Tissue and host species-specific transcriptional changes in models of experimental visceral leishmaniasis [version 1; referees: 3 approved, 1 approved with reservations]

Background: Human visceral leishmaniasis, caused by infection with Leishmania donovani or L. infantum, is a potentially fatal disease affecting 50,000-90,000 people yearly in 75 disease endemic countries, with more than 20,000 deaths reported. Experimental models of infection play a major role in understanding parasite biology, host-pathogen interaction, disease pathogenesis, and parasite transmission. In addition, they have an essential role in the identification and pre-clinical evaluation of new drugs and vaccines. However, our understanding of these models remains fragmentary. Although the immune response to Leishmania donovani infection in mice has been extensively characterized, transcriptomic analysis capturing the tissue-specific evolution of disease has yet to be reported. Methods: We provide an analysis of the transcriptome of spleen, liver and peripheral blood of BALB/c mice infected with L. donovani. Where possible, we compare our data in murine experimental visceral leishmaniasis with transcriptomic data in the public domain obtained from the study of L. donovani-infected hamsters and patients with human visceral leishmaniasis. Digitised whole slide images showing the histopathology in spleen and liver are made available via a dedicated website, www.leishpathnet.org. Results: Our analysis confirms marked tissue-specific alterations in the transcriptome of infected mice over time and identifies previously unrecognized parallels and differences between murine, hamster and human responses to infection. We show commonality of interferon-regulated genes whilst confirming a greater activation of type 2 immune pathways in infected hamsters compared to mice. Cytokine genes and genes encoding immune checkpoints were markedly tissue specific and dynamic in their expression, and pathways focused on non-immune cells reflected tissue specific immunopathology. Our data also addresses the value of measuring peripheral blood transcriptomics as a potential window into underlying systemic disease.  Conclusions: Our transcriptomic data, coupled with histopathologic analysis of the tissue response, provide an additional resource to underpin future mechanistic studies and to guide clinical research

Apego en niños con asistencia temprana a salas cuna en la ciudad de Punta Arenas (Chile): un estudio piloto

Este estudio piloto tuvo por objetivo conocer los vínculos de apego en niños y niñas que asisten a salas cuna. Se aplicó la Escala de apego durante estrés (ADS) a 25 díadas madre-infante (cuyos niños y niñas tenían entre 10 y 14 meses de edad), que asistían a salas cuna en la ciudad de Punta Arenas. La muestra fue no probabilística intencional, mientras que el diseño no experimental, transversal, descriptivo. Los resultados indican que la distribución de los tipos de apego es similar al patrón universal; sin embargo, una prolongada estadía en salas cuna se asocia a un mayor riesgo de apego inseguro aun cuando los efectos de la edad de ingreso son controlados. Se discuten los alcances e implicancias para futuras investigaciones

Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Abstract Background Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX ). Methods In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung–Knapp–Sidik–Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. Conclusions Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care

Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19: a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Abstract Background Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GEHFX ). Methods In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung–Knapp–Sidik–Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. Conclusions Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care