SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2025
Prevalence of autoantibody responses in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) may significantly contribute to the pathogenesis of autoimmune rheumatic diseases; interactions between the virus and defence mechanisms may promote the development of autoimmune processes. Studies have reported elevated levels of autoimmune antibodies in patients with Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19), however, the exact prevalence remains poorly undocumented. This study aims to evaluate the prevalence of autoantibodies in COVID-19 patients compared to unaffected individuals.
methodsElectronic searches were conducted using the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Chinese Biological Medicine Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WANFANG, and Chinese Weipu (VIP). The case-control studies investigating the presence of autoantibodies in the serum of COVID-19 patients and control subjects published were included in this meta-analysis. The search covered November 2019, to December 2025. Studies were rigorously screened based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Quality assessment was performed using a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). The odds ratios (ORs) for autoantibody seropositivity were calculated using RevMan 5.3. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to evaluate the stability results, and publication bias was assessed using Egger’s test and funnel plot.
resultsA total of 17 studies involving 1652 COVID-19 patients and 1455 control subjects met eligibility criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The overall OR for antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) was 2.90 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.36–6.18], for anti-cardiolipin antibodies (ACAs) was 3.34 (95% CI: 2.14–5.21), for anti-β2-glycoprotein 1 antibodies (anti-β2GP1) was 1.87 (95% CI: 1.00–3.49) and that for anti-cytoplasmic neutrophil antibodies (ANCAs) was 8.49 (95% CI: 3.38–21.33). Among the 11 studies assessing ANAs, the quality varied widely, resulting in considerable heterogeneity in the meta-analysis results. Heterogeneity across studies on ANAs may partially stem from differences in assay manufacturers as well as variations in the working cut-off dilution used for IIF. Egger’s test reports indicated statistically significant publication bias among the included studies on ANAs.
conclusionsThis study suggests a higher seroprevalence of autoantibodies, including ANAs, ACAs, anti-β2GP1, and ANCAs in COVID-19 patients compared to control subjects. The findings identified a possible association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and autoantibody positivity, contributing to the understanding of COVID-19’s role in autoimmune processes. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.