Introduction: Within this large-scale study, we compared clinical symptoms, laboratory findings, radiographic signs, and outcomes of COVID-19, SARS, and MERS to find unique features.
Method:We searched all relevant literature published up to February 28, 2020.Depending on the heterogeneity test, we used either random or fixed-effect models to analyze the appropriateness of the pooled results. Study has been registered in the PROSPERO database (ID 176106).Result: Overall 114 articles included in this study; 52 251 COVID-19 confirmed patients (20 studies), 10 037 SARS (51 studies), and 8139 MERS patients (43 studies) were included. The most common symptom was fever; COVID-19 (85.6%, P < .001), SARS (96%, P < .001), and MERS (74%, P < .001), respectively. Analysis showed that 84% of Covid-19 patients, 86% of SARS patients, and 74.7% of MERS patients had an abnormal chest X-ray. The mortality rate in COVID-19 (5.6%, P < .001) was lower than SARS (13%, P < .001) and MERS (35%, P < .001) between all confirmed patients. Conclusions: At the time of submission, the mortality rate in COVID-19 confirmed cases is lower than in SARS-and MERS-infected patients. Clinical outcomes and findings would be biased by reporting only confirmed cases, and this should be considered when interpreting the data.
Background: Breast cancer is reported as one of the most common cancers among females worldwide. Infectious agents especially viruses have been considered as role players in the development of breast cancer. Although some investigations suggest an association between bovine leukemia virus (BLV) and breast cancer, the involvement of this virus as a risk factor remains controversial. The present study aimed to find out any possible association between BLV and breast cancer through conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: Systematic literature search was performed by finding related case-control articles from the PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, and EMBASE databases. The heterogeneity and the multivariable-adjusted OR and corresponding 95% CI were applied by meta-analysis and forest plot across studies. All statistical analyses were performed using Stata 14.1. Result: Based on a comprehensive literature search, 9 case-control studies were included for meta-analysis. The combination of all included studies showed that BLV infection is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer [summary OR (95% CI) 2.57 (1.45, 4.56)]. Conclusion: This is the first meta-analysis to analyze a potential association between BLV infection and the risk of breast cancer. Control of the infection in cattle herds and screening of the milk and dairy products may help to reduce the transmission of the virus to humans.
Aim: The present study aimed to find out the prevalence and any possible association between human herpesvirus (HHV-6) and primary brain tumors. Materials & methods: The systematic literature search was performed by finding related articles from major databases. Analysis was performed by comprehensive meta-analysis software. Results: A total of 13 (25 datasets) articles were included in the study, seven (15 datasets) of which were case/control and the rest (ten datasets) were cross-sectional studies. The pooled prevalence of HHV-6 among primary brain cancer patients was 29% (95% CI: 24–33%; I2 = 97.89%). An association was found between HHV-6 and primary brain cancer (summary odds ratio: 3.77% [95% CI: 2.59–5.49%; I2 = 19.0%]). Conclusion: Our analysis demonstrated that HHV-6 is associated with primary brain cancer. Reactivation of the virus could be triggered by the tumor, therefore, we cannot be certain that the virus appeared before the cancer development.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.