Reinfection versus failure of viral clearance in a COVID-19 patient with hematologic malignancy

Ibrahim, Moayed; Vegel, Andrew; Niu, Alex; Panse, Ketaki; Chen, Rebecca; Safah, Hana; Socola, Francisco; Luk, Alfred; Saba, Nakhle S.

doi:10.1016/j.leukres.2021.106514

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study demonstrated one of the first preliminary clinical results of COVID-19 reinfection in solid cancer patients. Previously, there have been cases reported previously in patients with a hematological malignancy [ 17 , 18 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical and Laboratory Outcomes of the Solid Cancer Patients Reinfected with SARS-CoV-2

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical and laboratory outcomes of solid cancer patients who were reinfected with COVID-19. Methods: Patients who were tested negative on the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) PCR test and those with improved clinical conditions after infection with COVID-19 were enrolled in this study. Patients who received a positive COVID-19 PCR test 28 days after the initial positive PCR test were considered as reinfected. Results: A total of 1024 patients with the diagnosis of solid malignancy and COVID-19 PCR positivity were examined. The reinfection rate was 3.1%. Mortality rate of reinfection was 34.3%. The serum ferritin and creatinine values in reinfection were found to be significantly higher than the first infection (respectively; p = 0.015, p = 0.014). Conclusion: This study has demonstrated one of the first preliminary clinical results of COVID-19 reinfection in solid cancer patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical and Laboratory Outcomes of the Solid Cancer Patients Reinfected with SARS-CoV-2

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to the research conducted on patients with blood malignancies, there is a higher probability of false negatives, which can depend on endogenous factors such as hematocrit, triglycerides, cholesterol, and other blood substances [ 15 , 16 ]. Hence, it is necessary to identify the virus in these patients by more sensitive tests such as CRISPR [ 17 ]. Therefore, this review article can help young infectious disease specialists, hematologists, and physicians gain a deeper understanding of this condition and quickly look at recent events caused by HDMs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19 in patients with anemia and haematological malignancies: risk factors, clinical guidelines, and emerging therapeutic approaches

Kakavandi,

Hajikhani,

Azizi

et al. 2024

Cell Commun Signal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extensive research in countries with high sociodemographic indices (SDIs) to date has shown that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may be directly associated with more severe outcomes among patients living with haematological disorders and malignancies (HDMs). Because individuals with moderate to severe immunodeficiency are likely to undergo persistent infections, shed virus particles for prolonged periods, and lack an inflammatory or abortive phase, this represents an overall risk of morbidity and mortality from COVID-19. In cases suffering from HDMs, further investigation is needed to achieve a better understanding of triviruses and a group of related variants in patients with anemia and HDMs, as well as their treatment through vaccines, drugs, and other methods. Against this background, the present study aimed to delineate the relationship between HDMs and the novel COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Besides, effective treatment options for HDM cases were further explored to address this epidemic and its variants. Therefore, learning about how COVID-19 manifests in these patients, along with exploiting the most appropriate treatments, may lead to the development of treatment and care strategies by clinicians and researchers to help patients recover faster.

show abstract

Multiple durgs

2021

Reactions Weekly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple durgs COVID-19 infection and off label use: case reportA 59-year-old man developed a covid-19 infection during treatment with bendamustine, bleomycin, cyclophosphamide, dacarbazine, doxorubicin, etoposide, obinutuzumab, prednisone, procarbazine, vinblastine and vincristine for classical Hodgkin lymphoma. Additionally, he received off label treatment with azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir and convalescent-anti-SARS-CoV-2-plasma for covid-19 infection [routes and dosages not stated].The man diagnosed with classical Hodgkin lymphoma, and started receiving treatment with doxorubicin [adriamycin], bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine. Due to the incomplete response and residual disease, he was further treated with bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine and prednisone along with involved-site radiation therapy. Subsequently, he developed follicular lymphoma (grade IIIA), and he started receiving bendamustine and obinutuzumab [G-Benda] due to enlarging lymphadenopathy. In the meantime, he was brought to the emergency department due to shortness of breath and dry cough for 1 week. In the hospital, he underwent various laboratory investigations. A nasopharyngeal swab test, was found to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. COVID-19 was determined to be related to chemotherapy.The man started receiving off label treatment with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and lopinavir/ritonavir due to his increasing oxygen requirement. Additionally, he received one unit of convalescent-anti-SARS-CoV-2-plasma [convalescent plasma; off-label treatment] due to insignificant improvement. He received a second unit of convalescent-anti-SARS-CoV-2-plasma due to minimal efficacy. Subsequently, he received an immune globulin [immunoglobulin]. However, his respiratory status worsened, and remdesivir was started. Further, his respiratory status improved long with decrease in oxygen requirement. After 90 days of hospitalisation, he was discharged, but his COVID-19 PCR testing was found to be positive during discharge. After 20 weeks of initial diagnosis, COVID-19 PCR test was negative. His chemotherapy was discontinued due to poor response. After 2 months of discharge, he re-visited the hospital due to chills, worsening shortness of breath, and a productive cough, and he was hospitalised. At the time of hospitalisation, he was febrile, tachycardic, hypotensive, and hypoxic, which required oxygen. A repeated COVID-19 test revealed a negative result. After that, he underwent a chest X-ray, which showed a right lower lobe consolidation and a CT scan revealed slight improvement in ground glass opacities, no pulmonary embolism and increased right lung consolidation. Hence, bacterial pneumonia was presumed and unspecified antibiotics and immune globulin were started. His fever persisted. Hence, a bronchoscopy was performed, which showed normal flora and was negative for bacterial, fungal and viral infections. Repeat nasopharyngeal tests were performed, which came negative. Despite...

show abstract

Reinfection versus failure of viral clearance in a COVID-19 patient with hematologic malignancy

Cited by 4 publications

References 15 publications

Clinical and Laboratory Outcomes of the Solid Cancer Patients Reinfected with SARS-CoV-2

Clinical and Laboratory Outcomes of the Solid Cancer Patients Reinfected with SARS-CoV-2

COVID-19 in patients with anemia and haematological malignancies: risk factors, clinical guidelines, and emerging therapeutic approaches

Multiple durgs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About