Peri-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection increases postoperative mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal duration of planned delay before surgery in patients who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection. This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery during October 2020. Surgical patients with pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 infection were compared with those without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality. Logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted 30-day mortality rates stratified by time from diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection to surgery. Among 140,231 patients (116 countries), 3127 patients (2.2%) had a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Adjusted 30-day mortality in patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection was 1.5% (95%CI 1.4-1.5). In patients with a pre-operative SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis, mortality was increased in patients having surgery within 0-2 weeks, 3-4 weeks and 5-6 weeks of the diagnosis (odds ratio (95%CI) 4.1 (3.3-4.8), 3.9 (2.6-5.1) and 3.6 (2.0-5.2), respectively). Surgery performed ≥ 7 weeks after SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was associated with a similar mortality risk to baseline (odds ratio (95%CI) 1.5 (0.9-2.1)). After a ≥ 7 week delay in undertaking surgery following SARS-CoV-2 infection, patients with ongoing symptoms had a higher mortality than patients whose symptoms had resolved or who had been asymptomatic (6.0% (95%CI 3.2-8.7) vs. 2.4% (95%CI 1.4-3.4) vs. 1.3% (95%CI 0.6-2.0), respectively). Where possible, surgery should be delayed for at least 7 weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with ongoing symptoms ≥ 7 weeks from diagnosis may benefit from further delay.

SARS-CoV-2 has been associated with an increased rate of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients. Since surgical patients are already at higher risk of venous thromboembolism than general populations, this study aimed to determine if patients with peri-operative or prior SARS-CoV-2 were at further increased risk of venous thromboembolism. We conducted a planned sub-study and analysis from an international, multicentre, prospective cohort study of elective and emergency patients undergoing surgery during October 2020. Patients from all surgical specialties were included. The primary outcome measure was venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis) within 30 days of surgery. SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis was defined as peri-operative (7 days before to 30 days after surgery); recent (1-6 weeks before surgery); previous (≥7 weeks before surgery); or none. Information on prophylaxis regimens or pre-operative anti-coagulation for baseline comorbidities was not available. Postoperative venous thromboembolism rate was 0.5% (666/123,591) in patients without SARS-CoV-2; 2.2% (50/2317) in patients with peri-operative SARS-CoV-2; 1.6% (15/953) in patients with recent SARS-CoV-2; and 1.0% (11/1148) in patients with previous SARS-CoV-2. After adjustment for confounding factors, patients with peri-operative (adjusted odds ratio 1.5 (95%CI 1.1-2.0)) and recent SARS-CoV-2 (1.9 (95%CI 1.2-3.3)) remained at higher risk of venous thromboembolism, with a borderline finding in previous SARS-CoV-2 (1.7 (95%CI 0.9-3.0)). Overall, venous thromboembolism was independently associated with 30-day mortality ). In patients with SARS-CoV-2, mortality without venous thromboembolism was 7.4% (319/4342) and with venous thromboembolism was 40.8% (31/76). Patients undergoing surgery with peri-operative or recent SARS-CoV-2 appear to be at increased risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism compared with patients with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Optimal venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment are unknown in this cohort of patients, and these data should be interpreted accordingly.

In the midst of the current economic crisis, there is renewed interest in transforming vacant lots into food-producing gardens. This study analyzed whether vacant lots are suitable for food production, by comparing the soil nematode food webs and nutrient pools of vacant lots and community gardens in two post-industrial U.S. cities, Akron and Cleveland, Ohio. Twelve vacant lots and 12 community gardens were examined in the two cities. All six Akron community gardens were established just prior to the initiation of this study, whereas the six in Cleveland were 15-30 years old. Soil pH, texture, moisture, organic matter, mineral nitrogen content, microbial biomass, and nematode communities were measured in both cities. Soil decomposition rate was also measured in Cleveland. Results show that the soils of vacant lots surpassed those of the newlyestablished Akron gardens and were equal to the soils of the well-established Cleveland gardens in the amount of ammonium-nitrogen, total nematode population, genus diversity, and maturity and structure indices. The soils of the vacant lots were lower than the community gardens in the amounts of soil moisture, organic matter, and nitrate-nitrogen, which we associate with the addition of water, compost, fertilizer, and tilling in the gardens. No significant difference was found between community gardens and vacant lots in microbial biomass, decomposition rate, or nematode enrichment index, which seems to indicate that vacant lots are equal to community gardens in nutrient availability and nutrient cycling. We conclude that barring any contamination, the soil in vacant lots maybe suitable for the establishment of food gardens, which can provide many desirable ecosystem services and enhance human well-being. We also find that the disturbance associated with tillage and conversion of a vacant lot into a community garden has short-term ramifications for both nematode food webs and mineral-nitrogen content.

Background First-line therapy for treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma includes combination platinum-based chemotherapies, though resistance and long-term toxicity concerns to these regimens cause limitations in progression-free survival and overall survival. Maintenance treatment with an alternative agent such as the PD-L1 inhibitor, avelumab (Bavencio ® ), after initial chemotherapy has been shown to prolong overall survival. The aim of this review is to provide a landscape clinical use of avelumab in the treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma with a focus on patient selection and outcomes. Methods This review includes the most up to date phases and results from clinical trials published in peer-reviewed journals. Results Three studies were included, one phase 1B trial, one phase 1B trial with 2 year follow-up, and one phase 3 trial. Patients receiving avelumab maintenance therapy at 10 mg/kg IV every two weeks had an overall better performance status, though those with an increased ECOG-PS, increased Bellmunt risk score, or failure of ≥3 chemotherapies had poorer responses. Patients over the age of 65 had a higher ORR (18–25%) compared to younger patients (13–14%). Patients with PD-L1 positive tumors had a significantly increased CR median ORR (13.8%), median PFS (5.7 months), and median 12-month OS rate (79.1%) compared to control subjects receiving best supportive care (1.2%, 2.1 months, 60.4%, respectively). TRAEs were seen in 86.7% of patients, with 32.4% of patients experiencing a ≥grade 3 AE. The most common AE was IRR (32.4%, ≥grade 3 1.01%) and irAE 25.6% of any grade, including various rashes and pruritus AEs, immune-related thyroid disorders, and immune related hepatitis. There were 3 reported treatment-related deaths (0.05%). Ongoing phases of one of the trials is investigating the use of docetaxel and avelumab together after failure of one chemotherapy. Conclusion Avelumab as a maintenance therapy after platinum-based chemotherapy failure or in platinum-ineligible patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma is an effective option with increased ORR, PFS, and OS with a similar safety profile to other chemotherapies. Ongoing studies currently in recruitment and active clinical trials will yield valuable insights into optimizing avelumab therapy in conjunction with chemotherapies and/or immunotherapies, better characterization of response for PD-L1 positive tumors, and a clearer insight into clinically validated prognostic factors to improve patient outcomes.