首页> 外文期刊>Panminerva medica >Repurposing of drugs for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
【24h】

Repurposing of drugs for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机译:COVID-19 药物的再利用:系统评价和荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the data currently available regarding the repurposing of different drugs for COVID-19 treatment. Participants with suspected or diagnosed COVID-19 were included in this study. The interventions that have been considered were repurposed drugs and comparators that included standard of care treatment or placebo. We searched Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, clinical trial registration site in the UK(NIHR), Europe (clinicaltrialsregister.eu), US (ClinicalTrials.gov) and internationally (isrctn.com), and reviewed the reference lists of articles for eligible articles published up to April 22, 2020. All studies in English that evaluated the efficacy of the listed drugs were included. Cochrane RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tool were used to assess study quality. This systematic review adheres to the PRISMA guidelines. The protocol is available at PROSPERO (CRD42020180915). From 708 identified studies or clinical trials, 16 studies and 16 case reports met our eligibility criteria. Of these, 6 were randomized controlled trials (763 patients), 7 cohort studies (321 patients) and 3 case series (191 patients). Chloroquine (CQ) had a 100 discharge rate compared to 50 with lopinavir-ritonavir at day 14, however a trial has recommended against a high dosage due to cardiotoxic events. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has shown no significant improvement in negative seroconversion rate which is also seen in our meta-analysis (P=0.68). Adverse events with HCQ have a significant difference compared to the control group (P=0.001). Lopinavir-ritonavir has shown no improvement in time to clinical improvement which is seen in our meta-analyses (P=0.1). Remdesivir has shown no significant improvement in time to clinical improvement but this trial had insufficient power. Due to the paucity in evidence, it is difficult to establish the efficacy of these drugs in the treatment of COVID-19 as currently there is no significant clinical effectiveness of the repurposed drugs. Further large clinical trials are required to achieve more reliable findings. A risk-benefit analysis is required on an individual basis to weigh out the potential improvement in clinical outcome and viral load reduction compared to the risks of the adverse events.
机译:本系统综述的目的是评估目前关于将不同药物重新用于COVID-19治疗的可用数据。本研究包括疑似或确诊 COVID-19 的参与者。已经考虑的干预措施是重新利用的药物和对照剂,包括标准护理治疗或安慰剂。我们检索了Ovid-MEDLINE、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆、英国(NIHR)、欧洲(clinicaltrialsregister.eu)、美国(ClinicalTrials.gov)和国际(isrctn.com)的临床试验注册网站,并回顾了截至2020年4月22日发表的合格文章的参考文献列表。纳入了所有评估所列药物疗效的英文研究。使用Cochrane RoB 2.0和ROBINS-I工具评估研究质量。本系统综述遵循PRISMA指南。该协议可在PROSPERO(CRD42020180915)获得。在708项已确定的研究或临床试验中,有16项研究和16份病例报告符合我们的纳入标准。其中,6项为随机对照试验(763名患者)、7项队列研究(321名患者)和3项病例系列研究(191名患者)。在第 14 天,氯喹 (CQ) 的放电率为 100%,而洛匹那韦-利托那韦的放电率为 50%,但一项试验建议,由于心脏毒性事件,不要使用高剂量。羟氯喹 (HCQ) 在阴性血清转化率方面没有显著改善,这在我们的荟萃分析中也可见 (P=0.68)。与对照组相比,HCQ的不良事件差异有统计学意义(P=0.001)。洛匹那韦-利托那韦在临床改善时间上没有改善,这在我们的荟萃分析中可见(P=0.1)。瑞德西韦在临床改善时间方面没有显示出显着改善,但该试验的功效不足。由于缺乏证据,很难确定这些药物在治疗 COVID-19 中的疗效,因为目前重新利用的药物没有显着的临床有效性。需要进一步的大型临床试验才能获得更可靠的结果。需要根据个体情况进行风险-收益分析,以权衡与不良事件风险相比,临床结果和病毒载量降低的潜在改善。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号