Ethnobotanical research under the COVID-19 pandemic: assessing a remote method for documenting Indigenous plant-related knowledge

Background: In response to the limitations on fieldwork imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, we describe and assess a remote method for documenting plant-related knowledge, using smartphones that requires no in-person interaction between an on-site Indigenous community and off-site researchers. Methods: The on-site team identified the Indigenous taxa, created equivalents of photo vouchers, and recorded their names and uses as voice messages using a smartphone, thereby learning about plants from one another. They then sent the data using WhatsApp messages to the off-site team, who identified the botanical names of the taxa, and analyzed the plant-related knowledge. Results: We assess the remote, collaborative, and transdisciplinary quality of the method, factoring in communication, audiovisual documentation, species identification, knowledge exchange, logistics, and ethics. Despite the problems we experienced with identifying taxa growing in high forest and translation issues that complicated the documentation of plant uses, the method was on the whole a success. It allowed the on-site team to activate their passive knowledge of their language and share their knowledge with their relatives. The off-site team identified 57% of the recorded 54 taxa to species level and documented their names and uses as primary audio data, which keep on enhancing the quality of the documentation. Conclusions: Smartphones can be used as research tools during periods of restricted physical access, but also to extend research beyond the fleeting field visits and to elevate the empirical standard of ethnobotany when it comes to language data. We see such remote research solutions not as replacements for in-person collaborations, but as valid and dynamically evolving research methods in their own right. © 2023, Ilia State University, Institute of Botany, Department of Ethnobotany. All rights reserved.

Occupational Risk Factors for SARS-CoV-2 Seropositivity in Healthcare Workers: Results of a Longitudinal Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to evaluate COVID-19 risk factors among healthcare workers (HCWs) before vaccine-induced immunity. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal cohort study of HCWs ( N = 1233) with SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G quantification by ELISA and repeated surveys over 9 months. Risk factors were assessed by multivariable-adjusted logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G was associated with work in internal medicine (odds ratio [OR], 2.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-8.26) and role of physician-in-training (OR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.08-6.43), including interns (OR, 4.22; 95% CI, 1.20-14.00) and resident physicians (OR, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.24-8.33). Odds were lower among staff confident in N95 use (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.31-0.96) and decreased over the follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Excess COVID-19 risk observed among physicians-in-training early in the COVID-19 pandemic was reduced with improved occupational health interventions before vaccinations.

SHORTER DISEASE DURATION IS ASSOCIATED WITH BETTER OUTCOMES IN PATIENTS WITH MODERATELY TO SEVERELY ACTIVE CROHN'S DISEASE TREATED WITH RISANKIZUMAB: RESULTS FROM THE PHASE 3 ADVANCE, MOTIVATE, AND FORTIFY STUDIES

Background: An association between shorter disease duration and improved clinical efficacy has been shown in post hoc analyses of clinical trial data with biological therapies in Crohn’s disease (CD). The efficacy and safety of risankizumab (RZB) as induction and maintenance therapy have been recently reported.1,2 Here, the efficacy of RZB stratified by baseline CD duration is reported. Methods: In ADVANCE (NCT03105128) and MOTIVATE (NCT03104413), patients with moderately to severely active CD received intravenous (IV) RZB induction therapy or placebo (PBO) for 12 weeks. Patients with clinical response to RZB IV induction were re-randomised in a 52-week maintenance study (FORTIFY NCT03105102) to receive subcutaneous (SC) RZB or PBO (ie, withdrawal). For this posthoc analysis, patient subgroups were stratified by years of CD duration at baseline (< 2, 2– 5, > 5–10, and > 10 years). Induction analyses focused on patients who received RZB 600 mg IV or PBO for 12 weeks. As all patients who entered maintenance responded to RZB IV induction, maintenance analyses were limited to those patients who responded to induction and then received RZB 360 mg SC for 52 weeks. Clinical and endoscopic outcomes were evaluated using nonresponder imputation incorporating multiple imputation to handle missing data due to impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Safety was assessed throughout the studies. Results: The induction and maintenance analyses included 527 patients who received RZB 600 mg IV and 141 patients who received RZB 360 mg SC, respectively. At the end of induction (week 12), patients with CD duration of < 2 years achieved higher rates of endoscopic outcomes with IV RZB induction vs patients with longer durations of disease (Figure 1), and regardless of baseline CD duration, greater proportions of RZB-treated patients achieved clinical remission (defined by stool frequency and abdominal pain), endoscopic response, endoscopic remission, and ulcer-free endoscopy vs PBO (P ≤ .05). Clinical remission rates at week 12 were numerically higher in patients with CD duration of < 5 years vs > 5 years (Figure 1). Similar results for improved clinical and endoscopic outcomes associated with shorter disease duration were observed at week 52 with RZB 360 mg SC maintenance treatment (Figure 2). RZB was well tolerated with lower rates of serious adverse events and serious infections vs PBO in induction, across CD duration subgroups. Conclusions: RZB induction and maintenance therapy was effective and well tolerated with a safety profile generally similar across CD duration subgroups. Achievement of clinical and endoscopic endpoints were higher in patients with shorter duration of CD, suggesting that earlier introduction of RZB therapy may lead to improved outcomes.

[Cellular immunotherapy at the University Hospital of Liege : advances, challenges and prospects]

Cellular immunotherapy consists in using the cells of the immune system as a therapeutic weapon. In this constantly evolving field, the therapeutic strategies developed at the University Hospital of Liege are hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, mesenchymal stromal cells and targeted therapy with CAR-T cells (Chimeric Antigen Receptor T cells). The first two modalities represent a form of non-targeted cell therapy that has been developed over the past decades. While hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is established as the reference treatment for many hematological diseases, mesenchymal stromal cells are still under investigation in various pathologies (notably Crohn's disease, organ transplantation, COVID-19 and pulmonary fibrosis). By contrast, CAR-T cells represent a recently developed and extremely promising targeted immunotherapy. This therapeutic approach has already revolutionized the treatment of B-cell lymphopathies, and has the potential to do the same for many other diseases in the near future.

Shorter disease duration is associated with better outcomes in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's Disease treated with risankizumab: Results from the phase 3 ADVANCE, MOTIVATE, and FORTIFY studies

Background: An association between shorter disease duration and improved clinical efficacy has been shown in post hoc analyses of clinical trial data with biological therapies in Crohn's disease (CD). The efficacy and safety of risankizumab (RZB) as induction and maintenance therapy have been recently reported. Here, the efficacy of RZB stratified by baseline CD duration is reported. Methods: In ADVANCE (NCT03105128) and MOTIVATE (NCT03104413), patients with moderately to severely active CD received intravenous (IV) RZB induction therapy or placebo (PBO) for 12 weeks. Patients with clinical response to RZB IV induction were re-randomised in a 52-week maintenance study (FORTIFY, NCT03105102) to receive subcutaneous (SC) RZB or PBO (ie, withdrawal). For this post-hoc analysis, patient subgroups were stratified by years of CD duration at baseline (< 2, 2-5, > 5-10, and > 10 years). Induction analyses focused on patients who received RZB 600 mg IV or PBO for 12 weeks. As all patients who entered maintenance responded to RZB IV induction, maintenance analyses were limited to those patients who responded to induction and then received RZB 360 mg SC for 52 weeks. Clinical and endoscopic outcomes were evaluated using nonresponder imputation incorporating multiple imputation to handle missing data due to impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Safety was assessed throughout the studies. Results: The induction and maintenance analyses included 527 patients who received RZB 600 mg IV and 141 patients who received RZB 360 mg SC, respectively. At the end of induction (week 12), patients with CD duration of < 2 years achieved higher rates of endoscopic outcomes with IV RZB induction vs patients with longer durations of disease (Figure 1), and regardless of baseline CD duration, greater proportions of RZB-treated patients achieved clinical remission (defined by stool frequency and abdominal pain), endoscopic response, endoscopic remission, and ulcer-free endoscopy vs PBO (P ≤ .05). Clinical remission rates at week 12 were numerically higher in patients with CD duration of < 5 years vs > 5 years (Figure 1). Similar results for improved clinical and endoscopic outcomes associated with shorter disease duration were observed at week 52 with RZB 360 mg SC maintenance treatment (Figure 2). RZB was well tolerated with lower rates of serious adverse events and serious infections vs PBO in induction, across CD duration subgroups. Conclusion: RZB induction and maintenance therapy was effective and well tolerated with a safety profile generally similar across CD duration subgroups. Achievement of clinical and endoscopic endpoints were higher in patients with shorter duration of CD, suggesting that earlier introduction of RZB therapy may lead to improved outcomes.

Performance of Abbott Architect, Ortho Vitros, and Euroimmun Assays in Detecting Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection (preprint)

Background: Several serological assays have been developed to detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies, but evidence about their comparative performance is limited. We sought to assess the sensitivity of four anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) in individuals with evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: We obtained sera from 36 individuals with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March and May 2020. We evaluated samples collected at around 21 days ({+/-}14 days) after their initial PCR test using 3 commercially available ELISA assays, two anti-spike (Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics Vitros, and Euroimmun) and one anti-nucleocapsid (Abbott Architect), and a Yale-developed anti-spike ELISA test. We determined the sensitivity of the tests and compared their results. The Euroimmun and Yale ELISA had an equivocal and indeterminate category, which were considered as both negative and positive. Results: Among the 36 individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection, mean age was 43 ({+/-}13) years and 19 (53%) were female. The sensitivities of the tests were not significantly different (Abbott Architect, Ortho Vitros, Euroimmmun, and Yale assays: 86% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71-95), 94% (95% CI, 81-99), 86% (95% CI, 71-95), and 94% (95% CI, 81-99), respectively; p-value=0.464). The sensitivities of the Euroimmun and Yale ELISA tests increased when the equivocal/indeterminate results were considered positive (97% [95% CI, 85-100] and 100% [95% CI, 90-100], respectively), but were not significantly different from other tests (p=0.082). The cross-correlation coefficient ranged from 0.85-0.98 between three anti-spike protein assays (Ortho Vitros, Euroimmun, Yale) and was 0.58-0.71 between the three anti-spike protein assays and the anti-nucleocapsid assay (Abbott). Conclusion: The sensitivities of four anti-SARS-CoV-2 protein assays did not significantly differ, although the sample size was small. Sensitivity also depended on the interpretation of equivocal and indeterminate results. The strongest correlations were present for the three anti-spike proteins assays. These findings suggest that individual test characteristics and the correlation between different tests should be considered when comparing or aggregating data across different populations studies for serologic surveillance of past SARS-CoV-2 infection.