ABSTRACT
C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio (CAR) is an independent risk factor in cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and infectious diseases. Through this study, we investigated the CAR values with respect to the severity and mortality of COVID-19 patients. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to retrieve studies that evaluated CAR values upon hospital admission in relation to the severity or mortality of COVID-19 patients. We adopted a random-effect model to calculate the pooled mean difference (MD) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Quality assessment was appraised using a Newcastle-Ottawa scale and publication bias was assessed using the Begg-test and funnel plot. We equally performed a subgroup analysis using study location and a sensitivity analysis only with studies with low risk of bias. We analyzed 32 studies (n = 12445). Severe COVID-19 patients had higher on-admission CAR values than non-severe COVID-19 patients (MD: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.35-2.03; p < 0.001; I2 = 89%). Non-survivor patients with COVID-19 had higher CAR values than survivor patients (MD: 2.59; 95% CI: 1.95-3.23; p < 0.001; I2 = 92%). In sensitivity analysis, the relationship remained with a decreasing of heterogeneity for severity (MD: 1.22; 95% CI: 1.03-1.40; p < 0.001; I2 = 13%) and for mortality (MD: 2.99; 95% CI: 2.47-3.51; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%). High CAR values were found in COVID-19 patients who developed severe disease or died.
ABSTRACT
Fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio (FAR) and blood urea nitrogen-to-albumin ratio (BAR) are inflammatory biomarkers that have been associated with clinical outcomes of multiple diseases. The objective of this study is to evaluate the association of these biomarkers with the severity and mortality of COVID-19 patients. A systematic search was performed in five databases. Observational studies that reported the association between FAR and BAR values with the severity and mortality of COVID-19 patients were included. Random-effects models were used for meta-analyses, and effects were expressed as Odds Ratio (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Publication bias was assessed using the Begg test, while the quality assessment was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. A total of 21 studies (n = 7949) were included. High FAR values were associated with a higher risk of severity (OR: 2.41; 95% CI 1.41-4.12; p < 0.001) and mortality (OR: 2.05; 95% CI 1.66-2.54; p < 0.001). High BAR values were associated with higher risk of mortality (OR: 4.63; 95% CI 2.11-10.15; p < 0.001). However, no statistically significant association was found between BAR values and the risk of severity (OR: 1.16; 95% CI 0.83-1.63; p = 0.38). High FAR and BAR values were associated with poor clinical outcomes.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Vaccination represents an important strategy to mitigate COVID-19 related morbidity and mortality by protecting against severe forms of the disease and reducing hospitalization and death rates. In this sense, the objective of this study is to estimate the prevalence of Vaccination Intention (VI) against COVID-19 in Latin America and Caribbean (LAC). METHODS: We conducted a systematic review with a comprehensive search strategy for the following databases: PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. A random-effect model meta-analysis was carried out using observational studies assessing the intention to vaccines against COVID-19 in LAC countries. The Clopper-Pearson method was used to estimate 95% Confidence Intervals. The quality assessment was developed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale adapted for cross-sectional studies. A subgroup analysis by study location and a sensitivity analysis were developed. RESULTS: Nineteen cross-sectional studies were included. Five meta-analyzes were performed according to the target population of the included studies. The VI in the general population of LAC was 78.0% (95%CI: 74.0%-82.0%). The VI for non-pregnant women was 78.0% (95%CI: 58.0%-99.0%), for elderly population was 63.0% (95%CI: 59.0%-69.0%), for pregnant women was 69.0% (95%CI: 61.0%-76.0%) and for health-personnel was 83.0% (95% CI: 71.0%-96.0%). The sensitivity analysis for general population meta-analysis that included only low risk of bias studies showed a 77.0% VI (95%CI: 73.0%-82.0%) and for non-pregnant women, 85.0% VI (95%CI: 79.0%-90.0%). CONCLUSION: Despite the high prevalence of VI in general population found in our study, VI prevalence from elderly people and pregnant women are lower than other population groups and overall population.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Caribbean Region/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Latin America/epidemiology , VaccinationABSTRACT
Background and aims: The albumin-to-globulin ratio (AGR) has been used to predict severity and mortality in infectious diseases. The aim of this study is to evaluate the prognostic value of the AGR in COVID-19 patients. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. We included observational studies assessing the association between the AGR values upon hospital admission and severity or all-cause mortality in COVID-19 patients. In the meta-analyses we used random effect models. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The effect measures were expressed as mean difference (MD) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI). We performed Egger's test and funnel plots to assess the publication bias. Results: The included studies had a total of 11356 patients corresponding to 31 cohort studies. Severe COVID-19 patients had lower AGR values than non-severe COVID-19 patients (mean difference (MD), -0.27; 95% IC, -0.32 to -0.22; p < 0.001; I2 = 88%). Non-survivor patients with COVID-19 had lower AGR values than survivor patients (MD, -0.29; 95% IC, -0.35 to -0.24; p < 0.001; I2 = 79%). In the sensitivity analysis, we only included studies with low risk of bias, which decreased the heterogeneity for both outcomes (severity, I2 = 20%; mortality, I2 = 5%). Conclusions: Low AGR values upon hospital admission were found in COVID-19 patients with a worse prognosis.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Apolipoproteins are predictive biomarkers for cardiovascular, neoplasms and cerebrovascular diseases and are postulated as prognostic biomarkers in infectious diseases, as COVID-19. Thus, we assessed the prognosis value of apolipoproteins for COVID-19 severity and mortality. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using observational studies that reported the association between apolipoproteins and severity or mortality in COVID-19 patients. Newcastle-Ottawa was used for the quality assessment of included studies. Effects measurements were shown as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and Egger-test was developed for assessing the risk of bias publication. RESULTS: We analyzed 12 cohort studies (n = 3580). Patients with low ApoliproteinA1 (ApoA1) (OR 0.35; 95%CI 0.24 to 0.49; P < 0.001) and ApoliproteinB (ApoB) (OR = 0.78; 95%CI 0.69 to 0.87; P < 0.001) values had a higher risk of developing severe disease. ApoB/ApoA1 ratio showed no statistically significant association with higher odds of severity. Low ApoA1 levels were associated with higher odds of all-cause mortality (OR = 0.34; 95%CI 0.20 to 0.57; P < 0.001). ApoB values showed no statistically significant association with a high risk of all-cause mortality. CONCLUSION: We suggest that adequate levels of ApoA1 and ApoB can be a protective factor for severity in COVID-19, and ApoB/ApoA1 ratio did not show predictive utility for severity.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Apolipoprotein A-I , Apolipoproteins , Humans , Prognosis , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is an accessible and widely used biomarker. NLR may be used as an early marker of poor prognosis in patients with COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prognostic value of the NLR in patients diagnosed with COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Observational studies that reported the association between baseline NLR values (ie, at hospital admission) and severity or all-cause mortality in COVID-19 patients were included. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Random effects models and inverse variance method were used for meta-analyses. The effects were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Small study effects were assessed with the Egger's test. RESULTS: We analysed 61 studies (n = 15 522 patients), 58 cohorts, and 3 case-control studies. An increase of one unit of NLR was associated with higher odds of severity (OR 6.22; 95%CI 4.93 to 7.84; P < .001) and higher odds of all-cause mortality (OR 12.6; 95%CI 6.88 to 23.06; P < .001). In our sensitivity analysis, we found that 41 studies with low risk of bias and moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 53% and 58%) maintained strong association between NLR values and both outcomes (severity: OR 5.36; 95% CI 4.45 to 6.45; P < .001; mortality: OR 10.42 95% CI 7.73 to 14.06; P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: Higher values of NLR were associated with severity and all-cause mortality in hospitalised COVID-19 patients.