Background: The recent emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) led to a current pandemic of unprecedented scale. Although diagnostic tests are fundamental to the ability to detect and respond, overwhelmed healthcare systems are already experiencing shortages of reagents associated with this test, calling for a lean immediately applicable protocol.Methods: RNA extracts of positive samples were tested for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 using reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction, alone or in pools of different sizes (2-, 4-, 8-, 16-, 32-, and 64-sample pools) with negative samples. Transport media of additional 3 positive samples were also tested when mixed with transport media of negative samples in pools of 8.Results: A single positive sample can be detected in pools of up to 32 samples, using the standard kits and protocols, with an estimated false negative rate of 10%. Detection of positive samples diluted in even up to 64 samples may also be attainable, although this may require additional amplification cycles. Single positive samples can be detected when pooling either after or prior to RNA extraction.Conclusions: As it uses the standard protocols, reagents, and equipment, this pooling method can be applied immediately in current clinical testing laboratories. We hope that such implementation of a pool test for coronavirus disease 2019 would allow expanding current screening capacities, thereby enabling the expansion of detection in the community, as well as in close organic groups, such as hospital departments, army units, or factory shifts.

The recent emergence of SARS-CoV-2 lead to a current pandemic of unprecedented levels. Though diagnostic tests are fundamental to the ability to detect and respond, many health systems are already experiencing shortages of reagents associated with this test. Here, testing a pooling approach for the standard RT-qPCR test, we find that a single positive sample can be detected even in pools of up to 32 samples, with an estimated false negative rate of 10%. Detection of positive samples diluted in even up to 64 samples may also be attainable, though may require additional amplification cycles. As it uses the standard protocols, reagents and equipment, this pooling method can be applied immediately in current clinical testing laboratories. We hope that such implementation of a pool test for COVID-19 would allow expanding current screening capacities thereby enabling the expansion of detection in the community, as well as in close integral groups, such as hospital departments, army units, or factory shifts.

We had previously reported short-term efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of the BNT162b2 vaccine among cancer patients with solid tumors. We aimed to evaluate these outcomes at six months postvaccination. The study cohort comprised patients who were on treatment during vaccination and throughout six months postvaccination. Serologic tests were performed after second vaccination and six months afterward. An age-matched cohort of health care workers served as controls. Documentation of COVID-19 infection, blood tests, and imaging studies during the study period was reviewed. Participants included 154 patients and 135 controls. Six months postvaccination, 122 (79%) patients were seropositive compared with 114 (84%) controls (P = 0.32). Serology titer dramatically decreased in a similar manner in both cohorts. No COVID-19 cases were documented in controls, and one case occurred in patient cohort. All previously reported adverse effects resolved. Taken together, the pattern of immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety of BNT162b2 in patients with cancer with solid tumors at six months postvaccination resembles that of the general population. Significance: Evidence regarding efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with cancer indicate a favorable short-term profile. Immunomodulation due to anticancer treatments may affect immunity and immunogenicity of patients with cancer to the BNT162b2 vaccine over time. Our study sheds light on these long-term outcomes and portrays a trend that resembles the general population. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 2355

COVID-19 exerts deleterious cardiopulmonary effects, leading to a worse prognosis in the most affected. This retrospective multi-center observational cohort study aimed to analyze the trajectories of key vitals amongst hospitalized COVID-19 patients using a chest-patch wearable providing continuous remote patient monitoring of numerous vital signs. The study was conducted in five COVID-19 isolation units. A total of 492 COVID-19 patients were included in the final analysis. Physiological parameters were measured every 15 min. More than 3 million measurements were collected including heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, cardiac output, cardiac index, systemic vascular resistance, respiratory rate, blood oxygen saturation, and body temperature. Cardiovascular deterioration appeared early after admission and in parallel with changes in the respiratory parameters, showing a significant difference in trajectories within sub-populations at high risk. Early detection of cardiovascular deterioration of COVID-19 patients is achievable when using frequent remote patient monitoring.

(1) Background: Medical teams are at the forefront of the COVID-19 pandemic. Decision making among medical staff is important for promoting and maintaining the health of patients and staff. This study examines factors associated with physicians’ decision making and preventive behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic in Israel. (2) Methods: An online survey was conducted among 187 Israeli physicians in April and May 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. The questionnaire included the levels of physicians’ perceived threat and perceived risk during the epidemic, trust in the health system, emotions, and the degree of compliance with hygiene rules and mandated behaviors. (3) Results: Most physicians reported complying with the rules of hygiene at work (73%) and full compliance with Ministry of Health guidelines (61%). The findings show that higher levels of trust, positive emotions, and threat and risk perceptions were associated with a higher degree of compliance with Ministry of Health guidelines and more careful decision making among physicians. (4) Conclusions: Levels of trust in the health system and positive emotions among healthcare staff during the pandemic are related to careful adherence to guidelines. Taking steps to maintain physical and mental health among healthcare staff is important for their functioning and for maintaining public health.

Background: The risk of cancer patients to develop COVID19 infection is unclear. We aimed to prospectively study cancer patients and oncology healthcare workers for COVID19 serology. In IgG+ cases, immune profile was determined to portray the pattern of immune response to SARS-CoV2. Methods: Cancer patients on active treatment and healthcare workers were enrolled. During the study period (3/2020–6/2020), demographic data and blood were collected at three time points. Expression of IgG, IgM, and IgA were assessed. In SARS-CoV-2 IgG+ cases and matched negative cases, we performed mass cytometry time of flight (CyTOF) analysis on the basis of the expression of surface markers. Results: The study included 164 cancer patients on active intravenous treatment and 107 healthcare workers at the cancer center. No symptomatic cases were reported during the study period. Serology analysis revealed four IgG+ patients (2.4%) and two IgG+ healthcare workers (1.9%)—all were asymptomatic. CyTOF analysis demonstrated substantial reduction in myeloid cells in healthcare workers who were SARS-CoV-2 IgG+ compared to those who were SARS-CoV-2 IgG-, whereas in cancer patients, the reduction was relatively milder (≈50% reduction in SARS-CoV-2 IgG+ cancer patients compared with ≈90% reduction in SARS-CoV-2 IgG+ workers). Conclusion: Our results indicate a similar rate of asymptomatic COVID19 infection in cancer patients and healthcare workers in a longitudinal study throughout the pandemic time. Due to differential immune cell profiles of cancer patients who are treated with immunomodulatory agents, the host response to the SARS-COV2 may play a role in COVID19 course and representation. The immunological perspective of cancer treatments on the risk for COVID19 infection should be further explored.