Immunological Signatures in Blood and Urine in 80 Individuals Hospitalized during the Initial Phase of COVID-19 Pandemic with Quantified Nicotine Exposure.

This research analyzes immunological response patterns to SARS-CoV-2 infection in blood and urine in individuals with serum cotinine-confirmed exposure to nicotine. Samples of blood and urine were obtained from a total of 80 patients admitted to hospital within 24 h of admission (tadm), 48 h later (t48h), and 7 days later (t7d) if patients remained hospitalized or at discharge. Serum cotinine above 3.75 ng/mL was deemed as biologically significant exposure to nicotine. Viral load was measured with serum SARS-CoV-2 S-spike protein. Titer of IgG, IgA, and IgM against S- and N-protein assessed specific antiviral responses. Cellular destruction was measured by high mobility group box protein-1 (HMGB-1) serum levels and heat shock protein 60 (Hsp-60). Serum interleukin 6 (IL-6), and ferritin gauged non-specific inflammation. The immunological profile was assessed with O-link. Serum titers of IgA were lower at tadm in smokers vs. nonsmokers (p = 0.0397). IgM at t48h was lower in cotinine-positive individuals (p = 0.0188). IgG did not differ between cotinine-positive and negative individuals. HMGB-1 at admission was elevated in cotinine positive individuals. Patients with positive cotinine did not exhibit increased markers of non-specific inflammation and tissue destruction. The blood immunological profile had distinctive differences at admission (MIC A/B↓), 48 h (CCL19↓, MCP-3↓, CD28↑, CD8↓, IFNγ↓, IL-12↓, GZNB↓, MIC A/B↓) or 7 days (CD28↓) in the cotinine-positive group. The urine immunological profile showed a profile with minimal overlap with blood as the following markers being affected at tadm (CCL20↑, CXCL5↑, CD8↑, IL-12↑, MIC A/B↑, GZNH↑, TNFRS14↑), t48h (CCL20↓, TRAIL↓) and t7d (EGF↑, ADA↑) in patients with a cotinine-positive test. Here, we showed a distinctive immunological profile in hospitalized COVID-19 patients with confirmed exposure to nicotine.

Circulating Tumor DNA, Imaging, and Carcinoembryonic Antigen: Comparison of Surveillance Strategies Among Patients Who Underwent Resection of Colorectal Cancer-A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Almost one-third of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients experience recurrence after resection; nevertheless, follow-up strategies remain controversial. We sought to systematically assess and compare the accuracy of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), imaging [positron emission tomography (PET) and computed tomography (CT) scans], and circulating tumor DNA (CtDNA) as surveillance strategies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science, and CINAHL were systematically searched. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) was used to assess methodological quality. We performed a bivariate random-effects meta-analysis and reported pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) values for each surveillance strategy. RESULTS: Thirty studies were included in the analysis. PET scans had the highest sensitivity to detect recurrence (0.95; 95%CI 0.91-0.97), followed by CT scans (0.77; 95%CI 0.67-0.85). CtDNA positivity had the highest specificity to detect recurrence (0.95; 95%CI 0.91-0.97), followed by increased CEA levels (0.88; 95%CI 0.82-0.92). Furthermore, PET scans had the highest DOR to detect recurrence (DOR 120.7; 95%CI 48.9-297.9) followed by CtDNA (DOR 37.6; 95%CI 20.8-68.0). CONCLUSION: PET scans had the highest sensitivity and DOR to detect recurrence, while CtDNA had the highest specificity and second highest DOR. Combinations of traditional cross-sectional/functional imaging and newer platforms such as CtDNA may result in optimized surveillance of patients following resection of CRC.

A systematic review of vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia in individuals who received COVID-19 adenoviral-vector-based vaccines.

Reports of thrombotic response after receiving COVID-19 Adenoviral-Vector Based Vaccines raise concerns about vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT); therefore, we conduct this systematic review to report susceptible demographics outcomes, commonalities, and prognosis of reporting cases. We identified published articles by searching PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science from December 2020 till May 2021, with an updated search in September 2021. All case reports and case series reporting thrombotic response after receiving COVID-19 Adenoviral-Vector Based Vaccines were eligible for including. In addition, two authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the included studies. A total of 157 patients with thrombotic events after the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine and 16 patients with thrombotic events after Ad26.COV2. S vaccine was included in our study. 72% of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 cases were females, while in Ad26.COV2.S subgroup, all reported patients were females. The commonest presentations were deep vein thrombosis 20 (12.7%) and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis 18 (11.5%) in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 subgroup while cerebral venous sinus thrombosis 14 (87.5%) and pulmonary embolism 2 (12.5%) in the Ad26.COV2. S subgroup. In this study, we described the certain demographics associated with VITT and the clinical presentations of those cases in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and Ad26.COV2. S vaccines. Young individuals, particularly females, may be more susceptible to VITT, and future studies should seek to confirm this association. In addition, the clinical presentation of VITT commonly includes cerebral thrombi, pulmonary embolism, and deep venous thrombosis, but other presentations are also possible, highlighting the importance of clinical vigilance in recent vaccine recipients.