IMPORTANCEAndrogen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been theorized to decrease the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with prostate cancer owing to a potential decrease in the tissuebased expression of the SARS-CoV-2 coreceptor transmembrane protease, serine 2 (TMPRSS2). OBJECTIVE To examine whether ADT is associated with a decreased rate of 30-day mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients with prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study analyzed patient data recorded in the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry between March 17, 2020, and February 11, 2021. The consortium maintains a centralized multi-institution registry of patients with a current or past diagnosis of cancer who developed COVID-19. Data were collected and managed using REDCap software hosted at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee. Initially, 1228patients aged 18 years or older with prostate cancer listed as their primary malignant neoplasm were included; 122 patients with a second malignant neoplasm, insufficient follow-up, or low-quality data were excluded. Propensity matching was performed using the nearest-neighbor method with a 1:3 ratio of treated units to control units, adjusted for age, body mass index, race and ethnicity, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score, smoking status, comorbidities (cardiovascular, pulmonary, kidney disease, and diabetes), cancer status, baseline steroid use, COVID-19 treatment, and presence of metastatic disease. EXPOSURES Androgen deprivation therapy use was defined as prior bilateral orchiectomy or pharmacologic ADT administered within the prior 3 months of presentation with COVID-19. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was the rate of all-cause 30-day mortality after COVID-19 diagnosis for patients receiving ADT compared with patients not receiving ADT after propensity matching. RESULTSAfter exclusions, 1106 patients with prostate cancer (before propensity score matching: median age, 73 years [IQR, 65-79 years]; 561 (51%) self-identified as non-Hispanic White) were included for analysis. Of these patients, 477 were included for propensity score matching (169 who received ADT and 308 who did not receive ADT). After propensity matching, there was no significant difference in the primary end point of the rate of all-cause 30-day mortality (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.42-1.42).

Genetic testing has a potential in the prevention of genetic diseases, particularly in communities with high rates of consanguineous marriage. Therefore, knowledge, practice, and attitudes of the public in Jordan regarding genetic testing were investigated. Individuals (N = 3,196) were questioned about the concepts of genetic testing and genetic counselors, if they underwent any genetic tests, the type of test, the method of consenting to the test, as well as their level of satisfaction with the privacy of the genetic testing service. The likelihood of pursuing predictive genetic testing for cancer was also investigated. Although almost 70 % of respondents knew the term "genetic testing," only 18 % had undergone genetic testing, primarily the mandatory premarital test. In addition, there was a lack of general knowledge about genetic counselors. Many of those who had genetic testing (45 %) indicated they did not go through a consent process, and a lack of consent was significantly related to dissatisfaction with the privacy of the service. Approximately 55 % of respondents indicated they would potentially pursue predictive genetic testing for cancer. Going for routine health checkups was not significantly correlated with either actual or potential uptake of genetic testing, suggesting health care providers do not play an influential role in patients' testing decisions. Our results show a gap between the knowledge and uptake of genetic testing and may help to guide the design of effective strategies to initiate successful genetic counseling and testing services.

ImportanceCytokine storm due to COVID-19 can cause high morbidity and mortality and may be more common in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy (IO) due to immune system activation.ObjectiveTo determine the association of baseline immunosuppression and/or IO-based therapies with COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis registry-based retrospective cohort study included 12 046 patients reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from March 2020 to May 2022. The CCC19 registry is a centralized international multi-institutional registry of patients with COVID-19 with a current or past diagnosis of cancer. Records analyzed included patients with active or previous cancer who had a laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction and/or serologic findings.ExposuresImmunosuppression due to therapy; systemic anticancer therapy (IO or non-IO).Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was a 5-level ordinal scale of COVID-19 severity: no complications; hospitalized without requiring oxygen; hospitalized and required oxygen; intensive care unit admission and/or mechanical ventilation; death. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of cytokine storm.ResultsThe median age of the entire cohort was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-74) years and 6359 patients were female (52.8%) and 6598 (54.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 599 (5.0%) patients received IO, whereas 4327 (35.9%) received non-IO systemic anticancer therapies, and 7120 (59.1%) did not receive any antineoplastic regimen within 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Although no difference in COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm was found in the IO group compared with the untreated group in the total cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.13, and aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.41-1.93, respectively), patients with baseline immunosuppression treated with IO (vs untreated) had worse COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm (aOR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.38-8.01, and aOR, 4.41; 95% CI, 1.71-11.38, respectively). Patients with immunosuppression receiving non-IO therapies (vs untreated) also had worse COVID-19 severity (aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.36-2.35) and cytokine storm (aOR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.42-3.79).Conclusions and RelevanceThis cohort study found that in patients with cancer and COVID-19, administration of systemic anticancer therapies, especially IO, in the context of baseline immunosuppression was associated with severe clinical outcomes and the development of cytokine storm.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04354701

Background: Diagnosis of interstitial lung disease (ILD) is based on multidisciplinary team discussion (MDD) with the incorporation of clinical, radiographical, and histopathologic information if available. We aim to evaluate the diagnostic yield and safety outcomes of transbronchial lung cryobiopsy (TBLC) in the diagnosis of ILD.Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis by comprehensive literature search to include all studies that evaluated the diagnostic yields and/or adverse events with TBLC in patients with ILD. We calculated the pooled event rates and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the diagnostic yield by MDD, histopathologic diagnostic yield, and various clinical adverse events.Results: We included 68 articles (44 full texts and 24 abstracts) totaling 6386 patients with a mean age of 60.7 ± 14.1 years and 56% men. The overall diagnostic yield of TBLC to achieve a definite or high-confidence diagnosis based on MDD was 82.3% (95% CI: 78.9%-85.2%) and histopathologic diagnosis of 72.5% (95% CI: 67.7%-76.9%). The overall rate of pneumothorax was 9.6% (95% CI: 7.9%-11%), while the rate of pneumothorax requiring drainage by a thoracostomy tube was 5.3% (95% CI: 4.1%-6.9%). The rate of moderate bleeding was 11.7% (95% CI: 9.1%-14.9%), while the rate of severe bleeding was 1.9% (95% CI: 1.4%-2.6%). The risk of mortality attributed to the procedure was 0.9% (95% CI: 0.7%-1.3%).Conclusion: Among patients with undiagnosed or unclassified ILD requiring tissue biopsy for diagnosis, transbronchial cryobiopsy represents a reliable alternative to surgical lung biopsy with decreased incidence of various clinical adverse events.

PURPOSE: Recent literature suggests an increasing use of systemic treatment in patients with advanced cancer near the end of life (EOL), partially driven by the increasing adoption of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). While studies have identified this trend, additional variables associated with ICI use at EOL are limited. Our aim was to characterize a population of patients who received a dose of ICI in the last 30 days of life. METHODS: We performed a manual retrospective chart review of patients ≥ 18 years who died within 30 days of receiving a dose of ICI. Metrics such as Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), number of ICI doses, need for hospitalization, and numerous other variables were evaluated. RESULTS: Over a 4-year time period, 97 patients received an ICI at EOL. For 40% of patients, the ICI given in the 30 days before death was their only dose. Over 50% of patients had an ECOG PS of ≥ 2, including 17% of patients with an ECOG PS of 3. Over 60% were hospitalized, 65% visited the emergency department, 20% required intensive care unit admission, and 25% died in the hospital. CONCLUSION: Our study contributes to the ongoing literature regarding the risks and benefits of ICI use in patients with advanced cancer near the EOL. While accurate predictions regarding the EOL are challenging, oncologists may routinely use clinical factors such as ECOG PS along with patient preferences to guide recommendations and shared decision making. Ultimately, further follow-up studies to better characterize and prognosticate this population of patients are needed.