Cognitive after-effects and associated correlates among post-illness COVID-19 survivors: a cross-sectional study, Egypt.

Background: COVID-19's after-effects among survivors are of increased concern. The cognitive aftermath of COVID-19 virus infection was underrated. This study aimed to identify and compare the cognitive impairment (CI) and its correlates among COVID-19 survivors and control subjects. A total of 85 adults who survived COVID-19 virus infection and an equal number of control subjects (matched for age, sex, education, and socioeconomic level) were included in this study. They were recruited from Zagazig University Hospitals, Sharkia Province, Egypt. All subjects were interviewed utilizing a semistructured demographic and clinical checklist, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test, and the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS). Results: More than half of COVID-19 survivors experienced CI (compared to only 8% of control subjects). Individuals who survived COVID-19 virus infection were more likely to have impairments in visuo-executive functions (OR: 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.5), attention (OR: 0.4, 95% CI 0.3-0.7), language (OR: 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.5), delayed recall (OR: 0.5, 95% CI 0.4-0.6), and total MoCA Scores (OR: 0.1, 95% CI 0.04-0.2). Among COVID-19 survivors, those who experienced CI were likely to be older (OR: 1.1, 95% CI 1.03-1.2), and of low-to-moderate education (OR: 4.9, 95% CI 1.6-15.1). Conclusions: CI was prevalent among COVID-19 survivors. The visuo-executive functions, attention, language, and delayed recall were the most affected domains. Older age and lower educational level predicted CI in COVID-19 survivors.

Predictors for Severity of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Healthcare Workers.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are still at higher risk of acquiring severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections than the general population. Identifying risk factors associated with severe SARS-CoV-2 infections is of paramount importance to protect HCWs and the non-infected patients attending different healthcare facilities. PURPOSE: To recognize the predictors for severity of SARS-CoV2 infection among HCWs working in either COVID-19 or non-COVID-19 healthcare settings. Also, to assess compliance of HCW to standard precautions of infection control and explore the possible risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among HCWs with suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, from different Egyptian governorates. They were asked to fill in a web-based self-reporting questionnaire. The questionnaire assessed the demographic and socio-economic characteristics of participants, compliance of HCWs to standard precautions of infection control and COVID-19 presentation. RESULTS: Our study enrolled 204 HCWs (52.3% physicians). Infection of SARS-CoV-2 was confirmed in 61.3% by RT- PCR; 35.8% were admitted to hospital, and of these, 3.9% were admitted to the intensive care unit. While 30.4% had mild disease, 48.5% had moderate disease, 17.2% had severe disease and 3.9% had critical disease. Regression analysis for variables predicting COVID-19 severity among study healthcare workers showed that associated chronic diseases and management at home were the main independent variables predicting severity of their SARS-COV-2 infection, while the variables age, sex, residence, occupation or drug history of immunosuppressives had no role in severity prediction. CONCLUSION: Associated chronic diseases and management at home were the main independent variables predicting severity of SARS-COV-2 infection among HCWs. So, HCWs with chronic diseases should not work in COVID-19 designated hospitals, and there should be a screening strategy for their infection with SARS-COV-2. HCWs must not be negligent in adhering to strict precautions of infection control. HCWs infected with SARS-COV-2 must be managed in hospital not at home.

Profiling the physiological pitfalls of anti-hepatitis C direct-acting agents in budding yeast.

Sofosbuvir and Daclatasvir are among the direct-acting antiviral (DAA) medications prescribed for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C (CHC) virus infection as combination therapy with other antiviral medications. DAA-based therapy achieves high cure rates, reaching up to 97% depending on the genotype of the causative hepatitis C virus (HCV). While DAAs have been approved as an efficient and well-tolerated therapy for CHC, emerging concerns about adverse cardiac side effects, higher risk of recurrence and occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and doubts of genotoxicity have been reported. In our study, we investigated in detail physiological off-targets of DAAs and dissected the effects of these drugs on cellular organelles using budding yeast, a unicellular eukaryotic organism. DAAs were found to disturb the architecture of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and the mitochondria, while showing no apparent genotoxicity or DNA damaging effect. Our study provides evidence that DAAs are not associated with genotoxicity and highlights the necessity for adjunctive antioxidant therapy to mitigate the adverse effects of DAAs on ER and mitochondria.

Diagnostic performance of rapid antigen test for COVID-19 and the effect of viral load, sampling time, subject's clinical and laboratory parameters on test accuracy.

BACKGROUND: Egypt was among the first 10 countries in Africa that experienced COVID-19 cases. The sudden surge in the number of cases is overwhelming the capacity of the national healthcare system, particularly in developing countries. Central to the containment of the ongoing pandemic is the availability of rapid and accurate diagnostic tests that could pinpoint patients at early disease stages. In the current study, we aimed to (1) Evaluate the diagnostic performance of the rapid antigen test (RAT) "Standard™ Q COVID-19 Ag" against reverse transcriptase quantitative real-time PCR (RT-qPCR) in eighty-three swabs collected from COVID-19 suspected individuals showing various demographic features, clinical and radiological findings. (2) Test whether measuring laboratory parameters in participant's blood would enhance the predictive accuracy of RAT. (3) Identify the most important features that determine the results of both RAT and RT-qPCR. METHODS: Diagnostic measurements (e.g. sensitivity, specificity, etc.) and receiver operating characteristic curve were used to assess the clinical performance of "Standard™ Q COVID-19 Ag". We used the support vector machine (SVM) model to investigate whether measuring laboratory indices would enhance the accuracy of RAT. Moreover, a random forest classification model was used to determine the most important determinants of the results of RAT and RT-qPCR for COVID-19 diagnosis. RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of RAT were 78.2, 64.2, and 75.9%, respectively. Samples with high viral load and those that were collected within one-week post-symptoms showed the highest sensitivity and accuracy. The SVM modeling showed that measuring laboratory indices did not enhance the predictive accuracy of RAT. CONCLUSION: "Standard™ Q COVID-19 Ag" should not be used alone for COVID-19 diagnosis due to its low diagnostic performance relative to the RT-qPCR. RAT is best used at the early disease stage and in patients with high viral load.