Introduction Since the early SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, cancer patients have been assumed to be at higher risk for severe COVID-19. Here, we present an analysis of cancer patients from the LEOSS (Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2 Infected Patients) registry to determine whether cancer patients are at higher risk. Patients and methods We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 435 cancer patients and 2636 non-cancer patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, enrolled between March 16 and August 31, 2020. Data on socio-demographics, comorbidities, cancer-related features and infection course were collected. Age-, sex- and comorbidity-adjusted analysis was performed. Primary endpoint was COVID-19-related mortality. Results In total, 435 cancer patients were included in our analysis. Commonest age category was 76–85 years (36.5%), and 40.5% were female. Solid tumors were seen in 59% and lymphoma and leukemia in 17.5% and 11% of patients. Of these, 54% had an active malignancy, and 22% had recently received anti-cancer treatments. At detection of SARS-CoV-2, the majority (62.5%) presented with mild symptoms. Progression to severe COVID-19 was seen in 55% and ICU admission in 27.5%. COVID-19-related mortality rate was 22.5%. Male sex, advanced age, and active malignancy were associated with higher death rates. Comparing cancer and non-cancer patients, age distribution and comorbidity differed significantly, as did mortality (14% vs 22.5%, p value < 0.001). After adjustments for other risk factors, mortality was comparable. Conclusion Comparing cancer and non-cancer patients, outcome of COVID-19 was comparable after adjusting for age, sex, and comorbidity. However, our results emphasize that cancer patients as a group are at higher risk due to advanced age and pre-existing conditions.

Background Elevated proinflammatory cytokines are associated with greater COVID-19 severity. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, in patients with severe (requiring supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula or face mask) or critical (requiring greater supplemental oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal support) COVID-19. Methods We did a 60-day, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial at 45 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Russia, and Spain. We included adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia, who required oxygen supplementation or intensive care. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1 with permuted blocks of five) to receive intravenous sarilumab 400 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo. Patients, care providers, outcome assessors, and investigators remained masked to assigned intervention throughout the course of the study. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of two or more points (seven point scale ranging from 1 [death] to 7 [discharged from hospital]) in the modified intention-to-treat population. The key secondary endpoint was proportion of patients alive at day 29. Safety outcomes included adverse events and laboratory assessments. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04327388 ; EudraCT, 2020-001162-12; and WHO, U1111-1249-6021. Findings Between March 28 and July 3, 2020, of 431 patients who were screened, 420 patients were randomly assigned and 416 received placebo (n=84 [20%]), sarilumab 200 mg (n=159 [38%]), or sarilumab 400 mg (n=173 [42%]). At day 29, no significant differences were seen in median time to an improvement of two or more points between placebo (12·0 days [95% CI 9·0 to 15·0]) and sarilumab 200 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 12·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·40]; log-rank p=0·96) or sarilumab 400 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 13·0]; HR 1·14 [95% CI 0·84 to 1·54]; log-rank p=0·34), or in proportions of patients alive (77 [92%] of 84 patients in the placebo group; 143 [90%] of 159 patients in the sarilumab 200 mg group; difference −1·7 [−9·3 to 5·8]; p=0·63 vs placebo; and 159 [92%] of 173 patients in the sarilumab 400 mg group; difference 0·2 [−6·9 to 7·4]; p=0·85 vs placebo). At day 29, there were numerical, non-significant survival differences between sarilumab 400 mg (88%) and placebo (79%; difference +8·9% [95% CI −7·7 to 25·5]; p=0·25) for patients who had critical disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 65% (55 of 84) in the placebo group, 65% (103 of 159) in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 70% (121 of 173) in the sarilumab 400 mg group, and of those leading to death 11% (nine of 84) were in the placebo group, 1...

Sepsis and septic shock are major causes of mortality during chemotherapy-induced neutropenia for malignancies requiring urgent treatment. Thus, awareness of the presenting characteristics and prompt management is most important. Improved management of sepsis during neutropenia may reduce the mortality of cancer therapies. However, optimal management may differ between neutropenic and non-neutropenic patients. The aim of the current guideline is to give evidence-based recommendations for hematologists, oncologists, and intensive care physicians on how to manage adult patients with neutropenia and sepsis.

Cancer patients frequently require central venous catheters for therapy and parenteral nutrition and are at high risk of central venous catheter–related infections (CRIs). Moreover, CRIs prolong hospitalization, cause an excess in resource utilization and treatment cost, often delay anti-cancer treatment, and are associated with a significant increase in mortality in cancer patients. We therefore summoned a panel of experts by the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) and updated our previous guideline on CRIs in cancer patients. After conducting systematic literature searches on PubMed, Medline, and Cochrane databases, video- and meeting-based consensus discussions were held. In the presented guideline, we summarize recommendations on definition, diagnosis, management, and prevention of CRIs in cancer patients including the grading of strength of recommendations and the respective levels of evidence. This guideline supports clinicians and researchers alike in the evidence-based decision-making in the management of CRIs in cancer patients.

Purpose Knowledge regarding patients’ clinical condition at severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection is sparse. Data in the international, multicenter Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV-2-Infected Patients (LEOSS) cohort study may enhance the understanding of COVID-19. Methods Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, enrolled in the LEOSS cohort study between March 16, 2020, and May 14, 2020, were analyzed. Associations between baseline characteristics and clinical stages at diagnosis (uncomplicated vs. complicated) were assessed using logistic regression models. Results We included 2155 patients, 59.7% (1,287/2,155) were male; the most common age category was 66–85 years (39.6%; 500/2,155). The primary COVID-19 diagnosis was made in 35.0% (755/2,155) during complicated clinical stages. A significant univariate association between age; sex; body mass index; smoking; diabetes; cardiovascular, pulmonary, neurological, and kidney diseases; ACE inhibitor therapy; statin intake and an increased risk for complicated clinical stages of COVID-19 at diagnosis was found. Multivariable analysis revealed that advanced age [46–65 years: adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.73, 95% CI 1.25–2.42, p = 0.001; 66–85 years: aOR 1.93, 95% CI 1.36–2.74, p < 0.001; > 85 years: aOR 2.38, 95% CI 1.49–3.81, p < 0.001 vs. individuals aged 26–45 years], male sex (aOR 1.23, 95% CI 1.01–1.50, p = 0.040), cardiovascular disease (aOR 1.37, 95% CI 1.09–1.72, p = 0.007), and diabetes (aOR 1.33, 95% CI 1.04–1.69, p = 0.023) were associated with complicated stages of COVID-19 at diagnosis. Conclusion The LEOSS cohort identified age, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and male sex as risk factors for complicated disease stages at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, thus confirming previous data. Further data regarding outcomes of the natural course of COVID-19 and the influence of treatment are required.

Background and purpose During acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) infection, neurological signs, symptoms and complications occur. We aimed to assess their clinical relevance by evaluating real‐world data from a multinational registry. Methods We analyzed COVID‐19 patients from 127 centers, diagnosed between January 2020 and February 2021, and registered in the European multinational LEOSS (Lean European Open Survey on SARS‐Infected Patients) registry. The effects of prior neurological diseases and the effect of neurological symptoms on outcome were studied using multivariate logistic regression. Results A total of 6537 COVID‐19 patients (97.7% PCR‐confirmed) were analyzed, of whom 92.1% were hospitalized and 14.7% died. Commonly, excessive tiredness (28.0%), headache (18.5%), nausea/emesis (16.6%), muscular weakness (17.0%), impaired sense of smell (9.0%) and taste (12.8%), and delirium (6.7%) were reported. In patients with a complicated or critical disease course (53%) the most frequent neurological complications were ischemic stroke (1.0%) and intracerebral bleeding (ICB; 2.2%). ICB peaked in the critical disease phase (5%) and was associated with the administration of anticoagulation and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Excessive tiredness (odds ratio [OR] 1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20–1.68) and prior neurodegenerative diseases (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.07–1.63) were associated with an increased risk of an unfavorable outcome. Prior cerebrovascular and neuroimmunological diseases were not associated with an unfavorable short‐term outcome of COVID‐19. Conclusion Our data on mostly hospitalized COVID‐19 patients show that excessive tiredness or prior neurodegenerative disease at first presentation increase the risk of an unfavorable short‐term outcome. ICB in critical COVID‐19 was associated with therapeutic interventions, such as anticoagulation and ECMO, and thus may be an indirect complication of a life‐threatening systemic viral infection.

Hematologic and oncologic patients with chemo- or immunotherapy-related immunosuppression are at substantial risk for bacterial infections and Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PcP). As bacterial resistances are increasing worldwide and new research reshapes our understanding of the interactions between the human host and bacterial commensals, administration of antibacterial prophylaxis has become a matter of discussion. This guideline constitutes an update of the 2013 published guideline of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO). It gives an overview about current strategies for antibacterial prophylaxis in cancer patients while taking into account the impact of antibacterial prophylaxis on the human microbiome and resistance development. Current literature published from January 2012 to August 2020 was searched and evidence-based recommendations were developed by an expert panel. All recommendations were discussed and approved in a consensus conference of the AGIHO prior to publication. As a result, we present a comprehensive update and extension of our guideline for antibacterial and PcP prophylaxis in cancer patients.

Aims SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with adverse outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. Here, we analyzed whether specific biomarkers predict the clinical course of COVID-19 in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities. Methods and results We enrolled 2147 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection which were included in the Lean European Open Survey on SARS-CoV‑2 (LEOSS)-registry from March to June 2020. Clinical data and laboratory values were collected and compared between patients with and without cardiovascular comorbidities in different clinical stages of the disease. Predictors for mortality were calculated using multivariate regression analysis. We show that patients with cardiovascular comorbidities display significantly higher markers of myocardial injury and thrombo-inflammatory activation already in the uncomplicated phase of COVID-19. In multivariate analysis, elevated levels of troponin [OR 1.54; (95% CI 1.22–1.96), p < 0.001)], IL-6 [OR 1.69 (95% CI 1.26–2.27), p < 0.013)], and CRP [OR 1.32; (95% CI 1.1–1.58), p < 0.003)] were predictors of mortality in patients with COVID-19. Conclusion Patients with cardiovascular comorbidities show elevated markers of thrombo-inflammatory activation and myocardial injury, which predict mortality, already in the uncomplicated phase of COVID-19. Starting targeted anti-inflammatory therapy and aggressive anticoagulation already in the uncomplicated phase of the disease might improve outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities. Graphic abstract Elevated markers of thrombo-inflammatory activation predict outcome in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities and COVID-19 disease: insights from the LEOSS registry