Serum lipid mediator profiles in COVID-19 patients and lung disease severity: a pilot study.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection is highly heterogeneous, ranging from asymptomatic to severe and fatal cases. COVID-19 has been characterized by an increase of serum pro-inflammatory cytokine levels which seems to be associated with fatal cases. By contrast, the role of pro-resolving lipid mediators (SPMs), involved in the attenuation of inflammatory responses, has been scarcely investigated, so further studies are needed to understand SPMs metabolism in COVID-19 and other infectious diseases. Our aim was to analyse the lipid mediator metabolome, quantifying pro- and anti-inflammatory serum bioactive lipids by LC-MS/MS in 7 non-infected subjects and 24 COVID-19 patients divided into mild, moderate, and severe groups according to the pulmonary involvement, to better understand the disease outcome and the severity of the pulmonary manifestations. Statistical analysis was performed with the R programming language (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). All COVID-19 patients had increased levels of Prostaglandin E2. Severe patients showed a significant increase versus controls, mild- and moderate-affected patients, expressed as median (interquartile range), in resolvin E1 [112.6 (502.7) vs 0.0 (0.0) pg/ml in the other groups], as well as in maresin 2 [14.5 (7.0) vs 8.1 (4.2), 5.5 (4.3), and 3.0 (4.0) pg/ml, respectively]. Moreover, 14-hydroxy docosahexaenoic acid (14-HDHA) levels were also increased in severe vs control and mild-affected patients [24.7 (38.2) vs 2.4 (2.2) and 3.7 (6.4) ng/mL, respectively]. Resolvin D5 was also significantly elevated in both moderate [15.0 (22.4) pg/ml] and severe patients [24.0 (24.1) pg/ml] versus controls [0.0 (0.0) pg/ml]. These results were confirmed by sparse partial least squares discriminant analysis which highlighted the contribution of these mediators to the separation between each of the groups. In conclusion, the potent inflammatory response to SARS-CoV-2 infection involves not only pro- but also anti-inflammatory lipid mediators that can be quantified in easily accessible serum samples, suggesting the need to perform future research on their generation pathways that will help us to discover new therapeutic targets.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in colorectal cancer diagnosis and presentation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a decrease in the colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence, due to the disruption of screening programmes and a downscaling of endoscopic activity. The endpoint of this study is to evaluate if the pandemic has led to a change in CRC diagnostic rate and presentation in our population. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective study of all public hospitals of the Aragon region, attending a population of 1,329,391 inhabitants. We have analyzed all CRC cases detected and endoscopic units workload the year before the pandemic onset (1 March 2019-14 March 2020) and the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic (15 March 2020-28 February 2021). RESULTS: The diagnosis of CRC cases dropped a 38.9% (888 pre-pandemic vs 542 pandemic cases). Also, there were 30.3% less colonoscopies performed (24,860 vs 17,337). During the pandemic, CRC cases were diagnosed in older patients (72.4±12.2 vs 71.2±12.1 years, p=0.021), and had more frequently severe complications at diagnosis (14.6% vs 10.4%, p=0.019). Moreover, most CRC cases were diagnosed in symptomatic patients (81.4%). No significant difference was found in CRC stage at diagnosis, although stage IV was more frequent (20.1% vs 16.1%). Most hospitals reported a lower workload of endoscopic activity. CONCLUSION: CRC diagnostic rate was lower after the onset of the pandemic. CRC was diagnosed in older patients and was more frequently associated with complications. After the onset of the pandemic, the endoscopic units did not reach the workload performed previously.

Impact of the lockdown period due to the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with inflammatory bowel disease Impacto del confinamiento debido a la pandemia por COVID-19 en pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal

Introduction The lockdown period due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Spain probably had a significant emotional impact on chronic patients and hence on those who are suffering from inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) due to their high risk of emotional disorders. The aim of this study was to learn how COVID-19 influenced patients suffering from IBD during the quarantine period, focusing in particular on psychological distress through the Perceived Stress Scale-10 (PSS-10) and also the impact of the pandemic on therapeutic adherence using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Patients and methods A prospective, single-centre and analytical observational study was carried out in the IBD unit in August 2020. Patients were contacted and interviewed by phone. A descriptive analysis was carried out and subsequently the factors associated with the loss of therapeutic adherence and higher-moderate levels of stress were analyzed through logistic regression multivariate analyses. Results A total of 426 patients were included with a median PSS-10 score of 12 (10–16). A higher level of stress was reported by those who were not married, women and those who experienced an increase in IBD-related symptoms. Adherence to treatment was not associated with stress based on the PSS-10 questionnaire. Conclusions Although the lockdown period due to the COVID-19 pandemic has probably had a significant emotional impact on Spaniards with IBD, IBD patients in general had lower PSS-10 scores.

Multiple Approaches at Admission Based on Lung Ultrasound and Biomarkers Improves Risk Identification in COVID-19 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Risk stratification of COVID-19 patients is fundamental to improving prognosis and selecting the right treatment. We hypothesized that a combination of lung ultrasound (LUZ-score), biomarkers (sST2), and clinical models (PANDEMYC score) could be useful to improve risk stratification. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study designed to analyze the prognostic value of lung ultrasound, sST2, and PANDEMYC score in COVID-19 patients. The primary endpoint was in-hospital death and/or admission to the intensive care unit. The total length of hospital stay, increase of oxygen flow, or escalated medical treatment during the first 72 h were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: a total of 144 patients were included; the mean age was 57.5 ± 12.78 years. The median PANDEMYC score was 243 (52), the median LUZ-score was 21 (10), and the median sST2 was 53.1 ng/mL (30.9). Soluble ST2 showed the best predictive capacity for the primary endpoint (AUC = 0.764 (0.658-0.871); p = 0.001), towards the PANDEMYC score (AUC = 0.762 (0.655-0.870); p = 0.001) and LUZ-score (AUC = 0.749 (0.596-0.901); p = 0.002). Taken together, these three tools significantly improved the risk capacity (AUC = 0.840 (0.727-0.953); p ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The PANDEMYC score, lung ultrasound, and sST2 concentrations upon admission for COVID-19 are independent predictors of intra-hospital death and/or the need for admission to the ICU for mechanical ventilation. The combination of these predictive tools improves the predictive power compared to each one separately. The use of decision trees, based on multivariate models, could be useful in clinical practice.

Evidence-Based Selection on the Appropriate FIT Cut-Off Point in CRC Screening Programs in the COVID Pandemic.

Background: The COVID pandemic has forced the closure of many colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs. Resuming these programs is a priority, but fewer colonoscopies may be available. We developed an evidence-based tool for decision-making in CRC screening programs, based on a fecal hemoglobin immunological test (FIT), to optimize the strategy for screening a population for CRC. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data collected at a regional CRC screening program between February/2014 and November/2018. We investigated two different scenarios: not modifying vs. modifying the FIT cut-off value. We estimated program outcomes in the two scenarios by evaluating the numbers of cancers and adenomas missed or not diagnosed in due time (delayed). Results: The current FIT cut-off (20-µg hemoglobin/g feces) led to 6,606 colonoscopies per 100,000 people invited annually. Without modifying this FIT cut-off value, when the optimal number of individuals invited for colonoscopies was reduced by 10-40%, a high number of CRCs and high-risk adenomas (34-135 and 73-288/100.000-people invited, respectively) will be undetected every year. When the FIT cut-off value was increased to where the colonoscopy demand matched the colonoscopy availability, the number of missed lesions per year was remarkably reduced (9-36 and 29-145/100.000 people, respectively). Moreover, the unmodified FIT scenario outcome was improved by prioritizing the selection process based on sex (males) and age, rather than randomly reducing the number invited. Conclusions: Assuming a mismatch between the availability and demand for annual colonoscopies, increasing the FIT cut-off point was more effective than randomly reducing the number of people invited. Using specific risk factors to prioritize access to colonoscopies should be also considered.

Impact of the lockdown period due to the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

INTRODUCTION: The lockdown period due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Spain probably had a significant emotional impact on chronic patients and hence on those who are suffering from inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) due to their high risk of emotional disorders. The aim of this study was to learn how COVID-19 influenced patients suffering from IBD during the quarantine period, focusing in particular on psychological distress through the Perceived Stress Scale-10 (PSS-10) and also the impact of the pandemic on therapeutic adherence using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective, single-centre and analytical observational study was carried out in the IBD unit in August 2020. Patients were contacted and interviewed by phone. A descriptive analysis was carried out and subsequently the factors associated with the loss of therapeutic adherence and higher-moderate levels of stress were analyzed through logistic regression multivariate analyses. RESULTS: A total of 426 patients were included with a median PSS-10 score of 12 (10-16). A higher level of stress was reported by those who were not married, women and those who experienced an increase in IBD-related symptoms. Adherence to treatment was not associated with stress based on the PSS-10 questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: Although the lockdown period due to the COVID-19 pandemic has probably had a significant emotional impact on Spaniards with IBD, IBD patients in general had lower PSS-10 scores.

[Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus infection in patients and professional staff at a medium or long-stay hospital in Spain]. / Prevalencia de infección por coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes y profesionales de un hospital de media y larga estancia en España.

BACKGROUND AND GOALS: The aim of the study is to know the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients and professional staff of a medium or long-stay hospital during the peak period of the pandemic in Spain, spring 2020. MATERIAL AND METHODS: At the end of February 2020, we developed at the hospital a strategy to diagnose the SARS-CoV-2 infection consisting of complementing the realization of PCR tests at real time with a quick technique of lateral flow immunochromatography to detect IgG and IgM antibodies against the virus. We also developed a protocol to realize those diagnostic tests and considered an infection (current or past) a positive result in any of the above tests. We included 524 participants in the study (230 patients and 294 hospital staff), and divided them into hospital patients and Hemodialysis outpatients. Furthermore, we divided the hospital staff into healthcare and non-healthcare staff. The documented period was from March, 20th to April, 21st, 2020. RESULTS: 26 out of 230 patients tested positive in any of the diagnostic techniques (PCR, antibodies IgG, IgM) with a 11.30% prevalence. According to patients groups, we got a 14.38% prevalence in hospital patients vs. 5.95% in outpatients, with a significantly higher risk in admitted patients after adjustment for age and gender (OR=3,309, 95%CI: 1,154-9,495). 24 out of 294 hospital staff tested positive in any of the diagnostic techniques, with a 8.16% prevalence. According to the groups, we got a 8.91% prevalence in healthcare staff vs. 4.26% in non-healthcare staff. Thus, we do not see any statistically significant differences between hospital staff and patients as far as prevalence is concerned (P=0,391), (OR=2,200, 95%CI: 0,500-9,689). CONCLUSIONS: The result of the study was a quite low prevalence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection, in both patients and hospital staff, being the hospital patients' prevalence rate higher than the outpatients', and the healthcare staff higher than the non-healthcare's. Combining PCR tests (gold standard) with antibodies tests proved useful as a diagnostic strategy.