Role of Antioxidant Therapy in the Treatment and Prognosis of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background A significant aspect of the SARS-CoV-2 pathology involves oxidative stress, characterized by an imbalance between the production of harmful free radicals and the body's antioxidant defenses. With the ongoing evolution of SARS-CoV-2, the investigation into non–virus-specific therapeutic options, such as antioxidant therapy, has gained importance. Objectives This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize data from randomized control trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of antioxidant therapy in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods We searched the peer-reviewed indexed literature on MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and Scopus, from inception to July 2023. Results The search identified 3306 articles from which 25 were included for quantitative synthesis, with 5 studies eligible for meta-analysis. Antioxidant therapies included zinc, vitamin A, vitamin C, and combination treatments. Zinc interventions showed mixed results regarding intensive care unit admissions and hospital stays. Vitamin A studies indicated improvements in inflammatory markers. Vitamin C studies displayed inconsistent effects on clinical improvement and hospitalization. Combination treatments suggested benefits in symptom clearance and cytokine storm reduction. Meta-analysis of vitamin C studies found no significant difference in C-reactive protein concentrations (−0.50; 95% CI: −3.63, 2.63; I 2 = 0%), intensive care unit stay duration (pooled mean difference: 1.44; 95% CI: 0.07, 2.81; I 2 = 0%), or mortality (pooled odds ratio: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.28, 1.09; I 2 = 0%), with a slight trend favoring reduced hospitalization duration (pooled mean difference: −2.37; 95% CI: −2.99, −1.76; I 2 = 49%). Of the 25 studies, 8 were high quality with low bias, 6 had some concerns, and 11 were low quality with high bias. Conclusions The review presents mixed efficacy of antioxidant therapies for SARS-CoV-2, with some studies indicating potential benefits. Further well-designed large-scale RCTs are warranted to determine the definitive role of antioxidants in SARS-CoV-2 treatment. This systematic review was registered at PROSPERO as CRD42023430805.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.025 | 0.041 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".