Persistent chemosensory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients: a deep dive into the psychophysical and genetic characterisation of an Italian cohort

Background/Objectives: Chemosensory dysfunction is a hallmark of SARS-CoV-2 infection;nevertheless, the genetic factors predisposing to long-term smell and taste loss are still unknown. This study aims to identify candidate genes possibly involved in persistent smell/taste loss through Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) analysis of a large cohort of 130 fully characterised Italian individuals, previously diagnosed with COVID-19. Method(s): DNA of all analysed patients was used to perform WGS analysis, and a detailed personal anamnesis was collected. Moreover, orthonasal function was assessed through the extended Sniffin' Sticks test, retronasal function was tested with 20 powdered tasteless aromas, and taste was determined with validated Taste Strips. Self-reported smell and taste alterations were assessed via Visual Analog Scales plus questionnaires. Result(s): The clinical evaluation allowed to classify the patients in two groups: 88 cases affected by persistent smell dysfunction (median age, 49) and 42 controls (median age, 51). Among cases, 26.1% (n = 23) were functionally anosmic and 73.9% (n = 65) were hyposmic. Within cases, 77 underwent the taste strip test: 53.2% (n = 41) presented hypogeusia and 46.8% (n = 36) were normogeusic. Preliminary WGS results on a first subset of 76 samples confirmed the important role of UGT2A1 gene, previously described as involved in smell loss. Interestingly, we identified a nonsense variant (rs111696697, MAF 0.046) significantly associated with anosmia in males (p-value: 0.0183). Conclusion(s): Here, for the first time a large cohort of patients, fully characterised through a comprehensive psychophysical evaluation of smell and taste, have been analysed to better define the genetic bases of COVID-19-related persistent chemosensory dysfunction.

Outcome of COVID-19 on Indian patients with cancer: A multicenter, retrospective study

Background: Managing patients with cancer during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been challenging. Disruptions in cancer management have been observed due to cancellation of treatment, issues related to commuting, and dearth of health-care workers. Objective(s): This study was conducted during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic and was aimed at evaluating the 30-day all-cause mortality among patients with cancer and COVID-19 infection and the factors affecting it. Material(s) and Method(s): In this retrospective study, we collected secondary data from nine tertiary care centers in South India over a period of 10 months from March to Dec 2020. Patients across all age groups with histopathologically confirmed diagnosis of cancer who were affected by COVID-19 during their evaluation or treatment were included in the study. The primary outcome variables of the present study were 30-day all-cause mortality, cancer outcomes, and COVID-19 outcomes. Result(s): A total of 206 patients were included. Median age of the cohort was 55.5 years, and the male-To-female ratio was 1:1.03. The 30-day mortality rate was 12.6%. Twenty-Two patients (10.7%) had severe COVID-19 infection at the initial presentation. Predictors for severe pneumonia at the initial presentation were incomplete remission at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis and palliative intent of treatment. Severe pneumonia at the initial presentation, diagnosis of COVID-19 on or before August 2020, and need for ventilator support were associated with increased mortality. Conclusion(s): Severity of infection at the initial presentation, cancer status, and the intent of cancer treatment impact COVID-19 outcomes in patients with cancer.Copyright © 2022 Iranian Society of Ophthalmology. All rights reserved.

Anosmia and COVID-19.

Anosmia associated or not with dysgeusia seems to be a frequent symptom in cases of infection with SARS-CoV-2 responsible for COVID-19. It can be the initial symptom of the disease or remain isolated in pauci-symptomatic patients. Waiting for scientific confirmation and in the context of the current pandemic, it seems essential to consider any patient with a new anosmia as being infected with SARS-CoV-2 until proven otherwise. These patients should therefore isolate themselves and remain alert to the occurrence of other symptoms suggestive of the infection and/or be tested. Topical and systemic corticosteroids and nose washes are contraindicated. The natural course of anosmia seems to be favorable in most cases.Copyright © 2020 Editions Medecine et Hygiene. All rights reserved.

Clinical and laboratory characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infection in overweight and obese patients.

Objective. To assess the impact of obesity and overweight on the course of COVID-19. Patients and methods. This prospective study included 218 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection aged 18 to 94 years hospitalized between June 2020 and March 2021. We evaluated their clinical and laboratory parameters and their association with body weight. All patients were divided into 3 groups depending on their body mass index (BMI). Group 1 included 81 patients with grade 1-3 obesity (BMI >=30);group 2 comprised 71 overweight patients (BMI >=25 and <30);group 3 included 66 patients with normal body weight (BMI >=18.5 and <25). We analyzed clinical symptoms (including shortness of breath, fever, myalgia, headache, fatigue, changes in the oropharynx, cough, rhinorrhea, sore throat, anosmia, and diarrhea), prevalence of concomitant disorders and complications, findings of computed tomography and pulse oximetry, and findings of instrumental and laboratory examinations (complete blood count, urine test, electrocardiography, echo cardiography, biochemical assays, including C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, lactate, lactate dehydrogenase, activated partial thromboplastin time, prothrombin index, D-dimer, ferritin). Data analysis was performed using the Statistica 6.0 software. Results. We found that overweight and obese patients were more likely to have the main COVID-19 symptoms and comorbidities than those with normal weight. Overweight and obese patients also required respiratory support more frequently than patients with normal weight. Obese and overweight patients had more severe systemic inflammation (CRP, procalcitonin), cytolysis (ALT, AST), and thrombosis (D-dimer). Conclusion. Our findings suggest that obesity and overweight are the factors associated with a more severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, which should be considered when planning their treatment and developing resource strategies.Copyright © 2022, Dynasty Publishing House. All rights reserved.

COVID-19 IN PATIENTS WITH INFLAMMATORY ARTHRITIS IN THE VINSCHGAU VALLEY IN SOUTH TYROL

BackgroundFor patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases, the Covid-19 pandemic carried some implications in addition to those faced by the general population. In particular, the question whether these patients are at increased risk of contracting Covid-19 or have an unfavourable disease course has been and is a matter of concern.In autumn 2020, the population of the Vinschgau valley in South Tyrol, northern Italy was still largely spared from infection with SARS-CoV-2. Accordingly, incidence of the disease in the upcoming winter was anticipated to be high.ObjectivesThis prospective observational study aimed at characterizing Covid-19 infections in a population of patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) residing in the Vinschgau valley. The study was conceived as companion project to an analogously designed prospective cohort study in the general population of the Vinschgau valley, the CHRIS Covid-19 study.MethodsBetween september and december 2020, IA patients (i.e. previously diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis [RA], psoriatic arthritis [PsA] or peripheral spondyloarthritis [SpA]) residing in the Vinschgau valley (n=394 based on national healthcare system database) were contacted. Those who consented to participate in the study underwent a clinical baseline visit including TJC, SJC, VAS and assessment of RAID, PsAID9 or BASDAI (range 0-10, respectively). In addition, a Covid-19 screening questionnaire was administered. Then, active and/or past infection with SARS-CoV-2 were determined by nasopharyneal swab (PCR) and serum antibody test. In positively tested subjects, Covid-19 disease severity was graded according to WHO criteria (range 0-8, with 0 = no evidence of infection and 8 = death). Patients were followed-up with regular telephone interviews including Covid-19 screening questionnaire and RAID/PsAID/BASDAI for up to 12 months.Results111 patients (72 RA, 29 PsA, 10 SpA) were enrolled (see Table 1 for demographics and comorbidities).A total number of 19 PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections in 17 patients (10 RA, 7 PsA) were observed. Mean ± standard deviation 7-day incidence (incident cases/study population) was 0.003 ± 0.007.Fatigue, fever, anosmia and sore throat (present in 57.9%, 47.4%, 42.1% and 36.8% of infections, respectively) were the most frequent symptoms. Median (min-max) disease severity was 2 [1-4]. Two infections led to hospitalization, in one case oxygen supply was necessary. Four infections were asymptomatic (Figure 1).One patient died during follow-up due to pre-existing non-small cell lung cancer.Median absolute difference between post- and pre-infection disease activity was 0.4 and -0.8 for RAID and PsAID, respectively (both markedly below the minimal clinically important difference of 3 and 3.6 points, respectively).ConclusionIncidence of Covid-19 in the analysed cohort of patients with IA was low. Symptoms and comorbidities of SARS-CoV-2-positive IA patients reflected those known from the general population. Covid-19 seemed to have no relevant impact on IA disease activity. Comparison of these preliminary data with those of the general population is planned.Figure 1.Spectrum of clinical symptoms reported by study patients during infection with SARS-CoV-2[Figure omitted. See PDF]Table 1.Demographic data and selected comorbidities of study patients. Age and body mass index (BMI) are given in means ± standard deviation, female sex and comorbidities are given in n (% of column totals).TotalSARS-CoV-2 positiveHospitalized111172Age at inclusion (years)59.7 ± 9.462.5 ± 10.076.3 ± 9.0BMI at inclusion (kg/m2)27.9 ± 17.126.1 ± 3.330.5 ± 1.6Female sex76 (68.5)10 (58.8)1 (50)Active smokers22 (19.8)1 (5.9)0 (0)Arterial hypertension44 (39.6)8 (47.1)2 (50)Diabetes mellitus4 (3.6)1 (5.9)1 (50)Hyperlipidemia27 (24.3)2 (11.8)1 (50)Cardiac arrhythmias12 (10.8)2 (11.8)1 (50)History of cancer5 (4.5)1 (5.9)0 (0)Chronic bronchitis4 (3.6)1 (5.9)0 (0)Asthma3 (2.7%)0 (0)0 (0)Hospitalized in previous 12 months21 (18.9)3 (17.6)0 (0)Surgery with general anaesthesia in previous 12 months11 (9.9)2 (11.8)0 (0)Ack owledgementsThe authors thank Elena Cannavò and the CHRIS study team, whose support was of invaluable importance for the conduction of the study.Disclosure of InterestsNone Declared.

Association Between COVID-19 Pandemic and Serious Mental Illness: Systematic Review within Salutogenesis Model for Public Health Management

Background: The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the constant transformation of the SARS-COV-2 virus form, exposure to substantial psychosocial stress, environmental change, and isolation have led to the inference that the overall population's mental health could be affected, resulting in an increase in cases of psychosis. Objective(s): We initiated a systematic review to determine the impact of the SARS-COV-2 virus and its long-term effects-in both symptomatic and asymptomatic cases-on people with or without psychosis. We envisioned that this would give us an insight into effective clinical intervention methods for patients with psychosis during and after the pandemic. Method(s): We selected fifteen papers that met our inclusion criteria, i.e., those that considered participants with or without psychiatric illness and exposed to SARS-COV-2 infection, for this review and were retrieved via Google, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, PubMed, and PsychINFO Database. Key Gap: There is a dearth of research in understanding how COVID-19 affects people with or without a prior personal history of psychosis. Result(s): The systematic review summary provides insight into the state of knowledge. Insights from the systematic review have also been reviewed from the salutogenesis model's perspec-tive. There is moderate evidence of new-onset psychosis during the COVID-19 pandemic in which some antipsychotics treated the psychotic symptoms of patients while treating for COVID-19. Suggestions and recommendations are made for preventive and promotive public health strategies. Conclusion(s): The Salutogenesis model and Positive Psychology Interventions (PPI) provide another preventive and promotive public health management approach.Copyright © 2023 Bentham Science Publishers.

The Association of COVID-19 Severity with Laboratory Parameters, Radiologic Findings, Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Pregnant Women: A Multicenter Study in Indonesia

Objectives: Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2/COVID-19 infection is still a global concern, with pregnant women are considered as vulnerable population. Until now, the characteristics of pregnant women in Indonesia who are infected with COVID-19, as well as pregnancy and neonatal outcomes, are still unknown. This study aims to obtain national data, which are expected to be useful for the prevention and management of COVID-19 in pregnant women in Indonesia. Method(s): There were 1,427 patients recruited in this retrospective multicenter study. This study involved 11 hospitals in 10 provinces in Indonesia and was carried out using secondary patient data from April 2020 to July 2021. COVID-19 severity was differentiated into asymptomatic-to-mild symptoms and moderate-to-severe symptoms. The collected data include maternal characteristics, laboratory examinations, imaging, pregnancy outcomes, and neonatal outcomes. Result(s): Leukocyte, platelets, basophil, neutrophils segment, lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), C-reactive protein (CRP), urea, and creatinine were found to be significantly associated with severity differences (p < 0.05). Moderate-severe symptoms of COVID-19 also shown to have suggestive pneumonia findings on chest X-ray findings. Patients with asymptomatic-to-mild symptoms had significantly (p < 0.001) higher recovery rate, shorter hospital stay, less intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and had more vaginal delivery. Neonates from mother with mild symptoms also had significantly (p < 0.001) higher survival rate, higher birth weight, and higher APGAR score. Conclusion(s): Several laboratory and radiology components, as well as maternal and neonatal outcomes are related to the severity of COVID-19 in pregnant women in Indonesia.Copyright © The Author(s). 2023.

Once again about the new coronavirus infection COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to affect millions of people with increasing morbidity and mortality. Substantial variations exists in drug treatment of COVID-19. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) facilitates survival of select critically ill patients with COVID-19 with about 25-45% survival rate;survivors tend to be younger and have a shorter duration from diagnosis to cannulation. The practioners found the severe complications including concomitant neurological manifestations (from headache, anosmia, ageusia to encephalopathy, stroke and others) and multisystem inflammation syndrome (MIS) predominantly in children few weeks after SARS-CoV-2 infection and characterized by persistent fever, vomiting, headache, Kawasaki - like rash and fatigue. Regarding MIS the authors did not find strong association between the complications rate and outcomes and regime of immunomodulation treatment. The neurological manifestations in pts with COVID-19 were associated with higher in-hospital mortality.Copyright © 2022 Sinergia Press. All rights reserved.

Long-Term Neurologic Sequelae Among Patients with Varying COVID-19 Severity: An Administrative Claims Database Analysis

Objectives: Examine the long-term incident neurologic sequelae post COVID recovery and assess relationship with COVID severity using real-world data. Method(s): This retrospective cohort study was conducted using Optum Research Database between 01July2019 to 30Sep2022. Patients included were >=18 years with COVID diagnosis (index date) between 01Jan2020 and 31Oct2020, with continuous enrollment 6 months before and >=12 months after index date, known demographics, not pregnant, and with no baseline neurologic conditions. Patients were stratified into COVID severity cohorts as mild (index diagnosis), moderate (inpatient visit within 15 days of index), or severe (evidence of acute respiratory distress) and followed for a minimum of 12-months post-index. Neurologic sequelae examined were persistent headache, migraine, anosmia, sleep disturbance, cognitive dysfunction, post-traumatic stress disorder, suicidality, anxiety, depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, cerebrovascular disease (CVD), fatigue/myalgia and tremors. Descriptive statistics and incidence rate ratios (IRR) were calculated to assess outcomes. Result(s): Of 534,843 patients, 107,656 (Mild 96,637;Moderate 3,371;Severe 7,648) met the study inclusion criteria. Median follow up time was 750, 774 and 768 days in the mild, moderate and severe cohorts, respectively. About 20% of patients in the mild, 32% in moderate and 35% in the severe cohort experienced >=3 neurologic sequelae during the follow-up period. A significantly higher incidence of any neurologic sequelae was observed in moderate and severe cohorts compared with the mild cohort (IRR 3.1 and 3.0, respectively;p<0.001). Cognitive dysfunction (moderate IRR 5.4, severe IRR 5.7;p<0.001), and CVD (moderate IRR 4.8, severe IRR 4.0;p<0.001) were the most commonly occurring manifestations in moderate and severe cohorts compared with the mild cohort. Conclusion(s): These results highlight the need for long-term monitoring and preventative strategies for neurologic conditions post COVID recovery that might impair quality of life and increase overall healthcare burden in the U.S.Copyright © 2023

PRE-EXPOSURE PROPHYLAXIS WITH TIXAGEVIMAB/CILGAVIMAB: SINGLE CENTRE EXPERIENCE IN A COHORT OF RHEUMATIC PATIENTS

BackgroundVaccination against SARS-CoV2 had a critical role in the fight against COVID19 pandemic.A weaker humoral response to COVID19 vaccine has been found in rheumatic patients treated with Rituximab (RTX) or Mycophenolate Mofetil (MMF)[1]. Despite the evidence that anti-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines can elicit a T-cell response [2], some data show that even the cellular immunity could be impaired in rheumatic patients [3] but COVID19 serology is the only parameter that is feasible to measure in daily practice.Tixagevimab+cilgavimab are two human-derived monoclonal antibodies administered parenterally and authorized by regulatory agencies in February 2022 for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) against COVID19 from different virus variants in fragile patients.ObjectivesTo demonstrate safety and effectiveness of tixagevimab+cilgavimab.MethodsPatients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases undergoing immunosuppressive treatment with RTX or MMF during the vaccination campaign were enrolled between April and June 2022. All patients must have anti-spike antibody levels below the protective threshold (defined by anti-spike IgG titre <250 BAU/ml) after receiving at least 2 vaccine doses.Patients were monitored with a questionnaire every month about COVID19 symptoms (including respiratory and gastrointestinal symptoms, anosmia and ageusia, skin rash and potential contact with COVID19+ subjects) and were checked for anti-spike and anti-nucleocapside antibodies titres every 2 months for a total of a 6 month follow-up. MMF dose was reduced at 1 g/die at the time of vaccine administration.ResultsFifteen patients were enrolled: 9 participants had a connective tissue disease (CTD;1 dermatomyositis, 3 anti-syntethase syndrome, 4 systemic sclerosis, 1 systemic lupus erythematosus) and 6 had vasculitis (all granulomatosis with polyangiitis). 12 of them received RTX in the preceding 12 months and 3 were taking MMF.About safety, the therapy was very well tolerated and only 4 patients (26%) reported a non-severe adverse event in the 2 weeks following drug administration (2 myalgia, 1 headache, 1 fatigue), none of them requiring hospitalization nor pharmacologic treatment.Regarding effectiveness, 3/15 patients contracted SARS-Cov2 infection (20%) with mild symptoms and no need for hospitalization nor oxygen therapy. Only 1 of them received an antiviral drug (nirmatrelvir+ritonavir). All infected patients had a CTD diagnosis. No significant correlation was observed between the type of rheumatic disease and the risk of infection or response to tixagevimab+cilgavimab.ConclusionNone of our patients developed severe adverse events after tixagevimab+cilgavimab administration and, among the 3 SARS-CoV2 infected patients, none required hospitalization nor oxygen therapy.We conclude that in our experience tixagevimab+cilgavimab is a safe and useful complementary immunization strategy to vaccination for COVID19 prophylaxis.These data will be implemented in a larger study, comprehending various immunocompromised patients from several departments.References[1] Furer et al., Ann Rheum Dis, 2021[2] Mangalakumari et al., Nat Rev Immunol, 2020[3] Picchianti-Diamanti et al., Front Immunol, 2021Charateristic of the cohortIdentificativeAgeDiagnosisRTX/MMFSARS-CoV2 InfectionHospitalizationAntiviral drugs180SScMMF-//270ASSDRTX+nono370ASSDRTX+noyes452GPARTX-//551GPARTX-//649SSc+SSjRTX-//768SScMMF-//847LESRTX-//964ASSDRTX-//1068GPARTX-//1123GPARTX-//1258DMRTX+nono1361SScMMF-//1475GPARTX-//1569GPARTX-//Figure 1.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsNone Declared.

PATIENTS WITH AXIAL SPONDYLOARTHRITIS HAVE BETTER SARS-CoV-2 OUTCOMES COMPARED WITH PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: DATA FROM THE NATIONAL SAR-COVID REGISTRY

BackgroundPatients with rheumatic diseases may present more severe SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to the general population. However, in some studies, hospitalization and mortality due COVID-19 were lower in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) compared to other rheumatic diseases.ObjectivesTo assess the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with axSpA from the SAR-COVID registry, comparing them with patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to determine the factors associated with poor outcomes and death.MethodsPatients ≥18 years old from the SAR-COVID national registry with diagnosis of AxSpA (ASAS criteria 2009) and RA (ACR/EULAR criteria 2010) who had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (RT-PCR or positive serology), recruited from August 2020 to June 2022 were included. Sociodemographic and clinical data, comorbidities, treatments and outcomes of the infection were collected. Infection severity was assessed using the WHO-ordinal scale (WHO-OS)[1]: ambulatory [1], mild hospitalizations (2.3 y 4), severe hospitalizations (5.6 y 7) and death [8].Statistical analysisDescriptive statistics. Chi[2] or Fischer test and Student T or Mann-Whitney as appropriate. Poisson generalized linear model.ResultsA total of 1226 patients were included, 59 (4.8%) with axSpA and 1167 (95.2%) with RA. RA patients were significantly older, more frequently female, and had a longer disease duration. More than a third of the patients were in remission. 43.9 % presented comorbidities, arterial hypertension being the most frequent. At the time of SARS-Cov-2 diagnosis, patients with RA used glucocorticoids and conventional DMARDs more frequently than those with axSpA, while 74.6% of the latter were under treatment with biological DMARDs being anti-TNF the most used (61%).94.9 % of the patients in both groups reported symptoms related to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Although the differences were not significant, patients with RA presented more frequently cough, dyspnea, and gastrointestinal symptoms, while those with axSpA reported more frequently odynophagia, anosmia, and dysgeusia. During the SARS-CoV-2 infection, 6.8% and 23.5% of the patients with axSpA and RA were hospitalized, respectively. All of the patients with axSpA were admitted to the general ward, while 26.6% of those with RA to intensive care units. No patient with axSpA had complications or severe COVID-19 (WHO-OS>=5) or died as a result of the infection while mortality in the RA group was 3.3% (Figure 1).In the multivariate analysis adjusted to poor prognosis factors, no association was found between the diagnosis of axSpA and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection assessed with the WHO-OS (OR -0.18, IC 95%(-0.38, 0.01, p=0.074).ConclusionPatients with EspAax did not present complications from SARS-CoV-2 infections and none of them died due COVID-19.Reference[1]World Health Organization coronavirus disease (COVID-19) Therapeutic Trial Synopsis Draft 2020.Figure 1.Outcomes and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with axSpA and RA.[Figure omitted. See PDF]Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsAndrea Bravo Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Tatiana Barbich Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Carolina Isnardi Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretati n, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Gustavo Citera Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Emilce Edith Schneeberger Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Rosana Quintana Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Cecilia Pisoni Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Mariana Pera Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Edson Velozo Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Dora Aida Pereira Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Paula Alba Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Juan A Albiero Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Jaime Villafañe Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Hernan Maldonado Ficco Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Veronica Sa io Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Santiago Eduardo Aguero Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Romina Rojas Tessel Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Maria Isabel Quaglia Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., María Soledad Gálvez Elkin Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access tothe information collected in the database., Gisela Paola Pendon Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Carolina Aeschlimann Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Gustavo Fabian Rodriguez Gil Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Malena Viola Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Cecilia Romeo Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Carla Maldini Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Silvana Mariela Conti Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor re istry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Rosana Gallo Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Leticia Ibañez Zurlo Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Maria Natalia Tamborenea Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Susana Isabel Pineda Vidal Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Debora Guaglianone Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Jonatan Marcos Mareco Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Cecilia Goizueta Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Elisa Novatti Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Fernanda Guzzanti Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Gimena Gómez Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Karen Roberts Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of t em participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database., Guillermo Pons-Estel Grant/research support from: SAR-COVID is a multi-sponsor registry, where Pfizer, Abbvie, and Elea Phoenix provided unrestricted grants. None of them participated or influenced the development of the project, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing the report. They do not have access to the information collected in the database.

Persistent symptoms after COVID-19 reported by the Dutch media and the general population: Potential nocebo effects?

Aim: The prevalence rate of post COVID-19 condition (PCC) is an estimated 12.7% in the general population. Nocebo effects have been suggested as a cause for PCC, potentially resulting in stigmatizing attitudes towards people with PCC. As it is pivotal to explore whether nocebo effects contribute to PCC, we studied whether the frequency of media attention towards PCC-related symptoms corresponded with prevalence rates of these symptoms in the general population. Method(s): Prevalence rates and typology of PCC-related symptoms in the general population, adjusted for prevalence rates of symptoms in a non-infected control population, were calculated by using data from the Lifelines COVID-19 Cohort (N = 76,422). Media attention towards PCC was assessed by coding 1266 Dutch PCC-related news articles (inter-rater-kappa >= 0.75). In these, we assessed whether 23 symptoms were mentioned as being PCC-related. Result(s): PCC-related symptoms were mentioned in 390 (30.8%) news articles. Five of the ten core symptoms of PCC were mentioned by 10 or fewer news articles. Ageusia/anosmia was the most prevalent PCC-related symptom, in 7.2% of participants. However, it was mentioned in only 80 (6.3%) articles. General tiredness and breathing difficulties were most frequently mentioned as being PCC-related (in 23.9% and 17.1% of articles, respectively), while these were far from the most prevalent PCC-related symptoms reported by participants (2.8% and 1.9%, respectively). Conclusion(s): If PCC was predominantly attributable to nocebo effects, its symptom profile would be expected to reflect levels of media attention for PCC. Our findings do not support media attention-related nocebo effects as predominant cause of PCC development.Copyright © 2023

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV- 2 in children of school-going age in district Swabi, Pakistan

Introduction: Earlier estimates of SARS-CoV- 2 do not accurately account for the extent of undiagnosed infections in children, who typically experience mild or asymptomatic disease. The purpose of this study was to estimate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV- 2 antibodies in children from District Swabi, one of the populous districts of Pakistan, and to identify symptoms most frequently associated with seropositivity. Methodology: We used ELISA to test for the presence of antibodies, IgM and IgG, in blood samples collected from 246 children of school-going age (5-16 years old) selected randomly from the district of Swabi, Pakistan. This study was approved by Khyber Medical University, Peshawar, Ethical Board, and Advanced Studies Review Board. Data were collected on a purposefully built questionnaire. Result(s): Overall, 2.0% of our participants were seropositive for IgM, whereas 23.1% were seropositive for IgG. Older age, female gender, and contact history were significantly associated with higher seropositivity. Symptoms associated with seropositivity were: fever (98.0%), cough (90.0%), sore throat (79.0%), coryza (68.0%), myalgia (61.0%), loss of sense of smell and taste (49.0%), and vomiting or diarrhoea (8.0%). Although 77.6% of our IgG seropositive participants recalled experiencing flu-like symptoms, none of the participants in this study had visited the doctor or were tested for SARS-COV- 2. We found IgG titres to be significantly higher in symptomatic children. Conclusion(s): The number of undiagnosed infections in children may be substantially larger than the official accounts. Sparse data are available regarding coronavirus disease in children, particularly in low middle-income countries (LMIC). The most frequently symptoms were fever, cough, sore throat, coreza, myalgia, loss of sense of smell and taste and lastly vomiting and diarrhoea. Serological studies provide valuable insight into the immunological status of a population, and can prove vital when considering future strategies.

ENT Manifestation of Covid-19: An Experience at a Tertiary Care Medical Teaching Institute of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

Aim: To determine the frequency of ear, nose and throat related disorders of covid disease in PCR proven positive Covid-19 patients. Method(s): This prospective study included 320 Covid-19 positive patients and was conducted at ENT Department of MTI Hayatabad Medical Complex, Peshawar from May 1, 2021 to April 30, 2022. The acute phase of covid-19 was taken as the time interval between the onsets of symptoms as day 1 today 30th post infection. Questions were asked about the following symptoms;flu, sore throat, sinus involvement, taste disturbances, smell disturbances, hoarseness and hearing loss. Clinical examination and relevant investigations were carried out to make a diagnosis. The data was documented on a proforma & analyzed using SPSS 26.0 for windows to determine the frequencies of signs & symptoms related to ENT. Result(s): A total of 320 patients were included in the study. The ages ranged from 18-50 years with mean age of 33.96 years. The age group 18-25 years mostly presented with symptoms related to ENT. Upper respiratory tract infection was the commonest symptom (60.6%) followed by sore throat (57.5%). Smell and taste disturbances accounted for in 46.3% & 15.3 % of the patients respectively. Fungal rhinosinusitis was observed in 6.9% of the patients. As there is a wide variation of the ENT symptoms in covid disease, it is important to know the predictive symptoms so that appropriate measures can be adopted. Identification & isolation of patients will prevent spread of disease and focused therapy and investigations. Practical implication Conclusion(s): The portal of entry for the SARS-CoV-2 is through the upper airway. It is important to know the symptoms related to ENT to make an early diagnosis and therefore, institute measures for management and prevention of further spread of the disease.Copyright © 2023 Lahore Medical And Dental College. All rights reserved.

Comparative Study of Chemosensory Dysfunction in COVID-19 in 2 Geographically Distinct Regions.

OBJECTIVE: To directly compare the prevalence of chemosensory dysfunction (smell and taste) in geographically distinct regions with the same questionnaires. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed to evaluate the self-reported symptoms among adults (older than 18 years) who underwent COVID-19 testing at an ambulatory assessment center in Canada and at a hospital in Israel between March 16, 2020, and August 19, 2020. The primary outcome was the prevalence of self-reported chemosensory dysfunction (anosmia/hypomsia and dysgeusia/ageusia). Subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the prevalence of chemosensory deficits among the outpatients. RESULTS: We identified a total of 350 COVID-19-positive patients (138 Canadians and 212 Israelis). The overall prevalence of chemosensory dysfunction was 47.1%. There was a higher proportion of chemosensory deficits among Canadians compared to Israelis (66.7% vs 34.4%, P < .01). A subgroup analysis for outpatients (never hospitalized) still identified a higher prevalence of chemosensory dysfunction among Canadians compared to Israelis (68.2% vs 36.1%, P < 0.01). A majority of patients recovered their sense of smell after 4 weeks of symptom onset. CONCLUSION: Although the prevalence of chemosensory deficit in COVID-19 was found to be similar to previously published reports, the prevalence can vary significantly across different geographical regions. Therefore, it is important to obtain regionally specific data so that the symptom of anosmia/dysgeusia can be used as a guide for screening for the clinical diagnosis of COVID-19.

Use of platelet-rich plasma for COVID-19-related olfactory loss: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The current study evaluated the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), an autologous blood product with supraphysiologic concentrations of growth factors, in the treatment of prolonged coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related smell loss. METHODS: This multi-institutional, randomized controlled trial recruited patients with COVID-19 who had objectively measured smell loss (University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test [UPSIT] ≤ 33) between 6 and 12 months. Patients were randomized to three intranasal injections of either PRP or sterile saline into their olfactory clefts. The primary outcome measure was change in Sniffin' Sticks score (threshold, discrimination, and identification [TDI]) from baseline. The secondary end point measures included responder rate (achievement of a clinically significant improvement, ≥5.5 points TDI), change in individual TDI olfaction scores, and change in subjective olfaction via a visual analog scale. RESULTS: A total of 35 patients were recruited and 26 completed the study. PRP treatment resulted in a 3.67-point (95% CI: 0.05-7.29, p = 0.047) greater improvement in olfaction compared with the placebo group at 3 months and a higher response rate (57.1% vs 8.3%, odds ratio 12.5 [95% exact bootstrap confidence interval, 2.2-116.7]). There was a greater improvement in smell discrimination following PRP treatment compared with placebo but no difference in smell identification or threshold. There was no difference in subjective scores between PRP and placebo. No adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSION: Olfactory function following COVID-19 can improve spontaneously after 6 months and can improve to a greater extent with PRP injection. These data build on the promise of PRP to be a safe potential treatment option for patients with COVID-19-related smell loss, and larger-powered studies will help further assess its efficacy.

Management of Post-Infectious Anosmia and Hyposmia: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Anosmia and hyposmia significantly affect patients' quality of life and have many etiologies, including trauma, inflammatory conditions including chronic rhinosinusitis, neoplasm, and viral infections, such as rhinovirus and SARS-CoV-2. OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to establish whether a consensus exists regarding optimal management of olfactory dysfunction and to provide insight into the treatment of anosmia in the current climate of increased prevalence secondary to COVID-19. Thus, we aimed to systematically review the literature on the management of non-Chronic-rhinosinusitis- related anosmia/hyposmia. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for articles published since January 1990 using terms combined with Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). We included articles evaluating management of anosmia and hyposmia written in the English language, with original data, a minimum of 3 months of follow-up except for COVID-related studies, at least 2 patients, and well-defined and measurable outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 3013 unique titles were returned upon the initial search. Of these, 297 abstracts were examined, yielding 19 full texts meeting inclusion criteria (8 with level 1 evidence, 3 with level 2, 1 with level 3, and 7 with level 4). The studies included a total of 1522 subjects, with follow up ranging from 3 to 72 months, with an exception for COVID related studies. Endpoints were based on clinically significant improvements of olfactory functions as measured through validated smell tests. Treatments with the most robust data were intranasal corticosteroids and olfactory training. CONCLUSION: The literature on the treatment of anosmia and hyposmia includes randomized trials showing the efficacy of a few modalities. While further research is needed to expand therapeutic options for this debilitating condition, the current literature supports the use of olfactory training and topical corticosteroids.

Omega-3 Fatty Acid Supplementation for the Treatment of Persistent COVID-Related Olfactory Dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of omega-3 fatty acid (O3FA) supplementation in the treatment of COVID-related olfactory dysfunction (OD). METHODS: Patients with laboratory-confirmed or clinically-suspected COVID-19 infection and new-onset OD from August 2020 to November 2021 were prospectively recruited. Patients with quantitative OD, defined as a brief smell identification test (BSIT) score of 9 or less, were eligible for study inclusion. The experimental group received 2 g of O3FA supplementation, while the control group received an identical placebo to be taken daily for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was a change in BSIT score between the initial and 6-week follow-up tests. RESULTS: One hundred and seventeen patients were included in the analysis, including 57 patients in the O3FA group and 60 in the placebo group. O3FA group patients demonstrated a mean BSIT improvement of 1.12 ± 1.99 compared to 0.68 ± 1.86 in the placebo group (p = 0.221). Seventy-seven patients, 42 within the O3FA group and 35 in the placebo group, completed a follow-up BSIT survey at an average of 717.8 days from study onset. At long-term follow-up, there was an average BSIT score improvement of 1.72 within the O3FA group compared to 1.76 within the placebo group (p = 0.948). CONCLUSION: Among patients with persistent COVID-related OD, our study showed no clear evidence of relative short-term or long-term olfactory recovery among patients receiving high doses of O3FA supplementation.

Prevalence and 24-month recovery of olfactory dysfunction in COVID-19 patients: A multicentre prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence and recovery of olfactory dysfunction (OD) in COVID-19 patients 24 months after the infection. METHODS: From 22 March 2020 to 5 June 2022, 251 COVID-19 patients were followed in three European medical centres. Olfactory function was assessed with subjective patient-reported outcome questionnaires and odour identification tests at baseline, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months postinfection. The predictive values of epidemiological and clinical data were investigated with multivariate analysis. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-one patients completed the evaluations. The odour identification test revealed that 123 patients (50.8%) had OD at baseline. The prevalence of persistent psychophysical abnormalities at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months post-COVID-19 was 24.2%, 17.9%, 5.8% and 2.9%, respectively (p = 0.001). Parosmia occurred in 40 patients (23.4%) and lasted 60 ± 119 days. At 2 years, 51 patients (29.8%) self reported that their olfaction was unnormalised. Older patients had better odour identification evaluations at baseline (p < 0.001) but those with OD reported lower odour identification test scores at the end of the follow-up. Parosmia occurred more frequently in young patients. The olfactory training was significantly associated with higher values of Sniffin' Sticks tests at 18 months postinfection (rs = 0.678; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Two years post-COVID-19, 29.8% of patients reported persistent OD, but only 2.9% had abnormal identification psychophysical evaluations.

Recovery from olfactory and gustatory dysfunction following COVID-19 acquired during Omicron BA.1 wave in Italy.

BACKGROUND: Despite alterations in the sense of smell and taste have dominated the symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the prevalence and the severity of self-reporting COVID-19 associated olfactory and gustatory dysfunction has dropped significantly with the advent of the Omicron BA.1 subvariant. However, data on the evolution of Omicron-related chemosensory impairment are still lacking. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to estimate the prevalence and the recovery rate of self-reported chemosensory dysfunction 6-month after SARS-CoV-2 infection acquired during the predominance of the Omicron BA.1 subvariant in Italy. METHODS: Prospective observational study based on the sino-nasal outcome tool 22 (SNOT-22), item "sense of smell or taste" and additional outcomes conducted in University hospitals and tertiary referral centers in Italy. RESULTS: Of 338 patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 completing the baseline survey, 294 (87.0 %) responded to the 6-month follow-up interview. Among them, 101 (34.4 %) and 4 (1.4 %) reported an altered sense of smell or taste at baseline and at 6 months, respectively. Among the 101 patients with COVID-19-associated smell or taste dysfunction during the acute phase of the disease, 97 (96.0 %) reported complete resolution at 6 months. The duration of smell or taste impairment was significantly shorter in vaccinated patients (p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with that observed in subjects infected during the first wave of the pandemic, the recovery rate from chemosensory dysfunctions reported in the present series of patients infected during the predominance of the Omicron BA.1 subvariant was more favorable with a shorter duration being positively influenced by vaccination.