Europe PMC

This website requires cookies, and the limited processing of your personal data in order to function. By using the site you are agreeing to this as outlined in our privacy notice and cookie policy.

COVID-19, nausea, and vomiting.

Author information

Affiliations

  • 1. Division of Biomedical Sciences, St George's University of London, London, UK.
      Authors
    • Andrews PLR 1
    (1 author)
  • 2. Blizard Institute and the National Centre for Bowel Research, Barts The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
      Authors
    • Cai W 2
    • Sanger GJ 2
    (2 authors)
  • 3. School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
      Authors
    • Rudd JA 3
    (1 author)

ORCIDs linked to this article

Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 05 Oct 2020, 36(3):646-656
https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.15261 PMID: 32955126 PMCID: PMC7537541

Review

This article is in the Europe PMC Open access subset. Refer to the copyright information in the article for licensing details.
Free full text in Europe PMC

Abstract 

Exclusion of nausea (N) and vomiting (V) from detailed consideration as symptoms of COVID-19 is surprising as N can be an early presenting symptom. We examined the incidence of NV during infection before defining potential mechanisms. We estimate that the overall incidence of nausea (median 10.5%), although variable, is comparable with diarrhea. Poor definition of N, confusion with appetite loss, and reporting of N and/or V as a single entity may contribute to reporting variability and likely underestimation. We propose that emetic mechanisms are activated by mediators released from the intestinal epithelium by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) modulate vagal afferents projecting to the brainstem and after entry into the blood, activate the area postrema (AP) also implicated in anorexia. The receptor for spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, angiotensin 2 converting enzyme (ACE2), and transmembrane protease serine (for viral entry) is expressed in upper gastrointestinal (GI) enterocytes, ACE2 is expressed on enteroendocrine cells (EECs), and SARS-CoV-2 infects enterocytes but not EECs (studies needed with native EECs). The resultant virus-induced release of epithelial mediators due to exocytosis, inflammation, and apoptosis provides the peripheral and central emetic drives. Additionally, data from SARS-CoV-2 show an increase in plasma angiotensin II (consequent on SARS-CoV-2/ACE2 interaction), a centrally (AP) acting emetic, providing a further potential mechanism in COVID-19. Viral invasion of the dorsal brainstem is also a possibility but more likely in delayed onset symptoms. Overall, greater attention must be given to nausea as an early symptom of COVID-19 and for the insights provided into the GI effects of SARS-CoV-2.

Free full text 

Logo of pheblackwellLink to Publisher's site
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021 Mar; 36(3): 646–656.
Published online 2020 Oct 5. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.15261
PMCID: PMC7537541
PMID: 32955126

COVID‐19, nausea, and vomiting

Paul L R Andrews,corresponding author 1 Weigang Cai, 2 John A Rudd, 3 and Gareth J Sanger 2
Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer

Abstract

Exclusion of nausea (N) and vomiting (V) from detailed consideration as symptoms of COVID‐19 is surprising as N can be an early presenting symptom. We examined the incidence of NV during infection before defining potential mechanisms. We estimate that the overall incidence of nausea (median 10.5%), although variable, is comparable with diarrhea. Poor definition of N, confusion with appetite loss, and reporting of N and/or V as a single entity may contribute to reporting variability and likely underestimation. We propose that emetic mechanisms are activated by mediators released from the intestinal epithelium by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) modulate vagal afferents projecting to the brainstem and after entry into the blood, activate the area postrema (AP) also implicated in anorexia. The receptor for spike protein of SARS‐CoV‐2, angiotensin 2 converting enzyme (ACE2), and transmembrane protease serine (for viral entry) is expressed in upper gastrointestinal (GI) enterocytes, ACE2 is expressed on enteroendocrine cells (EECs), and SARS‐CoV‐2 infects enterocytes but not EECs (studies needed with native EECs). The resultant virus‐induced release of epithelial mediators due to exocytosis, inflammation, and apoptosis provides the peripheral and central emetic drives. Additionally, data from SARS‐CoV‐2 show an increase in plasma angiotensin II (consequent on SARS‐CoV‐2/ACE2 interaction), a centrally (AP) acting emetic, providing a further potential mechanism in COVID‐19. Viral invasion of the dorsal brainstem is also a possibility but more likely in delayed onset symptoms. Overall, greater attention must be given to nausea as an early symptom of COVID‐19 and for the insights provided into the GI effects of SARS‐CoV‐2.

Keywords: ACE2, angiotensin converting enzyme 2, angiotensin II, COVID‐19, dexamethasone, diarrhea, enteroendocrine cells, nausea, SARS‐CoV‐2, vomiting

Introduction

In addition to the prominent respiratory and pyrexic symptoms of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), 1 the symptom complex can include symptoms associated with the digestive tract including anorexia, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. Of these, diarrhea has received the most attention in the original literature, 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 commentaries, 7 , 8 , 9 and reviews. 10 , 11 , 12 Surprisingly, nausea and vomiting have not been discussed in detail. This is a serious omission as nausea and vomiting can be the presenting symptoms, as exemplified by the first cases of COVID‐19 in the United States 13 and China. 2 Initially, the occurrence of nausea and vomiting was reported to be “uncommon” with an incidence of < 4%, 7 but more recently, their prevalence has been described as “common.” 11 Superficially at least, the incidence of nausea and vomiting seems comparable with that for diarrhea (~ 5–6% in some systematic studies 14 , 15 ); ~ 10% in others 10 ; some studies report incidences for diarrhea of ≥ 30%. 3 , 11

It is important to understand the incidence of nausea and vomiting during COVID‐19 and the mechanisms by which this can occur. Patients with digestive tract symptoms, including nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, may have delayed hospital admission and a worse clinical outcome than those without. 16 It has been argued 3 that the value of diarrhea as a clinical symptom in the diagnosis and spread of COVID‐19 may be underestimated, particularly as digestive tract symptoms may precede respiratory ones. 11 However, nausea is an acute onset, early warning of a problem in the upper digestive tract (primarily stomach and small intestine), which can receive air when swallowing, and is a component of the body's epithelial defenses, triggered in the “natural” world by ingested toxins. 17 This mean that nausea may be the first indication of gastrointestinal (GI) infection by SARS‐CoV‐2; interestingly, “virus” is the Latin word for “poison.” Given the current paucity of knowledge, we first address key questions about COVID‐19 in relation to the prevalence of nausea and vomiting and then discuss plausible mechanisms.

How good is the epidemiological data on the incidence of nausea and vomiting in COVID‐19?

Nausea is a self‐reported sensation, but unless it is clearly defined for the patient, particularly in epidemiological studies and drug trials, there is a potential for confusion. Firstly, reporting of the symptom needs to be specifically requested to avoid the practice of merging the terms nausea, retching, and vomiting into a single adverse event. Secondly, the patient will base their understanding of the word on what they have been told nausea feels like (most likely originally by a parent or a clinician) or their previous experience of nausea (most likely in motion sickness); this may also be influenced by cultural and linguistic differences. Thirdly, symptoms that can occur with nausea or independently such as lack of desire to eat, dyspepsia, and epigastric discomfort short of overt pain may or may not be reported as nausea. These problems are compounded by the lack of a validated diagnostic biomarker for nausea although elevated plasma vasopressin and gastric dysrhythmia are associated with nausea. 18 , 19

It has been proposed to use pictograms to improve digestive tract symptom assessment, 20 helping to minimize linguistic and translation issues—particularly important when assessing comparability of symptom reporting from a global pandemic where cultural perceptions and understanding of nausea may complicate accurate reporting.

The literature contains multiple definitions of nausea (table 1.1, 18 for 30 definitions from the literature), which may be associated with different body areas (e.g. head, chest, and epigastrium). 19 Here, we define nausea as “a self‐reported, unpleasant sensation associated with the desire to vomit or the feeling that vomiting is imminent”. 18 Although vomiting is easier to define (the forceful oral expulsion of upper digestive tract contents), it may be identified incorrectly and used interchangeably with retching (unproductive, forceful, externally visible, rhythmic contractions of thoracic, and abdominal muscles usually preceding vomiting 21 ) and can be confused with intense gastroesophageal reflux. Nausea and vomiting can be reported as a single entity (nausea or vomiting, 1 nausea and/or vomiting 22 ) although they are a sensation and motor act respectively.

However, in reviewing the publications where data on the incidence of both nausea and vomiting have been collected, it is clear that both can be an early “acute” symptom of COVID‐19. Detailed data need to be collected on the incidence of N & V at all stages of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. We highlight four important issues related to the epidemiology.

  • 1.

    Nausea and vomiting need to be reported separately. In the studies where this has been performed, the incidences are either identical (e.g. 1% vs 1% 1 ; 5% vs 5% 23 ; 3.7% vs 3.7% 24 ) or higher than for vomiting (e.g. 10.1% vs 3.6%; 17.3% vs 5.0%; 26.4% vs 15.4% 25 , 26 , 27 A similar equivalence in the incidence of nausea and vomiting is seen for SARS and MERS where the overall incidences of both are higher at ~ 20%. 12 Although the data on COVID‐19 are limited, the incidence of nausea appears to be highly variable with a range of 1–30% 23 , 26 (Figure 1). Our literature analysis of 41 studies of >12,000 COVID‐19 patients (including children 28 ) in which nausea and/or vomiting data was reported, showed that the median incidence of nausea was 10.5% and that of diarrhea reported in the same studies was 11%; the latter comparable with the prevalence of 10.4% reported in a recent systematic review 58 but higher than in some other studies. 14 , 15 These findings support the view that nausea and diarrhea should be given equal prominence as symptoms. Notably, the median incidence of vomiting was 7% (Fig. 1), an incidence comparable with the 6.9% reported for abdominal pain in a systematic review/meta‐analysis. 58 It should be noted that as far as we are aware, separate detailed data on the incidence of nausea and vomiting in male and female patients have not been published and apart from the studies in children, there is no detailed age‐stratified symptom data.

    An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is JGH-36-646-g002.jpg

    The incidence of nausea and/or vomiting and diarrhea from 41 clinical studies 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 16 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 : nausea, n = 34; vomiting, n = 39; diarrhea, n = 39. Values for individual studies are shown together with the median and 95% confidence intervals. No distinction was made between nausea and vomiting in 10 studies, so the same incidence was used in both categories. The total number of patients in the studies was 12 239. Five studies (data indicated by triangles) reported only data on children (1.5 months to 17 years). 28 , 34 , 37 , 38 , 51

  • 2.

    What is the co‐occurrence of nausea and vomiting with other digestive tract symptoms in COVID‐19? Considering the likely effects of SARS‐CoV‐2 on the digestive tract (discussed further), a relationship between symptoms such as nausea/vomiting and diarrhea would not be unexpected but identifying the time of onset of each postinfection is essential to assessing their relative relevance for diagnosis. Without data on individual patients, it is not possible to draw firm conclusions, but some studies have begun to report the incidence of single and groups of symptoms. For example, nausea or vomiting with diarrhea has been reported with an incidence of 4.9% 29 and 4.3%. 22 In the 41 clinical studies analyzed above, 27 reported the incidence of nausea/vomiting and diarrhea with our analysis showing a correlation (Spearman R, 0.8 and 0.7). Identification of the temporal expression of symptoms and their clustering will be essential for classification of the ways in which SARS‐CoV‐2 infection can present, and to quickly recognize evolving patterns of presentation, as this may be a reflection of viral load and its relative impact on the respiratory and digestive tracts, and subsequently the brain (see further for the discussion). One study noted that patients with nausea and vomiting, and diarrhea were more likely to have fever, than those with either digestive symptom alone. 30 Finally, it is recognized that type II diabetes is a risk factor for COVID‐19. 59 The frequent occurrence of gastroparesis in diabetic patients 60 may make this group either more sensitive to the nausea and vomiting during SARS‐CoV‐2 infection or result in more intense symptoms.

  • 3.

    What is the severity of the nausea? To date, the published studies have only reported on the presence or not of nausea and vomiting, with no descriptions of their severity, comparable with those used routinely to assess these symptoms as side‐effects of anticancer chemotherapy. 61 A study of almost 2000 patients reported that GI symptoms (predominantly diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain) were “judged to be mild” in 74% of patients, 31 which could imply it was more severe in the remaining 26%. Additionally, there is a paucity of data on the temporal pattern of nausea and vomiting during the course of the disease. One publication commented that digestive symptoms (including vomiting but not nausea) became more pronounced as the severity of disease increased. 16 In another, the prevalence of nausea or vomiting was twice as high in hospitalized patients (not intensive care unit) compared with the emergency department (10% [6.2–15.8] vs 22.6% [19.5–26.1]) but interestingly reduced to 10.2% (6.9–14.7%) in patients in intensive care. 32 A recent commentary on the research priorities in the digestive manifestations of COVID‐19 62 called for “a more rigorous and systematic assessment of the prevalence, spectrum and severity of digestive manifestations”. We agree but strongly argue that nausea should be included as part of the symptom cluster. Similarly, the utility of mobile technology for collecting real‐time data on symptoms of COVID‐19 (see further) has been demonstrated, 63 , 64 but the symptom check list included in the supporting information 63 included diarrhea, abdominal pain and skipping meals, not nausea or vomiting. Such mobile technology is ideally suited to obtain data on the presence and intensity of nausea with a high temporal resolution and to investigate changing patterns of symptom expression.

  • 4.

    The relationship between nausea and appetite. A few studies report lack/loss of appetite or poor/low appetite, with an incidence apparently higher than that of nausea (23.2%, 49.5%, and 40%). 16 , 22 , 30 Of these studies, some 16 , 30 did not report nausea but others 22 reported “nausea and/or vomiting” with an incidence of 12% but the percentage of patients with either nausea or vomiting or both was not reported. While reduced appetite is a common symptom of infection, it can also be secondary to nausea as indicated by a preclinical study of the cytokine growth differentiation factor 15 65 demonstrating anorexia by induction of nausea and/or engaging with emetic mechanisms; this is also the case in cancer chemotherapy. 61 The incidence of anorexia in COVID‐19 patients in intensive care units is reported to be ~ 2× that of patients who were not. 33 As described above, it is likely that some patents will report loss of appetite when in reality, they have nausea, emphasizing the need for clarity and consistency of definitions when collecting data on nausea (as proposed for diarrhoea 3 ). The recent study of real‐time tracking of self‐reported symptoms 63 identified “skipped meals” as the symptom with the second highest odds ratio of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection after loss of smell; nausea as a potential underlying cause of skipping meals should be investigated further. Although children become infected with COVID‐19, they appear to be relatively asymptomatic in relation to adults, but there are reports of vomiting. 28 , 34 However, young children may not be capable of verbalizing nausea and food refusal in children has been argued to be an indicator of nausea. 66

In summary, more attention should be given to recognizing nausea, which as we highlighted above must be clearly defined to avoid confusion, as a potential early symptom of COVID‐19 particularly when collecting epidemiological data. It is plausible that infected subjects who do not have the classical symptoms (fever and persistent cough and loss of taste/smell) may have initially experienced mild, transient nausea, and dismissed it. Accordingly, asymptomatic but SARS‐CoV‐2 positive individuals, many of whom are likely to be in the younger age groups, need to be investigated to determine if they have recently had an episode of nausea, which was dismissed or ascribed to “food poisoning.” Thus, because nausea is an early alerting symptom of a challenge (toxic food and chemicals, bacterial toxin, and virus) to the upper digestive tract, this may be an overlooked initial symptom of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Such studies are also important because if nausea is an early symptom of COVID‐19, the vomiting that may follow would lead to ejection of aerosolized, viral contaminated vomit, as occurs in patients infected with norovirus. 67

Finally, it is important to recognize that subjects with nausea (primarily studied in motion sickness) may have a reduction in cutaneous blood flow to the forehead manifest as “pallor” 68 associated with “cold sweating.” 18 As the forehead is a common site at which temperature is taken, nausea induced by SARS‐CoV‐2 could be a factor confounding detection of raised core temperature by a single time point measurement of forehead temperature alone.

How could SARS‐CoV‐2 induce nausea and vomiting?

There are no formal studies at present so we have reviewed the effects of SARS‐CoV‐2 (and other coronaviruses) on the digestive tract in the light of knowledge of the established mechanisms of nausea and vomiting; this is the same approach that has been used to understand the pathogenesis of other symptoms (e.g. diarrhoea 10 ).

SARS‐CoV‐2 can readily access the digestive tract by several routes (Fig. 2). We hypothesize that SARS‐CoV‐2 would induce acute (first few days postinfection) nausea and vomiting by causing the release of key hormones from the enteroendocrine cells (EECs) in the mucosa of the upper GI tract or after gaining direct entry into the blood, by acting directly within the brainstem.

  • 1.

    Pathways of nausea and vomiting

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is JGH-36-646-g001.jpg

Diagram summarizing the potential mechanisms by which SARS‐CoV‐2 could induce nausea and vomiting. The left‐hand panel shows the routes by which virus can enter the body to access the airways and digestive tract. Air can enter the digestive tract during swallowing. The presence of high levels of angiotensin converting enzyme 2 receptor in the airways and digestive tract is indicated by red lines. The middle panel shows the potential mechanisms (based on evidence discussed in the text) for the interaction of the virus with the digestive tract epithelium leading to release of neuroactive agents from enteroendocrine cells and inflammatory mediations which act either by stimulating/sensitizing abdominal vagal afferent terminals and/or act on the area postrema in the dorsal medulla where the blood brain and blood cerebrospinal fluid barriers are relatively permeable. In addition, angiotensin II levels may increase and have central actions together with virus, which may enter the circulation from damaged lungs and digestive tract epithelia. The right hand panel summarizes the consequences of vagal afferent and area postrema activation to induce nausea and vomiting by projection of information to higher brain regions (nausea and anorexia) and vomiting by motor pathways in the ventral brainstem and spinal cord. 5‐HT, 5‐hydroxytryptamine; ACE 2, angiotensin converting enzyme receptor 2; AP, area postrema; CCK, cholecystokinin; DMVN, dorsal motor vagal nucleus; EEC, enteroendocrine cells in the digestive tract; GLP‐1, glucagon‐like peptide‐1; IL‐6, interleukin‐6; NTS, nucleus tractus solitarius; TMPRSS2, transmembrane protease serine 2; VRG, ventral respiratory group of neurones. [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

Induction of nausea and vomiting from the digestive tract occurs via two main mechanisms 18 , 69 :

  • a)

    Activation of abdominal vagal afferents, either mechanoreceptors located in the muscle layers or afferents terminating in close apposition to the mucosa activated by neuroactive agents (e.g. 5‐hydroxytrytamine [5‐HT], substance P [SP], and cholecystokinin [CCK]) released locally from the EECs to act at receptors expressed by afferent nerve terminals. Among the EEC cells, the enterochromaffin (EC) cells in the duodenum and jejunum contain most of the 5‐HT present in the body of humans and other mammals, which when released by chemical (e.g. cancer chemotherapy and oral emetics) and pathological (e.g. inflammation) stimuli, has a particularly prominent role in induction of emesis via activating abdominal vagal afferent nerve terminals 70 (Fig. 2)

  • b)

    Release of neuroactive agents into the hepatic portal vein and subsequently the systemic circulation to act on the area postrema, a circumventricular organ located at the caudal extremity of the fourth ventricle where the blood–brain and cerebrospinal fluid‐brain barriers are relatively permeable (Fig. 2). These agents may originate from the EECs (e.g. glucagon like‐1 peptide and CCK) but also as cytokines from inflamed or damaged GI epithelia.

Both the vagal afferents and area postrema efferents activate the nucleus tractus solitarius (NTS), subjacent to the area postrema in the brainstem, which in turn activates the visceral and somatic motor pathways for vomiting elsewhere within the brain stem and also sends projections to higher brain regions generating the sensation of nausea 18 , 19 (Fig. 2). The release of neuroactive agents from EECs is implicated in both acute, early onset nausea and vomiting when the release is by Ca++‐mediated exocytotic mechanisms and in more protracted responses when inflammatory‐like responses and cell damage are implicated. 61 The likelihood that nausea requires less intense activation of the above pathways than does vomiting means that greater emphasis should be given to nausea rather than vomiting as an initial symptom of digestive tract infection by SARS‐CoV‐2.

  • 2.

    ACE2 in the digestive tract, viral entry, nausea, and vomiting by peripheral actions of SARS‐CoV‐2

Release of neuroactive agents from the digestive tract acting locally (vagal afferents) and systemically (area postrema) has been implicated in nausea and vomiting induced by toxins ingested with food, therapeutic drugs, and bacteria. 69 , 71 , 72 , 73 We know of only one study investigating a direct link between viral infection and the mechanisms of nausea and vomiting. The virus commonly responsible for infantile gastroenteritis (vomiting and diarrhea are symptoms), rotavirus, has been shown to infect and replicate in EC cells (from midgut carcinoid tumor and GOT1 cells), increasing intracellular [Ca++] and secretion of 5‐HT from the EC cells. Notably, 5‐HT secretion increased by 6 h after infection. 74 Using supernatant from viral infected MA104 cells, secretion of 5‐HT from GOT1 and primary EC tumor cells occurred within 60 min demonstrating that it was most likely due to viral protein(s) from infected cells rather than due to cell replication. Cell [Ca++] was elevated and 5‐HT secreted in response to the enterotoxic glycoprotein NSP4 previously shown to be secreted from human intestinal cells infected with rotavirus. In mice infected with rotavirus, there was colocalization between viral proteins and 5‐HT‐containing EC cells, and Fos immunohistochemistry showed intense activation of the NTS suggestive of vagal afferent activation (see above). The same laboratory also demonstrated an ability of adenovirus 41, a cause of acute gastroenteritis with diarrhea and vomiting, to increase 5‐HT release from human EC cells. 75

Finally, it is worth noting that rotavirus infected infant mice displayed diarrhea, which was treated with the 5‐HT3 receptor antagonist ondansetron, which also improved weight gain and interestingly, attenuated viral shedding. 76 The latter may be of clinical value as ondansetron and other 5‐HT3 antagonists are widely available for treatment of acute cancer chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting. 69

So, what of SARS‐CoV‐2? The angiotensin converting enzyme II (ACE2) protein is the receptor for the spike protein of SARS‐CoV‐2, providing a key component of the entry route for the virus into cells as is the case for SARS and MERS. 77 , 78 Cellular serine protease transmembrane protease serine‐2 (TMPRSS2) is required together with ACE2 for viral entry. 79 , 80 Early human and rodent studies identified ACE2 in the digestive tract and particularly not only the ileum but also other regions of the small intestine. 77 , 81 , 82 More recent studies have confirmed the presence of ACE2 in human small intestine, including the duodenum, and some have shown expression of TMPRSS2. 3 , 83 , 84 , 85 In particular, the studies have identified ACE2 and TMPRSS2 in “absorptive enterocytes” and more generally “epithelial cells.” 6 , 84 Expression of ACE2 mRNA has also been shown in the relatively sparse EECs within the enterocytes of human stomach and ileum, 86 although a transcriptomic and proteomic study of human and mouse intestinal EECs did not highlight ACE2 as among the most highly expressed receptors in either species. 87 These data find some concordance with a study of mouse small intestine appearing to indicate that although the ACE2 receptor was highly expressed in enterocytes, there was no expression in “endocrine” cells (although the viral receptor HCoV‐229E (ANPEP) was present in this population). 3 However, mice lack the ability to vomit and other differences between human and rodent digestive tract suggest caution should be exercised in translating from one species to another. 88 , 89 A recent study using human small intestinal organoids cultured from adult stem cells in a variety of different media showed infection of enterocytes by SARS‐COV and SARS‐CoV‐2. 83 Notably, however, EECs stained with an antibody for Chromogranin A+ (CGA) were never infected; CGA is expressed in all EEC cells, particularly the monoamine containing subpopulation. 90 These data contrast with the expression of ACE2 by EECs within human stomach and ileum and with an ability of enteroviruses to infect EECs. 86 , 91 They suggest that the SARS viruses are unlikely to enter EECs to cause GI disturbances by directly stimulating the release of hormones from these cells. However, key experiments remain. For example, might the EECs of the organoid differ in some way from the native EEC, preventing viral entry? Nevertheless, if confirmed, it seems that the induction of enterocyte apoptosis and the rapidly increasing inflammatory and immune cell milieu surrounding the EECs (measured as increased mRNA for cytokines and interferon stimulated genes) 83 will secondarily induce the release of hormones from the embedded EECs (Worthington et al 92 for mechanisms).

In addition, gut microbiota have been implicated in modulation of gut inflammation 93 but as yet, it is unclear how changes in gut microbiota during SARS‐CoV‐2 infection may contribute to the generation of symptoms. For example, a pilot study of the fecal microbiome in hospitalized patients showed an association between changes in the microbiota, fecal levels of SARS‐CoV‐2 and the severity of respiratory symptoms. 94 However, only one of the patients reported GI symptoms (diarrhea before admission) and none during admission. Microbiota were included in a model of SARS‐CoV‐2‐induced diarrhoea. 10 This is of particular relevance as ACE2 has been implicated in the regulation of the gut microbiome and susceptibility to colitis. 95

Finally, we should not overlook the impact of viral‐induced digestive tract damage, loss of integrity, and release of an “inflammatory soup” on infection, resulting in sensitization of vagal afferents via receptors for diverse agents including cytokines, prostaglandins, amines, and purines. There is limited mechanistic data on cytokine‐induced emesis. One study in the cat showed that intramuscular injections of IL‐2‐induced emesis after the area postrema was ablated, providing indirect evidence for a peripheral action, 96 but in rat area postrema cells IL‐1β increased Ca++ influx. 97 A more recent study of the cytokine growth differentiation factor 15 favors a central action. 65 Activation of prostanoid receptors on vagal nerve terminals represents an additional pathway shown to induce vomiting. 98

An observation of potential therapeutic relevance comes from a study with the NK1 receptor antagonist aprepitant in patients with HIV. 99 NK1 antagonists are used to treat cancer chemotherapy‐induced emesis by both central and peripheral actions with interactions between the 5‐HT3 and the NK1 receptor. 61 , 69 In HIV patients, aprepitant administered over 2 weeks reduced plasma concentrations of cytokines (G‐CSF, IL‐6, IL‐8, and TNFα) with in vitro and preclinical studies in nonhuman primates providing additional evidence for antiretroviral and anti‐inflammatory effects. Overall, this combination of actions of aprepitant together with the anti‐emetic activity 69 may make the drug worthy of investigation in COVID‐19 patients particularly as aerosolized vomit is a viral vector. 67

Further studies are required to investigate the presence of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 in the various subpopulations of EEC cells (particularly EC cells). 100 , 101 Additionally, it should be noted that many of the GI hormones capable of inducing nausea and vomiting can also reduce appetite and food intake (e.g. CCK and glucagon like‐1 peptide) by acting on the area postrema and hypothalamic circumventricular organs, so may also relate to the appetite suppression reported on admission in a few studies, but at a relatively high incidence. 16 , 30

Finally, although attention has focused on the intestinal epithelium, the early human studies reported the presence of ACE2 in the smooth muscle cells of the muscularis mucosa and muscularis propria and the vascular smooth muscle and endothelium in the stomach, small intestine, and colon. 77 This does not necessarily mean that SARS‐CoV‐2 gains entry into the muscle cells as additional binding to a chemokine coreceptor may be needed. Nevertheless, further studies are needed to assess whether actions of SARS‐CoV‐2 on GI smooth muscle could be involved in the pathophysiology of GI symptoms. The presence of ACE2 (and TMPRSS2) in these locations requires study using current molecular techniques and functional studies using in vitro pharmacological models 102 to assess whether actions of SARS‐CoV‐2 on GI smooth muscle could be involved in symptom generation. For example, changes in GI motility may be involved in COVID‐19 diarrhea, described more as an increase in stool frequency rather than liquidity 16 so may not be (completely) of epithelial origin.

  • 3.

    ACE2 in the gut‐brain axis, viral entry, nausea, and vomiting by central actions of SARS‐CoV‐2

As the COVID‐19 pandemic has progressed, there has been increasing awareness of the central nervous system as a target, with some authors including nausea, vomiting, and headache as “neurologic signs.” 103 There is preclinical data showing ACE2 expression in the brain notably in the NTS and the area postrema 104 and more limited evidence for the presence of ACE2 in the brain. 105 , 106 The view that SARS‐CoV‐2 can access the brain via the blood (the circumventricular organs where the blood–brain barrier is relatively permeable being assumed to be particularly vulnerable) or by neuroinvasion via the vagal afferents (which supply both the lungs and the digestive tract) is growing in strength 105 , 107 , 108 ; SARS‐CoV is neuroinvasive and has been detected in human brain. 109 While the vagal transport of SARS‐CoV‐2 is unlikely to account for acute onset of nausea and vomiting, access of the virus to the NTS and more directly via the area postrema is a potential mechanism by which later nausea and vomiting may be induced and a pathway by which regulation of breathing and blood pressure can be compromised. Vomiting is a key symptom of porcine hemagglutinating encephalomyelitis coronavirus, which can access the brain stem, but it must be noted that it has not been determined if this effect is due to a central (e.g. NTS) or peripheral effect. 110

Viral damage to the dorsal brain stem, which has a major role in regulation of digestive tract function, could contribute to the development of postviral digestive tract symptoms (e.g. gastroparesis), which may emerge during recovery.

Are there lessons to be learnt for the digestive tract from the interactions between SARS‐CoV and ACE2 in the respiratory system?

The interactions between SARS‐CoV, ACE2, and the respiratory epithelium in the pathogenesis of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)/acute lung injury, has a number of lessons for understanding the effects of SARS‐CoV‐2 on the digestive tract (for reviews see. 111 , 112 The key observations in the airways, mostly from mice studies are (i) ACE2 is protective against acute lung injury by its conversion of angiotensin II (AII) to angiotensin (1–7) and angiotensin I to angiotensin (1–9), with severe ARDS in Ace2 KOs being improved by administration of an angiotensin 1 receptor (AT1) antagonist; (ii) Once initiated the severity of ARDS is influenced by ACE2 and other components of the renin‐angiotensin system (RAS); and (iii) Ace2 KOs are resistant to SARS‐CoV; in wild‐type mice, SARS‐CoV downregulates ACE2 in the lungs with consequent elevation of AII levels, also reported in patients with ARDS. 113 These studies give insights into viral effects on the lungs, but as the studies were in mice which do not vomit, 74 , 75 the effect of ACE2 KO on vomiting is unknown.

The presence of ACE2 and SARS‐CoV‐2 in digestive tract epithelium and the superficial similarities between airways and the digestive tract, including the presence of EECs linked to the vagus, 114 enables speculation on the effects of ACE2 and SARS‐CoV‐2 interactions in the digestive tract in relation to nausea and vomiting.

  • a)

    SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in the digestive tract causes inflammatory damage, with consequences for induction of nausea and vomiting, discussed above. The inflammatory effects are local and systemic. In human ARDS plasma IL‐6, increases and interestingly treatment with recombinant human ACE2 showed a trend to decrease IL‐6, 113 an effect if repeated in COVID‐19 patients may be beneficial to the digestive tract as well as any effects of cytokines on nausea, vomiting, and food intake.

  • b)

    Interaction between SARS‐CoV‐2 and ACE2 in both the respiratory and digestive tracts will elevate plasma AII concentrations; in patients, the average concentration of plasma AII is ~ 3× higher than in healthy subjects with an average concentration of ~ 300 pg/mL. 35 In preclinical studies, AII has been shown to induce emesis when given intravenously and into the cerebral ventricles 115 , 116 and to increase neuronal activity in the area postrema 117 , 118 , 119 with AT1 receptors implicated. This provides a plausible mechanism by which elevated plasma AII in COVID‐19 could induce nausea and vomiting, providing an additional trigger to those from the GI tract (Fig. 2). There is also preclinical evidence that systemic AII can have central effects to suppress respiration, which are not dependent upon the integrity of the AP. 120 Circulating AII can also affect gastric and intestinal motility and could contribute the genesis of nausea (and diarrhea). The EC50 for contraction of the human small intestine in vitro was 1.5 × 10−8 M, 121 a concentration less than the average of ~ 300 pg/mL reported in COVID‐19 patients, 35 which equates to ~3 × 10−7 M, and an earlier study reported contraction of gastric muscle with a threshold concentration of AII of 10−9 M. 122

  • c)

    Angiotensin 1 and 2 receptors are found throughout the digestive tract and modulate smooth muscle activity as well as epithelial secretion and absorption. 123 Actions of elevated AII could influence any of these functions with motility changes most likely to be implicated in nausea and abdominal pain (these could also involve local vasoconstriction) and both motility and epithelial transport in pathogenesis of diarrhea. Understanding the digestive tract effects of SARS‐CoV‐2 will require a detailed understanding of the RAS in the human digestive tract.

Possible role of medications and coexisting morbidities in nausea and vomiting in COVID‐19 patients

The above sections have focused on the direct effects of SARS‐CoV‐2 on the digestive tract as the most likely cause of nausea and vomiting. However, two other potential causes need to be recognized briefly for completeness. Firstly, prior to presentation at hospital, patients may be prescribed medications which may have nausea and vomiting as side effects. Of particular relevance are ACE inhibitors for treatment of hypertension (e.g. lisinopril) and antidiabetic drugs (e.g. metformin and liraglutide). Hospitalized patients being treated for COVID‐19 may be treated with cytokine modulators, antibiotics, and antiviral agents, which may have nausea as a side‐effect and should be considered when assessing the incidence of nausea. One publication reported that the incidence of nausea and vomiting did not differ whether patients did or did not receive either antibiotics or antiviral treatments. 4 Secondly, nausea and vomiting may be secondary to damage outside the upper digestive tract. Although the lungs and airways might seem an obvious site given particularly considering their vagal afferent innervation, there is no evidence that nausea or vomiting can be induced from the airways. However, there is preclinical evidence that activation of respiratory system vagal afferents can block induction of vomiting. 124 Renal failure is also a symptom of severe COVID‐19 and in other settings nausea and vomiting can be symptoms with the mechanism not defined, although it is unlikely to be due to renal afferents. 125 The liver is also damaged in severe COVID‐19, and although it has a vagal afferent supply projecting to the brainstem, 126 there is no evidence implicating the afferents directly in nausea and vomiting. 127 It is likely that nausea and vomiting associated with hepatic failure is due to loss of the detoxifying function of the liver. Cardiac failure also occurs in severe cases of COVID‐19. Ventricular cardiac afferents in the cat have been shown to be capable of inducing vomiting and are thought to be responsible for the nausea and vomiting associated with a myocardial infarct 128 so could provide a pathway for their induction in cardiac failure.

Therapeutic opportunities

Optimal anti‐emetic treatment relies on an understanding of the pharmacology of the pathways involved. On the basis of our hypothesized mechanisms described above, we would expect the combination of a 5‐hydroytryptamine3 (e.g. ondansetron and palonosetron) and a neurokinin1 receptor antagonist (e.g. aprepitant) to be effective as they would block at the peripheral site of activation/sensitization of vagal afferents and central sites in the dorsal brain stem (NTS/area postrema). 69 It is interesting to note that the synthetic corticosteroid dexamethasone is being used to treat the inflammatory actions effects of SARS‐CoV‐2, but the use of dexamethasone as an anti‐emetic may not be widely known outside the oncology community. In the treatment of the intense nausea and vomiting associated with some anticancer chemotherapy regimens, dexamethasone has been used for 40 years 129 in conjunction with more classical anti‐emetics (e.g. metoclopramide, ondansetron, and aprepitant) 61 , 69 where it enhances their efficacy with a particular improvement in nausea (see other studies 61 , 69 , 130 for references). The anti‐emetic effect of dexamethasone has been ascribed to its anti‐inflammatory effect on the intestinal epithelium as its efficacy is greater in the delayed phase of chemotherapy‐induced emesis where inflammatory damage releasing systemic mediators acting on the area postrema has been implicated. 69 However, there has been little formal research on the mechanism(s) underlying the anti‐emetic effects of dexamethasone, but such studies may provide additional insights into its effects on the digestive tract in COVID‐19.

The provision of anti‐emetics to patients presenting with nausea will help alleviate this unpleasant symptom, reduce the probability that the patient will vomit, but if vomiting is present they will reduce it and the associated potential viral spread by aerosolization in vomit.

Concluding comments

This review has highlighted nausea and vomiting as acute symptoms of COVID‐19 with a focus on incidence of occurrence (Fig. 1) and on mechanisms (Fig. 2). The literature we reviewed shows the incidence of nausea ranges from 1% to 30% but with a median incidence of 10.5%, similar to that of diarrhea but less than that of vomiting (7%). A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the incidence of nausea and vomiting as separate symptoms in COVID‐19 is needed. However, many studies do not report nausea, and although more studies report vomiting, it is not clear if this represents difference in data collection methodology. We argue that there should be a greater focus on collecting data on nausea as it may be a more sensitive early marker of digestive tract infection (i.e. prior to fever and cough and probably preceding diarrhea) in addition to representing a neglected symptom with a particular potential to be overlooked in children. The absence of diagnostic biomarkers for nausea is an additional challenge. 130 A possible mechanism is discussed whereby nausea and vomiting can be initiated by SARS‐CoV‐2 within the blood acting directly on brainstem structures. We also propose that the EECs may be a target for SARS‐CoV‐2 responsible (in part) for the pathogenesis of nausea and vomiting; these proposals require further testing using available techniques and may give insights into supportive treatments (e.g. 5‐HT3 and NK1 receptor antagonists). Further studies of mechanisms are needed and in addition to in vitro studies of EEC cell lines these may include studies in the ferret, which is sensitive to SARS‐CoV‐2 131 and which is an established animal model for the study of emetic mechanisms and anti‐emetic pharmacology. 132 The incidence of nausea/vomiting and diarrhea in COVID‐19 is lower than in SARS, but the SARS‐CoV‐2 protein spike is 10–20× more potent at binding ACE2 compared with SARS, 133 so a comparison of the effects on different cell populations in the GI epithelium may provide an insight into the reasons. The brain stem as a site at which mediators from the digestive tract induce nausea and vomiting and loss of appetite is discussed. Finally, as the majority of patients who develop COVID‐19 recover, the potential development of postinfection functional bowel disorders 134 needs to be monitored, where nausea and vomiting may also be symptoms. Thus, the recognition of nausea and vomiting as key symptoms should lead to greater understanding of how SARS‐CoV‐2 attacks the GI tract and brainstem so preventative measures can treat the symptoms and limit the spread of the virus by vomiting.

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr Heidi Shuk Han Ng, LASEC and SBS, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong for comments on the final drafts of the original submission.

Notes

Andrews, P. L. R. , Cai, W. , Rudd, J. A. , and Sanger, G. J. (2021) COVID‐19, nausea, and vomiting. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 36: 646–656. 10.1111/jgh.15261. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Declaration of conflict of interest: GJS and JAR receive research funding from Takeda Pharmaceuticals. The other authors declare no conflict of interest.

Authors contribution: PLRA wrote the first draft, and all authors modified drafts and provided intellectual input.

Financial support: No funding directly attributed to this article.

References

1. Guan WJ, Ni ZY, Hu Y et al. Clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 in China. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020; 382: 1708–1720. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
2. Jin X, Lian JS, Hu JH et al. Epidemiological, clinical and virological characteristics of 74 cases of coronavirus‐infected disease 2019 (COVID‐19) with gastrointestinal symptoms. Gut 2020; 69: 1002–1009. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
3. Liang W, Feng Z, Rao S et al. Diarrhoea may be underestimated: a missing link in 2019 novel coronavirus. Gut 2020; 69: 1141–1143. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
4. Lin L, Jiang X, Zhang Z et al. Gastrointestinal symptoms of 95 cases with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Gut 2020; 69: 997–1001. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
5. Song F, Shi N, Shan F et al. Emerging 2019 novel coronavirus (2019‐nCoV) pneumonia. Radiology 2020; 295: 210–217. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
6. Xiao F, Tang M, Zheng X, Liu Y, Li X, Shan H. Evidence for gastrointestinal infection of SARS‐CoV‐2. Gastroenterology 2020; 158: 1831–1833 e3. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
7. Gao QY, Chen YX, Fang JY. 2019 Novel coronavirus infection and gastrointestinal tract. J. Dig. Dis. 2020; 21: 125–126. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
8. Gu J, Han B, Wang J. COVID‐19: gastrointestinal manifestations and potential fecal‐oral transmission. Gastroenterology 2020; 158: 1518–1519. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
9. Ng SC, Tilg H. COVID‐19 and the gastrointestinal tract: more than meets the eye. Gut 2020; 69: 973–974. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
10. D'Amico F, Baumgart DC, Danese S, Peyrin‐Biroulet L. Diarrhea during COVID‐19 infection: pathogenesis, epidemiology, prevention and management. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2020; 18: 1663–1672. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
11. Hajifathalian K, Mahadev S, Schwartz RE et al. SARS‐COV‐2 infection (coronavirus disease 2019) for the gastrointestinal consultant. World J. Gastroenterol. 2020; 26: 1546–1553. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
12. Wong SH, Lui RN, Sung JJ. Covid‐19 and the digestive system. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2020; 35: 744–748. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
13. Holshue ML, DeBolt C, Lindquist S et al. First case of 2019 novel coronavirus in the United States. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020; 382: 929–936. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
14. Rodriguez‐Morales AJ, Cardona‐Ospina JA, Gutierrez‐Ocampo E et al. Clinical, laboratory and imaging features of COVID‐19: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Travel Med. Infect. Dis. 2020; 34: 101623. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
15. Li LQ, Huang T, Wang YQ et al. COVID‐19 patients' clinical characteristics, discharge rate, and fatality rate of meta‐analysis. J. Med. Virol. 2020. 10.1002/jmv25757 [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
16. Pan L, Mu M, Yang P et al. Clinical characteristics of COVID‐19 patients with digestive symptoms in Hubei, China: a descriptive, cross‐sectional, multicenter study. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2020; 115: 766–773. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
17. Davis C, Harding R, Leslie R, Andrews P. The organisation of vomiting as a protective reflex. In: Nausea and Vomiting: Mechanisms and Treatment. Springer, 1986; 65–75. [Google Scholar]
18. Stern RM, Koch KL, Andrews P. Nausea: Mechanisms and Management. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. [Google Scholar]
19. Koch KL, Hasler WL. Nausea and Vomiting: Diagnosis and Treatment. Springer, 2016. [Google Scholar]
20. Tack J, Carbone F, Holvoet L, Vanheel H, Vanuytsel T, Vandenberghe A. The use of pictograms improves symptom evaluation by patients with functional dyspepsia. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 2014; 40: 523–530. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
21. Andrews P, Bhandari P, Garland S et al. Does retching have a function. An experimental study in the ferret. Pharmacodyn. Therap. 1990; 9: 135–152. [Google Scholar]
22. Cholankeril G, Podboy A, Aivaliotis VI et al. High prevalence of concurrent gastrointestinal manifestations in patients with SARS‐CoV‐2: early experience from California. Gastroenterology 2020; 159: 775–777. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
23. Chen N, Zhou M, Dong X et al. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. Lancet 2020; 395: 507–513. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
24. Zhou F, Yu T, Du R et al. Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID‐19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2020; 395: 1054–1062. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
25. Wang D, Hu B, Hu C et al. Clinical characteristics of 138 hospitalized patients with 2019 novel coronavirus‐infected pneumonia in Wuhan, China. JAMA 2020; 323: 1061–1069. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
26. Zhang JJ, Dong X, Cao YY et al. Clinical characteristics of 140 patients infected with SARS‐CoV‐2 in Wuhan, China. Allergy 2020; 75: 1730–1741. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
27. Reddm WD, Zhou JC, Hathorn KE et al. Prevalence and characteristics of gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection in the United States: a multicenter cohort study. Gastroenterology 2020. in press. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
28. Lu X, Zhang L, Du H et al. SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in children. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020; 382: 1663–1665. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
29. Cholankeril G, Podboy A, Aivaliotas V et al. Association of digestive symptoms and hospitalization in patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. medRxiv 2020. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
30. Han C, Duan C, Zhang S et al. Digestive symptoms in COVID‐19 patients with mild disease severity: clinical presentation, stool viral RNA testing, and outcomes. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2020; 115: 916–923. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
31. Elmunzer BJ, Spitzer RL, Foster LD et al. Digestive manifestations in patients hospitalized with COVID‐19. medRxiv 2020. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
32. Argenziano MG, Bruce SL, Slater CL et al. Characterization and clinical course of 1000 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 in New York: retrospective case series. BMJ 2020; 369: m1996. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
33. Wang F, Yang Y, Dong K et al. Clinical characteristics of 28 patients with diabetes and covid‐19 in Wuhan, China. Endocr. Pract. 2020; 26: 668–674. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
34. Xia W, Shao J, Guo Y, Peng X, Li Z, Hu D. Clinical and CT features in pediatric patients with COVID‐19 infection: different points from adults. Pediatr. Pulmonol. 2020; 55: 1169–1174. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
35. Liu Y, Yang Y, Zhang C et al. Clinical and biochemical indexes from 2019‐nCoV infected patients linked to viral loads and lung injury. Sci. China Life Sci. 2020; 63: 364–374. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
36. Zhang L, Bai T, Jin Y et al. Digestive involvement of the coronavirus disease 2019: need attention on the 'gut‐type' in the novel coronaviral infection. Lancet Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2020. April 6. [Google Scholar]
37. Qiu H, Wu J, Hong L, Luo Y, Song Q, Chen D. Clinical and epidemiological features of 36 children with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) in Zhejiang, China: an observational cohort study. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2020; 20: 689–696. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
38. Wang D, Ju XL, Xie F et al. Clinical analysis of 31 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus infection in children from six provinces (autonomous region) of northern China. Zhonghua Er Ke Za Zhi 2020; 58: 269–274. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
39. Shi H, Han X, Jiang N et al. Radiological findings from 81 patients with COVID‐19 pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2020; 20: 425–434. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
40. Fang D, Ma J, Guan J, Wang M, Song Y, Tian D. Manifestations of digestive system in hospitalized patients with novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a single‐center, descriptive study. Chin. J. Dig. 2020; 40. [Google Scholar]
41. Yang X, Yu Y, Xu J et al. Clinical course and outcomes of critically ill patients with SARS‐CoV‐2 pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a single‐centered, retrospective, observational study. Lancet Respir. Med. 2020; 8: 475–481. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
42. Chu M, Xu J, Zhong F et al. Digestive symptoms of COVID‐19 and high expression of ACE2 in digestive tract organs. Available at SSRN 3572849. 2020. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract]
43. Luo S, Zhang X, Xu H. Don't overlook digestive symptoms in patients with 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID‐19). Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2020; 18: 1636–1637. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
44. Yang W, Cao Q, Qin L et al. Clinical characteristics and imaging manifestations of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID‐19): a multi‐center study in Wenzhou city, Zhejiang, China. J. Infect. 2020; 80: 388–393. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
45. Buscarini E, Manfredi G, Brambilla G et al. Gastrointestinal symptoms as Covid‐19 onset in hospitalized Italian patients. medRxiv 2020. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
46. Wu J, Liu J, Zhao X et al. Clinical characteristics of imported cases of COVID‐19 in Jiangsu Province: a multicenter descriptive study. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2020; 71: 706–712. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
47. Wang L, Gao YH, Lou LL, Zhang GJ. The clinical dynamics of 18 cases of COVID‐19 outside of Wuhan, China. Eur. Respir. J. 2020; 55: 2000398. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
48. Wu WS, Li YG, Wei ZF et al. Investigation and analysis on characteristics of a cluster of COVID‐19 associated with exposure in a department store in Tianjin. Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi 2020; 41: 489–493. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
49. Li Y, Wang W, Lei Y et al. Comparison of the clinical characteristics between RNA positive and negative patients clinically diagnosed with 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia. Zhonghua jie he hu xi za zhi= Zhonghua jiehe he huxi zazhi= Chin. J. Tuberculosis Respiratory Dis. 2020; 43: E023‐E. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
50. Liu M, He P, Liu HG et al. Clinical characteristics of 30 medical workers infected with new coronavirus pneumonia. Zhonghua Jie He Hu Xi Za Zhi 2020; 43: 209–214. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
51. Liu W, Zhang Q, Chen J et al. Detection of Covid‐19 in children in early January 2020 in Wuhan, China. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020; 382: 1370–1371. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
52. Xu X, Yu C, Qu J et al. Imaging and clinical features of patients with 2019 novel coronavirus SARS‐CoV‐2. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 2020; 47: 1275–1280. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
53. An P, Chen H, Jiang X et al. Clinical features of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia presented gastrointestinal symptoms but without fever onset. Lancet Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2020. February 6. [Google Scholar]
54. Wei X‐S, Wang X, Niu Y‐R et al. Diarrhea is associated with prolonged symptoms and viral carriage in COVID‐19. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2020; 18: 1753–1759. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
55. Zhong ZF, Huang J, Yang X et al. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of COVID‐19 patients in Hengyang, Hunan Province, China. World J. Clin. Cases 2020; 8: 2554–2565. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
56. Chen A, Agarwal A, Ravindran N, To C , Zhang T, Thuluvath PJ. Are gastrointestinal symptoms specific for COVID‐19 infection? A prospective case‐control study from the United States. Gastroenterology 2020: S0016–5085(20)30664–8. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
57. Team CC‐R. Characteristics of health care personnel with COVID‐19 ‐ United States, February 12‐April 9, 2020. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly Rep. 2020; 69: 477–481. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
58. Rokkas T. Gastrointestinal involvement in COVID‐19: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Ann. Gastroenterol. 2020; 33: 355–365. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
59. Rao S, Lau A. COVID‐19 has become a major public health problem. There is good evidence that ACE2 is a receptor for SARS‐CoV‐2, and high expression of ACE2 may increase susceptibility to infection. We aimed to explore risk factors affecting susceptibility to infection and prioritize drug repositioning candidates, based on Mendelian randomization (MR) studies on ACE2 lung expression. Diabetes Care 2020; 43. [Google Scholar]
60. Parkman HP, Wilson LA, Farrugia G et al. Delayed gastric emptying associates with diabetic complications in diabetic patients with symptoms of gastroparesis. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2019; 114: 1778–1794. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
61. Andrews PL, Rudd JA. The Physiology and Pharmacology of Nausea and Vomiting Induced by Anticancer Chemotherapy in Humans. Management of Chemotherapy‐Induced Nausea and Vomiting. Springer, 2016; 5–44. [Google Scholar]
62. Aroniadis OC, DiMaio CJ, Dixon RE et al. Current knowledge and research priorities in the digestive manifestations of COVID‐19. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2020; 18: 1682–1684. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
63. Menni C, Valdes AM, Freidin MB et al. Real‐time tracking of self‐reported symptoms to predict potential COVID‐19. Nat. Med. 2020; 26: 1037–1040. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
64. Drew DA, Nguyen LH, Steves CJ et al. Rapid implementation of mobile technology for real‐time epidemiology of COVID‐19. Science 2020; 368: 1362–1367. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
65. Borner T, Shaulson ED, Ghidewon MY et al. GDF15 induces anorexia through nausea and emesis. Cell Metab. 2020; 31: 351–362. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
66. Richards CA, Andrews PL. Food refusal: a sign of nausea? J. Pediatr. Gastroenterol. Nutr. 2004; 38: 227–228. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
67. Tung‐Thompson G, Libera DA, Koch KL, de Los Reyes FL, Jaykus LA 3rd. Aerosolization of a human norovirus surrogate, bacteriophage MS2, during simulated vomiting. PLoS ONE 2015; 10: e0134277. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
68. Holmes SR, King S, Stott J, Clemes S. Facial skin pallor increases during motion sickness. J. Psychophysiol. 2002; 16: 150–157. [Google Scholar]
69. Sanger GJ, Andrews PLR. A history of drug discovery for treatment of nausea and vomiting and the implications for future research. Front. Pharmacol. 2018; 9: 913. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
70. Andrews PL, Rapeport WG, Sanger GJ. Neuropharmacology of emesis induced by anti‐cancer therapy. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 1988; 9: 334–341. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
71. Wu W, Zhou HR, Bursian SJ et al. Comparison of anorectic and emetic potencies of deoxynivalenol (vomitoxin) to the plant metabolite deoxynivalenol‐3‐glucoside and synthetic deoxynivalenol derivatives EN139528 and EN139544. Toxicol. Sci. 2014; 142: 167–181. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
72. Zhou HR, Pestka JJ. Deoxynivalenol (vomitoxin)‐induced cholecystokinin and glucagon‐like peptide‐1 release in the STC‐1 enteroendocrine cell model is mediated by calcium‐sensing receptor and transient receptor potential ankyrin‐1 channel. Toxicol. Sci. 2015; 145: 407–417. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
73. Hu DL, Zhu G, Mori F et al. Staphylococcal enterotoxin induces emesis through increasing serotonin release in intestine and it is downregulated by cannabinoid receptor 1. Cell. Microbiol. 2007; 9: 2267–2277. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
74. Hagbom M, Istrate C, Engblom D et al. Rotavirus stimulates release of serotonin (5‐HT) from human enterochromaffin cells and activates brain structures involved in nausea and vomiting. PLoS Pathog. 2011; 7: e1002115. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
75. Westerberg S, Hagbom M, Rajan A et al. Interaction of human enterochromaffin cells with human enteric adenovirus 41 leads to serotonin release and subsequent activation of enteric glia cells. J. Virol. 2018; 92: e00026–e00018. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
76. Bialowas S, Hagbom M, Nordgren J et al. Rotavirus and serotonin cross‐talk in diarrhoea. PLoS ONE 2016; 11: e0159660. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
77. Hamming I, Timens W, Bulthuis ML, Lely AT, Navis G, van Goor H. Tissue distribution of ACE2 protein, the functional receptor for SARS coronavirus. A first step in understanding SARS pathogenesis. J. Pathol. 2004; 203: 631–637. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
78. Lu R, Zhao X, Li J et al. Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor binding. Lancet 2020; 395: 565–574. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
79. Hoffmann M, Kleine‐Weber H, Schroeder S et al. SARS‐CoV‐2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2 and is blocked by a clinically proven protease inhibitor. Cell 2020; 181: 271–280. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
80. Zhang H, Penninger JM, Li Y, Zhong N, Slutsky AS. Angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) as a SARS‐CoV‐2 receptor: molecular mechanisms and potential therapeutic target. Intensive Care Med. 2020; 46: 586–590. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
81. Harmer D, Gilbert M, Borman R, Clark KL. Quantitative mRNA expression profiling of ACE 2, a novel homologue of angiotensin converting enzyme. FEBS Lett. 2002; 532: 107–110. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
82. Gembardt F, Sterner‐Kock A, Imboden H et al. Organ‐specific distribution of ACE2 mRNA and correlating peptidase activity in rodents. Peptides 2005; 26: 1270–1277. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
83. Lamers MM, Beumer J, van der Vaart J et al. SARS‐CoV‐2 productively infects human gut enterocytes. Science 2020; 369: 50–54. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
84. Zhang H, Kang Z, Gong H et al. Digestive system is a potential route of COVID‐19: an analysis of single‐cell coexpression pattern of key proteins in viral entry process. Gut 2020; 69: 1010–1018. [Google Scholar]
85. Zou X, Chen K, Zou J, Han P, Hao J, Han Z. Single‐cell RNA‐seq data analysis on the receptor ACE2 expression reveals the potential risk of different human organs vulnerable to 2019‐nCoV infection. Front. Med. 2020. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
86. Qi F, Qian S, Zhang S, Zhang Z. Single cell RNA sequencing of 13 human tissues identify cell types and receptors of human coronaviruses. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2020; 526: 135–140. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
87. Roberts GP, Larraufie P, Richards P et al. Comparison of human and murine enteroendocrine cells by transcriptomic and peptidomic profiling. Diabetes 2019; 68: 1062–1072. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
88. Horn CC, Kimball BA, Wang H et al. Why can't rodents vomit? A comparative behavioral, anatomical, and physiological study. PLoS ONE 2013; 8: e60537. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
89. Sanger GJ, Holbrook JD, Andrews PL. The translational value of rodent gastrointestinal functions: a cautionary tale. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 2011; 32: 402–409. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
90. Engelstoft MS, Lund ML, Grunddal KV et al. Research resource: a chromogranin A reporter for serotonin and histamine secreting enteroendocrine cells. Mol. Endocrinol. 2015; 29: 1658–1671. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
91. Drummond CG, Bolock AM, Ma C, Luke CJ, Good M, Coyne CB. Enteroviruses infect human enteroids and induce antiviral signaling in a cell lineage‐specific manner. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2017; 114: 1672–1677. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
92. Worthington JJ, Reimann F, Gribble FM. Enteroendocrine cells‐sensory sentinels of the intestinal environment and orchestrators of mucosal immunity. Mucosal Immunol. 2018; 11: 3–20. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
93. Valdes AM, Walter J, Segal E, Spector TD. Role of the gut microbiota in nutrition and health. BMJ 2018; 361: k2179. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
94. Zuo T, Zhang F, Lui GCY et al. Alterations in gut microbiota of patients with COVID‐19 during time of hospitalization. Gastroenterology 2020: S0016–5085(20)34701–6. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
95. Hashimoto T, Perlot T, Rehman A et al. ACE2 links amino acid malnutrition to microbial ecology and intestinal inflammation. Nature 2012; 487: 477–481. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
96. Gonsalves SF, Landgraf BE, Ciardelli TL, Borison HL. Early toxicity of recombinant interleukin‐2 in cats. Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn. Ther. 1991; 310: 175–185. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
97. Wuchert F, Ott D, Rafalzik S, Roth J, Gerstberger R. Tumor necrosis factor‐alpha, interleukin‐1beta and nitric oxide induce calcium transients in distinct populations of cells cultured from the rat area postrema. J. Neuroimmunol. 2009; 206: 44–51. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
98. Kan KKW, Wai MK, Jones RL, Rudd JA. Role of prostanoid EP3/1 receptors in mechanisms of emesis and defaecation in ferrets. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 2017; 803: 112–117. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
99. Barrett JS, Spitsin S, Moorthy G et al. Pharmacologic rationale for the NK1R antagonist, aprepitant as adjunctive therapy in HIV. J. Transl. Med. 2016; 14: 148. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
100. Diwakarla S, Fothergill LJ, Fakhry J, Callaghan B, Furness JB. Heterogeneity of enterochromaffin cells within the gastrointestinal tract. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2017; 29: e13101. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
101. Goldspink DA, Reimann F, Gribble FM. Models and tools for studying enteroendocrine cells. Endocrinology 2018; 159: 3874–3884. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
102. Broad J, Góralczyk A, Mannur K, Dukes G, Sanger G. Drugs acting at 5‐HT 4, D2, motilin, and ghrelin receptors differ markedly in how they affect neuromuscular functions in human isolated stomach. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2014; 26: 851–861. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
103. Li YC, Bai WZ, Hashikawa T. The neuroinvasive potential of SARS‐CoV2 may play a role in the respiratory failure of COVID‐19 patients. J. Med. Virol. 2020; 92: 552–555. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
104. Doobay MF, Talman LS, Obr TD, Tian X, Davisson RL, Lazartigues E. Differential expression of neuronal ACE2 in transgenic mice with overexpression of the brain renin‐angiotensin system. Am. J. Physiol. Regul. Integr. Comp. Physiol. 2007; 292: R373–R381. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
105. Baig AM, Khaleeq A, Ali U, Syeda H. Evidence of the COVID‐19 virus targeting the CNS: tissue distribution, host‐virus interaction, and proposed neurotropic mechanisms. ACS Chem. Nerosci. 2020; 11: 995–998. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
106. Li Z, Liu T, Yang N et al. Neurological manifestations of patients with COVID‐19: potential routes of SARS‐CoV‐2 neuroinvasion from the periphery to the brain. Front. Med. 2020: 1–9. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
107. Baig AM. Neurological manifestations in COVID‐19 caused by SARS‐CoV‐2. CNS Neurosci. Ther. 2020; 26: 499–501. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
108. Zhou L, Zhang M, Wang J, Gao J. Sars‐Cov‐2: underestimated damage to nervous system. Travel Med. Infect. Dis. 2020: 101642. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
109. Xu J, Zhong S, Liu J et al. Detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus in the brain: potential role of the chemokine mig in pathogenesis. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2005; 41: 1089–1096. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
110. Mora‐Diaz JC, Pineyro PE, Houston E, Zimmerman J, Gimenez‐Lirola LG. Porcine hemagglutinating encephalomyelitis virus: a review. Front Vet. Sci. 2019; 6: 53. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
111. Imai Y, Kuba K, Ohto‐Nakanishi T, Penninger JM. Angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) in disease pathogenesis. Circ. J. 2010; 74: 405–410. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
112. Gaddam RR, Chambers S, Bhatia M. ACE and ACE2 in inflammation: a tale of two enzymes. Inflamm. Allergy Drug Targets 2014; 13: 224–234. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
113. Khan A, Benthin C, Zeno B et al. A pilot clinical trial of recombinant human angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2 in acute respiratory distress syndrome. Crit. Care 2017; 21: 234. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
114. Mazzone SB, Undem BJ. Vagal afferent innervation of the airways in health and disease. Physiol. Rev. 2016; 96: 975–1024. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
115. Carpenter DO, Briggs DB, Strominger N. Peptide‐induced emesis in dogs. Behav. Brain Res. 1984; 11: 277–281. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
116. Wu M, Harding RK, Hugenholtz H, Kucharczyk J. Emetic effects of centrally administered angiotensin II, arginine vasopressin and neurotensin in the dog. Peptides 1985; 6: 173–175. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
117. Carpenter DO, Briggs DB, Strominger N. Responses of neurons of canine area postrema to neurotransmitters and peptides. Cell. Mol. Neurobiol. 1983; 3: 113–126. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
118. Brooks MJ, Hubbard JI, Sirett NE. Extracellular recording in rat area postrema in vitro and the effects of cholinergic drugs, serotonin and angiotensin II. Brain Res. 1983; 261: 85–90. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
119. Hay M, Edwards GL, Lindsley K et al. Increases in cytosolic Ca2+ in rat area postrema/mNTS neurons produced by angiotensin II and arginine‐vasopressin. Neurosci. Lett. 1993; 151: 121–125. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
120. Borison HL, Hubbard JI, McCarthy LE. Central respiratory inhibition by angiotensin II in anesthetized cats. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 1988; 247: 781–790. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
121. Ewert S, Spak E, Olbers T, Johnsson E, Edebo A, Fandriks L. Angiotensin II induced contraction of rat and human small intestinal wall musculature in vitro . Acta Physiol (Oxf.) 2006; 188: 33–40. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
122. Ludtke FE, Golenhofen K, Schubert F. Angiotensin II stimulates human gastric smooth muscle in vitro. J. Auton. Pharmacol. 1989; 9: 139–147. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
123. Fandriks L. The angiotensin II type 2 receptor and the gastrointestinal tract. J. Renin Angiotensin Aldosterone Syst. 2010; 11: 43–48. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
124. Zabara J, Chaffee RB Jr, Tansy MF. Neuroinhibition in the regulation of emesis. Space Life Sci. 1972; 3: 282–292. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
125. Borison HL, Hebertson LM. Role of medullary emetic chemoreceptor trigger zone (CT zone) in postnephrectomy vomiting in dogs. Am. J. Physiol. 1959; 197: 850–852. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
126. Jensen KJ, Alpini G, Glaser S. Hepatic nervous system and neurobiology of the liver. Compr. Physiol. 2013; 3: 655–665. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
127. Horn CC, Richardson EJ, Andrews PL, Friedman MI. Differential effects on gastrointestinal and hepatic vagal afferent fibers in the rat by the anti‐cancer agent cisplatin. Auton. Neurosci. 2004; 115: 74–81. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
128. Abrahamsson H, Thoren P. Vomiting and reflex vagal relaxation of the stomach elicited from heart receptors in the cat. Acta Physiol. Scand. 1973; 88: 433–439. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
129. Baker J, Lokey J, Price N, Winokur S, Bowen J, Taylor A. Nabilone as an antiemetic. New Eng. J. Med. 1979; 301: 728. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
130. Andrews PL, Sanger GJ. Nausea and the quest for the perfect anti‐emetic. Eur. J. Pharmacol. 2014; 722: 108–121. [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
131. Shi J, Wen Z, Zhong G et al. Susceptibility of ferrets, cats, dogs, and other domesticated animals to SARS‐coronavirus 2. Science 2020; 368: 1016–1020. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
132. Percie du Sert N, Andrews PLR. The ferret in nausea and vomiting research: lessons in translation of basic science to the clinic. Chapter 31. In: Fox JG, Marini RP, eds. Biology and Diseases of the Ferret. Iowa, USA: Wiley Blackwell, 2014; 735–778. [Google Scholar]
133. Wrapp D, Wang N, Corbett KS et al. Cryo‐EM structure of the 2019‐nCoV spike in the prefusion conformation. Science 2020; 367: 1260–1263. [Europe PMC free article] [Abstract] [Google Scholar]
134. Spiller R. Diarrhea‐predominant bowel disorders following inflammation and infection. In: Spiller R, Grundy D, eds. Pathophysiology of the Enteric Nervous System: A Basis for Understanding Functional Diseases. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing, 2004; 188–200. [Google Scholar]

Full text links 

Read article at publisher's site: https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.15261

Read article for free, from open access legal sources, via Unpaywall: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/jgh.15261Unpaywall

Citations & impact 

Impact metrics

31
Citations
Jump to Citations

Citations of article over time

Alternative metrics

Altmetric item for https://www.altmetric.com/details/91073992
Altmetric
Discover the attention surrounding your research
https://www.altmetric.com/details/91073992

Smart citations by scite.ai
Smart citations by scite.ai include citation statements extracted from the full text of the citing article. The number of the statements may be higher than the number of citations provided by EuropePMC if one paper cites another multiple times or lower if scite has not yet processed some of the citing articles.
Explore citation contexts and check if this article has been supported or disputed.
https://scite.ai/reports/10.1111/jgh.15261

Supporting
Mentioning
Contrasting
1
51
0

Article citations

Go to all (31) article citations

Similar Articles 

To arrive at the top five similar articles we use a word-weighted algorithm to compare words from the Title and Abstract of each citation.

Funding 

Funders who supported this work.

Medical Research Council (1)