ArticleAnnals of hematology2024
Comprehensive procedure for injecting Evusheld® for hematological diseases in a single institute.
Article in Annals of hematology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Time to anti-cancer treatment resumption after SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with active haematological diseases undergoing combined antiviral treatments.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Tixagevimab and cilgavimab (EVA, Evusheld®), monoclonal antibody combination treatments, consisted of two neutralizing antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). EVA showed prophylactic and therapeutic effects against coronavirus disease 2019. The Japanese Society of Hematology recommended EVA for such patients with active treatment, but each institution decided on comprehensive administration. We develop a systematic procedure for comprehensive EVA injection prophylactically in patients with hematological malignancies without any over/under-indication. We listed all patients with the required indications from November 2022 to March 2023. We included 178 cases, 84 females and 94 males, with a median age of 70 (range: 19-90) years. Underlying diseases are myeloid neoplasms in 36 (20%), lymphoid neoplasms in 75 (73%), and others. Indications were intensively hematological malignancy treatment, rituximab treatment within 12 months, burton kinase inhibitor treatment, after chimeric antigen receptor T cell immunotherapy, and after stem cell transplantation in 74 (41%), 73 (41%), 3 (2%), 5 (3%), and 23 (13%) cases, respectively. Of the 178 cases, 22 (12.4%) refused EVA injection. Further, 42 and 136 cases were administered outpatient and inpatient, respectively. Over 95% of the listed cases received EVA injection within 3 months. No severe toxicities were observed among them (N = 156), and 8 (5.2%) cases had breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection, which was significantly lower (P = 0.02) than those without EVA (4 [18.2%] of 22 cases). Both groups showed no moderate or severe infection cases. This single-center experience showed that comprehensive EVA injection management effectively generated safer completion with preferable clinical impact.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38734996What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.