Are Older People Really More Susceptible to SARS-CoV-2?

Since the outbreak, COVID-19 has spread rapidly across the globe due to its high infectivity and lethality. Age appears to be one of the key factors influencing the status and progression of SARS-CoV-2 infection, as multiple reports indicated that the majority of COVID-19 infections and severe cases are elderly. Most people simply assume that the elderly are more susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 than the young, but the mechanism behind it is still open to question. The older and younger people are at similar risk of infection because their infection process is the same and they must be exposed to the virus first. However, whether they will get sick after exposure to the virus and how their disease progresses depend on their immune mechanisms. In older populations, inflammation and immune aging reduce their ability to resist SARS-CoV-2 infection. Meanwhile, under the influence of comorbidities, ACE2 receptor and various cytokines undergo corresponding changes, thus accelerating the entry, replication, and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the body, promoting disease progression, and leading to severe illness and even death. In addition, the relatively fragile mental state of the elderly can also affect their timely recovery from COVID-19. Therefore, once older people are infected with SARS-CoV-2, they are more prone to severe illness and death with a poor prognosis, and they should strengthen protection to avoid exposure to the virus.

Efficacy and Safety of Lianhua Qingwen for Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread around the world since its outbreak, and there is no ascertained effective drug up to now. Lianhua Qingwen (LHQW) has been widely used in China and overseas Chinese, which had some advantages in the treatment of COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of LHQW for COVID-19 by conducting a systematic review with meta-analysis. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in 12 electronic databases from their establishment to October 30, 2021. Note Express 3.2.0 was used for screening of trials, and the data was independently extracted in duplicate by 2 researchers. The risk of bias of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies were assessed by using the Cochrane collaboration tool and Newcastle Ottawa Scale, respectively, followed by data analysis using RevMan 5.3. The RCTs or retrospective studies to treat COVID-19 using LHQW were included. The intervention measures in the experimental group were LHQW alone or combined with chemical drugs (LCWC), and that in the control group were chemical drugs (CDs). Outcome measures included computed tomography (CT) recovery rate, disappearance rates of primary (fever, cough, fatigue), respiratory, gastrointestinal and other symptoms, exacerbation rate and adverse reaction. Subgroup analysis was conducted according to whether LHQW was combined with CDs and the different treatment methods in the control group. RESULTS: Nine trials with 1,152 participants with COVID-19 were included. The CT recovery rates of LHQW and LCWC were 1.36 and 1.32 times of CDs, respectively (P<0.05). Compared with CDs, LCWC remarkably increased the disappearance rates of fever, cough, fatigue, expectoration, shortness of breath, and muscle soreness (P<0.05). LHQW also obviously decreased the exacerbation rate, which was 0.45 times of CDs alone (P<0.05). There was no obvious difference between LCWC and CDs in adverse reaction (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: LHQW was more suitable for treating COVID-19 patients with obvious expectoration, shortness of breath and muscle soreness. LHQW had advantages in treating COVID-19 with no obvious exacerbation. (PROSPERO No. CRD42021235937).

Efficacy and Safety of "Three Chinese Patent Medicines and Three TCM Prescriptions" for COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the efficacy, safety, and precision of TMTP for COVID-19. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials and retrospective studies were searched in 11 electronic databases. This network meta-analysis included trials using TMTP to treat patients with COVID-19. The traditional pairwise meta-analysis was done by using Stata 15, and Bayesian network meta-analysis was done with WinBUGS. RESULTS: 18 trials were included with 2036 participants and 7 drugs. The results showed that LHQW had the most significant effects on improving expectoration, shortness of breath, sore throat, nausea, emesis, inappetence, muscle soreness, and headache, and it could produce the least adverse reactions. XBJ was the best drug for fever, fatigue, and diarrhea, which showed great advantages in lowering WBC levels. XFBD was the most effective drug for cough and chest distress, which had the least exacerbation rate. JHQG was the most effective for rhinobyon and rhinorrhea, while QFPD was the best drug in decreasing CRP levels. CONCLUSION: This study was the first most large-scale and comprehensive research of TMTP for COVID-19. The results showed that LHQW had good efficacy without obvious adverse reactions. Therefore, we believe that it should be firstly recommended for COVID-19 treatment. In addition, XBJ is recommended for patients with a severe fever, fatigue, and diarrhea, and JHQG is recommended for patients with obvious rhinobyon and rhinorrhea; then, XFBD is recommended for patients with cough and chest tightness as the main manifestation. Our findings will help experts develop new COVID-19 treatment guidelines to better guide clinical medication for protecting the health of COVID-19 patients.