Effect of glucocorticoids on the development of COVID‐19‐associated pulmonary aspergillosis: A meta‐analysis of 21 studies and 5174 patients

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

COVID‐19‐associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) remains a high mortality mycotic infection throughout the pandemic, and glucocorticoids (GC) may be its root cause. Our aim was to evaluate the effect of systemic GC treatment on the development of CAPA. We systematically searched the PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus and Embase databases to collect eligible studies published until 31 December 2022. The pooled outcome of CAPA development was calculated as the log odds ratio (LOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random effect model. A total of 21 studies with 5174 patients were included. Of these, 20 studies with 4675 patients consisting of 2565 treated with GC but without other immunomodulators (GC group) and 2110 treated without GC or other immunomodulators (controls) were analysed. The pooled LOR of CAPA development was higher for the GC group than for the controls (0.54; 95% CI: 0.22, 0.86; p < .01). In the subgroups, the pooled LOR was higher for high‐dose GC (0.90; 95% CI: 0.17, 1.62: p = .01) and dexamethasone (0.71; 95% CI: 0.35, 1.07; p < .01) but had no significant difference for low‐dose GC (0.41; 95% CI: −0.07, 0.89; p = .09), and non‐dexamethasone GC (0.21; 95% CI: −0.36, 0.79; p = .47), treated patients versus controls. GC treatment increases the risk of CAPA development, and this risk is particularly associated with the use of high‐dose GC or dexamethasone treatment.

Related collections

Most cited references 65

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19 — Preliminary Report

Mark Peters (2021)

Abstract Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with diffuse lung damage. Glucocorticoids may modulate inflammation-mediated lung injury and thereby reduce progression to respiratory failure and death. Methods In this controlled, open-label trial comparing a range of possible treatments in patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19, we randomly assigned patients to receive oral or intravenous dexamethasone (at a dose of 6 mg once daily) for up to 10 days or to receive usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Here, we report the preliminary results of this comparison. Results A total of 2104 patients were assigned to receive dexamethasone and 4321 to receive usual care. Overall, 482 patients (22.9%) in the dexamethasone group and 1110 patients (25.7%) in the usual care group died within 28 days after randomization (age-adjusted rate ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 0.93; P<0.001). The proportional and absolute between-group differences in mortality varied considerably according to the level of respiratory support that the patients were receiving at the time of randomization. In the dexamethasone group, the incidence of death was lower than that in the usual care group among patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (29.3% vs. 41.4%; rate ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.81) and among those receiving oxygen without invasive mechanical ventilation (23.3% vs. 26.2%; rate ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.94) but not among those who were receiving no respiratory support at randomization (17.8% vs. 14.0%; rate ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.55). Conclusions In patients hospitalized with Covid-19, the use of dexamethasone resulted in lower 28-day mortality among those who were receiving either invasive mechanical ventilation or oxygen alone at randomization but not among those receiving no respiratory support. (Funded by the Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research and others; RECOVERY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04381936; ISRCTN number, 50189673.)

0 comments Cited 4967 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses.

Andreas Stang (2010)

0 comments Cited 4089 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Revision and Update of the Consensus Definitions of Invasive Fungal Disease From the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and the Mycoses Study Group Education and Research Consortium

J. Peter Donnelly, Sharon C-J Chen, Carol A Kauffman … (2020)

Abstract Background Invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) remain important causes of morbidity and mortality. The consensus definitions of the Infectious Diseases Group of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and the Mycoses Study Group have been of immense value to researchers who conduct clinical trials of antifungals, assess diagnostic tests, and undertake epidemiologic studies. However, their utility has not extended beyond patients with cancer or recipients of stem cell or solid organ transplants. With newer diagnostic techniques available, it was clear that an update of these definitions was essential. Methods To achieve this, 10 working groups looked closely at imaging, laboratory diagnosis, and special populations at risk of IFD. A final version of the manuscript was agreed upon after the groups’ findings were presented at a scientific symposium and after a 3-month period for public comment. There were several rounds of discussion before a final version of the manuscript was approved. Results There is no change in the classifications of “proven,” “probable,” and “possible” IFD, although the definition of “probable” has been expanded and the scope of the category “possible” has been diminished. The category of proven IFD can apply to any patient, regardless of whether the patient is immunocompromised. The probable and possible categories are proposed for immunocompromised patients only, except for endemic mycoses. Conclusions These updated definitions of IFDs should prove applicable in clinical, diagnostic, and epidemiologic research of a broader range of patients at high-risk.