The origins of low-temperature tissue storage research date back to the late 1800s. Over half a century later, osmotic stress was revealed to be a main contributor to cell death during cryopreservation. Consequently, the addition of cryoprotective agents (CPAs) such as dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), glycerol (GLY), ethylene glycol (EG), or propylene glycol (PG), although toxic to cells at high concentrations, was identified as a necessary step to protect against rampant cell death during cryopreservation. In addition to osmotic stress, cooling and thawing rates were also shown to have significant influence on cell survival during low temperature storage. In general, successful low-temperature cell preservation consists of the addition of a CPA (commonly 10% DMSO), alone or in combination with additional permeating or non-permeating agents, cooling rates of approximately 1ºC/min, and storage in either liquid or vapor phase nitrogen. In addition to general considerations, cell-specific recommendations for hepatocytes, pancreatic islets, sperm, oocytes, and stem cells should be observed to maximize yields. For example, rapid cooling is associated with better cryopreservation outcomes for oocytes, pancreatic islets, and embryonic stem cells while slow cooling is recommended for cryopreservation of hepatocytes, hematopoietic stem cells, and mesenchymal stem cells. Yields can be further maximized by implementing additional pre-cryo steps such as: pre-incubation with glucose and anti-oxidants, alginate encapsulation, and selecting cells within an optimal age range and functional ability. Finally, viability and functional assays are critical steps in determining the quality of the cells post-thaw and improving the efficiency of the current cryopreservation methods.

IMPORTANCEAndrogen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been theorized to decrease the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with prostate cancer owing to a potential decrease in the tissuebased expression of the SARS-CoV-2 coreceptor transmembrane protease, serine 2 (TMPRSS2). OBJECTIVE To examine whether ADT is associated with a decreased rate of 30-day mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients with prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study analyzed patient data recorded in the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry between March 17, 2020, and February 11, 2021. The consortium maintains a centralized multi-institution registry of patients with a current or past diagnosis of cancer who developed COVID-19. Data were collected and managed using REDCap software hosted at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee. Initially, 1228patients aged 18 years or older with prostate cancer listed as their primary malignant neoplasm were included; 122 patients with a second malignant neoplasm, insufficient follow-up, or low-quality data were excluded. Propensity matching was performed using the nearest-neighbor method with a 1:3 ratio of treated units to control units, adjusted for age, body mass index, race and ethnicity, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score, smoking status, comorbidities (cardiovascular, pulmonary, kidney disease, and diabetes), cancer status, baseline steroid use, COVID-19 treatment, and presence of metastatic disease. EXPOSURES Androgen deprivation therapy use was defined as prior bilateral orchiectomy or pharmacologic ADT administered within the prior 3 months of presentation with COVID-19. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was the rate of all-cause 30-day mortality after COVID-19 diagnosis for patients receiving ADT compared with patients not receiving ADT after propensity matching. RESULTSAfter exclusions, 1106 patients with prostate cancer (before propensity score matching: median age, 73 years [IQR, 65-79 years]; 561 (51%) self-identified as non-Hispanic White) were included for analysis. Of these patients, 477 were included for propensity score matching (169 who received ADT and 308 who did not receive ADT). After propensity matching, there was no significant difference in the primary end point of the rate of all-cause 30-day mortality (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.42-1.42).

Pancreatic islet transplantation to restore insulin production in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus patients is commonly performed by infusion of islets into the hepatic portal system. However, the risk of portal vein thrombosis or elevation of portal pressure after transplantation introduces challenges to this procedure. Thus, alternative sites have been investigated, among which the omentum represents an ideal candidate. The surgical site is easily accessible, and the tissue is highly vascularized with a large surface area for metabolic exchange. Furthermore, the ability of the omentum to host large volumes of islets represents an intriguing if not ideal site for encapsulated islet transplantation. Research on the safety and efficacy of the omentum as a transplant site focuses on the utilization of biologic scaffolds or encapsulation of islets in a biocompatible semi-permeable membrane. Currently, more clinical trials are required to better characterize the safety and efficacy of islet transplantation into the omentum.

ImportanceCytokine storm due to COVID-19 can cause high morbidity and mortality and may be more common in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy (IO) due to immune system activation.ObjectiveTo determine the association of baseline immunosuppression and/or IO-based therapies with COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis registry-based retrospective cohort study included 12 046 patients reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from March 2020 to May 2022. The CCC19 registry is a centralized international multi-institutional registry of patients with COVID-19 with a current or past diagnosis of cancer. Records analyzed included patients with active or previous cancer who had a laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction and/or serologic findings.ExposuresImmunosuppression due to therapy; systemic anticancer therapy (IO or non-IO).Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was a 5-level ordinal scale of COVID-19 severity: no complications; hospitalized without requiring oxygen; hospitalized and required oxygen; intensive care unit admission and/or mechanical ventilation; death. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of cytokine storm.ResultsThe median age of the entire cohort was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-74) years and 6359 patients were female (52.8%) and 6598 (54.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 599 (5.0%) patients received IO, whereas 4327 (35.9%) received non-IO systemic anticancer therapies, and 7120 (59.1%) did not receive any antineoplastic regimen within 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Although no difference in COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm was found in the IO group compared with the untreated group in the total cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.13, and aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.41-1.93, respectively), patients with baseline immunosuppression treated with IO (vs untreated) had worse COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm (aOR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.38-8.01, and aOR, 4.41; 95% CI, 1.71-11.38, respectively). Patients with immunosuppression receiving non-IO therapies (vs untreated) also had worse COVID-19 severity (aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.36-2.35) and cytokine storm (aOR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.42-3.79).Conclusions and RelevanceThis cohort study found that in patients with cancer and COVID-19, administration of systemic anticancer therapies, especially IO, in the context of baseline immunosuppression was associated with severe clinical outcomes and the development of cytokine storm.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04354701

No abstract