Do Certain Biomarkers Predict Adverse Outcomes in Coronavirus Disease 2019?

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Given the rapid spread of the disease, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the 2019 - 2020 coronavirus outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on January 30, 2020, and a pandemic on March 11, 2020. There have been several reports of the limited resources including the lack of intensive care unit (ICU) beds and mechanical ventilators. Thus, biomarkers that predict ICU stay and mortality will be an important tool to appropriately allocate the limited resources. The aim of this review was to identify laboratory markers that can effectively predict the risk of severe infection and increased mortality in COVID-19 cases. We conducted a systematic review of existing literature in six databases to evaluate the predictive value of various biomarkers. We used the keywords "COVID-19", "SARS-CoV-2", "Novel corona virus pneumonia", "Biomarkers", "Adverse outcomes", "Mortality", etc. among many others to refine our search. Several biomarkers were identified to be associated with adverse outcomes in the above studies. These biomarkers can be used as a tool to identify patients at increased risk for adverse outcomes so that the need for aggressive critical care in such patients is met.

Uremic- and Dialysis-Associated Pericarditis.

Uremic pericarditis occurs as a result of inflammation of the pericardium due to toxins and immune complexes in patients with renal disease. The initial clinical manifestations of pericarditis and acute coronary syndrome may be similar, and initial EKG findings may overlap. The management of this disease needs the combined efforts of internists, cardiologists, and nephrologists. Its incidence has been reduced since the introduction of renal replacement therapy. Dialysis continues to be the mainstay of treatment.

Enhancing HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Practices via an Educational Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV involves using antiretroviral drugs to prevent individuals at high risk from acquiring HIV infection. Most practicing primary care providers believe PrEP to be safe and effective, but less than half have prescribed or referred for PrEP. Attitudes and prescribing patterns among house officers have not been well described previously. STUDY QUESTION: Can an educational intervention enhance HIV PrEP practices among internal medicine house officers? STUDY DESIGN: This study relied on a pretest/posttest design. All categorical trainees at a medium-sized internal medicine program were offered a baseline survey to assess their knowledge on PrEP. This was followed by a PrEP-focused educational intervention and a postintervention survey. MEASURES AND OUTCOMES: Likert scales captured perceptions regarding safety, effectiveness, barriers, factors that would promote PrEP use, potential side effects, impact on risk-taking behavior, and provider comfort level in assessing behavioral risks and in PrEP prescribing. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon signed rank test, and the Kruskal-Wallis test. Significance was accepted for P < 0.05. RESULTS: Forty-eight (100%) trainees participated in the educational session, 45 (94%) in a preintervention survey, and 36 (75%) in a postintervention survey. Before PrEP training, 22% of respondents were unaware of PrEP, 78% believed PrEP was effective, 66% believed PrEP was safe, 62% had fair or poor awareness of side effects; 18% of residents had referred for or prescribed PrEP, and 31% believed they were likely to prescribe PrEP in the next 6 months. After the intervention, 94% of trainees believed PrEP was effective (P < 0.001), 92% believed PrEP was safe (P < 0.001), and two-thirds believed they were likely to prescribe PrEP in the next 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Brief, focused training on HIV prevention promotes awareness, acceptance, and likelihood of prescribing PrEP by internal medicine trainees.

Prosthetic Aortic Valve Endocarditis Without Evidence of Vegetation.

Despite significant technological advances, the diagnosis of infective endocarditis (IE) remains a major challenge, and the condition continues to be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Valvular vegetations have long been the diagnostic and pathologic hallmarks of IE. However, IE can be diagnosed even in the absence of vegetations using the modified Duke criteria. Vegetation-negative endocarditis is rare, and to the present authors' knowledge no cases of septic emboli in the absence of valvular vegetations have been reported. Herein is reported a case of prosthetic aortic valve endocarditis associated with both clinical and radiologic evidence of septic emboli, but in the absence of vegetations on both repeated transesophageal echocardiography and pathologic evaluation. This case highlights the importance of maintaining a high clinical suspicion and a low threshold for the surgical replacement of a possibly infected valve, in patients that meet other clinical criteria for IE, even in the absence of detectable valvular vegetations.

Diagnosis and treatment of CD20 negative B cell lymphomas.

CD20 negative B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) is rare and accounts for approximately 1-2% of B cell lymphomas. CD20- negative NHL is frequently associated with extranodal involvement, atypical morphology, aggressive clinical behaviour, resistance to standard chemotherapy and poor prognosis. The most common types of these include plasmablastic lymphoma, primary effusion lymphoma, large B-cell lymphoma arising from HHV8-associated multicentric Castleman's disease, and ALK+ large B cell lymphoma. This review provides an overview of the diagnostic and treatment modalities for CD20 negative B cell NHL.

Extramedullary hematopoiesis presented as cytopenia and massive paraspinal masses leading to cord compression in a patient with hereditary persistence of fetal hemoglobin.

BACKGROUND: Extramedullary hematopoeisis (EMH) can occur in various physiological and pathologic states. The spleen is the most common site of EMH. CASE PRESENTATION: We report a case with hereditary persistence of fetal hemoglobin with extramedullary hematopoiesis presented as cord compression and cytopenia secondary to multi-paraspinal masses. CONCLUSION: Treatment can be a challenge. Relapse is a possibility.

Factors Predictive of Improved Survival in Patients With Brain Metastases From Gynecologic Cancer: A Single Institution Retrospective Study of 47 Cases and Review of the Literature.

OBJECTIVE: The reported incidence of brain metastasis from epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), endometrial cancer (EC), and cervical cancer (CC) is exceedingly rare. As the long-term survival for patients with gynecologic cancer increases, there has been a corresponding increase in the number of diagnosed intracranial metastases. We seek to report our experience with managing brain metastatic disease (BMD) in patients with gynecologic cancer. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients with EOC, EC, and CC at our institution revealed 47 patients with concurrent BMD between 2000 and 2013. Demographic data, risk factors, treatment modalities, progression-free data, and overall survival data were collected. RESULTS: Median survival time in patients with brain metastasis from EOC, EC, and CC was 9.0, 4.5, and 3.0 months, respectively. Two-year overall survival rates were 31.6%, 13.6%, and 0%, respectively. Patients received surgery, radiation therapy alone, palliative care, or radiation plus surgery. Radiation combined with surgical resection resulted in a significant hazards ratio of 0.36 (95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.86), compared with radiation alone. CONCLUSIONS: Our report provides a large single-institution experience of brain metastases from gynecologic cancer. Patients with BMD have poor prognoses; however, treatment with multimodal therapy including surgical resection and radiation may prolong overall survival.