Preclinical in vivo assessment of the activity of AZD7442 anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies against Omicron sublineages.

Therapeutic monoclonal antibodies have been successful in protecting vulnerable populations against SARS-CoV-2. However, their effectiveness has been hampered by the emergence of new variants. To adapt the therapeutic landscape, health authorities have based their recommendations mostly on in vitro neutralization tests. However, these do not provide a reliable understanding of the changes in the dose-effect relationship and how they may translate into clinical efficacy. Taking the example of EvusheldTM (AZD7442), we aimed to investigate how in vivo data can provide critical quantitative results and project clinical effectiveness. We used the Golden Syrian hamster model to estimate 90 % effective concentrations (EC90) of AZD7442 in vivo against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1, BA.2 and BA.5 variants. While our in vivo results confirmed the partial loss of AZD7442 activity for BA.1 and BA.2, they showed a much greater loss of efficacy against BA.5 than that obtained in vitro. We analyzed in vivo EC90s in perspective with antibody levels measured in a cohort of immunocompromised patients who received 300 mg of AZD7442. We found that a substantial proportion of patients had serum levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein IgG above the estimated in vivo EC90 for BA.1 and BA.2 (21 % and 92 % after 1 month, respectively), but not for BA.5. These findings suggest that AZD7442 is likely to retain clinical efficacy against BA.2 and BA.1, but not against BA.5. Overall, the present study illustrates the importance of complementing in vitro investigations by preclinical studies in animal models to help predict the efficacy of monoclonal antibodies in humans.

Dexamethasone treatment for COVID-19 is related to increased mortality in hematologic malignancy patients: results from the EPICOVIDEHA Registry.

Not available.

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.

Long-term exposure to ambient air pollution and risk of leukemia and lymphoma in a pooled European cohort.

Leukemia and lymphoma are the two most common forms of hematologic malignancy, and their etiology is largely unknown. Pathophysiological mechanisms suggest a possible association with air pollution, but little empirical evidence is available. We aimed to investigate the association between long-term residential exposure to outdoor air pollution and risk of leukemia and lymphoma. We pooled data from four cohorts from three European countries as part of the "Effects of Low-level Air Pollution: a Study in Europe" (ELAPSE) collaboration. We used Europe-wide land use regression models to assess annual mean concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), black carbon (BC) and ozone (O3) at residences. We also estimated concentrations of PM2.5 elemental components: copper (Cu), iron (Fe), zinc (Zn); sulfur (S); nickel (Ni), vanadium (V), silicon (Si) and potassium (K). We applied Cox proportional hazards models to investigate the associations. Among the study population of 247,436 individuals, 760 leukemia and 1122 lymphoma cases were diagnosed during 4,656,140 person-years of follow-up. The results showed a leukemia hazard ratio (HR) of 1.13 (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.01-1.26) per 10 µg/m3 NO2, which was robust in two-pollutant models and consistent across the four cohorts and according to smoking status. Sex-specific analyses suggested that this association was confined to the male population. Further, the results showed increased lymphoma HRs for PM2.5 (HR = 1.16; 95% CI: 1.02-1.34) and potassium content of PM2.5, which were consistent in two-pollutant models and according to sex. Our results suggest that air pollution at the residence may be associated with adult leukemia and lymphoma.

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.

Age, successive waves, immunization, and mortality in elderly COVID-19 hematological patients: EPICOVIDEHA findings.

OBJECTIVES: Elderly patients with hematologic malignancies face the highest risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. The infection's impact on different age groups remains unstudied in detail. METHODS: We analyzed elderly patients (age groups: 65-70, 71-75, 76-80, and >80 years old) with hematologic malignancies included in the EPICOVIDEHA registry between January 2020 and July 2022. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression models were conducted to identify factors influencing death in COVID-19 patients with hematological malignancy. RESULTS: The study included data from 3,603 elderly patients (aged 65 or older) with hematological malignancy, with a majority being male (58.1%) and a significant proportion having comorbidities. The patients were divided into four age groups, and the analysis assessed COVID-19 outcomes, vaccination status, and other variables in relation to age and pandemic waves. The 90-day survival rate for patients with COVID-19 was 71.2%, with significant differences between groups. The pandemic waves had varying impacts, with the first wave affecting patients over 80 years old, the second being more severe in 65-70, and the third being the least severe in all age groups. Factors contributing to 90-day mortality included age, comorbidities, lymphopenia, active malignancy, acute leukemia, less than three vaccine doses, severe COVID-19, and using only corticosteroids as treatment. CONCLUSION: These data underscore the heterogeneity of elderly hematological patients, highlight the different impacts of COVID-19 waves and the pivotal importance of vaccination, and may help in planning future healthcare efforts.

Brentuximab vedotin with AVD for stage II-IV HIV-related Hodgkin lymphoma (AMC 085): phase 2 results from an open-label, single arm, multicentre phase 1/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Brentuximab vedotin in combination with doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (AVD) is approved in the upfront setting for advanced stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). People living with HIV have been excluded from these studies. We aimed to understand the activity and safety of brentuximab vedotin-AVD in people living with HIV diagnosed with Hodgkin lymphoma, while focusing on HIV disease parameters and antiretroviral therapy (ART) interactions. METHODS: We present the phase 2 portion of a multicentre phase 1/2 study. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, had untreated stage II-IV HIV-associated cHL (HIV-cHL), a Karnofsky performance status of more than 30%, a CD4+ T-cell count of 50 cells per µL or more, were required to take ART, and were not on strong CYP3A4 or P-glycoprotein inhibitors. Patients were treated intravenously with 1·2 mg/kg of brentuximab vedotin (recommended phase 2 dose) with standard doses of AVD for six cycles on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint of the phase 2 portion was 2-year progression-free survival (PFS), assessed in all eligible participants who began treatment. Accrual has been completed. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01771107. FINDINGS: Between March 8, 2013, and March 7, 2019, 41 patients received study therapy with a median follow up of 29 months (IQR 16-38). 34 (83%) of 41 patients presented with stage III-IV and seven (17%) with stage II unfavourable HIV-cHL. 37 (90%) of 41 patients completed therapy, all 37 of whom achieved complete response. The 2-year PFS was 87% (95% CI 71-94) and the overall survival was 92% (78-97). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were peripheral sensory neuropathy (four [10%] of 41 patients), neutropenia (18 [44%]), and febrile neutropenia (five [12%]). One treatment-related death was reported, due to infection. INTERPRETATION: Brentuximab vedotin-AVD was highly active and had a tolerable adverse event rate in HIV-cHL and is an important therapeutic option for people with HIV-cHL. The complete reponse rate is encouraging and is possibly related to a unique aspect of HIV-cHL biology. Upcoming 5-year data will evaluate the sustainability of the outcomes obtained. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health and National Cancer Institute.

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.

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in COVID-19 patients with haematological malignancies: a report from the EPICOVIDEHA registry.

Background: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment decreases the hospitalisation rate in immunocompetent patients with COVID-19, but data on efficacy in patients with haematological malignancy are scarce. Here, we describe the outcome of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment in a large cohort of the latter patients. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study from the multicentre EPICOVIDEHA registry (NCT04733729) on patients with haematological malignancy, who were diagnosed with COVID-19 between January and September 2022. Patients receiving nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were compared to those who did not. A logistic regression was run to determine factors associated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir administration in our sample. Mortality between treatment groups was assessed with Kaplan-Meier survival plots after matching all the patients with a propensity score. Additionally, a Cox regression was modelled to detect factors associated with mortality in patients receiving nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Findings: A total of 1859 patients were analysed, 117 (6%) were treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, 1742 (94%) were treated otherwise. Of 117 patients receiving nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, 80% had received ≥1 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose before COVID-19 onset, 13% of which received a 2nd vaccine booster. 5% were admitted to ICU. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment was associated with the presence of extrapulmonary symptoms at COVID-19 onset, for example anosmia, fever, rhinitis, or sinusitis (aOR 2.509, 95%CI 1.448-4.347) and 2nd vaccine booster (aOR 3.624, 95%CI 1.619-8.109). Chronic pulmonary disease (aOR 0.261, 95%CI 0.093-0.732) and obesity (aOR 0.105, 95%CI 0.014-0.776) were not associated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir use. After propensity score matching, day-30 mortality rate in patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was 2%, significantly lower than in patients with SARS-CoV-2 directed treatment other than nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (11%, p = 0.036). No factor was observed explaining the mortality difference in patients after nirmatrelvir/ritonavir administration. Interpretation: Haematological malignancy patients were more likely to receive nirmatrelvir/ritonavir when reporting extrapulmonary symptoms or 2nd vaccine booster at COVID-19 onset, as opposed to chronic pulmonary disease and obesity. The mortality rate in patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was lower than in patients with targeted drugs other than nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Funding: EPICOVIDEHA has received funds from Optics COMMIT (COVID-19 Unmet Medical Needs and Associated Research Extension) COVID-19 RFP program by GILEAD Science, United States (Project 2020-8223).

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.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and monoclonal antibodies on outcome post-CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapy: an EPICOVIDEHA survey.

Patients with previous CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy have a prolonged vulnerability to viral infections. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has a great impact and has previously been shown to cause high mortality in this population. Until now, real-world data on the impact of vaccination and treatment on patients with COVID-19 after CD19-directed CAR T-cell therapy are lacking. Therefore, this multicenter, retrospective study was conducted with data from the EPICOVIDEHA survey. Sixty-four patients were identified. The overall mortality caused by COVID-19 was 31%. Patients infected with the Omicron variant had a significantly lower risk of death due to COVID-19 compared with patients infected with previous variants (7% vs 58% [P = .012]). Twenty-six patients were vaccinated at the time of the COVID-19 diagnosis. Two vaccinations showed a marked but unsignificant reduction in the risk of COVID-19-caused mortality (33.3% vs 14.2% [P = .379]). In addition, the course of the disease appears milder with less frequent intensive care unit admissions (39% vs 14% [P = .054]) and a shorter duration of hospitalization (7 vs 27.5 days [P = .022]). Of the available treatment options, only monoclonal antibodies seemed to be effective at reducing mortality from 32% to 0% (P = .036). We conclude that survival rates of CAR T-cell recipients with COVID-19 improved over time and that the combination of prior vaccination and monoclonal antibody treatment significantly reduces their risk of death. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT04733729.

Salvage therapy with brentuximab-vedotin and bendamustine for patients with R/R PTCL: a retrospective study from the LYSA group.

Patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL) have a poor prognosis. Bendamustine (B) and brentuximab-vedotin (Bv) have shown interesting results in this setting. However, little information is available about their efficacy in combination. This multicenter and retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of BBv in patients with noncutaneous R/R PTCL among 21 LYSA centers in France and Belgium. The primary objective was the overall response rate. A total of 82 patients with R/R PTCL were included. The best overall response rate (ORR) was 68%, with 49% of patients in complete response (CR). In multivariable analysis, only the disease status after the last regimen (relapse vs refractory) was associated with the response with an ORR of 83% vs 57%. Median duration of response was 15.4 months for patients in CR. With a median follow-up of 22 months, the median progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 8.3 and 26.3 months respectively. Moreover, patients in CR, who underwent an allogeneic transplant, had a better outcome than patients who did not with a median PFS and OS of 19.3 vs 4.8 months and not reached vs 12.4 months, respectively. Fifty-nine percent of patients experienced grade 3/4 adverse events that were mainly hematologic. BBv is highly active in patients with R/R PTCL and should be considered as a one of the best options of immunochemotherapy salvage combination in this setting and particularly as a bridge to allogeneic transplant for eligible patients.