Abstract

BACKGROUND Despite the exact etiopathogenesis of psoriasis remains unknown, the increasing or decreasing of some trace elements and oxidative stress status are considered to play a role. In this study, the effect of Lactocare® synbiotic on the serum levels of trace elements including Zn, Cu, Mg, Na, Fe, P, Ca, and K in the patients with mild to moderate psoriasis was investigated. METHODS Sixty-four patients with mild to moderate psoriasis were included. Patients were randomly divided into treatment (n═32) and control (n═32) groups. The treatment group received Lactocare® and the control group received a placebo (two times daily for 12 weeks). Eight patients from the intervention group and 18 patients from the control group discontinued the study because of the recent COVID-19 condition. For routine trace element analysis, the blood samples were collected from all patients at the baseline as well as week 12 post-treatment. The serum was then isolated and the serum levels of trace elements including Fe, K, Ca, Mg, P, Zn, Na, and Cu were measured using an automatic electrolyte analyzer. For confirmation of the effect of Lactocare® on the alteration of serum levels of trace elements, intra-group analysis was performed at two interval times: baseline and week 12 post-treatment. RESULTS The serum levels of K, P, and Ca in the placebo group were significantly higher than that of the treatment group at baseline. Serum levels of Zn and Ca were significantly higher in the treatment group compared to the placebo group at week 12 post-treatment. Moreover, a significantly lower serum level of K, P, and Ca in the treatment group at the baseline compared to the placebo group was compensated on week 12 post-treatment. Intra-group analysis in the treatment group showed that the serum levels of Fe, Ca, Mg, P, Zn, and Na was significantly increased at week 12 post-treatment compared to baseline levels. Whereas, intra-group analysis in the control group showed only Ca has a significant difference between baseline and week 12 post-treatment. CONCLUSION The serum levels of Fe, Zn, P, Mg, Ca, and Na are increased significantly 12 weeks after oral administration of Lactocare® in psoriatic patients. The serum level of Fe and Cu is affected by sex at pre- and post-treatment. This study supports the concept that Lactocare® exerts beneficial effects in the gastrointestinal tract to improve mineral absorption in psoriatic patients.

Abstract

Objective: To quantify the current weight of evidence of the association between overweight and obesity as risk factors for COVID-19-related hospitalisations (including hospital admission, intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation) and death, and to assess the magnitude of the association and the potential dose-response relationships. Design: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Sciences, WHO COVID-19 database and Google Scholar were used to identify articles published up to 20 July 2021. Peer-reviewed studies reporting adjusted estimates of the association between overweight or obesity and COVID-19 outcomes were included. Three authors reviewed the articles and agreed. The quality of eligible studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate the combined effects. Results: A total of 208 studies with 3 550 997 participants from over 32 countries were included in this meta-analysis. Being overweight was associated with an increased risk of COVID-19-related hospitalisations (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.28, n=21 studies), but not death (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.13, n=21). However, patients with obesity were at increased risk of both COVID-19-related hospitalisations (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.62 to 1.84, n=58) and death (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.32, n=77). Similarly, patients with extreme obesity were at increased risk of COVID-19-related hospitalisations (OR 2.53, 95% CI 1.67 to 3.84, n=12) and death (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.76 to 3.00, n=19). There was a linear dose-response relationship between these obesity categories and COVID-19 outcomes, but the strength of the association has decreased over time. Conclusion: Being overweight increases the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalisations but not death, while obesity and extreme obesity increase the risk of both COVID-19-related hospitalisations and death. These findings suggest that prompt access to COVID-19 care, prioritisation for COVID-19 vaccination and other preventive measures are warranted for this vulnerable group.

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Vitamin D supplementation plays a key effect in lowering cytokine storms among COVID-19 patients by influencing the activity of the renin-angiotensin system and the production of the angiotensin-2 converting enzyme. The study was conducted to explore the effect of high-dose intramuscular vitamin D in hospitalized adults infected with moderate-to-severe SARS-CoV-2 in comparison with the standard of care in the COVID-19 protocol. Materials and Methods: Two groups of patients were compared in this prospective randomized controlled trial as the vitamin D was administered orally to group 1 (alfacalcidol 1 mcg/day) and intramuscularly to group 2 (cholecalciferol 200,000 IU). One hundred and sixteen participants were recruited in total, with fifty-eight patients in each group. Following the Egyptian Ministry of Health's policy for COVID-19 management, all patients received the same treatment for a minimum of five days. Results: A significant difference was recorded in the length of hospital stay (8.6 versus 6.8 days), need for high oxygen or non-invasive mechanical ventilator (67% versus 33%), need for a mechanical ventilator (25% versus 75%), clinical improvement (45% versus 55%), the occurrence of sepsis (35% versus 65%), and in the monitored laboratory parameters in favor of high-dose vitamin D. Moreover, clinical improvement was significantly associated with the need for low/high oxygen, an invasive/non-invasive mechanical ventilator (MV/NIMV), and diabetes, while mortality was associated with the need for MV, ICU admission, atrial fibrillation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, and the occurrence of secondary infection. Conclusions: Our study showed that high-dose vitamin D was considered a promising treatment in the suppression of cytokine storms among COVID-19 patients and was associated with better clinical improvement and fewer adverse outcomes compared to low-dose vitamin D.

Abstract

Retrospective studies showed a relationship between vitamin D status and COVID-19 severity and mortality, with an inverse relation between SARS-CoV-2 positivity and circulating calcifediol levels. The objective of this pilot study was to investigate the effect of vitamin D supplementation on the length of hospital stay and clinical improvement in patients with vitamin D deficiency hospitalized with COVID-19. The study was randomized, double blind and placebo controlled. A total of 50 subjects were enrolled and received, in addition to the best available COVID therapy, either vitamin D (25,000 IU per day over 4 consecutive days, followed by 25,000 IU per week up to 6 weeks) or placebo. The length of hospital stay decreased significantly in the vitamin D group compared to the placebo group (4 days vs. 8 days; p = 0.003). At Day 7, a significantly lower percentage of patients were still hospitalized in the vitamin D group compared to the placebo group (19% vs. 54%; p = 0.0161), and none of the patients treated with vitamin D were hospitalized after 21 days compared to 14% of the patients treated with placebo. Vitamin D significantly reduced the duration of supplemental oxygen among the patients who needed it (4 days vs. 7 days in the placebo group; p = 0.012) and significantly improved the clinical recovery of the patients, as assessed by the WHO scale (p = 0.0048). In conclusion, this study demonstrated that the clinical outcome of COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization was improved by administration of vitamin D.

Abstract

PURPOSE Vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency may increase the susceptibility to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to determine the association between vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency and susceptibility to COVID-19, its severity, mortality, and role of vitamin D in its treatment. METHODS We searched CINAHL, Cochrane library, EMBASE, PubMED, Scopus, and Web of Science up to May 30, 2021, for observational studies on association between vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency and susceptibility to COVID-19, severe disease, and death among adults, and, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing vitamin D treatment against standard care or placebo, in improving severity or mortality among adults with COVID-19. Risk of bias was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies and AUB-KQ1 Cochrane tool for RCTs. Study-level data were analyzed using RevMan 5.3 and R (v4.1.0). Heterogeneity was determined by I2 and sources were explored through prespecified sensitivity analyses, subgroup analyses, and meta-regressions. RESULTS Of 1877 search results, 76 studies satisfying eligibility criteria were included. Seventy-two observational studies were included in the meta-analysis (n = 1 976 099). Vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency increased the odds of developing COVID-19 (odds ratio [OR] 1.46; 95% CI, 1.28-1.65; P < 0.0001; I2 = 92%), severe disease (OR 1.90; 95% CI, 1.52-2.38; P < 0.0001; I2 = 81%), and death (OR 2.07; 95% CI, 1.28-3.35; P = 0.003; I2 = 73%). The 25-hydroxy vitamin D concentrations were lower in individuals with COVID-19 compared with controls (mean difference [MD] -3.85 ng/mL; 95% CI, -5.44 to -2.26; P ≤ 0.0001), in patients with severe COVID-19 compared with controls with nonsevere COVID-19 (MD -4.84 ng/mL; 95% CI, -7.32 to -2.35; P = 0.0001) and in nonsurvivors compared with survivors (MD -4.80 ng/mL; 95% CI, -7.89 to -1.71; P = 0.002). The association between vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency and death was insignificant when studies with high risk of bias or studies reporting unadjusted effect estimates were excluded. Risk of bias and heterogeneity were high across all analyses. Discrepancies in timing of vitamin D testing, definitions of severe COVID-19, and vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency partly explained the heterogeneity. Four RCTs were widely heterogeneous precluding meta-analysis. CONCLUSION Multiple observational studies involving nearly 2 million adults suggest vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency increases susceptibility to COVID-19 and severe COVID-19, although with a high risk of bias and heterogeneity. Association with mortality was less robust. Heterogeneity in RCTs precluded their meta-analysis.

Abstract

PURPOSE It has been shown that low Vitamin D serum concentration is associated with increased pneumonia and viral respiratory infections. Vitamin D is readily available, inexpensive, and easy to administer to subjects infected with COVID-19. If effective in reducing the severity of COVID-19, it could be an important and feasible therapeutic intervention. METHODS We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to determine the effects of Vitamin D serum concentration on mortality and morbidity in COVID-19 patients. The primary objectives were to determine if Vitamin D serum concentration decrease mortality, ICU admissions, ventilator support, and length of hospital stay in COVID-19 patients. RESULTS A total of 3572 publications were identified. Ultimately, 20 studies are included. A total of 12,806 patients aged between 42 to 81 years old were analyzed. The pooled estimated RR for mortality, ICU admission, ventilator support and length of hospital stay were 1.49 (95% CI: 1.34, 1.65), 0.87 (95% CI: 0.67, 1.14), 1.29 (95% CI: 0.79, 1.84), and 0.84 (95% CI -0.45, 2.13). CONCLUSION There is no statistical difference in mortality, ICU admission rate, ventilator support requirement, and length of hospital stay in COVID-19 patients with low and high Vitamin D serum concentration.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a devastating impact worldwide, and timely detection and quarantine of infected patients are critical to prevent spread of disease. Serological antibody testing is an important diagnostic method used increasingly in clinics, although its clinical application is still under investigation. METHODS A meta-analysis was conducted to compare the diagnostic performance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 antibody tests in patients with COVID-19. The test results analysed included: (1) IgM-positive but IgG-negative (IgM+IgG-); (2) IgG-positive but IgM-negative (IgG+IgM-); (3) both IgM-positive and IgG-positive (IgM+IgG+); (4) IgM-positive without IgG information (IgM+IgG+/-); (5) IgG-positive without IgM information (IgG+IgM+/-); (6) either IgM-positive or IgG-positive (IgM+ or IgG+); and (7) IgA-positive (IgA+). RESULTS Sixty-eight studies were included. Pooled sensitivities for IgM+IgG-, IgG+IgM-, IgM+IgG+, IgM+IgG+/-, IgG+IgM+/-, and IgM+ or IgG+ were 6%, 7%, 53%, 68%, 73% and 79% respectively. Pooled specificities ranged from 98% to 100%. IgA+ had a pooled sensitivity of 78% but a relatively low specificity of 88%. Tests conducted 2 weeks after symptom onset showed better diagnostic accuracy than tests conducted earlier. Chemiluminescence immunoassay and detection of S protein as the antigen could offer more accurate diagnostic results. DISCUSSION These findings support the supplemental role of serological antibody tests in the diagnosis of COVID-19. However, their capacity to diagnose COVID-19 early in the disease course could be limited.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Upper respiratory tract infections are reportedly more frequent and more severe in individuals with lower vitamin D levels. Based on these findings, it has been suggested that vitamin D can prevent or reduce the severity of COVID-19. METHODS We used two-sample Mendelian randomisation (MR) to assess the causal effect of vitamin D levels on SARS-CoV-2 infection risk and COVID-19 severity using publicly available data. We also carried out a genome-wide association analysis (GWA) of vitamin D deficiency in the UK Biobank (UKB) and used these results and two-sample MR to assess the causal effect of vitamin D deficiency on SARS-CoV-2 infection risk and COVID-19 severity. RESULTS We found no evidence that vitamin D levels causally affect the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (ln(OR)=0.17 (95% CI -0.22 to 0.57, p=0.39)) nor did we find evidence that vitamin D levels causally affect COVID-19 severity (ln(OR)=0.36 (95% CI -0.89 to 1.61, p=0.57)). Based on our GWA analysis, we found that 17 independent variants are associated with vitamin D deficiency in the UKB. Using these variants as instruments for our two-sample MR analyses, we found no evidence that vitamin D deficiency causally affects the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (ln(OR)=-0.04 (95% CI -0.1 to 0.03, p=0.25)) nor did we find evidence that vitamin D deficiency causally affects COVID-19 severity (ln(OR)=-0.24 (95% CI -0.55 to 0.08, p=0.14)). CONCLUSIONS In conclusion, we found no evidence that vitamin D is protective against SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 severity. Our data support the recent statement by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence that the use of vitamin D supplementation to mitigate COVID-19 is not supported by the available data.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The role of vitamin D supplementation as a treatment for COVID-19 has been a subject of considerable discussion. A thorough understanding of the current evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of vitamin D supplementation for COVID-19 based on randomised controlled trials is required. OBJECTIVES To assess whether vitamin D supplementation is effective and safe for the treatment of COVID-19 in comparison to an active comparator, placebo, or standard of care alone, and to maintain the currency of the evidence, using a living systematic review approach. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, Web of Science and the WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies without language restrictions to 11 March 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating vitamin D supplementation for people with COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, age, gender or ethnicity. We excluded studies investigating preventive effects, or studies including populations with other coronavirus diseases (severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane risk of bias tool (ROB 2) for RCTs. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the following prioritised outcome categories: individuals with moderate or severe COVID-19: all-cause mortality, clinical status, quality of life, adverse events, serious adverse events, and for individuals with asymptomatic or mild disease: all-cause mortality, development of severe clinical COVID-19 symptoms, quality of life, adverse events, serious adverse events. MAIN RESULTS We identified three RCTs with 356 participants, of whom 183 received vitamin D. In accordance with the World Health Organization (WHO) clinical progression scale, two studies investigated participants with moderate or severe disease, and one study individuals with mild or asymptomatic disease. The control groups consisted of placebo treatment or standard of care alone. Effectiveness of vitamin D supplementation for people with COVID-19 and moderate to severe disease We included two studies with 313 participants. Due to substantial clinical and methodological diversity of both studies, we were not able to pool data. Vitamin D status was unknown in one study, whereas the other study reported data for vitamin D deficient participants. One study administered multiple doses of oral calcifediol at days 1, 3 and 7,  whereas the other study gave a single high dose of oral cholecalciferol at baseline. We assessed one study with low risk of bias for effectiveness outcomes, and the other with some concerns about randomisation and selective reporting. All-cause mortality at hospital discharge (313 participants) We found two studies reporting data for this outcome. One study reported no deaths when treated with vitamin D out of 50 participants, compared to two deaths out of 26 participants in the control group (Risk ratio (RR) 0.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 2.13). The other study reported nine deaths out of 119 individuals in the vitamin D group, whereas six participants out of 118 died in the placebo group (RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.55 to 4.04]. We are very uncertain whether vitamin D has an effect on all-cause mortality at hospital discharge (very low-certainty evidence). Clinical status assessed by the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (237 participants) We found one study reporting data for this outcome. Nine out of 119 participants needed invasive mechanical ventilation when treated with vitamin D, compared to 17 out of 118 participants in the placebo group (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.13). Vitamin D supplementation may decrease need for invasive mechanical ventilation, but the evidence is uncertain (low-certainty evidence). Quality of life We did not find data for quality of life. Safety of vitamin D supplementation for people with COVID-19 and moderate to severe disease We did not include data from one study, because assessment of serious adverse events was not described and we are concerned that data might have been inconsistently measured. This study reported vomiting in one out of 119 participants immediately after vitamin D intake (RR 2.98, 95% CI 0.12 to 72.30). We are very uncertain whether vitamin D supplementation is associated with higher risk for adverse events (very low-certainty). Effectiveness and safety of vitamin D supplementation for people with COVID-19 and asymptomatic or mild disease We found one study including 40 individuals, which did not report our prioritised outcomes, but instead data for viral clearance, inflammatory markers, and vitamin D serum levels. The authors reported no events of hypercalcaemia, but recording and assessment of further adverse events remains unclear. Authors administered oral cholecalciferol in daily doses for at least 14 days, and continued with weekly doses if vitamin D blood levels were > 50 ng/mL. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is currently insufficient evidence to determine the benefits and harms of vitamin D supplementation as a treatment of COVID-19. The evidence for the effectiveness of vitamin D supplementation for the treatment of COVID-19 is very uncertain. Moreover, we found only limited safety information, and were concerned about consistency in measurement and recording of these outcomes. There was substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity of included studies, mainly because of different supplementation strategies, formulations, vitamin D status of participants, and reported outcomes. There is an urgent need for well-designed and adequately powered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with an appropriate randomisation procedure, comparability of study arms and preferably double-blinding. We identified 21 ongoing and three completed studies without published results, which indicates that these needs will be addressed and that our findings are subject to change in the future. Due to the living approach of this work, we will update the review periodically.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES Dietary supplements may ameliorate SARS-CoV-2 infection, although scientific evidence to support such a role is lacking. We investigated whether users of the COVID-19 Symptom Study app who regularly took dietary supplements were less likely to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN App-based community survey. SETTING 445 850 subscribers of an app that was launched to enable self-reported information related to SARS-CoV-2 infection for use in the general population in the UK (n=372 720), the USA (n=45 757) and Sweden (n=27 373). MAIN EXPOSURE Self-reported regular dietary supplement usage (constant use during previous 3 months) in the first waves of the pandemic up to 31 July 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by viral RNA reverse transcriptase PCR test or serology test before 31 July 2020. RESULTS In 372 720 UK participants (175 652 supplement users and 197 068 non-users), those taking probiotics, omega-3 fatty acids, multivitamins or vitamin D had a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection by 14% (95% CI (8% to 19%)), 12% (95% CI (8% to 16%)), 13% (95% CI (10% to 16%)) and 9% (95% CI (6% to 12%)), respectively, after adjusting for potential confounders. No effect was observed for those taking vitamin C, zinc or garlic supplements. On stratification by sex, age and body mass index (BMI), the protective associations in individuals taking probiotics, omega-3 fatty acids, multivitamins and vitamin D were observed in females across all ages and BMI groups, but were not seen in men. The same overall pattern of association was observed in both the US and Swedish cohorts. CONCLUSION In women, we observed a modest but significant association between use of probiotics, omega-3 fatty acid, multivitamin or vitamin D supplements and lower risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. We found no clear benefits for men nor any effect of vitamin C, garlic or zinc. Randomised controlled trials are required to confirm these observational findings before any therapeutic recommendations can be made.