Accuracy of Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction in COVID-19 Patients

Impact of anabolic androgenic steroids on COVID-19

In the wake of the Novel Coronavirus arrival, the world witnessed the fragility of healthcare systems and the resilience of healthcare workers who stood on the front lines. SARS-CoV-2, also known as COVID-19 or severe acute respiratory syndrome, first appeared in China in December 2019. The infection quickly spread across the nation and the world. All countries severely restricted social interaction to stop the virus's transmission, impacting all sporting, social, and recreational activities. Anabolic androgenic steroids (AASs) are frequently used illegally to enhance strength and physical attractiveness. However, they could hurt immune system health. Much research hasn't been done yet on the connection between Covid-19 and AASs. Synthetic testosterone analogs known as anabolic androgenic steroids (AASs) can have an immune-system-altering effect. Sportspeople and bodybuilders are vulnerable to AAS abuse. Governmental reactions to the coronavirus infection issue over the last year have drawn much attention and discussion regarding public services, the experience and lessons learned from different limitations, and strategies for dealing with potential future pandemics. Using AAS has the potential to cause a variety of adverse reactions, including cardiovascular issues (including high blood pressure, heart disease, and blood clots), liver damage, renal failure, mood swings, aggressiveness, and psychiatric disorders. Individuals already suffering from severe respiratory conditions like COVID-19 may have these risks increased. This review mainly highlights the anabolic androgen steroids use and its unseen effects on coronavirus patients and gymnastics.

From Archipelago to Pandemic Battleground: Unveiling Indonesia's COVID-19 Crisis

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed unprecedented challenges to countries worldwide, including Indonesia. With its unique archipelagic geography consisting of more than 17,000 thousand islands, Indonesia faces unique complexities in managing the spread of the virus. Based on existing literature, this review article elaborates on key issues that have shaped Indonesia's COVID-19 response. The article begins by examining the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia, along with the implementation of various preventive measures and the impact of the virus on public health. This article examines how Indonesia's socio-economic factors have generally influenced its healthcare system and further delves into the COVID-19 response strategies implemented by the Indonesian government and public health authorities as well as overall crisis preparedness. It discusses the actions taken to control the spread of the virus, including testing strategies and vaccination efforts. The difficulties encountered in implementing these measures are presented. In conclusion, this review article provides a comprehensive understanding of the COVID-19 crisis in Indonesia, covering facts on multiple dimensions ranging from the timeline of the pandemic to vaccination efforts, epidemiology, socio-economic implications, testing strategies, mobility patterns, public holidays, the impact of working from home, and the utilization of complementary and alternative medicine in addition to the standard of care for COVID-19. The insights gained from this article can complement future strategies for pandemic management and response in Indonesia and other countries facing similar challenges.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of COVID-19 tests in the unified health system

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness ratio and economic impact of the Rapid Antigen Test (TR-Ag) to replace RT-PCR for the detection of the new Coronavirus in the Unified Health System (SUS).

METHODS

This is a cost-effectiveness analysis. Clinical protocols were used for the diagnosis of COVID-19 at the São José Municipal Hospital, located in the city of Itaberá-SP. The Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) was divided into two scenarios. In the first, the accuracy reported by the test manufacturers was included, and in the second, the cost resulting from a systematic review. Both were compared with the performance of the RT-PCR test. The increase in diagnoses was chosen as a health outcome and absenteeism was used as a criterion for assessing the economic impact.

RESULTS

The analysis resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of R$ 42,136.67 and R$ 68,329.73 for every thousand tests, according to the accuracy of the manufacturers' TR-Ag tests and what is reported in the literature in relation to RT-PCR, respectively. The average value found for the RT-PCR test (R$ 202.87) represents an increase of 165.32% in cost in relation to the value found for the TR-Ag. 4,305 tests were performed between April 2020 and December 2021 at the referral hospital. Also, maintaining the use of RT-PCR as the first choice for diagnosing COVID-19 and regulating absenteeism in the economically active population could have an impact of up to R$ 1,022,779.68 on municipal management.

CONCLUSION

It is concluded that the TR-Ag are configured as a cost-effective alternative for the SUS in the detection of the new Coronavirus. The strategy becomes economically favorable for the expansion of testing, combating the COVID-19 pandemic and reducing the impact on the local economy. However, studies are needed to validate the accuracy of the tests so that economic evaluations on the subject are more assertive.

Detection of Specific RNA Targets by Multimerization

Detection of specific RNA targets via amplification-mediated techniques is widely used in fundamental studies and medicine due to essential role of RNA in transfer of genetic information and development of diseases. Here, we report on an approach for detection of RNA targets based on the particular type of isothermal amplification, namely, reaction of nucleic acid multimerization. The proposed technique requires only a single DNA polymerase possessing reverse transcriptase, DNA-dependent DNA polymerase, and strand-displacement activities. Reaction conditions that lead to efficient detection of the target RNAs through multimerization mechanism were determined. The approach was verified by using genetic material of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus as a model viral RNA. Reaction of multimerization allowed to differentiate the SARS-CoV-2 RNA-positive samples from the SARS-CoV-2 negative samples with high reliability. The proposed technique allows detection of RNA even in the samples, which were subjected to multiple freezing-thawing cycles.

Diagnostic Sensitivity of Saliva and Other Respiratory Tract Samples of SARS-CoV-2 Variants in Patients with COVID-19

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants continue to emerge during the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Contrasting studies on the omicron variant have demonstrated higher viral loads in different clinical specimens, which is consistent with its high transmissibility. We investigated the viral load in clinical specimens that were infected with the SARS-CoV-2 wild-type, delta, and omicron variants, and we analyzed the diagnostic accuracy of upper and lower respiratory specimens for these variants. We performed nested reverse transcription (RT)-polymerase chain reaction (PCR), targeting the spike gene and sequencing for variant classification. RT-PCR was performed using upper and lower respiratory specimens, including saliva from 78 COVID-19 patients (wild-type, delta, and omicron variants). A comparison of the sensitivity and specificity, using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values from the N gene, showed that the omicron variant saliva samples had a higher sensitivity (AUC = 1.000) than did the delta (AUC = 0.875) and the wild-type (AUC = 0.878) variant samples. The sensitivity of the omicron saliva samples was greater than that of the wild-type nasopharynx and sputum samples (P < 0.001). The viral loads of the saliva samples containing the wild-type, delta, and omicron variants were 8.18 × 105, 2.77 × 106, and 5.69 × 105, respectively, which did not differ significantly (P = 0.610). Statistically significant differences were not observed in the saliva viral loads between vaccinated and nonvaccinated patients who were infected with the omicron variant (P = 0.120). In conclusion, omicron saliva samples had higher sensitivity than did wild-type and delta samples, and the viral load did not significantly differ between vaccinated and nonvaccinated patients. Further research is necessary to elucidate the mechanisms underlying the sensitivity differences. IMPORTANCE Owing to the vast heterogeneity of the studies focused on the correlation between the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant and COVID-19, accurate comparisons of the specificity and sensitivity of samples and associated outcomes are still inconclusive. Moreover, limited information is available on the leading causes of infection and the factors that are associated with the conditions that underlie the spread of infection. Although several studies have contributed important knowledge regarding infectious specimens, the impact of saliva samples remains unknown. This study showed that the sensitivity of the omicron variant saliva samples was higher than that of the wild-type nasopharyngeal and sputum samples. Moreover, neither vaccinated nor nonvaccinated patients who were infected with the omicron variant showed any significant differences in SARS-CoV-2 viral loads. Hence, this study is an important step toward understanding how saliva sample results are correlated with other specimen results, regardless of the vaccination status of patients who are infected with the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant.

The Assessment of Multiplex PCR in Identifying Bacterial Infections in Patients Hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Systematic Review

Bacterial infection can occur in patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 in various conditions, resulting in poorer outcomes, such as a higher death rate. This current systematic review was conducted in order to assess the efficiency of multiplex PCR in detecting bacterial infections in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, as well as to analyze the most common bacterial pathogens and other factors that interfere with this diagnosis. The research was conducted using four electronic databases (PubMed, Taylor&Francis, Web of Science, and Wiley Online Library). Out of 290 studies, nine were included in the systematic review. The results supported the use of multiplex PCR in detecting bacteria, considering its high sensitivity and specificity rates. The most common bacterial pathogens found were Klebsiella pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Haemophilus influenzae. The median age at admission was 61.5 years, and the majority of patients were men (70.3%), out of a total of 1553 patients. The proportion of ICU admission was very high, with a pooled proportion of 52.6% over the analyzed studies, and an average duration of hospitalization of 13 days. The mortality rate was proportionally high, as was the rate of ICU admission, with a pooled mortality of 24.9%. It was discovered that 65.2% of all patients used antibiotics before admission, with or without medical prescription. Antibiotic treatment should be considered consciously, considering the high risks of developing antibiotic resistance.

Reverse transcriptase-free detection of viral RNA using Hemo Klentaq DNA polymerase

COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the demand for the fast and reliable detection of viral RNA. Although various methods for RNA amplification and detection have been proposed, some limitations, including those caused by reverse transcription (RT), need to be overcome. Here, we report on the direct detection of specific RNA by conventional polymerase chain reaction (PCR) requiring no prior RT step. It was found that Hemo KlenTaq (HKTaq), which is posed as DNA-dependent DNA polymerase, possesses reverse transcriptase activity and provides reproducible amplification of RNA targets with an efficiency comparable to common RT-PCR. Using nasopharyngeal swab extracts from COVID-19-positive patients, the high reliability of SARS-CoV-2 detection based on HKTaq was demonstrated. The most accurate detection of specific targets are provided by nearby primers, which allow to determine RNA in solutions affected to multiple freeze-thaw cycles. HKTaq can be used for elaboration of simplified amplification techniques intended for the analysis of any specific RNA and requiring only one DNA polymerase.

Performance of nasopharyngeal swab and saliva in detecting Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants

A prospective cohort study was conducted during the Delta and Omicron severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) epidemic waves from paired nasopharyngeal swab (NPS or NP swab) and saliva samples taken from 624 participants. The study aimed to assess if any differences among participants from both waves could be observed and if any difference in molecular diagnostic performance could be observed among the two sample types. Samples were transported immediately to the laboratory to ensure the highest possible sample quality without any freezing and thawing steps before processing. Nucleic acids from saliva and NPS were prospectively extracted and SARS‐CoV‐2 was detected using a real‐time reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction. All observed results were statistically analyzed. Although the results obtained with NP and saliva agreed overall, higher viral loads were observed in NP swabs regardless of the day of specimen collection in both SARS‐CoV‐2 epidemic waves. No significant difference could be observed between the two epidemic waves characterized by Delta or Omicron SARS‐CoV‐2. To note, Delta infection resulted in higher viral loads both in NP and saliva and more symptoms, including rhinorrhea, cough, and dyspnea, whereas Omicron wave patients more frequently reported sore throat. An increase in the mean log RNA of SARS‐CoV‐2 was observed with the number of expressed symptoms in both waves, however, the difference was not significant. Data confirmed that results from saliva were concordant with those from NP swabs, although saliva proved to be a challenging sample with frequent inhibitions that required substantial retesting.