Controversial treatments: An updated understanding of the coronavirus disease 2019.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Zhang C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7228369 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The SARS-CoV-2 virus is an etiological agent of pandemic COVID-19, which spreads rapidly worldwide. No proven effective therapies currently exist for this virus, and efforts to develop antiviral strategies for the treatment of COVID-19 are underway. The rapidly increasing understanding of SARS-CoV-2 virology provides a notable number of possible immunological procedures and drug targets. However, gaps remain in our understanding of the pathogenesis of COVID-19. In this review, we describe the latest information in the context of immunological approaches and emerging current antiviral strategies for COVID-19 treatment.
| S-EPMC7414363 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: To study the potential effect of COVID-19 on the endometrium of affected symptomatic women. Design: Preliminary study of the endometrial transcriptomes in women with COVID-19 through RNA sequencing. Setting: Hospital and university laboratories. Subjects: Women with COVID-19 lacking SARS-CoV-2 infection in endometrial tissue. Intervention/Exposure: Endometrial biopsy collection. Main outcomes measures: Endometrial gene expression and functional analysis of patients with COVID-19 versus uninfected individuals. Results: COVID-19 systemic disease alters endometrial gene expression in 75% of women, with patients exhibiting a preponderance of 163 up-regulated (e.g., UTS2, IFI6, IFIH1, BNIP3) and 72 down-regulated genes (e.g., CPZ, CDH3, IRF4) (FDR<0.05). A total of 161 dysregulated functions (36 up-regulated and 125 down-regulated) were typically enriched in COVID-19 endometria, including upregulation in pathways involved in response to virus and cytokine inflammation, highlighting upregulation of a COVID-19 response pathway. Conclusion: COVID-19 affects endometrial gene expression despite the absence of SARS-CoV-2 particles in endometrial tissues.
2024-04-22 | GSE202553 | GEO
Project description:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and was first reported in December 2019 in Wuhan, China. Since then, it caused a global pandemic with 212,324,054 confirmed cases and 4,440,840 deaths worldwide as of August 22, 2021. The disease spectrum of COVID-19 ranges from asymptomatic subclinical infection to clinical manifestations predominantly affecting the respiratory system. However, it is now evident that COVID-19 is a multiorgan disease with a broad spectrum of manifestations leading to multiple organ injuries including the cardiovascular system. We review studies that have shown that the relationship between cardiovascular diseases and COVID-19 is indeed bidirectional, implicating that preexisting cardiovascular comorbidities increase the morbidity and mortality of COVID-19, and newly emerging cardiac injuries occur in the settings of acute COVID-19 in patients with no preexisting cardiovascular disease. We present the most up-to-date literature summary to explore the incidence of new-onset cardiac complications of coronavirus and their role in predicting the severity of COVID-19. We review the association of elevated troponin with the severity of COVID-19 disease, which includes mild compared to severe disease, in nonintensive care unit compared to intensive care unit patients and in those discharged from the hospital compared to those who die. The role of serum troponin levels in predicting prognosis are compared in survivors and non-survivors. The association between COVID-19 disease and myocarditis, heart failure and coagulopathy are reviewed. Finally, an update on beneficial treatments is discussed.
| S-EPMC8983616 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is currently the most important etiological agent of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with millions of infections and deaths in the last 2 years worldwide. Several reasons and parameters are responsible for the difficult management of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) patients; the first is virus behavioral factors such as high transmission rate, and the different molecular and cellular mechanisms of pathogenesis remain a matter of controversy, which is another factor.SummaryIn the present review, we attempted to explain about features of SARS-COV-2, particularly focusing on the various aspects of pathogenesis and treatment strategies. Key Messages: We note evidence for the understanding of the precise molecular and cellular mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis, which can help design the appropriate drug or vaccine. Additionally, and importantly, we reported the updated issues associated with the history and development of treatment strategies such as, drugs, vaccines, and other medications that have been approved or under consideration in clinics and markets worldwide.
| S-EPMC8805078 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7094318 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWith the global spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), an increasing number of clinical trials are being designed and executed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of various therapies for COVID-19. We conducted this survey to assess the methodological quality of registry protocols on potential treatments for COVID-19.MethodsClinical trial protocols were identified on the ClinicalTrials.gov and the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. Protocols were screened by two investigators independently against pre-defined eligibility criteria. Quality of the included protocols was assessed according to the modified 14-item SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) 2013 Statement.ResultsWe included 82 randomized controlled trial (RCT) protocols investigating treatment modalities for COVID-19. These ongoing trials are being conducted in 16 provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities of China, and study interventions were either Western medicines (n = 56) or traditional Chinese medicine (n = 26). Findings of our quality assessment indicated that the existing trial protocols could be further improved on several aspects, including selection and definition of outcome measures, descriptions of study interventions and comparators, study subject recruitment time, definition of study inclusion and exclusion criteria, and allocation concealment methods. Descriptions of random sequence generation methodologies were accurate for the majority of included trial protocols (n = 64; 78.05%); however, reporting of allocation concealment remained unclear in 63 (76.83%) protocols. Therefore, the overall risk of selection bias across these RCTs was judged to be unclear. A total of 52 (63.41%) included RCT protocols were open-label trials and are thus associated with a high risk of performance bias and detection bias.ConclusionQuality of currently available RCT protocols on the treatments for COVID-19 could be further improved. For transparency and effective knowledge translation in real-world clinically settings, it is important for trial investigators to standardize baseline treatments for patients with COVID-19 and assess clinically important core outcome measures. Despite eager anticipation from the public on the results of effectiveness trials in COVID-19, robust design, execution, and reporting of these trials should be regarded as high priority.
| S-EPMC7481475 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveSocial distancing policies are key in curtailing severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spread, but their effectiveness is heavily contingent on public understanding and collective adherence. We studied public perception of social distancing through organic, large-scale discussion on Twitter.DesignRetrospective cross-sectional study.MethodsBetween March 27 and April 10, 2020, we retrieved English-only tweets matching two trending social distancing hashtags, #socialdistancing and #stayathome. We analyzed the tweets using natural language processing and machine-learning models, and we conducted a sentiment analysis to identify emotions and polarity. We evaluated the subjectivity of tweets and estimated the frequency of discussion of social distancing rules. We then identified clusters of discussion using topic modeling and associated sentiments.ResultsWe studied a sample of 574,903 tweets. For both hashtags, polarity was positive (mean, 0.148; SD, 0.290); only 15% of tweets had negative polarity. Tweets were more likely to be objective (median, 0.40; IQR, 0-0.6) with ~30% of tweets labeled as completely objective (labeled as 0 in range from 0 to 1). Approximately half of tweets (50.4%) primarily expressed joy and one-fifth expressed fear and surprise. Each correlated well with topic clusters identified by frequency including leisure and community support (ie, joy), concerns about food insecurity and quarantine effects (ie, fear), and unpredictability of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its implications (ie, surprise).ConclusionsConsidering the positive sentiment, preponderance of objective tweets, and topics supporting coping mechanisms, we concluded that Twitter users generally supported social distancing in the early stages of their implementation.
| S-EPMC7450231 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 raised the attention towards bacterial coinfection and its role in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease. This study aims to systematically review and identify the pooled prevalence of bacterial coinfection in the related articles. A comprehensive search was conducted in international databases, including MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase, to identify the articles on the prevalence of bacterial coinfections in COIVD-19 patients from 1 December 2019 until 30 December 2020. All observational epidemiological studies that evaluated the prevalence of bacterial coinfections in patients with COVID-19 were included without any restriction. Forty-two studies including a total sample size of 54,695 were included in the analysis. The pooled estimate for the prevalence of bacterial coinfections was 20.97% (95% CI: 15.95-26.46), and the pooled prevalence of bacterial coinfections was 5.20% (95% CI: 2.39-8.91) for respiratory subtype and 4.79% (95% CI: 0.11-14.61) for the gastrointestinal subtype. The pooled prevalence for Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office and South-East Asia Regional Office was 100% (95% CI: 82.35-100.00) and 2.61% (95% CI: 1.74-3.62). This rate of coinfection poses a great danger towards patients, especially those in critical condition. Although there are multiple complications and adverse effects related to extensive use of antibiotics to treat patients with COVID-19, it seems there is no other option except applying them, and it needs to be done carefully.
| S-EPMC8245302 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 continues to grow and spread throughout the world since being declared a pandemic. Despite extensive scientific research globally including repurposing of several existing drugs, there is no effective or proven therapy for this enigmatic disease which is still largely managed empirically This systematic review evaluated the role of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the treatment of COVID-19 infection and was conducted using Cochrane methodology for systematic reviews of interventional studies including risk of bias assessment and grading of the quality of evidence. Only prospective clinical trials randomly assigning COVID-19 patients to HCQ plus standard of care therapy (test arm) versus placebo/standard of care (control arm) were included. Data were pooled using the random-effects model and expressed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of 10,492 patients from 19 randomised controlled trials were included. The use of HCQ was not associated with higher rates of clinical improvement (RR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.96-1.03, p = 0.79) or reduction in all-cause mortality by Day14 (RR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.97-1.19, p = 0.19) or Day28 (RR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.99-1.19, p = 0.09) compared to placebo/standard of care. There was no significant difference in serious adverse events between the two arms (RR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.85-1.19, p = 0.95). There is low-to-moderate certainty evidence that HCQ therapy is generally safe but does not reduce mortality or enhance recovery in patients with COVID-19 infection.
| S-EPMC8420202 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of this study was to identify miRNAs that were dysregulated after the onset of COVID-19 and thus potentially be used for risk stratification (i.e., mortality). Therefore, we conducted a multi-center, retrospective longitudinal cohort study enrolling 142 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who presented to two Canadian hospitals from May 2020 – December 2020 along with a cohort of 27 SARS-CoV-2 patients with mild upper respiratory tract symptoms and 69 SARS-CoV-2-negative patients from the ICU. Blood was biobanked from SARS-CoV-2 positive patients in the emergency department (mild), ward (moderate) or intensive care unit (severe). Assessment of miRNA expression and co-regulatory network generation revealed significant transcriptome dyregulation in pateints with severe COVID-19 that was largely different from SARS-CoV-2 negative patients in the ICU.
2022-04-08 | GSE178246 | GEO