COVID-19 risk perception and vaccine acceptance in individuals with self-reported chronic respiratory or autoimmune conditions.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 disproportionately affects those with preexisting conditions, but little research has determined whether those with chronic diseases view the pandemic itself differently - and whether there are differences between chronic diseases. We theorized that while individuals with respiratory disease or autoimmune disorders would perceive greater threat from COVID-19 and be more supportive of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), those with autoimmune disorders would be less likely to support vaccination-based interventions. METHODS: We conducted a two-wave online survey conducted in February and November 2021 asking respondents their beliefs about COVID-19 risk perception, adoption and support of interventions, willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19, and reasons for vaccination. Regression analysis was conducted to assess the relationship of respondents reporting a chronic disease and COVID-19 behaviors and attitudes, compared to healthy respondents adjusting for demographic and political factors. RESULTS: In the initial survey, individuals reporting a chronic disease had both stronger feelings of risk from COVID-19 as well as preferences for NPIs than healthy controls. The only NPI that was still practiced significantly more compared to healthy controls in the resample was limiting trips outside of the home. Support for community-level NPIs was higher among individuals reporting a chronic disease than healthy controls and remained high among those with respiratory diseases in sample 2. Vaccine acceptance produced more divergent results: those reporting chronic respiratory diseases were 6% more willing to be vaccinated than healthy controls, while we found no significant difference between individuals with autoimmune diseases and healthy controls. Respondents with chronic respiratory disease and those with autoimmune diseases were more likely to want to be vaccinated to protect themselves from COVID-19, and those with an autoimmune disease were more likely to report fear of a bad vaccine reaction as the reason for vaccine hesitancy. In the resample, neither those with respiratory diseases nor autoimmune diseases reported being more willing to receive a booster vaccine than healthy controls. CONCLUSIONS: It is not enough to recognize the importance of health in determining attitudes: nuanced differences between conditions must also be recognized.

SARS-CoV-2 and HIV: Impact on Pulmonary Epithelial Cells.

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic provides a natural opportunity for the collision of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) with chronic infections, which place numerous individuals at high risk of severe COVID-19. Infection with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), a global epidemic, remains a major public health concern. Whether prior HIV+ status exacerbates COVID-19 warrants investigation. Herein, we characterized the impact of SARS-CoV-2 in human bronchial epithelial cells (HBECs) previously exposed to HIV. We optimized the air-liquid interface (ALI) cell culture technique to allow for challenges with HIV at the basolateral cell surface and SARS-CoV-2 spike protein on the apical surface, followed by genetic analyses for cellular stress/toxicity and innate/adaptive immune responses. Our results suggest that the IL-10 pathway was consistently activated in HBECs treated with spike, HIV, or a combination. Recombinant spike protein elicited COVID-19 cytokine storms while HIV activated different signaling pathways. HIV-treated HBECs could no longer activate NF-kB, pro-inflammatory TRAF-6 ubiquitination nor RIP1 signaling. Combinations of HIV and SARS-CoV-2 spike increased gene expression for activation of endoplasmic reticulum-phagosome pathway and downregulated non-canonical NF-kB pathways that are key in functional regulatory T cells and RNA Polymerase II transcription. Our in vitro studies suggest that prior HIV infection may not exacerbate COVID-19. Further in vivo studies are warranted to advance this field.

Hyperacute stroke thrombolysis via telemedicine: a multicentre study of performance, safety and clinical efficacy.

OBJECTIVES: Timely thrombolysis of ischaemic stroke improves functional recovery, yet its delivery nationally is challenging due to shortages in the stroke specialist workforce and large geographical areas. One solution is remote stroke specialist input to regional centres via telemedicine. This study evaluates the usage and key metrics of performance of the East of England Stroke Telemedicine Partnership-the largest telestroke service in the UK-in providing hyperacute stroke care. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: The East of England Stroke Telemedicine Partnership provides a horizontal 'hubless' model of out-of-hours hyperacute stroke care to a population of 6.2 million across a 7500 square mile semirural region. PARTICIPANTS: All (2709) telestroke consultations between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Thrombolysis decision, pre-thrombolysis and post-thrombolysis stroke severity (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, NIHSS), haemorrhagic complications, and hyperacute pathway timings. RESULTS: Over the period, 1149 (42.4%) individuals were thrombolysed. Thrombolysis rates increased from 147/379 (38.8%) in 2014 to 225/490 (45.9%) in 2019. Median (IQR) pre-thrombolysis NIHSS was 10 (6-17), reducing to 6 (2-14) 24-hour post-thrombolysis (p<0.001). Post-thrombolysis haemorrhage occurred in 27 cases (2.3%). Over the period, median (IQR) door-to-needle time reduced from 85 (65-108) min to 68 (55-97.5) min (p<0.01), driven by improved imaging-to-needle times from 52.5 (38-72.25) min to 42 (30.5-62.5) min (p<0.01). However, the same period saw an increase in median onset-to-hospital arrival time from 77.5 (60-109.25) min to 95 (70-135) min (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The results from this large hyperacute telestroke cohort indicate two important points for clinical practice. First, telemedicine via a hubless horizontal model provides a clinically effective and safe method for delivering hyperacute stroke thrombolysis. Second, improved door-to-needle times were offset by a concerning rise in prehospital timings. These findings indicate that although telemedicine may benefit in-hospital hyperacute stroke care, improvements across the whole stroke pathway are essential.

“Lung Time No See”: SARS-Cov-2 Spike Protein Changes Genetic Expression in Human Primary Bronchial Epithelial Cells After Recovery

Background Current reports show that people infected with SARS-CoV-2 do not recover completely, and even asymptomatic COVID-19 patients may experience slight changes in their overall health, which is the basis of the new area of study termed ?Long-Haul COVID?. Our hypothesis is that even in the asymptomatic infection, exposures to the viral spike protein are enough to induce long-lasting changes in baseline genetic expression. Objective This study sought to survey what type of cell biological processes would be affected in human primary bronchial epithelial cells (HBECs) post-exposure to spike protein and whether they would persist post-recovery. Methods Herein, we advanced an Air Liquid Interface (ALI) cell culture technique to simulate the physiological conditions in the lung airway in vitro. Briefly, HBECs were grown and differentiated, before treatment with either a low (50 ng/mL) or high (5 ug/mL) concentration of recombinant SARS-CoV-2 spike protein for 4 hours. After a 48-hour recovery, cells were processed for RNA extractions and qPCR to screen genes using Qiagen RT2 Profiler PCR Arrays;data were analyzed in GeneGlobe. Results We used the (2

SARS-CoV-2 and Human Immunodeficiency Virus: Pathogen Pincer Attack.

Paramount efforts worldwide are seeking to increase understanding of the basic virology of SARS-CoV-2, characterize the spectrum of complications associated with COVID-19, and develop vaccines that can protect from new and recurrent infections with SARS-CoV-2. While we continue learning about this new virus, it is clear that 1) the virus is spread via the respiratory route, primarily by droplets and contact with contaminated surfaces and fomites, as well as by aerosol formation during invasive respiratory procedures; 2) the airborne route is still controversial; and 3) that those infected can spread the virus without necessarily developing COVID-19 (ie, asymptomatic). With the number of SARS-CoV-2 infections increasing globally, the possibility of co-infections and/or co-morbidities is becoming more concerning. Co-infection with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) is one such example of polyparasitism of interest. This military-themed comparative review of SARS-CoV-2 and HIV details their virology and describes them figuratively as separate enemy armies. HIV, an old enemy dug into trenches in individuals already infected, and SARS-CoV-2 the new army, attempting to attack and capture territories, tissues and organs, in order to provide resources for their expansion. This analogy serves to aid in discussion of three main areas of focus and draw attention to how these viruses may cooperate to gain the upper hand in securing a host. Here we compare their target, the key receptors found on those tissues, viral lifecycles and tactics for immune response surveillance. The last focus is on the immune response to infection, addressing similarities in cytokines released. While the majority of HIV cases can be successfully managed with antiretroviral therapy nowadays, treatments for SARS-CoV-2 are still undergoing research given the novelty of this army.

Human Infection Challenge Studies: a Test for the Social Value Criterion of Research Ethics.

Human infection challenge studies involving the intentional infection of research participants with a disease-causing agent have recently been suggested as a means to speed up the search for a vaccine for the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. Calls for challenge studies, however, rely on the expected social value of these studies. This value represents more than the simple possibility that a successful study will lead to the rapid development and dissemination of vaccines but also some expectation that this will actually occur. I show how this expectation may not be realistic in the current political moment and offer potential ways to make sure that any challenge trials that arise actually achieve their goals.