The current mortality of IE remains high, and is mainly due to its complications, such as CHF and stroke.

No abstract

B cell-targeting strategies such as rituximab are widely used in B cell hematologic malignancies, rheumatologic and musculoskeletal diseases and a variety of autoimmune disorders. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate how exposure to anti-CD20 treatment profoundly affects B cell functions involved in anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunity and significantly impacts on the clinical and serological course of SARS-CoV-2 infection, long term immunity and vaccine responses. The data presented here suggest that the effects of B cell-depleting agents on adaptive immunity should be taken into account for the proper selection and interpretation of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics and to guide appropriate therapeutic approaches and protective measures. Combination therapeutic strategies including immunotherapy in association with prolonged antiviral treatment may play a decisive role in the setting of B cell immune deficiencies.

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

Even in the modern era of advanced diagnostic imaging, improved antibiotic therapy and potentially curative surgery, infective endocarditis remains a serious disease with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Reasons for such a persistently poor outcome may be represented by the changing epidemiology and microbiology, with new groups of patients at risk and new and more aggressive microorganisms. However, the inadequate use of both diagnostic (blood cultures and echocardiography) and therapeutic (antibiotics and surgery) means can influence the generally delayed diagnosis and poor prognosis seen in patients with infective endocarditis. We tried to identify the critical points in the management of patients with infective endocarditis and to elaborate a formal multidisciplinary approach based on the strict collaboration of specialists in infectious diseases, microbiology, cardiology and cardiac surgery. We hypothesized that this approach could increase the adherence to the published guidelines, and could represent a means to improve the outcome of patients with infective endocarditis.

This study aimed to compare the clinical progression of COVID-19 in high-risk outpatients treated with the monoclonal antibodies (mAb) bamlanivimab, bamlanivimab-etesevimab and casirivimab-imdevimab. This is an observational, multi-centre, prospective study conducted from 18 March to 15 July 2021 in eight Italian tertiary-care hospitals including mild-to-moderate COVID-19 outpatients receiving bamlanivimab (700 mg), bamlanivimab-etesevimab (700–1400 mg) or casirivimab-imdevimab (1200–1200 mg). All patients were at high risk of COVID-19 progression according to Italian Medicines Agency definitions. In a patient subgroup, SARS-CoV-2 variant and anti-SARS-CoV-2 serology were analysed at baseline. Factors associated with 28-day all-cause hospitalisation were identified using multivariable multilevel logistic regression (MMLR) and summarised with adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of 635 outpatients received mAb: 161 (25.4%) bamlanivimab, 396 (62.4%) bamlanivimab-etesevimab and 78 (12.2%) casirivimab-imdevimab. Ninety-five (15%) patients received full or partial SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. The B.1.1.7 (Alpha) variant was detected in 99% of patients. Baseline serology showed no significant differences among the three mAb regimen groups. Twenty-eight-day all-cause hospitalisation was 11.3%, with a significantly higher proportion (p 0.001) in the bamlanivimab group (18.6%), compared to the bamlanivimab-etesevimab (10.1%) and casirivimab-imdevimab (2.6%) groups. On MMLR, aORs for 28-day all-cause hospitalisation were significantly lower in patients receiving bamlanivimab-etesevimab (aOR 0.51, 95% CI 0.30–0.88 p 0.015) and casirivimab-imdevimab (aOR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03–0.61, p 0.009) compared to those receiving bamlanivimab. No patients with a history of vaccination were hospitalised. The study suggests differences in clinical outcomes among the first available mAb regimens for treating high-risk COVID-19 outpatients. Randomised trials are needed to compare efficacy of mAb combination regimens in high-risk populations and according to circulating variants.

No abstract