• 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.

Infect Dis (Lond) . Remdesivir for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of ran

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Infect Dis (Lond)


. 2021 May 11;1-9.
doi: 10.1080/23744235.2021.1923799. Online ahead of print.
Remdesivir for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials


George N Okoli[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Rasheda Rabbani[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Leslie Copstein[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Amenah Al-Juboori[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Nicole Askin[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Ahmed M Abou-Setta[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Background: In view of many unanswered clinical questions regarding treatment of COVID-19 with remdesivir, we systematically identified, critically appraised and summarized the findings from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of remdesivir for COVID-19.
Methods: We searched relevant databases/websites (up to September 2020) and selected English-language RCT publications of remdesivir for COVID-19. We conducted meta-analysis using an inverse variance, random-effects model in addition to trial sequential analysis (TSA) for the efficacy outcomes: all-cause mortality, viral burden and clinical progression. Safety outcomes were diarrhoea, nausea, and vomiting. We calculated the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for all outcomes. Statistical heterogeneity was calculated using the I[SUP]2[/SUP] statistic.
Results: We included five RCTs (7540 participants) from 7237 citations. Most (80%) were of an unclear to high risk of bias. There was no evidence of a significant improvement with remdesivir (100 mg, 10 days) regarding all-cause mortality (RR 0.94, CI 0.82-1.07; I[SUP]2[/SUP] = 0%; 4 RCTs; 7143 patients), clinical progression (RR 1.08, CI 0.99-1.18; I[SUP]2[/SUP] = 70.4%; 3 RCTs; 1692 patients), or diarrhoea (RR 0.82, CI 0.40-1.66; I[SUP]2[/SUP] = 0%; 2 RCTs; 630 patients). Nausea occurred more often with remdesivir (RR 2.77, CI 1.28-6.03; I[SUP]2[/SUP] = 0%; 2 RCTs; 630 patients). TSA showed that the required information size was not reached for firm conclusions to be drawn.
Conclusions and relevance: There is insufficient evidence to support the use of remdesivir for treatment of COVID-19. More high-quality RCTs are needed for a stronger evidence. Until then, remdesivir should remain an experimental drug for COVID-19.

Keywords: COVID-19; Remdesivir; efficacy; randomized controlled trials; safety; systematic review.
 
Back
Top Bottom