METHODS AND RESULTS: Analysis of publicly available DLBCL microarray data sets showed that TRPM4 transcripts were up-regulated in DLBCL compared to normal germinal centre B (GCB) cells, were expressed more highly in the activated B cell-like DLBCL (ABC-DLBCL) subtype and higher TRPM4 transcripts conferred worse overall survival (OS) in R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone)-treated DLBCL cases (P < 0.05). Our immunohistochemical analysis showed that TRPM4 was expressed in various human tissues but not in normal B cells within lymphoid tissues (reactive tonsil, lymph node and appendix). TRPM4 protein was present in 26% (n = 49 of 189) of our cohort of R-CHOP-treated DLBCL cases and this was associated significantly with more aggressive clinical parameters, including higher lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scores or stage (P < 0.01 for each of the parameters) and the ABC-DLBCL subtype (P = 0.016). TRPM4 positivity conferred significantly worse OS (P = 0.004) and progression-free survival (PFS) (P = 0.005). Worse OS remained associated significantly with TRPM4 positivity in multivariate analysis, including higher International Prognostic Index (IPI) or the non-GCB DLBCL phenotype (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: TRPM4 protein expression is up-regulated in DLBCL cases compared to non-malignant B cells with preferential expression in ABC-DLBCL cases, and it confers significantly poorer DLBCL patient outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A review of multiple reports and kit inserts on the diagnostic performance of rapid tests from various manufacturers that are commercially available were performed. Only preliminary data are available currently.
RESULTS: From a total of nine rapid detection test (RDT) kits, three kits offer total antibody detection, while six kits offer combination SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG detection in two separate test lines. All kits are based on colloidal gold-labeled immunochromatography principle and one-step method with results obtained within 15 minutes, using whole blood, serum or plasma samples. The sensitivity for both IgM and IgG tests ranges between 72.7% and 100%, while specificity ranges between 98.7% to 100%. Two immunochromatography using nasopharyngeal or throat swab for detection of COVID-19 specific antigen are also reviewed.
CONCLUSIONS: There is much to determine regarding the value of serological testing in COVID-19 diagnosis and monitoring. More comprehensive evaluations of their performance are rapidly underway. The use of serology methods requires appropriate interpretations of the results and understanding the strengths and limitations of such tests.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 110 nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) were collected from children aged one month to 12 years old who were admitted with ARI in UKMMC during a one-year period. The two qPCR assays were conducted in parallel.
RESULTS: Ninety-seven samples (88.2%) were positive by QIAstat-Dx RP and 86 (78.2%) by RespiFinder assay. The overall agreement on both assays was substantial (kappa value: 0.769) with excellent concordance rate of 96.95%. Using both assays, hRV/EV, INF A/H1N1 and RSV were the most common pathogens detected. Influenza A/H1N1 infection was significantly seen higher in older children (age group > 60 months old) (53.3%, p-value < 0.05). Meanwhile, RSV and hRV/EV infection were seen among below one-year-old children. Co-infections by two to four pathogens were detected in 17 (17.5%) samples by QIAstat-Dx RP and 12 (14%) samples by RespiFinder, mainly involving hRV/EV. Bacterial detection was observed only in 5 (4.5%) and 6 (5.4%) samples by QIAstat-Dx RP and RespiFinder, respectively, with Mycoplasma pneumoniae the most common detected.
CONCLUSION: The overall performance of the two qPCR assays was comparable and showed excellent agreement. Both detected various clinically important respiratory pathogens in a single test with simultaneous multiple infection detection. The use of qPCR as a routine diagnostic test can improve diagnosis and management.
METHODS: We systematically searched five electronic databases (PubMed, CENTRAL, Embase, Global Health, and PsycINFO) from date of inception to September 30, 2022, for studies reporting on the effect of bebtelovimab in SARS-CoV-2 infection, using a combination of search terms around -bebtelovimab‖, -LY-CoV1404‖, -LY3853113‖, and -coronavirus infection‖. All citations were screened independently by two researchers. Data were extracted and thematically analyzed based on study design by adhering to the stipulated scoping review approaches.
RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies were included, thirty-four non-clinical studies were narratively synthesized, and five clinical studies were meta-analyzed. The non-clinical studies revealed bebtelovimab not only potently neutralized wide-type SARS-CoV-2 and existing variants of concern such as B.1.1.7 (Alpha), B.1.351 (Beta), P.1 (Gamma), and B.1.617.2 (Delta), but also retained appreciable activity against Omicron lineages, including BA.2.75, BA.4, BA.4.6, and BA.5. Unlike other monoclonal antibodies, bebtelovimab was able to bind to epitope of the SARS-CoV-2 S protein by exploiting loop mobility or by minimizing side-chain interactions. Pooled analysis from clinical studies depicted that the rates of hospitalization, ICU admission, and death were similar between bebtelovimab and other COVID-19 therapies. Bebtelovimab was associated with a low incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events.
CONCLUSION: Preclinical evidence suggests bebtelovimab be a potential treatment for COVID-19 amidst viral evolution. Bebtelovimab has comparable efficacy to other COVID-19 therapies without evident safety concerns.
METHODS: Our goal was to study the demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as their correlation with RF seropositivity, among a series of 80 RA patients aged ≥ 18 years who attend Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUSM).
RESULTS: Of the 80 RA patients included in this study, 66 (82.5%) were female and 14 (17.5%) were male. No significant associations between RF seropositivity and demographic and/or clinical characteristics or other laboratory investigations were observed, including gender, morning stiffness, individual joint involvement (from multiple sites of the body), and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) measurement. However, a significant association between RF seropositivity and patients aged ≥ 50 was found (P = 0.032).
CONCLUSION: RF seropositivity was found to be more common in much older RA patients.