The level of knowledge, attitude and practice on complementary feeding among caregivers in Kampung Jeriah, Sibu, Sarawak from 23rd September 2013 to 8th December 2013

Background: The period for complementary feeding is crucial for young infants. Lack of awareness in knowledge, attitude and practice towards complementary feeding among caregivers will lead to improper practice of complementary feeding which may affect the health of children under their care. Objective: The purpose of this study is to determine the level of knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) on complementary feeding among caregivers in Kampung Jeriah, Sibu, Sarawak. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study done among 60 caregivers in Kampung Jeriah, Sibu, Sarawak. Non-probability sampling method was adopted to select at least one caregiver from each household in the village. A self-administered style of data collection was used. The data was analysed for descriptive data of mean, median, frequencies and standard deviation using SPSS version 20.0. Results: Among the respondents, the levels of KAP are 61.7%, 50% and 60% respectively. In this study, the respondents with lower income have significantly better knowledge regarding complementary feeding (p=0.01). The results also showed that respondents aged 25-44 years old had good practice towards complementary feeding as compared to younger or older group, which is reflected in the p value 0.032. Almost half of the respondents with good level of knowledge (48.6%) started to give complementary food to their child at age 6 months old. Conclusion: Generally, the respondents had a satisfactory level of knowledge and practices towards complementary feeding. However. the level of attitude on complementary feeding was relatively low compared to the level of knowledge and practice. Statistically, there was no significant correlation between the three components (knowledge, attitude and practice on complementary feeding). It was recommended that more health education should be held by the health authority on complementary feeding so that the knowledge, attitude and practice of caregivers on the topic could be improved. II

Outcome of infection with omicron SARS‐CoV‐2 variant in patients with hematological malignancies : an EPICOVIDEHA survey report

International audienceSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has caused high mortality in patients with hematological malignancies (HM). 1 The newly emerged omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2 harbor multiple novel spike protein mutations that raise concerns about vaccine efficiency and antiviral efficacy of the available therapeutic monoclonal antibodies. 2 The first published clinical data in immunocompetent patients have found that infection with omicron variants is associated with reduced vaccine efficiency compared to the delta variants, but decreased hospital admission and mortality. 3,4 Preliminary, prepublished, data from a large case-control study have shown that the vaccine effect against omicron in immunocompromised patients, including HM patients, is even more reduced, but data regarding clinical outcomes are lacking. 5 The aim of this study was to describe risk factors, antiviral treatment and outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant infection in 593 HM patients included in the EPICOVIDEHA registry. EPICOVIDEHA is an international open web-based registry for patients with HM infected with SARS-CoV-2. 1,6 Both hospitalized and nonhospitalized patients are eligible for inclusion. The questionnaire includes data on the HM, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status, risk factors for severe COVID-19 infection, SARS-CoV-2 virus variant, antiviral treatment, and outcomes including mortality (eFigure 1 and eTable 4)

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in COVID-19 patients with haematological malignancies: a report from the EPICOVIDEHA registry

International audienceBackground: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment decreases the hospitalisation rate in immunocompetent patients with COVID-19, but data on efficacy in patients with haematological malignancy are scarce. Here, we describe the outcome of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment in a large cohort of the latter patients. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study from the multicentre EPICOVIDEHA registry (NCT04733729) on patients with haematological malignancy, who were diagnosed with COVID-19 between January and September 2022. Patients receiving nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were compared to those who did not. A logistic regression was run to determine factors associated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir administration in our sample. Mortality between treatment groups was assessed with Kaplan–Meier survival plots after matching all the patients with a propensity score. Additionally, a Cox regression was modelled to detect factors associated with mortality in patients receiving nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Findings: A total of 1859 patients were analysed, 117 (6%) were treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, 1742 (94%) were treated otherwise. Of 117 patients receiving nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, 80% had received ≥1 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose before COVID-19 onset, 13% of which received a 2nd vaccine booster. 5% were admitted to ICU. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment was associated with the presence of extrapulmonary symptoms at COVID-19 onset, for example anosmia, fever, rhinitis, or sinusitis (aOR 2.509, 95%CI 1.448–4.347) and 2nd vaccine booster (aOR 3.624, 95%CI 1.619–8.109). Chronic pulmonary disease (aOR 0.261, 95%CI 0.093–0.732) and obesity (aOR 0.105, 95%CI 0.014–0.776) were not associated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir use. After propensity score matching, day-30 mortality rate in patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was 2%, significantly lower than in patients with SARS-CoV-2 directed treatment other than nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (11%, p = 0.036). No factor was observed explaining the mortality difference in patients after nirmatrelvir/ritonavir administration. Interpretation: Haematological malignancy patients were more likely to receive nirmatrelvir/ritonavir when reporting extrapulmonary symptoms or 2nd vaccine booster at COVID-19 onset, as opposed to chronic pulmonary disease and obesity. The mortality rate in patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was lower than in patients with targeted drugs other than nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Funding: EPICOVIDEHA has received funds from Optics COMMIT (COVID-19 Unmet Medical Needs and Associated Research Extension) COVID-19 RFP program by GILEAD Science, United States (Project 2020-8223)

COVID-19 infection in adult patients with hematological malignancies: a European Hematology Association Survey (EPICOVIDEHA)

Background: Patients with hematological malignancies (HM) are at high risk of mortality from SARS-CoV-2 disease 2019 (COVID-19). A better understanding of risk factors for adverse outcomes may improve clinical management in these patients. We therefore studied baseline characteristics of HM patients developing COVID-19 and analyzed predictors of mortality. Methods: The survey was supported by the Scientifc Working Group Infection in Hematology of the European Hematology Association (EHA). Eligible for the analysis were adult patients with HM and laboratory-confrmed COVID19 observed between March and December 2020. Results: The study sample includes 3801 cases, represented by lymphoproliferative (mainly non- Hodgkin lymphoma n=1084, myeloma n=684 and chronic lymphoid leukemia n=474) and myeloproliferative malignancies (mainly acute myeloid leukemia n=497 and myelodysplastic syndromes n=279). Severe/critical COVID-19 was observed in 63.8% of patients (n=2425). Overall, 2778 (73.1%) of the patients were hospitalized, 689 (18.1%) of whom were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Overall, 1185 patients (31.2%) died. The primary cause of death was COVID19 in 688 patients (58.1%), HM in 173 patients (14.6%), and a combination of both COVID-19 and progressing HM in 155 patients (13.1%). Highest mortality was observed in acute myeloid leukemia (199/497, 40%) and myelodysplastic syndromes (118/279, 42.3%). The mortality rate signifcantly decreased between the frst COVID-19 wave (March–May 2020) and the second wave (October–December 2020) (581/1427, 40.7% vs. 439/1773, 24.8%, p value<0.0001). In the multivariable analysis, age, active malignancy, chronic cardiac disease, liver disease, renal impairment, smoking history, and ICU stay correlated with mortality. Acute myeloid leukemia was a higher mortality risk than lymphoproliferative diseases. Conclusions: This survey confrms that COVID-19 patients with HM are at high risk of lethal complications. However, improved COVID-19 prevention has reduced mortality despite an increase in the number of reported cases

Age, successive waves, immunization, and mortality in elderly COVID-19 hematological patients: EPICOVIDEHA findings

Objectives: Elderly patients with hematologic malignancies face the highest risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. The infection's impact on different age groups remains unstudied in detail. Methods: We analyzed elderly patients (age groups: 65-70, 71-75, 76-80, and >80 years old) with hematologic malignancies included in the EPICOVIDEHA registry between January 2020 and July 2022. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression models were conducted to identify factors influencing death in COVID-19 patients with hematological malignancy. Results: The study included data from 3,603 elderly patients (aged 65 or older) with hematological malignancy, with a majority being male (58.1%) and a significant proportion having comorbidities. The patients were divided into four age groups, and the analysis assessed COVID-19 outcomes, vaccination status, and other variables in relation to age and pandemic waves. The 90-day survival rate for patients with COVID-19 was 71.2%, with significant differences between groups. The pandemic waves had varying impacts, with the first wave affecting patients over 80 years old, the second being more severe in 65-70, and the third being the least severe in all age groups. Factors contributing to 90-day mortality included age, comorbidities, lymphopenia, active malignancy, acute leukemia, less than three vaccine doses, severe COVID-19, and using only corticosteroids as treatment. Conclusion: These data underscore the heterogeneity of elderly hematological patients, highlight the different impacts of COVID-19 waves and the pivotal importance of vaccination, and may help in planning future healthcare efforts

36-month clinical outcomes of patients with venous thromboembolism: GARFIELD-VTE

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), encompassing both deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide.Methods: GARFIELD-VTE is a prospective, non-interventional observational study of real-world treatment practices. We aimed to capture the 36-month clinical outcomes of 10,679 patients with objectively confirmed VTE enrolled between May 2014 and January 2017 from 415 sites in 28 countries.Findings: A total of 6582 (61.6 %) patients had DVT alone, 4097 (38.4 %) had PE +/- DVT. At baseline, 98.1 % of patients received anticoagulation (AC) with or without other modalities of therapy. The proportion of patients on AC therapy decreased over time: 87.6 % at 3 months, 73.0 % at 6 months, 54.2 % at 12 months and 42.0 % at 36 months. At 12-months follow-up, the incidences (95 % confidence interval [CI]) of all-cause mortality, recurrent VTE and major bleeding were 6.5 (7.0-8.1), 5.4 (4.9-5.9) and 2.7 (2.4-3.0) per 100 person-years, respectively. At 36-months, these decreased to 4.4 (4.2-4.7), 3.5 (3.2-2.7) and 1.4 (1.3-1.6) per 100 person-years, respectively. Over 36-months, the rate of all-cause mortality and major bleeds were highest in patients treated with parenteral therapy (PAR) versus oral anti-coagulants (OAC) and no OAC, and the rate of recurrent VTE was highest in patients on no OAC versus those on PAR and OAC. The most frequent cause of death after 36-month follow-up was cancer (n = 565, 48.6 %), followed by cardiac (n = 94, 8.1 %), and VTE (n = 38, 3.2 %). Most recurrent VTE events were DVT alone (n = 564, 63.3 %), with the remainder PE, (n = 236, 27.3 %), or PE in combination with DVT (n = 63, 7.3 %).Interpretation: GARFIELD-VTE provides a global perspective of anticoagulation patterns and highlights the accumulation of events within the first 12 months after diagnosis. These findings may help identify treatment gaps for subsequent interventions to improve patient outcomes in this patient population

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field