Diagnostic utility of clinical laboratory data determinations for patients with the severe COVID-19

COVID-19 treatment: close to a cure? A rapid review of pharmacotherapies for the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2)

Currently, there is no approved therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The World Health Organization (WHO) therefore endorses supportive care only. However, frontline clinicians and researchers have been experimenting with several virus-based and host-based therapeutics since the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in China. China's National Health Commission has issued the first COVID-19 treatment guidelines with therapy suggestions, which has inspired clinical studies worldwide. This review evaluates the major therapeutics. Key evidence from in vitro research, animal models and clinical research in emerging coronaviruses is examined. The antiviral therapies remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir and umifenovir, if considered, should be initiated before the peak of viral replication for an optimal outcome. Ribavirin may be beneficial as an add-on therapy but is ineffective as monotherapy. Corticosteroid use should be limited to specific co-morbidities. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is not recommended owing to lack of data in COVID-19. The traditional Chinese medicine Xuebijing may benefit patients with complications of bacterial pneumonia or sepsis. The efficacy of interferon is unclear owing to conflicting outcomes in coronavirus studies. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have shown in vitro inhibition of SARS-CoV-2, but studies on their clinical efficacy and whether the benefits outweigh the risk of dysrhythmias remain inconclusive. For patients who develop cytokine release syndrome, interleukin-6 inhibitors may be beneficial.

The clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with diabetes and secondary hyperglycaemia with coronavirus disease 2019: A single-centre, retrospective, observational study in Wuhan

AIM

To explore whether coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with diabetes and secondary hyperglycaemia have different clinical characteristics and prognoses than those without significantly abnormal glucose metabolism.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 166 COVID-19 patients at Tongji Hospital (Wuhan) from 8 February to 21 March 2020. Clinical characteristics and outcomes (as of 4 April 2020) were compared among control (group 1), secondary hyperglycaemia (group 2: no diabetes history, fasting plasma glucose levels of ≥7.0 mmol/L once and HbA1c values <6.5%) and patients with diabetes (group 3).

RESULTS

Compared with group 1, groups 2 and 3 had higher rates of leukocytosis, neutrophilia, lymphocytopenia, eosinopenia and levels of hypersensitive C-reactive protein, ferritin and d-dimer (P < .05 for all). Group 2 patients had higher levels of lactate dehydrogenase, prevalence of liver dysfunction and increased interleukin-8 (IL-8) than those in group 1, and a higher prevalence of increased IL-8 was found in group 2 than in group 3 (P < .05 for all). The proportions of critical patients in groups 2 and 3 were significantly higher compared with group 1 (38.1%, 32.8% vs. 9.5%, P < .05 for both). Groups 2 and 3 had significantly longer hospital stays than group 1, which was nearly 1 week longer. The composite outcomes risks were 5.47 (1.56-19.82) and 2.61 (0.86-7.88) times greater in groups 2 and 3 than in group 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Hyperglycaemia in both diabetes and secondary hyperglycaemia patients with COVID-19 may indicate poor prognoses. There were differences between patients with secondary hyperglycaemia and those with diabetes. We recommend that clinicians pay more attention to the blood glucose status of COVID-19 patients, even those not diagnosed with diabetes before admission.

Overcoming Barriers: The Endothelium As a Linchpin of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pathogenesis?

OBJECTIVE

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic involving >5 500 000 cases worldwide as of May 26, 2020. The culprit is the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2, which invades cells by binding to ACE2 (angiotensin-converting enzyme 2). While the majority of patients mount an appropriate antiviral response and recover at home, others progress to respiratory distress requiring hospital admission for supplemental oxygen. In severe cases, deterioration to acute respiratory distress syndrome necessitating mechanical ventilation, development of severe thrombotic events, or cardiac injury and dysfunction occurs. In this review, we highlight what is known to date about COVID-19 and cardiovascular risk, focusing in on the putative role of the endothelium in disease susceptibility and pathogenesis. Approach and Results: Cytokine-driven vascular leak in the lung alveolar-endothelial interface facilitates acute lung injury in the setting of viral infection. Given that the virus affects multiple organs, including the heart, it likely gains access into systemic circulation by infecting or passing from the respiratory epithelium to the endothelium for viral dissemination. Indeed, cardiovascular complications of COVID-19 are highly prevalent and include acute cardiac injury, myocarditis, and a hypercoagulable state, all of which may be influenced by altered endothelial function. Notably, the disease course is worse in individuals with preexisting comorbidities that involve endothelial dysfunction and may be linked to elevated ACE2 expression, such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Rapidly emerging data on COVID-19, together with results from studies on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-1, are providing insight into how endothelial dysfunction may contribute to the pandemic that is paralyzing the globe. This may, in turn, inform the design of biomarkers predictive of disease course, as well as therapeutics targeting pathogenic endothelial responses.

Diagnosing COVID-19 in the Emergency Department: A Scoping Review of Clinical Examinations, Laboratory Tests, Imaging Accuracy, and Biases

OBJECTIVE

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged as a global pandemic in early 2020 with rapidly evolving approaches to diagnosing the clinical illness called coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The primary objective of this scoping review is to synthesize current research of the diagnostic accuracy of history, physical examination, routine laboratory tests, real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR), immunology tests, and computed tomography (CT) for the emergency department (ED) diagnosis of COVID-19. Secondary objectives included a synopsis of diagnostic biases likely with current COVID-19 research as well as corresponding implications of false-negative and false-positive results for clinicians and investigators.

METHODS

A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Scoping Review (PRISMA-ScR)-adherent synthesis of COVID-19 diagnostic accuracy through May 5, 2020, was conducted. The search strategy was designed by a medical librarian and included studies indexed by PubMed and Embase since January 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 1,907 citations were screened for relevance. Patients without COVID-19 are rarely reported, so specificity and likelihood ratios were generally unavailable. Fever is the most common finding, while hyposmia and hypogeusia appear useful to rule in COVID-19. Cough is not consistently present. Lymphopenia is the mostly commonly reported laboratory abnormality and occurs in over 50% of COVID-19 patients. rRT-PCR is currently considered the COVID-19 criterion standard for most diagnostic studies, but a single test sensitivity ranges from 60% to 78%. Multiple reasons for false-negatives rRT-PCR exist, including sample site tested and disease stage during which sample was obtained. CT may increase COVID-19 sensitivity in conjunction with rRT-PCR, but guidelines for imaging patients most likely to benefit are emerging. IgM and IgG serology levels are undetectable in the first week of COVID-19, but sensitivity (range = 82% to 100%) and specificity (range = 87% to 100%) are promising. Whether detectable COVID-19 antibodies correspond to immunity remains unanswered. Current studies do not adhere to accepted diagnostic accuracy reporting standards and likely report significantly biased results if the same tests were to be applied to general ED populations with suspected COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

With the exception of fever and disorders of smell/taste, history and physical examination findings are unhelpful to distinguish COVID-19 from other infectious conditions that mimic SARS-CoV-2 like influenza. Routine laboratory tests are also nondiagnostic, although lymphopenia is a common finding and other abnormalities may predict severe disease. Although rRT-PCR is the current criterion standard, more inclusive consensus-based criteria will likely emerge because of the high false-negative rate of PCR tests. The role of serology and CT in ED assessments remains undefined.

Liver injury is associated with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis of retrospective studies

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak is a major threat to human beings. Lung injury has been reported as the major outcome of COVID-19 infection. However, liver damage has also been considered to occur in severe cases. The current meta-analysis of retrospective studies was carried out to summarize available findings on the association between liver injury and severity of COVID-19 infection. Online databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched to detect relevant publications up to 1 April 2020, using relevant keywords. To pool data, a fixed- or random-effects model was used depending on the heterogeneity between studies. Furthermore, publication bias test and sensitivity analysis were also applied. In total, 20 retrospective studies with 3428 COVID-19 infected patients (severe cases, n = 1455; mild cases, n = 1973), were included in this meta-analysis. Higher serum levels of aspartate aminotransferase (weighted mean difference, 8.84 U/L; 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.97 to 11.71; P < 0.001), alanine aminotransferase (weighted mean difference, 7.35 U/L; 95% CI, 4.77 to 9.93; P < 0.001), total bilirubin (weighted mean difference, 2.30 mmol/L; 95% CI, 1.24 to 3.36; P < 0.001), and lower serum levels of albumin (weighted mean difference, -4.24 g/L; 95% CI, -6.20 to -2.28; P < 0.001) were associated with a significant increase in the severity of COVID-19 infection. The incidence of liver injury, as assessed by serum analysis (aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin, and albumin levels), seems to be higher in patients with severe COVID-19 infection.

The risk and prognosis of COVID-19 infection in cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Numerous studies have been published regarding outcomes of cancer patients infected with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. However, most of these are single-center studies with a limited number of patients. To better assess the outcomes of this new infection in this subgroup of susceptible patients, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 infection on cancer patients. We performed a literature search using PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for studies that reported the risk of infection and complications of COVID-19 in cancer patients and retrieved 22 studies (1018 cancer patients). The analysis showed that the frequency of cancer among patients with confirmed COVID-19 was 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3–3) in the overall cohort. These patients had a mortality of 21.1% (95% CI: 14.7–27.6), severe/critical disease rate of 45.4% (95% CI: 37.4–53.3), intensive care unit (ICU) admission rate of 14.5% (95% CI: 8.5–20.4), and mechanical ventilation rate of 11.7% (95% CI: 5.5–18). The double-arm analysis showed that cancer patients had a higher risk of mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 3.23, 95% CI: 1.71–6.13), severe/critical disease (OR = 3.91, 95% CI: 2.70–5.67), ICU admission (OR = 3.10, 95% CI: 1.85–5.17), and mechanical ventilation (OR = 4.86, 95% CI: 1.27–18.65) than non-cancer patients. Furthermore, cancer patients had significantly lower platelet levels and higher D-dimer levels, C-reactive protein levels, and prothrombin time. In conclusion, these results indicate that cancer patients are at a higher risk of COVID-19 infection-related complications. Therefore, cancer patients need diligent preventive care measures and aggressive surveillance for earlier detection of COVID-19 infection.

COVID-19 and Liver Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Aims The prevalence and extent of liver damage in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients remain poorly understood, primarily due to small-sized epidemiological studies with varying definitions of "liver injury". We conducted a meta-analysis to derive generalizable, well-powered estimates of liver injury prevalence in COVID-19 patients. We also aimed to assess whether liver injury prevalence is significantly greater than the baseline prevalence of chronic liver disease (CLD). Our secondary aim was to study whether the degree of liver injury was associated with the severity of COVID-19. Materials and Methods Electronic databases (PubMed and Scopus) were systematically searched in June 2020 for studies reporting the prevalence of baseline CLD and current liver injury in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Liver injury was defined as an elevation in transaminases >3 times above the upper limit of normal. For the secondary analysis, all studies reporting mean liver enzyme levels in severe versus non-severe COVID-19 patients were included. A random-effects model was used for meta-analysis. Proportions were subjected to arcsine transformation and pooled to derive pooled proportions and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup differences were tested for using the chi-square test and associated p-value. Means and their standard errors were pooled to derive weighted mean differences (WMDs) and corresponding 95% CIs. Results Electronic search yielded a total of 521 articles. After removal of duplicates and reviewing the full-texts of potential studies, a total of 27 studies met the inclusion criteria. Among a cohort of 8,817 patients, the prevalence of current liver injury was 15.7% (9.5%-23.0%), and this was significantly higher than the proportion of patients with a history of CLD (4.9% [2.2%-8.6%]; p < 0.001). A total of 2,900 patients in our population had severe COVID-19, and 7,184 patients had non-severe COVID-19. Serum ALT (WMD: 7.19 [4.90, 9.48]; p < 0.001; I2 = 69%), AST (WMD: 9.02 [6.89, 11.15]; p < 0.001; I2 = 73%) and bilirubin levels (WMD: 1.78 [0.86, 2.70]; p < 0.001; I2 = 82%) were significantly higher in patients with severe COVID-19 when compared to patients with non-severe disease. Albumin levels were significantly lower in patients with severe COVID-19 (WMD: -4.16 [-5.97, -2.35]; p < 0.001; I2 = 95%). Conclusions Patients with COVID-19 have a higher than expected prevalence of liver injury, and the extent of the injury is associated with the severity of the disease. Further studies are required to assess whether hepatic damage is caused by the virus, medications, or both.

Diabetes as a risk factor for greater COVID-19 severity and in-hospital death: A meta-analysis of observational studies

AIMS

To estimate the prevalence of established diabetes and its association with the clinical severity and in-hospital mortality associated with COVID-19.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science, from 1st January 2020 to 15th May 2020, for observational studies of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects modeling. A total of 83 eligible studies with 78,874 hospitalized patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were included. The pooled prevalence of established diabetes was 14.34% (95% CI 12.62-16.06%). However, the prevalence of diabetes was higher in non-Asian vs. Asian countries (23.34% [95% CI 16.40-30.28] vs. 11.06% [95% CI 9.73-12.39]), and in patients aged ≥60 years vs. those aged <60 years (23.30% [95% CI 19.65-26.94] vs. 8.79% [95% CI 7.56-10.02]). Pre-existing diabetes was associated with an approximate twofold higher risk of having severe/critical COVID-19 illness (n = 22 studies; random-effects odds ratio 2.10, 95% CI 1.71-2.57; I2 = 41.5%) and ~threefold increased risk of in-hospital mortality (n = 15 studies; random-effects odds ratio 2.68, 95% CI 2.09-3.44; I2 = 46.7%). Funnel plots and Egger's tests did not reveal any significant publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-existing diabetes is significantly associated with greater risk of severe/critical illness and in-hospital mortality in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.

Linear B-cell epitopes in the spike and nucleocapsid proteins as markers of SARS-CoV-2 exposure and disease severity

Background

Given the unceasing worldwide surge in COVID-19 cases, there is an imperative need to develop highly specific and sensitive serology assays to define exposure to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

Methods

Pooled plasma samples from PCR positive COVID-19 patients were used to identify linear B-cell epitopes from a SARS-CoV-2 peptide library of spike (S), envelope (E), membrane (M), and nucleocapsid (N) structural proteins by peptide-based ELISA. Hit epitopes were further validated with 79 COVID-19 patients with different disease severity status, 13 seasonal human CoV, 20 recovered SARS patients and 22 healthy donors.

Findings

Four immunodominant epitopes, S14P5, S20P2, S21P2 and N4P5, were identified on the S and N viral proteins. IgG responses to all identified epitopes displayed a strong detection profile, with N4P5 achieving the highest level of specificity (100%) and sensitivity (>96%) against SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, the magnitude of IgG responses to S14P5, S21P2 and N4P5 were strongly associated with disease severity.

Interpretation

IgG responses to the peptide epitopes can serve as useful indicators for the degree of immunopathology in COVID-19 patients, and function as higly specific and sensitive sero-immunosurveillance tools for recent or past SARS-CoV-2 infections. The flexibility of these epitopes to be used alone or in combination will allow for the development of improved point-of-care-tests (POCTs).

Funding

Biomedical Research Council (BMRC), the A*ccelerate GAP-funded project (ACCL/19-GAP064-R20H-H) from Agency of Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), and National Medical Research Council (NMRC) COVID-19 Research fund (COVID19RF-001) and CCGSFPOR20002. ATR is supported by the Singapore International Graduate Award (SINGA), A*STAR.

Hemostatic Changes in Patients with COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis with Meta-Regressions

BACKGROUND

Complications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) include coagulopathy. We performed a meta-analysis on the association of COVID-19 severity with changes in hemostatic parameters.

METHODS

Data on prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), D-Dimer, platelets (PLT), or fibrinogen in severe versus mild COVID-19 patients, and/or in non-survivors to COVID-19 versus survivors were systematically searched. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated.

RESULTS

Sixty studies comparing 5487 subjects with severe and 9670 subjects with mild COVID-19 documented higher PT (SMD: 0.41; 95%CI: 0.21, 0.60), D-Dimer (SMD: 0.67; 95%CI: 0.52, 0.82), and fibrinogen values (SMD: 1.84; 95%CI: 1.21, 2.47), with lower PLT count (SMD: -0.74; 95%CI: -1.01, -0.47) among severe patients. Twenty-five studies on 1511 COVID-19 non-survivors and 6287 survivors showed higher PT (SMD: 0.67; 95%CI: 0.39, 0.96) and D-Dimer values (SMD: 3.88; 95%CI: 2.70, 5.07), with lower PLT count (SMD: -0.60, 95%CI: -0.82, -0.38) among non-survivors. Regression models showed that C-reactive protein values were directly correlated with the difference in PT and fibrinogen.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant hemostatic changes are associated with COVID-19 severity. Considering the risk of fatal complications with residual chronic disability and poor long-term outcomes, further studies should investigate the prognostic role of hemostatic parameters in COVID-19 patients.

Reporting of D-dimer data in COVID-19: some confusion and potential for misinformation

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) represents a new pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome virus coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). A previous pooled analysis clearly identified elevated D-dimer levels as being associated with severity of COVID-19. Since then, several other studies have provided clearer support for this initial evidence. However, potentially under-recognized by those reporting on D-dimer is the considerable variation in reporting units for D-dimer, and thus also the potential for misreporting of D-dimer data based on poor or incomplete reporting. A PubMed search was used to identify recent papers reporting on D-dimers in COVID-19-based studies. We report that: (1) most publications did not identify either the manufacturer or D-dimer product used; (2) most did not identify whether D-dimer values were reported as D-dimer units (DDU) or fibrinogen equivalent units (FEU) (~2 ×  differences); (3) nearly half did not identify normal cut-off values; (4) some did not report numerical findings or units for D-dimer; (5) where reported, most identified units as either mg/L or μg/mL; (6) we identified at least four errors in reporting from 21 papers. It may not be possible to truly standardize D-dimer assays, but it should be feasible to harmonize D-dimer assays to a single unit of measurement.

Early use of tocilizumab in the prevention of adult respiratory failure in SARS-CoV-2 infections and the utilization of interleukin-6 levels in the management

Respiratory failure in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection appears related to cytokine release syndrome that often results in mechanical ventilation (MV). We investigated the role of tocilizumab (TCZ) on interleukin-6 (IL-6) trends and MV in patients with SARS-CoV-2. In this longitudinal observational study, 112 patients were evaluated from 1 February to 31 May 2020. TCZ was administered followed by methylprednisolone to patients with >3L oxygen requirement and pneumonia severity index score ≤130 with computed tomography scan changes. IL-6, C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), D-dimer, and procalcitonin were monitored on days 0, 3, and 6 of therapy. Statistical analyses were performed with significance ≤0.05. Eighty out of 112 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients (45 males, 56.96%; 34 females, 43.04%) were included in this study. Seven patients expired (8.75%) and nine patients required MV (11.25%). Median IL-6 levels pre-administration of TCZ was 342.50 (78.25-666.25) pg/mL compared with post-administration on day 3 (563; 162-783) pg/mL (P < .00001). On day 6, the median dropped to 545 (333.50-678.50) pg/mL compared with day 3 (P = .709). CRP, ferritin, LDH, and D-dimer levels were reduced after TCZ therapy. Early use of TCZ may reduce the need for MV and decrease CRP, ferritin, LDH, and D-dimer levels. The sequential use of methylprednisolone for 72 hours seems to potentiate the effect and prolong the suppression of the cytokine storm. IL-6 levels may be helpful as a prognostic tool.

Prediction Model Based on the Combination of Cytokines and Lymphocyte Subsets for Prognosis of SARS-CoV-2 Infection

BACKGROUND

There are currently rare satisfactory markers for predicting the death of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of this study is to establish a model based on the combination of serum cytokines and lymphocyte subsets for predicting the prognosis of the disease.

METHODS

A total of 739 participants with COVID-19 were enrolled at Tongji Hospital from February to April 2020 and classified into fatal (n = 51) and survived (n = 688) groups according to the patient's outcome. Cytokine profile and lymphocyte subset analysis was performed simultaneously.

RESULTS

The fatal patients exhibited a significant lower number of lymphocytes including B cells, CD4⁺ T cells, CD8⁺ T cells, and NK cells and remarkably higher concentrations of cytokines including interleukin-2 receptor, interleukin-6, interleukin-8, and tumor necrosis factor-α on admission compared with the survived subjects. A model based on the combination of interleukin-8 and the numbers of CD4⁺ T cells and NK cells showed a good performance in predicting the death of patients with COVID-19. When the threshold of 0.075 was used, the sensitivity and specificity of the prediction model were 90.20% and 90.26%, respectively. Meanwhile, interleukin-8 was found to have a potential value in predicting the length of hospital stay until death.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant increase of cytokines and decrease of lymphocyte subsets are found positively correlated with in-hospital death. A model based on the combination of three markers provides an attractive approach to predict the prognosis of COVID-19.

Clinical characteristics and laboratory results of pregnant women with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China

Objective

To evaluate the clinical characteristics and laboratory test results in pregnant women with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19).

Methods

A retrospective study to review and compare clinical data including electronic medical records and laboratory tests from pregnant and nonpregnant patients admitted the Central Hospital of Wuhan, China from December 8, 2019 to April 1, 2020.

Results

A total of 72 women (30 pregnant and 42 nonpregnant) with COVID‐19 were included. No patients developed severe pneumonia during the study. Compared with the nonpregnant group, pregnant patients were admitted to hospital earlier (0.25 vs 11.00 days; P<0.001), presented milder symptoms, had a higher rate of asymptomatic infection (26.7% vs 0%), and shorter length of hospital stay (14.5 vs 17.0 days; P<0.01). Laboratory test results showed that levels of inflammation markers such as white blood cell count, neutrophil count and percentage, C‐reactive protein, procalcitonin, and D‐dimer were significantly higher in pregnant women, whereas mean lymphocyte percentage was significantly lower compared with nonpregnant women.

Conclusion

In some respects, the clinical characteristics and laboratory test results of COVID‐19 in pregnant patients seems to be distinctive from their nonpregnant counterparts. Appropriate advice and positive treatment might be critical to the prognosis when dealing with these pregnant patients. Pregnant patients with COVID‐19 had their own positive clinical characteristics and special laboratory test results. Responsive medical advice and active treatment for those patients are critical to recovery.

The clinical characteristics and laboratory test results of COVID‐19 in pregnancy seemed to be distinctive from those in non‐pregnancy in some respects. Immediate medical advice and active treatment for pregnant patients with COVID‐19 are critical to recovery.

Targeting GM-CSF in COVID-19 Pneumonia: Rationale and Strategies

COVID-19 is a clinical syndrome ranging from mild symptoms to severe pneumonia that often leads to respiratory failure, need for mechanical ventilation, and death. Most of the lung damage is driven by a surge in inflammatory cytokines [interleukin-6, interferon-γ, and granulocyte-monocyte stimulating factor (GM-CSF)]. Blunting this hyperinflammation with immunomodulation may lead to clinical improvement. GM-CSF is produced by many cells, including macrophages and T-cells. GM-CSF-derived signals are involved in differentiation of macrophages, including alveolar macrophages (AMs). In animal models of respiratory infections, the intranasal administration of GM-CSF increased the proliferation of AMs and improved outcomes. Increased levels of GM-CSF have been recently described in patients with COVID-19 compared to healthy controls. While GM-CSF might be beneficial in some circumstances as an appropriate response, in this case the inflammatory response is maladaptive by virtue of being later and disproportionate. The inhibition of GM-CSF signaling may be beneficial in improving the hyperinflammation-related lung damage in the most severe cases of COVID-19. This blockade can be achieved through antagonism of the GM-CSF receptor or the direct binding of circulating GM-CSF. Initial findings from patients with COVID-19 treated with a single intravenous dose of mavrilimumab, a monoclonal antibody binding GM-CSF receptor α, showed oxygenation improvement and shorter hospitalization. Prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trials are ongoing. Anti-GM-CSF monoclonal antibodies, TJ003234 and gimsilumab, will be tested in clinical trials in patients with COVID-19, while lenzilumab received FDA approval for compassionate use. These trials will help inform whether blunting the inflammatory signaling provided by the GM-CSF axis in COVID-19 is beneficial.

Immune response to SARS-CoV-2 and mechanisms of immunopathological changes in COVID-19

As a zoonotic disease that has already spread globally to several million human beings and possibly to domestic and wild animals, eradication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) appears practically impossible. There is a pressing need to improve our understanding of the immunology of this disease to contain the pandemic by developing vaccines and medicines for the prevention and treatment of patients. In this review, we aim to improve our understanding on the immune response and immunopathological changes in patients linked to deteriorating clinical conditions such as cytokine storm, acute respiratory distress syndrome, autopsy findings and changes in acute-phase reactants, and serum biochemistry in COVID-19. Similar to many other viral infections, asymptomatic disease is present in a significant but currently unknown fraction of the affected individuals. In the majority of the patients, a 1-week, self-limiting viral respiratory disease typically occurs, which ends with the development of neutralizing antiviral T cell and antibody immunity. The IgM-, IgA-, and IgG-type virus-specific antibodies levels are important measurements to predict population immunity against this disease and whether cross-reactivity with other coronaviruses is taking place. High viral load during the first infection and repeated exposure to virus especially in healthcare workers can be an important factor for severity of disease. It should be noted that many aspects of severe patients are unique to COVID-19 and are rarely observed in other respiratory viral infections, such as severe lymphopenia and eosinopenia, extensive pneumonia and lung tissue damage, a cytokine storm leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome, and multiorgan failure. Lymphopenia causes a defect in antiviral and immune regulatory immunity. At the same time, a cytokine storm starts with extensive activation of cytokine-secreting cells with innate and adaptive immune mechanisms both of which contribute to a poor prognosis. Elevated levels of acute-phase reactants and lymphopenia are early predictors of high disease severity. Prevention of development to severe disease, cytokine storm, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and novel approaches to prevent their development will be main routes for future research areas. As we learn to live amidst the virus, understanding the immunology of the disease can assist in containing the pandemic and in developing vaccines and medicines to prevent and treat individual patients.

Multi-organ Dysfunction in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This study aimed to provide systematic evidence for the association between multiorgan dysfunction and COVID-19 development. Several online databases were searched for articles published until May 13, 2020. Two investigators independently selected trials, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of individual trials. Single-arm meta-analysis was performed to summarize the clinical features of confirmed COVID-19 patients. Fixed effects meta-analysis was performed for clinically relevant parameters that were closely related to the patients' various organ functions. A total of 73 studies, including 171,108 patients, were included in this analysis. The overall incidence of severe COVID-19 and mortality were 24% (95% confidence interval [CI], 20%-28%) and 2% (95% CI, 1%-3%), respectively. Patients with hypertension (odds ratio [OR] = 2.40; 95% CI, 2.08-2.78), cardiovascular disease (CVD) (OR = 3.54; 95% CI, 2.68-4.68), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (OR=3.70; 95% CI, 2.93-4.68), chronic liver disease (CLD) (OR=1.48; 95% CI, 1.09-2.01), chronic kidney disease (CKD) (OR = 1.84; 95% CI, 1.47-2.30), chronic cerebrovascular diseases (OR = 2.53; 95% CI, 1.84-3.49) and chronic gastrointestinal (GI) disease (OR = 2.13; 95% CI, 1.12-4.05) were more likely to develop severe COVID-19. Increased levels of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), creatine kinase (CK), high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI), myoglobin, creatinine, urea, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and total bilirubin were highly associated with severe COVID-19. The incidence of acute organ injuries, including acute cardiac injury (ACI); (OR = 11.87; 95% CI, 7.64-18.46), acute kidney injury (AKI); (OR=10.25; 95% CI, 7.60-13.84), acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); (OR=27.66; 95% CI, 18.58-41.18), and acute cerebrovascular diseases (OR=9.22; 95% CI, 1.61-52.72) was more common in patients with severe COVID-19 than in patients with non-severe COVID-19. Patients with a history of organ dysfunction are more susceptible to severe conditions. COVID-19 can aggravate an acute multiorgan injury.

Can pioglitazone be potentially useful therapeutically in treating patients with COVID-19?

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has become a pandemic disease (COVID-19) that has spread globally causing more than 30,000 deaths. Despite the immense and ongoing global effort, no efficacious drugs to fight this plague have been identified and patients admitted to the intensive care units (ICU), for respiratory distress, are managed mostly by means of supportive care based on oxygen maintenance. Several authors have reported that the prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases comorbidities were indeed frequent among patients with COVID-19, which suggests that these conditions are likely to aggravate and complicate the prognosis. What the aforementioned diseases have in common is a latent chronic inflammatory state that may be associated with the alteration of laboratory parameters that are typical of the metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance. In severe COVID-19 patients laboratory markers of inflammation such as C-reactive protein, IL-6, D-dimer, serum ferritin and lactate dehydrogenase are elevated in many patients; assessed since the 4th-6th day of illness onset, such increases seem to be predictive of an adverse prognosis. Our hypothesis is that drugs belonging to the family of thiazolidinediones (TZD) such as pioglitazone or rosiglitazone, approved for treating the condition of insulin resistance and the accompanying inflammation, could ameliorate the prognosis of those COVID-19 patients with diabetes, hypertension and cardiovascular disorders comorbidities. TZD are PPARγ agonists that act on nuclear receptors, thereby triggering certain transcription factors. TZD were widely used for type-2 diabetes in the first decade of this century and although concerns have been raised for possible side effects associated with long-term treatment, their use has been recently revaluated for their anti-inflammatory properties in numerous medical conditions.

Coronavirus disease 2019 induces multi-lineage, morphologic changes in peripheral blood cells

The clinical course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) varies from mild symptoms to acute respiratory distress syndrome, hyperinflammation, and coagulation disorder. The hematopoietic system plays a critical role in the observed hyperinflammation, particularly in severely ill patients. We conducted a prospective diagnostic study performing a blood differential analyzing morphologic changes in peripheral blood of COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 associated morphologic changes were defined in a training cohort and subsequently validated in a second cohort (n = 45). Morphologic aberrations were further analyzed by electron microscopy (EM) and flow cytometry of lymphocytes was performed. We included 45 COVID-19 patients in our study (median age 58 years; 82% on intensive care unit). The blood differential showed a specific pattern of pronounced multi-lineage aberrations in lymphocytes (80%) and monocytes (91%) of patients. Overall, 84%, 98%, and 98% exhibited aberrations in granulopoiesis, erythropoiesis, and thrombopoiesis, respectively. Electron microscopy revealed the ultrastructural equivalents of the observed changes and confirmed the multi-lineage aberrations already seen by light microscopy. The morphologic pattern caused by COVID-19 is characteristic and underlines the serious perturbation of the hematopoietic system. We defined a hematologic COVID-19 pattern to facilitate further independent diagnostic analysis and to investigate the impact on the hematologic system during the clinical course of COVID-19 patients.

Cholesterol: A new game player accelerating vasculopathy caused by SARS-CoV-2?

The pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has become a global threat to public health. Functional impairments in multiple organs have been reported in COVID-19, including lungs, heart, kidney, liver, brain, and vascular system. Patients with metabolic-associated preconditions, such as hypertension, obesity, and diabetes, are susceptible to experiencing severe symptoms. The recent emerging evidence of coagulation disorders in COVID-19 suggests that vasculopathy appears to be an independent risk factor promoting disease severity and mortality of affected patients. We recently found that the decreased levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterols (LDL-c) correlate with disease severity in COVID-19 patients, indicating pathological interactions between dyslipidemia and vasculopothy in patients with COVID-19. However, this clinical manifestation has been unintentionally underestimated by physicians and scientific communities. As metabolic-associated morbidities are generally accompanied with endothelial cell (EC) dysfunctions, these pre-existing conditions may make ECs more vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 attack. In this mini-review, we summarize the metabolic and vascular manifestations of COVID-19 with an emphasis on the association between changes in LDL-c levels and the development of severe symptoms as well as the pathophysiologic mechanisms underlying the synergistic effect of LDL-c and SARS-CoV-2 on EC injuries and vasculopathy.

Current laboratory diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged in December 2019 in Wuhan, China; it has since caused a pandemic, with more than 10,000 confirmed cases (> 800,000 tests) in Korea as of May 2020. Real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is currently the most commonly used method for the diagnosis of COVID-19 worldwide. The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine and Korea Centers for Disease Prevention and Control regularly update the guidelines for COVID-19 diagnosis. Emergency use authorization for some laboratory diagnostic kits has been granted, enabling the timely diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19, and the isolation of infected patients. Due to the collective efforts of the government, medical professionals, local authorities, and the public, Korea's response to the COVID-19 outbreak has been accepted widely as a model. Here, we summarize the currently available laboratory tests for COVID-19 diagnosis. Although RT-PCR tests are used widely to confirm COVID-19, antibody tests could provide information about immune responses to the virus.

Can we use interleukin-6 (IL-6) blockade for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-induced cytokine release syndrome (CRS)?

The emergent outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a global pandemic. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and multiorgan dysfunction are among the leading causes of death in critically ill patients with COVID-19. The elevated inflammatory cytokines suggest that a cytokine storm, also known as cytokine release syndrome (CRS), may play a major role in the pathology of COVID-19. However, the efficacy of corticosteroids, commonly utilized antiinflammatory agents, to treat COVID-19-induced CRS is controversial. There is an urgent need for novel therapies to treat COVID-19-induced CRS. Here, we discuss the pathogenesis of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-induced CRS, compare the CRS in COVID-19 with that in SARS and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and summarize the existing therapies for CRS. We propose to utilize interleukin-6 (IL-6) blockade to manage COVID-19-induced CRS and discuss several factors that should be taken into consideration for its clinical application.

Novel coronavirus (COVID-19) infection: What a doctor on the frontline needs to know

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a zoonotic respiratory infection originating from Wuhan, China. Rapidly spreading from Wuhan to all inhabited continents of the world, the World Health Organisation declared COVID-19 a pandemic on March 11, 2019. Infected patients present with fever and cough; radiological features include bilateral infiltrates on chest x-ray and computed tomography scanning. Management is supportive with oxygen supplementation, broad-spectrum antibiotics as well as careful fluid balancing. A number of drugs, both new and old, are currently in clinical trials and being used on an experimental basis in clinical practice. The COVID-19 pandemic is the greatest worldwide public health crisis of a generation, and has led to seismic political, economic and social changes. This review provides an overview of COVID-19 for junior doctors who find themselves on a new frontline of healthcare.

COVID-19 outbreak in Iraqi Kurdistan: The first report characterizing epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and radiological findings of the disease

INTRODUCTION

On March 11, 2020, the novel coronavirus was declared a global pandemic. The disease was named COVID-19 standing for coronavirus disease 2019. The objectives were to determine the epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics of COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

In this prospective descriptive study, 15 confirmed hospitalized cases of COVID-19 between 18th March and April 7, 2020 were followed-up till discharge.

RESULTS

There were 15 reported patients infected by 3 imported index cases from Europe. The mean age of the patients was 28.06 (SD: 16.42 years). The patients' age stratification was as follows: 0-5 (2, 13.3%); 6-18 (2, 13.3); 19-50 (10, 66.7%), and 51-64 years (1, 6.7%). The patients were male (9, 60.0%) and female (6, 40.0%). Most of the patients had mild disease severity (13, 86.7%), followed by mild-moderate (1, 6.7%) and moderate-severe (1, 6.7%). The study revealed that 6 patients were asymptomatic, and 9 patients were symptomatic. The most common symptoms were: fever (n = 8; 53.3%), cough (n = 7; 46.7%), shortness of breath (n = 3; 20.0%), fatigue (n = 3; 20.0%), and taste and smell disorders (n = 4; 26.7%). All patients were recovered and discharged over a median of 8 between 8 and 21 days. The mean and Std. deviation values of the hematological were: WBC: 6.57 (1.86); neutrophil count: 3.75 (1.26); lymphocyte count: 1.87 (0.41); Hb: 13.89 (1.26); platelet count: 207.67 (52.21).

CONCLUSION

All COVID-19 cases were linked to foreign visits with few local transmissions to close contacts without community transmission. The majority of cases were mild illnesses with full recovery.

A Collaborative Multidisciplinary Approach to the Management of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in the Hospital Setting

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which presents an unprecedented challenge to medical providers worldwide. Although most SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals manifest with a self-limited mild disease that resolves with supportive care in the outpatient setting, patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 will require a multidisciplinary collaborative management approach for optimal care in the hospital setting. Laboratory and radiologic studies provide critical information on disease severity, management options, and overall prognosis. Medical management is mostly supportive with antipyretics, hydration, oxygen supplementation, and other measures as dictated by clinical need. Among its medical complications is a characteristic proinflammatory cytokine storm often associated with end-organ dysfunction, including respiratory failure, liver and renal insufficiency, cardiac injury, and coagulopathy. Specific recommendations for the management of these medical complications are discussed. Despite the issuance of emergency use authorization for remdesivir, there are still no proven effective antiviral and immunomodulatory therapies, and their use in COVID-19 management should be guided by clinical trial protocols or treatment registries. The medical care of patients with COVID-19 extends beyond their hospitalization. Postdischarge follow-up and monitoring should be performed, preferably using telemedicine, until the patients have fully recovered from their illness and are released from home quarantine protocols.

COVID-19 and immunomodulation in IBD

The current coronavirus pandemic is an ongoing global health crisis due to COVID-19, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Although COVID-19 leads to little or mild flu-like symptoms in the majority of affected patients, the disease may cause severe, frequently lethal complications such as progressive pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome and organ failure driven by hyperinflammation and a cytokine storm syndrome. This situation causes various major challenges for gastroenterology. In the context of IBD, several key questions arise. For instance, it is an important question to understand whether patients with IBD (eg, due to intestinal ACE2 expression) might be particularly susceptible to COVID-19 and the cytokine release syndrome associated with lung injury and fatal outcomes. Another highly relevant question is how to deal with immunosuppression and immunomodulation during the current pandemic in patients with IBD and whether immunosuppression affects the progress of COVID-19. Here, the current understanding of the pathophysiology of COVID-19 is reviewed with special reference to immune cell activation. Moreover, the potential implications of these new insights for immunomodulation and biological therapy in IBD are discussed.

Antiviral anticoagulation

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel envelope virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hallmarks of COVID-19 are a puzzling form of thrombophilia that has elevated D-dimer but only modest effects on other parameters of coagulopathy. This is combined with severe inflammation, often leading to acute respiratory distress and possible lethality. Coagulopathy and inflammation are interconnected by the transmembrane receptor, tissue factor (TF), which initiates blood clotting as a cofactor for factor VIIa (FVIIa)-mediated factor Xa (FXa) generation. TF also functions from within the nascent TF/FVIIa/FXa complex to trigger profound changes via protease-activated receptors (PARs) in many cell types, including SARS-CoV-2-trophic cells. Therefore, aberrant expression of TF may be the underlying basis of COVID-19 symptoms. Evidence suggests a correlation between infection with many virus types and development of clotting-related symptoms, ranging from heart disease to bleeding, depending on the virus. Since numerous cell types express TF and can act as sites for virus replication, a model envelope virus, herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV1), has been used to investigate the uptake of TF into the envelope. Indeed, HSV1 and other viruses harbor surface TF antigen, which retains clotting and PAR signaling function. Strikingly, envelope TF is essential for HSV1 infection in mice, and the FXa-directed oral anticoagulant apixaban had remarkable antiviral efficacy. SARS-CoV-2 replicates in TF-bearing epithelial and endothelial cells and may stimulate and integrate host cell TF, like HSV1 and other known coagulopathic viruses. Combined with this possibility, the features of COVID-19 suggest that it is a TFopathy, and the TF/FVIIa/FXa complex is a feasible therapeutic target.

COVID-19 as an Acute Inflammatory Disease

The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic caused by the virus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has created an unprecedented global crisis for the infrastructure sectors, including economic, political, healthcare, education, and research systems. Although over 90% of infected individuals are asymptomatic or manifest noncritical symptoms and will recover from the infection, those individuals presenting with critical symptoms are in urgent need of effective treatment options. Emerging data related to mechanism of severity and potential therapies for patients presenting with severe symptoms are scattered and therefore require a comprehensive analysis to focus research on developing effective therapeutics. A critical literature review suggests that the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with dysregulation of inflammatory immune responses, which in turn inhibits the development of protective immunity to the infection. Therefore, the use of therapeutics that modulate inflammation without compromising the adaptive immune response could be the most effective therapeutic strategy.

Melatonin is a potential adjuvant to improve clinical outcomes in individuals with obesity and diabetes with coexistence of Covid-19

Coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is a newly discovered highly pathogenic virus that was declared pandemic in March 2020 by the World Health Organization. The virus affects the respiratory system, produces an inflammatory storm that causes lung damage and respiratory dysfunction. It infects humans of all ages. The Covid-19 takes a more severe course in individuals with chronic metabolic diseases such as obesity, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension. This category of persons exhibits weak immune activity and decreased levels of endogenous antioxidants. Melatonin is a multifunctional signaling hormone synthesized and secreted primarily by the pineal gland. It is a potent antioxidant with immunomodulatory action and has remarkable anti-inflammatory effects under a variety of circumstances. Regarding Covid-19 and metabolic syndrome, adequate information about the relationship between these two comorbidities is required for better management of these patients. Since Covid-19 infection and complications involve severe inflammation and oxidative stress in people with obesity and diabetes, we anticipated the inclusion of melatonin, as powerful antioxidant, within proposed treatment protocols. In this context, melatonin is a potential and promising agent to help overcome Covid-19 infection and boost the immune system in healthy persons and obese and diabetic patients. This review summarizes some evidence from recently published reports on the utility of melatonin as a potential adjuvant in Covid-19-infected individuals with diabetes and obesity.

[Drug treatment of coronavirus disease COVID-19: evidence exists?]

The article provides a review of foreign literature for 2020 on existing methods of drug treatment of coronavirus disease COVID-19. To date, in the treatment of COVID-19 in different countries, a little more than 10 drugs are used. The largest number of studies on the testing of these drugs is carried out by scientists from China, the USA, and European countries. It should be noted that among these drugs there is not a single new drug developed specifically for the treatment of COVID-19, the recommended and used drugs have previously been used to treat, as a rule, diseases of the viral etiology, less often another pathology. These suggestions are often based on analogy, the hypothesis of their supposed effectiveness for COVID-19. It can be assumed that a brake on the development of a drug specific for coronavirus disease is a poor knowledge of the pathogenesis of virus invasion in the body's adhesives and the development of complications. The review provides detailed literature data on drugs such as hydroxychloroquine / chloroquine, lopinavir/natinavir, remdesivir, ACE inhibitors and angiotensin converting enzyme receptor blockers, tissue plasminogen activator, as well as plasma transfusion transfusions.

Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and resulting COVID-19 pandemic present important diagnostic challenges. Several diagnostic strategies are available to identify current infection, rule out infection, identify people in need of care escalation, or to test for past infection and immune response. Serology tests to detect the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 aim to identify previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and may help to confirm the presence of current infection.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of antibody tests to determine if a person presenting in the community or in primary or secondary care has SARS-CoV-2 infection, or has previously had SARS-CoV-2 infection, and the accuracy of antibody tests for use in seroprevalence surveys.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook electronic searches in the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and the COVID-19 Living Evidence Database from the University of Bern, which is updated daily with published articles from PubMed and Embase and with preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv. In addition, we checked repositories of COVID-19 publications. We did not apply any language restrictions. We conducted searches for this review iteration up to 27 April 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included test accuracy studies of any design that evaluated antibody tests (including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays, chemiluminescence immunoassays, and lateral flow assays) in people suspected of current or previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, or where tests were used to screen for infection. We also included studies of people either known to have, or not to have SARS-CoV-2 infection. We included all reference standards to define the presence or absence of SARS-CoV-2 (including reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction tests (RT-PCR) and clinical diagnostic criteria).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed possible bias and applicability of the studies using the QUADAS-2 tool. We extracted 2x2 contingency table data and present sensitivity and specificity for each antibody (or combination of antibodies) using paired forest plots. We pooled data using random-effects logistic regression where appropriate, stratifying by time since post-symptom onset. We tabulated available data by test manufacturer. We have presented uncertainty in estimates of sensitivity and specificity using 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 57 publications reporting on a total of 54 study cohorts with 15,976 samples, of which 8526 were from cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Studies were conducted in Asia (n = 38), Europe (n = 15), and the USA and China (n = 1). We identified data from 25 commercial tests and numerous in-house assays, a small fraction of the 279 antibody assays listed by the Foundation for Innovative Diagnostics. More than half (n = 28) of the studies included were only available as preprints. We had concerns about risk of bias and applicability. Common issues were use of multi-group designs (n = 29), inclusion of only COVID-19 cases (n = 19), lack of blinding of the index test (n = 49) and reference standard (n = 29), differential verification (n = 22), and the lack of clarity about participant numbers, characteristics and study exclusions (n = 47). Most studies (n = 44) only included people hospitalised due to suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection. There were no studies exclusively in asymptomatic participants. Two-thirds of the studies (n = 33) defined COVID-19 cases based on RT-PCR results alone, ignoring the potential for false-negative RT-PCR results. We observed evidence of selective publication of study findings through omission of the identity of tests (n = 5). We observed substantial heterogeneity in sensitivities of IgA, IgM and IgG antibodies, or combinations thereof, for results aggregated across different time periods post-symptom onset (range 0% to 100% for all target antibodies). We thus based the main results of the review on the 38 studies that stratified results by time since symptom onset. The numbers of individuals contributing data within each study each week are small and are usually not based on tracking the same groups of patients over time. Pooled results for IgG, IgM, IgA, total antibodies and IgG/IgM all showed low sensitivity during the first week since onset of symptoms (all less than 30.1%), rising in the second week and reaching their highest values in the third week. The combination of IgG/IgM had a sensitivity of 30.1% (95% CI 21.4 to 40.7) for 1 to 7 days, 72.2% (95% CI 63.5 to 79.5) for 8 to 14 days, 91.4% (95% CI 87.0 to 94.4) for 15 to 21 days. Estimates of accuracy beyond three weeks are based on smaller sample sizes and fewer studies. For 21 to 35 days, pooled sensitivities for IgG/IgM were 96.0% (95% CI 90.6 to 98.3). There are insufficient studies to estimate sensitivity of tests beyond 35 days post-symptom onset. Summary specificities (provided in 35 studies) exceeded 98% for all target antibodies with confidence intervals no more than 2 percentage points wide. False-positive results were more common where COVID-19 had been suspected and ruled out, but numbers were small and the difference was within the range expected by chance. Assuming a prevalence of 50%, a value considered possible in healthcare workers who have suffered respiratory symptoms, we would anticipate that 43 (28 to 65) would be missed and 7 (3 to 14) would be falsely positive in 1000 people undergoing IgG/IgM testing at days 15 to 21 post-symptom onset. At a prevalence of 20%, a likely value in surveys in high-risk settings, 17 (11 to 26) would be missed per 1000 people tested and 10 (5 to 22) would be falsely positive. At a lower prevalence of 5%, a likely value in national surveys, 4 (3 to 7) would be missed per 1000 tested, and 12 (6 to 27) would be falsely positive. Analyses showed small differences in sensitivity between assay type, but methodological concerns and sparse data prevent comparisons between test brands.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity of antibody tests is too low in the first week since symptom onset to have a primary role for the diagnosis of COVID-19, but they may still have a role complementing other testing in individuals presenting later, when RT-PCR tests are negative, or are not done. Antibody tests are likely to have a useful role for detecting previous SARS-CoV-2 infection if used 15 or more days after the onset of symptoms. However, the duration of antibody rises is currently unknown, and we found very little data beyond 35 days post-symptom onset. We are therefore uncertain about the utility of these tests for seroprevalence surveys for public health management purposes. Concerns about high risk of bias and applicability make it likely that the accuracy of tests when used in clinical care will be lower than reported in the included studies. Sensitivity has mainly been evaluated in hospitalised patients, so it is unclear whether the tests are able to detect lower antibody levels likely seen with milder and asymptomatic COVID-19 disease. The design, execution and reporting of studies of the accuracy of COVID-19 tests requires considerable improvement. Studies must report data on sensitivity disaggregated by time since onset of symptoms. COVID-19-positive cases who are RT-PCR-negative should be included as well as those confirmed RT-PCR, in accordance with the World Health Organization (WHO) and China National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China (CDC) case definitions. We were only able to obtain data from a small proportion of available tests, and action is needed to ensure that all results of test evaluations are available in the public domain to prevent selective reporting. This is a fast-moving field and we plan ongoing updates of this living systematic review.

IMMUNOPATHOLOGY AND IMMUNOPHARMACOTHERAPY OF CORONAVIRUS DISEASE 2019 (COVID-19): FOCUS ON INTERLEUKIN 6

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has drawn closer attention than ever before to the problems of the immunopathology of human diseases, many of which have been reflected when studying immune-mediated inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IIRDs). The hyperimmune response called a cytokine storm, the pathogenetic subtypes of which include hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, macrophage activation syndrome, and cytokine release syndrome, is among the most serious complications of IIRDs or treatment for malignant neoplasms and may be a stage of COVID-19 progression. A premium is placed to interleukin-6 (IL-6) in the spectrum of cytokines involved in the pathogenesis of the cytokine storm syndrome. The clinical introduction of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that inhibit the activity of this cytokine (tocilizumab, sarilumab, etc.) is one of the major advances in the treatment of IIRDs and critical conditions within the cytokine storm syndrome in COVID-19. The review discusses data on the clinical and prognostic value of IL-6 and the effectiveness of anti-IL-6 receptor and anti-IL-6 mAbs, as well as prospects for personalized therapy of the cytokine storm syndrome in COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease 2019: favorable outcome in an immunosuppressed patient with multiple sclerosis

The rapid and global spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, a viral pathogen responsible for the development of the “coronavirus disease of 2019” (COVID-19), has developed into an unprecedented health crisis with considerable case fatality rate. Patients with comorbidities are considered to be at higher risk for severe disease with acute respiratory failure, intensive care unit admission, and/or death. Particular vigilance has been warranted regarding the continuation of immunosuppressive treatments since viral clearing may be hampered in such cases. In contrast, it has also been hypothesized that overactive immune responses may trigger a cytokine storm associated with clinical deterioration, which has generated an interest in certain immunosuppressant drugs as potential treatment for COVID-19. We would like to present the first case report of a patient who was formally diagnosed with COVID-19 while being under disease-modifying treatment with rituximab, an anti-CD20 B cell depleting agent, for multiple sclerosis. The clinical picture was mild for which we have tried to provide an immunopathological framework.

COVID-19 and Thrombotic or Thromboembolic Disease: Implications for Prevention, Antithrombotic Therapy, and Follow-Up: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), a viral respiratory illness caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), may predispose patients to thrombotic disease, both in the venous and arterial circulations, because of excessive inflammation, platelet activation, endothelial dysfunction, and stasis. In addition, many patients receiving antithrombotic therapy for thrombotic disease may develop COVID-19, which can have implications for choice, dosing, and laboratory monitoring of antithrombotic therapy. Moreover, during a time with much focus on COVID-19, it is critical to consider how to optimize the available technology to care for patients without COVID-19 who have thrombotic disease. Herein, the authors review the current understanding of the pathogenesis, epidemiology, management, and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 who develop venous or arterial thrombosis, of those with pre-existing thrombotic disease who develop COVID-19, or those who need prevention or care for their thrombotic disease during the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 and Thrombotic or Thromboembolic Disease: Implications for Prevention, Antithrombotic Therapy, and Follow-Up: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), a viral respiratory illness caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), may predispose patients to thrombotic disease, both in the venous and arterial circulations, because of excessive inflammation, platelet activation, endothelial dysfunction, and stasis. In addition, many patients receiving antithrombotic therapy for thrombotic disease may develop COVID-19, which can have implications for choice, dosing, and laboratory monitoring of antithrombotic therapy. Moreover, during a time with much focus on COVID-19, it is critical to consider how to optimize the available technology to care for patients without COVID-19 who have thrombotic disease. Herein, the authors review the current understanding of the pathogenesis, epidemiology, management, and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 who develop venous or arterial thrombosis, of those with pre-existing thrombotic disease who develop COVID-19, or those who need prevention or care for their thrombotic disease during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 Cytokine Storm; What We Know So Far

COVID-19 is a rapidly spreading global threat that has been declared as a pandemic by the WHO. COVID-19 is transmitted via droplets or direct contact and infects the respiratory tract resulting in pneumonia in most of the cases and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in about 15 % of the cases. Mortality in COVID-19 patients has been linked to the presence of the so-called "cytokine storm" induced by the virus. Excessive production of proinflammatory cytokines leads to ARDS aggravation and widespread tissue damage resulting in multi-organ failure and death. Targeting cytokines during the management of COVID-19 patients could improve survival rates and reduce mortality.

Exploring pharmacological approaches for managing cytokine storm associated with pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome in COVID-19 patients

Sars-CoV-2 complications include pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which require intensive care unit admission. These conditions have rapidly overwhelmed healthcare systems, with detrimental effects on the quality of care and increased mortality. Social isolation strategies have been implemented worldwide with the aim of reducing hospital pressure. Among therapeutic strategies, the use of immunomodulating drugs, to improve prognosis, seems promising. Particularly, since pneumonia and ARDS are associated with a cytokine storm, drugs belonging to therapeutic classes as anti-IL-6, anti-TNF, and JAK inhibitors are currently studied. In this article, we discuss the potential advantages of the most promising pharmacological approaches.

Coronaviral Infection (COVID-19) in Children (Situation on April 2020)

Dear friends, colleagues!

Not so much time has passed since my last published review on this topic, bit so many news has appeared that has completely changed our vision of the disease and its treatment! It is interesting in both, medical and philosophical way. From philosophical point of view: 1–2 months of our previous pre-COVID life flew quick as lightning but now it is long period while we are observing this new infection and looking for new ways of management and its control. Then as now we are going to discuss its medical part.

Silibinin and SARS-CoV-2: Dual Targeting of Host Cytokine Storm and Virus Replication Machinery for Clinical Management of COVID-19 Patients

COVID-19, the illness caused by infection with the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, is a rapidly spreading global pandemic in urgent need of effective treatments. Here we present a comprehensive examination of the host- and virus-targeted functions of the flavonolignan silibinin, a potential drug candidate against COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2. As a direct inhibitor of STAT3—a master checkpoint regulator of inflammatory cytokine signaling and immune response—silibinin might be expected to phenotypically integrate the mechanisms of action of IL-6-targeted monoclonal antibodies and pan-JAK1/2 inhibitors to limit the cytokine storm and T-cell lymphopenia in the clinical setting of severe COVID-19. As a computationally predicted, remdesivir-like inhibitor of RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp)—the central component of the replication/transcription machinery of SARS-CoV-2—silibinin is expected to reduce viral load and impede delayed interferon responses. The dual ability of silibinin to target both the host cytokine storm and the virus replication machinery provides a strong rationale for the clinical testing of silibinin against the COVID-19 global public health emergency. A randomized, open-label, phase II multicentric clinical trial (SIL-COVID19) will evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of silibinin in the prevention of acute respiratory distress syndrome in moderate-to-severe COVID-19-positive onco-hematological patients at the Catalan Institute of Oncology in Catalonia, Spain.

How to Build the Plane While Flying: VTE/PE Thromboprophylaxis Clinical Guidelines for COVID-19 Patients

Over the years, the practice of medicine has evolved from authority-based to experience-based to evidence-based with the introduction of the scientific process, clinical trials, and outcomes-based data analysis (Tebala GD. Int J Med Sci. 2018;15(12):1397-1405). The time required to perform the necessary randomized controlled trials, a systematic literature review, and meta-analysis of these trials to then create, accept, promulgate, and educate the practicing clinicians to use the evidence-based clinical guidelines is typically measured in years. When the severe acute respiratory syndrome novel coronavirus-2 (SARS-nCoV-2) pandemic commenced in Wuhan, China at the end of 2019, there were few available clinical guidelines to deploy, let alone adapt and adopt to treat the surge of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. The aim of this study is to first explain how clinical guidelines, on which bedside clinicians have grown accustomed, can be created in the midst of a pandemic, with an evolving scientific understanding of the pathophysiology of the hypercoagulable state. The second is to adapt and adopt current venous thromboembolism diagnostic and treatment guidelines, while relying on the limited available observational reporting of COVID-19 patients to create a comprehensive clinical guideline to treat COVID-19 patients.

COVID-19: A review of therapeutics under investigation

The COVID-19 outbreak has disrupted global health care networks and caused thousands of deaths and an international economic downturn. Multiple drugs are being used on patients with COVID-19 based on theoretical and in vitro therapeutic targets. Several of these therapies have been studied, but many have limited evidence behind their use, and clinical trials to evaluate their efficacy are either ongoing or have not yet begun. This review summarizes the existing evidence for medications currently under investigation for treatment of COVID-19, including remdesivir, chloroquine/hydroxychlorquine, convalescent plasma, lopinavir/ritonavir, IL-6 inhibitors, corticosteroids, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors.

COVID-19 pathophysiology: A review

In December 2019, a novel coronavirus, now named as SARS-CoV-2, caused a series of acute atypical respiratory diseases in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. The disease caused by this virus was termed COVID-19. The virus is transmittable between humans and has caused pandemic worldwide. The number of death tolls continues to rise and a large number of countries have been forced to do social distancing and lockdown. Lack of targeted therapy continues to be a problem. Epidemiological studies showed that elder patients were more susceptible to severe diseases, while children tend to have milder symptoms. Here we reviewed the current knowledge about this disease and considered the potential explanation of the different symptomatology between children and adults.

COVID-19: Immunology and treatment options

The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV2 causes COVID-19, a pandemic threatening millions. As protective immunity does not exist in humans and the virus is capable of escaping innate immune responses, it can proliferate, unhindered, in primarily infected tissues. Subsequent cell death results in the release of virus particles and intracellular components to the extracellular space, which result in immune cell recruitment, the generation of immune complexes and associated damage. Infection of monocytes/macrophages and/or recruitment of uninfected immune cells can result in massive inflammatory responses later in the disease. Uncontrolled production of pro-inflammatory mediators contributes to ARDS and cytokine storm syndrome. Antiviral agents and immune modulating treatments are currently being trialled. Understanding immune evasion strategies of SARS-CoV2 and the resulting delayed massive immune response will result in the identification of biomarkers that predict outcomes as well as phenotype and disease stage specific treatments that will likely include both antiviral and immune modulating agents.

IL-6: Relevance for immunopathology of SARS-CoV-2

COVID-19 mortality is strongly associated with the development of severe pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome with the worst outcome resulting in cytokine release syndrome and multiorgan failure. It is becoming critically important to identify at the early stage of the infection those patients who are prone to develop the most adverse effects. Elevated systemic interleukin-6 levels in patients with COVID-19 are considered as a relevant parameter in predicting most severe course of disease and the need for intensive care. This review discusses the mechanisms by which IL-6 may possibly contribute to disease exacerbation and the potential of therapeutic approaches based on anti-IL-6 biologics.

Interleukin-6 and severe COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence links COVID-19 severity to hyper-inflammation. Treatment with tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against the interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor, was shown to lead to clinical improvement in patients with severe COVID-19. We, therefore, performed the present systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate whether the circulating levels of IL-6 is a reliable indicator of disease severity among patients affected with COVID-19.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar on April 19, 2020.

RESULTS

Eleven studies provided data of IL-6 levels in patients with severe to critical COVID-19 (severe) and patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 (non-severe). The included studies were of moderate to high quality. The mean patients' age was 60.9 years, ranging from 45.2 to 76.7 years in the severe group and 46.8 years, ranging from 37.9 to 61 years, in the nonsevere group. Fifty-two percent were male in the severe group, as compared to 46% in the non-severe group. An overall random effects meta-analysis showed significantly higher serum levels of IL-6 in the severe group than in the non-severe group with a mean difference of +23.1 pg/mL (95% CI: 12.42-33.79) and the overall effect of 4.24 (P-value < 0.001). Meta-regressions showed that neither age nor sex significantly influenced the mean difference of IL-6 between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis and meta-regression reveal a reliable relationship between IL-6 and COVID-19 severity, independent of age and sex. Future research is, however, required to assess the effect of BMI on the pattern of IL-6 production in patients with COVID-19. Also, there might be confounding factors that influence the relationship between IL-6 and COVID-19 severity and remain as yet unknown.