Background: Patients with hematological malignancies (HM) are at high risk of mortality from SARS-CoV-2 disease 2019 (COVID-19). A better understanding of risk factors for adverse outcomes may improve clinical management in these patients. We therefore studied baseline characteristics of HM patients developing COVID-19 and analyzed predictors of mortality. Methods: The survey was supported by the Scientific Working Group Infection in Hematology of the European Hematology Association (EHA). Eligible for the analysis were adult patients with HM and laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 observed between March and December 2020. Results: The study sample includes 3801 cases, represented by lymphoproliferative (mainly non-Hodgkin lymphoma n = 1084, myeloma n = 684 and chronic lymphoid leukemia n = 474) and myeloproliferative malignancies (mainly acute myeloid leukemia n = 497 and myelodysplastic syndromes n = 279). Severe/critical COVID-19 was observed in 63.8% of patients (n = 2425). Overall, 2778 (73.1%) of the patients were hospitalized, 689 (18.1%) of whom were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Overall, 1185 patients (31.2%) died. The primary cause of death was COVID-19 in 688 patients (58.1%), HM in 173 patients (14.6%), and a combination of both COVID-19 and progressing HM in 155 patients (13.1%). Highest mortality was observed in acute myeloid leukemia (199/497, 40%) and myelodysplastic syndromes (118/279, 42.3%). The mortality rate significantly decreased between the first COVID-19 wave (March–May 2020) and the second wave (October–December 2020) (581/1427, 40.7% vs. 439/1773, 24.8%, p value < 0.0001). In the multivariable analysis, age, active malignancy, chronic cardiac disease, liver disease, renal impairment, smoking history, and ICU stay correlated with mortality. Acute myeloid leukemia was a higher mortality risk than lymphoproliferative diseases. Conclusions: This survey confirms that COVID-19 patients with HM are at high risk of lethal complications. However, improved COVID-19 prevention has reduced mortality despite an increase in the number of reported cases.

Purpose: The Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) is present in the malignant Hodgkin/Reed–Sternberg (HRS) cells of 20% to 40% cases of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) in Western countries. We were interested in the detection and quantification of cell-free plasma EBV-DNA as an indicator of biological and clinical characteristics in EBV-associated HL. Experimental Design: EBV was detected in peripheral blood compartments (whole blood, plasma, and mononuclear cells) at diagnosis by real-time PCR for the EBNA (EB nuclear antigen) region (n = 93) and in HRS cells by in situ hybridization for EBV-encoded small RNAs (EBER; n = 63). These data were correlated to histological and clinical characteristics, EBV serology, circulating cell-free DNA, and interleukin (IL)-6 levels. Results: Detection of EBV-DNA in plasma had a high specificity (90%), but a relatively low sensitivity (65%) to predict for EBV association. The viral load was higher in patients with advanced stage disease, older age in the presence of B-symptoms, and international prognostic score more than 2. The presence of EBV in HRS cells and higher plasma EBV-DNA copy numbers correlated to an increased frequency of tumor-infiltrating CD68+ macrophages in lymph node biopsies. Plasma EBV-DNA load correlated to circulating cell-free DNA and IL-6 levels, and inversely correlated to lymphocyte counts and EBNA1 antibody titers. Conclusion: Although the presence of EBV-DNA in peripheral blood cannot be regarded as a surrogate marker for EBER, the plasma EBV-DNA load at HL diagnosis is an indicator of disease activity and biological characteristics associated with negative prognosis. Moreover, the inverse correlation to EBNA1 antibody titers and lymphocyte counts may indicate a reduction in immunosurveillance, favoring the expansion of EBV-HRS cells in HL. Clin Cancer Res; 17(9); 2885–92. ©2011 AACR.

Purpose: Cytokines play a pivotal role in Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL). Because interleukin-6 (IL-6) induces expression of hepcidin, one of the principal regulators of iron metabolism, we studied the contribution of hepcidin in anemia in HL at diagnosis. Patients and Methods: Plasma samples from 65 patients with HL were analyzed for hepcidin levels using a combination of weak cation exchange chromatography and time-of-flight mass spectrometry; cytokine levels were analyzed using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays and parameters of iron metabolism and acute-phase reaction. Results: Hepcidin plasma levels were significantly higher in HL patients when compared with controls, independent of the presence of anemia (P = .001). In the subset of patients with anemia, hepcidin levels inversely correlated with hemoglobin levels (P = .01). Analyzing parameters of iron metabolism, hepcidin levels showed a positive correlation with ferritin (P < .001) and an inverse correlation to iron and iron-binding capacity. Hepcidin strongly correlated to IL-6 levels (P < .001) but not to IL-10 or thymus and activation-regulated cytokine (TARC)/chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 17 (CCL17) levels. In a multivariate regression analysis, IL-6 and fibrinogen levels were independently associated with hepcidin. Higher hepcidin levels were observed in patients with more aggressive disease characteristics: stage IV disease (P = .01), presence of B symptoms (P = .03), and International Prognostic Score > 2 (P = .005). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that in HL, hepcidin is upregulated by IL-6. Elevated hepcidin levels result in iron restriction and signs of anemia of chronic inflammation, although hepcidin-independent mechanisms contribute to development of anemia in HL.

Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is among the neoplastic diseases that has the best long-term outcome after cytotoxic treatment. Cure rates approach 80-90%, however, 15-20% of patients will be resistant to therapy (primary refractory) or relapse after treatment. Prognostic factors should help to stratify therapy according to the risk profile and identify patients at risk for failure. Significance of prognostic factors partly depends on the efficacy of the treatments administered, since new effective therapies can variably counterbalance the adverse effects of some unfavorable clinical determinants. As a consequence, some prognostic factors thought to be important in the past may become meaningless when modern successful therapies are used. Therefore, the value of prognostic factors has to be updated periodically, and compared to new emerging biomarkers. Besides the prognostic role of PET imaging, tissue and circulating biomarkers, as the number of tumor-infiltrating macrophages, cytokine and chemokine levels and profiling of circulating nucleic acids (DNA and microRNAs) have shown promise.

Lymphoma is listed among the neoplasias with a high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Risk factors for VTE appear to differ from risk factors in solid tumors. We review the literature of the last 20 years for reports identifying these risk factors in cohorts consisting exclusively of lymphoma patients. We selected 25 publications. The most frequent studies were analyses of retrospective single-center cohorts. We also included two reports of pooled analyses of clinical trials, two meta-analyses, two analyses of patient registries, and three analyses of population-based databases. The VTE risk is the highest upfront during the first two months after lymphoma diagnosis and decreases over time. This upfront risk may be related to tumor burden and the start of chemotherapy as contributing factors. Factors consistently reported as VTE risk factors are aggressive histology, a performance status ECOG ≥ 2 leading to increased immobility, more extensive disease, and localization to particular sites, such as central nervous system (CNS) and mediastinal mass. Association between laboratory values that are part of risk assessment models in solid tumors and VTE risk in lymphomas are very inconsistent. Recently, VTE risk scores for lymphoma were developed that need further validation, before they can be used for risk stratification and primary prophylaxis. Knowledge of VTE risk factors in lymphomas may help in the evaluation of the individual risk-benefit ratio of prophylaxis and help to design prospective studies on primary prophylaxis in lymphoma.