scholarly journals Analysis: A meta-analysis of Early Results to predict Vaccine efficacy against Omicron

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David S Khoury ◽  
Megan Steain ◽  
James Triccas ◽  
Alex Sigal ◽  
Miles Philip Davenport ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Vaccine Efficacy ◽  
Booster Dose ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Primary Immunisation ◽  
Early Results

In the studies to date, the estimated fold-drop in neutralisation titre against Omicron ranges from 2- to over 20-fold depending on the study and serum tested. Collating data from the se results in a combined estimate of the fold drop in neutralisation titre against Omicron of 9.7 (95%CI 5.5-17.1). We use our previously established model to predict that six months after primary immunisation with an mRNA vaccine, efficacy for Omicron is estimated to have waned to around 40% against symptomatic and 80% against severe disease. A booster dose with an existing mRNA vaccine (even though it targets the ancestral spike) has the potential to raise efficacy to 86.2% (95% CI: 75.4-92.9) (symptomatic) and 98.2% (95% CI 90.9-99.7) (severe) against Omicron.

scholarly journals Hematologic, biochemical and immune biomarker abnormalities associated with severe illness and mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (7) ◽  
pp. 1021-1028 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brandon Michael Henry ◽  
Maria Helena Santos de Oliveira ◽  
Stefanie Benoit ◽  
Mario Plebani ◽  
Giuseppe Lippi
Keyword(s):  
Serum Ferritin ◽  
Weighted Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Severe Illness ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽  
Discriminative Ability ◽  
Laboratory Findings ◽  
Liver And Kidney ◽  
Wbc Count

AbstractBackgroundAs coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic rages on, there is urgent need for identification of clinical and laboratory predictors for progression towards severe and fatal forms of this illness. In this study we aimed to evaluate the discriminative ability of hematologic, biochemical and immunologic biomarkers in patients with and without the severe or fatal forms of COVID-19.MethodsAn electronic search in Medline (PubMed interface), Scopus, Web of Science and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) was performed, to identify studies reporting on laboratory abnormalities in patients with COVID-19. Studies were divided into two separate cohorts for analysis: severity (severe vs. non-severe and mortality, i.e. non-survivors vs. survivors). Data was pooled into a meta-analysis to estimate weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for each laboratory parameter.ResultsA total number of 21 studies was included, totaling 3377 patients and 33 laboratory parameters. While 18 studies (n = 2984) compared laboratory findings between patients with severe and non-severe COVID-19, the other three (n = 393) compared survivors and non-survivors of the disease and were thus analyzed separately. Patients with severe and fatal disease had significantly increased white blood cell (WBC) count, and decreased lymphocyte and platelet counts compared to non-severe disease and survivors. Biomarkers of inflammation, cardiac and muscle injury, liver and kidney function and coagulation measures were also significantly elevated in patients with both severe and fatal COVID-19. Interleukins 6 (IL-6) and 10 (IL-10) and serum ferritin were strong discriminators for severe disease.ConclusionsSeveral biomarkers which may potentially aid in risk stratification models for predicting severe and fatal COVID-19 were identified. In hospitalized patients with respiratory distress, we recommend clinicians closely monitor WBC count, lymphocyte count, platelet count, IL-6 and serum ferritin as markers for potential progression to critical illness.

scholarly journals Differences in coagulopathy indices in patients with severe versus non-severe COVID-19: a meta-analysis of 35 studies and 6427 patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Polimeni ◽  
Isabella Leo ◽  
Carmen Spaccarotella ◽  
Annalisa Mongiardo ◽  
Sabato Sorrentino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Platelet Count ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Coagulation Factors ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Severe Group ◽  
Intravascular Coagulopathy ◽  
The Difference ◽  
D Dimer

AbstractCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly contagious disease that appeared in China in December 2019 and spread rapidly around the world. Several patients with severe COVID-19 infection can develop a coagulopathy according to the ISTH criteria for disseminated intravascular coagulopathy (DIC) with fulminant activation of coagulation, resulting in widespread microvascular thrombosis and consumption of coagulation factors. We conducted a meta-analysis in order to explore differences in coagulopathy indices in patients with severe and non-severe COVID-19. An electronic search was performed within PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus electronic databases between December 2019 (first confirmed Covid-19 case) up to April 6th, 2020. The primary endpoint was the difference of D-dimer values between Non-Severe vs Severe disease and Survivors vs Non-Survivors. Furthermore, results on additional coagulation parameters (platelet count, prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time) were also analyzed. The primary analysis showed that mean d-dimer was significantly lower in COVID-19 patients with non-severe disease than in those with severe (SMD − 2.15 [− 2.73 to − 1.56], I2 98%, P < 0.0001). Similarly, we found a lower mean d-dimer in Survivors compared to Non-Survivors (SMD − 2.91 [− 3.87 to − 1.96], I2 98%, P < 0.0001). Additional analysis of platelet count showed higher levels of mean PLT in Non-Severe patients than those observed in the Severe group (SMD 0.77 [0.32 to 1.22], I2 96%, P < 0.001). Of note, a similar result was observed even when Survivors were compared to Non-Survivors (SMD 1.84 [1.16 to 2.53], I2 97%, P < 0.0001). Interestingly, shorter mean PT was found in both Non-Severe (SMD − 1.34 [− 2.06 to − 0.62], I2 98%, P < 0.0002) and Survivors groups (SMD − 1.61 [− 2.69 to − 0.54], I2 98%, P < 0.003) compared to Severe and Non-Survivor patients. In conclusion, the results of the present meta-analysis demonstrate that Severe COVID-19 infection is associated with higher D-dimer values, lower platelet count and prolonged PT. This data suggests a possible role of disseminated intravascular coagulation in the pathogenesis of COVID-19 disease complications.

scholarly journals Serum albumin concentrations are associated with disease severity and outcomes in coronavirus 19 disease (COVID-19): a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Panagiotis Paliogiannis ◽  
Arduino Aleksander Mangoni ◽  
Michela Cangemi ◽  
Alessandro Giuseppe Fois ◽  
Ciriaco Carru ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Serum Albumin ◽  
Disease Severity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Geographic Area ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Poor Outcome ◽  
Standard Mean Difference ◽  
Meta Regression Analysis

AbstractCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), an infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is responsible for the most threatening pandemic in modern history. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the associations between serum albumin concentrations and COVID-19 disease severity and adverse outcomes. A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, from inception to October 30, 2020. Sixty-seven studies in 19,760 COVID-19 patients (6141 with severe disease or poor outcome) were selected for analysis. Pooled results showed that serum albumin concentrations were significantly lower in patients with severe disease or poor outcome (standard mean difference, SMD: − 0.99 g/L; 95% CI, − 1.11 to − 0.88, p < 0.001). In multivariate meta-regression analysis, age (t =  − 2.13, p = 0.043), publication geographic area (t = 2.16, p = 0.040), white blood cell count (t =  − 2.77, p = 0.008) and C-reactive protein (t =  − 2.43, p = 0.019) were significant contributors of between-study variance. Therefore, lower serum albumin concentrations are significantly associated with disease severity and adverse outcomes in COVID-19 patients. The assessment of serum albumin concentrations might assist with early risk stratification and selection of appropriate care pathways in this group.

scholarly journals Renin-angiotensin system blocker and outcomes of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Thorax ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. thoraxjnl-2020-215322
Author(s):  
Hyun Woo Lee ◽  
Chang-Hwan Yoon ◽  
Eun Jin Jang ◽  
Chang-Hoon Lee
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Renin Angiotensin System ◽  
Angiotensin Ii Receptor ◽  
Angiotensin System ◽  
Risk Of Mortality ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Receptor Blockers

BackgroundThe association of ACE inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) with disease severity of patients with COVID-19 is still unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate if ACEI/ARB use is associated with the risk of mortality and severe disease in patients with COVID-19.MethodsWe searched all available clinical studies that included patients with confirmed COVID-19 who could be classified into an ACEI/ARB group and a non-ACEI/ARB group up until 4 May 2020. A meta-analysis was performed, and primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and severe disease.ResultsACEI/ARB use did not increase the risk of all-cause mortality both in meta-analysis for 11 studies with 12 601 patients reporting ORs (OR=0.52 (95% CI=0.37 to 0.72), moderate certainty of evidence) and in 2 studies with 8577 patients presenting HRs. For 12 848 patients in 13 studies, ACEI/ARB use was not related to an increased risk of severe disease in COVID-19 (OR=0.68 (95% CI=0.44 to 1.07); I2=95%, low certainty of evidence).ConclusionsACEI/ARB therapy was not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality or severe manifestations in patients with COVID-19. ACEI/ARB therapy can be continued without concern of drug-related worsening in patients with COVID-19.

scholarly journals Risk predictors of progression to severe disease during the febrile phase of dengue: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sorawat Sangkaew ◽  
Damien Ming ◽  
Adhiratha Boonyasiri ◽  
Kate Honeyford ◽  
Siripen Kalayanarooj ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Risk Predictors

scholarly journals Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic: an overview of systematic reviews

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Israel Júnior Borges do Nascimento ◽  
Dónal P. O’Mathúna ◽  
Thilo Caspar von Groote ◽  
Hebatullah Mohamed Abdulazeem ◽  
Ishanka Weerasekara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Troponin I ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Ground Glass Opacity ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Reactive Protein ◽  
Overview Of Systematic Reviews ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Navigating the rapidly growing body of scientific literature on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is challenging, and ongoing critical appraisal of this output is essential. We aimed to summarize and critically appraise systematic reviews of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in humans that were available at the beginning of the pandemic. Methods Nine databases (Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Sciences, PDQ-Evidence, WHO’s Global Research, LILACS, and Epistemonikos) were searched from December 1, 2019, to March 24, 2020. Systematic reviews analyzing primary studies of COVID-19 were included. Two authors independently undertook screening, selection, extraction (data on clinical symptoms, prevalence, pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, diagnostic test assessment, laboratory, and radiological findings), and quality assessment (AMSTAR 2). A meta-analysis was performed of the prevalence of clinical outcomes. Results Eighteen systematic reviews were included; one was empty (did not identify any relevant study). Using AMSTAR 2, confidence in the results of all 18 reviews was rated as “critically low”. Identified symptoms of COVID-19 were (range values of point estimates): fever (82–95%), cough with or without sputum (58–72%), dyspnea (26–59%), myalgia or muscle fatigue (29–51%), sore throat (10–13%), headache (8–12%) and gastrointestinal complaints (5–9%). Severe symptoms were more common in men. Elevated C-reactive protein and lactate dehydrogenase, and slightly elevated aspartate and alanine aminotransferase, were commonly described. Thrombocytopenia and elevated levels of procalcitonin and cardiac troponin I were associated with severe disease. A frequent finding on chest imaging was uni- or bilateral multilobar ground-glass opacity. A single review investigated the impact of medication (chloroquine) but found no verifiable clinical data. All-cause mortality ranged from 0.3 to 13.9%. Conclusions In this overview of systematic reviews, we analyzed evidence from the first 18 systematic reviews that were published after the emergence of COVID-19. However, confidence in the results of all reviews was “critically low”. Thus, systematic reviews that were published early on in the pandemic were of questionable usefulness. Even during public health emergencies, studies and systematic reviews should adhere to established methodological standards.

scholarly journals Clinical characteristics, treatment and outcomes of paediatric COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. archdischild-2020-321385
Author(s):  
Omar Irfan ◽  
Fiona Muttalib ◽  
Kun Tang ◽  
Li Jiang ◽  
Zohra S Lassi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Disease Severity ◽  
World Bank ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Income Level ◽  
Clinical Findings ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries

ObjectiveCompare paediatric COVID-19 disease characteristics, management and outcomes according to World Bank country income level and disease severity.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.SettingBetween 1 December 2019 and 8 January 2021, 3350 articles were identified. Two reviewers conducted study screening, data abstraction and quality assessment independently and in duplicate. Observational studies describing laboratory-confirmed paediatric (0–19 years old) COVID-19 were considered for inclusion.Main outcomes and measuresThe pooled proportions of clinical findings, treatment and outcomes were compared according to World Bank country income level and reported disease severity.Results129 studies were included from 31 countries comprising 10 251 children of which 57.4% were hospitalised. Mean age was 7.0 years (SD 3.6), and 27.1% had a comorbidity. Fever (63.3%) and cough (33.7%) were common. Of 3670 cases, 44.1% had radiographic abnormalities. The majority of cases recovered (88.9%); however, 96 hospitalised children died. Compared with high-income countries, in low-income and middle-income countries, a lower proportion of cases were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) (9.9% vs 26.0%) yet pooled proportion of deaths among hospitalised children was higher (relative risk 2.14, 95% CI 1.43 to 3.20). Children with severe disease received antimicrobials, inotropes and anti-inflammatory agents more frequently than those with non-severe disease. Subgroup analyses showed that a higher proportion of children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) were admitted to ICU (47.1% vs 22.9%) and a higher proportion of hospitalised children with MIS-C died (4.8% vs 3.6%) compared with the overall sample.ConclusionPaediatric COVID-19 has a favourable prognosis. Further severe disease characterisation in children is needed globally.

Influenza Vaccine Efficacy and Effectiveness in Pregnant Women: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trang Ho Thu Quach ◽  
Nicholas Alexander Mallis ◽  
José F. Cordero
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Influenza Vaccine ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Vaccine Efficacy ◽  
Meta Analysis
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document