COVID-19 Infection and Mortality among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients and Candidates before availability of specific vaccines in Colombia

Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2690-8808/0178

COVID-19 Infection and Mortality among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients and Candidates before availability of specific vaccines in Colombia

  • Yazmin Rocio Arias-Murillo 1*
  • Maria Angélica salinas- N 2
  • Miguel Ángel Castro-Jiménez 3
  • Camilo Montero 4
  • Jorge Alberto Cortes 5

1 Coordinación Nacional de la Red de Donación y Trasplante. Grupo de Investigación en Bancos de Sangre, Transfusiones y Trasplantes. Instituto Nacional de Salud. Colombia.

2 Coordinación Nacional de la Red de Donación y Trasplante. Grupo de Investigación en Bancos de Sangre, Transfusiones y Trasplantes. Instituto Nacional de Salud. Colombia.

3 Coordinación Nacional de la Red de Donación y Trasplante. Instituto Nacional de Salud. Colombia

4 Programa de Trasplantes. Clinica Colsanitas. Colombia.

5 Departamento de Medicina Interna, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia

*Corresponding Author: Yazmin Rocio Arias-Murillo, Department of surgery, Government Medical College Shadol, India.

Citation: Yazmin Rocio Arias-Murillo, Maria Angélica salinas- N, Castro-Jiménez MA, Camilo Montero, Jorge A Cortes. (2023), COVID-19 Infection and Mortality among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients and Candidates before availability of specific vaccines in Colombia. J, Clinical Case Reports and Studies, 5(1); DOI:10.31579/2690-8808/0178

Copyright: © 2024, Yazmin Rocio Arias-Murillo. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Received: 15 December 2023 | Accepted: 02 January 2024 | Published: 05 January 2024

Keywords: specific vaccines; infection and mortality

Abstract

According to official data provided by the World Health Organization (WHO), China reported the first cases related to the COVID-19 pandemic on December 31, 2019. More than two months later, WHO declared the new infection a pandemic on March 11, 2020. 

Introduction

According to official data provided by the World Health Organization (WHO), China reported the first cases related to the COVID-19 pandemic on December 31, 2019. More than two months later, WHO declared the new infection a pandemic on March 11, 2020 [1]. 

The SARS-CoV-2 infection was diagnosed for the first time in Colombia in a young woman who returned from Italy on March 6, 2020. Since that day and until February 28, 2021, the country had 2.251.690 accumulated laboratory-confirmed cases, of which 59.766 (2,6%) had died, and 36.659 (1,6%) were still active [2]. 

Solid organ transplant recipients are considered as a high-risk group for developing COVID-19-related complications [3-4]. Several studies showed poor clinical outcomes and an increased risk of death in these individuals than in those who were waitlisted [5-7]. An earlier investigation from the United States, however, found that waitlisted patients were more likely to require hospitalization (82% vs. 65%) and were at a higher risk of mortality (34% vs. 16%) than transplant patients [7]. 

The availability of information obtained through interinstitutional strategic collaboration as complimentary sources of data that is being developed in Colombia can be used to, for example, study the impact of COVID-19 in the Colombian population. Under these considerations, the main objective of this paper is to describe epidemiological measures such as positivity rates of infection, deaths, mortality, and case-fatality ratios in both solid organ transplant recipients and waitlisted candidates during the first year from the arrival of COVID-19 to Colombia, the total period before specific viral vaccines were distributed around the country.

Methodology

Design and period of study

We conducted an observational study using several sources of routinely collected health data, with follow-up of the vital status, of both waitlisted candidates and transplant recipients carried out in Colombia. The analysis period runs from March 6, 2020, the day of the first confirmed imported case in Colombia, to February 28, 2021 (cut-off day of the current analysis, also representing the total pandemic period before COVID-19 vaccines were available in the country). The COVID-19 vaccines program in Colombia began at the end of February/2021, so our results basically reflect the situation of solid organ transplant recipients and candidates (waitlist) before the introduction of specific vaccines in the Colombian population.

Selection of subjects 

The complete list of potentially eligible subjects was obtained from the National Donation and Transplant Information System (RedDataINS©) of the National Health Institute of Colombia, the institution in charge of managing the donation and transplantation process in the country. In our study, we included those subjects in the list who had a known result (positive or negative) of a SARS-CoV-2 test by using the National COVID-19 Data Repository (SISMUESTRAS), which is the official dataset of the laboratory results of the COVID-19 tests. There were no additional exclusion criteria

Definition of a positive case of SARS-Cov-2 infection

In this study the presence of a infection was defined as a positive result on real‐time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay of nasal and/or pharyngeal swab specimens and/or a positive result on a serological or antigen test as it was reported by authorized clinical laboratories throughout the country, either public or private, as part of their function for supporting the clinical diagnostic process or as screening before, for example, of surgical procedures. 

Data collection

Baseline sociodemographic and clinical variables related to history of chronic conditions, type of organ affected, results of the COVID-19 test, vital status at the time of cut-off and immediate cause of death were included in the study. An additional variable was created for this study to identify those waitlisted candidates who changed their status to transplant recipient after the COVID-19 test. In according to this variable, we established three categories of subjects for the study: those who were transplant recipients before the diagnostic test; those who were on the waiting list both before and after the diagnostic test until death or the cut-off date, and those who received a transplant after the diagnostic test.

Data collection

RedDataINS system let us select subjects and obtain clinical information for each of them. It was complemented, if available to a specific individual, with that from the National Public Health Surveillance System (SIVIGILA). 

On the other hand, information of deaths was obtained from the provisional information of a National System of Vital Statistics (RUAF-ND), 

which is based on medical death certificates and let to identify if deaths were due to COVID-19 or not. This database may be subject to updating (in our case, it was verified at Jun 30, 2021).

Statistical analysis

We summarize quantitative variables with arithmetic means (standard deviation) or medians (interquartile ranges, IQR) and categorical variables with proportions. We calculated percentages (%) of positivity to infection, number of deaths, case-fatality ratios (CFR), and all-cause mortality for each group and subgroup of analysis. 

Ethical aspects

This research used data derived from pre-existing databases in the country. Subjects were not directly interviewed or exposed to any clinical intervention. The study had no any risk or negative consequence for subjects. 

Results

Basic demographic and clinical information

At the cut-off date, a total of 9779 persons were registered in the RedData-INS© database. The present analysis includes 2551 (26%) of them, who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 and whose results were reported (see above). Most of the subjects included were men (57,9%), aged between 50 and 59 years old (23,4%) and lived in a low socioeconomic status (i.e., the first two levels of six: 45,8 %), in Bogotá (32,5%) or were affiliated to the contributive regime of health insurance (57,0%). 

The median age of individuals was 48 years (range: 0-84; IQR: 34-59), and it was six years higher in who tested positive than in negatives (53 vs 47), and in men (51; IQR: 37-61) than in women (43; IQR: 31-56). Kidney, followed by liver, is the most common organ needed among subjects of the study, 81% of subjects who tested positive and ~73% of those who tested negative were either transplant recipients or waitlisted candidates of kidney. 

There was a high prevalence of chronic comorbidities, mainly hypertension (70,1%) and autoimmune diseases (26%), among the subjects. The prevalence of these chronic conditions was, in absolute terms, higher in who tested positive than in negatives, except in those who had an autoimmune disease (Table 1). 

Table 1: Distribution of subjects in according to results of SARS-CoV-2 test and selected demographic and clinical conditions, Colombia, 6 March 2020- 28 February 2021

The distribution of subjects according to the test results, history of transplant at the testing day and vital status at the end of follow-up, both grouped and by specific organ is shown in Figure 1. About 55% of the subjects were transplant recipients before the COVID-19 test. 

Positivity rates to SARS-CoV-2

A total of 602 (23,2%) subjects was diagnosed as having the viral infection as indicated by a positive test. The positive percentages were 

similar in both transplant recipients (23,1%) and in waitlisted subjects (24,2%). A positive test was found in 25,6%, 16,3%, 10,4% and 22,4% of the kidney, liver, heart, and lung subjects (for both transplant and waitlisted subjects of each specific organ), respectively.  The positivity to infection was similar in transplant and nontransplant subjects of kidney (~25%), but clinically higher in transplant recipients of liver and heart and in those waitlisted for lung than in those of the respective complementary group (Figure 1, inferior boxes).

Figure 1. Distribution of subjects in according to the result of SARS-CoV-2 test, vital status at the end of follow-up and cause of death. Transplant recipients and non-transplant (waiting list) patients. All solid organs and by specific organ. Colombia, March 2020-February 2021

Median time of follow-up

The median time elapsed from the day of the COVID-19 test to the end of the study (or death) was 184 days for all the subjects (IQR: 127-239), men (IQR: 127-236) and women (IQR: 126-241); 175 days (IQR: 108-223, range: 0-342) in those who tested positive and 186 days (IQR: 130-246, range: 0-356) in those negative to the infection. The median time was 179 days (IQR: 125-233) in those transplanted subjects before the test and 193 days (IQR: 129-243) in those in waiting list. In the case of kidney, median time of follow-up was 175 days (IQR: 108-223, range: 0-342) in those who tested positive and 186 days (IQR: 130-246, range: 0-356) in those negative to the infection.

Deaths, mortality, and case-fatality ratios

There were 265 (10,4%) deaths from all causes during the follow-up period among all subjects of the study, in 119 (44,9%) of them COVID-19 was the underlying cause of death, resulting in a COVID-19-specific mortality of 4,7% (119/2551) for all the subjects of the study, and in about 1 death of each five subjects who tested positive (119/602; case-fatality ratio=19,8%) (see Figure 1). Of patients who had a positive test for the virus, 28 (4,7%) died from causes other than COVID-19. 

Case-fatality ratios were 21,4% and 20% in those subjects who were transplanted before and in those who changed his/her status from waitlisted to transplanted after the index COVID-19 test, respectively, and 17% in those who remained as waitlisted candidates to the end of follow-up or death. 

On the other hand, among patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, the probability of die for COVID-19 (i.e., as the underlying cause of death) was higher in transplant recipients (87,3% of them) than in those who remained on waiting list (73%). Besides, mortality rates due to COVID-19 was 5,1% among the total of transplant recipients and 4,1% among those waitlisted candidates.

In patients who died having tested positive for COVID-19, and whose death was attributable to that infection, the median number of days from diagnosis 

to death was 22 (IQR: 12-37, range: 0-309). It was 23 days (IQR: 12-39, range: 2-309) in transplant recipients and 21 days (IQR: 12-28, range: 0-176) in those on waiting lists. 

There was a higher proportion of deaths from all causes among those who were on the waiting list than in those transplanted for the same organ. The all-causes mortality was lower in patients on waiting list for kidney (9,8%) than in those on waiting list of the other organs (16,9%-31,8%) albeit in transplant patients it was lower in liver and lung than in kidney and heart. 

However, COVID-19, as a cause of death, was more frequent in kidney than in the other organs studied in both transplant recipients and waitlisted subjects. In fact, the percentage of COVID-19-related deaths was as high as 63,3% in transplant patients of kidney and ranging from 0,0% to 39,1% in the cases of lung, heart, and liver. Related to this finding, the case-fatality ratio due to COVID-19 was also higher in kidney transplant recipients than in those who had a liver, heart, and lung transplant but, in the case of patients on the waiting list, the CFR was higher for liver and heart than in kidney or lung patients. There were no observed deaths by COVID-19 in the cases of lung and pancreas patients (CFR=0,0% for both). 

In dead patients who had tested positive for COVID-19, and whose death was attributable to this infection, the median numbers of days from diagnosis to death were 21 days (IQR: 12-36,5; n=96 deaths), 20 days (IQR: 14-28, n=15) and 63,5 days (IQR: 45-70, n=4) in, respectively, the cases of kidney, liver, and heart in transplant and nontransplant patients. This measure was similar between transplant (median=20 days, IQR: 13-38, n=55) and nontransplant (median=21 days, IQR: 11-29, n=41) subjects of kidney but higher in transplant patients (median=24 days, IQR: 12-33, n=9) than in those waitlisted (median=19,5 days, IQR: 19-26, n=6) patients of liver. Among those 28 patients who were infected and died in follow-up, but their underlying cause of death was other than COVID-19, the most common immediate causes of death were cardiogenic shock (21,4%), haemorrhagic shock (10,7%) and acute myocardial infarction (10,7%) (Table 2).


                                                                          

Table 2: Immediate cause of death in infected transplant and nontransplant patients whose underlying cause of death was other than COVID-19 (N=28).

Discussion

These results, based on national data of a middle-income country, indicate that proportions of positivity to SARS-CoV-2 infection were basically the same for solid organ transplant (23,1%) and waitlisted (24,2%) subjects among those with a known result of the test, which was also seen in kidney and liver, the two most common solid organs needed in Colombia. These percentages are higher than those reported for solid organ transplant patients in other countries in a similar period of study ranging from 5% to 11% [9-10] 

However, as in general population [11], the true level of transmission of the virus in the transplant and waitlisted population in the country may be even underestimated if we compare with the results of the subjects participants in this study because of several reasons including that a high proportion of individuals with the infection might be undetected (subclinical or asymptomatic presentation of the infection) [12,13], misdiagnosed (e.g., due to clinical- or diagnostic test-related failures) [14,15] or have a lower opportunity for access to healthcare [16], among others.

Solid organ transplant recipients are a very special population given by their chronic immunocompromised state which is linked to a higher risk for severe COVID-19 but being counterbalanced by its beneficial effect on the cytokine storm [17]. Waitlisted patients may also have a high risk of severe complications and death in the course of the infection due to aspects such as a high prevalence of chronic diseases 18]. 

Of the total of subjects included in our study, 10% died with about 45% (119/2.551) of these deaths were attributable to COVID-19, which also means that 4,2% of subjects in waitlist and 5,1% of those who were transplanted before the index test died due to this infection. Solid organ transplant recipients have a high prevalence of comorbidities, and they are at 

increased risk of complications and death from COVID-19, which has been described around the world [19-25]. In the same sense of it, it was noted a high prevalence of chronic disease among subjects included in Colombia. 

Comparing our specific results in mortality measures of kidney with those published from France, CFR was higher in our country for both transplant subjects (23,8% and 20,1% (122/606), respectively) and waitlisted candidates (16,5% and 12,6% (60/478), respectively) [26]. However, a more realistic comparison between studies requires additional epidemiological analyses for studying the effects of factors such as age, sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, prevalence of comorbid conditions and even duration of follow-up, among others.

The median survival time from the positive test to the COVID-19-related death was similar comparing both kidney (21 days) and liver (20 days) transplant recipients and candidates. That median time was also similar in transplant and nontransplant patients of kidney, but we also found a higher median time in transplant recipients than in waitlisted subjects of liver. During the follow-up, there were no detected COVID-19-attributable deaths for waitlisted or transplant patients of lung or pancreas but their percentage of participation among the total is really low. 

Our study offers a general and specific by organ panorama of the effects of COVID-19 on deaths for both transplant and waitlisted population since COVID-19 report was mandatory for public health purposes. However, our study has some limitations that should be considered, which are mainly focused on the representativeness of the subjects whose COVID-19 test results was known with respect to the totality of the individuals being waitlisted candidates or transplant recipients. Since we chose only patients with a known result of SARS CoV-2 test, overall and specific measures of mortality described here might be, however, overestimated comparing to the behavior of the infection in the rest of subjects of the RedDataINS© national database. The 2020 report of statistics published by the Donation and Transplantation Network Group of the Colombian NIH established that there were 251 deaths (of any cause) among a total of 2978 waitlisted patients, resulting in a mortality of 8,4% [27]. In our study, mortality was estimated in 11,3% for the same group, a difference of about 3 more deaths for each 100 patients, albeit this difference would be lower due the absence of pandemic virus in the country during the first 2 months of the year used for the 2020 annual report but not for our study. It is also noteworthy that the overall mortality in waitlisted patients had been reported in 4,78% in 2018 [28] and 4,87% in 2019 [29]. It means that, in according to the 2020 report, there were 3-4 more deaths per 100 subjects comparing to these pre-pandemic years, or 6 based on our results. If waitlisted subjects who had positive tests included in our study are ignored, our study reduces the overall mortality to 7,4% among waitlisted subjects (negative for SARS-CoV-2), meaning an unexplained excess of about 2,6 deaths for 100 subjects after discarding the effect of COVID-19 diagnosis. 

These results show that COVID-19-attributtable mortality is high and it could explain the number increased of deaths found in our study, although there is a wide range of demographic characteristics of patients to be considered. The findings described here are important because these patients represent a vulnerable population and are often excluded from clinical trials of vaccines [30]. In addition, 134 cases of death were reported during the study period among patients with solid organ transplants, of which 69 were attributed to COVID-19, that is, more than half of the deaths (51.5%) that occurred in our series were secondary to COVID-19. Because we have included only subjects with a positive or negative result to the COVID-19 test, total numbers of deaths are lower than they are for all solid organ transplant recipient or candidates. In fact, for kidney recipients, other national source of health data shows 138 all-causes deaths (n=138) reported among them in a year (July 2019- June 2020), which means about 53% more deaths than reported in our study (31).

In conclusion, we found a very important role of COVID-19 on deaths of solid organ transplant recipients and candidates during the first year of the pandemic in Colombia, a period in which specific vaccines were unavailable around the country. Our findings support the need of designing combined preventive and therapeutic strategies from clinical and epidemiological perspectives, which should become an integral part of the approach to this special population in Colombia.

References

Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.

img

Virginia E. Koenig

Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.

img

Delcio G Silva Junior

Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.

img

Ziemlé Clément Méda

Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.

img

Mina Sherif Soliman Georgy

We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.

img

Layla Shojaie

The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.

img

Sing-yung Wu

Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.

img

Orlando Villarreal

Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.

img

Katarzyna Byczkowska

Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.

img

Anthony Kodzo-Grey Venyo

Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.

img

Pedro Marques Gomes

Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.

img

Bernard Terkimbi Utoo

This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.

img

Prof Sherif W Mansour

Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.

img

Hao Jiang

As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.

img

Dr Shiming Tang

Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.

img

Raed Mualem

International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.

img

Andreas Filippaios

Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.

img

Dr Suramya Dhamija

Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.

img

Bruno Chauffert

I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!

img

Baheci Selen

"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".

img

Jesus Simal-Gandara

I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.

img

Douglas Miyazaki

We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.

img

Dr Griffith

I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.

img

Dr Tong Ming Liu

I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.

img

Husain Taha Radhi

I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.

img

S Munshi

Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.

img

Tania Munoz

“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.

img

George Varvatsoulias

Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.

img

Rui Tao

Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.

img

Khurram Arshad