Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33012349›Full record

ReviewMayo Clinic proceedings2020

COVID-19 and Sex Differences: Mechanisms and Biomarkers.

Tu Haitao, Jane V Vermunt, Jithma Abeykoon, Ranine Ghamrawi, Madugodaralalage Gunaratne, Muthuvel Jayachandran, Kavita Narang, Santosh Parashuram, Sonja Suvakov, Vesna D Garovic

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Mayo Clinic proceedings, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 184 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
184citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
22.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

184 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 311 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article

124 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Tu HaitaoDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Nephrology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, PR China.
Jane V VermuntDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Jithma AbeykoonDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Ranine GhamrawiDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Madugodaralalage GunaratneDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Muthuvel JayachandranDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Division of Hematology and Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Physiology and Biomedical Engineering, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Kavita NarangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Santosh ParashuramDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Sonja SuvakovDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Vesna D GarovicDivision of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. Electronic address: garovic.vesna@mayo.edu.
Mayo Clinic · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · US

Funding

Hypertensive pregnancy disorders and future coronary artery diseaseR01HL136348 · NHLBI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI GAROVIC, VESNA D · 2018 to 2022
$2.6M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL136348
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Men are consistently overrepresented in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severe outcomes, including higher fatality rates. These differences are likely due to gender-specific behaviors, genetic and hormonal factors, and sex differences in biological pathways related to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Several social, behavioral, and comorbid factors are implicated in the generally worse outcomes in men compared with women. Underlying biological sex differences and their effects on COVID-19 outcomes, however, have received less attention. The present review summarizes the available literature regarding proposed molecular and cellular markers of COVID-19 infection, their associations with health outcomes, and any reported modification by sex. Biological sex differences characterized by such biomarkers exist within healthy populations and also differ with age- and sex-specific conditions, such as pregnancy and menopause. In the context of COVID-19, descriptive biomarker levels are often reported by sex, but data pertaining to the effect of patient sex on the relationship between biomarkers and COVID-19 disease severity/outcomes are scarce. Such biomarkers may offer plausible explanations for the worse COVID-19 outcomes seen in men. There is the need for larger studies with sex-specific reporting and robust analyses to elucidate how sex modifies cellular and molecular pathways associated with SARS-CoV-2. This will improve interpretation of biomarkers and clinical management of COVID-19 patients by facilitating a personalized medical approach to risk stratification, prevention, and treatment.

Indexed as

BetacoronavirusSex CharacteristicsBiomarkersCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19FemaleHumansMalePandemicsPneumonia, ViralSARS-CoV-2Sex FactorsBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID33012349
PMCPMC7402208
OpenAlexW3046281247

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.