Concussion in Non-athletes: Assessment of Cognition and Symptomatology (CONTACTS) study protocol - an exploratory cohort study investigating the utility of sports concussion assessment tools and salivary microRNAs to diagnose concussion in NHS patients.

INTRODUCTION: Concussion is a complex pathophysiological process with a wide range of non-specific signs and symptoms. There are currently no objective diagnostic tests to identify concussion, and diagnosis relies solely on history and examination. Recent research has identified a unique panel of microRNAs (miRNAs) that distinguish between concussed and non-concussed rugby players. This study aims to assess the diagnostic utility of salivary miRNAs in concussion for a sample of UK National Health Service patients and whether well-established sports-related concussion (SRC) assessment tools may be translated into the emergency department (ED). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Concussion in Non-athletes: Assessment of Cognition and Symptomatology is a single-centre, prospective, two-phase cohort study. The concussed cohort will consist of participants with maxillofacial trauma and concurrent concussion. The control cohort will consist of participants with isolated limb trauma and no evidence of concussion. Participants will be recruited in the ED and saliva samples will be taken to identify the presence of miRNAs. The SRC assessments being investigated include the Sports Concussion Assessment Test, Fifth Edition (SCAT5), the Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) and the ImPACT Quick. Follow-up will be at 24-48 hours in-hospital and remotely via telephone and email at 14 days and 6 months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted in February 2021 by the West Midlands Coventry & Warwickshire Research Ethics Committee (ref 20/WM/0299). The investigators intend to submit their study findings for publication in peer-reviewed journals and to disseminate study findings via presentation at academic meetings. The results will also form part of a doctorate thesis, registered at the University of Birmingham.

Analysis of the trend in community prescribing of RAAS inhibitors during the COVID-19 pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has sparked novel research and insights, but also concerns and anxiety regarding established practices. Early into the pandemic, public and scientific concern was raised regarding the role of renin–angiotensin– aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors on the susceptibility to COVID-19 given their effect on angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE-2), the host receptor for the virus. This gathered media attention globally, despite several health boards encouraging the ongoing use of these medications. We aimed to investigate whether, despite advice supporting continued use of these medications, there was a change in prescribing practices for RAAS inhibitors in general practice. Data were collated from the NHS digital platform, which provides monthly practice-level prescribing information for all primary care practices in England. We performed an interrupted time-series analysis on national-level prescribing data comparing time-series coefficients pre- and post-March 2020 with metformin used as a control. We find that from March to December 2020, prescribing rates of RAAS inhibitors were reduced relative to the previous time-series trend. This finding persisted after adjustment for rates of metformin prescription. This suggests that there was a change in prescribing behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may be linked to the public and scientific concerns during this time.

Currently prescribed drugs in the UK that could upregulate or downregulate ACE2 in COVID-19 disease: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To review evidence on routinely prescribed drugs in the UK that could upregulate or downregulate ACE2 and potentially affect COVID-19 disease. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCE: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science. STUDY SELECTION: Any design with animal or human models examining a currently prescribed UK drug compared with a control, placebo or sham group, and reporting an effect on ACE2 level, activity or gene expression. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and OpenGrey from inception to 1 April 2020. Methodological quality was assessed using the SYstematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) risk-of-bias tool for animal studies and Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for human studies. RESULTS: We screened 3360 titles and included 112 studies with 21 different drug classes identified as influencing ACE2 activity. Ten studies were in humans and one hundred and two were in animal models None examined ACE2 in human lungs. The most frequently examined drugs were angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (n=55) and ACE inhibitors (ACE-I) (n=22). More studies reported upregulation than downregulation with ACE-I (n=22), ARBs (n=55), insulin (n=8), thiazolidinedione (n=7) aldosterone agonists (n=3), statins (n=5), oestrogens (n=5) calcium channel blockers (n=3) glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonists (n=2) and Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (n=2). CONCLUSIONS: There is an abundance of the academic literature and media reports on the potential of drugs that could attenuate or exacerbate COVID-19 disease. This is leading to trials of repurposed drugs and uncertainty among patients and clinicians concerning continuation or cessation of prescribed medications. Our review indicates that the impact of currently prescribed drugs on ACE2 has been poorly studied in vivo, particularly in human lungs where the SARS-CoV-2 virus appears to enact its pathogenic effects. We found no convincing evidence to justify starting or stopping currently prescribed drugs to influence outcomes of COVID-19 disease.

Drug treatments affecting ACE2 in COVID-19 infection: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 virus causing COVID-19 binds human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors in human tissues. ACE2 expression may be associated with COVID-19 infection and mortality rates. Routinely prescribed drugs that up- or down-regulate ACE2 expression are, therefore, of critical research interest as agents that might promote or reduce risk of COVID-19 infection in a susceptible population. AIM: To collate evidence on routinely prescribed drug treatments in the UK that could up- or down-regulate ACE2, and thus potentially affect COVID-19 infection. DESIGN & SETTING: Systematic review of studies published in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to 1 April 2020. METHOD: A systematic review will be conducted in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Inclusion criteria will be: (1) assesses the effect of drug exposure on ACE2 level of expression or activity; (2) the drug is included in the British National Formulary (BNF) and, therefore, available to prescribe in the UK; and (3) a control, placebo, or sham group is included as comparator. Exclusion criteria will be: (1) ACE2 measurement in utero; (2) ACE2 measurement in children aged <18 years; (3) drug not in the BNF; and (4) review article. Quality will be assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for human studies, and the SYstematic Review Center for Laboratory animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) risk of bias tool for animal studies. RESULTS: Data will be reported in summary tables and narrative synthesis. CONCLUSION: This systematic review will identify drug therapies that may increase or decrease ACE2 expression. This might identify medications increasing risk of COVID-19 transmission, or as targets for intervention in mitigating transmission.