Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Review of the Literature

In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the spread of SARS-CoV-2 a global pandemic. To date, coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) has spread to over 200 countries, leading to over 1.6 million cases and over 99,000 deaths. Given that there is neither a vaccine nor proven treatment for COVID-19, there is currently an urgent need for effective pharmacotherapy. To address the need for an effective treatment of SARS-CoV-2 during the worldwide pandemic, this systematic review of intravenous (IV) remdesivir was performed. Remdesivir, an anti-viral prodrug originally developed to treat Ebola virus disease, has shown broad spectrum activity against the Coronavirus family. A recent case report reported improvement of clinical symptoms with remdesivir in a patient with COVID-19. After conducting a systematic search of 18 clinical trial registries and three large scientific databases, we identified 86 potentially eligible items. Following removal of duplicates (n = 21), eligible studies were reviewed independently by two authors. After the first round of screening, inter-rater agreement was 98.5% (κ = 0.925). After the second round of full-text screening, inter-rater agreement was 100%. A total of seven ongoing and recruiting clinical trials of remdesivir (100-200 milligrams, intravenous [IV]) were included. We identified the following primary outcomes: patients discharged (n = 2); time to clinical status improvement (n = 2); improved O2 saturation (n = 2); body temperature normalization (n = 2); and clinical status (n = 1). Secondary outcomes in all identified studies included documentation of adverse events. Phase 3 trials are expected to be completed between April 2020–2023. Therefore, despite supportive data from in vitro and in vivo studies, the clinical effectiveness of IV remdesivir for treatment of COVID-19 and potential side effects remain incompletely defined in the human population

Reduced perineuronal net expression in Fmr1 KO mice auditory cortex and amygdala is linked to impaired fear-associated memory.

Fragile X Syndrome (FXS) is a leading cause of heritable intellectual disability and autism. Humans with FXS show anxiety, sensory hypersensitivity and impaired learning. The mechanisms of learning impairments can be studied in the mouse model of FXS, the Fmr1 KO mouse, using tone-associated fear memory paradigms. Our previous study reported impaired development of parvalbumin (PV) positive interneurons and perineuronal nets (PNN) in the auditory cortex of Fmr1 KO mice. A recent study suggested PNN dynamics in the auditory cortex following tone-shock association is necessary for fear expression. Together these data suggest that abnormal PNN regulation may underlie tone-fear association learning deficits in Fmr1 KO mice. We tested this hypothesis by quantifying PV and PNN expression in the amygdala, hippocampus and auditory cortex of Fmr1 KO mice following fear conditioning. We found impaired tone-associated memory formation in Fmr1 KO mice. This was paralleled by impaired learning-associated regulation of PNNs in the superficial layers of auditory cortex in Fmr1 KO mice. PV cell density decreased in the auditory cortex in response to fear conditioning in both WT and Fmr1 KO mice. Learning-induced increase of PV expression in the CA3 hippocampus was only observed in WT mice. We also found reduced PNN density in the amygdala and auditory cortex of Fmr1 KO mice in all conditions, as well as reduced PNN intensity in CA2 hippocampus. There was a positive correlation between tone-associated memory and PNN density in the amygdala and auditory cortex, consistent with a tone-association deficit. Altogether our studies suggest a link between impaired PV and PNN regulation within specific regions of the fear conditioning circuit and impaired tone memory formation in Fmr1 KO mice

Depression Stigma and Depression Stigma Among University Students: A Five Nation Survey

Depression disorders have increased markedly as a source of disability worldwide. These trends are broadly mirrored in the university setting. Moreover, most students do not seek treatment for depression in-part due to social stigma surrounding depression. However, how depression severity and social stigma vary between universities worldwide remains unknown. As a result, this cross-sectional study was performed to determine differences in depressive disorders and stigmatized beliefs between students from five countries. A survey containing Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and Depression Stigma Scale (DSS) was distributed to universities in the United States, Taiwan, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Czech Republic. Depression, stigmatized of personal views, and stigmatized perceptions about depression were compared between students in each nation using ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey tests. Responses were obtained from the United States (n=593), Taiwan (n=217), United Arab Emirates (n=134), Egypt (n=105), and Czech Republic (n=238). Of 1287 responses, 30.7% screened positive for a depressive disorder. Students from the United Arab Emirates exhibited more depression followed by students from the Czech Republic, Untied States, and Taiwan (