University of Miami, Plastic Surgery, Miami, United States.
University of Miami, Urology, Miami, United States.
Int J Infect Dis. 2022 Mar;116S:S40. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.12.096. Epub 2022 Feb 28.
: This article has been removed: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal). This article has been retracted at the request of the authors. The abstract was presented as a poster in the IMED last year. Our study was about the association of Ivermectin with reduction in mortality in COVID, a retrospective study with many limitations (which is innate in these types of studies). As in any retrospective study, we could not control for all the confounding variables, mainly severity of disease in patients treated with either ivermectin or remdesivir. Another important caveat is that it was conducted in July 2021, eight months ago, when we did not have all the clinical evidence we have right now about ivermectin in COVID-19. We were very clear in the abstract conclusions that our results are only showing an "association", they are not definitive, and further randomized clinical trials must be done to prove the efficacy of Ivermectin. However, the study has been misinterpreted by a significant number of people in the scientific community and the general population, stating that based on our study, ivermectin is effective to reduce COVID-19 mortality. We are really concerned about this problem because the patients may start taking or demanding this medication from their physicians, which can potentially be harmful. We know that a retrospective study like ours cannot be used to change or guide clinical practice. Retrospective studies are only helpful to formulate hypothesis that can be utilized to design clinical trials. This misrepresentation of the study may lead to a huge public health problem, since Ivermectin is a medication that is not FDA approved for COVID treatment, and currently has proven to be ineffective in clinical trials, which are truly the gold standard to evaluate the efficacy of a medication.
请参阅 Elsevier 撤稿政策（https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal）。应作者要求，本文已被撤回。该摘要曾作为海报在去年的 IMED 上展示。我们的研究是关于伊维菌素与 COVID 死亡率降低的相关性，这是一项具有许多局限性的回顾性研究（这些类型的研究中固有存在）。与任何回顾性研究一样，我们无法控制所有混杂变量，主要是接受伊维菌素或瑞德西韦治疗的患者的疾病严重程度。另一个重要的警告是，这项研究是在 2021 年 7 月进行的，距今已有 8 个月，当时我们没有现在关于 COVID-19 中伊维菌素的所有临床证据。我们在摘要结论中非常明确地指出，我们的结果仅显示出“关联”，它们不是确定的，必须进行更多的随机临床试验来证明伊维菌素的疗效。然而，这项研究在科学界和普通民众中被大量人误解，称根据我们的研究，伊维菌素可有效降低 COVID-19 的死亡率。我们真的很担心这个问题，因为患者可能开始向他们的医生开或要求开这种药物，这可能会带来潜在的危害。我们知道，像我们这样的回顾性研究不能用于改变或指导临床实践。回顾性研究仅有助于提出假说，从而可以用于设计临床试验。对这项研究的错误表述可能会导致一个巨大的公共卫生问题，因为伊维菌素不是 FDA 批准用于 COVID 治疗的药物，并且在临床试验中已被证明无效，临床试验才是评估药物疗效的真正金标准。
