Background: Passive immunotherapy with convalescent plasma (CP) is a potential treatment for COVID-19 for which evidence from controlled clinical trials is lacking. Methods: We conducted a multi-center, randomized clinical trial in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. All patients received standard of care treatment, including off-label use of marketed medicines, and were randomized 1:1 to receive one dose (250-300 mL) of CP from donors with IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients in categories 5, 6 or 7 of the COVID-19 ordinal scale at day 15. Results: The trial was stopped after first interim analysis due to the fall in recruitment related to pandemic control. With 81 patients randomized, there were no patients progressing to mechanical ventilation or death among the 38 patients assigned to receive plasma (0%) versus 6 out of 43 patients (14%) progressing in control arm. Mortality rates were 0% vs 9.3% at days 15 and 29 for the active and control groups, respectively. No significant differences were found in secondary endpoints. At inclusion, patients had a median time of 8 days (IQR, 6-9) of symptoms and 49,4% of them were positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. Conclusions: Convalescent plasma could be superior to standard of care in avoiding progression to mechanical ventilation or death in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The strong dependence of results on a limited number of events in the control group prevents drawing firm conclusions about CP efficacy from this trial. (Funded by Instituto de Salud Carlos III; NCT04345523).

Background: The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in haematological patients (HP) has not been comprehensively reported. Methods: We analysed 39 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and haematological malignancies. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were compared to a matched control group of 53 non-cancer patients with COVID-19. Univariate and multivariate analyses were carried out to assess the risk factors associated with poor outcome. Results: The most frequent haematological diseases were lymphoma (30%) and multiple myeloma (30%). Eighty-seven % HP developed moderate or severe disease. Patients with haematological malignancies had a significantly higher mortality rate compared to non-cancer patients (35.9% vs 13.2%; P = .003 (odds ratio 6.652). The worst outcome was observed in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia patients. Only age >70 years and C reactive protein >10 mg/dl at admission were associated with higher risk of death (odds ratio 34.86, P = .003 and 13.56,P = .03). Persistent viral sheddind was detected in 5 HP. Active chemotherapy, viral load at diagnosis and COVID-19 therapy were not predictors of outcome. Conclusion: Mortality of COVID-19 is significantly higher in patients with haematological malignancies compared to non-cancer patients. The impact of persistent viral shedding must be considered in order to restart therapies and maintain infectious control measures.

Bone marrow infiltration (BMI), categorized as an extra-nodal site, affects stage and is associated with poor prognosis in newly diagnosed lymphoma patients. We have evaluated the accuracy of PET/CT and bone marrow biopsy (BMB) to assess BMI in 372 lymphoma patients [140 Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) and 232 High Grade B-cell non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (HG B-NHL), among them 155 Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLCL)]. For HL cases, and taking into account PET/CT, sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy were 96.7, 99.3, and 99.3% while those of BMB were 32.3, 83.8, and 85%, respectively. For HG B-NHL and considering PET/CT, sensitivity, NPV, and accuracy were 52.7, 81.7, and 84.1%, while those of BMB were 77.6, 90.2, and 90.7%, respectively. In the HG B-NHL group, 25 patients would have been under-staged without BMB. These results lead us to recommend PET/CT and the avoidance of BMB to assess BMI in HL. In the case of HG B-NHL, bone marrow status should be assessed firstly by means of PET/CT; only in either focal or diffuse PET/CT with low borderline SUV max values or in negative cases, should BMB be carried out afterwards. In the HG B-NHL setting and at the present moment, both techniques are complementary.

Several studies have reported uneven results when evaluating the prognostic value of bone marrow biopsy (BMB) and PET/CT as part of the staging of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The heterogeneity of the inclusion criteria and not taking into account selection and collinearity biases in the analysis models might explain part of these discrepancies. To address this issue we have carried a retrospective multicenter study including 268 DLBCL patients with a BMB and a PET/CT available at diagnosis where we estimated both the prognosis impact and the diagnostic accuracy of each technique. Only patients treated with R‐CHOP/21 as first line (n = 203) were included in the survival analysis. With a median follow‐up of 25 months the estimated 3‐year progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 76.3% and 82.7% respectively. In a multivariate analysis designed to avoid a collinearity bias with IPI categories, BMB‐BMI [bone marrow involvement](+) (HR: 3.6) and ECOG PS > 1 (HR: 2.9) were independently associated with a shorter PFS and three factors, age >60 years old (HR: 2.4), ECOG PS >1 (HR: 2.4), and abnormally elevated B2‐microglobulin levels (HR: 2.2) were independently associated with a shorter OS. In our DLBCL cohort, treated with a uniform first‐line chemotherapy regimen, BMI by BMB complemented performance status in predicting those patients with a higher risk for relapse or progression. In this cohort BMI by PET/CT could not independently predict a shorter PFS and/or OS.