Department of Microbiology, School of Life Sciences, Sikkim University, Tadong, Gangtok, India.
Centre for Advanced Research (CFAR), Faculty of Medicine, King George's Medical University (KGMU), Lucknow, India.
J Med Virol. 2022 Dec;94(12):5766-5779. doi: 10.1002/jmv.28060. Epub 2022 Sep 7.
The aim of the study was to trace and understand the origin of Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) through various available literatures and accessible databases. Although the world enters the third year of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, health and socioeconomic impacts continue to mount, the origin and mechanisms of spill-over of the SARS-CoV-2 into humans remain elusive. Therefore, a systematic review of the literature was performed that showcased the integrated information obtained through manual searches, digital databases (PubMed, CINAHL, and MEDLINE) searches, and searches from legitimate publications (1966-2022), followed by meta-analysis. Our systematic analysis data proposed three postulated hypotheses concerning the origin of the SARS-CoV-2, which include zoonotic origin (Z), laboratory origin (L), and obscure origin (O). Despite the fact that the zoonotic origin for SARS-CoV-2 has not been conclusively identified to date, our data suggest a zoonotic origin, in contrast to some alternative concepts, including the probability of a laboratory incident or leak. Our data exhibit that zoonotic origin (Z) has higher evidence-based support as compared to laboratory origin (L). Importantly, based on all the studies included, we generated the forest plot with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the risk ratio estimates. Our meta-analysis further supports the zoonotic origin of SARS/SARS-CoV-2 in the included studies.
本研究旨在通过各种现有文献和可访问的数据库追踪和了解严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒 2 (SARS-CoV-2) 的起源。尽管世界已经进入 2019 年冠状病毒病 2019 大流行的第三年,但仍在继续造成健康和社会经济方面的影响,而 SARS-CoV-2 溢出到人类的起源和机制仍然难以捉摸。因此,对文献进行了系统回顾,展示了通过手动搜索、数字数据库(PubMed、CINAHL 和 MEDLINE)搜索以及合法出版物(1966-2022 年)搜索获得的综合信息,然后进行了荟萃分析。我们的系统分析数据提出了有关 SARS-CoV-2 起源的三个假设,包括动物源(Z)、实验室源(L)和不明来源(O)。尽管迄今为止尚未确定 SARS-CoV-2 的动物源,但我们的数据表明,与其他一些概念(包括实验室事故或泄漏的可能性)相反,存在动物源。我们的数据表明,与实验室起源(L)相比,动物源(Z)具有更高的基于证据的支持。重要的是,根据所有纳入的研究,我们生成了风险比估计值的 95%置信区间(CI)的森林图。我们的荟萃分析进一步支持了纳入研究中 SARS/SARS-CoV-2 的动物源。