Berti Giacomo, Mengato Daniele, Ocagli Honoria, Chinellato Gianmarco, Mazzitelli Maria, Cattelan Anna Maria, Baldi Ileana, Venturini Francesca
Unit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Cardiac Thoracic Vascular Sciences and Public Health, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Hospital Pharmacy Unit, Hospital-University of Padua, Padova, Italy.
Front Pharmacol. 2025 Apr 16;16:1537018. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2025.1537018. eCollection 2025.
Remdesivir (RDV) and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NRM/RTV) are two antiviral agents for treating outpatient adults with mild to moderate symptomatic COVID-19 at high risk of developing a severe disease. The review objectives are to compare the efficacy and safety of these antivirals based on published RCT and real-world data, and to evaluate costs from a healthcare perspective.
This study provides a network meta-analysis of RDV and NRM/RTV for early treatment of COVID-19. The outcomes analysed were hospitalisation for any cause and serious adverse events. A cost-analysis was performed incorporating drug costs, administration, hospitalisations, and management of adverse events. A budget impact analysis was estimated for the University Hospital of Padua.
Our results indicated that RDV showed a trend towards a lower risk of hospitalisation compared to NRM/RTV (RR 1.59, 95% CI: 0.60-4.20), though this was not statistically significant. For safety, NRM/RTV demonstrated a slightly lower risk of serious adverse events compared to RDV (RR 0.92, 95% CI: 0.31-2.74), but without statistical significance. A cost analysis showed that NRM/RTV could save €550,854.46 per 1,000 patients. Finally, a budget impact analysis based on data from the University Hospital of Padua estimated annual savings of €210,977.25 if all early treatments were administered with NRM/RTV instead of RDV.
The comparison of the two antiviral therapies for the early treatment of COVID-19 did not yield statistically significant differences in the potential efficacy and safety to prevent hospitalisation or serious adverse events. However, the results of the cost-analysis showed a saving in favour of NRM/RTV.
瑞德西韦(RDV)和奈玛特韦/利托那韦(NRM/RTV)是两种用于治疗有发展为重症疾病高风险的轻至中度症状的门诊成年新冠肺炎患者的抗病毒药物。本综述的目的是根据已发表的随机对照试验(RCT)和真实世界数据比较这些抗病毒药物的疗效和安全性,并从医疗保健角度评估成本。
本研究对RDV和NRM/RTV用于新冠肺炎早期治疗进行网络荟萃分析。分析的结局包括因任何原因住院和严重不良事件。进行了成本分析,纳入了药物成本、给药、住院以及不良事件管理。对帕多瓦大学医院进行了预算影响分析。
我们的结果表明,与NRM/RTV相比,RDV有住院风险较低的趋势(风险比1.59,95%置信区间:0.60 - 4.20),尽管这在统计学上不显著。在安全性方面,与RDV相比,NRM/RTV发生严重不良事件的风险略低(风险比0.92,95%置信区间:0.31 - 2.74),但无统计学意义。成本分析表明,NRM/RTV每1000例患者可节省550,854.46欧元。最后,基于帕多瓦大学医院的数据进行的预算影响分析估计,如果所有早期治疗都使用NRM/RTV而非RDV,每年可节省210,977.25欧元。
两种抗病毒疗法用于新冠肺炎早期治疗在预防住院或严重不良事件的潜在疗效和安全性方面未产生统计学上的显著差异。然而,成本分析结果显示使用NRM/RTV更节省成本。