-
Heliyon Sep 2023Azivudine has undergone a few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as of late. This study aimed to assess the COVID-19 treatment with azvudine's efficacy and safety. (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Azivudine has undergone a few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as of late. This study aimed to assess the COVID-19 treatment with azvudine's efficacy and safety.
METHODS
Through January 20, 2023, systematic searches of PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and MedRxiv were conducted to find the RCTs. The included studies' bias risk was evaluated using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.4 (PROSPERO Code: CRD42023395022).
RESULTS
A total of five RCTs with 1142 COVID-19 patients, 575 of whom received azvudine, were included. Additionally, seven RCTs are currently being conducted. In terms of clinical improvement and PT-PCR (reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction) negativity, the azvudine group had a greater patient percentage than the usual treatment or placebo group. It also took less time for the PT-PCR to become negative. In comparison to the placebo or standard treatment groups, the frequency of adverse events was reduced in the azvudine group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80 to 0.99) and major adverse events (RR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.22 to 1.79) groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Without the burden of side effects, azvudine can hasten the clinical symptoms of COVID-19 patients and PT-PCR negative. It will take more extensive research to confirm these conclusions.
PubMed: 37809649
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20153 -
Journal of Pharmaceutical and... Jan 2023The current pandemic of the acute severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) killed about 6.4 million and infected more than 600 million individuals by... (Review)
Review
The current pandemic of the acute severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) killed about 6.4 million and infected more than 600 million individuals by august of 2022, and researchers worldwide are searching for fast and selective approaches for this virus detection. Colorimetric biosensors are an excellent alternative because they are sensitive, simple, fast, and low-cost for rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 compared to standard Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) techniques. This study systematically searched and reviewed literature data related to colorimetric biosensors in detecting SARS-CoV-2 viruses, recovered from the Scopus (n = 16), Web of Science (n = 19), PubMed (n = 19), and Science Direct (n = 17) databases totalizing n = 71 articles. Data were analyzed for the type of nanomaterial, biorecognition material at the detection limit (LOD), and devices designed for diagnostics. The most applied nanomaterial were gold nanoparticles, in their original form and hybrid in quantum dots and core-shell. In addition, we show high specificity in point-of-care (POC) diagnostic devices as a faster and cheaper alternative for clinical diagnosis. Finally, the highlights of the colorimetric biosensor developed for diagnostic devices applied in swabs, surgical masks, and lateral flow immunoassays were presented.
Topics: Humans; SARS-CoV-2; Colorimetry; Gold; COVID-19; Metal Nanoparticles
PubMed: 36206693
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2022.115087 -
Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine Sep 2019The pathogenic role of mycoplasmas in the lower respiratory tract (LRT) of dogs is debated, because mycoplasmas can be isolated from both healthy and sick dogs. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The pathogenic role of mycoplasmas in the lower respiratory tract (LRT) of dogs is debated, because mycoplasmas can be isolated from both healthy and sick dogs.
OBJECTIVES
To critically assess available data from controlled observational studies on the role of 4 mycoplasma species in LRT disease of dogs.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analyses.
METHODS
Seven electronic databases were searched for relevant publications. Risk of bias was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analyses, stratified by mycoplasmal species, were performed using a random effects Bayesian model with noninformative priors to estimate pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between Mycoplasma cynos, Mycoplasma canis, Mycoplasma spumans, and Mycoplasma edwardii and LRT disease in dogs.
RESULTS
Five studies were included from 1201 references identified. All studies dealt with M. cynos, whereas 3 dealt with the other mycoplasma species. A significant association was found between M. cynos and LRT disease (Bayesian OR, 3.60; CI, 1.31-10.29). Conversely, M. canis, M. spumans, and M. edwardii were not significantly associated with LRT signs (Bayesian OR, 1.06; CI, 0.10-14.63; Bayesian OR, 3.40; CI, 0.16-54.27; and Bayesian OR, 1.04; CI, 0.05-23.54, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE
Results support a pathogenic role of M. cynos and a commensal role of M. canis and M. edwardii in LRT in dogs. Although the association was not significant based on the CI, the point estimate of the Bayesian OR was relatively high for M. spumans, making its role less clear. Mycoplasma cynos-specific polymerase chain reaction should be considered on samples from dogs with LRT.
Topics: Animals; Dog Diseases; Dogs; Mycoplasma; Mycoplasma Infections; Respiratory Tract Infections
PubMed: 31297880
DOI: 10.1111/jvim.15568 -
Journal of Virological Methods Feb 2022The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the test accuracy of reverse-transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and reverse... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the test accuracy of reverse-transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) and reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We comprehensively searched PUBMED, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Service System until September 1, 2021. We included clinical studies assessing the sensitivity and specificity of RT-PCR and RT-LAMP using respiratory samples. Thirty-three studies were included with 9360 suspected cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The RT-PCR or other comprehensive diagnostic method was defined as the reference method. The results showed that the overall pooled sensitivity of RT-PCR and RT-LAMP was 0.96 (95 % CI, 0.93-0.98) and 0.92 (95 % CI, 0.85-0.96), respectively. RT-PCR and RT-LAMP had a 0.06 (95 % CI, 0.04-0.08) and 0.12 (95 % CI, 0.06-0.16) false-negative rates (FNR), respectively. Moreover, subgroup analysis showed mixed sampling and multiple target gene diagnosis methods had better diagnostic value than single-site sampling and a single target gene. The sensitivity and FNR were also significantly affected by the reference method. Comparing RT-LAMP with established suboptimal RT-PCR may exaggerate the performance of RT-LAMP. RT-PCR and RT-LAMP showed high values in the diagnosis of COVID-19, but there was still a FNR of about 6%-12%.
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; Molecular Diagnostic Techniques; Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques; Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction; Reverse Transcription; SARS-CoV-2; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 34856308
DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2021.114392 -
The Journal of Infection May 2023The clinical impact of rapid sample-to-answer "syndromic" multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing for respiratory viruses is not clearly established. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
The clinical impact of rapid sample-to-answer "syndromic" multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing for respiratory viruses is not clearly established. We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to evaluate this impact for patients with possible acute respiratory tract infection in the hospital setting.
METHODS
We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases from 2012 to present and conference proceedings from 2021 for studies comparing clinical impact outcomes between multiplex PCR testing and standard testing.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven studies with 17,321 patient encounters were included in this review. Rapid multiplex PCR testing was associated with a reduction of - 24.22 h (95% CI -28.70 to -19.74 h) in the time to results. Hospital length of stay was decreased by -0.82 days (95% CI -1.52 to -0.11 days). Among influenza positive patients, antivirals were more likely to be given (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.06-1.48) and appropriate infection control facility use was more common with rapid multiplex PCR testing (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.16-2.07).
CONCLUSIONS
Our systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates a reduction in time to results and length of stay for patients overall along with improvements in appropriate antiviral and infection control management among influenza-positive patients. This evidence supports the routine use of rapid sample-to-answer multiplex PCR testing for respiratory viruses in the hospital setting.
Topics: Humans; Influenza, Human; Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction; Viruses; Respiratory Tract Infections; Antiviral Agents
PubMed: 36906153
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2023.03.005 -
F1000Research 2021Mass testing and adequate management are essential to terminate the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This testing is due to the possibility of...
Mass testing and adequate management are essential to terminate the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This testing is due to the possibility of unidentified cases, especially ones without COVID-19 related symptoms. This review aimed to examine the outcome of the existing studies on the ways of identifying COVID-19 cases, and determine the populations at risk, symptom and diagnostic test management of COVID-19. The articles reviewed were scientific publications on the PubMed, Science Direct, ProQuest, and Scopus databases. The keywords used to obtain the data were COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and case detection, case management or diagnostic test. We applied the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Population, Intervention, Control and Outcomes (PICO) approaches. A total of 21 articles from 13 countries met the inclusion criteria and were further analyzed qualitatively. However, 62% of the articles used a rapid antibody test for screening rather than a rapid antigen test. According to the rapid antigen test, 51.3% were positive, with men aged above 50 years recording the highest number of cases. Furthermore, 57.1% of patients were symptomatic, while diagnostic tests' sensitivity and specificity increased to 100% in 14 days after the onset. : Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is recommended by the World Health Organization for detection of COVID-19. Suppose it is unavailable, the rapid antigen test is used as an alternative rather than the rapid antibody test. Diagnosis is expected to be confirmed using the PCR and serological assay to achieve an early diagnosis of COVID-19, according to disease progression, gradual rapid tests can be used, such as rapid antigen in an earlier week and antibody tests confirmed by RT-PCR and serological assay in the second week of COVID-19.
Topics: COVID-19; COVID-19 Testing; Clinical Laboratory Techniques; Humans; Male; SARS-CoV-2; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 35719313
DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.50929.3 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2022To determine the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To determine the diagnostic accuracy of serological tests for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19).
METHODS
PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 1 2020 to September 2 2022. We included studies that measured the sensitivity, specificity or both qualities of a COVID-19 serological test and a reference standard of a viral culture or reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). The risk of bias was assessed by using quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies 2 (QUADAS-2). The primary outcomes included overall sensitivity and specificity, as stratified by the methods of serological testing [enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs) or chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs)] and immunoglobulin classes (IgG, IgM, or both). Secondary outcomes were stratum-specific sensitivity and specificity within the subgroups, as defined by study or participant characteristics, which included the time from the onset of symptoms, testing commercial kits or an in-house assay, antigen target, clinical setting, serological kit as the index test and the type of specimen for the RT-PCR reference test.
RESULTS
Eight thousand seven hundred and eighty-five references were identified and 169 studies included. Overall, we judged the risk of bias to be high in 47.9 % (81/169) of the studies, and a low risk of applicability concerns was found in 100% (169/169) of the studies. For each method of testing, the pooled sensitivity of the ELISAs ranged from 81 to 82%, with sensitivities ranging from 69 to 70% for the LFIAs and 77% to 79% for the CLIAs. Among the evaluated tests, IgG (80-81%)-based tests exhibited better sensitivities than IgM-based tests (66-68%). IgG/IgM-based CLIA had the highest sensitivity [87% (86-88%)]. All of the tests displayed high specificity (97-98%). Heterogeneity was observed in all of the analyses. The detection of nucleocapsid protein (77-80%) as the antigen target was found to offer higher sensitivity results than surface protein detection (66-68%). Sensitivity was higher in the in-house assays (78-79%) than in the commercial kits (47-48%).
CONCLUSION
Among the evaluated tests, ELISA and CLIA tests performed better in terms of sensitivity than did the LFIA. IgG-based tests had higher sensitivity than IgM-based tests, and combined IgG/IgM test-based CLIA tests had the best overall diagnostic test accuracy. The type of sample, serological kit and timing of use of the specific tests were associated with the diagnostic accuracy. Due to the limitations of the serological tests, other techniques should be quickly approved to provide guidance for the correct diagnosis of COVID-19.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Serologic Tests; Immunoglobulin G; Immunoglobulin M
PubMed: 36589993
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.923525 -
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance Feb 2024COVID-19 screening is an effective nonpharmaceutical intervention for identifying infected individuals and interrupting viral transmission. However, questions have been... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
COVID-19 screening is an effective nonpharmaceutical intervention for identifying infected individuals and interrupting viral transmission. However, questions have been raised regarding its effectiveness in controlling the spread of novel variants and its high socioeconomic costs. Therefore, the optimization of COVID-19 screening strategies has attracted great attention.
OBJECTIVE
This review aims to summarize the evidence and provide a reference basis for the optimization of screening strategies for the prevention and control of COVID-19.
METHODS
We applied a methodological framework for scoping reviews and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist. We conducted a scoping review of the present publications on the optimization of COVID-19 screening strategies. We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, and Elsevier ScienceDirect databases for publications up to December 31, 2022. English publications related to screening and testing strategies for COVID-19 were included. A data-charting form, jointly developed by 2 reviewers, was used for data extraction according to the optimization directions of the screening strategies.
RESULTS
A total of 2770 unique publications were retrieved from the database search, and 95 abstracts were retained for full-text review. There were 62 studies included in the final review. We summarized the results in 4 major aspects: the screening population (people at various risk conditions such as different regions and occupations; 12/62, 19%), the timing of screening (when the target population is tested before travel or during an outbreak; 12/62, 19%), the frequency of screening (appropriate frequencies for outbreak prevention, outbreak response, or community transmission control; 6/62, 10%), and the screening and detection procedure (the choice of individual or pooled detection and optimization of the pooling approach; 35/62, 56%).
CONCLUSIONS
This review reveals gaps in the optimization of COVID-19 screening strategies and suggests that a number of factors such as prevalence, screening accuracy, effective allocation of resources, and feasibility of strategies should be carefully considered in the development of future screening strategies.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Databases, Factual; Disease Outbreaks; Travel
PubMed: 38412011
DOI: 10.2196/44349 -
One Health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) Dec 2022is an important foodborne intracellular pathogen. The pathogen is the primary cause of human Listeriosis. The main source of human Listeriosis is through consumption of... (Review)
Review
is an important foodborne intracellular pathogen. The pathogen is the primary cause of human Listeriosis. The main source of human Listeriosis is through consumption of contaminated food products. Other modes of transmission include zoonotic and vertical transmission. The disease often presents in a mild form, but severe and fatal cases, as well as outbreaks, may occur. Despite these challenges, there has been little attempt at enumerating the burden of the disease in countries of Southeast Asia (SEA) and some developing countries. Thus, this study investigated the prevalence of L. in SEA using one health approach through a systematic review and meta-analysis (SR&MA) of the existing literature. In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, an a priori protocol for the SR&MA was developed and registered in PROSPERO (). A systematic search of four electronic databases was performed for relevant citations. The identified publications were screened, and 17 studies were included in the review from where data was extracted. The pooling of the prevalence estimate (with the 95% confidence interval [CI]) was done using the random effect model by employing the double transformed arcsine method using MetaXL software. The overall determined prevalence for L. in SEA (in food, animal, and environmental sources) was 16% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10-23). Further subgroup analysis revealed ready-to-eat food of vegetable origin with the highest prevalence of 21% (CI: 6-41). Also, seven virulence genes were identified to be prevalent in the subregion. The commonest identification method was found to be the polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The knowledge of the high prevalence of L. in SEA is relevant for informed decision making by clinicians, public health practitioners, and policymakers. To achieve the goal of the effective control and prevention of the disease in the subregion.
PubMed: 36277096
DOI: 10.1016/j.onehlt.2022.100417 -
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases Mar 2021We were tasked by the World Health Organization (WHO) to address the following question: What techniques should be used to diagnose Schistosoma infections in snails and...
BACKGROUND
We were tasked by the World Health Organization (WHO) to address the following question: What techniques should be used to diagnose Schistosoma infections in snails and in the water in potential transmission sites? Our goal was to review and evaluate the available literature and provide recommendations and insights for the development of WHO's Guidelines Development Group for schistosomiasis control and elimination.
METHODOLOGY
We searched several databases using strings of search terms, searched bibliographies of pertinent papers, and contacted investigators who have made contributions to this field. Our search covered from 1970 to Sept 2020. All papers were considered in a PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework, and retained papers were grouped by technique and subjected to our GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) evidence assessment profile determined in consultation with WHO. We also considered issues of sensitivity, specificity, coverage, cost, robustness, support needs, schistosome species discrimination, and relevant detection limits.
PRINCIPAL FINDINGS
Our PRISMA process began with the perusal of 949 articles, of which 158 were retained for data extraction and evaluation. We identified 25 different techniques and for each applied a GRADE assessment considering limitations, inconsistency, imprecision, indirectness, and publication bias. We also provide advantages and disadvantages for each category of techniques.
CONCLUSIONS
Our GRADE analysis returned an assessment of moderate quality of evidence for environmental DNA (eDNA), qPCR and LAMP (Loop-mediated isothermal amplification). No single ideal diagnostic approach has yet been developed, but considerable recent progress has been made. We note a growing trend to use eDNA techniques to permit more efficient and replicable sampling. qPCR-based protocols for follow-up detection offer a versatile, mature, sensitive, and specific platform for diagnosis though centralized facilities will be required to favor standardization. Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) can play a complementary role if inhibitors are a concern, or more sensitivity or quantification is needed. Snail collection, followed by shedding, is encouraged to provide specimens for sequence verifications of snails or schistosomes. LAMP or other isothermal detection techniques offer the prospect of less expensive and more distributed network of analysis but may face standardization and verification challenges related to actual sequences amplified. Ability to detect schistosome infections in snails or in the water is needed if control and elimination programs hope to succeed. Any diagnostic techniques used need to be regularly verified by the acquisition of DNA sequences to confirm that the detected targets are of the expected species. Further improvements may be necessary to identify the ideal schistosome or snail sequences to target for amplification. More field testing and standardization will be essential for long-term success.
Topics: Animals; DNA, Environmental; DNA, Helminth; Molecular Diagnostic Techniques; Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques; Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction; Schistosoma; Schistosomiasis; Snails; Water
PubMed: 33760814
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009175