Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Viruses ; 15(4)2023 04 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2302988

ABSTRACT

Numerous studies have focused on inflammation-related markers to understand COVID-19. In this study, we performed a comparative analysis of spike (S) and nucleocapsid (N) protein-specific IgA, total IgG and IgG subclass response in COVID-19 patients and compared this to their disease outcome. We observed that the SARS-CoV-2 infection elicits a robust IgA and IgG response against the N-terminal (N1) and C-terminal (N3) region of the N protein, whereas we failed to detect IgA antibodies and observed a weak IgG response against the disordered linker region (N2) in COVID-19 patients. N and S protein-specific IgG1, IgG2 and IgG3 response was significantly elevated in hospitalized patients with severe disease compared to outpatients with non-severe disease. IgA and total IgG antibody reactivity gradually increased after the first week of symptoms. Magnitude of RBD-ACE2 blocking antibodies identified in a competitive assay and neutralizing antibodies detected by PRNT assay correlated with disease severity. Generally, the IgA and total IgG response between the discharged and deceased COVID-19 patients was similar. However, significant differences in the ratio of IgG subclass antibodies were observed between discharged and deceased patients, especially towards the disordered linker region of the N protein. Overall, SARS-CoV-2 infection is linked to an elevated blood antibody response in severe patients compared to non-severe patients. Monitoring of antigen-specific serological response could be an important tool to accompany disease progression and improve outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Immunoglobulin G , Immunoglobulin A , Immunoglobulin M , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus
3.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 8: 758405, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1581293

ABSTRACT

Background: The use of corticosteroids may help control the cytokine storm occurring in acute respiratory failure due to the severe form of COVID-19. We evaluated the postacute effect of corticosteroids used during the acute phase, such as impairment in pulmonary function parameters, on day 120 (D120)-follow-up, in participants who survived over 28 days. Methods: This is a parallel, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase IIb clinical trial carried out between April 18 and October 9, 2020, conducted in hospitalized patients with clinical-radiological suspicion of COVID-19, aged 18 years or older, with SpO2 ≤ 94% on room air or requiring supplementary oxygen, or under invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in a referral center in Manaus, Western Brazilian Amazon. Intravenous methylprednisolone (MP) (0.5 mg/kg) was given two times daily for 5 days to these patients. The primary outcome used for this study was pulmonary function testing at day 120 follow-up visit. Results: Out of the total of surviving patients at day 28 (n = 246) from the Metcovid study, a total of 118 underwent satisfactory pulmonary function testing (62 in the placebo arm and 56 in the MP arm). The supportive treatment was similar between the placebo and MP groups (seven [11%] vs. four [7%]; P = 0.45). At hospital admission, IL-6 levels were higher in the MP group (P < 0.01). Also, the need for ICU (P = 0.06), need for IMV (P = 0.07), and creatine kinase (P = 0.05) on admission also tended to be higher in this group. In the univariate analysis, forced expiratory volume on 1st second of exhalation (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) at D120 follow-up were significantly higher in patients in the MP arm, being this last parameter also significantly higher in the multivariate analysis independently of IMV and IL-6 levels on admission. Conclusion: The use of steroids for at least 5 days in severe COVID-19 was associated with a higher FVC, which suggests that hospitalized COVID-19 patients might benefit from the use of MP in its use in the long-term, with less pulmonary restrictive functions, attributed to fibrosis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT04343729.

5.
Clin Infect Dis ; 72(9): e373-e381, 2021 05 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1216632

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Steroid use for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is based on the possible role of these drugs in mitigating the inflammatory response, mainly in the lungs, triggered by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of methylprednisolone (MP) among hospitalized patients with suspected COVID-19. METHODS: A parallel, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, Phase IIb clinical trial was performed with hospitalized patients aged ≥18 years with clinical, epidemiological, and/or radiological suspected COVID-19 at a tertiary care facility in Manaus, Brazil. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) to receive either intravenous MP (0.5 mg/kg) or placebo (saline solution) twice daily for 5 days. A modified intention-to-treat (mITT) analysis was conducted. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. RESULTS: From 18 April to 16 June 2020, 647 patients were screened, 416 were randomized, and 393 were analyzed as mITT, with 194 individuals assigned to MP and 199 to placebo. SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction in 81.3%. The mortality rates at Day 28 were not different between groups. A subgroup analysis showed that patients over 60 years old in the MP group had a lower mortality rate at Day 28. Patients in the MP arm tended to need more insulin therapy, and no difference was seen in virus clearance in respiratory secretion until Day 7. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest that a short course of MP in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 did not reduce mortality in the overall population. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04343729.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adolescent , Adult , Brazil , Double-Blind Method , Humans , Methylprednisolone/therapeutic use , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
6.
Anal Chem ; 93(4): 2471-2479, 2021 02 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1065764

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 is still placing a heavy health and financial burden worldwide. Impairment in patient screening and risk management plays a fundamental role on how governments and authorities are directing resources, planning reopening, as well as sanitary countermeasures, especially in regions where poverty is a major component in the equation. An efficient diagnostic method must be highly accurate, while having a cost-effective profile. We combined a machine learning-based algorithm with mass spectrometry to create an expeditious platform that discriminate COVID-19 in plasma samples within minutes, while also providing tools for risk assessment, to assist healthcare professionals in patient management and decision-making. A cross-sectional study enrolled 815 patients (442 COVID-19, 350 controls and 23 COVID-19 suspicious) from three Brazilian epicenters from April to July 2020. We were able to elect and identify 19 molecules related to the disease's pathophysiology and several discriminating features to patient's health-related outcomes. The method applied for COVID-19 diagnosis showed specificity >96% and sensitivity >83%, and specificity >80% and sensitivity >85% during risk assessment, both from blinded data. Our method introduced a new approach for COVID-19 screening, providing the indirect detection of infection through metabolites and contextualizing the findings with the disease's pathophysiology. The pairwise analysis of biomarkers brought robustness to the model developed using machine learning algorithms, transforming this screening approach in a tool with great potential for real-world application.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Machine Learning , Metabolomics , Adult , Aged , Automation , Biomarkers/metabolism , Brazil , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
7.
JAMA Netw Open ; 3(4): e208857, 2020 04 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-116839

ABSTRACT

Importance: There is no specific antiviral therapy recommended for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In vitro studies indicate that the antiviral effect of chloroquine diphosphate (CQ) requires a high concentration of the drug. Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 2 CQ dosages in patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel, double-masked, randomized, phase IIb clinical trial with 81 adult patients who were hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was conducted from March 23 to April 5, 2020, at a tertiary care facility in Manaus, Brazilian Amazon. Interventions: Patients were allocated to receive high-dosage CQ (ie, 600 mg CQ twice daily for 10 days) or low-dosage CQ (ie, 450 mg twice daily on day 1 and once daily for 4 days). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was reduction in lethality by at least 50% in the high-dosage group compared with the low-dosage group. Data presented here refer primarily to safety and lethality outcomes during treatment on day 13. Secondary end points included participant clinical status, laboratory examinations, and electrocardiogram results. Outcomes will be presented to day 28. Viral respiratory secretion RNA detection was performed on days 0 and 4. Results: Out of a predefined sample size of 440 patients, 81 were enrolled (41 [50.6%] to high-dosage group and 40 [49.4%] to low-dosage group). Enrolled patients had a mean (SD) age of 51.1 (13.9) years, and most (60 [75.3%]) were men. Older age (mean [SD] age, 54.7 [13.7] years vs 47.4 [13.3] years) and more heart disease (5 of 28 [17.9%] vs 0) were seen in the high-dose group. Viral RNA was detected in 31 of 40 (77.5%) and 31 of 41 (75.6%) patients in the low-dosage and high-dosage groups, respectively. Lethality until day 13 was 39.0% in the high-dosage group (16 of 41) and 15.0% in the low-dosage group (6 of 40). The high-dosage group presented more instance of QTc interval greater than 500 milliseconds (7 of 37 [18.9%]) compared with the low-dosage group (4 of 36 [11.1%]). Respiratory secretion at day 4 was negative in only 6 of 27 patients (22.2%). Conclusions and Relevance: The preliminary findings of this study suggest that the higher CQ dosage should not be recommended for critically ill patients with COVID-19 because of its potential safety hazards, especially when taken concurrently with azithromycin and oseltamivir. These findings cannot be extrapolated to patients with nonsevere COVID-19. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04323527.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Chloroquine/analogs & derivatives , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus , Brazil , COVID-19 , Chloroquine/administration & dosage , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Chloroquine/therapeutic use , Disease Outbreaks , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Oseltamivir/therapeutic use , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Care Centers
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL