Early outcome of a 31-gene expression profile test in 86 AJCC stage IB-II melanoma patients. A prospective multicentre cohort study

Background: The clinical and pathological features of primary melanoma are not sufficiently sensitive to accurately predict which patients are at a greater risk of relapse. Recently, a 31-gene expression profile (DecisionDx-Melanoma) test has shown promising results. Objectives: To evaluate the early prognostic performance of a genetic signature in a multicentre prospectively evaluated cohort. Methods: Inclusion of patients with AJCC stages IB and II conducted between April 2015 and December 2016. All patients were followed up prospectively to assess their risk of relapse. Prognostic performance of this test was evaluated individually and later combined with the AJCC staging system. Prognostic accuracy of disease-free survival was determined using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analysis. Results of the gene expression profile test were designated as Class 1 (low risk) and Class 2 (high risk). Results: Median follow-up time was 26 months (IQR 22-30). The gene expression profile test was performed with 86 patients; seven had developed metastasis (8.1%) and all of them were in the Class 2 group, representing 21.2% of this group. Gene expression profile was an independent prognostic factor for relapse as indicated by multivariate Cox regression analysis, adjusted for AJCC stages and age. Conclusions: This prospective multicentre cohort study, performed in a Spanish Caucasian cohort, shows that this 31-gene expression profile test could correctly identify patients at early AJCC stages who are at greater risk of relapse. We believe that gene expression profile in combination with the AJCC staging system could well improve the detection of patients who need intensive surveillance and optimize follow-up strategies

Choice of the initial antiretroviral treatment for HIV-positive individuals in the era of integrase inhibitors

BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe the most frequently prescribed initial antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens in recent years in HIV-positive persons in the Cohort of the Spanish HIV/AIDS Research Network (CoRIS) and to investigate factors associated with the choice of each regimen. METHODS: We analyzed initial ART regimens prescribed in adults participating in CoRIS from 2014 to 2017. Only regimens prescribed in >5% of patients were considered. We used multivariable multinomial regression to estimate Relative Risk Ratios (RRRs) for the association between sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and the choice of the initial regimen. RESULTS: Among 2874 participants, abacavir(ABC)/lamivudine(3TC)/dolutegavir(DTG) was the most frequently prescribed regimen (32.1%), followed by tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC)/elvitegravir(EVG)/cobicistat(COBI) (14.9%), TDF/FTC/rilpivirine (RPV) (14.0%), tenofovir alafenamide (TAF)/FTC/EVG/COBI (13.7%), TDF/FTC+DTG (10.0%), TDF/FTC+darunavir/ritonavir or darunavir/cobicistat (bDRV) (9.8%) and TDF/FTC+raltegravir (RAL) (5.6%). Compared with ABC/3TC/DTG, starting TDF/FTC/RPV was less likely in patients with CD4100.000 copies/mL. TDF/FTC+DTG was more frequent in those with CD4100.000 copies/mL. TDF/FTC+RAL and TDF/FTC+bDRV were also more frequent among patients with CD4<200 cells//muL and with transmission categories other than men who have sex with men. Compared with ABC/3TC/DTG, the prescription of other initial ART regimens decreased from 2014-2015 to 2016-2017 with the exception of TDF/FTC+DTG. Differences in the choice of the initial ART regimen were observed by hospitals' location. CONCLUSIONS: The choice of initial ART regimens is consistent with Spanish guidelines' recommendations, but is also clearly influenced by physician's perception based on patient's clinical and sociodemographic variables and by the prescribing hospital location

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

Effects of hospital facilities on patient outcomes after cancer surgery: an international, prospective, observational study

Background Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide.Methods A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study-a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital.Findings Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.85 [95% CI 2.58-5.75]; p&lt;0.0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63.0% vs 82.7%; OR 0.35 [0.23-0.53]; p&lt;0.0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer.Interpretation Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised

Changes in peripheral blood levels of platelet-activating factor after orthotopic liver transplantation

Platelet-Activating factor (PAF) is a phospholipid mediator structurally characterized as 1-alkyl-2-acetyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine with a broad range of biological activities. PAF has been implicated as a mediator of the acute allergic and inflammatory response as well as in the pathogenesis of hyperacute rejection in organ transplantation, which is mediated..

Changes in peripheral blood levels of platelet-activating factor after orthotopic liver transplantation

Platelet-Activating factor (PAF) is a phospholipid mediator structurally characterized as 1-alkyl-2-acetyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine with a broad range of biological activities. PAF has been implicated as a mediator of the acute allergic and inflammatory response as well as in the pathogenesis of hyperacute rejection in organ transplantation, which is mediated..

Early outcome of a 31-gene expression profile test in 86 AJCC stage IB-II melanoma patients. A prospective multicentre cohort study

Background: The clinical and pathological features of primary melanoma are not sufficiently sensitive to accurately predict which patients are at a greater risk of relapse. Recently, a 31-gene expression profile (DecisionDx-Melanoma) test has shown promising results. Objectives: To evaluate the early prognostic performance of a genetic signature in a multicentre prospectively evaluated cohort. Methods: Inclusion of patients with AJCC stages IB and II conducted between April 2015 and December 2016. All patients were followed up prospectively to assess their risk of relapse. Prognostic performance of this test was evaluated individually and later combined with the AJCC staging system. Prognostic accuracy of disease-free survival was determined using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analysis. Results of the gene expression profile test were designated as Class 1 (low risk) and Class 2 (high risk). Results: Median follow-up time was 26 months (IQR 22-30). The gene expression profile test was performed with 86 patients; seven had developed metastasis (8.1%) and all of them were in the Class 2 group, representing 21.2% of this group. Gene expression profile was an independent prognostic factor for relapse as indicated by multivariate Cox regression analysis, adjusted for AJCC stages and age. Conclusions: This prospective multicentre cohort study, performed in a Spanish Caucasian cohort, shows that this 31-gene expression profile test could correctly identify patients at early AJCC stages who are at greater risk of relapse. We believe that gene expression profile in combination with the AJCC staging system could well improve the detection of patients who need intensive surveillance and optimize follow-up strategies