Black carbon aerosol reductions during COVID-19 confinement quantified by aircraft measurements over Europe

The abrupt reduction in human activities during the first lockdown of the COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented atmospheric conditions. To quantify the changes in lower tropospheric air pollution, we conducted the BLUESKY aircraft campaign and measured vertical profiles of black carbon (BC) aerosol particles over western and southern Europe in May and June 2020. We compared the results to similar measurements of the EMeRGe EU campaign performed in July 2017 and found that the BC mass concentrations (MBC) were reduced by about 48%. For BC particle number concentrations, we found comparable reductions. Based on ECHAM/MESSy Atmospheric Chemistry (EMAC) chemistry-transport model simulations, we found differences in meteorological conditions and flight patterns responsible for about 7% of the MBC reductions. Accordingly 41% of MBC reductions can be attributed to reduced anthropogenic emissions. Our results reflect the strong and immediate positive effect of changes in human activities on air quality and the atmospheric role of BC aerosols as a major air pollutant in the Anthropocene.

High efficacy of therapeutic equine hyperimmune antibodies against SARS CoV-2 variants of concern (preprint)

SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VoC) show reduced neutralization by vaccine-induced and therapeutic monoclonal antibodies. We tested therapeutic equine polyclonal antibodies (pAbs) against four VoC (alpha, beta, epsilon and gamma). We show that equine pAbs efficiently neutralize VoC, suggesting they are an effective, broad coverage, low-cost and a scalable COVID-19 treatment.

Exploring Urological Experience in the COVID-19 Outbreak: American Confederation of Urology (CAU) Survey

ABSTRACT Purpose: To explore the current situation faced by Latin American urology departments during the COVID-19 Outbreak in terms of knowledge, actions, prioritization of urology practices, and implementation of internal clinical management protocols for inpatients and outpatients. Material and Methods: A non-validated, structured, self-administered, electronic survey with 35 closed multiple choice questions was conducted in Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, and English and Deutsch versions from April 1st to April 30th, 2020. The survey was distributed through social networks and the official American Confederation of Urology (CAU) website. It was anonymous, mainly addressed to Latin American urologists and urology residents. It included 35 questions exploring different aspects: 1) Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and internal management protocols for healthcare providers;2) Priority surgeries and urological urgencies and 3) Inpatient and outpatient care. Results: Of 864 surveys received, 846 had at least 70% valid responses and were included in the statistical analyses. Surveys corresponded to South America in 62% of the cases, Central America and North America in 29.7%. 12.7% were residents. Regarding to PPE and internal management protocols, 88% confirmed the implementation of specific protocols and 45.4% have not received training to perform a safe clinical practice;only 2.3% reported being infected with COVID-19. 60.9% attended urgent surgeries. The following major uro-oncologic surgeries were reported as high priority: Radical Nephrectomy (RN) 58.4%, and Radical Cystectomy (RC) 57.3%. When we associate the capacity of hospitalization (urologic beds available) and percentage of high-priority surgery performed, we observed that centers with fewer urological beds (10-20) compared to centers with more urological beds (31-40) performed more frequently major urologic cancer surgeries: RN 54.5% vs 60.8% (p=0.0003), RC 53.1% vs 64.9% (p=0.005) respectively. Conclusions: At the time of writing (May 13th 2020) our data represents a snapshot of COVID-19 outbreak in Latin American urological practices. Our findings have practical implications and should be contextualized considering many factors related to patients and urological care: The variability of health care scenarios, institutional capacity, heterogeneity and burden of urologic disease, impact of surgical indications and decision making when prioritizing and scheduling surgeries in times of COVID-19 pandemic.

Development and pre-clinical characterization of two therapeutic equine formulations towards SARS-CoV-2 proteins for the potential treatment of COVID-19 (preprint)

In the current global emergency due to SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, passive immunotherapy emerges as a promising treatment for COVID-19. Among animal-derived products, equine formulations are still the cornerstone therapy for treating envenomations due to animal bites and stings. Therefore, drawing upon decades of experience in manufacturing snake antivenom, we developed and preclinically evaluated two anti-SARS-CoV-2 polyclonal equine formulations as potential alternative therapy for COVID-19. We immunized two groups of horses with either S1 (anti-S1) or a mixture of S1, N, and SEM mosaic (anti-Mix) viral recombinant proteins. Horses reached a maximum anti-viral antibody level at 7 weeks following priming, and showed no major adverse acute or chronic clinical alterations. Two whole-IgG formulations were prepared via hyperimmune plasma precipitation with caprylic acid and then formulated for parenteral use. Both preparations had similar physicochemical and microbiological quality and showed ELISA immunoreactivity towards S1 protein and the receptor binding domain (RBD). The anti-Mix formulation also presented immunoreactivity against N protein. Due to high anti-S1 and anti-RBD antibody content, final products exhibited high in vitro neutralizing capacity of SARS-CoV-2 infection, 80 times higher than a pool of human convalescent plasma. Pre-clinical quality profiles were similar among both products, but clinical efficacy and safety must be tested in clinical trials. The technological strategy we describe here can be adapted by other producers, particularly in low- and middle-income countries.

Unrecognized liver injury assessed by fibrosis indexes is associated with mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients (preprint)

Background Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) with acute respiratory distress syndrome is a life-threatening condition. A previous diagnosis of chronic liver disease is associated with poorer outcomes. Nevertheless, the impact of silent liver injury has not been investigated. We aimed to explore the association of pre-admission liver fibrosis indexes with the prognosis of critically ill COVID-19 patients.Methods Observational study in 214 patients with COVID-19 consecutively admitted to the ICU. Pre-admission liver fibrosis indexes were calculated. In-hospital mortality and predictive factors were explored with Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis.Results The mean age was 59.58 (13.79) years. Sixteen patients (7.48%) had previously recognized chronic liver disease. Up to 78.84% of patients according to Forns, and 45.76% according to FIB-4, had more than minimal fibrosis. Fibrosis indexes were higher in non-survivors [Forns: 6.04 (1.42) vs 4.99 (1.58), p < 0.001; FIB-4: 1.77 (1.17) vs 1.41 (0.91), p = 0.020)], but no differences were found in liver biochemistry parameters. Patients with any degree of fibrosis either by Forns or FIB-4 had a higher mortality, which increased according to the severity of fibrosis (p < 0.05 for both indexes). Both Forns [HR 1.41 (1.11-1.81); p = 0.006] and FIB-4 [HR 1.31 (0.99-1.72); p = 0.051] were independently related to survival after adjusting for the Charlson Comorbidity Index, APACHE II and ferritin.Conclusion Unrecognized liver fibrosis, assessed by serological tests prior to admission, is independently associated with a higher risk of death in patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to the ICU.

Identification of Vulnerable Populations and Areas at Higher Risk of COVID-19 Related Mortality in the U.S. (preprint)

Background The role of health-related disparities including sociodemographic, environmental, and critical care capacity in the COVID-19 pandemic are poorly understood. In the present study, we characterized vulnerable populations located in areas at higher risk of COVID-19 related mortality and low critical healthcare capacity in the U.S. Methods Using Bayesian multilevel analysis and small area disease risk mapping, we assessed the spatial variation of COVID-19 related mortality risk for the U.S. in relation with healthcare disparities including race, ethnicity, poverty, air quality, and critical healthcare capacity. Results Overall, highly populated, regional air hub areas, and minorities had an increased risk of COVID-19 related mortality. We found that with an increase of only 1 ug/m3 in long term PM2.5 exposure, the COVID-19 mortality rate increased by 13%. Counties with major air hubs had 18% increase in COVID-19 related death compared to counties with no airport connectivity. Sixty-eight percent of the counties with high COVID-19 related mortality risk were also counties with lower critical care capacity than national average. These counties were primary located at the North- and South-Eastern regions of the country. Conclusion The existing disparity in health and environmental risk factors that exacerbate the COVID-19 related mortality, along with the regional healthcare capacity, determine the vulnerability of populations to COVID-19 related mortality. The results from this study can be used to guide the development of strategies for the identification and targeting preventive strategies in vulnerable populations with a higher proportion of minority groups living in areas with poor air quality and low healthcare capacity.

Exploring Urological Experience in the COVID-19 Outbreak: American Confederation of Urology (CAU) Survey.

PURPOSE: To explore the current situation faced by Latin American urology departments during the COVID-19 Outbreak in terms of knowledge, actions, prioritization of urology practices, and implementation of internal clinical management protocols for inpatients and outpatients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A non-validated, structured, self-administered, electronic survey with 35 closed multiple choice questions was conducted in Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, and English and Deutsch versions from April 1st to April 30th, 2020. The survey was distributed through social networks and the official American Confederation of Urology (CAU) website. It was anonymous, mainly addressed to Latin American urologists and urology residents. It included 35 questions exploring different aspects: 1) Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and internal management protocols for healthcare providers; 2) Priority surgeries and urological urgencies and 3) Inpatient and outpatient care. RESULTS: Of 864 surveys received, 846 had at least 70% valid responses and were included in the statistical analyses. Surveys corresponded to South America in 62% of the cases, Central America and North America in 29.7%. 12.7% were residents. Regarding to PPE and internal management protocols, 88% confirmed the implementation of specific protocols and 45.4% have not received training to perform a safe clinical practice; only 2.3% reported being infected with COVID-19. 60.9% attended urgent surgeries. The following major uro-oncologic surgeries were reported as high priority: Radical Nephrectomy (RN) 58.4%, and Radical Cystectomy (RC) 57.3%. When we associate the capacity of hospitalization (urologic beds available) and percentage of high-priority surgery performed, we observed that centers with fewer urological beds (10-20) compared to centers with more urological beds (31-40) performed more frequently major urologic cancer surgeries: RN 54.5% vs 60.8% (p=0.0003), RC 53.1% vs 64.9% (p=0.005) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: At the time of writing (May 13th 2020) our data represents a snapshot of COVID-19 outbreak in Latin American urological practices. Our findings have practical implications and should be contextualized considering many factors related to patients and urological care: The variability of health care scenarios, institutional capacity, heterogeneity and burden of urologic disease, impact of surgical indications and decision making when prioritizing and scheduling surgeries in times of COVID-19 pandemic.

On the impact of early non-pharmaceutical interventions as containment strategies against the COVID-19 pandemic (preprint)

Background The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) emerged in December 2019 in Wuhan, China and has spread since then to around 210 countries and territories by April 2020. Consequently, countries have adopted physical distance measures in an attempt to mitigate the uncontrolled spread of the virus. A critical question for policymakers to inform evidence-based practice is if and how physical distance measures slowed the propagation of COVID-19 in the early phase of the pandemic. Methods This study aims to quantify the effects of physical distance mitigation measures on the propagation of the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from John Hopkins University on confirmed cases and testing data from the Our World in Data were used in an interrupted time series analysis to estimate the effects of physical distance measures on the growth rates of the pandemic in 12 countries of Asia, Africa, and Europe. Findings We found that physical distance measures produced a significant decrease in the growth rates of the COVID-19 pandemic in five countries (Austria, Belgium, Italy, Malaysia, and South Korea). The test-positivity rate was significant in understanding the slowing growth rate of COVID-19 cases caused by the mitigation measures, as it provides important context that is missing from analysis based only on confirmed case data. Interpretation Physical distance interventions effectively slowed the progression of the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this study could inform infectious disease mitigation policies based on physical distance measures by quantifying the differential health outcomes of a pandemic with and without physical distance interventions.