This data-based cohort consisted of 26,508 (7%) United States veterans out of the 399,290 who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 from 1 March to 10 September 2020. We aimed to assess the interaction of post-index vitamin D (Vit D) and corticosteroid (CRT) use on 30-day mortality among hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Combination Vit D and CRT drug use was assessed according to four multinomial pairs (−|+, −|−, +|+, +|−). Respective categorical effects were computed on a log-binomial scale as adjusted relative risk (aRR). Approximately 6% of veterans who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 died within 30 days of their index date. Among hospitalized patients, a significantly decreased aRR was observed for the use of Vit D in the absence of CRTs relative to patients who received CRTs but not Vit D (aRR = 0.30; multiplicity corrected, p = 0.0004). Among patients receiving systemically administered CRTs (e.g., dexamethasone), the use of Vit D was associated with fewer deaths in hospitalized patients (aRR = 0.51) compared with non-hospitalized patients (aRR = 2.5) (P-for-Interaction = 0.0071). Evaluating the effect of modification of these compounds in the context of hospitalization may aid in the management of COVID-19 and provide a better understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying this and future infectious disease outbreaks.

The Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index (SII) is an important marker of immune function, defined as the product of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet count (P). Higher baseline SII levels have been associated with improved survival in various types of cancers, including lung cancer. Data were obtained from PROCLAIM, a randomized phase III trial comparing two different chemotherapy regimens pemetrexed + cisplatin (PEM) vs. etoposide + cisplatin (ETO), in combination with radiotherapy (RT) for the treatment of stage III non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to determine if SII measured at the mid-treatment window for RT (weeks 3–4) is a significant predictor of survival, and if the effect of PEM vs. ETO differs by quartile (Q) level of SII. Hazard-ratios (HR) for survival were estimated using a proportional hazards model, accounting for the underlying correlated structure of the data. A total of 548 patients were included in our analysis. The median age at baseline was 59 years. Patients were followed for a median of 24 months. Adjusting for age, body mass index, sex, race, and chemotherapy regimen, SII was a significant mid-treatment predictor of both overall (adjusted HR (aHR) = 1.6, p < 0.0001; OS) and progression-free (aHR = 1.3, p = 0.0072; PFS) survival. Among patients with mid-RT SII values above the median (6.8), those receiving PEM (vs. ETO) had superior OS (p = 0.0002) and PFS (p = 0.0002). Our secondary analysis suggests that SII is an informative mid-treatment marker of OS and PFS in locally advanced non-squamous NSCLC.

Asian (AZN) women are a heterogeneous group, comprising a wide array of cultural beliefs, languages, and healthcare needs. Yet, studies of breast cancer (BCa) risks and outcomes predominately consider AZNs in aggregate, assuming that the distinct ethnicities have similar disease profiles and homogeneous responses to treatment. This stereotypical portrayal of AZNs as a homogenous group tends to mask disparities. For example, healthcare-seeking behaviors and attitudes of medical providers toward AZN BCa patients frequently differ within this group and from other races. Misconceptions may arise that significantly influence the prevention, detection, treatment, and post-therapeutic care of AZN women. In addition to low BCa screening rates among AZN women, disparities also exist in various stages of BCa treatment—omission of radiation after breast-conserving surgery, less access to hypofractionation, underutilization of hormonal therapy, and higher-cost treatment owing to high HER2+ incidence. In this perspective, we highlight the need for disaggregated research of BCa among AZN women and advocate for comprehensive, culturally sensitive strategies to address health disparities in this priority population. Improving BCa literacy and awareness, access to care, and equitable recruitment into clinical trials are a few amelioratory goals to consider in the future.

We read with interest several manuscripts recently published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH) on the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. While these articles provide a well-rounded overview on the risk and current status of this virus, we herein add some relevant information on its etiology, prevention and management, especially for resource-limited healthcare systems. The use of protective actions is both complex and expensive. Affordable options are essential to respond to this and future viral outbreaks.

During their deployment to Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), many Veterans were exposed to a wide array of toxic substances and psychologic stressors, most notably airborne/environmental pollutants from open burn pits. Service members do not deploy whilst unhealthy, but often they return with a multitude of acute and chronic symptoms, some of which only begin to manifest years after their deployment. Our findings, while preliminary in nature, suggest that Iraq War Veterans who participated in our survey reported a decrease in overall physical fitness and increased respiratory clinical symptoms compared with pre-deployment periods. The objective of this report is to provide information that will benefit how combat Veterans are cared for post-deployment. Strategies for a wider and more comprehensive assessment and medical screening process post-deployment are recommended.

Vitamin D is an important immune-modulator with anti-inflammatory properties. While this prohormone has been studied extensively in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19, findings have been inconsistent regarding its overall benefit in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Most studies to date have been observational in nature, not accounting for the use of corticosteroids. Furthermore, the few randomized clinical trials designed to examine the effect of vitamin D supplementation on COVID-19 outcomes have been relatively small and thus insufficiently powered to assure a balance of corticosteroid use between study arms. The current perspective addresses the interaction of vitamin D and corticosteroids as a potential explanation for the divergent results reported in the literature. Future research on vitamin D and COVID-19 will benefit by considering this interaction, especially among hospitalized patients requiring oxygen and mechanical ventilation.