Background: COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to significantly affect the mental health of healthcare workers (HCWs), who stand in the frontline of this crisis. It is, therefore, an immediate priority to monitor rates of mood, sleep and other mental health issues in order to understand mediating factors and inform tailored interventions. The aim of this review is to synthesize and analyze existing evidence on the prevalence of depression, anxiety and insomnia among HCWs during the Covid-19 outbreak. Methods: A systematic search of literature databases was conducted up to April 17th, 2020. Two reviewers independently assessed full-text articles according to predefined criteria. Risk of bias for each individual study was assessed and data pooled using random-effects meta-analyses to estimate the prevalence of specific mental health problems. The review protocol is registered in PROSPERO and is available online. Findings: Thirteen studies were included in the analysis with a combined total of 33,062 participants. Anxiety was assessed in 12 studies, with a pooled prevalence of 23•2% and depression in 10 studies, with a prevalence rate of 22•8%. A subgroup analysis revealed gender and occupational differences with female HCPs and nurses exhibiting higher rates of affective symptoms compared to male and medical staff respectively. Finally, insomnia prevalence was estimated at 38•9% across 5 studies. Interpretation: Early evidence suggests that a considerable proportion of HCWs experience mood and sleep disturbances during this outbreak, stressing the need to establish ways to mitigate mental health risks and adjust interventions under pandemic conditions.

No abstract

No abstract

Current standard treatment of COVID-19 lacks in effective antiviral options. Plitidepsin, a cyclic depsipeptide authorized in Australia for patients with refractory multiple myeloma, has recently emerged as a candidate anti-SARS-CoV-2 agent. The aim of this review was to summarize current knowledge on plitidepsin’s clinical profile, anti-tumour and anti-SARS-CoV-2 mechanisms and correlate this with available or anticipated, preclinical or clinical evidence on the drug’s potential for COVID-19 treatment.PubMed, Scopus, CENTRAL, clinicaltrials.gov, medRxiv and bioRxiv databases were searched.Plitidepsinexerts its anti-tumour and antiviral properties primarily through acting on isoforms of the host cell’s eukaryotic-translation-elongation-factor-1-alpha (eEF1A). Through inhibiting eEF1A and therefore translation of necessary viral proteins, it behaves as a “host-directed” anti-SARS-CoV-2 agent. In respect to its potent anti-SARS-CoV-2 properties, the drug has demonstrated superior ex vivo efficacy compared to other host-directed agents and remdesivir, and it might retain its antiviral effect against the more transmittable B.1.1.7 variant. Its well-studied safety profile, also in combination with dexamethasone, may accelerate its repurposing chances for COVID-19 treatment. Preliminary findings in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, have suggested potential safety and efficacy of plitidepsin, in terms of viral load reduction and clinical resolution. However, the still incomplete understanding of its exact integration into host cell–SARS-CoV-2 interactions, its intravenous administration exclusively purposing it for hospital settings the and precocity of clinical data are currently considered its chief deficits. A phase III trial is being planned to compare the plitidepsin–dexamethasone regimen to the current standard of care only in moderately affected hospitalized patients. Despite plitidepsin’s preclinical efficacy, current clinical evidence is inadequate for its registration in COVID-19 patients.Therefore, multicentre trials on the drug’s efficacy, potentially also studying populations of emerging SARS-CoV-2 lineages, are warranted.

We conducted a retrospective observational study to assess the hospitalization rates for acute exacerbations of asthma and COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) during the first imposed lockdown in Athens, Greece. Patient characteristics and the concentration of eight air pollutants [namely, NO (nitrogen monoxide), NO2 (nitrogen dioxide), CO (carbon monoxide), PM2.5 (particulate matter 2.5), PM10 (particulate matter 10), O3 (ozone), SO2 (sulfur dioxide) and benzene] were considered. A total of 153 consecutive hospital admissions were studied. Reduced admissions occurred in the Lockdown period compared to the Pre-lockdown 2020 (p < 0.001) or the Control 2019 (p = 0.007) period. Furthermore, the concentration of 6/8 air pollutants positively correlated with weekly hospital admissions in 2020 and significantly decreased during the lockdown. Finally, admitted patients for asthma exacerbation during the lockdown were younger (p = 0.046) and less frequently presented respiratory failure (p = 0.038), whereas patients with COPD presented higher blood eosinophil percentage (p = 0.017) and count (p = 0.012). Overall, admissions for asthma and COPD exacerbations decreased during the lockdown. This might be partially explained by reduction of air pollution during this period while medical care avoidance behavior, especially among elderly patients cannot be excluded. Our findings aid in understanding the untold impact of the pandemic on diseases beyond COVID-19, focusing on patients with obstructive diseases.