Background Data on patients with COVID-19 who have cancer are lacking. Here we characterise the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 and identify potential prognostic factors for mortality and severe illness.Methods In this cohort study, we collected de-identified data on patients with active or previous malignancy, aged 18 years and older, with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection from the USA, Canada, and Spain from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) database for whom baseline data were added between March 17 and April 16, 2020. We collected data on baseline clinical conditions, medications, cancer diagnosis and treatment, and COVID-19 disease course. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality within 30 days of diagnosis of COVID-19. We assessed the association between the outcome and potential prognostic variables using logistic regression analyses, partially adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, and obesity. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701, and is ongoing. FindingsOf 1035 records entered into the CCC19 database during the study period, 928 patients met inclusion criteria for our analysis. Median age was 66 years (IQR 57-76), 279 (30%) were aged 75 years or older, and 468 (50%) patients were male. The most prevalent malignancies were breast (191 [21%]) and prostate (152 [16%]). 366 (39%) patients were on active anticancer treatment, and 396 (43%) had active (measurable) cancer. At analysis (May 7, 2020), 121 (13%) patients had died. In logistic regression analysis, independent factors associated with increased 30-day mortality, after partial adjustment, were: increased age (per 10 years; partially adjusted odds ratio 1•84, 95% CI 1•53-2•21), male sex (1•63, 1•07-2•48), smoking status (former smoker vs never smoked: 1•60, 1•03-2•47), number of comorbidities (two vs none: 4•50, 1•33-15•28), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or higher (status of 2 vs 0 or 1: 3•89, 2•11-7•18), active cancer (progressing vs remission: 5•20, 2•77-9•77), and receipt of azithromycin plus hydroxychloroquine (vs treatment with neither: 2•93, 1•79-4•79; confounding by indication cannot be excluded). Compared with residence in the US-Northeast, residence in Canada (0•24, 0•07-0•84) or the US-Midwest (0•50, 0•28-0•90) were associated with decreased 30-day all-cause mortality. Race and ethnicity, obesity status, cancer type, type of anticancer therapy, and recent surgery were not associated with mortality. Interpretation Among patients with cancer and COVID-19, 30-day all-cause mortality was high and associated with general risk factors and risk factors unique to patients with cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to better understand the effect of COVID-19 on outcomes in patients with cancer, including the ability to continue specific cancer treatments.

Background Patients with cancer may be at high risk of adverse outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection. We analyzed a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) to identify prognostic clinical factors, including laboratory measurements and anti-cancer therapies. Patients and Methods Patients with active or historical cancer and a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis recorded between March 17-November 18, 2020 were included. The primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on an ordinal scale (uncomplicated, hospitalized, admitted to intensive care unit, mechanically ventilated, died within 30 days). Multivariable regression models included demographics, cancer status, anti-cancer therapy and timing, COVID-19-directed therapies, and laboratory measurements (among hospitalized patients). Results 4,966 patients were included (median age 66 years, 51% female, 50% non-Hispanic white); 2,872 (58%) were hospitalized and 695 (14%) died; 61% had cancer that was present, diagnosed, or treated within the year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Older age, male sex, obesity, cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities, renal disease, diabetes mellitus, non-Hispanic Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, worse ECOG performance status, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and hematologic malignancy were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Among hospitalized patients, low or high absolute lymphocyte count, high absolute neutrophil count, low platelet count, abnormal creatinine, troponin, LDH, and CRP were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Patients diagnosed early in the COVID-19 pandemic (January-April 2020) had worse outcomes than those diagnosed later. Specific anti-cancer therapies (e.g. R-CHOP, platinum combined with etoposide, and DNA methyltransferase inhibitors) were associated with high 30-day all-cause mortality. Conclusions Clinical factors (e.g. older age, hematological malignancy, recent chemotherapy) and laboratory measurements were associated with poor outcomes among patients with cancer and COVID-19. Although further studies are needed, caution may be required in utilizing particular anti-cancer therapies.

IMPORTANCE COVID-19 is a life-threatening illness for many patients. Prior studies have established hematologic cancers as a risk factor associated with particularly poor outcomes from COVID-19. To our knowledge, no studies have established a beneficial role for anti-COVID-19 interventions in this at-risk population. Convalescent plasma therapy may benefit immunocompromised individuals with COVID-19, including those with hematologic cancers.OBJECTIVE To evaluate the association of convalescent plasma treatment with 30-day mortality in hospitalized adults with hematologic cancers and COVID-19 from a multi-institutional cohort. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis retrospective cohort study using data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry with propensity score matching evaluated patients with hematologic cancers who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Data were collected between

BackgroundThe recommendations of the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation’s “Choosing Wisely®” initiative recognize the importance of improving the appropriateness of testing behavior and reducing the number of duplicate laboratory tests.ObjectiveTo assess the effectiveness of an electronic medical record Best Practice Alert (BPA or “pop up”) intervention aimed at reducing duplicate laboratory tests and hospital costs.DesignComparison of the number of duplicated laboratory tests performed on inpatients before and after the intervention.SettingUniversity of Florida Health Shands Hospital, Gainesville, FL, USA, during 2014–2017.InterventionThe electronic medical record intervention was a BPA pop-up alert that informed the ordering physician if a recent identical order already existed along with the “ordering time”, “collecting time”, “resulting time”, and the result itself.Main outcome measuresPercentage change in the number of inpatient duplicate orders of selected clinical biochemistry tests and cost savings from reduction of the duplicates. Student’s t-test and beta-binomial models were used to analyze the data.ResultsResults from the beta-binomial model indicated that the intervention reduced the overall duplicates by 18% (OR=0.82, standard error=0.016, P-value<0.000). Percent reductions in 9 of the 17 tests were statistically significant: serum hemoglobin A1C level, vitamin B12, serum erythrocyte sedimentation rate, serum folate, serum iron, lipid panel, respiratory viral panel, serum thyroid stimulating hormone level, and Vitamin D. Additionally, important cost savings were realized from the reduction of duplicates for each lab test (with the exception of CRP) with an estimated overall savings of $72,543 over 17 months in the post-intervention period.ConclusionsThe present study included all hospital inpatients and covered 17 clinical laboratory tests. This rather simple and low-cost intervention resulted in significant reductions in percentage duplicates of several tests and resulted in cost savings. The study also highlights the role of hospitalists in quality improvement.

Background Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) is a cell surface protein that can act as a tumor suppressor or activator, depending upon the level of expression and interaction with the microenvironment and chemokines. DPP4 inhibitors are used to treat diabetes. Methods We conducted this Surveillance Epidemiology and Endpoint Research‐Medicare database study to evaluate the role of DPP4 inhibitors on the overall survival (OS) of diabetic patients diagnosed with colorectal (CRC) and lung cancers. Results Diabetic patients with CRC or lung cancer who were treated with DPP4 inhibitors exhibited a statistically significant survival advantage (hazard ratio [HR] of 0.89; CI: 0.82‐0.97, P = 0.007) that remained significant after controlling for all other confounders. When DPP4 inhibitors were used in combination of metformin which is known to suppress cancer, the survival advantage was even more pronounced (HR of 0.83; CI: 0.77‐0.90, P < 0.0001). Data were then analyzed separately for two cancer types. In the CRC‐only cohort, the use of DPP4 inhibitors alone had a positive trend but did not meet statistically significant threshold (HR of 0.87; CI: 0.75‐1.00, P = 0.055), while the combined use of DPP4 inhibitors and metformin was associated with statistically significant survival advantage (HR of 0.77; CI: 0.67‐0.89, P = 0.003). Similarly, for the lung cancer cohort, use of DPP4 alone was not found to be statistically significant (HR of 0.93; CI: 0.83‐1.03, P = 0.153), whereas lung cancer patients treated with the combination of DPP4 inhibitors and metformin showed statistically significant survival advantage (HR of 0.88; CI: 0.80‐0.97, P = 0.010). Conclusions DPP4 inhibition in CRC and lung cancer is associated with improved OS, which possibly may be due to the effect of DPP4 inhibition on immunoregulation of cancer.