According to the World Health Organization (WHO), viral diseases continue to emerge and represent a serious issue to public health In the last twenty years, several viral epidemics such as the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in 2002 to 2003, and H1N1 influenza in 2009, have been recorded Most recently, the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) was first identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012 In a timeline that reaches the present day, an epidemic of cases with unexplained low respiratory infections detected in Wuhan, the largest metropolitan area in China's Hubei province, was first reported to the WHO Country Office in China, on December 31, 2019 Published literature can trace the beginning of symptomatic individuals back to the beginning of December 2019 As they were unable to identify the causative agent, these first cases were classified as "pneumonia of unknown etiology " The Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and local CDCs organized an intensive outbreak investigation program The etiology of this illness is now attributed to a novel virus belonging to the coronavirus (CoV) family, COVID-19 On February 11, 2020, the WHO Director-General, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, announced that the disease caused by this new CoV was a "COVID-19," which is the acronym of "coronavirus disease 2019" In the past twenty years, two additional coronavirus epidemics have occurred  SARS-CoV provoked a large-scale epidemic beginning in China and involving two dozen countries with approximately 8000 cases and 800 deaths, and the MERS-CoV that began in Saudi Arabia and has approximately 2,500 cases and 800 deaths and still causes as sporadic cases This new virus seems to be very contagious and has quickly spread globally In a meeting on January 30, 2020, per the International Health Regulations (IHR, 2005), the outbreak was declared by the WHO a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) as it had spread to 18 countries with four countries reporting human-to-human transmission An additional landmark occurred on February 26, 2020, as the first case of the disease, not imported from China, was recorded in the United States Initially, the new virus was called 2019-nCoV Subsequently, the task of experts of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) termed it the SARS-CoV-2 virus as it is very similar to the one that caused the SARS outbreak (SARS-CoVs) The CoVs have become the major pathogens of emerging respiratory disease outbreaks They are a large family of single-stranded RNA viruses (+ssRNA) that can be isolated in different animal species  For reasons yet to be explained, these viruses can cross species barriers and can cause, in humans, illness ranging from the common cold to more severe diseases such as MERS and SARS  Interestingly, these latter viruses have probably originated from bats and then moving into other mammalian hosts — the Himalayan palm civet for SARS-CoV, and the dromedary camel for MERS-CoV — before jumping to humans The dynamics of SARS-Cov-2 are currently unknown, but there is speculation that it also has an animal origin The potential for these viruses to grow to become a pandemic worldwide seems to be a serious public health risk Concerning COVID-19, the WHO raised the threat to the CoV epidemic to the "very high" level, on February 28, 2020 Probably, the effects of the epidemic caused by the new CoV has yet to emerge as the situation is quickly evolving World governments are at work to establish countermeasures to stem possible devastating effects Health organizations coordinate information flows and issues directives and guidelines to best mitigate the impact of the threat At the same time, scientists around the world work tirelessly, and information about the transmission mechanisms, the clinical spectrum of disease, new diagnostics, and prevention and therapeutic strategies are rapidly developing Many uncertainties remain with regard to both the virus-host interac ion and the evolution of the epidemic, with specific reference to the times when the epidemic will reach its peak At the moment, the therapeutic strategies to deal with the infection are only supportive, and prevention aimed at reducing transmission in the community is our best weapon Aggressive isolation measures in China have led to a progressive reduction of cases in the last few days In Italy, in geographic regions of the north of the peninsula, political and health authorities are making incredible efforts to contain a shock wave that is severely testing the health system In the midst of the crisis, the authors have chosen to use the "Statpearls" platform because, within the PubMed scenario, it represents a unique tool that may allow them to make updates in real-time  The aim, therefore, is to collect information and scientific evidence and to provide an overview of the topic that will be continuously updated

/pdf/features-evaluation-and-treatment-coronavirus-covid-19-20k4uevtsr.pdf

Features, Evaluation and Treatment Coronavirus (COVID-19)

Objective: The recent outbreak of Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) is reminiscent of the SARS outbreak in 2003. We aim to compare the severity and mortality between male and female patients with COVID-19 or SARS. Study Design and Setting: We extracted the data from: (1) a case series of 43 hospitalized patients we treated, (2) a public data set of the first 37 cases of patients who died of COVID-19 and 1,019 patients who survived in China, and (3) data of 524 patients with SARS, including 139 deaths, from Beijing in early 2003. Results: Older age and a high number of comorbidities were associated with higher severity and mortality in patients with both COVID-19 and SARS. Age was comparable between men and women in all data sets. In the case series, however, men's cases tended to be more serious than women's (P = 0.035). In the public data set, the number of men who died from COVID-19 is 2.4 times that of women (70.3 vs. 29.7%, P = 0.016). In SARS patients, the gender role in mortality was also observed. The percentage of males were higher in the deceased group than in the survived group (P = 0.015). Conclusion: While men and women have the same prevalence, men with COVID-19 are more at risk for worse outcomes and death, independent of age.

/pdf/gender-differences-in-patients-with-covid-19-focus-on-1vv8pp0pjl.pdf

Gender Differences in Patients With COVID-19: Focus on Severity and Mortality

COVID-19 pathophysiology: A review.

The World Health Organization has declared the rapid spread of COVID-19 around the world a global public health emergency. It is well-known that the spread of the disease is influenced by people’s ...

/pdf/risk-perceptions-of-covid-19-around-the-world-2lsrxkfia8.pdf

Risk perceptions of COVID-19 around the world

Anecdotal evidence suggests that Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, exhibits differences in morbidity and mortality between sexes. Here, we present a meta-analysis of 3,111,714 reported global cases to demonstrate that, whilst there is no difference in the proportion of males and females with confirmed COVID-19, male patients have almost three times the odds of requiring intensive treatment unit (ITU) admission (OR = 2.84; 95% CI = 2.06, 3.92) and higher odds of death (OR = 1.39; 95% CI = 1.31, 1.47) compared to females. With few exceptions, the sex bias observed in COVID-19 is a worldwide phenomenon. An appreciation of how sex is influencing COVID-19 outcomes will have important implications for clinical management and mitigation strategies for this disease. Anecdotal reports suggest potential severity and outcome differences between sexes following infection by SARS-CoV-2. Here, the authors perform meta-analyses of more than 3 million cases collected from global public data to demonstrate that male patients with COVID-19 are 3 times more likely to require intensive care, and have ~40% higher death rate.

/pdf/male-sex-identified-by-global-covid-19-meta-analysis-as-a-17muit0nde.pdf

Male sex identified by global COVID-19 meta-analysis as a risk factor for death and ITU admission.

Importance The recent outbreak of Novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) Disease (COVID-19) has put the world on alert, that is reminiscent of the SARS outbreak seventeen years ago. Objective We aim to compare the severity and mortality between male and female patients with both COVID-19 and SARS, to explore the most useful prognostic factors for individualized assessment. Design, Setting, and Participants We extracted the data from a case series of 43 hospitalized patients we treated, a public data set of the first 37 cases died of COVID-19 in Wuhan city and 1019 survived patients from six cities in China. We also analyzed the data of 524 patients with SARS, including 139 deaths, from Beijing city in early 2003. Main Outcomes and Measures Severity and mortality. Results Older age and high number of comorbidities were associated with higher severity and mortality in patients with both COVID-19 and SARS. The percentages of older age (≥65 years) were much higher in the deceased group than in the survived group in patients with both COVID-19 (83.8 vs. 13.2, P Conclusions and Relevance Older age and male gender are risk factors for worse outcome in patients with COVID. While men and women have the same susceptibility to both SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV, men may be more prone to have higher severity and mortality independent of age and susceptibility. Key Points Question Are men more susceptible to getting and dying from COVID-19? Findings In the case series, men tend to be more serious than women. In the public data set, the percentage of men were higher in the deceased group than in the survived group, although age was comparable between men and women. Meaning Male gender is a risk factor for worse outcome in patients with COVID independent of age and susceptibility.

/pdf/gender-differences-in-patients-with-covid-19-focus-on-5qkuv553m7.pdf

Gender differences in patients with COVID-19: Focus on severity and mortality

The pandemic of 2019 coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) disease (COVID-19) has imposed a severe public health burden worldwide. Most patients with COVID-19 were mild. Severe patients progressed rapidly to critical condition including acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), multi-organ failure and even death. This study aims to find early multi-organ injury indicators and blood glucose for predicting mortality of COVID-19.Fasting blood glucose (FBG) ≥7.0 mmol/L for two times during hospitalization and without a history of diabetes were defined as new-onset COVID-19-related diabetes (CRD). Indicators of injuries for multiple organs, including the lung, heart, kidney and liver, and glucose homeostasis were specifically analyzed for predicting death.A total of 120 patients with a severity equal to or greater than Moderate were hospitalized. After excluding patients with history of diabetes, chronic heart, kidney, and liver disease, 69 patients were included in the final analysis. Of the 69 patients, 23 were Moderate, 20 were Severe, and 26 were Critical (including 16 deceased patients). Univariable analysis indicated that CRD, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), hydroxybutyrate dehydrogenase (HBDH), creatine kinase (CK) and creatinine (Cr) were associated with death. Multivariable analysis indicated that CRD was an independent predictor for death (HR = 3.75, 95% CI 1.26-11.15). Abnormal glucose homeostasis or CRD occurred earlier than other indicators for predicting poor outcomes. Indicators of multiple organ injury were in parallel with the expression patterns of ACE2 (the SARS-CoV-2 receptor) in different organs including pancreatic islet.New-onset COVID-19-related diabetes is an early indicator of multi-organ injury and predictor for poor outcomes and death in COVID-19 patients. As it is easy to perform for clinical practices and self-monitoring, glucose testing will be helpful for predicting poor outcomes to facilitate appropriate intensive care. 

/pdf/new-onset-covid-19-related-diabetes-an-early-indicator-of-17kyo6m2.pdf

New-onset COVID-19–related diabetes: an early indicator of multi-organ injury and mortally of SARS-CoV-2 infection

Although 20-60% of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) have asthma, the risk factors associated with comorbid asthma are not clear. The aim of the study was to investigate the factors associated with asthma, and develop a practical scoring system to screen asthma comorbidity in CRSwNP patients.This report describes a cross-sectional study with consecutive CRSwNP patients. Two cohorts of CRSwNP patients named "modelling" group and "validation" group were investigated respectively. Logistic regression analysis was performed based on demographic and clinical data collected from patients in the modelling group to determine the risk factors associated with asthma, and establish a scoring system for screening comorbid asthma. Receiver operating characteristic curve was constructed to evaluate the screening system; the optimal cut-off point was established by means of the Yoden Index. The consistency between the diagnosis of asthma by the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) criteria and by the screening system was assessed by Kappa value in the validation group.Totally 150 patients in modelling group and 78 patients in validation group were enrolled. Female gender (odds ratio [OR] = 6.4; P < 0.001), allergic rhinitis (OR = 2.9; P = 0.021), serum total (T)-immunoglobulin (Ig) E ≥ 69.0kU/L (OR = 12.0; P < 0.001), and blood eosinophil count ≥ 0.35 × 109/L (OR = 4.0; P = 0.001) were shown to be independent risk factors for asthma in patients with CRSwNP. Based on these variables, a scoring system (FAIE) ranging from 0(no risk) to 6(high risk); was developed. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the system was 0.823, and the optimal cut-off value was 3 points, with sensitivity 83.8% and specificity 68.6% for screening asthma. The asthma comorbidity determined with FAIE score ≥ 3 points in the validation group, was moderately consistent with that defined by GINA (Kappa = 0.513, P < 0.001), with sensitivity 76.9% and specificity 74.4%.Female gender, allergic rhinitis, serum T-IgE level, and blood eosinophil count are independent risk factors for asthma comorbidity in patients with CRSwNP, and the FAIE system may be practical for screening comorbid asthma in these patients. 

/pdf/risk-factors-associated-with-comorbid-asthma-in-patients-3g8dcyk5.pdf

Risk factors associated with comorbid asthma in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a cross-sectional study

Abstract Background Asthma is significantly related to chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) both in prevalence and severity. However, the clinical patterns of uncontrolled asthma with and without comorbid CRS are still unclear. This study aimed to explore the clinical characteristics and cytokine patterns of patients with uncontrolled asthma, with and without comorbid CRS. Methods 22 parameters associated with demographic characteristics, CRS comorbidity, severity of airflow obstruction and airway inflammation, and inflammation type of asthma were collected and assessed in 143 patients with uncontrolled asthma. Different clusters were explored using two-step cluster analysis. Sputum samples were collected for assessment of Th1/Th2/Th17 and epithelium-derived cytokines. Results Comorbid CRS was identified as the most important variable for prediction of different clusters, followed by pulmonary function parameters and blood eosinophil level. Three clusters of patients were determined: Cluster 1 (n = 46) characterized by non-atopic patients with non-eosinophilic asthma without CRS, demonstrating moderate airflow limitation; Cluster 2 (n = 54) characterized by asthma patients with mild airflow limitation and CRS, demonstrating higher levels of blood eosinophils and immunoglobulin E (IgE) than cluster 1; Cluster 3 (n = 43) characterized by eosinophilic asthma patients with severe airflow limitation and CRS (46.5% with nasal polyps), demonstrating worst lung function, lowest partial pressure of oxygen (PaO 2 ), and highest levels of eosinophils, fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and IgE. Sputum samples from Cluster 3 showed significantly higher levels of Interleukin (IL)-5, IL-13, IL-33, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α than the other two clusters; and remarkably elevated IL-4, IL-17 and interferon (IFN)-γ compared with cluster 2. The levels of IL-10 and IL-25 were not significantly different among the three clusters. Conclusions Uncontrolled asthma may be endotyped into three clusters characterized by CRS comorbidity and inflammatory cytokine patterns. Furthermore, a united-airways approach may be especially necessary for management of asthma patients with Type 2 features. 

/pdf/clinical-and-cytokine-patterns-of-uncontrolled-asthma-with-1flkbqk2.pdf

Jian-Min Jin

Papers

Gender Differences in Patients With COVID-19: Focus on Severity and Mortality

Gender differences in patients with COVID-19: Focus on severity and mortality

New-onset COVID-19–related diabetes: an early indicator of multi-organ injury and mortally of SARS-CoV-2 infection

Risk factors associated with comorbid asthma in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a cross-sectional study

Clinical and cytokine patterns of uncontrolled asthma with and without comorbid chronic rhinosinusitis: a cross-sectional study