miR-155: A Potential Biomarker for Predicting Mortality in COVID-19 Patients

COVID-19, a pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome caused by Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), continues to pose diagnostic and therapeutic challenges due to its unpredictable clinical course. Prognostic biomarkers may improve care by enabling quick identification of patients who can be safely discharged home versus those who may need careful respiratory monitoring and support. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) have risen to prominence as biomarkers for many disease states and as tools to assist in medical decisions. In the present study, we aimed to examine circulating miRNAs in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and to explore their potential as biomarkers for disease severity. We studied, by quantitative PCR, the expressions of miR-21, miR-146a, miR-146b, miR-155, and miR-499 in peripheral blood. We found that mild COVID-19 patients had 2.5-fold less circulating miR-155 than healthy people, and patients with a severe COVID-19 disease had 5-fold less circulating miR-155 than healthy people. In addition, we found that miR-155 is a good predictor of COVID-19 mortality. We suggest that examining miR-155 levels in patients’ blood, upon admission to hospital, will ameliorate the care given to COVID-19 patients

Fetal congenital heart disease - mode of delivery and obstetrical complications

Abstract Background The optimal mode of delivery in cases of fetal congenital heart disease (CHD) is not established. The few relevant studies did not address operative vaginal delivery. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of fetal CHD on mode of delivery during a trial of labor, and to secondarily describe some obstetric complications. Methods The database of a tertiary medical center was searched for women who gave birth to a singleton, liveborn neonate in 2015–2018. Mode of delivery was compared between women carrying a fetus with known CHD and women with a healthy fetus matched 1:5 for maternal age, parity, body mass index, and gestational age. Results The cohort included 616 women, 105 in the CHD group and 511 in the control group. The rate of operative vaginal delivery was significantly higher in the CHD group (18.09% vs 9.78%, OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.13–3.63, p = 0.01); the difference remained significant after adjustment for nulliparity and gestational age at delivery (aOR 2.58, 95% CI 1.36–4.9, p < 0.01). There was no difference between the CHD and control group in rate of intrapartum cesarean delivery (9.52% vs 10.76%, respectively, OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.47–1.98, p = 0.93). The most common indication for operative vaginal delivery was non-reassuring fetal heart rate (78.94% vs 64%, respectively). Median birth weight percentile was significantly lower in the CHD group (45th vs 53rd percentile, p = 0.04). Conclusions Our findings suggest that operative vaginal delivery, performed mostly because of non-reassuring fetal heart rate, is more common in pregnancies complicated by a prenatal diagnosis of CHD than non-anomalous pregnancies

Ursodeoxycholic acid in intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy

Background: Ursodeoxycholic acid is commonly used to treat intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, yet its largest trial detected minimal benefit for a composite outcome (stillbirth, preterm birth, and neonatal unit admission). We aimed to examine whether ursodeoxycholic acid affects specific adverse perinatal outcomes. Methods: In this systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Global Health, MIDIRS, and Cochrane without language restrictions for relevant articles published between database inception, and Jan 1, 2020, using search terms referencing intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, ursodeoxycholic acid, and perinatal outcomes. Eligible studies had 30 or more study participants and reported on at least one individual with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy and bile acid concentrations of 40 μmol/L or more. We also included two unpublished cohort studies. Individual participant data were collected from the authors of selected studies. The primary outcome was the prevalence of stillbirth, for which we anticipated there would be insufficient data to achieve statistical power. Therefore, we included a composite of stillbirth and preterm birth as a main secondary outcome. A mixed-effects meta-analysis was done using multi-level modelling and adjusting for bile acid concentration, parity, and multifetal pregnancy. Individual participant data analyses were done for all studies and in different subgroups, which were produced by limiting analyses to randomised controlled trials only, singleton pregnancies only, or two-arm studies only. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019131495. Findings: The authors of the 85 studies fulfilling our inclusion criteria were contacted. Individual participant data from 6974 women in 34 studies were included in the meta-analysis, of whom 4726 (67·8%) took ursodeoxycholic acid. Stillbirth occurred in 35 (0·7%) of 5097 fetuses among women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy treated with ursodeoxycholic acid and in 12 (0·6%) of 2038 fetuses among women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy not treated with ursodeoxycholic acid (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·04, 95% CI 0·35–3·07; p=0·95). Ursodeoxycholic acid treatment also had no effect on the prevalence of stillbirth when considering only randomised controlled trials (aOR 0·29, 95% CI 0·04–2·42; p=0·25). Ursodeoxycholic acid treatment had no effect on the prevalence of the composite outcome in all studies (aOR 1·28, 95% CI 0·86–1·91; p=0·22), but was associated with a reduced composite outcome when considering only randomised controlled trials (0·60, 0·39–0·91; p=0·016). Interpretation: Ursodeoxycholic acid treatment had no significant effect on the prevalence of stillbirth in women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, but our analysis was probably limited by the low overall event rate. However, when considering only randomised controlled trials, ursodeoxycholic acid was associated with a reduction in stillbirth in combination with preterm birth, providing evidence for the clinical benefit of antenatal ursodeoxycholic acid treatment. Funding: Tommy's, the Wellcome Trust, ICP Support, and the National Institute for Health Research.</p

Ursodeoxycholic acid in intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis

Background: Ursodeoxycholic acid is commonly used to treat intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, yet its largest trial detected minimal benefit for a composite outcome (stillbirth, preterm birth, and neonatal unit admission). We aimed to examine whether ursodeoxycholic acid affects specific adverse perinatal outcomes. Methods: In this systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Global Health, MIDIRS, and Cochrane without language restrictions for relevant articles published between database inception, and Jan 1, 2020, using search terms referencing intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, ursodeoxycholic acid, and perinatal outcomes. Eligible studies had 30 or more study participants and reported on at least one individual with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy and bile acid concentrations of 40 μmol/L or more. We also included two unpublished cohort studies. Individual participant data were collected from the authors of selected studies. The primary outcome was the prevalence of stillbirth, for which we anticipated there would be insufficient data to achieve statistical power. Therefore, we included a composite of stillbirth and preterm birth as a main secondary outcome. A mixed-effects meta-analysis was done using multi-level modelling and adjusting for bile acid concentration, parity, and multifetal pregnancy. Individual participant data analyses were done for all studies and in different subgroups, which were produced by limiting analyses to randomised controlled trials only, singleton pregnancies only, or two-arm studies only. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019131495. Findings: The authors of the 85 studies fulfilling our inclusion criteria were contacted. Individual participant data from 6974 women in 34 studies were included in the meta-analysis, of whom 4726 (67·8%) took ursodeoxycholic acid. Stillbirth occurred in 35 (0·7%) of 5097 fetuses among women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy treated with ursodeoxycholic acid and in 12 (0·6%) of 2038 fetuses among women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy not treated with ursodeoxycholic acid (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1·04, 95% CI 0·35–3·07; p=0·95). Ursodeoxycholic acid treatment also had no effect on the prevalence of stillbirth when considering only randomised controlled trials (aOR 0·29, 95% CI 0·04–2·42; p=0·25). Ursodeoxycholic acid treatment had no effect on the prevalence of the composite outcome in all studies (aOR 1·28, 95% CI 0·86–1·91; p=0·22), but was associated with a reduced composite outcome when considering only randomised controlled trials (0·60, 0·39–0·91; p=0·016). Interpretation: Ursodeoxycholic acid treatment had no significant effect on the prevalence of stillbirth in women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, but our analysis was probably limited by the low overall event rate. However, when considering only randomised controlled trials, ursodeoxycholic acid was associated with a reduction in stillbirth in combination with preterm birth, providing evidence for the clinical benefit of antenatal ursodeoxycholic acid treatment. Funding: Tommy's, the Wellcome Trust, ICP Support, and the National Institute for Health Research