Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Funder: laura and john arnold foundationBACKGROUND: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX ). METHODS: In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. RESULTS: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care

Impact of clinical phenotypes on management and outcomes in European atrial fibrillation patients: a report from the ESC-EHRA EURObservational Research Programme in AF (EORP-AF) General Long-Term Registry

Background: Epidemiological studies in atrial fibrillation (AF) illustrate that clinical complexity increase the risk of major adverse outcomes. We aimed to describe European AF patients\u2019 clinical phenotypes and analyse the differential clinical course. Methods: We performed a hierarchical cluster analysis based on Ward\u2019s Method and Squared Euclidean Distance using 22 clinical binary variables, identifying the optimal number of clusters. We investigated differences in clinical management, use of healthcare resources and outcomes in a cohort of European AF patients from a Europe-wide observational registry. Results: A total of 9363 were available for this analysis. We identified three clusters: Cluster 1 (n = 3634; 38.8%) characterized by older patients and prevalent non-cardiac comorbidities; Cluster 2 (n = 2774; 29.6%) characterized by younger patients with low prevalence of comorbidities; Cluster 3 (n = 2955;31.6%) characterized by patients\u2019 prevalent cardiovascular risk factors/comorbidities. Over a mean follow-up of 22.5 months, Cluster 3 had the highest rate of cardiovascular events, all-cause death, and the composite outcome (combining the previous two) compared to Cluster 1 and Cluster 2 (all P <.001). An adjusted Cox regression showed that compared to Cluster 2, Cluster 3 (hazard ratio (HR) 2.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.27\u20133.62; HR 3.42, 95%CI 2.72\u20134.31; HR 2.79, 95%CI 2.32\u20133.35), and Cluster 1 (HR 1.88, 95%CI 1.48\u20132.38; HR 2.50, 95%CI 1.98\u20133.15; HR 2.09, 95%CI 1.74\u20132.51) reported a higher risk for the three outcomes respectively. Conclusions: In European AF patients, three main clusters were identified, differentiated by differential presence of comorbidities. Both non-cardiac and cardiac comorbidities clusters were found to be associated with an increased risk of major adverse outcomes

Male breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers : pathology data from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2

Background: BRCA1 and, more commonly, BRCA2 mutations are associated with increased risk of male breast cancer (MBC). However, only a paucity of data exists on the pathology of breast cancers (BCs) in men with BRCA1/2 mutations. Using the largest available dataset, we determined whether MBCs arising in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers display specific pathologic features and whether these features differ from those of BRCA1/2 female BCs (FBCs). Methods: We characterised the pathologic features of 419 BRCA1/2 MBCs and, using logistic regression analysis, contrasted those with data from 9675 BRCA1/2 FBCs and with population-based data from 6351 MBCs in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Results: Among BRCA2 MBCs, grade significantly decreased with increasing age at diagnosis (P = 0.005). Compared with BRCA2 FBCs, BRCA2 MBCs were of significantly higher stage (P for trend = 2 x 10(-5)) and higher grade (P for trend = 0.005) and were more likely to be oestrogen receptor-positive [odds ratio (OR) 10.59; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 5.15-21.80] and progesterone receptor-positive (OR 5.04; 95 % CI 3.17-8.04). With the exception of grade, similar patterns of associations emerged when we compared BRCA1 MBCs and FBCs. BRCA2 MBCs also presented with higher grade than MBCs from the SEER database (P for trend = 4 x 10(-12)). Conclusions: On the basis of the largest series analysed to date, our results show that BRCA1/2 MBCs display distinct pathologic characteristics compared with BRCA1/2 FBCs, and we identified a specific BRCA2-associated MBC phenotype characterised by a variable suggesting greater biological aggressiveness (i.e., high histologic grade). These findings could lead to the development of gender-specific risk prediction models and guide clinical strategies appropriate for MBC management.Peer reviewe

Associations between Prenatal Urinary Biomarkers of Phthalate Exposure and Preterm Birth: A Pooled Study of 16 US Cohorts

Importance: Phthalate exposure is widespread among pregnant women and may be a risk factor for preterm birth. Objective: To investigate the prospective association between urinary biomarkers of phthalates in pregnancy and preterm birth among individuals living in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: Individual-level data were pooled from 16 preconception and pregnancy studies conducted in the US. Pregnant individuals who delivered between 1983 and 2018 and provided 1 or more urine samples during pregnancy were included. Exposures: Urinary phthalate metabolites were quantified as biomarkers of phthalate exposure. Concentrations of 11 phthalate metabolites were standardized for urine dilution and mean repeated measurements across pregnancy were calculated. Main Outcomes and Measures: Logistic regression models were used to examine the association between each phthalate metabolite with the odds of preterm birth, defined as less than 37 weeks of gestation at delivery (n = 539). Models pooled data using fixed effects and adjusted for maternal age, race and ethnicity, education, and prepregnancy body mass index. The association between the overall mixture of phthalate metabolites and preterm birth was also examined with logistic regression. G-computation, which requires certain assumptions to be considered causal, was used to estimate the association with hypothetical interventions to reduce the mixture concentrations on preterm birth. Results: The final analytic sample included 6045 participants (mean [SD] age, 29.1 [6.1] years). Overall, 802 individuals (13.3%) were Black, 2323 (38.4%) were Hispanic/Latina, 2576 (42.6%) were White, and 328 (5.4%) had other race and ethnicity (including American Indian/Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian, >1 racial identity, or reported as other). Most phthalate metabolites were detected in more than 96% of participants. Higher odds of preterm birth, ranging from 12% to 16%, were observed in association with an interquartile range increase in urinary concentrations of mono-n-butyl phthalate (odds ratio [OR], 1.12 [95% CI, 0.98-1.27]), mono-isobutyl phthalate (OR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.00-1.34]), mono(2-ethyl-5-carboxypentyl) phthalate (OR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.00-1.34]), and mono(3-carboxypropyl) phthalate (OR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.01-1.29]). Among approximately 90 preterm births per 1000 live births in this study population, hypothetical interventions to reduce the mixture of phthalate metabolite levels by 10%, 30%, and 50% were estimated to prevent 1.8 (95% CI, 0.5-3.1), 5.9 (95% CI, 1.7-9.9), and 11.1 (95% CI, 3.6-18.3) preterm births, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Results from this large US study population suggest that phthalate exposure during pregnancy may be a preventable risk factor for preterm delivery

Bisimilarity is not Finitely Based over BPA with Interrupt

This paper shows that bisimulation equivalence does not afford a finite equational axiomatization over the language obtained by enriching Bergstra and Klop’s Basic Process Algebra with the interrupt operator. Moreover, it is shown that the collection of closed equations over this language is also not finitely based. In sharp contrast to these results, the collection of closed equations over the language BPA enriched with the disrupt operator is proven to be finitely based

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients with Concomitant Cancer: A Literature Review

ObjectivesAbdominal aortic aneurysmal (AAA) repair in patients with concomitant cancer is controversial due to increased comorbidity and reduced life expectancy in this specific patient group. This literature review aims to investigate the evidence supporting one treatment modality over another (endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) or open repair (OR)), as well as treatment strategy (staged AAA-, cancer first or simultaneous procedures) in patients with AAA and concomitant cancer.MethodsLiterature review, including studies published from 2000 to 2021 on surgical treatment in patients with AAA and concomitant cancer and related outcomes (30-day morbidity/complications as well as 30-day and 3-year mortality).Results24 studies comprising 560 patients undergoing surgical treatment of AAA and concomitant cancer were included. Of these, 220 cases were treated with EVAR and 340 with OR. Simultaneous procedures were performed in 190 cases, 370 received staged procedures. The 30-day mortality for EVAR versus OR was 1% and 8%, corresponding to a relative risk (RR) of 0.11 (95% CI: 0.03–0.46, p = 0.002). No difference in mortality was observed between staged versus simultaneous procedure nor between AAA-first versus cancer-first strategy, RR 0.59 (95% CI: 0.29–1.1, p = 0.13) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.34–2.31, p = 0.80), respectively. Overall, 3-year mortality was 21% for EVAR and 39% for OR from 2000–2021, while the mortality up to 3 years after EVAR within recent years (2015–2021) was 16%.ConclusionThis review supports EVAR treatment as first choice if suitable. No consensus was established on treating either the aneurysm or the cancer first or simultaneously. Long-term mortality after EVAR was comparable to non-cancer patients within recent years

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients with Concomitant Cancer: A Literature Review

ObjectivesAbdominal aortic aneurysmal (AAA) repair in patients with concomitant cancer is controversial due to increased comorbidity and reduced life expectancy in this specific patient group. This literature review aims to investigate the evidence supporting one treatment modality over another (endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) or open repair (OR)), as well as treatment strategy (staged AAA-, cancer first or simultaneous procedures) in patients with AAA and concomitant cancer.MethodsLiterature review, including studies published from 2000 to 2021 on surgical treatment in patients with AAA and concomitant cancer and related outcomes (30-day morbidity/complications as well as 30-day and 3-year mortality).Results24 studies comprising 560 patients undergoing surgical treatment of AAA and concomitant cancer were included. Of these, 220 cases were treated with EVAR and 340 with OR. Simultaneous procedures were performed in 190 cases, 370 received staged procedures. The 30-day mortality for EVAR versus OR was 1% and 8%, corresponding to a relative risk (RR) of 0.11 (95% CI: 0.03–0.46, p = 0.002). No difference in mortality was observed between staged versus simultaneous procedure nor between AAA-first versus cancer-first strategy, RR 0.59 (95% CI: 0.29–1.1, p = 0.13) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.34–2.31, p = 0.80), respectively. Overall, 3-year mortality was 21% for EVAR and 39% for OR from 2000–2021, while the mortality up to 3 years after EVAR within recent years (2015–2021) was 16%.ConclusionThis review supports EVAR treatment as first choice if suitable. No consensus was established on treating either the aneurysm or the cancer first or simultaneously. Long-term mortality after EVAR was comparable to non-cancer patients within recent years