Editorial Department, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, No 85 Jiefang South Road, Taiyuan, Shanxi, China.
Department of Laboratory Medicine, Kunshan Hospital Affiliated To Nanjing University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Kunshan, Jiangsu, China.
J Transl Med. 2020 Jul 6;18(1):274. doi: 10.1186/s12967-020-02442-5.
Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many researchers in China have performed related clinical research. However, systematic reviews of the registered clinical trials are still lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of clinical trials for COVID-19 to summarize their characteristics.
This study is based on the PRISMA recommendations in the Cochrane handbook. The Chinese Clinical Registration Center and the ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched to identify registered clinical trials related to COVID-19. The retrieval inception date was February 9, 2020. Two researchers independently selected the literature based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias.
A total of 75 registered clinical trials (63 interventional studies and 12 observational studies) for COVID-19 were identified. The majority of clinical trials were sponsored by Chinese hospitals. Only 11 trials have begun to recruit patients, and none of the registered clinical trials have been completed; 34 trials were early clinical exploratory trials or in the pre-experiment stage, 13 trials were phase III, and four trials were phase IV. The intervention methods included traditional Chinese medicine in 26 trials, Western medicine in 30 trials, and integrated traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine in 19 trials. The subjects were primarily non-critical adult patients (≥ 18 years old). The median sample size of the trials was 100 (IQR: 60-200), and the median length of the trial periods was 179 d (IQR: 94-366 d). The main outcomes were clinical observation and examinations. Overall, the methodological quality of both the interventional trials and observational studies was low.
Intensive clinical trials on the treatment of COVID-19 using traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine are ongoing or will be performed in China. However, based on the uncertain methodological quality, small sample size, and long trial duration, we will not be able to obtain reliable, high-quality clinical evidence regarding the treatment of COVID-19 in the near future. Improving the quality of study design, prioritizing promising drugs, and using different designs and statistical methods are worth advocating and recommending for clinical trials of COVID-19 in the future.
自 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)爆发以来,中国许多研究人员开展了相关的临床研究。然而,针对已注册的临床试验,仍缺乏系统评价。因此,我们对 COVID-19 的临床试验进行了系统评价,以总结其特征。
本研究基于 Cochrane 手册中的 PRISMA 建议。检索中国临床试验注册中心和 ClinicalTrials.gov 数据库,以确定与 COVID-19 相关的已注册临床试验。检索起始日期为 2020 年 2 月 9 日。两名研究人员根据纳入和排除标准独立筛选文献、提取数据并评估偏倚风险。
共纳入 75 项 COVID-19 注册临床试验(63 项干预性研究和 12 项观察性研究)。临床试验多由中国医院发起。仅有 11 项试验开始招募患者,且均未完成;34 项为早期临床探索性试验或处于预实验阶段,13 项为 III 期,4 项为 IV 期。干预方法包括中药 26 项,西药 30 项,中西医结合 19 项。受试对象主要为非重症成年患者(≥18 岁)。试验样本量中位数为 100(IQR:60-200),试验周期中位数为 179 天(IQR:94-366 天)。主要结局为临床观察和检查。总体而言,干预性试验和观察性研究的方法学质量均较低。
中国正在开展或即将开展针对 COVID-19 的中医药和西药治疗的密集临床试验。然而,鉴于不确定的方法学质量、小样本量和长试验周期,我们在近期内无法获得 COVID-19 治疗的可靠、高质量临床证据。提高研究设计质量、优先考虑有前途的药物,以及未来在 COVID-19 临床试验中使用不同的设计和统计方法,是值得提倡和推荐的。