The difference in all-cause mortality between COVID-19 patients treated with standard of care plus placebo and those treated with standard of care alone: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of immunomodulatory kinase inhibitors.

IF 8.8 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-16 DOI:10.1177/01410768231202657
Ping-Tao Tseng, Bing-Syuan Zeng, Chih-Wei Hsu, Trevor Thompson, Brendon Stubbs, Po-Ren Hsueh, Kuan-Pin Su, Yen-Wen Chen, Tien-Yu Chen, Yi-Cheng Wu, Pao-Yen Lin, Andre F Carvalho, Dian-Jeng Li, Ta-Chuan Yeh, Cheuk-Kwan Sun, Yu-Shian Cheng, Yow-Ling Shiue, Chih-Sung Liang, Yu-Kang Tu
{"title":"The difference in all-cause mortality between COVID-19 patients treated with standard of care plus placebo and those treated with standard of care alone: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of immunomodulatory kinase inhibitors.","authors":"Ping-Tao Tseng, Bing-Syuan Zeng, Chih-Wei Hsu, Trevor Thompson, Brendon Stubbs, Po-Ren Hsueh, Kuan-Pin Su, Yen-Wen Chen, Tien-Yu Chen, Yi-Cheng Wu, Pao-Yen Lin, Andre F Carvalho, Dian-Jeng Li, Ta-Chuan Yeh, Cheuk-Kwan Sun, Yu-Shian Cheng, Yow-Ling Shiue, Chih-Sung Liang, Yu-Kang Tu","doi":"10.1177/01410768231202657","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to assess whether participants assigned to a placebo and standard of care (SoC) group had different major coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related outcomes than those assigned to SoC alone.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Frequentist model-based NMA.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of Janus kinase/Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors for the management of COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Patients with COVID-19 infection.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was the 28-day all-cause mortality, and secondary outcomes were: (1) use of mechanical ventilation; (2) secondary bacterial infection; (3) acceptability (i.e. drop-out rate); and (4) safety (i.e. serious adverse events). We conducted an NMA using the frequentist model. Effect sizes were estimated using odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 14 eligible RCTs enrolling a total of 13,568 participants with COVID-19. Participants assigned to placebo plus SoC had a significantly higher risk of 28-day all-cause mortality than those receiving SoC alone (OR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.07-1.79). This finding did not change substantially by subgroup analysis stratified by epidemiology factor, pandemic history progression and statistical methodologic consideration. In addition, none of the treatments investigated were associated with a significantly different risk of secondary bacterial infection, acceptability or safety compared with the SoC group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This NMA suggested a higher all-cause mortality in patients treated with placebo plus SoC compared with those treated with SoC alone. However, caution is advised in interpreting these results due to the absence of a direct head-to-head comparison. Future research should critically evaluate the necessity of placebo administration in COVID-19 RCTs and consider alternative study designs to minimise potential biases.<b>Trial registration:</b> The current study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan (TSGHIRB No. B-109-29) and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022376217).</p>","PeriodicalId":17271,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"57-68"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10949870/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01410768231202657","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to assess whether participants assigned to a placebo and standard of care (SoC) group had different major coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related outcomes than those assigned to SoC alone.

Design: Frequentist model-based NMA.

Setting: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of Janus kinase/Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors for the management of COVID-19.

Participants: Patients with COVID-19 infection.

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the 28-day all-cause mortality, and secondary outcomes were: (1) use of mechanical ventilation; (2) secondary bacterial infection; (3) acceptability (i.e. drop-out rate); and (4) safety (i.e. serious adverse events). We conducted an NMA using the frequentist model. Effect sizes were estimated using odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).

Results: We identified 14 eligible RCTs enrolling a total of 13,568 participants with COVID-19. Participants assigned to placebo plus SoC had a significantly higher risk of 28-day all-cause mortality than those receiving SoC alone (OR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.07-1.79). This finding did not change substantially by subgroup analysis stratified by epidemiology factor, pandemic history progression and statistical methodologic consideration. In addition, none of the treatments investigated were associated with a significantly different risk of secondary bacterial infection, acceptability or safety compared with the SoC group.

Conclusions: This NMA suggested a higher all-cause mortality in patients treated with placebo plus SoC compared with those treated with SoC alone. However, caution is advised in interpreting these results due to the absence of a direct head-to-head comparison. Future research should critically evaluate the necessity of placebo administration in COVID-19 RCTs and consider alternative study designs to minimise potential biases.Trial registration: The current study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan (TSGHIRB No. B-109-29) and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022376217).

接受标准护理加安慰剂治疗的COVID-19患者与单独接受标准护理治疗的患者全因死亡率的差异:免疫调节激酶抑制剂随机对照试验的网络荟萃分析
目的:本网络荟萃分析(NMA)的目的是评估分配到安慰剂和标准治疗(SoC)组的参与者是否与单独分配到SoC组的参与者有不同的2019年主要冠状病毒病(COVID-19)相关结局。设计:基于频率模型的NMA。背景:我们检索了Janus激酶/布鲁顿酪氨酸激酶抑制剂治疗COVID-19的随机对照试验(RCTs)。参与者:COVID-19感染患者。主要结局指标:主要结局指标为28天全因死亡率,次要结局指标为:(1)机械通气使用情况;(2)继发细菌感染;(3)可接受性(即退学率);(4)安全性(即严重不良事件)。我们使用频率模型进行了NMA。使用95%置信区间(95% ci)的优势比(ORs)估计效应量。结果:我们确定了14项符合条件的随机对照试验,共纳入了13568名COVID-19参与者。安慰剂加SoC组的受试者28天全因死亡率明显高于单独接受SoC组(OR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.07-1.79)。通过流行病学因素、流行史进展和统计方法学的分层亚组分析,这一发现没有实质性改变。此外,与SoC组相比,所调查的治疗方法中没有一种与继发性细菌感染风险、可接受性或安全性显着不同相关。结论:该NMA表明,与单独接受SoC治疗的患者相比,安慰剂加SoC治疗的患者全因死亡率更高。然而,由于缺乏直接的正面比较,建议在解释这些结果时谨慎。未来的研究应严格评估在COVID-19随机对照试验中使用安慰剂的必要性,并考虑替代研究设计,以尽量减少潜在的偏差。试验注册:本研究已获得台湾台北国防医疗中心三军总医院机构审查委员会(TSGHIRB号)批准。B-109-29),并在普洛斯彼罗注册(CRD42022376217)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
3.50%
发文量
107
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Since 1809, the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine (JRSM) has been a trusted source of information in the medical field. Our publication covers a wide range of topics, including evidence-based reviews, original research papers, commentaries, and personal perspectives. As an independent scientific and educational journal, we strive to foster constructive discussions on vital clinical matters. While we are based in the UK, our articles address issues that are globally relevant and of interest to healthcare professionals worldwide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信