Little is known about the ongoing monkeypox (mpox) outbreak, and the clinical features of mpox in patients worldwide have not been rigorously analysed. Thus, we aimed to investigate the clinical features associated with mpox infection and understand the pathophysiology and characteristics of the disease. For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for articles published till 16 September 2022. We used a random effects model to calculate the pooled prevalence and 95% confidence interval (CI). We used the I2 statistic to assess heterogeneity, Egger's test to assess publication bias, 95% prediction interval to determine the level of uncertainty, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Joanna Briggs Institute quality assessment tool to assess the risk of bias. Twenty-six relevant articles from 19 countries across 5 continents were included, and data on 5472 mpox patients with 18 unique features were analysed. The pooled prevalence of clinical features of mpox were rash (85.7%, 95% CI: 68.3-94.3; k = 21), chills (77.8%, 95% CI: 70.5-83.7; k = 3), and fever (62.3%, 95% CI: 51.3-71.6; k = 25), lymphadenopathy (58.6%, 95% CI: 47.2-69.2; k = 21), lethargy or exhaustion (46.8%, 95% CI: 30.7-63.5; k = 14), pruritus (40.6%, 95% CI: 28.5-54.0; k = 5), myalgia (36.0%, 95% CI: 24.3-49.7; k = 16), headache (34.6%, 95% CI: 23.4-47.8; k = 17), skin ulcer (31.1%, 95% CI: 18.6-47.1; k = 7), abdomen symptom (24.2%, 95% CI: 17.9-31.9; k = 11), pharyngitis (23.0%, 95% CI: 12.7-37.9; k = 14), respiratory symptom (19.5%, 95% CI: 6.8-44.6; k = 6), nausea or vomiting (13.0%, 95% CI: 4.6-31.9; k = 3), scrotal or penile oedema (10.7%, 95% CI: 6.3-17.7; k = 4), conjunctivitis (7.1%, 95% CI: 2.4-18.9; k = 6), and death (0.9%, 95% CI: 0.4-2.0; k = 26). This is the first international and comprehensive study to examine all clinical presentations of human mpox infection. Our systematic review proposes a comprehensive understanding of the current mpox outbreak and may serve as key data for future studies on the pathological mechanisms and epidemiology of mpox infections.
On 23 July 2022, the World Health Organization declared the global mpox outbreak as a public health emergency of international significance. The mpox virus (MPXV) that caused the outbreak was classified as clade IIb, which belongs to the West African clade. However, the relationship between MPXV clades and symptoms, as well as the severity of mpox outcomes, is not fully understood. Thus, we aimed to investigate the global mpox prevalence and the differences in clinical manifestations and outcomes among patients with mpox between pre-outbreak (2003-2021) and the current mpox outbreak. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Google Scholar were searched using the keyword "monkeypox" and "mpox" up to 13 October 2022. A random effects model was used to obtain the pooled prevalence and 95% confidence intervals. This study included 27 articles, and 5698 patients with mpox with 19 distinctive features from 19 countries across five continents were assessed. Patients with mpox during the 2022 mpox outbreak showed mild clinical manifestations and outcomes compared with those before the 2022 mpox outbreak: mild rash (relative ratio [RR]: 5.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.52-17.08), fever (0.68, 0.49-0.94), pruritus (0.25, 0.19-0.32), myalgia (0.50, 0.31-0.81), headache (0.56, 0.35-0.88), skin ulcer (0.32, 0.17-0.59), abdominal symptom (0.29, 0.20-0.42), pharyngitis (0.32, 0.18-0.58), nausea or vomiting (0.15, 0.02-0.93), conjunctivitis (0.11, 0.03-0.38), concomitant infection with HIV (1.70, 0.95-3 0.04), and death (0.02, 0.001-0.31). MPXV clade IIb exhibited higher infectivity but may cause mild disease symptoms and low mortality rate. It is important to consider MPXV infection in patients with mpox-related features and/or a history of sexual transmission to prevent the spread of the disease and recognise the current pandemic threat.
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.