Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33646058›Full record

ArticleInnate immunity2021

Circulating cell-free DNA, peripheral lymphocyte subsets alterations and neutrophil lymphocyte ratio in assessment of COVID-19 severity.

Reham Hammad, Mona Abd El Rahman Eldosoky, Shaimaa Hani Fouad, Abdelaleem Elgendy, Amany M Tawfeik, Mohamed Alboraie, Mariam Fathy Abdelmaksoud

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Innate immunity, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Reham HammadClinical Pathology Department, Faculty of Medicine (for Girls), Al-Azhar University, Egypt.ORCID 0000-0002-8967-9106
Mona Abd El Rahman EldosokyClinical Pathology Department, Faculty of Medicine (for Girls), Al-Azhar University, Egypt.
Shaimaa Hani FouadInternal Medicine Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Ain-Shams University, Egypt.ORCID 0000-0003-4052-9454
Abdelaleem ElgendyClinical Pathology Department, Faculty of Medicine (for Boys), Al-Azhar University, Egypt.
Amany M TawfeikMicrobiology and Immunology Department, Faculty of Medicine (for Girls), Al-Azhar University, Egypt.
Mohamed AlboraieDepartment of Internal Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Egypt.ORCID 0000-0002-8490-9822
Mariam Fathy AbdelmaksoudClinical Pathology department Ain-Shams University, Egypt.
Al-Azhar University · EGAin Shams University · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cell destruction results in plasma accumulation of cell-free DNA (cfDNA). Dynamic changes in circulating lymphocytes are features of COVID-19. We aimed to investigate if cfDNA level can serve in stratification of COVID-19 patients, and if cfDNA level is associated with alterations in lymphocyte subsets and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR). This cross-sectional comparative study enrolled 64 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients. Patients were subdivided to severe and non-severe groups. Plasma cfDNA concentration was determined by real-time quantitative PCR. Lymphocyte subsets were assessed by flow cytometry. There was significant increase in cfDNA among severe cases when compared with non-severe cases. cfDNA showed positive correlation with NLR and inverse correlation with T cell percentage. cfDNA positively correlated with ferritin and C-reactive protein. The output data of performed ROC curves to differentiate severe from non-severe cases revealed that cfDNA at cut-off ≥17.31 ng/µl and AUC of 0.96 yielded (93%) sensitivity and (73%) specificity. In summary, excessive release of cfDNA can serve as sensitive COVID-19 severity predictor. There is an association between cfDNA up-regulation and NLR up-regulation and T cell percentage down-regulation. cfDNA level can be used in stratification and personalized monitoring strategies in COVID-19 patients.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCOVID-19C-Reactive ProteinCross-Sectional StudiesDiagnosis, DifferentialDNAFemaleFerritinsHumansLymphocyte CountLymphocytesLymphocyte SubsetsMaleMiddle AgedNeutrophilsC-Reactive ProteinDNAFerritinscfDNACOVID-19 monitoringCOVID-19 patients’ stratificationCOVID-19 severity predictorsNLRpersonalized biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID33646058
PMCPMC8054149
OpenAlexW3134942237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.