-
Immunity, Inflammation and Disease Jun 2024The COVID-19 pandemic has taken many forms and continues to evolve, now around the Omicron wave, raising concerns over the globe. With COVID-19 being declared no longer... (Review)
Review
New variants of COVID-19 (XBB.1.5 and XBB.1.16, the "Arcturus"): A review of highly questioned concerns, a brief comparison between different peaks in the COVID-19 pandemic, with a focused systematic review on expert recommendations for prevention, vaccination, and treatment measures in the general...
INTRODUCTION
The COVID-19 pandemic has taken many forms and continues to evolve, now around the Omicron wave, raising concerns over the globe. With COVID-19 being declared no longer a "public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC)," the COVID pandemic is still far from over, as new Omicron subvariants of interest and concern have risen since January of 2023. Mainly with the XBB.1.5 and XBB.1.16 subvariants, the pandemic is still very much "alive" and "breathing."
METHODS
This review consists of five highly concerning questions about the current state of the COVID Omicron peak. We searched four main online databases to answer the first four questions. For the last one, we performed a systematic review of the literature, with keywords "Omicron," "Guidelines," and "Recommendations."
RESULTS
A total of 31 articles were included. The main symptoms of the current Omicron wave include a characteristically high fever, coughing, conjunctivitis (with itching eyes), sore throat, runny nose, congestion, fatigue, body ache, and headache. The median incubation period of the symptoms is shorter than the previous peaks. Vaccination against COVID can still be considered effective for the new subvariants.
CONCLUSION
Guidelines recommend continuation of personal protective measures, third and fourth dose boosters, along with administration of bivalent messenger RNA vaccine boosters. The consensus antiviral treatment is combination therapy using Nirmatrelvir and Ritonavir, and the consensus for pre-exposure prophylaxis is Tixagevimab and Cilgavimab combination. We hope the present paper raises awareness for the continuing presence of COVID and ways to lower the risks, especially for at-risk groups.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19 Vaccines; Vaccination; Pandemics; Antiviral Agents; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 38938013
DOI: 10.1002/iid3.1323 -
AIDS Research and Therapy Jun 2024Despite remarkable progress, HIV's influence on global health remains firm, demanding continued attention. Understanding the effectiveness of third-line antiretroviral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Despite remarkable progress, HIV's influence on global health remains firm, demanding continued attention. Understanding the effectiveness of third-line antiretroviral therapy in individuals who do not respond to second-line drugs is crucial for improving treatment strategies. The virological outcomes of third-line antiretroviral therapy vary from study to study, highlighting the need for robust global estimates.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of databases including PubMed, MEDLINE, International Scientific Indexing, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, was conducted. STATA version 17 statistical software was used for analysis. A random-effects model was applied to compute the pooled estimates. Subgroup analysis, heterogeneity, publication bias, and sensitivity analysis were also performed. The prediction interval is computed to estimate the interval in which a future study will fall. The GRADE tool was also used to determine the quality of the evidence.
RESULTS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, 15 studies involving 1768 HIV patients receiving third-line antiretroviral therapy were included. The pooled viral suppression of third-line antiretroviral therapy was 76.6% (95% CI: 71.5- 81.7%). The viral suppression rates at 6 and 12 months were 75.5% and 78.6%, respectively. Furthermore, third-line therapy effectively suppressed viral RNA copy numbers to ≤ 50 copies/mL, ≤ 200 copies/mL, and ≤ 400 copies/mL with rates of 70.7%, 85.4%, and 85.7%, respectively.
CONCLUSION
More than three-fourths of patients on third-line antiretroviral therapy achieve viral suppression. Consequently, improving access to and timely initiation of third-line therapy may positively impact the quality of life for those with second-line treatment failure.
Topics: Humans; Anti-HIV Agents; Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active; Global Health; HIV Infections; HIV-1; Treatment Outcome; Viral Load
PubMed: 38918866
DOI: 10.1186/s12981-024-00630-7 -
BMC Public Health Jun 2024Acute HIV infection during pregnancy and in the postpartum period increases the risk of vertical transmission. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Acute HIV infection during pregnancy and in the postpartum period increases the risk of vertical transmission. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended preexposure prophylaxis for pregnant and postpartum women at risk of acquiring HIV. However, there are significant gaps between the actual practice and the ideal goal of preexposure prophylaxis implementation among pregnant and postpartum women. Therefore, it is important to determine what influences women's implementation of preexposure prophylaxis during pregnancy and in the postpartum period. This review aims to aggregate barriers and facilitators to preexposure prophylaxis implementation among pregnant and postpartum women.
METHODS
A range of electronic databases, including PubMed, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, Embase, and Web of Science, were searched for potentially relevant qualitative studies. The search period extended from the establishment of the databases to March 16, 2023. This review used the ENTREQ (Enhancing transparency in reporting of qualitative research synthesis) statement to guide the design and reporting of qualitative synthesis. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist. The JBI meta-aggregation method was applied for guiding the data extraction, and the JBI ConQual method was applied for guiding the evaluation of the level of evidence for the synthesis.
RESULTS
Of retrieved 2042 studies, 12 met the inclusion criteria. The total population sample included 447 participants, including 231 pregnant and postpartum women, 21 male partners, 75 healthcare providers (HCPs)/healthcare workers (HCWs), 18 policymakers, 37 mothers, and 65 women of childbearing age. A total of 149 findings with credibility ratings of "unequivocal" or "equivocal" were included in this meta-synthesis. Barriers and facilitators to preexposure prophylaxis implementation were coded into seven categories, including three facilitator categories: perceived benefits, maintaining relationships with partners, and external support, and four barriers: medication-related barriers, stigma, barriers at the level of providers and facilities, and biases in risk perception.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review and meta-synthesis aggregated the barriers and facilitators of preexposure prophylaxis implementation among pregnant and postpartum women. We aggregated several barriers to maternal preexposure prophylaxis implementation, including medication-related factors, stigma, barriers at the level of providers and facilities, and risk perception biases. Therefore, intervention measures for improving preexposure prophylaxis services can be developed based on these points.
PROSPERO NUMBER
CRD42023412631.
Topics: Humans; Female; Pregnancy; Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis; HIV Infections; Postpartum Period; Qualitative Research; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Anti-HIV Agents; Adult; Patient Acceptance of Health Care; Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical
PubMed: 38902766
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-024-19168-4 -
PloS One 2024Depression is a very common psychiatric disorder in worldwide. Globally, Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) is highly prevalent among women, and are disproportionately... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Depression is a very common psychiatric disorder in worldwide. Globally, Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) is highly prevalent among women, and are disproportionately affected by depression. Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) adherence which could highly be affected by depression is yet to be explored effectively. Depression affects overall poor HIV clinical outcomes, socioeconomic and social interactions. However, it is not well understood specifically how depression affects ART adherence in women living with HIV (WLWHIV). Investigating the effects of depression on ART adherence is critical in order to develop nuanced new evidence to address non-adherence in WLWHIV.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a meta-analysis on the correlation between depression and adherence to antiretroviral therapy among women living with HIV in the globe.
METHOD
Using population, exposed and outcome approach, we searched Scopus, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Psych info, Web of science and google scholar for cohort and cross-sectional studies globally. The search strategy was structured comprising terms associated with antiretroviral therapy and adherence, women living with HIV and depression. We evaluated the paper quality, using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scales (NOS). The fixed effect model was used to analysis the effect of depression on ART adherence.
RESULT
A total of 8 articles comprise 6474 participants were included in this study. There were controversial findings related to the effect of depression to ART adherence. Among three cross-sectional study, one article demonstrating, depression was associated with ART adherence. Of the five cohort studies, four cohort studies reported association. The overall pooled estimated effect of depression on ART adherence was 1.02 [RR = 1.015 with 95% CI (1.004, 1.026)] with a p-value of 0.005.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Depression was the risk factor for ART adherence among women living with HIV. It is therefore, necessary for clinician to note this and perform screening for ART adherence.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
The review protocol was developed with prospero registration: CRD42023415935.
Topics: Humans; HIV Infections; Female; Depression; Medication Adherence; Anti-HIV Agents
PubMed: 38900748
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300106 -
Nutrients May 2024Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) emerged over the years as a promising approach in the management of chronic pain. Despite the fact that the efficacy of micron-size PEA... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) emerged over the years as a promising approach in the management of chronic pain. Despite the fact that the efficacy of micron-size PEA formulations appears to be time-dependent, the optimal timing has not yet been elucidated. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to estimate the possible advantage of an extended treatment in the relief of chronic pain. The literature search was conducted consulting scientific databases, to identify clinical trials in which micron-size PEA was administered for at least 60 days, and pain assessed by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) or Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Nine studies matched the required criteria, for a total of 742 patients involved. The meta-analysis showed a statistically and clinically significant pain intensity reduction after 60 days of micron-size PEA supplementation, compared to 30 days (1.36 points, < 0.01). The secondary analysis revealed a weighted NRS/VAS score decrease of 2.08 points within the first month of treatment. These two obtained scores corresponded to a 35.1% pain intensity reduction within the first month, followed by a further 35.4% during the second month. Overall, these results confirm the clinically relevant and time-depended pain-relieving effect of micron-size PEA and therefore the advantage of an extended treatment, especially in patient with incomplete pain management.
Topics: Palmitic Acids; Humans; Amides; Ethanolamines; Chronic Pain; Pain Measurement; Administration, Oral; Treatment Outcome; Analgesics
PubMed: 38892586
DOI: 10.3390/nu16111653 -
PloS One 2024The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of azvudine in treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of azvudine in treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2).
METHODS
A search was carried out in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and Google Scholar until October 20, 2023. The Cochrane risk of bias tools were used to assess the quality of included studies. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software was used to analyze data.
RESULTS
Twenty-one studies including 10,011 patients were examined. The meta-analysis results showed that azvudine and standard of care/placebo (SOC/PBO) were significantly different concerning mortality rate (risk ratio [RR] = 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40 to 0.57) and negative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) conversion time (standard mean difference = - 0.75, 95% CI: -1.29 to-0.21). However, the two groups did not show significant differences concerning hospital stay, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and need for mechanical ventilation (P > 0.05). On the other hand, azvudine and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir were significantly different in mortality rate (RR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.92), ICU admission (RR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.78), and need for mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.51 to 0.89), but the two treatments were not significantly different in negative PCR conversion time, and hospital stay (P > 0.05). The incidence of adverse events between groups was not significant (P > 0.05). The certainty of evidence was rated as low or moderate.
CONCLUSIONS
The antiviral effectiveness of azvudine against SARS-COV-2 is questionable with regard to the certainty of evidence. Further research should be conducted to establish the effectiveness and safety of azvudine in COVID-19.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Antiviral Agents; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38870134
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298772 -
Reviews in Medical Virology Jul 2024This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of azvudine versus nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) in treating coronavirus... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of azvudine versus nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) in treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The researchers conducted searches on PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and Google Scholar until January 2024. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was utilised to evaluate the quality of the included studies, and data analysis was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. Thirteen studies, including 4949 patients, were analysed. The meta-analysis results showed no significant difference between the azvudine and Paxlovid groups in terms of mortality rate (odds rate [OR] = 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-1.21), negative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) conversion time (standard mean difference [SMD] = 1.52, 95% CI: -1.07-4.11), and hospital stay (SMD = -0.39, 95% CI: -1.12-0.33). However, a significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of intensive care unit admission (OR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.23-0.75) and the need for mechanical ventilation (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.44-0.86) in favour of azvudine. The incidence of adverse events in the azvudine group was significantly lower (OR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.43-0.99). The certainty of evidence was rated as low and moderate. Azvudine and Paxlovid demonstrated similar effectiveness in reducing mortality rates, negative PCR conversion time and hospital stay. However, azvudine showed better effectiveness in improving other outcomes. Regarding the level of certainty of evidence, further research is needed to validate or challenge these results.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Antiviral Agents; SARS-CoV-2; Ritonavir; Drug Combinations; COVID-19; Lopinavir; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38849982
DOI: 10.1002/rmv.2551 -
AIDS Research and Therapy Jun 2024Mother-to-child transmission (MTCT) of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) remains a major public health challenge in Ethiopia. The objective of this review was to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Magnitude and risk factors of mother-to-child transmission of HIV among HIV-exposed infants after Option B+ implementation in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Mother-to-child transmission (MTCT) of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) remains a major public health challenge in Ethiopia. The objective of this review was to assess the pooled magnitude of MTCT of HIV and its risk factors among mother-infant pairs who initiated antiretroviral therapy (ART) after Option B+ in Ethiopia.
METHODS
A systematic search of literature from PubMed, Hinari, African Journals Online (AJOL), Science Direct, and Google Scholar databases was conducted from June 11, 2013 to August 1, 2023. The authors used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines to guide the article selection process and reporting. Observational studies that reported the magnitude and/or risk factors on MTCT of HIV among mother-infant pairs who initiated ART after the implementation of Option B+ in Ethiopia were included. We applied a random-effect model meta-analysis to estimate the overall pooled magnitude and risk factors of MTCT of HIV. A funnel plot and Egger's regression test were employed to check publication bias, and heterogeneity was assessed using I statistics. The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database with registration ID number CRD42022325938.
RESULT
Eighteen published articles on the magnitude of MTCT and 16 published articles on its risk factors were included in this review. The pooled magnitude of MTCT of HIV after the Option B+ program in Ethiopia was 4.05% (95% CI 3.09, 5.01). Mothers who delivered their infants at home [OR: 9.74; (95% CI: 6.89-13.77)], had not been on ART intervention [OR: 19.39; (95% CI: 3.91-96.18)], had poor adherence to ART [OR: 7.47; (95% CI: 3.40-16.45)], initiated ART during pregnancy [OR: 5.09; (95% CI: 1.73-14.97)], had WHO clinical stage 2 and above [OR: 4.95; (95% CI: 1.65-14.88]], had a CD4 count below 350 at enrolment [OR: 5.78; (95% CI: 1.97-16.98], had no or low male partner involvement [OR: 5.92; (95% CI: 3.61-9.71]] and whose partner was not on ART [OR: 8.08; (95% CI: 3.27-19.93]] had higher odds of transmitting HIV to their infants than their counterparts.
CONCLUSION
This review showed that the pooled magnitude of MTCT of HIV among mother-infant pairs who initiated ART after the Option B + program in Ethiopia is at the desired target of the WHO, which is less than 5% in breastfeeding women. Home delivery, lack of male partner involvement, advanced HIV-related disease, lack of PMTCT intervention, and poor ARV adherence were significant risk factors for MTCT of HIV in Ethiopia.
Topics: Humans; Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical; HIV Infections; Ethiopia; Risk Factors; Female; Pregnancy; Infant; Anti-HIV Agents; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Infant, Newborn; Mothers
PubMed: 38849895
DOI: 10.1186/s12981-024-00623-6 -
AIDS Research and Therapy Jun 2024Despite the widespread use of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in preventing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission, scant information on HIV drug resistance... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Despite the widespread use of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in preventing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission, scant information on HIV drug resistance mutations (DRMs) has been gathered over the past decade. This review aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of pre-exposure prophylaxis and its two-way impact on DRM.
METHODS
We systematically reviewed studies on DRM in pre-exposure prophylaxis according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis 2020 guidelines. PubMed, Cochrane, and SAGE databases were searched for English-language primary studies published between January 2001 and December 2023. The initial search was conducted on 9 August 2021 and was updated through 31 December 2023 to ensure the inclusion of the most recent findings. The registration number for this protocol review was CRD42022356061.
RESULTS
A total of 26,367 participants and 562 seroconversion cases across 12 studies were included in this review. The pooled prevalence estimate for all mutations was 6.47% (95% Confidence Interval-CI 3.65-9.93), while Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate/Emtricitabine-associated drug resistance mutation prevalence was 1.52% (95% CI 0.23-3.60) in the pre-exposure prophylaxis arm after enrolment. A subgroup analysis, based on the study population, showed the prevalence in the heterosexual and men who have sex with men (MSM) groups was 5.53% (95% CI 2.55-9.40) and 7.47% (95% CI 3.80-12.11), respectively. Notably, there was no significant difference in the incidence of DRM between the pre-exposure prophylaxis and placebo groups (log-OR = 0.99, 95% CI -0.20 to 2.18, I2 = 0%; p = 0.10).
DISCUSSION
Given the constrained prevalence of DRM, the World Health Organization (WHO) advocates the extensive adoption of pre-exposure prophylaxis. Our study demonstrated no increased risk of DRM with pre-exposure prophylaxis (p > 0.05), which is consistent with these settings. These findings align with the previous meta-analysis, which reported a 3.14-fold higher risk in the pre-exposure prophylaxis group than the placebo group, although the observed difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.21).
CONCLUSIONS
Despite the low prevalence of DRM, pre-exposure prophylaxis did not significantly increase the risk of DRM compared to placebo. However, long-term observation is required to determine further disadvantages of extensive pre-exposure prophylaxis use. PROSPERO Number: CRD42022356061.
Topics: Humans; Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis; HIV Infections; Drug Resistance, Viral; Mutation; Anti-HIV Agents; HIV-1; Male; Administration, Oral; Female; Tenofovir; Prevalence
PubMed: 38844950
DOI: 10.1186/s12981-024-00627-2 -
BMC Cancer Jun 2024Colorectal cancer is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide. The first and second lines of treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) include chemotherapy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Colorectal cancer is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide. The first and second lines of treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) include chemotherapy based on 5-fluorouracil. However, treatment following progression on the first and second line is still unclear. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases for studies investigating the use of trifluridine-tipiracil with bevacizumab versus trifluridine-tipiracil alone for mCRC. We used RStudio version 4.2.3; and we considered p < 0.05 significant. Seven studies and 1,182 patients were included - 602 (51%) received trifluridine-tipiracil plus bevacizumab. Compared with control, the progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.42-0.63; p < 0.001) and overall survival (OS) (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.52-0.70; p < 0.001) were significantly higher with bevacizumab. The objective response rate (ORR) (RR 3.14; 95% CI 1.51-6.51; p = 0.002) and disease control rate (DCR) (RR 1.66; 95% CI 1.28-2.16; p = 0.0001) favored the intervention. Regarding adverse events, the intervention had a higher rate of neutropenia (RR 1.38; 95% CI 1.19-1.59; p = 0.00001), whereas the monotherapy group had a higher risk of anemia (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.44-0.82; p = 0.001). Our results support that the addition of bevacizumab is associated with a significant benefit in PFS, OS, ORR and DCR.
Topics: Humans; Colorectal Neoplasms; Bevacizumab; Trifluridine; Thymine; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Pyrrolidines; Drug Combinations; Neoplasm Metastasis; Progression-Free Survival; Uracil; Drug Resistance, Neoplasm
PubMed: 38825703
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12447-8