No abstract

No abstract

Summary Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) is associated with immunocompromise and high risk of severe COVID‐19 disease and mortality. Monoclonal B‐cell lymphocytosis (MBL) patients also have immune impairment. We evaluated humoural and cellular immune responses in 181 patients with CLL (160) and MBL (21) to correlate failed seroconversion [<50 AU/ml SARS‐CoV‐2 II IgG assay, antibody to spike protein; Abbott Diagnostics)] following each of two vaccine doses with clinical and laboratory parameters. Following first and second doses, 79.2% then 45% of CLL, and 50% then 9.5% of MBL patients respectively remained seronegative. There was significant association between post dose two antibody level with pre‐vaccination reduced IgM (p < 0.0001), IgG2 (p < 0.035), and IgG3 (p < 0.046), and CLL therapy within 12 months (p < 0.001) in univariate analysis. By multivariate analysis, reduced IgM (p < 0.0002) and active therapy (p < 0.0002) retained significance. Anti‐spike protein levels varied widely and were lower in CLL than MBL patients, and both lower than in normal donors. Neutralisation activity showed anti‐spike levels <1000 AU/ml were usually negative for both an early viral clade and the contemporary Delta variant and 72.9% of CLL and 53.3% of MBL failed to reach levels ≥1000 AU/ml. In a representative sample, ~80% had normal T‐cell responses. Failed seroconversion occurred in 36.6% of treatment‐naïve patients, in 78.1% on therapy, and in 85.7% on ibrutinib.

Medical practitioners and the pharmaceutical industry serve interests that sometimes overlap and sometimes conflict. There is strong evidence that associations between industry and doctors influence the behaviour of the latter in relation to both clinical decision making and the conduct of research. In view of the risk of compromising relationships with patients and the integrity of the research process, doctors must exercise care in their dealings with industry. The basic principles underlying the conduct of doctors with respect to pharmaceutical companies should be openness and transparency. Clearly articulated procedures should be developed to deal with specific issues such as travel subsidies, receipt of gifts, sponsorship of conferences and continuing education activities, and dualities of interest arising in clinical and research settings.

Refusal of organ donation is common, and becoming more frequent. In Australia refusal by families occurred in 56% of cases in 1995 in New South Wales, and had risen to 82% in 1999, becoming the most important determinant of the country's very low organ donation rate (8.9/million in 1999).Leading causes of refusal, identified in many studies, include the lack of understanding by families of brain death and its implications, and subsequent reluctance to relegate the body to purely instrumental status. It is an interesting paradox that surveys of the public continue to show considerable support for organ donation programmes—in theory we will, in practice we won't (and don't).In this paper we propose that the Australian community may, for good reason, distrust the concept of and criteria for “whole brain death”, and the equation of this new concept with death of the human being. We suggest that irreversible loss of circulation should be reinstated as the major defining characteristic of death, but that brain-dead, heart-beating entities remain suitable organ donors despite being alive by this criterion. This presents a major challenge to the “dead donor rule”, and would require review of current transplantation legislation. Brain dead entities are suitable donors because of irreversible loss of personhood, accurately and robustly defined by the current brain stem criteria.Even the dead are not terminally ill any more.1