Atypical presentations of MERS-CoV infection in immunocompromised hosts

Lessons from SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2 Infections: What We Know So Far

Within past decades, human infections with emerging and reemerging zoonotic viral pathogens have raised the eminent public health concern. Since November 2002, three highly pathogenic and major deadly human coronaviruses of the βετα-genera (β-hCoVs), namely, severe acute respiratory distress syndrome-coronavirus (SARS-CoV), middle east respiratory syndrome-coronavirus (MERS-CoV), and SARS-CoV-2, have been globally emerged and culminated in the occurrence of SARS epidemic, MERS outbreak, and coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, respectively. The global emergence and spread of these three major deadly β-hCoVs have extremely dreadful impacts on human health and become an economic burden. Unfortunately, clear specific and highly efficient medical countermeasures for these three β-hCoVs and their underlying fatal illnesses remain under development. Although they belong to the same family and share many features and convergent evolution, these three deadly β-hCoVs have some important and obvious differences. By utilizing their lessons and gaining a deeper understanding of these β-hCoVs, we can identify areas of improvement and provide preparedness plans for fighting and controlling the future reemerging human infections that might arise from them or from other potential pathogenic hCoVs. Therefore, this review summarizes the state-of-the-art information and compares the similarities and dissimilarities between SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2, in terms of their evolution trait, genome organization, host cell entry mechanisms, tissue infectivity tropisms, transmission routes and contagiousness, and the clinical characteristics, laboratory features, and immunological abnormalities of their related illnesses. It also provides an overview of the emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. Additionally, it discusses the challenges of the most proposed treatment options for SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Enhanced inflammation and suppressed adaptive immunity in COVID-19 with prolonged RNA shedding

Little is known regarding why a subset of COVID-19 patients exhibited prolonged positivity of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here, we found that patients with long viral RNA course (LC) exhibited prolonged high-level IgG antibodies and higher regulatory T (Treg) cell counts compared to those with short viral RNA course (SC) in terms of viral load. Longitudinal proteomics and metabolomics analyses of the patient sera uncovered that prolonged viral RNA shedding was associated with inhibition of the liver X receptor/retinoid X receptor (LXR/RXR) pathway, substantial suppression of diverse metabolites, activation of the complement system, suppressed cell migration, and enhanced viral replication. Furthermore, a ten-molecule learning model was established which could potentially predict viral RNA shedding period. In summary, this study uncovered enhanced inflammation and suppressed adaptive immunity in COVID-19 patients with prolonged viral RNA shedding, and proposed a multi-omic classifier for viral RNA shedding prediction.

OUP accepted manuscript

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, has currently affected >220 million individuals worldwide. The complex interplay of immune dysfunction, active malignancy, the effect of cancer treatment on the immune system and additional comorbidities associated with cancer and COVID-19 all affect the outcomes of COVID-19 in patients with cancer. We have discussed the published findings (through the end of September 2021) on the effects of cancer on the morbidity and mortality of COVID-19, common factors between cancer and COVID-19, the interaction of cancer and COVID-19 treatments, the impact of COVID-19 on cancer clinical services, immune test findings in cancer patients with COVID-19 and the long-term effects of COVID-19 on cancer survivors.

Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) Virus-Pathophysiological Axis and the Current Treatment Strategies

Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) is a lethal respiratory disease with its first case reported back in 2012 (Jeddah, Saudi Arabia). It is a novel, single-stranded, positive-sense RNA beta coronavirus (MERS-CoV) that was isolated from a patient who died from a severe respiratory illness. Later, it was found that this patient was infected with MERS. MERS is endemic to countries in the Middle East regions, such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, Oman, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. It has been reported that the MERS virus originated from bats and dromedary camels, the natural hosts of MERS-CoV. The transmission of the virus to humans has been thought to be either direct or indirect. Few camel-to-human transmissions were reported earlier. However, the mode of transmission of how the virus affects humans remains unanswered. Moreover, outbreaks in either family-based or hospital-based settings were observed with high mortality rates, especially in individuals who did not receive proper management or those with underlying comorbidities, such as diabetes and renal failure. Since then, there have been numerous reports hypothesising complications in fatal cases of MERS. Over the years, various diagnostic methods, treatment strategies and preventive measures have been strategised in containing the MERS infection. Evidence from multiple sources implicated that no treatment options and vaccines have been developed in specific, for the direct management of MERS-CoV infection. Nevertheless, there are supportive measures outlined in response to symptom-related management. Health authorities should stress more on infection and prevention control measures, to ensure that MERS remains as a low-level threat to public health.

The Incubation Period of COVID-19: Current Understanding and Modeling Technique

This chapter aims to answer the following questions regarding the incubation period of COVID-19. Why is understanding the incubation period of COVID-19 important? How long is the incubation time, and what are the associating factors? How should the incubation period be modeled given the current pandemic situation? Where should we go from here? As a critical epidemiological metric, the incubation period is of public health and clinical importance. While the incubation time of COVID-19 is generally similar to that of SARS and MERS, recent studies identifying factors that impact the incubation period of COVID-19, travel history, for example, only tell part of the story. Therefore, in addition to reviewing current findings, this chapter also explores the modeling technique and future research directions of the incubation period of COVID-19.

Serological assays and host antibody detection in coronavirus-related disease diagnosis

Coronaviruses (CoV) are a family of viral pathogens that infect both birds and mammals, including humans. Seven human coronaviruses (HCoV) have been recognized so far. HCoV-229E, -OC43, -NL63, and -HKU1 account for one-third of common colds with mild symptoms. The other three members are severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2. These viruses are responsible for SARS, MERS, and CoV disease 2019 (COVID-19), respectively. A variety of diagnostic techniques, including chest X-rays, computer tomography (CT) scans, analysis of viral nucleic acids, proteins, or whole virions, and host antibody detection using serological assays have been developed for the detection of these viruses. In this review, we discuss conventional serological tests, such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), western blot (WB), immunofluorescence assay (IFA), lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), and chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA), as well as biosensor-based assays that have been developed for diagnosing HCoV-associated diseases since 2003, with an in-depth focus on COVID-19.

Outcome of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) in hematology and oncology patients: A case series in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) is associated with a high fatality rate (34%), which is higher in the presence of co-morbidities. The aim of the current study was to assess the clinical course and the outcome in hematological or oncological malignancy cases, diagnosed with MERS-CoV.

METHODS

This is a case series of hematological /oncological cases, diagnosed with MERS-CoV, in a tertiary care setting in 2015. The cases were identified based on the World Health Organization (WHO) MERS-CoV case definition. The demographic, clinical, and outcome data were retrieved from the patients' medical charts and electronic health records.

RESULTS

In total, nine hematological or oncological cases were identified, diagnosed with MERS-CoV. The baseline malignant condition was hematological malignancy in seven patients, as well as colon cancer and osteosarcoma in one patient each. Six (67%) patients were male. The median age was 65 years (range 16-80 years). Co-morbidities included chronic kidney disease (n = 3.33%), diabetes mellitus (n = 3.33%), and hypertension (n = 2.22%). The presenting symptoms were shortness of breath (n = 6.66%), fever (n = 5.55%), cough (n = 2.22%), and diarrhea (n = 2.22%). Chest x-rays indicated bilateral infiltrates in 6 patients (66%). The PCR (polymerase chain reaction) test was repeated in six patients to confirm the diagnosis. The mortality rate was 100%, and the median time to death was 26 days (range 15-77 days).

CONCLUSION

MERS-CoV infection in this small cohort of hematology or oncology patients has a 100% mortality rate, regardless of the status of the underlying disease. The confirmation of the diagnosis may require repeated testing. Additional studies are required to verify the findings and to elucidate the disease pathogenesis in cancer patients.

Challenges of Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in the Era of COVID-19

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic raised unprecedented concerns in the hematopoietic stem cell transplant community. The diagnosis of COVID-19 in these transplant recipients may require extensive laboratory testing and high clinical suspicion, as atypical clinical manifestations or other respiratory viral infections are common in this patient population. The underlying malignancies, immunosuppressed state, frequently observed coinfections, and advanced age in some patients may also predispose them to worse clinical outcomes. Similar outcomes have been previously described with other human coronaviruses, including the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus and the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. Many hematopoietic stem cell transplant organizations have issued elaborative guidelines that aim to prevent transmission and hence adverse patient outcomes. All potential donors are thoroughly screened, and donated products are cryopreserved in advance. Potential hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients are also screened, and most nonurgent transplant cases with low risk of progression and/or death are deferred. Current hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients should adhere to precaution and isolation measures, while their transplant units should also follow strict safety protocols, similar to other infectious outbreaks. The prolonged susceptibility of hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients to respiratory viral infections might necessitate extending these measures even after the peak of the outbreak until a gradually return to normality is possible.

Case Study: Prolonged Infectious SARS-CoV-2 Shedding from an Asymptomatic Immunocompromised Individual with Cancer

Long-term severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) shedding was observed from the upper respiratory tract of a female immunocompromised individual with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and acquired hypogammaglobulinemia. Shedding of infectious SARS-CoV-2 was observed up to 70 days, and of genomic and subgenomic RNA up to 105 days, after initial diagnosis. The infection was not cleared after the first treatment with convalescent plasma, suggesting a limited effect on SARS-CoV-2 in the upper respiratory tract of this individual. Several weeks after a second convalescent plasma transfusion, SARS-CoV-2 RNA was no longer detected. We observed marked within-host genomic evolution of SARS-CoV-2 with continuous turnover of dominant viral variants. However, replication kinetics in Vero E6 cells and primary human alveolar epithelial tissues were not affected. Our data indicate that certain immunocompromised individuals may shed infectious virus longer than previously recognized. Detection of subgenomic RNA is recommended in persistently SARS-CoV-2-positive individuals as a proxy for shedding of infectious virus.

Coronavirus Spectrum Infections (COVID-19, MERS, SARS) in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly around the world to become a global pandemic. There is limited data on the impact of COVID-19 among patients with cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to determine outcomes of adult patients with cancer affected by coronavirus infections, specifically SARS, MERS, and COVID-19. Studies were independently screened by two reviewers and assessed for quality and bias. Outcomes measured included study characteristics, cancer type, phase of care at the time of diagnosis, and clinical presentation. Morbidity and mortality outcomes were analyzed to assess the severity of infection as compared to the general population.

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies with 110 patients were included. Of these, 66.4% had COVID-19 infections, 32.7% MERS and only one patient with SARS. The majority of COVID-19 studies were based on studies in China. There was a 56.6% rate of a severe event, including ICU admission or requiring mechanical ventilation, with an overall 44.5% fatality rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with cancer with coronavirus infections may be more susceptible to higher morbidity and mortality.

Navigating immunosuppression in a pandemic: A guide for the dermatologist from the COVID Task Force of the Medical Dermatology Society and Society of Dermatology Hospitalists

Dermatologists treating immune-mediated skin disease must now contend with the uncertainties associated with immunosuppressive use in the context of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Although the risk of infection with many commonly used immunosuppressive agents remains low, direct data evaluating the safety of such agents in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are scarce. This article reviews and offers guidance based on currently available safety data and the most recent COVID-19 outcome data in patients with immune-mediated dermatologic disease. The interdisciplinary panel of experts emphasizes a stepwise, shared decision-making approach in the management of immunosuppressive therapy. The goal of this article is to help providers minimize the risk of disease flares while simultaneously minimizing the risk of iatrogenic harm during an evolving pandemic.

COVID-19 in Spain: Transplantation in the midst of the pandemic

Spain has been one of the most affected countries by the COVID-19 outbreak. As of April 28, 2020, the number of confirmed cases is 210 773, including 102 548 patients recovered, more than 10 300 admitted to the ICU, and 23 822 deaths, with a global case fatality rate of 11.3%. From the perspective of donation and transplantation, the Spanish system first focused on safety issues, providing recommendations for donor evaluation and testing, and to rule out SARS-CoV-2 infection in potential recipients prior to transplantation. Since the country entered into an epidemiological scenario of sustained community transmission and saturation of intensive care, developing donation and transplantation procedures has become highly complex. Since the national state of alarm was declared in Spain on March 13, 2020, the mean number of donors has declined from 7.2 to 1.2 per day, and the mean number of transplants from 16.1 to 2.1 per day. Increased mortality on the waiting list may become a collateral damage of this terrible pandemic.

From SARS and MERS to COVID-19: a brief summary and comparison of severe acute respiratory infections caused by three highly pathogenic human coronaviruses

Within two decades, there have emerged three highly pathogenic and deadly human coronaviruses, namely SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. The economic burden and health threats caused by these coronaviruses are extremely dreadful and getting more serious as the increasing number of global infections and attributed deaths of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV. Unfortunately, specific medical countermeasures for these hCoVs remain absent. Moreover, the fast spread of misinformation about the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic uniquely places the virus alongside an annoying infodemic and causes unnecessary worldwide panic. SARS-CoV-2 shares many similarities with SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, certainly, obvious differences exist as well. Lessons learnt from SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, timely updated information of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV, and summarized specific knowledge of these hCoVs are extremely invaluable for effectively and efficiently contain the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV. By gaining a deeper understanding of hCoVs and the illnesses caused by them, we can bridge knowledge gaps, provide cultural weapons for fighting and controling the spread of MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2, and prepare effective and robust defense lines against hCoVs that may emerge or reemerge in the future. To this end, the state-of-the-art knowledge and comparing the biological features of these lethal hCoVs and the clinical characteristics of illnesses caused by them are systematically summarized in the review.

From SARS and MERS to COVID-19: a brief summary and comparison of severe acute respiratory infections caused by three highly pathogenic human coronaviruses

Within two decades, there have emerged three highly pathogenic and deadly human coronaviruses, namely SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. The economic burden and health threats caused by these coronaviruses are extremely dreadful and getting more serious as the increasing number of global infections and attributed deaths of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV. Unfortunately, specific medical countermeasures for these hCoVs remain absent. Moreover, the fast spread of misinformation about the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic uniquely places the virus alongside an annoying infodemic and causes unnecessary worldwide panic. SARS-CoV-2 shares many similarities with SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, certainly, obvious differences exist as well. Lessons learnt from SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, timely updated information of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV, and summarized specific knowledge of these hCoVs are extremely invaluable for effectively and efficiently contain the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV. By gaining a deeper understanding of hCoVs and the illnesses caused by them, we can bridge knowledge gaps, provide cultural weapons for fighting and controling the spread of MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2, and prepare effective and robust defense lines against hCoVs that may emerge or reemerge in the future. To this end, the state-of-the-art knowledge and comparing the biological features of these lethal hCoVs and the clinical characteristics of illnesses caused by them are systematically summarized in the review.

SARS-CoV2 and immunosuppression: A double-edged sword

Severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS‐Cov2) outbreak has caused a pandemic rapidly impacting on the way of life of the entire world. This impact in the specific setting of transplantation and immunosuppression has been poorly explored to date. Discordant data exist on the impact of previous coronavirus outbreaks on immunosuppressed patients. Overall, only a very limited number of cases have been reported in literature, suggesting that transplanted patients not necessarily present an increased risk of severe SARS‐Cov2‐related disease compared to the general population. We conducted a literature review related to the impact of immunosuppression on coronavirus infections including case reports and series describing immunosuppression management in transplant recipients. The role of steroids, calcineurin inhibitors, and mycophenolic acid has been explored more in detail. A point‐in‐time snapshot of the yet released literature and some considerations in relation to the use of immunosuppression in SARS‐Cov2 infected transplant recipients are provided here for the physicians dealing with immunocompromised patients.

Immunosuppressive and immunomodulator therapy for rare or uncommon skin disorders in pandemic days

Immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory therapies are important in dermatology, but indications are influenced by SARS-CoV-2. We will focus on skin disorders such as autoimmune connective tissue disorders, neutrophilic dermatoses, and vasculitis. Immunomodulators such as colchicine and antimalarials can easily be preferred taking their beneficial effects on COVID-19 into consideration and also given their wide spectrum of action. Among the conventional therapies, methotrexate, azathioprine, and mycophenolate mofetil increase the risk of infection, and thus their use is recommended only when necessary and at low doses. On the other hand, use of cyclosporine is also not recommended as it increases the risk of hypertension, which is susceptible to COVID-19. Anti-TNF agents from among the biological therapies appear to be slightly risky in terms of susceptibility to infection. However, there are ongoing studies which suggest that some biological treatments may reduce cytokine storm impeding the COVID-19 progression as a result, in spite of their susceptibilities to COVID-19. Patients, who will be started on immunosuppressive therapy, should be tested for COVID-19 prior to the therapy, and in the event that COVID-19 is suspected, the therapy should be discontinued.

Safety of Drugs During Previous and Current Coronavirus Pandemics: Lessons for Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The coronavirus 2019 [COVID-19] pandemic has posed challenges in the routine care of patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD]. One of the key challenges is quantification of the risks of immunosuppressive and biological therapies in IBD patients during the pandemic. The similarities and differences between previous coronavirus outbreaks and the pathobiology of the infections can give useful information in understanding the risks, and perhaps potential beneficial aspects of drugs used in IBD. Although clinical, immunological and pharmacological data from the experience with previous coronavirus outbreaks cannot be automatically translated to predict the safety of IBD therapies during the COVID-19 pandemic, the signals so far from these outbreaks on IBD patients who are on immunomodulators and biologics are reassuring to patients and clinicians alike.

Management of primary hepatic malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic: recommendations for risk mitigation from a multidisciplinary perspective

Around the world, recommendations for cancer treatment are being adapted in real time in response to the pandemic of COVID-19. We, as a multidisciplinary team, reviewed the standard management options, according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer classification system, for hepatocellular carcinoma. We propose treatment recommendations related to COVID-19 for the different stages of hepatocellular carcinoma (ie, 0, A, B, and C), specifically in relation to surgery, locoregional therapies, and systemic therapy. We suggest potential strategies to modify risk during the pandemic and aid multidisciplinary treatment decision making. We also review the multidisciplinary management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma as a potentially curable and incurable diagnosis in the setting of COVID-19.

COVID-19 and the use of immunomodulatory and biologic agents for severe cutaneous disease: An Australian/New Zealand consensus statement

Patients on immunomodulators, including biologic agents and new small molecular inhibitors, for cutaneous disease, represent a potentially vulnerable population during the COVID‐19 pandemic. There is currently insufficient evidence to determine whether patients on systemic immunomodulators are at increased risk of developing COVID‐19 disease or more likely to have severe disease. As such, clinicians need to assess the benefit‐to‐risk ratio on a case‐by‐case basis. In patients with suspected or confirmed COVID‐19 disease, all immunomodulators used for skin diseases should be immediately withheld, with the possible exception of systemic corticosteroid therapy, which needs to be weaned. In patients who develop symptoms or signs of an upper respiratory tract infection, but COVID‐19 is not yet confirmed, consider dose reduction or temporarily cessation for 1–2 weeks. In otherwise well patients, immunomodulators and biologics should be continued. In all patients, and their immediate close contacts, the importance of preventative measures to minimise human‐to‐human transmission cannot be overemphasised.

Management of Pemphigus in COVID-19 Pandemic Era; a Review Article

The novel coronavirus is rapidly spreading around the world. Since the public announcement of the COVID-19 outbreak, several concerns have been raised by dermatologists as well as pemphigus patients who take immunosuppressive drugs. In this paper, we review the literature about the common treatment of pemphigus with a focus on the lessons from similar epidemics to find a proper suggestion to manage pemphigus in the COVID-19 pandemic era. The effect of many of the drugs used for treatment of Pemphigus vulgaris (PV) on COVID-19 is not clear. We also do not have data on the impact of this autoimmune disease, which may involve the mucous membranes, on the acquisition or course of COVID-19. We are currently in the midst of a pandemic and evaluating the effect of COVID-19 on the population of susceptible patients suffering from auto-immune diseases like pemphigus is essential. The evidence on best ways to manage patients with underlying conditions, such as pemphigus, during the outbreak of COVID-19 is evolving and the data is updated every day.

Caring for our cancer patients in the wake of COVID-19

In response to our current global pandemic, unprecedented healthcare changes may have significant consequences for cancer patients in the United Kingdom. We explore why cancer patients may be more susceptible to severe infection and complications, highlighting various interventions that may help to ensure continuity of care in this unique cohort.

Middle East respiratory syndrome

The Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) is a lethal zoonotic pathogen that was first identified in humans in Saudi Arabia and Jordan in 2012. Intermittent sporadic cases, community clusters, and nosocomial outbreaks of MERS-CoV continue to occur. Between April 2012 and December 2019, 2499 laboratory-confirmed cases of MERS-CoV infection, including 858 deaths (34·3% mortality) were reported from 27 countries to WHO, the majority of which were reported by Saudi Arabia (2106 cases, 780 deaths). Large outbreaks of human-to-human transmission have occurred, the largest in Riyadh and Jeddah in 2014 and in South Korea in 2015. MERS-CoV remains a high-threat pathogen identified by WHO as a priority pathogen because it causes severe disease that has a high mortality rate, epidemic potential, and no medical countermeasures. This Seminar provides an update on the current knowledge and perspectives on MERS epidemiology, virology, mode of transmission, pathogenesis, diagnosis, clinical features, management, infection control, development of new therapeutics and vaccines, and highlights unanswered questions and priorities for research, improved management, and prevention.

Infection Prevention Measures for Surgical Procedures during a Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Outbreak in a Tertiary Care Hospital in South Korea

In 2015, we experienced the largest in-hospital Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) outbreak outside the Arabian Peninsula. We share the infection prevention measures for surgical procedures during the unexpected outbreak at our hospital. We reviewed all forms of related documents and collected information through interviews with healthcare workers of our hospital. After the onset of outbreak, a multidisciplinary team devised institutional MERS-control guidelines. Two standard operating rooms were converted to temporary negative-pressure rooms by physically decreasing the inflow air volume (−4.7 Pa in the main room and −1.2 Pa in the anteroom). Healthcare workers were equipped with standard or enhanced personal protective equipment according to the MERS-related patient’s profile and symptoms. Six MERS-related patients underwent emergency surgery, including four MERS-exposed and two MERS-confirmed patients. Negative conversion of MERS-CoV polymerase chain reaction tests was noticed for MERS-confirmed patients before surgery. MERS-exposed patients were also tested twice preoperatively, all of which were negative. All operative procedures in MERS-related patients were performed without specific adverse events or perioperative MERS transmission. Our experience with setting up a temporary negative-pressure operation room and our conservative approach for managing MERS-related patients can be referred in cases of future unexpected MERS outbreaks in non-endemic countries.

A database of geopositioned Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus occurrences

As a World Health Organization Research and Development Blueprint priority pathogen, there is a need to better understand the geographic distribution of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and its potential to infect mammals and humans. This database documents cases of MERS-CoV globally, with specific attention paid to zoonotic transmission. An initial literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus; after screening articles according to the inclusion/exclusion criteria, a total of 208 sources were selected for extraction and geo-positioning. Each MERS-CoV occurrence was assigned one of the following classifications based upon published contextual information: index, unspecified, secondary, mammal, environmental, or imported. In total, this database is comprised of 861 unique geo-positioned MERS-CoV occurrences. The purpose of this article is to share a collated MERS-CoV database and extraction protocol that can be utilized in future mapping efforts for both MERS-CoV and other infectious diseases. More broadly, it may also provide useful data for the development of targeted MERS-CoV surveillance, which would prove invaluable in preventing future zoonotic spillover.

Measurement(s)	Middle East Respiratory Syndrome • geographic location
Technology Type(s)	digital curation
Factor Type(s)	geographic distribution of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) • year
Sample Characteristic - Organism	Middle East respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus
Sample Characteristic - Location	Earth (planet)

Machine-accessible metadata file describing the reported data: 10.6084/m9.figshare.11108801

Host Determinants of MERS-CoV Transmission and Pathogenesis

Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) is a zoonotic pathogen that causes respiratory infection in humans, ranging from asymptomatic to severe pneumonia. In dromedary camels, the virus only causes a mild infection but it spreads efficiently between animals. Differences in the behavior of the virus observed between individuals, as well as between humans and dromedary camels, highlight the role of host factors in MERS-CoV pathogenesis and transmission. One of these host factors, the MERS-CoV receptor dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4), may be a critical determinant because it is variably expressed in MERS-CoV-susceptible species as well as in humans. This could partially explain inter- and intraspecies differences in the tropism, pathogenesis, and transmissibility of MERS-CoV. In this review, we explore the role of DPP4 and other host factors in MERS-CoV transmission and pathogenesis-such as sialic acids, host proteases, and interferons. Further characterization of these host determinants may potentially offer novel insights to develop intervention strategies to tackle ongoing outbreaks.

Middle East respiratory syndrome: what we learned from the 2015 outbreak in the Republic of Korea

Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) was first isolated from a patient with severe pneumonia in 2012. The 2015 Korea outbreak of MERSCoV involved 186 cases, including 38 fatalities. A total of 83% of transmission events were due to five superspreaders, and 44% of the 186 MERS cases were the patients who had been exposed in nosocomial transmission at 16 hospitals. The epidemic lasted for 2 months and the government quarantined 16,993 individuals for 14 days to control the outbreak. This outbreak provides a unique opportunity to fill the gap in our knowledge of MERS-CoV infection. Therefore, in this paper, we review the literature on epidemiology, virology, clinical features, and prevention of MERS-CoV, which were acquired from the 2015 Korea outbreak of MERSCoV.

Pathogenicity and Viral Shedding of MERS-CoV in Immunocompromised Rhesus Macaques

Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) has recently emerged in the Middle East. Since 2012, there have been approximately 2,100 confirmed cases, with a 35% case fatality rate. Disease severity has been linked to patient health status, as people with chronic diseases or an immunocompromised status fare worse, although the mechanisms of disease have yet to be elucidated. We used the rhesus macaque model of mild MERS to investigate whether the immune response plays a role in the pathogenicity in relation to MERS-CoV shedding. Immunosuppressed macaques were inoculated with MERS-CoV and sampled daily for 6 days to assess their immune statues and to measure viral shedding and replication. Immunosuppressed macaques supported significantly higher levels of MERS-CoV replication in respiratory tissues and shed more virus, and virus disseminated to tissues outside of the respiratory tract, whereas viral RNA was confined to respiratory tissues in non-immunosuppressed animals. Despite increased viral replication, pathology in the lungs was significantly lower in immunosuppressed animals. The observation that the virus was less pathogenic in these animals suggests that disease has an immunopathogenic component and shows that inflammatory responses elicited by the virus contribute to disease.