tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Open Forum Infect Dis
. 2022 Jan 17;9(2)
fab645.
doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofab645. eCollection 2022 Feb.
Ivermectin for COVID-19: Addressing Potential Bias and Medical Fraud
Andrew Hill[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Manya Mirchandani[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Victoria Pilkington[SUP] 3 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Abstract
Ivermectin has become a controversial potential medicine for coronavirus disease 2019. Some early studies suggested clinical benefits in treatment of infection. However, the body of evidence includes studies of varying quality. Furthermore, some trials have now been identified as potentially fraudulent. We present a subgroup meta-analysis to assess the effects of stratifying by trial quality on the overall results. The stratification is based on the Cochrane Risk of Bias measures and raw data analysis where possible. The results suggest that the significant effect of ivermectin on survival was dependent on largely poor-quality studies. According to the potentially fraudulent study (risk ratio [RR], 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02-0.35), ivermectin improved survival ~12 times more in comparison with low-risk studies (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.56-1.66). This highlights the need for rigorous quality assessments, for authors to share patient-level data, and for efforts to avoid publication bias for registered studies. These steps are vital to facilitate accurate conclusions on clinical treatments.
Keywords: COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; ivermectin.
. 2022 Jan 17;9(2)
fab645.doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofab645. eCollection 2022 Feb.
Ivermectin for COVID-19: Addressing Potential Bias and Medical Fraud
Andrew Hill[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Manya Mirchandani[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Victoria Pilkington[SUP] 3 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 35071686
- PMCID: PMC8774052
- DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofab645
Abstract
Ivermectin has become a controversial potential medicine for coronavirus disease 2019. Some early studies suggested clinical benefits in treatment of infection. However, the body of evidence includes studies of varying quality. Furthermore, some trials have now been identified as potentially fraudulent. We present a subgroup meta-analysis to assess the effects of stratifying by trial quality on the overall results. The stratification is based on the Cochrane Risk of Bias measures and raw data analysis where possible. The results suggest that the significant effect of ivermectin on survival was dependent on largely poor-quality studies. According to the potentially fraudulent study (risk ratio [RR], 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02-0.35), ivermectin improved survival ~12 times more in comparison with low-risk studies (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.56-1.66). This highlights the need for rigorous quality assessments, for authors to share patient-level data, and for efforts to avoid publication bias for registered studies. These steps are vital to facilitate accurate conclusions on clinical treatments.
Keywords: COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; ivermectin.