Autoimmune and immunoserological markers of COVID-19 pneumonia: Can they help in the assessment of disease severity.

Background: Immune dysregulation and associated inefficient anti-viral immunity during Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) can cause tissue and organ damage which shares many similarities with pathogenetic processes in systemic autoimmune diseases. In this study, we investigate wide range autoimmune and immunoserological markers in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Methods: Study included 51 patients with confirmed Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 infection and hospitalized due to COVID-19 pneumonia. Wide spectrum autoantibodies associated with different autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases were analyzed and correlated with clinical and laboratory features and pneumonia severity. Results: Antinuclear antibodies (ANA) positivity was found in 19.6%, anti-cardiolipin IgG antibodies (aCL IgG) in 15.7%, and anti-cardiolipin IgM antibodies (aCL IgM) in 7.8% of patients. Positive atypical x anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (xANCA) were detected in 10.0% (all negative for Proteinase 3 and Myeloperoxidase) and rheumatoid factor was found in 8.2% of patients. None of tested autoantibodies were associated with disease or pneumonia severity, except for aCL IgG being significantly associated with higher pneumonia severity index (p = 0.036). Patients with reduced total serum IgG were more likely to require non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV) (p < 0.0001). Serum concentrations of IgG (p = 0.003) and IgA (p = 0.032) were significantly lower in this group of patients. Higher total serum IgA (p = 0.009) was associated with mortality, with no difference in serum IgG (p = 0.115) or IgM (p = 0.175). Lethal outcome was associated with lower complement C4 (p = 0.013), while there was no difference in complement C3 concentration (p = 0.135). Conclusion: Increased autoimmune responses are present in moderate and severe COVID-19. Severe pneumonia is associated with the presence of aCL IgG, suggesting their role in disease pathogenesis. Evaluation of serum immunoglobulins and complement concentration could help assess the risk of non-invasive mechanical ventilation NIMV and poor outcome.

Treatment of neurosarcoidosis--innovations and challenges.

INTRODUCTION: Sarcoidosis affects the central nervous system more frequently than it used to be believed. While the cranial nerves are most frequently affected, neurosarcoidosis can involve other nervous system tissues as well. TREATMENT OF NEUROSARCOIDOSIS: Although a lot of drugs have proved useful in treating neurosarcoidosis, corticosteroids are still the gold standard in treatment of these patients. Therapeutic protocols differ regarding the dose of these drugs. Symptomatic neurosarcoidosis should always be treated with pulse corticosteroid therapy. People with diabetes, high blood pressure, osteoporosis and tuberculosis should be carefully monitored, as they are prone to complications associated with treatment with corticosteroids. In cases when treatment with corticosteroids does not show the desired results or therapy is discontinued due to the development of side effects, there are other pharmacologic options, such as methotrexate, mycophenolate mofetil, cyclophosphamide, chloroquine, azathioprine, thalidomide, and infliximab. It should be noted that the treatment response to the above mentioned regimens, except for infliximab, is relatively slow compared to corticosteroids; therefore, corticosteroids should be taken into account in all states and particularly in the acute phase of the disease. CONCLUSION: It is the existence of different forms of the disease, lack of local diagnostic criteria and different and non standardized therapy that makes the treatment of this disease difficult. Despite advances in pharmacotherapy and radiological diagnosis, it is necessary to develop better diagnostic strategies in order to set the optimal therapeutic approach.

Diagnosis of neurosarcoidosis--necessity of biopsy.

INTRODUCTION: Sarcoidosis can affect any part of the central nervous system presenting with an extremely diverse clinical picture. Clinical presentations actually depend on the localization ofgranulomas in the central nervous system. Making diagnosis according to the localization and the clinical variations is often a clinical challenge. DIAGNOSIS OF NEUROSARCOIDOSIS: Diagnosis is based on the clinical picture, clinical and radiological findings (magnetic resonance imaging with contrast endocranium), laboratory findings (angio-tenzin-converting enzyme and chitotriosidase in cerebrospinal fluid); however, it is necessary first to exclude all other possible causes of granulomatous inflammation. Recent studies in patients with neurosarcoidosis show a high value of at least one marker of the disease. The safest way and the gold standard in diagnosing this disease would be histopathological confirmation, which is rarely performed due to its invasiveness. CONCLUSION: New diagnostic methods will contribute to better methods of bypassing invasive procedures, and they will significantly facilitate the diagnosis of neurosarcoidosis, which is a real challenge even for experienced clinicians who deal with this disease.