Signaling pathways and intervention for therapy of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) represents one of the fastest growing epidemic metabolic disorders worldwide and is a strong contributor for a broad range of comorbidities, including vascular, visual, neurological, kidney, and liver diseases. Moreover, recent data suggest a mutual interplay between T2DM and Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). T2DM is characterized by insulin resistance (IR) and pancreatic ß cell dysfunction. Pioneering discoveries throughout the past few decades have established notable links between signaling pathways and T2DM pathogenesis and therapy. Importantly, a number of signaling pathways substantially control the advancement of core pathological changes in T2DM, including IR and ß cell dysfunction, as well as additional pathogenic disturbances. Accordingly, an improved understanding of these signaling pathways sheds light on tractable targets and strategies for developing and repurposing critical therapies to treat T2DM and its complications. In this review, we provide a brief overview of the history of T2DM and signaling pathways, and offer a systematic update on the role and mechanism of key signaling pathways underlying the onset, development, and progression of T2DM. In this content, we also summarize current therapeutic drugs/agents associated with signaling pathways for the treatment of T2DM and its complications, and discuss some implications and directions to the future of this field.

Correlation between self-health management, adaptation, and perceived stress among nursing interns in medical school

Objective: To explore health self-management, adaptation, and perceived stress among nursing interns in medical colleges and universities under the normal prevention and control of COVID-19, and to provide a scientific basis for the health management of practice nursing students.

Donor tolerability of convalescent plasma donation.

BACKGROUND: Since early 2020, convalescent plasma has been widely used for treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). There is limited information regarding donor tolerability of convalescent plasma donation. In this study, we evaluated the short-term donor tolerability of convalescent plasma donation. METHODS: A prospective study of 309 convalescent plasma donation related adverse events were conducted at Wuhan Blood Center of China, from February 12 to April 1, 2020. Additionally, up to 28-day post-donation follow-ups were performed on the donors. RESULTS: Sixteen (5.2%) adverse events were reported in 309 donations. All of these were mild vasovagal without loss of consciousness. The frequency of adverse reactions was higher in donors with a per donation volume of >8 mL/kg body weight or ≥ 600 mL, <100 mm Hg in pre-donation systolic blood pressure, or less than 28 days from the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. There was no correlation to donation history, weight, sex, ABO blood type, pre-donation diastolic blood pressure, pulse, or hemoglobin. CONCLUSION: The donation of convalescent plasma is generally safe. Mitigation of risk factors associated with adverse events can further enhance donor tolerability of convalescent plasma donation.

Analysis of viral load in different specimen types and serum antibody levels of COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has caused a global pandemic and the death toll is increasing. However, there is no definitive information regarding the type of clinical specimens that is the best for SARS-CoV-2 detection, the antibody levels in patients with different duration of disease, and the relationship between antibody level and viral load. METHODS: Nasopharyngeal swabs, anal swabs, saliva, blood, and urine specimens were collected from patients with a course of disease ranging from 7 to 69 days. Viral load in different specimen types was measured using droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). Meanwhile, anti-nucleocapsid protein (anti-N) IgM and IgG antibodies and anti-spike protein receptor-binding domain (anti-S-RBD) IgG antibody in all serum samples were tested using ELISA. RESULTS: The positive detection rate in nasopharyngeal swab was the highest (54.05%), followed by anal swab (24.32%), and the positive detection rate in saliva, blood, and urine was 16.22%, 10.81%, and 5.41%, respectively. However, some patients with negative nasopharyngeal swabs had other specimens tested positive. There was no significant correlation between antibody level and days after symptoms onset or viral load. CONCLUSIONS: Other specimens could be positive in patients with negative nasopharyngeal swabs, suggesting that for patients in the recovery period, specimens other than nasopharyngeal swabs should also be tested to avoid false negative results, and anal swabs are recommended. The antibody level had no correlation with days after symptoms onset or the viral load of nasopharyngeal swabs, suggesting that the antibody level may also be affected by other factors.

Feasibility of a pilot program for COVID-19 convalescent plasma collection in Wuhan, China.

BACKGROUND: A novel coronavirus has caused an international outbreak. Currently, there are no specific therapeutic agents for coronavirus infections. Convalescent plasma (CP) therapy is a potentially effective treatment option. METHODS: Patients who had recovered from COVID-19 and had been discharged from the hospital for more than 2 weeks were recruited. COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP)-specific donor screening and selection were performed based on the following criteria: 1) aged 18-55 years; 2) eligible for blood donation; 3) diagnosed with COVID-19; 4) had two consecutive negative COVID-19 nasopharyngeal swab tests based on PCR (at least 24 hr apart) prior to hospital discharge; 5) had been discharged from the hospital for more than 2 weeks; and 6) had no COVID-19 symptoms prior to convalescent plasma donation. In addition, preference was given to CCP donors who had a fever lasting more than 3 days or a body temperature exceeding 38.5°C (101.3°F), and who donated 4 weeks after the onset of symptoms. CCP collection was performed using routine plasma collection procedures via plasmapheresis. In addition to routine donor testing, the CCP donors' plasma was also tested for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid and S-RBD-specific IgG antibody. RESULTS: Of the 81 potential CCP donors, 64 (79%) plasma products were collected. There were 18 female donors and 46 male donors. There were 34 first-time blood donors and 30 repeat donors. The average time between CCP collection and initial symptom onset was 49.1 days, and the average time between CCP collection and hospital discharge was 38.7 days. The average volume of CCP collected was 327.7 mL. All Alanine transaminase (ALT) testing results met blood donation requirements. HIV Ag/Ab, anti-HCV, anti-syphilis, and HBsAg were all negative; NAT for HIV, HBV, and HCV were also negative. In addition, all of the CCP donors' plasma units were negative for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Of the total 64 CCP donors tested, only one had an S-RBD-specific IgG titer of 1:160, all others had a titer of ≥1:320. CONCLUSION: Based on a feasibility study of a pilot CCP program in Wuhan, China, we demonstrated the success and feasibility of CCP collection. In addition, all of the CCP units collected had a titer of ≥1:160 for S-RBD-specific IgG antibody, which met the CCP quality control requirements based on the Chinese national guidelines for CCP.

Characteristics and serological patterns of COVID-19 convalescent plasma donors: optimal donors and timing of donation.

BACKGROUND: The lack of effective treatments against the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has led to the exploratory use of convalescent plasma for treating COVID-19. Case reports and case series have shown encouraging results. This study investigated SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and epidemiological characteristics in convalescent plasma donors, to identify criteria for donor selection. METHODS: Recovered COVID-19 patients, aged 18-55 years, who had experienced no symptoms for more than 2 weeks, were recruited. Donor characteristics such as disease presentations were collected and SARS-CoV-2 N-specific IgM, IgG, and S-RBD-specific IgG levels were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). RESULTS: Whereas levels of N-specific IgM antibody declined after recovery, S-RBD-specific and N-specific IgG antibodies increased after 4 weeks from the onset of symptoms, with no significant correlation to age, sex, or ABO blood type. Donors with the disease presentation of fever exceeding 38.5°C or lasting longer than 3 days exhibited higher levels of S-RBD-specific IgG antibodies at the time of donation. Of the 49 convalescent plasma donors, 90% had an S-RBD-specific IgG titer of ≥1:160 and 78% had a titer of ≥1:640 at the time of plasma donation. Of the 30 convalescent plasma donors, who had donated plasma later than 28 days after the onset of symptoms and had a disease presentation of fever lasting longer than 3 days or a body temperature exceeding 38.5°C, 100% had an S-RBD-specific IgG titer of ≥1:160 and 93% had a titer of ≥1:640. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that the S-RBD-specific IgG antibody reaches higher levels after 4 weeks from the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. We recommend the following selection criteria for optimal donation of COVID-19 convalescent plasma: 28 days after the onset of symptoms and with a disease presentation of fever lasting longer than 3 days or a body temperature exceeding 38.5°C. Selection based on these criteria can ensure a high likelihood of achieving sufficiently high S-RBD-specific IgG titers.

Effect of Convalescent Plasma Therapy on Time to Clinical Improvement in Patients With Severe and Life-threatening COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Convalescent plasma is a potential therapeutic option for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but further data from randomized clinical trials are needed. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of convalescent plasma therapy for patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Open-label, multicenter, randomized clinical trial performed in 7 medical centers in Wuhan, China, from February 14, 2020, to April 1, 2020, with final follow-up April 28, 2020. The trial included 103 participants with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 that was severe (respiratory distress and/or hypoxemia) or life-threatening (shock, organ failure, or requiring mechanical ventilation). The trial was terminated early after 103 of a planned 200 patients were enrolled. Intervention: Convalescent plasma in addition to standard treatment (n = 52) vs standard treatment alone (control) (n = 51), stratified by disease severity. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was time to clinical improvement within 28 days, defined as patient discharged alive or reduction of 2 points on a 6-point disease severity scale (ranging from 1 [discharge] to 6 [death]). Secondary outcomes included 28-day mortality, time to discharge, and the rate of viral polymerase chain reaction (PCR) results turned from positive at baseline to negative at up to 72 hours. Results: Of 103 patients who were randomized (median age, 70 years; 60 [58.3%] male), 101 (98.1%) completed the trial. Clinical improvement occurred within 28 days in 51.9% (27/52) of the convalescent plasma group vs 43.1% (22/51) in the control group (difference, 8.8% [95% CI, -10.4% to 28.0%]; hazard ratio [HR], 1.40 [95% CI, 0.79-2.49]; P = .26). Among those with severe disease, the primary outcome occurred in 91.3% (21/23) of the convalescent plasma group vs 68.2% (15/22) of the control group (HR, 2.15 [95% CI, 1.07-4.32]; P = .03); among those with life-threatening disease the primary outcome occurred in 20.7% (6/29) of the convalescent plasma group vs 24.1% (7/29) of the control group (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.30-2.63]; P = .83) (P for interaction = .17). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality (15.7% vs 24.0%; OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.22-1.59]; P = .30) or time from randomization to discharge (51.0% vs 36.0% discharged by day 28; HR, 1.61 [95% CI, 0.88-2.95]; P = .12). Convalescent plasma treatment was associated with a negative conversion rate of viral PCR at 72 hours in 87.2% of the convalescent plasma group vs 37.5% of the control group (OR, 11.39 [95% CI, 3.91-33.18]; P < .001). Two patients in the convalescent plasma group experienced adverse events within hours after transfusion that improved with supportive care. Conclusion and Relevance: Among patients with severe or life-threatening COVID-19, convalescent plasma therapy added to standard treatment, compared with standard treatment alone, did not result in a statistically significant improvement in time to clinical improvement within 28 days. Interpretation is limited by early termination of the trial, which may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important difference. Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000029757.