Background: COVID-19 is a serious and potentially deadly disease. Early diagnosis of infected individuals will play an important role in stopping its further escalation. The present gold standard for sampling is the nasopharyngeal swab method. However, several recent papers suggested that saliva-based testing is a promising alternative that could simplify and accelerate COVID-19 diagnosis. Objectives: Our aim was to conduct a meta-analysis on the reliability and consistency of SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA detection in saliva specimens. Methods: We have reported our meta-analysis according to the Cochrane Handbook. We searched the Cochrane Library, Embase, Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science and clinical trial registries for eligible studies published between 1 January and 25 April 2020. The number of positive tests and the total number of tests conducted were collected as raw data. The proportion of positive tests in the pooled data were calculated by score confidence-interval estimation with the Freeman–Tukey transformation. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 measure and the χ 2 -test. Results: The systematic search revealed 96 records after removal of duplicates. Twenty-six records were included for qualitative analysis and 5 records for quantitative synthesis. We found 91% (CI 80–99%) sensitivity for saliva tests and 98% (CI 89–100%) sensitivity for nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) tests in previously confirmed COVID-19 patients, with moderate heterogeneity among the studies. Additionally, we identified 18 registered, ongoing clinical trials of saliva-based tests for detection of the virus. Conclusion: Saliva tests offer a promising alternative to NPS for COVID-19 diagnosis. However, further diagnostic accuracy studies are needed to improve their specificity and sensitivity.

Estrogen is one of the most important female sex hormones, and is indispensable for reproduction. However, its role is much wider. Among others, due to its neuroprotective effects, estrogen protects the brain against dementia and complications of traumatic injury. Previously, it was used mainly as a therapeutic option for influencing the menstrual cycle and treating menopausal symptoms. Unfortunately, hormone replacement therapy might be associated with detrimental side effects, such as increased risk of stroke and breast cancer, raising concerns about its safety. Thus, tissue-selective and non-classical estrogen analogues have become the focus of interest. Here, we review the current knowledge about estrogen effects in a broader sense, and the possibility of using selective estrogen-receptor modulators (SERMs), selective estrogen-receptor downregulators (SERDs), phytoestrogens, and activators of non-genomic estrogen-like signaling (ANGELS) molecules as treatment.

Objectives: Our aim was to conduct a meta-analysis on the reliability and consistency of SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA detection in saliva specimens. Methods: We reported our meta-analysis according to the Cochrane Handbook. We searched the Cochrane Library, Embase, Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science and clinical trial registries for eligible studies published between 1 January and 25 April 2020. The number of positive tests and total number of conducted tests were collected as raw data. The proportion of positive tests in the pooled data were calculated by score confidence interval estimation with the Freeman-Tukey transformation. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 measure and the Chi2 test. Results: The systematic search revealed 96 records after removal of duplicates. 26 records were included for qualitative analysis and 5 records for quantitative synthesis. We found 91% (95%CI = 80%-99%) sensitivity for saliva tests and 98% (95%CI 89%-100%) sensitivity for nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) tests in previously confirmed COVID-19 infected patients, with moderate heterogeneity among studies. Additionally, we identified 18 registered, ongoing clinical trials on saliva-based tests for detection of the virus. Conclusion: Saliva tests offer a promising alternative to NPS for COVID-19 diagnosis. However, further diagnostic accuracy studies are needed to improve their specificity and sensitivity.