Asthma and COVID-19: a systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Severe coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) presents with progressive dyspnea, which results from acute lung inflammatory edema leading to hypoxia. As with other infectious diseases that affect the respiratory tract, asthma has been cited as a potential risk factor for severe COVID-19. However, conflicting results have been published over the last few months and the putative association between these two diseases is still unproven.Methods
Here, we systematically reviewed all reports on COVID-19 published since its emergence in December 2019 to June 30, 2020, looking into the description of asthma as a premorbid condition, which could indicate its potential involvement in disease progression.Results
We found 372 articles describing the underlying diseases of 161,271 patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Asthma was reported as a premorbid condition in only 2623 patients accounting for 1.6% of all patients.Conclusions
As the global prevalence of asthma is 4.4%, we conclude that either asthma is not a premorbid condition that contributes to the development of COVID-19 or clinicians and researchers are not accurately describing the premorbidities in COVID-19 patients.
SUBMITTER: Mendes NF
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7787409 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundResearch on the longer-term sequelae of COVID-19 in patients with asthma is limited.ObjectiveTo assess the frequency and severity of long-term symptoms of COVID-19 in the population of asthma patients.MethodsA systematic review of the published literature was conducted in accordance with the recommendations of the PRISMA statement. EMBASE, MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Scopus Scholar were searched for terms related to asthma and post or long COVID-19, and for systematic reviews related to specific questions within our review, up to June 2022.ResultsData from 9 references publications included in the review were extracted. A total of 1466 adult asthmatic patients with COVID-19 infection were described in all the publications mentioned above. Of the long-term symptoms reported after COVID-19, patients indicated: lower respiratory symptoms, fatigue, cognitive symptoms, psychological problems, and other such as skin rashes, gastrointestinal disorders, tachycardia, palpitations, ocular disorders, ageusia/hypogeusia, anosmia/hyposmia, and poor sleep quality. These symptoms in similar intensity were observed in the comparison groups without a diagnosis of asthma.ConclusionsThe published data neither confirm nor deny that long-term COVID-19 symptoms in patients with asthma diagnosis are different in strength and frequency from patients without asthma diagnosis. To indicate associations between asthma and COVID-19 infection and severity, as well as the frequency of long-term symptoms of COVID-19, more longitudinal research is needed in chronic asthma patients with different phenotypes, intensity of treatment, and degree of asthma control.
| S-EPMC10452668 | biostudies-literature
Project description:RationaleWhether asthma constitutes a risk factor for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is unclear. Here, we aimed to assess whether asthma, the most common chronic disease in children, is associated with higher COVID-19 risk or severity in pediatric populations.MethodsWe performed a systematic literature search in three stages: first, we reviewed PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL for systematic reviews of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and COVID-19 in pediatric populations, and reviewed their primary articles; second, we searched PubMed for studies on COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 and asthma/wheeze, and evaluated whether the resulting studies included pediatric populations; third, we repeated the second search in BioRxiv.org and MedRxiv.org to find pre-prints that may have information on pediatric asthma.ResultsIn the first search, eight systematic reviews were found, of which five were done in pediatric populations; none of the 67 primary studies included data on pediatric asthma as a comorbidity for COVID-19. In the second search, we found 34 results in PubMed, of which five reported asthma in adults, but none included data on children. In the third search, 25 pre-prints in MedRxiv included data on asthma, but none on children. We found one report by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stating that 40/345 (~11.5%) children with data on chronic conditions had "chronic lung diseases including asthma," and one from a tertiary hospital in New York that reported asthma in 11/46 (~23.9%) children hospitalized for COVID-19.ConclusionThere is scarcely any data on whether childhood asthma (or other pediatric respiratory diseases) constitute risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 severity. Studies are needed that go beyond counting the number of cases in the pediatric age range.
| S-EPMC7323291 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe impact of asthma on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains largely unknown.ObjectiveTo investigate the asthma prevalence among patients with COVID-19 and compare outcomes between patients with and without asthma.MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, bioRxiv, and medRxiv for studies reporting asthma prevalence in general patients with COVID-19 or comparing outcomes between patients with and without asthma, and excluded duplicate publications, reviews, editorials, comments, single case reports, or small case series (<10 cases). We determined the pooled estimates of effect using random-effect model.ResultsOn the basis of 131 studies (410,382 patients), we found great variability in the prevalence of comorbid asthma among patients with COVID-19 in different countries or regions ranging from 1.1% to 16.9%. No significant difference in asthma prevalence was found between hospitalized and nonhospitalized (risk ratio [RR], 1.15; 95% CI, 0.92-1.43), severe and nonsevere (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.92-1.57), intensive care unit and non-intensive care unit (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.92-1.54), dead and survived (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.73-1.11), intubated/mechanically ventilated and nonintubated/mechanically ventilated (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.71-1.17) patients with COVID-19. Patients with asthma have a lower risk of death compared with patients without asthma (RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.43-0.98). Asthma is not associated with a higher risk of intubation or mechanical ventilation (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.72-1.46).ConclusionsThere is great variability in asthma prevalence among patients with COVID-19 in different countries or regions. Asthma is not associated with higher COVID-19 severity or worse prognosis, and patients with asthma are found to have a lower risk of death compared with patients without asthma.
| S-EPMC7725230 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective:To describe perinatal and neonatal outcomes in newborns exposed to SARS-CoV-2. Methods:A systematic review was conducted by searching PubMed Central, LILACS, and Google Scholar using the keywords 'covid ' AND 'newborn' OR 'child' OR 'infant,' on 18 March 2020, and again on 17 April 2020. One researcher conducted the search and extracted data on demographics, maternal outcomes, diagnostic tests, imaging, and neonatal outcomes. Results:Of 256 publications identified, 20 met inclusion criteria and comprised neonatal outcome data for 222 newborns whose mothers were suspected or confirmed to be SARS-CoV-2 positive perinatally (17 studies) or of newborns referred to hospital with infection/pneumonia (3 studies). Most (12 studies) were case-series reports; all were from China, except three (Australia, Iran, and Spain). Of the 222 newborns, 13 were reported as positive for SARS-CoV-2; most of the studies reported no or mild symptoms and no adverse perinatal outcomes. Two papers among those from newborns who tested positive reported moderate or severe clinical characteristics. Five studies using data on umbilical cord blood, placenta, and/or amniotic fluid reported no positive results. Nine studies reported radiographic imaging, including 5 with images of pneumonia, increased lung marking, thickened texture, or high-density nodular shadow. Minor, non-specific changes in biochemical variables were reported. Studies that tested breast milk reported negative SARS-CoV-2 results. Conclusions:Given the paucity of studies at this time, vertical transmission cannot be confirmed or denied. Current literature does not support abstaining from breastfeeding nor separating mothers and newborns. Further evidence and data collection networks, particularly in the Americas, are needed for establishing definitive guidelines and recommendations.
| S-EPMC7241573 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhile the landscape of vaccine and treatment candidates against the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been reviewed systematically, prophylactic candidates remain unexplored.ObjectivesTo map pre- and postexposure prophylactic (PrEP and PEP) candidate for COVID-19.Data sourcesPubMed/Medline, Embase, International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform clinical trial registries and medRxiv.Study eligibility criteria and participantsAll studies in humans or animals and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in humans reporting primary data on prophylactic candidates against COVID-19, excluding studies focused on key populations.InterventionsPrEP and PEP candidate for COVID-19.MethodsSystematic review and qualitative synthesis of COVID-19 PrEP and PEP studies and RCTs complemented by search of medRxiv and PubMed and Embase for studies reporting RCT outcomes since systematic review search completion.ResultsWe identified 13 studies (from 2119 database records) and 117 RCTs (from 5565 RCTs listed in the registries) that met the inclusion criteria. Non-RCT studies reported on cross-sectional studies using hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in humans (n = 2) or reported on animal studies (n = 7), most of which used antibodies. All five completed RCTs focused on the use of HCQ as either PrEP or PEP, and these and the cross-sectional studies reported no prophylactic effect. The majority of ongoing RCTs evaluated HCQ or other existing candidates including non-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines, anti(retro)virals or use of vitamins and supplements.ConclusionsThe key message from completed studies and RCTs seems to be that HCQ does not work. There is little evidence regarding other compounds, with all RCTs using candidates other than HCQ still ongoing. It remains to be seen if the portfolio of existing molecules being evaluated in RCTs will identify successful prophylaxis against COVID-19 or if there is a need for the development of new candidates.
| S-EPMC7813508 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST563 | biostudies-other
Project description:Older people have paid a huge toll in terms of mortality during the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. Frailty may have contributed to the vulnerability of older people to more severe clinical presentation. We aimed at reviewing available evidence about frailty and COVID-19. We searched PUBMED, Web of Science, and EMBASE from 1 December 2019 to 29 May 2020. Study selection and data extraction were performed by three independent reviewers. Qualitative synthesis was conducted and quantitative data extracted when available. Forty papers were included: 13 editorials, 15 recommendations/guidelines, 3 reviews, 1 clinical trial, 6 observational studies, 2 case reports. Editorials and reviews underlined the potential clinical relevance of assessing frailty among older patients with COVID-19. However, frailty was only investigated in regards to its association with overall mortality, hospital contagion, intensive care unit admission rates, and disease phenotypes in the few observational studies retrieved. Specific interventions in relation to frailty or its impact on COVID-19 treatments have not been evaluated yet. Even with such limited evidence, clinical recommendations on the use of frailty tools have been proposed to support decision making about escalation plan. Ongoing initiatives are expected to improve knowledge of COVID-19 interaction with frailty and to promote patient-centered approaches.
| S-EPMC7408623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Recently, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has affected more than 200 countries and lead to enormous losses. This study systematically reviews the application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques in COVID-19, especially for diagnosis, estimation of epidemic trends, prognosis, and exploration of effective and safe drugs and vaccines; and discusses the potential limitations. Methods: We report this systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library from inception to 19 September 2020 for published studies of AI applications in COVID-19. We used PROBAST (prediction model risk of bias assessment tool) to assess the quality of literature related to the diagnosis and prognosis of COVID-19. We registered the protocol (PROSPERO CRD42020211555). Results: We included 78 studies: 46 articles discussed AI-assisted diagnosis for COVID-19 with total accuracy of 70.00 to 99.92%, sensitivity of 73.00 to 100.00%, specificity of 25 to 100.00%, and area under the curve of 0.732 to 1.000. Fourteen articles evaluated prognosis based on clinical characteristics at hospital admission, such as clinical, laboratory and radiological characteristics, reaching accuracy of 74.4 to 95.20%, sensitivity of 72.8 to 98.00%, specificity of 55 to 96.87% and AUC of 0.66 to 0.997 in predicting critical COVID-19. Nine articles used AI models to predict the epidemic of the COVID-19, such as epidemic peak, infection rate, number of infected cases, transmission laws, and development trend. Eight articles used AI to explore potential effective drugs, primarily through drug repurposing and drug development. Finally, 1 article predicted vaccine targets that have the potential to develop COVID-19 vaccines. Conclusions: In this review, we have shown that AI achieved high performance in diagnosis, prognosis evaluation, epidemic prediction and drug discovery for COVID-19. AI has the potential to enhance significantly existing medical and healthcare system efficiency during the COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC8514781 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This systematic review aimed to reevaluate the available evidence of the use of biologics as treatment candidates for the treatment of severe and advanced COVID-19 disease; what are the rationale for their use, which are the most studied, and what kind of efficacy measures are described? A search through Cochrane, Embase, Pubmed, Medline, medrxiv.org, and Google scholar was performed on the use of biologic interventions in COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 infection, viral pneumonia, and sepsis, until 11 January 2022. Throughout the research, we identified 4821 records, of which 90 were selected for qualitative analysis. Amongst the results, we identified five popular targets of use: IL6 and IL1 inhibitors, interferons, mesenchymal stem cells treatment, and anti-spike antibodies. None of them offered conclusive evidence of their efficacy with consistency and statistical significance except for some studies with anti-spike antibodies; however, Il6 and IL1 inhibitors as well as interferons show encouraging data in terms of increased survival and favorable clinical course that require further studies with better methodology standardization.
| S-EPMC9321859 | biostudies-literature