An Online Survey on the Relationship Between Positive Coping and Post-Traumatic Stress Symptoms (PTSS) of Medical Students in China During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Mediating Role of Social Support.

BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic has caused varying degrees of psychological stress among medical students. This research explored the post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) of medical students in China and their relationship with positive coping and social support. MATERIAL AND METHODS In the form of cross-sectional online survey, 2280 medical students locked down at home were selected by random cluster method to investigate social support, coping style, and PTSS using the Social Support Rating Scale (SSRS), Simplified Coping Style Questionnaire (SCSQ), and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Checklist-Civilian Version (PCL-C), respectively. RESULTS This research found that the PTSS detection rate in medical students was 10.42% during the COVID-19 pandemic. The PTSS scores of females were significantly higher than that of the males. However, the PTSS detection rate in females (9.71%) was not significantly different from that in males (11.24%). Compared with those of the non-PTSS group, the total score and its all-factor score of social support, the total score of coping style and the positive coping score of the PTSS group were much lower, while the negative coping score of the PTSS group was much higher (P<0.01). Positive coping was positively correlated with social support, while positive coping and social support were negatively correlated with PTSS. The total effect of positive coping on PTSS was -0.310 (P<0.001), the direct effect was -0.128 (P<0.01), and the indirect effect was -0.182 (P<0.001). Social support played a mediating role between positive coping and PTSS, with the mediating effect accounting for 58.81% of the total effect. CONCLUSIONS Social support plays a mediating role between positive coping and post-traumatic stress symptoms. Objective support and positive coping are the 2 main protective factors of PTSS.

Bioinformatics and system biology approach to identify potential common pathogenesis for COVID-19 infection and osteoarthritis.

A growing of evidence has showed that patients with osteoarthritis (OA) had a higher coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) infection rate and a poorer prognosis after infected it. Additionally, scientists have also discovered that COVID-19 infection might cause pathological changes in the musculoskeletal system. However, its mechanism is still not fully elucidated. This study aims to further explore the sharing pathogenesis of patients with both OA and COVID-19 infection and find candidate drugs. Gene expression profiles of OA (GSE51588) and COVID-19 (GSE147507) were obtained from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database. The common differentially expressed genes (DEGs) for both OA and COVID-19 were identified and several hub genes were extracted from them. Then gene and pathway enrichment analysis of the DEGs were performed; protein-protein interaction (PPI) network, transcription factor (TF)-gene regulatory network, TF-miRNA regulatory network and gene-disease association network were constructed based on the DEGs and hub genes. Finally, we predicted several candidate molecular drugs related to hub genes using DSigDB database. The receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) was applied to evaluate the accuracy of hub genes in the diagnosis of both OA and COVID-19. In total, 83 overlapping DEGs were identified and selected for subsequent analyses. CXCR4, EGR2, ENO1, FASN, GATA6, HIST1H3H, HIST1H4H, HIST1H4I, HIST1H4K, MTHFD2, PDK1, TUBA4A, TUBB1 and TUBB3 were screened out as hub genes, and some showed preferable values as diagnostic markers for both OA and COVID-19. Several candidate molecular drugs, which are related to the hug genes, were identified. These sharing pathways and hub genes may provide new ideas for further mechanistic studies and guide more individual-based effective treatments for OA patients with COVID-19 infection.

Real-world effectiveness of steroids in severe COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Randomised controlled trials have shown that steroids reduce the risk of dying in patients with severe Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), whilst many real-world studies have failed to replicate this result. We aim to investigate real-world effectiveness of steroids in severe COVID-19. METHODS: Clinical, demographic, and viral genome data extracted from electronic patient record (EPR) was analysed from all SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive patients admitted with severe COVID-19, defined by hypoxia at presentation, between March 13th 2020 and May 27th 2021. Steroid treatment was measured by the number of prescription-days with dexamethasone, hydrocortisone, prednisolone or methylprednisolone. The association between steroid > 3 days treatment and disease outcome was explored using multivariable cox proportional hazards models with adjustment for confounders (including age, gender, ethnicity, co-morbidities and SARS-CoV-2 variant). The outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: 1100 severe COVID-19 cases were identified having crude hospital mortality of 15.3%. 793/1100 (72.1%) individuals were treated with steroids and 513/1100 (46.6%) received steroid ≤ 3 days. From the multivariate model, steroid > 3 days was associated with decreased hazard of in-hospital mortality (HR: 0.47 (95% CI: 0.31-0.72)). CONCLUSION: The protective effect of steroid treatment for severe COVID-19 reported in randomised clinical trials was replicated in this retrospective study of a large real-world cohort.

Safety and Immunogenicity of a Recombinant Adenovirus Type-5-Vectored Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccine With a Homologous Prime-Boost Regimen in Healthy Participants Aged ≥6 Years: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 2b Trial.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the safety and immunogenicity of a recombinant adenovirus type-5 (Ad5)-vectored coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine with homologous prime-boost regimens in healthy participants aged ≥6 years. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, participants received vaccine or placebo 56 days apart. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) antibodies to the receptor binding domain (RBD) and pseudovirus neutralizing antibodies were detected. Adverse events were monitored for 28 days following each vaccination. RESULTS: A total of 430 participants were enrolled in the study, with 30 participants aged 18-55 years (MID cohort), 250 aged ≥56 years (OLD cohort), and 150 aged 6-17 years (MIN cohort). Ad5-vectored COVID-19 vaccine induced significant RBD-specific ELISA antibodies that decreased with increasing age, with geometric mean titers (GMTs) of 1037.5 in the MIN cohort, 647.2 in the MID cohort, and 338.0 in the OLD cohort receiving 5 × 1010 viral particles on day 28 following boost vaccination. Pseudovirus neutralizing antibodies showed a similar pattern, with GMTs of 168.0 in the MIN cohort, 76.8 in the MID cohort, and 79.7 in the OLD cohort. A single dose in children and adolescents induced higher antibody responses than that elicited by 2 doses in adults, with GMTs of 1091.6 and 96.6 for ELISA antibody and neutralizing antibody, respectively. Homologous prime-boost vaccination was safe and tolerable. CONCLUSIONS: Ad5-vectored COVID-19 vaccine with a single dose was safe and induced robust immune responses in children and adolescents aged 6-17 years. A prime-boost regimen needs further exploration for Ad5-vectored COVID-19 vaccine.Ad5-vectored COVID-19 vaccine with a single dose was safe and tolerated, and induced robust immune responses in children and adolescents aged 6-17 years. The boosting effect on immune responses of the homologous prime-boost regime given 56 days apart was limited. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04566770.

Developing a Long COVID Phenotype for Postacute COVID-19 in a National Primary Care Sentinel Cohort: Observational Retrospective Database Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Following COVID-19, up to 40% of people have ongoing health problems, referred to as postacute COVID-19 or long COVID (LC). LC varies from a single persisting symptom to a complex multisystem disease. Research has flagged that this condition is underrecorded in primary care records, and seeks to better define its clinical characteristics and management. Phenotypes provide a standard method for case definition and identification from routine data and are usually machine-processable. An LC phenotype can underpin research into this condition. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop a phenotype for LC to inform the epidemiology and future research into this condition. We compared clinical symptoms in people with LC before and after their index infection, recorded from March 1, 2020, to April 1, 2021. We also compared people recorded as having acute infection with those with LC who were hospitalized and those who were not. METHODS: We used data from the Primary Care Sentinel Cohort (PCSC) of the Oxford Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) database. This network was recruited to be nationally representative of the English population. We developed an LC phenotype using our established 3-step ontological method: (1) ontological step (defining the reasoning process underpinning the phenotype, (2) coding step (exploring what clinical terms are available, and (3) logical extract model (testing performance). We created a version of this phenotype using Protégé in the ontology web language for BioPortal and using PhenoFlow. Next, we used the phenotype to compare people with LC (1) with regard to their symptoms in the year prior to acquiring COVID-19 and (2) with people with acute COVID-19. We also compared hospitalized people with LC with those not hospitalized. We compared sociodemographic details, comorbidities, and Office of National Statistics-defined LC symptoms between groups. We used descriptive statistics and logistic regression. RESULTS: The long-COVID phenotype differentiated people hospitalized with LC from people who were not and where no index infection was identified. The PCSC (N=7.4 million) includes 428,479 patients with acute COVID-19 diagnosis confirmed by a laboratory test and 10,772 patients with clinically diagnosed COVID-19. A total of 7471 (1.74%, 95% CI 1.70-1.78) people were coded as having LC, 1009 (13.5%, 95% CI 12.7-14.3) had a hospital admission related to acute COVID-19, and 6462 (86.5%, 95% CI 85.7-87.3) were not hospitalized, of whom 2728 (42.2%) had no COVID-19 index date recorded. In addition, 1009 (13.5%, 95% CI 12.73-14.28) people with LC were hospitalized compared to 17,993 (4.5%, 95% CI 4.48-4.61; P<.001) with uncomplicated COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Our LC phenotype enables the identification of individuals with the condition in routine data sets, facilitating their comparison with unaffected people through retrospective research. This phenotype and study protocol to explore its face validity contributes to a better understanding of LC.

Short-term effects of COVID-19 on the risk of traumatic fractures in China cities.

This study aimed to investigate the association between COVID-19 and fracture risk and provide a targeted reference for the world through China's experience. A nationally representative sample of COVID-19 prevalence areas selected using stratified random sampling was retrospectively analyzed. Age, sex, fracture site, mechanism of injury, and concurrent fractures of traumatic fracture patients in selected hospitals were collected from 10 January to 10 July 2020. The epidemiologic characteristics of traumatic fractures and the association between COVID-19 and fracture risk were explored using descriptive epidemiological methods and a distributed lag nonlinear model. A total of 67,249 patients (52.3% males, 49.4 ± 19.4 years old) with 68,989 fractures were included. The highest proportion of fractures were in the tibia and fibula (14.9%), followed by the femur (13.6%) and ulna and radius (12.5%). Low-energy fractures accounted for 23.3%. With the increase in newly confirmed COVID-19 cases, fracture risk decreased for children, young and middle-aged adults, elderly men, high-energy fractures, and residents in regions with < 1000 cumulative confirmed COVID-19 cases. Fracture risk decreased sharply in all residents except elderly women, for low-energy fractures, and in regions with > 1000 cumulative confirmed COVID-19 cases when newly confirmed COVID-19 cases increased in China. Primary (home) prevention measures are emphasized to prevent traumatic fractures.

Descriptive comparison of admission characteristics between pandemic waves and multivariable analysis of the association of the Alpha variant (B.1.1.7 lineage) of SARS-CoV-2 with disease severity in inner London.

BACKGROUND: The Alpha variant (B.1.1.7 lineage) of SARS-CoV-2 emerged and became the dominant circulating variant in the UK in late 2020. Current literature is unclear on whether the Alpha variant is associated with increased severity. We linked clinical data with viral genome sequence data to compare admitted cases between SARS-CoV-2 waves in London and to investigate the association between the Alpha variant and the severity of disease. METHODS: Clinical, demographic, laboratory and viral sequence data from electronic health record systems were collected for all cases with a positive SARS-CoV-2 RNA test between 13 March 2020 and 17 February 2021 in a multisite London healthcare institution. Multivariate analysis using logistic regression assessed risk factors for severity as defined by hypoxia at admission. RESULTS: There were 5810 SARS-CoV-2 RNA-positive cases of which 2341 were admitted (838 in wave 1 and 1503 in wave 2). Both waves had a temporally aligned rise in nosocomial cases (96 in wave 1 and 137 in wave 2). The Alpha variant was first identified on 15 November 2020 and increased rapidly to comprise 400/472 (85%) of sequenced isolates from admitted cases in wave 2. A multivariate analysis identified risk factors for severity on admission, such as age (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.03, for every year older; p<0.001), obesity (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.26; p<0.001) and infection with the Alpha variant (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.24; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis is the first in hospitalised cohorts to show increased severity of disease associated with the Alpha variant. The number of nosocomial cases was similar in both waves despite the introduction of many infection control interventions before wave 2.

Evaluation and improvement of the National Early Warning Score (NEWS2) for COVID-19: a multi-hospital study.

BACKGROUND: The National Early Warning Score (NEWS2) is currently recommended in the UK for the risk stratification of COVID-19 patients, but little is known about its ability to detect severe cases. We aimed to evaluate NEWS2 for the prediction of severe COVID-19 outcome and identify and validate a set of blood and physiological parameters routinely collected at hospital admission to improve upon the use of NEWS2 alone for medium-term risk stratification. METHODS: Training cohorts comprised 1276 patients admitted to King's College Hospital National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust with COVID-19 disease from 1 March to 30 April 2020. External validation cohorts included 6237 patients from five UK NHS Trusts (Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals, University Hospitals Southampton, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, University College London Hospitals, University Hospitals Birmingham), one hospital in Norway (Oslo University Hospital), and two hospitals in Wuhan, China (Wuhan Sixth Hospital and Taikang Tongji Hospital). The outcome was severe COVID-19 disease (transfer to intensive care unit (ICU) or death) at 14 days after hospital admission. Age, physiological measures, blood biomarkers, sex, ethnicity, and comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular, respiratory and kidney diseases) measured at hospital admission were considered in the models. RESULTS: A baseline model of 'NEWS2 + age' had poor-to-moderate discrimination for severe COVID-19 infection at 14 days (area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) in training cohort = 0.700, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.680, 0.722; Brier score = 0.192, 95% CI 0.186, 0.197). A supplemented model adding eight routinely collected blood and physiological parameters (supplemental oxygen flow rate, urea, age, oxygen saturation, C-reactive protein, estimated glomerular filtration rate, neutrophil count, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio) improved discrimination (AUC = 0.735; 95% CI 0.715, 0.757), and these improvements were replicated across seven UK and non-UK sites. However, there was evidence of miscalibration with the model tending to underestimate risks in most sites. CONCLUSIONS: NEWS2 score had poor-to-moderate discrimination for medium-term COVID-19 outcome which raises questions about its use as a screening tool at hospital admission. Risk stratification was improved by including readily available blood and physiological parameters measured at hospital admission, but there was evidence of miscalibration in external sites. This highlights the need for a better understanding of the use of early warning scores for COVID.

The prevalence and risk factors of psychological disturbances of frontline medical staff in china under the COVID-19 epidemic: Workload should be concerned.

BACKGROUND: To our best knowledge, this was the first time to investigate the prevalence and risk factors of psychological disturbances, including depression, anxiety, somatization symptoms, insomnia and suicide, among frontline medical staff, who were working with the COVID-10 infected patients directly. METHODS: Patient Health Questionnaire Depression (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire scale (GAD-7), Symptom Check List-90 (SCL-90) somatization, Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and the suicidal module of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview were used for online survey. RESULTS: A total of 606 frontline hospital staff and1099 general population were recruited. The prevalence of depression, anxiety, somatization symptoms, insomnia, and suicide risk in frontline medical staffs were 57.6%, 45.4%, 12.0%, 32.0% and 13.0%, respectively. Except for suicide risk, the prevalence of other psychological disorders in frontline medical staff were higher than those in general population (all p<0.01). Among the frontline medical staff, the daily working hours were associated with all psychological disturbance (all p<0.01), women with anxiety (p = 0.02), body mass index (BMI) with anxiety and insomnia (p = 0.02, p = 0.03). Age was negatively associated with depression, anxiety, and insomnia (all p<0.01). Finally, years of working and family income were negatively associated with suicide risk (p = 0.03, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that during the outbreak of COVID-19, the frontline medical staff are more likely to suffer from psychological disturbances than general population. It is noticeable that daily working hours are a risk factor for all measured psychological disturbances, and some other variables may be involved in certain psychological disturbances of frontline medical staff.

Immunogenicity and safety of a recombinant adenovirus type-5-vectored COVID-19 vaccine in healthy adults aged 18 years or older: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: This is the first randomised controlled trial for assessment of the immunogenicity and safety of a candidate non-replicating adenovirus type-5 (Ad5)-vectored COVID-19 vaccine, aiming to determine an appropriate dose of the candidate vaccine for an efficacy study. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial of the Ad5-vectored COVID-19 vaccine was done in a single centre in Wuhan, China. Healthy adults aged 18 years or older, who were HIV-negative and previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection-free, were eligible to participate and were randomly assigned to receive the vaccine at a dose of 1 × 1011 viral particles per mL or 5 × 1010 viral particles per mL, or placebo. Investigators allocated participants at a ratio of 2:1:1 to receive a single injection intramuscularly in the arm. The randomisation list (block size 4) was generated by an independent statistician. Participants, investigators, and staff undertaking laboratory analyses were masked to group allocation. The primary endpoints for immunogenicity were the geometric mean titres (GMTs) of specific ELISA antibody responses to the receptor binding domain (RBD) and neutralising antibody responses at day 28. The primary endpoint for safety evaluation was the incidence of adverse reactions within 14 days. All recruited participants who received at least one dose were included in the primary and safety analyses. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04341389. FINDINGS: 603 volunteers were recruited and screened for eligibility between April 11 and 16, 2020. 508 eligible participants (50% male; mean age 39·7 years, SD 12·5) consented to participate in the trial and were randomly assigned to receive the vaccine (1 × 1011 viral particles n=253; 5 × 1010 viral particles n=129) or placebo (n=126). In the 1 × 1011 and 5 × 1010 viral particles dose groups, the RBD-specific ELISA antibodies peaked at 656·5 (95% CI 575·2-749·2) and 571·0 (467·6-697·3), with seroconversion rates at 96% (95% CI 93-98) and 97% (92-99), respectively, at day 28. Both doses of the vaccine induced significant neutralising antibody responses to live SARS-CoV-2, with GMTs of 19·5 (95% CI 16·8-22·7) and 18·3 (14·4-23·3) in participants receiving 1 × 1011 and 5 × 1010 viral particles, respectively. Specific interferon γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay responses post vaccination were observed in 227 (90%, 95% CI 85-93) of 253 and 113 (88%, 81-92) of 129 participants in the 1 × 1011 and 5 × 1010 viral particles dose groups, respectively. Solicited adverse reactions were reported by 183 (72%) of 253 and 96 (74%) of 129 participants in the 1 × 1011 and 5 × 1010 viral particles dose groups, respectively. Severe adverse reactions were reported by 24 (9%) participants in the 1 × 1011 viral particles dose group and one (1%) participant in the 5 × 1010 viral particles dose group. No serious adverse reactions were documented. INTERPRETATION: The Ad5-vectored COVID-19 vaccine at 5 × 1010 viral particles is safe, and induced significant immune responses in the majority of recipients after a single immunisation. FUNDING: National Key R&D Programme of China, National Science and Technology Major Project, and CanSino Biologics.

COVID-19 and immunomodulation treatment for women with reproductive failures.

COVID-19 pandemic is affecting various areas of health care, including human reproduction. Many women with reproductive failures, during the peri-implantation period and pregnancy, are on the immunotherapy using immune modulators and immunosuppressant due to underlying autoimmune diseases, cellular immune dysfunction, and rheumatic conditions. Many questions have been raised for women with immunotherapy during the COVID-19 pandemic, including infection susceptibility, how to manage women with an increased risk of and active COVID-19 infection. SARS-CoV-2 is a novel virus, and not enough information exists. Yet, we aim to review the data from previous coronavirus outbreaks and current COVID-19 and provide interim guidelines for immunotherapy in women with reproductive failures.

Safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of a recombinant adenovirus type-5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine: a dose-escalation, open-label, non-randomised, first-in-human trial.

BACKGROUND: A vaccine to protect against COVID-19 is urgently needed. We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of a recombinant adenovirus type-5 (Ad5) vectored COVID-19 vaccine expressing the spike glycoprotein of a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) strain. METHODS: We did a dose-escalation, single-centre, open-label, non-randomised, phase 1 trial of an Ad5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine in Wuhan, China. Healthy adults aged between 18 and 60 years were sequentially enrolled and allocated to one of three dose groups (5 × 1010, 1 × 1011, and 1·5 × 1011 viral particles) to receive an intramuscular injection of vaccine. The primary outcome was adverse events in the 7 days post-vaccination. Safety was assessed over 28 days post-vaccination. Specific antibodies were measured with ELISA, and the neutralising antibody responses induced by vaccination were detected with SARS-CoV-2 virus neutralisation and pseudovirus neutralisation tests. T-cell responses were assessed by enzyme-linked immunospot and flow-cytometry assays. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04313127. FINDINGS: Between March 16 and March 27, 2020, we screened 195 individuals for eligibility. Of them, 108 participants (51% male, 49% female; mean age 36·3 years) were recruited and received the low dose (n=36), middle dose (n=36), or high dose (n=36) of the vaccine. All enrolled participants were included in the analysis. At least one adverse reaction within the first 7 days after the vaccination was reported in 30 (83%) participants in the low dose group, 30 (83%) participants in the middle dose group, and 27 (75%) participants in the high dose group. The most common injection site adverse reaction was pain, which was reported in 58 (54%) vaccine recipients, and the most commonly reported systematic adverse reactions were fever (50 [46%]), fatigue (47 [44%]), headache (42 [39%]), and muscle pain (18 [17%]. Most adverse reactions that were reported in all dose groups were mild or moderate in severity. No serious adverse event was noted within 28 days post-vaccination. ELISA antibodies and neutralising antibodies increased significantly at day 14, and peaked 28 days post-vaccination. Specific T-cell response peaked at day 14 post-vaccination. INTERPRETATION: The Ad5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine is tolerable and immunogenic at 28 days post-vaccination. Humoral responses against SARS-CoV-2 peaked at day 28 post-vaccination in healthy adults, and rapid specific T-cell responses were noted from day 14 post-vaccination. Our findings suggest that the Ad5 vectored COVID-19 vaccine warrants further investigation. FUNDING: National Key R&D Program of China, National Science and Technology Major Project, and CanSino Biologics.