Airborne PM Impact on Health, Overview of Variables, and Key Factors to Decision Making in Air Quality

This chapter intends to contribute to the understanding of the multiple aspects related to particulate matter (PM) in an air urban environment, in particular, regarding its impact on human health. A general overview of variables and key factors is presented to identify, relate, and understand the diverse and multidisciplinary variables that contribute to PM concentration in urban environments associated with health impacts. This relation is difficult to quantify, given the numerous variables that are interlinked due to the multidisciplinary aspects involved. Our aim is to identify the main multidisciplinary aspects, namely, meteorology, urban geometry, buildings, roads and footpaths, road traffic, industries, air concentration measurements, and health. The main strategic aspects for decision making related to airborne PM impact on health are also discussed

COVID-19 and Intracranial Hemorrhage: A Multicenter Case Series, Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis

Introduction: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) profoundly impacts hemostasis and microvasculature. In the light of the dilemma between thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications, in the present paper, we systematically investigate the prevalence, mortality, radiological subtypes, and clinical characteristics of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients. Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we performed a systematic review of the literature by screening the PubMed database and included patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and concomitant ICH. We performed a pooled analysis, including a prospectively collected cohort of critically ill COVID-19 patients with ICH, as part of the PANDEMIC registry (Pooled Analysis of Neurologic Disorders Manifesting in Intensive Care of COVID-19). Results: Our literature review revealed a total of 217 citations. After the selection process, 79 studies and a total of 477 patients were included. The median age was 58.8 years. A total of 23.3% of patients experienced the critical stage of COVID-19, 62.7% of patients were on anticoagulation and 27.5% of the patients received ECMO. The prevalence of ICH was at 0.85% and the mortality at 52.18%, respectively. Conclusion: ICH in COVID-19 patients is rare, but it has a very poor prognosis. Different subtypes of ICH seen in COVID-19, support the assumption of heterogeneous and multifaceted pathomechanisms contributing to ICH in COVID-19. Further clinical and pathophysiological investigations are warranted to resolve the conflict between thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications in the future

Sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with severe or critical COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

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, 11% (17 of 159) were in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 10% (18 of 173) were in the sarilumab 400 mg group. Interpretation: This trial did not show efficacy of sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and receiving supplemental oxygen. Adequately powered trials of targeted immunomodulatory therapies assessing survival as a primary endpoint are suggested in patients with critical COVID-19. Funding: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals

Sin / Sense

Sexto desafío por la erradicación de la violencia contra las mujeres del Institut Universitari d’Estudis Feministes i de Gènere «Purificación Escribano» de la Universitat Jaume

Toxicities of novel therapies for hematologic malignancies

Introduction: Over the last decade targeted therapies have transformed the treatment landscape for hematologic malignancies with >70 new or extended approvals by the FDA since 2010. Since many of these drugs are registered for multiple entities and >1/3 were approved in the last two years, treatment options in hematology are rapidly expanding. Despite the justified excitement around the often previously unseen emerging therapeutic potential, distinct side-effect profiles require vigilance and adequate management by patients and caregivers. Areas covered: This review provides a summary of the unique toxicity profiles of therapies for hematologic malignancies during the last decade with a focus on clinical implications and applicability. Due to the already wide implementation in common practice or an immense potential thereof selected treatments such as immune checkpoint inhibitors, various monoclonal antibodies, tyrosine kinase inhibitors and CAR T-cell therapies are discussed in detail. Challenges and potential strategies to assess and manage real-world toxicity after drug approval are addressed. Expert opinion: The rapidly expanding therapeutic landscape of hematologic malignancies comes with a broad spectrum of side effects which are distinct from conventional hematotoxicity and require alertness

Plasma exchange with COVID-19 convalescent plasma in a patient with severe ANCA-associated vasculitis and COVID-19 pneumonia after rituximab therapy

The combination of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia and pulmonary-renal syndrome due to ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) poses diagnostic uncertainty and a therapeutic dilemma. According to current limited knowledge of COVID-19, the application of commonly used drugs in AAV, cyclophosphamide (CYC) and rituximab (RTX), must be weighed carefully in active COVID-19 infection. We report a case of a 52-year-old male patient with concurrent severe COVID-19 pneumonia and acute relapse of pulmonary-renal syndrome due to AAV after recent RTX maintenance dose. The patient presented with severe hypoxaemia, complete B-cell depletion and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 viraemia. He was successfully treated with therapeutic plasma exchange employing COVID-19 convalescent plasma

Batten down the hatches: CAR T-cells - immuno-oncology meets intensive care medicine

CAR T-cell treatment has brought a significant benefit for patients with relapsed and refractory lymphoma and even long lasting remissions seem to be possible. Despite the good results CAR T-cell treatment is associated with severe and potentially life-threatening adverse effects. Patients regularly develop Cytokine Release Syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) after the transfusion of CAR T-cells. In addition to these immunological reactions patients can develop severe and life-threatening infections and other related adverse effects. Due to the increasing number of patients receiving CAR T-cells and the upcoming clinical trials more and more patients will potentially require intensive care treatment for the adverse effects after CAR T-cell treatment. The management of these patients requires an extensive diagnostic workup and complex treatment. An interdisciplinary team of hematologist, intensivist and others like neurologist and palliative medicine consultants is crucial for the best treatment of these patients. Together with the increasing number of patients this can lead to logistical issues for the intensive care departments of centers offering CAR T-cell therapies