Background Elevated proinflammatory cytokines are associated with greater COVID-19 severity. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, in patients with severe (requiring supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula or face mask) or critical (requiring greater supplemental oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal support) COVID-19. Methods We did a 60-day, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial at 45 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Russia, and Spain. We included adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia, who required oxygen supplementation or intensive care. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1 with permuted blocks of five) to receive intravenous sarilumab 400 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo. Patients, care providers, outcome assessors, and investigators remained masked to assigned intervention throughout the course of the study. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of two or more points (seven point scale ranging from 1 [death] to 7 [discharged from hospital]) in the modified intention-to-treat population. The key secondary endpoint was proportion of patients alive at day 29. Safety outcomes included adverse events and laboratory assessments. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04327388 ; EudraCT, 2020-001162-12; and WHO, U1111-1249-6021. Findings Between March 28 and July 3, 2020, of 431 patients who were screened, 420 patients were randomly assigned and 416 received placebo (n=84 [20%]), sarilumab 200 mg (n=159 [38%]), or sarilumab 400 mg (n=173 [42%]). At day 29, no significant differences were seen in median time to an improvement of two or more points between placebo (12·0 days [95% CI 9·0 to 15·0]) and sarilumab 200 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 12·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·40]; log-rank p=0·96) or sarilumab 400 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 13·0]; HR 1·14 [95% CI 0·84 to 1·54]; log-rank p=0·34), or in proportions of patients alive (77 [92%] of 84 patients in the placebo group; 143 [90%] of 159 patients in the sarilumab 200 mg group; difference −1·7 [−9·3 to 5·8]; p=0·63 vs placebo; and 159 [92%] of 173 patients in the sarilumab 400 mg group; difference 0·2 [−6·9 to 7·4]; p=0·85 vs placebo). At day 29, there were numerical, non-significant survival differences between sarilumab 400 mg (88%) and placebo (79%; difference +8·9% [95% CI −7·7 to 25·5]; p=0·25) for patients who had critical disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 65% (55 of 84) in the placebo group, 65% (103 of 159) in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 70% (121 of 173) in the sarilumab 400 mg group, and of those leading to death 11% (nine of 84) were in the placebo group, 1...

Introduction Studies suggest that patients with cancer are more likely to experience severe outcomes from COVID-19. Therefore, cancer centers have undertaken efforts to care for patients with cancer in COVID-free units. Nevertheless, the frequency and relevance of nosocomial transmission of COVID-19 in patients with cancer remain unknown. The goal of this study was to determine the incidence and impact of hospital-acquired COVID-19 in this population and identify predictive factors for COVID-19 severity in patients with cancer. Methods Patients with cancer and a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 were prospectively identified using provincial registries and hospital databases between March 3 rd and May 23 rd , 2020 in the provinces of Quebec and British Columbia in Canada. Patient’s baseline characteristics including age, sex, comorbidities, cancer type, and type of anti-cancer treatment were collected. The exposure of interest was incidence of hospital-acquired infection defined by diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 ≥ 5 days after hospital admission for COVID-unrelated cause. Co-primary outcomes were death or composite outcomes of severe illness from COVID-19 such as hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, intensive-care unit (ICU) admission and/or mechanical ventilation. Results A total of 252 patients (N=249 adult, and N=3 pediatric) with COVID-19 and cancer were identified, and the majority were residents of Quebec (N=233). One-hundred-and-six patients (42.1%) received active anti-cancer treatment in the last 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. During a median follow-up of 25 days, 33 (13.1%) required admission to the ICU, and 71 (28.2%) died. Forty-seven (19.1%) had a diagnosis of hospital-acquired COVID-19. Median overall survival was shorter in those with hospital-acquired infection, compared to a contemporary community-acquired population (27 days vs unreached, HR 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-4.4, p=0.0006). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that hospital-acquired COVID-19, age, ECOG status, and advanced stage of cancer were independently associated with death. Interpretation Our study demonstrates a high rate of nosocomial transmission of COVID-19, associated with increased mortality in both univariate and multivariate analysis in the cancer population, reinforcing the importance of treating patients with cancer in COVID-free units. We also validated that age and advanced cancer were negative predictive factors for COVID-19 severity in patients with cancer.

Primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) comprises approximately 5 % of all primary brain tumors. During the past two decades the incidence of PCNSL has increased, and as a result clinical research to determine the optimal treatment for PCNSL patients also has increased. Diagnosis is based on histopathologic findings traditionally established by biopsy only. More recent data raise controversy and challenges this biopsy-only paradigm, showing a potential advantage for surgical resection with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Using high-dose intravenous (IV) methotrexate-based chemotherapy alone or as part of a regimen can lead to disease cure. The role of whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) remains controversial and more frequently is omitted to avoid potential delayed neurocognitive effects, especially in patients older than age 60 years. Newer data from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) using five cycles of Rituximab, Methotrexate, Vincristine, and Procarbazine (R-MVP) followed by low-dose WBRT (2,340 cgy), and then two cycles of Ara-C had excellent disease control with low neuro-toxicity and is now the basis of an ongoing RTOG (Radiation Treatment Oncology Group) trial comparing early versus delayed WBRT. Other chemotherapeutics and novel treatments, such as autologous stem cell transplantation, are being studied for potential use in PCNSL. Unlike many other primary brain tumors seen in adults, PCNSL is potentially curable; therefore, balancing treatment decisions with long-term neurocognitive effects and toxicities is crucial.

Pyoderma gangrenosum (pg) is a rare neutrophilic dermatosis characterized by painful necrotic ulceration affecting preferentially the lower extremities. Diagnosis is challenging, and a thorough workup (including biopsy) is required. In this case report, we describe a 67-year-old patient with a diagnosis of myelodysplastic syndrome (mds) who developed fever and pg two days after the first cycle of subcutaneous azacitidine (Vidaza; Celgene Corporation, Summit, NJ, USA). On physical examination, the patient had four erythematous plaques at sites of subcutaneous injections of azacitidine on the arms, as well as three other plaques in proximity. A skin biopsy demonstrated a dense neutrophilic interstitial infiltrate in the dermis. After the diagnosis of pg, prednisone 1 mg/kg was started and the fever subsided rapidly. This was followed by the resolution of the cutaneous lesions. Changing the route of administration of azacitidine from subcutaneous to intravenous and adding a daily dose of prednisone during the treatment allowed the patient to receive a total of 10 cycles of azacitidine. This is the second case reported in the literature. Because azacitidine is frequently used in mds and acute myeloid leukemia, clinicians should be aware of this rare cutaneous adverse event. Our approach can be used to avoid the recurrence of pg when continuing azacitidine treatment.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background Chemotherapy has been associated with a theoretical risk of hepatitis C virus (HCV) reactivation. However, little is known about the amplitude of viral replication and the incidence of subsequent hepatic exacerbation. Method We aimed to describe the occurrence of hepatitis flare and HCV reactivation at our center. We included, over a period of 5 years, adult patients with chronic HCV receiving intravenous chemotherapy. We excluded patients with undetectable HCV RNA, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver metastases or other etiologies of hepatic disease. The primary objective was to identify hepatic flares (elevation of alanine aminotransferase 3 times above the upper limit of normal). Secondary objectives were to assess viral reactivation (HCVr, HCV-RNA ≥1 log10 IU/mL when compared to baseline value), hepatic decompensation, mortality and the impact on the chemotherapy. Descriptive statistics were used. Results A total of 11 patients with chronic HCV were identified among the 5761 oncology patients. Five patients experienced a hepatic flare with median maximal ALT value of 139 U/L (IQR 133-237). Only 2 patients met criteria for HCVr with a median RNA increase of 1.16 log IU/mL (IQR 1.1-1.2). One patient presented with both HCVr and a hepatic flare. Only one patient required chemotherapy discontinuation following hepatic flare. No hepatic decompensation or related mortality were observed. Conclusion We identified a very small number of HCV cases among our population. We observed HCVr and hepatic flares, but only one consequence on cancer treatment. Nonetheless, HCV screening is encouraged among patients undergoing chemotherapy to allow close follow-up of hepatic function.