Obesity as an independent risk factor for COVID-19 severity and mortality.

BACKGROUND: Since December 2019, the world has struggled with the COVID-19 pandemic. Even after the introduction of various vaccines, this disease still takes a considerable toll. In order to improve the optimal allocation of resources and communication of prognosis, healthcare providers and patients need an accurate understanding of factors (such as obesity) that are associated with a higher risk of adverse outcomes from the COVID-19 infection. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate obesity as an independent prognostic factor for COVID-19 severity and mortality among adult patients in whom infection with the COVID-19 virus is confirmed. SEARCH METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, two COVID-19 reference collections, and four Chinese biomedical databases were searched up to April 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included case-control, case-series, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, and secondary analyses of randomised controlled trials if they evaluated associations between obesity and COVID-19 adverse outcomes including mortality, mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, hospitalisation, severe COVID, and COVID pneumonia. Given our interest in ascertaining the independent association between obesity and these outcomes, we selected studies that adjusted for at least one factor other than obesity. Studies were evaluated for inclusion by two independent reviewers working in duplicate.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Using standardised data extraction forms, we extracted relevant information from the included studies. When appropriate, we pooled the estimates of association across studies with the use of random-effects meta-analyses. The Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tool provided the platform for assessing the risk of bias across each included study. In our main comparison, we conducted meta-analyses for each obesity class separately. We also meta-analysed unclassified obesity and obesity as a continuous variable (5 kg/m2 increase in BMI (body mass index)). We used the GRADE framework to rate our certainty in the importance of the association observed between obesity and each outcome. As obesity is closely associated with other comorbidities, we decided to prespecify the minimum adjustment set of variables including age, sex, diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease for subgroup analysis.  MAIN RESULTS: We identified 171 studies, 149 of which were included in meta-analyses.  As compared to 'normal' BMI (18.5 to 24.9 kg/m2) or patients without obesity, those with obesity classes I (BMI 30 to 35 kg/m2), and II (BMI 35 to 40 kg/m2) were not at increased odds for mortality (Class I: odds ratio [OR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94 to 1.16, high certainty (15 studies, 335,209 participants); Class II: OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.36, high certainty (11 studies, 317,925 participants)). However, those with class III obesity (BMI 40 kg/m2 and above) may be at increased odds for mortality (Class III: OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.39 to 2.00, low certainty, (19 studies, 354,967 participants)) compared to normal BMI or patients without obesity. For mechanical ventilation, we observed increasing odds with higher classes of obesity in comparison to normal BMI or patients without obesity (class I: OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.59, 10 studies, 187,895 participants, moderate certainty; class II: OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.96, 6 studies, 171,149 participants, high certainty; class III: OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.59 to 2.97, 12 studies, 174,520 participants, high certainty). However, we did not observe a dose-response relationship across increasing obesity classifications for ICU admission and hospitalisation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that obesity is an important independent prognostic factor in the setting of COVID-19. Consideration of obesity may inform the optimal management and allocation of limited resources in the care of COVID-19 patients.

Scleromyxedema in an adult following Sinopharm BBIBP-CorV vaccination: An extremely rare phenomenon.

Introduction: The Sinopharm BBIBP-CorV vaccine produces a variety of cutaneous adverse effects. Scleromyxedema is a mucinous connective tissue disorder that causes skin thickness and sclerodermoid changes. According to our findings, this is the first case of scleromyxedema induced by the Sinopharm immunization. Case description: We discuss the case of a 75-year-old woman who acquired progressive thickening of the skin in her limbs and trunk after getting the Sinopharm vaccination. Examination, laboratory testing, and a biopsy were used to verify scleromyxedema diagnosis. Intravenous immunoglobulins, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisolone were used in the treatment of the patient. The outcomes from the 4-month follow-up were reassuring. Conclusion: This study emphasizes the need of considering scleromyxedema as a connective tissue pathology in patients who have recently received Sinopharm vaccine and have similar cutaneous signs.

Seroconversion following the first, second, and third dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in immunocompromised population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Immunocompromised (IC) patients are at higher risk of more severe COVID-19 infections than the general population. Special considerations should be dedicated to such patients. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines based on the vaccine type and etiology as well as the necessity of booster dose in this high-risk population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases for observational studies published between June 1st, 2020, and September 1st, 2021, which investigated the seroconversion after COVID-19 vaccine administration in adult patients with IC conditions. For investigation of sources of heterogeneity, subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were conducted. Statistical analysis was performed using R software. RESULTS: According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, we included 81 articles in the meta-analysis. The overall crude prevalence of seroconversion after the first (n: 7460), second (n: 13,181), and third (n: 909, all population were transplant patients with mRNA vaccine administration) dose administration was 26.17% (95% CI 19.01%, 33.99%, I2 = 97.1%), 57.11% (95% CI: 49.22%, 64.83%, I2 = 98.4%), and 48.65% (95% CI: 34.63%, 62.79%, I2 = 94.4%). Despite the relatively same immunogenicity of mRNA and vector-based vaccines after the first dose, the mRNA vaccines induced higher immunity after the second dose. Regarding the etiologic factor, transplant patients were less likely to develop immunity after both first and second dose rather than patients with malignancy (17.0% vs 37.0% after first dose, P = 0.02; 38.3% vs 72.1% after second dose, P < 0.001) or autoimmune disease (17.0% vs 36.4%, P = 0.04; 38.3% vs 80.2%, P < 0.001). To evaluate the efficacy of the third dose, we observed an increasing trend in transplant patients after the first (17.0%), second (38.3%), and third (48.6%) dose. CONCLUSION: The rising pattern of seroconversion after boosting tends to be promising. In this case, more attention should be devoted to transplant patients who possess the lowest response rate.

The effect of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines against postvaccination laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, symptomatic COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and mortality rate: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We systematically reviewed the literature to investigate the pooled effect of COVID-19 mRNA vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and its clinical outcomes. METHODS: Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed (Medline), and Embase were searched on 9 September 2021. The odds ratio (OR) of COVID-19 infection and its clinical outcomes in fully/ partially vaccinated versus unvaccinated participants were calculated and pooled by using a random-effects model. RESULTS: The pooled analysis showed that among health care workers and general population, vaccinated participants with one or two doses were less likely to infect with SARS-CoV-2 (OR = 0.16; 95%CI: 0.08-0.32; I2 = 79.86%; 95%CI I2: 68.99-87.21%), to develop symptomatic COVID-19 infection (OR = 0.09; 95%CI: 0.03-0.32; I2 = 80.43%; 95%CI I2: 70.83-89.33%), to admit to the hospital because of COVID-19 (OR = 0.13; 95%CI: 0.06-0.28; I2 = 86.19%; 95%CI I2: 67.80-93.88%), and to die from COVID-19 (OR = 0.14; 95%CI: 0.06-0.35; I2 = 66.76%; 95%CI I2: 54.00-76.99%) than unvaccinated participants. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, especially following administration of two doses, are extremely effective. It would be suggested further studies with large sample size and different ethnicities to be conducted among the general population to warrant these results.

Bibliometric overview of Ramadan fasting studies during 2010-2021.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To quantify the bibliometric parameters of Ramadan fasting literature from 2010 to 2021. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Scopus was searched for all articles related to Ramadan fasting or Islamic fasting from the beginning of 2010 to the end of 2021. Only original articles and reviews were included and their bibliometric and scientometric parameters were determined using Excel, Graph Pad Prism, VOSviewer, and Sci2 tool software. RESULTS: Finally 1276 articles, including 1109 original articles and 167 reviews, were included. These articles had 14263 citations and an H-index of 48. Based on the number of publications, top institute, top journal, top country, and top authors were University of Sfax (n = 48 articles), Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice (n = 69), the United States (n = 144), and Chtourou H & Hassanein M (n = 38), respectively. Also, Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice had a strong bibliographic coupling with other journals. The recent bursting words were adrenal insufficiency and COVID-19. The most co-occurred topics were the effect of Ramadan fasting on diabetic patients, pregnant women, and glycemic state and body composition of diabetic patients. CONCLUSION: This study provided a comprehensive bibliometric overview of Ramadan fasting literature from 2010 to 2021. The temporal change in the number of publications and other analyses on the literature of 2019, 2020 and 2021 showed that substantial increasing publications with new emerging subjects had become of interest to many researchers during the last three years.

The Effect of HIV/AIDS Infection on the Clinical Outcomes of COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: Patients with HIV may be more likely to become severely ill from COVID-19. The present meta-analysis aims to determine the impact of HIV/AIDS infection on the clinical outcomes of COVID-19. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify relevant cohort studies to evaluate the association of HIV/AIDS infection with clinical outcomes of COVID-19. International databases, including PubMed (Medline), Web of Sciences, Scopus, and Embase, were searched from the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic until January 2022. We utilized the risk ratio (RR) with its 95% confidence interval (95% CI) to quantify the effect of cohort studies. RESULTS: Twelve cohort studies were included in this meta-analysis, which examined a total number of 17,786,384 patients. Among them, 40,386 were identified to be HIV positive, and 17,745,998 were HIV negative. The pooled analyses showed HIV positive patients who were co-infected with SARS-CoV-2 were 58% more likely to develop a fever (RR=1.58; 95% CI: 1.42, 1.75), 24% more likely to have dyspnea (RR=1.24; 95% CI: 1.08, 1.41), 45% more likely to be admitted to ICU (RR=1.45; 95% CI: 1.26, 1.67), and 37% more likely to die from to COVID-19 (RR=1.37; 95% CI: 1.30, 1.45) than HIV negative patients. CONCLUSION: HIV/AIDS coinfection with COVID 19 increased the risk of fever, dyspnea, ICU admission, and mortality.

Immunogenicity of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in immunocompromised patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Immunocompromised (IC) patients are at higher risk of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, morbidity, and mortality compared to the general population. They should be prioritized for primary prevention through vaccination. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in IC patients through a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. METHOD: PubMed-MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for original articles reporting the immunogenicity of two doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in adult patients with IC condition between June 1, 2020 and September 1, 2021. Meta-analysis was performed using either random or fixed effect according to the heterogeneity of the studies. Subgroup analysis was performed to identify potential sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: A total of 26 studies on 3207 IC patients and 1726 healthy individuals were included. The risk of seroconversion in IC patients was 48% lower than those in controls (RR = 0.52 [0.42, 0.65]). IC patients with autoimmune conditions were 54%, and patients with malignancy were 42% more likely to have positive seroconversion than transplant recipients (P < 0.01). Subgroup meta-analysis based on the type of malignancy, revealed significantly higher proportion of positive seroconversion in solid organ compared to hematologic malignancies (RR = 0.88 [0.85, 0.92] vs. 0.61 [0.44, 0.86], P = 0.03). Subgroup meta-analysis based on type of transplantation (kidney vs. others) showed no statistically significant between-group difference of seroconversion (P = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: IC patients, especially transplant recipients, developed lower immunogenicity with two-dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Among patients with IC, those with autoimmune conditions and solid organ malignancies are mostly benefited from COVID-19 vaccination. Findings from this meta-analysis could aid healthcare policymakers in making decisions regarding the importance of the booster dose or more strict personal protections in the IC patients.

Evaluation of Reinfection in COVID-19 Patients in the World: A Narrative Review.

Background: The evaluation of reinfection and the genetic structure of all human and virus genomes could help to develop programs and protocols for providing services and ultimately to prevent the disease by producing more effective vaccines. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the presence and occurrence of COVID-19 reinfection through a narrative review study. Methods: We searched the Medline (PubMed), Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane library, Ovid, and CINHAL databases. Inclusion criteria included all studies whose main purpose was to provide information about the occurrence or presence of reinfection in patients with COVID-19. An independent samples t test was used to compare the continuous outcomes between the 2 groups. Results: The mean duration of the first episode in the group with mild or moderate COVID-19 was 24.42±1.67 days, and it was 21.80±3.79 days in the group with severe COVID-19. The mean duration of the second episode (reinfection) in patients with mild or moderate form was 15.38 ± 5.57 days, and it was 19.20±2.98 days in patients with severe form. In both episodes, the duration of the disease did not significantly differ between the 2 groups (p=0.484 in the first episode; p=0.675 in the second episode), but the interval to the occurrence of reinfection in patients with the mild or moderate form was significantly longer than those with the severe form (p<0.001). In this instance, the time interval in patients with the mild or moderate form was 36.63±5.71 days while in those with the severe form of the disease it was 29.70±5.65 days. Besides, the genomes of the viruses isolated from the first and second episode were different. Conclusion: According to the results, all patients should be very careful about the severity of the second episode because of the more need for medical interventions for saving the patients. The interval between the first end and the second episode as well as the duration of each episode is highly important for better management of the disease.

Bibliometric analysis of global scientific research on Coronavirus (COVID-19).

Background: Since the outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease from Wuhan, China, in early December 2019, many scientists focused on this infection to find a way to deal with it. Due to the dramatic scientific growth in this field, we conducted a scientometric study to gain a better understanding of the scientific literature on COVID-19. Methods: We extracted all COVID-19 documents indexed in the Scopus from December 1, 2019, to April 1, 2020, without any language limitation and determined their bibliometric characteristics, including document type, open accessibility status, citation counting, H-index, top cited documents, the most productive countries, institutions and journals, international collaboration, the most frequent terms and keywords, journal bibliographic coupling and cocitations. Results: A total of 923 documents on COVID-19 were retrieved, of which 418 were original articles. All documents had received 2551 citations with an average citation of 2.76 per document and an h-index of 23. China ranked first with 348 documents, followed by the United States (n = 160). The Lancet and BMJ Clinical Research Ed published the most documents (each with 74 documents) and 2 institutions (University of Hong Kong and Huazhong University of Science and Technology) ranked first in this regard. In addition, the present study analyzed the top 25 highly-cited documents (those that had received 70% of all citations). Conclusion: This study highlighted the focused subjects on various aspects of COVID-19 literature such as pathogenesis, epidemiology, transmission, diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and its complications.