A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Low Dose Radiation Therapy for COVID-19 Pneumonia: Learnings of 4 Years Since Pandemic

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Usha Yadav, Balvinder Kaur Sapra
{"title":"A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Low Dose Radiation Therapy for COVID-19 Pneumonia: Learnings of 4 Years Since Pandemic","authors":"Usha Yadav,&nbsp;Balvinder Kaur Sapra","doi":"10.1111/cts.70137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>COVID-19 caused a worldwide pandemic resulting in break of demand–supply chain in all aspects of healthcare, high mortality rates, and a constant quest for effective treatment modalities. Based on historical and recent evidences of anti-inflammatory effects of low dose of ionizing radiation, several healthcare professionals proposed low-dose radiation therapy (LDRT) along with ongoing pharmacological treatment for COVID-19 pneumonia. A positive response in a few initial studies led to systematic trials by increasing the number of patients in the range of 0.5–1.5 Gy. However, the concerns of radiation-induced risks were also raised in parallel. In the present article, we have highlighted the basis of LDRT for COVID-19 therapy. We have reviewed the available literature, specifically for outcomes on various clinical trials carried out with LDRT. Meta-analysis was performed to identify if any survival benefits are offered by addition of LDRT over pharmacological treatment alone among COVID-19 pneumonia patients. Other clinical recovery parameters such as intubation rates, oxygenation status, anti-inflammatory response have also been compared. Overall data trends favored LDRT with standard pharmacological treatment against control cohort which received standard treatment alone at all the endpoints in majority studies. LDRT addition resulted in significantly higher odds of survival than control cohort. Among critical and/or mechanically ventilated patients, LDRT did not show any promising outcomes over the control group. In conclusion, LDRT may serve as a promising complementary treatment modality with a potential of better prognosis, provided the patient selection criteria are critically identified and implemented.</p>","PeriodicalId":50610,"journal":{"name":"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"18 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cts.70137","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cts.70137","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

COVID-19 caused a worldwide pandemic resulting in break of demand–supply chain in all aspects of healthcare, high mortality rates, and a constant quest for effective treatment modalities. Based on historical and recent evidences of anti-inflammatory effects of low dose of ionizing radiation, several healthcare professionals proposed low-dose radiation therapy (LDRT) along with ongoing pharmacological treatment for COVID-19 pneumonia. A positive response in a few initial studies led to systematic trials by increasing the number of patients in the range of 0.5–1.5 Gy. However, the concerns of radiation-induced risks were also raised in parallel. In the present article, we have highlighted the basis of LDRT for COVID-19 therapy. We have reviewed the available literature, specifically for outcomes on various clinical trials carried out with LDRT. Meta-analysis was performed to identify if any survival benefits are offered by addition of LDRT over pharmacological treatment alone among COVID-19 pneumonia patients. Other clinical recovery parameters such as intubation rates, oxygenation status, anti-inflammatory response have also been compared. Overall data trends favored LDRT with standard pharmacological treatment against control cohort which received standard treatment alone at all the endpoints in majority studies. LDRT addition resulted in significantly higher odds of survival than control cohort. Among critical and/or mechanically ventilated patients, LDRT did not show any promising outcomes over the control group. In conclusion, LDRT may serve as a promising complementary treatment modality with a potential of better prognosis, provided the patient selection criteria are critically identified and implemented.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cts-Clinical and Translational Science
Cts-Clinical and Translational Science 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.60%
发文量
234
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical and Translational Science (CTS), an official journal of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, highlights original translational medicine research that helps bridge laboratory discoveries with the diagnosis and treatment of human disease. Translational medicine is a multi-faceted discipline with a focus on translational therapeutics. In a broad sense, translational medicine bridges across the discovery, development, regulation, and utilization spectrum. Research may appear as Full Articles, Brief Reports, Commentaries, Phase Forwards (clinical trials), Reviews, or Tutorials. CTS also includes invited didactic content that covers the connections between clinical pharmacology and translational medicine. Best-in-class methodologies and best practices are also welcomed as Tutorials. These additional features provide context for research articles and facilitate understanding for a wide array of individuals interested in clinical and translational science. CTS welcomes high quality, scientifically sound, original manuscripts focused on clinical pharmacology and translational science, including animal, in vitro, in silico, and clinical studies supporting the breadth of drug discovery, development, regulation and clinical use of both traditional drugs and innovative modalities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信