The impact of COVID-19 on pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on maternal and newborn health is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the association between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection during pregnancy and adverse pregnancy outcomes.METHODS:We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies with comparison data on SARS-CoV-2 infection and severity of COVID-19 during pregnancy. We searched for eligible studies in MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, medRxiv and Cochrane databases up to Jan. 29, 2021, using Medical Subject Headings terms and keywords for “severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 OR SARS-CoV-2 OR coronavirus disease 2019 OR COVID-19” AND “pregnancy.” We evaluated the methodologic quality of all included studies using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Our primary outcomes were preeclampsia and preterm birth. Secondary outcomes included stillbirth, gestational diabetes and other pregnancy outcomes. We calculated summary odds ratios (ORs) or weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects meta-analysis.RESULTS:We included 42 studies involving 438 548 people who were pregnant. Compared with no SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy, COVID-19 was associated with preeclampsia (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.73), preterm birth (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.39) and stillbirth (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.90). Compared with mild COVID-19, severe COVID-19 was strongly associated with preeclampsia (OR 4.16, 95% CI 1.55 to 11.15), preterm birth (OR 4.29, 95% CI 2.41 to 7.63), gestational diabetes (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.09 to 3.64) and low birth weight (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.12).INTERPRETATION:COVID-19 may be associated with increased risks of preeclampsia, preterm birth and other adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and was declared a global pandemic in March 2020.¹ Pregnant people and infants may be particularly susceptible to COVID-19 because the physiologic changes of pregnancy involve cardiorespiratory and immune systems, which may result in an altered response to SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy. ² Fetuses may be exposed to SARS-CoV-2 during critical periods of fetal development.³ The nature of the association between COVID-19 and pregnancy outcomes remains unclear, and meta-analyses involving patients with COVID-19 who are pregnant are limited. Previous reviews have focused mostly on prevalence estimates from case reports or case series that are difficult to interpret and potentially biased.^4,5 A 2020 systematic review suggested that people who are pregnant did not have an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or symptomatic COVID-19, but they were at risk of severe COVID-19 compared with those who were not pregnant.⁵ However, this review included suspected COVID-19 cases in addition to confirmed cases.⁵ Although some recent observational studies have suggested that people with confirmed asymptomatic and symptomatic COVID-19,^6–15 as well as mild and severe infections,^{6,8,9,15–22} may be at risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, we are unaware of any systematic reviews that have comprehensively evaluated these data.We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes among pregnant patients with COVID-19. We aimed to determine the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and adverse pregnancy outcomes, including preeclampsia, preterm birth and stillbirth.     

Hydroxychloroquine and QTc prolongation in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundAmong many drugs that hold potential in COVID-19 pandemic, chloroquine (CQ), and its derivative hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have generated unusual interest. With increasing usage, there has been growing concern about the prolongation of QTc interval and Torsades de Pointes (TdP) with HCQ, especially in combination with azithromycin.AimsThis meta-analysis is planned to study the risk of QTc prolongation and Torsades de pointes (TdP) by a well-defined criterion for HCQ, CQ alone, and in combination with Azithromycin in patients with COVID-19.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was made in two databases (PubMed, Embase). Three outcomes explored in the included studies were frequency of QTc > 500 ms (ms) or ΔQTc > 60 ms (Outcome 1), frequency of QTc > 500 ms (Outcome 2) and frequency of TdP (Outcome 3). Random effects method with inverse variance approach was used for computation of pooled summary and risk ratio.ResultsA total of 13 studies comprising of 2138 patients were included in the final analysis. The pooled prevalence of outcome 1, outcome 2 and outcome 3 for HCQ, CQ with or without Azithromycin were 10.18% (5.59–17.82%, I² – 92%), 10.22% (6.01–16.85%, I² – 79%), and 0.72% (0.34–1.51, I² – 0%) respectively. The prevalence of outcome 2 in subgroup analysis for HCQ and HCQ + Azithromycin was 7.25% (3.22–15.52, I² – 59%) and 8.61% (4.52–15.79, I² – 76%), respectively. The risk ratio (RR) for outcome 1 and outcome 2 between HCQ + Azithromycin and HCQ was 1.22 (0.77–1.93, I² – 0%) & 1.51 (0.79–2.87, I² – 13%), respectively and was not significant. Heterogeneity was noted statistically as well clinically (regimen types, patient numbers, study design, and outcome definition).ConclusionThe use of HCQ/CQ is associated with a high prevalence of QTc prolongation. However, it is not associated with a high risk of TdP.     

Antiviral drug treatment for nonsevere COVID-19: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background:Randomized trial evidence suggests that some antiviral drugs are effective in patients with COVID-19. However, the comparative effectiveness of antiviral drugs in nonsevere COVID-19 is unclear.Methods:We searched the Epistemonikos COVID-19 L·OVE (Living Overview of Evidence) database for randomized trials comparing antiviral treatments, standard care or placebo in adult patients with nonsevere COVID-19 up to Apr. 25, 2022. Reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We performed a frequentist network meta-analysis and assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.Results:We identified 41 trials, which included 18 568 patients. Compared with standard care or placebo, molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir–ritonavir each reduced risk of death with moderate certainty (10.9 fewer deaths per 1000, 95% confidence interval [CI] 12.6 to 4.5 fewer for molnupiravir; 11.7 fewer deaths per 1000, 95% CI 13.1 fewer to 2.6 more). Compared with molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir–ritonavir probably reduced risk of hospital admission (27.8 fewer admissions per 1000, 95% CI 32.8 to 18.3 fewer; moderate certainty). Remdesivir probably has no effect on risk of death, but may reduce hospital admissions (39.1 fewer admissions per 1000, 95% CI 48.7 to 13.7 fewer; low certainty).Interpretation:Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir–ritonavir probably reduce risk of hospital admissions and death among patients with nonsevere COVID-19. Nirmatrelvir–ritonavir is probably more effective than molnupiravir for reducing risk of hospital admissions. Most trials were conducted with unvaccinated patients, before the emergence of the Omicron variant; the effectiveness of these drugs must thus be tested among vaccinated patients and against newer variants.

Most trials addressing the treatment of patients with COVID-19 have targeted patients admitted to hospital with severe or critical disease.¹ However, more recently, several treatments, including antiviral drugs, antidepressants, monoclonal antibodies and inhaled corticosteroids, have been studied for patients with nonsevere COVID-19.² Preliminary evidence from ongoing or recently completed trials suggests that 2 novel antiviral drugs — molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir–ritonavir (Paxlovid) — may be effective at reducing risk of hospital admission.^3–5 To date, evidence on antiviral drugs for nonsevere COVID-19 has not been systematically synthesized or appraised. Furthermore, although efficacy data from trials of molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir–ritonavir and remdesivir are promising, no head-to-head trials have compared these drugs.A network meta-analysis allows for comparison of treatments that have not been compared in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), using pooled estimates from direct and indirect evidence. They can provide guidance to clinicians and evidence users in determining which treatments are superior. This is particularly important as health care systems attempt to prioritize access to effective COVID-19 treatments in the early stages of the disease.We sought to compare the effectiveness of antiviral drugs for patients with nonsevere COVID-19.     

Comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for the treatment of COVID-19: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BackgroundNumerous clinical trials and observational studies have investigated various pharmacological agents as potential treatment for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the results are heterogeneous and sometimes even contradictory to one another, making it difficult for clinicians to determine which treatments are truly effective.Methods and findingsWe carried out a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to systematically evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions and the level of evidence behind each treatment regimen in different clinical settings. Both published and unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and confounding-adjusted observational studies which met our predefined eligibility criteria were collected. We included studies investigating the effect of pharmacological management of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 management. Mild patients who do not require hospitalization or have self-limiting disease courses were not eligible for our NMA. A total of 110 studies (40 RCTs and 70 observational studies) were included. PubMed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, medRxiv, SSRN, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from the beginning of 2020 to August 24, 2020. Studies from Asia (41 countries, 37.2%), Europe (28 countries, 25.4%), North America (24 countries, 21.8%), South America (5 countries, 4.5%), and Middle East (6 countries, 5.4%), and additional 6 multinational studies (5.4%) were included in our analyses. The outcomes of interest were mortality, progression to severe disease (severe pneumonia, admission to intensive care unit (ICU), and/or mechanical ventilation), viral clearance rate, QT prolongation, fatal cardiac complications, and noncardiac serious adverse events. Based on RCTs, the risk of progression to severe course and mortality was significantly reduced with corticosteroids (odds ratio (OR) 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.86, p = 0.032, and OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.91, p = 0.002, respectively) and remdesivir (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.50, p < 0.001, and OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.98, p = 0.041, respectively) compared to standard care for moderate to severe COVID-19 patients in non-ICU; corticosteroids were also shown to reduce mortality rate (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.73, p < 0.001) for critically ill patients in ICU. In analyses including observational studies, interferon-alpha (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.39, p = 0.004), itolizumab (OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.92, p = 0.042), sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.88, p = 0.030), anakinra (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.82, p = 0.019), tocilizumab (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.60, p < 0.001), and convalescent plasma (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.96, p = 0.038) were associated with reduced mortality rate in non-ICU setting, while high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.49, p = 0.003), ivermectin (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.57, p = 0.005), and tocilizumab (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.90, p = 0.012) were associated with reduced mortality rate in critically ill patients. Convalescent plasma was the only treatment option that was associated with improved viral clearance rate at 2 weeks compared to standard care (OR 11.39, 95% CI 3.91 to 33.18, p < 0.001). The combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin was shown to be associated with increased QT prolongation incidence (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.26 to 3.20, p = 0.003) and fatal cardiac complications in cardiac-impaired populations (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.24 to 4.00, p = 0.007). No drug was significantly associated with increased noncardiac serious adverse events compared to standard care. The quality of evidence of collective outcomes were estimated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. The major limitation of the present study is the overall low level of evidence that reduces the certainty of recommendations. Besides, the risk of bias (RoB) measured by RoB2 and ROBINS-I framework for individual studies was generally low to moderate. The outcomes deducted from observational studies could not infer causality and can only imply associations. The study protocol is publicly available on PROSPERO (CRD42020186527).ConclusionsIn this NMA, we found that anti-inflammatory agents (corticosteroids, tocilizumab, anakinra, and IVIG), convalescent plasma, and remdesivir were associated with improved outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Hydroxychloroquine did not provide clinical benefits while posing cardiac safety risks when combined with azithromycin, especially in the vulnerable population. Only 29% of current evidence on pharmacological management of COVID-19 is supported by moderate or high certainty and can be translated to practice and policy; the remaining 71% are of low or very low certainty and warrant further studies to establish firm conclusions.

In this meta-analysis, Min Seo Kim and colleagues synthesise results from randomized trials and observational studies on COVID-19 treatments.     

Incidence and impact of cardiac arrhythmias in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundStudies have shown that cardiac arrhythmias may occur in up to 44% of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and has been associated with an increased risk of death. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the incidence of cardiac arrhythmias in patients with COVID-19 and their implications on patient prognosis.MethodsWe performed a systematic literature search from PubMed, SCOPUS, Europe PMC, Cochrane Central Databases, and Google Scholar + Preprint Servers. The primary endpoint of the study was poor outcomes including mortality, severe COVID-19, and the need for ICU care.ResultsA total of 4 studies including 784 patients were analyzed. The incidence of arrhythmia in patients with COVID-19 was 19% (9–28%; I²: 91.45). Arrhythmia occurred in 48% (38–57%; I²: 48.08) of patients with poor outcome and 6% (1–12%; I²: 85.33%) of patients without poor outcome. Patients with COVID-19 experiencing arrhythmia had an increased risk of poor outcome (RR 7.96 [3.77, 16.81], p < 0.001; I²: 71.1%). The funnel-plot analysis showed an asymmetrical funnel plot with most of the studies on the right side of the effect estimate. The regression-based Egger’s test showed indication of small-study effects (p = 0.001).ConclusionCardiac arrhythmias were significantly associated with an increased risk of poor outcome in COVID-19. Arrhythmias were observed in 19% of patients with COVID-19 and in 48% of patients with COVID-19 and poor outcomes.     

Traditional Chinese herbal medicine at the forefront battle against COVID-19: Clinical experience and scientific basis

BackgroundThroughout the 5000-year history of China, more than 300 epidemics were recorded. Traditional Chinese herbal medicine (TCM) has been used effectively to combat each of these epidemics’ infections, and saved many lives. To date, there are hundreds of herbal TCM formulae developed for the purpose of prevention and treatment during epidemic infections. When COVID-19 ravaged the Wuhan district in China in early January 2020, without a deep understanding about the nature of COVID-19, patients admitted to the TCM Hospital in Wuhan were immediately treated with TCM and reported later with >90% efficacy.ApproachWe conducted conduct a systematic survey of various TCM herbal preparations used in Wuhan and to review their efficacy, according to the published clinical data; and, secondly, to find the most popular herbs used in these preparations and look into the opportunity of future research in the isolation and identification of bioactive natural products for fighting COVID-19.ResultsAlthough bioactive natural products in these herbal preparations may have direct antiviral activities, TCM employed for fighting epidemic infections was primarily based on the TCM theory of restoring the balance of the human immune system, thereby defeating the viral infection indirectly. In addition, certain TCM teachings relevant to the meridian system deserve better attention. For instance, many TCM herbal preparations target the lung meridian, which connects the lung and large intestine. This interconnection between the lung, including the upper respiratory system, and the intestine, may explain why certain TCM formulae showed excellent relief of lung congestion and diarrhea, two characteristics of COVID-19 infection.ConclusionThere is good reason for us to learn from ancient wisdom and accumulated clinical experience, in combination with cutting edge science and technologies, to fight with the devastating COVID-19 pandemic now and emerging new coronaviruses in the future.     

Prevalence and characteristics of malaria among COVID-19 individuals: A systematic review,meta-analysis,and analysis of case reports

BackgroundThe world population is currently at a very high risk of Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). People who live in malaria-endemic areas and get infected by SARS-CoV-2 may be at increased risk of severe COVID-19 or unfavorable disease outcomes if they ignore their malaria status. Therefore, the present study aimed to synthesize, qualitatively and quantitatively, information on the prevalence and characteristics of malaria infection among COVID-19-infected individuals. The findings will help us better understand this particular comorbidity during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThe systematic review protocol was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with the identification number: CRD42021247521. We searched for studies reporting on the coinfection of COVID-19 and malaria in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to March 27, 2021 using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms. The study’s methodological quality in the search output was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools for cross-sectional study. The pooled prevalence of Plasmodium spp. infection among patients infected with COVID-19 was estimated using the random effect model and then graphically presented as forest plots. The heterogeneity among the included studies was assessed using Cochrane Q and I² statistics. The characteristics of patients co-infected with COVID-19 and malaria were derived from case reports and series and were formally analyzed using simple statistics.ResultsTwelve of 1,207 studies reporting the coinfection of COVID-19 and malaria were selected for further analysis. Results of quantitative synthesis show that the pooled prevalence of Plasmodium spp. infection (364 cases) among COVID–19 individuals (1,126 cases) is 11%, with a high degree of heterogeneity (95% CI: 4%–18%, I²: 97.07%, 5 studies). Most of the coinfections were reported in Nigeria (336 cases), India (27 cases), and the Democratic Republic of Congo (1 case). Results of qualitative synthesis indicate that patients with coinfection are typically symptomatic at presentation with mild or moderate parasitemia. An analysis of case reports and series indicates that co-infected individuals often display thrombocytopenia, lymphopenia, and elevated bilirubin levels. Among four patients (30%) who required treatment with intravenous artesunate, one experienced worsened clinical status after administering the drug. One serious outcome of coinfection involved a pregnant woman who experienced fetal abortion due to the initial misdiagnosis of malaria.ConclusionsAll individuals in malaria-endemic regions who are febrile or display symptoms of COVID-19 should be evaluated for malaria to avoid serious complications. Further prospective studies are required to investigate the burden and outcomes of COVID-19 in malaria-endemic regions. Prompt management is required to prevent serious outcomes in individuals co-infected with COVID-19 and malaria.     

The height premium: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The taller people are, the more money they tend to earn. This phenomenon is widely known as the height premium. However, it is not yet known whether the height premium is universal, or whether it varies by context. To that end, a systematic review of the literature was performed. Five databases were searched until August 2020. Ultimately, a list of 42 studies were included in a narrative synthesis, and 17 studies were included in a meta-analysis. Based on the meta-analysis, we found evidence that the height premium varied by context: the height premium was smaller in the U.S. and Australia, and larger in Latin America and Asia. Within geographies, there appeared to be a larger height premium for men than for women. Cultural factors, labor market structures and biology may play a role in determining the strength of the height premium.     

中草药对小鼠肠道菌群影响的实验研究

目的研究党参、茯苓、白术、白芍和陈皮五味中药制成的复方合剂对肠道菌群调节作用。方法将小鼠分为正常对照组、低剂量组、中剂量组和高剂量组。对照组灌服蒸馏水14 d,低剂量组、中剂量组和高剂量组灌服不同剂量的复方合剂14 d,检测实验前后肠道菌群数量。结果灌服后小鼠肠道菌群与灌服前比较,乳杆菌、双歧杆菌数量明显增加,肠球菌数量明显减少,肠杆菌数量差异无统计学意义。结论党参、茯苓、白术、白芍和陈皮五味中药制成的复方合剂对小鼠肠道菌群具有一定的调节作用。     

Effect of traditional Chinese medicine on gut microbiota in adults with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundDespite advances in research on type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with the development of science and technology, the pathogenesis and treatment response of T2DM remain unclear. Recent studies have revealed a significant role of the microbiomein the development of T2DM, and studies have found that the gut microbiota may explain the therapeutic effect of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), a primary branch of alternative and complementary medicine, in the treatment of T2DM. The aim of this study was to systematically review all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on TCM for gut microbiota to assess the effectiveness and safety of TCM in T2DM patients.MethodsAll RCTs investigating the effects of TCM interventions on modulating gut microbiota and improving glucose metabolism in the treatment of T2DM adults were included. Meta-analyses were conducted when sufficient data were available, other results were reported narratively. The study protocol was pre-specified, documented, and published in PROSPERO (registration no. CRD42020188043).ResultsFive studies met the eligibility criteria ofthe systematic review. All five studies reported the effects of TCM interventions on the gut microbiota modulation and blood glucose control. There were statistically significant improvements in HbA1c (mean difference [MD]: -0.69%; [95% CI −0.24, −0.14]; p = 0.01, I² = 86%), fasting blood glucose (MD: −0.87 mmol/l; [95% CI -1.26, -0.49]; p < 0.00001, I² = 75%) and 2-h postprandial blood glucose(MD: -0.83mmol/l; [95% CI: -1.01, -0.65]; p < 0.00001, I² = 0%). In addition, there were also statistically significant improvements in homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) (standardized mean difference [SMD]: −0.99, [95% CI −1.25 to -0.73]; p < 0.00001, I² = 0%) and homeostasis model assessment of β-cell function (HOMA-β) (SMD: 0.54, [95% CI 0.21 to 0.87]; p = 0.001, I² = 0%).There was a significant change in the relative abundance of bacteria in the genera Bacteroides (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.87%; [95% CI 0.58, 1.16], however, the change in Enterococcus abundance was not statistically significant (SMD: -1.71%; [95% CI: -3.64, 0.23]; p = 0.08) when comparing TCM supplementaltreatment with comparator groups. Other changes in the gut microbiota, including changes in the relative abundances of some probiotics and opportunistic pathogens at various taxon levels, and changes in diversity matrices (α and β), were significant by narrative analysis. However, insufficient evidences were found to support that TCM intervention had an effect on inflammation.ConclusionTCM had the effect of modulating gut microbiota and improving glucose metabolisms in T2DM patients. Although the results of the included studies are encouraging, further well-conducted studies on TCM interventions targeting the gut microbiota are needed.     

Prognostic serum biomarkers in cancer patients with COVID-19: A systematic review

PurposeCancer patients with COVID-19 likely express biomarker changes in circulation. However, the biomarkers used in SARS-CoV-2 infected cancer patients for COVID-19 severity and prognosis are largely unclear. Therefore, this systematic review aims to determine what biomarkers were measured in cancer patients with COVID-19 and their prognostic utility.MethodsA systematic literature review in PubMed, Embase, and Scopus was performed on June 16th, 2021. The search keywords coronavirus, neoplasm, biomarkers, and disease progression were used to filter out 17 eligible studies, which were then carefully evaluated.ResultsA total of 4,168 patients, 16 types of cancer, and 60 biomarkers were included. Seven up-regulated markers, including CRP, d-dimer, ferritin, IL-2R, IL-6, LDH, and PCT, were identified in eligible studies. Albumin and hemoglobin were significantly down-regulated in cancer patients with COVID-19. Moreover, we observed that the SARS-CoV-2 infected cancer patients with lower CRP, ferritin, and LDH levels successfully survived from COVID-19 treatments.ConclusionSeveral important clinical biomarkers, such as CRP, ferritin, and LDH, may serve as the prognostic markers to predict the outcomes following COVID-19 treatment and monitor the deterioration of COVID-19 in cancer patients.     

中药薯蓣皂苷对NLRP3炎性体的作用

目的 检测中药薯蓣皂苷是否可以抑制粪肠球菌脂磷壁酸（LTA）所诱导的NLRP3炎性体的活化。方法 选用中药薯蓣皂苷作为实验药物,作用于小鼠巨噬细胞RAW264.7,NLRP3炎性体相关因子mRNA的表达用Real-time qPCR方法检测。通过免疫荧光染色检测薯蓣皂苷对NF-κB的表达情况,流式细胞仪检测其对ROS的表达情况。结果 Real-time qPCR试验显示,中药薯蓣皂苷在LTA存在下,可以明显降低NLRP3、Caspase-1及IL-1β的mRNA表达。免疫荧光染色及流式细胞仪的检测证实,其对NLRP3的抑制主要是通过抑制NF-κB的活化及ROS的释放而实现。结论 薯蓣皂苷可有效抑制NLRP3炎性体的表达,其机制是通过抑制NF-κB信号通路及ROS的释放而实现。薯蓣皂苷可以作为临床难治性牙髓根尖周病治疗的候选药物。     

Prevention and treatment of COVID-19 using Traditional Chinese Medicine: A review

BackgroundA novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV2) outbreak in more than 200 countries recently caused viral pneumonia that was extremely infectious and pathogenic. The Chinese government proposes that both Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) and Western medicine can be used in combination to treat pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV2, and TCM effectively provides continuous prevention and treatment.MethodsThe present review analyzes and summarizes the prevention and treatment of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) with TCM. A classified analysis of the efficacy and advantages of TCM for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 was performed, and the mechanisms of TCM in treating COVID-19 are summarized.ResultsTCM is effective in preventing COVID-19, and medical staff can prevent an iatrogenic infection by taking a decoction made based on the principles of TCM. As of March 13, 2020, new cases of COVID-19 in China have decreased in number to single digits. TCM's curative effect was outstanding, with a national participation rate of over 90%. More than 70,000 people were cured of COVID-19 and discharged from the hospital. Only approximately 10,000 patients are currently being treated, and the total treatment time is approximately 2 months.ConclusionsTCM is currently the best choice for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19, and it is expected that it will be promoted by countries around the world.     

In silico toxicity studies of traditional Chinese herbal medicine: A mini review

With the availability of public databases that store compound-target/compound-toxicity information, and Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) databases, in silico approaches are used in toxicity studies of TCM herbal medicine. Here, three in silico approaches for toxicity studies were reviewed, which include machine learning, network toxicology and molecular docking. For each method, its application and implementation e.g., single classifier vs. multiple classifier, single compound vs. multiple compounds, validation vs. screening, were explored. While these methods provide data-driven toxicity prediction that is validated in vitro and/or in vivo, it is still limited to single compound analysis. In addition, these methods are limited to several types of toxicity, with hepatotoxicity being the most dominant. Future studies involving the testing of combination of compounds on the front end i.e., to generate data for in silico modeling, and back end i.e., validate findings from prediction models will advance the in silico toxicity modeling of TCM compounds.     

Post-stroke infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background  

stroke is the main cause of disability in high-income countries, and ranks second as a cause of death worldwide. Patients with acute stroke are at risk for infections, but reported post-stroke infection rates vary considerably. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the pooled post-stroke infection rate and its effect on outcome.     

The effect of Bt crops on soil invertebrates: a systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis

The ongoing debate about the ecological effects of Bt-crops calls for thorough reviews about the impact on soil biodiversity and their ecosystem services. Transgenic Bt-crops have been genetically modified by inserting a Bacillus thuriengensis gene so the plant expresses a Cry toxin aimed for insect crop pests. Non-target soil invertebrates are particularly recognized for their contribution to plant nutrient availability and turnover of organic matter and it is therefore relevant to protect these invertebrate taxa. A number of studies have compared the population abundance and biomass of soil invertebrates in agricultural fields planted with genetically modified Bt crops and their conventional counterparts. Here, were review and analyze a selection of studies on Protista, nematodes, Collembola, mites, enchytraeids, and earthworms systematically to empower the evidence for asking the question whether population abundances and biomasses of soil invertebrates are changed by Bt crops compared to conventional crops. 6110 titles were captured, of which 38 studies passed our inclusion criteria, and a final number of 22 publications were subject to data extraction. A database with 2046 records was compiled covering 36 locations and the Bt types Cry1Ab, Cry1Ac, Cry3Bb1 and Cry3Aa. Comparative effect sizes in terms of Hedges’ g were calculated irrespectively of statistical significance of effects of the source studies. Cry effects on populations were compared across the studies in a meta-analysis employing a hierarchical Bayesian approach of weighted data according to the level of replication. The temporal development of effect sizes was modelled, thereby taking into account the variable duration of the field experiments. There was considerable variation among soil invertebrate orders, but the sample size was insufficient and the sample heterogeneity too large to draw any credible conclusions on the effect of Cry at the order level. However, across orders there was no significant effect of Cry on soil invertebrates.

     

Efficacy and safety of convalescent plasma for severe COVID-19 based on evidence in other severe respiratory viral infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND:The safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain uncertain. To support a guideline on COVID-19 management, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of convalescent plasma in COVID-19 and other severe respiratory viral infections.METHODS:In March 2020, we searched international and Chinese biomedical literature databases, clinical trial registries and prepublication sources for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies comparing patients receiving and not receiving convalescent plasma. We included patients with acute coronavirus, influenza and Ebola virus infections. We conducted a meta-analysis using random-effects models and assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.RESULTS:Of 1099 unique records, 6 studies were eligible, and none of these included patients with COVID-19. One nonrandomized study (n = 40) on convalescent plasma in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) provided uninformative results regarding mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] CI 0.01 to 1.70). Pooled estimates from 4 RCTs on influenza (n = 572) showed no convincing effects on deaths (4 RCTs, RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.81), complete recovery (2 RCTs, odds ratio 1.04, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.64) or length of stay (3 RCTs, mean difference −1.62, 95% CI −3.82 to 0.58, d). The quality of evidence was very low for all efficacy outcomes. Convalescent plasma caused few or no serious adverse events in influenza RCTs (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.29, low-quality evidence).INTERPRETATION:Studies of non-COVID-19 severe respiratory viral infections provide indirect, very low-quality evidence that raises the possibility that convalescent plasma has minimal or no benefit in the treatment of COVID-19 and low-quality evidence that it does not cause serious adverse events.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been diagnosed in nearly 3 million individuals around the globe, of whom around 0.2 million have died.¹ Many patients with COVID-19 develop severe acute respiratory illness requiring admission to intensive care units (ICU) and often mechanical ventilation.² The case fatality rate in COVID-19 may be as high as 2.3% overall² and from 10% to 40% among severely affected individuals. ^3,4 There is an urgent need for effective therapies.Emerging epidemiologic and clinical data show both similarities and differences between severe COVID-19 and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS).⁵ Similarly, treatment strategies for severe influenza infections tested during the H1N1 pandemic and H5N1 and H7N9 outbreaks could inform the care of patients with severe COVID-19.⁶Of the treatment options proposed for COVID-19,⁷ convalescent plasma has evidence suggesting a mortality benefit for Ebola virus infection.⁸ This intervention has also been tested in other severe acute viral respiratory infections.^6,9,10 “Convalescent plasma” refers to plasma obtained from individuals recently recovered from a viral illness, which is expected to contain the highest levels of polyclonal antibodies directed against the virus.¹¹ Similarly, “hyperimmune plasma” is collected from donors exhibiting high titres of neutralizing antibodies, independent of time elapsed since viral illness. Authors have used the terms interchangeably, and because viral neutralization is only one of the postulated mechanisms by which antibodies exert their antiviral effect, the importance of the distinction between the 2 products remains unclear (Figure 1).Open in a separate windowFigure 1:Potential mechanisms of action of anti–severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This figure illustrates the normal entry of SARS-CoV-2 in a host cell, in which membrane fusion is mediated by the interaction between the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein (red) and the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor (green) on the host cell, either through the cytoplasmic or endosomal route. Antibodies directed against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein can interfere with its interaction with the ACE2 receptor and prevent viral entry in the host cell (panel A). Antibodies directed against epitopes outside the RBD can also exert antiviral functions through other mechanisms (panels B, C and D). The relative importance of these various functions in rescuing patients from an active SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. Importantly, neutralization assays generally used to qualify hyperimmune products measure only 1 of the 4 mechanisms depicted here and do not necessarily correlate with the others.Clinicians have typically administered convalescent plasma to patients with viral infections whose condition deteriorated despite supportive care.⁶ Although the primary postulated mechanism of action of convalescent plasma is reduction in viremia (passive immunity),¹² an increase in host immune response (active immunity) has also been proposed.¹³ We describe in Figure 1 the possible mechanisms by which convalescent plasma inhibits severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).Systematic summaries of the available evidence regarding safety and effectiveness can inform the use of convalescent plasma in patients with COVID-19. We therefore conducted a systematic review to summarize the evidence for convalescent plasma to support a guideline on COVID-19 management.¹⁴ Because we anticipated a paucity of direct evidence addressing the use of convalescent plasma in COVID-19, we summarized the available evidence addressing convalescent plasma in the treatment of SARS, MERS and influenza, including H1N1, H7N9 and H5N1, as well as addressing possible adverse effects in patients with Ebola disease.     

传统中草药对肠道益生微生物的作用研究进展

探讨传统中草药对肠道益生微生物的调整作用,重点概述了不同种类与剂量中草药对益生微生物生长的影响及相应的研究方法。在上述基础上对中草药与肠道益生微生物的作用机制、研究前景和发展趋势进行了展望。