Remote vs in-person BRCA1/2 non-carriers test disclosure: patients' choice during Covid-19 pandemic restriction.

During Covid-19 pandemic most hospitals have restricted in-person delivery of non-essential healthcare services, including genetic testing delivery, to slow the spread of the virus. Our Onco-Genetic Service also faced this challenging period and had to re-organize its clinical practice with the use of tele-health. Aim of the present paper is to understand whether and how Covid-19-related changes in medical practice influenced patients' satisfaction about the health service provided. 125 BRCA1/2 non carriers (109/125, 87.2% female and 16/125, 12.8% male) in Istituto Tumori "Giovanni Paolo II" of Bari were enrolled. All participants were asked to choose whether they prefer in-person or remote post-test counselling session. Basing on patients' choice, two groups of subjects were composed. One week after the post-test counselling session, participants were phone called and asked to complete: a socio-demographic form, a brief structured interview about their Covid-19 related worries and their satisfaction with the health service provided, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Fear of Covid-19 scale. Qualitative information about patients' choice were also collected. No significant difference about patients' satisfaction with the health service provided emerged between groups. Patients who preferred remote post-test counselling had higher anxiety, worries and fear-of Covid-19 than the others. All remote-counselling subjects preferred tele-genetics because of Covid-19 security, would choose it again and would recommend it to others. Cancer tele-genetics offers good guarantees of comfort and efficacy, but patients' choices are related to personal and psychological variables. The use of tele-genetics has to be a patient's choice.

Weighted Gene Co-Expression Network Analysis Combined with Machine Learning Validation to Identify Key Modules and Hub Genes Associated with SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused an enormous loss of lives. Various clinical trials of vaccines and drugs are being conducted worldwide; nevertheless, as of today, no effective drug exists for COVID-19. The identification of key genes and pathways in this disease may lead to finding potential drug targets and biomarkers. Here, we applied weighted gene co-expression network analysis and LIME as an explainable artificial intelligence algorithm to comprehensively characterize transcriptional changes in bronchial epithelium cells (primary human lung epithelium (NHBE) and transformed lung alveolar (A549) cells) during severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Our study detected a network that significantly correlated to the pathogenicity of COVID-19 infection based on identified hub genes in each cell line separately. The novel hub gene signature that was detected in our study, including PGLYRP4 and HEPHL1, may shed light on the pathogenesis of COVID-19, holding promise for future prognostic and therapeutic approaches. The enrichment analysis of hub genes showed that the most relevant biological process and KEGG pathways were the type I interferon signaling pathway, IL-17 signaling pathway, cytokine-mediated signaling pathway, and defense response to virus categories, all of which play significant roles in restricting viral infection. Moreover, according to the drug-target network, we identified 17 novel FDA-approved candidate drugs, which could potentially be used to treat COVID-19 patients through the regulation of four hub genes of the co-expression network. In conclusion, the aforementioned hub genes might play potential roles in translational medicine and might become promising therapeutic targets. Further in vitro and in vivo experimental studies are needed to evaluate the role of these hub genes in COVID-19.

Prospective Observational COVID-19 Screening and Monitoring of Asymptomatic Cancer Center Health-Care Workers with a Rapid Serological Test.

Health-care workers (HCW) are at high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and, if asymptomatic, for transmitting the virus to fragile cancer patients. We monitored all asymptomatic HCWs of a cancer institute (94% of all employees agreed to enter the study) with the rapid serological test, VivaDiagTM, identifying SARS-CoV-2 associated-IgM/IgG. The tests were performed at time 0 (n = 606) and after 14 days (n = 393). Overall, the VivaDiagTM results of nine HCWs (1.5%) were positive, with one confirmed to be SARS-CoV-2-positive after oropharyngeal swab testing by RT-PCR. At time 0, all nine cases showed IgM expression while IgG was detected in only one. After 14 days, IgM persisted in all the cases, while IgG became evident in four. A chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) confirmed IgM positivity in 5/13 VivaDiagTM positive cases and IgG positivity in 4/5 VivaDiagTM positive cases. Our study suggests that the VivaDiagTM test can be of help in identifying SARS-CoV-2 infected people in cohorts of subjects with a high prevalence.

Rapid Serological Assays and SARS-CoV-2 Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction Assays for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2: Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for the identification of viral nucleic acid is the current standard for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but technical issues limit its utilization for large-scale screening. Serological immunoglobulin M (IgM)/IgG testing has been proposed as a useful tool for detecting SARS-CoV-2 exposure. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to compare the results of the rapid serological VivaDiag test for SARS-CoV-2-related IgM/IgG detection with those of the standard RT-PCR laboratory test for identifying SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid. METHODS: We simultaneously performed both serological and molecular tests with a consecutive series of 191 symptomatic patients. The results provided by a new rapid serological colorimetric test for analyzing IgM/IgG expression were compared with those of RT-PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 detection. RESULTS: Of the 191 subjects, 70 (36.6%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 based on RT-PCR results, while 34 (17.3%) tested positive based on serological IgM/IgG expression. Additionally, 13 (6.8%) subjects tested positive based on serological test results, but also tested negative based on RT-PCR results. The rapid serological test had a sensitivity of 30% and a specificity of 89% compared to the standard RT-PCR assay. Interestingly, the performance of both assays improved 8 days after symptom appearance. After 10 days had passed since symptom appearance, the predictive value of the rapid serological test was higher than that of the standard molecular assay (proportion of positive results: 40% vs 20%). Multivariate analysis showed that age >58 years (P<.01) and period of >15 days after symptom onset (P<.02) were significant and independent factors associated with serological test positivity. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid serological test analyzed in this study seems limited in terms of usefulness when diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, it may be useful for providing relevant information on people's immunoreaction to COVID-19 exposure.

The Strategic Alliance between Clinical and Molecular Science in the War against SARS-CoV-2, with the Rapid-Diagnostics Test as an Indispensable Weapon for Front Line Doctors.

Our work concerns the actual problem of spread of SARS- CoV-2 outbreak which requires fast and correct as possible answer. In current scenario, the need of rapid answer put away the imperative of proper methodology. We focus on the serogical immunoassay for diagnosis of Covid-19 as an important weapon not only for diagnostic purpose, but also for epidemiologic one. The right equilibrium between high speed, low cost and accuracy is obtained with easy-to-use decentralized point-of-care test as the colloidal gold-based immunochromatographic strip assay which detects IgM and IgG antibodies directed against SARS-CoV-2. As our aim is to evaluate the efficacy of Covid-19 rapid tests and of serological assays in real-life settings, we designed a research protocol aimed to establish how to use correctly these diagnostics, taking into account the different possible clinical and epidemiological scenarios.

Fertility Preservation in Cancer Patients During the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), also identified as Corona virus disease 19 (COVID-19), has recently produced a dramatic and widespread sanitary emergency. However, despite the necessity to assist a substantial number of affected patients, it is also essential to, at the same time, guarantee the usual clinical care, particularly to cancer patients, including fertility preservation (FP) strategies before the beginning of the anti-cancer treatments. The FP techniques for adult female patients include oocyte and embryo cryopreservation, which require both adequate ovarian reserve (OR) and controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) to promote multiple follicular growth. However, ovarian tissue cryopreservation is an additional FP practice suitable when an anti-cancer treatment is urgently required, whereas, for male patients, sperm cryopreservation is a simple and well-adopted procedure. Here, we focus on the current conditions in terms of agreements and rules of FP procedures during this COVID-19 pandemic to achieve and provide useful recommendations for the adoption of these techniques in patients with cancer.

A moonshot approach toward the management of cancer patients in the COVID-19 time: what have we learned and what could the Italian network of cancer centers (Alliance Against Cancer, ACC) do after the pandemic wave?

If we focus our attention on seven main features of COVID-19 infection (heterogeneity, fragility, lack of effective treatments and vaccines, "miraculous cures", psychological suffering, deprivation, and globalization), we may establish parallelism with the challenges faced in the steep road to the understanding and treatment of neoplastic diseases. How the similarities between these two conditions can help us cope with the emergency effort represented by the management of cancer patients in the COVID-19 era, today and in the future? In a manner similar to the Cancer Moonshot initiative in the United States, we can hypothesize a multinational moonshot project towards the management of cancer patients during COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, we believe that the main road to elaborate meaningful scientific evidence is represented by the collection of all the data on COVID-19 and cancer comorbidity that are and will become available in cancer centers, coupled with the design of large clinical studies. To address this goal, it is essential to identify the entity that can produce this scientific evidences and the potentially most successful research strategy to undertake. The largest Italian organization for cancer research, Alliance Against Cancer (Alleanza Contro il Cancro, ACC), is called to play a scientific leadership in addressing these challenges, which requires the coordination of oncology teams at regional, national, and international levels. To fulfill this commitment, ACC will create a liaison with health government agencies in order to develop "dynamic" indications able to fight such an unpredictable pandemic.