Key clinical point: Patients with stage III early-onset colorectal cancer (EO-CRC) experienced more frequent disease recurrence and cancer-specific mortality than patients with late-onset CRC (LO-CRC), suggesting more aggressive disease biology.

Major finding: Despite a higher likelihood of receiving more aggressive treatment and completing planned 6-month therapy duration (P < .001), patients with stage III EO-CRC vs LO-CRC had a significantly lower 3-year relapse-free rate (hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; P = .003) and higher 5-year cancer-specific mortality rate (HR, 1.20; P = .03).

Study details: This was a pooled analysis of 16,349 patients with CRC from 6 clinical trials of adjuvant chemotherapy including 1,564 patients with EO-CRC and 14,785 with LO-CRC.

Disclosures: This study was supported by European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Japanese Foundation for Multidisciplinary Treatment of Cancer, and others. The authors declared receiving honoraria, research funding, consulting or advisory role, travel, accommodation expenses, stock, and other ownership interests from various sources.

Source: Fontana E et al. J Clin Oncol. 2021 Nov 9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.21.02008.

Key clinical point: Patients with stage III early-onset colorectal cancer (EO-CRC) experienced more frequent disease recurrence and cancer-specific mortality than patients with late-onset CRC (LO-CRC), suggesting more aggressive disease biology.

Major finding: Despite a higher likelihood of receiving more aggressive treatment and completing planned 6-month therapy duration (P < .001), patients with stage III EO-CRC vs LO-CRC had a significantly lower 3-year relapse-free rate (hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; P = .003) and higher 5-year cancer-specific mortality rate (HR, 1.20; P = .03).

Study details: This was a pooled analysis of 16,349 patients with CRC from 6 clinical trials of adjuvant chemotherapy including 1,564 patients with EO-CRC and 14,785 with LO-CRC.

Disclosures: This study was supported by European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Japanese Foundation for Multidisciplinary Treatment of Cancer, and others. The authors declared receiving honoraria, research funding, consulting or advisory role, travel, accommodation expenses, stock, and other ownership interests from various sources.

Source: Fontana E et al. J Clin Oncol. 2021 Nov 9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.21.02008.

Key clinical point: Patients with stage III early-onset colorectal cancer (EO-CRC) experienced more frequent disease recurrence and cancer-specific mortality than patients with late-onset CRC (LO-CRC), suggesting more aggressive disease biology.

Major finding: Despite a higher likelihood of receiving more aggressive treatment and completing planned 6-month therapy duration (P < .001), patients with stage III EO-CRC vs LO-CRC had a significantly lower 3-year relapse-free rate (hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; P = .003) and higher 5-year cancer-specific mortality rate (HR, 1.20; P = .03).

Study details: This was a pooled analysis of 16,349 patients with CRC from 6 clinical trials of adjuvant chemotherapy including 1,564 patients with EO-CRC and 14,785 with LO-CRC.

Disclosures: This study was supported by European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Japanese Foundation for Multidisciplinary Treatment of Cancer, and others. The authors declared receiving honoraria, research funding, consulting or advisory role, travel, accommodation expenses, stock, and other ownership interests from various sources.

Source: Fontana E et al. J Clin Oncol. 2021 Nov 9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.21.02008.

Key clinical point: Simultaneous resection of primary colonic tumor and hepatic arterial infusion pump (HAIP) implantation are safe in patients with colon cancer and synchronous liver metastases.

Major finding: Grade 3-4 complications were similar between patients who underwent simultaneous colectomy and HAIP placement vs prior colectomy (P = .872), whereas grade 1-2 complications (36.8% vs 19.0%; P < .001) and the rate for surgical site infection (25.6% vs14.7%; P = .022) were significantly higher with simultaneous colectomy and HAIP placement. The median time from pump placement to the start of HAIP chemotherapy was not different between the groups (P = .924).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective analysis of 398 patients with colon cancer and synchronous liver metastases who underwent resection of the primary colon tumor either simultaneous with HAIP placement (n=258) or prior to HAIP placement (n=116).

Disclosures: This study was partly supported by National Cancer Institute. J Garcia-Aguilar declared receiving honoraria from Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, and Intuitive Inc.

Source: Verheij FS et al. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Nov 9. doi: 10.1245/s10434-021-11029-3.

Key clinical point: Simultaneous resection of primary colonic tumor and hepatic arterial infusion pump (HAIP) implantation are safe in patients with colon cancer and synchronous liver metastases.

Major finding: Grade 3-4 complications were similar between patients who underwent simultaneous colectomy and HAIP placement vs prior colectomy (P = .872), whereas grade 1-2 complications (36.8% vs 19.0%; P < .001) and the rate for surgical site infection (25.6% vs14.7%; P = .022) were significantly higher with simultaneous colectomy and HAIP placement. The median time from pump placement to the start of HAIP chemotherapy was not different between the groups (P = .924).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective analysis of 398 patients with colon cancer and synchronous liver metastases who underwent resection of the primary colon tumor either simultaneous with HAIP placement (n=258) or prior to HAIP placement (n=116).

Disclosures: This study was partly supported by National Cancer Institute. J Garcia-Aguilar declared receiving honoraria from Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, and Intuitive Inc.

Source: Verheij FS et al. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Nov 9. doi: 10.1245/s10434-021-11029-3.

Key clinical point: Simultaneous resection of primary colonic tumor and hepatic arterial infusion pump (HAIP) implantation are safe in patients with colon cancer and synchronous liver metastases.

Major finding: Grade 3-4 complications were similar between patients who underwent simultaneous colectomy and HAIP placement vs prior colectomy (P = .872), whereas grade 1-2 complications (36.8% vs 19.0%; P < .001) and the rate for surgical site infection (25.6% vs14.7%; P = .022) were significantly higher with simultaneous colectomy and HAIP placement. The median time from pump placement to the start of HAIP chemotherapy was not different between the groups (P = .924).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective analysis of 398 patients with colon cancer and synchronous liver metastases who underwent resection of the primary colon tumor either simultaneous with HAIP placement (n=258) or prior to HAIP placement (n=116).

Disclosures: This study was partly supported by National Cancer Institute. J Garcia-Aguilar declared receiving honoraria from Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, and Intuitive Inc.

Source: Verheij FS et al. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Nov 9. doi: 10.1245/s10434-021-11029-3.

Key clinical point: A single flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) at the age of 55-64 years substantially reduced the risk for colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and CRC-related mortality, which was maintained up to 15 and 19 years, respectively.

Major finding: CRC incidence and CRC mortality reduced by 19% (rate ratio [RR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71-0.93) and 22% (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61-0.98), respectively, in the group that underwent FS vs usual care, with the reduction mainly driven by a reduced incidence of distal CRC (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59-0.84) and distal CRC mortality (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.50-0.95).

Study details: Findings are from SCORE randomized control trial including 34,272 participants who expressed interest in having FS and were randomly assigned to FS (n=17,136) or usual care (n=17,136) groups.

Disclosures: The trial was supported by Italian Association for Cancer Research, Italian National Research Council, and others. C Semore declared receiving research funding, travel support, and paid/unpaid leadership or fiduciary role for various sources.

Source: Senore C et al. Ann Intern Med. 2021 Nov 9. doi: 10.7326/M21-0977. 

Key clinical point: A single flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) at the age of 55-64 years substantially reduced the risk for colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and CRC-related mortality, which was maintained up to 15 and 19 years, respectively.

Major finding: CRC incidence and CRC mortality reduced by 19% (rate ratio [RR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71-0.93) and 22% (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61-0.98), respectively, in the group that underwent FS vs usual care, with the reduction mainly driven by a reduced incidence of distal CRC (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59-0.84) and distal CRC mortality (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.50-0.95).

Study details: Findings are from SCORE randomized control trial including 34,272 participants who expressed interest in having FS and were randomly assigned to FS (n=17,136) or usual care (n=17,136) groups.

Disclosures: The trial was supported by Italian Association for Cancer Research, Italian National Research Council, and others. C Semore declared receiving research funding, travel support, and paid/unpaid leadership or fiduciary role for various sources.

Source: Senore C et al. Ann Intern Med. 2021 Nov 9. doi: 10.7326/M21-0977. 

Key clinical point: A single flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) at the age of 55-64 years substantially reduced the risk for colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and CRC-related mortality, which was maintained up to 15 and 19 years, respectively.

Major finding: CRC incidence and CRC mortality reduced by 19% (rate ratio [RR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71-0.93) and 22% (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61-0.98), respectively, in the group that underwent FS vs usual care, with the reduction mainly driven by a reduced incidence of distal CRC (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59-0.84) and distal CRC mortality (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.50-0.95).

Study details: Findings are from SCORE randomized control trial including 34,272 participants who expressed interest in having FS and were randomly assigned to FS (n=17,136) or usual care (n=17,136) groups.

Disclosures: The trial was supported by Italian Association for Cancer Research, Italian National Research Council, and others. C Semore declared receiving research funding, travel support, and paid/unpaid leadership or fiduciary role for various sources.

Source: Senore C et al. Ann Intern Med. 2021 Nov 9. doi: 10.7326/M21-0977. 

Key clinical point: Sleep-related hypoxia is associated with worse outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

Major finding: Sleep-related hypoxia was associated with an increased risk for COVID-19-related hospitalization and mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.08-1.57; P = .005).

Study details: The data come from a case-control study involving 5,402 individuals who had previously participated in a sleep study, of whom 1,935 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.

Disclosures: The study was supported by the Neuroscience Transformative Research Resource Development Award (R Mehra). A Milinovich reported ties with various pharmaceutical companies and research organizations. L Aboussouan, L Jehi, R Mehra, and C Pena Orbea reported ties with research organizations and/or publishing companies. The remaining authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Pena Orbea C et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Nov 10. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.34241.

Key clinical point: Sleep-related hypoxia is associated with worse outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

Major finding: Sleep-related hypoxia was associated with an increased risk for COVID-19-related hospitalization and mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.08-1.57; P = .005).

Study details: The data come from a case-control study involving 5,402 individuals who had previously participated in a sleep study, of whom 1,935 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.

Disclosures: The study was supported by the Neuroscience Transformative Research Resource Development Award (R Mehra). A Milinovich reported ties with various pharmaceutical companies and research organizations. L Aboussouan, L Jehi, R Mehra, and C Pena Orbea reported ties with research organizations and/or publishing companies. The remaining authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Pena Orbea C et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Nov 10. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.34241.

Key clinical point: Sleep-related hypoxia is associated with worse outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

Major finding: Sleep-related hypoxia was associated with an increased risk for COVID-19-related hospitalization and mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.08-1.57; P = .005).

Study details: The data come from a case-control study involving 5,402 individuals who had previously participated in a sleep study, of whom 1,935 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.

Disclosures: The study was supported by the Neuroscience Transformative Research Resource Development Award (R Mehra). A Milinovich reported ties with various pharmaceutical companies and research organizations. L Aboussouan, L Jehi, R Mehra, and C Pena Orbea reported ties with research organizations and/or publishing companies. The remaining authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Pena Orbea C et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Nov 10. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.34241.

Key clinical point: Johnson & Johnson's (J&J) adenoviral vector COVID-19 vaccine (Ad26.COV) was effective in preventing COVID-19 and severe outcomes in a real-world setting.

Major finding: The incidence rate ratio of COVID-19 in the Ad26.COV-vaccinated vs unvaccinated cohort was 0.26 (95% CI, 0.20-0.34), corresponding to an effectiveness of 73.6% (95% CI, 65.9%-79.9%). Ad26.COV recipients also had a lower risk for hospitalization (odds ratio [OR], 0.32; P = .00028) and ICU admissions (OR, 0.00; P = .001) compared with unvaccinated individuals.

Study details: The data come from an analysis of 8,889 individuals vaccinated with Ad26.COV and 88,898 unvaccinated matched controls.

Disclosures: No information on funding was available. J Corchado-Garcia, D Zemmour, T Hughes, P Lenehan, C Pawlowski, JC O’Horo, AD Badley, MD Swift, T Wagner, and V Soundararajan reported relationships with various pharmaceutical companies. The remaining authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Corchado-Garcia J et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Nov 2. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.32540.

Key clinical point: Johnson & Johnson's (J&J) adenoviral vector COVID-19 vaccine (Ad26.COV) was effective in preventing COVID-19 and severe outcomes in a real-world setting.

Major finding: The incidence rate ratio of COVID-19 in the Ad26.COV-vaccinated vs unvaccinated cohort was 0.26 (95% CI, 0.20-0.34), corresponding to an effectiveness of 73.6% (95% CI, 65.9%-79.9%). Ad26.COV recipients also had a lower risk for hospitalization (odds ratio [OR], 0.32; P = .00028) and ICU admissions (OR, 0.00; P = .001) compared with unvaccinated individuals.

Study details: The data come from an analysis of 8,889 individuals vaccinated with Ad26.COV and 88,898 unvaccinated matched controls.

Disclosures: No information on funding was available. J Corchado-Garcia, D Zemmour, T Hughes, P Lenehan, C Pawlowski, JC O’Horo, AD Badley, MD Swift, T Wagner, and V Soundararajan reported relationships with various pharmaceutical companies. The remaining authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Corchado-Garcia J et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Nov 2. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.32540.

Key clinical point: Johnson & Johnson's (J&J) adenoviral vector COVID-19 vaccine (Ad26.COV) was effective in preventing COVID-19 and severe outcomes in a real-world setting.

Major finding: The incidence rate ratio of COVID-19 in the Ad26.COV-vaccinated vs unvaccinated cohort was 0.26 (95% CI, 0.20-0.34), corresponding to an effectiveness of 73.6% (95% CI, 65.9%-79.9%). Ad26.COV recipients also had a lower risk for hospitalization (odds ratio [OR], 0.32; P = .00028) and ICU admissions (OR, 0.00; P = .001) compared with unvaccinated individuals.

Study details: The data come from an analysis of 8,889 individuals vaccinated with Ad26.COV and 88,898 unvaccinated matched controls.

Disclosures: No information on funding was available. J Corchado-Garcia, D Zemmour, T Hughes, P Lenehan, C Pawlowski, JC O’Horo, AD Badley, MD Swift, T Wagner, and V Soundararajan reported relationships with various pharmaceutical companies. The remaining authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Corchado-Garcia J et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Nov 2. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.32540.

Key clinical point: A single subcutaneous dose of levilimab (LVL) was safe and effective in severely ill patients with COVID-19 not requiring mechanical ventilation.

Major finding: 63.1% of patients in the LVL group vs 42.7% in the placebo group achieved sustained clinical improvement on day 14 (P = .0017). Adverse event frequency was comparable between the groups.

Study details: In the phase 3 CORONA trial, 206 patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either LVL+standard of care (SOC) vs placebo+SOC.

Disclosures: This study was funded by JSC BIOCAD. MY Gilyarov reported ties with various pharmaceutical companies. AI Seleznev, YN Linkova, EA Dokukina, PS Pukhtinskaia, AV Eremeeva, MA Morozova, AV Zinkina-Orikhan, and AA Lutckii are employees of JSC BIOCAD.

Source: Lomakin NV et al. Inflamm Res. 2021 Sep 29. doi: 10.1007/s00011-021-01507-5.

Key clinical point: A single subcutaneous dose of levilimab (LVL) was safe and effective in severely ill patients with COVID-19 not requiring mechanical ventilation.

Major finding: 63.1% of patients in the LVL group vs 42.7% in the placebo group achieved sustained clinical improvement on day 14 (P = .0017). Adverse event frequency was comparable between the groups.

Study details: In the phase 3 CORONA trial, 206 patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either LVL+standard of care (SOC) vs placebo+SOC.

Disclosures: This study was funded by JSC BIOCAD. MY Gilyarov reported ties with various pharmaceutical companies. AI Seleznev, YN Linkova, EA Dokukina, PS Pukhtinskaia, AV Eremeeva, MA Morozova, AV Zinkina-Orikhan, and AA Lutckii are employees of JSC BIOCAD.

Source: Lomakin NV et al. Inflamm Res. 2021 Sep 29. doi: 10.1007/s00011-021-01507-5.

Key clinical point: A single subcutaneous dose of levilimab (LVL) was safe and effective in severely ill patients with COVID-19 not requiring mechanical ventilation.

Major finding: 63.1% of patients in the LVL group vs 42.7% in the placebo group achieved sustained clinical improvement on day 14 (P = .0017). Adverse event frequency was comparable between the groups.

Study details: In the phase 3 CORONA trial, 206 patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either LVL+standard of care (SOC) vs placebo+SOC.

Disclosures: This study was funded by JSC BIOCAD. MY Gilyarov reported ties with various pharmaceutical companies. AI Seleznev, YN Linkova, EA Dokukina, PS Pukhtinskaia, AV Eremeeva, MA Morozova, AV Zinkina-Orikhan, and AA Lutckii are employees of JSC BIOCAD.

Source: Lomakin NV et al. Inflamm Res. 2021 Sep 29. doi: 10.1007/s00011-021-01507-5.

Key clinical point: HIV-positive individuals are more likely to be hospitalized for or die from COVID-19 compared with non-HIV individuals.

Major finding: The HIV-positive vs non-HIV group had a higher risk for COVID-19-related hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.15-1.26) and mortality (aOR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.16-1.44). The risk was pronounced for older patients, male sex, and Black race.

Study details: The data come from a US population-based surveillance study involving 1,436,622 COVID-19 cases, of which 13,170 were HIV positive.

Disclosures: The study was funded by National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and National Institutes of Health, USA. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Yang X et al. Lancet HIV. 2021 Oct 13. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3018(21)00239-3.

Key clinical point: HIV-positive individuals are more likely to be hospitalized for or die from COVID-19 compared with non-HIV individuals.

Major finding: The HIV-positive vs non-HIV group had a higher risk for COVID-19-related hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.15-1.26) and mortality (aOR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.16-1.44). The risk was pronounced for older patients, male sex, and Black race.

Study details: The data come from a US population-based surveillance study involving 1,436,622 COVID-19 cases, of which 13,170 were HIV positive.

Disclosures: The study was funded by National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and National Institutes of Health, USA. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Yang X et al. Lancet HIV. 2021 Oct 13. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3018(21)00239-3.

Key clinical point: HIV-positive individuals are more likely to be hospitalized for or die from COVID-19 compared with non-HIV individuals.

Major finding: The HIV-positive vs non-HIV group had a higher risk for COVID-19-related hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.15-1.26) and mortality (aOR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.16-1.44). The risk was pronounced for older patients, male sex, and Black race.

Study details: The data come from a US population-based surveillance study involving 1,436,622 COVID-19 cases, of which 13,170 were HIV positive.

Disclosures: The study was funded by National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and National Institutes of Health, USA. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Yang X et al. Lancet HIV. 2021 Oct 13. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3018(21)00239-3.

Key clinical point: Heart rate variability (HRV) is a predictor of survival and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in older adults hospitalized with COVID-19.

Major finding: After adjusting for age and chronic heart disease, HRV was a significant predictor of survival (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] with low vs high HRV, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.27-0.97). This association was primarily driven by patients aged ≥70 years (aHR with low vs high HRV, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12-0.66). HRV also predicted ICU admission within the first week of hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.29-0.90), independent of age and chronic heart disease.

Study details: The data come from a retrospective cohort study involving 271 consecutive adults hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 2020 and May 2020.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any specific funding. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Mol MBA et al. PLoS One. 2021 Oct 28. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258841.

Key clinical point: Heart rate variability (HRV) is a predictor of survival and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in older adults hospitalized with COVID-19.

Major finding: After adjusting for age and chronic heart disease, HRV was a significant predictor of survival (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] with low vs high HRV, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.27-0.97). This association was primarily driven by patients aged ≥70 years (aHR with low vs high HRV, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12-0.66). HRV also predicted ICU admission within the first week of hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.29-0.90), independent of age and chronic heart disease.

Study details: The data come from a retrospective cohort study involving 271 consecutive adults hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 2020 and May 2020.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any specific funding. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Mol MBA et al. PLoS One. 2021 Oct 28. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258841.

Key clinical point: Heart rate variability (HRV) is a predictor of survival and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in older adults hospitalized with COVID-19.

Major finding: After adjusting for age and chronic heart disease, HRV was a significant predictor of survival (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] with low vs high HRV, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.27-0.97). This association was primarily driven by patients aged ≥70 years (aHR with low vs high HRV, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12-0.66). HRV also predicted ICU admission within the first week of hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.29-0.90), independent of age and chronic heart disease.

Study details: The data come from a retrospective cohort study involving 271 consecutive adults hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 2020 and May 2020.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any specific funding. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Mol MBA et al. PLoS One. 2021 Oct 28. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258841.

Key clinical point: Sotrovimab significantly reduced the risk for complications, hospitalization, or mortality in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

Major finding: 1% of patients in the sotrovimab group vs 7% in the placebo group experienced disease progression leading to hospitalization (relative risk reduction, 85%; P = .002). Grade 3/4 adverse events were reported in 2% of patients in the sotrovimab group vs 6% of patients in the placebo group.

Study details: The data come from a prespecified, interim analysis of the ongoing, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 COMET-ICE trial assessing the efficacy and safety of sotrovimab in patients with high-risk, ambulatory, mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

Disclosures: The COMET-ICE trial was funded by Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline. The COMET-ICE Investigators reported relationships with Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline.

Source: Gupta A et al. N Engl J Med. 2021 Oct 27. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2107934.

Key clinical point: Sotrovimab significantly reduced the risk for complications, hospitalization, or mortality in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

Major finding: 1% of patients in the sotrovimab group vs 7% in the placebo group experienced disease progression leading to hospitalization (relative risk reduction, 85%; P = .002). Grade 3/4 adverse events were reported in 2% of patients in the sotrovimab group vs 6% of patients in the placebo group.

Study details: The data come from a prespecified, interim analysis of the ongoing, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 COMET-ICE trial assessing the efficacy and safety of sotrovimab in patients with high-risk, ambulatory, mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

Disclosures: The COMET-ICE trial was funded by Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline. The COMET-ICE Investigators reported relationships with Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline.

Source: Gupta A et al. N Engl J Med. 2021 Oct 27. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2107934.

Key clinical point: Sotrovimab significantly reduced the risk for complications, hospitalization, or mortality in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

Major finding: 1% of patients in the sotrovimab group vs 7% in the placebo group experienced disease progression leading to hospitalization (relative risk reduction, 85%; P = .002). Grade 3/4 adverse events were reported in 2% of patients in the sotrovimab group vs 6% of patients in the placebo group.

Study details: The data come from a prespecified, interim analysis of the ongoing, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 COMET-ICE trial assessing the efficacy and safety of sotrovimab in patients with high-risk, ambulatory, mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

Disclosures: The COMET-ICE trial was funded by Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline. The COMET-ICE Investigators reported relationships with Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline.

Source: Gupta A et al. N Engl J Med. 2021 Oct 27. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2107934.

Key clinical point: Individuals who had received diphtheria or tetanus vaccinations in the last 10 years were less likely to develop severe COVID-19 compared with those who had not received them.

Major finding: The study included 103,049 participants (mean age, 71.5 years; 54.2% women) with vaccination records for the past 10 years and data on COVID-19 testing.

Study details: Individuals who had been vaccinated against diphtheria (odds ratio [OR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33-0.68; P = .000053) and tetanus (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37-0.72; P = .00012) in the last 10 years had a lower likelihood of developing severe COVID-19 symptoms compared with those who had not received them.

Disclosures: The study was funded by the Research Council of Norway, the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority, Stiftelsen Kristian Gerhard Jebsen, The European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, and National Institutes of Health. O Andreassen and J Pinzón-Espinosa reported relationships with various pharmaceutical companies. The remaining authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Monereo-Sánchez J et al. Front Immunol. 2021 Oct 7. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.749264.

Key clinical point: Individuals who had received diphtheria or tetanus vaccinations in the last 10 years were less likely to develop severe COVID-19 compared with those who had not received them.

Major finding: The study included 103,049 participants (mean age, 71.5 years; 54.2% women) with vaccination records for the past 10 years and data on COVID-19 testing.

Study details: Individuals who had been vaccinated against diphtheria (odds ratio [OR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33-0.68; P = .000053) and tetanus (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37-0.72; P = .00012) in the last 10 years had a lower likelihood of developing severe COVID-19 symptoms compared with those who had not received them.

Disclosures: The study was funded by the Research Council of Norway, the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority, Stiftelsen Kristian Gerhard Jebsen, The European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, and National Institutes of Health. O Andreassen and J Pinzón-Espinosa reported relationships with various pharmaceutical companies. The remaining authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Monereo-Sánchez J et al. Front Immunol. 2021 Oct 7. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.749264.

Key clinical point: Individuals who had received diphtheria or tetanus vaccinations in the last 10 years were less likely to develop severe COVID-19 compared with those who had not received them.

Major finding: The study included 103,049 participants (mean age, 71.5 years; 54.2% women) with vaccination records for the past 10 years and data on COVID-19 testing.

Study details: Individuals who had been vaccinated against diphtheria (odds ratio [OR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33-0.68; P = .000053) and tetanus (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37-0.72; P = .00012) in the last 10 years had a lower likelihood of developing severe COVID-19 symptoms compared with those who had not received them.

Disclosures: The study was funded by the Research Council of Norway, the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority, Stiftelsen Kristian Gerhard Jebsen, The European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, and National Institutes of Health. O Andreassen and J Pinzón-Espinosa reported relationships with various pharmaceutical companies. The remaining authors declared no conflict of interests.

Source: Monereo-Sánchez J et al. Front Immunol. 2021 Oct 7. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.749264.