Association of vitamin D deficiency with COVID-19 infection severity: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
We sought to evaluate the association between vitamin D deficiency and the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection.Methods
Multiple databases from 1 January 2019 to 3 December 2020 were searched for observational studies evaluating the association between vitamin D deficiency and severity of COVID-19 infection. Independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data for the review. The main outcomes of interest were mortality, hospital admission, length of hospital stay and intensive care unit admission.Results
Seventeen observational studies with 2756 patients were included in the analyses. Vitamin D deficiency was associated with significantly higher mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 2.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.50-4.05; 12 studies; hazard ratio [HR]: 4.11, 95% CI: 2.40-7.04; 3 studies), higher rates of hospital admissions (OR: 2.18, 95% CI: 1.48-3.21; 3 studies) and longer hospital stays (0.52 days; 95% CI: 0.25-0.80; 2 studies) as compared to nonvitamin D deficient status. Subgroup analyses based on different cut-offs for defining vitamin D deficiency, study geographic locations and latitude also showed similar trends.Conclusions
Vitamin D deficiency is associated with greater severity of COVID-19 infection. Further studies are warranted to determine if vitamin D supplementation can decrease the severity of COVID-19.
SUBMITTER: Wang Z
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8444883 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:This systematic review was conducted to summarize and clarify the evidence on the association between 25-hydroxyvitamin-D [25(OH)D] concentrations and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) risk and outcomes. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases and Google Scholar were searched up to 26 November 2020. All retrospective and prospective cohort, cross-sectional, case-control, and randomized controlled trial studies that investigated the relation between 25(OH)D and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and COVID-19 severity were included. Thirty-nine studies were included in the current systematic review. In studies that were adjusted (OR: 1.77; 95% CI: 1.24, 2.53; I2: 44.2%) and nonadjusted for confounders (OR: 1.75; 95% CI: 1.44, 2.13; I2: 33.0%) there was a higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the vitamin D deficiency (VDD) group. Fifteen studies evaluated associations between VDD and composite severity. In the studies that were adjusted (OR: 2.57; 95% CI: 1.65, 4.01; I2 = 0.0%) and nonadjusted for confounders (OR: 10.61; 95% CI: 2.07, 54.23; I2 = 90.8%) there was a higher severity in the VDD group. Analysis of studies with crude OR (OR: 2.62; 95% CI: 1.13, 6.05; I2: 47.9%), and adjusted studies that used the Cox survival method (HR: 7.67; 95% CI: 3.92, 15.03; I2: 0.0%) indicated a significant association of VDD with mortality, while in adjusted studies that used logistic regression, no relation was observed (OR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.63, 1.75; I2: 76.6%). The results of studies that examined relations between VDD and intensive care unit (ICU) admission, pulmonary complications, hospitalization, and inflammation were inconsistent. In conclusion, although studies were heterogeneous in methodological and statistical approach, most of them indicated a significant relation between 25(OH)D and SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 composite severity, and mortality. With regard to infection, caution should be taken in interpreting the results, due to inherent study limitations. For ICU admission, inflammation, hospitalization, and pulmonary involvement, the evidence is currently inconsistent and insufficient.
| S-EPMC7989595 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesExtensive evidence links low vitamin D status and comorbidities with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes, but the results of published studies are contradictory. Therefore, we investigated the association of lower levels of vitamin D and comorbidities with the risk of COVID-19 infection.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov for articles published until August 20, 2021. Sixteen eligible studies were identified (386 631 patients, of whom 181 114 were male). We included observational cohort and case-control studies that evaluated serum levels of vitamin D in COVID-19-positive and COVID-19-negative patients. Mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.ResultsSignificantly lower vitamin D levels were found in COVID-19-positive patients (MD, -1.70; 95% CI, -2.74 to -0.66; p=0.001), but with variation by study design (case-control: -4.04; 95% CI, -5.98 to -2.10; p<0.001; cohort: -0.39; 95% CI, -1.62 to 0.84; p=0.538). This relationship was more prominent in female patients (MD, -2.18; 95% CI, -4.08 to -0.28; p=0.024) than in male patients (MD, -1.74; 95% CI, -3.79 to 0.31; p=0.096). Male patients showed higher odds of having low vitamin D levels (odds ratio [OR], 2.09; 95% CI, 1.38 to 3.17; p<0.001) than female patients (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.86; p=0.477). Comorbidities showed inconsistent, but generally non-significant, associations with COVID-19 infection.ConclusionsLow serum vitamin-D levels were significantly associated with the risk of COVID-19 infection. This relationship was stronger in female than in male COVID-19 patients. Limited evidence was found for the relationships between comorbidities and COVID-19 infection, warranting large population-based studies to clarify these associations.
| S-EPMC9371781 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe association between influenza vaccination and COVID-19 remains controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate whether influenza vaccination reduces the susceptibility and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection.MethodsA systematic literature search of PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, SinoMed, Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, and China Science and Technology Journal VIP Database was conducted from database inception to August 2021. The pooled RR with 95% CI was used to estimate the effect of influenza vaccination on COVID-19. The I2 value was used to assess heterogeneity. If I2>50%, the random-effects model was used as the pooling method.ResultsA total of 23 published articles with 1,037,445 participants were identified. This meta-analysis showed that influenza vaccination was associated with reduced risk of COVID-19 infection (RR=0.83, 95% CI=0.76, 0.90) and hospitalization (RR=0.71, 95% CI=0.59, 0.84), although not significantly associated with intensive care unit admission and death (risk of intensive care unit admission: RR=0.93, 95% CI=0.64, 1.36; risk of death: RR=0.83, 95% CI=0.68, 1.01). Further analysis suggested that the tetravalent influenza vaccine may be associated with a reduced risk of COVID-19 infection (RR=0.74, 95% CI=0.65, 0.84).DiscussionThe results suggest that influenza vaccination is associated with reduced susceptibility to or disease severity of COVID-19 and that influenza vaccination may reduce the risk of COVID-19 and improve clinical outcomes.
| S-EPMC8920881 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe evidence regarding the efficacy of vitamin D supplementation in reducing severity of COVID-19 is still insufficient. This is partially due to the lack of primary robust trial-based data and heterogeneous study designs.AimThis evidence summary, aims to study the effect of vitamin D supplementation on morbidity and mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.Design: Evidence summary of systematic reviews.MethodsFor this study, systematic reviews and meta-analysis published from December 2019 to January 2022 presenting the impact of vitamin D supplementation on COVID-19 severity were screened and selected from PubMed and Google scholar. After initial screening, 10 eligible reviews were identified and quality of included reviews were assessed using AMSTAR and GRADE tools and overlapping among the primary studies used were also assessed.ResultsThe number of primary studies included in the systematic reviews ranged from 3 to 13. Meta-analysis of seven systematic reviews showed strong evidence that vitamin D supplementation reduces the risk of mortality (Odds ratio: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.346-0.664; P < 0.001) in COVID patients. It was also observed that supplementation reduces the need for intensive care (Odds ratio: 0.35; 95%CI: 0.28-0.44; P < 0.001) and mechanical ventilation (Odds ratio: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.411-0.708; P < 0.001) requirement. The findings were robust and reliable as level of heterogeneity was considerably low. However the included studies were of varied quality. Qualitative analysis showed that supplements (oral and IV) are well tolerated, safe and effective in COVID patients.ConclusionThe findings of this study show that vitamin D supplementation is effective in reducing the COVID-19 severity. Hence, vitamin D should be recommended as an adjuvant therapy for COVID-19.However, more robust and larger trials are required to substantiate it further.
| S-EPMC9383458 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We investigated the association between endogenous vitamin D and the severity of COVID-19 as well as the mechanisms of action of vitamin D supplementation. Vitamin D deficiency and insufficiency were associated with increased severity and unfavourable outcome after 28 days. Vitamin D levels were negatively associated with biomarkers of COVID-19 severity. Vitamin D supplementation after challenge of mice with COVID-19 plasma led to reduced levels of TNFα, IL-6, IFNγ and MPO in the lung, as well as down-regulation of pro-inflammatory pathways as derived from RNA-seq experiments. Thus, vitamin D demonstrates a protective effect against severity and unfavorable outcome in COVID-19, possibly through attenuation of tissue-specific hyperinflammation.
2024-01-16 | GSE222471 | GEO
Project description:Vitamin D is associated with biological activities of the innate and adaptive immune systems, as well as inflammation. In observational studies, an inverse relationship has been found between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentrations and the risk or severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Several mechanisms have been proposed for the role of vitamin D in COVID-19, including modulation of immune and inflammatory responses, regulation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, and involvement in glucose metabolism and cardiovascular system. Low 25(OH)D concentrations might predispose patients with COVID-19 to severe outcomes not only via the associated hyperinflammatory syndrome but also by worsening preexisting impaired glucose metabolism and cardiovascular diseases. Some randomized controlled trials have shown that vitamin D supplementation is beneficial for reducing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 RNA positivity but not for reducing intensive care unit admission or all-cause mortality in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19. Current evidence suggests that taking a vitamin D supplement to maintain a serum concentration of 25(OH)D of at least 30 ng/mL (preferred range 40-60 ng/mL), can help reduce the risk of COVID-19 and its severe outcomes, including mortality. Although further well designed studies are warranted, it is prudent to recommend vitamin D supplements to people with vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency during the COVID-19 pandemic according to international guidelines.
| S-EPMC8724612 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesAlthough vaccination has started, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) poses a continuing threat to public health. Therefore, in addition to vaccination, the use of supplements to support the immune system may be important. The purpose of this study was to synthesize evidence on the possible effect of low serum vitamin D levels (25[OH]D<20 ng/mL or 50 nmol/L) on COVID-19 infection and outcomes.MethodsWe searched Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect without any language restrictions for articles published between January 1 and December 15, 2020. We performed 3 meta-analyses (called vitamin D and COVID-19 infection meta-analysis [D-CIMA], vitamin D and COVID-19 severity meta-analysis [D-CSMA], and vitamin D and COV ID-19 mortality meta-analysis [D-CMMA] for COVID-19 infection, severity, and mortality, respectively) to combine odds ratio values according to laboratory measurement units for vitamin D and the measured serum 25(OH)D level.ResultsTwenty-one eligible studies were found to be relevant to the relationship between vitamin D and COVID-19 infection/outcomes (n=205,869). The D-CIMA meta-analysis showed that individuals with low serum vitamin D levels were 1.64 times (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32 to 2.04; p<0.001) more likely to contract COVID-19. The D-CSMA meta-analysis showed that people with serum 25(OH)D levels below 20 ng/mL or 50 nmol/L were 2.42 times (95% CI, 1.13 to 5.18; p=0.022) more likely to have severe COVID-19. The D-CMMA meta-analysis showed that low vitamin D levels had no effect on COVID-19 mortality (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.53 to 5.06, p=0.390).ConclusionsAccording to our results, vitamin D deficiency may increase the risk of COVID-19 infection and the likelihood of severe disease. Therefore, we recommend vitamin D supplementation to prevent COVID-19 and its negative outcomes.
| S-EPMC8769802 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The administration of intravenous vitamin C (IV-VC) in treating patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still highly controversial. There have been no previous studies on the effect of IV-VC on the severity and mortality of COVID-19. Hence, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the disease severity and mortality in patients with COVID-19 who promptly received IV-VC treatment vs those who did not. We performed a comprehensive systematic search of seven health science databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Data, up to June 23, 2021. We identified a total of seven related articles, which were included in this study. This meta-analysis showed that IV-VC treatment did not affect disease severity compared with placebo treatment or usual care (odds ratio [OR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.07; P = 0.10). In addition, no statistically significant difference in mortality was observed between patients who received IV-VC treatment and those who did not (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.00; P = 0.05). Moreover, the adjusted meta-analysis revealed that the use of IV-VC did not influence disease severity (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.34 to 1.31; P = 0.242) or mortality (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.40; P = 0.877) in comparison with a control group. The results of this meta-analysis demonstrated that short-term IV-VC treatment did not reduce the risk of severity and mortality in patients with COVID-19.
| S-EPMC9088481 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Ecological evidence links ambient particulate matter ≤2.5 mm (PM2.5) and the rate of COVID-19 infections, severity, and deaths. However, such studies are unable to account for individual-level differences in major confounders like socioeconomic status and often rely on imprecise measures of PM2.5. We conducted a systematic review of case-control and cohort studies, which rely on individual-level data, searching Medline, Embase, and the WHO COVID-19 database up to 30 June 2022. Study quality was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results were pooled with a random effects meta-analysis, with Egger's regression, funnel plots, and leave-one-out/trim-and-fill sensitivity analyses to account for publication bias. N = 18 studies met inclusion criteria. A 10 μg/m3 increase in PM2.5 was associated with 66 % (95 % CI: 1.31-2.11) greater odds of COVID-19 infection (N = 7) and 127 % (95 % CI: 1.41-3.66) odds of severe illness (hospitalisation, ICU admission, or requiring respiratory support) (N = 6). Pooled mortality results (N = 5) indicated increased deaths due to PM2.5 but were non-significant (OR 1.40; 0.94 to 2.10). Most studies were rated "good" quality (14/18 studies), though there were numerous methodological issues; few used individual-level data to adjust for socioeconomic status (4/18 studies), instead using area-based indicators (11/18 studies) or no such adjustments (3/18 studies). Most severity (9/10 studies) and mortality studies (5/6 studies) were based on people already diagnosed COVID-19, potentially introducing collider bias. There was evidence of publication bias in studies of infection (p = 0.012) but not severity (p = 0.132) or mortality (p = 0.100). While methodological limits and evidence of bias require cautious interpretation of the findings, we found compelling evidence that PM2.5 increases the risk of COVID-19 infection and severe disease, and weaker evidence of an increase in mortality risk.
| S-EPMC10079587 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vasovagal syncope (VVS) is the most prevalent type of syncope and its management includes pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions. Recently, studies have investigated vitamin D levels in VVS patients. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to review these studies to find possible associations between vitamin D deficiency and vitamin D levels with VVS. International databases including Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase were searched with keywords related to "vasovagal syncope" and "vitamin D." Studies were screened and the data were extracted from them. Random-effect meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for vitamin D levels in comparison to VVS patients and controls. Also, VVS occurrence was measured and the odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI were calculated for comparison of vitamin D deficient cases and nondeficient individuals. Six studies were included with 954 cases investigated. Meta-analysis showed that patients with VVS had significantly lower vitamin D serum levels in comparison to non-VVS cases (SMD -1.05, 95% CI -1.54 to -0.57, p-value < .01). Moreover, VVS occurrence was higher in vitamin D-deficient individuals (OR 5.43, 95% CI 2.40 to 12.27, p-value < .01). Our findings which show lower vitamin D levels in VVS patients can have clinical implications in order for clinicians to pay attention to this when approaching VVS. Further randomized controlled trials are certainly warranted to assess the role of vitamin D supplementation in individuals with VVS.
| S-EPMC10352974 | biostudies-literature