Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 17 de 17
Filter
1.
Front Oncol ; 12: 976143, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2080205

ABSTRACT

The uncontrollable COVID-19 crises in the SARS-CoV-2 high-prevalence areas have greatly disrupted the routine treatment of liver cancer and triggered a role transformation of radiotherapy for liver cancer. The weight of radiotherapy in the treatment algorithm for liver cancer has been enlarged by the COVID-19 pandemic, which is helpful for the optimal risk-benefit profile.

2.
Frontiers in oncology ; 12, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2045999

ABSTRACT

The uncontrollable COVID-19 crises in the SARS-CoV-2 high-prevalence areas have greatly disrupted the routine treatment of liver cancer and triggered a role transformation of radiotherapy for liver cancer. The weight of radiotherapy in the treatment algorithm for liver cancer has been enlarged by the COVID-19 pandemic, which is helpful for the optimal risk-benefit profile.

3.
J Cancer ; 12(12): 3558-3565, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1355160

ABSTRACT

Purpose: Data are extremely limited with regards to the impact of COVID-19 on cancer patients. Our study explored the distinct clinical features of COVID-19 patients with cancer. Experimental Design: 189 COVID-19 patients, including 16 cancer patients and 173 patients without cancer, were recruited. Propensity score 1:4 matching (PSM) was performed between cancer patients and patients without cancer based on age, gender and comorbidities. Survival was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and the difference was compared by the log-rank test. Results: PSM analysis yielded 16 cancer patients and 64 propensity score-matched patients without cancer. Compared to patients without cancer, cancer patients tended to have leukopenia and elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and procalcitonin. For those with critical COVID-19, cancer patients had an inferior survival than those without cancer. Also, cancer patients with severe/critical COVID-19 tended to be male and present with low SPO2 and albumin, and high hs-CRP, lactate dehydrogenase and blood urea nitrogen on admission compared to those with mild COVID-19. In terms of risk factors, recent cancer diagnosis (within 1 year of onset of COVID-19) and anti-tumor treatment within 3 months of COVID-19 diagnosis were associated with inferior survival. Conclusions: We found COVID-19 patients with cancer have distinct clinical features as compared to patients without cancer. Importantly, cancer patients with critical COVID-19 were found to have poorer outcomes compared to those without cancer. In the cancer cohort, patients with severe/critical COVID-19 presented with a distinct clinical profile from those with mild COVID-19; short cancer history and recent anti-cancer treatment were associated with inferior survival.

4.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 8: 667623, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1337648

ABSTRACT

Background: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been a major threat to global health. Regional differences in epidemiological and clinical characteristics, treatment and outcomes of patients have not yet been investigated. This study was conducted to investigate these differences amongCOVID-19 patients in Hubei Province, China. Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study analyzed data on 289 COVID-19 patients from designated hospitals in three regions:Urban (Wuhan Union West Hospital), Suburban areas of Wuhan (Hannan Hospital) and Enshi city, between February 8 and 20, 2020. The final date of follow-up was December 14th, 2020. The outcomes were case fatality rate and epidemiological and clinical data. Results: Urban Wuhan experienced a significantly higher case fatality rate (21.5%) than suburban Wuhan (5.23%) and rural area of Enshi (3.51%). Urban Wuhan had a higher proportion of patients on mechanical ventilation (24.05%) than suburban Wuhan (0%) and rural Enshi (3.57%). Treatment with glucocorticoids was equivalent in urban and suburban Wuhan (46.84 and 45.75%, respectively) and higher than Enshi (25.00%). Urban Wuhan had a higher proportion of patients with abnormal tests including liver function and serum electrolytes and a higher rate of pneumonia (p < 0.01 for all). Urban Wuhan also had a higher incidence of respiratory failure, heart disease, liver disease and shock, compared with the other two regions (all p < 0.05). Conclusions: Our findings revealed that there are regional differences in COVID-19. These findings provide novel insights into the distribution of appropriate resources for the prevention, control and treatment of COVID-19 for the global community.

5.
Front Psychol ; 12: 641167, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1332136

ABSTRACT

The building of cabin hospitals in Wuhan has been proven to be clinically successful in curing mild-symptom COVID-19 patients shortly after the outbreak of COVID-19 in late 2019. At the same time, the psychological effect of patients being treated in cabin hospitals and the features of the psychological status of the whole society remained ambiguous. This study adopted a self-administrated questionnaire to investigate the stress, depression, and anxiety status of patients in cabin hospitals (n = 212) and healthy participants outside of Hubei province (n = 221) in a population level from February 29 to March 01, 2020. The research measured participants' stress response, depression level, and anxiety level as well as their social support system and their resilience level. Results indicated that in this sudden outbreak of an unknown pandemic, all people (whether or not infected) showed a generally high level of stress, depression, and anxiety, regardless of age, gender, education level, and employment. It also showed that people with a lower level of psychological resilience and social support reported more severe symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress. Moreover, the research also found a positive effect of cabin hospitals on the psychological recovery of COVID-19 patients. Stress response of patients increased after entering into cabin hospitals, while after 3-4 weeks' treatment, patients showed a decrease in their depression and anxiety levels. This research advances the understanding of COVID-19 and gives suggestions to optimize the design and the allocation of resources in cabin hospitals and better deal with the unknown pandemics in the future.

6.
Transl Psychiatry ; 11(1): 273, 2021 05 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1219881

ABSTRACT

Frontline healthcare nurses devoted themselves to deal with the outbreak of COVID-19, saving many lives. However, they are under incredible unknown psychological pressures with a considerable risk of infection. In this study, a self-administered questionnaire was used to survey 593 frontline nurses in Wuhan City and non-Hubei provinces for psychological responses from March 1 to March 10, 2020. Compared with nurses outside Hubei Province, those working in Wuhan were more likely to feel physically and mentally exhausted. Their probable depression and anxiety were significantly higher than those of nurses outside Hubei province (31.2%, 18.3% vs. 13.8%, 5.9%). Correspondingly, the depressive symptoms were more often reported in the Wuhan group (70.8% vs. 41.4%). Although Wuhan received wishes, concerns, and abundant psychological and material resources from all of the world, the survey-based study found that frontline nurses in Wuhan still had higher depression and anxiety with less social support compared with nurses from non-Hubei provinces. Unexpectedly, only 4.0% of nurses have sought psychological assistance. These findings suggested that the short-term psychological impact of frontline nurses in Wuhan during the COVID-19 outbreak was extremely high compared with nurses outside Hubei Province. This research enlightened the efficient integration of psychological resources, the optimization of the nurse emergency psychological assistance system, and the mental health care of medical staff during the outbreak of epidemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Nurses , Anxiety , China/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Patient Care , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Int Rev Immunol ; 41(2): 217-230, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1093424

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) triggered by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) erupted in Hubei Province of China in December 2019 and has become a pandemic. Severe COVID-19 patients who suffer from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and multi-organ dysfunction have high mortality. Several studies have shown that this is closely related to the cytokine release syndrome (CRS), often loosely referred to as cytokine storm. IL-6 is one of the key factors and its level is positively correlated with the severity of the disease. The molecular mechanisms for CRS in COVID-19 are related to the effects of the S-protein and N-protein of the virus and its ability to trigger NF-κB activation by disabling the inhibitory component IκB. This leads to activation of immune cells and the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines such as IL-6 and TNF-α. Other mechanisms related to IL-6 include its interaction with GM-CSF and interferon responses. The pivotal role of IL-6 makes it a target for therapeutic agents and studies on tocilizumab are already ongoing. Other possible targets of treating CRS in COVID-19 include IL-1ß and TNF-α. Recently, reports of a CRS like illness called multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) in children have surfaced, with a variable presentation which in some cases resembles Kawasaki disease. It is likely that the immunological derangement and cytokine release occurring in COVID-19 cases is variable, or on a spectrum, that can potentially be governed by genetic factors. Currently, there are no approved biological modulators for the treatment of COVID-19, but the urgency of the pandemic has led to numerous clinical trials worldwide. Ultimately, there is great promise that an anti-inflammatory modulator targeting a cytokine storm effect may prove to be very beneficial in reducing morbidity and mortality in COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cytokine Release Syndrome , COVID-19/complications , Humans , Morbidity , SARS-CoV-2 , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome
8.
NPJ Precis Oncol ; 5(1): 1, 2021 Jan 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1042956

ABSTRACT

Little is known of the patterns of expression of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 or the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in patients with COVID-19 and colorectal cancer. We found in both bulk and single-cell RNA-seq profiles that ACE2 and TMPRSS2 were expressed at high levels on tumor and normal colorectal epithelial tissues. Clinically, patients with colorectal cancer and COVID-19 were more likely to have lymphopenia, higher respiratory rate, and high hypersensitive C-reactive protein levels than matched patients with COVID-19 but without cancer. These results suggest that patients with colorectal cancer may be particularly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Further mechanistic studies are needed to support our findings.

10.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 201(11): 1372-1379, 2020 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-975792

ABSTRACT

Rationale: The global death toll from coronavirus disease (COVID-19) virus as of May 12, 2020, exceeds 286,000. The risk factors for death were attributed to advanced age and comorbidities but have not been accurately defined.Objectives: To report the clinical features of 85 fatal cases of COVID-19 in two hospitals in Wuhan.Methods: Medical records were collected of 85 fatal cases of COVID-19 between January 9, 2020, and February 15, 2020. Information recorded included medical history, exposure history, comorbidities, symptoms, signs, laboratory findings, computed tomographic scans, and clinical management.Measurements and Main Results: The median age of the patients was 65.8 years, and 72.9% were male. Common symptoms were fever (78 [91.8%]), shortness of breath (50 [58.8%]), fatigue (50 [58.8%]), and dyspnea (60 [70.6%]). Hypertension, diabetes, and coronary heart disease were the most common comorbidities. Notably, 81.2% of patients had very low eosinophil counts on admission. Complications included respiratory failure (80 [94.1%]), shock (69 [81.2%]), acute respiratory distress syndrome (63 [74.1%]), and arrhythmia (51 [60%]), among others. Most patients received antibiotic (77 [90.6%]), antiviral (78 [91.8%]), and glucocorticoid (65 [76.5%]) treatments. A total of 38 (44.7%) and 33 (38.8%) patients received intravenous immunoglobulin and IFN-α2b, respectively.Conclusions: In this depictive study of 85 fatal cases of COVID-19, most cases were males aged over 50 years with noncommunicable chronic diseases. The majority of the patients died of multiple organ failure. Early onset of shortness of breath may be used as an observational symptom for COVID-19 exacerbations. Eosinophilopenia may indicate a poor prognosis. A combination of antimicrobial drugs did not offer considerable benefit to the outcome of this group of patients.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , China/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Coronary Disease/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Hypertension/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Multiple Organ Failure/virology , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Young Adult
11.
J Immunother Cancer ; 8(2)2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-748814

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Individualized prediction of mortality risk can inform the treatment strategy for patients with COVID-19 and solid tumors and potentially improve patient outcomes. We aimed to develop a nomogram for predicting in-hospital mortality of patients with COVID-19 with solid tumors. METHODS: We enrolled patients with COVID-19 with solid tumors admitted to 32 hospitals in China between December 17, 2020, and March 18, 2020. A multivariate logistic regression model was constructed via stepwise regression analysis, and a nomogram was subsequently developed based on the fitted multivariate logistic regression model. Discrimination and calibration of the nomogram were evaluated by estimating the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) for the model and by bootstrap resampling, a Hosmer-Lemeshow test, and visual inspection of the calibration curve. RESULTS: There were 216 patients with COVID-19 with solid tumors included in the present study, of whom 37 (17%) died and the other 179 all recovered from COVID-19 and were discharged. The median age of the enrolled patients was 63.0 years and 113 (52.3%) were men. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that increasing age (OR=1.08, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.16), receipt of antitumor treatment within 3 months before COVID-19 (OR=28.65, 95% CI 3.54 to 231.97), peripheral white blood cell (WBC) count ≥6.93 ×109/L (OR=14.52, 95% CI 2.45 to 86.14), derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (dNLR; neutrophil count/(WBC count minus neutrophil count)) ≥4.19 (OR=18.99, 95% CI 3.58 to 100.65), and dyspnea on admission (OR=20.38, 95% CI 3.55 to 117.02) were associated with elevated mortality risk. The performance of the established nomogram was satisfactory, with an AUC of 0.953 (95% CI 0.908 to 0.997) for the model, non-significant findings on the Hosmer-Lemeshow test, and rough agreement between predicted and observed probabilities as suggested in calibration curves. The sensitivity and specificity of the model were 86.4% and 92.5%. CONCLUSION: Increasing age, receipt of antitumor treatment within 3 months before COVID-19 diagnosis, elevated WBC count and dNLR, and having dyspnea on admission were independent risk factors for mortality among patients with COVID-19 and solid tumors. The nomogram based on these factors accurately predicted mortality risk for individual patients.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Hospital Mortality , Neoplasms/therapy , Nomograms , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Age Factors , Aged , Area Under Curve , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , China/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Dyspnea/physiopathology , Fatigue/physiopathology , Female , Heart Rate , Humans , Leukocyte Count , Logistic Models , Lung Neoplasms/complications , Lung Neoplasms/therapy , Lymphocyte Count , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Neoplasm Staging , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/pathology , Neutrophils , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/complications , ROC Curve , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2
13.
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine ; 202(2):300, 2020.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-660932
14.
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine ; 202(2):301-303, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-657287
15.
American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine ; 2020.
Article | WHO COVID | ID: covidwho-327237
16.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 115(5): 766-773, 2020 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-143091

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Since the outbreak of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in December 2019, various digestive symptoms have been frequently reported in patients infected with the virus. In this study, we aimed to further investigate the prevalence and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with digestive symptoms. METHODS: In this descriptive, cross-sectional, multicenter study, we enrolled confirmed patients with COVID-19 who presented to 3 hospitals from January 18, 2020, to February 28, 2020. All patients were confirmed by real-time polymerase chain reaction and were analyzed for clinical characteristics, laboratory data, and treatment. Data were followed up until March 18, 2020. RESULTS: In the present study, 204 patients with COVID-19 and full laboratory, imaging, and historical data were analyzed. The average age was 52.9 years (SD ± 16), including 107 men and 97 women. Although most patients presented to the hospital with fever or respiratory symptoms, we found that 103 patients (50.5%) reported a digestive symptom, including lack of appetite (81 [78.6%] cases), diarrhea (35 [34%] cases), vomiting (4 [3.9%] cases), and abdominal pain (2 [1.9%] cases). If lack of appetite is excluded from the analysis (because it is less specific for the gastrointestinal tract), there were 38 total cases (18.6%) where patients presented with a gastrointestinal-specific symptom, including diarrhea, vomiting, or abdominal pain. Patients with digestive symptoms had a significantly longer time from onset to admission than patients without digestive symptoms (9.0 days vs 7.3 days). In 6 cases, there were digestive symptoms, but no respiratory symptoms. As the severity of the disease increased, digestive symptoms became more pronounced. Patients with digestive symptoms had higher mean liver enzyme levels, lower monocyte count, longer prothrombin time, and received more antimicrobial treatment than those without digestive symptoms. DISCUSSION: We found that digestive symptoms are common in patients with COVID-19. Moreover, these patients have a longer time from onset to admission, evidence of longer coagulation, and higher liver enzyme levels. Clinicians should recognize that digestive symptoms, such as diarrhea, are commonly among the presenting features of COVID-19 and that the index of suspicion may need to be raised earlier in at-risk patients presenting with digestive symptoms. However, further large sample studies are needed to confirm these findings.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Diseases/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 , China/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Gastrointestinal Diseases/therapy , Gastrointestinal Diseases/virology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Prevalence , Treatment Outcome
17.
Can J Cardiol ; 36(6): 915-930, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-72377

ABSTRACT

With more than 1,800,000 cases and 110,000 deaths globally, COVID-19 is one of worst infectious disease outbreaks in history. This paper provides a critical review of the available evidence regarding the lessons learned from the Chinese experience with COVID-19 prevention and management. The steps that have led to a near disappearance of new cases in China included rapid sequencing of the virus to establish testing kits, which allowed tracking of infected persons in and out of Wuhan. In addition, aggressive quarantine measures included the complete isolation of Wuhan and then later Hubei Province and the rest of the country, as well as closure of all schools and nonessential businesses. Other measures included the rapid construction of two new hospitals and the establishment of "Fangcang" shelter hospitals. In the absence of a vaccine, the management of COVID-19 included antivirals, high-flow oxygen, mechanical ventilation, corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine, tocilizumab, interferons, intravenous immunoglobulin, and convalescent plasma infusions. These measures appeared to provide only moderate success. Although some measures have been supported by weak descriptive data, their effectiveness is still unclear pending well controlled clinical trials. In the end, it was the enforcement of drastic quarantine measures that stopped SARS-CoV-2 from spreading. The earlier the implementation, the less likely resources will be depleted. The most critical factors in stopping a pandemic are early recognition of infected individuals, carriers, and contacts and early implementation of quarantine measures with an organised, proactive, and unified strategy at a national level. Delays result in significantly higher death tolls.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Communicable Disease Control , Coronavirus Infections , Pandemics , Patient Care Management , Pneumonia, Viral , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , China/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Care Management/methods , Patient Care Management/organization & administration , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL