Dataset Information

JAK-inhibitors for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19): a meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: We analyzed reports on safety and efficacy of JAK-inhibitors in patients with coronavirus infectious disease-2019 (COVID-19) published between January 1st and March 6th 2021 using the Newcastle-Ottawa and Jadad scales for quality assessment. We used disease severity as a proxy for time when JAK-inhibitor therapy was started. We identified 6 cohort studies and 5 clinical trials involving 2367 subjects treated with ruxolitinib (N = 3) or baricitinib 45 (N = 8). Use of JAK-inhibitors decreased use of invasive mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.63; [95% Confidence Interval (CI), 0.47, 0.84]; P = 0.002) and had borderline impact on rates of intensive care unit (ICU) admission (RR = 0.24 [0.06, 1.02]; P = 0.05) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS; RR = 0.50 [0.19, 1.33]; P = 0.16). JAK-inhibitors did not decrease length of hospitalization (mean difference (MD) -0.18 [-4.54, 4.18]; P = 0.94). Relative risks of death for both drugs were 0.42 [0.30, 0.59] (P < 0.001), for ruxolitinib, RR = 0.33 (0.13, 0.88; P = 0.03) and for baricitinib RR = 0.44 (0.31, 0.63; P < 0.001). Timing of JAK-inhibitor treatment during the course of COVID-19 treatment may be important in determining impact on outcome. However, these data are not consistently reported.

SUBMITTER: Chen CX

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8119232 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

JAK-inhibitors for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19): a meta-analysis.

Chen Chong-Xiang CX Wang Jiao-Jiao JJ Li Huan H Yuan Le-Tao LT Gale Robert Peter RP Liang Yang Y

Leukemia 20210514 9

We analyzed reports on safety and efficacy of JAK-inhibitors in patients with coronavirus infectious disease-2019 (COVID-19) published between January 1st and March 6th 2021 using the Newcastle-Ottawa and Jadad scales for quality assessment. We used disease severity as a proxy for time when JAK-inhibitor therapy was started. We identified 6 cohort studies and 5 clinical trials involving 2367 subjects treated with ruxolitinib (N = 3) or baricitinib 45 (N = 8). Use of JAK-inhibitors decreased use ...[more]

PMID: 33990684

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveClinical and laboratory biomarkers to predict the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are essential in this pandemic situation of which resource allocation must be urgently prepared especially in the context of respiratory support readiness. Lymphocyte count has been a marker of interest since the first COVID-19 publication. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in order to investigate the association of lymphocyte count on admission and the severity of COVID-19. We would also like to analyze whether patient characteristics such as age and comorbidities affect the relationship between lymphocyte count and COVID-19.MethodsComprehensive and systematic literature search was performed from PubMed, SCOPUS, EuropePMC, ProQuest, Cochrane Central Databases, and Google Scholar. Research articles in adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 with information on lymphocyte count and several outcomes of interest, including mortality, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), intensive care unit (ICU) care, and severe COVID-19, were included in the analysis. Inverse variance method was used to obtain mean differences and its standard deviations. Maentel-Haenszel formula was used to calculate dichotomous variables to obtain odds ratios (ORs) along with its 95% confidence intervals. Random-effect models were used for meta-analysis regardless of heterogeneity. Restricted-maximum likelihood random-effects meta-regression was performed for age, gender, cardiac comorbidity, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, COPD, and smoking.ResultsThere were a total of 3099 patients from 24 studies. Meta-analysis showed that patients with poor outcome have a lower lymphocyte count (mean difference - 361.06 μL [- 439.18, - 282.95], p < 0.001; I 2 84%) compared to those with good outcome. Subgroup analysis showed lower lymphocyte count in patients who died (mean difference - 395.35 μL [- 165.64, - 625.07], p < 0.001; I 2 87%), experienced ARDS (mean difference - 377.56 μL [- 271.89, - 483.22], p < 0.001; I 2 0%), received ICU care (mean difference - 376.53 μL [- 682.84, - 70.22], p = 0.02; I 2 89%), and have severe COVID-19 (mean difference - 353.34 μL [- 250.94, - 455.73], p < 0.001; I 2 85%). Lymphopenia was associated with severe COVID-19 (OR 3.70 [2.44, 5.63], p < 0.001; I 2 40%). Meta-regression showed that the association between lymphocyte count and composite poor outcome was affected by age (p = 0.034).ConclusionThis meta-analysis showed that lymphopenia on admission was associated with poor outcome in patients with COVID-19.

Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed increasing challenges to global health systems. Vaccination against COVID-19 can effectively prevent the public, particularly healthcare workers (HCWs), from being infected by this disease.ObjectivesWe aim to understand the factors influencing HCWs' acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase and Web of Science to collect literature published before May 15, 2022, about HCWs' acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines. The Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale was used to assess the risk of bias and the quality of the included studies. We utilized Stata 14.0 software for this meta-analysis with a random-effects model, and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported. This meta-analysis was conducted in alignment with the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guideline.ResultsOur meta-analysis included 71 articles with 93,508 HCWs involved. The research showed that the acceptance of vaccines had significantly increased among HCWs compared to non-HCWs (OR = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.16-3.12). A willingness to undergo COVID-19 vaccination was observed in 66% (95% CI: 0.61-0.67) of HCWs. Among the HCWs involved, doctors showed a generally increased intention to be vaccinated compared with nurses (OR = 2.22, 95% CI: 1.71-2.89). Additionally, males were found to hold more positive attitudes toward vaccination than females (OR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.55-2.12). When the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines was improved, the vaccination acceptance of HCWs was greatly increased accordingly (OR = 5.03, 95% CI: 2.77-9.11). The HCWs who were willing to vaccinate against seasonal influenza showed an increased acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines (OR = 3.52, 95% CI: 2.34-5.28). Our study also showed that HCWs who were willing to be vaccinated against COVID-19 experienced a reduced rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.66-0.92).ConclusionsOur analysis revealed that the five factors of occupation, gender, vaccine effectiveness, seasonal influenza vaccines, and SARS-CoV-2 infection presumably affected the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines among HCWs. It is essential to boost the confidence of HCWs in COVID-19 vaccines for the containment of the epidemic.

Project description:Importance: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a newly emerging infectious disease that has caused a global pandemic. The presenting symptoms are mainly respiratory symptom, yet studies have reported nervous system involvement in the disease. A systematic review and meta-analysis of these studies are required to understanding the neurologic characteristic of the disease and help physicians with early diagnosis and management. Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the neurologic characteristics in patients with COVID-19. Evidence Review: Authors conducted a literature search through PubMed from January 1st, 2020 to April 8th, 2020. Furthermore, the authors added additional sources by reviewing related references. Studies presenting the neurologic features of COVID-19 patients in their data were included. Case reports and case series were also included in this review. The quality of the studies was assessed based on the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine guidelines. Selected studies were included in the meta-analysis of proportion and the heterogeneity test. Finding: From 280 identified studies, 33 were eligible, with 7,559 participants included. Most of the included studies were from China (29 [88%]). Muscle injury or myalgia was the most common (19.2%, 95%CI 15.4-23.2%) neurologic symptom of COVID-19, followed by headache (10.9%, 95%CI 8.62-13.51%); dizziness (8.7%, 95%CI 5.02-13.43%); nausea with or without vomiting (4.6%, 95%CI 3.17-6.27%); concurrent cerebrovascular disease (4.4%, 95%CI 1.92-7.91%); and impaired consciousness (3.8%, 95%CI 0.16-12.04%). Underlying cerebrovascular disease was found in 8.5% (95%CI 4.5-13.5%) of the studies. Conclusion: Neurologic findings vary from non-specific to specific symptoms in COVID-19 patients. Some severe symptoms or diseases can present in the later stage of the disease. Physicians should be aware of the presence of neurologic signs and symptoms as a chief complaint of COVID-19, in order to improve management and prevent a worsening outcome of the patients.

Dataset Information

JAK-inhibitors for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19): a meta-analysis.

Publications

JAK-inhibitors for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19): a meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets