Unidad de Revisiones Sistemáticas y Meta-análisis (URSIGET), Vicerrectorado de Investigación, Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola (USIL), Lima, Peru.
Hospital Guillermo Kaelin de La Fuente, Lima, Peru.
PLoS One. 2020 Dec 10;15(12):e0243705. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243705. eCollection 2020.
Efficacy and safety of treatments for hospitalized COVID-19 are uncertain. We systematically reviewed efficacy and safety of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19.
Studies evaluating remdesivir in adults with hospitalized COVID-19 were searched in several engines until August 21, 2020. Primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, clinical improvement or recovery, need for invasive ventilation, and serious adverse events (SAEs). Inverse variance random effects meta-analyses were performed.
We included four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 2296) [two vs. placebo (n = 1299) and two comparing 5-day vs. 10-day regimens (n = 997)], and two case series (n = 88). Studies used intravenous remdesivir 200mg the first day and 100mg for four or nine more days. One RCT (n = 236) was stopped early due to AEs; the other three RCTs reported outcomes between 11 and 15 days. Time to recovery was decreased by 4 days with remdesivir vs. placebo in one RCT (n = 1063), and by 0.8 days with 5-days vs. 10-days of therapy in another RCT (n = 397). Clinical improvement was better for 5-days regimen vs. standard of care in one RCT (n = 600). Remdesivir did not decrease all-cause mortality (RR 0.71, 95%CI 0.39 to 1.28, I2 = 43%) and need for invasive ventilation (RR 0.57, 95%CI 0.23 to 1.42, I2 = 60%) vs. placebo at 14 days but had fewer SAEs; 5-day decreased need for invasive ventilation and SAEs vs. 10-day in one RCT (n = 397). No differences in all-cause mortality or SAEs were seen among 5-day, 10-day and standard of care. There were some concerns of bias to high risk of bias in RCTs. Heterogeneity between studies could be due to different severities of disease, days of therapy before outcome determination, and how ordinal data was analyzed.
There is paucity of adequately powered and fully reported RCTs evaluating effects of remdesivir in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Until stronger evidence emerges, we cannot conclude that remdesivir is efficacious for treating COVID-19.
治疗住院 COVID-19 的疗效和安全性尚不确定。我们系统地回顾了瑞德西韦治疗 COVID-19 的疗效和安全性。
在几个引擎中搜索评估瑞德西韦治疗住院 COVID-19 成人的研究,直到 2020 年 8 月 21 日。主要结局包括全因死亡率、临床改善或恢复、需要有创通气和严重不良事件(SAE)。采用逆方差随机效应荟萃分析。
我们纳入了四项随机对照试验(RCT)(n = 2296)[两组对照安慰剂(n = 1299)和两组比较 5 天与 10 天疗程(n = 997)]和两项病例系列(n = 88)。研究使用静脉内瑞德西韦 200mg 第 1 天,然后连续 4 或 9 天使用 100mg。一项 RCT(n = 236)因 AE 提前终止;另外三项 RCT 报告了 11 至 15 天的结局。一项 RCT(n = 1063)显示,与安慰剂相比,瑞德西韦治疗可使恢复时间缩短 4 天,另一项 RCT(n = 397)显示 5 天疗程与 10 天疗程相比,恢复时间缩短 0.8 天。一项 RCT(n = 600)显示,5 天疗程与标准治疗相比,临床改善更好。瑞德西韦在 14 天内并未降低全因死亡率(RR 0.71,95%CI 0.39 至 1.28,I2 = 43%)和需要有创通气(RR 0.57,95%CI 0.23 至 1.42,I2 = 60%)与安慰剂相比,但不良事件更少;一项 RCT(n = 397)显示,5 天疗程比 10 天疗程减少了需要有创通气和不良事件。5 天、10 天和标准治疗之间的全因死亡率或不良事件无差异。RCT 存在高偏倚风险的一些担忧。研究之间的异质性可能归因于疾病严重程度不同、结局确定前的治疗天数以及对序贯数据的分析方式不同。
目前缺乏足够有力和充分报告的 RCT 来评估瑞德西韦治疗住院 COVID-19 患者的效果。在出现更强有力的证据之前,我们不能得出瑞德西韦治疗 COVID-19 有效的结论。