COVID-19 Clinical Features and Outcome in Italian Patients Treated with Biological Drugs Targeting Type 2 Inflammation

This is a multicentric investigation involving two Italian centers that examined the clinical course of COVID-19 in patients receiving biological therapy targeting type 2 inflammation and those not receiving biologicals. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the management of respiratory and allergic disorders and the potential impact of biological therapy in the most severe forms has been a point of uncertainty. Our multicentric investigation aimed to compare the clinical course of COVID-19 and the impact of vaccination in an Italian cohort of patients with atopic disorders caused by a type 2 inflammation, such as eosinophilic asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP), atopic dermatitis (AD), and chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). A questionnaire was given to patients coming to our outpatient clinic for the first evaluation or follow-up visit, asking for the clinical characteristics of the infection, the ongoing therapy during the infection, any relevant change, and the patient’s vaccination status. We enrolled 132 atopic patients from two Italian centers; 62 patients were on biological therapy at the time of infection (omalizumab 31%, mepolizumab 26%, benralizumab 19%, and dupilumab 24%). The median age was 56 (IQR 22.8) for patients on biologicals and 48 (IQR 26.5) for those not on biologicals (p = 0.028). The two groups were comparable in terms of sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking history, and systemic oral corticosteroid use (OCS). There were no significant differences in non-biological therapy and comorbidity between the two groups. The patients not on biological therapy had a prevalence of 87% for asthma, 52% for CRSwNP, 10% for CSU, and 6% for AD. The patients on biologicals had a prevalence of 93% for asthma, 17% for CRSwNP, and 10% for CSU. In our work, we observed that mAbs targeting type 2 inflammation in patients with COVID-19 appeared to be safe, with no worsening of symptoms, prolongation of infection, or increase in hospitalizations. Between the two groups, there were no significant differences in the duration of swab positivity (p = 0.45) and duration of symptoms (p = 0.38). During COVID-19, patients on biologicals experienced a significant increase in common cold-like symptoms (p = 0.038), dyspnea (p = 0.016), and more, but not significant, asthma exacerbations, with no significant differences between the different biologicals. Regarding the vaccination status, we observed that there was an increased number of hospitalizations among unvaccinated patients in both groups, although the difference did not reach statistical significance. No patients on biologicals reported safety issues or adverse effects associated with the use of biological treatments during COVID-19. Our investigation showed that mAbs against type 2 inflammation given during Coronavirus Disease 2019 are safe and do not impact the clinical course or main outcomes. Therefore, we found no signals suggesting that anti-Th2 biological therapy should be discontinued during SARS-CoV-2 infection. Controlled studies and analysis, including data from registries and real-life studies, are required to draw firm conclusions regarding the safety or possible advantages that anti-type 2 mAbs could offer in particular clinical contexts, such as infections

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy among Italian Healthcare Workers: Latent Profiles and Their Relationships to Predictors and Outcome

Vaccine hesitancy and conspiracy beliefs among healthcare workers (HCWs) represent operational priorities that require urgent attention. Identifying and classifying specific subpopulation of hesitancy is crucial to customize educational and intervention strategies to enhance the acceptance and uptake rate of vaccination. Thus, the main purpose of our study was to empirically identify latent profiles of vaccine hesitancy among Italian HCWs adopting a person-centered approach and investigating their relationships with antecedents and intention to get a fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccine. We conducted latent profile analyses (LPA) to identify different configurations of vaccine hesitancy based on five antecedents of vaccination: confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation, and collective responsibility among a sample of Italian HCWs (n = 573). LPA revealed four distinct profiles: believer (61.5%), middler (24.7%), hesitant (9.00%), and rejecter (4.7%). Having conspiracy beliefs was associated with a greater likelihood of membership in all but believer. Finally, the likelihood of intention to get a fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccine was lowest in the rejector and hesitant profiles. Theoretical contributions and implications for practice are discussed

Calcinosis as the presenting sign of juvenile dermatomyositis in a 14-month-old boy.

We describe a 14-month-old child with dermatomyositis in whom calcinosis was the first sign of the disease. This case shows that calcinosis, usually a late complication of dermatomyositis, may be the presenting sign of the disease even in young children and when Gottron's sign is still absent and muscular weakness not prominent

Utilizzo del telerilevamento per l\u2019analisi della biodiversit\ue0 strutturale: il caso studio della Riserva Forestale di Cl\uf6ise (Asiago, VI)

The Forest Reserve called \u201cCl\uf6ise\u201d is located on the Asiago Plateau (VI). It has an extension of about 17 ha, occupied by a mixed forest with Spruce (Picea abies) Fir (Abies alba) and Beech (Fagus sylvatica) and without cutting activities since 60 years. In 2009 a permanent monitoring area of 1 hectare was established within the reserve with the aim of analyzing the structure and the forest dynamics without significant human disturbance. In July 2012 the entire forest reserve was covered by a LiDAR survey within the Alpine Project NEWFOR (NEW technologies for a better mountain forest timber mobilization). In the present work the preliminary results of the use of LiDAR technology for the analysis of structural biodiversity of the forest are presented. The data obtained from field measurements (position, height, species, canopy, projection) have been used to validate the same information extracted from the CHM. The field surveys show a good level of structural biodiversity even if the influence of past silvicultural treatments is still evident. The validation of the data extracted from LiDAR with the ground truth showed a good correspondence for what concerns the extraction of information regarding the dominant trees while problems have been encountered for the analysis of the undergrowt

RECOGNITION OF LIVE HUMAN FACES BY PET DOGS

Several studies have focused on how dogs use visual information about human faces, but their ability to recognize the faces of familiar people is not yet understood. We tested 30 dogs on their ability to recognize their owners by using face information alone. In a series of two-choice tasks, dogs had to choose between their owner and a stranger, who wore identical clothes and stood behind an apparatus that allowed dogs to only see the people\u2019s legs and heads. In the TEST condition heads were not frontally oriented towards the dog and were illuminated by a spotlight, while a shower cap covered the people\u2019s hair. In the BASE condition, heads faced the dog, there was no spotlight and no cap. In the ODOR condition, only legs were visible. A choice was recorded when the dog overstepped the apparatus where one of the two people stood. Only in BASE condition the dogs choose the owner above chance (N = 22, P = 0.008, one-tailed Binomial). Condition had a significant effect on choices (Q = 6.7, P = 0.03), as dogs chose the owner more often in BASE than TEST (N = 14, Q = 5.3, P 0.02) and ODOR (N = 15, Q = 5.4, P 0.02), whereas no difference was found between the latter two (Q = 0.07, P = 0.7). Results suggest that dogs cannot recognize their owner\u2019s face under certain viewing conditions, raising questions about which perceptual information is most relevant for human face recognition by dogs