Biomarkers are valuable tools in clinical practice. In 2001, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) standardized the definition of a biomarker as a characteristic that is objectively measured and evaluated as an indicator of normal biological processes, pathogenic processes, or pharmacological responses to a therapeutic intervention. A biomarker has clinical relevance when it presents precision, standardization and reproducibility, suitability to the patient, straightforward interpretation by clinicians, and high sensitivity and/or specificity by the parameter it proposes to identify. Thus, serum biomarkers should have advantages related to the simplicity of the procedures and to the fact that venous blood collection is commonplace in clinical practice. We described the potentiality of cfDNA as a general clinical biomarker and focused on endothelial dysfunction. Circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) refers to extracellular DNA present in body fluid that may be derived from both normal and diseased cells. An increasing number of studies demonstrate the potential use of cfDNA as a noninvasive biomarker to determine physiologic and pathologic conditions. However, although still scarce, increasing evidence has been reported regarding using cfDNA in cardiovascular diseases. Here, we have reviewed the history of cfDNA, its source, molecular features, and release mechanism. We also show recent studies that have investigated cfDNA as a possible marker of endothelial damage in clinical settings. In the cardiovascular system, the studies are quite new, and although interesting, stronger evidence is still needed. However, some drawbacks in cfDNA methodologies should be overcome before its recommendation as a biomarker in the clinical setting.

Serum-based ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) has been widely used to detect anti–severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies. However, to date, no study has investigated patient urine as a biological sample to detect SARS-CoV-2 virus-specific antibodies. An in-house urine-based ELISA was developed using recombinant SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in urine was established, with 94% sensitivity and 100% specificity for the detection of anti–SARS-CoV-2 antibodies with the urine-based ELISA and 88% sensitivity and 100% specificity with a paired serum-based ELISA. The urine-based ELISA that detects anti–SARS-CoV-2 antibodies is a noninvasive method with potential application as a facile COVID-19 immunodiagnostic platform, which can be used to report the extent of exposure at the population level and/or to assess the risk of infection at the individual level.

Sepsis continues to be a significant public health challenge despite advances in understanding its pathophysiology and management strategies. Therefore, this study evaluated the value of cell-free nuclear DNA (cf-nDNA) and cell-free mitochondrial DNA (cf-mtDNA) for assessing the severity and prognosis of sepsis. Ninety-four patients were divided into three groups: infection (n = 32), sepsis (n = 30), and septic shock (n = 32). Plasma samples were collected at the time of diagnosis, and cfDNA concentrations were determined by qPCR assay. The results showed that plasma cfDNA levels increased with the severity of the disease. To distinguish between patients with infection and those with sepsis, the biomarker L1PA2₉₀ achieved the highest AUC of 0.817 (95% CI: 0.725–0.909), demonstrating a sensitivity of 77.0% and a specificity of 79.3%. When cf-nDNA was combined with the SOFA score, there was a significant improvement in the AUC (0.916 (0.853–0.979)), sensitivity (88.1%), and specificity (80.0%). Moreover, patients admitted to the ICU after being diagnosed with sepsis had significantly higher cf-nDNA concentrations. In patients admitted to the ICU, combining cf-nDNA with the SOFA score yielded an AUC of 0.753 (0.622–0.857), with a sensitivity of 95.2% and a specificity of 50.0%. cfDNA can differentiate between patients with infection and those with sepsis. It can also identify patients who are likely to be admitted to the ICU by predicting those with indications for intensive care, suggesting its potential as a biomarker for sepsis.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus underscored the crucial role of laboratorial tests as a strategy to control the disease, mainly to indicate the presence of specific antibodies in human samples from infected patients. Therefore, suitable recombinant antigens are relevant for the development of reliable tests, and so far, single recombinant proteins have been used. In this context, B-cell epitopes-based chimeric proteins can be an alternative to obtain tests with high accuracy through easier and cheaper production. The present study used bioinformatics tools to select specific B-cell epitopes from the spike (S) and the nucleocapsid (N) proteins from the SARS-CoV-2 virus, aiming to produce a novel recombinant chimeric antigen (N4S11-SC2). Eleven S and four N-derived B-cell epitopes were predicted and used to construct the N4S11-SC2 protein, which was analyzed in a recombinant format against serum and urine samples, by means of an in house-ELISA. Specific antibodies were detected in the serum and urine samples of COVID-19 patients, which were previously confirmed by qRT-PCR. Results showed that N4S11-SC2 presented 83.7% sensitivity and 100% specificity when using sera samples, and 91.1% sensitivity and 100% specificity using urine samples. Comparable findings were achieved with paired urine samples when compared to N and S recombinant proteins expressed in prokaryotic systems. However, better results were reached for N4S11-SC2 in comparison to the S recombinant protein when using paired serum samples. Anti-N4S11-SC2 antibodies were not clearly identified in Janssen Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19-vaccinated subjects, using serum or paired urine samples. In conclusion, this study presents a new chimeric recombinant antigen expressed in a prokaryotic system that could be considered as an alternative diagnostic marker for the SARS-CoV-2 infection, with the potential benefits to be used on serum or urine from infected patients.

Critical COVID-19 has been associated with altered patterns of cytokines. Distinct inflammatory processes in systemic and pulmonary sites have been reported, but studies comparing these two sites are still scarce. We aimed to evaluate the profile of pulmonary and systemic cytokines and chemokines in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Levels of cytokines and chemokines were measured in plasma samples and minibronchoalveolar lavage of critical COVID-19 patients within 48 h and 5–8 days after intubation. Distinct inflammatory processes were observed in the lungs and blood, which were regulated separately. Survivor patients showed higher lung cytokine levels including IFN-γ, IL-2, IL-4, G-CSF, and CCL4, while nonsurvivors displayed higher levels in the blood, which included IL-6, CXCL8, CXCL10, CCL2, and CCL4. Furthermore, our findings indicate that high TNF and CXCL8 levels in the mini-BAL were associated with better lung oxygen exchange capacity, whereas high levels of IFN-γ in plasma were associated with worse lung function, as measured using the PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio. These results suggest that a robust and localized inflammatory response in the lungs is protective and associated with survival, whereas a systemic inflammatory response is detrimental and associated with mortality in critical COVID-19.