Citations

AbstractBackgroundSolid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at increased risk for complications from SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Little is known regarding clinical course and outcomes of breakthrough COVID‐19 in the fully vaccinated SOT population. We sought to describe our cohort of SOT recipients who developed symptomatic breakthrough COVID‐19 after full vaccination.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective review of SOT recipients diagnosed with COVID‐19 at least 14 days after completing SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccination. Patients were analyzed according to those presenting with mild‐to‐moderate and severe COVID‐19, respectively. We described presenting characteristics, COVID‐19 therapy, and analyzed outcomes including emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalization, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission.ResultsThirty‐five patients met inclusion criteria. These had a mean age of 60.8 years and kidney transplant was the most common SOT type. Five patients presented with severe COVID‐19 at diagnosis, all requiring hospitalization without ICU admission. From the 30 patients who presented with mild‐to‐moderate infection, 28 received casirivimab–imdevimab. Four of these 28 (14.3%) had an ED visit, with one requiring hospital admission (3.4%). No patients required ICU admission.ConclusionBreakthrough COVID‐19 may occur in SOT recipients after full vaccination, though they appear to have acceptable outcomes. Anti‐spike monoclonal antibody therapy for eligible SOT patients may have mitigated clinical progression and improved the outcomes. Further study with large cohorts is warranted.

Abstract Background Breakthrough coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may occur in fully vaccinated persons. Methods We assessed the clinical outcomes of breakthrough COVID-19 in fully vaccinated individuals. Results In this cohort of 1395 persons (mean age, 54.3 years; 60% female; median body mass index, 30.7) who developed breakthrough COVID- 19, there were 107 (7.7%) who required hospitalization by day 28. Hospitalization was significantly associated with the number of medical comorbidities. Antispike monoclonal antibody treatment was significantly associated with a lower risk of hospitalization (odds ratio, 0.227; 95% confidence interval, 0.128–0.403; P < .001). The number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent 1 hospitalization was 225 among the lowest risk patient group compared with NNT of 4 among those with highest numbers of medical comorbidity. Conclusions Monoclonal antibody treatment is associated with reduced hospitalization in vaccinated high-risk persons with mild to moderate COVID-19.

Abstract Background Graduate Medical Education training programs transitioned to all-virtual recruitment in 2020. Limited data have been published regarding the consequences of this transition. We aimed to understand (1) infectious diseases (ID) fellowship programs’ recruitment efforts and the effect of virtual recruitment on application and interview numbers and (2) the number of programs to which matched applicants applied and interviewed and applicants’ perspectives on virtual recruitment. Methods In 2020–2021, we surveyed all US ID fellowship program directors (PDs) and matched applicants. Descriptive data analysis was performed on quantitative survey items. Free-text responses were analyzed through a quantitative content analysis approach. Results The PD response rate was 68/158 (43%); the applicant response rate was at least 23% (85/365). PDs reported a 27% increase in mean number of applications received and a 45% increase in mean number of applicants interviewed compared with the previous year. Applicants especially valued the online program structure information, PD program overview videos, didactic and curriculum content, and fellow testimonials and profiles. Most applicants preferred interviews lasting no more than 40 minutes and interview days lasting no more than 5 hours. Nearly all (60/64, 94%) PDs adequately learned about candidates; most (48/64, 75%) felt unable to showcase their program as well as when in-person. Most PDs (54/64, 84%) and applicants (56/73, 77%) want an option for virtual recruitment. Conclusions Virtual recruitment enabled programs to accommodate more applicants and highlighted applicants’ preferences for programs’ augmented online presences and time-limited interview days. Most programs and applicants want an option for virtual interviews.

Abstract Background Bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab are authorized for treatment of mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in high-risk patients. We compared the outcomes of patients who received these therapies to identify factors associated with hospitalization and other clinical outcomes. Methods Adult patients who received monoclonal antibody from 19 November 2020 to 11 February 2021 were selected and divided into those who received bamlanivimab (n = 2747) and casirivimab-imdevimab (n = 849). The 28-day all-cause and COVID-19–related hospitalizations were compared between the groups. Results The population included 3596 patients; the median age was 62 years, and 50% were female. All had ≥1 medical comorbidity; 55% had multiple comorbidities. All-cause and COVID-19–related hospitalization rates at 28 days were 3.98% and 2.56%, respectively. After adjusting for medical comorbidities, there was no significant difference in all-cause and COVID-19–related hospitalization rates between bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab (adjusted hazard ratios [95% confidence interval], 1.4 [.9–2.2] and 1.6 [.8–2.7], respectively). Chronic kidney, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and immunocompromised status were associated with higher likelihood of hospitalization. Conclusions This observational study on the use of bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab in high-risk patients showed similarly low rates of hospitalization. The number and type of medical comorbidities are associated with hospitalizations after monoclonal antibody treatment.

AbstractBackgroundBamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab are authorized for emergency use treatment of mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients at high risk for developing severe disease or hospitalization. Their safety and efficacy have not been specifically evaluated in solid organ transplant recipients.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed solid organ transplant recipients who received monoclonal antibody infusion for COVID-19 at Mayo Clinic sites through January 23, 2021. Outcomes included emergency department visit, hospitalization, mortality, and allograft rejection.ResultsSeventy-three patients were treated, most commonly with bamlanivimab (75.3%). The median age was 59 years, 63% were male, and the median Charlson comorbidity index was 5. Transplant type included 41 kidney (56.2%), 13 liver (17.8%), 11 heart (15.1%), 4 kidney-pancreas (5.5%), 2 lung (2.7%), 1 heart-liver, and 1 pancreas. Eleven (15.1%) patients had an emergency department visit within 28 days of infusion, including 9 (12.3%) who were hospitalized for a median of 4 days. One patient required intensive care unit admission for a nonrespiratory complication. No patients required mechanical ventilation, died, or experienced rejection. Ten adverse events occurred, with 1 seeking medical evaluation. Hypertension was associated with hospital admission (P < .05), while other baseline characteristics were similar. The median time from symptom onset to antibody administration was 4 days in nonhospitalized patients compared with 6 days among hospitalized patients (P < .05).ConclusionsMonoclonal antibody treatment has favorable outcomes with minimal adverse effects in solid organ transplant recipients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Earlier administration of monoclonal antibody therapy appears to be more efficacious.

Background The clinical outcomes of patients who decline anti-spike monoclonal antibody therapies for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is not known. Factors associated with the decision to accept or decline the offer for anti-spike monoclonal antibody therapies are not established. This study aimed to identify factors impacting the decision to consent for monoclonal antibody therapies and assess the differences in clinical outcomes of patients who accepted compared to those who declined these therapies. Methods This retrospective cohort study enrolled 2820 adult patients who were offered monoclonal antibody therapies, bamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab, for COVID-19 at Mayo Clinic in the Midwest between 11/19/2020 and 12/31/2020. The primary endpoint is the decision to accept or decline monoclonal antibody treatment. Secondary endpoints were patient-level factors that could have impacted the decision to accept treatment (age, gender, race, ethnicity, primary language spoken, and medical comorbidities). The main clinical endpoint was hospitalization within 28 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. Results 59.1% (n = 1669) chose to accept monoclonal antibody therapy, and 40.9% (n = 1151) chose to decline the offer for treatment. Patients were more likely to accept treatment if they were non-Hispanic White, English speaking, identified a spouse or life partner, had a religious affiliation, and possessed more medical comorbidities. Overall, 28-day hospitalization rate was 2.6% (n = 72/2820) and was higher among those who declined (3.3%) than those who accepted monoclonal antibody therapy (2.0%; Rate Ratio = 0.62, 95% Confidence Interval, 0.39-0.98). Conclusions Despite having more comorbidities, patients who accepted monoclonal antibody treatments had a lower rate of hospitalization compared to patients who declined treatment. Several social and cultural factors were associated with the decision to decline therapy, including race, language, ethnicity, and lack of social support. These findings can inform public health efforts to reduce social disparities in the treatment of COVID-19 and increase utilization of monoclonal antibody therapies in high risk populations.

AbstractInvasive fungal infections threaten lung transplant outcomes with high associated morbidity and mortality. Pharmacologic prophylaxis may be key to prevent posttransplant invasive fungal infections, but cost, adverse effects, and absorption issues are barriers to effective prophylaxis. Trends in fungal infection diagnostic strategies utilize molecular diagnostic methodologies to complement traditional histopathology and culture techniques. While lung transplant recipients are susceptible to a variety of fungal pathogens, Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. infections remain the most common. With emerging resistant organisms and multiple novel antifungal agents in the research pipeline, it is likely that treatment strategies will continue to evolve.