Introduction: More than 15 million adults in the USA have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) places a high burden on the healthcare system. Many hospital admissions are due to an exacerbation, which is suspected to be from a viral cause. The purpose of this analysis was to compare the outcomes of patients with a positive and negative respiratory virus panel who were admitted to the hospital with COPD exacerbations. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in the Geisinger Healthcare System. The dataset included 2729 patient encounters between 1 January 2006 and 30 November 2017. Hospital length of stay was calculated as the discrete number of calendar days a patient was in the hospital. Patient encounters with a positive and negative respiratory virus panel were compared using Pearson’s chi-square or Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables and Student’s t-test or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for continuous variables. Results: There were 1626 patients with a total of 2729 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation encounters. Nineteen percent of those encounters (n = 524) had a respiratory virus panel performed during their admission. Among these encounters, 161 (30.7%) had positive results, and 363 (69.3%) had negative results. For encounters with the respiratory virus panel, the mean age was 64.5, 59.5% were female, 98.9% were white, and the mean body mass index was 26.6. Those with a negative respiratory virus panel had a higher median white blood cell count (11.1 vs. 9.9, p = 0.0076). There were no other statistically significant differences in characteristics between the two groups. Respiratory virus panel positive patients had a statistically significant longer hospital length of stay. There were no significant differences with respect to being on mechanical ventilation or ventilation-free days. Conclusion: This study shows that a positive respiratory virus panel is associated with increased length of hospital stay. Early diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation patients with positive viral panel would help identify patients with a longer length of stay.

There has been an outbreak of lung injury associated with e-cigarettes and vaping in the United States since early 2019. We present two cases who were admitted to the hospital with shortness of breath and cough. Chest imaging showed they had interstitial changes. They were diagnosed with e-cigarette and vaping product use-associated lung injury (EVALI) and treated with steroids and supportive management. With an improvement in symptoms, they were discharged home. On follow-up in the clinic, both patients were asymptomatic and had complete resolution of radiographic abnormalities. However, pulmonary function testing showed reduced diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO). Total lung capacity (TLC), forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in the first one second (FEV-1), and the FEV-1/FVC ratio were normal.

Multiple patients with prostate cancer become resistant to castration therapies, which is termed castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). The purpose of this review is to assess the status of efficacy (≥50% decline in prostate-specific antigen (PSA), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS)) and safety (grade 3-4 adverse effects) of monoclonal antibodies in CRPC. We searched databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Hazard ratios of PFS and OS were 0.77 (95% CI = 0.69-0.87, I² = 53%) and 0.98 (95% CI = 0.86-1.11, I² = 40%), respectively, in the favor of monoclonal antibodies as compared to placebo. Risk ratio (RR) of >50% decline in PSA was 1.99 (95% CI = 0.97-4.08, I² = 53%) in favor of monoclonal antibodies. Pooled incidence of >50% decline in PSA levels was 15% (95% CI = 0.1-0.23, I² = 83%), 29% (95% CI = 0.14-0.51, I² = 93%), 63% (95% CI = 0.49-0.76, I² = 77%), and 88% (95% CI = 0.81-0.93, I² = 0%) in single, two, three, and four-drug regimens, respectively. Monoclonal antibodies are well tolerated and showed better PFS as compared to placebo. However, OS was only improved with ipilimumab. Denosumab delayed skeletal-related adverse events as compared to zoledronic acid. More multicenter double-blind clinical trials may be needed to confirm these results.