Background: The cause of end-organ damage and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients is postulated to be connected to the uncontrolled increase of pro-inflammatory cytokines. The upregulation of many cytokines is dependent on signaling through the Janus kinase 1 (JAK-1) and JAK-2 pathways. Ruxolitinib, a JAK-1 and JAK-2 inhibitor, is documented to have potent anti-inflammatory activity by targeting several cytokines and growth factors with proposed efficacy in the cytokine storm observed in severe COVID-19 patients; therefore, this study examines the efficacy and tolerability of ruxolitinib for adult COVID-19 patients. Materials and Methods: This review was conducted using preferred reporting items for aystematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) methodology. Six reviewers analyzed 1,120 results. Seven studies were selected and validated. A quantitative meta-analysis was further performed to evaluate clinical improvement at day 28, mortality at day 28, and oxygen requirements comparing treatment and standard of care groups. Results: 168 individuals were involved in the studies selected: 122 in cohort studies, 4 in case reports, and 41 in randomized controlled studies. The ruxolitinib group had a higher likelihood of clinical improvement by the 28th day of treatment when assessed with the standard of care (SOC) group (odds ratio [OR]: 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53 -4.16; P = 0.45; I2 = 0%). The SOC group was at a higher risk of experiencing serious adverse events (OR: 0.17; 95% CI: 0.03 - 1.13; P = 0.07). Notably the SOC group had a higher likelihood of death (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.11-2.29; P = 0.07; I2= 0%). Conclusion Prior studies on ruxolitinib have demonstrated it is able to decrease inflammatory markers. In recent studies on COVID-19, treatment with ruxolitinib decreased the time on mechanical ventilation, hospitalization time, and the need for vasopressor support. Additionally, ruxolitinib showed decreased mortality and demonstrated improvement in lung congestion as evidenced by computerized tomography imaging. These findings warrant further clinical investigation into Ruxolitinib as a potential treatment approach for severe COVID-19.

Background: The cause of end-organ damage and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients is postulated to be connected to the uncontrolled increase of pro-inflammatory cytokines. The upregulation of many cytokines is dependent on signaling through the Janus kinase 1 (JAK-1) and JAK-2 pathways. Ruxolitinib, a JAK-1 and JAK-2 inhibitor, is documented to have potent anti-inflammatory activity by targeting several cytokines and growth factors with proposed efficacy in the cytokine storm observed in severe COVID-19 patients; therefore, this study examines the efficacy and tolerability of ruxolitinib for adult COVID-19 patients. Materials and Methods: This review was conducted using preferred reporting items for aystematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) methodology. Six reviewers analyzed 1,120 results. Seven studies were selected and validated. A quantitative meta-analysis was further performed to evaluate clinical improvement at day 28, mortality at day 28, and oxygen requirements comparing treatment and standard of care groups. Results: 168 individuals were involved in the studies selected: 122 in cohort studies, 4 in case reports, and 41 in randomized controlled studies. The ruxolitinib group had a higher likelihood of clinical improvement by the 28th day of treatment when assessed with the standard of care (SOC) group (odds ratio [OR]: 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53 -4.16; P = 0.45; I2 = 0%). The SOC group was at a higher risk of experiencing serious adverse events (OR: 0.17; 95% CI: 0.03 - 1.13; P = 0.07). Notably the SOC group had a higher likelihood of death (OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.11-2.29; P = 0.07; I2= 0%). Conclusion Prior studies on ruxolitinib have demonstrated it is able to decrease inflammatory markers. In recent studies on COVID-19, treatment with ruxolitinib decreased the time on mechanical ventilation, hospitalization time, and the need for vasopressor support. Additionally, ruxolitinib showed decreased mortality and demonstrated improvement in lung congestion as evidenced by computerized tomography imaging. These findings warrant further clinical investigation into Ruxolitinib as a potential treatment approach for severe COVID-19.

Objectives: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused devastation in over 200 countries. Italy, Spain, and the United States (US) were most severely affected by the first wave of the pandemic. The reasons why some countries were more strongly affected than others remain unknown. We identified the most-affected and lessaffected countries and states and explored environmental, host, and infrastructure risk factors that may explain differences in the SARS-CoV-2 mortality burden. Methods: We identified the top 10 countries/US states with the highest deaths per population until May 2020. For each of these 10 case countries/states, we identified 6 control countries/ states with a similar population size and at least 3 times fewer deaths per population. We extracted data for 30 risk factors from publicly available, trusted sources. We compared case and control countries/states using the non-parametric Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and conducted a secondary cluster analysis to explore the relationship between the number of cases per population and the number of deaths per population using a scalable EM (expectation– maximization) clustering algorithm. Results: Statistically significant differences were found in 16 of 30 investigated risk factors, the most important of which were temperature, neonatal and under-5 mortality rates, the percentage of under-5 deaths due to acute respiratory infections (ARIs) and diarrhea, and tuberculosis incidence (p < 0.05) Conclusion Countries with a higher burden of baseline pediatric mortality rates, higher pediatric mortality from preventable diseases like diarrhea and ARI, and higher tuberculosis incidence had lower rates of coronavirus disease 2019-associated mortality, supporting the hygiene hypothesis.

Objectives: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused devastation in over 200 countries. Italy, Spain, and the United States (US) were most severely affected by the first wave of the pandemic. The reasons why some countries were more strongly affected than others remain unknown. We identified the most-affected and lessaffected countries and states and explored environmental, host, and infrastructure risk factors that may explain differences in the SARS-CoV-2 mortality burden. Methods: We identified the top 10 countries/US states with the highest deaths per population until May 2020. For each of these 10 case countries/states, we identified 6 control countries/ states with a similar population size and at least 3 times fewer deaths per population. We extracted data for 30 risk factors from publicly available, trusted sources. We compared case and control countries/states using the non-parametric Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and conducted a secondary cluster analysis to explore the relationship between the number of cases per population and the number of deaths per population using a scalable EM (expectation– maximization) clustering algorithm. Results: Statistically significant differences were found in 16 of 30 investigated risk factors, the most important of which were temperature, neonatal and under-5 mortality rates, the percentage of under-5 deaths due to acute respiratory infections (ARIs) and diarrhea, and tuberculosis incidence (p < 0.05) Conclusion Countries with a higher burden of baseline pediatric mortality rates, higher pediatric mortality from preventable diseases like diarrhea and ARI, and higher tuberculosis incidence had lower rates of coronavirus disease 2019-associated mortality, supporting the hygiene hypothesis.

As of August 9, 2021, there have been around 203 million confirmed cases of coronavirus disease (2019) COVID-19, including 4.3 million deaths. Adverse psychological effects are expected to be long-lasting in vulnerable groups, especially among frontline healthcare workers, given the magnitude of the crisis. Observing strict quarantine and social distancing measures, while being an important strategy to curb the spread, have also led to a significant negative impact on mental health indicators; the long-term consequences are yet to be assessed on a global scale. A medical crisis may become a mental health crisis and the updated findings are reviewed in this paper to provide an updated brief for immunological, occupational, socioeconomic, racial/ethnic, psychological predictors while commenting on care recommendations to prevent psychological trauma from progressing to PTSD.