Background: Glucagon-like peptide 1 agonists differ in chemical structure, duration of action and in their effects on clinical outcomes. The cardiovascular effects of once-weekly albiglutide in type 2 diabetes are unknown. Methods: We randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease to the addition of once-weekly subcutaneous injection of albiglutide (30 mg to 50 mg) or matching placebo to standard care. We hypothesized that albiglutide would be noninferior to placebo for the primary outcome of first occurrence of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. If noninferiority was confirmed by an upper limit of the 95% confidence interval for the hazard ratio of less than 1.30, closed-testing for superiority was prespecified. Findings: Overall, 9463 participants were followed for a median of 1.6 years. The primary composite outcome occurred in 338 of 4731 patients (7.1%; 4.6 events per 100 person-years) in the albiglutide group and in 428 of 4732 patients (9.0%; 5.9 events per 100 person-years) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI ], 0.68 to 0.90), indicating that albiglutide, was superior to placebo (P<0.0001 for noninferiority, P=0.0006 for superiority). The incidence of acute pancreatitis (albiglutide 10 patients and placebo 7 patients), pancreatic cancer (6 and 5), medullary thyroid carcinoma (0 and 0), and other serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. Interpretation: In patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, albiglutide was superior to placebo with respect to major adverse cardiovascular events. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; Harmony Outcomes ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02465515.) noninferiority; P = 0.06 for superiority). There seems to be variation in the results of existing trials with GLP-1 receptor agonists, which if correct, might reflect drug structure or duration of action, patients studied, duration of follow-up or other factors.

Background: Prognostic factors of poor outcome in patients with hematological malignancies and COVID-19 are poorly defined. Patients and methods: This was a Spanish transplant group and cell therapy (GETH) multicenter retrospective observational study, which included a large cohort of blood cancer patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection through PCR assays from March 1st 2020 to May 15th 2020. Results: We included 367 pediatric and adult patients with hematological malignancies, including recipients of autologous (ASCT) (n = 58) or allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) (n = 65) from 41 hospitals in Spain. Median age of patients was 64 years (range 1-93.8). Recipients of ASCT and allo-SCT showed lower mortality rates (17% and 18%, respectively) compared to non-SCT patients (31%) (p = 0.02). Prognostic factors identified for day 45 overall mortality (OM) by logistic regression multivariate analysis included age > 70 years [odds ratio (OR) 2.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-3.8, p = 0.011]; uncontrolled hematological malignancy (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.6-5.2, p < 0.0001); ECOG 3-4 (OR, 2.56, 95% CI 1.4-4.7, p = 0.003); neutropenia (< 0.5 × 10 9 /L) (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.3-6.1, p = 0.01); and a C-reactive protein (CRP) > 20 mg/dL (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.7-6.4, p < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis of 216 patients with very severe COVID-19, treatment with azithromycin or low dose corticosteroids was associated with lower OM (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.2-0.89 and OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11-0.87, respectively, p = 0.02) whereas the use of hidroxycloroquine did not show significant improvement in OM (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.37-1.1, P = 0.1).

Background During the COVID‐19 outbreak, most hospitals deferred elective surgical procedures to allow space for the overwhelming number of COVID‐19 patient admissions, expecting a decrease in routine blood component requirements. However, because transfusion support needs of COVID‐19 patients are not well known, its impact on hospital blood supply is uncertain. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of the COVID‐19 pandemic on transfusion demand. Study Design and Methods Transfusion records during the peak of the COVID‐19 pandemic (March 1‐April 30, 2020) were reviewed in our center to assess changes in blood requirements. Results During this period 636 patients received a total of 2934 blood components, which reflects a 17.6% reduction in transfusion requirements with regard to the same period of 2019, and blood donations in Madrid dropped by 45%. The surgical blood demand decreased significantly during the outbreak (50.2%). Blood usage in the hematology and oncology departments remained unchanged, while the day ward demand halved, and intensive care unit transfusion needs increased by 116%. A total of 6.2% of all COVID inpatients required transfusion support. COVID‐19 inpatients consumed 19% of all blood components, which counterbalanced the savings owed to the reduction in elective procedures. Conclusion Although only a minority of COVID‐19 inpatients required transfusion, the expected reduction in transfusion needs caused by the lack of elective surgical procedures is partially offset by the large number of admitted patients during the peak of the pandemic. This fact must be taken into account when planning hospital blood supply.

No abstract