84 research outputs found

    Autoantibodies neutralizing type I IFNs are present in ~4% of uninfected individuals over 70 years old and account for ~20% of COVID-19 deaths

    Get PDF
    Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The Authors, some rights reserved.Circulating autoantibodies (auto-Abs) neutralizing high concentrations (10 ng/ml; in plasma diluted 1:10) of IFN-alpha and/or IFN-omega are found in about 10% of patients with critical COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pneumonia but not in individuals with asymptomatic infections. We detect auto-Abs neutralizing 100-fold lower, more physiological, concentrations of IFN-alpha and/or IFN-omega (100 pg/ml; in 1:10 dilutions of plasma) in 13.6% of 3595 patients with critical COVID-19, including 21% of 374 patients >80 years, and 6.5% of 522 patients with severe COVID-19. These antibodies are also detected in 18% of the 1124 deceased patients (aged 20 days to 99 years; mean: 70 years). Moreover, another 1.3% of patients with critical COVID-19 and 0.9% of the deceased patients have auto-Abs neutralizing high concentrations of IFN-beta. We also show, in a sample of 34,159 uninfected individuals from the general population, that auto-Abs neutralizing high concentrations of IFN-alpha and/or IFN-omega are present in 0.18% of individuals between 18 and 69 years, 1.1% between 70 and 79 years, and 3.4% >80 years. Moreover, the proportion of individuals carrying auto-Abs neutralizing lower concentrations is greater in a subsample of 10,778 uninfected individuals: 1% of individuals 80 years. By contrast, auto-Abs neutralizing IFN-beta do not become more frequent with age. Auto-Abs neutralizing type I IFNs predate SARS-CoV-2 infection and sharply increase in prevalence after the age of 70 years. They account for about 20% of both critical COVID-19 cases in the over 80s and total fatal COVID-19 cases.Peer reviewe

    Higher COVID-19 pneumonia risk associated with anti-IFN-α than with anti-IFN-ω auto-Abs in children

    Full text link
    We found that 19 (10.4%) of 183 unvaccinated children hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia had autoantibodies (auto-Abs) neutralizing type I IFNs (IFN-alpha 2 in 10 patients: IFN-alpha 2 only in three, IFN-alpha 2 plus IFN-omega in five, and IFN-alpha 2, IFN-omega plus IFN-beta in two; IFN-omega only in nine patients). Seven children (3.8%) had Abs neutralizing at least 10 ng/ml of one IFN, whereas the other 12 (6.6%) had Abs neutralizing only 100 pg/ml. The auto-Abs neutralized both unglycosylated and glycosylated IFNs. We also detected auto-Abs neutralizing 100 pg/ml IFN-alpha 2 in 4 of 2,267 uninfected children (0.2%) and auto-Abs neutralizing IFN-omega in 45 children (2%). The odds ratios (ORs) for life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia were, therefore, higher for auto-Abs neutralizing IFN-alpha 2 only (OR [95% CI] = 67.6 [5.7-9,196.6]) than for auto-Abs neutralizing IFN-. only (OR [95% CI] = 2.6 [1.2-5.3]). ORs were also higher for auto-Abs neutralizing high concentrations (OR [95% CI] = 12.9 [4.6-35.9]) than for those neutralizing low concentrations (OR [95% CI] = 5.5 [3.1-9.6]) of IFN-omega and/or IFN-alpha 2

    Potential human transmission of amyloid β pathology: surveillance and risks

    Get PDF
    Studies in experimental animals show transmissibility of amyloidogenic proteins associated with prion diseases, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and other neurodegenerative diseases. Although these data raise potential concerns for public health, convincing evidence for human iatrogenic transmission only exists for prions and amyloid β after systemic injections of contaminated growth hormone extracts or dura mater grafts derived from cadavers. Even though these procedures are now obsolete, some reports raise the possibility of iatrogenic transmission of amyloid β through putatively contaminated neurosurgical equipment. Iatrogenic transmission of amyloid β might lead to amyloid deposition in the brain parenchyma and blood vessel walls, potentially resulting in cerebral amyloid angiopathy after several decades. Cerebral amyloid angiopathy can cause life-threatening brain haemorrhages; yet, there is no proof that the transmission of amyloid β can also lead to Alzheimer's dementia. Large, long-term epidemiological studies and sensitive, cost-efficient tools to detect amyloid are needed to better understand any potential routes of amyloid β transmission and to clarify whether other similar proteopathic seeds, such as tau or α-synuclein, can also be transferred iatrogenically

    The risk of COVID-19 death is much greater and age dependent with type I IFN autoantibodies

    Get PDF
    SignificanceThere is growing evidence that preexisting autoantibodies neutralizing type I interferons (IFNs) are strong determinants of life-threatening COVID-19 pneumonia. It is important to estimate their quantitative impact on COVID-19 mortality upon SARS-CoV-2 infection, by age and sex, as both the prevalence of these autoantibodies and the risk of COVID-19 death increase with age and are higher in men. Using an unvaccinated sample of 1,261 deceased patients and 34,159 individuals from the general population, we found that autoantibodies against type I IFNs strongly increased the SARS-CoV-2 infection fatality rate at all ages, in both men and women. Autoantibodies against type I IFNs are strong and common predictors of life-threatening COVID-19. Testing for these autoantibodies should be considered in the general population

    The risk of COVID-19 death is much greater and age dependent with type I IFN autoantibodies

    Get PDF
    Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection fatality rate (IFR) doubles with every 5 y of age from childhood onward. Circulating autoantibodies neutralizing IFN-α, IFN-ω, and/or IFN-β are found in ∼20% of deceased patients across age groups, and in ∼1% of individuals aged 4% of those >70 y old in the general population. With a sample of 1,261 unvaccinated deceased patients and 34,159 individuals of the general population sampled before the pandemic, we estimated both IFR and relative risk of death (RRD) across age groups for individuals carrying autoantibodies neutralizing type I IFNs, relative to noncarriers. The RRD associated with any combination of autoantibodies was higher in subjects under 70 y old. For autoantibodies neutralizing IFN-α2 or IFN-ω, the RRDs were 17.0 (95% CI: 11.7 to 24.7) and 5.8 (4.5 to 7.4) for individuals <70 y and ≥70 y old, respectively, whereas, for autoantibodies neutralizing both molecules, the RRDs were 188.3 (44.8 to 774.4) and 7.2 (5.0 to 10.3), respectively. In contrast, IFRs increased with age, ranging from 0.17% (0.12 to 0.31) for individuals <40 y old to 26.7% (20.3 to 35.2) for those ≥80 y old for autoantibodies neutralizing IFN-α2 or IFN-ω, and from 0.84% (0.31 to 8.28) to 40.5% (27.82 to 61.20) for autoantibodies neutralizing both. Autoantibodies against type I IFNs increase IFRs, and are associated with high RRDs, especially when neutralizing both IFN-α2 and IFN-ω. Remarkably, IFRs increase with age, whereas RRDs decrease with age. Autoimmunity to type I IFNs is a strong and common predictor of COVID-19 death.The Laboratory of Human Genetics of Infectious Diseases is supported by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute; The Rockefeller University; the St. Giles Foundation; the NIH (Grants R01AI088364 and R01AI163029); the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; NIH Clinical and Translational Science Awards program (Grant UL1 TR001866); a Fast Grant from Emergent Ventures; Mercatus Center at George Mason University; the Yale Center for Mendelian Genomics and the Genome Sequencing Program Coordinating Center funded by the National Human Genome Research Institute (Grants UM1HG006504 and U24HG008956); the Yale High Performance Computing Center (Grant S10OD018521); the Fisher Center for Alzheimer’s Research Foundation; the Meyer Foundation; the JPB Foundation; the French National Research Agency (ANR) under the “Investments for the Future” program (Grant ANR-10-IAHU-01); the Integrative Biology of Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratory of Excellence (Grant ANR-10-LABX-62-IBEID); the French Foundation for Medical Research (FRM) (Grant EQU201903007798); the French Agency for Research on AIDS and Viral hepatitis (ANRS) Nord-Sud (Grant ANRS-COV05); the ANR GENVIR (Grant ANR-20-CE93-003), AABIFNCOV (Grant ANR-20-CO11-0001), CNSVIRGEN (Grant ANR-19-CE15-0009-01), and GenMIS-C (Grant ANR-21-COVR-0039) projects; the Square Foundation; Grandir–Fonds de solidarité pour l’Enfance; the Fondation du Souffle; the SCOR Corporate Foundation for Science; The French Ministry of Higher Education, Research, and Innovation (Grant MESRI-COVID-19); Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), REACTing-INSERM; and the University Paris Cité. P. Bastard was supported by the FRM (Award EA20170638020). P. Bastard., J.R., and T.L.V. were supported by the MD-PhD program of the Imagine Institute (with the support of Fondation Bettencourt Schueller). Work at the Neurometabolic Disease lab received funding from Centre for Biomedical Research on Rare Diseases (CIBERER) (Grant ACCI20-767) and the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement 824110 (EASI Genomics). Work in the Laboratory of Virology and Infectious Disease was supported by the NIH (Grants P01AI138398-S1, 2U19AI111825, and R01AI091707-10S1), a George Mason University Fast Grant, and the G. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers Charitable Foundation. The Infanta Leonor University Hospital supported the research of the Department of Internal Medicine and Allergology. The French COVID Cohort study group was sponsored by INSERM and supported by the REACTing consortium and by a grant from the French Ministry of Health (Grant PHRC 20-0424). The Cov-Contact Cohort was supported by the REACTing consortium, the French Ministry of Health, and the European Commission (Grant RECOVER WP 6). This work was also partly supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, NIH (Grants ZIA AI001270 to L.D.N. and 1ZIAAI001265 to H.C.S.). This program is supported by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (Grant ANR-10-LABX-69-01). K.K.’s group was supported by the Estonian Research Council, through Grants PRG117 and PRG377. R.H. was supported by an Al Jalila Foundation Seed Grant (Grant AJF202019), Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and a COVID-19 research grant (Grant CoV19-0307) from the University of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. S.G.T. is supported by Investigator and Program Grants awarded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and a University of New South Wales COVID Rapid Response Initiative Grant. L.I. reports funding from Regione Lombardia, Italy (project “Risposta immune in pazienti con COVID-19 e co-morbidità”). This research was partially supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Grant COV20/0968). J.R.H. reports funding from Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (Grant HHSO10201600031C). S.O. reports funding from Research Program on Emerging and Re-emerging Infectious Diseases from Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (Grant JP20fk0108531). G.G. was supported by the ANR Flash COVID-19 program and SARS-CoV-2 Program of the Faculty of Medicine from Sorbonne University iCOVID programs. The 3C Study was conducted under a partnership agreement between INSERM, Victor Segalen Bordeaux 2 University, and Sanofi-Aventis. The Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale funded the preparation and initiation of the study. The 3C Study was also supported by the Caisse Nationale d’Assurance Maladie des Travailleurs Salariés, Direction générale de la Santé, Mutuelle Générale de l’Education Nationale, Institut de la Longévité, Conseils Régionaux of Aquitaine and Bourgogne, Fondation de France, and Ministry of Research–INSERM Program “Cohortes et collections de données biologiques.” S. Debette was supported by the University of Bordeaux Initiative of Excellence. P.K.G. reports funding from the National Cancer Institute, NIH, under Contract 75N91019D00024, Task Order 75N91021F00001. J.W. is supported by a Research Foundation - Flanders (FWO) Fundamental Clinical Mandate (Grant 1833317N). Sample processing at IrsiCaixa was possible thanks to the crowdfunding initiative YoMeCorono. Work at Vall d’Hebron was also partly supported by research funding from Instituto de Salud Carlos III Grant PI17/00660 cofinanced by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF/FEDER). C.R.-G. and colleagues from the Canarian Health System Sequencing Hub were supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (Grants COV20_01333 and COV20_01334), the Spanish Ministry for Science and Innovation (RTC-2017-6471-1; AEI/FEDER, European Union), Fundación DISA (Grants OA18/017 and OA20/024), and Cabildo Insular de Tenerife (Grants CGIEU0000219140 and “Apuestas científicas del ITER para colaborar en la lucha contra la COVID-19”). T.H.M. was supported by grants from the Novo Nordisk Foundation (Grants NNF20OC0064890 and NNF21OC0067157). C.M.B. is supported by a Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research Health Professional-Investigator Award. P.Q.H. and L. Hammarström were funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (Antibody Therapy Against Coronavirus consortium, Grant 101003650). Work at Y.-L.L.’s laboratory in the University of Hong Kong (HKU) was supported by the Society for the Relief of Disabled Children. MBBS/PhD study of D.L. in HKU was supported by the Croucher Foundation. J.L.F. was supported in part by the Evaluation-Orientation de la Coopération Scientifique (ECOS) Nord - Coopération Scientifique France-Colombie (ECOS-Nord/Columbian Administrative department of Science, Technology and Innovation [COLCIENCIAS]/Colombian Ministry of National Education [MEN]/Colombian Institute of Educational Credit and Technical Studies Abroad [ICETEX, Grant 806-2018] and Colciencias Contract 713-2016 [Code 111574455633]). A. Klocperk was, in part, supported by Grants NU20-05-00282 and NV18-05-00162 issued by the Czech Health Research Council and Ministry of Health, Czech Republic. L.P. was funded by Program Project COVID-19 OSR-UniSR and Ministero della Salute (Grant COVID-2020-12371617). I.M. is a Senior Clinical Investigator at the Research Foundation–Flanders and is supported by the CSL Behring Chair of Primary Immunodeficiencies (PID); by the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven C1 Grant C16/18/007; by a Flanders Institute for Biotechnology-Grand Challenges - PID grant; by the FWO Grants G0C8517N, G0B5120N, and G0E8420N; and by the Jeffrey Modell Foundation. I.M. has received funding under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (Grant Agreement 948959). E.A. received funding from the Hellenic Foundation for Research and Innovation (Grant INTERFLU 1574). M. Vidigal received funding from the São Paulo Research Foundation (Grant 2020/09702-1) and JBS SA (Grant 69004). The NH-COVAIR study group consortium was supported by a grant from the Meath Foundation.Peer reviewe

    Perception et mémoire des visages

    No full text
    Tiberghien Guy. Perception et mémoire des visages. In: Intellectica. Revue de l'Association pour la Recherche Cognitive, n°5, 1988/1. Perception visuelle. pp. 89-111

    Psychologie scientifique et pédagogie de la mémoire

    No full text
    Scientific psychology and pedagogy of the memory - Scientific answers to three questions that every educator asks will allow the settlement of a new pedagogy of the memory : 1) Does memory exist ? 2) Is memory no more than a passive fact ? 3) Do memory and intelligence have to be opposed ? Conclusion : the loss of value of the memory in the ideas has no connection in any way with the data obtained by scientific investigations in psychology. The main patterns of the memory functioning have to be known in the practice of pedagogy. Bibliography. Graphics.Des réponses scientifiques aux trois questions que se pose tout éducateur permettront de fonder une nouvelle pédagogie de la mémoire : 1) la mémoire existe-t-elle ? 2) la mémoire n'est-elle qu'un phénomène passif ? 3) faut-il opposer la mémoire à l'intelligence ? En conclusion : la dévalorisation idéologique de la mémoire ne correspond en aucune manière aux données recueillies par l'investigation scientifique en psychologie. Les caractéristiques essentielles du fonctionnement mnésique ne peuvent être ignorées dans la pratique pédagogique. Bibliographie. Graphiques.Psícologia científica y pedagogía de la memona - Las repuestas cientificas a las tres preguntas que se hace todo educador, permitiran crear una nueva pedagogía de la memoria : 1) ¿ existe la memoria ? 2) ¿ es la memoria no mas que un fenómeno pasivo ? 3) ¿ hay que oponer la memoria a la inteligencia ? En conclusion : la desvalorización ideologica de la memoría no corresponde, de ninguna manera, con los datos recogidos por la investigación cientifica en psicología. Las caracteristicas esenciales del funcionamiento mnesico no pueden permanecer desconocidas en la pratica pedagógica. Bibliografía. Gráficos.Tiberghien Guy. Psychologie scientifique et pédagogie de la mémoire. In: Revue française de pédagogie, volume 18, 1972. pp. 32-40

    Influence du renforcement sur l'évolution de la certitude et du temps de décision dans le jugement perceptif

    No full text
    24 students are put in a situation of perceptive judgement. They have to choose the shorter of two lengths simultaneously shown on the screen of a tachistoscope. The latency of each decision-time is recorded and the subfect has to give his confidence judgement by a conventional metric scale. The subjects are randomly assigned in four experimental groups. In each group, the judgements of the subjects are confirmed in these a priori ratios : πa = 20 %, πb = 40 %, πc = 60 %, πd = 80 %. The results show that the confidence judgements of these groups are significatively different according to each confirmation ratio. If the reinforcement is stopped, the results are yet significatively different but a beginning of extinction is observed. However, the confirmation ratio seems have no influence on the evolution of the time-decision. The differenciation of the confidence judgements observed in this experiment is due to the influence of conditional processes. The results concerning to the decision-time let to suppose a « confidence judgement-time » and the hypothetical relations between the internal confidence and the verbal confidence.On place 24 étudiants dans une situation de jugement perceptif. Ceux-ci doivent choisir la plus courte de deux longueurs présentées simultanément sur l'écran d'un tachistoscope. On enregistre la latence de chaque réponse décisoire (Temps de décision) et on demande au sujet d'exprimer verbalement le degré de certitude qu'il y attache à l'aide d'une échelle métrique conventionnelle. Les sujets sont répartis au hasard en quatre groupes expérimentaux. En fonction de leur appartenance à l'un ou l'autre de ces groupes les sujets voient leurs jugements confirmés selon des taux déterminés a priori : πa = 20 %, πb = 40 %, πc = 60 % et πd = 80 %. On constate que les niveaux de certitude de ces groupes se différencient de façon très significative en fonction du taux de confirmation qui leur a été administré. D'ailleurs si l'on interrompt l'application du renforcement la différenciation subsiste mais semble affectée par un début d'extinction. Cet effet différentiateur du taux de confirmation ne se retrouve cependant pas en ce qui concerne l'évolution du temps de décision. La différenciation des niveaux de certitude observée dans cette expérimentation est attribuée à l'influence de processus de type conditionnel. Les résultats relatifs au temps de décision ont permis d'évoquer l'existence supposée d'un « temps d'expression de la certitude », ainsi que les relations hypothétiques entre la certitude interne et la certitude verbalisée.Tiberghien Guy. Influence du renforcement sur l'évolution de la certitude et du temps de décision dans le jugement perceptif. In: L'année psychologique. 1967 vol. 67, n°1. pp. 73-87
    corecore