| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Gerkin, RC, et al.
(författare)
-
The best COVID-19 predictor is recent smell loss: a cross-sectional study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences. - : Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- BackgroundCOVID-19 has heterogeneous manifestations, though one of the most common symptoms is a sudden loss of smell (anosmia or hyposmia). We investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19.MethodsThis preregistered, cross-sectional study used a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n=4148) or negative (C19-; n=546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified singular and cumulative predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery.ResultsBoth C19+ and C19-groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean±SD, C19+: -82.5±27.2 points; C19-: -59.8±37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both single and cumulative feature models (ROC AUC=0.72), with additional features providing negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms, such as fever or cough. Olfactory recovery within 40 days was reported for ∼50% of participants and was best predicted by time since illness onset.ConclusionsAs smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19, we developed the ODoR-19 tool, a 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss. Numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4<OR<10), which can be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Parma, Valentina, et al.
(författare)
-
More Than Smell—COVID-19 Is Associated With Severe Impairment of Smell, Taste, and Chemesthesis
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Chemical Senses. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0379-864X .- 1464-3553. ; 45:7, s. 609-622
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Recent anecdotal and scientific reports have provided evidence of a link between COVID-19 and chemosensory impairments, such as anosmia. However, these reports have downplayed or failed to distinguish potential effects on taste, ignored chemesthesis, and generally lacked quantitative measurements. Here, we report the development, implementation, and initial results of a multilingual, international questionnaire to assess self-reported quantity and quality of perception in 3 distinct chemosensory modalities (smell, taste, and chemesthesis) before and during COVID-19. In the first 11 days after questionnaire launch, 4039 participants (2913 women, 1118 men, and 8 others, aged 19–79) reported a COVID-19 diagnosis either via laboratory tests or clinical assessment. Importantly, smell, taste, and chemesthetic function were each significantly reduced compared to their status before the disease. Difference scores (maximum possible change ±100) revealed a mean reduction of smell (−79.7 ± 28.7, mean ± standard deviation), taste (−69.0 ± 32.6), and chemesthetic (−37.3 ± 36.2) function during COVID-19. Qualitative changes in olfactory ability (parosmia and phantosmia) were relatively rare and correlated with smell loss. Importantly, perceived nasal obstruction did not account for smell loss. Furthermore, chemosensory impairments were similar between participants in the laboratory test and clinical assessment groups. These results show that COVID-19-associated chemosensory impairment is not limited to smell but also affects taste and chemesthesis. The multimodal impact of COVID-19 and the lack of perceived nasal obstruction suggest that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus strain 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection may disrupt sensory-neural mechanisms.
|
|
| 10. |
- Gerkin, Richard C., et al.
(författare)
-
Recent Smell Loss Is the Best Predictor of COVID-19 Among Individuals With Recent Respiratory Symptoms
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Chemical Senses. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0379-864X .- 1464-3553. ; 46
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In a preregistered, cross-sectional study, we investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19 using a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0–100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n = 4148) or negative (C19−; n = 546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified univariate and multivariate predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery. Both C19+ and C19− groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean ± SD, C19+: −82.5 ± 27.2 points; C19−: −59.8 ± 37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both univariate and multivariate models (ROC AUC = 0.72). Additional variables provide negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms (e.g., fever). Olfactory recovery within 40 days of respiratory symptom onset was reported for ~50% of participants and was best predicted by time since respiratory symptom onset. We find that quantified smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19 amongst those with symptoms of respiratory illness. To aid clinicians and contact tracers in identifying individuals with a high likelihood of having COVID-19, we propose a novel 0–10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss, the ODoR-19. We find that numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4 < OR < 10). Once independently validated, this tool could be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.
|
|
| 11. |
|
|
| 12. |
- Lopes, Fernando, et al.
(författare)
-
ER-stress mobilization of death-associated protein kinase-1-dependent xenophagy counteracts mitochondria stress-induced epithelial barrier dysfunction
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of Biological Chemistry. - : AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC. - 0021-9258 .- 1083-351X. ; 293:9, s. 3073-3087
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The gut microbiome contributes to inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), in which bacteria can be present within the epithelium. Epithelial barrier function is decreased in IBD, and dysfunctional epithelial mitochondria and endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress have been individually associated with IBD. We therefore hypothesized that the combination of ER and mitochondrial stresses significantly disrupt epithelial barrier function. Here, we treated human colonic biopsies, epithelial colonoids, and epithelial cells with an uncoupler of oxidative phosphorylation, dinitrophenol (DNP), with or without the ER stressor tunicamycin and assessed epithelial barrier function by monitoring internalization and translocation of commensal bacteria. We also examined barrier function and colitis in mice exposed to dextran sodium sulfate (DSS) or DNP and co-treated with DAPK6, an inhibitor of death-associated protein kinase 1 (DAPK1). Contrary to our hypothesis, induction of ER stress (i.e. the unfolded protein response) protected against decreased barrier function caused by the disruption of mitochondrial function. ER stress did not prevent DNP-driven uptake of bacteria; rather, specific mobilization of the ATF6 arm of ER stress and recruitment of DAP K1 resulted in enhanced autophagic killing (xenophagy) of bacteria. Of note, epithelia with a Crohns disease susceptibility mutation in the autophagy gene ATG16L.1 exhibited less xenophagy. Systemic delivery of the DAPK1 inhibitor DAPK6 increased bacterial translocation in DSS- or DNP-treated mice. We conclude that promoting ER stress ATF6 DAPK1 signaling in transporting enterocytes counters the transcellular passage of bacteria evoked by dysfunctional mitochondria, thereby reducing the potential for metabolic stress to reactivate or perpetuate inflammation.
|
|
| 13. |
- Sedaghat, Ahmad R., et al.
(författare)
-
Consensus criteria for chronic rhinosinusitis disease control : an international Delphi Study*
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Rhinology. - 0300-0729. ; 61:6, s. 519-530
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) disease control is a global metric of disease status for CRS. While there is broad acceptance that it is an important treatment goal, there has been inconsistency in the criteria used to define CRS control. The objective of this study was to identify and develop consensus around essential criteria for assessment of CRS disease control. Methods: Modified Delphi methodology consisting of three rounds to review a list of 24 possible CRS control criteria developed by a 12-person steering committee. The core authorship of the multidisciplinary EPOS 2020 guidelines was invited to participate. Results: Thirty-two individuals accepted the invitation to participate and there was no dropout of participants throughout the entire study (3 rounds). Consensus essential criteria for assessment of CRS control were: overall symptom severity, need for CRS-related systemic corticosteroids in the prior 6 months, severity of nasal obstruction, and patient-reported CRS control. Near-consensus items were: nasal endoscopy findings, severity of smell loss, overall quality of life, impairment of normal activities and severity of nasal discharge. Participants’ comments provided insights into caveats of, and disagreements related to, near-consensus items. Conclusions: Overall symptom severity, use of CRS-related systemic corticosteroids, severity of nasal obstruction, and patient-reported CRS control are widely agreed upon essential criteria for assessment of CRS disease control. Consideration of near-consensus items to assess CRS control should be implemented with their intrinsic caveats in mind. These identified consensus CRS control criteria, together with evidence-based support, will provide a foundation upon which CRS control criteria with wide-spread acceptance can be developed.
|
|
