Background Data on patients with COVID-19 who have cancer are lacking. Here we characterise the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 and identify potential prognostic factors for mortality and severe illness.Methods In this cohort study, we collected de-identified data on patients with active or previous malignancy, aged 18 years and older, with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection from the USA, Canada, and Spain from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) database for whom baseline data were added between March 17 and April 16, 2020. We collected data on baseline clinical conditions, medications, cancer diagnosis and treatment, and COVID-19 disease course. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality within 30 days of diagnosis of COVID-19. We assessed the association between the outcome and potential prognostic variables using logistic regression analyses, partially adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, and obesity. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701, and is ongoing. FindingsOf 1035 records entered into the CCC19 database during the study period, 928 patients met inclusion criteria for our analysis. Median age was 66 years (IQR 57-76), 279 (30%) were aged 75 years or older, and 468 (50%) patients were male. The most prevalent malignancies were breast (191 [21%]) and prostate (152 [16%]). 366 (39%) patients were on active anticancer treatment, and 396 (43%) had active (measurable) cancer. At analysis (May 7, 2020), 121 (13%) patients had died. In logistic regression analysis, independent factors associated with increased 30-day mortality, after partial adjustment, were: increased age (per 10 years; partially adjusted odds ratio 1•84, 95% CI 1•53-2•21), male sex (1•63, 1•07-2•48), smoking status (former smoker vs never smoked: 1•60, 1•03-2•47), number of comorbidities (two vs none: 4•50, 1•33-15•28), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or higher (status of 2 vs 0 or 1: 3•89, 2•11-7•18), active cancer (progressing vs remission: 5•20, 2•77-9•77), and receipt of azithromycin plus hydroxychloroquine (vs treatment with neither: 2•93, 1•79-4•79; confounding by indication cannot be excluded). Compared with residence in the US-Northeast, residence in Canada (0•24, 0•07-0•84) or the US-Midwest (0•50, 0•28-0•90) were associated with decreased 30-day all-cause mortality. Race and ethnicity, obesity status, cancer type, type of anticancer therapy, and recent surgery were not associated with mortality. Interpretation Among patients with cancer and COVID-19, 30-day all-cause mortality was high and associated with general risk factors and risk factors unique to patients with cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to better understand the effect of COVID-19 on outcomes in patients with cancer, including the ability to continue specific cancer treatments.

Background Patients with cancer may be at high risk of adverse outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection. We analyzed a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) to identify prognostic clinical factors, including laboratory measurements and anti-cancer therapies. Patients and Methods Patients with active or historical cancer and a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis recorded between March 17-November 18, 2020 were included. The primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on an ordinal scale (uncomplicated, hospitalized, admitted to intensive care unit, mechanically ventilated, died within 30 days). Multivariable regression models included demographics, cancer status, anti-cancer therapy and timing, COVID-19-directed therapies, and laboratory measurements (among hospitalized patients). Results 4,966 patients were included (median age 66 years, 51% female, 50% non-Hispanic white); 2,872 (58%) were hospitalized and 695 (14%) died; 61% had cancer that was present, diagnosed, or treated within the year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Older age, male sex, obesity, cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities, renal disease, diabetes mellitus, non-Hispanic Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, worse ECOG performance status, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and hematologic malignancy were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Among hospitalized patients, low or high absolute lymphocyte count, high absolute neutrophil count, low platelet count, abnormal creatinine, troponin, LDH, and CRP were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Patients diagnosed early in the COVID-19 pandemic (January-April 2020) had worse outcomes than those diagnosed later. Specific anti-cancer therapies (e.g. R-CHOP, platinum combined with etoposide, and DNA methyltransferase inhibitors) were associated with high 30-day all-cause mortality. Conclusions Clinical factors (e.g. older age, hematological malignancy, recent chemotherapy) and laboratory measurements were associated with poor outcomes among patients with cancer and COVID-19. Although further studies are needed, caution may be required in utilizing particular anti-cancer therapies.

Among 2,186 U.S. adults with invasive cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, we examined the association of COVID-19 treatments with 30-day all-cause mortality and factors associated with treatment. Logistic regression with multiple adjustments (e.g., comorbidities, cancer status, baseline COVID-19 severity) was performed. Hydroxychloroquine with any other drug was associated with increased mortality versus treatment with any COVID-19 treatment other than hydroxychloroquine or untreated controls; this association was not present with hydroxychloroquine alone. Remdesivir had numerically reduced mortality versus untreated controls that did not reach statistical significance. Baseline COVID-19 severity was strongly associated with receipt of any treatment. Black patients were approximately half as likely to receive remdesivir as white patients. Although observational studies can be limited by potential unmeasured confounding, our findings add to the emerging understanding of patterns of care for patients with cancer and COVID-19 and support evaluation of emerging treatments through inclusive prospective controlled trials. SIgnIfICAnCe: Evaluating the potential role of COVID-19 treatments in patients with cancer in a large observational study, there was no statistically significant 30-day all-cause mortality benefit with hydroxychloroquine or high-dose corticosteroids alone or in combination; remdesivir showed potential benefit. Treatment receipt reflects clinical decision-making and suggests disparities in medication access.

IMPORTANCE COVID-19 is a life-threatening illness for many patients. Prior studies have established hematologic cancers as a risk factor associated with particularly poor outcomes from COVID-19. To our knowledge, no studies have established a beneficial role for anti-COVID-19 interventions in this at-risk population. Convalescent plasma therapy may benefit immunocompromised individuals with COVID-19, including those with hematologic cancers.OBJECTIVE To evaluate the association of convalescent plasma treatment with 30-day mortality in hospitalized adults with hematologic cancers and COVID-19 from a multi-institutional cohort. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis retrospective cohort study using data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry with propensity score matching evaluated patients with hematologic cancers who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Data were collected between

Background Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represent an appealing treatment for patients with advanced urothelial cancer (aUC) and a poor performance status (PS). However, the benefit of ICIs for patients with a poor PS remains unknown. It was hypothesized that a poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS (≥2 vs 0‐1) would correlate with shorter overall survival (OS) in patients receiving ICIs. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, clinicopathologic, treatment, and outcome data were collected for patients with aUC who were treated with ICIs at 18 institutions (2013‐2019). The overall response rate (ORR) and OS were compared for patients with an ECOG PS of 0 to 1 and patients with an ECOG PS ≥ 2 at ICI initiation. The association between a new ICI in the last 30 and 90 days of life (DOL) and death location was also tested. Results Of the 519 patients treated with ICIs, 395 and 384 were included in OS and ORR analyses, respectively, with 26% and 24% having a PS ≥ 2. OS was higher in those with a PS of 0 to 1 than those with a PS ≥ 2 who were treated in the first line (median, 15.2 vs 7.2 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; P = .01) but not in subsequent lines (median, 9.8 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.78; P = .27). ORRs were similar for patients with a PS of 0 to 1 and patients with a PS ≥ 2 in both lines. Of the 288 patients who died, 10% and 32% started ICIs in the last 30 and 90 DOL, respectively. ICI initiation in the last 30 DOL was associated with increased odds of death in a hospital (odds ratio, 2.89; P = .04). Conclusions Despite comparable ORRs, ICIs may not overcome the negative prognostic role of a poor PS, particularly in the first‐line setting, and the initiation of ICIs in the last 30 DOL was associated with hospital death location.

The NS3 helicase (NS3h) of hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a 3′ to 5′ SF2 RNA and DNA helicase that is essential for the replication of HCV. We have examined the kinetic mechanism of translocation of NS3h along single-stranded nucleic acid with bases rU, dU and dT and have found that the macroscopic rate of translocation is dependent upon both the base and sugar moieties of the nucleic acid, with approximate macroscopic translocation rates of 3 nt/s (oligo-dT), 35 nt/s (oligo-dU), and 42 nt/s (oligo-rU), respectively. We found a strong correlation between the macroscopic translocation rates and the binding affinity of the translocating NS3h protein to the respective substrates such that weaker affinity corresponded to faster translocation. The values of K0.5 for NS3h translocation at a saturating ATP concentration are: (3.3 ± 0.4) μM nucleotide (poly-dT), (27 ± 2) μM nucleotide (poly-dU), and (36 ± 2) μM nucleotide (poly-rU). Furthermore, the results of isothermal titration of NS3h with these oligonucleotides suggest that differences in TΔS° are the principal source of the differences in the affinity of NS3h binding to these substrates. Interestingly, despite the differences in macroscopic translocation rates and binding affinities, the ATP coupling stoichiometry for NS3h translocation was identical for all three substrates, ~0.5 ATP molecules consumed per nucleotide translocated. This similar periodicity of ATP consumption implies a similar mechanism for NS3h translocation along RNA and DNA substrates.

Summary Background Xpert MTB/RIF, the most widely used automated nucleic acid amplification test for tuberculosis, is available in more than 130 countries. Although diagnostic accuracy is well documented, anticipated improvements in patient outcomes have not been clearly identified. We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis to examine improvements in patient outcomes associated with Xpert MTB/RIF. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry from inception to Feb 1, 2018, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of Xpert MTB/RIF with sputum smear microscopy as tests for tuberculosis diagnosis in adults (aged 18 years or older). We excluded studies of patients with extrapulmonary tuberculosis, and studies in which mortality was not assessed. We used a two-stage approach for our primary analysis and a one-stage approach for the sensitivity analysis. To assess the primary outcome of cumulative 6-month all-cause mortality, we first performed logistic regression models (random effects for cluster randomised trials, with robust SEs for multicentre studies) for each trial, and then pooled the odds ratio (OR) estimates by a fixed-effects (inverse variance) or random-effects (Der Simonian Laird) meta-analysis. We adjusted for age and gender, and stratified by HIV status and previous tuberculosis-treatment history. The study protocol has been registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42014013394. Findings Our search identified 387 studies, of which five RCTs were eligible for analysis. 8567 adult clinic attendees (4490 [63·5%] of 7074 participants for whom data were available were HIV-positive) were tested for tuberculosis with Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert group) versus sputum smear microscopy (sputum smear group), across five low-income and middle-income countries (South Africa, Brazil, Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Tanzania). The primary outcome (reported in three studies) occurred in 182 (4·5%) of 4050 patients in the Xpert group and 217 (5·3%) of 4093 patients in the smear group (pooled adjusted OR 0·88, 95% CI 0·68–1·14 [p=0·34]; for HIV-positive individuals OR 0·83, 0·65–1·05 [p=0·12]). Kaplan-Meier estimates showed a lower rate of death (12·73 per 100 person-years in the Xpert group vs 16·38 per 100 person-years in the sputum smear group) for HIV-positive patients (hazard ratio 0·76, 95% CI 0·60–0·97; p=0·03). The risk of bias was assessed as reasonable and the statistical heterogeneity across studies was low (I2<20% for the primary outcome). Interpretation Despite individual patient data analysis from five RCTs, we were unable to confidently rule in nor rule out an Xpert MTB/RIF-associated reduction in mortality among outpatients tested for tuberculosis. Reduction in mortality among HIV-positive patients in a secondary analysis suggests the possibility of population-level impact.

Compared with whites, blacks have lower aldosterone and Hispanics have higher PRA. Aldosterone had significant associations with higher SBP in Hispanics compared with other groups, a finding that may suggest a different mechanism of hypertension.