mteb/CovidQA huggingface dataset:
We examined the effect of increasing doses of CC10 protein (0, 50, 150, and 300 ng/mL) on IFN-γ-induced Fgl2 expression in THP-1 cells. CC10 treatment showed a 10.1% decrease in THP-1 cells compared to that in control after stimulation with 10 ng/mL IFN-γ for 12 h. CC10 protein inhibited Fgl2 expression between doses of 0 ng/mL and 300 ng/mL (Figure 4A ). In particular, 150 ng/mL CC10 protein had the strongest inhibitory effect on Fgl2 expression among the doses, and we chose this dose for the following experiments. We explored the effect of different time points of stimulation with a concentration of 150 ng/mL CC10 protein. After stimulation with CC10 protein for 6, 12, and 24 h compared to the PBS control, the strongest inhibitory effect on Fgl2 expression was noted at 12 h; hence, we chose this time point for the following studies ( Figure 4B ). An increasing number of studies suggest that macrophages are the primary source of Fgl2. In order to ascertain that CC10 has a direct
effect on macrophages, we treated THP-1 cells with recombinant CC10 and assessed the expression of Fgl2. Unlike in controls, IFN-γ induced a significant increase in Fgl2 expression. This effect was attenuated when cells were treated with CC10 protein (Figures 4C,D) , revealing that CC10 directly reduces the levels of Fgl2 in macrophages. To further explore the possibility that CC10 protein directly acts on macrophages, we infected murine PEMs with MHV-3 in the presence of recombinant CC10 and determined Fgl2 expression. Compared to levels in the controls, MHV-3infected macrophages exhibited a significant increase in Fgl2 production, and this effect was abolished by using CC10 protein (Figures 5A,B) , indicating that CC10 directly modulates Fgl2 production in macrophages.
In order to determine genes that were downregulated after stimulation by CC10 protein, we used DNA microarray analysis to screen for differentially expressed genes. THP-1 cells were cultured and PMA was added to induce differentiation into macrophages. The production of Fgl2 was stimulated by IFNγ. The experimental group was treated with CC10 protein for microarray detection of differentially expressed genes. The results showed that the most obviously downregulated genes were UBE2W, HECTD1, MIR612, ATRX, SOX4, HBP1, and Fgl2 (Supplementary Table 1) . And then these genes were tested by qPCR. However, UBE2W, HECTD1, MIR612, ATRX, and SOX4 was not differentially expressed by qPCR, while HBP1 and fgl2 were still down-regulated genes. DNA microarray analysis identified HBP1 as a down-regulated gene involved in the pathological processes of the regulation of CC10.
Recently, very limited studies have explored the role of HBP1 in FH. Nevertheless, the mechanistic functions of HBP1 in FH remain largely unexplored. Therefore, we selected this gene for further study. qPCR analysis confirmed that mRNA levels of HBP1 were significantly decreased in THP-1 cells after CC10

protein stimulation compared to that in the PBS control group (Figure 6A ).

We knocked down HBP1 using HBP1-siRNA. Then, transfection of HBP1-SiRNA into HUVECs was detected by qPCR and western-blotting methods. As expected, HBP1 knockdown led to significantly decreased expression of HBP1 (Figures 6B,C) . Furthermore, HBP1 knockdown impaired expression of Fgl2 (Figure 6D ), suggesting that HBP1 was able to activate Fgl2.
HBP1-SiRNA was used to transfect HUVECs. Then, IFN-γ was added to induce the expression of Fgl2 followed by stimulation with CC10 protein (150 ng/ml) after 2 h. Finally, we explored the expression of Fgl2 by qPCR. The results showed that HBP1-SiRNA treatment abrogated the inhibitory effect of CC10 on Fgl2 expression in HUVECs (Figure 7) . That is to say, CC10 could suppress Fgl2 expression in macrophages. Such an effect may be mediated by the transcription factor HBP1.
It is well-known that CC10 protein can suppress the immune response. In animal models of allergic diseases of the respiratory tract, most of evidences confirm this inhibition (26) . Its function in FH has not been investigated yet. Here, we used a murine FH model established by MHV-3 infection to explore the effects of CC10 in this disease process. To determine the role of CC10 in the pathogenesis of FH, CC10 protein was injected into a mouse FH model established by MHV-3 infection. MHV-3-induced liver injury in CC10-treated mice occurred rarely and the areas of lesions were much fewer than those in saline-treated control mice. In summary, these results suggested that CC10 could reduce pathological liver damage in this FH model together with lower mortality rates followed by MHV-3 infection.
MHV-3 induced fulminant viral hepatitis progresses rapidly and infected mice die within 3-5 days. Previous studies suggested fgl2 played a vital role in this process with a 15-40% increase of survival when fgl2 was deleted (12, 15, 27, 28) . Multiple inflammatory factors or mediators including TNF-α and IFN-γ, IL-1β and C5aR have been demonstrated to promote FH progression with significant discrepancies between liver damage and survival rate (29) (30) (31) (32) , which is accordant with our observation that CC10 substantially alleviated liver injury though survival rate improved mildly. The survival rate based on hours may be more accurate to examine the effect of CC10 on FH.
It is speculated that fgl2 can mediate lethality in MHV-3-induced FH. This is due to the fact that fgl2 induces the deposition of fibrinogen, which leads to activation of the coagulation cascade and induction of procoagulant activity (15) . To determine whether the tissue necrosis was mediated by Fgl2 in CC10-treated mice following infection, Fgl2 expression was observed. Results suggested that the expression of Fgl2 was significantly increased in MHV-3-induced FH mice and CC10 treatment significantly reduced the production of Fgl2 in the infected liver and serum. In addition, decreased fibrinogen deposition was also observed in the livers of CC10-treated mice. Therefore, our research results strongly clarify that the lower mortality of CC10-treated mice after MHV-3 infection is due to the lower levels of Fgl2 and decreased fibrinogen deposition.
Indeed, it has been reported that Fgl2 is expressed on macrophages, and the expression of Fgl2 is believed to be induced by IFN-γ and TNF-α (22) . Cultured THP-1 cells activated by IFN-γ or IL-2 have been demonstrated, with induction of Fgl2 expression and enhanced activation of human prothrombin (23) . Therefore, in this study, we explored this cell line to investigate the modulation of CC10 on Fgl2. Surprisingly, we found that CC10 directly inhibited IFN-γ-induced Fgl2 expression in THP-1 cells. As we know, IFN-γ has proved to be the main cytokine that leads to the development and progression of FH. Also, it was shown that IFN-γ might exert its own proinflammatory biological function through enhancing Fgl2 expression. Therefore, in our study, CC10 might counter the effect of IFN-γ in the setting of FH, which substantiates its role in FH. These results demonstrated that CC10 regulates the expression of Fgl2 in macrophages.
In the current study, we used co-immunoprecipitation to analyze binding between CC10 and Fgl2. In this study, we investigated possible protein-protein interactions between CC10 and Fgl2 in vitro. The Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells transfected with pcDNA3.1-hCC10 and pcDNA3.1-hFgl2. Cellular proteins were immunoprecipitated with anti-CC10 antibody or anti-Fgl2 antibody. Immunoblotting was performed with anti-Fgl2 and anti-CC10 antibodies. Immunoprecipitation of protein extracts from pcDNA 3.1-CC10 and pcDNA3.1-Fgl2 co-transfected CHO cells with anti-Fgl2 or anti-CC10 antibody followed by western blotting with Fgl2 and CC10 antibodies indicated that CC10 did not co-immunoprecipitate with Fgl2, showing that there is no direct relationship between CC10 and Fgl2 (data not shown). The results showed that CC10 has no direct interaction with Fgl2. From our previous study the gene of fgl2 contributed profoundly in MHV-3 induced fulminant hepatitis and is extensively expressed in macrophages
and endothelium (12, 33) . Our microarray indicated a CC10 down-regulated fgl2 expression and this is further confirmed by qPCR and Western blotting in vivo (peritoneal macrophages) and in vitro (THP-1, macrophage cell line). Therefore, it is reasonable to focus on macrophages to display the effect of CC10 on fgl2 expression and eventually mice survival. We entirely agree there may be other possibilities for a protective effect of CC10 to contribute to the disease process. This is worth further studies. The potential receptor of CC10 has not been revealed yet. Our previous study have demonstrated that CC10 have effect of dendritic cells in allergic rhinitis (34) . In this research, we evaluated the effect of CC10 on macrophages functions and found Fgl2 was substantially down-regulated upon CC10 treatment, therefore, we speculate that potential CC10 receptor may be also expressed on macrophages. The potential target of CC10 on other immune cells cannot be excluded.
DNA microarray analysis is one of the most powerful approaches for the potential identification of unexpected genes involved in pathogenic processes. By using this approach, HMGbox transcription factor 1 (HBP1) was found to be one of the most downregulated genes after CC10 treatment of THP-1 cells. HBP1 is a well-described transcriptional repressor that modulates expression of genes involved in cell cycle progression. In a recent study, it was found that HBP1 is a direct target of miR-21 and confirmed that HBP1 modulates the inhibitory function of miR-21-ASO in hepatosteatosis and carcinogenesis simultaneously (23) . HBP1 is an endogenous inhibitor of the Wnt signaling pathway in both normal and cancer cells. The tumor suppressor role of HBP1 has been reported in some malignancies, such as oral cancer and glioma (35) . However, an association between HBP1 and Fgl2 has not been investigated yet. The current study clearly demonstrated that CC10 protects against MHV-3 induced FH via
suppression of Fgl2 expression. Such effects might be mediated by HBP1. However, the functional status of HBP1 in the CC10 pathway requires further research, and such studies are conducting in our laboratory.
In conclusion, we demonstrated that CC10 could limit the immunopathological damage in MHV-3-induced FH mice. Our results suggest that enhancing CC10 expression by an immunotherapeutic approach might be an effective treatment for FH.

HY performed all the described experiments and wrote the manuscript. YL assisted with some experiments, analyzed experimental results, and edited the manuscript. HW analyzed experimental results. XW reviewed and edited the manuscript. JH, WY, DX, XL, GS, and QN provided experimental help and design.
Hydroxychloroquine, a less toxic derivative of chloroquine, is effective in inhibiting SARS-CoV-2 infection in vitro

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7078228/

SHA: 1cf54d1c77b7f0494ab971429d26e0e199952d09

Authors: Liu, Jia; Cao, Ruiyuan; Xu, Mingyue; Wang, Xi; Zhang, Huanyu; Hu, Hengrui; Li, Yufeng; Hu, Zhihong; Zhong, Wu; Wang, Manli
Date: 2020-03-18
DOI: 10.1038/s41421-020-0156-0
License: cc-by

Abstract: nan
Text: Hydroxychloroquine, a less toxic derivative of chloroquine, is effective in inhibiting SARS-CoV-2 infection in vitro Jia Liu 1 , Ruiyuan Cao 2 , Mingyue Xu 1,3 , Xi Wang 1 , Huanyu Zhang 1,3 , Hengrui Hu 1,3 , Yufeng Li 1,3 , Zhihong Hu 1 , Wu Zhong 2 and Manli Wang 1 Dear Editor, The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2/2019-nCoV) poses a serious threat to global public health and local economies. As of March 3, 2020, over 80,000 cases have been confirmed in China, including 2946 deaths as well as over 10,566 confirmed cases in 72 other countries. Such huge numbers of infected and dead people call for an urgent demand of effective, available, and affordable drugs to control and diminish the epidemic.
We have recently reported that two drugs, remdesivir (GS-5734) and chloroquine (CQ) phosphate, efficiently inhibited SARS-CoV-2 infection in vitro 1 . Remdesivir is a nucleoside analog prodrug developed by Gilead Sciences (USA). A recent case report showed that treatment with remdesivir improved the clinical condition of the first patient infected by SARS-CoV-2 in the United States 2 , and a phase III clinical trial of remdesivir against SARS-CoV-2 was launched in Wuhan on February 4, 2020. However, as an experimental drug, remdesivir is not expected to be largely available for treating a very large number of patients in a timely manner. Therefore, of the two potential drugs, CQ appears to be the drug of choice for large-scale use due to its availability, proven safety record, and a relatively low cost. In light of the preliminary clinical data, CQ has been added to the list of trial drugs in the Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of COVID-19 (sixth edition) published by
National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China. CQ (N4-(7-Chloro-4-quinolinyl)-N1,N1-diethyl-1,4pentanediamine) has long been used to treat malaria and amebiasis. However, Plasmodium falciparum developed widespread resistance to it, and with the development of new antimalarials, it has become a choice for the prophylaxis of malaria. In addition, an overdose of CQ can cause acute poisoning and death 3 . In the past years, due to infrequent utilization of CQ in clinical practice, its production and market supply was greatly reduced, at least in China. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) sulfate, a derivative of CQ, was first synthesized in 1946 by introducing a hydroxyl group into CQ and was demonstrated to be much less (~40%) toxic than CQ in animals 4 . More importantly, HCQ is still widely available to treat autoimmune diseases, such as systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis. Since CQ and HCQ share similar chemical structures and mechanisms of acting as a weak base
and immunomodulator, it is easy to conjure up the idea that HCQ may be a potent candidate to treat infection by SARS-CoV-2. Actually, as of February 23, 2020, seven clinical trial registries were found in Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (http://www.chictr.org.cn) for using HCQ to treat COVID-19. Whether HCQ is as efficacious as CQ in treating SARS-CoV-2 infection still lacks the experimental evidence.
To this end, we evaluated the antiviral effect of HCQ against SARS-CoV-2 infection in comparison to CQ in vitro. First, the cytotoxicity of HCQ and CQ in African green monkey kidney VeroE6 cells (ATCC-1586) was measured by standard CCK8 assay, and the result showed © The Author(s) 2020
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. (Fig. 1a) . To better compare the antiviral activity of CQ versus HCQ, the dose-response curves of the two compounds against SARS-CoV-2 were
determined at four different multiplicities of infection (MOIs) by quantification of viral RNA copy numbers in the cell supernatant at 48 h post infection (p.i.). The data summarized in Fig. 1a and Supplementary Table S1 show that, at all MOIs (0.01, 0.02, 0.2, and 0.8), the 50% maximal effective concentration (EC 50 ) for CQ (2.71, 3.81, 7.14, and 7.36 μM) was lower than that of HCQ (4.51, 4.06, 17.31, and 12.96 μM). The differences in EC 50 values were statistically significant at an MOI of 0.01 (P < 0.05) and MOI of 0.2 (P < 0.001) (Supplementary Table S1 ). It is worth noting that the EC 50 values of CQ seemed to be a little higher than that in our previous report (1.13 μM at an MOI of 0.05) 1 , which is likely due to the adaptation of the virus in cell culture that significantly increased viral infectivity upon continuous passaging. Consequently, the selectivity index (SI = CC 50 /EC 50 ) of CQ (100.81, 71.71, 38.26, and 37.12) was higher than that of HCQ (55.32, 61.45, 14.41,
19.25) at MOIs of 0.01, 0.02, 0.2, and 0.8, respectively. These results were corroborated by immunofluorescence microscopy as evidenced by different expression levels of virus nucleoprotein (NP) at the indicated drug concentrations at 48 h p.i. (Supplementary Fig. S1 ). Taken together, the data suggest that the anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity of HCQ seems to be less potent compared to CQ, at least at certain MOIs.
Both CQ and HCQ are weak bases that are known to elevate the pH of acidic intracellular organelles, such as endosomes/lysosomes, essential for membrane fusion 5 . In addition, CQ could inhibit SARS-CoV entry through changing the glycosylation of ACE2 receptor and spike protein 6 . Time-of-addition experiment confirmed that HCQ effectively inhibited the entry step, as well as the post-entry stages of SARS-CoV-2, which was also found upon CQ treatment (Supplementary Fig. S2 ). To further explore the detailed mechanism of action of CQ and HCQ in inhibiting virus entry, co-localization of virions with early endosomes (EEs) or endolysosomes (ELs) was analyzed by immunofluorescence analysis (IFA) and confocal microscopy. Quantification analysis showed that, at 90 min p.i. in untreated cells, 16.2% of internalized virions (anti-NP, red) were observed in early endosome antigen 1 (EEA1)-positive EEs (green), while more virions (34.3%) were transported into the late endosomal-lysosomal protein
LAMP1 + ELs (green) (n > 30 cells for each group). By contrast, in the presence of CQ or HCQ, significantly more virions (35.3% for CQ and 29.2% for HCQ; P < 0.001) were detected in the EEs, while only very few virions (2.4% for CQ and 0.03% for HCQ; P < 0.001) were found to be co-localized with LAMP1 + ELs (n > 30 cells) (Fig. 1b, c) . This suggested that both CQ and HCQ blocked the transport of SARS-CoV-2 from EEs to ELs, which appears to be a requirement to release the viral genome as in the case of SARS-CoV 7 .
Interestingly, we found that CQ and HCQ treatment caused noticeable changes in the number and size/morphology of EEs and ELs (Fig. 1c) . In the untreated cells, most EEs were much smaller than ELs (Fig. 1c) . In CQand HCQ-treated cells, abnormally enlarged EE vesicles were observed (Fig. 1c , arrows in the upper panels), many of which are even larger than ELs in the untreated cells. This is in agreement with previous report that treatment with CQ induced the formation of expanded cytoplasmic vesicles 8 . Within the EE vesicles, virions (red) were localized around the membrane (green) of the vesicle. CQ treatment did not cause obvious changes in the number and size of ELs; however, the regular vesicle structure seemed to be disrupted, at least partially. By contrast, in HCQ-treated cells, the size and number of ELs increased significantly (Fig. 1c , arrows in the lower panels).
Since acidification is crucial for endosome maturation and function, we surmise that endosome maturation might be blocked at intermediate stages of endocytosis, resulting in failure of further transport of virions to the ultimate releasing site. CQ was reported to elevate the pH (see figure on previous page) Fig. 1 Comparative antiviral efficacy and mechanism of action of CQ and HCQ against SARS-CoV-2 infection in vitro. a Cytotoxicity and antiviral activities of CQ and HCQ. The cytotoxicity of the two drugs in Vero E6 cells was determined by CCK-8 assays. Vero E6 cells were treated with different doses of either compound or with PBS in the controls for 1 h and then infected with SARS-CoV-2 at MOIs of 0.01, 0.02, 0.2, and 0.8. The virus yield in the cell supernatant was quantified by qRT-PCR at 48 h p.i. Y-axis represents the mean of percent inhibition normalized to the PBS group. The experiments were repeated twice. b, c Mechanism of CQ and HCQ in inhibiting virus entry. Vero E6
cells were treated with CQ or HCQ (50 μM) for 1 h, followed by virus binding (MOI = 10) at 4°C for 1 h. Then the unbound virions were removed, and the cells were further supplemented with fresh drug-containing medium at 37°C for 90 min before being fixed and stained with IFA using anti-NP antibody for virions (red) and antibodies against EEA1 for EEs (green) or LAMP1 for ELs (green). The nuclei (blue) were stained with Hoechst dye. The portion of virions that co-localized with EEs or ELs in each group (n > 30 cells) was quantified and is shown in b. Representative confocal microscopic images of viral particles (red), EEA1 + EEs (green), or LAMP1 + ELs (green) in each group are displayed in c. The enlarged images in the boxes indicate a single vesicle-containing virion. The arrows indicated the abnormally enlarged vesicles. Bars, 5 μm. Statistical analysis was performed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with GraphPad Prism (F = 102.8, df = 5,182, ***P < 0.001).
of lysosome from about 4.5 to 6.5 at 100 μM 9 . To our knowledge, there is a lack of studies on the impact of HCQ on the morphology and pH values of endosomes/ lysosomes. Our observations suggested that the mode of actions of CQ and HCQ appear to be distinct in certain aspects.

It has been reported that oral absorption of CQ and HCQ in humans is very efficient. In animals, both drugs share similar tissue distribution patterns, with high concentrations in the liver, spleen, kidney, and lung reaching levels of 200-700 times higher than those in the plasma 10 . It was reported that safe dosage (6-6.5 mg/kg per day) of HCQ sulfate could generate serum levels of 1.4-1.5 μM in humans 11 . Therefore, with a safe dosage, HCQ concentration in the above tissues is likely to be achieved to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Clinical investigation found that high concentration of cytokines were detected in the plasma of critically ill patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, suggesting that cytokine storm was associated with disease severity 12 . Other than its direct antiviral activity, HCQ is a safe and successful anti-inflammatory agent that has been used extensively in autoimmune diseases and can significantly decrease the production of cytokines and, in particular, pro-inflammatory factors. Therefore, in COVID-19 patients, HCQ may also contribute to attenuating the inflammatory response. In conclusion, our results show that HCQ can efficiently inhibit SARS-CoV-2 infection in vitro. In combination with its anti-inflammatory function, we predict that the drug has a good potential to combat the disease. This possibility awaits confirmation by clinical trials. We need to point out, although HCQ is less toxic than CQ, prolonged and overdose usage can still cause poisoning. And the relatively low SI of HCQ
requires careful designing and conducting of clinical trials to achieve efficient and safe control of the SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Factors Associated With Mental Health Outcomes Among Health Care Workers Exposed to Coronavirus Disease 2019

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7090843/

SHA: 0a08fddd9dcee1b1254a05b49113521bbc423ccd

Authors: Lai, Jianbo; Ma, Simeng; Wang, Ying; Cai, Zhongxiang; Hu, Jianbo; Wei, Ning; Wu, Jiang; Du, Hui; Chen, Tingting; Li, Ruiting; Tan, Huawei; Kang, Lijun; Yao, Lihua; Huang, Manli; Wang, Huafen; Wang, Gaohua; Liu, Zhongchun; Hu, Shaohua
Date: 2020-03-23
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3976
License: cc-by