Evaluation of post-vaccination immunoglobulin G antibodies and T-cell immune response after inoculation with different types and doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines: A retrospective cohort study.

Introduction: The induction and speed of production of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) immune biomarkers may vary by type and number of inoculated vaccine doses. This study aimed to explore variations in SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike (anti-S), anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N), and neutralizing immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies, and T-cell response by type and number of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses received. Methods: In a naturally exposed and SARS-CoV-2-vaccinated population, we quantified the anti-S, anti-N, and neutralizing IgG antibody concentration and assessed T-cell response. Data on socio-demographics, medical history, and history of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination were collected. Furthermore, nasal swabs were collected to test for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Confounder-adjusted association between having equal or more than a median concentration of the three IgG antibodies and T-cell response by number and type of the inoculated vaccines was quantified. Results: We surveyed 952 male participants with a mean age of 35.5 years ± 8.4 standard deviations. Of them, 52.6% were overweight/obese, and 11.7% had at least one chronic comorbidity. Of the participants, 1.4, 0.9, 20.2, 75.2, and 2.2% were never vaccinated, primed with only one dose, primed with two doses, boosted with only one dose, and boosted with two doses, respectively. All were polymerase chain reaction-negative to SARS-CoV-2. BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm) was the most commonly used vaccine (92.1%), followed by rAd26-S + rAd5-S (Sputnik V Gam-COVID-Vac) (1.5%) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) (0.3%). Seropositivity to anti-S, anti-N, and neutralizing IgG antibodies was detected in 99.7, 99.9, and 99.3% of the study participants, respectively. The T-cell response was detected in 38.2% of 925 study participants. Every additional vaccine dose was significantly associated with increased odds of having ≥median concentration of anti-S [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 1.34; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02-1.76], anti-N (aOR, 1.35; 95% CI: 1.03-1.75), neutralizing IgG antibodies (aOR, 1.29; 95% CI: 1.00-1.66), and a T-cell response (aOR, 1.48; 95% CI: 1.12-1.95). Compared with boosting with only one dose, boosting with two doses was significantly associated with increased odds of having ≥median concentration of anti-S (aOR, 13.8; 95% CI: 1.78-106.5), neutralizing IgG antibodies (aOR, 13.2; 95% CI: 1.71-101.9), and T-cell response (aOR, 7.22; 95% CI: 1.99-26.5) although not with anti-N (aOR, 0.41; 95% CI: 0.16-1.08). Compared with priming and subsequently boosting with BBIBP-CorV, all participants who were primed with BBIBP-CorV and subsequently boosted with BNT162b2 had ≥median concentration of anti-S and neutralizing IgG antibodies and 14.6-time increased odds of having a T-cell response (aOR, 14.63; 95% CI: 1.78-120.5). Compared with priming with two doses, boosting with the third dose was not associated, whereas boosting with two doses was significantly associated with having ≥median concentration of anti-S (aOR, 14.20; 95% CI: 1.85-109.4), neutralizing IgG (aOR, 13.6; 95% CI: 1.77-104.3), and T-cell response (aOR, 7.62; 95% CI: 2.09-27.8). Conclusion: Achieving and maintaining a high blood concentration of protective immune biomarkers that predict vaccine effectiveness is very critical to limit transmission and contain outbreaks. In this study, boosting with only one dose or with only BBIBP-CorV after priming with BBIBP-CorV was insufficient, whereas boosting with two doses, particularly boosting with the mRNA-based vaccine, was shown to be associated with having a high concentration of anti-S, anti-N, and neutralizing IgG antibodies and producing an efficient T-cell response.

Evaluation of post-vaccination immunoglobulin G antibodies and T-cell immune response after inoculation with different types and doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines: A retrospective cohort study

Introduction The induction and speed of production of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) immune biomarkers may vary by type and number of inoculated vaccine doses. This study aimed to explore variations in SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike (anti-S), anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N), and neutralizing immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies, and T-cell response by type and number of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses received. Methods In a naturally exposed and SARS-CoV-2–vaccinated population, we quantified the anti-S, anti-N, and neutralizing IgG antibody concentration and assessed T-cell response. Data on socio-demographics, medical history, and history of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination were collected. Furthermore, nasal swabs were collected to test for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Confounder-adjusted association between having equal or more than a median concentration of the three IgG antibodies and T-cell response by number and type of the inoculated vaccines was quantified. Results We surveyed 952 male participants with a mean age of 35.5 years ± 8.4 standard deviations. Of them, 52.6% were overweight/obese, and 11.7% had at least one chronic comorbidity. Of the participants, 1.4, 0.9, 20.2, 75.2, and 2.2% were never vaccinated, primed with only one dose, primed with two doses, boosted with only one dose, and boosted with two doses, respectively. All were polymerase chain reaction-negative to SARS-CoV-2. BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm) was the most commonly used vaccine (92.1%), followed by rAd26-S + rAd5-S (Sputnik V Gam-COVID-Vac) (1.5%) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) (0.3%). Seropositivity to anti-S, anti-N, and neutralizing IgG antibodies was detected in 99.7, 99.9, and 99.3% of the study participants, respectively. The T-cell response was detected in 38.2% of 925 study participants. Every additional vaccine dose was significantly associated with increased odds of having ≥median concentration of anti-S [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 1.34;95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02–1.76], anti-N (aOR, 1.35;95% CI: 1.03–1.75), neutralizing IgG antibodies (aOR, 1.29;95% CI: 1.00–1.66), and a T-cell response (aOR, 1.48;95% CI: 1.12–1.95). Compared with boosting with only one dose, boosting with two doses was significantly associated with increased odds of having ≥median concentration of anti-S (aOR, 13.8;95% CI: 1.78–106.5), neutralizing IgG antibodies (aOR, 13.2;95% CI: 1.71–101.9), and T-cell response (aOR, 7.22;95% CI: 1.99–26.5) although not with anti-N (aOR, 0.41;95% CI: 0.16–1.08). Compared with priming and subsequently boosting with BBIBP-CorV, all participants who were primed with BBIBP-CorV and subsequently boosted with BNT162b2 had ≥median concentration of anti-S and neutralizing IgG antibodies and 14.6-time increased odds of having a T-cell response (aOR, 14.63;95% CI: 1.78–120.5). Compared with priming with two doses, boosting with the third dose was not associated, whereas boosting with two doses was significantly associated with having ≥median concentration of anti-S (aOR, 14.20;95% CI: 1.85–109.4), neutralizing IgG (aOR, 13.6;95% CI: 1.77–104.3), and T-cell response (aOR, 7.62;95% CI: 2.09–27.8). Conclusion Achieving and maintaining a high blood concentration of protective immune biomarkers that predict vaccine effectiveness is very critical to limit transmission and contain outbreaks. In this study, boosting with only one dose or with only BBIBP-CorV after priming with BBIBP-CorV was insufficient, whereas boosting with two doses, particularly boosting with the mRNA-based vaccine, was shown to be associated with having a high concentration of anti-S, anti-N, and neutralizing IgG antibodies and producing an efficient T-cell response.

Susceptibility to reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 virus relative to existing antibody concentrations and T cell response.

OBJECTIVES: We investigated the reinfection rate of vaccinated or convalescent immunized SARS-CoV-2 in 952 expatriate workers with SARS-CoV-2 serological antibody (Ab) patterns and surrogate T cell memory at recruitment and follow-up. METHODS: Trimeric spike, nucleocapsid, and neutralizing Abs were measured, along with a T cell stimulation assay, targeting SARS-CoV-2 memory in clusters of differentiation (CD) 4+ and CD8+ T cells. The subjects were then followed up for reinfection for up to 6 months. RESULTS: The seroprevalence positivity at enrollment was greater than 99%. The T cell reactivity in this population was 38.2%. Of the 149 (15.9%) participants that were reinfected during the follow-up period (74.3%) had nonreactive T cells at enrollment. Those who had greater than 100 binding Ab units/ml increase from the median concentration of antispike immunoglobulin G Abs had a 6% reduction in the risk of infection. Those who were below the median concentration had a 78% greater risk of infection. CONCLUSION: Significant immune protection from reinfection was observed in those who retained T cell activation memory. Additional protection was observed when the antispike was greater than the median value.

Experience of the United Arab Emirates in the use of monoclonal antibody drug sotrovimab in high-risk vaccinated and unvaccinated patients with COVID-19: an observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Monoclonal antibodies can slow COVID-19 progression. This study describes the experience of using sotrovimab in patients with COVID-19 at high risk for disease progression and hospitalisation within the United Arab Emirates (UAE). DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: A tertiary hospital in the Emirate of Sharjah, UAE. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 at high risk for disease progression. INTERVENTIONS: Infusion with a single 500 mg dose of the monoclonal antibody drug sotrovimab. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Any adverse effect within 24 hours, disease progression within 5 days, emergency department visit within 10 days, hospital admission within 10 days or mortality within 28 days of infusion. RESULTS: 3227 high-risk COVID-19 patients were infused with sotrovimab during the mild (n=3107, 96.3%) or moderate (n=120, 3.7%) disease stages. The incidence of at least one outcome was recorded in 196 (6.1%) of the patients (60.7 per 1000 patients). The most common outcome was disease progression within 5 days of infusion in 129 patients (4.0%), followed by emergency department visits by 90 patients (2.8%) within 10 days. Twenty-nine (0.9%) patients were hospitalised within 10 days of infusion with only two deaths (0.1%). Patients infused with sotrovimab during the moderate disease stage had 11 times greater odds of developing at least one outcome compared with patients infused during the mild stage (adjusted OR, aOR 10.86, 95% CI 7.14 to 16.54). SARS-CoV-2 vaccinated (aOR 12.8, 95% CI 7.3 to 20.5) and unvaccinated (aOR 7.2, 95% CI 3.4 to 15.3) patients infused with sotrovimab during the moderate disease stage had similar odds of at least one outcome compared with patients infused during the mild stage. CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk sotrovimab-infused COVID-19 patients, there were relatively low incidences of disease progression and hospitalisation. Regardless of vaccination history, monoclonal antibody intervention during the early stages of COVID-19 results in better outcomes.

SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research Trend during the First Two Years of the Pandemic in the United Arab Emirates: A PRISMA-Compliant Bibliometric Analysis.

Scientific research is an integral part of fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. This bibliometric analysis describes the COVID-19 research productivity of the United Arab Emirates (UAE)-affiliated researchers during the first two years of the pandemic, 2020 to 2022. The Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database was utilized to retrieve publications related to COVID-19 published by UAE-affiliated researcher(s). A total of 1008 publications met the inclusion criteria and were included in this bibliometric analysis. The most studied broad topics were general internal medicine (11.9%), public environmental occupational health (7.8%), pharmacology/pharmacy (6.3%), multidisciplinary sciences (5%), and infectious diseases (3.4%). About 67% were primary research articles, 16% were reviews, and the remaining were editorials letters (11.5%), meeting abstracts/proceedings papers (5%), and document corrections (0.4%). The University of Sharjah was the leading UAE-affiliated organization achieving 26.3% of the publications and funding 1.8% of the total 1008 published research. This study features the research trends in COVID-19 research affiliated with the UAE and shows the future directions. There was an observable nationally and international collaboration of the UAE-affiliated authors, particularly with researchers from the USA and England. This study highlights the need for in-depth systematic reviews addressing the specific COVID-19 research-related questions and studied populations.

Clinical and Laboratory Features of PCR-Confirmed and Clinically Suspected COVID-19 Pediatric Patients: A Single Hospital-Based Experience During the First COVID-19 Wave in the United Arab Emirates.

Objective: This study investigated clinical and laboratory differences between confirmed (RT-PCR-positive) and clinically suspected (RT-PCR-negative) COVID-19 pediatric patients, and explored factors associated with disease severity at presentation and duration of hospitalization. Methods: Medical charts of COVID-19-confirmed and clinically suspected pediatric patients admitted to a tertiary hospital in Abu Dhabi were reviewed. Sociodemographic information and clinical and laboratory outcomes were retrieved and analyzed. Results: Between 1 April to 30 June, 2020, 173 patients (mean age: 3.6 ± SD 3.2 years) presented with respiratory symptoms. Of them, 18.0% had confirmed contact with COVID-19 cases, 66.5% had symptoms for ≤3 days, and 86.7% were with moderate to severe disease. Twenty-eight (16.1%) patients tested positive while the rest (83.8%) tested negative in RT-PCR. COVID-19-confirmed and clinically suspected patients were statistically similar (p > 0.05) in all sociodemographic data, disease severity, and vital signs except residence status (89.3% vs. 58.6% were residents, respectively, p = 0.002) and contact with confirmed COVID-19 cases (82.1% vs. 5.5%, respectively, p < 0.001). Fever (100 and 91.0%) and cough (100 and 95.9%) were the most common symptoms in both confirmed and clinically suspected COVID-19 patients. All patients were statistically comparable in mean white blood cell and platelet counts and hemoglobin concentration, except in mean concentration of neutrophils (higher in clinically suspected, p = 0.019). C-reactive protein was two times higher in clinically suspected compared to confirmed patients (p = 0.043). Lymphocyte (OR: 1.31, p < 0.001), LDH (OR: 1.01, p = 0.001), D-dimer (OR: 1.92, p < 0.001), and ferritin levels after 24-36 h (OR: 9.25, p < 0.05), and SGPT (OR: 1.04, p < 0.05) were all associated with disease severity. Elevated ferritin (>300 µg/L) after 24-36 h was the only correlated factor with disease severity (aOR: 17.38, p < 0.05). Confirmed compared with clinically suspected patients (aOR: 4.00, 95% CI: 2.92-5.10) and children with moderate compared with mild disease (aOR: 5.87, 95% CI: 1.08-32.06) had longer hospitalization. Conclusion: In pediatric patients with negative RT-PCR, COVID-19 is still suspected based on clinical symptoms and epidemiological data. A tentative diagnosis can be made based on a thorough examination, and proper medical management can be initiated promptly.

Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Europe: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prevalence Studies.

Background: Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) is defined as the type of hyperglycemia diagnosed for the first-time during pregnancy, presenting with intermediate glucose levels between normal levels for pregnancy and glucose levels diagnostic of diabetes in the non-pregnant state. We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze studies of prevalence of GDM in European countries at regional and sub-regional levels, according to age, trimester, body weight, and GDM diagnostic criteria. Methods: Systematic search was conducted in five databases to retrieve studies from 2014 to 2019 reporting the prevalence of GDM in Europe. Two authors have independently screened titles and abstracts and full text according to eligibility using Covidence software. A random-effects model was used to quantify weighted GDM prevalence estimates. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute criteria was used to assess the risk of bias. Results: From the searched databases, 133 research reports were deemed eligible and included in the meta-analysis. The research reports yielded 254 GDM-prevalence studies that tested 15,572,847 pregnant women between 2014 and 2019. The 133 research reports were from 24 countries in Northern Europe (44.4%), Southern Europe (27.1%), Western Europe (24.1%), and Eastern Europe (4.5%). The overall weighted GDM prevalence in the 24 European countries was estimated at 10.9% (95% CI: 10.0-11.8, I2 : 100%). The weighted GDM prevalence was highest in the Eastern Europe (31.5%, 95% CI: 19.8-44.6, I2 : 98.9%), followed by in Southern Europe (12.3%, 95% CI: 10.9-13.9, I2 : 99.6%), Western Europe (10.7%, 95% CI: 9.5-12.0, I2 : 99.9%), and Northern Europe (8.9%, 95% CI: 7.9-10.0, I2 : 100). GDM prevalence was 2.14-fold increased in pregnant women with maternal age ≥30 years (versus 15-29 years old), 1.47-fold if the diagnosis was made in the third trimester (versus second trimester), and 6.79- fold in obese and 2.29-fold in overweight women (versus normal weight). Conclusions: In Europe, GDM is significant in pregnant women, around 11%, with the highest prevalence in pregnant women of Eastern European countries (31.5%). Findings have implications to guide vigilant public health awareness campaigns about the risk factors associated with developing GDM. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/], identifier CRD42020161857.

Effect of pharmacological interventions on lipid profiles and C-reactive protein in polycystic ovary syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a heterogeneous condition affecting women of reproductive age. It is associated with dyslipidaemia and elevated plasma C-reactive protein (CRP), which increase the risks of cardiovascular disease (CVD). OBJECTIVE: To review the existing evidence on the effects of different pharmacological interventions on lipid profiles and CRP of women with PCOS. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science in April 2020 and updated the results in March 2021. STUDY SELECTION: The study included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and follows the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent researchers extracted data and assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Covidence systematic review software were used for blinded screening and study selection. DATA SYNTHESIS: In 29 RCTs, there were significant reductions in triglycerides with atorvastatin versus placebo [mean difference (MD): -0.21 mmol/L; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.39, -0.03, I2 = 0%, moderate grade evidence]. Significant reductions were seen for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) with metformin versus placebo [standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.41; 95% CI: -0.85, 0.02, I2 = 59%, low grade evidence]. Significant reductions were also seen for total cholesterol with saxagliptin versus metformin (MD: -0.15 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.23, -0.08, I2 = 0%, very low grade evidence). Significant reductions in C-reactive protein (CRP) were seen for atorvastatin versus placebo (MD: -1.51 mmol/L; 95% CI: -3.26 to 0.24, I2 = 75%, very low-grade evidence). CONCLUSION: There were significant reductions in the lipid parameters when metformin, atorvastatin, saxagliptin, rosiglitazone and pioglitazone were compared with placebo or other agents. There was also a significant reduction of CRP with atorvastatin.

Sharps injuries and splash exposures among healthcare workers in Arab countries: protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Sharps injuries, including needlestick injuries and splash exposures, constitute serious occupational health problems for healthcare workers, carrying the risk of bloodborne infections. However, data on such occupational incidents and their risk factors in healthcare settings are scarce and not systematically summarised in the Arab countries.The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to review published literature about sharps injuries and splash exposures of healthcare workers in Arab countries, with the objectives to determine the incidence and/or prevalence of these events, their identified risk factors and the applied preventive and postexposure prophylactic measures. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The protocol is developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol guidelines. A comprehensive presearch developed in January to March 2021 in the database PubMed will be followed by a systematic search of six, core medical and health science databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science and Africa-Wide Information in May 2021. The search will be performed without any filters or restrictions for publication years. Covidence systematic review tool will be used for document management, blinded screening and study selection. Two reviewers will independently screen the records, extract data and conduct risk of bias assessment. Results will be synthesised narratively in summary tables, and, if findings allow, meta-analysis will be conducted on the incidence and/or prevalence of sharps injuries and splash exposures, and on the effect size of risk factors. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The systematic review methodology does not require ethics approval due to the nature of the study design based only on published studies. The results of the systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, disseminated to stakeholders and made publicly available. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021242416.

Impact of cardiac rehabilitation on mortality and morbidity in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) decreases the morbidity and mortality risk among patients with cardiac diseases; however, the impact of CR on patients with diabetes remains underexplored. This is a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis methodology to explore if the effect of CR on mortality and morbidity is the same in patients with type 2 diabetes compared with patients without diabetes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Interventional and non-interventional studies comparing the effect of CR, for at least 1 month, on all-cause mortality and cardiovascular outcomes including fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction, revascularisation and rehospitalisation in adults with cardiac diseases will be deemed eligible for inclusion. Studies published between 1990 and 2020 will be searched in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, Scopus and in registries for randomised controlled trials. Eligible studies will be selected using the Covidence software, and their salient details regarding the design, population, tested interventions and outcomes of interest will be gathered. The quality of studies to be deemed eligible and reviewed will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's tools. The appraisal process will be based on the study design (interventional and non-interventional). In the meta-analysis step, the pooled effect of CR on the outcomes will be estimated. All meta-analyses will be done using the random-effects model approach (inverse-variance method). I2 and p value of χ2 statistics will guide the heterogeneity assessment. Subgroup analyses will also be performed. The small study effect will be investigated by generating the funnel plots. The symmetry of the latter will be tested by performing Egger's test. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The systematic review will use data from published literature; hence, no ethical approval will be required. Findings of the systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in peer-reviewed international journals and will be disseminated in local and international scientific meetings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020148832.

Risk factors associated with quad bike crashes: a protocol for systematic review of observational studies.

INTRODUCTION: Quad bikes are four-wheeled vehicles, driven off-road on uneven terrains by farmers for work or young adults for leisure. Quad bike accidental crashes result mostly due to the unique ecosystem of uneven terrain, where these unstable vehicles are commonly driven, in addition to numerous distinctive sociodemographic characteristics related to drivers. This is a protocol for a systematic review of observational studies from all geographical regions and demographic groups in the world to summarise the common risk factors relating to quad bike crashes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A comprehensive search for the literature on quad bike crashes and related injuries will be conducted in six electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, IEEE and PsycINFO. Proquest Dissertation and Thesis, OpenGrey and BASE will be searched for grey literature. Five researchers will be involved in the screening, and the review of full text articles, using the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Disagreements between reviewers will be resolved by discourse. Three researchers will help resolving conflicts that may arise during the screening process and will resolve eventual conflicts identified in the process with the help of the systematic review software 'Covidence' for automatic deduplication and blinded screening. Information on crashes leading to injuries and death, target population characteristics and risk factors involved will be extracted from eligible articles in addition to the assessment of the quality of the researched articles. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Since this is a systematic review of published literature, a formal ethical approval is not needed. Results of the review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and reports to the concerned authorities. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020170245.

Diabetes prevalence and mortality in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are at high risk of fatal outcomes. This meta-analysis quantifies the prevalence of mortality among (1) diabetic and (2) non-diabetic, and (3) the prevalence of DM, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Published studies were retrieved from four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and medRxiv) and appraised critically utilizing the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's tool. Meta-analyses were performed using the random-effects model. The measures of heterogeneity were ascertained by I- squared (I 2 ) and Chi-squared (Chi 2 ) tests statistics. Predictors of heterogeneity were quantified using meta-regression models. RESULTS: Of the reviewed 475 publications, 22 studies (chiefly case series (59.09 %)), sourcing data of 45,775 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, were deemed eligible. The weighted prevalence of mortality in hospitlized COVID-19 patients with DM (20.0 %, 95 % CI: 15.0-26.0; I 2 , 96.8 %) was 82 % (1.82-time) higher than that in non-DM patients (11.0 %, 95 % CI: 5.0-16.0; I 2 , 99.3 %). The prevalence of mortality among DM patients was highest in Europe (28.0 %; 95 % CI: 14.0-44.0) followed by the United States (20.0 %, 95 % CI: 11.0-32.0) and Asia (17.0 %, 95 % CI: 8.0-28.0). Sample size and severity of the COVID-19 were associated (p < 0.05) with variability in the prevalence of mortality. The weighted prevalence of DM among hospitalized COVID-19 patients was 20 % (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 15-25, I 2 , 99.3 %). Overall, the quality of the studies was fair. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients were appreciably burdened with a high prevalence of DM. DM contributed to the increased risk of mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients compared to non-DM patients, particularly among critically ill patients. Registration: PROSPERO (registration no. CRD42020196589). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40200-021-00779-2.

Epidemiological characterization of symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19 cases and positivity in subsequent RT-PCR tests in the United Arab Emirates.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases could be symptomatic or asymptomatic. We (1) characterized and analyzed data collected from the first cohort of reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed COVID-19 cases reported in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, according to the symptomatic state, and (2) identified factors associated with the symptomatic state. The association between the symptomatic state and testing positive in three subsequent RT-PCR testing rounds was also quantified. Between February 28 and April 8, 2020, 1,249 cases were reported. Sociodemographic characteristics, working status, travel history, and chronic comorbidities of 791 cases were analyzed according to the symptomatic state (symptomatic or asymptomatic). After the first confirmatory test, the results of three subsequent tests were analyzed. The mean age of the 791 cases was 35.6 ± 12.7 years (range: 1-81). Nearly 57.0% of cases were symptomatic. The two most frequent symptoms were fever (58.0%) and cough (41.0%). Symptomatic cases (mean age 36.3 ± 12.6 years) were significantly older than asymptomatic cases (mean age 34.5 ± 12.7 years). Compared with nonworking populations, working in public places (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 1.76, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.11-2.80), healthcare settings (aOR, 2.09, 95% CI: 1.01-4.31), or in the aviation and tourism sectors (aOR, 2.24, 95% CI: 1.14-4.40) was independently associated with the symptomatic state. Reporting at least one chronic comorbidity was also associated with symptomatic cases (aOR, 1.76, 95% CI: 1.03-3.01). Compared with asymptomatic cases, symptomatic cases had a prolonged duration of viral shedding and consistent odds of ≥2 positive COVID-19 tests result out of the three subsequent testing rounds. A substantial proportion of the diagnosed COVID-19 cases in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi were asymptomatic. Quarantining asymptomatic cases, implementing prevention measures, and raising awareness among populations working in high-risk settings are warranted.