Reply to Davison, G. Comment on "Huijghebaert et al. Does Trypsin Oral Spray (Viruprotect®/ColdZyme®) Protect against COVID-19 and Common Colds or Induce Mutation? Caveats in Medical Device Regulations in the European Union. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 5066".

We have read the comment from Davison with great interest [...].

Closing schools for SARS-CoV-2: a pragmatic rapid recommendation.

Background: In Belgium, schools closed during the first lockdown in March 2020, with a partial reopening in May. They fully reopened in September. During the summer, infections started to increase in the general population, speeding up in September. Some measures were taken to limit social contacts but those were insufficient to mitigate the exponential rise of infections in October. Children were still receiving all lessons at school at that time and it was questioned whether this position was tenable. We systematically compared the benefits and harms of closing primary and secondary schools and developed a recommendation. Methods: A multidisciplinary panel, including school pupils and teachers, educational experts, clinicians and researchers, produced this recommendation in compliance with the standards for trustworthy rapid guidelines. The recommendation is based on data collected through national surveillance or studies from Belgium, and supported by a rapid literature review. Results: Closing schools during the first lockdown probably resulted in a large learning delay and possibly led to more cases of child abuse. We are uncertain about the effect on the infection rate, hospitalisations, transmission rates, mental health of children, teachers and parents. The panel concluded that the balance of benefits and harms of closing schools clearly shifts against closing schools. Detrimental effects are even worse for vulnerable children. This recommendation is affected by the local virus circulation. Conclusion: The guideline panel issues a strong recommendation against closing schools when the virus circulation is low to moderate, and a weak recommendation against closing schools when the virus circulation is high. It does not apply when the school system cannot function due to lack of teachers, too many children who are at home or a shortage of support services. As the results of international studies are consistent with Belgian study results, this recommendation may also be relevant internationally.

Does Trypsin Oral Spray (Viruprotect®/ColdZyme®) Protect against COVID-19 and Common Colds or Induce Mutation? Caveats in Medical Device Regulations in the European Union.

BACKGROUND: nasal or oral sprays are often marketed as medical devices (MDs) in the European Union to prevent common cold (CC), with ColdZyme®/Viruprotect® (trypsin/glycerol) mouth spray claiming to prevent colds and the COVID-19 virus from infecting host cells and to shorten/reduce CC symptoms as an example. We analyzed the published (pre)-clinical evidence. METHODS: preclinical: comparison of in vitro tests with validated host cell models to determine viral infectivity. Clinical: efficacy, proportion of users protected against virus (compared with non-users) and safety associated with trypsin/glycerol. RESULTS: preclinical data showed that exogenous trypsin enhances SARS-CoV-2 infectivity and syncytia formation in host models, while culture passages in trypsin presence induce spike protein mutants. The manufacturer claims >98% SARS-CoV-2 deactivation, although clinically irrelevant as based on a tryptic viral digest, inserting trypsin inactivation before host cells exposure. Efficacy and safety were not adequately addressed in clinical studies or leaflets (no COVID-19 data). Protection was obtained among 9-39% of users, comparable to or lower than placebo-treated or non-users. Several potential safety risks (tissue digestion, bronchoconstriction) were identified. CONCLUSIONS: the current European MD regulations may result in insufficient exploration of (pre)clinical proof of action. Exogenous trypsin exposure even raises concerns (higher SARS-CoV-2 infectivity, mutations), whereas its clinical protective performance against respiratory viruses as published remains poor and substandard.

Essentials in saline pharmacology for nasal or respiratory hygiene in times of COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Nasal irrigation or nebulizing aerosol of isotonic or hypertonic saline is a traditional method for respiratory or nasal care. A recent small study in outpatients with COVID-19 without acute respiratory distress syndrome suggests substantial symptom resolution. We therefore analyzed pharmacological/pharmacodynamic effects of isotonic or hypertonic saline, relevant to SARS-CoV-2 infection and respiratory care. METHODS: Mixed search method. RESULTS: Due to its wetting properties, saline achieves an improved spreading of alveolar lining fluid and has been shown to reduce bio-aerosols and viral load. Saline provides moisture to respiratory epithelia and gels mucus, promotes ciliary beating, and improves mucociliary clearance. Coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2 damage ciliated epithelium in the nose and airways. Saline inhibits SARS-CoV-2 replication in Vero cells; possible interactions involve the viral ACE2-entry mechanism (chloride-dependent ACE2 configuration), furin and 3CLpro (inhibition by NaCl), and the sodium channel ENaC. Saline shifts myeloperoxidase activity in epithelial or phagocytic cells to produce hypochlorous acid. Clinically, nasal or respiratory airway care with saline reduces symptoms of seasonal coronaviruses and other common cold viruses. Its use as aerosol reduces hospitalization rates for bronchiolitis in children. Preliminary data suggest symptom reduction in symptomatic COVID-19 patients if saline is initiated within 48 h of symptom onset. CONCLUSIONS: Saline interacts at various levels relevant to nasal or respiratory hygiene (nasal irrigation, gargling or aerosol). If used from the onset of common cold symptoms, it may represent a useful add-on to first-line interventions for COVID-19. Formal evaluation in mild COVID-19 is desirable as to establish efficacy and optimal treatment regimens.

COVID-19: Does the infectious inoculum dose-response relationship contribute to understanding heterogeneity in disease severity and transmission dynamics?

The variation in the speed and intensity of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and severity of the resulting COVID-19 disease are still imperfectly understood. We postulate a dose-response relationship in COVID-19, and that "the dose of virus in the initial inoculum" is an important missing link in understanding several incompletely explained observations in COVID-19 as a factor in transmission dynamics and severity of disease. We hypothesize that: (1) Viral dose in inoculum is related to severity of disease, (2) Severity of disease is related to transmission potential, and (3) In certain contexts, chains of severe cases can build up to severe local outbreaks, and large-scale intensive epidemics. Considerable evidence from other infectious diseases substantiates this hypothesis and recent evidence from COVID-19 points in the same direction. We suggest research avenues to validate the hypothesis. If proven, our hypothesis could strengthen the scientific basis for deciding priority containment measures in various contexts in particular the importance of avoiding super-spreading events and the benefits of mass masking.

A call for strengthened evidence on targeted, non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID-19 for the protection of vulnerable individuals in sub-Saharan Africa.

Following the easing of lockdown measures in many sub-Saharan African countries, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases have been on the rise. As the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of COVID-19, may be difficult to stop in these settings, we propose that the existing COVID-19 prevention strategies aimed at reducing overall transmission are complemented with more targeted strategies to protect people at risk of severe COVID-19 disease. We suggest investigating the feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of distributing COVID-19 prevention kits to households with persons at increased risk of severe COVID-19 disease.

The COVID-19 pandemic: diverse contexts; different epidemics-how and why?

It is very exceptional that a new disease becomes a true pandemic. Since its emergence in Wuhan, China, in late 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes COVID-19, has spread to nearly all countries of the world in only a few months. However, in different countries, the COVID-19 epidemic takes variable shapes and forms in how it affects communities. Until now, the insights gained on COVID-19 have been largely dominated by the COVID-19 epidemics and the lockdowns in China, Europe and the USA. But this variety of global trajectories is little described, analysed or understood. In only a few months, an enormous amount of scientific evidence on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 has been uncovered (knowns). But important knowledge gaps remain (unknowns). Learning from the variety of ways the COVID-19 epidemic is unfolding across the globe can potentially contribute to solving the COVID-19 puzzle. This paper tries to make sense of this variability-by exploring the important role that context plays in these different COVID-19 epidemics; by comparing COVID-19 epidemics with other respiratory diseases, including other coronaviruses that circulate continuously; and by highlighting the critical unknowns and uncertainties that remain. These unknowns and uncertainties require a deeper understanding of the variable trajectories of COVID-19. Unravelling them will be important for discerning potential future scenarios, such as the first wave in virgin territories still untouched by COVID-19 and for future waves elsewhere.