Background: Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca are recently introduced vaccines to combat COVID-19 pandemic. During clinical trials, mild to moderate side effects have been associated with these vaccines. Thus, we aimed to evaluate short-term post-vaccination side effects. Methods: Cross-sectional, retrospective study using an online questionnaire was conducted among COVID-19 vaccines recipients in Saudi Arabia. General and demographic data were collected, and vaccine-associated side effects after receiving at least one dose of each vaccine were evaluated. Results: Our final sample consisted of 515 participants with a median age of 26 years. Most of the study participants were female (57%). Nearly 13% of the study subjects have reported previous infections with SARS-CoV-2. Oxford-AstraZeneca and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines have been received by 75% and 25% of the study participants, respectively. Side effects associated with COVID-19 vaccines have been reported by 60% of the study subjects, and most of them reported fatigue (90%), pain at the site of the injections (85%). Conclusion: Side effects that are reported post Oxford-AstraZeneca and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines among our study participants are not different from those that were reported in the clinical trials, indicating safe profiles for both vaccines. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of the current vaccines in protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfections.

The rapidly spreading Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), represents an unprecedented serious challenge to the global public health community. The extremely rapid international spread of the disease with significant morbidity and mortality made finding possible therapeutic interventions a global priority. While approved specific antiviral drugs against SARS-CoV-2 are still lacking, a large number of existing drugs are being explored as a possible treatment for COVID-19 infected patients. Recent publications have re-examined the use of Chloroquine (CQ) and/or Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a potential therapeutic option for these patients. In an attempt to explore the evidence that supports their use in COVID-19 patients, we comprehensively reviewed the previous studies which used CQ or HCQ as an antiviral treatment. Both CQ and HCQ demonstrated promising in vitro results, however, such data have not yet been translated into meaningful in vivo studies. While few clinical trials have suggested some beneficial effects of CQ and HCQ in COVID-19 patients, most of the reported data are still preliminary. Given the current uncertainty, it is worth being mindful of the potential risks and strictly rational the use of these drugs in COVID-19 patients until further high quality randomized clinical trials are available to clarify their role in the treatment or prevention of COVID-19.

As the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is caused by the novel SARS-CoV-2, continues to spread rapidly around the world, there is a need for well validated serological assays that allow the detection of viral specific antibody responses in COVID-19 patients or recovered individuals. In this study, we established and used multiple indirect Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA)-based serological assays to study the antibody response in COVID-19 patients. In order to validate the assays we determined the cut off values, sensitivity and specificity of the assays using sera collected from pre-pandemic healthy controls, COVID-19 patients at different time points after disease-onset, and seropositive sera to other human coronaviruses (CoVs). The developed SARS-CoV-2 S1 subunit of the spike glycoprotein and nucleocapsid (N)-based ELISAs not only showed high specificity and sensitivity but also did not show any cross-reactivity with other CoVs. We also show that all RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 patients tested in our study developed both virus specific IgM and IgG antibodies as early as week one after disease onset. Our data also suggest that the inclusion of both S1 and N in serological testing would capture as many potential SARS-CoV-2 positive cases as possible than using any of them alone. This is specifically important for tracing contacts and cases and conducting large-scale epidemiological studies to understand the true extent of virus spread in populations.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, continues to spread globally with significantly high morbidity and mortality rates. Antigen-specific responses are of unquestionable value for clinical management of COVID-19 patients. Here, we investigated the kinetics of IgM, IgG against the spike (S) and nucleoproteins (N) proteins and their neutralizing capabilities in hospitalized COVID-19 patients with different disease presentations (i.e., mild, moderate or severe), need for intensive care units (ICU) admission or outcomes (i.e., survival vs death). We show that SARS-CoV-2 specific IgG, IgM and neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) were readily detectable in almost all COVID-19 patients with various clinical presentations. Interestingly, significantly higher levels of nAbs as well as anti-S1 and -N IgG and IgM antibodies were found in patients with more severe symptoms, patients requiring admission to ICU or those with fatal outcomes. More importantly, early after symptoms onset, we found that the levels of anti-N antibodies correlated strongly with disease severity. Collectively, these findings provide new insights into the kinetics of antibody responses in COVID-19 patients with different disease severity.

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is an ongoing global pandemic that is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The severity and mortality rates of COVID-19 are affected by several factors, such as respiratory diseases, diabetes, and hypertension. Bacterial coinfections are another factor that could contribute to the severity of COVID-19. Limited studies have investigated morbidity and mortality due to microbial coinfections in COVID-19 patients. Here, we retrospectively studied the effects of bacterial coinfections on intensive care unit (ICU)-admitted patients with COVID-19 in Asir province, Saudi Arabia. We analyzed electronic medical records of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 at Asir Central Hospital. A total of 34 patients were included, and the clinical data of 16 patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 only and 18 patients coinfected with SARS-CoV-2 and bacterial infections were analyzed in our study. Our data showed that the length of stay at the hospital for patients infected with both SARS-CoV-2 and bacterial infection was 35.2 days, compared to 16.2 days for patients infected with only SARS-CoV-2 (p = 0.0001). In addition, higher mortality rates were associated with patients in the coinfection group compared to the SARS-CoV-2-only infected group (50% vs. 18.7%, respectively). The study also showed that gram-negative bacteria are the most commonly isolated bacteria in COVID-19 patients. To conclude, this study found that individuals with COVID-19 who presented with bacterial infections are at higher risk for a longer stay at the hospital and potentially death. Further studies with a larger population are warranted to better understand the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 with bacterial infections.

Background: Massive vaccination campaigns have been undertaken globally to combat the spread of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). While most COVID-19 vaccines have shown excellent efficacy and safety profiles in clinical studies, real-world monitoring of vaccine safety is still important. In this study, we aimed to investigate the early side effects of Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) mRNA vaccine in children between 12–18 years old in Saudi Arabia. Method: To investigate the side effects in children in this age range following the administration of either one or two doses of Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) mRNA vaccine, we conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study using a self-administered online survey. General and demographic data were collected, and vaccine-associated side effects following vaccination were evaluated. Results: The study recruited a total of 965 eligible participants. Overall, 571 (60%) of the study participants reported at least one side effect following Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) mRNA vaccination. The most frequently reported side effects were pain or redness at the site of injection (90%), fatigue (67%), fever (59%), headache (55%), nausea or vomiting (21%), and chest pain and shortness of breath (20%). Joint or bone pain were reported less frequently among our participants (2%). Our data showed that more female participants reported side effects compared to male participants, with 52% and 48%, respectively. Side effects were more common after the second dose compared to the first dose in our study cohort. Conclusions: While 60% of the children (12–18 years old) who received Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) mRNA vaccine reported side effects, our data showed that these side effects were not different from those that were reported in the clinical trials which lasted only for a few days. Side effects were more common after the second dose. Larger epidemiological and molecular studies are needed to evaluate the safety and the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine in protection of children against SARS-CoV-2 reinfections.