Dataset Information

Association Between Vitamin D and Influenza: Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT: Background: Vitamin D supplementation improves the immune function of human body and can be a convenient way to prevent influenza. However, evidence on the protective effect of vitamin D supplementation on influenza from Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) is inconclusive. Methods: RCTs regarding the association between vitamin D supplementation and influenza were identified by searching PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase and Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM) from inception until present (last updated on 10 November 2021). Studies that reported dosages and durations of vitamin D supplementation and number of influenza infections could be included. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test and I ² statistics, the meta-analysis was conducted by using a random-effects model, the pooled effects were expressed with risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Results: 10 trials including 4859 individuals were ultimately eligible after scanning. There was no evidence of a significant heterogeneity among studies (I ² = 27%, P = 0.150). Meta-regression analysis finding indicated that country, latitude, average age, economic level, follow-up period and average daily vitamin D intake did not cause the statistical heterogeneity. The study finding indicates that substitution with vitamin D significantly reduces the risk of influenza infections (RR = 0.78, 95% CI:0.64-0.95). No evidence of publication bias was observed. Omission of any single trial had little impact on the pooled risk estimates. Conclusions: The meta-analysis produced a corroboration that vitamin D supplement has a preventive effect on influenza. Strategies for preventing influenza can be optimized by vitamin D supplementation.

SUBMITTER: Zhu Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8777486 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Aging is a phenomenon universally involving all organisms, genetically determined, and epigenetically influenced by the environment. Numerous observational studies have shown the positive impact of non-pharmacological approaches started in younger age on chronic conditions affecting the elderly health and survival. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effect of beta-carotene on the total and cause-specific mortality as reported by randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods We searched Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL Cochrane from inception to September 2021. Studies were eligible if enrolled adults with any health condition, compared beta-carotene supplements at any dose with placebo or no intervention, provided information on deaths from any cause, and were RCTs, in English. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the GRADE. Risk ratios and their 95% confidence intervals were used and a P-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Among 3,942 articles searched, 44 articles on 31 RCTs, which included 216,734 total subjects, 108,622 in beta-carotene supplement groups, and 108,112 in the placebo or no-intervention groups, were involved in the final analyses. In a random-effects meta-analysis of all 31 trials, beta-carotene supplements were found to have no preventive effect on mortality (risk ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.98–1.05, I2 = 42%). Further, the analysis showed no preventive effect on cancer, cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and other mortality causes. Instead, beta-carotene supplementation significantly increased the risk of lung cancer mortality (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02, 1.27, I2 = 3%) but decreased the risk of human immunodeficiency virus-related mortality (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33, 0.92, I2 = 0). Conclusion More studies should be performed to better define the role of beta-carotene on survival, to confirm or deny our results. Therefore, the possible beneficial or harmful effects of the beta-carotene supplementation on mortality must not be overstated. Systematic Review Registration [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=259354], identifier [CRD42021259354].

Project description:In 2012, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning regarding potential adverse effects of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) on cognition, based on the Adverse Events Reporting System and a review of the medical literature. We aimed to synthesize randomized clinical trial (RCTs) evidence on the association between statin therapy and cognitive outcomes.We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL through December 2012, and reviewed published systematic reviews of statin treatment. We sought RCTs that compared statin treatment versus placebo or standard care, and reported at least one cognitive outcome (frequency of adverse cognitive events or measurements using standard neuropsychological cognitive test scores). Studies reporting sufficient information to calculate effect sizes were included in meta-analyses. Standardized and unstandardized mean differences were calculated for continuous outcomes for global cognition and for pre-specified cognitive domains. The main outcome was change in cognition measured by neuropsychological tests; an outcome of secondary interest was the frequency of adverse cognitive events observed during follow-up.We identified 25 RCTs (all placebo-controlled) reporting cognitive outcomes in 46,836 subjects, of which 23 RCTs reported cognitive test results in 29,012 participants. Adverse cognitive outcomes attributable to statins were rarely reported in trials involving cognitively normal or impaired subjects. Furthermore, meta-analysis of cognitive test data (14 studies; 27,643 participants) failed to show significant adverse effects of statins on all tests of cognition in either cognitively normal subjects (standardized mean difference 0.01, 95% confidence interval, CI, -0.01 to 0.03, p?=?0.42) or Alzheimer's disease subjects (standardized mean difference -0.05, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.10, p?=?0.38).Statin therapy was not associated with cognitive impairment in RCTs. These results raise questions regarding the continued merit of the FDA warning about potential adverse effects of statins on cognition.

Dataset Information

Association Between Vitamin D and Influenza: Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets