Age is the main determinant of COVID-19 related in-hospital mortality with minimal impact of pre-existing comorbidities, a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: Age and comorbidities increase COVID-19 related in-hospital mortality risk, but the extent by which comorbidities mediate the impact of age remains unknown. METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study with data from 45 Dutch hospitals, 4806 proven COVID-19 patients hospitalized in Dutch hospitals (between February and July 2020) from the CAPACITY-COVID registry were included (age 69[58–77]years, 64% men). The primary outcome was defined as a combination of in-hospital mortality or discharge with palliative care. Logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the associations between sex, age, and comorbidities with the primary outcome. The effect of comorbidities on the relation of age with the primary outcome was evaluated using mediation analysis. RESULTS: In-hospital COVID-19 related mortality occurred in 1108 (23%) patients, 836 (76%) were aged ≥70 years (70+). Both age 70+ and female sex were univariably associated with outcome (odds ratio [OR]4.68, 95%confidence interval [4.02–5.45], OR0.68[0.59–0.79], respectively;both p<  0.001). All comorbidities were univariably associated with outcome (p<0.001), and all but dyslipidemia remained significant after adjustment for age70+ and sex. The impact of comorbidities was attenuated after age-spline adjustment, only leaving female sex, diabetes mellitus (DM), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and chronic pulmonary obstructive disease (COPD) significantly associated (female OR0.65[0.55–0.75], DM OR1.47[1.26–1.72], CKD OR1.61[1.32–1.97], COPD OR1.30[1.07–1.59]). Pre-existing comorbidities in older patients negligibly (<6% in all comorbidities) mediated the association between higher age and outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Age is the main determinant of COVID-19 related in-hospital mortality, with negligible mediation effect of pre-existing comorbidities

Amsterdam International Consensus Meeting: tumor response scoring in the pathology assessment of resected pancreatic cancer after neoadjuvant therapy

Histopathologically scoring the response of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) to neoadjuvant treatment can guide the selection of adjuvant therapy and improve prognostic stratification. However, several tumor response scoring (TRS) systems exist, and consensus is lacking as to which system represents best practice. An international consensus meeting on TRS took place in November 2019 in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Here, we provide an overview of the outcomes and consensus statements that originated from this meeting. Consensus (≥80% agreement) was reached on a total of seven statements: (1) TRS is important because it provides information about the effect of neoadjuvant treatment that is not provided by other histopathology-based descriptors. (2) TRS for resected PDAC following neoadjuvant therapy should assess residual (viable) tumor burden instead of tumor regression. (3) The CAP scoring system is considered the most adequate scoring system to date because it is based on the presence and amount of residual cancer cells instead of tumor regression. (4) The defining criteria of the categories in the CAP scoring system should be improved by replacing subjective terms including “minimal” or “extensive” with objective criteria to evaluate the extent of viable tumor. (5) The improved, consensus-based system should be validated retrospectively and prospectively. (6) Prospective studies should determine the extent of tissue sampling that is required to ensure adequate assessment of the residual cancer burden, taking into account the heterogeneity of tumor response. (7) In future scientific publications, the extent of tissue sampling should be described in detail in the “Materials and methods” section