ABSTRACT
Background: Qingfei Paidu decoction (QFPD) has been widely used in treating COVID-19 in China. However, there is still a lack of comprehensive and systematic evidence to demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of QFPD. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of QFPD in patients with COVID-19. Methods: We searched seven databases up to 5 March 2021. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data of interest, and assessed risk of bias. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the risk of bias of cohort and non-randomized trials. The "Quality Assessment Tool for Before-After (Pre-Post) Studies With No Control Group" was adopted for controlled pre-post studies. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) to assess the certainty of evidence. We carried out a random effect meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3. For outcomes that could not be meta-analyzed, we performed a descriptive analysis. Results: We identified 16 studies with 11,237 patients, including one RCT, six non-randomized trials, two cohort studies, and seven pre-post studies. The certainty of evidence was low to very low because of the observational study design. QFPD combined with conventional treatment might decrease the time for nucleic acid conversion (MD = -4.78 days, 95% CI: -5.79 to -3.77), shorten the length of hospital stay (MD = -7.95 days, 95% CI: -14.66 to -1.24), shorten the duration of symptoms recovery of fever (MD = -1.51 days, 95% CI: -1.92 to -1.09), cough (MD = -1.64 days, 95% CI: -1.91 to -1.36) and chest CT (MD = -2.23 days, 95% CI: -2.46 to -2.00), improve the overall traditional Chinese medicine symptom scores (MD = 41.58 scores, 95% CI: 32.67 to 50.49), and change the laboratory indexes, such as WBC, AST, and CRP. Conclusion: QFPD combined with conventional treatment might be effective for patients with COVID-19. No serious adverse reactions related to QFPD were observed. Further high-quality studies are still needed in the future.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in rapid and regionally different approaches to breast cancer care. METHODS: In order to evaluate these changes, a COVID-19-specific registry was developed within the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) Mastery that tracked whether decisions were usual or modified for COVID-19. Data on patient care entered into the COVID-19-specific registry and the ASBrS Mastery registry from 1 March 2020 to 15 March 2021 were reviewed. RESULTS: Overall, 177 surgeons entered demographic and treatment data on 2791 patients. Mean patient age was 62.7 years and 9.0% (252) were of African American race. Initial consultation occurred via telehealth in 6.2% (173) of patients and 1.4% (40) developed COVID-19. Mean invasive tumor size was 2.1 cm and 17.8% (411) were node-positive. In estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (ER+/HER2-) disease, neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) was used as the usual approach in 6.9% (119) of patients and due to COVID-19 in an additional 31% (542) of patients. Patients were more likely to receive NET due to COVID-19 with increasing age and if they lived in the Northeast or Southeast (odds ratio [OR] 1.1, 2.3, and 1.7, respectively; p < 0.05). Genomic testing was performed on 51.5% (781) of estrogen-positive patients, of whom 20.7% (162) had testing on the core due to COVID-19. Patients were less likely to have core biopsy genomic testing due to COVID-19 if they were older (OR 0.89; p = 0.01) and more likely if they were node-positive (OR 4.0; p < 0.05). A change in surgical approach due to COVID-19 was reported for 5.4% (151) of patients. CONCLUSION: The ASBrS COVID-19 registry provided a platform for monitoring treatment changes due to the pandemic, highlighting the increased use of NET.