Efficacy and safety of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) antibodies in COVID-19 patients: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine the efficacy and safety of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) antibodies in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: We searched Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases until July 27, 2022. Both randomized control trials (RCTs) and cohort studies were included and analyzed separately. The outcomes included mortality, incidence of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), ventilation improvement rate (need oxygen therapy to without oxygen therapy), secondary infection, and adverse events (AEs). The odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated by a random-effects meta-analysis model. RESULTS: Five RCTs and 2 cohort studies with 1726 COVID-19 patients were recruited (n = 866 in the GM-CSF antibody group and n = 891 in the control group). GM-CSF antibodies treatment reduced the incidence of IMV, which was supported by two cohort studies (OR 0.16; 95% CI 0.03, 0.74) and three RCTs (OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.41, 0.94). GM-CSF antibodies resulted in slight but not significant reductions in mortality (based on two cohort studies and five RCTs) and ventilation improvement (based on one cohort study and two RCTs). The sensitive analysis further showed the results of mortality and ventilation improvement rate became statistically significant when one included study was removed. Besides, GM-CSF antibodies did not increase the risks of the second infection (based on one cohort study and five RCTs) and AEs (based on five RCTs). CONCLUSION: GM-CSF antibody treatments may be an efficacious and well-tolerant way for the treatment of COVID-19. Further clinical evidence is still warranted.

Efficacy and safety of granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) antibodies in COVID-19 patients: a meta-analysis

Objective This study aims to determine the efficacy and safety of granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) antibodies in COVID-19 patients. Methods We searched Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases until July 27, 2022. Both randomized control trials (RCTs) and cohort studies were included and analyzed separately. The outcomes included mortality, incidence of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), ventilation improvement rate (need oxygen therapy to without oxygen therapy), secondary infection, and adverse events (AEs). The odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated by a random-effects meta-analysis model. Results Five RCTs and 2 cohort studies with 1726 COVID-19 patients were recruited (n = 866 in the GM-CSF antibody group and n = 891 in the control group). GM-CSF antibodies treatment reduced the incidence of IMV, which was supported by two cohort studies (OR 0.16;95% CI 0.03, 0.74) and three RCTs (OR 0.62;95% CI 0.41, 0.94). GM-CSF antibodies resulted in slight but not significant reductions in mortality (based on two cohort studies and five RCTs) and ventilation improvement (based on one cohort study and two RCTs). The sensitive analysis further showed the results of mortality and ventilation improvement rate became statistically significant when one included study was removed. Besides, GM-CSF antibodies did not increase the risks of the second infection (based on one cohort study and five RCTs) and AEs (based on five RCTs). Conclusion GM-CSF antibody treatments may be an efficacious and well-tolerant way for the treatment of COVID-19. Further clinical evidence is still warranted. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10787-022-01105-9.

Variation in Public Trust, Perceived Societal Fairness, and Well-Being before and after COVID-19 Onset-Evidence from the China Family Panel Studies.

The sudden onset of the COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on all aspects of people's lives, including their attitudes toward society and psychological well-being. This study aimed to analyze the variation in public trust, perceived societal fairness, and well-being before and after the outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study used two-wave longitudinal data of 15,487 residents (2018, T1; 2020, T2) derived from the Chinese Family Panel Studies (CFPS). A repeated measures analysis of variance showed that (a) public trust, perceived societal fairness, and subjective well-being significantly improved and (b) depression significantly increased. Linear regression analysis showed that education and socioeconomic status had a significant predictive effect on public trust, perceived societal fairness, and depression; socioeconomic status had a significant predictive effect on subjective well-being. This study provides evidence and direction for current social governance, namely, policy implementation and pandemic response.

Stronger functional network connectivity and social support buffer against negative affect during the COVID-19 outbreak and after the pandemic peak.

Health and financial uncertainties, as well as enforced social distancing, during the COVID-19 pandemic have adversely affected the mental health of people. These impacts are expected to continue even after the pandemic, particularly for those who lack support from family and friends. The salience network (SN), default mode network (DMN), and frontoparietal network (FPN) function in an interconnected manner to support information processing and emotional regulation processes in stressful contexts. In this study, we examined whether functional connectivity of the SN, DMN, and FPN, measured using resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging before the pandemic, is a neurobiological marker of negative affect (NA) during the COVID-19 pandemic and after its peak in a large sample (N = 496, 360 females); the moderating role of social support in the brain-NA association was also investigated. We found that participants reported an increase in NA during the pandemic compared to before the pandemic, and the NA did not decrease, even after the peak period. People with higher connectivity within the SN and between the SN and the other two networks reported less NA during and after the COVID-19 outbreak peak, and the buffer effect was stronger if their social support was greater. These findings suggest that the functional networks that are responsible for affective processing and executive functioning, as well as the social support from family and friends, play an important role in protecting against NA under stressful and uncontrollable situations.

Trait self-control and disinhibited eating in COVID-19: The mediating role of perceived mortality threat and negative affect.

As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spreads globally, people are at risk of developing disinhibited eating behaviors. This study aimed to examine whether perceived mortality threat and negative affect mediate the relationship between trait self-control and disinhibited eating during the pandemic. A longitudinal survey was administered to a sample of college students (N = 634) before the outbreak (September 2019, T1), during the mid-term (February 2020, T2), and in the later stage of the pandemic (April 2020, T3). Self-report measures of trait self-control (T1), perceived mortality threat (T2, T3), negative affect (T2, T3), and disinhibited eating (T2, T3) were successively completed. Trait self-control was found to be negatively associated with negative affect, perceived mortality threat, and disinhibited eating during the mid-term and later stage of the pandemic. Disinhibited eating was positively associated with negative affect and perceived mortality threat. The longitudinal mediation results demonstrated that trait self-control (T1) could negatively predict disinhibited eating (T3) through negative affect (T2) rather than through perceived mortality threat. These findings suggest that trait self-control is of great importance in regulating psychological discomfort and disinhibited eating during stressful periods and that negative affect might be the main psychological mechanism underlying the relationship between self-control ability and disinhibited eating.

Evaluation of the clinical performance of single-, dual-, and triple-target SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR methods.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a pandemic. Reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) has played a vital role in the diagnosis of COVID-19, but the rates of false negatives is not ideal in dealing with this highly infectious virus. It is thus necessary to systematically evaluate the clinical performance of the single-, dual-, triple-target detection kits to guide the clinical diagnosis of this disease. METHODS: A series of reference materials calibrated by droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) and 57 clinical samples were used to evaluate the clinical performance of six single-, dual-, triple-target SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection kits based on RT-qPCR. RESULTS: The dual-target kits, kit B and kit C had the highest and the lowest detection sensitivity, which was 125 copies/mL and 4000 copies/mL, respectively. Among the 57 clinical samples from patients with COVID-19, 47 were tested positive by the kit B, while 35, 29, 28, 30, and 29 were found positive by the kits A, C, D, E, and F, respectively. The number of targets in a detection kit is not a key factor affecting sensitivity, while the amount of sample loading may influence the performance of a detection kit. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a guide when choosing or developing a nucleic acid detection kit for the diagnosis of COVID-19. Also, the absolute-quantification feature and high-sensitivity performance of ddPCR, suggesting that it can be used to review clinically suspected samples.