Dataset Information

Pneumonia Caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 and Influenza Virus: A Multicenter Comparative Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Detailed differences in clinical information between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia (CP), which is the main phenotype of SARS-CoV-2 disease, and influenza pneumonia (IP) are still unclear.

Methods

A prospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted by including patients with CP who were hospitalized between January and June 2020 and a retrospective cohort of patients with IP hospitalized from 2009 to 2020. We compared the clinical presentations and studied the prognostic factors of CP and IP.

Results

Compared with the IP group (n = 66), in the multivariate analysis, the CP group (n = 362) had a lower percentage of patients with underlying asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P < .01), lower neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (P < .01), lower systolic blood pressure (P < .01), higher diastolic blood pressure (P < .01), lower aspartate aminotransferase level (P < .05), higher serum sodium level (P < .05), and more frequent multilobar infiltrates (P < .05). The diagnostic scoring system based on these findings showed excellent differentiation between CP and IP (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.889). Moreover, the prognostic predictors were different between CP and IP.

Conclusions

Comprehensive differences between CP and IP were revealed, highlighting the need for early differentiation between these 2 pneumonias in clinical settings.

SUBMITTER: Oi I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8244664 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDisinfection is one of the most effective ways to block the rapid transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Due to the prolonged coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, disinfectants have become crucial to prevent person-to-person transmission and decontaminate hands, clothes, facilities and equipment. However, there is a lack of accurate information on the virucidal activity of commercial disinfectants.AimTo evaluate the virucidal efficacy of 72 commercially available disinfectants constituting 16 types of ingredients against SARS-CoV-2.MethodsSARS-CoV-2 was tested with various concentrations of disinfectants at indicated exposure time points as recommended by the manufacturers. The 50% tissue culture infectious dose assay was used to calculate virus titre, and trypan blue staining and CCK-8 were used to assess cell viability after 3-5 days of SARS-CoV-2 infection.FindingsThis study found that disinfectants based on 83% ethanol, 60% propanol/ethanol, 0.00108-0.0011% sodium dichloroisocyanurate and 0.497% potassium peroxymonosulfate inactivated SARS-CoV-2 effectively and safely. Although disinfectants based on 0.05-0.4% benzalkonium chloride (BAC), 0.02-0.07% quaternary ammonium compound (QAC; 1:1), 0.4% BAC/didecyldimethylammonium chloride (DDAC), 0.28% benzethonium chloride concentrate/2-propanol, 0.0205-0.14% DDAC/polyhexamethylene biguanide hydrochloride (PHMB) and 0.5% hydrogen peroxide inactivated SARS-CoV-2 effectively, they exhibited cytotoxicity. Conversely, disinfectants based on 0.04-4% QAC (2:3), 0.00625% BAC/DDAC/PHMB, and 0.0205-0.14% and 0.0173% peracetic acid showed approximately 50% virucidal efficacy with no cytotoxicity. Citric acid (0.4%) did not inactivate SARS-CoV-2.ConclusionThese results indicate that most commercially available disinfectants exert a disinfectant effect against SARS-CoV-2. However, re-evaluation of the effective concentration and exposure time of certain disinfectants is needed, especially citric acid and peracetic acid.

Project description:Some respiratory viruses can cause a viral interference through the activation of the interferon (IFN) pathway that reduces the replication of another virus. Epidemiological studies of coinfections between SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses have been hampered by non-pharmacological measures applied to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2 during the COVID-19 pandemic. With the ease of these interventions, SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A viruses can now co-circulate. It is thus of prime importance to characterize their interactions. In this work, we investigated viral interference effects between an Omicron variant and a contemporary influenza A/H3N2 strain, in comparison with an ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain and the 2009 pandemic influenza A/H1N1 virus. We infected nasal human airway epitheliums with SARS-CoV-2 and influenza, either simultaneously or 24 h apart. Viral load was measured by RT-qPCR and IFN-α/β/λ1/λ2 proteins were quantified by immunoassay. Expression of four interferon-stimulated genes (ISGs; OAS1/IFITM3/ISG15/MxA) was also measured by RT-droplet digital PCR. Additionally, susceptibility of each virus to IFN-α/β/λ2 recombinant proteins was determined. Our results showed that influenza A, and especially A/H3N2, interfered with both SARS-CoV-2 viruses, but that SARS-CoV-2 did not significantly interfere with A/H3N2 or A/H1N1. Consistently with these results, influenza, and particularly the A/H3N2 strain, caused a higher production of IFN proteins and expression of ISGs than SARS-CoV-2. SARS-CoV-2 induced a marginal IFN production and reduced the IFN response during coinfections with influenza. All viruses were susceptible to exogenous IFNs, with the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 and Omicron being less susceptible to type I and type III IFNs, respectively. Thus, influenza A causes a viral interference towards SARS-CoV-2 most likely through an IFN response. The opposite is not necessarily true, and a concurrent infection with both viruses leads to a lower IFN response. Taken together, these results help us to understand how SARS-CoV-2 interacts with another major respiratory pathogen.