Human Cytomegalovirus: detection of congenital and perinatal infection in Argentina

BACKGROUND: Human cytomegalovirus (CMV) is one of the most commonly found agents of congenital infections. Primary maternal infection is associated with risk of symptomatic congenital diseases, and high morbidity is frequently associated with very low birth weight. Neonates with asymptomatic infection develop various sequelae during infancy. This is the first Argentine study performed in neonates with congenital and postnatal HCMV infection. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique with different pairs of primers, to detect cytomegalovirus isolated in tissue cultures and directly in urine and dried blood spot (DBS) specimens. Results were compared with IgM detection. METHODS: The study was performed between 1999 and 2001 on routine samples in the Laboratory. A total of 61 urine and 56 serum samples were selected from 61 newborns/infants, 33 patients whose samples were analyzed during the first two to three weeks of life were considered congenital infections; the remaining 28 patients whose samples were taken later than the third week were grouped as perinatal infections, although only in 4 the perinatal transmission of infection was determined unequivocally Cytomegalovirus diagnosis was made by isolating the virus from urine samples in human foreskin fibroblast cells. Three different primer pairs directed to IE, LA and gB genes were used for the HCMV PCR assay in viral isolates. Subsequently, PCR and nested PCR (nPCR) assays with gB primers were performed directly in urine and in 11 samples of dried blood spot (DBS) on Guthrie Card, these results were then compared with serology. RESULTS: The main clinical manifestations of the 33 patients with congenital infection were purpura, jaundice, hepatomegaly and anaemia. Three patients presented low birth weight as single symptom, 10, intracranial calcifications, and 2, kidney failure. In the 28 patients grouped as with perinatal infection, anaemia, hepatosplenomegaly and enzymatic alteration were predominant, and 4 patients were HIV positive. The primers used to amplify the gB region had a PCR positivity rate of 100%, whereas those that amplified IE and LA regions had a PCR positivity rate of 54% and 61% respectively, in CMV isolates. Amplification by PCR of urine samples (with no previous DNA extraction), using primers for the gB region, detected 34/61 positive samples. Out of the 33 samples from patients with congenital infection, 24 (73%) were positive. When nPCR was used in these samples, all were positive, whereas in the remaining 28 patients, two negative cases were found. Cytomegalovirus DNA detection in 11 samples was also carried out in DBS: 7 DBS samples were positive and 4 were negative. CONCLUSIONS: Primers directed to the gB fragment region were the best choice for the detection of CMV DNA in positive isolates. In congenital infections, direct PCR in urine was positive in a high percentage (73%) of samples; however, in patients grouped as with perinatal infection only 36% of the cases were positive. With n-PCR, total sample positivity reached 97%. PCR technique performed in DBS allowed identifying congenital infection in four patients and to be confirmed in 3. These results show the value of nPCR for the detection of all cases of CMV infection. The assay offers the advantage that it may be performed within the normal working day and provides reliable results in a much shorter time frame than that required for either traditional tissue culture or the shell-viral assay

Follow-up care for cancer survivors: views of the younger adult

BACKGROUND: Since the launch of the National Cancer Survivorship Initiative, there has been a surge of interest surrounding the value and organisation of long-term follow-up care after cancer treatment. We report the views of 309 adult cancer survivors (aged 18-45 years) on provision of follow-up and preferences for care. METHODS: A total of 207 survivors completed questionnaires before and after routine consultant-led follow-up appointments and 102 were recruited by post. Measures of health status (including late effects, perceived vulnerability to late effects and quality of life), reasons for attending follow-up (clinical and supportive), issues to be discussed at follow-up and preferences for different models of care were assessed. RESULTS: In all, 59% of the survivors reported experiencing one or more cancer-related health problems. Survivors rated clinical reasons for attending follow-up more highly than supportive reasons (P < 0.001), although nutritional advice and counselling were considered useful (60 and 47%, respectively). Those still receiving scheduled follow-up appointments did not discuss the range of issues intended with 'late effects' and 'fertility', which were particularly under-discussed. Hospital rather than GP follow-up was more highly rated. CONCLUSION: Survivors value the clinical reassurance currently provided by consultant-led care. However, supportive needs are not systematically addressed. Multi-disciplinary services are recommended to meet supportive needs in addition to clinical care

Determinants of recovery from post-COVID-19 dyspnoea: analysis of UK prospective cohorts of hospitalised COVID-19 patients and community-based controls

Background The risk factors for recovery from COVID-19 dyspnoea are poorly understood. We investigated determinants of recovery from dyspnoea in adults with COVID-19 and compared these to determinants of recovery from non-COVID-19 dyspnoea. Methods We used data from two prospective cohort studies: PHOSP-COVID (patients hospitalised between March 2020 and April 2021 with COVID-19) and COVIDENCE UK (community cohort studied over the same time period). PHOSP-COVID data were collected during hospitalisation and at 5-month and 1-year follow-up visits. COVIDENCE UK data were obtained through baseline and monthly online questionnaires. Dyspnoea was measured in both cohorts with the Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify determinants associated with a reduction in dyspnoea between 5-month and 1-year follow-up. Findings We included 990 PHOSP-COVID and 3309 COVIDENCE UK participants. We observed higher odds of improvement between 5-month and 1-year follow-up among PHOSP-COVID participants who were younger (odds ratio 1.02 per year, 95% CI 1.01–1.03), male (1.54, 1.16–2.04), neither obese nor severely obese (1.82, 1.06–3.13 and 4.19, 2.14–8.19, respectively), had no pre-existing anxiety or depression (1.56, 1.09–2.22) or cardiovascular disease (1.33, 1.00–1.79), and shorter hospital admission (1.01 per day, 1.00–1.02). Similar associations were found in those recovering from non-COVID-19 dyspnoea, excluding age (and length of hospital admission). Interpretation Factors associated with dyspnoea recovery at 1-year post-discharge among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 were similar to those among community controls without COVID-19. Funding PHOSP-COVID is supported by a grant from the MRC-UK Research and Innovation and the Department of Health and Social Care through the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) rapid response panel to tackle COVID-19. The views expressed in the publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the National Health Service (NHS), the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. COVIDENCE UK is supported by the UK Research and Innovation, the National Institute for Health Research, and Barts Charity. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the funders

Clinical characteristics with inflammation profiling of long COVID and association with 1-year recovery following hospitalisation in the UK: a prospective observational study

Background No effective pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions exist for patients with long COVID. We aimed to describe recovery 1 year after hospital discharge for COVID-19, identify factors associated with patient-perceived recovery, and identify potential therapeutic targets by describing the underlying inflammatory profiles of the previously described recovery clusters at 5 months after hospital discharge. Methods The Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) is a prospective, longitudinal cohort study recruiting adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from hospital with COVID-19 across the UK. Recovery was assessed using patient-reported outcome measures, physical performance, and organ function at 5 months and 1 year after hospital discharge, and stratified by both patient-perceived recovery and recovery cluster. Hierarchical logistic regression modelling was performed for patient-perceived recovery at 1 year. Cluster analysis was done using the clustering large applications k-medoids approach using clinical outcomes at 5 months. Inflammatory protein profiling was analysed from plasma at the 5-month visit. This study is registered on the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN10980107, and recruitment is ongoing. Findings 2320 participants discharged from hospital between March 7, 2020, and April 18, 2021, were assessed at 5 months after discharge and 807 (32·7%) participants completed both the 5-month and 1-year visits. 279 (35·6%) of these 807 patients were women and 505 (64·4%) were men, with a mean age of 58·7 (SD 12·5) years, and 224 (27·8%) had received invasive mechanical ventilation (WHO class 7–9). The proportion of patients reporting full recovery was unchanged between 5 months (501 [25·5%] of 1965) and 1 year (232 [28·9%] of 804). Factors associated with being less likely to report full recovery at 1 year were female sex (odds ratio 0·68 [95% CI 0·46–0·99]), obesity (0·50 [0·34–0·74]) and invasive mechanical ventilation (0·42 [0·23–0·76]). Cluster analysis (n=1636) corroborated the previously reported four clusters: very severe, severe, moderate with cognitive impairment, and mild, relating to the severity of physical health, mental health, and cognitive impairment at 5 months. We found increased inflammatory mediators of tissue damage and repair in both the very severe and the moderate with cognitive impairment clusters compared with the mild cluster, including IL-6 concentration, which was increased in both comparisons (n=626 participants). We found a substantial deficit in median EQ-5D-5L utility index from before COVID-19 (retrospective assessment; 0·88 [IQR 0·74–1·00]), at 5 months (0·74 [0·64–0·88]) to 1 year (0·75 [0·62–0·88]), with minimal improvements across all outcome measures at 1 year after discharge in the whole cohort and within each of the four clusters. Interpretation The sequelae of a hospital admission with COVID-19 were substantial 1 year after discharge across a range of health domains, with the minority in our cohort feeling fully recovered. Patient-perceived health-related quality of life was reduced at 1 year compared with before hospital admission. Systematic inflammation and obesity are potential treatable traits that warrant further investigation in clinical trials. Funding UK Research and Innovation and National Institute for Health Research