Search

We evaluated the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on disease outcome in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection with a prospective study. 745 vaccinated and 451 unvaccinated patients consecutively admitted to a COVID-19 Hospital from 1st September 2021 to 1st September 2022 were included. Compared with unvaccinated cases, vaccinated patients were older, had more comorbidities, but had a lower risk of O2 need (odds ratio, OR, 0.46; 95 % CI 0.32-0.65) by logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, sex, comorbidity and WHO COVID-19 Clinical Progression Scale at admission. The ORs for O2 need were 0.38 (0.24-0.61), 0.50 (0.30-0.83) and 0.57 (0.34-0.96) in patients vaccinated 14-120, 121-180 and > 180 days prior to hospitalization, respectively. An anti-spike Ig titer higher than 5000 U/ml was associated with a reduced risk of O2 need (OR 0.52; 95 % CI 0.30-0.92). This study shows that COVID-19 vaccination has a significant impact on COVID-19 outcomes in hospitalized patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of an educational intervention based on the Italian Society of Internal Medicine Choosing Wisely (CW-SIMI) recommendations., Design: Multicenter, interventional, controlled study., Setting: Twenty-three acute-care hospital wards in Italy., Participants: 303 Physicians working in internal medicine wards., Intervention: An online educational course., Main Outcomes: The rate of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) prescriptions, the number of days of central venous catheter (CVC) usage, and the duration of intravenous (IV) antibiotic prescriptions evaluated at one month (T1) and at six months (T2) after course completion. Patients admitted and discharged during a 30-day period before the educational intervention (T0, one year before T2) were considered the comparison group., Results: A total of 232 physicians completed the course, while 71 did not attend the course. Data from 608, 662, and 555 patients were analyzed at T0, T1, and T2, respectively. The rate of PPI prescriptions declined at one month (RR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.52-0.87, p = 0.0005) and at six months (RR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.46-0.84, p = 0.003), and the number of days of CVC usage was reduced at six months (9.13 days at T0 vs. 5.52 days at T2, p = 0.007). The duration of IV antibiotic prescriptions displayed a decreasing trend (7.94 days at T0 vs. 7.42 days at T2, p = 0.081)., Conclusions: A simple online educational intervention based on the CW-SIMI recommendations was associated with a clinically relevant reduction in the usage of PPIs and CVCs. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and a possible benefit on patients' outcomes., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Tocilizumab (TCZ), a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting the interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor, has been proposed for the treatment of COVID-19 patients; however, limited data are available on the safety and efficacy., Methods: We performed a retrospective study on severe COVID-19 patients with hyper-inflammatory features admitted outside intensive care units (ICUs). Patients treated with intravenous TCZ in addition to standard of care were compared to patients treated with standard of care alone. Safety and efficacy were assessed over a 28-day follow-up., Results: 65 patients were included. Among them, 32 were treated with TCZ. At baseline, all patients were on high-flow supplemental oxygen and most (78% of TCZ patients and 61% of standard treatment patients) were on non-invasive ventilation. During the 28-day follow-up, 69% of TCZ patients experienced a clinical improvement compared to 61% of standard treatment patients (p = 0.61). Mortality was 15% in the tocilizumab group and 33% in standard treatment group (p = 0.15). In TCZ group, at multivariate analysis, older age was a predictor of death, whereas higher baseline PaO2:FiO2 was a predictor of clinical improvement at day 28. The rate of infection and pulmonary thrombosis was similar between the two groups., Conclusions: At day 28, clinical improvement and mortality were not statistically different between tocilizumab and standard treatment patients in our cohort. Bacterial or fungal infections were recorded in 13% of tocilizumab patients and in 12% of standard treatment patients. Confirmation of efficacy and safety will require ongoing controlled trials., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 European Federation of Internal Medicine. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Metastatic renal cell cancer (RCC) portends a bad prognosis, but survival is quite different among different patients. The objective of this study was to determine prognostic factors for survival with the aim to offer patients proper therapeutic options., Methods: A consecutive series of 109 metastatic RCC patients admitted to our department since 1988 was reviewed, and survival from the time of diagnosis with metastases recognition was considered. The role of age, sex, disease-free interval (DFI), ECOG performance status (PS), stage at diagnosis, grading, number and type of metastatic sites, nephrectomy, blood levels of hemoglobin, creatinine, albumin, calcium, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), ferritin, alkaline phosphatase, triglycerides was assessed in univariate and multivariate analysis., Results: In our study, the following variables were found to be statistically significant at the univariate analysis (p < 0.01): DFI, ECOG PS, stage at diagnosis, grading, nephrectomy, sites of metastases, blood hemoglobin, serum albumin, calcium, LDH, alkaline phosphatase. Indeed, only an ECOG PS of 2-3 (relative risk 1.82; p = 0.003) and blood hemoglobin levels < or = 10 g/100 ml (relative risk 1.20; p = 0.017) retained their value as independent risk factors for poor survival at multivariate analysis. According to the number of independent risk factors, three groups of patients were identified, with significantly different median survival (21.7 vs. 8.6 vs. 3.5 months; log-rank test: p = 0.00004, p = 0.04126 and p = 0.00047, respectively)., Conclusions: Poor performance status and anemia at diagnosis of metastatic RCC predict the worst outcome in our series. These factors could be taken into account to stratify patients in clinical trails and to select the proper treatment option in oncological practice.