Treatment of COVID-19 - Evidence-Based or Personalized Medicine?

Bio-ethical issues in oncology during the first wave of the COVID-19 epidemic: A qualitative study in a French hospital

BACKGROUND

Using a specific bioethical theory (=global bioethics) and method (=a posteriori), we try here to identify and evaluate the bio-ethical issues raised by the COVID-19 pandemic, and possible solutions, to improve the management of cancer patients at the hospital in future pandemics, before the emergence of vaccines or scientifically validated treatments.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Our work is based primarily on the clinical experience of three oncologists from the oncology department of Foch Hospital in France, who were on the frontline during the first wave of the epidemic. We compared their perceptions with published findings, to complete or nuance their views.

RESULTS

Three bio-ethical issues were identified, and possible solutions to these problems were evaluated: (1) scientific evidence versus lack of time → the creation of emergency multidisciplinary team meetings (MTM); (2) healthcare equality versus lack of resources → the development of telemedicine; (3) individual liberties versus risk of contamination → role of cancer patients' associations, psychologists and bioethicists.

CONCLUSION

We consider the creation of an emergency MTM, in particular, in addition to a true ethics committee with real competence in bioethics, to be a first solution that would be easy to implement in hospitals in many countries.

In vitro high-content tissue models to address precision medicine challenges

The field of precision medicine allows for tailor-made treatments specific to a patient and thereby improve the efficiency and accuracy of disease prevention, diagnosis, and treatment and at the same time would reduce the cost, redundant treatment, and side effects of current treatments. Here, the combination of organ-on-a-chip and bioprinting into engineering high-content in vitro tissue models is envisioned to address some precision medicine challenges. This strategy could be employed to tackle the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which has made a significant impact and paradigm shift in our society. Nevertheless, despite that vaccines against COVID-19 have been successfully developed and vaccination programs are already being deployed worldwide, it will likely require some time before it is available to everyone. Furthermore, there are still some uncertainties and lack of a full understanding of the virus as demonstrated in the high number new mutations arising worldwide and reinfections of already vaccinated individuals. To this end, efficient diagnostic tools and treatments are still urgently needed. In this context, the convergence of bioprinting and organ-on-a-chip technologies, either used alone or in combination, could possibly function as a prominent tool in addressing the current pandemic. This could enable facile advances of important tools, diagnostics, and better physiologically representative in vitro models specific to individuals allowing for faster and more accurate screening of therapeutics evaluating their efficacy and toxicity. This review will cover such technological advances and highlight what is needed for the field to mature for tackling the various needs for current and future pandemics as well as their relevancy towards precision medicine.

In-Hospital Mortality of COVID-19 Patients Treated with High-Flow Nasal Oxygen: Evaluation of Biomarkers and Development of the Novel Risk Score Model CROW-65

To replace mechanical ventilation (MV), which represents the cornerstone therapy in severe COVID-19 cases, high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) therapy has recently emerged as a less-invasive therapeutic possibility for those patients. Respecting the risk of MV delay as a result of HFNO use, we aimed to evaluate which parameters could determine the risk of in-hospital mortality in HFNO-treated COVID-19 patients. This single-center cohort study included 102 COVID-19-positive patients treated with HFNO. Standard therapeutic methods and up-to-date protocols were used. Patients who underwent a fatal event (41.2%) were significantly older, mostly male patients, and had higher comorbidity burdens measured by CCI. In a univariate analysis, older age, shorter HFNO duration, ventilator initiation, higher CCI and lower ROX index all emerged as significant predictors of adverse events (p < 0.05). Variables were dichotomized and included in the multivariate analysis to define their relative weights in the computed risk score model. Based on this, a risk score model for the prediction of in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients treated with HFNO consisting of four variables was defined: CCI > 4, ROX index ≤ 4.11, LDH-to-WBC ratio, age > 65 years (CROW-65). The main purpose of CROW-65 is to address whether HFNO should be initiated in the subgroup of patients with a high risk of in-hospital mortality.