Next Article in Journal
A Trust-Based Methodology to Evaluate Deep Learning Models for Automatic Diagnosis of Ocular Toxoplasmosis from Fundus Images
Previous Article in Journal
Quantitative Assessment of Three-Dimensional Choroidal Vascularity and Choriocapillaris Flow Signal Voids in Myopic Patients Using SS-OCTA
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Diagnostics
Volume 11
Issue 11
10.3390/diagnostics11111952
diagnostics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Risk Factors of Cytomegalovirus Reactivation in Ulcerative Colitis Patients: A Meta-Analysis

by
Yafei Qin
1,2,†,
Grace Wang
3,†,
Dejun Kong
1,2,
Guangming Li
1,2,
Hongda Wang
1,2,
Hong Qin
1,2 and
Hao Wang
1,2,*
1
Department of General Surgery, Tianjin Medical University General Hospital, 154 Anshan Road, Heping District, Tianjin 300052, China
2
Tianjin General Surgery Institute, Tianjin Medical University General Hospital, 154 Anshan Road, Heping District, Tianjin 300052, China
3
Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S2E8, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
Yafei Qin and Grace Wang are the co-first authors for this paper.
Diagnostics 2021, 11(11), 1952; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11111952
Received: 8 September 2021 / Revised: 12 October 2021 / Accepted: 18 October 2021 / Published: 21 October 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is associated with exacerbation of disease activity in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). However, the risk factors for CMV reactivation in this population remain debatable. This meta-analysis was performed to identify the risk factors for CMV reactivation in UC patients. PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched from the inception of these databases to 31 August 2021, with the aim of identifying studies that investigated the risk factors of CMV reactivation in UC patients. A quality assessment of the included studies was performed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The publication bias was assessed respectively via a funnel plot and Egger’s regression asymmetry test. The robustness and reliability of each outcome were evaluated by sensitivity analysis. Twenty studies were included in the final meta-analysis, comprising a total of 2099 patients with UC. A significantly higher risk of CMV reactivation was observed in patients with severe UC (OR = 1.465, 95% CI: 1.107 to 1.939, p = 0.008), pancolitis (OR = 2.108, 95% CI: 1.586 to 2.800, p = 0.0001), older age of UC onset (MD = 6.212, 95% CI: 2.552 to 9.971, p = 0.001), as well as use of glucocorticoids (OR = 4.175, 95% CI: 3.076 to 5.666, p = 0.001), immunosuppressants (OR = 1.795, 95% CI: 1.289 to 2.501, p = 0.001), and azathioprine (OR = 1.444, 95% CI: 1.012 to 2.061, p = 0.043). However, infliximab treatment was observed not to increase the occurrence of CMV reactivation in patients who suffered from UC. In contrast, 5-aminosalicylic acid (OR = 0.674, 95% CI: 0.492 to 0.924, p = 0.014) was associated with a lower risk of CMV reactivation. Patients with UC should be closely monitored for risk factors of CMV reactivation in order to provide timely diagnosis and antiviral treatment.

1. Introduction

The prevalence of ulcerative colitis (UC) has steadily increased over the last few decades [1], particularly in Europe, Canada, and the United States [2,3]. The etiology of UC is linked to a dysregulated immune response to normal mucosal resident microflora, genetic susceptibility, and infection, among other influences [4,5]. However, the accumulating literature indicates that human cytomegalovirus (CMV) raises the risk of colectomy and mortality in patients with UC [6]. CMV, which belongs to the Herpesviridae family, is an opportunistic virus with latent and reactivated characteristics [7]. CMV can remain quiescent inside a human host, but CMV replication is further activated in circumstances of immune imbalance [8]. Therefore, patients with UC are more susceptible to CMV reactivation due to a compromised intestinal immunological barrier, as well as exposure to numerous immunosuppressive agents [9,10]. The risk of reactivation of CMV has been reported to range from 21% to 34% in patients with severe UC and from 32% to 36% in patients with the steroid-refractory disease [11,12]. It is generally believed that CMV reactivation is a poor prognostic indicator among patients with UC flares [13]. This can be compounded by the inflammatory reaction and exacerbated colonic damage associated with CMV reactivation [14]. Notably, the risk of colectomy in UC patients with steroid-refractory disease appears to be lower in patients on antiviral therapy [15]. The European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization guidelines suggest prompt antiviral therapy when acute severe colitis patients have CMV reactivation [16,17]. However, it is still controversial whether the extent and severity of the UC, as well as the application of immunosuppressive agents, are related to CMV reactivation [6,12]. This study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the risk factors for CMV reactivation in UC patients.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Literature and Search Strategy

A comprehensive literature search of electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure, was performed, from the inception of these databases to 31 August 2021. We retrieved studies assessing CMV reactivation in UC using the following keywords in accordance with Boolean logic: (“ulcerative colitis” OR “UC” OR “inflammatory bowel disease” OR “IBD” OR “colitis gravis” OR “ulcerative colitis type” OR “idiopathic proctocolitis”) and (“cytomegalovirus” OR “CMV” OR “salivary gland virus” OR “herpesvirus 5” OR “HHV 5”). Beyond this, references from the included articles were also manually searched to identify other potential qualifying studies that may have been missed by the database searches.

2.2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

The articles were included in this meta-analysis as long as they met the criteria of PICOS: (I) Population: Patients with a definitive diagnosis of UC; (II) Intervention: Different disease features and therapeutic options; (III) Comparison: UC patients with or without CMV reactivation (diagnostic criteria: Intestinal tissue H&E staining reveals CMV inclusion bodies; CMV-DNA positive in intestinal tissue; CMV-DNA or pp65 positive in blood with typical deep intestinal ulcers); (IV) Outcome measures: UC severity, pancolitis, glucocorticoid, immunosuppressants, azathioprine, infliximab, 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA), and age of onset; (V) Study design: An official published case–control study, cohort study, or randomized controlled trial (RCT). Exclusion criteria: (I) Diagnosis of CMV reactivation only based on the positive serological antibody or endoscopic performance, but the serological test is negative; (II) abstract, letter, editorial, expert opinion, or case report; (III) non-comparative study; (IV) study design not rigorous; (V) inadequate raw data.

2.3. Data Extraction and Outcome Measures

Two of the reviewers (Y.Q. and D.K.) independently extracted data from the included studies. The following essential information was captured: First, author name, year of publication, sample size, study design, outcomes, and other relevant data. The data collection and refinement statistics were summarized. Where there were conflicts of opinion, the final decision was made by another authority author (H.W.). The outcome measurements were UC severity, pancolitis, age of onset, glucocorticoid, immunosuppressants, azathioprine, infliximab, and 5-ASA.

2.4. Quality Assessment and Statistical Analysis

The methodological quality of the included case–control and cohort studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) [18]. The literature quality evaluation was conducted separately by two reviewers (G.L. and H.Q.). A consensus was reached through consultation for divergence. We used Stata version 15.1 (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA) for statistical analyses. When I2 > 50%, the data were deemed to have apparent heterogeneity. We conducted a meta-analysis using a random-effect model according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (version 5.1.0). Otherwise, a fixed-effect model was conducted. For continuous variables (age of onset), weighted mean difference (WMD) was expressed for assessment. Odds ratio (OR) was applied for the assessment of categorical variables (UC severity, pancolitis, glucocorticoid, immunosuppressants, azathioprine, infliximab, and 5-ASA).

2.5. Publication Bias

Publication bias was assessed respectively via a funnel plot and calculation of Egger’s regression asymmetry test [19].

2.6. Sensitivity Analysis

The robustness and reliability of each outcome were evaluated by sensitivity analysis. Sensitivity analysis of the effects was carried out by omitting each trial in turn and recalculating the pooled effect size [20].

3. Results

3.1. Search Results

A total of 495 studies were identified on the initial database search. We collected 405 articles after removing duplicates. By screening the abstract, 363 studies were omitted. Another 22 articles were further excluded after reading the full text. Ultimately, 20 publications [6,8,9,12,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36] were eligible for data extraction and meta-analysis (Figure 1).

3.2. Characteristics of the Included Studies

The characteristics of the 20 included studies are summarized in Table 1. The included studies comprised 2099 UC patients who were incorporated into this analysis; of these, 591 patients had CMV reactivation and 1508 patients were CMV negative.

3.3. Study Quality and Risk of Bias

The NOS results suggested that all eligible studies in this meta-analysis were of high quality, because their scores were equal to or greater than seven points. The details of the study quality assessments are presented in Table 2.

3.4. Publication Bias

For outcomes (severe UC, pancolitis, glucocorticoid, and immunosuppressants) that were reported in more than 10 articles, Figure 2 indicates that the funnel plot was symmetrical. Meanwhile, Egger’s tests were used to statistically assess the funnel plot symmetry for all outcomes. The Egger’s tests did not indicate the presence of publication bias (Figure 3), and the specific outcomes are shown in Table 3.

3.5. Outcomes of the Meta-Analysis

3.5.1. Severe UC

All UC patients were evaluated by the modified Mayo scoring system and modified Truelove and Witts scoring system. The number of patients with mild-to-moderate and severe UC was extracted from ten articles. The findings indicate that the risk of CMV reactivation in severe UC was 1.465 times higher than that in mild-to-moderate UC (heterogeneity I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.858, OR = 1.465, 95% CI: 1.107 to 1.939, p = 0.008; Figure 4).

3.5.2. Pancolitis

Fourteen articles documented colonoscopy results in patients with UC to determine the extent of intestinal lesions. There was no significant heterogeneity in the statistical results of the pooled literature (I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.507). The results of the fixed-effect model showed that the existence of pancolitis could increase the probability of CMV reactivation (OR = 2.108, 95% CI: 1.586 to 2.800, p = 0.0001; Figure 5).

3.5.3. Age of Onset

Eight publications focused on the age of UC patients with CMV reactivation. The heterogeneity test of the included studies demonstrated substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 64.6%, p = 0.006). The results of the random-effect model showed that older age of onset of UC was associated with a higher likelihood of CMV reactivation (MD = 6.212, 95% CI: 2.552 to 9.971, p = 0.001; Figure 6).

3.5.4. Glucocorticoids

Fourteen articles described the possibility of CMV reactivation in UC patients treated with glucocorticoids. The heterogeneity test indicated that there was no heterogeneity (I2 = 38.1%, p = 0.073). The results of the fixed analysis indicated that UC patients on glucocorticoids were 4.175 times more likely to experience CMV reactivation compared to those without glucocorticoid therapy (OR = 4.175, 95% CI: 3.076 to 5.666, p = 0.001; Figure 7).

3.5.5. Immunosuppressants

Fifteen articles identified the risk of CMV reactivation following the use of immunosuppressive agents (azathioprine, cyclosporine, methotrexate, 6-mercaptopurine, and mesalamine) in UC patients. The pooled results of the present meta-analysis revealed that the use of immunosuppressive agents increases the risk of CMV reactivation in patients with UC (OR = 1.795, 95% CI: 1.289 to 2.501, p = 0.001; Figure 8). Similarly, the results of the subgroup analysis demonstrated that azathioprine use was a risk factor for CMV reactivation (OR = 1.444, 95% CI: 1.012 to 2.061, p = 0.043; Figure 8).

3.5.6. 5-ASA

Nine articles described the risk of CMV reactivation in UC patients treated with 5-ASA. The effects of the fixed-effect model revealed that 5-ASA was associated with a lower probability of CMV reactivation (heterogeneity I2 = 18.0%, p = 0.283, OR = 0.674, 95% CI: 0.492 to 0.924, p = 0.014; Figure 9).

3.5.7. Infliximab

Seven articles assessed whether infliximab affected CMV infection or reactivation in UC patients. There was no obvious heterogeneity (I2 = 68.3%, p = 0.004). A random-effect model was used. Pooling the results demonstrated that infliximab therapy was not a risk factor for CMV reactivation (OR = 1.915, 95% CI: 0.870 to 4.217, p = 0.107; Figure 10).

3.5.8. Sensitivity Analysis

As shown in Figure 11, the results of the sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the effects of all the risk factors on CMV reactivation in UC patients remained consistent after removing the trials one by one.

4. Discussion

The relationship between CMV reactivation and UC has been reviewed for several decades. Several studies have shown that CMV reactivation carries an increased risk of surgical complications and mortality in patients with UC [37]. A large number of proinflammatory cytokines such as TNF-α, IFN-γ, and IL-2 could activate the expression of transcription factor activator protein-1 (AP-1) and nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB), thereby increasing the expression of MIP-1, CCL5, MCP-1, and adhesion molecules (ICAM-1 and VCAM-1) involved in inflammation [38,39]. Stimulated by these cytokines, monocytes, and dendritic cells phagocytosing CMV travel to the intestinal mucosal injury area by chemotaxis. TNF-α and IFN-γ mediate the activation of CMV in monocytes and dendritic cells, respectively. Furthermore, Smith et al. [40] showed that the monocytes infected with latent CMV infiltrated tissues and differentiated into macrophages that specifically expressed CDl4, TLR4, and TLR5. On the one hand, macrophages, particularly CDl4+ macrophages, also play an essential role in “saving cells” supporting CMV from latent to active state [41,42,43]. On the other hand, CMV reactivation promotes the expression of myeloiddifferentiationfactor88 (MyD88) and the phosphorylation of IKBα and NF-κB, contributing not just to replication but also to infectivity of CMV [44]. Taken together, CMV could penetrate the lamina propria and induce an abnormal mucosal immune reaction, exacerbating the systemic inflammatory response of the intestine [45].
More severe UC was associated with a higher risk of CMV reactivation. In this study, we found that the risk of CMV reactivation in patients with severe UC was 1.465 times higher than that of patients with mild-to-moderate UC. Furthermore, the risk of CMV reactivation was 2.108 times higher in patients with pancolitis compared to those with limited left colon lesions. These findings are supported by Nowacki [27], holding that severe UC and pancolitis are predictive factors for CMV reactivation. Indeed, severe UC and pancolitis indicate more intense inflammatory reactions, substantial intestinal mucosal barrier disruptions, and increased intestinal mucosal permeability, all of which may increase CMV reactivation.
The correlation between age of UC onset and risk of CMV reactivation remains controversial. Criscuoli [8] evaluated the natural history of CMV reactivation in a series of UC patients and found that there were no significant differences in the risk of CMV reactivation between patients ≥50 vs. <50 years of age. However, Pillet et al. [10] claimed that the age of UC onset over the age of 30 years is a contributing factor for CMV reactivation. This present meta-analysis indicated that UC patients with a later age of onset are more likely to suffer from CMV reactivation. Further examination of the articles included in this review revealed that the studies that found the age of UC onset to have little impact on CMV reactivation had enrolled UC patients from a narrow age range, primarily between 42 and 46 years old [6].
In addition to the disease features of UC patients, the association between treatment strategies and CMV reactivation should be noted. Glucocorticoids in various forms (mainly including hydrocortisone, dexamethasone, prednisolone, and prednisone) are highly potent steroid hormones on the front line of UC treatment. This meta-analysis found that glucocorticoid therapy is a risk factor for CMV reactivation, raising the risk by 4.175 times. Lee et al. [6] suggested that an average glucocorticoid use of more than 40 mg per day within one month would increase the incidence of CMV reactivation. Others have concluded that a cumulative glucocorticoid usage of greater than 400 mg within four weeks is a risk factor [25]. While the relationship between glucocorticoids and CMV reactivation was well established in our study, further investigation into the precise frequency and dose of glucocorticoids is still needed. This study also found that immunosuppressive agents are a risk factor for CMV reactivation. Likely, other studies have shown that both the reactivation and proliferative abilities of CMV are augmented by immunosuppressants [37]. Azathioprine, a cost-effective and widely available immunosuppressant for UC, was determined to be a risk factor for CMV reactivation in the subgroup analysis. The combined assessment of different immunosuppressants, including azathioprine, cyclosporine, methotrexate, 6-mercaptopurine, and mesalamine, in our study contributed to heterogeneity and may have impacted our analyses. Future studies should more clearly establish the association between CMV reactivation and individual immunosuppressants used in UC.
Interestingly, we found that 5-ASA use correlated with a lower risk of CMV reactivation. This may be confounded by the fact that patients treated with 5-ASA have milder disease and a subsequently lower incidence of CMV reactivation. Infliximab, a chimeric monoclonal immunoglobulin G1, and TNF-α antagonist, has been shown to block inflammatory responses and clear CMV infections [6,12]. As we know, TNF-α facilitates the reactivation of CMV in monocytes and dendritic cells [42]. Consistent with the results of the previous study, this meta-analysis demonstrated that infliximab is not a risk factor for CMV reactivation in UC patients [27].
Although we systematically proved that severe UC, pancolitis, older age of UC onset, glucocorticoids, immunosuppressants, and azathioprine are risk factors for CMV reactivation in UC patients, this study has several limitations. First, the relationship between more biological agents such as vedolizumab should be identified. Second, further research is required to determine the role of different immunosuppressants in CMV reactivation in UC patients.

5. Conclusions

Severe UC, pancolitis, glucocorticoids, immunosuppressants, azathioprine, and later age of onset are risk factors for CMV reactivation in patients with UC. Patients with these disease characteristics should be proactively screened for CMV reactivation in order to facilitate early diagnosis and timely antiviral treatment.

Author Contributions

Y.Q., conception and design, collection and assembly of data, data analysis and interpretation, and manuscript writing; G.W., data analysis and interpretation and manuscript revising and editing; D.K., H.Q., G.L. and H.W. (Hongda Wang), data collection and analysis; H.W. (Hao Wang), conception and design, financial support, administrative support, manuscript writing, and final approval of the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by grants to Hao Wang from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 82071802), a Tianjin Application Basis and Cutting-Edge Technology Research Grant (no. 14JCZDJC35700), the Li Jieshou Intestinal Barrier Research Special Fund (no. LJS_201412), the Natural Science Foundation of Tianjin (no. 18JCZDJC35800), and the Tianjin Medical University Talent Fund; by a grant to Hong-da Wang from the Tianjin Research Innovation Project for Postgraduate Students (no. 2020YJSS177); by a grant to Guang-ming Li from the Tianjin Research Innovation Project for Postgraduate Students (no. 2020YJSS176).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Kaplan, G.G. The global burden of IBD: From 2015 to 2025. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2015, 12, 720–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Molodecky, N.A.; Soon, I.S.; Rabi, D.M.; Ghali, W.A.; Ferris, M.; Chernoff, G.; Benchimol, E.I.; Panaccione, R.; Ghosh, S.; Barkema, H.W.; et al. Increasing incidence and prevalence of the inflammatory bowel diseases with time, based on systematic review. Gastroenterology 2012, 142, 46–54.e42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  3. Ng, S.C.; Shi, H.Y.; Hamidi, N.; Underwood, F.E.; Tang, W.; Benchimol, E.I.; Panaccione, R.; Ghosh, S.; Wu, J.C.Y.; Chan, F.K.L.; et al. Worldwide incidence and prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease in the 21st century: A systematic review of population-based studies. Lancet 2018, 390, 2769–2778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Adams, S.M.; Bornemann, P.H. Ulcerative colitis. Am. Fam. Physician 2013, 87, 699–705. [Google Scholar]
  5. Ordás, I.; Eckmann, L.; Talamini, M.; Baumgart, D.C.; Sandborn, W.J. Ulcerative colitis. Lancet 2012, 380, 1606–1619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  6. Lee, H.S.; Park, S.H.; Kim, S.H.; Kim, J.; Choi, J.; Lee, H.J.; Kim, W.S.; Lee, J.M.; Kwak, M.S.; Hwang, S.W.; et al. Risk Factors and Clinical Outcomes Associated with Cytomegalovirus Colitis in Patients with Acute Severe Ulcerative Colitis. Inflamm. Bowel. Dis. 2016, 22, 912–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Dowd, J.B.; Bosch, J.A.; Steptoe, A.; Jayabalasingham, B.; Lin, J.; Yolken, R.; Aiello, A.E. Persistent Herpesvirus Infections and Telomere Attrition Over 3 Years in the Whitehall II Cohort. J. Infect. Dis. 2017, 216, 565–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Criscuoli, V.; Rizzuto, M.R.; Montalbano, L.; Gallo, E.; Cottone, M. Natural history of cytomegalovirus infection in a series of patients diagnosed with moderate-severe ulcerative colitis. World J. Gastroenterol. 2011, 17, 633–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Henmi, Y.; Kakimoto, K.; Inoue, T.; Nakazawa, K.; Kubota, M.; Hara, A.; Mikami, T.; Naka, Y.; Hirata, Y.; Hirata, Y.; et al. Cytomegalovirus infection in ulcerative colitis assessed by quantitative polymerase chain reaction: Risk factors and effects of immunosuppressants. J. Clin. Biochem. Nutr. 2018, 63, 246–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  10. Pillet, S.; Pozzetto, B.; Roblin, X. Cytomegalovirus and ulcerative colitis: Place of antiviral therapy. World J. Gastroenterol. 2016, 22, 2030–2045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Wang, Y.; Aggarwal, P.; Liu, X.; Lu, H.; Lian, L.; Wu, X.; Guo, S.; Aggarwal, N.; Lashner, B.; Shen, B. Antiviral Treatment for Colonic Cytomegalovirus Infection in Ulcerative Colitis Patients Significantly Improved Their Surgery Free Survival. J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2018, 52, e27–e31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Kim, Y.S.; Kim, Y.H.; Kim, J.S.; Cheon, J.H.; Ye, B.D.; Jung, S.A.; Park, Y.S.; Choi, C.H.; Jang, B.I.; Han, D.S.; et al. The prevalence and efficacy of ganciclovir on steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis with cytomegalovirus infection: A prospective multicenter study. J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2012, 46, 51–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Oh, S.J.; Lee, C.K.; Kim, Y.-W.; Jeong, S.J.; Park, Y.M.; Oh, C.H.; Kim, J.-W.; Kim, H.J. True cytomegalovirus colitis is a poor prognostic indicator in patients with ulcerative colitis flares: The 10-year experience of an academic referral inflammatory bowel disease center. Scand. J. Gastroenterol. 2019, 54, 976–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Ciccocioppo, R.; Racca, F.; Scudeller, L.; Piralla, A.; Formagnana, P.; Pozzi, L.; Betti, E.; Vanoli, A.; Riboni, R.; Kruzliak, P.; et al. Differential cellular localization of Epstein-Barr virus and human cytomegalovirus in the colonic mucosa of patients with active or quiescent inflammatory bowel disease. Immunol. Res. 2016, 64, 191–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Shukla, T.; Singh, S.; Loftus, E.V., Jr.; Bruining, D.H.; McCurdy, J.D. Antiviral Therapy in Steroid-refractory Ulcerative Colitis with Cytomegalovirus: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 2015, 21, 2718–2725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Magro, F.; Gionchetti, P.; Eliakim, R.; Ardizzone, S.; Armuzzi, A.; Barreiro-de Acosta, M.; Burisch, J.; Gecse, K.B.; Hart, A.L.; Hindryckx, P.; et al. Third European Evidence-based Consensus on Diagnosis and Management of Ulcerative Colitis. Part 1: Definitions, Diagnosis, Extra-intestinal Manifestations, Pregnancy, Cancer Surveillance, Surgery, and Ileo-anal Pouch Disorders. J. Crohn’s Colitis 2017, 11, 649–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Rahier, J.F.; Magro, F.; Abreu, C.; Armuzzi, A.; Ben-Horin, S.; Chowers, Y.; Cottone, M.; de Ridder, L.; Doherty, G.; Ehehalt, R.; et al. Second European evidence-based consensus on the prevention, diagnosis and management of opportunistic infections in inflammatory bowel disease. J. Crohn’s Colitis 2014, 8, 443–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Stang, A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 2010, 25, 603–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  19. Wu, J.; Zhang, A.; Li, L.; Liu, S.; Yang, F.; Yang, R. Meta-analysis of the Efficacy and Tolerability of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Combined with Chemotherapy in First-line Treatment of Small Cell Lung Cancer. Clin. Ther. 2021, 43, 582–593.e2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Williams, Z.J.; Suzman, E.; Woynaroski, T.G. Prevalence of Decreased Sound Tolerance (Hyperacusis) in Individuals With Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Meta-Analysis. Ear Hear. 2021, 42, 1137–1150. [Google Scholar]
  21. Chun, J.; Lee, C.; Kwon, J.E.; Hwang, S.W.; Kim, S.G.; Kim, J.S.; Jung, H.C.; Im, J.P. Usefulness of the cytomegalovirus antigenemia assay in patients with ulcerative colitis. Intest. Res. 2015, 13, 50–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  22. Hirayama, Y.; Ando, T.; Hirooka, Y.; Watanabe, O.; Miyahara, R.; Nakamura, M.; Yamamura, T.; Goto, H. Characteristic endoscopic findings and risk factors for cytomegalovirus-associated colitis in patients with active ulcerative colitis. World J. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2016, 8, 301–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Inokuchi, T.; Kato, J.; Hiraoka, S.; Suzuki, H.; Nakarai, A.; Hirakawa, T.; Akita, M.; Takahashi, S.; Harada, K.; Okada, H.; et al. Long-term follow-up of ulcerative colitis patients treated on the basis of their cytomegalovirus antigen status. World J. Gastroenterol. 2014, 20, 509–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Levin, A.; Yaari, S.; Stoff, R.; Caplan, O.; Wolf, D.G.; Israeli, E. Diagnosis of Cytomegalovirus Infection during Exacerbation of Ulcerative Colitis. Digestion 2017, 96, 142–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Matsuoka, K.; Iwao, Y.; Mori, T.; Sakuraba, A.; Yajima, T.; Hisamatsu, T.; Okamoto, S.; Morohoshi, Y.; Izumiya, M.; Ichikawa, H.; et al. Cytomegalovirus is frequently reactivated and disappears without antiviral agents in ulcerative colitis patients. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2007, 102, 331–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. McCurdy, J.D.; Jones, A.; Enders, F.T.; Killian, J.M.; Loftus, E.V., Jr.; Smyrk, T.C.; Bruining, D.H. A model for identifying cytomegalovirus in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2015, 13, 131–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Nowacki, T.M.; Bettenworth, D.; Meister, T.; Heidemann, J.; Lenze, F.; Schmidt, H.H.; Heinzow, H.S. Novel score predicts risk for cytomegalovirus infection in ulcerative colitis. J. Clin. Virol Off. Publ. Pan Am. Soc. Clin. Virol. 2018, 105, 103–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Omiya, M.; Matsushita, M.; Tanaka, T.; Kawamata, S.; Okazaki, K. The absence of large ulcer predicts latent cytomegalovirus infection in ulcerative colitis with positive mucosal viral assay. Intern. Med. 2010, 49, 2277–2282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  29. Ormeci, A.C.; Akyuz, F.; Baran, B.; Soyer, O.M.; Gokturk, S.; Onel, M.; Onel, D.; Agacfidan, A.; Demirci, M.; Yegen, G.; et al. Steroid-refractory inflammatory bowel disease is a risk factor for CMV infection. Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 2016, 20, 858–865. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  30. Pillet, S.; Jarlot, C.; Courault, M.; Del Tedesco, E.; Chardon, R.; Saint-Sardos, P.; Presles, E.; Phelip, J.M.; Berthelot, P.; Pozzetto, B.; et al. Infliximab Does Not Worsen Outcomes During Flare-ups Associated with Cytomegalovirus Infection in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 2015, 21, 1580–1586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Suzuki, H.; Kato, J.; Kuriyama, M.; Hiraoka, S.; Kuwaki, K.; Yamamoto, K. Specific endoscopic features of ulcerative colitis complicated by cytomegalovirus infection. World J. Gastroenterol. 2010, 16, 1245–1251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  32. Zagorowicz, E.; Bugajski, M.; Wieszczy, P.; Pietrzak, A.; Magdziak, A.; Mroz, A. Cytomegalovirus Infection in Ulcerative Colitis is Related to Severe Inflammation and a High Count of Cytomegalovirus-positive Cells in Biopsy Is a Risk Factor for Colectomy. J. Crohn’s Colitis 2016, 10, 1205–1211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  33. Yuhong, Z.; Xinpu, M. Clinical characteristics and risk factors of ulcerative colitis complicated with cytomegalovirus infection. Pract. Prev. Med. 2018, 3, 25. [Google Scholar]
  34. Tao, L.; Ping, Z. Clinical Characteristics and Risk Factors of Cytomegalovirus Infection in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis. J. Prev. Med. Chin. PLA 2019, 1, 37. [Google Scholar]
  35. Ting, F.; Minhu, C.; Yao, H.; Zhirong, Z.; Baili, C. Clinical features analysis of ulcerative colitis complicated with cytomegalovirus infection. Chin. J. Dig. 2016, 2, 78–85. [Google Scholar]
  36. Gang, X.; Linman, Y.; Xingyuan, H. Risk factors, clinical features and clinical outcome of cytomegalovirus infection in patients with ulcreative colitis. Chin. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2016, 10, 25. [Google Scholar]
  37. Uchino, M.; Matsuoka, H.; Bando, T.; Hirata, A.; Sasaki, H.; Hirose, K.; Takesue, Y.; Nakamura, S.; Tomita, N.; Ikeuchi, H. Clinical features and treatment of ulcerative colitis-related severe gastroduodenitis and enteritis with massive bleeding after colectomy. Int. J. Colorectal. Dis. 2014, 29, 239–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Gullett, J.C.; Nolte, F.S. Quantitative nucleic acid amplification methods for viral infections. Clin. Chem. 2015, 61, 72–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  39. Söderberg-Nauclér, C.; Fish, K.N.; Nelson, J.A. Interferon-gamma and tumor necrosis factor-alpha specifically induce formation of cytomegalovirus-permissive monocyte-derived macrophages that are refractory to the antiviral activity of these cytokines. J. Clin. Investig. 1997, 100, 3154–3163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  40. Smith, P.D.; Shimamura, M.; Musgrove, L.C.; Dennis, E.A.; Bimczok, D.; Novak, L.; Ballestas, M.; Fenton, A.; Dandekar, S.; Britt, W.J.; et al. Cytomegalovirus enhances macrophage TLR expression and MyD88-mediated signal transduction to potentiate inducible inflammatory responses. J. Immunol. 2014, 193, 5604–5612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  41. Söderberg-Nauclér, C.; Fish, K.N.; Nelson, J.A. Reactivation of latent human cytomegalovirus by allogeneic stimulation of blood cells from healthy donors. Cell 1997, 91, 119–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  42. Hahn, G.; Jores, R.; Mocarski, E.S. Cytomegalovirus remains latent in a common precursor of dendritic and myeloid cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1998, 95, 3937–3942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  43. Söderberg-Nauclér, C.; Nelson, J.Y. Human cytomegalovirus latency and reactivation—a delicate balance between the virus and its host’s immune system. Intervirology 1999, 42, 314–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Lee, Y.K.; Turner, H.; Maynard, C.L.; Oliver, J.R.; Chen, D.; Elson, C.O.; Weaver, C.T. Late developmental plasticity in the T helper 17 lineage. Immunity 2009, 30, 92–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  45. Langner, C.; Magro, F.; Driessen, A.; Ensari, A.; Mantzaris, G.J.; Villanacci, V.; Becheanu, G.; Borralho Nunes, P.; Cathomas, G.; Fries, W.; et al. The histopathological approach to inflammatory bowel disease: A practice guide. Virchows Arch. 2014, 464, 511–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
Diagnostics 11 01952 g001 550
Figure 1. Flow chart illustrating the selection process for the articles included in the present meta-analysis.
Figure 1. Flow chart illustrating the selection process for the articles included in the present meta-analysis.
Diagnostics 11 01952 g001
Diagnostics 11 01952 g002 550
Figure 2. Funnel plot analysis for the publication bias assessment: (A) Severe UC; (B) pancolitis; (C) glucocorticoids; (D) immunosuppressants. UC = ulcerative colitis; OR = odds ratio; s.e. = standard error.
Figure 2. Funnel plot analysis for the publication bias assessment: (A) Severe UC; (B) pancolitis; (C) glucocorticoids; (D) immunosuppressants. UC = ulcerative colitis; OR = odds ratio; s.e. = standard error.
Diagnostics 11 01952 g002
Diagnostics 11 01952 g003 550
Figure 3. Egger’s publication bias plot: (A) Severe UC; (B) pancolitis; (C) age of onset; (D) glucocorticoids; (E) immunosuppressants; (F) azathioprine; (G) 5-ASA; (H) infliximab. UC = ulcerative colitis; 5-ASA = 5-aminosalicylic acid; SND = standard normal deviation; CI = confidence interval.
Figure 3. Egger’s publication bias plot: (A) Severe UC; (B) pancolitis; (C) age of onset; (D) glucocorticoids; (E) immunosuppressants; (F) azathioprine; (G) 5-ASA; (H) infliximab. UC = ulcerative colitis; 5-ASA = 5-aminosalicylic acid; SND = standard normal deviation; CI = confidence interval.
Diagnostics 11 01952 g003
Diagnostics 11 01952 g004 550
Figure 4. A forest plot diagram showing severe UC. UC = ulcerative colitis; OR = odds ratio.
Figure 4. A forest plot diagram showing severe UC. UC = ulcerative colitis; OR = odds ratio.
Diagnostics 11 01952 g004
Diagnostics 11 01952 g005 550
Figure 5. A forest plot diagram showing pancolitis. OR = odds ratio.
Figure 5. A forest plot diagram showing pancolitis. OR = odds ratio.
Diagnostics 11 01952 g005
Diagnostics 11 01952 g006 550
Figure 6. A forest plot diagram showing the age of onset. WMD = weighted mean difference.
Figure 6. A forest plot diagram showing the age of onset. WMD = weighted mean difference.
Diagnostics 11 01952 g006
Diagnostics 11 01952 g007 550
Figure 7. A forest plot diagram showing glucocorticoids. OR = odds ratio.
Figure 7. A forest plot diagram showing glucocorticoids. OR = odds ratio.
Diagnostics 11 01952 g007
Diagnostics 11 01952 g008 550
Figure 8. A forest plot diagram showing immunosuppressants and azathioprine. OR = odds ratio.
Figure 8. A forest plot diagram showing immunosuppressants and azathioprine. OR = odds ratio.
Diagnostics 11 01952 g008
Diagnostics 11 01952 g009 550
Figure 9. A forest plot diagram showing 5-ASA. 5-ASA = 5-aminosalicylic acid; OR = odds ratio.
Figure 9. A forest plot diagram showing 5-ASA. 5-ASA = 5-aminosalicylic acid; OR = odds ratio.
Diagnostics 11 01952 g009
Diagnostics 11 01952 g010 550
Figure 10. A forest plot diagram showing infliximab. OR = odds ratio.
Figure 10. A forest plot diagram showing infliximab. OR = odds ratio.
Diagnostics 11 01952 g010
Diagnostics 11 01952 g011 550
Figure 11. Sensitivity analysis of all outcomes: (A) Severe UC; (B) pancolitis; (C) age of onset; (D) glucocorticoids; (E) immunosuppressants; (F) azathioprine; (G) 5-ASA; (H) infliximab. UC = ulcerative colitis; 5-ASA = 5-aminosalicylic acid; CI = confidence interval.
Figure 11. Sensitivity analysis of all outcomes: (A) Severe UC; (B) pancolitis; (C) age of onset; (D) glucocorticoids; (E) immunosuppressants; (F) azathioprine; (G) 5-ASA; (H) infliximab. UC = ulcerative colitis; 5-ASA = 5-aminosalicylic acid; CI = confidence interval.
Diagnostics 11 01952 g011
Table
Table 1. The basic characteristics of the studies included in the meta-analysis.
Table 1. The basic characteristics of the studies included in the meta-analysis.
AuthorYearCountryStudy DesignStudy GroupGenderAge *Disease Duration (Years)
CMV+CMV−CMV+ (M/F)CMV− (M/F)CMV+CMV−CMV+CMV−
Matsuoka [25]2007JapanRetrospective252312/1317/642 ± 14.537.2 ± 11.24.85 ± 3.855.35 ± 5.00
Omiya [28]2010JapanProspective713NANANANANANA
Suzuki [31]2010JapanRetrospective15588/726/32NANA7.14 ± 7.414.12 ± 7.39
Criscuoli [8]2011ItalyProspective285719/931/26NANANANA
Kim [12]2012KoreaProspective314120/1128/1343.1 ± 15.443.4 ± 14.12.4 ± 2.653.7 ± 4.94
Inokuchi [23]2014JapanRetrospective407826/1431/4745 ± 14.236 ± 12.51.5 ± 0.604.6 ± 0.53
Chun [21]2015KoreaRetrospective12316/614/17NANANANA
McCurdy [26]2015USARetrospective45139NANANANANANA
Pillet [30]2015FranceProspective397028/1144/2651.2 ± 17.046.5 ± 18.06.59 ± 7.006.67 ± 6.75
Hirayama [22]2016JapanRetrospective3411519/1564/5142.3 ± 14.429.0 ± 14.44.6 ± 4.96.0 ± 7.4
Lee [6]2016KoreaRetrospective509930/2050/4945 ± 14.7542 ± 10.332.2 ± 3.254.7 ± 4.83
ORMECI [29]2016TurkeyRetrospective8356/217/18NANANANA
Zagórowicz [32]2016PolandRetrospective336222/1139/23NANANANA
Henmi [9]2018JapanRetrospective266015/1138/2255.0 ± 13.241.8 ± 16.25.95 ± 5.076.67 ± 7.45
Levin [24]2017USARetrospective13156/712/3NANANANA
Nowacki [27]2018GermanyRetrospective3420525/9108/9737 ± 17.836 ± 18.99.0 ± 8.44.4 ± 7.3
Feng [35]2016ChinaRetrospective316018/1339/21NANANANA
Xu [36]2016ChinaRetrospective4914328/2182/61NANANANA
Li [34]2019ChinaRetrospective349121/1349/42NANA3.92 ± 1.834.84 ± 2.31
Zhang [33]2018ChinaRetrospective3711323/1461/52NANA3.94 ± 1.954.86 ± 2.32
* The age of the patients when the disease was first diagnosed; CMV = cytomegalovirus; M = male; F = female; NA = not available.
Table
Table 2. Quality assessment using the NOS for risk of bias of studies included in the meta-analysis.
Table 2. Quality assessment using the NOS for risk of bias of studies included in the meta-analysis.
StudyYearSelectionComparabilityExposureTotal
Matsuoka20074329
Omiya20104228
Suzuki20104239
Criscuoli20114228
Kim20124239
Inokuchi20143328
Chun20154239
McCurdy20154239
Pillet20154239
Hirayama20163238
Lee20164239
ORMECI20164228
Zagórowicz20163227
Henmi20183238
Levin20174239
Nowacki20184138
Feng20164138
Xu20164228
Li20193227
Zhang20184138
NOS = Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
Table
Table 3. The results of the Egger’s tests for outcomes.
Table 3. The results of the Egger’s tests for outcomes.
Number of StudiesStd_Efftp > |t|95% CI
Severe UC10Slope−0.240.813−1.5211.231
Bias0.880.404−1.8664.172
Pancolitis14Slope1.660.123−0.206−1.442
Bias0.170.868−1.4421.686
Age of onset8Slope0.870.419−22.1709.180
Bias−0.420.690−12.9659.180
Glucocorticoids14Slope1.280.224−0.4771.841
Bias1.400.186−0.6883.184
Immunosuppressants15Slope0.480.642−1.1861.854
Bias0.500.623−2.3913.598
Azathioprine8Slope0.410.699−1.4301.998
Bias0.120.906−3.1693.507
5-ASA9Slope−1.660.140−2.2850.399
Bias0.990.354−1.5543.803
Infliximab7Slope0.870.423−1.8603.770
Bias−0.240.821−5.6324.675
UC = ulcerative colitis; 5-ASA = 5-aminosalicylic acid.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Qin, Y.; Wang, G.; Kong, D.; Li, G.; Wang, H.; Qin, H.; Wang, H. Risk Factors of Cytomegalovirus Reactivation in Ulcerative Colitis Patients: A Meta-Analysis. Diagnostics 2021, 11, 1952. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11111952

AMA Style

Qin Y, Wang G, Kong D, Li G, Wang H, Qin H, Wang H. Risk Factors of Cytomegalovirus Reactivation in Ulcerative Colitis Patients: A Meta-Analysis. Diagnostics. 2021; 11(11):1952. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11111952

Chicago/Turabian Style

Qin, Yafei, Grace Wang, Dejun Kong, Guangming Li, Hongda Wang, Hong Qin, and Hao Wang. 2021. "Risk Factors of Cytomegalovirus Reactivation in Ulcerative Colitis Patients: A Meta-Analysis" Diagnostics 11, no. 11: 1952. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11111952

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop