Comparing Molnupiravir to Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir (Paxlovid) in the Treatment of Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19 in Immunocompromised Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir has been shown to reduce the risk of COVID-19 progression by 88% compared to placebo, while Molnupiravir reduced it by 31%. However, these two agents have not been compared head-to-head. We therefore compared the safety and efficacy of both agents for the treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in immunocompromised cancer patients. METHODS: We identified 240 cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and treated with Molnupiravir or Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir. Patients were matched using a 1:2 ratio based on age group (18-64 years vs. ≥65) and type of cancer. The collected data included demographics, comorbidities, and treatment outcome. RESULTS: Both groups had comparable characteristics and presenting symptoms. However, dyspnea was more prevalent in the Molnupiravir group, while sore throat was more prevalent in the Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir group. The rate of disease progression was comparable in both groups by univariate and multivariable analysis. Treatment with Molnupiravir versus Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir revealed no significant difference in disease progression by multivariable analysis (adjusted OR = 1.31, 95% CI: 0.56-3.14, p = 0.70). Patients who received Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir, however, were significantly more prone to having drug-drug interactions/adverse events (30% vs. 0%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in cancer patients, Molnupiravir was comparable to Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir in preventing progression to severe disease/death and rebound events, and it had a superior safety profile.

Long COVID in cancer patients: preponderance of symptoms in majority of patients over long time period.

Background: An increasing number of observational studies have reported the persistence of symptoms following recovery from acute COVID-19 disease in non-cancer patients. The long-term consequences of COVID-19 are not fully understood particularly in the cancer patient population. The purpose of this study is to assess post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) in cancer patients following acute COVID-19 recovery. Methods: We identified cancer patients at MD Anderson Cancer Center who were diagnosed with COVID-19 disease between March 1, 2020, and September 1, 2020, and followed them till May 2021. To assess PASC, we collected patients reported outcomes through questionnaires that were sent to patients daily for 14 days after COVID-19 diagnosis then weekly for 3 months, and then monthly thereafter. We also reviewed patients' electronic medical records to capture the persistence or emergence of new COVID19-related symptoms reported during any clinic or hospital encounter beyond 30 days of the acute illness and up to 14 months. Results: We included 312 cancer patients with a median age of 57 years (18-86). The majority of patients had solid tumors (75%). Of the 312 patients, 188 (60%) reported long COVID-19 symptoms with a median duration of 7 months and up to 14 months after COVID-19 diagnosis. The most common symptoms reported included fatigue (82%), sleep disturbances (78%), myalgias (67%), and gastrointestinal symptoms (61%), followed by headache, altered smell or taste, dyspnea (47%), and cough (46%). A higher number of females reported a persistence of symptoms compared to males (63% vs. 37%; p=0.036). Cancer type, neutropenia, lymphocytopenia, and hospital admission during acute COVID-19 disease were comparable in both groups. Among the 188 patients with PASC, only 16 (8.5%) were re-admitted for COVID-related reasons. Conclusions: More than one out of two cancer patients, and more likely females, report PASC that may persist beyond 6 months and even 1 year. The most common symptoms are non-respiratory and consist of fatigue, sleep disturbance, myalgia, and gastrointestinal symptoms. Most of the cancer patients with PASC were managed on outpatient basis with only 8.5% requiring a COVID-19-related re-admission. Funding: This research is supported by the National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute under award number P30CA016672, which supports the MD Anderson Cancer Center Clinical Trials Office. The funders had no role in study design, data collection, and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

International multicenter study comparing COVID-19 in patients with cancer to patients without cancer: Impact of risk factors and treatment modalities on survivorship.

Background: In this international multicenter study, we aimed to determine the independent risk factors associated with increased 30 day mortality and the impact of cancer and novel treatment modalities in a large group of patients with and without cancer with COVID-19 from multiple countries. Methods: We retrospectively collected de-identified data on a cohort of patients with and without cancer diagnosed with COVID-19 between January and November 2020 from 16 international centers. Results: We analyzed 3966 COVID-19 confirmed patients, 1115 with cancer and 2851 without cancer patients. Patients with cancer were more likely to be pancytopenic and have a smoking history, pulmonary disorders, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and corticosteroid use in the preceding 2 wk (p≤0.01). In addition, they were more likely to present with higher inflammatory biomarkers (D-dimer, ferritin, and procalcitonin) but were less likely to present with clinical symptoms (p≤0.01). By country-adjusted multivariable logistic regression analyses, cancer was not found to be an independent risk factor for 30 day mortality (p=0.18), whereas lymphopenia was independently associated with increased mortality in all patients and in patients with cancer. Older age (≥65y) was the strongest predictor of 30 day mortality in all patients (OR = 4.47, p<0.0001). Remdesivir was the only therapeutic agent independently associated with decreased 30 day mortality (OR = 0.64, p=0.036). Among patients on low-flow oxygen at admission, patients who received remdesivir had a lower 30 day mortality rate than those who did not (5.9 vs 17.6%; p=0.03). Conclusions: Increased 30 day all-cause mortality from COVID-19 was not independently associated with cancer but was independently associated with lymphopenia often observed in hematolgic malignancy. Remdesivir, particularly in patients with cancer receiving low-flow oxygen, can reduce 30 day all-cause mortality. Funding: National Cancer Institute and National Institutes of Health.

Procalcitonin for antimicrobial stewardship among cancer patients admitted with COVID-19.

Background: Procalcitonin (PCT) has been used to guide antibiotic therapy in bacterial infections. We aimed to determine the role of PCT in decreasing the duration of empiric antibiotic therapy among cancer patients admitted with COVID-19. Methods: This retrospective study included cancer patients admitted to our institution for COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and June 28, 2021, with a PCT test done within 72 hr after admission. Patients were divided into two groups: PCT <0.25 ng/ml and PCT ≥0.25 ng/ml. We assessed pertinent cultures, antibacterial use, and duration of empiric antibacterial therapy. Results: The study included 530 patients (median age, 62 years [range, 13-91]). All the patients had ≥1 culture test within 7 days following admission. Patients with PCT <0.25 ng/ml were less likely to have a positive culture than were those with PCT ≥0.25 ng/ml (6% [20/358] vs. 17% [30/172]; p<0.0001). PCT <0.25 ng/ml had a high negative predictive value for bacteremia and 30 day mortality. Patients with PCT <0.25 ng/ml were less likely to receive intravenous (IV) antibiotics for >72 hr than were patients with PCT ≥0.25 ng/ml (45% [162/358] vs. 69% [119/172]; p<0.0001). Among patients with PCT <0.25 ng/ml and negative cultures, 30 day mortality was similar between those who received IV antibiotics for ≥72 hr and those who received IV antibiotics for shorter durations (2% [2/111] vs. 3% [5/176], p=0.71). Conclusions: Among cancer patients with COVID-19, PCT level <0.25 ng/ml is associated with lower likelihood of bacterial co-infection and greater likelihood of a shorter antibiotic course. In patients with PCT level <0.25 ng/ml and negative cultures, an antibiotic course of >72 hr may not be necessary. PCT could be useful in enhancing antimicrobial stewardship in cancer patients with COVID-19. Funding: This research was supported by the National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute under award number P30CA016672, which supports MD Anderson Cancer Center's Clinical Trials Office.

International Multicenter Study Comparing Cancer to Non-Cancer Patients with COVID-19: Impact of Risk Factors and Treatment Modalities on Survivorship.

Background: In this international multicenter study we aimed to determine the independent risk factors associated with increased 30-day mortality and the impact of novel treatment modalities in a large group of cancer and non-cancer patients with COVID-19 from multiple countries. Methods: We retrospectively collected de-identified data on a cohort of cancer and non-cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between January and November 2020, from 16 international centers. Results: We analyzed 3966 COVID-19 confirmed patients, 1115 cancer and 2851 non-cancer patients. Cancer patients were more likely to be pancytopenic, and have a smoking history, pulmonary disorders, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and corticosteroid use in the preceding two weeks (p≤0.01). In addition, they were more likely to present with higher inflammatory biomarkers (D-dimer, ferritin and procalcitonin), but were less likely to present with clinical symptoms (p≤0.01). By multivariable logistic regression analysis, cancer was an independent risk factor for 30-day mortality (OR 1.46; 95% CI 1.03 to 2.07; p=0.035). Older age (≥65 years) was the strongest predictor of 30-day mortality in all patients (OR 4.55; 95% CI 3.34 to6.20; p< 0.0001). Remdesivir was the only therapeutic agent independently associated with decreased 30-day mortality (OR 0.58; CI 0.39-0.88; p=0.009). Among patients on low-flow oxygen at admission, patients who received remdesivir had a lower 30-day mortality rate than those who did not (5.9% vs 17.6%; p=0.03). Conclusions: Cancer is an independent risk factor for increased 30-day all-cause mortality from COVID-19. Remdesivir, particularly in patients receiving low-flow oxygen, can reduce 30-day all-cause mortality. Condensed Abstract: In this large multicenter worldwide study of 4015 patients with COVID-19 that included 1115 patients with cancer, we found that cancer is an independent risk factor for increased 30-day all-cause mortality. Remdesivir is a promising treatment modality to reduce 30-day all-cause mortality.

Real-World Use of Isavuconazole as Primary Therapy for Invasive Fungal Infections in High-Risk Patients with Hematologic Malignancy or Stem Cell Transplant.

(1) Introduction: Invasive fungal infections (IFIs) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality among immunocompromised patients with hematologic malignancies (HM) and stem cell transplants (SCT). Isavuconazole was approved by FDA as a primary therapy for Invasive Aspergillosis (IA) and Mucormycosis. The aim of this study is to look at the real-world use of Isavuconazole in patients with HM and evaluate their clinical outcomes and safety. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of HM patients at MD Anderson Cancer Center who had definite, probable or possible mold infections between 1 April 2016 and 31 January 2020 and were treated with Isavuconazole for a period of at least 7 days. Clinical and radiological findings were assessed at baseline and at 6 and 12 weeks of follow up. (3) Results: We included 200 HM patients with IFIs that were classified as definite (11), probable (63) and possible (126). Aspergillus spp was the most commonly isolated pathogen. The majority of patients (59%) received prophylaxis with anti-mold therapy and Isavuconazole was used as a primary therapy in 43% of patients, and as salvage therapy in 58%. The switch to Isavuconazole was driven by the failure of the primary therapy in 66% of the cases and by adverse effects in 29%. Isavuconazole was used as monotherapy in 30% of the cases and in combination in 70%. Adverse events possibly related to Isavuconazole were reported in eight patients (4%) leading to drug discontinuation. Moreover, a favorable response with Isavuconazole was observed in 40% at 6 weeks and in 60% at 12 weeks. There was no significant difference between isavuconazole monotherapy and combination therapy (p = 0.16 at 6 weeks and p = 0.06 at 12 weeks). Finally, there was no significant difference in outcome when Isavuconazole was used after failure of other anti-mold prophylaxis or treatment versus when used de novo as an anti-mold therapy (p = 0.68 at 6 weeks and p = 0.25 at 12 weeks). (4) Conclusions: Whether used as first-line therapy or after the failure of other azole and non-azole prophylaxis or therapies, isavuconazole seems to have a promising clinical response and a good safety profile as an antifungal therapy in high-risk cancer patients with hematologic malignancies. Moreover, combination therapy did not improve the outcome compared to Isavuconazole therapy.

The role of procalcitonin in identifying high-risk cancer patients with febrile neutropenia: A useful alternative to the multinational association for supportive care in cancer score.

BACKGROUND: The Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) risk index has been utilized to determine the risk for poor clinical outcomes in patients with febrile neutropenia (FN) in an emergency center (EC). However, this index comprises subjective elements and elaborated metrics limiting its use in ECs. We sought to determine whether procalcitonin (PCT) level (biomarker of bacterial infection) with or without lactate level (marker of inadequate tissue perfusion) offers a potential alternative to MASSC score in predicting the outcomes of patients with FN presenting to an EC. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 550 cancer patients with FN who presented to our EC between April 2018, and April 2019, and had serum PCT and lactate levels measured. RESULTS: Compared with patients with PCT levels <0.25 ng/ml, those with levels ≥0.25 ng/ml had a significantly higher 14-day mortality rate (5.2% vs. 0.7%; p = 0.002), a higher bloodstream infection (BSI) rate, and a longer hospital length of stay (LOS). Logistic regression analysis showed that patients with PCT levels ≥0.25 ng/ml and lactate levels >2.2 mmol/L were more likely to be admitted and have an LOS >7 days, BSI, and 14-day mortality than patients with lower levels. PCT level was a significantly better predictor of BSI than MASSC score (p = 0.003) or lactate level (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Procalcitonin level is superior to MASCC index in predicting BSI. The combination of PCT and lactate levels is a good predictor of BSI, hospital admission, and 14-day mortality and could be useful in identifying high-risk FN patients who require hospital admission.

Systematic review of major osteoporotic fracture to hip fracture incidence rate ratios worldwide: implications for Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX)-derived estimates.

The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) is the most widely used tool for fracture prediction. It provides 10-year probabilities for hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF). It uses country-specific hip fracture incidence and life expectancy data, and for most countries, MOF/hip fracture incidence rate ratios (IRRs) from Malmo Sweden. However, the risk of MOF varies by age, sex, and geography. The objective is to compare the MOF/hip IRRs across countries, by sex and age. This systematic review targeted observational studies of MOF and hip fractures in individuals >50 years (PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019129259). One reviewer screened potential articles. Two reviewers completed duplicate and independent data abstraction, and assessed study quality based on population representativeness, study design and duration, definition of ethnicity, and fracture characteristics. We calculated the MOF/hip IRRs (95% confidence interval) and Z-values to compare IRRs in various countries to those for Sweden. We included 27 studies, of fair to good quality in the majority, from Europe (15), US and Canada (7), Asia (3), and Australia (2). The IRRs were twofold to 10-fold higher in younger compared to older age categories, and in women compared to men, with few exceptions. Within Europe, and using Sweden as a reference, MOF/Hip IRRs in women 50-54 years from Finland, Italy, Netherlands, Denmark, and UK were significantly lower by 38% to 60%. Findings were similar in men. At older ages, MOF/Hip IRRs were consistently lower in women from European countries compared to Sweden, by 10%-40% and 11%-51%, at 75-79 years and 85-89 years, respectively. Findings were heterogenous in men and in non-European countries. In conclusion, the MOF/hip fracture IRR may vary between countries. The variability at older ages may affect FRAX prediction when country-specific fracture IRRs are not used. Further research is needed to elucidate the implication of our findings to FRAX-derived MOF estimates in various countries. © 2021 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR).

Barriers, Attitudes and Clinical Approach of Lebanese Physicians Towards HPV Vaccination; A Cross- Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVES: HPV infection is associated with the development of cervical and oropharyngeal cancer. HPV vaccination prevents cervical cancer, but is still not part of Lebanon's routine vaccination schedule. As such, understanding physicians' practice towards HPV vaccination is essential. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study in Greater Beirut, Lebanon to assess the barriers, attitudes and clinical approach of Lebanese physicians towards HPV vaccination. We also aimed to analyze the factors associated with physicians' barriers to HPV vaccination. RESULTS: In total, 228 physicians completed the survey. Our results show that physicians and parents consider the cost of HPV vaccination to be a main barrier (58.9% and 80.7% respectively). Also, parents tend to have concerns about vaccine safety (78.1%), efficacy (68.6%), and lack education concerning HPV infection (81.8%). Furthermore, female physicians tend to have fewer barriers when compared to male physicians (aOR = 0.39; p-value = 0.007). Additionally, physicians who completed residency programs in the USA also showed fewer barriers when compared to physicians who completed Lebanese residency programs (aOR = 0.24; p-value = 0.040). Finally, physicians with higher knowledge score have fewer barriers when compared to those with lower knowledge scores (aOR = 0.42; p-value = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Physician gender, residency program and level of knowledge play a role in HPV vaccine barriers and recommendation in Lebanon. Future improvements in cost and awareness about HPV might improve vaccination rates. Creating uniform practices towards HPV vaccine is warranted to improve patient care.

Factors associated with Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccine recommendation by physicians in Lebanon, a cross-sectional study.

Persistent Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) infection is associated with the development of cervical cancer, a leading cause of female death worldwide. In Lebanon, cervical cancer is the 6th most common cancer amongst girls and women aged 14-44 years. Cervical cancer is preventable through HPV vaccination; however, Lebanon does not include HPV vaccination in its national routine vaccination schedule. Hence, physician recommendation is key for patient vaccine uptake. We conducted a cross-sectional study in Beirut, Lebanon to assess factors affecting physician recommendation regarding HPV vaccination. Physicians practicing in Obstetrics and Gynecology (OBGYN), Pediatrics, Family Medicine and Infectious Diseases were included in the study. In total, 228 physicians completed the survey (28.79% response rate). The survey consisted of a set of demographic and HPV knowledge questions along with clinical vignettes. The vignettes presented theoretical patients who differed in gender, age, sexual activity, social background and whether the patient presented with his mother or not. The results show that physicians tend to recommend the vaccine more commonly for vignettes presenting female patients, with an Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) of 6.8. Also, physicians were more likely to recommend the vaccine for vignettes with patients coming from a non-conservative background (AOR = 2.1), vignettes where patients claim to be sexually active (AOR = 2.7) and vignettes where patients presented with their mother (AOR = 1.4). Physicians tend to recommend the vaccine less in vignettes with married patients (AOR = 0.5). Physicians with higher knowledge scores recommended the vaccine more often (AOR = 3.4). Overall, OBGYN physicians recommended the vaccine less than pediatricians (AOR = 0.5). These results show that Lebanese physicians' recommendations rely on factors external to international guidelines. The results also highlight the importance of knowledge in adequate patient consultation. Thus, improved physician awareness towards international guidelines and physician education regarding HPV vaccination is essential in order to improve patient care in Lebanon.