Suppr超能文献

用于治疗新型冠状病毒肺炎的药物重新利用:一项系统综述与荟萃分析

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

作者信息

Kotecha Pinky, Light Alexander, Checcucci Enrico, Amparore Daniele, Fiori Cristian, Porpiglia Francesco, Dasgupta Prokar, Elhage Oussama

机构信息

Department of Immunobiology, School of Immunology and Microbial Sciences, Biomedical Research Center, Faculty of Life Science and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.

Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, University of Turin, Orbassano, Turin, Italy.

出版信息

Panminerva Med. 2022 Mar;64(1):96-114. doi: 10.23736/S0031-0808.20.04024-0. Epub 2020 Oct 19.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

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.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

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).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

摘要

引言

本系统评价的目的是评估目前可获得的关于不同药物用于治疗新型冠状病毒肺炎(COVID-19)的现有数据。本研究纳入了疑似或确诊为COVID-19的参与者。所考虑的干预措施为重新利用的药物以及包括标准治疗或安慰剂在内的对照物。

证据获取

我们检索了Ovid-MEDLINE、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆、英国(国家卫生研究院)、欧洲(clinicaltrialsregister.eu)、美国(ClinicalTrials.gov)和国际(isrctn.com)的临床试验注册网站,并查阅了截至2020年4月22日发表的符合条件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。本系统评价遵循PRISMA指南。该方案可在PROSPERO(CRD42020180915)上获取。

证据综合

在708项已识别的研究或临床试验中,16项研究和16例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例患者),7项队列研究(321例患者)和3个病例系列(191例患者)。在第14天,氯喹(CQ)的出院率为100%,而洛匹那韦-利托那韦为50%,然而一项试验因心脏毒性事件建议避免高剂量使用。羟氯喹(HCQ)在血清学阴转率方面未显示出显著改善,这在我们的荟萃分析中也有体现(P = 0.68)。与对照组相比,HCQ的不良事件有显著差异(P = 0.001)。洛匹那韦-利托那韦在临床改善时间方面未显示出改善,这在我们的荟萃分析中也有体现(P = 0.1)。瑞德西韦在临床改善时间方面未显示出显著改善,但该试验的效力不足。

结论

由于证据不足,目前难以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著的临床效果。需要进一步开展大型临床试验以获得更可靠的结果。需要根据个体情况进行风险效益分析,权衡与不良事件风险相比临床结局的潜在改善和病毒载量降低情况。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验