1.
COVID-19 infection: the perspectives on immune responses.
Shi, Y, Wang, Y, Shao, C, Huang, J, Gan, J, Huang, X, Bucci, E, Piacentini, M, Ippolito, G, Melino, G
Cell death and differentiation. 2020;27(5):1451-1454
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
The SARS-CoV-2 infection triggers an immune response which varies greatly from one person to another. It can be roughly divided into three stages: stage I, an asymptomatic incubation period with or without detectable virus; stage II, non-severe symptomatic period with the presence of virus; stage III, severe respiratory symptomatic stage with high viral load. Currently around 15% of people infected end up in severe stage III. There appears to be a two-phase immune response; an early protective phase and a second inflammation-driven damaging phase. In phase one the adaptive immune system responds to the virus. Being in good general health is important in this phase to limiting the progression of the disease to a more severe stage. In phase two the innate immune system response to tissue damage caused by the virus could lead to widespread inflammation of the lungs and acute respiratory distress syndrome or respiratory failure. Therapeutically this raises the question of whether the immune response should be boosted in phase one and suppressed in phase two. There also appears to be an element of viral relapse in some patients discharged from hospital indicating that a virus-eliminating immune response may be difficult to achieve naturally. These same patients may also not respond to vaccines. Overall, it is still unclear why some people develop severe disease, whilst others do not. Overall immunity alone does not explain the differences in disease presentation.
2.
The treatment of oral aphthous ulceration or erosive lichen planus with topical clobetasol propionate in three preparations: a clinical and pilot study on 54 patients.
Lo Muzio, L, della Valle, A, Mignogna, MD, Pannone, G, Bucci, P, Bucci, E, Sciubba, J
Journal of oral pathology & medicine : official publication of the International Association of Oral Pathologists and the American Academy of Oral Pathology. 2001;(10):611-7
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study evaluated the clinical use of a corticosteroid in three preparations (topical clobetasol propionate ointment, clobetasol propionate in an oral analgesic base, and clobetasol propionate in an adhesive denture paste). METHODS Fifty-four patients (34 males and 20 females) with a history of vesiculo-ulcero-erosive oral lesions were selected: 24 with oral erosive lichen planus and 30 with aphthae. The subjects enrolled were randomly divided into three groups, each of 18 patients (10 with aphthae and 8 with lichen planus): the first was treated with topical clobetasol propionate ointment (0.05%) directly on the lesion(s) three times a day; the second with clobetasol propionate in an adhesive denture paste in equal amounts (1:1) two times a day; the third with clobetasol propionate in an oral analgesic base (Orabase-B) in equal amounts (1:1) two times a day. Each subject scored his or her symptoms daily from most severe (7) to none (0) by verbal assessments using a categorical scale. RESULTS In all cases, the administration of the corticosteroid was effective in producing remission of symptoms in each group of patients. Significant differences (P<0.05) between groups were determined by the Kruskal-Wallis test. The Dunn test was used in order to detect which group differs from the others; clobetasol and adhesive denture paste correlated with an early remission of pain in lichen and apthous lesions. CONCLUSION The results suggest that topical application of clobetasol in an adhesive denture paste is an effective drug for symptomatic oral vesiculo-erosive and/or ulcerative lesions.