• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Eur J Clin Invest . Efficacy of various treatment modalities for nCOV-2019: a systematic review and meta-analysis

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Eur J Clin Invest


. 2020 Aug 18;e13383.
doi: 10.1111/eci.13383. Online ahead of print.
Efficacy of various treatment modalities for nCOV-2019: a systematic review and meta-analysis


Shubham Misra[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Manabesh Nath[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Vijay Hadda[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Deepti Vibha[SUP] 1 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Background: Several therapeutic agents have been investigated for treatment of novel Coronavirus-2019 (nCOV-2019). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of various treatment modalities in nCOV-2019 patients.
Methods: A literature search was conducted before 29 June 2020 in PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane library databases. A fixed-effect model was applied if I[SUP]2[/SUP] <50%, else results were combined using random-effect model. Risk Ratio (RR) or Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) along-with 95% Confidence Interval (95%CI) were used to pool the results. Between-study heterogeneity was explored using influence and sensitivity analyses and publication bias was assessed using funnel plots. Entire statistical analysis was conducted in R version 3.6.2.
Results: Fifty studies involving 15 in-vitro and 35 clinical studies including 9170 nCOV-2019 patients were included. Lopinavir-Ritonavir was significantly associated with shorter mean time to clinical recovery (SMD -0.32; 95%CI -0.57 to -0.06), Remdesivir was significantly associated with better overall clinical recovery (RR 1.17; 95%CI 1.07 to 1.29) and Tocilizumab was associated with less all-cause mortality (RR 0.38; 95%CI 0.16 to 0.93). Hydroxychloroquine was associated with longer time to clinical recovery and less overall clinical recovery. It additionally had higher all-cause mortality and more total adverse events.
Conclusion: Our meta-analysis suggests that except in vitro studies, no treatment has shown overall favorable outcomes in nCOV-2019 patients. Lopinavir-Ritonavir, Remdesivir and Tocilizumab may have some benefits while Hydroxychloroquine administration may cause harm in nCOV-2019 patients. Results from upcoming large clinical trials may further clarify role of these drugs.

Keywords: Humans; Interventions; Novel Coronavirus-2019; Treatments; nCOV-2019.
 
Back
Top Bottom