In the WHO European Region, COVID-19 surveillance was implemented 27 January 2020. We detail the first European cases. As at 21 February, nine European countries reported 47 cases. Among 38 cases studied, 21 were linked to two clusters in Germany and France, 14 were infected in China. Median case age was 42 years; 25 were male. Late detection of the clusters’ index cases delayed isolation of further local cases. As at 5 March, there were 4,250 cases.

No abstract

The Swedish OCTO and NONA immune longitudinal studies were able to identify and confirm an immune risk profile (IRP) predictive of an increased 2-year mortality in very old individuals, 86–94 years of age. The IRP, was associated with persistent cytomegalovirus infection and characterized by inverted CD4/CD8 ratio and related to expansion of terminally differentiated effector memory T cells (TEMRA phenotype). In the present HEXA immune longitudinal study, we have examined a younger group of elderly individuals (n = 424, 66 years of age) in a population-based sample in the community of Jönköping, Sweden, to examine the relevance of findings previously demonstrated in the very old. Immunological monitoring that was conducted included T cell subsets and CMV-IgG and CMV-IgM serology. The result showed a prevalence of 15 % of individuals with an inverted CD4/CD8 ratio, which was associated with seropositivity to cytomegalovirus and increases in the level of TEMRA cells. The proportion of individuals with an inverted CD4/CD8 ratio was significantly higher in men whereas the numbers of CD3+CD4+ cells were significantly higher in women. In conclusion, these findings are very similar to those previously found by us in the Swedish longitudinal studies, suggesting that an immune profile previously identified in the very old also exists in the present sample of hexagenerians. Therefore, it will be important to examine clinical parameters, including morbidity and mortality, to assess whether the immune profile also is a risk profile associated with higher mortality in this sample of hexagenerians.

Background Genomic medicine has paved the way for identifying biomarkers and therapeutically actionable targets for complex diseases, but is complicated by the involvement of thousands of variably expressed genes across multiple cell types. Single-cell RNA-sequencing study (scRNA-seq) allows the characterization of such complex changes in whole organs. Methods The study is based on applying network tools to organize and analyze scRNA-seq data from a mouse model of arthritis and human rheumatoid arthritis, in order to find diagnostic biomarkers and therapeutic targets. Diagnostic validation studies were performed using expression profiling data and potential protein biomarkers from prospective clinical studies of 13 diseases. A candidate drug was examined by a treatment study of a mouse model of arthritis, using phenotypic, immunohistochemical, and cellular analyses as read-outs. Results We performed the first systematic analysis of pathways, potential biomarkers, and drug targets in scRNA-seq data from a complex disease, starting with inflamed joints and lymph nodes from a mouse model of arthritis. We found the involvement of hundreds of pathways, biomarkers, and drug targets that differed greatly between cell types. Analyses of scRNA-seq and GWAS data from human rheumatoid arthritis (RA) supported a similar dispersion of pathogenic mechanisms in different cell types. Thus, systems-level approaches to prioritize biomarkers and drugs are needed. Here, we present a prioritization strategy that is based on constructing network models of disease-associated cell types and interactions using scRNA-seq data from our mouse model of arthritis, as well as human RA, which we term multicellular disease models (MCDMs). We find that the network centrality of MCDM cell types correlates with the enrichment of genes harboring genetic variants associated with RA and thus could potentially be used to prioritize cell types and genes for diagnostics and therapeutics. We validated this hypothesis in a large-scale study of patients with 13 different autoimmune, allergic, infectious, malignant, endocrine, metabolic, and cardiovascular diseases, as well as a therapeutic study of the mouse arthritis model. Conclusions Overall, our results support that our strategy has the potential to help prioritize diagnostic and therapeutic targets in human disease. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13073-019-0657-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Patients with viral infections of the central nervous system (CNS) may present with a variety of neurological symptoms, most commonly dominated by either encephalitis or meningitis. The aetiological panorama varies in different parts of the world as well as over time. Thus, virological first-line diagnostics must be adapted to the current epidemiological situation and to the individual patient history, including recent travels. This review focuses on the diagnostics and treatment of viral CNS infections in the immunocompetent host from a Northern European perspective. Effective vaccines are available for viruses such as poliovirus and tick-borne encephalitis virus (TBEV) and for the childhood diseases morbilli (measles), rubella (German measles), parotitis (mumps) and varicella (chickenpox). However, cases do appear due to suboptimal immunization rates. In viral CNS infections, epidemiological surveillance is essential for establishing preventive strategies and for detecting emerging viruses. Knowledge of the possibilities and limitations of diagnostic methods for specific viral CNS infections is vital. A positive cerebral spinal fluid (CSF) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) finding is usually reliable for aetiological diagnosis. The demonstration of intrathecal antibody synthesis is useful for confirming the aetiology in a later stage of disease, hitherto sufficiently evaluated in herpes simplex encephalitis (HSE) and tick-borne encephalitis (TBE). Despite improved virological and differential diagnostic methods, aetiology remains unknown in about half of the cases with suspected viral encephalitis. Antiviral treatment is available chiefly for infections caused by herpesviruses, and acyclovir (aciclovir) is the drug of choice for empirical therapy in suspected viral encephalitis. However, randomized, controlled antiviral trials have only been conducted for HSE, while such studies are lacking in other viral CNS infections. Viral cytolysis and immune-mediated mechanisms may contribute to varying extents to neurological damage. Although the brain damage is believed to depend, to a varying degree, on the intrathecal host immune response, the use of corticosteroids in viral CNS infections is scarcely studied, as is specific treatment for neuroinflammation. Improved antiviral and immunomodulating treatment is desirable. Since neurological sequelae are still abundant, follow-up after severe viral CNS disease must include a neuropsychological assessment and an individually adapted rehabilitation plan.