ABSTRACT
SARS-CoV-2 virus emerged in January 2020 in Korea, and the COVID-19 pandemic changed quarantine policy, personal hygiene awareness, social contact policy, and so on. Therefore, prevalence of diseases has also changed. We investigated the prevalence of 16 respiratory viruses during the COVID-19 pandemic period. We analyzed 20,513 sputum specimens of patients with acute respiratory symptoms from over 350 hospitals in southwest region of Korea for 2 years (July 2020-June 2022) to determine positive rates of detection using the Allplex Respiratory Panel 1/2/3 (Seegene, Republic of Korea) which is a multiplex real-time PCR assay by month. The positive rate of most respiratory viruses was less than 5% at the early period (July 2020-June 2021) of COVID-19 pandemic, except for adenovirus, human rhinovirus and human bocavirus (hBoV). The positive rate of most respiratory viruses tends to decrease during the period of rapid increase in the number of COVID-19 infections except for coronavirus OC43 and hBoV. The positive rates of respiratory syncytial virus A, respiratory syncytial virus B, and parainfluenza virus 3 increased during the cold season just before the rapid increase in the number of COVID-19 infections. Influenza virus positivity was very low (<2%) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The low positive rate of most respiratory viruses in the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic may be related to strict quarantine policy at that time. The patterns of outbreaks of other respiratory viruses vary from virus to virus during the COVID-19 pandemic. Rapid increase in the number of COVID-19 infections during the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the prevalence of other respiratory viruses. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of International Journal of Infectious Diseases is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)
ABSTRACT
Background: Demand for alcohol-based products, including gel- and aqueous-type hand sanitizers, room sprays, and mouthwashes, has rapidly increased during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic because of their microbicidal properties. However, toxic methanol can be found from the intentional addition of methanol by manufacturers and invariable production during the manufacturing of alcohol (ethanol). Although the FDA has recommended that such products should contain less than 630 ppm of methanol, it is only a temporary measure established specifically to regulate such products during the current COVID-19 pandemic and hence is not strictly regulated. Objective: This study aims to detect and quantify the level of methanol in alcohol-based products. However, some manufacturers unethically add methanol to their products and promote them as methanol-free. Besides, they do not provide proficiency and toxicity test results. Therefore, these kinds of products need to be analyzed to determine if they are acceptable to use. Methods: This study qualitatively and quantitatively investigates the amount of methanol in commercial alcohol-based products using a newly developed headspace gas chromatography/mass spectrometry method. Moreover, alcoholic beverages which contain methanol are analyzed to be compared with the levels of methanol in alcohol-based products and determine if their methanol levels are acceptable. Results: Methanol concentrations in gel-type hand sanitizers (517 ppm) and mouthwashes (202 ppm) were similar to those in white wine (429 ppm) and beer (256 ppm), respectively, while that of aqueous-type hand sanitizers (1139 ppm) was 1.5 times more than that of red wine (751 ppm). Conclusion: Methanol levels in most of the alcohol-based products did not exceed the FDA-recommended limit.
ABSTRACT
Purpose Patients with COVID-19 show variable clinical course;transplant patients often show worse outcomes. The effect of COVID-19 on the allograft and the sources of tissue injury that contribute to such poor outcomes are poorly defined. This study leverages cell-free DNA (cfDNA) to measure allograft injury as donor-derived cfDNA (ddcfDNA) and injury from different tissue types using tissue-specific DNA methylomic signatures. Methods 14 consecutive COVID-19 transplant patients (8 Kidney, 3 Lung, 1 Heart, 1 Liver, and one multi-organ transplant patients) and 30 healthy controls were included. Plasma nuclear cfDNA (ncfDNA) and mitochondrial cfDNA (mtcfDNA) level were measured via digital droplet PCR, and ddcfDNA using AlloSure (CareDx). cfDNA whole-genome bisulfite sequencing was performed to identify cfDNA tissues of origin leveraging tissue specific DNA methylomes and deconvolution algorithm. Results 75% of the COVID-19 transplant patients showed high ddcfDNA level compared to published quiescent values, including all lung, 50% of the kidney, liver and multi-organ transplant patients (8.5, 4.4, 30 and 16-X fold change, respectively). Total ncfDNA and mtcfDNA were 15X and 310X higher in COVID-19 transplant patients compared to controls, respectively;< 0.0001.The predominant tissues contributing to cfDNA were hematopoietic cells (80%) (Figure). More importantly, COVID-19 transplant patients showed 10 to 100 fold higher tissue specific cfDNA derived from monocyte, neutrophil, erythroblast, vascular endothelium, adipocyte, hepatocyte, kidney, heart and lung compared to controls. Analysis comparing cfDNA in transplant and non-transplant COVID-19 patients is on-going. Conclusion The allograft undergoes significant injury following COVID-19. Further, cfDNA from multiple tissue types is significantly higher in COVID-19 transplant patients. Future studies in a larger cohorts of transplant and non-transplant patients are needed to elucidate why transplant patients show worse COVID-19 outcomes.