The COVID-19 Worsening Score (COWS)-a predictive bedside tool for critical illness

18Objectives: To evaluate the accuracy of a new COVID-19 prognostic score based on lung ultrasound (LUS) and previously validated variables in predicting critical illness. Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort development and internal validation study of the COVID-19 Worsening Score (COWS), based on a combination of the previously validated COVID-GRAM score (GRAM) variables and LUS. Adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) were enrolled. Ten variables previously identified by GRAM, days from symptom onset, LUS findings, and peripheral oxygen saturation/fraction of inspired oxygen (P/F) ratio were analyzed. LUS score as a single predictor was assessed. We evaluated GRAM model's performance, the impact of adding LUS, and then developed a new model based on the most predictive variables. Results: Among 274 COVID-19 patients enrolled, 174 developed critical illness. The GRAM score identified 51 patients at high risk of developing critical illness and 132 at low risk. LUS score over 15 (range 0 to 36) was associated with a higher risk ratio of critical illness (RR, 2.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.52-2.77; area under the curve [AUC], 0.63; 95% CI 0.676-0.634). The newly developed COVID-19 Worsening Score relies on five variables to classify high- and low-risk patients with an overall accuracy of 80% and negative predictive value of 93% (95% CI, 87%-98%). Patients scoring more than 0.183 on COWS showed a RR of developing critical illness of 8.07 (95% CI, 4.97-11.1). Conclusions: COWS accurately identify patients who are unlikely to need intensive care unit (ICU) admission, preserving resources for the remaining high-risk patients.openopenBoero, Enrico; Rovida, Serena; Schreiber, Annia; Berchialla, Paola; Charrier, Lorena; Cravino, Marta Maria; Converso, Marcella; Gollini, Paola; Puppo, Mattia; Gravina, Angela; Fornelli, Giorgia; Labarile, Giulia; Sciacca, Santi; Bove, Tiziana; Karakitsos, Dimitrios; Aprà, Franco; Blaivas, Michael; Vetrugno, LuigiBoero, Enrico; Rovida, Serena; Schreiber, Annia; Berchialla, Paola; Charrier, Lorena; Cravino, Marta Maria; Converso, Marcella; Gollini, Paola; Puppo, Mattia; Gravina, Angela; Fornelli, Giorgia; Labarile, Giulia; Sciacca, Santi; Bove, Tiziana; Karakitsos, Dimitrios; Aprà, Franco; Blaivas, Michael; Vetrugno, Luig

Nutrigenomics and Nutrigenetics in Metabolic- (Dysfunction) Associated Fatty Liver Disease: Novel Insights and Future Perspectives

Metabolic- (dysfunction) associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) represents the predominant hepatopathy and one of the most important systemic, metabolic-related disorders all over the world associated with severe medical and socio-economic repercussions due to its growing prevalence, clinical course (steatohepatitis and/or hepatocellular-carcinoma), and related extra-hepatic comorbidities. To date, no specific medications for the treatment of this condition exist, and the most valid recommendation for patients remains lifestyle change. MAFLD has been associated with metabolic syndrome; its development and progression are widely influenced by the interplay between genetic, environmental, and nutritional factors. Nutrigenetics and nutrigenomics findings suggest nutrition’s capability, by acting on the individual genetic background and modifying the specific epigenetic expression as well, to influence patients’ clinical outcome. Besides, immunity response is emerging as pivotal in this multifactorial scenario, suggesting the interaction between diet, genetics, and immunity as another tangled network that needs to be explored. The present review describes the genetic background contribution to MAFLD onset and worsening, its possibility to be influenced by nutritional habits, and the interplay between nutrients and immunity as one of the most promising research fields of the future in this context

Boceprevir or telaprevir in hepatitis C virus chronic infection: The Italian real life experience

AIM: To check the safety and efficacy of boceprevir/ telaprevir with peginterferon/ribavirin for hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 in the real-world settings. METHODS: This study was a non-randomized, observational, prospective, multicenter. This study involved 47 centers in Italy. A database was prepared for the homogenous collection of the data, was used by all of the centers for data collection, and was updated continuously. All of the patients enrolled in this study were older than 18 years of age and were diagnosed with chronic infection due to HCV genotype 1. The HCV RNA testing was performed using COBAS-TaqMan2.0 (Roche, LLQ 25 IU/mL). RESULTS: All consecutively treated patients were included. Forty-seven centers enrolled 834 patients as follows: Male 64%; median age 57 (range 18-78), of whom 18.3% were over 65; mean body mass index 25.6 (range 16-39); genotype 1b (79.4%); diagnosis of cirrhosis (38.2%); and fibrosis F3/4 (71.2%). The following drugs were used: Telaprevir (66.2%) and PEG-IFN-alpha2a (67.6%). Patients were naïve (24.4%), relapsers (30.5%), partial responders (14.8%) and null responders (30.3%). Overall, adverse events (AEs) occurred in 617 patients (73.9%) during the treatment. Anemia was the most frequent AE (52.9% of cases), especially in cirrhotic. The therapy was stopped for 14.6% of the patients because of adverse events or virological failure (15%). Sustained virological response was achieved in 62.7% of the cases, but was 43.8% in cirrhotic patients over 65 years of age. CONCLUSION: In everyday practice, triple therapy is safe but has moderate efficacy, especially for patients over 65 years of age, with advanced fibrosis, nonresponders to peginterferon + ribavirin

Tocilizumab for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. The single-arm TOCIVID-19 prospective trial

BackgroundTocilizumab blocks pro-inflammatory activity of interleukin-6 (IL-6), involved in pathogenesis of pneumonia the most frequent cause of death in COVID-19 patients.MethodsA multicenter, single-arm, hypothesis-driven trial was planned, according to a phase 2 design, to study the effect of tocilizumab on lethality rates at 14 and 30 days (co-primary endpoints, a priori expected rates being 20 and 35%, respectively). A further prospective cohort of patients, consecutively enrolled after the first cohort was accomplished, was used as a secondary validation dataset. The two cohorts were evaluated jointly in an exploratory multivariable logistic regression model to assess prognostic variables on survival.ResultsIn the primary intention-to-treat (ITT) phase 2 population, 180/301 (59.8%) subjects received tocilizumab, and 67 deaths were observed overall. Lethality rates were equal to 18.4% (97.5% CI: 13.6-24.0, P=0.52) and 22.4% (97.5% CI: 17.2-28.3, P<0.001) at 14 and 30 days, respectively. Lethality rates were lower in the validation dataset, that included 920 patients. No signal of specific drug toxicity was reported. In the exploratory multivariable logistic regression analysis, older age and lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio negatively affected survival, while the concurrent use of steroids was associated with greater survival. A statistically significant interaction was found between tocilizumab and respiratory support, suggesting that tocilizumab might be more effective in patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline.ConclusionsTocilizumab reduced lethality rate at 30 days compared with null hypothesis, without significant toxicity. Possibly, this effect could be limited to patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline.Registration EudraCT (2020-001110-38); clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04317092)

Erratum to: Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) (Autophagy, 12, 1, 1-222, 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356

non present