ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Real-world data on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness are needed to validate evidence from randomized clinical trials. Accordingly, this study aims to evaluate, in a real-world setting in Brazil, the effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 against symptomatic COVID-19 and COVID-19-related complications across diverse populations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A test-negative case-control study with follow-up of cases is currently being conducted in Toledo, a city in southern Brazil, following a mass COVID-19 vaccination campaign with BNT162b2. The study is being conducted among patients aged 12 years or older seeking care in the public health system with acute respiratory symptoms and tested for SARS-CoV-2 on reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Cases are RT-PCR positive and controls RT-PCR negative. Test-positive cases are prospectively followed through structured telephone interviews performed at 15 days post-enrollment, and at 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. Baseline demographic, clinical, and vaccination data are being collected by means of structured interviews and medical registry records reviews at the time of enrollment. All RT-PCR-positive samples are screened for mutations to identify SARS-CoV-2 variants. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been approved by the research ethics committee of all participant sites. Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRAIL REGISTRATION: Clinicatrials.gov: NCT05052307.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , BNT162 Vaccine , Brazil/epidemiology , Case-Control Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicABSTRACT
The relationship between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and neurodegenerative diseases is yet to be fully clarified. Rapid worsening and even new-onset cases of those disorders have been reported in association with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We describe three cases of neurodegenerative diseases in patients with SARS-CoV-2: a case of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease during the COVID-19 acute phase, to our knowledge, is the second one described in the literature; a rapidly progressive Alzheimer's Disease; and a patient with frontotemporal dementia, and a quick decline of both cognitive and behavioral domains. This report suggests an association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and a higher probability of developing or accelerating neurodegenerative chronic neurologic conditions. We reinforce the need for a close cognitive follow-up in the aftermath of Sars-Cov2 infection.
ABSTRACT
The relationship between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and neurodegenerative diseases is yet to be fully clarified. Rapid worsening and even new-onset cases of those disorders have been reported in association with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We describe three cases of neurodegenerative diseases in patients with SARS-CoV-2: a case of Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease during the COVID-19 acute phase, to our knowledge, is the second one described in the literature;a rapidly progressive Alzheimer's Disease;and a patient with frontotemporal dementia, and a quick decline of both cognitive and behavioral domains. This report suggests an association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and a higher probability of developing or accelerating neurodegenerative chronic neurologic conditions. We reinforce the need for a close cognitive follow-up in the aftermath of Sars-Cov2 infection.
ABSTRACT
Background: The use of corticosteroids may help control the cytokine storm occurring in acute respiratory failure due to the severe form of COVID-19. We evaluated the postacute effect of corticosteroids used during the acute phase, such as impairment in pulmonary function parameters, on day 120 (D120)-follow-up, in participants who survived over 28 days. Methods: This is a parallel, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase IIb clinical trial carried out between April 18 and October 9, 2020, conducted in hospitalized patients with clinical-radiological suspicion of COVID-19, aged 18 years or older, with SpO2 ≤ 94% on room air or requiring supplementary oxygen, or under invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in a referral center in Manaus, Western Brazilian Amazon. Intravenous methylprednisolone (MP) (0.5 mg/kg) was given two times daily for 5 days to these patients. The primary outcome used for this study was pulmonary function testing at day 120 follow-up visit. Results: Out of the total of surviving patients at day 28 (n = 246) from the Metcovid study, a total of 118 underwent satisfactory pulmonary function testing (62 in the placebo arm and 56 in the MP arm). The supportive treatment was similar between the placebo and MP groups (seven [11%] vs. four [7%]; P = 0.45). At hospital admission, IL-6 levels were higher in the MP group (P < 0.01). Also, the need for ICU (P = 0.06), need for IMV (P = 0.07), and creatine kinase (P = 0.05) on admission also tended to be higher in this group. In the univariate analysis, forced expiratory volume on 1st second of exhalation (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) at D120 follow-up were significantly higher in patients in the MP arm, being this last parameter also significantly higher in the multivariate analysis independently of IMV and IL-6 levels on admission. Conclusion: The use of steroids for at least 5 days in severe COVID-19 was associated with a higher FVC, which suggests that hospitalized COVID-19 patients might benefit from the use of MP in its use in the long-term, with less pulmonary restrictive functions, attributed to fibrosis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT04343729.
ABSTRACT
SUMMARY Background The rapid and accurate testing of SARS-CoV-2 infection is still crucial to mitigate, and eventually halt, the spread of this disease. Currently, nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and oropharyngeal swab (OPS) are the recommended standard sampling, yet, with some limitations. Several specimens that are easier to collect are being tested as alternatives to nasal/throat swabs in nucleic acid assays for SARS-CoV-2 detection. This study aims to critically appraise and compare the clinical performance of RT-PCR tests using oral saliva, deep-throat saliva/ posterior oropharyngeal saliva (DTS/POS), sputum, urine, feces, and tears/conjunctival swab [CS]) against standard specimens (NPS, OPS, or a combination of both). Methods In this systematic review and meta-analysis, five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ClinicalTrial.gov and NIPH Clinical Trial) were searched up to the 30 th of December 2020. Case-control and cohort studies on the detection of SARS-CoV-2 were included. Methodological quality was assessed through the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS 2). Findings We identified 3022 entries, 33 of which (1.1%) met all required criteria and were included for the quantitative data analysis. Saliva presented the higher accuracy, 92.1% (95% CI: 70.0-98.3), with an estimated sensitivity of 83.9% (95% CI: 77.4-88.8) and specificity of 96.4% (95% CI: 89.5-98.8). DTS/POS samples had an overall accuracy of 79.7% (95% CI: 43.3-95.3), with an estimated sensitivity of 90.1% (95% CI: 83.3-96.9) and specificity of 63.1% (95% CI: 36.8-89.3). Remaining index specimens presented uncertainty given the lack of studies available. Interpretation Our meta-analysis shows that saliva samples from oral region provide a high sensitivity and specificity, being the best candidate as an alternative specimen to NPS/OPS for COVID-19 detection, with suitable protocols for swab-free sample collection to be determined and validated in the future. The distinction between oral and extra-oral salivary samples will be crucial since DTS/POS samples may induce a higher rate of false positives. Urine, feces, tears/CS and sputum seem unreliable for diagnosis. Saliva testing may increase testing capacity, ultimately promoting the implementation of truly deployable COVID-19 tests, which could either work at the point-of-care (e.g. hospitals, clinics) or outbreak control spots (e.g. schools, airports, and nursing homes). Funding Nothing to declare. Research in context Evidence before this study The lack of systematized data on the accuracy performance of alternative specimens for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 (against the standard NPS/OPS). The ever-growing number of studies available, made this updated systematic review timely and of the utmost importance Added value of this study Our meta-analysis shows that saliva samples from the oral region provide a high sensitivity and specificity, being the best candidate as an alternative specimen to NPS/OPS for COVID-19 detection, with suitable protocols for swab-free sample collection to be determined and validated in the future. The distinction between oral and extra-oral salivary samples will be crucial since DTS/POS samples may induce a higher rate of false positives. Implications of all the available evidence Saliva samples simply taken from the oral cavity are promising alternatives to the currently used nasal/throat swabs. Saliva specimens can be self-collected, mitigate the discomfort caused by sampling, reduce the transmission risk and increase testing capacity. Therefore, the validation of this alternative specimen will promote the implementation of truly deployable rapid tests for SARS-CoV-2 detection at the point-of-care or outbreak spots.