Effect of the Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme (ACE) (I/D) Polymorphism in COVID-19 Patients and Their Healthy Contacts.

Introduction The quest to understand the pathophysiology behind the deleterious effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak took a turn when involvement of the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) receptors in different organs, especially the lungs, could explain all the clinical manifestations and adverse events in patients. The I/D polymorphism in the ACE gene, having been attributed in various studies, was also seen to have an effect in this pandemic. Present study aimed to analyze the effect of this I/D mutation in COVID-19 patients and in their healthy contacts. Methods Patients with past history of COVID-19 infection and their healthy contacts were enrolled in the study after obtaining ethical clearance and informed consent. The polymorphism was studied by real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Data was analyzed in SPSS version 20 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). p value less than 0.05 was taken as significant. Results The allelic distribution followed the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, with the wild 'D' allele being dominant in the population. Between the case and controls, the mutant 'I' allele was observed more in the controls, and the association was statistically significant. Conclusion From the results of the present study, it could be concluded that while the wild 'D' allele led to higher chances of being affected with COVID-19, the polymorphism to 'I' allele was relatively protective in nature.

Sociodemographic Comparison of Children With High-risk Medical Conditions Referred vs Identified Through Screening Plus Outreach for COVID-19 Therapeutics.

Importance: Minoritized groups are less likely to receive COVID-19 therapeutics, but few studies have identified potential methods to reduce disparities. Objective: To determine whether screening plus outreach, when compared with referral alone, increases identification of vulnerable pediatric patients at high risk for severe disease eligible for COVID-19 therapeutics from low-resourced communities. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 medication allocation between January 1, 2022, and February 15, 2022, at Lurie Children's Hospital, a quaternary care children's hospital, in Chicago, Illinois. The cohorts were pediatric patients referred for COVID-19 therapeutics or with a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction within the hospital system followed by outreach. Screening involved daily review of positive cases of SARS-CoV-2, followed by medical record review for high-risk conditions, and communication with clinicians and/or patients and families to offer therapy. Exposures: Diagnosis of COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary measure was difference in child opportunity index (COI) scores between the 2 cohorts. Secondary measures included presence and duration of symptoms at diagnosis, medication uptake, race and ethnicity, insurance type, qualifying medical condition, sex, primary language, and age. Results: Of 145 total patients, the median (IQR) age was 15 (13-17) years, and most were male (87 participants [60.0%]), enrolled in public insurance (83 participants [57.2%]), and members of minoritized racial and ethnic groups (103 participants [71.0%]). The most common qualifying conditions were asthma and/or obesity (71 participants [49.0%]). From 9869 SARS-CoV-2 tests performed, 94 eligible patients were identified via screening for COVID-19 therapeutics. Fifty-one patients were identified via referral. Thirty-two patients received medication, of whom 8 (25%) were identified by screening plus outreach alone. Compared with referred patients, patients in the screening plus outreach group were more likely to have moderate, low, or very low COI composite scores (70 patients [74.5%] vs 27 patients [52.9%]); public insurance (65 patients [69.1%] vs 18 patients [35.3%]); and asthma or obesity (60 patients [63.8%] vs 11 patients [21.6%]). Patients in the referral group were more likely to be non-Hispanic White (23 patients [45.1%] vs 19 patients [20.2%]) and receive medication (24 patients [47.1%] vs 8 patients [8.5%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with referral patients, screening plus outreach patients for COVID-19 medications were more socially vulnerable, with lower COI scores, and more likely to have asthma or obesity. Future studies should investigate communication strategies to improve uptake of these medications after outreach.

Characterizing altruistic motivation in potential volunteers for SARS-CoV-2 challenge trials.

In human challenge trials (HCTs), volunteers are deliberately infected with an infectious agent. Such trials can be used to accelerate vaccine development and answer important scientific questions. Starting early in the COVID-19 pandemic, ethical concerns were raised about using HCTs to accelerate development and approval of a vaccine. Some of those concerns pertained to potential exploitation of and/or lack of truly informed consent from volunteers. Specific areas of concern arose around individuals who may be unusually risk-seeking or too economically vulnerable to refuse the payments these trials provide, as opposed to being motivated primarily by altruistic goals. This pre-registered study is the first large-scale survey to characterize people who, early in the pandemic, expressed interest and intention to volunteer to participate in COVID-19 HCTs. We found that individuals expressing interest in SARS-CoV-2 HCTs exhibit consistently altruistic motivations without any special indication of poor risk perception or economic vulnerability. In finding that, early in the pandemic, COVID-19 HCTs were able to attract volunteers whose values align with the nature of these trials, and who are not unusually vulnerable to exploitation, this study may allay some ethical concerns about the volunteers interested in participating in such trials.

Evidence for SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron co-infections and recombination.

BACKGROUND: Between November 2021 and February 2022, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Delta and Omicron variants co-circulated in the United States, allowing for co-infections and possible recombination events. METHODS: We sequenced 29,719 positive samples during this period and analyzed the presence and fraction of reads supporting mutations specific to either the Delta or Omicron variant. FINDINGS: We identified 18 co-infections, one of which displayed evidence of a low Delta-Omicron recombinant viral population. We also identified two independent cases of infection by a Delta-Omicron recombinant virus, where 100% of the viral RNA came from one clonal recombinant. In the three cases, the 5' end of the viral genome was from the Delta genome and the 3' end from Omicron, including the majority of the spike protein gene, though the breakpoints were different. CONCLUSIONS: Delta-Omicron recombinant viruses were rare, and there is currently no evidence that Delta-Omicron recombinant viruses are more transmissible between hosts compared with the circulating Omicron lineages. FUNDING: This research was supported by the NIH RADx initiative and by the Centers for Disease Control Contract 75D30121C12730 (Helix).

Influence of laboratory biomarkers on inflammatory indices for assessing severity progression in COVID-19 cases.

Background and Objective: This study explored the role of various laboratory biomarkers on inflammatory indices for predicting disease progression toward severity in COVID-19 patients. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted on 1233 adults confirmed for COVID-19. The participants were grouped undermild, moderate, and severe grade disease. Serum bio-inflammatory index (SBII) and systemic inflammatory index (SII) were calculated and correlated with disease severity. The study variables, including clinical details and laboratory variables, were analyzed for impact on the inflammatory indices and severity status using a sequential multiple regression model to determine the predictors for mortality. Receiver operating characteristics defined the cut-off values for severity. Results: Among the study population, 56.2%, 20.7%, and 23.1% were categorized as mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19 cases. Diabetes with hypertension was the most prevalent comorbid condition. The odds for males to have the severe form of the disease was 1.6 times (95% CI = 1.18-2.18, P = 0.002). The median (inter-quartile-range) of SBII was 549 (387.84-741.34) and SII was 2097.6 (1113.9-4153.73) in severe cases. Serum urea, electrolytes, gamma-glutamyl transferase, red-cell distribution width-to-hematocrit ratio, monocytopenia, and eosinopenia exhibited a significant influence on the SpO2, SBII, and SII. Both SBII (r = -0.582, P < 0.001) and SII (r = -0.52, P < 0.001) strongly correlated inversely with SpO2 values [Figures 3a and 3b]. More than 80% of individuals admitted with severe grade COVID-19 had values of more than 50th percentile of SBII and SII. The sensitivity and specificity of SBII at 343.67 for severity were 81.4% and 70.1%, respectively. SII exhibited 77.2% sensitivity and 70.8% specificity at 998.72. Conclusion: Serial monitoring of the routinely available biomarkers would provide considerable input regarding inflammatory status and severity progression in COVID-19.

Ethics review of COVID-19 human challenge studies: A joint HRA/WHO workshop.

This report of a joint World Health Organization (WHO) and United Kingdom (UK) Health Research Authority (HRA) workshop discusses the ethics review of the first COVID-19 human challenge studies, undertaken in the midst of the pandemic. It reviews the early efforts of international and national institutions to define the ethical standards required for COVID-19 human challenge studies and create the frameworks to ensure rigorous and timely review of these studies. This report evaluates the utility of the WHO's international guidance document Key criteria for the ethical acceptability of COVID-19 human challenge studies (WHO Key Criteria) as a practical resource for the ethics review of COVID-19 human challenge studies. It also assesses the UK HRA's approach to these complex ethics reviews, including the formation of a Specialist Ad-Hoc Research Ethics Committee (REC) for COVID-19 Human Challenge Studies to review all current and future COVID-19 human challenge studies. In addition, the report outlines the reflections of REC members and researchers regarding the ethics review process of the first COVID-19 human challenge studies. Finally, it considers the potential ongoing scientific justification for COVID-19 human challenge studies, particularly in relation to next-generation vaccines and optimisation of vaccination schedules. Overall, there was broad agreement that the WHO Key Criteria represented an international consensus document that played a powerful role in setting norms and delineating the necessary conditions for the ethical acceptability of COVID-19 human challenge studies. Workshop members suggested that the WHO Key Criteria could be practically implemented to support researchers and ethics reviewers, including in the training of ethics committee members. In future, a wider audience may be engaged by the original document and potential additional materials, informed by the experiences of those involved in the first COVID-19 human challenge studies outlined in this document.

Fair Allocation of Scarce Therapies for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued emergency use authorizations (EUAs) for monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for nonhospitalized patients with mild or moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease and for individuals exposed to COVID-19 as postexposure prophylaxis. EUAs for oral antiviral drugs have also been issued. Due to increased demand because of the Delta variant, the federal government resumed control over the supply and asked states to ration doses. As future variants (eg, the Omicron variant) emerge, further rationing may be required. We identify relevant ethical principles (ie, benefiting people and preventing harm, equal concern, and mitigating health inequities) and priority groups for access to therapies based on an integrated approach to population health and medical factors (eg, urgently scarce healthcare workers, persons in disadvantaged communities hard hit by COVID-19). Using priority categories to allocate scarce therapies effectively operationalizes important ethical values. This strategy is preferable to the current approach of categorical exclusion or inclusion rules based on vaccination, immunocompromise status, or older age, or the ad hoc consideration of clinical risk factors.

Early Biochemical Markers in Predicting the Clinical Outcome of COVID-19 Patients Admitted in Tertiary Care Hospital.

Introduction An array of routinely accessible serum biomarkers was assessed to explore their overall impact on severity and mortality in coronavirus disease 2019. Materials and Methods A retrospective analysis of 1,233 adults was conducted. The study groups comprised 127 nonsurvivors and 1,106 survivors. Data for demographic details, clinical presentations, and laboratory reports were recorded from the medical record section. The predictors were analyzed for their influence on mortality. Results The mean (+ standard deviation) age of the patients in the nonsurvivor group was 58.8 (13.8) years. The mean age (56.4 years) was highest in severe grade patients. The odds ratio for death was 2.72 times for patients above the age of 40 years. About 46% of nonsurvivors died within 5 days of admission. Males were found to be more prone to death than females by a factor of 1.36. Serum urea depicted highest sensitivity (85%) for nonsurvival at 52.5 mg/dL. Serum albumin (3.23 g/dL), albumin-to-globulin ratio (0.97), and C-reactive protein-to albumin ratio (CAR) (2.08) showed a sensitivity of more than 70% for mortality outcomes. The high hazard ratio (HR) for deceased patients with hyperkalemia was 2.419 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.96-2.99; p < 0.001). The risk for nonsurvival was increased with elevated serum creatinine by 15.6% and uric acid by 21.7% ( p < 0.001). The HR for hypoalbuminemia was 0.254 (95% CI: 0.196-0.33; p < 0.001) and CAR was 1.319 (95% CI: 1.246-1.397; p < 0.001). Saturation of oxygen ( p < 0.001), lactate dehydrogenase ( p = 0.006), ferritin ( p = 0.004), hyperuricemia ( p = 0.027), hyperkalemia ( p < 0.001), hypoalbuminemia ( p = 0.002), and high CAR values (0.031) served as potential predictors for mortality. Conclusion Adjusting for all the predictor variables, serum uric acid, potassium, albumin, and CAR values at the time of admission were affirmed as the potential biomarkers for mortality.

The Essential Role of Data and Safety Monitoring Boards (DSMBs) in Ensuring the Ethics of Global Vaccine Trials to Address Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19O).

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are being developed and implemented with unprecedented speed. Accordingly, trials considered ethical at their inception may quickly become concerning. We provide recommendations for Data and Safety Monitoring Boards (DSMBs) on monitoring the ethical acceptability of COVID-19 vaccine trials, focusing on placebo-controlled trials in low- and middle-income countries.

Cutaneous manifestations associated with COVID-19 in children: A systematic review.

Cutaneous manifestation of COVID 19 in children has not yet been reviewed systematically. Hence, this review gives the clinicians a future direction to be vigilant for skin presentations during pandemics. The Pubmed database used for literature search with keywords COVID 19, children, and skin in different combinations. Articles published in English with cases of age one month to 18 years were eligible. The outcome included varied aspects of cutaneous and COVID 19 infection. The authors did not register review protocol. Of 51 publications identified, 13 studies containing 149 children met the eligibility criteria. Acrally located erythematous maculopapular lesion was the most common finding in 138 children. The researcher reported Erythema multiforme, varicella like exanthem, and Kawasaki disease like presentations in the rest of the cases. The duration of the skin lesion was 1 2 weeks in 43%. Skin biopsy done in 18 patients revealed superficial and deep perivascular and peri eccrine lymphocytic infiltrate and lymphocytic vasculitis. RT PCR was positive13.8% cases. Serological markers for HSV, parvovirus B19 analyzed across various studies, were negative, except positive mycoplasma pneumonia in 2 of 20 cases tested. Clinicopathologic analysis established chilblains like lesion in 43% cases with no confirmed etiology like cold exposure, autoimmune dysfunction, drug reaction, or viral infection. The usual cephalo caudal spread of a viral exanthem was also missing. However, a low number of discussed cases was a limitation of the study. The absence of any confirmed etiology for such cutaneous manifestations, the possibility of COVID 19, should be explored and thoroughly evaluated and isolated during such a pandemic.

Enrolling Minors in COVID-19 Vaccine Trials.

It is widely agreed that an effective response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic needs to include a vaccine that is safe and effective for minors. However, many current vaccine trials have no plans for when to enroll minors. Others have recently proposed enrolling minors as young as 12 years old. This lack of a systematic approach raises 2 concerns. Waiting too long to enroll minors could unjustly deny minors and their families the benefits of a vaccine and has the potential to delay an effective response to the pandemic by a year or longer. At the same time, enrolling minors too soon runs the risk of exposing them to excessive risks. With these concerns in mind, in the present article, we propose recommendations for when and how to enroll minors in vaccine trials for the coronavirus disease 2019.

Key criteria for the ethical acceptability of COVID-19 human challenge studies: Report of a WHO Working Group.

This report of the WHO Working Group for Guidance on Human Challenge Studies in COVID-19 outlines ethical standards for COVID-19 challenge studies. It includes eight Key Criteria related to scientific justification, risk-benefit assessment, consultation and engagement, co-ordination of research, site selection, participant selection, expert review, and informed consent. The document aims to provide comprehensive guidance to scientists, research ethics committees, funders, policymakers, and regulators in deliberations regarding SARS-CoV-2 challenge studies by outlining criteria that would need to be satisfied in order for such studies to be ethically acceptable.

So much at stake: Ethical tradeoffs in accelerating SARSCoV-2 vaccine development.

BACKGROUND: A sense of urgency exists to develop vaccines against SARS CoV-2, responsible for numerous global cases and deaths, as well as widespread social and economic disruption. Multiple approaches have been proposed to speed up vaccine development, including accelerated randomized controlled trials (RCT), controlled human challenge trials (CHI), and wide distribution through an emergency use authorization after collecting initial data. There is a need to examine how best to accelerate vaccine development in the setting of a pandemic, without compromising ethical and scientific norms. METHODS: Trade-offs in scientific and social value between generating reliable evidence about safety and efficacy while promoting rapid vaccine availability are examined along five ethically relevant dimensions: (1) confidence in and generalizability of data, (2) feasibility, (3) speed and cost, (4) participant risks, and (5) social risks. RESULTS: Accelerated individually randomized RCTs permit expeditious evaluation of vaccine candidates using established methods, expertise, and infrastructure. RCTs are more likely than other approaches to be feasible, increase speed and reduce cost, and generate reliable data about safety and efficacy without significantly increasing risks to participants or undermining societal trust. CONCLUSION: Ethical analysis suggests that accelerated RCTs are the best approach to accelerating vaccine development in a pandemic, and more likely than other approaches to enhance social value without compromising ethics or science. RCTs can expeditiously collect rigorous data about vaccine safety and efficacy. Innovative and flexible designs and implementation strategies to respond to shifting incidence and test vaccine candidates in parallel or sequentially would add value, as will coordinated data sharing across vaccine trials. CHI studies may be an important complementary strategy when more is known. Widely disseminating a vaccine candidate without efficacy data will not serve the public health nor achieve the goal of identifying safe and effective SARS Co-V-2 vaccines.