Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc ; 12(6): 322-331, 2023 Jun 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20237253

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To identify a diagnostic blood transcriptomic signature that distinguishes multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) from Kawasaki disease (KD), bacterial infections, and viral infections. METHODS: Children presenting with MIS-C to participating hospitals in the United Kingdom and the European Union between April 2020 and April 2021 were prospectively recruited. Whole-blood RNA Sequencing was performed, contrasting the transcriptomes of children with MIS-C (n = 38) to those from children with KD (n = 136), definite bacterial (DB; n = 188) and viral infections (DV; n = 138). Genes significantly differentially expressed (SDE) between MIS-C and comparator groups were identified. Feature selection was used to identify genes that optimally distinguish MIS-C from other diseases, which were subsequently translated into RT-qPCR assays and evaluated in an independent validation set comprising MIS-C (n = 37), KD (n = 19), DB (n = 56), DV (n = 43), and COVID-19 (n = 39). RESULTS: In the discovery set, 5696 genes were SDE between MIS-C and combined comparator disease groups. Five genes were identified as potential MIS-C diagnostic biomarkers (HSPBAP1, VPS37C, TGFB1, MX2, and TRBV11-2), achieving an AUC of 96.8% (95% CI: 94.6%-98.9%) in the discovery set, and were translated into RT-qPCR assays. The RT-qPCR 5-gene signature achieved an AUC of 93.2% (95% CI: 88.3%-97.7%) in the independent validation set when distinguishing MIS-C from KD, DB, and DV. CONCLUSIONS: MIS-C can be distinguished from KD, DB, and DV groups using a 5-gene blood RNA expression signature. The small number of genes in the signature and good performance in both discovery and validation sets should enable the development of a diagnostic test for MIS-C.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mucocutaneous Lymph Node Syndrome , Child , Humans , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/genetics , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/diagnosis , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/genetics , Hospitals , Mucocutaneous Lymph Node Syndrome/diagnosis , Mucocutaneous Lymph Node Syndrome/genetics , COVID-19 Testing
2.
Lancet Rheumatol ; 5(4): e184-e199, 2023 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2239656

ABSTRACT

Background: Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), a hyperinflammatory condition associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, has emerged as a serious illness in children worldwide. Immunoglobulin or glucocorticoids, or both, are currently recommended treatments. Methods: The Best Available Treatment Study evaluated immunomodulatory treatments for MIS-C in an international observational cohort. Analysis of the first 614 patients was previously reported. In this propensity-weighted cohort study, clinical and outcome data from children with suspected or proven MIS-C were collected onto a web-based Research Electronic Data Capture database. After excluding neonates and incomplete or duplicate records, inverse probability weighting was used to compare primary treatments with intravenous immunoglobulin, intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, or glucocorticoids alone, using intravenous immunoglobulin as the reference treatment. Primary outcomes were a composite of inotropic or ventilator support from the second day after treatment initiation, or death, and time to improvement on an ordinal clinical severity scale. Secondary outcomes included treatment escalation, clinical deterioration, fever, and coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN69546370. Findings: We enrolled 2101 children (aged 0 months to 19 years) with clinically diagnosed MIS-C from 39 countries between June 14, 2020, and April 25, 2022, and, following exclusions, 2009 patients were included for analysis (median age 8·0 years [IQR 4·2-11·4], 1191 [59·3%] male and 818 [40·7%] female, and 825 [41·1%] White). 680 (33·8%) patients received primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin, 698 (34·7%) with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, 487 (24·2%) with glucocorticoids alone; 59 (2·9%) patients received other combinations, including biologicals, and 85 (4·2%) patients received no immunomodulators. There were no significant differences between treatments for primary outcomes for the 1586 patients with complete baseline and outcome data that were considered for primary analysis. Adjusted odds ratios for ventilation, inotropic support, or death were 1·09 (95% CI 0·75-1·58; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids and 0·93 (0·58-1·47; corrected p value=1·00) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Adjusted average hazard ratios for time to improvement were 1·04 (95% CI 0·91-1·20; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, and 0·84 (0·70-1·00; corrected p value=0·22) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Treatment escalation was less frequent for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids (OR 0·15 [95% CI 0·11-0·20]; p<0·0001) and glucocorticoids alone (0·68 [0·50-0·93]; p=0·014) versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Persistent fever (from day 2 onward) was less common with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids compared with either intravenous immunoglobulin alone (OR 0·50 [95% CI 0·38-0·67]; p<0·0001) or glucocorticoids alone (0·63 [0·45-0·88]; p=0·0058). Coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution did not differ significantly between treatment groups. Interpretation: Recovery rates, including occurrence and resolution of coronary artery aneurysms, were similar for primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin when compared to glucocorticoids or intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids. Initial treatment with glucocorticoids appears to be a safe alternative to immunoglobulin or combined therapy, and might be advantageous in view of the cost and limited availability of intravenous immunoglobulin in many countries. Funding: Imperial College London, the European Union's Horizon 2020, Wellcome Trust, the Medical Research Foundation, UK National Institute for Health and Care Research, and National Institutes of Health.

3.
N Engl J Med ; 385(1): 11-22, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1585668

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Evidence is urgently needed to support treatment decisions for children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. METHODS: We performed an international observational cohort study of clinical and outcome data regarding suspected MIS-C that had been uploaded by physicians onto a Web-based database. We used inverse-probability weighting and generalized linear models to evaluate intravenous immune globulin (IVIG) as a reference, as compared with IVIG plus glucocorticoids and glucocorticoids alone. There were two primary outcomes: the first was a composite of inotropic support or mechanical ventilation by day 2 or later or death; the second was a reduction in disease severity on an ordinal scale by day 2. Secondary outcomes included treatment escalation and the time until a reduction in organ failure and inflammation. RESULTS: Data were available regarding the course of treatment for 614 children from 32 countries from June 2020 through February 2021; 490 met the World Health Organization criteria for MIS-C. Of the 614 children with suspected MIS-C, 246 received primary treatment with IVIG alone, 208 with IVIG plus glucocorticoids, and 99 with glucocorticoids alone; 22 children received other treatment combinations, including biologic agents, and 39 received no immunomodulatory therapy. Receipt of inotropic or ventilatory support or death occurred in 56 patients who received IVIG plus glucocorticoids (adjusted odds ratio for the comparison with IVIG alone, 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33 to 1.82) and in 17 patients who received glucocorticoids alone (adjusted odds ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.22 to 1.33). The adjusted odds ratios for a reduction in disease severity were similar in the two groups, as compared with IVIG alone (0.90 for IVIG plus glucocorticoids and 0.93 for glucocorticoids alone). The time until a reduction in disease severity was similar in the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that recovery from MIS-C differed after primary treatment with IVIG alone, IVIG plus glucocorticoids, or glucocorticoids alone, although significant differences may emerge as more data accrue. (Funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 Program and others; BATS ISRCTN number, ISRCTN69546370.).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Immunoglobulins, Intravenous/therapeutic use , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/drug therapy , Adolescent , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Child , Child, Preschool , Cohort Studies , Confidence Intervals , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Immunomodulation , Male , Propensity Score , Regression Analysis , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/immunology , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/mortality , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/therapy , Treatment Outcome
4.
Archives of Disease in Childhood ; 106(Suppl 1):A307, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1443487

ABSTRACT

BackgroundPaediatric trainees organise an annual induction day to welcome new ST1 trainees across multiple sectors of the deanery. This event aims to prepare trainees not only to survive, but also to thrive, encouraging them to feel inspired and enthusiastic about their training journey. It is always well attended and has received consistently excellent feedback. Other deaneries have found it to be a key means of disseminating information not provided through other sources. Since up to 100 trainees were predicted to attend the 2020 event, the COVID-19 pandemic presented a challenge.ObjectivesTo design and run a virtual induction event for new ST1 trainees, whilst maintaining the success and positivity of previous face-to-face events.MethodsAttendees were surveyed in advance to allow the organisers to tailor the event to their needs, worries and interests. The event was discussed with key stakeholders within the relevant deaneries. In accordance with the feedback received, the event was tailored to suit a virtual platform.The induction ‘day’ was shortened to half a day and individual sessions were limited to maintain momentum and engagement. In light of the current events surrounding Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups, it was deemed important to include a new session focused on this topic. Traditionally, the chance to meet other trainees starting at the same Trust was a highlight of the event. Breakout groups were designed to facilitate this virtual meeting. A handbook and YouTube channel were created to complement the day, covering content which could not be included in the live event, and as an additional resource for the year ahead.ResultsThe virtual event received extremely positive feedback. Of 107 new ST1 trainees in the region, approximately 95 (88.8%) attended, and 68 (71.5% attendees) provided feedback. 92.6% of trainees felt more prepared to start training following the event. Trainees scored how prepared they felt before and after the event using a five-point Likert scale, with a mean increase in their score of 1.12 following the event (p<0.01).83.8% felt that the event worked well virtually, particularly highlighting the value of the breakout session, live chat and dedicated Q&A session. They rated the opportunity for networking as the most useful aspect of the event, and fed back that the enthusiasm and preparation by the team facilitated a smooth event. The newly-created resources were also considered relevant and useful.76.5% attendees said they would prefer a face-to-face event. They felt that opportunities for networking were more limited with fewer opportunities for questions.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the transformation of the annual ST1 induction event to a virtual platform. A pre-questionnaire was crucial in identifying needs and concerns of trainees, enabling the event to be tailored accordingly. The networking element was retained through the use of breakout groups, and the enthusiasm of organisers and speakers continued to shine through. An overall positive atmosphere and engaging event was commended in feedback from trainees, proving the event to be successful in overcoming challenges presented by the current climate.

5.
JAMA ; 324(3): 259-269, 2020 07 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-574774

ABSTRACT

Importance: In communities with high rates of coronavirus disease 2019, reports have emerged of children with an unusual syndrome of fever and inflammation. Objectives: To describe the clinical and laboratory characteristics of hospitalized children who met criteria for the pediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome temporally associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (PIMS-TS) and compare these characteristics with other pediatric inflammatory disorders. Design, Setting, and Participants: Case series of 58 children from 8 hospitals in England admitted between March 23 and May 16, 2020, with persistent fever and laboratory evidence of inflammation meeting published definitions for PIMS-TS. The final date of follow-up was May 22, 2020. Clinical and laboratory characteristics were abstracted by medical record review, and were compared with clinical characteristics of patients with Kawasaki disease (KD) (n = 1132), KD shock syndrome (n = 45), and toxic shock syndrome (n = 37) who had been admitted to hospitals in Europe and the US from 2002 to 2019. Exposures: Signs and symptoms and laboratory and imaging findings of children who met definitional criteria for PIMS-TS from the UK, the US, and World Health Organization. Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinical, laboratory, and imaging characteristics of children meeting definitional criteria for PIMS-TS, and comparison with the characteristics of other pediatric inflammatory disorders. Results: Fifty-eight children (median age, 9 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 5.7-14]; 20 girls [34%]) were identified who met the criteria for PIMS-TS. Results from SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction tests were positive in 15 of 58 patients (26%) and SARS-CoV-2 IgG test results were positive in 40 of 46 (87%). In total, 45 of 58 patients (78%) had evidence of current or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. All children presented with fever and nonspecific symptoms, including vomiting (26/58 [45%]), abdominal pain (31/58 [53%]), and diarrhea (30/58 [52%]). Rash was present in 30 of 58 (52%), and conjunctival injection in 26 of 58 (45%) cases. Laboratory evaluation was consistent with marked inflammation, for example, C-reactive protein (229 mg/L [IQR, 156-338], assessed in 58 of 58) and ferritin (610 µg/L [IQR, 359-1280], assessed in 53 of 58). Of the 58 children, 29 developed shock (with biochemical evidence of myocardial dysfunction) and required inotropic support and fluid resuscitation (including 23/29 [79%] who received mechanical ventilation); 13 met the American Heart Association definition of KD, and 23 had fever and inflammation without features of shock or KD. Eight patients (14%) developed coronary artery dilatation or aneurysm. Comparison of PIMS-TS with KD and with KD shock syndrome showed differences in clinical and laboratory features, including older age (median age, 9 years [IQR, 5.7-14] vs 2.7 years [IQR, 1.4-4.7] and 3.8 years [IQR, 0.2-18], respectively), and greater elevation of inflammatory markers such as C-reactive protein (median, 229 mg/L [IQR 156-338] vs 67 mg/L [IQR, 40-150 mg/L] and 193 mg/L [IQR, 83-237], respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: In this case series of hospitalized children who met criteria for PIMS-TS, there was a wide spectrum of presenting signs and symptoms and disease severity, ranging from fever and inflammation to myocardial injury, shock, and development of coronary artery aneurysms. The comparison with patients with KD and KD shock syndrome provides insights into this syndrome, and suggests this disorder differs from other pediatric inflammatory entities.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Symptom Assessment , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/diagnosis , Adolescent , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Child , Child, Preschool , England , Female , Humans , Male , Mucocutaneous Lymph Node Syndrome/physiopathology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/physiopathology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL