Risk Factors for Severe Disease and Efficacy of Treatment in Patients Infected With COVID-19: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Zhang JJY
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7239203 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Risk Factors for Severe Disease and Efficacy of Treatment in Patients Infected With COVID-19: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression Analysis.
Zhang John J Y JJY Lee Keng Siang KS Ang Li Wei LW Leo Yee Sin YS Young Barnaby Edward BE
Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 20201101 16
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic spread globally in the beginning of 2020. At present, predictors of severe disease and the efficacy of different treatments are not well understood. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published studies up to 15 March 2020, which reported COVID-19 clinical features and/or treatment outcomes. Forty-five studies reporting 4203 patients were included. Pooled rates of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mortality, and acute resp ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundBeing protease inhibitors and owing to their efficacy in SARS-CoV, lopinavir + ritonavir (L/R) combination is being used in the management of COVID-19. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we have evaluated the comparative safety and efficacy of L/R combination.Materials and methodsComparative, observational studies and controlled clinical trials comparing L/R combination to standard of care (SOC)/control or any other antiviral agent/combinations were included. A total of 10 databases were searched to identify 13 studies that fulfilled the predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria.ResultsNo discernible beneficial effect was seen in the L/R group in comparison to SOC/control in terms of "progression to more severe state" (4 studies, odds ratio [OR]: 1.446 [0.722-2.895]), "mortality" (3 studies, OR: 1.208 [0.563-2.592]), and "virological cure on days 7-10" (3 studies, OR: 0.777 [0.371-1.630]), while the L/R combination arm performed better than the SOC/control arm in terms of "duration of hospital stay" (3 studies, mean difference (MD): -1.466 [-2.403 to - 0.529]) and "time to virological cure" (3 studies, MD: -3.272 [-6.090 to - 0.454]). No difference in efficacy was found between L/R versus hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and L/R versus arbidol. However, in a single randomized controlled trail (open label), chloroquine (CQ) performed better than L/R. The combination L/R with arbidol may be beneficial (in terms of virological clearance and radiological improvement); however, we need more dedicated studies. Single studies report efficacy of L/R + interferon (IFN, either alpha or 1-beta) combination. We need more studies to delineate the proper effect size. Regarding adverse effects, except occurrence of diarrhea (higher in the L/R group), safety was comparable to SOC.ConclusionIn our study, no difference was seen between the L/R combination and the SOC arm in terms of "progression to more severe state," "mortality," and virological cure on days 7-10;" however, some benefits in terms of "duration of hospital stay" and "time to virological cure" were seen. No significant difference in efficacy was seen when L/R was compared to arbidol and HCQ monotherapy. Except for the occurrence of diarrhea, which was higher in the L/R group, safety profile of L/R is comparable to SOC. Compared to L/R combination, CQ, L/R + arbidol, L/R + IFN-α, and L/R + IFN-1β showed better efficacy, but the external validity of these findings is limited by limited number of studies (1 study each).
| S-EPMC7722914 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been the most important global issue since December 2019. Although the clinical course of COVID-19 is known to be milder in children than in adults, associated hospitalizations among children have increased since the emergence of contagious severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants and the achievement of a high vaccination rate in adults. Considering these global and domestic situations, we believe that risk stratification in children with COVID-19 is urgently needed for decision making regarding hospitalization priority in children infected with SARS-CoV-2 and vaccination priority against COVID-19.MethodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by comprehensively searching the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and KoreaMed databases through August 25, 2021. The criteria for enrollment were "severe COVID-19" as poor outcomes (intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, and/or death) and underlying comorbidities before SARS-CoV-2 infection.ResultsAmong 872 screened studies, 17 articles were included in the systematic review, and 10 articles were included in the meta-analysis. Neonate (risk ratio [RR], 2.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.83-3.97), prematurity in young infants (RR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.63-2.46), obesity (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.24-1.64), diabetes (RR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.95-2.62), chronic lung disease (RR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.71-4.00), heart disease (RR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.58-2.09), neurologic disease (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05-1.33), and immunocompromised status (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.01-2.04) were significant risk factors for severe COVID-19 in children. In the subgroup analysis, age younger than 3 months (RR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.11-0.66), asthma (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.98-1.20), and neurodevelopmental disorders (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.75-1.04) were not risk factors for severe COVID-19.ConclusionChildren with comorbidities such as obesity, diabetes, heart disease, chronic lung diseases other than asthma, seizure disorders, and an immunocompromised status had a high prevalence of severe COVID-19. Neonate and premature infants had a high risk of severe COVID-19. Defining the high-risk group for severe COVID-19 could help to guide hospital admission and priority for vaccination against SARS-CoV-2.
| S-EPMC8822112 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of baricitinib in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).MethodsDatabases were searched for studies that compared the clinical efficacy and adverse effects of baricitinib with standard therapy for the treatment of severe COVID-19 and clearly reported relevant outcomes published until December 31, 2022. The corresponding data were extracted from these studies. A fixed-effects model was used to calculate the pooled estimates. The study protocol can be accessed at PROSPERO (CRD42023394173).ResultsThe baricitinib group had a significantly lower mortality rate and proportion of patients who received mechanical ventilation than the control group (OR = 0.61, 0.57; P = .008, 0.02; 95% CI 0.42-0.88; 0.35-0.92; I2 = 71% and 86%, respectively). The length of hospital stay and rates of severe adverse events were not significantly different between the 2 groups.ConclusionBaricitinib reduces mortality and mechanical ventilation requirements in patients with severe COVID-19. Therefore, we developed a comprehensive understanding of the role of baricitinib in patients with severe COVID-19.
| S-EPMC10695502 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTill now, no meta-analysis is available to address the clinical profile, risk factors, different interventions, and outcomes among COVID-19-associated rhino-orbito-cerebral mucormycosis (C-ROCM) cases.Materials and methodsEight literature databases were screened using appropriate keywords from November 1, 2019, to June 30, 2021. The objectives were to analyze the clinical and microbiological profile, risk factor/comorbidity, intervention, and outcome. "R-metafor package" was used for analysis.ResultsA total of 23 studies were included. The mean age of presentation of C-ROCM was 54.6 years. The most common presentation was ptosis (72.7%), lid edema (60.6%), proptosis (60.6%), ophthalmoplegia (57.3%), loss of vision (53.7%), facial edema (34.7%), and nasal-blockage (11.8%). Evidence of intracranial spread was seen in 42.8% of cases. Rhizopus was the most common fungus (57.1%) isolated in fungal culture. Among C-ROCM patients, diabetes was the commonest comorbid condition, and the use of corticosteroids related to COVID-19 treatment was the most common risk factor (85.75%). Compared to controlled diabetics, C-ROCM was significantly higher among uncontrolled diabetics (odds ratio [OR] 0.15, 95% confidence interval [C.I.] 0.041-0.544, P = 0.0010). However, no significant association was seen between C-ROCM and COVID-19 severity (OR 0.930, 95% C.I. 0.212-4.087, P = 0.923). For treatment, amphotericin-B was the most common antifungal drug used which was followed by surgical options. However, mortality was high (prevalence 0.344, 95% C.I. 0.205-0.403) despite treatment.ConclusionAlthough local rhino-orbito symptoms were the first to appear, rapid intracranial extension was seen in a significant number of C-ROCM cases. Uncontrolled diabetes and excessive use of corticosteroid were the most common risk factors present among the C-ROCM cases. High index clinical suspicion is imperative (specifically among COVID-19 patients with diabetes), and routine screening may be helpful.
| S-EPMC8764981 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Since December 2019, the pneumonia cases infected with 2019 novel coronavirus have appeared, posing a critical threat to global health. In this study, we performed a meta-analysis to discover the different clinical characteristics between severe and non-severe patients with COVID-19 to find the potential risk factors and predictors of this disease's severity, as well as to serve as a guidance for subsequent epidemic prevention and control work. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase and other databases were searched to collect studies on the difference of clinical characteristics of severe and non-severe patients. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software, and the funnel plots could be made to evaluate the publication bias. P>0.05 means no statistical significance. Furthermore, a meta-regression analysis was performed by using Stata 15.0 to find the potential factors of the high degree of heterogeneity (I2>50%). Sixteen studies have been included, with 1,172 severe patients and 2,803 non-severe patients. Compared with non-severe patients, severe patients were more likely to have the symptoms of dyspnea, hemoptysis, and the complications of ARDS, shock, secondary infection, acute kidney injury, and acute cardiac injury. Interestingly, the former smokers were more prevalent in severe cases as compared to non-severe cases, but there was no difference between the two groups of 'current smokers'. Except for chronic liver disease and chronic kidney disease, the underlying comorbidities of hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), malignancy, cerebrovascular disease, and HIV can make the disease worse. In terms of laboratory indicators, the decreased lymphocyte and platelet count, and the increased levels of white blood cell (WBC), D-dimer, creatine kinase, lactate dehydrogenase, procalcitonin, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and C-reactive protein were more prevalent in severe patients. Meta-regression analysis showed that patient age, gender, and proportion of severe cases did not significantly impact on the outcomes of any clinical indexes that showed high degree of heterogeneity in the meta-analysis. In conclusion, the severity of COVID-19 could be evaluated by, radiologic finding, some symptoms like dyspnea and hemoptysis, some laboratory indicators, and smoking history, especially the ex-smokers. Compared with non-severe patients, severe patients were more likely to have complications and comorbidities including hypertension, cardiovascular disease etc., which were the risk factors for the disease to be severer, but the chronic liver disease and chronic kidney disease were not associated the severity of COVID-19 in China.
| S-EPMC7797827 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Summary Vitamin D has many protective properties and potential role against acute lung injury. Low serum vitamin D is associated with high risk of pneumonia and development of acute respiratory distress syndrome. This study sought to analyse the efficacy of vitamin D in improving the outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid‐19) patients. Using specific keywords, we comprehensively searched the potential articles on PubMed, Europe PMC and ClinicalTrials.gov database until 8th May 2021. All published studies on Covid‐19 and vitamin D were retrieved. Statistical analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.4 software. A total of 11 studies with 22,265 Covid‐19 patients were included in the meta‐analysis. Our data suggested that vitamin D supplementation was associated with reduction in intensive care unit admission rate (OR 0.27; 95% CI: 0.09–0.76, p = 0.010, I2 = 70%, random‐effect modelling); reduction of the need for mechanical ventilation (OR 0.34; 95% CI: 0.16–0.72, p = 0.005, I2 = 61%, random‐effect modelling) and reduction of mortality from Covid‐19 (OR 0.37; 95% CI: 0.21–0.66, p < 0.001, I2 = 50%, random‐effect modelling). Further analysis showed that the associations were influenced by age (p = 0.020). Our study suggests that vitamin D supplementation may offer beneficial effects on Covid‐19 outcomes. However, more randomized clinical trials are required to confirm this conclusion.
| S-EPMC8420388 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the extent of sleep disturbances during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eleven databases and six preprint repositories were searched for the period from November 1, 2019, to July 15, 2021. The DerSimonian and Laird method was used to develop random-effect meta-analyses. Two hundred and fifty studies comprising 493,475 participants from 49 countries were included. During COVID-19, the estimated global prevalence of sleep disturbances was 40.49% [37.56; 43.48%]. Bayesian meta-analysis revealed an odds of 0.68 [0.59; 0.77] which translates to a rate of approximately 41%. This provides reassurance that the estimated rate using classical meta-analysis is robust. Six major populations were identified; the estimated prevalence of sleep problem was 52.39% [41.69; 62.88%] among patients infected with COVID-19, 45.96% [36.90; 55.30%] among children and adolescents, 42.47% [37.95; 47.12%] among healthcare workers, 41.50% [32.98; 50.56%] among special populations with healthcare needs, 41.16% [28.76; 54.79%] among university students, and 36.73% [32.32; 41.38%] among the general population. Sleep disturbances were higher during lockdown compared to no lockdown, 42.49% versus 37.97%. Four in every ten individuals reported a sleep problem during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients infected with the disease, children, and adolescents appeared to be the most affected groups.
| S-EPMC8782754 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background COVID-19 pandemic has created a need to identify potential predictors of severe disease. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of gastrointestinal predictors of severe COVID-19. Methods An extensive literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane. Odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) were calculated for proportional and continuous outcomes using a random-effect model. For each outcome, a 95% confidence interval (CI) and P-value were generated. Results A total of 83 studies (26912 patients, mean age 43.5±16.4 years, 48.2% female) were included. Gastrointestinal predictors of severe COVID-19 included the presence of diarrhea (OR 1.50, 95%CI 1.10-2.03; P=0.01), elevated serum aspartate aminotransferase (AST) (OR 4.00, 95%CI 3.02-5.28; P<0.001), and elevated serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (OR 2.54, 95%CI 1.91-3.37; P<0.001). Significantly higher levels of mean AST (MD 14.78 U/L, 95%CI 11.70-17.86 U/L; P<0.001), ALT (MD 11.87 U/L, 95%CI 9.23-14.52 U/L; P<0.001), and total bilirubin (MD 2.08 mmol/L, 95%CI 1.36-2.80 mmol/L; P<0.001) were observed in the severe COVID-19 group compared to non-severe COVID-19 group. Conclusion Gastrointestinal symptoms and biomarkers should be assessed early to recognize severe COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7599357 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This systemic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of tocilizumab for the treatment of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Candidate studies up to 24 May 2020 were identified from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, medRxiv and bioRxiv. Treatment outcomes included mortality, risk of intensive care unit (ICU) admission and the requirement for mechanical ventilation (MV). Seven retrospective studies involving 592 adult patients with severe COVID-19, including 240 in the tocilizumab group and 352 in the control group, were enrolled. All-cause mortality of severe COVID-19 patients among the tocilizumab group was 16.3% (39/240), which was lower than that in the control group (24.1%; 85/352). However, the difference did not reach statistical significance [risk ratio (RR) = 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-1.22; I2 = 68%]. Additionally, risk of ICU admission was similar between the tocilizumab and control groups (35.1% vs. 15.8%; RR = 1.51, 95% CI 0.33-6.78; I2 = 86%). The requirement for MV was similar between the tocilizumab and control groups (32.4% vs. 28.6%; RR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.14-4.94; I2 = 91%). However, these non-significant differences between the tocilizumab and control groups may have been the result of baseline characteristics of the tocilizumab group, which were more severe than those of the control group. Based on low-quality evidence, there is no conclusive evidence that tocilizumab would provide any additional benefit to patients with severe COVID-19. Therefore, further recommendation of tocilizumab for COVID-19 cases should be halted until high-quality evidence from randomised controlled trials is available.
| S-EPMC7377685 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo systematically review clinical and biochemical characteristics associated with the severity of the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-related disease (COVID-19).Materials and methodsSystematic review of observational studies from PubMed, ISI Web of Science, SCOPUS and Cochrane databases including people affected by COVID-19 and reporting data according to the severity of the disease. Data were combined with odds ratio (OR) and metanalysed. Severe COVID-19 was defined by acute respiratory distress syndrome, intensive care unit admission and death.ResultsWe included 12 studies with 2794 patients, of whom 596 (21.33%) had severe disease. A slightly higher age was found in severe vs non-severe disease. We found that prevalent cerebrovascular disease (odds ratio [OR] 3.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.73-7.72), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR: 2.39, 95% CI 1.10-5.19), prevalent cardiovascular disease (OR: 2.84, 95% CI 1.59-5.10), diabetes (OR: 2.78, 95% CI 2.09-3.72), hypertension (OR: 2.24, 95% CI 1.63-3.08), smoking (OR: 1.54, 95% CI 1.07-2.22) and male sex (OR: 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.49) were associated with severe disease. Furthermore, increased procalcitonin (OR: 8.21, 95% CI 4.48-15.07), increased D-Dimer (OR: 5.67, 95% CI 1.45-22.16) and thrombocytopenia (OR: 3.61, 95% CI 2.62-4.97) predicted severe infection.ConclusionCharacteristics associated with the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection may allow an early identification and management of patients with poor outcomes.
| S-EPMC7435565 | biostudies-literature