Risk Factors for Hospitalization and Effect of Immunosuppression on Clinical Outcomes Among an Urban Cohort of Patients With Mpox.

Background: During the 2022 mpox outbreak most patients were managed as outpatients, but some required hospitalization. Uncontrolled human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has been identified as a risk factor for severe mpox. Methods: Patients with mpox diagnosed or treated within the Johns Hopkins Health System between 1 June and 15 December 2022 were included. The primary outcome of interest was risk of hospitalization. Demographic features, comorbid conditions, treatment, and clinical outcomes were determined. Results: A total of 353 patients were tested or treated for mpox; 100 had mpox diagnosed or treated (median age, 35.3 years; 97.0% male; 57.0% black and 10.0% Hispanic; 46.0% people with HIV [PWH]). Seventeen patients (17.0%) required hospitalization, 10 of whom were PWH. Age >40 years, race, ethnicity, HIV status, insurance status, and body mass index >30 (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) were not associated with hospitalization. Eight of 9 patients (88.9%) with immunosuppression were hospitalized. Immunosuppression was associated with hospitalization in univariate (odds ratio, 69.3 [95% confidence interval, 7.8-619.7]) and adjusted analysis (adjusted odds ratio, 94.8 [8.5-1060.1]). Two patients (11.8%) who were hospitalized required intensive care unit admission and died; both had uncontrolled HIV infection and CD4 T-cell counts <50/µL. Median cycle threshold values for the first positive mpox virus sample did not differ between those who were hospitalized and those who were not. Conclusions: Immunosuppression was a significant risk factor for hospitalization with mpox. PWH with CD4 T-cell counts <50/µL are at high risk of death due to mpox infection. Patients who are immunosuppressed should be considered for early and aggressive treatment of mpox, given the increased risk of hospitalization.

Analysis of Clinical Outcomes of Pregnant Patients Treated With Nirmatrelvir and Ritonavir for Acute SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Importance: Pregnant people are at increased risk of poor outcomes due to infection with SARS-CoV-2, and there are limited therapeutic options available. Objective: To evaluate the clinical outcomes associated with nirmatrelvir and ritonavir used to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case series included pregnant patients who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection, received nirmatrelvir and ritonavir, and delivered their offspring within the Johns Hopkins Health System between December 22, 2021, and August 20, 2022. Exposures: Treatment with nirmatrelvir and ritonavir for SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinical characteristics and outcomes were ascertained through manual record review. Results: Forty-seven pregnant patients (median [range] age, 34 [22-43] years) were included in the study, and the median (range) gestational age of their offspring was 28.4 (4.3-39.6) weeks. Medication was initiated at a median (range) of 1 (0-5) day after symptom onset, and only 2 patients [4.3%] did not complete the course of therapy because of adverse effects. Thirty patients (63.8%) treated with nirmatrelvir and ritonavir had a comorbidity in addition to pregnancy that could be a risk factor for developing severe COVID-19. Twenty-five patients [53.2%] delivered after treatment with nirmatrelvir and ritonavir. Twelve of these patients [48.0%] underwent cesarean delivery, 9 [75.0%] of which were scheduled. Two of 47 patients [4.3%] were hospitalized for conditions related to preexisting comorbidities. Conclusions and Relevance: In this case series, pregnant patients who were treated with nirmatrelvir and ritonavir tolerated treatment well, although there was an unexpectedly high rate of cesarean deliveries. The lack of an increase in serious adverse effects affecting pregnant patients or offspring suggests that clinicians can use this drug combination to treat pregnant patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Immunogenicity and Risk Factors Associated With Poor Humoral Immune Response of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines in Recipients of Solid Organ Transplant: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Recipients of solid organ transplant (SOT) experience decreased immunogenicity after COVID-19 vaccination. Objective: To summarize current evidence on vaccine responses and identify risk factors for diminished humoral immune response in recipients of SOT. Data Sources: A literature search was conducted from existence of database through December 15, 2021, using MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Study Selection: Studies reporting humoral immune response of the COVID-19 vaccines in recipients of SOT were reviewed. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently extracted data from each eligible study. Descriptive statistics and a random-effects model were used. This report was prepared following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Data were analyzed from December 2021 to February 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The total numbers of positive immune responses and percentage across each vaccine platform were recorded. Pooled odds ratios (pORs) with 95% CIs were used to calculate the pooled effect estimates of risk factors for poor antibody response. Results: A total of 83 studies were included for the systematic review, and 29 studies were included in the meta-analysis, representing 11 713 recipients of SOT. The weighted mean (range) of total positive humoral response for antispike antibodies after receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was 10.4% (0%-37.9%) for 1 dose, 44.9% (0%-79.1%) for 2 doses, and 63.1% (49.1%-69.1%) for 3 doses. In 2 studies, 50% of recipients of SOT with no or minimal antibody response after 3 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine mounted an antibody response after a fourth dose. Among the factors associated with poor antibody response were older age (mean [SE] age difference between responders and nonresponders, 3.94 [1.1] years), deceased donor status (pOR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.53-0.83]; I2 = 0%), antimetabolite use (pOR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.14-0.29]; I2 = 70%), recent rituximab exposure (pOR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.07-0.61]; I2 = 0%), and recent antithymocyte globulin exposure (pOR, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.15-0.71]; I2 = 0%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the rates of positive antibody response in solid organ transplant recipients remained low despite multiple doses of mRNA vaccines. These findings suggest that more efforts are needed to modulate the risk factors associated with reduced humoral responses and to study monoclonal antibody prophylaxis among recipients of SOT who are at high risk of diminished humoral response.

Clinical course of COVID-19 in a liver transplant recipient on hemodialysis and response to tocilizumab therapy: A case report.

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly infectious and rapidly spreading disease. There are limited published data on the epidemiology and outcomes of COVID-19 infection among organ transplant recipients. After initial flulike symptoms, progression to an inflammatory phase may occur, characterized by cytokine release rapidly leading to respiratory and multiorgan failure. We report the clinical course and management of a liver transplant recipient on hemodialysis, who presented with COVID-19 pneumonia, and despite completing a 5-day course of hydroxychloroquine, later developed marked inflammatory manifestations with rapid improvement after administration of off-label, single-dose tocilizumab. We also highlight the role of lung ultrasonography in early diagnosis of the inflammatory phase of COVID-19. Future investigation of the effects of immunomodulators among transplant recipients with COVID-19 infection will be important.

Cross-sectional survey of Good Samaritan behaviour by physicians in North Carolina.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the responses of physicians to providing emergency medical assistance outside of routine clinical care. We assessed the percentage who reported previous Good Samaritan behaviour, their responses to hypothetical situations, their comfort providing specific interventions and the most likely reason they would not intervene. SETTING: Physicians residing in North Carolina. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of 1000 licensed physicians. INTERVENTION: Mailed survey. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study conducted May 2015 to September 2015. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: Willingness of physicians to act as Good Samaritans as determined by the last opportunity to intervene in an out-of-office emergency. RESULTS: The adjusted response rate was 26.1% (253/970 delivered). 4 out of 5 physicians reported previous opportunities to act as Good Samaritans. Approximately, 93% reported acting as a Good Samaritan during their last opportunity. There were no differences in this outcome between sexes, practice setting, specialty type or experience level. Doctors with greater perceived knowledge of Good Samaritan law were more likely to have intervened during a recent opportunity (p=0.02). The most commonly cited reason for potentially not intervening was that another health provider had taken charge. CONCLUSIONS: We found the frequency of Good Samaritan behaviour among physicians to be much higher than reported in previous studies. Greater helping behaviour was exhibited by those who expressed more familiarity with Good Samaritan law. These findings suggest that physicians may respond to legal protections.

Treatment outcomes of AIDS-associated Kaposi's sarcoma under a routine antiretroviral therapy program in Lilongwe, Malawi: bleomycin/vincristine compared to vincristine monotherapy.

PURPOSE: Despite Kaposi's sarcoma (KS) being the most prevalent AIDS-associated cancer in resource limited settings, optimal treatment options remain unknown. We assessed whether bleomycin/vincristine compared to vincristine monotherapy was associated with improved treatment outcomes for AIDS-associated KS among patients initiating combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) in Malawi. METHODS: All patients initiating cART and chemotherapy for AIDS-related KS were identified from an electronic data system from the HIV Lighthouse Clinic from 2002 to 2011. Treatment responses were compared between patients receiving vincristine monotherapy and vincristine/bleomycin. Binomial regression models were implemented to assess probability of tumor improvement for patients receiving vincristine/bleomycin compared to vincristine monotherapy after a complete cycle of chemotherapy (9-10 months). A chi-squared test was used to compare changes in CD4 count after six months of chemotherapy. RESULTS: Of 449 patients with AIDS-associated KS on chemotherapy, 94% received vincristine monotherapy and 6% received bleomycin/vincristine. Distribution of treatment outcomes was different: 29% of patients on vincristine experienced tumor improvement compared to 53% of patients on bleomycin/vincristine. Patients receiving bleomycin/vincristine were 2.25 (95% CI: 1.47, 3.44) times as likely to experience tumor improvement as to those on vincristine monotherapy. This value changed little after adjustment for age and baseline CD4 count: 2.46 (95% CI: 1.57, 3.86). Change in CD4 count was similar for patients receiving vincristine monotherapy and bleomycin/vincristine (p = 0.6). CONCLUSION: Bleomycin/vincristine for the treatment of AIDS-associated KS was associated with better tumor response compared to vincristine monotherapy without impairing CD4 count recovery. Replication in larger datasets and randomized controlled trials is necessary.