-
Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome Nov 2023Diabetes is a complicated, chronic condition that requires ongoing medical attention as well as multiple risk-reduction measures beyond glucose control. The prevalence... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Diabetes is a complicated, chronic condition that requires ongoing medical attention as well as multiple risk-reduction measures beyond glucose control. The prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) is highly variable in different parts of the world due to various environmental, ethnic, socioeconomic, and rural-urban differences. Diabetes is the leading cause of CKD. This study aimed to estimate the global prevalence of CKD and its associated factors among type 2 diabetes(T2DM) patients, provide scientific evidence for a better understanding of the burden of CKD among diabetes mellitus type 2 patients, and design interventional strategies.
METHODS
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) checklist guideline was followed for this review and meta-analysis. The electronic databases (Pub Med, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and grey literature) were searched to retrieve articles by using keywords. Joanna Briggs Institute Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument was used to assess the quality of studies. The meta-analysis was conducted using STATA 17 software. The Meta logistic regression was computed to present the pooled prevalence and Odds ratio (OR) of the determinate factors with a 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis 20 studies were done in 13 different countries. The pooled magnitude of chronic kidney disease among type 2 DM patients was 27% (95% CI 21%, 33%). The prevalence of chronic kidney disease differs across countries, with the maximum in the USA and the lowest in the United Arab Emirates. Patients with CKD have an elevated risk of severe renal and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, and, more recently, non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists are among the medications that have been demonstrated to slow the progression of CKD. In this systematic review and meta-analysis increased age, obesity, having a history of type 2 diabetes mellitus, smoking history, presence of hypertension, and cardiac heart disease were factors significantly associated with the presence of chronic kidney disease among type 2 diabetic patients.
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of chronic kidney disease among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients was high based on the included 20 articles. The review reported that old age, hypertension, cardiac disease, smoking, obesity, and duration of diabetes mellitus was predictor variable for chronic kidney disease among type 2 diabetic patients. Therefore, in order to lower the morbidity and mortality from chronic kidney disease among type 2 diabetic patients, it is advised to develop both preventive and curative intervention strategies, such as raising awareness, creating a supportive environment, and prescribing appropriate medication at an early stage.
PubMed: 38012781
DOI: 10.1186/s13098-023-01202-x -
Current Hypertension Reports Sep 2020While the COVID-19 pandemic is constantly evolving, it remains unclear whether the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
While the COVID-19 pandemic is constantly evolving, it remains unclear whether the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) affects the clinical course of SARS-CoV-2 infection. For this meta-analysis, PubMed, CENTRAL, and grey literature were searched from their inception to 19 May 2020 for randomized, controlled trials or observational studies that evaluate the association between the use of either ACE inhibitors or ARBs and the risk for major clinical endpoints (infection, hospitalization, admission to ICU, death) in adult patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, a subgroup geographical analysis of outcomes was performed. Studies including less than 100 subjects were excluded from our analysis.
RECENT FINDINGS
In total, 25 observational studies were included. ACE inhibitors and ARBs were not associated with increased odds for SARS-CoV-2 infection, admission to hospital, severe or critical illness, admission to ICU, and SARS-CoV-2-related death. In Asian countries, the use of ACE inhibitors/ARBs decreased the odds for severe or critical illness and death (OR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.16-0.89, I = 83%, and OR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.39-0.99, I = 0%, respectively), whereas they increased the odds for ICU admission in North America and death in Europe (OR = 1.75, 95% CI 1.37-2.23, I = 0%, and OR = 1.68, 95% CI 1.05-2.70, I = 82%, respectively). ACE inhibitors might be marginally protective regarding SARS-CoV-2-related death compared with ARBs (OR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.74-1.00, I = 0%). Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the aforementioned associations between ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and SARS-CoV-2.
Topics: Adult; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Asia; Betacoronavirus; COVID-19; Coronavirus Infections; Europe; Humans; North America; Pandemics; Pneumonia, Viral; Renin-Angiotensin System; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 32910274
DOI: 10.1007/s11906-020-01101-w -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Dec 2021The aim of this study was to continually evaluate the association between cardiovascular drug exposure and COVID-19 clinical outcomes (susceptibility to infection,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
The aim of this study was to continually evaluate the association between cardiovascular drug exposure and COVID-19 clinical outcomes (susceptibility to infection, disease severity, hospitalization, hospitalization length, and all-cause mortality) in patients at risk of/with confirmed COVID-19.
METHODS
Eligible publications were identified from more than 500 databases on 1 November 2020. One reviewer extracted data with 20% of the records independently extracted/evaluated by a second reviewer.
RESULTS
Of 52 735 screened records, 429 and 390 studies were included in the qualitative and quantitative syntheses, respectively. The most-reported drugs were angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) with ACEI/ARB exposure having borderline association with confirmed COVID-19 infection (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.00-1.31). Among COVID-19 patients, unadjusted estimates showed that ACEI/ARB exposure was associated with hospitalization (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.34-2.32), disease severity (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.26-1.55) and all-cause mortality (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.12-1.33) but not hospitalization length (mean difference -0.27, 95% CI -1.36-0.82 days). After adjustment, ACEI/ARB exposure was not associated with confirmed COVID-19 infection (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71-1.19), hospitalization (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.70-1.24), disease severity (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.81-1.38) or all-cause mortality (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70-1.00). Similarly, subgroup analyses involving only hypertensive patients revealed that ACEI/ARB exposure was not associated with confirmed COVID-19 infection (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.79-1.09), hospitalization (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.58-1.22), hospitalization length (mean difference -0.14, 95% CI -1.65-1.36 days), disease severity (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76-1.11) while it decreased the odds of dying (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.65-0.88). A similar trend was observed for other cardiovascular drugs. However, the validity of these findings is limited by a high level of heterogeneity and serious risk of bias.
CONCLUSION
Cardiovascular drugs are not associated with poor COVID-19 outcomes in adjusted analyses. Patients should continue taking these drugs as prescribed.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; COVID-19; Cardiovascular Agents; Humans; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34101232
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.14927 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Aug 2011Coronary artery disease is the leading cause of mortality in resource-rich countries, and is becoming a major cause of morbidity and mortality in resource-poor... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Coronary artery disease is the leading cause of mortality in resource-rich countries, and is becoming a major cause of morbidity and mortality in resource-poor countries. Secondary prevention in this context is long-term treatment to prevent recurrent cardiac morbidity and mortality in people who have had either a prior acute myocardial infarction (MI) or acute coronary syndrome, or who are at high risk due to severe coronary artery stenoses or prior coronary surgical procedures. Secondary prevention in people with an acute MI or acute coronary syndrome within the past 6 months is not included.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of antithrombotic treatment; other drug treatments; cholesterol reduction; blood pressure reduction; non-drug treatments; and revascularisation procedures? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to May 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 137 systematic reviews or RCTs that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: advice to eat less fat, advice to eat more fibre, advice to increase consumption of fish oils, amiodarone, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, angiotensin II receptor blockers plus ACE inhibitors, antioxidant vitamin combinations, antiplatelet agents, aspirin, beta-blockers, beta-carotene, blood pressure reduction, calcium channel blockers, cardiac rehabilitation including exercise, class I antiarrhythmic agents, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), fibrates, hormone replacement therapy (HRT), Mediterranean diet, multivitamins, non-specific cholesterol reduction, oral anticoagulants, oral glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), psychosocial treatment, smoking cessation, statins, vitamin C, and vitamin E.
Topics: Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary; Coronary Artery Bypass; Coronary Artery Disease; Coronary Stenosis; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Secondary Prevention; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 21875445
DOI: No ID Found -
Annals of Medicine Dec 2024Nocturnal blood pressure (BP) is correlated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and is an important predictor of cardiovascular death in hypertensive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Nocturnal blood pressure (BP) is correlated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and is an important predictor of cardiovascular death in hypertensive patients.
OBJECTIVE
Nocturnal BP control is of great importance for cardiovascular risk reduction. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to explore the efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) for nocturnal BP reduction in patients with mild to moderate hypertension.
METHODS
PICOS design structure was used to formulate the data extraction. All statistical calculations and analyses were performed with R.
RESULTS
Seventy-seven studies with 13,314 participants were included. The overall analysis indicated that nocturnal BP drop varied considerably among different ARBs. Allisartan (13.04 [95% CI (-18.41, -7.68)] mmHg), olmesartan (11.67 [95% CI (-14.12, -9.21)] mmHg), telmisartan (11.11 [95% CI (-12.12, -10.11)] mmHg) were associated with greater reduction in nocturnal systolic BP. In the aspect of the nocturnal-diurnal BP drop ratio, only allisartan was greater than 1. While, the variation tendency of last 4-6 h ambulatory BP was basically consistent with nocturnal BP. Additionally, allisartan showed improvement effect in the proportion of patients with dipping BP pattern.
CONCLUSIONS
This study demonstrates that for patients with mild to moderate hypertension, allisartan, olmesartan and telmisartan have more advantages in nocturnal BP reduction among the ARBs, while allisartan can reduce nighttime BP more than daytime BP and improve the dipping pattern.
Topics: Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory; Circadian Rhythm; Hypertension; Imidazoles; Tetrazoles; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38830046
DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2024.2362880 -
European Journal of Vascular and... Mar 2024Whether angiotensin II blockade is an effective medical treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) has not been established. This systematic review and... (Review)
Review
Systematic Review Examining the Association Between Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitor or Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Prescription and Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Growth and Events.
OBJECTIVE
Whether angiotensin II blockade is an effective medical treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) has not been established. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the association between angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) prescription and AAA growth and events.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from their inception to 4 January 2024, with no language restrictions.
REVIEW METHODS
The five databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting the association between ACEi or ARB prescription and AAA growth, repair, or rupture. The primary outcome was AAA growth, with secondary outcomes of AAA rupture, AAA repair, and AAA related events (rupture and repair combined). Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool for RCTs and with a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Random effects models were used for meta-analyses.
RESULTS
Eleven studies (two RCTs, eight observational studies, and one meta-analysis of individual patient data from seven populations) involving 58 022 patients were included. ACEi prescription was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in AAA growth (standard mean difference 0.01 mm/year, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.26 - 0.28; p = .93; I = 98%) or AAA repair (odds ratio [OR] 0.73, 95% CI 0.50 - 1.09; p = .65; I = 61%), but was associated with a statistically significantly lower risk of AAA rupture (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81 - 0.93; p < .001; I = 26%) and AAA related events (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72 - 0.95; p = .006; I = 80%). ARB prescription was not associated with significantly reduced AAA growth or a lower risk of AAA related events. The two RCTs had a low risk of bias, with one observational study having low, seven moderate, and one high risk of bias. All of the findings had a very low certainty of evidence based on the GRADE analysis.
CONCLUSION
There was no association between ACEi or ARB prescription and AAA growth, but ACEi prescription was associated with a reduced risk of AAA rupture and AAA related events with very low certainty of evidence.
PubMed: 38537880
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2024.03.034 -
Journal of the American Medical... Jul 2021To systematically review and synthesize the evidence on differential associations between antihypertensive medication (AHM) classes and the risk of incident dementia. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To systematically review and synthesize the evidence on differential associations between antihypertensive medication (AHM) classes and the risk of incident dementia.
DESIGN
Systematic review and random effects frequentist network meta-analysis. Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane library were searched from origin to December 2019.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies that compared associations of different AHM classes with incident all-cause dementia and/or Alzheimer's disease over at least 1 year of follow-up.
MEASURES
All cause dementia and/or Alzheimer's disease.
RESULTS
Fifteen observational studies and 7 RCTs were included. Data on AHM classes were available for 649,790 participants and dementia occurred in 19,600 (3.02%). Network meta-analysis showed that in observational studies, treatment with either calcium channel blockers (CCBs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) was associated with lower dementia risks than treatment with other antihypertensives: CCBs vs angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE inhibitors) (HR=0.84, 95% CI 0.74-0.95), beta blockers (HR=0.83, 95% CI 0.73-0.95) and diuretics (HR=0.89, 95% CI 0.78-1.01) and ARBs vs ACE inhibitors (HR=0.88, 95% CI 0.81-0.97), beta blockers (HR=0.87, 95% CI 0.77-0.99), and diuretics (HR=0.93, 95% CI 0.83-1.05). There were insufficient RCTs to create a robust network based on randomized data alone.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Recommending CCBs or ARBs as preferred first-line antihypertensive treatment may significantly reduce the risk of dementia. If corroborated in a randomized setting, these findings reflect a low-cost and scalable opportunity to reduce dementia incidence worldwide.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Calcium Channel Blockers; Dementia; Humans; Hypertension; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 33460618
DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2020.12.019 -
Hellenic Journal of Cardiology : HJC =... 2023Duchenne muscular dystrophy is a fatal X-linked recessive disease affecting approximately 1 in 3500 births. It is characterized by a genetic lack of dystrophin, which is... (Review)
Review
Duchenne muscular dystrophy is a fatal X-linked recessive disease affecting approximately 1 in 3500 births. It is characterized by a genetic lack of dystrophin, which is an essential protein for maintaining muscle integrity. The lack of dystrophin plays a pathophysiological role in the development of dilated cardiomyopathy in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Currently, no consensus exists on specific pharmacological therapy guidelines for these patients; however, it centers around the guidelines for heart failure management. This systematic review investigated 12 randomized control trials dating back to 2005 in the pharmacotherapy of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy Duchenne muscular dystrophy. This review specifically included angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, aldosterone receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitors, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. Despite their limitations, these studies have shown promising effects in improving the overall heart function and prognosis in patients with this condition. However, to attain higher statistical significance, future studies should investigate larger populations and for longer periods.
Topics: Humans; Cardiomyopathy, Dilated; Muscular Dystrophy, Duchenne; Dystrophin; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Adrenergic beta-Antagonists
PubMed: 37406964
DOI: 10.1016/j.hjc.2023.06.007 -
Oncotarget May 2018Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is one of the most common chronic liver diseases, ranging from simple steatosis to progressive steatohepatitis and cirrhosis....
OBJECTIVE
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is one of the most common chronic liver diseases, ranging from simple steatosis to progressive steatohepatitis and cirrhosis. Because of their anti-inflammatory and anti-fibrotic effects, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are potential therapeutic agents for NAFLD. The present systematic review assessed the effectiveness of ARBs in NAFLD management.
RESULTS
Accounting for data overlap and exclusion criteria, randomized controlled trial -based and single-arm meta-analyses were conducted for four studies with 362 patients and eight studies with 525 patients, respectively. Although alanine aminotransferase levels were not significantly affected by ARB treatment (standardized mean difference 0.20; 95% confidence interval (CI) [-0.04, 0.44]; 0.10), a fixed-effect model revealed a decreasing trend in alanine transaminase levels. Low-density lipoprotein levels were reduced by ARB treatment (MD 5.21; 95% CI [3.01, 7.40]; < 0.00001), and total cholesterol also decreased in response to ARBs (MD 2.10; 95% CI [-0.37, 4.57]; 0.10). However, the fibrosis score and NAFLD activity score were not significantly improved by ARB treatment (MD 0.10; 95% CI [-0.58, 0.78]; 0.77) (MD -0.25; 95% CI [-1.05, 0.55]; 0.53).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Keywords were used to identify studies in PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science and CNKI published up to July 31, 2017. Single-arm and RCT-based meta-analyses of the available data were performed using RevMan (version 5.3).
CONCLUSIONS
Although ARBs significantly decreased plasma low-density lipoprotein and total cholesterol levels, the current evidence is insufficient to support the efficacy of ARBs in managing fibrosis in NAFLD patients.
PubMed: 29844879
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.23816 -
BMC Medicine Dec 2022Sacubitril/valsartan and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) therapies were reported to affect glycaemic control and the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Sacubitril/valsartan and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) therapies were reported to affect glycaemic control and the development of diabetes mellitus (DM), but the findings are inconsistent. We examined the evidence for the effects of sacubitril/valsartan and ACEI/ARB in DM by conducting a meta-analysis.
METHODS
The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library), Embase, PubMed, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for data from randomised clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan and ACEI/ARB in patients, as of May 25, 2022. Patients were grouped by their disease background at baseline. The main outcomes were the number of new-onset DM and hypoglycaemia, elevated glycaemia, inadequate DM control, diabetes treatment, and diabetic complications, from baseline to the end of the trials. The risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (ROB 2). The quality of the evidence was evaluated according to the Recommendations for Assessment, Development, and Evaluation guidelines. The meta-analysis of the incidence of various outcomes was conducted using fixed or random effects models. The results are expressed as binary risk, 95% confidence interval (CI), and relative risk (RR). The Mantel-Haenszel method and Z test were used to determine the overall results and determine the significance of the RR.
RESULTS
This study included 31 RCTs and 86,809 subjects. Compared with placebo, sacubitril/valsartan treatment significantly reduced the risk of new-onset DM among all patients (RR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64-0.95), patients with heart failure (HF) (RR = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.12-0.48), HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (RR = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.12-0.50), and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (RR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.34-0.85). In contrast, sacubitril/valsartan treatment significantly increased the risk of hypoglycaemia among all patients (RR = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.05-3.47), patients with not all-DM (defined as part of the study population having DM at baseline) (RR = 5.71, 95% CI: 2.02-16.21), and patients with HFpEF (RR = 7.06, 95% CI: 2.10-23.76). Compared with ACEI/ARB, sacubitril/valsartan treatment significantly increased the risk of hypoglycaemia among patients with HF (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.12-3.06, p = 0.02) and HFpEF (RR 3.59, 95% CI 1.51-8.55, p = 0.004). Compared with placebo, ACEI/ARB treatment did significantly reduce the risk of new-onset DM among all patients (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.93, p = 0.0007) and patients with not all-HF (defined as part of the study population having HF at baseline) (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.82-0.93, p<0.0001) and HFpEF (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.44-0.83, p = 0.002), diabetes complications among patients with non-HF (/not all-DM) (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.76-0.99, p = 0.04), and subsequent diabetes treatment among patients with new-onset DM (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.58-0.84, p = 0.0002) and significantly increased the risk of hypoglycaemia among patients with not all-DM (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.172-3.61, p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS
The results of our study, especially in reducing glycaemia and new-onset DM, revealed that sacubitril/valsartan had a positive effect on the control of glycaemia and the development of DM. ACEI/ARB also had a beneficial effect but the effect was weaker than that of sacubitril/valsartan. The above effects varied across diseases but the evidence was strongest in patients with HF.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
CRD42022336311.
Topics: Humans; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Tetrazoles; Stroke Volume; Aminobutyrates; Valsartan; Heart Failure; Drug Combinations; Diabetes Mellitus; Hypoglycemia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36527023
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-022-02682-w