Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Future virology ; 2023.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-20238788

ABSTRACT

Aim: This study used CpG 684 as adjuvant of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine to detect a humoral and cellular immune response in mice. Materials & methods: We used 10 and 20 µg CpG 684 as adjuvants of am inactivated COVID-19 vaccine to immunize mice. IgG, IgG1, IgG2a, IgG2b and IgM binding antibodies were detected in serum by ELISA. The IFN-γ cytokine was detected by ELISPOT. Results: CpG 684 improved spike-specific IgG and IgM subtype binding antibodies and increased the neutralizing antibody titer against prototype, Delta and Beta strains. CpG 684 also improved cellular immune response. Conclusion: CpG 684 is an effective adjuvant for inactivated COVID-19 vaccine.

2.
Trials ; 22(1): 955, 2021 Dec 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2318366

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Influenza can fall into three categories according to severity: mild influenza, severe influenza, and critical influenza. Severe influenza can result in critical illness and sometimes death particularly in patients with comorbidities, advanced age, or pregnancy. Neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs) are the only antiviral drugs in widespread use for influenza. However, the effectiveness of NAIs against severe influenza is uncertain. New effective drugs or regimens are therefore urgently needed. Qiangzhu-qinggan (QZQG) formula has been found to be effective against influenza virus infection during long-term application in China, which lacks support of evidence-based clinical trial till now. This study is designed to assess the efficacy and safety of QZQG formula as an adjuvant therapy in adult patients with severe influenza. METHODS: This protocol is drawn up in accordance with the SPIRIT guidelines and CONSORT Extension for Chinese herbal medicine formulas. This is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter trial. Two hundred twenty-eight adults with severe influenza are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to QZQG or placebo for 7 days. All participants need to receive 1 day of screening before randomization, 7 days of intervention, and 21 days of observation after randomization. The primary outcome is the proportion of clinical improvement, defined as the proportion of patients who met the criteria of 3 points or less in the seven-category ordinal scale or 2 points or less in National Early Warning Score 2 within 7 days after randomization. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized, controlled, parallel, double-blind clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese herbal formula granules as an adjuvant therapy in adult patients with severe influenza. This study aims to redefine the value of traditional Chinese herbal medicines in the treatment of virus-related respiratory infectious diseases and serves as an example of evidence-based clinical trials of other Chinese herbal medicines.


Subject(s)
Drugs, Chinese Herbal , Influenza, Human , Adult , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Combined Modality Therapy , Double-Blind Method , Drugs, Chinese Herbal/adverse effects , Humans , Influenza, Human/diagnosis , Influenza, Human/drug therapy , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome
3.
Nat Rev Microbiol ; 19(6): 345, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1180248
4.
researchsquare; 2021.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-RESEARCHSQUARE | ID: ppzbmed-10.21203.rs.3.rs-397008.v1

ABSTRACT

Background: The reviews on the risk factors with ARDS and the worse outcomes concluded lacking robust data of risk factors to prevent COVID-19 and identified an urgent need for large sample and high-quality research in this area, as well as the features of the ARDS.Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 333 COVID-19 inpatients at two hospitals in Hubei of China in 2020. The COVID-19-related ARDS was diagnosed according to the Berlin criteria. The outcomes were ARDS development and the intubation or in-hospital death. The cox proportional hazard ratio (HR) models were employed to determine the significant risk factors. Results: The median number of days from symptom onset to ARDS diagnosis was 11.0 (IQR, 8.0–13.0). Up to 84.1% COVID-19-related ARDS patients demonstrated multiple organ injuries. The mortality rates were 41.9% and 85.7% in moderate and severe ARDS. The survival patients on invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) had been intubated earlier since ARDS diagnosis than those who had not survived (5.5 median days, IQR 4.0-7.0 days versus 11.5 median days, IQR 6.0-14.0 days, P < 0.001). Males and all abnormal laboratory indices associated with the higher risk of ARDS (P<0.05) but were not linked with the risk of intubation or death (P>0.05). The sensitivity analyses found that lymphocyte count of < 1000 per mm3 at hospital admission were still significantly associated with developing ARDS when adjusting for age and male gender (HR, 4.10; 95% CI, 2.40-7.10), and oxygenation index (OI) ratio < 150 were more likely to predict the intubation/death after age adjustment (HR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.17-5.30). Conclusion: The SARS-CoV-2-caused ARDS was not the typical ARDS according to Berlin criteria. The alive patients with IMV had been intubated earlier since ARDS diagnosis than those who had not survived. We identified male gender and abnormal laboratory indices associated with the ARDS but were not linked with the intubation/death. Sensitivity analysis concluded lymphocyte count of < 1000 per mm3 could predict ARDS while OI ratio less than 150 could predict intubation/death.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
5.
Infect Dis Poverty ; 10(1): 31, 2021 Mar 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1140517

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to a significant number of mortalities worldwide. COVID-19 poses a serious threat to human life. The clinical manifestations of COVID-19 are diverse and severe and 20% of infected patients are reported to be in a critical condition. A loss in lung function and pulmonary fibrosis are the main manifestations of patients with the severe form of the disease. The lung function is affected, even after recovery, thereby greatly affecting the psychology and well-being of patients, and significantly reducing their quality of life. METHODS: Participants must meet the following simultaneous inclusion criteria: over 18 years of age, should have recovered from severe or critical COVID-19 cases, should exhibit pulmonary fibrosis after recovery, and should exhibit Qi-Yin deficiency syndrome as indicated in the system of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). The eligible candidates will be randomized into treatment or control groups. The treatment group will receive modern medicine (pirfenidone) plus TCM whereas the control group will be administered modern medicine plus TCM placebo. The lung function index will be continuously surveyed and recorded. By comparing the treatment effect between the two groups, the study intend to explore whether TCM can improve the effectiveness of modern medicine in patients with pulmonary fibrosis arising as a sequelae after SARS-CoV-2 infection. DISCUSSION: Pulmonary fibrosis is one of fatal sequelae for some severe or critical COVID-19 cases, some studies reveal that pirfenidone lead to a delay in the decline of forced expiratory vital capacity, thereby reducing the mortality partly. Additionally, although TCM has been proven to be efficacious in treating pulmonary fibrosis, its role in treating pulmonary fibrosis related COVID-19 has not been explored. Hence, a multicenter, parallel-group, randomized controlled, interventional, prospective clinical trial has been designed and will be conducted to determine if a new comprehensive treatment for pulmonary fibrosis related to COVID-19 is feasible and if it can improve the quality of life of patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This multicenter, parallel-group, randomized controlled, interventional, prospective trial was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2000033284) on 26th May 2020 (prospective registered).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/virology , Pulmonary Fibrosis/etiology , Pulmonary Fibrosis/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Combined Modality Therapy , Data Analysis , Medicine, Chinese Traditional , Pulmonary Fibrosis/diagnosis , Quality of Life , Treatment Outcome
6.
researchsquare; 2021.
Preprint in English | PREPRINT-RESEARCHSQUARE | ID: ppzbmed-10.21203.rs.3.rs-307027.v1

ABSTRACT

Background: More evidence in understanding the heterogeneity of COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and in improving strategy to increase the survival from the critical patients intubated is always needed. The study aimed to comprehensively explore the features of COVID-19-associated ARDS and the features and outcomes between the early and late intubation groups. Methods: This retrospective cohort included 65 adult COVID-19 inpatients with ARDS at two hospitals in Hubei, China. The ARDS in these patients was diagnosed according to the Berlin criteria. We defined intubation within 7 days of ARDS diagnosis as ‘early’ intubation and that performed from the eighth day as ‘late’ intubation based on literatures. The outcomes were invasive mechanical ventilation and in-hospital death. The log-binomial regression models were used to explore the risk factors and the Kaplan-Meier statistic was used to estimate the risk of mortality. Results: The median number of days from symptom onset to ARDS diagnosis was 11.0 (IQR, 8.0–13.0). Up to 84.1% COVID-19-related ARDS patients demonstrated multiple organ injuries. The mortality rates were 41.9% and 85.7% in moderate and severe ARDS. The early intubation and the late intubation had the differences in days from symptom onset/hospital admission/ARDS diagnosis to intubation (P = 0.023, P = 0.011, P < 0.001). Compared with the early-intubation group, the late-intubation group showed less severity at admission (median oxygenation index 159.0 95% CI 134.0-203.0 vs. 133.9 95% CI 98.3-183.2), but required more aggressive therapies (ICU 80% vs. 70%, CRRT 50% vs. 10%, prone-position 50% vs. 30%, and ECMO 50% vs. 10%) and had higher risk to die at hospital (RR, 3.18; 95% CI 1.98-5.12). Conclusion: The ARDS caused by COVID-19 was not typical ARDS due to prolonged onset time, multiple organ injuries, and higher mortalities. The late-intubation group showed less severity at admission but higher risk of in-hospital death than the early-intubation group. 


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL