This narrative review argues that immune dysregulation—antigen persistence, innate/adaptive discord, endothelial dysfunction and autoimmunity—drives post‑COVID syndrome (PCS). Strength: wide mechanistic synthesis and up‑to‑date citations; Weaknesses: non‑systematic search, no new data, possible selection bias and limited methodological transparency ().
High‑quality cohort and mechanistic papers converge on a multi‑pathway model: (A) in a subset of patients, persistent antigen or viral fragments (anti‑N/anti‑S kinetics differ between PCC and recovered cohorts) are measurable and associate with PCS; (B) immune signatures (persistent innate activation, altered T/B subsets, cytokine triads IL‑1β/IL‑6/TNF) are reproducible across cohorts; (C) endothelial/complement/coagulation activation shows repeated signal in proteomics cohorts. Gomazkov correctly centers the immune system but overstates generality without subgroup stratification ().
Note: the pie encodes narrative emphasis in the review (how often themes and supporting citations appear), not quantitative patient data; used only to visualise the review's focus and to show how the author prioritises mechanisms.
Gomazkov provides a concise, up‑to‑date narrative arguing that immune dysregulation and antigen persistence are central to PCS. This is consistent with multiple cohort and mechanistic studies, but the review's narrative (non‑systematic) design, interstudy heterogeneity, and incomplete attention to null/contradictory data lower its evidentiary weight. The review is useful as a synthesis and hypothesis generator but should not be taken as definitive proof of a single, universal PCS mechanism ().
Custom summaries of the latest cutting edge Science research. Every Friday. No Ads.