• 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.

J Thorac Dis . Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for treatment of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19): a systematic review and meta-analysis of rando

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
J Thorac Dis


. 2021 Jan;13(1):202-212.
doi: 10.21037/jtd-20-2022.
Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for treatment of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19): a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials


Risa Ebina-Shibuya[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ho Namkoong[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Nobuyuki Horita[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Hideaki Kato[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Yu Hara[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Nobuaki Kobayashi[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Takeshi Kaneko[SUP] 3 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Background: Although the US government approved hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) for hospitalized coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) patients, some studies denied efficacy of HCQ and CQ. We aimed to evaluate HCQ/CQ treatment for COVID-19.
Methods: Five databases were searched on April 15, 2020, without publication date restriction. We followed both Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology statement reporting recommendations. A random-model meta-analysis was conducted to pool odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR). The quality of evidence for each outcome and the final recommendation was assessed using the GRADE guidelines of the American College of Chest Physicians.
Results: We identified four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and four observational studies with 2,063 COVID-19 cases. All-cause mortality was not affected by the administration of HCQ/CQ [OR: 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.53-2.09, P=0.89]. No improvement of viral clearance was found neither by time-to-event analysis (HR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.74-1.94, P=0.47) nor frequency on day 7 (OR: 1.47, 95% CI: 0.33-6.63, P=0.62). HCQ/CQ treatment increased the risk of the any adverse event with OR of 3.56 (95% CI: 1.62-7.83, P=0.002).
Conclusions: HCQ/CQ failed to decrease the all-cause mortality (very low quality evidence) and did not improve viral clearance (low or very low quality evidence) but increased the risk of any adverse event (moderate quality evidence). Routine administration of HCQ/CQ for COVID-19 patients is not recommended (weak recommendation, Grade 2C).

Keywords: Virus diseases; aminoquinolines; coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19); drug approval; evidence-based medicine; policy making.
 
Back
Top Bottom