|151||Overview of Immune Response During SARS-CoV-2 Infection: Lessons From the Past |
After the 1918 flu pandemic, the world is again facing a similar situation. However, the advancement in medical science has made it possible to identify that the novel infectious agent is from the coronavirus family. Rapid genome sequencing by various groups helped in identifying the structure and function of the virus, its immunogenicity in diverse populations, and potential preventive measures. Coronavirus attacks the respiratory system, causing pneumonia and lymphopenia in infected individuals. Viral components like spike and nucleocapsid proteins trigger an immune response in the host to eliminate the virus. These viral antigens can be either recognized by the B cells or presented by MHC complexes to the T cells, resulting in antibody production, increased cytokine secretion, and cytolytic activity in the acute phase of infection. Genetic polymorphism in MHC enables it to present some of the T cell epitopes very well over the other MHC alleles. The association of MHC alleles and its downregulated expression has been correlated with disease severity against influenza and coronaviruses. Studies have reported that infected individuals can, after recovery, induce strong protective responses by generating a memory T-cell pool against SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. These memory T cells were not persistent in the long term and, upon reactivation, caused local damage due to cross-reactivity. So far, the reports suggest that SARS-CoV-2, which is highly contagious, shows related symptoms in three different stages and develops an exhaustive T-cell pool at higher loads of viral infection. As there are no specific treatments available for this novel coronavirus, numerous small molecular drugs that are being used for the treatment of diseases like SARS, MERS, HIV, ebola, malaria, and tuberculosis are being given to COVID-19 patients, and clinical trials for many such drugs have already begun. A classical immunotherapy of convalescent plasma transfusion from recovered patients has also been initiated for the neutralization of viremia in terminally ill COVID-19 patients. Due to the limitations of plasma transfusion, researchers are now focusing on developing neutralizing antibodies against virus particles along with immuno-modulation of cytokines like IL-6, Type I interferons (IFNs), and TNF-α that could help in combating the infection. This review highlights the similarities of the coronaviruses that caused SARS and MERS to the novel SARS-CoV-2 in relation to their pathogenicity and immunogenicity and also focuses on various treatment strategies that could be employed for curing COVID-19.
|Front Immunol||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|152||Expanded Umbilical Cord Mesenchymal Stem Cells (UC-MSCs) as a Therapeutic Strategy in Managing Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: The Case for Compassionate Use |
|Pain Physician||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|153||COVID-19 pandemic and mental health consequences: Systematic review of the current evidence |
BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic general medical complications have received the most attention, whereas only few studies address the potential direct effect on mental health of SARS-CoV-2 and the neurotropic potential. Furthermore, the indirect effects of the pandemic on general mental health are of increasing concern, particularly since the SARS-CoV-1 epidemic (2002-2003) was associated with psychiatric complications. METHODS: We systematically searched the database Pubmed including studies measuring psychiatric symptoms or morbidities associated with COVID-19 among infected patients and among none infected groups the latter divided in psychiatric patients, health care workers and non-health care workers. RESULTS: A total of 43 studies were included. Out of these, only two studies evaluated patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection, whereas 41 evaluated the indirect effect of the pandemic (2 on patients with preexisting psychiatric disorders, 20 on medical health care workers, and 19 on the general public). 18 of the studies were case-control studies/compared to norm, while 25 of the studies had no control groups. The two studies investigating COVID-19 patients found a high level of post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) (96.2%) and significantly higher level of depressive symptoms (p=0.016). Patients with preexisting psychiatric disorders reported worsening of psychiatric symptoms. Studies investigating health care workers found increased depression/depressive symptoms, anxiety, psychological distress and poor sleep quality. Studies of the general public revealed lower psychological well-being and higher scores of anxiety and depression compared to before COVID-19, while no difference when comparing these symptoms in the initial phase of the outbreak to four weeks later. A variety of factors were associated with higher risk of psychiatric symptoms and/or low psychological well-being including female gender, poor-self-related health and relatives with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Research evaluating the direct neuropsychiatric consequences and the indirect effects on mental health is highly needed to improve treatment, mental health care planning and for preventive measures during potential subsequent pandemics.
|Brain Behav Immun||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|154||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.
|155||Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial |
BACKGROUND: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have been found to be efficient on SARS-CoV-2, and reported to be efficient in Chinese COV-19 patients. We evaluate the role of hydroxychloroquine on respiratory viral loads. PATIENTS AND METHODS: French Confirmed COVID-19 patients were included in a single arm protocol from early March to March 16(th), to receive 600mg of hydroxychloroquine daily and their viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs was tested daily in a hospital setting. Depending on their clinical presentation, azithromycin was added to the treatment. Untreated patients from another center and cases refusing the protocol were included as negative controls. Presence and absence of virus at Day6-post inclusion was considered the end point. RESULTS: Six patients were asymptomatic, 22 had upper respiratory tract infection symptoms and eight had lower respiratory tract infection symptoms. Twenty cases were treated in this study and showed a significant reduction of the viral carriage at D6-post inclusion compared to controls, and much lower average carrying duration than reported of untreated patients in the literature. Azithromycin added to hydroxychloroquine was significantly more efficient for virus elimination. CONCLUSION: Despite its small sample size our survey shows that hydroxychloroquine treatment is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients and its effect is reinforced by azithromycin.
|Int J Antimicrob Agents||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|156||Current status of antivirals and druggable targets of SARS CoV-2 and other human pathogenic coronaviruses |
Coronaviridae is a peculiar viral family, with a very large RNA genome and characteristic appearance, endowed with remarkable tendency to transfer from animals to humans. Since the beginning of the 21st century, three highly transmissible and pathogenic coronaviruses have crossed the species barrier and caused deadly pneumonia, inflicting severe outbreaks and causing human health emergencies of inconceivable magnitude. Indeed, in the past two decades, two human coronaviruses emerged causing serious respiratory illness: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-1) and Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), causing more than 10,000 cumulative cases, with mortality rates of 10 % for SARS-CoV-1 and 34.4 % for MERS-CoV. More recently, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged in China and has been identified as the etiological agent of the recent COVID-19 pandemic outbreak. It has rapidly spread throughout the world, causing nearly 22 million cases and ∼ 770,000 deaths worldwide, with an estimated mortality rate of ∼3.6 %, hence posing serious challenges for adequate and effective prevention and treatment. Currently, with the exception of the nucleotide analogue prodrug remdesivir, and despite several efforts, there is no known specific, proven, pharmacological treatment capable of efficiently and rapidly inducing viral containment and clearance of SARS-CoV-2 infection as well as no broad-spectrum drug for other human pathogenic coronaviruses. Another confounding factor is the paucity of molecular information regarding the tendency of coronaviruses to acquire drug resistance, a gap that should be filled in order to optimize the efficacy of antiviral drugs. In this light, the present review provides a systematic update on the current knowledge of the marked global efforts towards the development of antiviral strategies aimed at coping with the infection sustained by SARS-CoV-2 and other human pathogenic coronaviruses, displaying drug resistance profiles. The attention has been focused on antiviral drugs mainly targeting viral protease, RNA polymerase and spike glycoprotein, that have been tested in vitro and/or in clinical trials as well as on promising compounds proven to be active against coronaviruses by an in silico drug repurposing approach. In this respect, novel insights on compounds, identified by structure-based virtual screening on the DrugBank database endowed by multi-targeting profile, are also reported. We specifically identified 14 promising compounds characterized by a good in silico binding affinity towards, at least, two of the four studied targets (viral and host proteins). Among which, ceftolozane and NADH showed the best multi-targeting profile, thus potentially reducing the emergence of resistant virus strains. We also focused on potentially novel pharmacological targets for the development of compounds with anti-pan coronavirus activity. Through the analysis of a large set of viral genomic sequences, the current review provides a comprehensive and specific map of conserved regions across human coronavirus proteins which are essential for virus replication and thus with no or very limited tendency to mutate. Hence, these represent key druggable targets for novel compounds against this virus family. In this respect, the identification of highly effective and innovative pharmacological strategies is of paramount importance for the treatment and/or prophylaxis of the current pandemic but potentially also for future and unavoidable outbreaks of human pathogenic coronaviruses.
|Drug Resist Updat||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|157||Distance learning in clinical medical education amid COVID-19 pandemic in Jordan: current situation, challenges and perspectives |
BACKGROUND: As COVID-19 has been declared as a pandemic disease by the WHO on March 11th, 2020, the global incidence of COVID-19 disease increased dramatically. In response to the COVID-19 situation, Jordan announced the emergency state on the 19th of March, followed by the curfew on 21 March. All educational institutions have been closed as well as educational activities including clinical medical education have been suspended on the 15th of March. As a result, Distance E-learning emerged as a new method of teaching to maintain the continuity of medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic related closure of educational institutions. Distance E-Learning is defined as using computer technology to deliver training, including technology-supported learning either online, offline, or both. Before this period, distance learning was not considered in Jordanian universities as a modality for education. This study aims to explore the situation of distance E-learning among medical students during their clinical years and to identify possible challenges, limitations, satisfaction as well as perspectives for this approach to learning. METHODS: This cross-sectional study is based on a questionnaire that was designed and delivered to medical students in their clinical years. For this study, the estimated sample size (n = 588) is derived from the online Raosoft sample size calculator. RESULTS: A total of 652 students have completed the questionnaire, among them, 538 students (82.5%) have participated in distance learning in their medical schools amid COVID-19 pandemic. The overall satisfaction rate in medical distance learning was 26.8%, and it was significantly higher in students with previous experience in distance learning in their medical schools as well as when instructors were actively participating in learning sessions, using multimedia and devoting adequate time for their sessions. The delivery of educational material using synchronous live streaming sessions represented the major modality of teaching and Internet streaming quality and coverage was the main challenge that was reported by 69.1% of students. CONCLUSION: With advances in technologies and social media, distance learning is a new and rapidly growing approach for undergraduate, postgraduate, and health care providers. It may represent an optimal solution to maintain learning processes in exceptional and emergency situations such as COVID-19 pandemic. Technical and infrastructural resources reported as a major challenge for implementing distance learning, so understanding technological, financial, institutional, educators, and student barriers are essential for the successful implementation of distance learning in medical education.
|BMC Med Educ||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|158||Correlation of Chest CT and RT-PCR Testing for COVID-19 in China: A Report of 1014 Cases |
BACKGROUND: Chest CT is used for diagnosis of 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), as an important complement to the reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests. PURPOSE: To investigate the diagnostic value and consistency of chest CT as compared with comparison to RT-PCR assay in COVID-19. METHODS: From January 6 to February 6, 2020, 1014 patients in Wuhan, China who underwent both chest CT and RT-PCR tests were included. With RT-PCR as reference standard, the performance of chest CT in diagnosing COVID-19 was assessed. Besides, for patients with multiple RT-PCR assays, the dynamic conversion of RT-PCR results (negative to positive, positive to negative, respectively) was analyzed as compared with serial chest CT scans for those with time-interval of 4 days or more. RESULTS: Of 1014 patients, 59% (601/1014) had positive RT-PCR results, and 88% (888/1014) had positive chest CT scans. The sensitivity of chest CT in suggesting COVID-19 was 97% (95%CI, 95-98%, 580/601 patients) based on positive RT-PCR results. In patients with negative RT-PCR results, 75% (308/413) had positive chest CT findings; of 308, 48% were considered as highly likely cases, with 33% as probable cases. By analysis of serial RT-PCR assays and CT scans, the mean interval time between the initial negative to positive RT-PCR results was 5.1 ± 1.5 days; the initial positive to subsequent negative RT-PCR result was 6.9 ± 2.3 days). 60% to 93% of cases had initial positive CT consistent with COVID-19 prior (or parallel) to the initial positive RT-PCR results. 42% (24/57) cases showed improvement in follow-up chest CT scans before the RT-PCR results turning negative. CONCLUSION: Chest CT has a high sensitivity for diagnosis of COVID-19. Chest CT may be considered as a primary tool for the current COVID-19 detection in epidemic areas. A translation of this abstract in Farsi is available in the supplement. - ترجمه چکیده این مقاله به فارسی، در ضمیمه موجود است.
|Radiology||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|159||Technical guidelines for seasonal influenza vaccination in China (2020-2021) |
|Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|160||Avian influenza A H5N1 infection in humans |
|N Engl J Med||2005||CORD-19|
|161||SARS-associated coronavirus gene fragments were detected from a suspected pediatric SARS patient |
|Zhonghua Er Ke Za Zhi||2003||CORD-19|
|162||Association of Race and Ethnicity With Comorbidities and Survival Among Patients With COVID-19 at an Urban Medical Center in New York |
IMPORTANCE: As of May 11, 2020, there have been more than 290 000 deaths worldwide from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Risk-adjusted differences in outcomes among patients of differing ethnicity and race categories are not well characterized. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether presenting comorbidities in patients with COVID-19 in New York City differed by race/ethnicity and whether case fatality rates varied among different ethnic and racial groups, controlling for presenting comorbidities and other risk factors. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study included 5902 patients who presented for care to the Montefiore Medical Center, a large urban academic medical center in the Bronx, New York, between March 14 and April 15, 2020, and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 on reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction assay. Final data collection was April 27, 2020. EXPOSURES: Patient characteristics, including self-identified ethnicity/race, age, sex, socioeconomic status, and medical comorbidities, were tabulated. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Overall survival. Associations between patient demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and race/ethnicity were examined using χ(2) tests, and the association with survival was assessed using univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression, based on time from positive COVID-19 test. RESULTS: Of 9268 patients who were tested, 5902 ethnically diverse patients (63.7%) had SARS-CoV-2. Of these, 3129 patients (53.0%) were women, and the median (interquartile range) age was 58 (44-71) years. A total of 918 patients (15.5%) died within the study time frame. Overall, 1905 patients (32.3%) identified as Hispanic; 1935 (32.8%), non-Hispanic Black; 509 (8.6%), non-Hispanic White; and 171 (2.9%), Asian; the death rates were 16.2% (309), 17.2% (333), 20.0% (102), and 17.0% (29), respectively (P = .25). Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients had a higher proportion of more than 2 medical comorbidities with 654 (34.3%) and 764 (39.5%), respectively, compared with 147 (28.9%) among non-Hispanic White patients (P < .001). Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients were also more likely to test positive for COVID-19 than White patients, with 1905 of 2919 Hispanic patients (65.3%), 1935 of 2823 non-Hispanic Black patients (68.5%), and 509 of 960 non-Hispanic White patients (53.0%) having positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 (P < .001). While controlling for age, sex, socioeconomic status and comorbidities, patients identifying as Hispanic (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.98; P = .03) or non-Hispanic Black (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55-0.87; P = .002) had slightly improved survival compared with non-Hispanic White patients. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cohort study of patients with COVID-19 who presented for care at the same urban medical center, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients did not experience worse risk-adjusted outcomes compared with their White counterparts. This finding is important for understanding the observed population differences in mortality by race/ethnicity reported elsewhere.
|JAMA Netw Open||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|163||Newly discovered coronavirus as the primary cause of severe acute respiratory syndrome |
BACKGROUND: The worldwide outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is associated with a newly discovered coronavirus, SARS-associated coronavirus (SARSCoV). We did clinical and experimental studies to assess the role of this virus in the cause of SARS. METHODS: We tested clinical and postmortem samples from 436 SARS patients in six countries for infection with SARSCoV, human metapneumovirus, and other respiratory pathogens. We infected four cynomolgus macaques (Macaca fascicularis) with SARS-CoV in an attempt to replicate SARS and did necropsies on day 6 after infection. FINDINGS: SARS-CoV infection was diagnosed in 329 (75%) of 436 patients fitting the case definition of SARS; human metapneumovirus was diagnosed in 41 (12%) of 335, and other respiratory pathogens were diagnosed only sporadically. SARS-CoV was, therefore, the most likely causal agent of SARS. The four SARS-CoV-infected macaques excreted SARS-CoV from nose, mouth, and pharynx from 2 days after infection. Three of four macaques developed diffuse alveolar damage, similar to that in SARS patients, and characterised by epithelial necrosis, serosanguineous exudate, formation of hyaline membranes, type 2 pneumocyte hyperplasia, and the presence of syncytia. SARS-CoV was detected in pneumonic areas by virus isolation and RT-PCR, and was localised to alveolar epithelial cells and syncytia by immunohistochemistry and transmission electron microscopy. INTERPRETATION: Replication in SARS-CoV-infected macaques of pneumonia similar to that in human beings with SARS, combined with the high prevalence of SARS-CoV infection in SARS patients, fulfill the criteria required to prove that SARS-CoV is the primary cause of SARS. Published online July 22, 2003 http://image.thelancet.com/extras/03art6318web.pdf
|164||A Trial of Lopinavir-Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Severe Covid-19 |
BACKGROUND: No therapeutics have yet been proven effective for the treatment of severe illness caused by SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label trial involving hospitalized adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, which causes the respiratory illness Covid-19, and an oxygen saturation (Sao(2)) of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or a ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen (Pao(2)) to the fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio(2)) of less than 300 mm Hg. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either lopinavir–ritonavir (400 mg and 100 mg, respectively) twice a day for 14 days, in addition to standard care, or standard care alone. The primary end point was the time to clinical improvement, defined as the time from randomization to either an improvement of two points on a seven-category ordinal scale or discharge from the hospital, whichever came first. RESULTS: A total of 199 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent randomization; 99 were assigned to the lopinavir–ritonavir group, and 100 to the standard-care group. Treatment with lopinavir–ritonavir was not associated with a difference from standard care in the time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio for clinical improvement, 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.72). Mortality at 28 days was similar in the lopinavir–ritonavir group and the standard-care group (19.2% vs. 25.0%; difference, −5.8 percentage points; 95% CI, −17.3 to 5.7). The percentages of patients with detectable viral RNA at various time points were similar. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, lopinavir–ritonavir led to a median time to clinical improvement that was shorter by 1 day than that observed with standard care (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.91). Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common in the lopinavir–ritonavir group, but serious adverse events were more common in the standard-care group. Lopinavir–ritonavir treatment was stopped early in 13 patients (13.8%) because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized adult patients with severe Covid-19, no benefit was observed with lopinavir–ritonavir treatment beyond standard care. Future trials in patients with severe illness may help to confirm or exclude the possibility of a treatment benefit. (Funded by Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development and others; Chinese Clinical Trial Register number, ChiCTR2000029308.)
|N Engl J Med||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|165||Human aminopeptidase N is a receptor for human coronavirus 229E |
HUMAN coronaviruses (HCV) in two serogroups represented by HCV-229E and HCV-OC43 are an important cause of upper respiratory tract infections(1). Here we report that human aminopeptidase N, a cell-surface metalloprotease on intestinal, lung and kidney epithelial cells(2–5), is a receptor for human coronavirus strain HCV-229E, but not for HCV-OC43. A monoclonal antibody, RBS, blocked HCV-229E virus infection of human lung fibroblasts, immunoprecipitated aminopeptidase N and inhibited its enzymatic activity. HCV-229E-resistant murine fibroblasts became susceptible after transfection with complementary DNA encoding human aminopeptidase N. By contrast, infection of human cells with HCV-OC43 was not inhibited by antibody RBS and expression of aminopeptidase N did not enhance HCV-OC43 replication in mouse cells. A mutant aminopeptidase lacking the catalytic site of the enzyme did not bind HCV-229E or RBS and did not render murine cells susceptible to HCV-229E infection, suggesting that the virus-binding site may lie at or near the active site of the human aminopeptidase molecule.
|166||Controlled, double-blind, randomized trial to assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine chemoprophylaxis in SARS CoV2 infection in healthcare personnel in the hospital setting: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infection presents a high transmission in the group of health professionals in Spain (12-15% infected). Currently there is no accepted chemoprophylaxis but hydroxychloroquine (HDQ) is known to inhibit the coronavirus in vitro. Our hypothesis is that oral administration of hydroxychloroquine to healthcare professionals can reduce the incidence and prevalence of infection as well as its severity in this group. METHODS: Design: Prospective, single center, double blind, randomised, controlled trial (RCT). Participants: Adult health-care professionals (18-65 years) working in areas of high exposure and high risk of transmission of SARS-COV-2 (COVID areas, Intensive Care Unit –ICUs-, Emergency, Anesthesia and all those performing aerosol-generating procedures) will be included. Exclusion criteria include previous infection with SARS CoV2 (positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR or IgG serology), pregnancy or lactation, any contraindication to hydroxychloroquine or evidence of unstable or clinically significant systemic disease. INTERVENTIONS: Patients will be randomized (1:1) to receive once-daily oral Hydroxychloroquine 200mg for two months (HC group) or placebo (P group) in addition to the protective measures appropriate to the level of exposure established by the hospital. A serological evaluation will be carried out every 15 days with PCR in case of seroconversion, symptoms or risk exposure. Primary outcome is the percentage of subjects presenting infection (seroconversion and/or PCR +ve) by the SARS-Cov-2 virus during the observation period. Additionally, both the percentage of subjects in each group presenting Pneumonia with severity criteria (Curb 65 ≥2) and that of subjects requiring admission to ICU will be determined. DISCUSSION: While awaiting a vaccine, hygiene measures, social distancing and personal protective equipment are the only primary prophylaxis measures against SARS-CoV-2, but they have not been sufficient to protect our healthcare professionals. Some evidence of the in vitro efficacy of hydroxychloroquine against this virus is known, along with some clinical data that would support the study of this drug in the chemoprophylaxis of infection. However, there are still no data from controlled clinical trials in this regard. If our hypothesis is confirmed, hydroxychloroquine can help professionals fight this infection with more guarantees. PARTICIPANTS: This is a single-center study that will be carried out at the Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital. 450 health professionals working at the Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla in areas of high exposure and high risk of transmission of SARS COV2 (COVID hospital areas, Intensive Care Unit, Emergency, Anesthesia and all those performing aerosol-generating procedures) will be included. Inclusion criteria: 1) Health professionals aged between 18 and 65 years (inclusive) at the time of the first screening visit; 2) They must provide signed written informed consent and agree to comply with the study protocol; 3) Active work in high exposure areas during the last two weeks and during the following weeks. Exclusion criteria: 1) Previous infection with SARS CoV2 (positive coronavirus PCR or positive serology with SARS Cov2 negative PCR and absence of symptoms); 2) Current treatment with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine; 3) Hypersensitivity, allergy or any contraindication for taking hydroxychloroquine, in the technical sheet; 4) Previous or current treatment with tamoxifen or raloxifene; 5) Previous eye disease, especially maculopathy; 6) Known heart failure (Grade III to IV of the New York Heart Association classification) or prolonged QTc; 7) Any type of cancer (except basal cell) in the last 5 years; 6) Refusal to give informed consent; 8) Evidence of any other unstable or clinically significant untreated immune, endocrine, hematological, gastrointestinal, neurological, neoplastic or psychiatric illness; 9) Antibodies positive for the human immunodeficiency virus; 10) Significant kidney or liver disease; 11) Pregnancy or lactation. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: 1. Intervention: (n = 225): One 200 mg hydroxychloroquine sulfate coated tablet once daily for two months. 2. Comparator (control group) (n = 225): One hydroxychloroquine placebo tablet (identical to that of the drug) once daily for two months. MAIN OUTCOMES: number and percentage of healthcare personnel presenting symptomatic and asymptomatic infection (see “Diagnosis of SARS CoV2 infection” below) by the SARS-Cov2 virus during the study observation period (8 weeks) in both treatment arms; number and percentage of healthcare personnel in each group presenting with Pneumonia with severity criteria (Curb 65 ≥2) and number and percentage of healthcare personnel requiring admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in both treatment arms. DIAGNOSIS OF SARS COV2 INFECTION: Determination of IgA, IgM and IgG type antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 using the Anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA kit (EUROIMMUN Medizinische Labordiagnostika AG, Germany) every two weeks. In cases of seroconversion, a SARS-CoV-2 PCR will be performed to rule out / confirm an active infection (RT-PCR in One Step: RT performed with mastermix (Takara) and IDT probes, following protocol published and validated by the CDC Evaluation of COVID-19 in case of SARS-CoV-2 infection RANDOMISATION: Participants will be allocated to intervention and comparator groups according to a balanced randomization scheme (1: 1). The assignment will be made through a computer-generated numeric sequence for all participants BLINDING (MASKING): Both participants and investigators responsible for recruiting and monitoring participants will be blind to the assigned arm. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): Taking into account the current high prevalence of infection in healthcare personnel in Spain (up to 15%), to detect a difference equal to or greater than 8% in the percentage estimates through a two-tailed 95% CI, with a statistical power of 80% and a dropout rate of 5%, a total of 450 participants will need to be included (250 in each arm). TRIAL STATUS: The protocol approved by the health authorities in Spain (Spanish Agency for Medicines and Health Products “AEMPS”) and the Ethics and Research Committee of Cantabria (CEIm Cantabria) corresponds to version 1.1 of April 2, 2020. Currently, recruitment has not yet started, with the start scheduled for the second week of May 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Eudra CT number: 2020-001704-42 (Registered on 29 March 2020) FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).
|Trials||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|167||Escape from neutralizing antibodies by SARS-CoV-2 spike protein variants |
Neutralizing antibodies elicited by prior infection or vaccination are likely to be key for future protection of individuals and populations against SARS-CoV-2. Moreover, passively administered antibodies are among the most promising therapeutic and prophylactic anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents. However, the degree to which SARS-CoV-2 will adapt to evade neutralizing antibodies is unclear. Using a recombinant chimeric VSV/SARS-CoV-2 reporter virus, we show that functional SARS-CoV-2 S protein variants with mutations in the receptor-binding domain (RBD) and N-terminal domain that confer resistance to monoclonal antibodies or convalescent plasma can be readily selected. Notably, SARS-CoV-2 S variants that resist commonly elicited neutralizing antibodies are now present at low frequencies in circulating SARS-CoV-2 populations. Finally, the emergence of antibody-resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants that might limit the therapeutic usefulness of monoclonal antibodies can be mitigated by the use of antibody combinations that target distinct neutralizing epitopes.
|Elife||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|168||Pulmonary Vascular Endothelialitis, Thrombosis and Angiogenesis in Covid-19 |
|N Engl J Med||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|169||Quarantine alone or in combination with other public health measures to control COVID-19: a rapid review |
|Cochrane Database Syst Rev||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|170||A Reminder of Skin Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic |
|Acta Dermatovenerol Croat||2021||LitCov and CORD-19|
|171||Self-Reported Symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in a Nonhospitalized Population in Italy: Cross-Sectional Study of the EPICOVID-19 Web-Based Survey |
BACKGROUND: Understanding the occurrence of symptoms resembling those of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a large nonhospitalized population at the peak of the epidemic in Italy is of paramount importance; however, data are currently scarce. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to evaluate the association of self-reported symptoms with SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) test results in nonhospitalized individuals and to estimate the occurrence of symptoms associated with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in a larger nontested population. METHODS: EPICOVID19 is a self-administered cross-sectional voluntary web-based survey of adults throughout Italy who completed an anonymous questionnaire in the period of April 13 to 21, 2020. The associations between symptoms potentially related to SARS-CoV-2 infection and NPS results were calculated as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% CIs by multiple logistic regression analysis controlling for age, sex, education, smoking habits, and number of comorbidities. Thereafter, for each symptom and for combinations of the symptoms, we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and areas under the curve (AUCs) in a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to estimate the occurrence of COVID-19–like infection in the nontested population. RESULTS: A total of 171,310 people responded to the survey, of whom 102,543 (59.9%) were women; mean age 47.4 years. Out of the 4785 respondents with known NPS test results, 4392 were not hospitalized. Among the 4392 nonhospitalized respondents, those with positive NPS tests (856, 19.5%) most frequently reported myalgia (527, 61.6%), olfactory and taste disorders (507, 59.2%), cough (466, 54.4%), and fever (444, 51.9%), whereas 7.7% were asymptomatic. Multiple regression analysis showed that olfactory and taste disorders (aOR 10.3, 95% CI 8.4-12.7), fever (aOR 2.5, 95% CI 2.0-3.1), myalgia (aOR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-1.8), and cough (aOR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.6) were associated with NPS positivity. Having two to four of these symptoms increased the aOR from 7.4 (95% CI 5.6-9.7) to 35.5 (95% CI 24.6-52.2). The combination of the four symptoms showed an AUC of 0.810 (95% CI 0.795-0.825) in classifying positive NPS test results and then was applied to the nonhospitalized and nontested sample (n=165,782). We found that 7739 to 20,103 of these 165,782 respondents (4.4% to 12.1%) had experienced symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that self-reported symptoms are reliable indicators of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a pandemic context. A nonnegligible number of symptomatic respondents (up to 12.1%) were undiagnosed and potentially contributed to the spread of the infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04471701; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04471701
|JMIR Public Health Surveill||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|172||Pathogenesis-directed therapy of 2019 novel coronavirus disease |
|J Med Virol||2021||LitCov and CORD-19|
|173||Protecting the front line: a cross-sectional survey analysis of the occupational factors contributing to healthcare workers' infection and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA |
OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with significant occupational stressors and challenges for front-line healthcare workers (HCWs), including COVID-19 exposure risk. Our study sought to assess factors contributing to HCW infection and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA. DESIGN: We conducted a cross sectional survey of HCWs (physicians, nurses, emergency medical technicians (EMTs), non-clinical staff) during May 2020. Participants completed a 42-item survey assessing disease transmission risk (clinical role, work environment, availability of personal protective equipment) and mental health (anxiety, depression and burn-out). SETTING: The questionnaire was disseminated over various social media platforms. 3083 respondents from 48 states, the District of Columbia and US territories accessed the survey. PARTICIPANTS: Using a convenience sample of HCWs who worked during the pandemic, 3083 respondents accessed the survey and 2040 participants completed at least 80% of the survey. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Prevalence of self-reported COVID-19 infection, in addition to burn-out, depression and anxiety symptoms. RESULTS: Participants were largely from the Northeast and Southern USA, with attending physicians (31.12%), nurses (26.80%), EMTs (13.04%) with emergency medicine department (38.30%) being the most common department and specialty represented. Twenty-nine per cent of respondents met the criteria for being a probable case due to reported COVID-19 symptoms or a positive test. HCWs in the emergency department (31.64%) were more likely to contract COVID-19 compared with HCWs in the ICU (23.17%) and inpatient settings (25.53%). HCWs that contracted COVID-19 also reported higher levels of depressive symptoms (mean diff.=0.31; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.47), anxiety symptoms (mean diff.=0.34; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.52) and burn-out (mean diff.=0.54; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.71). CONCLUSION: HCWs have experienced significant physical and psychological risk while working during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings highlight the urgent need for increased support for provider physical and mental health well-being.
|BMJ Open||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|174||Identification of a new human coronavirus |
Three human coronaviruses are known to exist: human coronavirus 229E (HCoV-229E), HCoV-OC43 and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV). Here we report the identification of a fourth human coronavirus, HCoV-NL63, using a new method of virus discovery. The virus was isolated from a 7-month-old child suffering from bronchiolitis and conjunctivitis. The complete genome sequence indicates that this virus is not a recombinant, but rather a new group 1 coronavirus. The in vitro host cell range of HCoV-NL63 is notable because it replicates on tertiary monkey kidney cells and the monkey kidney LLC-MK2 cell line. The viral genome contains distinctive features, including a unique N-terminal fragment within the spike protein. Screening of clinical specimens from individuals suffering from respiratory illness identified seven additional HCoV-NL63-infected individuals, indicating that the virus was widely spread within the human population. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version of this article (doi:10.1038/nm1024) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
|175||Incidence of thrombotic complications in critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19 |
INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 may predispose to both venous and arterial thromboembolism due to excessive inflammation, hypoxia, immobilisation and diffuse intravascular coagulation. Reports on the incidence of thrombotic complications are however not available. METHODS: We evaluated the incidence of the composite outcome of symptomatic acute pulmonary embolism (PE), deep-vein thrombosis, ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction or systemic arterial embolism in all COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU of 2 Dutch university hospitals and 1 Dutch teaching hospital. RESULTS: We studied 184 ICU patients with proven COVID-19 pneumonia of whom 23 died (13%), 22 were discharged alive (12%) and 139 (76%) were still on the ICU on April 5th 2020. All patients received at least standard doses thromboprophylaxis. The cumulative incidence of the composite outcome was 31% (95%CI 20-41), of which CTPA and/or ultrasonography confirmed VTE in 27% (95%CI 17-37%) and arterial thrombotic events in 3.7% (95%CI 0-8.2%). PE was the most frequent thrombotic complication (n = 25, 81%). Age (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.05/per year, 95%CI 1.004-1.01) and coagulopathy, defined as spontaneous prolongation of the prothrombin time > 3 s or activated partial thromboplastin time > 5 s (aHR 4.1, 95%CI 1.9-9.1), were independent predictors of thrombotic complications. CONCLUSION: The 31% incidence of thrombotic complications in ICU patients with COVID-19 infections is remarkably high. Our findings reinforce the recommendation to strictly apply pharmacological thrombosis prophylaxis in all COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU, and are strongly suggestive of increasing the prophylaxis towards high-prophylactic doses, even in the absence of randomized evidence.
|Thromb Res||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|176||World Health Organization declares global emergency: A review of the 2019 novel coronavirus |
An unprecedented outbreak of pneumonia of unknown aetiology in Wuhan City, Hubei province in China emerged in December 2019. A novel coronavirus was identified as the causative agent and was subsequently termed COVID-19 by the World Health Organization (WHO). Considered a relative of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), COVID-19 is caused by a betacoronavirus named SARS-CoV-2 that affects the lower respiratory tract and manifests as pneumonia in humans. Despite rigorous global containment and quarantine efforts, the incidence of COVID-19 continues to rise, with 90,870 laboratory-confirmed cases and over 3,000 deaths worldwide. In response to this global outbreak, we summarise the current state of knowledge surrounding COVID-19.
|Int J Surg||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|177||Real Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infection Might Be Rare: Importance of Careful Interviews and Follow-up |
BACKGROUND: There is limited information on the clinical characteristics of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who are asymptomatic or have mild symptoms. METHODS: We performed a retrospective case series of patients with COVID-19 enrolled from February 22 to March 26, 2020. Forty cases of COVID-19 were confirmed using real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction among patients who underwent screening tests and were consecutively hospitalized at Ulsan University Hospital, Ulsan, Korea. The final follow-up date was May 19, 2020. All COVID-19 cases in Ulsan were included. Demographic and epidemiological information, comorbidities, clinical signs and symptoms, laboratory and radiologic findings, medications, treatments, outcomes, and main durations of patients with COVID-19 were compared according to supplemental oxygen requirement. RESULTS: Forty patients were included (median age, 30 years; interquartile range [IQR], 25–57 years; 58% female). Six (15%) patients required supplemental oxygen. The prevalence of asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was 5% and that of presymptomatic infection was 13%. Cough, fever, myalgia, rhinorrhea or nasal congestion, and diarrhea were the screening criteria for diagnosing symptomatic and presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. Sputum production, chest discomfort, a large number of symptoms, abnormal procalcitonin and C-reactive protein levels, and abnormal chest X-ray or chest computed tomography findings were more common in patients requiring supplemental oxygen than in those not requiring supplemental oxygen. Overall mortality rate was 3% (1/40). Four patients (10%) were readmitted after testing positive by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction again. Incubation period was 5 days (IQR, 4–6 days), and the duration of viral shedding was 21 days (IQR, 14–28 days; maximum, 51 days). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was 5%, which is much lower than that previously reported. This finding suggests that careful interviews and follow-ups should be performed to identify SARS-CoV-2 infections. Cough, fever, myalgia, rhinorrhea or nasal congestion, and diarrhea are adequate screening criteria for covering all symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Further evaluation is required to create representative screening criteria for COVID-19.
|J Korean Med Sci||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|178||Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and coronavirus testing-United States, 2003 |
|MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep||2003||CORD-19|
|179||Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with COVID-2019 |
|Nature||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|180||Analysis of adjunctive serological detection to nucleic acid test for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis |
BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic in China, December 2019. The clinical features and treatment of COVID-19 patients remain largely elusive. However, accurate detection is required for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis. We aimed to evaluate the antibodies-based test and nucleic acid-based test for SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 133 patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 and admitted to Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, China, from January 23 to March 1, 2020. Demographic data, clinical records, laboratory tests, and outcomes were collected. Data were accessed by SARS-CoV-2 IgM-IgG antibody test and real-time reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) detection for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid in COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: Of 133 COVID-19 patients, there were 44 moderate cases, 52 severe cases, and 37 critical cases with no differences in gender and age among three subgroups. In RT-PCR detection, the positive rate was 65.9%, 71.2%, and 67.6% in moderate, severe, and critical cases, respectively. Whereas the positive rate of IgM/IgG antibody detection in patients was 79.5%/93.2%, 82.7%/100%, and 73.0%/97.3% in moderate, severe, and critical cases, respectively. Moreover, the IgM and IgG antibodies concentrations were also examined with no differences among three subgroups. CONCLUSION: The IgM-IgG antibody test exhibited a useful adjunct to RT-PCR detection, and improved the accuracy in COVID-19 diagnosis regardless of the severity of illness, which provides an effective complement to the false-negative results from a nucleic acid test for SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosis after onsets.
|Int Immunopharmacol||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|181||How do children and adolescents with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) experience lockdown during the COVID-19 outbreak? |
OBJECTIVES: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the French government has decided a general lockdown. This unprecedented situation has raised concerns about children's and adolescent's mental health. Children and adolescents diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) may find this context of restrained activity particularly tricky. The objectives of our study are to gather information about the well-being and global life conditions of children and adolescents with ADHD during the COVID-19 outbreak in France. METHODS: We designed a survey including both open-ended questions and questionnaire items for parents of children and adolescents with ADHD. Parents responded to the following open-ended questions: 1) “How is your child doing since the lockdown?” 2) “How is life at home since the lockdown?” 3) “If you had a remote service provision with a mental health professional (e.g. by telephone or video technology), please share your thoughts and any suggestions with us” 4) “Please share any other items that you think are important about ADHD symptoms of your child and the lockdown situation”. This survey was posted on social media on the 6th of April and disseminated by French ADHD-parent and patient organizations. The present article reports the descriptive, qualitative and textometrical analyses of the survey. RESULTS: Between day 20 and 30 of lockdown, 538 parents responded to the survey, and we included 533 responses in the final analysis. The vast majority of responders were women 95 % (95 % CI 93,50; 97,18) with children whose mean age was 10,5 (95 % CI 7.58; 13.44). Since the lockdown, 34.71 % (95 % CI 30.70; 38.94) of children experienced a worsening in well-being, 34.33 % (95 % CI 30.34; 38.56) showed no significant changes and 30.96 % (95 % CI 27.09; 35.10) were doing better according to their parents. The thematic analysis showed that an improvement of their children's anxiety was one of the main topics addressed by parents. This improvement related to less school-related strain and flexible schedules that respected their children's rhythm. Improved self-esteem was another topic that parents linked with a lesser exposure of their children to negative feed-back. Parents repeatedly reported both inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity. However, optimal lockdown life conditions seemed to compensate for the impact of ADHD symptoms (e.g. sufficient space at home, presence of a garden). Some parents reported worsening of general well-being in their children, and this manifested as oppositional/defiant attitudes and emotional outbursts. Parents also cited sleep problems and anxiety in this context. As regards everyday life during lock-down, at-home schooling was another major topic–parents described that their children struggled to complete school-related tasks and that teachers seemed to have forgotten about academic accommodations. The lockdown situation seems to have raised parents’ awareness of the role of inattention and ADHD symptoms in their children's learning difficulties. Due to potential selection biases, the results of our survey may not be generalizable to all children and adolescents with ADHD. The main strengths of this rapid survey-based study lies in the reactivity of the participants and the quality and diversity of their responses to the open-ended questions. CONCLUSIONS: According to their parents, most children and adolescents with ADHD experience stability or improvement of their well-being. An improvement in school-related anxiety and the flexible adjustment to the children's’ rhythms as well as parents’ increased awareness of the difficulties their children experience are among the key topics in parents’ descriptions.
|Encephale||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|182||Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-like virus in Chinese horseshoe bats |
|Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A||2005||CORD-19|
|183||High prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among symptomatic healthcare workers in a large university tertiary hospital in São Paulo, Brazil |
BACKGROUND: Brazil became the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic in Latin America since May 2020, reporting the highest number of cases and deaths in the region. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, experiencing a significant burden from COVID-19. Identifying and understanding the clinical characteristics and risk factors associated with infection are of paramount importance to inform screening strategies and infection control practices in this scenario. The aims of this study were to investigate the prevalence and clinical characteristics of HCWs with COVID-19 symptoms. METHODS: Between March 21st and May 22nd, 2020 a cross-sectional study was performed in a tertiary university hospital in São Paulo. Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs with COVID-19 symptoms was determined by RT-PCR testing on nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal samples. Participants were asked to complete an electronic structured questionnaire including clinical and demographic data. RESULTS: Overall, 125 (42.37%) of 295 symptomatic HCWs tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Over the 10-week study period, positivity rates varied from 22.2% (95% CI 15.9–60.3%) in the second week to 55.9% (95% CI 43.2–68.6%) in the sixth week, reaching a plateau (38–46%) thereafter. Median (SD) age was 34.2 (9.9) years and 205 (69.5%) were female. We did not find significant differences in the prevalence of the most commonly reported underlying medical condition among healthcare workers that tested positive or negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection. After multivariable analysis, using logistic regression, anosmia (adjusted OR 4.4 95% CI 2.21–8.74) and ocular pain (adjusted OR 1.95 95% CI 1.14–3.33) were the only symptoms independently associated with positivity for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Follow-up information on clinical outcomes showed that 9 (7.2%) HCWs were hospitalized (seven were male) and 2 (1.6%) died. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study confirmed the high burden of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers in the hardest hit city by the pandemic in Latin America. Anosmia and ocular pain were symptoms independently associated with COVID-19 diagnosis. In low and middle-income countries, where limited availability of tests is frequent, these findings may contribute to optimize a targeted symptom-oriented screening strategy.
|BMC Infect Dis||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|184||Psychosocial factors associated with postpartum psychological distress during the Covid-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study |
BACKGROUND: Trauma, natural and man-made catastrophic events can be predictors of postpartum psychological distress. In a public health response due to coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak, the Italian government imposed a lockdown from March 9 to May 3. This extraordinary situation may have been challenging for maternal psychological health. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of depressive and post-traumatic stress symptoms in women giving birth during the Covid-19 pandemic and its associations with quarantine measures, obstetrical factors, and relational attachment style. METHODS: Women who gave birth in a high-volume obstetric/gynaecological medical centre located in an epidemic area during the Covid-19 pandemic (March 8 to June 15) were asked to complete an online survey about their childbirth experience and the perceived effect of the pandemic. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and the Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) were administered to assess levels of postpartum depressive and post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and relational style of attachment, respectively. Multivariate analysis was applied to identify associations between quarantine measures, childbirth experience, attachment style, and EPDS and IES-R scores. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 163 women (response rate 60.8%). The prevalence of depressive symptoms was 44.2% (EPDS cut-off score ≥ 11) and the PTSS rate was 42.9% (IES-R cut-off score ≥ 24). Dismissive and fearful avoidant attachment styles were significantly associated with the risk of depression and PTSS, respectively. Perceived pain during birth was a risk factor for postpartum depression. Perceived support provided by healthcare staff was a protective factor against depression and PTSS. Another protective factor against PTSS was quiet on the ward due to the absence of hospital visitors. CONCLUSION: This study reports a high prevalence of postpartum depressive and PTSS in women who gave birth during the Covid-19 pandemic. Postnatal psychological distress seemed to be associated more with the prenatal experience and other individual factors than with the pandemic hospital restrictions. Early detection during pregnancy of an insecure attachment style is fundamental to provide targeted preventive and therapeutic psychological interventions. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-020-03399-5.
|BMC Pregnancy Childbirth||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|185||The outbreak of the novel SARS-CoV-2: A review of the current global status |
There is currently an ongoing worldwide pandemic of a novel virus belonging to the family of Coronaviruses (CoVs) which are large, enveloped, plus-stranded RNA viruses. Coronaviruses belong to the order of Nidovirales, family of Coronavirinae and are divided into four genera: alphacoronavirus, betacoronavirus, gammacoronavirus and deltacoronavirus. CoVs cause diseases in a wide variety of birds and mammals and have been found in humans since 1960. To date, seven human CoVs were identified including the alpha-CoVs HCoVs-NL63 and HCoVs-229E and the beta-CoVs HCoVs-OC43, HCoVs-HKU1, the severe acute respiratory syndrome-CoV (SARS-CoV), the Middle East respiratory syndrome-CoV (MERS-CoV) and the novel virus that first appeared in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, and rapidly spread to 213 countries as of the writing this paper. It was ofﬁcially named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by the international committee on taxonomy of viruses (ICTV) and the disease’s name is COVID-19 for coronavirus disease 2019. SARS-CoV-2 is very contagious and is capable of spreading from human to human. Infection routes include droplet and contact, and aerosol transmission is currently under investigation. It is associated with a respiratory illness that may cause severe pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). SARS-CoV-2 became an emergency of international concern. As of July 12, 2020, the virus has been responsible for 12,698,995 confirmed cases and 564,924 deaths worldwide and the number is still increasing. Up until now, no specific treatment has yet been proven effective against SARS-CoV-2. Since the beginning of this outbreak, several interesting papers on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 have been published to report on the phylogenetic evolution, epidemiology, pathogenesis, transmission as well as clinical characteristics of COVID-19 and possible treatments agents. This paper is a systematic review of the available literature on SARS-CoV-2. It was performed in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and aims to help readers access the latest knowledge surrounding this new infectious disease and to provide a reference for future studies.
|J Infect Public Health||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|186||Identification and containment of an outbreak of SARS in a community hospital |
|187||Clinical predictors of mortality due to COVID-19 based on an analysis of data of 150 patients from Wuhan, China||Intensive Care Med||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|188||The propagation of "coronaviruses" in tissue-culture |
The conditions for the cultivation of the 229-E respiratory virus in tissue culture are described. The virus multiplies only in human tissue culture systems, but a variety of cell types are sensitive to it. The virus has been isolated in three continuous cell lines and a plaque assay has been developed in one of these. This cell line (L 132) derived from human embryo lung, was also used to isolate three other viruses of similar morphology which had previously been cultivated only in organ cultures of human respiratory epithelium. High rates of isolation of these viruses were made in L 132 cells using nasal washings from experimentally inoculated volunteers. It is concluded that this cell line is a valuable tool in the study of viruses of this group.
|Arch Gesamte Virusforsch||1969||CORD-19|
|189||Using BCG vaccine to enhance non-specific protection of Healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial in Denmark |
Objectives: The Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine against tuberculosis is associated with non- specific protective effects against other infections, and significant reductions in all-cause morbidity and mortality have been reported. We aim to test whether BCG vaccination may reduce susceptibility to and/or the severity of COVID-19 and other infectious diseases in health care workers (HCW) and thus prevent work absenteeism. The primary objective is to reduce absenteeism due to illness among HCW during the COVID-19 pandemic. The secondary objectives are to reduce the number of HCW that are infected with SARS-CoV-2, and to reduce the number of hospital admissions among HCW during the COVID-19 pandemic. Hypothesis: BCG vaccination of HCW will reduce absenteeism by 20% over a period of 6 months. Trial design: Placebo-controlled, single-blinded, randomised controlled trial, recruiting study participants at several geographic locations. The BCG vaccine is used in this study on a different indication than the one it has been approved for by the Danish Medicines Agency, therefore this is classified as a phase III study. Participants: The trial will recruit 1,500 HCW at Danish hospitals. To be eligible for participation, a subject must meet the following criteria: Adult (≥18 years); Hospital personnel working at a participating hospital for more than 22 hours per week. Known allergy to components of the BCG vaccine or serious adverse events to prior BCG administration. Known prior active or latent infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis); or other mycobacterial species. Previous confirmed COVID-19. Fever (>38 C) within the past 24 hours. Suspicion of active viral or bacterial infection. Pregnancy. Breastfeeding. Vaccination with other live attenuated vaccine within the last 4 weeks. Severely immunocompromised subjects. This exclusion category comprises: a) subjects with known infection by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1); b) subjects with solid organ transplantation; c) subjects with bone marrow transplantation; d) subjects under chemotherapy; e) subjects with primary immunodeficiency; f) subjects under treatment with any anti-cytokine therapy within the last year; g) subjects under treatment with oral or intravenous steroids defined as daily doses of 10 mg prednisone or equivalent for longer than 3 months; h) Active solid or non-solid malignancy or lymphoma within the prior two years. Direct involvement in the design or the execution of the BCG-DENMARK-COVID trial. Intervention and comparator: Participants will be randomised to BCG vaccine (BCG-Denmark, AJ Vaccines, Copenhagen, Denmark) or placebo (saline). An adult dose of 0.1 ml of resuspended BCG vaccine (intervention) or 0.1 ml of sterile 0.9% NaCl solution (control) is administered intradermally in the upper deltoid area of the right arm. All participants will receive one injection at inclusion, and no further treatment of study participants will take place. Main outcomes: Main study endpoint: Days of unplanned absenteeism due to illness within 180 days of randomisation. Secondary study endpoints: The cumulative incidence of documented COVID-19 and the cumulative incidence of hospital admission for any reason within 180 days of randomisation. Randomisation: Randomisation will be done centrally using the REDCap tool with stratification by hospital, sex and age groups (+/- 45 years of age) in random blocks of 4 and 6. The allocation ratio is 1:1. Blinding (masking): Participants will be blinded to treatment. The participant will be asked to leave the room while the allocated treatment is prepared. Once ready for injection, vaccine and placebo will look similar, and the participant will not be able to tell the difference. The physicians administering the treatment are not blinded. Numbers to be randomised (sample size): Sample size: N=1,500. The 1,500 participants will be randomised 1:1 to BCG or placebo with 750 participants in each group. Trial Status: Current protocol version 5.1, from July 6, 2020. Recruitment of study participants started on May 18, 2020 and we anticipate having finished recruiting by the end of December 2020. Trial registration: The trial was registered with EudraCT on April 16, 2020, EudraCT number: 2020-001888-90, and with ClinicalTrials.gov on May 1, 2020, registration number NCT04373291. Full protocol: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. Keywords: COVID-19, Randomised controlled trial, Protocol, BCG vaccine, NSEs/Non-specific effects of vaccines, Heterologous effects of vaccines, Health care workers, Pandemic, Immune training.
|Trials||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|190||Barriers and facilitators of adherence to social distancing recommendations during COVID-19 among a large international sample of adults |
BACKGROUND: Social distancing measures (e.g., avoiding travel, limiting physical contact with people outside of one’s household, and maintaining a 1 or 2-metre distance between self and others when in public, depending on the country) are the primary strategies used to prevent transmission of the SARS-Cov-2 virus that causes COVID-19. Given that there is no effective treatment or vaccine for COVID-19, it is important to identify barriers and facilitators to adherence to social distancing to inform ongoing and future public health campaigns. METHOD: This cross-sectional study was conducted online with a convenience sample of English-speaking adults. The survey was administered over the course of three weeks (March 30 –April 16, 2020) when social distancing measures were well-enforced in North America and Europe. Participants were asked to complete measures assessing socio-demographic characteristics, psychological constructs, including motivations to engage in social distancing, prosocial attitudes, distress, and social distancing behaviors. Descriptive (mean, standard deviation, percentage) and inferential statistics (logistic regression) were used to describes endorsement rates for various motivations, rates of adherence to social distancing recommendations, and predictors of adherence. RESULTS: Data were collected from 2013 adults living primarily in North America and Europe. Most frequently endorsed motivations to engage in social distancing (or facilitators) included “I want to protect others” (86%), “I want to protect myself” (84%), and I feel a sense of responsibility to protect our community” (84%). Most frequently endorsed motivations against social distancing (or barriers) included “There are many people walking on the streets in my area” (31%), “I have friends or family who need me to run errands for them” (25%), “I don’t trust the messages my government provides about the pandemic” (13%), and “I feel stressed when I am alone or in isolation” (13%). Adherence to social distancing recommendations ranged from 45% for “working from home or remotely” to 90% for “avoiding crowded places/non-essential travel”, with men and younger individuals (18–24 years) showing lower adherence compared to women and older individuals. CONCLUSION: This study found that adherence to social distancing recommendations vary depending on the behaviour, with none of the surveyed behaviours showing perfect adherence. Strongest facilitators included wanting to protect the self, feeling a responsibility to protect the community, and being able to work/study remotely; strongest barriers included having friends or family who needed help with running errands and socializing in order to avoid feeling lonely. Future interventions to improve adherence to social distancing measures should couple individual-level strategies targeting key barriers to social distancing identified herein, with effective institutional measures and public health interventions. Public health campaigns should continue to highlight compassionate attitudes towards social distancing.
|PLoS One||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|191||Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Binding to ACE2 Receptors from Human, Pets, Farm Animals and Putative Intermediate Hosts |
The emergence of a novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), resulted in a pandemic. Here, we used X-ray structures of human ACE2 bound to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein (S) from SARS-CoV-2 to predict its binding to ACE2 proteins from different animals, including pets, farm animals, and putative intermediate hosts of SARS-CoV-2. Comparing the interaction sites of ACE2 proteins known to serve or not serve as receptors allows the definition of residues important for binding. From the 20 amino acids in ACE2 that contact S, up to 7 can be replaced and ACE2 can still function as the SARS-CoV-2 receptor. These variable amino acids are clustered at certain positions, mostly at the periphery of the binding site, while changes of the invariable residues prevent S binding or infection of the respective animal. Some ACE2 proteins even tolerate the loss or acquisition of N-glycosylation sites located near the S interface. Of note, pigs and dogs, which are not infected or are not effectively infected and have only a few changes in the binding site, exhibit relatively low levels of ACE2 in the respiratory tract. Comparison of the RBD of S of SARS-CoV-2 with that from bat coronavirus strain RaTG13 (Bat-CoV-RaTG13) and pangolin coronavirus (Pangolin-CoV) strain hCoV-19/pangolin/Guangdong/1/2019 revealed that the latter contains only one substitution, whereas Bat-CoV-RaTG13 exhibits five. However, ACE2 of pangolin exhibits seven changes relative to human ACE2, and a similar number of substitutions is present in ACE2 of bats, raccoon dogs, and civets, suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 may not be especially adapted to ACE2 of any of its putative intermediate hosts. These analyses provide new insight into the receptor usage and animal source/origin of SARS-CoV-2. IMPORTANCE SARS-CoV-2 is threatening people worldwide, and there are no drugs or vaccines available to mitigate its spread. The origin of the virus is still unclear, and whether pets and livestock can be infected and transmit SARS-CoV-2 are important and unknown scientific questions. Effective binding to the host receptor ACE2 is the first prerequisite for infection of cells and determines the host range. Our analysis provides a framework for the prediction of potential hosts of SARS-CoV-2. We found that ACE2 from species known to support SARS-CoV-2 infection tolerate many amino acid changes, indicating that the species barrier might be low. Exceptions are dogs and especially pigs, which revealed relatively low ACE2 expression levels in the respiratory tract. Monitoring of animals is necessary to prevent the generation of a new coronavirus reservoir. Finally, our analysis also showed that SARS-CoV-2 may not be specifically adapted to any of its putative intermediate hosts.
|J Virol||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|192||Human and novel coronavirus infections in children: a review |
|Paediatr Int Child Health||2021||LitCov and CORD-19|
|193||Conversations and Medical News Frames on Twitter: Infodemiological Study on COVID-19 in South Korea |
BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2) was spreading rapidly in South Korea at the end of February 2020 following its initial outbreak in China, making Korea the new center of global attention. The role of social media amid the current coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has often been criticized, but little systematic research has been conducted on this issue. Social media functions as a convenient source of information in pandemic situations. OBJECTIVE: Few infodemiology studies have applied network analysis in conjunction with content analysis. This study investigates information transmission networks and news-sharing behaviors regarding COVID-19 on Twitter in Korea. The real time aggregation of social media data can serve as a starting point for designing strategic messages for health campaigns and establishing an effective communication system during this outbreak. METHODS: Korean COVID-19-related Twitter data were collected on February 29, 2020. Our final sample comprised of 43,832 users and 78,233 relationships on Twitter. We generated four networks in terms of key issues regarding COVID-19 in Korea. This study comparatively investigates how COVID-19-related issues have circulated on Twitter through network analysis. Next, we classified top news channels shared via tweets. Lastly, we conducted a content analysis of news frames used in the top-shared sources. RESULTS: The network analysis suggests that the spread of information was faster in the Coronavirus network than in the other networks (Corona19, Shincheon, and Daegu). People who used the word “Coronavirus” communicated more frequently with each other. The spread of information was faster, and the diameter value was lower than for those who used other terms. Many of the news items highlighted the positive roles being played by individuals and groups, directing readers’ attention to the crisis. Ethical issues such as deviant behavior among the population and an entertainment frame highlighting celebrity donations also emerged often. There was a significant difference in the use of nonportal (n=14) and portal news (n=26) sites between the four network types. The news frames used in the top sources were similar across the networks (P=.89, 95% CI 0.004-0.006). Tweets containing medically framed news articles (mean 7.571, SD 1.988) were found to be more popular than tweets that included news articles adopting nonmedical frames (mean 5.060, SD 2.904; N=40, P=.03, 95% CI 0.169-4.852). CONCLUSIONS: Most of the popular news on Twitter had nonmedical frames. Nevertheless, the spillover effect of the news articles that delivered medical information about COVID-19 was greater than that of news with nonmedical frames. Social media network analytics cannot replace the work of public health officials; however, monitoring public conversations and media news that propagates rapidly can assist public health professionals in their complex and fast-paced decision-making processes.
|J Med Internet Res||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|194||The species Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus: classifying 2019-nCoV and naming it SARS-CoV-2 |
The present outbreak of a coronavirus-associated acute respiratory disease called coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is the third documented spillover of an animal coronavirus to humans in only two decades that has resulted in a major epidemic. The Coronaviridae Study Group (CSG) of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses, which is responsible for developing the classification of viruses and taxon nomenclature of the family Coronaviridae, has assessed the placement of the human pathogen, tentatively named 2019-nCoV, within the Coronaviridae. Based on phylogeny, taxonomy and established practice, the CSG recognizes this virus as forming a sister clade to the prototype human and bat severe acute respiratory syndrome coronaviruses (SARS-CoVs) of the species Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus, and designates it as SARS-CoV-2. In order to facilitate communication, the CSG proposes to use the following naming convention for individual isolates: SARS-CoV-2/host/location/isolate/date. While the full spectrum of clinical manifestations associated with SARS-CoV-2 infections in humans remains to be determined, the independent zoonotic transmission of SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 highlights the need for studying viruses at the species level to complement research focused on individual pathogenic viruses of immediate significance. This will improve our understanding of virus–host interactions in an ever-changing environment and enhance our preparedness for future outbreaks.
|Nat Microbiol||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|195||COVID-19 in Africa: care and protection for frontline healthcare workers |
Medical staff caring for COVID-19 patients face mental stress, physical exhaustion, separation from families, stigma, and the pain of losing patients and colleagues. Many of them have acquired SARS-CoV-2 and some have died. In Africa, where the pandemic is escalating, there are major gaps in response capacity, especially in human resources and protective equipment. We examine these challenges and propose interventions to protect healthcare workers on the continent, drawing on articles identified on Medline (Pubmed) in a search on 24 March 2020. Global jostling means that supplies of personal protective equipment are limited in Africa. Even low-cost interventions such as facemasks for patients with a cough and water supplies for handwashing may be challenging, as is ‘physical distancing’ in overcrowded primary health care clinics. Without adequate protection, COVID-19 mortality may be high among healthcare workers and their family in Africa given limited critical care beds and difficulties in transporting ill healthcare workers from rural to urban care centres. Much can be done to protect healthcare workers, however. The continent has learnt invaluable lessons from Ebola and HIV control. HIV counselors and community healthcare workers are key resources, and could promote social distancing and related interventions, dispel myths, support healthcare workers, perform symptom screening and trace contacts. Staff motivation and retention may be enhanced through carefully managed risk ‘allowances’ or compensation. International support with personnel and protective equipment, especially from China, could turn the pandemic’s trajectory in Africa around. Telemedicine holds promise as it rationalises human resources and reduces patient contact and thus infection risks. Importantly, healthcare workers, using their authoritative voice, can promote effective COVID-19 policies and prioritization of their safety. Prioritizing healthcare workers for SARS-CoV-2 testing, hospital beds and targeted research, as well as ensuring that public figures and the population acknowledge the commitment of healthcare workers may help to maintain morale. Clearly there are multiple ways that international support and national commitment could help safeguard healthcare workers in Africa, essential for limiting the pandemic’s potentially devastating heath, socio-economic and security impacts on the continent.
|Global Health||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|196||Effects of the lockdown on the mental health of the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy: Results from the COMET collaborative network |
BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is an unprecedented traumatic event influencing the healthcare, economic, and social welfare systems worldwide. In order to slow the infection rates, lockdown has been implemented almost everywhere. Italy, one of the countries most severely affected, entered the “lockdown” on March 8, 2020. METHODS: The COvid Mental hEalth Trial (COMET) network includes 10 Italian university sites and the National Institute of Health. The whole study has three different phases. The first phase includes an online survey conducted between March and May 2020 in the Italian population. Recruitment took place through email invitation letters, social media, mailing lists of universities, national medical associations, and associations of stakeholders (e.g., associations of users/carers). In order to evaluate the impact of lockdown on depressive, anxiety and stress symptoms, multivariate linear regression models were performed, weighted for the propensity score. RESULTS: The final sample consisted of 20,720 participants. Among them, 12.4% of respondents (N = 2,555) reported severe or extremely severe levels of depressive symptoms, 17.6% (N = 3,627) of anxiety symptoms and 41.6% (N = 8,619) reported to feel at least moderately stressed by the situation at the DASS-21. According to the multivariate regression models, the depressive, anxiety and stress symptoms significantly worsened from the week April 9–15 to the week April 30 to May 4 (p < 0.0001). Moreover, female respondents and people with pre-existing mental health problems were at higher risk of developing severe depression and anxiety symptoms (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Although physical isolation and lockdown represent essential public health measures for containing the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, they are a serious threat for mental health and well-being of the general population. As an integral part of COVID-19 response, mental health needs should be addressed.
|Eur Psychiatry||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|197||Clinical trials and the COVID-19 pandemic |
|Hell J Nucl Med||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|198||Outcome of coronavirus spectrum infections (SARS, MERS, COVID-19) during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
ABSTRACT Objective The aim of this systematic review was to report pregnancy and perinatal outcomes of Coronavirus (CoV) spectrum infections, and particularly COVID-19 disease due to SARS-COV-2 infection during pregnancy. Data sources Medline, Embase, Cinahl and Clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched electronically utilizing combinations of word variants for “coronavirus” or “severe acute respiratory syndrome” or “SARS” or “Middle East respiratory syndrome” or “MERS” or “COVID-19” and “pregnancy”. The search and selection criteria were restricted to English language. Study eligibility criteria Inclusion criteria were pregnant women with a confirmed Coronavirus related illness, defined as either SARS, MERS or COVID-19. Study appraisal and synthesis methods We used meta-analyses of proportions to combine data and reported pooled proportions. The pregnancy outcomes observed included miscarriage, preterm birth, pre-eclampsia, preterm prelabor rupture of membranes, fetal growth restriction, and mode of delivery. The perinatal outcomes observed were fetal distress, Apgar score < 7 at five minutes, neonatal asphyxia, admission to neonatal intensive care unit, perinatal death, and evidence of vertical transmission. Results 19 studies including 79 women were eligible for this systematic review: 41 pregnancies (51.9%) affected by COVID-19, 12 (15.2%) by MERS, and 26 (32.9%) by SARS. An overt diagnosis of pneumonia was made in 91.8% and the most common symptoms were fever (82.6%), cough (57.1%) and dyspnea (27.0%). For all CoV infections, the rate of miscarriage was 39.1% (95% CI 20.2-59.8); the rate of preterm birth < 37 weeks was 24.3% (95% CI 12.5-38.6); premature prelabor rupture of membranes occurred in 20.7% (95% CI 9.5-34.9), preeclampsia in 16.2% (95% CI 4.2-34.1), and fetal growth restriction in 11.7% (95% CI 3.2-24.4); 84% were delivered by cesarean; the rate of perinatal death was 11.1% (95% CI 84.8-19.6) and 57.2% (95% CI 3.6-99.8) of newborns were admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit. When focusing on COVID-19, the most common adverse pregnancy outcome was preterm birth < 37 weeks, occurring in 41.1% (95% CI 25.6-57.6) of cases, while the rate of perinatal death was 7.0% (95% CI 1.4-16.3). None of the 41 newborns assessed showed clinical signs of vertical transmission. Conclusion In mothers infected with coronavirus infections, including COVID-19, >90% of whom also had pneumonia, PTB is the most common adverse pregnancy outcome. Miscarriage, preeclampsia, cesarean, and perinatal death (7-11%) were also more common than in the general population. There have been no published cases of clinical evidence of vertical transmission. Evidence is accumulating rapidly, so these data may need to be updated soon. The findings from this study can guide and enhance prenatal counseling of women with COVID-19 infection occurring during pregnancy.
|Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|199||Safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in healthy adults aged 18-59 years: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2 clinical trial |
BACKGROUND: With the unprecedented morbidity and mortality associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, a vaccine against COVID-19 is urgently needed. We investigated CoronaVac (Sinovac Life Sciences, Beijing, China), an inactivated vaccine candidate against COVID-19, containing inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), for its safety, tolerability and immunogenicity. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2 clinical trial, healthy adults aged 18–59 years were recruited from the community in Suining County of Jiangsu province, China. Adults with SARS-CoV-2 exposure or infection history, with axillary temperature above 37·0°C, or an allergic reaction to any vaccine component were excluded. The experimental vaccine for the phase 1 trial was manufactured using a cell factory process (CellSTACK Cell Culture Chamber 10, Corning, Wujiang, China), whereas those for the phase 2 trial were produced through a bioreactor process (ReadyToProcess WAVE 25, GE, Umea, Sweden). The phase 1 trial was done in a dose-escalating manner. At screening, participants were initially separated (1:1), with no specific randomisation, into two vaccination schedule cohorts, the days 0 and 14 vaccination cohort and the days 0 and 28 vaccination cohort, and within each cohort the first 36 participants were assigned to block 1 (low dose CoronaVac [3 μg per 0·5 mL of aluminium hydroxide diluent per dose) then another 36 were assigned to block 2 (high-dose Coronavc [6 μg per 0·5 mL of aluminium hydroxide diluent per dse]). Within each block, participants were randomly assigned (2:1), using block randomisation with a block size of six, to either two doses of CoronaVac or two doses of placebo. In the phase 2 trial, at screening, participants were initially separated (1:1), with no specific randomisation, into the days 0 and 14 vaccination cohort and the days 0 and 28 vaccination cohort, and participants were randomly assigned (2:2:1), using block randomisation with a block size of five, to receive two doses of either low-dose CoronaVac, high-dose CoronaVac, or placebo. Participants, investigators, and laboratory staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary safety endpoint was adverse reactions within 28 days after injection in all participants who were given at least one dose of study drug (safety population). The primary immunogenic outcome was seroconversion rates of neutralising antibodies to live SARS-CoV-2 at day 14 after the last dose in the days 0 and 14 cohort, and at day 28 after the last dose in the days 0 and 28 cohort in participants who completed their allocated two-dose vaccination schedule (per-protocol population). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04352608, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between April 16 and April 25, 2020, 144 participants were enrolled in the phase 1 trial, and between May 3 and May 5, 2020, 600 participants were enrolled in the phase 2 trial. 743 participants received at least one dose of investigational product (n=143 for phase 1 and n=600 for phase 2; safety population). In the phase 1 trial, the incidence of adverse reactions for the days 0 and 14 cohort was seven (29%) of 24 participants in the 3 ug group, nine (38%) of 24 in the 6 μg group, and two (8%) of 24 in the placebo group, and for the days 0 and 28 cohort was three (13%) of 24 in the 3 μg group, four (17%) of 24 in the 6 μg group, and three (13%) of 23 in the placebo group. The seroconversion of neutralising antibodies on day 14 after the days 0 and 14 vaccination schedule was seen in 11 (46%) of 24 participants in the 3 μg group, 12 (50%) of 24 in the 6 μg group, and none (0%) of 24 in the placebo group; whereas at day 28 after the days 0 and 28 vaccination schedule, seroconversion was seen in 20 (83%) of 24 in the 3 μg group, 19 (79%) of 24 in the 6 μg group, and one (4%) of 24 in the placebo group. In the phase 2 trial, the incidence of adverse reactions for the days 0 and 14 cohort was 40 (33%) of 120 participants in the 3 μg group, 42 (35%) of 120 in the 6 μg group, and 13 (22%) of 60 in the placebo group, and for the days 0 and 28 cohort was 23 (19%) of 120 in the 3 μg group, 23 (19%) of 120 in the 6 μg group, and 11 (18%) of 60 for the placebo group. Seroconversion of neutralising antibodies was seen for 109 (92%) of 118 participants in the 3 μg group, 117 (98%) of 119 in the 6 μg group, and two (3%) of 60 in the placebo group at day 14 after the days 0 and 14 schedule; whereas at day 28 after the days 0 and 28 schedule, seroconversion was seen in 114 (97%) of 117 in the 3 μg group, 118 (100%) of 118 in the 6 μg group, and none (0%) of 59 in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Taking safety, immunogenicity, and production capacity into account, the 3 μg dose of CoronaVac is the suggested dose for efficacy assessment in future phase 3 trials. FUNDING: Chinese National Key Research and Development Program and Beijing Science and Technology Program.
|Lancet Infect Dis||2020||LitCov and CORD-19|
|200||Case-Fatality Rate and Characteristics of Patients Dying in Relation to COVID-19 in Italy |
|JAMA||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 2022-07-25)
(3) Currently tweets of June 23rd to June 29th 2022 have been considered.