scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

David Goodman-Meza

Bio: David Goodman-Meza is an academic researcher from University of California, Los Angeles. The author has contributed to research in topics: Medicine & Men who have sex with men. The author has an hindex of 14, co-authored 44 publications receiving 1221 citations. Previous affiliations of David Goodman-Meza include Albert Einstein College of Medicine & UCLA Medical Center.

Papers published on a yearly basis

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Covid-19 Antibodies after Mild Infection Among 34 volunteers who had recovered from mild Covid- 19 illness, antiviral antibodies to the receptor-binding domain of the viral spike protein declined.
Abstract: Covid-19 Antibodies after Mild Infection Among 34 volunteers who had recovered from mild Covid-19 illness, antiviral antibodies to the receptor-binding domain of the viral spike protein declined wi...

907 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a meta-analysis was conducted to determine the accuracy of transcranial Doppler (TCD) compared with transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) as the reference.
Abstract: Objectives The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine the accuracy of transcranial Doppler (TCD) compared with transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) as the reference. Background Right-to-left shunting (RLS), usually through a patent foramen ovale (PFO), has been associated with migraine, cryptogenic stroke, and hypoxemia. With emerging observational studies and clinical trials on the subject of PFO, there is a need for accurate diagnosis of PFO in patients with these conditions, and those being considered for transcatheter closure. Although a TEE bubble study is the current standard reference for diagnosing PFO, the TCD bubble study may be a preferable alternative test for RLS because of its high sensitivity and specificity, noninvasive nature, and low cost. Methods A systematic review of Medline, the Cochrane Library, and Embase was done to look for all the prospective studies assessing intracardiac RLS using TCD compared with TEE as the reference; both tests were performed with a contrast agent and a maneuver to provoke RLS in all studies. Results A total of 27 studies (29 comparisons) with 1,968 patients (mean age 47.8 ± 5.7 years; 51% male) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The weighted mean sensitivity and specificity for TCD were 97% and 93%, respectively. Likewise, the positive and negative likelihood ratios were 13.51 and 0.04, respectively. When 10 microbubbles was used as the embolic cutoff for a positive TCD study, TCD produced a higher specificity compared with when 1 microbubble was used as the cutoff (p = 0.04); there was, however, no significant change in sensitivity (p = 0.29). Conclusions TCD is a reliable, noninvasive test with excellent diagnostic accuracies, making it a proficient test for detecting RLS. TCD can be used as a part of the stroke workup and for patients being considered for PFO closure. If knowledge of the precise anatomy is required, then TEE can be obtained before scheduling a patient for transcatheter PFO closure.

150 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
23 Jun 2021-ACS Nano
TL;DR: In this paper, a longitudinal assessment of vaccinees with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection using quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) of anti-RBD antibodies was conducted.
Abstract: Studies of two SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines suggested that they yield ∼95% protection from symptomatic infection at least short-term, but important clinical questions remain. It is unclear how vaccine-induced antibody levels quantitatively compare to the wide spectrum induced by natural SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccine response kinetics and magnitudes in persons with prior COVID-19 compared to virus-naive persons are not well-defined. The relative stability of vaccine-induced versus infection-induced antibody levels is unclear. We addressed these issues with longitudinal assessments of vaccinees with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection using quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) of anti-RBD antibodies. SARS-CoV-2-naive individuals achieved levels similar to mild natural infection after the first vaccination; a second dose generated levels approaching severe natural infection. In persons with prior COVID-19, one dose boosted levels to the high end of severe natural infection even in those who never had robust responses from infection, increasing no further after the second dose. Antiviral neutralizing assessments using a spike-pseudovirus assay revealed that virus-naive vaccinees did not develop physiologic neutralizing potency until the second dose, while previously infected persons exhibited maximal neutralization after one dose. Finally, antibodies from vaccination waned similarly to natural infection, resulting in an average of ∼90% loss within 90 days. In summary, our findings suggest that two doses are important for quantity and quality of humoral immunity in SARS-CoV-2-naive persons, while a single dose has maximal effects in those with past infection. Antibodies from vaccination wane with kinetics very similar to that seen after mild natural infection; booster vaccinations will likely be required.

56 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
22 Sep 2020-PLOS ONE
TL;DR: This ensemble machine learning algorithm to diagnose COVID-19 has the potential to be used as a screening tool at hospitals where PCR testing is scarce or unavailable and had excellent diagnostic metrics compared to SARS-CoV-2 PCR.
Abstract: Worldwide, testing capacity for SARS-CoV-2 is limited and bottlenecks in the scale up of polymerase chain reaction (PCR-based testing exist. Our aim was to develop and evaluate a machine learning algorithm to diagnose COVID-19 in the inpatient setting. The algorithm was based on basic demographic and laboratory features to serve as a screening tool at hospitals where testing is scarce or unavailable. We used retrospectively collected data from the UCLA Health System in Los Angeles, California. We included all emergency room or inpatient cases receiving SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing who also had a set of ancillary laboratory features (n = 1,455) between 1 March 2020 and 24 May 2020. We tested seven machine learning models and used a combination of those models for the final diagnostic classification. In the test set (n = 392), our combined model had an area under the receiver operator curve of 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.87-0.96). The model achieved a sensitivity of 0.93 (95% CI 0.85-0.98), specificity of 0.64 (95% CI 0.58-0.69). We found that our machine learning algorithm had excellent diagnostic metrics compared to SARS-CoV-2 PCR. This ensemble machine learning algorithm to diagnose COVID-19 has the potential to be used as a screening tool in hospital settings where PCR testing is scarce or unavailable.

51 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This study is the first to provide evidence of “ outness” as a moderating factor that attenuates syndemic effects on sexual risk-taking, and suggests that “outness’ may be a resilience factor for MSM in Tijuana.
Abstract: Multiple psychosocial conditions tend to co-occur and contribute to higher risk for HIV among men who have sex with men (MSM), a phenomenon known as syndemics Less is known about moderating factors that may attenuate the relation between syndemic conditions and sexual risk-taking We examined disclosure of same-sex sexual behavior or "outness" as a moderating factor of the syndemic effect We recruited a sample of MSM (n = 191) using respondent-driven sampling in Tijuana, Mexico Participants completed a survey of syndemic conditions (ie, substance use, depression, violence, internalized homophobia, and sexual compulsivity), sexual risk-taking (ie, condom unprotected anal sex with a stranger in the past 2 months), and the degree to which they are "out" about sex with men Consistent with previous research, we found that men who report more syndemic conditions show a greater prevalence of sexual risk-taking As predicted, men who were out to more people showed a weaker association between syndemic conditions and sexual risk-taking, whereas men who were out to fewer people showed the strongest association This study is the first to provide evidence of "outness" as a moderating factor that attenuates syndemic effects on sexual risk-taking Building upon previous research, the data suggest that "outness" may be a resilience factor for MSM in Tijuana HIV prevention intervention implications are discussed

47 citations


Cited by
More filters
01 Jan 2020
TL;DR: Prolonged viral shedding provides the rationale for a strategy of isolation of infected patients and optimal antiviral interventions in the future.
Abstract: Summary Background Since December, 2019, Wuhan, China, has experienced an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 have been reported but risk factors for mortality and a detailed clinical course of illness, including viral shedding, have not been well described. Methods In this retrospective, multicentre cohort study, we included all adult inpatients (≥18 years old) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from Jinyintan Hospital and Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital (Wuhan, China) who had been discharged or had died by Jan 31, 2020. Demographic, clinical, treatment, and laboratory data, including serial samples for viral RNA detection, were extracted from electronic medical records and compared between survivors and non-survivors. We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression methods to explore the risk factors associated with in-hospital death. Findings 191 patients (135 from Jinyintan Hospital and 56 from Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital) were included in this study, of whom 137 were discharged and 54 died in hospital. 91 (48%) patients had a comorbidity, with hypertension being the most common (58 [30%] patients), followed by diabetes (36 [19%] patients) and coronary heart disease (15 [8%] patients). Multivariable regression showed increasing odds of in-hospital death associated with older age (odds ratio 1·10, 95% CI 1·03–1·17, per year increase; p=0·0043), higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (5·65, 2·61–12·23; p Interpretation The potential risk factors of older age, high SOFA score, and d-dimer greater than 1 μg/mL could help clinicians to identify patients with poor prognosis at an early stage. Prolonged viral shedding provides the rationale for a strategy of isolation of infected patients and optimal antiviral interventions in the future. Funding Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences; National Science Grant for Distinguished Young Scholars; National Key Research and Development Program of China; The Beijing Science and Technology Project; and Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development.

4,408 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is shown that neutralization level is highly predictive of immune protection, and an evidence-based model of SARS-CoV-2 immune protection that will assist in developing vaccine strategies to control the future trajectory of the pandemic is provided.
Abstract: Predictive models of immune protection from COVID-19 are urgently needed to identify correlates of protection to assist in the future deployment of vaccines. To address this, we analyzed the relationship between in vitro neutralization levels and the observed protection from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection using data from seven current vaccines and from convalescent cohorts. We estimated the neutralization level for 50% protection against detectable SARS-CoV-2 infection to be 20.2% of the mean convalescent level (95% confidence interval (CI) = 14.4–28.4%). The estimated neutralization level required for 50% protection from severe infection was significantly lower (3% of the mean convalescent level; 95% CI = 0.7–13%, P = 0.0004). Modeling of the decay of the neutralization titer over the first 250 d after immunization predicts that a significant loss in protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection will occur, although protection from severe disease should be largely retained. Neutralization titers against some SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern are reduced compared with the vaccine strain, and our model predicts the relationship between neutralization and efficacy against viral variants. Here, we show that neutralization level is highly predictive of immune protection, and provide an evidence-based model of SARS-CoV-2 immune protection that will assist in developing vaccine strategies to control the future trajectory of the pandemic. Estimates of the levels of neutralizing antibodies necessary for protection against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 or severe COVID-19 are a fraction of the mean level in convalescent serum and will be useful in guiding vaccine rollouts.

2,705 citations

10 Mar 2020

2,024 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
08 Sep 2020-JAMA
TL;DR: In this interim report of the phase 1 and phase 2 trials of an inactivated COVID-19 vaccine, patients had a low rate of adverse reactions and demonstrated immunogenicity; the study is ongoing.
Abstract: Importance A vaccine against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is urgently needed. Objective To evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of an investigational inactivated whole-virus COVID-19 vaccine in China. Interventions In the phase 1 trial, 96 participants were assigned to 1 of the 3 dose groups (2.5, 5, and 10 μg/dose) and an aluminum hydroxide (alum) adjuvant-only group (n = 24 in each group), and received 3 intramuscular injections at days 0, 28, and 56. In the phase 2 trial, 224 adults were randomized to 5 μg/dose in 2 schedule groups (injections on days 0 and 14 [n = 84] vs alum only [n = 28], and days 0 and 21 [n = 84] vs alum only [n = 28]). Design, setting, and participants Interim analysis of ongoing randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 and 2 clinical trials to assess an inactivated COVID-19 vaccine. The trials were conducted in Henan Province, China, among 96 (phase 1) and 224 (phase 2) healthy adults aged between 18 and 59 years. Study enrollment began on April 12, 2020. The interim analysis was conducted on June 16, 2020, and updated on July 27, 2020. Main outcomes and measures The primary safety outcome was the combined adverse reactions 7 days after each injection, and the primary immunogenicity outcome was neutralizing antibody response 14 days after the whole-course vaccination, which was measured by a 50% plaque reduction neutralization test against live severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Results Among 320 patients who were randomized (mean age, 42.8 years; 200 women [62.5%]), all completed the trial up to 28 days after the whole-course vaccination. The 7-day adverse reactions occurred in 3 (12.5%), 5 (20.8%), 4 (16.7%), and 6 (25.0%) patients in the alum only, low-dose, medium-dose, and high-dose groups, respectively, in the phase 1 trial; and in 5 (6.0%) and 4 (14.3%) patients who received injections on days 0 and 14 for vaccine and alum only, and 16 (19.0%) and 5 (17.9%) patients who received injections on days 0 and 21 for vaccine and alum only, respectively, in the phase 2 trial. The most common adverse reaction was injection site pain, followed by fever, which were mild and self-limiting; no serious adverse reactions were noted. The geometric mean titers of neutralizing antibodies in the low-, medium-, and high-dose groups at day 14 after 3 injections were 316 (95% CI, 218-457), 206 (95% CI, 123-343), and 297 (95% CI, 208-424), respectively, in the phase 1 trial, and were 121 (95% CI, 95-154) and 247 (95% CI, 176-345) at day 14 after 2 injections in participants receiving vaccine on days 0 and 14 and on days 0 and 21, respectively, in the phase 2 trial. There were no detectable antibody responses in all alum-only groups. Conclusions and relevance In this interim report of the phase 1 and phase 2 trials of an inactivated COVID-19 vaccine, patients had a low rate of adverse reactions and demonstrated immunogenicity; the study is ongoing. Efficacy and longer-term adverse event assessment will require phase 3 trials. Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Identifier: ChiCTR2000031809.

631 citations