Search

Background: In the ACCESS trial the addition of clarithromycin to standard-of-care (SoC) antibiotics enhanced early clinical response and attenuated the inflammatory burden in adults with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) requiring hospitalization. A post-hoc analysis was performed to investigate the benefit in specific subgroups., Methods: The primary endpoint comprised two conditions to be met during the first 72 hours: ≥50% decrease of respiratory symptom severity score; and any of ≥30% decrease of SOFA score and favourable change of kinetics of procalcitonin (defined as ≥80% PCT decrease or PCT <0.25 ng/ml). In this exploratory post-hoc analysis achievement of the study composite primary endpoint was compared between the two treatment groups within subsets differentiated by demographic characteristics, comorbidities, CAP severity, baseline laboratory findings and corticosteroid co-administration. The impact of clarithromycin treatment on the need for mechanical ventilation (MV) in all subgroups was also analysed., Results: The addition of clarithromycin significantly increased the proportion of patients achieving the primary endpoint across all subgroups and decreased the need for MV in many subgroups. For instance, the primary endpoint was attained by 32.7% of placebo-treated patients and in 67% of clarithromycin-treated patients with CURB-65 score ≥2 (p<0.0001) whereas MV was required in 18.8% and 7.4% respectively (p=0.022). The addition of corticosteroids alone was not as clinically advantageous as the use of clarithromycin alone., Conclusion: Adding clarithromycin to SoC in the ACCESS study achieved early clinical anti-inflammatory responses and decreased the need for MV in subgroups of hospitalized patients with CAP., Registration: EudraCT 2020-004452-15; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04724044., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest K. Akinosoglou reports receiving honoraria and consulting fees from healthcare companies, including MSD, Pfizer, 3M Hellas, GSK/ViiV and Gilead. G. Poulakou has received honoraria and/or consulting fees by Astra-Zeneca, Gilead, GSK, Menarini, MSD, Norma, Pfizer and SOBI and research grants by the University of Minnesota/University College London, the Hellenic Institute for the Study of Sepsis, Bausch, Roche, Xenothera, FabNTech and Pfizer. I. Papanikolaou has received honoraria or served as PI for studies from Boehringer-ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca. H. Milionis reports receiving honoraria, consulting fees and non-financial support from healthcare companies, including Amgen, Angelini, Bayer, Mylan, MSD, Pfizer, and Servier. E. J. Giamarellos-Bourboulis has received honoraria from Abbott Products Operations, bioMérieux, GSK, UCB, Sobi AB and ThermoFisher Brahms GmbH; independent educational grants from Abbott Products Operations, AbbVie, bioMérieux Inc, Johnson & Johnson, InCyte, MSD, Novartis, UCB, Sanofi, Sobi; and the Horizon 2020 European Grants ImmunoSep and RISCinCOVID and the Horizon Health grant EPIC-CROWN-2 (granted to the Hellenic Institute for the Study of Sepsis). The other authors do not declare any conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: To estimate the protection that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine doses conferred to hospitalized patients with COVID-19 against adverse outcomes and longer length of stay during the Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 subvariant epidemics in Greece., Methods: The study was conducted from November 2022 to May 2023. Multivariable logistic and negative binomial regression models were applied to estimate the association between any adverse outcomes and length of stay with the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses., Results: We studied 962 patients (median age: 78 years; mean length of stay: 9.2 days), of whom 847 (88.0%) had ≥ 1 comorbidity. Of these, 39 (4.0%) were admitted to the intensive care unit, 44 (4.6%) received invasive mechanical ventilation, and 110 (11.4%) died in hospital. There were 184 (19.1%) unvaccinated patients, 125 (13.0%) with one or two vaccine doses, and 653 (67.9%) with ≥ 3 doses. In multivariable analyses, patients with ≥ 3 doses had lower odds of experiencing any adverse outcomes (adjusted odds ratio: 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37-0.86) compared with unvaccinated patients. On average, patients with one or two doses and those with ≥ 3 had decreased length of hospital stay (-1.5 days [95% CIs: -2.6 to -0.4] and -2.8 days [95% CIs: -4.1 to -1.4], respectively] compared with unvaccinated patients. Other characteristics consistently associated with adverse outcomes and longer length of stay included older age, having three or more comorbidities compared with none, and being admitted to the hospital two or more weeks post-diagnosis., Conclusions: A history of ≥ 3 vaccine doses conferred significant protection against any adverse outcome and longer length of stay in hospitalized patients with COVID-19., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Antimicrobial resistance poses a major threat to human health worldwide and the implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs), including antimicrobial de-escalation (ADE), is a multifaceted tool for minimizing unnecessary or inappropriate antibiotic exposure. This was a prospective observational study of 142 non-Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients with microbiologically documented infection who were initially administered empirical antimicrobial therapy and admitted to the medical wards of 6 tertiary-care hospitals in Greece from January 2017 to December 2018. Patients were divided into two groups, the ADE and non-ADE group, based on whether ADE was applied or not, respectively. Exploratory end-points were ADE feasibility, safety and efficacy. ADE was applied in 76 patients at a median time of 4 days (IQR: 3, 5). An increased likelihood of ADE was observed in patients with urinary tract (OR: 10.04, 95% CI: 2.91, 34.57; p < 0.001), skin and soft tissue (OR: 16.28, 95% CI: 1.68, 158.08; p = 0.016) and bloodstream infections (OR: 2.52, 95% CI: 1, 6.36; p = 0.05). Factors significantly associated with higher rates of ADE were clarithromycin administration, diagnosis of urinary tract infection (UTI), isolation of E. coli , age and symptoms type on admission. Mortality was lower in the ADE group (18.4% vs. 30.3% p < 0.1) and ADE was not significantly associated with the probability of death ( p = 0.432). ADE was associated with favorable clinical outcomes and can be performed even in settings with high prevalence of multi-drug resistant (MDR) pathogens without compromising safety.

Introduction: EXO-CD24 are exosomes genetically manipulated to over-express Cluster of Differentiation (CD) 24. It consists of two breakthrough technologies: CD24, the drug, as a novel immunomodulator that is smarter than steroids without any side effects, and exosomes as the ideal natural drug carrier., Methods: A randomized, single blind, dose-finding phase IIb trial in hospitalized patients with mild to moderate Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) was carried out in two medical centers in Athens. Patients received either 10 9 or 10 10 exosome particles of EXO-CD24, daily, for five consecutive days and monitored for 28 days. Efficacy was assessed at day 7 among 91 patients who underwent randomization. The outcome was also compared in a post-hoc analysis with an income control group (n = 202) that fit the inclusion and exclusion criteria., Results: The mean age was 49.4 (± 13.2) years and 74.4% were male. By day 7, 83.7% showed improved respiratory signs and 64% had better oxygen saturation (SpO 2 ) (p < 0.05). There were significant reductions in all inflammatory markers, most notably in C-reactive protein (CRP), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), ferritin, fibrinogen and an array of cytokines. Conversely, levels of the anti-inflammatory cytokine Interleukin-10 (IL-10) were increased (p < 0.05). Of all the documented adverse events, none were considered treatment related. No drug-drug interactions were noted. Two patients succumbed to COVID-19. Post-hoc analysis revealed that EXO-CD24 patients exhibited greater improvements in clinical and laboratory outcomes compared to an observational income control group., Conclusions: EXO-CD24 presents a promising therapeutic approach for hyper-inflammatory state and in particular ARDS. Its unique combination of exosomes, as a drug carrier, and CD24, as an immunomodulator, coupled with inhalation administration, warrants further investigation in a larger, international, randomized, quadri-blind trial against a placebo., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Since its first description in 2009, Candida auris has, so far, resulted in large hospital outbreaks worldwide and is considered an emerging global public health threat. Exceptionally for yeast, it is gifted with a profoundly worrying invasive potential and high inter-patient transmissibility. At the same time, it is capable of colonizing and persisting in both patients and hospital settings for prolonged periods of time, thus creating a vicious cycle of acquisition, spreading, and infection. It exhibits various virulence qualities and thermotolerance, osmotolerance, filamentation, biofilm formation and hydrolytic enzyme production, which are mainly implicated in its pathogenesis. Owing to its unfavorable profile of resistance to diverse antifungal agents and the lack of effective treatment options, the implementation of robust infection prevention and control (IPC) practices is crucial for controlling and minimizing intra-hospital transmission of C. auris . Rapid and accurate microbiological identification, adherence to hand hygiene, use of adequate personal protective equipment (PPE), proper handling of catheters and implantable devices, contact isolation, periodical environmental decontamination, targeted screening, implementation of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs and communication between healthcare facilities about residents' C. auris colonization status are recognized as coherent strategies for preventing its spread. Current knowledge on C. auris epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and its mechanisms of pathogenicity are summarized in the present review and a comprehensive overview of IPC practices ensuring yeast prevention is also provided.

Background/aim: Despite the widespread mass-vaccination programs worldwide and the continuing evolution of COVID-19 therapeutics, the burden of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with hematological malignancies (HM) remains elusive. The aim of the present study was to assess the clinical characteristics, outcomes and therapeutic strategies applied in HM patients hospitalized during the post-vaccine period in Greece., Patients and Methods: From June 2021 to October 2022, 60 HM patients with COVID-19 were retrospectively analyzed. Exploratory end-points included the incidence of intubation, probability of recovery, mortality, and duration of remdesivir (RDV) administration., Results: Overall, mechanical ventilation (MV) was required for five patients and crude mortality was 8.3%. HM of lymphocytic origin (p=0.035) and obesity (p=0.03) were the main determinants of the risk of intubation and among several laboratory markers, only LDH>520 IU/l was proven to be an independent MV predictor (p=0.038). The number of co-existing comorbidities (p=0.05) and disease severity on admission (p<0.001) were found to rule the probability of recovery, and dexamethasone was associated with worse prognosis, particularly in patients with mild/moderate COVID-19. RDV was administered to the entire cohort, of whom 38 were managed with an extended course. In the multivariate analysis, patients with HM of lymphocytic origin were more likely to receive RDV for more than five days (p=0.002)., Conclusion: Our study emphasizes the frailty of HM patients, even in the era of Omicron-variant predominance, and underlines the need to optimize therapy., (Copyright © 2023, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Remdesivir was the first antiviral approved for treating COVID-19. We investigated its patterns of use, effectiveness and safety in clinical practice in Greece. This is a retrospective observational study of hospitalized adults who received remdesivir for COVID-19 in September 2020-February 2021. The main endpoints were the time to recovery (hospital discharge within 30 days from admission) and safety. The "early" (remdesivir initiation within 24 h since hospitalization) and "deferred" (remdesivir initiation later on) groups were compared. One thousand and four patients (60.6% male, mean age 61 years, 74.3% with severe disease, 70.9% with ≥1 comorbidities) were included, and 75.9% of them were on a 5-day regimen, and 86.8% were in the early group. Among those with a baseline mild/moderate disease, the median (95% CI) time to recovery was 8 (7-9) and 12 (11-14) days for the early and deferred groups, respectively ( p < 0.001). The corresponding estimates for those with a severe disease were 10 (9-10) and 13 (11-15) days, respectively ( p = 0.028). After remdesivir initiation, increased serum transaminases and an acute kidney injury were observed in 6.9% and 2.1%, respectively. Nine (0.9%) patients discontinued the treatment due to adverse events. The effectiveness of remdesivir was increased when it was taken within 24 h since admission regardless of the disease severity. Remdesivir's safety profile is similar to that described in clinical trials and other real-world cohorts.

Background/aim: Immunomodulatory therapy with Tocilizumab (TCZ), a monoclonal antibody against interleukin-6 receptor-alpha, has been endorsed by the World Health Organization and other major regulatory bodies, as part of the standard-of-care therapy for severe or critical COVID-19 cases despite discordant trial outcomes. The aim of the present study was to report the experience of our center regarding TCZ routine use in severely ill COVID-19 patients who were hospitalized during the third pandemic wave in Greece., Patients and Methods: From March 2021 to December 2021, we retrospectively analyzed COVID-19 patients with radiological findings of pneumonia and signs of rapid respiratory deterioration that were treated with TCZ. The primary outcome included the risk of intubation or/and death in TCZ-treated patients compared to matched controls., Results: TCZ administration was neither predictive of intubation and/or death [OR=17.5 (95% CI=0.47-652.2; p=0.12)] or associated with fewer events (p=0.92) in multivariate analysis., Conclusion: Our single-center real-life experience is in line with recently published research, revealing no benefit from TCZ routine use in severely or critically ill patients with COVID-19., (Copyright © 2023, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Aim: We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of full (booster) vaccination against severe outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients during the Delta and Omicron waves., Methods: The study extended from November 15, 2021 to April 17, 2022. Full vaccination was defined as a primary vaccination plus a booster ≥ 6 months later., Results: We studied 1138 patients (mean age: 66.6 years), of whom 826 (72.6 %) had ≥ 1 comorbidity. Of the 1138 patients, 75 (6.6 %) were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU), 64 (5.6 %) received mechanical ventilation, and 172 (15.1 %) died. There were 386 (33.9 %) fully vaccinated, 172 (15.1 %) partially vaccinated, and 580 (51 %) unvaccinated patients. Unvaccinated patients were absent from work for longer periods compared to partially or fully vaccinated patients (mean absence of 20.1 days versus 12.3 and 17.3 days, respectively; p-value = 0.03). Compared to unvaccinated patients, fully vaccinated patients were less likely to be admitted to ICU [adjusted relative risk (ARR: 0.49; 95 % CI: 0.29-0.84)], mechanically ventilated (ARR: 0.43; 95 % CI: 0.23-0.80), and die (ARR: 0.57; 95 % CI: 0.42-0.78), while they were hospitalized for significantly shorter periods (ARR: 0.79; 95 % CI: 0.70-0.89). The adjusted full VE was 48.8 % (95 % CI: 42.7 %-54.9 %) against ICU admission, 55.4 % (95 % CI: 52.0 %-56.2 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 22.6 % (95 % CI: 7.4 %-34.8 %) against death. For patients with ≥ 3 comorbidities, VE was 56.2 % (95 % CI: 43.9 %-67.1 %) against ICU admission, 60.2 % (95 % CI: 53.7 %-65.4 %) against mechanical ventilation, and 43.9 % (95 % CI: 19.9 %-59.7 %) against death., Conclusions: Full (booster) COVID-19 vaccination conferred protection against severe outcomes, prolonged hospitalization, and prolonged work absenteeism., 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 © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background/aim: Anti-CD20-depleting monoclonal antibodies predispose patients to the development of severe disease of SARS-CoV-2 infection. These antibodies are given as backbone or maintenance therapy in patients with hematological malignancies and rheumatology diseases, inducing effective B-cell depletion along with antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) and disrupting infection-protective antibody responses., Case Report: We describe two cases of prolonged SARS-CoV-2 infection with common features, in two patients receiving anti-CD20 therapies, the first for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and the second for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). For CLL patient, despite administration of antiviral therapy, signs and symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection persisted for 43 days, with resolution and lymphocyte recovery from day 33. For RA patient, despite administration of two courses of antiviral therapy, signs and symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection persisted for 47 days, without resolution and lymphocyte recovery, leading to a fatal outcome due to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and unspecified sepsis., Conclusion: These two cases highlight the risk for persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients treated with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies and support a role for cellular immunity recovery for disease control., (Copyright © 2023, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus and characterized by an extremely variable disease course, ranging from asymptomatic cases to severe illness. Although all individuals may be infected by SARS-CoV-2, some people, including those of older age and/or with certain health conditions, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, and chronic respiratory disease, are at higher risk of getting seriously ill. For cancer patients, there are both direct consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, including that they are more likely to be infected by SARS-CoV-2 and more prone to develop severe complications, as well as indirect effects, such as delayed cancer diagnosis or treatment and deferred tests. Accumulating data suggest that aberrant SARS-CoV-2 immune response can be attributed to impaired interferon signaling, hyper-inflammation, and delayed adaptive immune responses. Interestingly, the SARS-CoV-2-induced immunological abnormalities, DNA damage induction, generation of micronuclei, and the virus-induced telomere shortening can abnormally activate the DNA damage response (DDR) network that plays a critical role in genome diversity and stability. We present a review of the current literature regarding the molecular mechanisms that are implicated in the abnormal interplay of the immune system and the DDR network, possibly contributing to some of the COVID-19 complications.

In several randomized studies, remdesivir (RDV) has been reported to shorten the recovery period and improve clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients, and thus, it is recommended as a standard of care. Nevertheless, controversial reports have been published. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the effectiveness of remdesivir in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia at three Greek University Departments of Infectious Diseases with homogenous treatment protocols. From September 2020 to February 2021, we retrospectively analyzed adults hospitalized with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and radiological findings of pneumonia, who received remdesivir once daily for five days. Exploratory end points were duration of hospitalization, time of intubation, and death. Overall, 551 patients were included in the study. The optimal cutoff point for the number of days needed after symptom initiation for drug administration associated with better clinical outcome was 7 days. Higher odds for discharge and lower for intubation were observed in patients with treatment initiation ≤7 days ( p = 0.052 and p = 0.019, retrospectively) regardless of gender ( p = 0.537), hypertension ( p = 0.096), dyslipidemia ( p = 0.221), diabetes mellitus ( p = 0.306), and usage of immunomodulators ( p = 0.408). Our study has demonstrated beneficial effects of early treatment with remdesivir (≤7 days from symptom onset) on rates of intubation and probability of discharge.

Since the pandemic's onset, a growing population of individuals has recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection and its long-term effects in some of the convalescents are gradually being reported. Although the precise etiopathogenesis of post-acute COVID-19 sequelae (PACS) remains elusive, the mainly accepted rationale is that SARS-CoV-2 exerts long-lasting immunomodulatory effects, promotes chronic low-grade inflammation, and causes irreversible tissue damage. So far, several viruses have been causally linked to human oncogenesis, whereas chronic inflammation and immune escape are thought to be the leading oncogenic mechanisms. Excessive cytokine release, impaired T-cell responses, aberrant activation of regulatory signaling pathways (e.g., JAK-STAT, MAPK, NF-kB), and tissue damage, hallmarks of COVID-19 disease course, are also present in the tumor microenvironment. Therefore, the intersection of COVID-19 and cancer is partially recognized and the long-term effects of the virus on oncogenesis and cancer progression have not been explored yet. Herein, we present an up-to-date review of the current literature regarding COVID-19 and cancer cross-talk, as well as the oncogenic pathways stimulated by SARS-CoV-2.

Background: Ensovibep (MP0420) is a designed ankyrin repeat protein, a novel class of engineered proteins, under investigation as a treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection., Objective: To investigate if ensovibep, in addition to remdesivir and other standard care, improves clinical outcomes among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with standard care alone., Design: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04501978)., Setting: Multinational, multicenter trial., Participants: Adults hospitalized with COVID-19., Intervention: Intravenous ensovibep, 600 mg, or placebo., Measurements: Ensovibep was assessed for early futility on the basis of pulmonary ordinal scores at day 5. The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery through day 90, defined as 14 consecutive days at home or place of usual residence after hospital discharge. A composite safety outcome that included death, serious adverse events, end-organ disease, and serious infections was assessed through day 90., Results: An independent data and safety monitoring board recommended that enrollment be halted for early futility after 485 patients were randomly assigned and received an infusion of ensovibep ( n  = 247) or placebo ( n  = 238). The odds ratio (OR) for a more favorable pulmonary outcome in the ensovibep (vs. placebo) group at day 5 was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.67 to 1.30; P  = 0.68; OR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The 90-day cumulative incidence of sustained recovery was 82% for ensovibep and 80% for placebo (subhazard ratio [sHR], 1.06 [CI, 0.88 to 1.28]; sHR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The primary composite safety outcome at day 90 occurred in 78 ensovibep participants (32%) and 70 placebo participants (29%) (HR, 1.07 [CI, 0.77 to 1.47]; HR < 1 would favor ensovibep)., Limitation: The trial was prematurely stopped because of futility, limiting power for the primary outcome., Conclusion: Compared with placebo, ensovibep did not improve clinical outcomes for hospitalized participants with COVID-19 receiving standard care, including remdesivir; no safety concerns were identified., Primary Funding Source: National Institutes of Health.

Background: Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is implicated by active endotheliitis, and cardiovascular morbidity. The long-COVID-19 syndrome implications in atherosclerosis have not been elucidated yet. We assessed the immediate, intermediate, and long-term effects of COVID-19 on endothelial function., Methods: In this prospective cohort study, patients hospitalized for COVID-19 at the medical ward or Intensive Care Unit (ICU) were enrolled and followed up to 6 months post-hospital discharge. Medical history and laboratory examinations were performed while the endothelial function was assessed by brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD). Comparison with propensity score-matched cohort (control group) was performed at the acute (upon hospital admission) and follow-up (1 and 6 months) stages., Results: Seventy-three patients diagnosed with COVID-19 (37% admitted in ICU) were recruited. FMD was significantly (p < 0.001) impaired in the COVID-19 group (1.65 ± 2.31%) compared to the control (6.51 ± 2.91%). ICU-treated subjects presented significantly impaired (p = 0.001) FMD (0.48 ± 1.01%) compared to those treated in the medical ward (2.33 ± 2.57%). During hospitalization, FMD was inversely associated with Interleukin-6 and Troponin I (p < 0.05 for all). Although, a significant improvement in FMD was noted during the follow-up (acute: 1.75 ± 2.19% vs. 1 month: 4.23 ± 2.02%, vs. 6 months: 5.24 ± 1.62%; p = 0.001), FMD remained impaired compared to control (6.48 ± 3.08%) at 1 month (p < 0.001) and 6 months (p = 0.01) post-hospital discharge., Conclusion: COVID-19 patients develop a notable endothelial dysfunction, which is progressively improved over a 6-month follow-up but remains impaired compared to healthy controls subjects. Whether chronic dysregulation of endothelial function following COVID-19 could be accompanied by a residual risk for cardiovascular and thrombotic events merits further research., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background/aim: This study analyzed the characteristics of patients with COVID-19 with major events during the first days of hospitalization., Patients and Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive patients admitted to two hospitals in Athens, Greece. The characteristics of patients with COVID-19 who suffered the primary endpoint (venous thromboembolic events, intubation, and death) during the first days of hospitalization were analyzed., Results: Among 95 patients included in the analysis, 21 presented with major adverse events during a median follow-up of 13 days. More than 50% of these patients presented with a major event during the first 3 days. Anticoagulation treatment was inversely associated with the cumulative incidence of the primary endpoint [hazard ratio=0.16 (95% confidence interval=0.06-0.47)]. Patients with major events were older, with lower baseline SatO 2 , and higher number of Wells' criteria and Charlson comorbidity index. Among these patients, those with hypertension were at higher risk for early occurrence of events (≤ first three days of hospitalization)., Conclusion: Major adverse events may occur early in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 with a high-risk profile. Anticoagulation treatment appears to reduce this risk and thus prompt thromboprophylaxis should be employed in these patients., (Copyright © 2022 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Prognostic and predictive biomarkers are being studied for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. The present study retrospectively assessed the mRNA expression of HER family receptor ligands and of other potential prognostic biomarkers and their association with time to progression (TTP), survival and clinicopathological characteristics in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) treated with trastuzumab. A total of 145 tumour tissue samples were analysed. mRNA expression analysis of the transcripts of interest was performed and the association of these markers with selected clinicopathological parameters was examined. HER2 status was centrally re-evaluated. Only 67.6% of patients were truly HER2-positive according to the central HER2 re-evaluation. Heparin binding epidermal growth factor (EGF)-like growth factor, transforming growth factor β1 (TGFB1) and thyroid hormone receptor α (THRA) mRNA expression was higher in HER2-positive patients (P=0.026, P<0.001 and P<0.001). Insulin-like growth factor binding protein 4 was correlated with retinoic acid receptor α, TGFB1 and THRA (rho=0.45, rho=0.60 and rho=0.45). In HER2-positive patients, high neuregulin 1 and high betacellulin were unfavourable factors for TTP [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.78, P=0.040 and HR=2.00, P=0.043, respectively]. In patients with de novo MBC, high EGF expression was associated with a non-significant prolongation of TTP (HR=0.52, P=0.080) and significantly longer survival (HR=0.40, P=0.020). The present study examined clinical and biological implications of specific genes and it was concluded that their expression has an impact on the outcome of trastuzumab-treated patients with MBC., Competing Interests: EM Advisory boards: Roche; GP advisory role: Roche; research funding: Roche. CC Advisory role: Roche; honoraria: Roche; advisory role: Roche. PP Advisory role: Roche; honoraria: Roche. AK Consulting or advisory role: Roche. ER Travel: Roche. AP Consultation Fees: Roche; honoraria: Roche. DP Advisory role: Roche; honoraria: Roche. GF Advisory Board: Roche., (Copyright © 2021, Spandidos Publications.)

Background/aim: Evidence suggests a beneficial effect of prone positioning (PP) in COVID-19., Materials and Methods: Meta-analysis of individual (7 investigators' groups) and aggregate data (PubMed/EMBASE) regarding the impact of PP on the ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PO 2 /FiO 2 ) in patients with COVID-19., Results: Among 121 patients (mean age±SD 59.1±10.7 years, 55% males, 57% intubated) the mean post-versus pre- PP PO 2 /FiO 2 difference was: (i) 50.4±64.3 mmHg, p<0.01, (ii) similar in awake (58.7±72.1 mmHg) versus intubated patients (44.1±57.5 mmHg, p=NS), (iii) inversely correlated with body mass index (r=-0.43, p<0.01). Meta-analysis of 23 studies (n=547, weighted age 58.3±4.1, 73% males, 59% intubated) showed a pooled PO 2 /FiO 2 difference of 61.8 [95% confidence intervals=49.9-73.6] mmHg. Meta-regression analysis revealed no associations with baseline demographics, the time in PP before assessment, and the risk of bias of the studies., Conclusion: PP seems to improve oxygenation of patients with COVID-19., (Copyright © 2022 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 has been associated with a survival benefit and is strongly recommended. However, the optimal dose of thromboprophylaxis remains unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis (PubMed/EMBASE) of studies comparing high (intermediate or therapeutic dose) versus standard (prophylactic dose) intensity of thrombo-prophylaxis with regard to outcome of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was performed. Randomized and non-randomized studies that provided adjusted effect size estimates were included. Meta-analysis of 7 studies comparing intermediate versus prophylactic dose of thromboprophylaxis (2 randomized and 5 observational, n = 2009, weighted age 61 years, males 61%, ICU 53%) revealed a pooled adjusted relative risk (RR) for death at 0.56 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.34, 0.92) in favor of the intermediate dose. For the same comparison arms, the pooled RR for venous thromboembolism was 0.84 (95% CI 0.54, 1.31), and for major bleeding events was 1.63 (95% CI 0.79, 3.37). Meta-analysis of 17 studies comparing therapeutic versus prophylactic dose of thromboprophylaxis (2 randomized and 15 observational, n = 7776, weighted age 64 years, males 54%, ICU 21%) revealed a pooled adjusted RR for death at 0.73 (95% CI 0.47, 1.14) for the therapeutic dose. An opposite trend was observed in the unadjusted analysis of 15 observational studies (RR 1.24 (95% CI 0.88, 1.74)). For the same comparison arms, the pooled RR for venous thromboembolism was 1.13 (95% CI 0.52, 2.48), and for major bleeding events 3.32 (95% CI 2.51, 4.40). In conclusion, intermediate compared with standard prophylactic dose of thromboprophylaxis appears to be rather safe and is associated with additional survival benefit, although most data are derived from observational retrospective analyses. Randomized studies are needed to define the optimal thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Early increase of soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) serum levels is indicative of increased risk of progression of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) to respiratory failure. The SAVE-MORE double-blind, randomized controlled trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of anakinra, an IL-1α/β inhibitor, in 594 patients with COVID-19 at risk of progressing to respiratory failure as identified by plasma suPAR ≥6 ng ml -1 , 85.9% (n = 510) of whom were receiving dexamethasone. At day 28, the adjusted proportional odds of having a worse clinical status (assessed by the 11-point World Health Organization Clinical Progression Scale (WHO-CPS)) with anakinra, as compared to placebo, was 0.36 (95% confidence interval 0.26-0.50). The median WHO-CPS decrease on day 28 from baseline in the placebo and anakinra groups was 3 and 4 points, respectively (odds ratio (OR) = 0.40, P < 0.0001); the respective median decrease of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score on day 7 from baseline was 0 and 1 points (OR = 0.63, P = 0.004). Twenty-eight-day mortality decreased (hazard ratio = 0.45, P = 0.045), and hospital stay was shorter., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Health care workers (HCWs) face a higher risk of infection, since they work at the front line of COVID-19 patients' management. Misinterpretations of current scientific evidence among HCWs may impact the delivery of appropriate care to COVID-19 patients and increase the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the hospital setting. Moreover, knowledge may affect HCWs perceptions depending on their broad beliefs and past experiences. The aim of this study was to explore the knowledge and perceptions of HCWs regarding COVID-19 issues during the second wave of the pandemic. A cross-sectional survey, involving a printed questionnaire, was conducted from 21 October 2020 to 31 January 2021 in four tertiary care hospitals located at four distant geographical regions in Greece. In total, 294 HCWs participated in this study. The majority of HCWs provided precise responses regarding general knowledge, perceptions, and practices concerning the COVID-19 pandemic. However, responses on hand hygiene and antimicrobial use in HCWs with COVID-19 were mistaken. This study reveals a certain degree of misconceptions and knowledge gaps in HCWs everyday practice, especially regarding hand hygiene and antimicrobial use in COVID-19 patients.

Background/aim: To investigate the efficacy (prognosis, coagulation/inflammation biomarkers) and safety (bleeding events) of different anticoagulation dosages in COVID-19 inpatients., Patients and Methods: COVID-19 inpatients (Athens, Greece) were included. The "Enhanced dose THRomboprophylaxis in Admissions (ETHRA)" protocol was applied in certain Departments, suggesting the use of intermediate anticoagulation dosage. The primary endpoint was a composite of intubation/venous thromboembolism/death. Inflammation/coagulation parameters were assessed., Results: Among 127 admissions, 95 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Twenty-one events (4 deaths, 17 intubations) were observed. Regression analysis demonstrated significant reduction of events with intermediate or therapeutic dosage [HR=0.16 (95%CI=0.05-0.52) p=0.002; HR=0.17 (0.04-0.71) p=0.015, respectively]. D-Dimer values were higher in those who met the composite endpoint. Intermediate dosage treatment was associated with decreased values of ferritin. Three patients (3%) had minor hemorrhagic complications., Conclusion: Anticoagulation treatment (particularly intermediate dosage) appears to have positive impact on COVID-19 inpatients' prognosis by inhibiting both coagulation and inflammatory cascades., (Copyright© 2021, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

A central paradigm of immunity is that interferon (IFN)-mediated antiviral responses precede pro-inflammatory ones, optimizing host protection and minimizing collateral damage 1,2 . Here, we report that for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) this paradigm does not apply. By investigating temporal IFN and inflammatory cytokine patterns in 32 moderate-to-severe patients with COVID-19 hospitalized for pneumonia and longitudinally followed for the development of respiratory failure and death, we reveal that IFN-λ and type I IFN production were both diminished and delayed, induced only in a fraction of patients as they became critically ill. On the contrary, pro-inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-8 were produced before IFNs in all patients and persisted for a prolonged time. This condition was reflected in blood transcriptomes wherein prominent IFN signatures were only seen in critically ill patients who also exhibited augmented inflammation. By comparison, in 16 patients with influenza (flu) hospitalized for pneumonia with similar clinicopathological characteristics to those of COVID-19 and 24 nonhospitalized patients with flu with milder symptoms, IFN-λ and type I IFN were robustly induced earlier, at higher levels and independently of disease severity, whereas pro-inflammatory cytokines were only acutely produced. Notably, higher IFN-λ concentrations in patients with COVID-19 correlated with lower viral load in bronchial aspirates and faster viral clearance and a higher IFN-λ to type I IFN ratio correlated with improved outcome for critically ill patients. Moreover, altered cytokine patterns in patients with COVID-19 correlated with longer hospitalization and higher incidence of critical disease and mortality compared to flu. These data point to an untuned antiviral response in COVID-19, contributing to persistent viral presence, hyperinflammation and respiratory failure.

Introduction: Greece is a country with limited spread of SARS-CoV-2 and cumulative infection attack rate of 0.12% (95% CI 0.06-0.26). Health care workers (HCWs) are a well-recognized risk group for COVID-19. The study aimed to estimate the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in a nosocomial setting and assess potential risk factors., Methods: HCWs from two hospitals participated in the study. Hospital-1 was a tertiary university affiliated center, involved in the care of COVID-19 patients while hospital-2 was a tertiary specialized cardiac surgery center not involved in the care of these patients. A validated, CE, rapid, IgM/IgG antibody point-of-care test was used. Comparative performance with a reference globally available assay was assessed., Results: 1,495 individuals consented to participate (response rate 77%). The anti-SARS-CoV-2 weighted prevalence was 1.26% (95% CI 0.43, 3.26) overall and 0.53% (95% CI 0.06, 2.78) and 2.70% (95% CI 0.57, 9.19) in hospital-1 and hospital-2, respectively although the study was underpowered to detect statistically significant differences. The overall, hospital-1, and hospital-2 seroprevalence was 10, 4 and 22 times higher than the estimated infection attack rate in general population, respectively. Suboptimal use of personal protective equipment was noted in both hospitals., Conclusions: These data have implications for the preparedness of a second wave of COVID-19 epidemic, given the low burden of SARS-CoV-2 infection rate, in concordance with national projections., Competing Interests: The study received funding from Gilead Sciences. There is a potential conflict of interest for the primary investigator, HA due to the funding received from Gilead. No other participant in the study has received funds from Gilead in any form or has been employed by Gilead. No participants have received funds for consultation services or donations or worked for any commercial company that would constitute a conflict of interest for the authors, including but not limited to Abbott and GenBody. The aforementioned competing interest does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Background: We evaluated real-world clinical outcomes and toxicity data and assessed treatment-related costs in patients with advanced breast cancer who received treatment with cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors (CDKi)., Patients and Methods: We conducted a prospective-retrospective analysis of patients with advanced hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer who received a CDKi, in combination with endocrine therapy, at any line of treatment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Cost analysis was conducted from a public third-payer (National Organization for Healthcare Services Provision (EOPYY)) perspective, assessing only costs related to direct medical care, including drug therapy costs and adverse drug reaction (ADR)-related costs., Results: From July 2015 to October 2019, 365 women received endocrine therapy combined with CDKi; median age was 61 years, postmenopausal 290 (80.6%) patients. CDKi were administered as first-line treatment in 149 (40.9%) patients, second-line treatment in 96 (26.4%) and third-line treatment and beyond in 119 (32.7%) patients. The most common adverse events were neutropenia, anaemia, thrombocytopenia and fatigue. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 86 (23.6%) patients, whereas 8 (2.2%) patients permanently discontinued treatment due to toxicity. The median PFS for patients who received CDKi as first-line, second-line and third-line treatment and beyond was 18.7, 12 and 7.4 months, respectively. The median overall survival since the initiation of CDKi treatment was 29.9 months (95% CI: 23.0-not yet reached (NR)). The mean pharmaceutical therapy cost estimated per cycle was 2 724.12 € for each patient, whereas the main driver of the ADR-related costs was haematological adverse events., Conclusions: Treatment with CDKi was well tolerated, with a low drug discontinuation rate. Patients who received CDKi as first-line treatment had improved PFS and OS compared with second-line treatment and beyond. The main component of direct medical costs assessed in the cost analysis comprises CDKi pharmaceutical therapy costs., Trial Registration Number: NCT04133207., Competing Interests: Competing interests: EF: stock ownership: GENPREX INC, ARIAD and Deciphera Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Travel grant: Merck, Pfizer and K.A.M Oncology/Hematology. Advisory: LEO Pharma. Speaker fees: Roche and Pfizer. AV: advisory boards: Angelini and Takeda. Speaker fees: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche and MSD. Training programmes: Astellas, Genesis Pharma, Pfizer, LEO, Abbvie and TEVAAN. Travel fees: Pfizer, Merck, Hospira, Sanofi, Roche, Astra Zeneca, Kyowa Kirin-Anabiosis and Rafarm. AB: advisory role and honorarium: Pfizer and Novartis. SK: consultation/advisory: Astra Zeneca and Roche. Research: Novartis and Roche. Speaker: Astra Zeneca, Novartis and Roche. IB: advisory board: Pfizer and Novartis. Educational grant: Pfizer. Research Fund: Novartis and Lilly. AN: advisory board and speaker fees: Pfizer and Novartis. GA: advisory boards: Novartis, BMS, Roche Hellas, Astra Zeneca, Sanofi, Amgen, Genesis Pharma, Merck and Pfizer. AP: consultation fees: Amgen, Merck Serono, Roche, BMS, Astra Zeneca and MSD. Honoraria: Amgen, Merck Serono, Roche, BMS, Astra Zeneca and MSD. Research funds: BMS and Kura. AK: advisory role: Genesis Pharma. Honoraria: Pfizer. Speaker’s bureau: Roche. Research funding: Merck. Travel: MSD. Educational grants: Novartis, Pfizer, Merck, Roche, BMS, MSD, Genesis and Ipsen. GM: honoraria/consultancy: Astra Zeneca, Roche, Pfizer, BMS, MSD, Takeda, Boehringer, Merck, Novartis and Amgen. Travel fees: Astra Zeneca, Roche, Pfizer, BMS, MSD, Takeda, Boehringer, Merck, Novartis, Astellas and Pierre Fabre. ER: consulting or advisory role: Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer. Research funding: Novartis, Demo Pharmaceutical, EORTC, Radius Pharmaceuticals, Tesaro, Parexel and Anabiosis Pharmaceuticals. Travel: Sanofi, Ipsen, Genesis Pharmaceuticals, LEO Pharma, Merck, Roche and Genekor. GF: advisory board: Pfizer, Sanofi and Roche. Honoraria: Astra Zeneca. Stock ownership: ARIAD and GENPREX. The rest of the authors declare no conflict of interest., (© Author (s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.)

The recent expansion of multidrug resistant and pan-drug-resistant pathogens poses significant challenges in the treatment of healthcare associated infections. An important advancement, is a handful of recently launched new antibiotics targeting some of the current most problematic Gram-negative pathogens, namely carbapenem-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) and carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa (CRPA). Less options are available against carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) and strains producing metallo-beta lactamases (MBL). Ceftazidime-avibactam signaled a turning point in the treatment of KPC and partly OXA- type carbapenemases, whereas meropenem-vaborbactam was added as a potent combination against KPC-producers. Ceftolozane-tazobactam could be seen as an ideal beta-lactam backbone for the treatment of CRPA. Plazomicin, an aminoglycoside with better pharmacokinetics and less toxicity compared to other class members, will cover important proportions of multi-drug resistant pathogens. Eravacycline holds promise in the treatment of infections by CRAB, with a broad spectrum of activity similar to tigecycline, and improved pharmacokinetics. Novel drugs and combinations are not to be considered "panacea" for the ongoing crisis in the therapy of XDR Gram-negative bacteria and colistin will continue to be considered as a fundamental companion drug for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (particularly in areas where MBL predominate), for the treatment of CRPA (in many cases being the only in vitro active drug) as well as CRAB. Aminoglycosides are still important companion antibiotics. Finally, fosfomycin as part of combination treatment for CRE infections and P. aeruginosa , deserves a greater attention. Optimal conditions for monotherapy and the "when and how" of combination treatments integrating the novel agents will be discussed.

Treatment options for multidrug resistant Acinetobacter baumannii strains (MDR-AB) are limited. Minocycline has been used alone or in combination in the treatment of infections associated with AB. A systematic review of the clinical use of minocycline in nosocomial infections associated with MDR-AB was performed according to the PRISMA-P guidelines. PubMed-Medline, Scopus and Web of Science TM databases were searched from their inception until March 2019. Additional Google Scholar free searches were performed. Out of 2990 articles, 10 clinical studies (9 retrospective case series and 1 prospective single center trial) met the eligibility criteria. In total, 223 out of 268 (83.2%) evaluated patients received a minocycline-based regimen; and 200 out of 218 (91.7%) patients with available data received minocycline as part of a combination antimicrobial regimen (most frequently colistin or carbapenems). Pneumonia was the most common infection type in the 268 cases (80.6% with 50.4% ventilator-associated pneumonia). The clinical and microbiological success rates following minocycline treatment were 72.6% and 60.2%, respectively. Mortality was 20.9% among 167 patients with relevant data. In this systematic review, minocycline demonstrated promising activity against MDR-AB isolates. This review sets the ground for further studies exploring the role of minocycline in the treatment of MDR-AB associated infections., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.Appendix A