Clinical Profiles, Laboratory Biomarkers, and Mortality in Cancer Patients with Lower Respiratory Tract Infections: A Prospective Cohort Study

Respiratory tract infections (RTIs) pose a substantial health burden worldwide, especially among immunocompromised groups like cancer patients. The aim of this prospective cohort study was to explore lower respiratory tract infections in cancer patients. We followed 107 cases with clinically or radiologically suspected lower respiratory tract infections until discharge or death, comprising 65 males and 42 females across diverse age groups. Clinical evaluations, including patient history, examination, and malignancy diagnosis, were conducted. Nasopharyngeal swabs (NPSs), sputum samples, and blood samples were collected within 24 h of symptom onset. Multiplex Real-Time PCR allowed for the simultaneous detection of viral, bacterial, and fungal infections, while conventional microbiological culture methods were used for bacterial and fungal analysis. SARS-CoV-2 infection was excluded in all of the enrolled patients using real-time RT-PCR. Hematological and biochemical analyses included hemoglobin, lymphocyte, neutrophil, and platelet counts, along with ALT, AST, creatinine, and CRP levels. Significant differences were noted in clinical presentations, management outcomes, and prognostic markers among patients with different hematological malignancies. Distinct clinical profiles were identified for leukemia, lymphoma, and solid tumors, with variations in age distribution and symptom prevalence. ICU admission rates varied significantly, with solid tumor patients exhibiting higher rates. The hematological and biochemical biomarkers differed across malignancies, with notable associations between lymphopenia, thrombocytopenia, and mortality following respiratory episodes. This study highlights the critical role of rapid pathogen detection and infection control measures in safeguarding vulnerable cancer patients from nosocomial transmission

Association between Pediatric Adenovirus Infection and Type 1 Diabetes

Background: Viruses are among the inducers of type 1 diabetes (T1D) as they are implicated in the initiation of β-cell destruction. This study aimed to explore the link between adenoviruses’ infection, inflammatory biomarkers, and the development of T1D. Methods: The study population included 80 children with T1D and 40 healthy controls (2–16 years old). The T1D group was further clustered into two groups according to time of T1D diagnosis: a group of children who were diagnosed during the first year of life and a second group who were diagnosed after the first year of life. Adenovirus DNA, anti-adenovirus IgG, cytokines, and lipid profiles were screened in the different groups. The results were statistically assessed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and LSD t-test. Results: Positive adenovirus PCR was detected in 2.5% and 20% of normal and T1D children, respectively. Moreover, the positive PCR results for adenovirus were found significantly higher in the T1D group, who were diagnosed during the first year of life (33.4%), in comparison to those diagnosed after the first year of life (12%). Anti-adenoviruses IgG was found in 12.5% and 40% of healthy controls and diabetic children, respectively. Seropositive results were found to be higher in newly diagnosed children (46.7%) in comparison to those previously diagnosed with T1D (36%). Body mass index (BMI), IFN-γ, IL-15, adiponectin, lipid profile, and microalbuminuria were significantly increased in T1D adenoviruses-positive children compared to children who were negative for adenoviruses. Conclusions: Adenovirus infection could be among the contributing risk factors and may play a role in the induction of T1D in children

Comparison of Different Antiviral Regimens in the Treatment of Patients with Severe COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes respiratory disorders, with disease severity ranging from asymptomatic to critical manifestations. The current retrospective study compared the efficacies of different antiviral regimens used in patients suffering from severe COVID-19 disease from 19 January 2020 to December 2021 in a single center in Saudi Arabia. In total, 188 patients were enrolled in the current study, including 158 patients treated with different antiviral regimens, and 30 who did not receive any antiviral treatment. Different antiviral regimens, including favipiravir, remdesivir, oseltamivir, favipiravir/remdesivir, and favipiravir/oseltamivir were adopted. The effects of using different antivirals and antibiotics on the survival rate were evaluated, as well as the presence of comorbidities. Among all severely affected patients, 39/188 (20.7%) survived. Both age and comorbidities, including diabetes and hypertension, were significantly correlated with high case fatality following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Remdesivir alone and the combination of favipiravir and remdesivir increased the survival rate. Surprisingly, both imipenem and linezolid helped in the deterioration of disease outcome in the patients. A negative correlation was detected between increased mortality and the use of favipiravir and the use of either imipenem or linezolid. Among the compared antiviral regimens used in the treatment of severe COVID-19, remdesivir was found to be an effective antiviral that reduces COVID-19 case fatality. Antibiotic treatment using imipenem and/or linezolid should be carefully re-evaluated

Comparison of Different Antiviral Regimens in the Treatment of Patients with Severe COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes respiratory disorders, with disease severity ranging from asymptomatic to critical manifestations. The current retrospective study compared the efficacies of different antiviral regimens used in patients suffering from severe COVID-19 disease from 19 January 2020 to December 2021 in a single center in Saudi Arabia. In total, 188 patients were enrolled in the current study, including 158 patients treated with different antiviral regimens, and 30 who did not receive any antiviral treatment. Different antiviral regimens, including favipiravir, remdesivir, oseltamivir, favipiravir/remdesivir, and favipiravir/oseltamivir were adopted. The effects of using different antivirals and antibiotics on the survival rate were evaluated, as well as the presence of comorbidities. Among all severely affected patients, 39/188 (20.7%) survived. Both age and comorbidities, including diabetes and hypertension, were significantly correlated with high case fatality following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Remdesivir alone and the combination of favipiravir and remdesivir increased the survival rate. Surprisingly, both imipenem and linezolid helped in the deterioration of disease outcome in the patients. A negative correlation was detected between increased mortality and the use of favipiravir and the use of either imipenem or linezolid. Among the compared antiviral regimens used in the treatment of severe COVID-19, remdesivir was found to be an effective antiviral that reduces COVID-19 case fatality. Antibiotic treatment using imipenem and/or linezolid should be carefully re-evaluated