SynthesisJAMA network open2026
CCL5 Levels, Disease Progression, and Mortality in Respiratory Viral Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: The role of chemokine C-C motif ligand 5 (CCL5) in respiratory viral infections remains controversial; although essential for viral clearance, it is also implicated in pathogenic hyperinflammation. Objective: To quantify associations between CCL5 levels and unfavorable disease progression and mortality in respiratory viral infections. Data Sources: Medline and PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, CABI Digital Library, and Global Health (Ovid) were searched from inception to October 1, 2025. Study Selection: Observational studies evaluating the association of CCL5 levels with clinical severity or survival in patients with confirmed respiratory viral infections. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) and certainty of evidence (GRADE). Data were pooled using a random-effects model following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data analysis was performed from September 2025 to December 2025. Main Outcomes and Measures: Unfavorable disease progression (severity) and all-cause mortality. Results: The meta-analysis included 18 studies (2376 patients; median age, 58.2 [range, 0.08-65.0] years; 1278 of 2126 male [60.1%]); 12 studies (67%) were of high methodological quality. Eleven studies (1214 patients) evaluated disease progression and 7 (1162 patients) evaluated mortality. Elevated CCL5 levels were associated with reduced odds of unfavorable disease progression (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.71-0.85; I2 = 0%) and mortality (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.55-0.76; I2 = 23.1%). The protective association had significantly larger effect sizes for mortality than for disease progression (P = .047 for interaction). Subgroup analyses for disease progression demonstrated consistent protective associations without significant interaction by virus type (coronavirus: OR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.70-0.90] vs noncoronavirus: OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.63-0.87]) or age group (pediatric: OR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.69-0.90] vs adult: OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.63-0.88]). Results remained consistent in sensitivity analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of 18 observational studies, elevated CCL5 levels were associated with favorable outcomes and survival in respiratory viral infections, reflecting a competent antiviral immune response rather than pathogenic hyperinflammation. These findings suggest that CCL5 may serve as a prognostic biomarker for risk stratification.
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.