Immunological Biomarkers of Fatal COVID-19: A Study of 868 Patients.

Information on the immunopathobiology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is rapidly increasing; however, there remains a need to identify immune features predictive of fatal outcome. This large-scale study characterized immune responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection using multidimensional flow cytometry, with the aim of identifying high-risk immune biomarkers. Holistic and unbiased analyses of 17 immune cell-types were conducted on 1,075 peripheral blood samples obtained from 868 COVID-19 patients and on samples from 24 patients presenting with non-SARS-CoV-2 infections and 36 healthy donors. Immune profiles of COVID-19 patients were significantly different from those of age-matched healthy donors but generally similar to those of patients with non-SARS-CoV-2 infections. Unsupervised clustering analysis revealed three immunotypes during SARS-CoV-2 infection; immunotype 1 (14% of patients) was characterized by significantly lower percentages of all immune cell-types except neutrophils and circulating plasma cells, and was significantly associated with severe disease. Reduced B-cell percentage was most strongly associated with risk of death. On multivariate analysis incorporating age and comorbidities, B-cell and non-classical monocyte percentages were independent prognostic factors for survival in training (n=513) and validation (n=355) cohorts. Therefore, reduced percentages of B-cells and non-classical monocytes are high-risk immune biomarkers for risk-stratification of COVID-19 patients.

Web-based formative assessment through clinical cases: role in pathophysiology teaching.

BACKGROUND: Active learning strategies such as formative assessment through clinical cases may help to get a deeper learning. We have studied the effect of this kind of online formative assessment in pathophysiology teaching. METHODS: Seven brief clinical cases were used to give formative assessment in the first semester of a pathophysiology course. To evaluate its effect on learning, we analyzed the proportion of students that passed the end of semester exam with a score above 60 over 100. We also analyzed the effect of the intervention according to the students' previous academic performance. RESULTS: Ninety-six students participated in the study and sat the exam. Sixty-five of them passed it. Students that passed the exam had a higher previous academic performance and had done a higher number of exercises of formative assessment, both in univariate and multivariate analysis. The participants were divided in three groups, according to their previous academic performance. In the intermediate group, the number of cases done by the students who passed the exam was significantly higher than in those who did not pass it (median: 4 versus 0; P = 0.009). CONCLUSION: Formative assessment through web-based clinical cases was followed by an improvement of the academic results in pathophysiology, mainly in students with intermediate performance.

The effect of early treatment with ivermectin on viral load, symptoms and humoral response in patients with non-severe COVID-19: A pilot, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Ivermectin inhibits the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro at concentrations not readily achievable with currently approved doses. There is limited evidence to support its clinical use in COVID-19 patients. We conducted a Pilot, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of a single dose of ivermectin reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 when administered early after disease onset. METHODS: Consecutive patients with non-severe COVID-19 and no risk factors for complicated disease attending the emergency room of the Clínica Universidad de Navarra between July 31, 2020 and September 11, 2020 were enrolled. All enrollments occurred within 72 h of onset of fever or cough. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive ivermectin, 400 mcg/kg, single dose (n = 12) or placebo (n = 12). The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA by PCR from nasopharyngeal swab at day 7 post-treatment. The primary outcome was supported by determination of the viral load and infectivity of each sample. The differences between ivermectin and placebo were calculated using Fisher's exact test and presented as a relative risk ratio. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04390022. FINDINGS: All patients recruited completed the trial (median age, 26 [IQR 19-36 in the ivermectin and 21-44 in the controls] years; 12 [50%] women; 100% had symptoms at recruitment, 70% reported headache, 62% reported fever, 50% reported general malaise and 25% reported cough). At day 7, there was no difference in the proportion of PCR positive patients (RR 0·92, 95% CI: 0·77-1·09, p = 1·0). The ivermectin group had non-statistically significant lower viral loads at day 4 (p = 0·24 for gene E; p = 0·18 for gene N) and day 7 (p = 0·16 for gene E; p = 0·18 for gene N) post treatment as well as lower IgG titers at day 21 post treatment (p = 0·24). Patients in the ivermectin group recovered earlier from hyposmia/anosmia (76 vs 158 patient-days; p < 0.001). INTERPRETATION: Among patients with non-severe COVID-19 and no risk factors for severe disease receiving a single 400 mcg/kg dose of ivermectin within 72 h of fever or cough onset there was no difference in the proportion of PCR positives. There was however a marked reduction of self-reported anosmia/hyposmia, a reduction of cough and a tendency to lower viral loads and lower IgG titers which warrants assessment in larger trials. FUNDING: ISGlobal, Barcelona Institute for Global Health and Clínica Universidad de Navarra.