Impact of most promising Ebola therapies on survival: a secondary analysis during the tenth outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

IF 4 3区 医学 Q2 VIROLOGY
Esther Mamu Kikwango, Pierre Z Akilimali, Nguyen Toan Tran
{"title":"Impact of most promising Ebola therapies on survival: a secondary analysis during the tenth outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo.","authors":"Esther Mamu Kikwango, Pierre Z Akilimali, Nguyen Toan Tran","doi":"10.1186/s12985-025-02766-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>MAb114, REGN-EB3, Remdesivir, and ZMapp, which are monoclonal antibody-based treatments, have been compared and shown to be promising therapies against the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD). There has been no comparison between these medications and standard treatment (without antiviral). Our study aimed to examine the contribution of each regimen compared to standard treatment on the survival of EVD patients and assess whether this association was modified by EVD vaccination (rVSV-ZEBOV Ebola vaccine) status.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>We performed a secondary analysis study using retrospective cohort data obtained from four EVD treatment centers located in Katwa, Mangina, Butembo, and Beni in the North Kivu region. The main outcome measure was mortality within a 28-day period among 781 included patients. A Cox model was used to identify predictors of survival in hospitalized EVD patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Vaccinated EVD patients were 1.7 times less likely to die compared to unvaccinated patients (3.70 days vs. 5.00 days; p = 0.0002). Delaying care and treatment at EVD treatment centres increased mortality risk by 5% for each day following symptom onset. Compared to the standard treatment group, adjusted mortality rates were significantly reduced in the groups receiving MAb114 (0.27, p < 0.001), REGN-EB3 (0.26, p < 0.001), and Remdesivir (0.38, p = 0.005). ZMapp also showed a reduction, though with borderline statistical significance (0.47, p = 0.032).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prompt identification and treatment, along with enhanced supportive care (such as replenishing fluids and electrolytes and managing symptoms), significantly improve survival chances. Concurrently, administering vaccines and using mAb114, REGN-EB3, and, to some extent, Remdesivir further increase patient survival rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":23616,"journal":{"name":"Virology Journal","volume":"22 1","pages":"144"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12079879/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Virology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12985-025-02766-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VIROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: MAb114, REGN-EB3, Remdesivir, and ZMapp, which are monoclonal antibody-based treatments, have been compared and shown to be promising therapies against the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD). There has been no comparison between these medications and standard treatment (without antiviral). Our study aimed to examine the contribution of each regimen compared to standard treatment on the survival of EVD patients and assess whether this association was modified by EVD vaccination (rVSV-ZEBOV Ebola vaccine) status.

Methodology: We performed a secondary analysis study using retrospective cohort data obtained from four EVD treatment centers located in Katwa, Mangina, Butembo, and Beni in the North Kivu region. The main outcome measure was mortality within a 28-day period among 781 included patients. A Cox model was used to identify predictors of survival in hospitalized EVD patients.

Results: Vaccinated EVD patients were 1.7 times less likely to die compared to unvaccinated patients (3.70 days vs. 5.00 days; p = 0.0002). Delaying care and treatment at EVD treatment centres increased mortality risk by 5% for each day following symptom onset. Compared to the standard treatment group, adjusted mortality rates were significantly reduced in the groups receiving MAb114 (0.27, p < 0.001), REGN-EB3 (0.26, p < 0.001), and Remdesivir (0.38, p = 0.005). ZMapp also showed a reduction, though with borderline statistical significance (0.47, p = 0.032).

Conclusions: Prompt identification and treatment, along with enhanced supportive care (such as replenishing fluids and electrolytes and managing symptoms), significantly improve survival chances. Concurrently, administering vaccines and using mAb114, REGN-EB3, and, to some extent, Remdesivir further increase patient survival rates.

最有希望的埃博拉疗法对生存的影响:刚果民主共和国第十次疫情期间的二次分析。
背景:MAb114、REGN-EB3、Remdesivir和ZMapp是基于单克隆抗体的治疗方法,经过比较发现它们是治疗埃博拉病毒病(EVD)的有希望的治疗方法。这些药物与标准治疗(不含抗病毒药物)之间没有比较。我们的研究旨在检查与标准治疗相比,每种治疗方案对EVD患者生存的贡献,并评估这种关联是否会因EVD疫苗接种(rVSV-ZEBOV埃博拉疫苗)状态而改变。方法:我们使用来自北基伍地区Katwa、Mangina、Butembo和Beni四个EVD治疗中心的回顾性队列数据进行了二次分析研究。主要结局指标是781例纳入研究的患者28天内的死亡率。采用Cox模型确定EVD住院患者的生存预测因素。结果:与未接种疫苗的患者相比,接种疫苗的EVD患者死亡的可能性低1.7倍(3.70天vs 5.00天;p = 0.0002)。在埃博拉病毒病治疗中心延迟护理和治疗会使症状出现后每天的死亡风险增加5%。与标准治疗组相比,接受MAb114治疗组的调整死亡率显著降低(0.27,p)。结论:及时识别和治疗,以及加强支持性护理(如补充液体和电解质以及控制症状),显著提高了生存机会。同时,接种疫苗和使用mAb114、REGN-EB3,以及在一定程度上使用Remdesivir,进一步提高了患者的生存率。
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
Virology Journal
Virology Journal 医学-病毒学
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
186
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Virology Journal is an open access, peer reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of virology, including research on the viruses of animals, plants and microbes. The journal welcomes basic research as well as pre-clinical and clinical studies of novel diagnostic tools, vaccines and anti-viral therapies. The Editorial policy of Virology Journal is to publish all research which is assessed by peer reviewers to be a coherent and sound addition to the scientific literature, and puts less emphasis on interest levels or perceived impact.
×
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