Case Report: Heterozygous Germline Variant in EIF6 Additional to Biallelic SBDS Pathogenic Variants in a Patient With Ribosomopathy Shwachman-Diamond Syndrome.

Background: Shwachman-Diamond syndrome (SDS) is a rare autosomal recessive ribosomopathy mainly characterized by exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, skeletal alterations, neutropenia, and a relevant risk of hematological transformation. At least 90% of SDS patients have pathogenic variants in SBDS, the first gene associated with the disease with very low allelic heterogeneity; three variants, derived from events of genetic conversion between SBDS and its pseudogene, SBDSP1, provided the alleles observed in about 62% of SDS patients. Methods: We performed a reanalysis of the available WES files of a group of SDS patients with biallelic SBDS pathogenic variants, studying the results by next bioinformatic and protein structural analysis. Parallelly, careful clinical attention was given to the patient focused in this study. Results: We found and confirmed in one SDS patient a germline heterozygous missense variant (c.100T>C; p.Phe34Leu) in the EIF6 gene. This variant, inherited from his mother, has a very low frequency, and it is predicted as pathogenic, according to several in silico prediction tools. The protein structural analysis also envisages the variant could reduce the binding to the nascent 60S ribosomal. Conclusion: This study focused on the hypothesis that the EIF6 germline variant mimics the effect of somatic deletions of chromosome 20, always including the locus of this gene, and similarly may rescue the ribosomal stress and ribosomal dysfunction due to SBDS mutations. It is likely that this rescue may contribute to the stable and not severe hematological status of the proband, but a definite answer on the role of this EIF6 variant can be obtained only by adding a functional layer of evidence. In the future, these results are likely to be useful for selected cases in personalized medicine and therapy.

Neuropathological findings from COVID-19 patients with neurological symptoms argue against a direct brain invasion of SARS-CoV-2: A critical systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Neuropathological studies can elucidate the mechanisms of nervous system damage associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Despite literature on this topic is rapidly expanding, correlations between neurological symptoms and brain pathology findings in COVID-19 patients remain largely unknown. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review on neuropathological studies in COVID-19, including 438 patients from 45 articles published by April 22, 2021. We retrieved quantitative data regarding demographic, clinical, and neuropathological findings. We carried out a Wilcoxon rank sum test or χ2 test to compare patients' subgroups based on different clinical and brain pathology features. RESULTS: Neuropathological findings in COVID-19 patients were microgliosis (52.5%), astrogliosis (45.6%), inflammatory infiltrates (44.0%), hypoxic-ischemic lesions (40.8%), edema (25.3%), and hemorrhagic lesions (20.5%). SARS-CoV-2 RNA and proteins were identified in brain specimens of 41.9% and 28.3% of subjects, respectively. Detailed clinical information was available from 245 patients (55.9%), and among them, 96 subjects (39.2%) had presented with neurological symptoms in association with typical COVID-19 manifestations. We found that: (i) the detection rate of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and proteins in brain specimens did not differ between patients with versus those without neurological symptoms; (ii) brain edema, hypoxic-ischemic lesions, and inflammatory infiltrates were more frequent in subjects with neurological impairment; (iii) neurological symptoms were more common among older individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic revision of clinical correlates in COVID-19 highlights the pathogenic relevance of brain inflammatory reaction and hypoxic-ischemic damage rather than neuronal viral load. This analysis indicates that a more focused study design is needed, especially in the perspective of potential therapeutic trials.

More Severe COVID-19 in Patients With Active Cancer: Results of a Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity presentation between oncologic and non-oncologic patients and to evaluate the impact of cancer type and stage on COVID-19 course. METHODS: We performed a multicentre, retrospective study involving 13 COVID-19 Units in Campania region from February to May 2020. We defined as severe COVID-19 presentation the cases that required mechanical ventilation and/or admission to Intensive Care Units (ICU) and/or in case of death. RESULTS: We enrolled 371 COVID-19 patients, of whom 34 (9.2%) had a history or a diagnosis of cancer (24 solid, 6 onco-hematological). Oncologic patients were older (p<0.001), had more comorbidities (p<0.001) and showed a higher rate of severe COVID-19 presentation (p=0.001) and of death (p<0.001). Compared to 12 patients with non-active cancer and to 337 without cancer, the 17 patients with active cancer had more comorbidities and showed a higher rate of severe COVID-19 and of mortality (all p values <0.001). Compared to the 281 non-severe patients, the 90 subjects with a severe presentation of COVID-19 were older (p<0.01), with more comorbidities (p<0.001) and with a higher rate of cancer (p=0.001). At multivariate analysis, age (OR 1.08, 95% CI: 1.04-1.11) and suffering from cancer in an active stage (OR 5.33, 95% CI: 1.77-16.53) were independently associated with severe COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Since the higher risk of severe evolution of COVID-19, cancer patients, especially those with an active malignancy, should be candidates for early evaluation of symptoms and early treatment for COVID-19.

The use of chest ultrasonography in suspected cases of COVID-19 in the emergency department.

AIM: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus-specific reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) represents the diagnostic gold standard. We explored the value of chest ultrasonography to predict positivity to SARS-CoV-2 on RT-PCR in suspected COVID-19 cases. PATIENTS & METHODS: Consecutive patients with suspect COVID-19 were included if they had fever and/or history of cough and/or dyspnea. Lung ultrasound score (LUSS) was computed according to published methods. RESULTS: A total of 76 patients were included. A 3-variable model based on aspartate transaminase (AST) > upper limit of normal, LUSS >12 and body temperature >37.5°C yielded an overall accuracy of 91%. CONCLUSION: A simple LUSS-based model may represent a powerful tool for initial assessment in suspected cases of COVID-19.

Lung ultrasound as diagnostic tool for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The aim of this study was to explore the role of lung ultrasound (LUS) in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection and to verify its utility in the prediction of lung disease's severity and outcome. Fifty-three consecutive patients presenting to the Emergency Department of Santa Maria delle Grazie Hospital with high suspicion of SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent diagnostic test for SARS-CoV-2 on samples obtained from nasopharyngeal swab as well as complete proper diagnostic work-up that included clinical evaluation, laboratory tests, blood gas analyses, chest CT and LUS. A semiquantitative analysis of B-lines distribution was performed to calculate the LUS score. Patients were divided into two groups according to the results of both SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test and other exams (Group A = pneumonia due to SARS-CoV2 infection vs Group B = no SARS-CoV2 infection and another definite diagnosis). LUS showed an excellent accuracy in predicting the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection (area under the ROC curve of 0.92 with a sensibility of 73% and a specificity of 89% a the cut-off of 12.5). LUS score was more impaired in SARS-CoV-2 patients (18.1 ± 6.0 vs 7.6 ± 5.9, p < 0.00001) and it is significantly negatively correlated with PF ratio values (r = - 0.719, p < 0.0001). An intrahospital mortality rate of 46% was found; patients with adverse outcome had significant higher value of LUS, PF, LDH, and APACHE II score. None of these parameters was predictive of mortality. LUS is a useful tool for the early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection and for the evaluation of the disease severity, but does not predict mortality. Further studies with repeated evaluations of LUS score are needed to further explore the role of LUS in the assessment of severity in SARS-CoV-2 disease and in the monitoring of the response to treatments.