Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userIdentification and Development of Therapeutics for COVID-19
169
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
After emerging in China in late 2019, the novel Severe acute respiratory syndrome-like coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spread worldwide and as of early 2021, continues to significantly impact most countries. Only a small number of coronaviruses are known to infect humans, and only two are associated with the severe outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2: Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus, a closely related species of SARS-CoV-2 that emerged in 2002, and Middle East respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus, which emerged in 2012. Both of these previous epidemics were controlled fairly rapidly through public health measures, and no vaccines or robust therapeutic interventions were identified. However, previous insights into the immune response to coronaviruses gained during the outbreaks of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) have proved beneficial to identifying approaches to the treatment and prophylaxis of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A number of potential therapeutics against SARS-CoV-2 and the resultant COVID-19 illness were rapidly identified, leading to a large number of clinical trials investigating a variety of possible therapeutic approaches being initiated early on in the pandemic. As a result, a small number of therapeutics have already been authorized by regulatory agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States, and many other therapeutics remain under investigation. Here, we describe a range of approaches for the treatment of COVID-19, along with their proposed mechanisms of action and the current status of clinical investigation into each candidate. The status of these investigations will continue to evolve, and this review will be updated as progress is made.
rate research
Read More
There have been more than 850,000 confirmed cases and over 48,000 deaths from the human coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), in the United States alone. However, there are currently no proven effective medications against COVID-19. Drug repurposing offers a promising way for the development of prevention and treatment strategies for COVID-19. This study reports an integrative, network-based deep learning methodology to identify repurposable drugs for COVID-19 (termed CoV-KGE). Specifically, we built a comprehensive knowledge graph that includes 15 million edges across 39 types of relationships connecting drugs, diseases, genes, pathways, and expressions, from a large scientific corpus of 24 million PubMed publications. Using Amazon AWS computing resources, we identified 41 repurposable drugs (including indomethacin, toremifene and niclosamide) whose therapeutic association with COVID-19 were validated by transcriptomic and proteomic data in SARS-CoV-2 infected human cells and data from ongoing clinical trials. While this study, by no means recommends specific drugs, it demonstrates a powerful deep learning methodology to prioritize existing drugs for further investigation, which holds the potential of accelerating therapeutic development for COVID-19.
COVID-19 has claimed more 1 million lives and resulted in over 40 million infections. There is an urgent need to identify drugs that can inhibit SARS-CoV-2. In response, the DOE recently established the Medical Therapeutics project as part of the National Virtual Biotechnology Laboratory, and tasked it with creating the computational infrastructure and methods necessary to advance therapeutics development. We discuss innovations in computational infrastructure and methods that are accelerating and advancing drug design. Specifically, we describe several methods that integrate artificial intelligence and simulation-based approaches, and the design of computational infrastructure to support these methods at scale. We discuss their implementation and characterize their performance, and highlight science advances that these capabilities have enabled.
We analyze risk factors correlated with the initial transmission growth rate of the recent COVID-19 pandemic in different countries. The number of cases follows in its early stages an almost exponential expansion; we chose as a starting point in each country the first day $d_i$ with 30 cases and we fitted for 12 days, capturing thus the early exponential growth. We looked then for linear correlations of the exponents $alpha$ with other variables, for a sample of 126 countries. We find a positive correlation, {it i.e. faster spread of COVID-19}, with high confidence level with the following variables, with respective $p$-value: low Temperature ($4cdot10^{-7}$), high ratio of old vs.~working-age people ($3cdot10^{-6}$), life expectancy ($8cdot10^{-6}$), number of international tourists ($1cdot10^{-5}$), earlier epidemic starting date $d_i$ ($2cdot10^{-5}$), high level of physical contact in greeting habits ($6 cdot 10^{-5}$), lung cancer prevalence ($6 cdot 10^{-5}$), obesity in males ($1 cdot 10^{-4}$), share of population in urban areas ($2cdot10^{-4}$), cancer prevalence ($3 cdot 10^{-4}$), alcohol consumption ($0.0019$), daily smoking prevalence ($0.0036$), UV index ($0.004$, 73 countries). We also find a correlation with low Vitamin D levels ($0.002-0.006$, smaller sample, $sim 50$ countries, to be confirmed on a larger sample). There is highly significant correlation also with blood types: positive correlation with types RH- ($3cdot10^{-5}$) and A+ ($3cdot10^{-3}$), negative correlation with B+ ($2cdot10^{-4}$). Several of the above variables are intercorrelated and likely to have common interpretations. We performed a Principal Component Analysis, in order to find their significant independent linear combinations. We also analyzed a possible bias: countries with low GDP-per capita might have less testing and we discuss correlation with the above variables.
The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, has led to a wide range of non-pharmaceutical interventions being implemented around the world to curb transmission. However, the economic and social costs of some of these measures, especially lockdowns, has been high. An alternative and widely discussed public health strategy for the COVID-19 pandemic would have been to shield those most vulnerable to COVID-19, while allowing infection to spread among lower risk individuals with the aim of reaching herd immunity. Here we retrospectively explore the effectiveness of this strategy, showing that even under the unrealistic assumption of perfect shielding, hospitals would have been rapidly overwhelmed with many avoidable deaths among lower risk individuals. Crucially, even a small (20%) reduction in the effectiveness of shielding would have likely led to a large increase (>150%) in the number of deaths compared to perfect shielding. Our findings demonstrate that shielding the vulnerable while allowing infections to spread among the wider population would not have been a viable public health strategy for COVID-19, and is unlikely to be effective for future pandemics.
The first part of the paper presents a review of the gold-standard testing protocol for Covid-19, real-time, reverse transcriptase PCR, and its properties and associated measurement data such as amplification curves that can guide the development of appropriate and accurate adaptive group testing protocols. The second part of the paper is concerned with examining various off-the-shelf group testing methods for Covid-19 and identifying their strengths and weaknesses for the application at hand. The third part of the paper contains a collection of new analytical results for adaptive semiquantitative group testing with probabilistic and combinatorial priors, including performance bounds, algorithmic solutions, and noisy testing protocols. The probabilistic setting is of special importance as it is designed to be simple to implement by nonexperts and handle heavy hitters. The worst-case paradigm extends and improves upon prior work on semiquantitative group testing with and without specialized PCR noise models.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
