Prophylactic treatment with oral azithromycin in cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic (OnCoVID): a randomized, single-blinded, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer are at high risk for severe courses of COVID-19. Based on (pre-)clinical data suggesting a potential protective effect due to the immunomodulating properties of azithromycin, we have initiated a prospective randomized trial. METHODS: This randomized, single-center, single-blinded, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial included adult patients with cancer undergoing systemic treatment. Patients were 1:1 randomized to oral azithromycin (1500 mg once weekly for 8 weeks) or placebo. The primary endpoint was the cumulative number of SARS-CoV-2 infections 12 weeks after treatment initiation. RESULTS: In total, 523 patients were screened, 68 patients were randomized, and 63 patients received at least one dose of the study drug. Due to low acceptance and a lack of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the study cohort, the study was prematurely closed. With no reported grade III-IV possibly treatment-related adverse events, azithromycin was generally well tolerated. Overall survival (OS) rates after 12 months were 83.5% and 70.3% in the azithromycin and placebo group, respectively (p = 0.37). Non-SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred in 4/32 (12.5%) in the azithromycin and 3/31 (9.7%) in the placebo group (p = 1). No emergence of azithromycin-resistant S. aureus strains could be observed. According to treatment group, longitudinal alterations in systemic inflammatory parameters were detected for neutrophil/lymphocyte and leukocyte/lymphocyte ratios. CONCLUSION: Although efficacy could not be assessed due to premature closure and low incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections, azithromycin was associated with a favorable side effect profile in patients with cancer. As other prophylactic treatments are limited, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination remains a high priority in oncological patients. CLINICALTRIALS: gov registration number and date (dd/mm/yyyy): NCT04369365, 30/04/2020.

Third dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in hemato-oncological patients and health care workers: immune responses and adverse events - a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Due to potentially immune-escaping virus variants and waning immunity, a third SARS-CoV-2 vaccination dose is increasingly recommended. However, data in patients with cancer are limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We measured anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody levels after the third vaccination dose in 439 patients with cancer and 41 health care workers (HCW) at an academic centre in Austria and a rural community hospital in Italy. Adverse events were retrieved from questionnaires. RESULTS: Overall, 439 patients and 41 HCW were included. SARS-CoV-2 infections were observed in 62/439 (14.1%) patients before vaccination and in 5/439 (1.1%) patients after ≥1 dose. Longitudinal analysis revealed a decrease of antibody levels between 3 and 6 months after second vaccination in patients with solid tumours (p < 0.001) and haematological malignancies without anti-B cell therapies (p < 0.001). After the third dose, anti-S levels increased compared to the first/second dose. Patients receiving B cell-targeted agents had lower antibody levels than patients with haematological malignancies undergoing other treatments (p < 0.001) or patients with solid tumours (p < 0.001). Moreover, anti-S levels correlated with CD19+ (B cell) and CD56+ (NK cell) counts in peripheral blood. The most frequent adverse events after the third dose were local pain (75/160, 46.9%), fatigue (25/160, 15.6%) and fever/chills (16/160, 10.0%). Patients with cancer had lower anti-S levels than HCW (p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: This study in patients with cancer shows improved antibody levels after the third vaccination dose at an acceptable side-effect profile. Lower antibody levels than in controls underline the need for further follow-up studies and dedicated trials.

Humoral Immune Response in Hematooncological Patients and Health Care Workers Who Received SARS-CoV-2 Vaccinations.

Importance: To our knowledge, little is known about antibody development after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in immunocompromised individuals, such as patients with cancer. Objective: To determine whether hematooncological patients develop anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after vaccination. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included 2 independent cohorts of patients who were treated for hematological and solid malignant tumors between October 2020 and May 2021, comprising 901 samples from 595 patients and 58 health care workers (HCWs). Serum samples were collected from patients who were treated at an academic center and a community hospital in a rural area and a control group of HCWs, all of whom received SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Main Outcomes and Measures: Total anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (anti-NC) and antispike protein (anti-S) antibodies were measured retrospectively. Results: In total, 595 patients (320 women [53.8%] and 275 men [46.2%]; median [range] age, 67 [19-96] years) and 58 HCWs (40 women [69.0%] and 18 men [31.0%]; median [range] age, 42 [24-60] years) were included. Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was documented in 43 of 595 (7.2%), while anti-NC antibodies that suggested previous infections were observed in 49 of 573 evaluable patients (8.6%). In both cohorts, anti-S antibody levels were higher in fully vaccinated patients compared with patients who received 1 dose. After the first vaccination, patients with hematological cancer who received B cell-targeting agents had lower anti-S levels (median, 1.6 AU/mL; range: 0-17 244 AU/mL) than patients who received other therapies (median, 191.6 AU/mL; range, 0-40 000; P < .001) or patients with solid tumors (median, 246.4 AU/mL; range, 0-40 000 AU/mL; P < .001). Anti-S levels after the first vaccination differed according to ongoing antineoplastic treatment modalities, with the lowest median levels in patients who received chemotherapy alone (157.7 AU/mL; range, 0-40 000 AU/mL) or in combination with immunotherapy (118.7 AU/mL; range, 14.1-38 727 AU/mL) and the highest levels in patients with no ongoing antineoplastic treatment (median, 634.3 AU/mL; range, 0-40 000 AU/mL; P = .01). Antibody levels after full immunization were higher in HCWs (median, 2500 U/mL; range, 485-2500 U/mL) than in patients with cancer (median, 117.0 U/mL; range, 0-2500 U/mL; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients with hematooncological diseases and a control group of HCWs, anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after vaccination could be detected in patients with cancer. Lower antibody levels compared with HCWs and differences in seroconversion in specific subgroups underscore the need for further studies on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with hematooncological disease.

Azithromycin concentrations during long-term regimen, a pilot study in patients with MALT lymphoma.

In view of the antineoplastic effects of the macrolide clarithromycin in mucosa associated lymphatic tissue (MALT)-lymphoma, we performed a pilot study assessing levels of azithromycin in plasma, peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) and polymorphonuclear leukocytes (PMN) of MALT-lymphoma patients to determine the pharmacokinetics and potential influences of respective concentrations on the therapeutic outcome. In total 16 patients with MALT-lymphoma received 1.5 g of oral azithromycin once-weekly over 6 months. Blood was sampled directly prior to the following dose every 4 weeks during treatment. Drug levels were analysed by high performance liquid chromatography in plasma and intracellularly in PBMC and PMN. They were correlated with patients' age, weight and body-mass-index and compared between patients responsive or unresponsive to treatment. Mean azithromycin plasma levels of all patients were 58.97 ± 30.48 ng/ml, remaining stable throughout the treatment period. Correlation analysis of plasma azithromycin showed no significance. Intracellular PBMC concentrations were 6648 ± 8479 ng/ml, without any significant difference between responders and non-responders. Mean PMN levels were 39,274 ± 25,659 ng/ml and significantly higher in patients unresponsive to treatment (t = 2.858, p = 0.017). Our drug regime led to continuously high plasma and exceedingly high intracellular concentrations of azithromycin in PBMC and PMN. Age, weight or body-mass-index had no significant influence on plasma levels and thence should not be considered in dosage finding. High AZM levels in PBMC did not lead to a better treatment response, whereas enrichment in PMN suggested a poorer outcome. The threshold for immunomodulatory effects on lymphoma cells might not have been reached. Additionally, the finding of stable plasma and intracellular concentrations over months with high-dose azithromycin administered in intervals might also be important for the further design of azithromycin-based trials against MALT-lymphoma.Trial registration: EudraCT 2016-001521-13, 14/06/2016.

Treatment of mucosa associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma with a long-term once-weekly regimen of oral azithromycin: Results from the phase II MALT-A trial.

The macrolide clarithromycin has been reported as active for therapy of mucosa associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma. Pharmacokinetic properties, however, require continuous daily intake over a prolonged period of time. As the macrolide azithromycin is characterized by a long half-life as well as potential antineoplastic activity in vitro, we have performed a phase II trial of long-term once-weekly oral azithromycin for treatment of MALT lymphoma. In a 2-stage-design, 16 patients (10 f/6 m) with histologically verified and measurable MALT lymphoma were included in the first phase of the trial, which could be expanded to a maximum of 46 patients depending on remissions in the first phase. Patients were given oral azithromycin 1500 mg once-weekly 4 times a month, and restaging was performed after 3 and 6 months. Two patients had gastric and 14 extragastric MALT lymphoma; 12/16 patients were treatment-naive and received azithromycin as first line treatment. Tolerance of this regimen was excellent, and 14/16 patients received 6 months of treatment as scheduled, while 1 patient each discontinued after 4 (progressive disease) and 1 cycle (personal reasons), respectively. The most commonly observed side effects were mild nausea (n = 8) and diarrhea (n = 4). Efficacy, however, was low as only 4/16 patients (25%) responded, with 2 complete and 2 partial remissions, 9 patients (56%) had stable disease, and 3 patients 19%) were rated as progressive disease. As the predefined activity of more than 7/16 patients responding was not reached, the study was stopped after 16 patients. Although long-term once-weekly oral azithromycin showed some antilymphoma activity, the response rate was below the predefined threshold of interest. However, based on our data, one cannot rule out suboptimal dosing in our study; attempts to study azithromycin at a different mode of application might be warranted in the future.

Impact of renal impairment on outcomes after autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma: a multi-center, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Renal impairment (RI) is a negative prognostic factor in Multiple Myeloma (MM) and affected patients are often excluded from autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). However, it remains unclear whether historically inferior outcome data still hold true. METHODS: From a total of 475 eligible MM patients who had undergone ASCT between 1998 and 2016, 374 were included in this multi-centric retrospective cohort study. Renal function was determined both at the time of MM diagnosis and ASCT by estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR according to the MDRD formula, RI defined as eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73m2). Patients were categorized into 3 groups: A) no RI diagnosis and ASCT, B) RI at diagnosis with normalization before ASCT and C) RI both at the time of diagnosis and ASCT. Log-rank testing was used for overall and progression-free survival (OS, PFS) analysis. CONCLUSION: While severe RI at MM diagnosis confers a risk of shorter OS, MM progression after ASCT is not affected by any stage of renal failure. It can be concluded that ASCT can be safely carried out in MM patients with mild to moderate RI and should be pro-actively considered in those with severe RI. RESULTS: When comparing all groups, no difference in OS and PFS was found (p = 0.319 and p = 0.904). After further stratification according to the degree of RI at the time of diagnosis, an OS disadvantage was detected for patients with an eGFR < 45 ml/min/m2. PFS was not affected by any RI stage.