This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

No abstract

Purpose of reviewBladder cancer is the 10th most common cancer in the world and the 6th most common cancer among men. In the past few years, several new agents have been approved for the treatment of urothelial tumors. In this paper, we review the evolving treatment landscape of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC).Recent findingsSince 2016, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved five immunotherapies targeting programmed cell death 1/programmed cell death 1 legend, an antinectin-4 antibody drug conjugate (ADC), and a fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor for the treatment of patients with advanced UC. Moreover, there are multiple targeted agents, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), ADCs, and their combinations currently being tested in clinical studies with the goal of obtaining FDA approval.SummaryPrecision oncology efforts continue to advance our understanding of the UC biology and transform the existing treatment paradigms. An enlarging arsenal of treatment options promises further personalization of UC therapy.

Background Cavities are frequent manifestations of a wide variety of pathological processes involving the lung. There has been a growing body of evidence of coronavirus disease 2019 leading to a cavitary pulmonary disease. Case presentation A healthy 29-year-old Filipino male presented to the hospital a couple of months after convalescence from coronavirus disease 2019 with severe pleuritic chest pain, fever, chills, and shortness of breath, and was found to have a cavitary lung lesion on chest computed tomography. While conservative management alone failed to improve the patient’s condition, he ultimately underwent left lung video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery decortication. Even though the surgical pathology revealed only necrosis with dense acute inflammation and granulation tissue with no microorganisms, he gradually improved with medical therapy adjunct with surgical therapy. Conclusion Documented cases of cavitary lung disease secondary to coronavirus disease 2019 have been mostly reported in the acute or subacute phase of the infection. However, clinicians should recognize this entity as a late complication of coronavirus disease 2019, even in previously healthy individuals.

Patient: Female, 78-year-old Final Diagnosis: Multisystem sarcoidosis with visceral and vertebral disease • sarcoidosis Symptoms: Weaknes of lower limbs Medication:— Clinical Procedure: — Specialty: Rheumatology Objective: Rare disease Background: Sarcoidosis is a systemic granulomatous disease which predominantly affects the lungs, skin, and lymph nodes. Vertebral sarcoidosis is a rare entity. The clinical presentation of sarcoidosis with diffuse vertebral osseous and visceral lesions, simulating a disseminated metastatic cancer, is extremely unusual and has been reported only in a handful of cases in the current literature. Case Report: A 78-year-old White female patient with a remote history of asymptomatic pulmonary sarcoidosis presented with a 1-month history of generalized weakness. Physical examination was positive for upper and lower midline spinal tenderness. Laboratory findings showed anemia, hypercalcemia, and deranged liver functions. Abdominal imaging revealed an enlarged and nodular liver, ascites, splenomegaly, and enlarged retroperitoneal lymph nodes. Spinal imaging demonstrated several multi-level vertebral osseous lesions suspicious for metastatic bone cancer. Following extensive diagnostic work-up to rule out underlying metastatic cancers, a bone biopsy from an iliac lesion demonstrated active non-caseating granulomas, and a diagnosis of multisystemic sarcoidosis was made. The patient was started on systemic corticosteroids and demonstrated a gradual symptomatic improvement. Follow-up imaging revealed interval resolution of vertebral lesions. Conclusions: The clinical and radiological features of vertebral sarcoidosis can be indistinguishable from metastatic bone cancers. The possibility of widespread extrapulmonary sarcoidosis should be considered in any patients with a remote history of pulmonary sarcoidosis who experience simultaneous onset of unexplained multisystemic symptoms.

Objective To describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of two waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We retrospectively reviewed a de-identified dataset of patients with COVID-19 admitted to our community hospital in Evanston, Illinois, from March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021. We then identified patients from the first wave as those admitted during the initial peak of admissions observed at our hospital between March 1, 2020, and September 3, 2020. The second wave was defined as those admitted during the second peak of admissions observed between October 1, 2020, and February 28, 2021. Results A total of 671 patients were included. Of those, 399 (59.46%) were identified as patients from the first wave, and 272 (40.54%) were identified as patients from the second wave. Significantly more patients received steroids (86.4% vs. 47.9%, p <.001), remdesivir (59.6% vs. 9.5%, p <.001), humidified high-flow nasal cannula (18% vs. 6.5%, p <.001) and noninvasive ventilation (11.8% vs. 3.3%, p <.001) during the second wave. Patients from the first wave had a greater hazard for death compared to patients from the second wave (Hazard Ratio [HR] 1.62, 95% CI 1.08 – 2.43; p =.019). Conclusion Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in our community hospital, we observed a decrease in case-fatality rate in the second surge of the COVID-19 pandemic compared with the first wave.

No abstract

Background Unlike SARS-CoV and MERS-C0V, SARS-CoV-2 has the potential to become a recurrent seasonal infection; hence, it is essential to compare the clinical spectrum of COVID-19 to the existent endemic coronaviruses. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients with seasonal coronavirus (sCoV) infection and COVID-19 to compare their clinical characteristics and outcomes. Methods A total of 190 patients hospitalized with any documented respiratory tract infection and a positive respiratory viral panel for sCoV from January 1, 2011, to March 31, 2020, were included. Those patients were compared with 190 hospitalized adult patients with molecularly confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 admitted from March 1, 2020, to May 25, 2020. Results Among 190 patients with sCoV infection, the Human Coronavirus-OC93 was the most common coronavirus with 47.4% of the cases. When comparing demographics and baseline characteristics, both groups were of similar age (sCoV: 74 years vs. COVID-19: 69 years) and presented similar proportions of two or more comorbidities (sCoV: 85.8% vs. COVID-19: 81.6%). More patients with COVID-19 presented with severe disease (78.4% vs. 67.9%), sepsis (36.3% vs. 20.5%), and developed ARDS (15.8% vs. 2.6%) compared to patients with sCoV infection. Patients with COVID-19 had an almost fourfold increased risk of in-hospital death than patients with sCoV infection (OR 3.86, CI 1.99–7.49; p < .001). Conclusion Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 had similar demographics and baseline characteristics to hospitalized patients with sCoV infection; however, patients with COVID-19 presented with higher disease severity, had a higher case-fatality rate, and increased risk of death than patients with sCoV. Clinical findings alone may not help confirm or exclude the diagnosis of COVID-19 during high acute respiratory illness seasons. The respiratory multiplex panel by PCR that includes SARS-CoV-2 in conjunction with local epidemiological data may be a valuable tool to assist clinicians with management decisions.