populations.

Surgical site infection following pancreaticoduodenectomy in a referral cancer center in Mexico.

BACKGROUND: Pancreaticoduodenectomy is the standard treatment for resectable periampullary cancer. Surgical site infections (SSI) are common complications with increased morbidity. The study aimed to describe the prevalence, risk factors, microbiology, and outcomes of SSI among patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study in a referral cancer center between January 2015 and June 2021. We analyzed baseline patient characteristics and SSI occurrence. Culture results and susceptibility patterns were described. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine risk factors, proportional hazards model to evaluate mortality, and Kaplan-Meier analysis to assess long-term survival. RESULTS: A total of 219 patients were enrolled in the study; 101 (46%) developed SSI. Independent factors for SSI were diabetes mellitus, preoperative albumin level, biliary drainage, biliary prostheses, and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula. The main pathogens were Enterobacteria and Enterococci. Multidrug-resistance rate in SSI was high but not associated with increased mortality. Infected patients had higher odds of sepsis, longer hospital stay and intensive care unit stay, and readmission rate. Neither 30-day mortality nor long-term survival was significantly different between infected and non-infected patients. CONCLUSIONS: SSI prevalence among patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy was high and largely caused by resistant microorganisms. Most risk factors were related to preoperative instrumentation of the biliary tree. SSI was associated with greater risk of unfavorable outcomes; however, survival was unaffected.

Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in cancer patients and healthcare workers vaccinated with two doses of BNT162b2 or AZD122. A propensity analysis.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is the most effective intervention for reducing the burden of SARS-CoV-2-related disease; however, gaps in knowledge regarding cancer patients (CPs) immune response persist. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the humoral response (anti-S antibodies) in CPs and healthcare workers (HCWs) vaccinated with two doses of BNT162b2 or AZD122 vaccines. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Polyspecific anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (anti-S) antibodies were quantified, and a 1:1 propensity score was used to balance baseline characteristics. Multiple logistic regressions were carried out to evaluate the effect of humoral response-related variables. RESULTS: One-hundred and twenty-seven CPs (22%) and 439 HCWs (78%) were included. Both populations developed anti-S antibodies in response to vaccination. The mRNA-based vaccine (BNT162b2) was associated with higher odds of having anti-S antibody titers ≥ 1,000 U/mL, while active cancer was related to a lower probability of developing high antibody titers. CONCLUSIONS: The BNT162b2 vaccine was associated with a higher humoral response. It is necessary for more information and vaccination strategies to be available for immunosuppressed patients in order to select the best biologics for this population based on individual characteristics.

ANTECEDENTES: La vacunación es la intervención más efectiva para reducir la carga de enfermedad por SARS-CoV-2; sin embargo, persisten brechas en el conocimiento en relación con la respuesta inmunológica de los pacientes con cáncer (PC). OBJETIVOS: Evaluar la respuesta humoral (anticuerpos anti-S) en PC y trabajadores de salud (TS) vacunados con dos dosis de la vacuna BNT162b2 o AZD122. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Se cuantificaron anticuerpos poliespecíficos contra la proteína de espiga de SARS-CoV-2 (anti-S) y se efectuó una puntuación de propensión 1:1 para equilibrar las características basales. Se realizaron regresiones logísticas múltiples para evaluar el efecto de las variables relacionadas con la respuesta humoral. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 127 PC (22 %) y 439 TS (78 %). Ambas poblaciones desarrollaron anticuerpos anti-S en respuesta a la vacunación. La vacuna de ARNm (BNT162b2) se asoció a mayor probabilidad de mostrar concentraciones de anticuerpos anti-S ≥ 1000 UI/mL, mientras que el cáncer activo se relacionó con menor probabilidad de presentar títulos altos de anticuerpos. CONCLUSIONES: La vacuna BNT162b2 se asoció a respuesta humoral mayor. Es necesario contar con más información y estrategias de vacunación en pacientes inmunosuprimidos. Es relevante la selección de los mejores biológicos para esta población y considerar las características individuales.

Who judges medical practice?

Lawsuits due to patient perception of inappropriate medical actions are a growing reality in medical practice, which entails widespread concern in the medical community. Lawsuits often entail additional circumstances beyond the primary concern of preventing or sanctioning acts of medical negligence. CETREMI proposes various recommendations aimed at legal and medical professionals to improve this circumstance and avoid harming the doctor-patient relationship.

Las demandas judiciales por la percepción del paciente de una actuación médica inadecuada son una realidad creciente en la práctica médica, la cual entraña una preocupación extendida en el gremio médico. Las demandas judiciales frecuentemente conllevan circunstancias adicionales a la primaria preocupación de prevenir o sancionar actos de negligencia médica. CETREMI emite algunas recomendaciones a los profesionales jurídicos y médicos para mejorar esta situación y evitar daños en la relación médico-paciente.

New interaction modalities between the pharmaceutical industry and physicians.

Due to sanitary restrictions secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic, various interactions between the pharmaceutical industry and physicians have changed. One of them has been the method for promoting medicinal products through academic meetings around diseases of financial interest. A recent modality has been unilateral promotion by the pharmaceutical industry through academic events with the invitation of so-called "experts" for the promotion of a specific drug. These meetings are often biased not towards optimal care of a disease, but rather towards commercial promotion of a specific drug, which may or may not be the best option, without considering associated therapeutic alternatives. The Committee of Ethics and Transparency in the Physician-Industry Relationship, of the National Academy of Medicine, analyzes this new circumstance and proposes some considerations to the medical community.

Debido a las restricciones sanitarias secundarias a la pandemia de COVID-19, diversas interacciones entre la industria farmacéutica y los médicos cambiaron. Una de ellas ha sido el método promocional de medicamentos a través de reuniones académicas en torno a padecimientos de interés financiero. Una modalidad reciente ha sido la promoción unilateral de un fármaco determinado por parte de la industria farmacéutica por medio de eventos académicos con la invitación de aparentes "expertos". Estas reuniones frecuentemente están sesgadas no hacia la atención óptima de un padecimiento, sino a la promoción comercial de un medicamento específico que pudiera o no ser la mejor opción o sin la consideración de alternativas terapéuticas asociadas. El Comité de Ética y Transparencia en la Relación Médico-Industria, de la Academia Nacional de Medicina de México, analiza esta nueva circunstancia y propone algunas consideraciones a la comunidad médica.

Factors associated with influenza vaccination acceptance in Mexican healthcare workers: A multicenter cross-sectional study.

Adherence of healthcare workers (HCWs) to influenza vaccination is far from optimal despite its being the most effective intervention for preventing influenza. In order to evaluate factors associated with influenza vaccination acceptance among Mexican HCWs during the 2017-2018 influenza season, a multicenter cross-sectional study spanning public and private hospitals was conducted. Participants were consecutively invited to answer a self-administered questionnaire. A total of 1513 out of 1553 questionnaires were evaluated. The median age of the participants was 32 (26-44) years and 65.8% were women. Nurses and physicians comprised 53.0% of the surveyed population. Total self-reported adherence to influenza vaccination among HCWs during the 2017-2018 season was 63.5% and varied across participating hospitals (P < 0.001). Factors positively associated with influenza vaccination were incremental doses of influenza vaccine received within the last 5 years (aOR = 1.94, 95% CI = 1.78-2.10), City 3 (aOR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.19-2.20) and City 1 (aOR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.02-1.91), whereas factors negatively associated were lack of a previous dose of influenza vaccine (aOR = 0.03, 95% CI = 0.01-0.08) and unawareness of the vaccination campaign (aOR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.44-0.72). Lack of information and poor communication were barriers identified by both vaccinated and unvaccinated personnel. This study concluded that adherence to influenza vaccination in Mexican HCWs is suboptimal and that the factors associated with receipt of influenza vaccine are similar to those reported in other studies.

Prevalence of latent tuberculosis in patients with hematological neoplasms in a cancer referral hospital in Mexico City.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of Latent Tuberculosis in patients with hematological neoplasms at the Instituto Nacional de Cancerología in Mexico City using the Tuberculin skin test (TST). METHODS: This retrospective study included all patients with a recent diagnosis of hematological neoplasms who were admitted for treatment from 2017 to 2018 and who were screened for latent tuberculosis with the TST. The prevalence of latent tuberculosis in this group, tolerance and therapeutic adherence in treated patients are described. RESULTS: The files of 446 patients with hematological malignancy who had a TST were reviewed. The prevalence of latent tuberculosis was 31.2% (n = 139). Ninety-three patients received isoniazid, 15.1% had some adverse reactions, but only 4 (4.3%) had to discontinue treatment. Two patients with latent tuberculosis under treatment with Isoniazid reactivated tuberculosis infection. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence in our study was within the range of other similar Mexican populations. Isoniazid treatment had an adequate tolerance and adherence. Longer follow-up could offer more information on the risk of reactivation in both groups.

Microbiological findings in bile cultures of patients with acute cholangitis undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiography.

Acute cholangitis (AC) is potentially fatal. Microbiological identification and susceptibility to antibiotics is essential in every hospital to direct treatment (1). Our hospital is a third-level cancer center. A retrospective, analytical study of 30 patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiography with AC and positive biliary culture (BC) was performed over a period of six months.

Randomized Controlled Trial to Reduce Bacterial Colonization of Surgical Drains with the Use of Chlorhexidine-Coated Dressings After Breast Cancer Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Breast surgery is considered a clean surgery. However, surgical-site infection (SSI) rates are currently higher than predicted. Postoperative drains remain in situ for several days, with inevitable bacterial colonization and increased SSI risk. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial from October 2016 to January 2018 analyzed patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. The patients were randomized to either the standard drain care group or the antiseptic dressing group (3M® Tegaderm® CHG). Drain samples taken on postoperative days (PODs) 7 and 14 were cultured as standardized in the laboratory. Colonization rates and SSI were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The study enrolled 104 patients with 167 surgical drains. The patients' clinical characteristics were similar in the two groups, with no statistically significant differences. Bulb fluid cultures at postoperative week (POW) 1 were positive for 42.9% of the control group and 28.9% of the antiseptic group (p = 0.06). Cultures from the POW 2 assessment were positive for 79.7% of the control group versus 54.9% of the antiseptic group (p = 0.001). Cultures from drain tubes were positive for 79.8% of the control group and 50.7% of the antiseptic group (p = < 0.001). In 11 patients, an SSI developed, 3 (5.8%) from the intervention and 8 (15.4%) from the control procedure (p = 0.11). CONCLUSION: The study findings demonstrated that the use of antiseptics at the drain exit site significantly reduced bacterial colonization of the closed drainage system in breast cancer surgery. Semi-permeable occlusive chlorhexidine-impregnated dressings provide an opportunity to test simple, safe, and low-cost interventions that may reduce drain bacterial colonization and SSI after breast surgery.