Inflammatory Response and Defects on Myelin Integrity in the Olfactory System of K18hACE2 Mice Infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Viruses, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), use respiratory epithelial cells as an entry point for infection. Within the nasal cavity, the olfactory epithelium (OE) is particularly sensitive to infections which may lead to olfactory dysfunction. In patients suffering from coronavirus disease 2019, deficits in olfaction have been characterized as a distinctive symptom. Here, we used the K18hACE2 mice to study the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection and inflammation in the olfactory system (OS) after 7 d of infection. In the OE, we found that SARS-CoV-2 selectively targeted the supporting/sustentacular cells (SCs) and macrophages from the lamina propria. In the brain, SARS-CoV-2 infected some microglial cells in the olfactory bulb (OB), and there was a widespread infection of projection neurons in the OB, piriform cortex (PC), and tubular striatum (TuS). Inflammation, indicated by both elevated numbers and morphologically activated IBA1+ cells (monocyte/macrophage lineages), was preferentially increased in the OE septum, while it was homogeneously distributed throughout the layers of the OB, PC, and TuS. Myelinated OS axonal tracts, the lateral olfactory tract, and the anterior commissure, exhibited decreased levels of 2',3'-cyclic-nucleotide 3'-phosphodiesterase, indicative of myelin defects. Collectively, our work supports the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 infected SC and macrophages in the OE and, centrally, microglia and subpopulations of OS neurons. The observed inflammation throughout the OS areas and central myelin defects may account for the long-lasting olfactory deficit.

Socioeconomic and Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Perception of Health Status and Literacy in Spine Oncological Patients: Insights from the All of Us Research Program.

STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was performed using the National Institutes of Health All of Us survey database. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess socioeconomic and racial disparities in the perception of personal health, health literacy, and healthcare access among spine oncology patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in health literacy and perception of health status have been described for many disease processes. However, few studies have assessed the prevalence of these disparities among spine oncology patients. METHODS: Adult spine oncology patients, identified using ICD-9/10-CM codes, were categorized by race/ethnicity: White/Caucasian (WC), Black/African-American (BAA), and Non-White Hispanic (NWH). Demographics and socioeconomic status were assessed. Questionnaire responses regarding baseline health status, perception of health status, health literacy, and barriers to healthcare were compared. RESULTS: Of the 1,175 patients identified, 207 (17.6%) were BAA, 267 (22.7%) were NWH, and 701 (59.7%) were WC. Socioeconomic status varied among cohorts, with WC patients reporting higher levels of education ( P<0.001 ), annual income greater than $50K ( P<0.001 ), and home ownership ( P<0.001 ). BAA and NWH patients reported greater rates of 7-day "Severe fatigue" ( P<0.001 ) and "10/10 pain" ( P<0.001 ) and lower rates of "Completely" able to perform everyday activities ( P<0.001 ). WC patients had a higher response rate for "Excellent/Very Good" regarding their own general health ( P<0.001 ) and quality ( P<0.001 ). The WC cohort had a significantly higher proportion of patients responding "Never" when assessing difficulty understanding ( P<0.001 ) and needing assistance with health materials ( P<0.001 ). BAA and NWH were significantly less likely to report feeling "Extremely" confident with medical forms ( P<0.001 ). BAA and NWH had significantly higher response rates to feeling "Somewhat Worried" about healthcare costs ( P<0.001 ) and with delaying medical care given "Can't Afford Co-pay" ( P<0.001 ). CONCLUSION: We identified disparities in perception of health status, literacy, and access among spine oncology patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.