Sotrovimab in the treatment of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19): a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Ana Flávia da Silva Amorim, Joselin Valeska Martinez Sobalvarro, Larissa Helena Torres, Tiago Marques Dos Reis
{"title":"Sotrovimab in the treatment of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19): a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.","authors":"Ana Flávia da Silva Amorim, Joselin Valeska Martinez Sobalvarro, Larissa Helena Torres, Tiago Marques Dos Reis","doi":"10.1007/s00210-024-03298-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study was carried out to verify the evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of sotrovimab in patients with COVID-19. This is a systematic review of randomized clinical trials retrieved from the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Lilacs, and Cochrane Library databases. The risk of bias was measured using the Cochrane Risk and Bias Checklist (RoB 2). For the meta-analysis, RStudio Version 2024.04.2 software was used. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022355786). A total of 1893 studies were identified and four were included in the study. The total population consisted of 5470 patients with COVID-19, 1921 (35%) in the sotrovimab group and 3549 (65%) in the control group (placebo or BRII-196 + BRII-198 or casirivimab + imdevimab or bamlanivimab + etesevimab, administered in a similar way to sotrovimab, in a single dose with a 60-min intravenous infusion). For the effectiveness outcome, three studies presented low risk and one high risk of bias, while for safety all presented high risk of bias. The meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the sotrovimab and control groups in terms of hospitalization rates (95% confidence interval (CI) - 2.10-0.51; p = 0 > 0.05), use of invasive mechanical ventilation (95% CI - 2.78-0.65; p = 0.35) and mortality (95% CI - 0.92-0.59; p = 0.39). However, sensitivity analysis showed that sotrovimab may be effective in reducing hospitalization rates compared to the control (IV =  - 1.57; 95% CI - 2.41-0.73; p = 0.99). The use of sotrovimab in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 had no significant impact on mortality and need for mechanical ventilation and did not appear to be safer compared to controls. However, there was evidence of effectiveness in reducing the rate of hospitalization, although the certainty of the evidence is moderate and the risk of bias is high.</p>","PeriodicalId":18876,"journal":{"name":"Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":"9573-9589"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00210-024-03298-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study was carried out to verify the evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of sotrovimab in patients with COVID-19. This is a systematic review of randomized clinical trials retrieved from the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Lilacs, and Cochrane Library databases. The risk of bias was measured using the Cochrane Risk and Bias Checklist (RoB 2). For the meta-analysis, RStudio Version 2024.04.2 software was used. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022355786). A total of 1893 studies were identified and four were included in the study. The total population consisted of 5470 patients with COVID-19, 1921 (35%) in the sotrovimab group and 3549 (65%) in the control group (placebo or BRII-196 + BRII-198 or casirivimab + imdevimab or bamlanivimab + etesevimab, administered in a similar way to sotrovimab, in a single dose with a 60-min intravenous infusion). For the effectiveness outcome, three studies presented low risk and one high risk of bias, while for safety all presented high risk of bias. The meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the sotrovimab and control groups in terms of hospitalization rates (95% confidence interval (CI) - 2.10-0.51; p = 0 > 0.05), use of invasive mechanical ventilation (95% CI - 2.78-0.65; p = 0.35) and mortality (95% CI - 0.92-0.59; p = 0.39). However, sensitivity analysis showed that sotrovimab may be effective in reducing hospitalization rates compared to the control (IV =  - 1.57; 95% CI - 2.41-0.73; p = 0.99). The use of sotrovimab in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 had no significant impact on mortality and need for mechanical ventilation and did not appear to be safer compared to controls. However, there was evidence of effectiveness in reducing the rate of hospitalization, although the certainty of the evidence is moderate and the risk of bias is high.

Abstract Image

索托维单抗治疗冠状病毒病-2019(COVID-19):随机临床试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
本研究旨在验证索托维单抗对 COVID-19 患者的有效性和安全性。本研究对从 PubMed、Embase、Scopus、Lilacs 和 Cochrane Library 数据库中检索到的随机临床试验进行了系统回顾。偏倚风险采用 Cochrane 风险与偏倚检查表(RoB 2)进行测量。荟萃分析使用 RStudio 2024.04.2 版软件。证据的确定性采用 GRADE 进行评估。研究方案已在 PROSPERO 注册(CRD42022355786)。共确定了 1893 项研究,其中 4 项被纳入本研究。研究对象包括5470名COVID-19患者,其中索托维单抗组1921人(占35%),对照组3549人(占65%)(安慰剂或BRII-196 + BRII-198或casirivimab + imdevimab或bamlanivimab + etesevimab,给药方式与索托维单抗相似,单剂量静脉输注60分钟)。关于有效性结果,三项研究存在低偏倚风险,一项存在高偏倚风险,而关于安全性结果,所有研究均存在高偏倚风险。荟萃分析表明,索托维单抗组与对照组在住院率(95% 置信区间 (CI) - 2.10-0.51; p = 0 > 0.05)、有创机械通气使用率(95% CI - 2.78-0.65; p = 0.35)和死亡率(95% CI - 0.92-0.59; p = 0.39)方面无显著差异。然而,敏感性分析表明,与对照组相比,索托维单抗可有效降低住院率(IV = - 1.57;95% CI - 2.41-0.73;P = 0.99)。使用索托维单抗治疗COVID-19患者对死亡率和机械通气需求没有显著影响,与对照组相比似乎也不更安全。不过,有证据表明,索托维单抗在降低住院率方面是有效的,但证据的确定性为中度,偏倚风险较高。
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
6.20
自引率
5.60%
发文量
142
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Naunyn-Schmiedeberg''s Archives of Pharmacology was founded in 1873 by B. Naunyn, O. Schmiedeberg and E. Klebs as Archiv für experimentelle Pathologie und Pharmakologie, is the offical journal of the German Society of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology (Deutsche Gesellschaft für experimentelle und klinische Pharmakologie und Toxikologie, DGPT) and the Sphingolipid Club. The journal publishes invited reviews, original articles, short communications and meeting reports and appears monthly. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg''s Archives of Pharmacology welcomes manuscripts for consideration of publication that report new and significant information on drug action and toxicity of chemical compounds. Thus, its scope covers all fields of experimental and clinical pharmacology as well as toxicology and includes studies in the fields of neuropharmacology and cardiovascular pharmacology as well as those describing drug actions at the cellular, biochemical and molecular levels. Moreover, submission of clinical trials with healthy volunteers or patients is encouraged. Short communications provide a means for rapid publication of significant findings of current interest that represent a conceptual advance in the field.
×
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