ObjectivesThe outbreak of COVID-19 posed the issue of urgently identifying treatment strategies. Colchicine was considered for this purpose based on well-recognised anti-inflammatory effects and potential antiviral properties. In the present study, colchicine was proposed to patients with COVID-19, and its effects compared with ‘standard-of-care’ (SoC).MethodsIn the public hospital of Esine, northern Italy, 140 consecutive inpatients, with virologically and radiographically confirmed COVID-19 admitted in the period 5–19 March 2020, were treated with ‘SoC’ (hydroxychloroquine and/or intravenous dexamethasone; and/or lopinavir/ritonavir). They were compared with 122 consecutive inpatients, admitted between 19 March and 5 April 2020, treated with colchicine (1 mg/day) and SoC (antiviral drugs were stopped before colchicine, due to potential interaction).ResultsPatients treated with colchicine had a better survival rate as compared with SoC at 21 days of follow-up (84.2% (SE=3.3%) vs 63.6% (SE=4.1%), p=0.001). Cox proportional hazards regression survival analysis showed that a lower risk of death was independently associated with colchicine treatment (HR=0.151 (95% CI 0.062 to 0.368), p<0.0001), whereas older age, worse PaO2/FiO2, and higher serum levels of ferritin at entry were associated with a higher risk.ConclusionThis proof-of-concept study may support the rationale of use of colchicine for the treatment of COVID-19. Efficacy and safety must be determined in controlled clinical trials.

Avoiding suction-related lung volume loss can be helpful in patients with an increased tendency to alveolar collapse; CS allows suctioning while avoiding dramatic drops in lung volumes and seems to be safe during the VC ventilation setting that we used.

Anti-RNAP3+ patients with SSc have a high risk of concomitant malignancy. These results have implications for clinical practice and suggest regular screening for cancer in anti-RNAP3+ patients.

Persistence of endoscopic activity is quite infrequent in patients with active UC achieving clinical remission after a 6-week treatment with oral plus topical mesalazine, but is a very strong predictor of early relapse.

41BAP1 germline mutations predispose to a cancer predisposition syndrome that includes 42 mesothelioma, cutaneous melanoma, uveal melanoma and other cancers. This co-occurrence 43 suggests that these tumors share a common carcinogenic pathway. To evaluate this hypothesis, we 44 studied 40 Italian families with mesothelioma and/or melanoma. The probands were sequenced for 45BAP1and for the most common melanoma predisposition genes (i.e. CDKN2A, CDK4, TERT, MITF 46 and POT1) to investigate if these genes may also confer susceptibility to mesothelioma. 47In two out of six families with both mesothelioma and melanoma we identified either a germline 48 nonsense mutation (c.1153C>T, p.Arg385*) in BAP1 or a recurrent pathogenic germline mutation 49 (c.301G>T, p.Gly101Trp) in CDKN2A. 50Our study suggests that CDKN2A, in addition to BAP1, could be involved in the melanoma and 51 mesothelioma susceptibility, leading to the rare familial cancer syndromes. It also suggests that 52 these tumors share key steps that drive carcinogenesis and that other genes may be involved in 53 inherited predisposition to malignant mesothelioma and melanoma.