Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is rapidly developing worldwide with a high mortality rate. In this meta-analysis study, the effect of influenza vaccination on the prevention of COVID-19 and its consequences in patients were investigated. The systematic search for this study was performed from November 2019 to 25 November 2020, in the databases of Medline, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Ebsco, Cochrane and medRxiv. Search terms used included COVID-19, coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, covid, influenza, flu, grippe and vaccine. The present study examined the association between influenza vaccination and COVID-19 including COVID-19 infection, mortality, hospitalisation and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Finally, the pooled estimates for different outcomes were calculated by the software for statistics and data science (STATA) version 15 and I2 was used to determine the heterogeneity. By analysing the data of articles, the pooled estimates of these data indicated that influenza vaccination could lower probability of COVID-19 infection up to 24% (OR = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.65, 0.91), of death up to 32% (OR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.42, 1.11), of the hospitalisation up to 25% (OR = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.46; 1.23) and of admission to ICU up to 29% (OR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.40, 1.27). Influenza vaccination can help decrease the COVID-19 infection and reduce hospitalisation and the need for ICU and mortality rates.
In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.