4CPS-287 Impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection in acute myeloid leukaemia patients: experience of the Pethema registry

Background and importanceSARS-CoV-2 infection can impact the survival of patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) but there is little published evidence in AML.Aim and objectivesTo analyse the clinical futures and outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection in AML patients.Material and methodsAn observationa...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy. Science and practice Vol. 28; no. Suppl 1; pp. A58 - A59
Main Authors Palanques Pastor, T, Megias Vericat, J, Martinez, P, Cornago Navascués, J, López Lorenzo, JL, Rodríguez, G, Cano, I, Arnan Sangerman, M, Poveda Andrés, JL, Montestinos, P
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London BMJ Publishing Group LTD 01.03.2021
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Background and importanceSARS-CoV-2 infection can impact the survival of patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) but there is little published evidence in AML.Aim and objectivesTo analyse the clinical futures and outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection in AML patients.Material and methodsAn observational multicentre study was conducted between March and May 2020 with 117 patients reported from 47 Spanish centres. Leukaemic and viral infections were studied, and inter-relationships were established.ResultsMedian age was 68 years, men (56.7% vs 43.3%), median time from AML diagnosis to SARS-CoV-2 was 4 months and mean number of comorbidities was 1.2. Cytogenetic risk was low in 16.9%, intermediate in 57.1% and high in 26.0%; 55.7% had active disease, 39.2% complete remission and 5.1% partial response. 29.4% were off-therapy and 70.6% were receiving anti-leukaemic treatment: induction chemotherapy (25.3%), hypomethylating (19.3%), clinical trial (17.0%), consolidation chemotherapy (14.8%), venetoclax (3.4%), FLT3 inhibitors (3.4%) and/or maintenance (1.1%). Overall, 3.7% were newly diagnosed, 77.8% had received one line of treatment, 14.8% two and 3.7% four. 15.4% had prior allogeneic transplantation.Only 4.0% of patients were asymptomatic, while the main signs and symptoms were fever (77.8%), pneumonia (75.0%), cough (65.3%), dyspnoea (52.0%), diarrhoea (20.4%), nausea/vomiting (12.2%), rhinorrhoea (10.2%) and headache (7.4%). Analytical parameters were: neutrophils 3112 cells/μL (1900–7300), lymphocytes 1090 cells/μL (1000–3000), interleukin 6 118 pg/mL (0–100), ferritin 4505 ng/mL (15–150) and D-dimer 2823 ng/mL (20–500), with liver enzymes altered in 23.9% of cases. 84.2% received specific treatment for coronavirus infection: chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine (82.2%), lopinavir/ritonavir (54.0%), corticosteroids (39.6%), azithromycin (33.0%), tocilizumab (15.8%), plasma convalescent (3.0%), clinical trial medication (3.0%), remdesivir (2.0%) and/or anakinra (1.0%).The course was mild in 14.7%, moderate in 32.0% and severe in 53.3%. Mean time to negativisation was 20.5 days, duration of symptoms 17.6 days and hospital stay 11.1 days. In 48.1% of cases treatment for AML was maintained, in 26.6% delayed and in 25.3% modified due to coronavirus disease. 47.5% died, establishing an association between mortality and age over 60 years (58.3% vs 36.4%, p=0.043), ≥2 lines of treatment (72.7% vs 44.3%, p=0.020), active disease (62.5% vs 29.4%, p=0.002) and pneumonia (61.2% vs 22.7%, p=0.002). Overall, 47.5% overcame the infection, and in 5.0% SARS-CoV-2 genetic material was still detected at the time of analysis. A non-significant lower mortality rate was observed among: previous transplantation (45.7% vs 64.3%, p=0.19), neutrophil >1900 cells/μL (41.1% vs 60.0%, p=0.09), lymphocyte >1000 cells/μL (42.9% vs 63.6%, p=0.09) and hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine plus azithromycin (35.3% vs 60.0%, p=0.10).Conclusion and relevanceSARS-CoV-2 infection produced high mortality among AML patients. Mortality was correlated with age, active disease and pneumonia.References and/or acknowledgementsAcknowledgements: Pethema FoundationConflict of interestNo conflict of interest
ISSN:2047-9956
2047-9964
DOI:10.1136/ejhpharm-2021-eahpconf.119