scholarly journals A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the global data involving 61,532 cancer patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Khoury ◽  
Sarah Nevitt ◽  
William Rohde Madsen ◽  
Lance Turtle ◽  
Gerry Davies ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Malignant Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Cancer Control ◽  
Haematological Malignancies ◽  
Cancer Treatments ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Increased Risk

Abstract Background SARS-CoV-2 have been shown to be associated with more severe disease and death in cancer patient. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to determine the risk by age, tumour type and treatment of infection with SARS-CoV-2 in cancer patients. Methods Systematic review by searching PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for articles published in English up to June 14, 2021 of SARS-CoV-2 infection in >10 patients with malignant disease. Outcomes included factors in patients with malignant disease that may predict a poor outcome from COVID-19 compared to patients without malignant disease, including patient demographics, tumour subtype and cancer treatments. A meta-analysis was performed using random effects model. Results 81 studies were included, totalling 61,532 cancer patients. Haematological malignancies comprised 22.1% (9,672 of 43,676) of cases. Relative risk (RR) of mortality when age and sex matched was 1.69 (95% CI, 1.46-1.95; p<0.001; I2=51%). RR of mortality, versus non-cancer patients, was associated with decreasing age (exp(b)0.96; 95% CI, 0.922-0.994; p=0.028) but not male sex (exp(b)1.89; 95% CI, 0.222-6.366; p=0.83). RR of mortality in those with haematological malignancies versus non-cancer control was 1.81 (95% CI, 1.53-2.95; I2=0.0%). Compared to other cancers, increased risk of death was seen for lung (RR 1.68, 95% CI, 1.45-1.94; p<0.001), genitourinary (RR 1.11; 95% CI, 1.00-1.24; p=0.059) and haematological malignancies (RR 1.42; 95% CI, 1.31-1.54; p<0.001). Breast (RR 0.51; 95% CI, 0.36-0.71; p<0.001) and gynaecological cancers (RR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62-0.93; p=0.009) had lower risk of death. Receipt of chemotherapy had greatest overall pooled mortality risk of 30% (95% CI, 25-36%; I2=86.97%) and endocrine therapy the lowest at 11% (95% CI, 6-16%; I2=70.7%). Conclusions Cancer patients, particularly younger cancer patients, appear at increased risk of mortality from COVID-19 compared to non-cancer patients. Differences in outcomes were seen based on tumour types and treatment.

scholarly journals Association of Steroids Use with Survival in Patients Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 546 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fausto Petrelli ◽  
Diego Signorelli ◽  
Michele Ghidini ◽  
Antonio Ghidini ◽  
Elio Gregory Pizzutilo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Symptom Control ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Increased Risk

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can elicit toxicities by inhibiting negative regulators of adaptive immunity. Sometimes, management of toxicities may require systemic glucocorticoids. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies to evaluate the correlation between steroids use, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) in cancer patients treated with ICIs. Publications that compared steroids with non-steroid users in cancer patients treated with ICIs from inception to June 2019 were identified by searching the EMBASE, PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Patients (studies, n = 16; patients, n = 4045) taking steroids were at increased risk of death and progression compared to those not taking steroids (HR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.24–1.91; p = 0.01 and HR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.02–1.76; p = 0.03, respectively). The main negative effect on OS was associated with patients taking steroids for supportive care (HR = 2.5, 95% CI 1.41–4.43; p < 0.01) or brain metastases (HR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.22–1.87; p < 0.01). In contrast, steroids used to mitigate adverse events did not negatively affect OS. In conclusion, caution is needed when steroids are used for symptom control. In these patients, a negative impact of steroid use was observed for both OS and PFS.

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 Impact of medical therapies for inflammatory bowel disease on the severity of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e000774
Author(s):  
Fatema Alrashed ◽  
Robert Battat ◽  
Israa Abdullah ◽  
Aline Charabaty ◽  
Mohammad Shehab
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel Disease ◽  
Bowel Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Aminosalicylic Acid ◽  
Icu Admission ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel ◽  
Medical Therapies

BackgroundDuring COVID-19 pandemic, the safety of medical therapies for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in relation to COVID-19 has emerged as an area of concern. This study aimed to evaluate the association between IBD therapies and severe COVID-19 outcomes.MethodWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published studies from December 2019 to August 2021 to identify studies that reported severe COVID-19 outcomes in patients on current IBD therapies including 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA), immunomodulators, corticosteroids, biologics, combination therapy, or tofacitinib.ResultsTwenty-two studies were identified. Corticosteroids (risk ratio (RR) 1.91 (95% CI 1.25 to 2.91, p=0.003)) and 5-ASA (RR 1.50 (95% CI 1.17 to 1.93, p=0.001)) were associated with increased risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes in patients with IBD patients. However, possible confounders for 5-ASA use were not controlled for. Sub-analysis showed that corticosteroids increased the risk of intensive care unit (ICU) admission but not mortality. Immunomodulators alone (RR 1.18 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.59, p=0.28)) or in combination with anti-TNFs ((RR 0.96 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.15, p=0.63)), tofacitinib (RR 0.81 (95% CI 0.49 to 1.33, p=0.40)) and vedolizumab ((RR 1.02 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.31, p=0.89)) were not associated with severe disease. Anti-TNFs (RR 0.47 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.54, p<0.00001)) and ustekinumab (RR 0.55 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.72, p<0.00001)) were associated with decreased risk of severe COVID-19.ConclusionIn patients with IBD, the risk of severe COVID-19 is higher among patients receiving corticosteroids. Corticosteroid use was associated with ICU admission but not mortality. The risk is also higher among patients receiving 5-ASAs. However, patient-level data were lacking and insufficient data existed for meta-regression analyses to adjust for confounding. Vedolizumab, tofacitinib, and immunomodulators alone or in combination with anti-TNF were not associated with severe disease. Anti-TNFs, and ustekinumab were associated with favourable outcomes.

scholarly journals Malignancy and Mortality in Pediatric-onset Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 732-741 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martine A Aardoom ◽  
Maria E Joosse ◽  
Andrica C H de Vries ◽  
Arie Levine ◽  
Lissy de Ridder
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel Disease ◽  
Bowel Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Fatal Outcome ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Specific Information ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel

Abstract Background Cancer and death are the most severe outcomes that affect patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). These outcomes are even more severe if they occur at a young age but are rare, even in the general population. We conducted a systematic review to provide an overview of all reported pediatric (PIBD) patients with severe outcome. Methods A literature search identified publications that reported development of cancer or fatal outcome in PIBD patients. Studies were eligible for inclusion when (1) article written in English, (2) original data, (3) individual patient information, (4) full text available, (5) study population consisting of patients diagnosed with IBD under the age of 19 years, and (6) who developed malignancy or fatality at any point later in life. Results A total of 98 included studies comprised data of 271 PIBD patients who developed cancer and/or fatal outcome at any point later in life. Meta-analysis demonstrated an increased risk for cancer in PIBD patients (pooled standardized incidence ratio 2.23, 95% CI: 1.98–2.52). The most frequent type of non-fatal cancer was lymphoma, whereas colorectal carcinomas were the most frequently reported type of fatal cancer in PIBD patients and were particularly associated with primary sclerosing cholangitis. The majority of patients with noncancer-related fatal outcomes were diagnosed with ulcerative colitis and most often died due to infectious complications or severe disease-associated complications. Conclusions The data in this review confirm that PIBD associated malignancy and mortality are rare and detailed clinical characteristics are limited. Prospective and international collaborations are needed to obtain more detailed patient-specific information, which is necessary to investigate the relationship between severe outcomes in PIBD patients and the currently used therapeutic strategies.

scholarly journals Association between health literacy and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhao-ya Fan ◽  
Yuan Yang ◽  
Fan Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Literacy ◽  
English Language ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Functional Health ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Newcastle Ottawa Scale

Abstract Background To identify the relationship between health literacy (HL) and mortality based on a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods Literature published from database inception until July 2020 was searched using the PubMed and Web of Science databases, using relevant keywords and clear inclusion and exclusion criteria. The search was limited to English language articles. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data. Pooled correlation coefficients and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) between HL and mortality were estimated using Stata 15.0 software. Potential sources of heterogeneity were explored using subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and meta-regression. Quality of the original studies that were included in the meta-analysis was evaluated using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. A funnel plot and Egger’s test were used to determine whether significant publication bias was present. Results Overall, 19 articles were included, reporting on a total of 41,149 subjects. Eleven were prospective cohort studies, and all articles were considered “good” quality. The most used screening instruments were the short Test of Functional Health Literacy (S-TOFHLA) in Adults and the Brief Health Literacy Screen (BHLS). Among 39,423 subjects (two articles did not report the number of patients with low HL), approximately 9202 (23%) had inadequate or marginal HL. The correlation coefficient between HL and mortality was 1.25 (95%CI = 0.25–0.44). Conclusion Lower HL was associated with an increased risk of death. This finding should be considered carefully and confirmed by further research.

scholarly journals Elevated D-Dimer Levels are Associated with Increased Risk of Mortality in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siddharth Shah ◽  
Kuldeep Shah ◽  
Siddharth B Patel ◽  
Forum S Patel ◽  
Mohammed Osman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Case Fatality ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Risk Of Mortality ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Novel Coronavirus ◽  
D Dimer

AbstractIntroductionThe 2019 novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV), now declared a pandemic has an overall case fatality of 2–3% but it is as high as 50% in critically ill patients. D-dimer is an important prognostic tool, often elevated in patients with severe COVID-19 infection and in those who suffered death. In this systematic review, we aimed to investigate the prognostic role of D-dimer in COVID-19 infected patients.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Medline, Embase, Ovid, and Cochrane for studies reporting admission D-dimer levels in COVID-19 patients and its effect on mortality.Results18 studies (16 retrospective and 2 prospective) with a total of 3,682 patients met the inclusion criteria. The pooled mean difference (MD) suggested significantly elevated D-dimer levels in patients who died versus those survived (MD 6.13 mg/L, 95% CI 4.16 − 8.11, p <0.001). Similarly, the pooled mean D-dimer levels were significantly elevated in patients with severe COVID-19 infection (MD 0.54 mg/L, 95% CI 0.28 − 0.8, p< 0.001). In addition, the risk of mortality was four-fold higher in patients with positive D-dimer vs negative D-dimer (RR 4.11, 95% CI 2.48 − 6.84, p< 0.001) and the risk of developing the severe disease was two-fold higher in patients with positive D-dimer levels vs negative D-dimer (RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.34 − 3.11, p < 0.001).ConclusionOur meta-analysis demonstrates that patients with COVID-19 presenting with elevated D-dimer levels have an increased risk of severe disease and mortality.

scholarly journals Obesity and Mortality Among Patients Diagnosed With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tahmina Nasrin Poly ◽  
Md. Mohaimenul Islam ◽  
Hsuan Chia Yang ◽  
Ming Chin Lin ◽  
Wen-Shan Jian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Risk Ratio ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Epidemiological Studies ◽  
Class Iii ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Risk Of Mortality ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Class Iii Obesity

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has already raised serious concern globally as the number of confirmed or suspected cases have increased rapidly. Epidemiological studies reported that obesity is associated with a higher rate of mortality in patients with COVID-19. Yet, to our knowledge, there is no comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of obesity and mortality among patients with COVID-19. We, therefore, aimed to evaluate the effect of obesity, associated comorbidities, and other factors on the risk of death due to COVID-19. We did a systematic search on PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus between January 1, 2020, and August 30, 2020. We followed Cochrane Guidelines to find relevant articles, and two reviewers extracted data from retrieved articles. Disagreement during those stages was resolved by discussion with the main investigator. The random-effects model was used to calculate effect sizes. We included 17 articles with a total of 543,399 patients. Obesity was significantly associated with an increased risk of mortality among patients with COVID-19 (RRadjust: 1.42 (95%CI: 1.24–1.63, p &lt; 0.001). The pooled risk ratio for class I, class II, and class III obesity were 1.27 (95%CI: 1.05–1.54, p = 0.01), 1.56 (95%CI: 1.11–2.19, p &lt; 0.01), and 1.92 (95%CI: 1.50–2.47, p &lt; 0.001), respectively). In subgroup analysis, the pooled risk ratio for the patients with stroke, CPOD, CKD, and diabetes were 1.80 (95%CI: 0.89–3.64, p = 0.10), 1.57 (95%CI: 1.57–1.91, p &lt; 0.001), 1.34 (95%CI: 1.18–1.52, p &lt; 0.001), and 1.19 (1.07–1.32, p = 0.001), respectively. However, patients with obesity who were more than 65 years had a higher risk of mortality (RR: 2.54; 95%CI: 1.62–3.67, p &lt; 0.001). Our study showed that obesity was associated with an increased risk of death from COVID-19, particularly in patients aged more than 65 years. Physicians should aware of these risk factors when dealing with patients with COVID-19 and take early treatment intervention to reduce the mortality of COVID-19 patients.

scholarly journals P01.06 Overweight and obesity as biomarkers for survival outcomes and immune related adverse events undergoing immunotherapy – a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. A5.2-A6
Author(s):  
P Trinkner ◽  
S Günther ◽  
M von Bergwelt ◽  
D Cordas dos Santos ◽  
S Theurich
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Normal Weight ◽  
Overweight And Obesity ◽  
Obese Patients ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Underweight Patients ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundThe impact of overweight/obesity in cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is controversial. To further contribute to this debate, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published articles evaluating the effects of overweight/obesity on survival and immune-related adverse events (irAEs).Materials and MethodsIn analogy to Cochrane recommendations, systematic literature searches included all published articles in PubMed until February 2021 with key terms ‘obesity’ and ‘overweight’ and ICI treatment irrespective of cancer entity and ICI used. Further selection criteria for meta-analysis included WHO cut-offs for overweight/obesity. For the random effects meta-analysis, we used Hazard Ratios (HR) for overall and progression-free survival (OS, PFS) and Odds Ratios (OR) for occurrence of irAEs with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95%CI), respectively.ResultsA total of 30 studies (12,895 patients, 38% female) selected for meta-analysis revealed a superior survival of overweight/obese patients (PFS: HR 0.9, 95%CI 0.77-1.04, p = 0.11; OS: 0.74, 95%CI 0.63-0.92, p = 0.0005) compared to normal weight patients. In subgroup analyses based on sex, overweight/obese male patients showed increased survival (PFS: HR 0.79, 95%CI 0.63-1.00, p = 0.05; OS: 0.71, 95%CI 0.58-0.86, p = 0.0005), whereas overweight/obese female patients had similar survival probabilities compared to their normal weight counterparts (PFS: HR 1.01, 95%CI 0.69-1.47, p = 0.96; OS: HR 0.73, 95%CI 0.48-1.10, p = 0.13). Underweight patients showed inferior survival (PFS: HR 1.48, 95%CI 1.07-2.04, p = 0.02; OS: HR 1.86, 95%CI 1.13-3.04, p = 0.01). In addition, overweight/obese patients had a higher risk of developing irAEs with grade ≥ 3 (OR 1.91, 95%CI 1.18-3.10, p = 0.008).ConclusionsOur meta-analysis revealed that overweight/obesity is a beneficial factor for PFS and OS in a mixed cohort of cancer patients undergoing ICI treatment accompanied by an increased risk of severe irAEs. The differences between overweight/obese males and overweight/obese females might point to sex specific adipose distribution patterns and interactions of sex steroids on a molecular level. A significant number of studies included underweight patients into normal weight control groups which led to a compromised interpretation of the data and should be addressed in future studies.Disclosure InformationP. Trinkner: None. S. Günther: None. M. von Bergwelt: None. D. Cordas dos Santos: None. S. Theurich: None.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document