Background Fungal co-infection is a recognised complication of respiratory virus infections, increasing morbidity and mortality, but can be readily treated if diagnosed early. An increasing number of small studies describing aspergillosis in COVID-19 patients with severe respiratory distress are being reported, but comprehensive data is lacking. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence, risk factors and impact of invasive fungal disease in adult COVID-19 patients with severe respiratory distress. Methods An evaluation of a national, multi-centre, prospective cohort evaluation of an enhanced testing strategy to diagnose invasive fungal disease in COVID-19 intensive care patients. Results were used to generate a mechanism to define aspergillosis in future COVID-19 patients. Results One-hundred and thirty-five adults (median age: 57, M/F: 2·2/1) were screened. The incidence was 26.7% (14.1% aspergillosis, 12·6% yeast infections). The overall mortality rate was 38%; 53% and 31% in patients with and without fungal disease, respectively (P: 0.0387). The mortality rate was reduced by the use of antifungal therapy (Mortality: 38·5% in patients receiving therapy versus 90% in patients not receiving therapy (P: 0.008). The use of corticosteroids (P: 0.007) and history of chronic respiratory disease (P: 0.05) increased the likelihood of aspergillosis. Conclusions Fungal disease occurs frequently in critically ill, mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients. The survival benefit observed in patients receiving antifungal therapy implies that the proposed diagnostic and defining criteria are appropriate. Screening using a strategic diagnostic approach and antifungal prophylaxis of patients with risk factors will likely enhance the management of COVID-19 patients.

No abstract

Background Optimal prophylactic and therapeutic management of thromboembolic disease in patients with COVID-19 remains a major challenge for clinicians. The aim of this study was to define the incidence of thrombotic and haemorrhagic complications in critically ill patients with COVID-19. In addition, we sought to characterise coagulation profiles using thromboelastography and explore possible biological differences between patients with and without thrombotic complications. Methods We conducted a multicentre retrospective observational study evaluating all the COVID-19 patients received in four intensive care units (ICUs) of four tertiary hospitals in the UK between March 15, 2020, and May 05, 2020. Clinical characteristics, laboratory data, thromboelastography profiles and clinical outcome data were evaluated between patients with and without thrombotic complications. Results A total of 187 patients were included. Their median (interquartile (IQR)) age was 57 (49–64) years and 124 (66.3%) patients were male. Eighty-one (43.3%) patients experienced one or more clinically relevant thrombotic complications, which were mainly pulmonary emboli (n = 42 (22.5%)). Arterial embolic complications were reported in 25 (13.3%) patients. ICU length of stay was longer in patients with thrombotic complications when compared with those without. Fifteen (8.0%) patients experienced haemorrhagic complications, of which nine (4.8%) were classified as major bleeding. Thromboelastography demonstrated a hypercoagulable profile in patients tested but lacked discriminatory value between those with and without thrombotic complications. Patients who experienced thrombotic complications had higher D-dimer, ferritin, troponin and white cell count levels at ICU admission compared with those that did not. Conclusion Critically ill patients with COVID-19 experience high rates of venous and arterial thrombotic complications. The rates of bleeding may be higher than previously reported and re-iterate the need for randomised trials to better understand the risk-benefit ratio of different anticoagulation strategies. Graphical abstract

BACKGROUND:Because the addition of nimotuzumab to chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer improved outcomes in a phase 2 study, the authors conducted a phase 3 study to confirm these findings. METHODS: This openlabel, investigator-initiated, phase 3, randomized trial was conducted from 2012 to 2018. Adult patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer who were fit for radical chemoradiation were randomized 1:1 to receive either radical radiotherapy (66-70 grays) with concurrent weekly cisplatin (30 mg/m 2 ) (CRT) or the same schedule of CRT with weekly nimotuzumab (200 mg) (NCRT). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); key secondary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS), duration of locoregional control (LRC), and overall survival (OS). An intent-to-treat analysis also was performed. RESULTS: In total, 536 patients were allocated equally to both treatment arms. The median follow-up was 39.13 months. The addition of nimotuzumab improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.89; P = .004), LRC (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50-0.89; P = .006), and DFS (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55-0.92; P = .008) and had a trend toward improved OS (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.65-1.08; P = .163). Grade 3 through 5 adverse events were similar between the 2 arms, except for a higher incidence of mucositis in the NCRT arm (66.7% vs 55.8%; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of nimotuzumab to concurrent weekly CRT improves PFS, LRC, and DFS. This combination provides a novel alternative therapeutic option to a 3-weekly schedule of 100 mg/m 2 cisplatin in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer who are treated with radical-intent CRT. Cancer 2019;125:3184-3197.