-
Annals of the New York Academy of... Jun 2016Mindfulness meditation represents a mental training framework for cultivating the state of mindful awareness in daily life. Recently, there has been a surge of interest... (Review)
Review
Mindfulness meditation represents a mental training framework for cultivating the state of mindful awareness in daily life. Recently, there has been a surge of interest in how mindfulness meditation improves human health and well-being. Although studies have shown that mindfulness meditation can improve self-reported measures of disease symptomatology, the effect that mindfulness meditation has on biological mechanisms underlying human aging and disease is less clear. To address this issue, we conducted the first comprehensive review of randomized controlled trials examining the effects of mindfulness meditation on immune system parameters, with a specific focus on five outcomes: (1) circulating and stimulated inflammatory proteins, (2) cellular transcription factors and gene expression, (3) immune cell count, (4) immune cell aging, and (5) antibody response. This analysis revealed substantial heterogeneity across studies with respect to patient population, study design, and assay procedures. The findings suggest possible effects of mindfulness meditation on specific markers of inflammation, cell-mediated immunity, and biological aging, but these results are tentative and require further replication. On the basis of this analysis, we describe the limitations of existing work and suggest possible avenues for future research. Mindfulness meditation may be salutogenic for immune system dynamics, but additional work is needed to examine these effects.
Topics: Awareness; Humans; Immune System; Immunity, Cellular; Meditation; Mindfulness; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 26799456
DOI: 10.1111/nyas.12998 -
The Lancet. Infectious Diseases May 2023The global surge in the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant has resulted in many individuals with hybrid immunity (immunity developed through a combination of SARS-CoV-2...
BACKGROUND
The global surge in the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant has resulted in many individuals with hybrid immunity (immunity developed through a combination of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination). We aimed to systematically review the magnitude and duration of the protective effectiveness of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against infection and severe disease caused by the omicron variant.
METHODS
For this systematic review and meta-regression, we searched for cohort, cross-sectional, and case-control studies in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the WHO COVID-19 database, and Europe PubMed Central from Jan 1, 2020, to June 1, 2022, using keywords related to SARS-CoV-2, reinfection, protective effectiveness, previous infection, presence of antibodies, and hybrid immunity. The main outcomes were the protective effectiveness against reinfection and against hospital admission or severe disease of hybrid immunity, hybrid immunity relative to previous infection alone, hybrid immunity relative to previous vaccination alone, and hybrid immunity relative to hybrid immunity with fewer vaccine doses. Risk of bias was assessed with the Risk of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions Tool. We used log-odds random-effects meta-regression to estimate the magnitude of protection at 1-month intervals. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022318605).
FINDINGS
11 studies reporting the protective effectiveness of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and 15 studies reporting the protective effectiveness of hybrid immunity were included. For previous infection, there were 97 estimates (27 with a moderate risk of bias and 70 with a serious risk of bias). The effectiveness of previous infection against hospital admission or severe disease was 74·6% (95% CI 63·1-83·5) at 12 months. The effectiveness of previous infection against reinfection waned to 24·7% (95% CI 16·4-35·5) at 12 months. For hybrid immunity, there were 153 estimates (78 with a moderate risk of bias and 75 with a serious risk of bias). The effectiveness of hybrid immunity against hospital admission or severe disease was 97·4% (95% CI 91·4-99·2) at 12 months with primary series vaccination and 95·3% (81·9-98·9) at 6 months with the first booster vaccination after the most recent infection or vaccination. Against reinfection, the effectiveness of hybrid immunity following primary series vaccination waned to 41·8% (95% CI 31·5-52·8) at 12 months, while the effectiveness of hybrid immunity following first booster vaccination waned to 46·5% (36·0-57·3) at 6 months.
INTERPRETATION
All estimates of protection waned within months against reinfection but remained high and sustained for hospital admission or severe disease. Individuals with hybrid immunity had the highest magnitude and durability of protection, and as a result might be able to extend the period before booster vaccinations are needed compared to individuals who have never been infected.
FUNDING
WHO COVID-19 Solidarity Response Fund and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Cross-Sectional Studies; Reinfection; Adaptive Immunity
PubMed: 36681084
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(22)00801-5 -
JAMA Oncology Dec 2020Measurable residual disease (MRD) refers to neoplastic cells that cannot be detected by standard cytomorphologic analysis. In patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML),... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Measurable residual disease (MRD) refers to neoplastic cells that cannot be detected by standard cytomorphologic analysis. In patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), determining the association of MRD with survival may improve prognostication and inform selection of efficient clinical trial end points.
OBJECTIVE
To examine the association between MRD status and disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with AML using scientific literature.
DATA SOURCES
Clinical studies on AML published between January 1, 2000, and October 1, 2018, were identified via searches of PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE.
STUDY SELECTION
Literature search and study screening were performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Studies that assessed DFS or OS by MRD status in patients with AML were included. Reviews, non-English-language articles, and studies reporting only outcomes after hematopoietic cell transplantation or those with insufficient description of MRD information were excluded.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Study sample size, median patient age, median follow-up time, MRD detection method, MRD assessment time points, AML subtype, specimen source, and survival outcomes were extracted. Meta-analyses were performed separately for DFS and OS using bayesian hierarchical modeling.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Meta-analyses of survival probabilities and hazard ratios (HRs) were conducted for OS and DFS according to MRD status.
RESULTS
Eighty-one publications reporting on 11 151 patients were included. The average HR for achieving MRD negativity was 0.36 (95% bayesian credible interval [CrI], 0.33-0.39) for OS and 0.37 (95% CrI, 0.34-0.40) for DFS. The estimated 5-year DFS was 64% for patients without MRD and 25% for those with MRD, and the estimated OS was 68% for patients without MRD and 34% for those with MRD. The association of MRD negativity with DFS and OS was significant for all subgroups, with the exception of MRD assessed by cytogenetics or fluorescent in situ hybridization.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that achievement of MRD negativity is associated with superior DFS and OS in patients with AML. The value of MRD negativity appears to be consistent across age groups, AML subtypes, time of MRD assessment, specimen source, and MRD detection methods. These results support MRD status as an end point that may allow for accelerated evaluation of novel therapies in AML.
Topics: Bayes Theorem; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation; Humans; In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence; Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute; Neoplasm, Residual; Prognosis
PubMed: 33030517
DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.4600 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2022There is evidence that the adaptive or acquired immune system is one of the crucial variables in differentiating the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19),...
BACKGROUND
There is evidence that the adaptive or acquired immune system is one of the crucial variables in differentiating the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This work aimed to analyze the immunopathological aspects of adaptive immunity that are involved in the progression of this disease.
METHODS
This is a systematic review based on articles that included experimental evidence from assays, cohort studies, reviews, cross-sectional and case-control studies from PubMed, SciELO, MEDLINE, and Lilacs databases in English, Portuguese, or Spanish between January 2020 and July 2022.
RESULTS
Fifty-six articles were finalized for this review. CD4+ T cells were the most resolutive in the health-disease process compared with B cells and CD8+ T lymphocytes. The predominant subpopulations of T helper lymphocytes (Th) in critically ill patients are Th1, Th2, Th17 (without their main characteristics) and regulatory T cells (Treg), while in mild cases there is an influx of Th1, Th2, Th17 and follicular T helper cells (Tfh). These cells are responsible for the secretion of cytokines, including interleukin (IL) - 6, IL-4, IL-10, IL-7, IL-22, IL-21, IL-15, IL-1α, IL-23, IL-5, IL-13, IL-2, IL-17, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), CXC motivating ligand (CXCL) 8, CXCL9 and tumor growth factor beta (TGF-β), with the abovementioned first 8 inflammatory mediators related to clinical benefits, while the others to a poor prognosis. Some CD8+ T lymphocyte markers are associated with the severity of the disease, such as human leukocyte antigen (HLA-DR) and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1). Among the antibodies produced by SARS-CoV-2, Immunoglobulin (Ig) A stood out due to its potent release associated with a more severe clinical form.
CONCLUSIONS
It is concluded that through this study it is possible to have a brief overview of the main immunological biomarkers and their function during SARS-CoV-2 infection in particular cell types. In critically ill individuals, adaptive immunity is varied, aberrantly compromised, and late. In particular, the T-cell response is also an essential and necessary component in immunological memory and therefore should be addressed in vaccine formulation strategies.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor; SARS-CoV-2; Interleukin-10; Interleukin-15; Interleukin-17; Interleukin-13; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha; Cross-Sectional Studies; Critical Illness; Ligands; Interleukin-2; Interleukin-4; Interleukin-5; Interleukin-7; Adaptive Immunity; HLA-DR Antigens; Interleukin-23; Inflammation Mediators; Transforming Growth Factor beta; Immunoglobulins
PubMed: 36300105
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.1001198 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2016Ganoderma lucidum is a natural medicine that is widely used and recommended by Asian physicians and naturopaths for its supporting effects on immune system. Laboratory... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Ganoderma lucidum is a natural medicine that is widely used and recommended by Asian physicians and naturopaths for its supporting effects on immune system. Laboratory research and a handful of preclinical trials have suggested that G. lucidum carries promising anticancer and immunomodulatory properties. The popularity of taking G. lucidum as an alternative medicine has been increasing in cancer patients. However, there is no systematic review that has been conducted to evaluate the actual benefits of G. lucidum in cancer treatment.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the clinical effects of G. lucidum on long-term survival, tumour response, host immune functions and quality of life in cancer patients, as well as adverse events associated with its use.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched an extensive set of databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, NIH, AMED, CBM, CNKI, CMCC and VIP Information/Chinese Scientific Journals Database was searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in October 2011. Other strategies used were scanning the references of articles retrieved, handsearching of the International Journal of Medicinal Mushrooms and contact with herbal medicine experts and manufacturers of G. lucidum. For this update we updated the searches in February 2016.
SELECTION CRITERIA
To be eligible for being included in this review, studies had to be RCTs comparing the efficacy of G. lucidum medications to active or placebo control in patients with cancer that had been diagnosed by pathology. All types and stages of cancer were eligible for inclusion. Trials were not restricted on the basis of language.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Five RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. Two independent review authors assessed the methodological quality of individual trials. Common primary outcomes were tumour response evaluated according to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, immune function parameters such as natural killer (NK)-cell activity and T-lymphocyte co-receptor subsets, and quality of life measured by the Karnofsky scale score. No trial had recorded long-term survival rates. Associated adverse events were reported in one study. A meta-analysis was performed to pool available data from the primary trials. Results were gauged using relative risks (RR) and standard mean differences (SMD) for dichotomous and continuous data respectively, with a 95% confidence interval (CI).
MAIN RESULTS
The methodological quality of primary studies was generally unsatisfying and the results were reported inadequately in many aspects. Additional information was not available from primary trialists. The meta-analysis results showed that patients who had been given G. lucidum alongside with chemo/radiotherapy were more likely to respond positively compared to chemo/radiotherapy alone (RR 1.50; 95% CI 0.90 to 2.51, P = 0.02). G. lucidum treatment alone did not demonstrate the same regression rate as that seen in combined therapy. The results for host immune function indicators suggested that G. lucidum simultaneously increases the percentage of CD3, CD4 and CD8 by 3.91% (95% CI 1.92% to 5.90%, P < 0.01), 3.05% (95% CI 1.00% to 5.11%, P < 0.01) and 2.02% (95% CI 0.21% to 3.84%, P = 0.03), respectively. In addition, leukocyte, NK-cell activity and CD4/CD8 ratio were marginally elevated. Four studies showed that patients in the G. lucidum group had relatively improved quality of life in comparison to controls. One study recorded minimal side effects, including nausea and insomnia. No significant haematological or hepatological toxicity was reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Our review did not find sufficient evidence to justify the use of G. lucidum as a first-line treatment for cancer. It remains uncertain whether G. lucidum helps prolong long-term cancer survival. However, G. lucidum could be administered as an alternative adjunct to conventional treatment in consideration of its potential of enhancing tumour response and stimulating host immunity. G. lucidum was generally well tolerated by most participants with only a scattered number of minor adverse events. No major toxicity was observed across the studies. Although there were few reports of harmful effect of G. lucidum, the use of its extract should be judicious, especially after thorough consideration of cost-benefit and patient preference. Future studies should put emphasis on the improvement in methodological quality and further clinical research on the effect of G. lucidum on cancer long-term survival are needed. An update to this review will be performed every two years.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Humans; Immunity, Cellular; Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reishi
PubMed: 27045603
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007731.pub3 -
Pathogens and Global Health Jul 2022This study aims to estimate the prevalence and longevity of detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and T and B memory cells after recovery. In addition, the prevalence of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This study aims to estimate the prevalence and longevity of detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and T and B memory cells after recovery. In addition, the prevalence of COVID-19 reinfection and the preventive efficacy of previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 were investigated. A synthesis of existing research was conducted. The Cochrane Library, the China Academic Journals Full Text Database, PubMed, and Scopus, and preprint servers were searched for studies conducted between 1 January 2020 to 1 April 2021. Included studies were assessed for methodological quality and pooled estimates of relevant outcomes were obtained in a meta-analysis using a bias adjusted synthesis method. Proportions were synthesized with the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation and binary outcomes using the odds ratio (OR). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I and Cochran's Q statistics and publication bias was assessed using Doi plots. Fifty-four studies from 18 countries, with around 12,000,000 individuals, followed up to 8 months after recovery, were included. At 6-8 months after recovery, the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 specific immunological memory remained high; IgG - 90.4% (95%CI 72.2-99.9, I = 89.0%), CD4+ - 91.7% (95%CI 78.2-97.1y), and memory B cells 80.6% (95%CI 65.0-90.2) and the pooled prevalence of reinfection was 0.2% (95%CI 0.0-0.7, I = 98.8). Individuals previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 had an 81% reduction in odds of a reinfection (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.1-0.3, I = 90.5%). Around 90% of recovered individuals had evidence of immunological memory to SARS-CoV-2, at 6-8 months after recovery and had a low risk of reinfection.RegistrationPROSPERO: CRD42020201234.
Topics: Adaptive Immunity; COVID-19; Humans; Prevalence; Reinfection; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 35099367
DOI: 10.1080/20477724.2022.2029301 -
Nutrition and Cancer 2022There is no consensus on the effect of the probiotics on postoperative adaptive immunity in patients undergoing surgical resection for CRC. We aimed to systematically... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
There is no consensus on the effect of the probiotics on postoperative adaptive immunity in patients undergoing surgical resection for CRC. We aimed to systematically evaluate the effect of probiotics on postoperative adaptive immunity in perioperative CRC patients. The main end points were postoperative serum IgG, IgA, IgM, CD4 T-cells, CD8 T-cells and CD4-to-CD8 ratio. Meta-analysis was performed with a fixed or random effects model. We included six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 492 perioperative CRC patients. The use of enteral probiotics significantly increased the levels of peripheral blood IgG (MD: 1.33; 95% CI: 0.88 - 1.77; I = 41%), IgA (MD: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.10 - 0.30; I = 53%), IgM (MD: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.13 - 0.24; I = 41%), CD4 T-cells (MD: 2.79; 95% CI: 2.34 - 3.24; I = 0) and CD4-to-CD8 ratio (MD: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.04 - 0.13; I = 7%). In conclusion, e report that the use of enteral probiotics improves postoperative humoral and cellular immunity in patients with CRC.
Topics: Adaptive Immunity; Colorectal Neoplasms; Humans; Immunoglobulin A; Immunoglobulin G; Immunoglobulin M; Probiotics
PubMed: 35341415
DOI: 10.1080/01635581.2022.2056619 -
International Journal of Infectious... Sep 2023To assess the evidence on the presence of antibodies cross-reactive with SARS-CoV-2 antigens in prepandemic samples from African populations. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To assess the evidence on the presence of antibodies cross-reactive with SARS-CoV-2 antigens in prepandemic samples from African populations.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating prepandemic African samples using pre-set assay-specific thresholds for SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity.
RESULTS
In total, 26 articles with 156 datasets were eligible, including 3437 positives among 29,923 measurements (11.5%) with large between-dataset heterogeneity. Positivity was similar for anti-nucleocapsid (14%) and anti-spike antibodies (11%), higher for anti-spike1 (23%), and lower for anti-receptor-binding domain antibodies (7%). Positivity was similar, on average, for immunoglobulin M and immunoglobulin G. Positivity was seen prominently in countries where malaria transmission occurs throughout and in datasets enriched in malaria cases (14%, 95% confidence interval, 12-15% vs 2%, 95% confidence interval 1-2% in other datasets). Substantial SARS-CoV-2 reactivity was seen in high malaria burden with or without high dengue burden (14% and 12%, respectively), and not without high malaria burden (2% and 0%, respectively). Lower SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactivity was seen in settings of high HIV seroprevalence. More sparse individual-level data showed associations of higher SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactivity with Plasmodium parasitemia and lower SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactivity with HIV seropositivity.
CONCLUSION
Prepandemic samples from Africa show high levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. At the country level, cross-reactivity tracks especially with malaria prevalence.
Topics: Humans; Immunity, Humoral; Seroepidemiologic Studies; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Africa; Immunoglobulin G; Antibodies, Viral
PubMed: 37327857
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2023.06.009 -
Cancers Jun 2023Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide. The main treatment options are laparoscopic (LS) and open surgery (OS), which might differ in their... (Review)
Review
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide. The main treatment options are laparoscopic (LS) and open surgery (OS), which might differ in their impact on the cellular immunity so indispensable for anti-infectious and antitumor defense. MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science (SCI-EXPANDED), the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP (WHO) were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing cellular immunity in CRC patients of any stage between minimally invasive and open surgical resections. A random effects-weighted inverse variance meta-analysis was performed for cell counts of natural killer (NK) cells, white blood cells (WBCs), lymphocytes, CD4+ T cells, and the CD4+/CD8+ ratio. The RoB2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias. The meta-analysis was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021264324). A total of 14 trials including 974 participants were assessed. The LS groups showed more favorable outcomes in eight trials, with lower inflammation and less immunosuppression as indicated by higher innate and adaptive cell counts, higher NK cell activity, and higher HLA-DR expression rates compared to OS, with only one study reporting lower WBCs after OS. The meta-analysis yielded significantly higher NK cell counts at postoperative day (POD)4 (weighted mean difference (WMD) 30.80 cells/µL [19.68; 41.92], 0.00001) and POD6-8 (WMD 45.08 cells/µL [35.95; 54.21], 0.00001). Although further research is required, LS is possibly associated with less suppression of cellular immunity and lower inflammation, indicating better preservation of cellular immunity.
PubMed: 37444491
DOI: 10.3390/cancers15133381 -
The Journal of Infectious Diseases May 2016Studies have been mixed on whether naturally acquired human papillomavirus (HPV) antibodies may protect against subsequent HPV infection. We performed a systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Studies have been mixed on whether naturally acquired human papillomavirus (HPV) antibodies may protect against subsequent HPV infection. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether naturally acquired HPV antibodies protect against subsequent genital HPV infection (ie, natural immunity).
METHODS
We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for studies examining natural HPV immunity against subsequent genital type-specific HPV infection in female and male subjects. We used random-effects models to derive pooled relative risk (RR) estimates for each HPV type.
RESULTS
We identified 14 eligible studies that included >24,000 individuals from 18 countries that examined HPV natural immunity. We observed significant protection against subsequent infection in female subjects with HPV-16 (pooled RR, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, .50-.80) and HPV-18 (0.70; .43-.98) but not in male subjects (HPV-16: 1.22; .67-1.77 [P= .05 (test for heterogeneity)]; HPV-18: 1.50; .46-2.55; [P= .15]). We also observed type-specific protection against subsequent infection for a combined measure of HPV-6/11/31/33/35/45/52/58 in female subjects (pooled RR, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, .57-.92). Natural immunity was also evident in female subjects when analyses were restricted to studies that used neutralizing assays, used HPV persistence as an outcome, or reported adjusted analyses (each P< .05).
CONCLUSIONS
HPV antibodies acquired through natural infection provide modest protection against subsequent cervical HPV infection in female subjects.
Topics: Adaptive Immunity; Adolescent; Adult; Antibodies, Viral; Female; Human papillomavirus 16; Human papillomavirus 18; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Papillomavirus Infections; Young Adult
PubMed: 26690341
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiv753