PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Marcano-Marcano, Luis
AU  - Salazar-Lugo, Raquel
TI  - Use of Biochemical Biomarkers to Evaluate the Role of Oxidative Stress in the Progression of COVID-19 Severity
AID  - 10.1101/2024.08.11.24311803
DP  - 2024 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2024.08.11.24311803
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/08/11/2024.08.11.24311803.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/08/11/2024.08.11.24311803.full
AB  - The role of oxidative stress and the use of biochemical biomarkers in the severity of COVID-19 was evaluated through a literature review (2020–2021) using scientific search engines such as PubMed, Science Direct, and Google Scholar. The search was limited to articles published in Spanish or English that reported on COVID-19 and its relationship with oxidative stress, following PRISMA-2020 guidelines. The search terms included oxidative stress, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, oxidative biomarkers, and oxidative damage. 93.5% of the selected studies were from the year 2021. These studies evaluated both oxidative stress biomarkers and oxidative damage biomarkers in COVID-19 patients. The reviewed studies reinforce the strong association of SARS-CoV-2 with oxidative stress and demonstrate how SARS-CoV-2-induced ROS production and disruption of the antioxidant defense system trigger a pro-inflammatory environment and cause severe tissue damage. In 64.7% of the studies, a combination of oxidative stress biomarkers (antioxidant and oxidative damage biomarkers) was used to assess COVID-19 severity. The most commonly used antioxidant biomarkers were thiols and total antioxidant capacity, followed by glutathione. The most commonly used oxidative damage biomarkers were malondialdehyde and peroxides, followed by advanced oxidation protein products. COVID-19 leads to a decrease in the antioxidant defense system, reflected by a decrease in antioxidant biomarkers and an increase in oxidative damage biomarkers.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study did not receive any fundingAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study is a systematic review and did not involve the collection of new data from human subjects. Therefore, no ethical approval was requiredI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript