The Endothelium and COVID-19: An Increasingly Clear Link Brief Title: Endotheliopathy in COVID-19.

The endothelium has a fundamental role in the cardiovascular complications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) particularly affects endothelial cells. The virus binds to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE-2) receptor (present on type 2 alveolar cells, bronchial epithelial cells, and endothelial cells), and induces a cytokine storm. The cytokines tumor necrosis factor alpha, interleukin-1 beta, and interleukin-6 have particular effects on endothelial cells-leading to endothelial dysfunction, endothelial cell death, changes in tight junctions, and vascular hyperpermeability. Under normal conditions, apoptotic endothelial cells are removed into the bloodstream. During COVID-19, however, endothelial cells are detached more rapidly, and do not regenerate as effectively as usual. The loss of the endothelium on the luminal surface abolishes all of the vascular responses mediated by the endothelium and nitric oxide production in particular, which results in greater contractility. Moreover, circulating endothelial cells infected with SARS-CoV-2 act as vectors for viral dissemination by forming clusters that migrate into the circulation and reach distant organs. The cell clusters and the endothelial dysfunction might contribute to the various thromboembolic pathologies observed in COVID-19 by inducing the formation of intravascular microthrombi, as well as by triggering disseminated intravascular coagulation. Here, we review the contributions of endotheliopathy and endothelial-cell-derived extracellular vesicles to the pathogenesis of COVID-19, and discuss therapeutic strategies that target the endothelium in patients with COVID-19.

A one-step assay for sorted CD3+ cell purity and chimerism after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

A hematopoietic chimerism assay is the laboratory test for monitoring engraftment and quantifying the proportions of donor and recipient cells after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients. Flow cytometry is the reference method for determining the purity of CD3+ cells on the chimerism of selected CD3+ cells. In the present study, we developed a single-step procedure that combines the CD3+ purity assay (using the PCR-based Non-T Genomic Detection Kit from Accumol, Calgary, Canada) and the qPCR chimerism monitoring assay (the QTRACE qPCR assay from Jeta Molecular, Utrecht, the Netherlands). First, for the CD3+ purity assay, we used a PCR-friendly protocol by changing the composition of the ready-to-use reaction tubes (buffer and taq polymerase) and obtained a satisfactory calibration plot (R2 = 0.8924) with a DNA reference scale of 2 ng/µl. Next, 29 samples (before and after CD3 positive selection) were analyzed, the mean cell purity was, respectively, 19.6% ± 6.45 and 98.9% ± 1.07 in the flow cytometry assay; 26.8% ± 7.63 and 98.5% ± 1.79 in the PCR-based non-T genomic detection assay. Our results showed that the CD3+ purity assay using a qPCR kit is a robust alternative to the flow cytometry assay and is associated with time savings when combined with a qPCR chimerism assay.

Flow cytometry crossmatching to investigate kidney-biopsy-proven, antibody-mediated rejection in patients who develop de novo donor-specific antibodies.

INTRODUCTION: The appearance of de novo donor-specific anti-human leukocyte antigen antibodies (dnDSAs) after kidney transplantation is independently associated with poor long-term allograft outcomes. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the predictive value of a flow cytometry crossmatching (FC-XM) assay after the appearance of dnDSAs related to antibody-mediated allograft rejection (ABMR) after kidney transplantation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 89 recipients with dnDSAs after transplantation were included. The crossmatching results were compared with the dnDSA profile (the mean fluorescence intensity (MFI), the complement-binding activity, and the IgG subclass profile) and the biopsy's morphological features. RESULTS: Of the 89 patients, 59 (66%) were positive in an FC-XM assay, 17 (19%) had complement-binding DSAs, 55 (62%) were positive for IgG1 and/or IgG3 in a solid phase assay, and 45 (51%) had morphological biopsy features linked to ABMR. CONCLUSION: An FC-XM assay was unable to discriminate between cases with or without ABMR on biopsy findings; it had a low positive predictive value (<70%) and a low negative positive predictive value (<42.9%), taking into account the sensitivity of our assay (limit of detection: DSAs with an MFI >3000). In this context, the height of the MFI of the dnDSAs might be enough for a high positive predictive value for ABMR and additional testing for complement binding activity can remain optional.

HLA-B*15:47:01 allele with undefined serological equivalent considered as B Blank.

We report a discordance between complement-dependent cytotoxicity and next-generation sequencing molecular typing revealing HLA-B*15:47:01 allele with undefined serological equivalent confirmed by high-level immunization against the B15 serotype. Due to the high-level immunization against HLA-B15 and B70 antigens, we considered the HLA-B*15:47:01 allele to be B Blank and not as B15 or B70 serological specificity.