We evaluated the effect of DMTs on Covid‐19 severity in patients with MS, with a pooled‐analysis of two large cohorts from Italy and France. The association of baseline characteristics and DMTs with Covid‐19 severity was assessed by multivariate ordinal‐logistic models and pooled by a fixed‐effect meta‐analysis. 1066 patients with MS from Italy and 721 from France were included. In the multivariate model, anti‐CD20 therapies were significantly associated (OR = 2.05, 95%CI = 1.39–3.02, p < 0.001) with Covid‐19 severity, whereas interferon indicated a decreased risk (OR = 0.42, 95%CI = 0.18–0.99, p = 0.047). This pooled‐analysis confirms an increased risk of severe Covid‐19 in patients on anti‐CD20 therapies and supports the protective role of interferon.

Background and Objectives It is unclear how multiple sclerosis (MS) affects the severity of COVID-19. The aim of this study is to compare COVID-19–related outcomes collected in an Italian cohort of patients with MS with the outcomes expected in the age- and sex-matched Italian population. Methods Hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and death after COVID-19 diagnosis of 1,362 patients with MS were compared with the age- and sex-matched Italian population in a retrospective observational case-cohort study with population-based control. The observed vs the expected events were compared in the whole MS cohort and in different subgroups (higher risk: Expanded Disability Status Scale [EDSS] score > 3 or at least 1 comorbidity, lower risk: EDSS score ≤ 3 and no comorbidities) by the χ² test, and the risk excess was quantified by risk ratios (RRs). Results The risk of severe events was about twice the risk in the age- and sex-matched Italian population: RR = 2.12 for hospitalization (p < 0.001), RR = 2.19 for ICU admission (p < 0.001), and RR = 2.43 for death (p < 0.001). The excess of risk was confined to the higher-risk group (n = 553). In lower-risk patients (n = 809), the rate of events was close to that of the Italian age- and sex-matched population (RR = 1.12 for hospitalization, RR = 1.52 for ICU admission, and RR = 1.19 for death). In the lower-risk group, an increased hospitalization risk was detected in patients on anti-CD20 (RR = 3.03, p = 0.005), whereas a decrease was detected in patients on interferon (0 observed vs 4 expected events, p = 0.04). Discussion Overall, the MS cohort had a risk of severe events that is twice the risk than the age- and sex-matched Italian population. This excess of risk is mainly explained by the EDSS score and comorbidities, whereas a residual increase of hospitalization risk was observed in patients on anti-CD20 therapies and a decrease in people on interferon.

Objective: To compare the performance of Likert and Prostate Imaging–Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) multiparametric (mp) MRI scoring systems for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Methods: 199 biopsy-naïve males undergoing prostate mpMRI were prospectively scored with Likert and PI-RADS systems by four experienced radiologists. A binary cut-off (threshold score ≥3) was used to analyze histological results by three groups: negative, insignificant disease (Gleason 3 + 3; iPCa), and csPCa (Gleason ≥3 +4). Lesion-level results and prostate zonal location were also compared. Results: 129/199 (64.8%) males underwent biopsy, 96 with Likert or PI-RADS score ≥3, and 21 with negative MRI. A further 12 patients were biopsied during follow-up (mean 507 days). Prostate cancer was diagnosed in 87/199 (43.7%) patients, 65 with (33.6%) csPCa. 30/92 (32.6%) patients with negative MRI were biopsied, with an NPV of 83.3% for cancer and 86.7% for csPCa. Likert and PI-RADS score differences were observed in 92 patients (46.2%), but only for 16 patients (8%) at threshold score ≥3. Likert scoring had higher specificity than PI-RADS (0.77 vs 0.66), higher area under the curve (0.92 vs 0.87, p = 0.002) and higher PPV (0.66 vs 0.58); NPV and sensitivity were the same. Likert had more five score results (58%) compared to PI-RADS (36%), but with similar csCPa detection (81.0 and 80.6% respectively). Likert demonstrated lower proportion of false positive in the predominately AFMS-involving lesions. Conclusion: Likert and PI-RADS systems both demonstrate high cancer detection rates. Likert scoring had a higher AUC with moderately higher specificity and lower positive call rate and could potentially help to reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies performed. Advances in knowledge: This paper illustrates that the Likert scoring system has potential to help urologists reduce the number of prostate biopsies performed.

Objectives: Our primary objective was to explore the effect of a eucaloric ketogenic diet (EKD) on mortality, admission to the intensive care unit, and need for non-invasive ventilation in hospitalized patients with COronaVIrus Disease 19 (COVID-19), in comparison to a eucaloric standard diet. Secondary objectives were verification of the safety and feasibility of the diet and its effects on inflammatory parameters, particularly interleukin-6.