Hong Zhang

To confirm the relationship between sex and the progression of Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19), and its potential mechanism, among severe patients. For this retrospective study, we included 168 consecutive severe patients with pathogen-confirmed COVID-19 who were hospitalized between January 16th and February 4th, 2020, at Tongji Hospital in Wuhan, China. Clinical characteristics, laboratory parameters, and outcomes were compared and analyzed between males and females. In the present study, we analyzed 168 severe patients with COVID-19, including 86 males and 82 females, and 48 patients (28.6%) were diagnosed as critically ill. Of 86 male patients, 12.8% (11/86) died and 75.6% (65/86) were discharged; of 82 female patients, 7.3% (6/82) died and 86.6% (71/82) were discharged. Eleven laboratory parameters showed significant differences between male and female patients, and six of them were higher during the whole clinical course in patients who died than in patients who were discharged. In adjusted logistic regression analysis, males with comorbidities presented a higher risk of being critically ill than males without comorbidities (OR = 3.824, 95% CI = 1.279-11.435). However, this association attenuated to null in female patients (OR = 2.992, 95% CI = 0.937-9.558). A similar sex-specific trend was observed in the relation between age and critically ill conditions. We highlighted sex-specific differences in clinical characteristics and prognosis. Male patients appeared to be more susceptible to age and comorbidities. Sex is an important biological variable that should be considered in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.

Recent studies have reported and provided nucleotide sequence data from divergent isolates of hepatitis E virus (HEV), including isolates from North America and Africa. Sera were investigated from 29 Chinese patients with a diagnosis of acute hepatitis and who were negative for hepatitis viruses A-E by serology (HEV was excluded by testing for IgG antibody only). To determine whether some patients were infected with HEV but had yet to seroconvert to antibody positivity, RT-PCR was carried out with primers designed within conserved sequences of the HEV open reading frame (ORF) 1 and ORF2 regions. Fifteen patients were found to harbour sequences related to HEV. Analysis of the HEV products revealed that nucleotide sequences from nine of the sera closely matched Burmese-like HEV sequences (more than 92% nucleotide identity across ORF1 and 88% in ORF2). The remaining six HEV isolates were similar to each other but divergent from all other known HEV sequences (74 to 83% nucleotide identity in ORF1 or ORF2). Phylogenetic analysis suggests that the six divergent isolates represent a fourth genotype of HEV, distinct from the previously described Burmese, Mexican and United States variants (genotypes 1, 2 and 3). This novel variant, referred to here as the Chinese genotype (genotype 4), may be responsible for a significant proportion of cases of acute hepatitis in China, as seen by the fact that 40% of the HEV-infected patients in this study were genotype 4 positive.

BACKGROUND: Genotypic sequencing for drug-resistant strains of HIV can guide the choice of antiretroviral therapy. OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of genotypic resistance testing for patients acquiring drug resistance through failed treatment (secondary resistance) and those infected with resistant virus (primary resistance). DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis with an HIV simulation model incorporating CD4 cell count and HIV RNA level as predictors of disease progression. DATA SOURCES: Published randomized trials and data from the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study, the national AIDS Cost and Services Utilization Survey, the Red Book, and an institutional cost-accounting system. TARGET POPULATION: HIV-infected patients in the United States with baseline CD4 counts of 0.250 x 10(9) cells/L. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Societal. INTERVENTIONS: Genotypic resistance testing and clinical judgment, compared with clinical judgment alone, in two contexts: after initial treatment failure (secondary resistance testing) and before initiation of antiretroviral therapy (primary resistance testing). OUTCOME MEASURES: Life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy, and cost-effectiveness in dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Secondary resistance testing increased life expectancy by 3 months, at a cost of $17 900 per QALY gained. The cost-effectiveness of primary resistance testing was $22 300 per QALY gained with a 20% prevalence of primary resistance but increased to $69 000 per QALY gained with 4% prevalence. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: The cost-effectiveness ratio for secondary resistance testing remained under $25 000 per QALY gained, even when effectiveness and cost of testing and antiretroviral therapy, quality-of-life weights, and discount rate were varied. CONCLUSIONS: Genotypic antiretroviral resistance testing following antiretroviral failure is cost-effective. Primary resistance testing also seems to be reasonably cost-effective and will become more so as the prevalence of primary resistance increases.

Graphene quantum dots (GQDs)-based nanohybrid materials have gained great attention in multiple research applications, particularly in biomedical fields due to their unique physicochemical properties and outstanding biocompatibility compared to other nanomaterials. In this review, we focus on the most recent emerging developments including synthesis methods, in vivo imaging and in vitro biosensing applications. We also discuss these unresolved problematic and controversial issues facing their biomedical applications. Consequently, trends in approaches to improve the analytical performance of GQDs-based nanomaterials have also been put forward. Keywords: Graphene quantum dots (GQDs), Immunosensors, Imaging, Drug delivery, Toxicity

COVID-19, an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has spread throughout the world. China has achieved rapid containment of this highly infectious disease following the principles of early detection, early quarantine and early treatment with integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine. The inclusion of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in the Chinese protocol is based on its successful historic experience in fighting against pestilence. Current findings have shown that the Chinese medicine can reduce the incidence of severe or critical events, improve clinical recovery and help alleviate symptoms such as cough or fever. To date there are over 133 ongoing registered clinical studies on TCM/integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine. The three Chinese patent medicines (Lianhua Qingwen Keli/Jiaonang (Forsythiae and Honeysuckle Flower Pestilence-Clearing Granules/Capsules), Jinhua Qinggan Keli (Honeysuckle Flower Cold-Relieving Granules) and Xuebijing (Stasis-Resolving & Toxin-Removing) Injection were officially approved by the National Medical Products Administration to list COVID-19 as an additional indication. The pharmacological studies have suggested that Chinese medicine is effective for COVID-19 probably through its host-directed regulation and certain antiviral effects.