This version of BIP! Finder aims to ease the exploration of COVID-19-related literature by enabling ranking articles based on various impact metrics.
Last Update: 18 - 01 - 2023 (628506 entries)
Popularity Influence Reader Attention Social Media Attention
|201||Feasibility of controlling COVID-19 outbreaks by isolation of cases and contacts |
BACKGROUND: Isolation of cases and contact tracing is used to control outbreaks of infectious diseases, and has been used for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Whether this strategy will achieve control depends on characteristics of both the pathogen and the response. Here we use a mathematical model to assess if isolation and contact tracing are able to control onwards transmission from imported cases of COVID-19. METHODS: We developed a stochastic transmission model, parameterised to the COVID-19 outbreak. We used the model to quantify the potential effectiveness of contact tracing and isolation of cases at controlling a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-like pathogen. We considered scenarios that varied in the number of initial cases, the basic reproduction number (R(0)), the delay from symptom onset to isolation, the probability that contacts were traced, the proportion of transmission that occurred before symptom onset, and the proportion of subclinical infections. We assumed isolation prevented all further transmission in the model. Outbreaks were deemed controlled if transmission ended within 12 weeks or before 5000 cases in total. We measured the success of controlling outbreaks using isolation and contact tracing, and quantified the weekly maximum number of cases traced to measure feasibility of public health effort. FINDINGS: Simulated outbreaks starting with five initial cases, an R(0) of 1·5, and 0% transmission before symptom onset could be controlled even with low contact tracing probability; however, the probability of controlling an outbreak decreased with the number of initial cases, when R(0) was 2·5 or 3·5 and with more transmission before symptom onset. Across different initial numbers of cases, the majority of scenarios with an R(0) of 1·5 were controllable with less than 50% of contacts successfully traced. To control the majority of outbreaks, for R(0) of 2·5 more than 70% of contacts had to be traced, and for an R(0) of 3·5 more than 90% of contacts had to be traced. The delay between symptom onset and isolation had the largest role in determining whether an outbreak was controllable when R(0) was 1·5. For R(0) values of 2·5 or 3·5, if there were 40 initial cases, contact tracing and isolation were only potentially feasible when less than 1% of transmission occurred before symptom onset. INTERPRETATION: In most scenarios, highly effective contact tracing and case isolation is enough to control a new outbreak of COVID-19 within 3 months. The probability of control decreases with long delays from symptom onset to isolation, fewer cases ascertained by contact tracing, and increasing transmission before symptoms. This model can be modified to reflect updated transmission characteristics and more specific definitions of outbreak control to assess the potential success of local response efforts. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, Global Challenges Research Fund, and Health Data Research UK.
|Lancet Glob Health||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|202||High expression of ACE2 receptor of 2019-nCoV on the epithelial cells of oral mucosa |
It has been reported that ACE2 is the main host cell receptor of 2019-nCoV and plays a crucial role in the entry of virus into the cell to cause the final infection. To investigate the potential route of 2019-nCov infection on the mucosa of oral cavity, bulk RNA-seq profiles from two public databases including The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Functional Annotation of The Mammalian Genome Cap Analysis of Gene Expression (FANTOM5 CAGE) dataset were collected. RNA-seq profiling data of 13 organ types with para-carcinoma normal tissues from TCGA and 14 organ types with normal tissues from FANTOM5 CAGE were analyzed in order to explore and validate the expression of ACE2 on the mucosa of oral cavity. Further, single-cell transcriptomes from an independent data generated in-house were used to identify and confirm the ACE2-expressing cell composition and proportion in oral cavity. The results demonstrated that the ACE2 expressed on the mucosa of oral cavity. Interestingly, this receptor was highly enriched in epithelial cells of tongue. Preliminarily, those findings have explained the basic mechanism that the oral cavity is a potentially high risk for 2019-nCoV infectious susceptibility and provided a piece of evidence for the future prevention strategy in dental clinical practice as well as daily life.
|Int J Oral Sci||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|203||Development and clinical application of a rapid IgM-IgG combined antibody test for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis |
The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) quickly spread all over China and to more than 20 other countries. Although the virus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus [SARS‐Cov‐2]) nucleic acid real‐time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test has become the standard method for diagnosis of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, these real‐time PCR test kits have many limitations. In addition, high false‐negative rates were reported. There is an urgent need for an accurate and rapid test method to quickly identify a large number of infected patients and asymptomatic carriers to prevent virus transmission and assure timely treatment of patients. We have developed a rapid and simple point‐of‐care lateral flow immunoassay that can detect immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG antibodies simultaneously against SARS‐CoV‐2 virus in human blood within 15 minutes which can detect patients at different infection stages. With this test kit, we carried out clinical studies to validate its clinical efficacy uses. The clinical detection sensitivity and specificity of this test were measured using blood samples collected from 397 PCR confirmed COVID‐19 patients and 128 negative patients at eight different clinical sites. The overall testing sensitivity was 88.66% and specificity was 90.63%. In addition, we evaluated clinical diagnosis results obtained from different types of venous and fingerstick blood samples. The results indicated great detection consistency among samples from fingerstick blood, serum and plasma of venous blood. The IgM‐IgG combined assay has better utility and sensitivity compared with a single IgM or IgG test. It can be used for the rapid screening of SARS‐CoV‐2 carriers, symptomatic or asymptomatic, in hospitals, clinics, and test laboratories.
|J Med Virol||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|204||Structure of Mpro from SARS-CoV-2 and discovery of its inhibitors |
|Nature||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|205||Coronavirus envelope protein: current knowledge |
BACKGROUND: Coronaviruses (CoVs) primarily cause enzootic infections in birds and mammals but, in the last few decades, have shown to be capable of infecting humans as well. The outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003 and, more recently, Middle-East respiratory syndrome (MERS) has demonstrated the lethality of CoVs when they cross the species barrier and infect humans. A renewed interest in coronaviral research has led to the discovery of several novel human CoVs and since then much progress has been made in understanding the CoV life cycle. The CoV envelope (E) protein is a small, integral membrane protein involved in several aspects of the virus’ life cycle, such as assembly, budding, envelope formation, and pathogenesis. Recent studies have expanded on its structural motifs and topology, its functions as an ion-channelling viroporin, and its interactions with both other CoV proteins and host cell proteins. MAIN BODY: This review aims to establish the current knowledge on CoV E by highlighting the recent progress that has been made and comparing it to previous knowledge. It also compares E to other viral proteins of a similar nature to speculate the relevance of these new findings. Good progress has been made but much still remains unknown and this review has identified some gaps in the current knowledge and made suggestions for consideration in future research. CONCLUSIONS: The most progress has been made on SARS-CoV E, highlighting specific structural requirements for its functions in the CoV life cycle as well as mechanisms behind its pathogenesis. Data shows that E is involved in critical aspects of the viral life cycle and that CoVs lacking E make promising vaccine candidates. The high mortality rate of certain CoVs, along with their ease of transmission, underpins the need for more research into CoV molecular biology which can aid in the production of effective anti-coronaviral agents for both human CoVs and enzootic CoVs.
|206||Extrapulmonary manifestations of COVID-19 |
|Nat Med||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|207||Imbalanced Host Response to SARS-CoV-2 Drives Development of COVID-19 |
Viral pandemics, such as the one caused by SARS-CoV-2, pose an imminent threat to humanity. Because of its recent emergence, there is a paucity of information regarding viral behavior and host response following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here we offer an in-depth analysis of the transcriptional response to SARS-CoV-2 compared with other respiratory viruses. Cell and animal models of SARS-CoV-2 infection, in addition to transcriptional and serum profiling of COVID-19 patients, consistently revealed a unique and inappropriate inflammatory response. This response is defined by low levels of type I and III interferons juxtaposed to elevated chemokines and high expression of IL-6. We propose that reduced innate antiviral defenses coupled with exuberant inflammatory cytokine production are the defining and driving features of COVID-19.
|Cell||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|208||The neuroinvasive potential of SARS-CoV-2 may play a role in the respiratory failure of COVID-19 patients |
Following the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS‐CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS‐CoV), another highly pathogenic coronavirus named SARS‐CoV‐2 (previously known as 2019‐nCoV) emerged in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, and rapidly spreads around the world. This virus shares highly homological sequence with SARS‐CoV, and causes acute, highly lethal pneumonia coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) with clinical symptoms similar to those reported for SARS‐CoV and MERS‐CoV. The most characteristic symptom of patients with COVID‐19 is respiratory distress, and most of the patients admitted to the intensive care could not breathe spontaneously. Additionally, some patients with COVID‐19 also showed neurologic signs, such as headache, nausea, and vomiting. Increasing evidence shows that coronaviruses are not always confined to the respiratory tract and that they may also invade the central nervous system inducing neurological diseases. The infection of SARS‐CoV has been reported in the brains from both patients and experimental animals, where the brainstem was heavily infected. Furthermore, some coronaviruses have been demonstrated able to spread via a synapse‐connected route to the medullary cardiorespiratory center from the mechanoreceptors and chemoreceptors in the lung and lower respiratory airways. Considering the high similarity between SARS‐CoV and SARS‐CoV2, it remains to make clear whether the potential invasion of SARS‐CoV2 is partially responsible for the acute respiratory failure of patients with COVID‐19. Awareness of this may have a guiding significance for the prevention and treatment of the SARS‐CoV‐2‐induced respiratory failure.
|J Med Virol||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|209||Analysis of therapeutic targets for SARS-CoV-2 and discovery of potential drugs by computational methods |
SARS-CoV-2 has caused tens of thousands of infections and more than one thousand deaths. There are currently no registered therapies for treating coronavirus infections. Because of time consuming process of new drug development, drug repositioning may be the only solution to the epidemic of sudden infectious diseases. We systematically analyzed all the proteins encoded by SARS-CoV-2 genes, compared them with proteins from other coronaviruses, predicted their structures, and built 19 structures that could be done by homology modeling. By performing target-based virtual ligand screening, a total of 21 targets (including two human targets) were screened against compound libraries including ZINC drug database and our own database of natural products. Structure and screening results of important targets such as 3-chymotrypsin-like protease (3CLpro), Spike, RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp), and papain like protease (PLpro) were discussed in detail. In addition, a database of 78 commonly used anti-viral drugs including those currently on the market and undergoing clinical trials for SARS-CoV-2 was constructed. Possible targets of these compounds and potential drugs acting on a certain target were predicted. This study will provide new lead compounds and targets for further in vitro and in vivo studies of SARS-CoV-2, new insights for those drugs currently ongoing clinical studies, and also possible new strategies for drug repositioning to treat SARS-CoV-2 infections.
|Acta Pharm Sin B||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|210||Prevalence of stress, anxiety, depression among the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on public mental health. Therefore, monitoring and oversight of the population mental health during crises such as a panedmic is an immediate priority. The aim of this study is to analyze the existing research works and findings in relation to the prevalence of stress, anxiety and depression in the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, articles that have focused on stress and anxiety prevalence among the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic were searched in the Science Direct, Embase, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science (ISI) and Google Scholar databases, without a lower time limit and until May 2020. In order to perform a meta-analysis of the collected studies, the random effects model was used, and the heterogeneity of studies was investigated using the I(2) index. Moreover. data analysis was conducted using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) software. RESULTS: The prevalence of stress in 5 studies with a total sample size of 9074 is obtained as 29.6% (95% confidence limit: 24.3–35.4), the prevalence of anxiety in 17 studies with a sample size of 63,439 as 31.9% (95% confidence interval: 27.5–36.7), and the prevalence of depression in 14 studies with a sample size of 44,531 people as 33.7% (95% confidence interval: 27.5–40.6). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 not only causes physical health concerns but also results in a number of psychological disorders. The spread of the new coronavirus can impact the mental health of people in different communities. Thus, it is essential to preserve the mental health of individuals and to develop psychological interventions that can improve the mental health of vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 pandemic.
|Global Health||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|211||Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock, 2012 |
OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock,” last published in 2008. DESIGN: A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. METHODS: The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Recommendations were classified into three groups: (1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; (2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and (3) pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 h after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 h of the recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 h of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1B); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement is based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥65 mmHg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of (a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or (b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7–9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a Pao (2)/Fio (2) ratio of ≤100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 h) for patients with early ARDS and a Pao (2)/Fi o (2) <150 mm Hg (2C); a protocolized approach to blood glucose management commencing insulin dosing when two consecutive blood glucose levels are >180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 h after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 h of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5–10 min (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven “absolute”’ adrenal insufficiency (2C). CONCLUSIONS: Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00134-012-2769-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
|Intensive Care Med||2013||CORD-19|
|212||A guide to cancer immunotherapy: from T-cell basic science to clinical practice |
The T lymphocyte, especially its capacity for antigen-directed cytotoxicity, has become a central focus for engaging the immune system in the fight against cancer. Basic science discoveries elucidating the molecular and cellular biology of the T cell have led to new strategies in this fight, including checkpoint blockade, adoptive cellular therapy and cancer vaccinology. This area of immunological research has been highly active for the past 50 years and is now enjoying unprecedented bench-to-bedside clinical success. Here, we provide a comprehensive historical and biological perspective regarding the advent and clinical implementation of cancer immunotherapeutics, with an emphasis on the fundamental importance of T lymphocyte regulation. We highlight clinical trials that demonstrate therapeutic efficacy and toxicities associated with each class of drug. Finally, we summarize emerging therapies and emphasize the yet to be elucidated questions and future promise within the field of cancer immunotherapy.
|Nat Rev Immunol||2020||CORD-19|
|213||Sex differences in immune responses |
|Nat Rev Immunol||2016||CORD-19|
|214||Treatment of 5 Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19 With Convalescent Plasma |
|JAMA||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|215||Surviving Sepsis Campaign: guidelines on the management of critically ill adults with COVID-19 |
BACKGROUND: The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting thousands of people around the world. Urgent guidance for clinicians caring for the sickest of these patients is needed. METHODS: We formed a panel of 36 experts from 12 countries. All panel members completed the World Health Organization conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel proposed 53 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 in the ICU. We searched the literature for direct and indirect evidence on the management of COVID-19 in critically ill patients in the ICU. We identified relevant and recent systematic reviews on most questions relating to supportive care. We assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then generated recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice recommendations. RESULTS: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued 54 statements, of which 4 are best practice statements, 9 are strong recommendations, and 35 are weak recommendations. No recommendation was provided for 6 questions. The topics were: (1) infection control, (2) laboratory diagnosis and specimens, (3) hemodynamic support, (4) ventilatory support, and (5) COVID-19 therapy. CONCLUSION: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued several recommendations to help support healthcare workers caring for critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. When available, we will provide new recommendations in further releases of these guidelines. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00134-020-06022-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
|Intensive Care Med||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|216||Anticoagulant treatment is associated with decreased mortality in severe COVID-19 patients with coagulopathy |
|J Thromb Haemost||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|217||Structure, Function and Evolution of Coronavirus Spike Proteins |
|Annu Rev Virol||2016||CORD-19|
|218||Severe Outcomes Among Patients with COVID-19-United States, February 12-March 16, 2020 |
Globally, approximately 170,000 confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) have been reported, including an estimated 7,000 deaths in approximately 150 countries (1). On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic (2). Data from China have indicated that older adults, particularly those with serious underlying health conditions, are at higher risk for severe COVID-19-associated illness and death than are younger persons (3). Although the majority of reported COVID-19 cases in China were mild (81%), approximately 80% of deaths occurred among adults aged ≥60 years; only one (0.1%) death occurred in a person aged ≤19 years (3). In this report, COVID-19 cases in the United States that occurred during February 12-March 16, 2020 and severity of disease (hospitalization, admission to intensive care unit [ICU], and death) were analyzed by age group. As of March 16, a total of 4,226 COVID-19 cases in the United States had been reported to CDC, with multiple cases reported among older adults living in long-term care facilities (4). Overall, 31% of cases, 45% of hospitalizations, 53% of ICU admissions, and 80% of deaths associated with COVID-19 were among adults aged ≥65 years with the highest percentage of severe outcomes among persons aged ≥85 years. In contrast, no ICU admissions or deaths were reported among persons aged ≤19 years. Similar to reports from other countries, this finding suggests that the risk for serious disease and death from COVID-19 is higher in older age groups.
|MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|219||Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 is a functional receptor for the SARS coronavirus |
Spike (S) proteins of coronaviruses, including the coronavirus that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), associate with cellular receptors to mediate infection of their target cells(1,2). Here we identify a metallopeptidase, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2)(3,4), isolated from SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-permissive Vero E6 cells, that efficiently binds the S1 domain of the SARS-CoV S protein. We found that a soluble form of ACE2, but not of the related enzyme ACE1, blocked association of the S1 domain with Vero E6 cells. 293T cells transfected with ACE2, but not those transfected with human immunodeficiency virus-1 receptors, formed multinucleated syncytia with cells expressing S protein. Furthermore, SARS-CoV replicated efficiently on ACE2-transfected but not mock-transfected 293T cells. Finally, anti-ACE2 but not anti-ACE1 antibody blocked viral replication on Vero E6 cells. Together our data indicate that ACE2 is a functional receptor for SARS-CoV. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version of this article (doi:10.1038/nature02145) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
|220||Global Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases and Risk Factors, 1990-2019: Update From the GBD 2019 Study |
Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), principally ischemic heart disease (IHD) and stroke, are the leading cause of global mortality and a major contributor to disability. This paper reviews the magnitude of total CVD burden, including 13 underlying causes of cardiovascular death and 9 related risk factors, using estimates from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study 2019. GBD, an ongoing multinational collaboration to provide comparable and consistent estimates of population health over time, used all available population-level data sources on incidence, prevalence, case fatality, mortality, and health risks to produce estimates for 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2019. Prevalent cases of total CVD nearly doubled from 271 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI]: 257 to 285 million) in 1990 to 523 million (95% UI: 497 to 550 million) in 2019, and the number of CVD deaths steadily increased from 12.1 million (95% UI:11.4 to 12.6 million) in 1990, reaching 18.6 million (95% UI: 17.1 to 19.7 million) in 2019. The global trends for disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and years of life lost also increased significantly, and years lived with disability doubled from 17.7 million (95% UI: 12.9 to 22.5 million) to 34.4 million (95% UI:24.9 to 43.6 million) over that period. The total number of DALYs due to IHD has risen steadily since 1990, reaching 182 million (95% UI: 170 to 194 million) DALYs, 9.14 million (95% UI: 8.40 to 9.74 million) deaths in the year 2019, and 197 million (95% UI: 178 to 220 million) prevalent cases of IHD in 2019. The total number of DALYs due to stroke has risen steadily since 1990, reaching 143 million (95% UI: 133 to 153 million) DALYs, 6.55 million (95% UI: 6.00 to 7.02 million) deaths in the year 2019, and 101 million (95% UI: 93.2 to 111 million) prevalent cases of stroke in 2019. Cardiovascular diseases remain the leading cause of disease burden in the world. CVD burden continues its decades-long rise for almost all countries outside high-income countries, and alarmingly, the age-standardized rate of CVD has begun to rise in some locations where it was previously declining in high-income countries. There is an urgent need to focus on implementing existing cost-effective policies and interventions if the world is to meet the targets for Sustainable Development Goal 3 and achieve a 30% reduction in premature mortality due to noncommunicable diseases.
|J Am Coll Cardiol||2020||CORD-19|
|221||COVID-19: A Perspective from China |
In December 2019, an outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection occurred in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China and spread across China and beyond. On February 12, 2020, WHO officially named the disease caused by the novel coronavirus as Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Since most COVID-19 infected patients were diagnosed with pneumonia and characteristic CT imaging patterns, radiological examinations have become vital in early diagnosis and assessment of disease course. To date, CT findings have been recommended as major evidence for clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 in Hubei, China. This review focuses on the etiology, epidemiology, and clinical symptoms of COVID-19, while highlighting the role of chest CT in prevention and disease control. A full translation of this article in Chinese is available in the supplement. - 请见䃼充资料阅读文章中文版∘
|Radiology||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|222||Diagnosing COVID-19: The Disease and Tools for Detection |
[Image: see text] COVID-19 has spread globally since its discovery in Hubei province, China in December 2019. A combination of computed tomography imaging, whole genome sequencing, and electron microscopy were initially used to screen and identify SARS-CoV-2, the viral etiology of COVID-19. The aim of this review article is to inform the audience of diagnostic and surveillance technologies for SARS-CoV-2 and their performance characteristics. We describe point-of-care diagnostics that are on the horizon and encourage academics to advance their technologies beyond conception. Developing plug-and-play diagnostics to manage the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak would be useful in preventing future epidemics.
|ACS Nano||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|223||Mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission and Pathogenesis |
The emergence of SARS-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) marks the third highly pathogenic coronavirus to spill over into the human population. SARS-CoV-2 is highly transmissible with a broad tissue tropism that is likely perpetuating the pandemic. However, important questions remain regarding its transmissibility and pathogenesis. In this review, we summarize current SARS-CoV-2 research, with an emphasis on transmission, tissue tropism, viral pathogenesis, and immune antagonism. We further present advances in animal models that are important for understanding the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2, vaccine development, and therapeutic testing. When necessary, comparisons are made from studies with SARS to provide further perspectives on COVID-19, as well as draw inferences for future investigations.
|Trends Immunol||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|224||Characteristics of COVID-19 infection in Beijing |
BACKGROUND: Since the first case of a novel coronavirus (COVID-19) infection pneumonia was detected in Wuhan, China, a series of confirmed cases of the COVID-19 were found in Beijing. We analyzed the data of 262 confirmed cases to determine the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 in Beijing. METHODS: We collected patients who were transferred by Beijing Emergency Medical Service to the designated hospitals. The information on demographic, epidemiological, clinical, laboratory test for the COVID-19 virus, diagnostic classification, cluster case and outcome were obtained. Furthermore we compared the characteristics between severe and common confirmed cases which including mild cases, no-pneumonia cases and asymptomatic cases, and we also compared the features between COVID-19 and 2003 SARS. FINDINGS: By Feb 10, 2020, 262 patients were transferred from the hospitals across Beijing to the designated hospitals for special treatment of the COVID-19 infected by Beijing emergency medical service. Among of 262 patients, 46 (17.6%) were severe cases, 216 (82.4%) were common cases, which including 192 (73.3%) mild cases, 11(4.2%) non-pneumonia cases and 13 (5.0%) asymptomatic cases respectively. The median age of patients was 47.5 years old and 48.5% were male. 192 (73.3%) patients were residents of Beijing, 50 (26.0%) of which had been to Wuhan, 116 (60.4%) had close contact with confirmed cases, 21 (10.9%) had no contact history. The most common symptoms at the onset of illness were fever (82.1%), cough (45.8%), fatigue (26.3%), dyspnea (6.9%) and headache (6.5%). The median incubation period was 6.7 days, the interval time from between illness onset and seeing a doctor was 4.5 days. As of Feb 10, 17.2% patients have discharged and 81.7% patients remain in hospital in our study, the fatality of COVID-19 infection in Beijing was 0.9%. INTERPRETATION: On the basis of this study, we provided the ratio of the COVID-19 infection on the severe cases to the mild, asymptomatic and non-pneumonia cases in Beijing. Population was generally susceptible, and with a relatively low fatality rate. The measures to prevent transmission was very successful at early stage, the next steps on the COVID-19 infection should be focused on early isolation of patients and quarantine for close contacts in families and communities in Beijing. FUNDING: Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission and Ministry of Science and Technology.
|J Infect||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|225||A global survey of potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine |
Several coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are currently in human trials. In June 2020, we surveyed 13,426 people in 19 countries to determine potential acceptance rates and factors influencing acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of these, 71.5% of participants reported that they would be very or somewhat likely to take a COVID-19 vaccine, and 61.4% reported that they would accept their employer’s recommendation to do so. Differences in acceptance rates ranged from almost 90% (in China) to less than 55% (in Russia). Respondents reporting higher levels of trust in information from government sources were more likely to accept a vaccine and take their employer’s advice to do so.
|Nat Med||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|226||Isolation, quarantine, social distancing and community containment: pivotal role for old-style public health measures in the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak |
Public health measures were decisive in controlling the SARS epidemic in 2003. Isolation is the separation of ill persons from non-infected persons. Quarantine is movement restriction, often with fever surveillance, of contacts when it is not evident whether they have been infected but are not yet symptomatic or have not been infected. Community containment includes measures that range from increasing social distancing to community-wide quarantine. Whether these measures will be sufficient to control 2019-nCoV depends on addressing some unanswered questions.
|J Travel Med||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|227||Updated understanding of the outbreak of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in Wuhan, China |
To help health workers and the public recognize and deal with the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019‐nCoV) quickly, effectively, and calmly with an updated understanding. A comprehensive search from Chinese and worldwide official websites and announcements was performed between 1 December 2019 and 9:30 am 26 January 2020 (Beijing time). A latest summary of 2019‐nCoV and the current outbreak was drawn. Up to 24 pm, 25 January 2020, a total of 1975 cases of 2019‐nCoV infection were confirmed in mainland China with a total of 56 deaths having occurred. The latest mortality was approximately 2.84% with a total of 2684 cases still suspected. The China National Health Commission reported the details of the first 17 deaths up to 24 pm, 22 January 2020. The deaths included 13 males and 4 females. The median age of the people who died was 75 (range 48‐89) years. Fever (64.7%) and cough (52.9%) were the most common first symptoms among those who died. The median number of days from the occurence of the first symptom to death was 14.0 (range 6‐41) days, and it tended to be shorter among people aged 70 years or more (11.5 [range 6‐19] days) than those aged less than 70 years (20 [range 10‐41] days; P = .033). The 2019‐nCoV infection is spreading and its incidence is increasing nationwide. The first deaths occurred mostly in elderly people, among whom the disease might progress faster. The public should still be cautious in dealing with the virus and pay more attention to protecting the elderly people from the virus.
|J Med Virol||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|228||Factors associated with COVID-19-related death using OpenSAFELY |
COVID-19 has rapidly impacted on mortality worldwide.(1) There is unprecedented urgency to understand who is most at risk of severe outcomes, requiring new approaches for timely analysis of large datasets. Working on behalf of NHS England we created OpenSAFELY: a secure health analytics platform covering 40% of all patients in England, holding patient data within the existing data centre of a major primary care electronic health records vendor. Primary care records of 17,278,392 adults were pseudonymously linked to 10,926 COVID-19 related deaths. COVID-19 related death was associated with: being male (hazard ratio 1.59, 95%CI 1.53-1.65); older age and deprivation (both with a strong gradient); diabetes; severe asthma; and various other medical conditions. Compared to people with white ethnicity, black and South Asian people were at higher risk even after adjustment for other factors (HR 1.48, 1.29-1.69 and 1.45, 1.32-1.58 respectively). We have quantified a range of clinical risk factors for COVID-19 related death in the largest cohort study conducted by any country to date. OpenSAFELY is rapidly adding further patients’ records; we will update and extend results regularly.
|Nature||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|229||Tracking Changes in SARS-CoV-2 Spike: Evidence that D614G Increases Infectivity of the COVID-19 Virus |
Summary A SARS-CoV-2 variant carrying the Spike protein amino acid change D614G has become the most prevalent form in the global pandemic. Dynamic tracking of variant frequencies revealed a recurrent pattern of G614 increase at multiple geographic levels: national, regional and municipal. The shift occurred even in local epidemics where the original D614 form was well established prior to the introduction of the G614 variant. The consistency of this pattern was highly statistically significant, suggesting that the G614 variant may have a fitness advantage. We found that the G614 variant grows to higher titer as pseudotyped virions. In infected individuals G614 is associated with lower RT-PCR cycle thresholds, suggestive of higher upper respiratory tract viral loads, although not with increased disease severity. These findings illuminate changes important for a mechanistic understanding of the virus, and support continuing surveillance of Spike mutations to aid in the development of immunological interventions.
|Cell||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|231||Cancer patients in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a nationwide analysis in China||Lancet Oncol||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|232||Psychiatric and neuropsychiatric presentations associated with severe coronavirus infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis with comparison to the COVID-19 pandemic |
BACKGROUND: Before the COVID-19 pandemic, coronaviruses caused two noteworthy outbreaks: severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), starting in 2002, and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), starting in 2012. We aimed to assess the psychiatric and neuropsychiatric presentations of SARS, MERS, and COVID-19. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases (from their inception until March 18, 2020), and medRxiv, bioRxiv, and PsyArXiv (between Jan 1, 2020, and April 10, 2020) were searched by two independent researchers for all English-language studies or preprints reporting data on the psychiatric and neuropsychiatric presentations of individuals with suspected or laboratory-confirmed coronavirus infection (SARS coronavirus, MERS coronavirus, or SARS coronavirus 2). We excluded studies limited to neurological complications without specified neuropsychiatric presentations and those investigating the indirect effects of coronavirus infections on the mental health of people who are not infected, such as those mediated through physical distancing measures such as self-isolation or quarantine. Outcomes were psychiatric signs or symptoms; symptom severity; diagnoses based on ICD-10, DSM-IV, or the Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders (third edition) or psychometric scales; quality of life; and employment. Both the systematic review and the meta-analysis stratified outcomes across illness stages (acute vs post-illness) for SARS and MERS. We used a random-effects model for the meta-analysis, and the meta-analytical effect size was prevalence for relevant outcomes, I(2) statistics, and assessment of study quality. FINDINGS: 1963 studies and 87 preprints were identified by the systematic search, of which 65 peer-reviewed studies and seven preprints met inclusion criteria. The number of coronavirus cases of the included studies was 3559, ranging from 1 to 997, and the mean age of participants in studies ranged from 12·2 years (SD 4·1) to 68·0 years (single case report). Studies were from China, Hong Kong, South Korea, Canada, Saudi Arabia, France, Japan, Singapore, the UK, and the USA. Follow-up time for the post-illness studies varied between 60 days and 12 years. The systematic review revealed that during the acute illness, common symptoms among patients admitted to hospital for SARS or MERS included confusion (36 [27·9%; 95% CI 20·5–36·0] of 129 patients), depressed mood (42 [32·6%; 24·7–40·9] of 129), anxiety (46 [35·7%; 27·6–44·2] of 129), impaired memory (44 [34·1%; 26·2–42·5] of 129), and insomnia (54 [41·9%; 22·5–50·5] of 129). Steroid-induced mania and psychosis were reported in 13 (0·7%) of 1744 patients with SARS in the acute stage in one study. In the post-illness stage, depressed mood (35 [10·5%; 95% CI 7·5–14·1] of 332 patients), insomnia (34 [12·1%; 8·6–16·3] of 280), anxiety (21 [12·3%; 7·7–17·7] of 171), irritability (28 [12·8%; 8·7–17·6] of 218), memory impairment (44 [18·9%; 14·1–24·2] of 233), fatigue (61 [19·3%; 15·1–23·9] of 316), and in one study traumatic memories (55 [30·4%; 23·9–37·3] of 181) and sleep disorder (14 [100·0%; 88·0–100·0] of 14) were frequently reported. The meta-analysis indicated that in the post-illness stage the point prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder was 32·2% (95% CI 23·7–42·0; 121 of 402 cases from four studies), that of depression was 14·9% (12·1–18·2; 77 of 517 cases from five studies), and that of anxiety disorders was 14·8% (11·1–19·4; 42 of 284 cases from three studies). 446 (76·9%; 95% CI 68·1–84·6) of 580 patients from six studies had returned to work at a mean follow-up time of 35·3 months (SD 40·1). When data for patients with COVID-19 were examined (including preprint data), there was evidence for delirium (confusion in 26 [65%] of 40 intensive care unit patients and agitation in 40 [69%] of 58 intensive care unit patients in one study, and altered consciousness in 17 [21%] of 82 patients who subsequently died in another study). At discharge, 15 (33%) of 45 patients with COVID-19 who were assessed had a dysexecutive syndrome in one study. At the time of writing, there were two reports of hypoxic encephalopathy and one report of encephalitis. 68 (94%) of the 72 studies were of either low or medium quality. INTERPRETATION: If infection with SARS-CoV-2 follows a similar course to that with SARS-CoV or MERS-CoV, most patients should recover without experiencing mental illness. SARS-CoV-2 might cause delirium in a significant proportion of patients in the acute stage. Clinicians should be aware of the possibility of depression, anxiety, fatigue, post-traumatic stress disorder, and rarer neuropsychiatric syndromes in the longer term. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), UK Medical Research Council, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and University College London.
|Lancet Psychiatry||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|233||Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guideline for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 2017 |
|234||COVID-19 and online teaching in higher education: A case study of Peking University |
Starting from the spring of 2020, the outbreak of the COVID‐19 caused Chinese universities to close the campuses and forced them to initiate online teaching. This paper focuses on a case of Peking University's online education. Six specific instructional strategies are presented to summarize current online teaching experiences for university instructors who might conduct online education in similar circumstances. The study concludes with five high‐impact principles for online education: (a) high relevance between online instructional design and student learning, (b) effective delivery on online instructional information, (c) adequate support provided by faculty and teaching assistants to students; (d) high‐quality participation to improve the breadth and depth of student's learning, and (e) contingency plan to deal with unexpected incidents of online education platforms.
|Hum Behav Emerg Technol||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|235||COVID-19 outbreak: Migration, effects on society, global environment and prevention |
Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic is considered as the most crucial global health calamity of the century and the greatest challenge that the humankind faced since the 2nd World War. In December 2019, a new infectious respiratory disease emerged in Wuhan, Hubei province, China and was named by the World Health Organization as COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019). A new class of corona virus, known as SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) has been found to be responsible for occurrence of this disease. As far as the history of human civilization is concerned there are instances of severe outbreaks of diseases caused by a number of viruses. According to the report of the World Health Organization (WHO as of April 18 2020), the current outbreak of COVID-19, has affected over 2164111 people and killed more than 146,198 people in more than 200 countries throughout the world. Till now there is no report of any clinically approved antiviral drugs or vaccines that are effective against COVID-19. It has rapidly spread around the world, posing enormous health, economic, environmental and social challenges to the entire human population. The coronavirus outbreak is severely disrupting the global economy. Almost all the nations are struggling to slow down the transmission of the disease by testing & treating patients, quarantining suspected persons through contact tracing, restricting large gatherings, maintaining complete or partial lock down etc. This paper describes the impact of COVID-19 on society and global environment, and the possible ways in which the disease can be controlled has also been discussed therein.
|Sci Total Environ||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|236||COVID-19 outbreak in Malaysia: Actions taken by the Malaysian government |
AIM AND BACKGROUND: COVID-19, a novel pneumonia disease originated from Wuhan, was confirmed by World Health Organization on 12th January 2020 before becoming an outbreak in all countries. OUTBREAK SITUATION: A stringent screening process in all airports had been enforced after the first case outside China was reported in Thailand. Up to 14th April 2020, Malaysia reported two waves of COVID-19 cases, which the first wave was successfully ended in less than two months. In early March 2020, the second wave arose with worrying situations. ACTIONS TAKEN: Malaysia government enforced the Movement Control Order starting from 18th March 2020 to seriously break the chain of COVID-19. Media actively spread the hashtag #stayhome. Non-governmental organizations including prison inmates were the earliest to sew personal protective equipment to frontliners. Various organizations hosted fund raising to provide essentials mainly to hospitals. Provisional hospital was set up, collaborations with healthcare service providers were granted while additional laboratories were assigned in enhancing the proficiency of Ministry of Health. ECONOMIC DOWNTURN: Initial financial stimulus amount RM 20.0 billion was released in February 2020 before the highlighted PRIHATIN package, amount RM 250 billion was announced. The PRIHATIN package was an all-inclusive support from the government to society in various backgrounds from students, families to business owners.
|Int J Infect Dis||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|237||COVID-19 and pregnancy: what obstetricians need to know |
Coronavirus disease 2019 is an emerging disease with a rapid increase in cases and deaths since its first identification in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. Limited data are available about coronavirus disease 2019 during pregnancy; however, information on illnesses associated with other highly pathogenic coronaviruses (ie, severe acute respiratory syndrome and the Middle East respiratory syndrome) might provide insights into coronavirus disease 2019’s effects during pregnancy. Coronaviruses cause illness ranging in severity from the common cold to severe respiratory illness and death. Currently the primary epidemiologic risk factors for coronavirus disease 2019 include travel from mainland China (especially Hubei Province) or close contact with infected individuals within 14 days of symptom onset. Data suggest an incubation period of ∼5 days (range, 2–14 days). Average age of hospitalized patients has been 49–56 years, with a third to half with an underlying illness. Children have been rarely reported. Men were more frequent among hospitalized cases (54–73%). Frequent manifestations include fever, cough, myalgia, headache, and diarrhea. Abnormal testing includes abnormalities on chest radiographic imaging, lymphopenia, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia. Initial reports suggest that acute respiratory distress syndrome develops in 17–29% of hospitalized patients. Overall case fatality rate appears to be ∼1%; however, early data may overestimate this rate. In 2 reports describing 18 pregnancies with coronavirus disease 2019, all were infected in the third trimester, and clinical findings were similar to those in nonpregnant adults. Fetal distress and preterm delivery were seen in some cases. All but 2 pregnancies were cesarean deliveries and no evidence of in utero transmission was seen. Data on severe acute respiratory syndrome and Middle East respiratory syndrome in pregnancy are sparse. For severe acute respiratory syndrome, the largest series of 12 pregnancies had a case-fatality rate of 25%. Complications included acute respiratory distress syndrome in 4, disseminated intravascular coagulopathy in 3, renal failure in 3, secondary bacterial pneumonia in 2, and sepsis in 2 patients. Mechanical ventilation was 3 times more likely among pregnant compared with nonpregnant women. Among 7 first-trimester infections, 4 ended in spontaneous abortion. Four of 5 women with severe acute respiratory syndrome after 24 weeks’ gestation delivered preterm. For Middle East respiratory syndrome, there were 13 case reports in pregnant women, of which 2 were asymptomatic, identified as part of a contact investigation; 3 patients (23%) died. Two pregnancies ended in fetal demise and 2 were born preterm. No evidence of in utero transmission was seen in severe acute respiratory syndrome or Middle East respiratory syndrome. Currently no coronavirus-specific treatments have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. Because coronavirus disease 2019 might increase the risk for pregnancy complications, management should optimally be in a health care facility with close maternal and fetal monitoring. Principles of management of coronavirus disease 2019 in pregnancy include early isolation, aggressive infection control procedures, oxygen therapy, avoidance of fluid overload, consideration of empiric antibiotics (secondary to bacterial infection risk), laboratory testing for the virus and coinfection, fetal and uterine contraction monitoring, early mechanical ventilation for progressive respiratory failure, individualized delivery planning, and a team-based approach with multispecialty consultations. Information on coronavirus disease 2019 is increasing rapidly. Clinicians should continue to follow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website to stay up to date with the latest information (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nCoV/hcp/index.html).
|Am J Obstet Gynecol||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|238||Closure of Universities Due to COVID-19: Impact on Education and Mental Health of Students and Academic Staff |
The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), originated in Wuhan city of China, has spread rapidly around the world, sending billions of people into lockdown. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the coronavirus epidemic a pandemic. In light of rising concern about the current COVID-19 pandemic, a growing number of universities across the world have either postponed or canceled all campus events such as workshops, conferences, sports, and other activities. Universities are taking intensive measures to prevent and protect all students and staff members from the highly infectious disease. Faculty members are already in the process of transitioning to online teaching platforms. In this review, the author will highlight the potential impact of the terrible COVID-19 outbreak on the education and mental health of students and academic staff.
|Cureus||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|239||Fair Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources in the Time of Covid-19 |
|N Engl J Med||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|240||Impact of Covid-19 on consumer behavior: Will the old habits return or die? |
The COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdown and social distancing mandates have disrupted the consumer habits of buying as well as shopping. Consumers are learning to improvise and learn new habits. For example, consumers cannot go to the store, so the store comes to home. While consumers go back to old habits, it is likely that they will be modified by new regulations and procedures in the way consumers shop and buy products and services. New habits will also emerge by technology advances, changing demographics and innovative ways consumers have learned to cope with blurring the work, leisure, and education boundaries.
|J Bus Res||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|241||Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of novel COVID-19 |
BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is a newly emerging virus. The antibody response in infected patient remains largely unknown, and the clinical values of antibody testing have not been fully demonstrated. METHODS: A total of 173 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were enrolled. Their serial plasma samples (n=535) collected during the hospitalization were tested for total antibodies (Ab), IgM and IgG against SARS-CoV-2. The dynamics of antibodies with the disease progress was analyzed. RESULTS: Among 173 patients, the seroconversion rate for Ab, IgM and IgG was 93.1%, 82.7% and 64.7%, respectively. The reason for the negative antibody findings in 12 patients might due to the lack of blood samples at the later stage of illness. The median seroconversion time for Ab, IgM and then IgG were day-11, day-12 and day-14, separately. The presence of antibodies was <40% among patients within 1-week since onset, and rapidly increased to 100.0% (Ab), 94.3% (IgM) and 79.8% (IgG) since day-15 after onset. In contrast, RNA detectability decreased from 66.7% (58/87) in samples collected before day-7 to 45.5% (25/55) during day 15-39. Combining RNA and antibody detections significantly improved the sensitivity of pathogenic diagnosis for COVID-19 (p<0.001), even in early phase of 1-week since onset (p=0.007). Moreover, a higher titer of Ab was independently associated with a worse clinical classification (p=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The antibody detection offers vital clinical information during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The findings provide strong empirical support for the routine application of serological testing in the diagnosis and management of COVID-19 patients.
|Clin Infect Dis||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|242||Evidence of the COVID-19 Virus Targeting the CNS: Tissue Distribution, Host-Virus Interaction and Proposed Neurotropic Mechanisms |
[Image: see text] The recent outbreak of coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) has gripped the world with apprehension and has evoked a scare of epic proportion regarding its potential to spread and infect humans worldwide. As we are in the midst of an ongoing pandemic of COVID-19, scientists are struggling to understand how it resembles and differs from the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) at the genomic and transcriptomic level. In a short time following the outbreak, it has been shown that, similar to SARS-CoV, COVID-19 virus exploits the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor to gain entry inside the cells. This finding raises the curiosity of investigating the expression of ACE2 in neurological tissue and determining the possible contribution of neurological tissue damage to the morbidity and mortality caused by COIVD-19. Here, we investigate the density of the expression levels of ACE2 in the CNS, the host–virus interaction and relate it to the pathogenesis and complications seen in the recent cases resulting from the COVID-19 outbreak. Also, we debate the need for a model for staging COVID-19 based on neurological tissue involvement.
|ACS Chem Neurosci||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|243||Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks |
|Nat Med||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|244||Integrated analysis of multimodal single-cell data |
The simultaneous measurement of multiple modalities represents an exciting frontier for single-cell genomics and necessitates computational methods that can define cellular states based on multimodal data. Here, we introduce “weighted-nearest neighbor” analysis, an unsupervised framework to learn the relative utility of each data type in each cell, enabling an integrative analysis of multiple modalities. We apply our procedure to a CITE-seq dataset of 211,000 human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with panels extending to 228 antibodies to construct a multimodal reference atlas of the circulating immune system. Multimodal analysis substantially improves our ability to resolve cell states, allowing us to identify and validate previously unreported lymphoid subpopulations. Moreover, we demonstrate how to leverage this reference to rapidly map new datasets and to interpret immune responses to vaccination and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our approach represents a broadly applicable strategy to analyze single-cell multimodal datasets and to look beyond the transcriptome toward a unified and multimodal definition of cellular identity.
|Cell||2021||LitCov and CORD-19|
|245||Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients with COVID-19 |
|Nat Med||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|246||A crucial role of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) in SARS coronavirus induced lung injury |
During several months of 2003, a newly identified illness termed severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) spread rapidly through the world(1,2,3). A new coronavirus (SARS-CoV) was identified as the SARS pathogen(4,5,6,7), which triggered severe pneumonia and acute, often lethal, lung failure(8). Moreover, among infected individuals influenza such as the Spanish flu(9,10) and the emergence of new respiratory disease viruses(11,12) have caused high lethality resulting from acute lung failure(13). In cell lines, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) has been identified as a potential SARS-CoV receptor(14). The high lethality of SARS-CoV infections, its enormous economic and social impact, fears of renewed outbreaks as well as the potential misuse of such viruses as biologic weapons make it paramount to understand the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV. Here we provide the first genetic proof that ACE2 is a crucial SARS-CoV receptor in vivo. SARS-CoV infections and the Spike protein of the SARS-CoV reduce ACE2 expression. Notably, injection of SARS-CoV Spike into mice worsens acute lung failure in vivo that can be attenuated by blocking the renin-angiotensin pathway. These results provide a molecular explanation why SARS-CoV infections cause severe and often lethal lung failure and suggest a rational therapy for SARS and possibly other respiratory disease viruses. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version of this article (doi:10.1038/nm1267) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
|247||Reference sequence (RefSeq) database at NCBI: current status, taxonomic expansion and functional annotation |
The RefSeq project at the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) maintains and curates a publicly available database of annotated genomic, transcript, and protein sequence records (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/refseq/). The RefSeq project leverages the data submitted to the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration (INSDC) against a combination of computation, manual curation, and collaboration to produce a standard set of stable, non-redundant reference sequences. The RefSeq project augments these reference sequences with current knowledge including publications, functional features and informative nomenclature. The database currently represents sequences from more than 55 000 organisms (>4800 viruses, >40 000 prokaryotes and >10 000 eukaryotes; RefSeq release 71), ranging from a single record to complete genomes. This paper summarizes the current status of the viral, prokaryotic, and eukaryotic branches of the RefSeq project, reports on improvements to data access and details efforts to further expand the taxonomic representation of the collection. We also highlight diverse functional curation initiatives that support multiple uses of RefSeq data including taxonomic validation, genome annotation, comparative genomics, and clinical testing. We summarize our approach to utilizing available RNA-Seq and other data types in our manual curation process for vertebrate, plant, and other species, and describe a new direction for prokaryotic genomes and protein name management.
|Nucleic Acids Res||2015||CORD-19|
|248||Prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of covid-19: systematic review and critical appraisal |
OBJECTIVE: To review and critically appraise published and preprint reports of prediction models for diagnosing coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) in patients with suspected infection, for prognosis of patients with covid-19, and for detecting people in the general population at risk of being admitted to hospital for covid-19 pneumonia. DESIGN: Rapid systematic review and critical appraisal. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Embase through Ovid, Arxiv, medRxiv, and bioRxiv up to 24 March 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Studies that developed or validated a multivariable covid-19 related prediction model. DATA EXTRACTION: At least two authors independently extracted data using the CHARMS (critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies) checklist; risk of bias was assessed using PROBAST (prediction model risk of bias assessment tool). RESULTS: 2696 titles were screened, and 27 studies describing 31 prediction models were included. Three models were identified for predicting hospital admission from pneumonia and other events (as proxy outcomes for covid-19 pneumonia) in the general population; 18 diagnostic models for detecting covid-19 infection (13 were machine learning based on computed tomography scans); and 10 prognostic models for predicting mortality risk, progression to severe disease, or length of hospital stay. Only one study used patient data from outside of China. The most reported predictors of presence of covid-19 in patients with suspected disease included age, body temperature, and signs and symptoms. The most reported predictors of severe prognosis in patients with covid-19 included age, sex, features derived from computed tomography scans, C reactive protein, lactic dehydrogenase, and lymphocyte count. C index estimates ranged from 0.73 to 0.81 in prediction models for the general population (reported for all three models), from 0.81 to more than 0.99 in diagnostic models (reported for 13 of the 18 models), and from 0.85 to 0.98 in prognostic models (reported for six of the 10 models). All studies were rated at high risk of bias, mostly because of non-representative selection of control patients, exclusion of patients who had not experienced the event of interest by the end of the study, and high risk of model overfitting. Reporting quality varied substantially between studies. Most reports did not include a description of the study population or intended use of the models, and calibration of predictions was rarely assessed. CONCLUSION: Prediction models for covid-19 are quickly entering the academic literature to support medical decision making at a time when they are urgently needed. This review indicates that proposed models are poorly reported, at high risk of bias, and their reported performance is probably optimistic. Immediate sharing of well documented individual participant data from covid-19 studies is needed for collaborative efforts to develop more rigorous prediction models and validate existing ones. The predictors identified in included studies could be considered as candidate predictors for new models. Methodological guidance should be followed because unreliable predictions could cause more harm than benefit in guiding clinical decisions. Finally, studies should adhere to the TRIPOD (transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis) reporting guideline. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Protocol https://osf.io/ehc47/, registration https://osf.io/wy245.
|BMJ||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|249||School closure and management practices during coronavirus outbreaks including COVID-19: a rapid systematic review |
In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, 107 countries had implemented national school closures by March 18, 2020. It is unknown whether school measures are effective in coronavirus outbreaks (eg, due to severe acute respiratory syndrome [SARS], Middle East respiratory syndrome, or COVID-19). We undertook a systematic review by searching three electronic databases to identify what is known about the effectiveness of school closures and other school social distancing practices during coronavirus outbreaks. We included 16 of 616 identified articles. School closures were deployed rapidly across mainland China and Hong Kong for COVID-19. However, there are no data on the relative contribution of school closures to transmission control. Data from the SARS outbreak in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Singapore suggest that school closures did not contribute to the control of the epidemic. Modelling studies of SARS produced conflicting results. Recent modelling studies of COVID-19 predict that school closures alone would prevent only 2–4% of deaths, much less than other social distancing interventions. Policy makers need to be aware of the equivocal evidence when considering school closures for COVID-19, and that combinations of social distancing measures should be considered. Other less disruptive social distancing interventions in schools require further consideration if restrictive social distancing policies are implemented for long periods.
|Lancet Child Adolesc Health||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|250||Evolution of the novel coronavirus from the ongoing Wuhan outbreak and modeling of its spike protein for risk of human transmission||Sci China Life Sci||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
(1) COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19). 2020. Version 2022-06-02. Retrieved from https://ai2-semanticscholar-cord-19.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/historical_releases.html. Accessed 2022-06-05. doi:10.5281/zenodo.3715506
(2) Chen Q, Allot A, & Lu Z. (2020) Keep up with the latest coronavirus research, Nature 579:193 and Chen Q, Allot A, Lu Z. LitCovid: an open database of COVID-19 literature. Nucleic Acids Research. 2020. (version 2023-01-10)
(3) Currently tweets of June 23rd to June 29th 2022 have been considered.