Comparison of WHO versus national COVID-19 therapeutic guidelines across the world: not exactly a perfect match.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic affected all WHO member states. We compared and contrasted the COVID-19 treatment guidelines of each member state with the WHO COVID-19 therapeutic guidelines. METHODS: Ministries of Health or accessed National Infectious Disease websites and other relevant bodies and experts were contacted to obtain national guidelines (NGs) for COVID-19 treatment. NGs were included only if they delineated specific pharmacological treatments for COVID-19, which were stratified by disease severity. We conducted a retrospective review using the adapted Reporting Checklist for Public Versions of Guidelines (RIGHT-PVG) survey checklist and a derived comparative metric based on the WHO guidelines was performed. RESULTS: COVID-19 therapeutics NGs could be obtained from 109 of the 194 WHO member states. There was considerable variation in guidelines and in disease severity stratifications. Therapeutic recommendations in many NGs differed substantially from the WHO guidelines. Overall in late 2022, 93% of NGs were recommending at least one treatment which had proved to be ineffective in large randomised trials, and was not recommended by WHO. Corticosteroids were not recommended in severe disease in nearly 10% of NGs despite overwhelming evidence of their benefit. NGs from countries with low-resource settings showed the greatest divergence when stratified by gross domestic product per year, Human Development Index and the Global Health Security Index. DISCUSSION: Our study is limited to NGs that were readily accessible, and it does not reflect the availability of recommended medicines in the field. Three years after the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, available COVID-19 NGs vary substantially in their therapeutic recommendations, often differ from the WHO guidelines, and commonly recommend ineffective, unaffordable or unavailable medicines.

Parvovirus B19V Nonstructural Protein NS1 Induces Double-Stranded Deoxyribonucleic Acid Autoantibodies and End-Organ Damage in Nonautoimmune Mice.

BACKGROUND: Viral infection is implicated in development of autoimmunity. Parvovirus B19 (B19V) nonstructural protein, NS1, a helicase, covalently modifies self double-stranded deoxyribonucleic acid (dsDNA) and induces apoptosis. This study tested whether resulting apoptotic bodies (ApoBods) containing virally modified dsDNA could induce autoimmunity in an animal model. METHODS: BALB/c mice were inoculated with (1) pristane-induced, (2) B19V NS1-induced, or (3) staurosporine-induced ApoBods. Serum was tested for dsDNA autoantibodies by Crithidia luciliae staining and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Brain, heart, liver, and kidney pathology was examined. Deposition of self-antigens in glomeruli was examined by staining with antibodies to dsDNA, histones H1 and H4, and TATA-binding protein. RESULTS: The B19V NS1-induced ApoBod inoculation induced dsDNA autoantibodies in a dose-dependent fashion. Histopathological features of immune-mediated organ damage were evident in pristane-induced and NS1-induced ApoBod groups; severity scores were higher in these groups than in staurosporine-treated groups. Tissue damage was dependent on NS1-induced ApoBod dose. Nucleosomal antigens were deposited in target tissue from pristane-induced and NS1-induced ApoBod inoculated groups, but not in the staurosporine-induced ApoBod inoculated group. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated proof of principle in an animal model that virally modified dsDNA in apoptotic bodies could break tolerance to self dsDNA and induce dsDNA autoantibodies and end-organ damage.