scholarly journals The antibody response of haematological malignancies to COVID-19 infection and vaccination

Author(s):  
Nicole A. Seebacher

SummaryCancer patients with COVID-19 have reduced survival. While most cancer patients, like the general population, have an almost 100% rate of seroconversion after COVID-19 infection or vaccination, patients with haematological malignancies have lower seroconversion rates and are far less likely to gain adequate protection. This raises the concern that patients with haematological malignancies, especially those receiving immunosuppressive therapies, may still develop the fatal disease when infected with COVID-19 after vaccination. There is an urgent need to develop Guidelines to help direct vaccination schedules and protective measures in oncology patients, differentiating those with haematological malignancies and those in an immunocompromised state.

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 4608-4608
Author(s):  
Samar Kulkarni ◽  
Stephanie Michail ◽  
Charlotte Smith ◽  
Joanna Tomlins ◽  
John Murray ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Community acquired SRVI increase hospital referrals, hospitalization and ICU admissions resulting in high morbidity and mortality during winter season. As there are no defined preventative or treatment measures for most of the SRVI, there is increasing burden on health service resources during SRVI season. This analysis was carried out to evaluate the SRVI incidence, risk factors, impact on mortality and changes in incidence trends over 9 year period in immunocompromised cancer patients. Methods: 2906 cancer patients (haematology: n=1098, 37.8%, lymphoma: n=643, 22.1%, other cancers: n= 1156, 40.1%) treated from January 2006 to January 2015 who had respiratory virus PCR were evaluated. Patients with haematological cancers included ALL (n=137), AML (n=338), Myeloma (n=396), CLL (n=131) or other cancers (n=96) [median age: 50 yr., 5-87, Male: 692, Female: 406). Common solid tumour diagnosis included cancer of Breast (n=280, 24.0%), GI tract (n=207, 17.8%), Lung (n=190, 16.3%), Genitourinary (n=180, 15.5%) or other sites (n=299, 25.7%), [Males: 461, Females: 695; median age: 55 yr., range: 6-89]. Patients with haematological malignancies were younger than patients with other cancers (median age: 50 yr. vs. 55 yr., p<0.001). 804 patients (27.7%) had stem cell transplant. Incidence was compared to the seasonal incidence of SRVI reported by NHS England. All patients with respiratory symptoms who had viral PCR requested on throat and nose swab were included. A total of 10,025 samples were evaluated. Results: In patients with malignancy, the season for ParaFlu, Rhinovirus, Metapneumovirus and FluA lasted longer than in general population (average: 2 months, started early and ended later). Incidence of RSV (6.2%, 4.9%, 1.6%, p=0.001), Adenovirus (1.3%, 1.7%, 0.33%, p=0.004), Rhinovirus (16.6%, 19.9%, 8.5%, p=0.001) and ParaFlu (7.4%, 6.3%, 2.6%, p=0.057) was higher in hematology and lymphoma patients. Incidence of PCP was higher in oncology patients (15.1%, 7.2%, 9.6%, p=0.001). Incidence of PCP was higher with increasing age (5.8% age< 50, 12.2% age>50 yr., p=0.001). Rhinovirus (18.7% age<25 yr., 12.3% age >75 yr., p=0.001) and ParaFlu (8.1% age <25 yr. vs. 6.1% age >25 yr., p=0.02) was higher in younger patients. Stem cell transplant increased risk of RSV (6.8% vs. 3.5%, p=0.001), Adenovirus (1.7% vs. 0.6%, p=0.001) and ParaFlu (8.1% vs. 0.23%, p=0.001) but risk of PCP (7.7% vs. 11.8%, p=0.0001) was lower. Risk of positive PCR for any respiratory virus was higher with increasing age, hematological cancers, and use of stem cell transplant. Surprisingly, diagnosis of CLL and Myeloma did not increase SIRV risk. Thirty-day mortality was higher in patients who had SRVI (p=0.041). Mortality was higher in patients with solid tumours (p<0.0001), RSV infection (p<0.001), FluA (p0.02), PCP (p<0.001), non-SCT patients (p<0.0001) and older age. Except for increasing incidence of PCP in Oncology patients no annual variations in the incidence of specific pathogens was seen. Conclusion: This is one of the first reports that compares incidence of SRVI in patients with cancer to that in general population. The analysis of SRVI using PCR based diagnosis demonstrates that incidence of SRVI in cancer patients show different trends than in general population. SRVI season lasts longer and RSV, FluA and PCP contribute to 30-day mortality. Increasing PCP incidence in patients with solid tumours raises the questions about need to use of PCP prophylaxis in all these cases. Disclosures Somervaille: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Imago Biosciences: Consultancy. Bloor:Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


2016 ◽  
Vol 07 (01) ◽  
pp. 20-25
Author(s):  
I. Pabinger ◽  
C. Ay

SummaryVenous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer is associated with an increased morbidity and mortality, and its prevention is of major clinical importance. However, the VTE rates in the cancer population vary between 0.5% - 20%, depending on cancer-, treatment- and patient-related factors. The most important contributors to VTE risk are the tumor entity, stage and certain anticancer treatments. Cancer surgery represents a strong risk factor for VTE, and medical oncology patients are at increased risk of developing VTE, especially when receiving chemotherapy or immunomodulatory drugs. Also biomarkers have been investigated for their usefulness to predict risk of VTE (e.g. elevated leukocyte and platelet counts, soluble P-selectin, D-dimer, etc.). In order to identify cancer patients at high risk of VTE and to improve risk stratification, risk assessment models have been developed, which contain both clinical parameters and biomarkers. While primary thromboprophylaxis with lowmolecular- weight-heparin (LMWH) is recommended postoperatively for a period of up to 4 weeks after major cancer surgery, the evidence is less clear for medical oncology patients. Thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical oncology patients is advocated, and is based on results of randomized controlled trials which evaluated the efficacy and safety of LMWH for prevention of VTE in hospitalized medically ill patients. In recent trials the benefit of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in the ambulatory setting has been investigated. However, at the present stage primary thromboprophylaxis for prevention of VTE in these patients is still a matter of debate and cannot be recommended for all cancer outpatients.


Author(s):  
Katja Leuteritz ◽  
Diana Richter ◽  
Anja Mehnert-Theuerkauf ◽  
Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg ◽  
Andreas Hinz

Abstract Purpose Quality of life (QoL) has been the subject of increasing interest in oncology. Most examinations of QoL have focused on health-related QoL, while other factors often remain unconsidered. Moreover, QoL questionnaires implicitly assume that the subjective importance of the various QoL domains is identical from one patient to the next. The aim of this study was to analyze QoL in a broader sense, considering the subjective importance of the QoL components. Methods A sample of 173 male urologic patients was surveyed twice: once while hospitalized (t1) and once again 3 months later (t2). Patients completed the Questions on Life Satisfaction questionnaire (FLZ-M), which includes satisfaction and importance ratings for eight dimensions of QoL. A control group was taken from the general population (n = 477). Results Health was the most important QoL dimension for both the patient and the general population groups. While satisfaction with health was low in the patient group, the satisfaction ratings of the other seven domains were higher in the patient group than in the general population. The satisfaction with the domain partnership/sexuality showed a significant decline from t1 to t2. Multiple regression analyses showed that the domains health and income contributed most strongly to the global QoL score at t2 in the patient group. Conclusion Health is not the only relevant category when assessing QoL in cancer patients; social relationships and finances are pertinent as well. Importance ratings contribute to a better understanding of the relevance of the QoL dimensions for the patients.


2021 ◽  
Vol 72 ◽  
pp. 101929
Author(s):  
Lucie Pehalova ◽  
Denisa Krejci ◽  
Jana Halamkova ◽  
Lenka Smardova ◽  
Lenka Snajdrova ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 233372142199766
Author(s):  
Zeynep Sipahi Karslı ◽  
Berna Kurt ◽  
İbrahim Karadağ ◽  
Berna Çakmak Öksüzoğlu

The study aimed to evaluate the Coronavirus pandemic awareness of cancer patients ≥65 years of age, considered a vulnerable group, and their hospital arrival process, follow-ups and treatments during the pandemic. COVID-19 pandemic was found to increases the mortality and morbidity rates of individuals who aged 65 years and older. The research was conducted with a cross-sectional descriptive correlational design. The sample consist of 77 cancer patients aged 65 years and older adult. Participants were recruited through convenience sampling. In total, 77 patients from the Oncology Hospital located in Ankara from April 29, 2020 to May 20, 2020. Data were collected using a two-part form and a questionnaire. The study was undertaken in accordance with the STROBE checklist for observational studies. Of the participants, 59.7% were female, the mean age was 70 years, 79.2% resided in Ankara and 98.7% traveled to the hospital by car. Looking at the gender and the protective measures taken at home, female participants were found to perform a statistically significant higher level of protective measures. In conclusion, the study results suggest that the restrictions for older adult oncology patients during the pandemic did not negatively affect the delivery of health care.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nico Gagelmann ◽  
Francesco Passamonti ◽  
Christine Wolschke ◽  
Radwan Massoud ◽  
Christian Niederwieser ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daisy E. Collins ◽  
Sarah J. Ellis ◽  
Madeleine M. Janin ◽  
Claire E. Wakefield ◽  
Kay Bussey ◽  
...  

Background: One in four school-aged children is bullied. However, the risk may be greater for childhood cancer patients/survivors (diagnosed <18 years), because of symptoms of the disease and treatment that may prejudice peers. While the serious consequences of bullying are well documented in the general population, bullying may have even greater impact in children with cancer due to the myriad of challenges associated with treatment and prolonged school absence. Objective: To summarize the state of evidence on bullying in childhood cancer patients/survivors; specifically, the rate and types of bullying experienced and the associated factors. Method: We searched five electronic databases from inception to February 2018 for original research articles reporting on bullying in childhood cancer patients/survivors. Results: We identified 29 eligible articles, representing 1,078 patients/survivors ( M = 14.35 years). Self-reports from patients/survivors revealed a considerably higher rate of bullying (32.2%) compared with the general population (25%). Our review identified little information on the factors associated with bullying in patients/survivors. However, the bullying described tended to be verbal and was often related to the physical side effects of treatment, indicating that differences in appearance may prejudice peers. It was further suggested that educating the child’s classmates about cancer may prevent bullying. Conclusions: Our findings confirm that bullying is a significant challenge for many childhood cancer patients/survivors. Additional studies are needed to identify factors that may influence the risk of bullying, which will inform the development of evidence-based interventions and guidelines to prevent bullying in childhood cancer patients/survivors.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 133 (10) ◽  
pp. 1130-1139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annemieke W. J. Opstal-van Winden ◽  
Hugoline G. de Haan ◽  
Michael Hauptmann ◽  
Marjanka K. Schmidt ◽  
Annegien Broeks ◽  
...  

Abstract Female Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) patients treated with chest radiotherapy (RT) have a very high risk of breast cancer. The contribution of genetic factors to this risk is unclear. We therefore examined 211 155 germline single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for gene-radiation interaction on breast cancer risk in a case-only analysis including 327 breast cancer patients after chest RT for HL and 4671 first primary breast cancer patients. Nine SNPs showed statistically significant interaction with RT on breast cancer risk (false discovery rate, &lt;20%), of which 1 SNP in the PVT1 oncogene attained the Bonferroni threshold for statistical significance. A polygenic risk score (PRS) composed of these SNPs (RT-interaction-PRS) and a previously published breast cancer PRS (BC-PRS) derived in the general population were evaluated in a case-control analysis comprising the 327 chest-irradiated HL patients with breast cancer and 491 chest-irradiated HL patients without breast cancer. Patients in the highest tertile of the RT-interaction-PRS had a 1.6-fold higher breast cancer risk than those in the lowest tertile. Remarkably, we observed a fourfold increased RT-induced breast cancer risk in the highest compared with the lowest decile of the BC-PRS. On a continuous scale, breast cancer risk increased 1.4-fold per standard deviation of the BC-PRS, similar to the effect size found in the general population. This study demonstrates that genetic factors influence breast cancer risk after chest RT for HL. Given the high absolute breast cancer risk in radiation-exposed women, these results can have important implications for the management of current HL survivors and future patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document