On December 31 st 2019, China notified the World Health Organization (WHO) of a novel coronavirus outbreak which was first observed a few weeks earlier in a patient presenting with severe respiratory disease in Wuhan. 1 In January 2020, the virus was identified as a novel coronavirus with more than 70% similarity with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), and it was officially named by the WHO as 2019 novel coronavirus (nCoV) or SARS-CoV-2. 1 Currently, SARS-CoV-2 has attributed to a worldwide pandemic resulting in over 40 million infections and 1 million deaths, with numbers constantly growing. 2 Coronaviruses are enveloped, non-segmented, positive-sense single-stranded RNA viruses with a diameter of 60-140 nm, including the spike, with genome sizes ranging from 26 to 32 kilobases (the largest known viral RNA genome). 3,4 Coronaviruses have four

Westergren method is considered as the reference procedure to measure Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) by the International Council for Standardization in Haematology. However, a closed automated method, VES Matic Cube 80 (DIESSE S.p.A., Siena, Italy), has been introduced as a new ESR measurement instrument. In this article, we report two different studies: first, we compared the two methods (Westergren and VES Matic Cube 80) and second, we correlated the inflammatory state of 248 patients with their ESR values. Total protein, albumin, C-reactive protein, and other inflammatory proteins were detected in each sample. The results obtained using VES Matic Cube 80 demonstrated a good correlation with those obtained using the Westergren method (Ordinary linear regression: y=0.955x-0.205, r(2) =0.816, P<0.05; Passing-Bablock regression equation: y=0.9153x-0.5763; Bland-Altman analysis: bias 1.2; limits of agreement -17.4-19.9) and with the inflammatory protein levels (CRP: r=0.554 and r=0.498 and Fibrinogen: r=0.699 and r=0.663 for Ves Matic Cube 80 and Westergren, respectively), supporting the hypothesis that VES Matic Cube 80 offers a fast and safe ESR determination, ensuring precision and a very good correlation with the reference method.

Echis carinatus venom (EV) is a complex mixture of toxins that contribute to its lethality. EV proteolytic activity was analyzed by zymography, chromogenic assays, and SDS-PAGE. To understand the molecular mechanism of the envenomation, we investigated the in vitro effect of EV on human plasma proteins. We looked for EV protein substrates and their proteolytic fragments. We analyzed EV proteolytic activity on standard proteins such as prothrombin or fibrinogen. To set up the optimal EV:plasma protein ratio conditions, plasma was incubated with EV (treated plasma), depleted of abundant proteins, and subjected to SDS-PAGE. Samples from control and treated plasma were also analyzed by 2-DE/MALDI-TOF MS, leading to the identification of four classes of plasma proteins cleaved by EV: proteases, protease inhibitors, binding proteins, and transporters. EV mainly proteolyzes entire proteins but can also act on physiological fragments. In summary, the physiological effects of EV proteases involve other important processes in addition to blood coagulation; complement activation and hemoglobin metabolism are also affected. In particular, the cleavage of protease inhibitors appears to be the mechanism through which the venom neutralizes the body's defenses.

Objectives : Serological assays for SARS-CoV-2 have a critical role not only in diagnosis of COVID-19, but also in assessing the degree and duration of response of specific antibodies against the virus obtained through infection or vaccination. We present the results obtained with a competitive immunoenzymatic method (Chorus SARS-CoV-2 “Neutralizing” Ab) for quantitative determination of total neutralizing anti-S1 SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (IgG, IgM, and IgA) in human serum obtained on a disposable device with the Chorus TRIO instrument using a recombinant strong neutralizing antibody as tracer. Methods : A total of 694 sera were evaluated for SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies: 407 uninfected, 201 symptomatic subjects, 37 post-infection patients, and 49 vaccinated. Sixty-eight of the previous sera were used to compare the Chorus SARS-CoV-2 “Neutralizing” Ab results with those obtained with micro-neutralization of the Alpha and original variants. A set of 74 positive sera for other respiratory infections were analyzed to evaluate the possible cross reaction to SARS-CoV-2 virus. Results : Of the 694 samples, only 3 had discordant results between micro-neutralization and values measured by Chorus SARS-CoV-2 “Neutralizing” Ab: 1 false negative and 2 false positives. Values of sensitivity and specificity were very high: percent positive agreement (sensitivity) 99.6% (95% CI: 97.7 - 99.9) and percent negative agreement (specificity) 99.6% (95% CI: 98.0 -99.9). Concordance was high with a Gwet's Ac1 of 0.992. No significant differences were observed between the alpha and original variants. Conclusions : The Chorus SARS-CoV-2 “Neutralizing” Ab test was highly sensitive and specific, and varies from most other currently available tests since it analyzes only antibodies with viral-neutralizing capacity.