Acute Surge of Atypical Memory and Plasma B-Cell Subsets Driven by an Extrafollicular Response in Severe COVID-19

BackgroundDespite the use of vaccines and therapeutics against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, this severe disease has been a critical burden on public health, whereas the pathogenic mechanism remains elusive. Recently, accumulating evidence underscores the potential role of the aberrant B-cell response and humoral immunity in disease progression, especially in high-risk groups. MethodsUsing single-cell RNA (scRNA) sequencing analysis, we investigated transcriptional features of B-cell population in peripheral blood from COVID-19 patients and compared them, according to clinical severity and disease course, against a public B-cell dataset. ResultsWe confirmed that acute B cells differentiate into plasma cells, particularly in severe patients, potentially through enhanced extrafollicular (EF) differentiation. In severe groups, the elevated plasma B-cell response displayed increased B-cell receptor (BCR) diversity, as well as higher levels of anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (anti-SARS-CoV-2) spike antibodies in plasma, than those in moderate cases, suggesting more robust and heterogeneous plasma cell response in severe COVID-19 patients. Trajectory analysis identified a differentiation pathway for the EF B-cell response from active naive to atypical memory B cells (AM2), in addition to the emergence of an aberrant plasma cell subset (PC2), which was associated with COVID-19 progression and severity. The AM2 and PC2 subsets surged in the acute phase of the severe disease and presented multiple inflammatory features, including higher cytokine expression and humoral effector function, respectively. These features differ from other B-cell subsets, suggesting a pathogenic potential for disease progression. ConclusionThe acute surge of AM2 and PC2 subsets with lower somatic hypermutation and higher inflammatory features may be driven by the EF B-cell response during the acute phase of severe COVID-19 and may represent one of the critical drivers in disease severity.N

Predictive Factors and Clinical Impacts of Delayed Isolation of Tuberculosis during Hospital Admission

Delayed isolation of tuberculosis (TB) can cause unexpected exposure of healthcare workers (HCWs). This study identified the predictive factors and clinical impact of delayed isolation. We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records of index patients and HCWs who underwent contact investigation after TB exposure during hospitalization at the National Medical Center, between January 2018 and July 2021. Among the 25 index patients, 23 (92.0%) were diagnosed with TB based on the molecular assay, and 18 (72.0%) had a negative acid-fast bacilli smear. Sixteen (64.0%) patients were hospitalized via the emergency room, and 18 (72.0%) were admitted to a non-pulmonology/infectious disease department. According to the patterns of delayed isolation, patients were classified into five categories. Among 157 close-contact events in 125 HCWs, 75 (47.8%) occurred in Category A. Twenty-five (20%) HCWs had multiple TB exposures (n = 57 events), of whom 37 (64.9%) belonged to Category A (missed during emergency situations). After contact tracing, latent TB infection was diagnosed in one (1.2%) HCW in Category A, who was exposed during intubation. Delayed isolation and TB exposure mostly occurred during pre-admission in emergency situations. Effective TB screening and infection control are necessary to protect HCWs, especially those who routinely contact new patients in high-risk departments

Predictive Factors and Clinical Impacts of Delayed Isolation of Tuberculosis during Hospital Admission

Delayed isolation of tuberculosis (TB) can cause unexpected exposure of healthcare workers (HCWs). This study identified the predictive factors and clinical impact of delayed isolation. We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records of index patients and HCWs who underwent contact investigation after TB exposure during hospitalization at the National Medical Center, between January 2018 and July 2021. Among the 25 index patients, 23 (92.0%) were diagnosed with TB based on the molecular assay, and 18 (72.0%) had a negative acid-fast bacilli smear. Sixteen (64.0%) patients were hospitalized via the emergency room, and 18 (72.0%) were admitted to a non-pulmonology/infectious disease department. According to the patterns of delayed isolation, patients were classified into five categories. Among 157 close-contact events in 125 HCWs, 75 (47.8%) occurred in Category A. Twenty-five (20%) HCWs had multiple TB exposures (n = 57 events), of whom 37 (64.9%) belonged to Category A (missed during emergency situations). After contact tracing, latent TB infection was diagnosed in one (1.2%) HCW in Category A, who was exposed during intubation. Delayed isolation and TB exposure mostly occurred during pre-admission in emergency situations. Effective TB screening and infection control are necessary to protect HCWs, especially those who routinely contact new patients in high-risk departments

Viral Load Kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in First Two Patients in Korea

As of February 2020, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak started in China in December 2019 has been spreading in many countries in the world. With the numbers of confirmed cases are increasing, information on the epidemiologic investigation and clinical manifestation have been accumulated. However, data on viral load kinetics in confirmed cases are lacking. Here, we present the viral load kinetics of the first two confirmed patients with mild to moderate illnesses in Korea in whom distinct viral load kinetics are shown. This report suggests that viral load kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 may be different from that of previously reported other coronavirus infections such as SARS-CoV

Remdesivir for Severe COVID-19 versus a Cohort Receiving Standard of Care.

BACKGROUND: We compared the efficacy of the antiviral agent, remdesivir, versus standard-of-care treatment in adults with severe COVID-19 using data from a phase 3 remdesivir trial and a retrospective cohort of patients with severe COVID-19 treated with standard-of-care. METHODS: GS-US-540-5773 is an ongoing phase 3, randomized, open-label trial comparing two courses of remdesivir (remdesivir-cohort). GS-US-540-5807 is an ongoing real-world, retrospective cohort study of clinical outcomes in patients receiving standard-of-care treatment (non-remdesivir-cohort). Inclusion criteria were similar between studies: patients had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, were hospitalized, had oxygen saturation 94% or lower on room air or required supplemental oxygen, and had pulmonary infiltrates. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighted multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the treatment effect of remdesivir versus standard-of-care. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with recovery on day 14, dichotomized from a 7-point clinical status ordinal scale. A key secondary endpoint was mortality. RESULTS: After the inverse probability of treatment weighting procedure 312 and 818 patients were counted in the remdesivir- and non-remdesivir-cohorts, respectively. At day 14, 74.4% of patients in the remdesivir-cohort had recovered versus 59.0% in the non-remdesivir-cohort (adjusted odds ratio 2.03: 95% confidence interval 1.34-3.08, p CONCLUSIONS: In this comparative analysis, by day 14, remdesivir was associated with significantly greater recovery and 62% reduced odds of death versus standard-of-care treatment in patients with severe COVID-19