scholarly journals Statin use and clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. postgradmedj-2020-139172
Author(s):  
Rimesh Pal ◽  
Mainak Banerjee ◽  
Urmila Yadav ◽  
Sukrita Bhattacharjee
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Fixed Effects Model ◽  
Adjusted Risk ◽  
Risk Estimates ◽  
Statin Use

PurposeObservations studies have shown that prior use of statins is associated with a reduced risk of adverse clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. However, the available data are limited, inconsistent and conflicting. Besides, no randomised controlled trial exists in this regard. Hence, the present meta-analysis was conducted to provide an updated summary and collate the effect of statin use on clinical outcomes in COVID-19 using unadjusted and adjusted risk estimates.MethodsPubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases were systematically searched using appropriate keywords till December 18 2020, to identify observational studies reporting clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients using statins versus those not using statins. Prior and in-hospital use of statins were considered. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Unadjusted and adjusted pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% CIs were calculated.ResultsWe included 14 observational studies pooling data retrieved from 19 988 patients with COVID-19. All the studies were of high/moderate quality. Pooled analysis of unadjusted data showed that statin use was not associated with improved clinical outcomes (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.50, p=0.94, I2=94%, random-effects model). However, on pooling adjusted risk estimates, the use of statin was found to significantly reduce the risk of adverse outcomes (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.63, p<0.0005, I2=0%, fixed-effects model).ConclusionsStatin use is associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Individuals with multiple comorbidities on statin therapy should be encouraged to continue the drug amid the ongoing pandemic.

scholarly journals Association of Metformin Use with Asthma Exacerbation in Patients with Concurrent Asthma and Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Li Wen ◽  
Wang Zhong ◽  
Yihui Chai ◽  
Qin Zhong ◽  
Jie Gao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Room ◽  
Asthma Exacerbation ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Emergency Department Visits ◽  
Emergency Room Visits ◽  
Fixed Effects Model ◽  
Adjusted Risk ◽  
Wide Range

Background. Asthma and diabetes are both diseases that affect a wide range of people worldwide. As a common treatment for diabetes, metformin has also been reported to be effective in improving asthma outcomes. We conducted a combined analysis to examine the efficacy of metformin in reducing asthma exacerbation in patients with concurrent asthma and diabetes. Methods. We searched the PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases for articles published prior to April 2020 to find observational studies of individuals with concurrent asthma and diabetes that compared the risk of asthma exacerbation between metformin users and nonusers. Two researchers separately screened the studies, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias. The primary outcome was the adjusted risk of asthma exacerbation. The secondary outcomes were the adjusted risk of asthma-related hospitalization and emergency room visits. Review Manager was used for data analysis and plotting. I2 and χ2 tests were used to estimate heterogeneity. A random effects or fixed effects model was used depending on the heterogeneity. Odds ratios were calculated for dichotomous variables. Results. We included two studies with a total of 25252 patients. The pooled effect size showed that metformin was inversely associated with a risk of asthma exacerbation (OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.28–1.48; χ2 = 5.42, P=0.02; I2 = 82%), asthma-related emergency department visits (OR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.74–0.89; χ2 = 0.36, P=0.55; I2 = 0%), and hospitalizations (OR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.14–1.29; χ2 = 4.01, P=0.05; I2 = 75%). Conclusion. This meta-analysis suggested that metformin decreased the risk of asthma-related emergency room visits for patients with concurrent asthma and diabetes. Metformin reduced the risk of asthma-related hospitalization and exacerbation but was not statistically significant. More randomized trials involving larger samples should be considered, and the mechanisms of these effects need to be fully elucidated.

scholarly journals The Association between Influenza Vaccination and COVID-19 and Its Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 529
Author(s):  
Ruitong Wang ◽  
Min Liu ◽  
Jue Liu
Keyword(s):  
Influenza Vaccination ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
Funnel Plots

Influenza could circulate in parallel with COVID-19. In the context of COVID-19, some studies observed inverse associations between influenza vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection and clinical outcomes, while others did not. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the association between influenza vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection and clinical outcomes, aiming to provide evidence for COVID-19 prevention and vaccination promotion. We searched four databases from inception to 10 March, 2021. Random effects and fixed effects models were used to pool odds ratios (ORs) and adjusted estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used funnel plots to evaluate the publication bias, I2 statistics to evaluate the heterogeneity, and conducted subgroup analyses. Sixteen observational studies involving 290,327 participants were included. Influenza vaccination was associated with a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (pooled adjusted OR: 0.86, 95%CI: 0.81–0.91), while not significantly associated with adverse outcomes (intensive care: adjusted OR 0.63, 95%CI: 0.22–1.81; hospitalization: adjusted OR 0.74, 95%CI: 0.51–1.06; mortality: adjusted OR 0.89, 95%CI: 0.73–1.09). Our findings suggest that influenza vaccination is associated with a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. It is crucial for policy makers to implement strategies on influenza vaccination, for it may also have benefits for COVID-19 prevention.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis about the Effect of Bisphosphonates on the Risk of Skeletal-Related Event in Men with Prostate Cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (13) ◽  
pp. 1604-1612
Author(s):  
Congcong Wu ◽  
Hua Jiang ◽  
Jianghua Chen
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Fixed Effects Model ◽  
Related Event ◽  
Mineral Density ◽  
Skeletal Related Event

Background: Although the adjuvant therapy of bisphosphonates in prostate cancer is effective in improving bone mineral density, it is still uncertain whether bisphosphonates could decrease the risk of Skeletal- Related Event (SRE) in patients with prostate cancer. We reviewed and analyzed the effect of different types of bisphosphonates on the risk of SRE, defined as pathological fracture, spinal cord compression, radiation therapy to the bone, surgery to bone, hypercalcemia, bone pain, or death as a result of prostate cancer. Methods: A systemic literature search was conducted on PubMed and related bibliographies. The emphasis during data extraction was laid on the Hazard Ratio (HR) and the corresponding 95% Confidence Interval (CI) from every eligible Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT). HR was pooled with the fixed effects model, and preplanned subgroup analyses were performed. Results: 5 RCTs (n = 4651) were included and analyzed finally after screening 51 articles. The meta-analysis of all participants showed no significant decrease in the risk of SRE when adding bisphosphonates to control group (HR = 0.968, 95% CI = 0.874 - 1.072, p = 0.536) with low heterogeneity (I2 = 0.0% (d.f. = 4) p = 0.679). There was no significant improvement on SRE neither in the subgroups with Metastases (M1) or Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer (CSPC) (respectively HR = 0.968, 95% CI = 0.874 - 1.072, p = 0.536, I2 = 0.0% (d.f. = 4) p = 0.679; HR = 0.954, 95% CI = 0.837 - 1.088, p = 0.484, I2 = 0.0% (d.f. = 3) p = 0.534). Conclusion: Our study demonstrated that bisphosphonates could not statistically significantly reduce the risk of SRE in patients with prostate cancer, neither in the subgroups with M1 or CSPC.

Use of Statins and Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Seven Randomized Clinical Trials and Nine Observational Studies

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (34) ◽  
pp. 8606-8612 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefanos Bonovas ◽  
Kalitsa Filioussi ◽  
Nikolaos Tsavaris ◽  
Nikolaos M. Sitaras
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Cancer Risk ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Fixed Effects Model

Purpose A growing body of evidence suggests that statins may have chemopreventive potential against breast cancer. Laboratory studies demonstrate that statins induce apoptosis and reduce cell invasiveness in various cell lines, including breast carcinoma cells. However, the clinical relevance of these data remains unclear. The nonconclusive nature of the epidemiologic data prompted us to conduct a detailed meta-analysis of the studies published on the subject in peer-reviewed literature. Patients and Methods A comprehensive search for articles published up until 2005 was performed; reviews of each study were conducted; and data were abstracted. Before meta-analysis, the studies were evaluated for publication bias and heterogeneity. Pooled relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% CIs were calculated using the random and the fixed-effects models. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also performed. Results Seven large randomized trials and nine observational studies (five case-control and four cohort studies) contributed to the analysis. We found no evidence of publication bias or heterogeneity among the studies. Statin use did not significantly affect breast cancer risk (fixed effects model: RR = 1.03; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.14; random effects model: RR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.18). When the analyses were stratified into subgroups, there was no evidence that study design substantially influenced the estimate of effects. Furthermore, the sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of our results. Conclusion Our meta-analysis findings do not support a protective effect of statins against breast cancer. However, this conclusion is limited by the relatively short follow-up times of the studies analyzed. Further studies are required to investigate the potential decrease in breast cancer risk among long-term statin users.

Prognosis of Adenosquamous Carcinoma Compared With Adenocarcinoma in Uterine Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 289-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jung-Yun Lee ◽  
Chulmin Lee ◽  
SeoKyung Hahn ◽  
Min A. Kim ◽  
Hee Seung Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Observational Studies ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Adenosquamous Carcinoma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Uterine Cervical Cancer ◽  
Recurrence Free Survival ◽  
Fixed Effects Model ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Clinical Stages ◽  
Histologic Subtypes

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the survival outcomes of adenosquamous carcinoma (ASC) and adenocarcinoma (AC) of the cervix.MethodsWe searched PubMed and Embase for observational studies that compared the outcomes of 2 histologic subtypes. Hazards ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated with a fixed effects model.ResultsA total of 17 studies were included in the analyses. Patients with ASC were associated significantly with poorer overall survival (death HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.12–1.43; I2= 0%) and recurrence-free survival (recurrence HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.05–1.95; I2= 19.4%) than those with AC. For clinical stages I and II in particular, ASC predicted significantly poorer outcomes compared with AC (death HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.17–1.70; I2= 0%).ConclusionsThis meta-analysis suggests that ASC may have poorer outcomes compared with AC of the cervix.

scholarly journals Clinical symptoms, comorbidities and complications features in severe and non-severe patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis without cases duplication

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhufeng Wang ◽  
Hongsheng Deng ◽  
Changxing Ou ◽  
Jingyi Liang ◽  
Yingzhi Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Clinical Symptoms ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mortality Rates ◽  
Fixed Effects Model ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Q Statistic

Abstract Background: The pandemic of COVID-19 posed a challenge to global healthcare. The mortality rates of severe cases range from 8.1% to 31.8%, and it is particularly important to identify risk factors that aggravate the disease.Methods: We performed a systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis, using 7 databases to assess clinical characteristics, comorbidities and complications in severe and non-severe patients with COVID-19. All the observational studies were included. We performed a random or fixed effects model meta-analysis to calculate the pooled proportion and 95% CI. Measure of heterogeneity was estimated by Cochran’s Q statistic, I2 index and P value.Results: 4881 cases from 25 studies related to COVID-19 were included. The most prevalent comorbidity was hypertension (severe: 33.4%, 95% CI: 25.4% - 41.4%; non-severe 21.6%, 95% CI: 9.9% - 33.3%), followed by diabetes (severe: 14.4%, 95% CI: 11.5% - 17.3%; non-severe: 8.5%, 95% CI: 6.1% - 11.0%). The prevalence of ARDS, AKI and shock were all higher in severe cases, with 41.1% (95% CI: 14.1% - 68.2%), 16.4% (95% CI: 3.4% - 29.5%) and 19.9% (95% CI: 5.5% - 34.4%), rather than 3.0% (95% CI: 0.6% - 5.5%), 2.2% (95% CI: 0.1% - 4.2%) and 4.1% (95% CI -4.8% - 13.1%) in non-severe patients, respectively. The death rate was higher in severe cases (30.3%, 95% CI: 13.8% - 46.8%) than non-severe cases (1.5%, 95% CI: 0.1% - 2.8%).Conclusions: Hypertension, diabetes and cardiovascular diseases may be risk factors for COVID-19 patients to develop into severe cases.

scholarly journals Cinacalcet Treatment Significantly Improves All-Cause and Cardiovascular Survival in Dialysis Patients: Results from a Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 1327-1338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuan Zu ◽  
Xiangxue Lu ◽  
Jinghong Song ◽  
Ling Yu ◽  
Han Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Mortality ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Fixed Effects Model ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Dialysis Patients ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Objective: To assess the long-term effects including all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and fracture incidence, of cinacalcet on secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) in patients on dialysis. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from their inception to October 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort design prospective observational studies assessing cinacalcet for the treatment of SHPT in dialysis patients were included. Data extraction was independently completed by 2 authors who determined the methodological quality of the studies and extracted data in duplicate. Study-specific risk estimates were tested by using a fixed effects model. Results: A total of 14 articles with 38,219 participants were included, of which 10 RCTs with 7,471 participants and 4 prospective observational studies with 30,748 participants fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Compared with no cinacalcet, cinacalcet administration reduced all-cause mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.89–0.94, p < 0.001) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.89–0.95, p < 0.001), but it did not significantly reduce the incidence of fractures (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87–1.00, p = 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this meta-analysis indicated that the treatment of SHPT with cinacalcet may in fact reduce all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality among patients receiving maintenance dialysis.

scholarly journals Maternal and neonatal outcomes associated with biologic exposure before and during pregnancy in women with inflammatory systemic diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Rheumatology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (8) ◽  
pp. 1808-1817 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole W Tsao ◽  
Nevena Rebic ◽  
Larry D Lynd ◽  
Mary A De Vera
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Congenital Anomalies ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Neonatal Outcomes ◽  
Systemic Diseases ◽  
Adjusted Risk ◽  
Risk Estimates ◽  
Maternal And Neonatal Outcomes

Abstract Objective To determine the association between exposure to biologics in pregnant women with inflammatory systemic diseases and maternal and neonatal outcomes through a meta-analysis of findings from studies identified in a systematic review. Methods We conducted a systematic review of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify observational studies assessing the perinatal impacts of biologic in women with inflammatory systemic disease. Findings were meta-analysed across included studies with random-effects models. Crude risk estimates and, where possible, adjusted risk estimates were pooled to determine the impact on results when confounding is addressed. Results Overall, 24 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analyses of crude risk estimates resulted in pooled odds ratios (OR) for the association of biologic use during pregnancy and the following respective outcomes: congenital anomalies (1.30, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.67), preterm birth (OR 1.61, 95% CI: 1.37, 1.89), and low birth weight (OR 1.68, 95% CI: 1.21, 2.31). However, in pooled analyses of adjusted risk estimates we observed that the association between biologics use during pregnancy in disease-matched exposed and unexposed pregnant women was no longer statistically significant for congenital anomalies (adjusted OR 1.18, 95% CI: 0.88, 1.57). Conclusion Pooled results from studies reporting adjusted risk estimates showed no increased risk of congenital anomalies associated with biologics use, suggesting that increased rates of adverse outcomes may be due to disease activity itself or other confounders.

scholarly journals Can Statin Treatment Reduce the Risk of Hepatocellular Carcinoma? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 153303382093488
Author(s):  
Yue Chang ◽  
Qinyu Liu ◽  
Zidong Zhou ◽  
Yuping Ding ◽  
Mei Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Relative Risk ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Statin Treatment ◽  
Fixed Effects Model ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Dose Dependent ◽  
Reduced Risk ◽  
Statin Use

Background: Whether statins can reduce the incidence of cancers has been an interesting topic in recent years. This meta-analysis aimed to determine the relationship between statin treatment with the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods: Studies published up to July 2019 were screened from databases. The data from approved studies were pooled. Random-effects or fixed-effects model was used to calculate the relative risk with 95% CIs in the overall group and subgroups. Sensitivity and meta-regression analyses were performed, and publication bias was evaluated. Results: A total of 18 studies involving 1 611 596 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The overall result showed a significantly reduced risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (relative risk = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.42-0.66) in statin users. In comparison to the risk in nonstatin users, the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma was reduced in all subgroups. The dose of statins and their pharmacokinetics can partly explain the heterogeneity in the overall meta-analysis ( I 2 = 94.6%, P = .000). A dose-dependent effect of statin use for the reduced risk of hepatocellular carcinoma was found. Conclusions: Findings from this meta-analysis support that statin use can significantly reduce the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma.

The Safety of Ovarian Preservation in Early-Stage Adenocarcinoma Compared With Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Uterine Cervix: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

2016 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 1510-1514 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiao-Bing Jiao ◽  
Jun Hu ◽  
Li-Rong Zhu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Squamous Cell ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Fixed Effects Model ◽  
Ovarian Preservation

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the incidence of ovarian metastasis (OM) in adenocarcinoma (ADC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) in early-stage cervical cancer and evaluate the safety of ovarian preservation in early-stage ADC.MethodsTo perform a meta-analysis to compare the incidence of OM between early-stage ADC and SCC, we searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane for observational studies that compared it with pathological evidence after radical hysterectomy and oophorectomy. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated with a fixed effects model. We also found a few articles evaluating the oncological prognosis of patients with ovarian preservation to perform a systematic review.ResultsA total of 5 studies were included in the meta-analyses. The incidence of OM of patients with early-stage ADC and SCC were 2% and 0.4%, respectively (odds ratio, 5.27; 95% confidence interval, 2.14–13.45). In 1427 patients with ADC or SCC of the cervix FIGO stage (CIS-IIA) who underwent hysterectomy, no ovarian recurrences were observed after unilateral or bilateral ovarian preservation in ADC patients in the follow-up (30–68 months); however, 15 patients with SCC developed pelvic recurrence.ConclusionsAlthough the incidence of OM was higher in early-stage ADC than SCC according to ovarian pathology, it might be relatively safe to perform ovarian preservation with early-stage ADC because of low ovarian recurrence rate in short-term follow-ups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document