揭示治疗动态:中和单克隆抗体与法非拉韦在减轻 COVID-19 门诊病人对中年和特殊人群(MA-FAST)的影响方面的深入比较分析。

IF 4.7 3区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Taweegrit Siripongboonsitti , Kriangkrai Tawinprai , Thachanun Porntharukcharoen , Supamas Sirisreetreerux , Thitapha Thongchai , Kamonwan Soonklang , Nithi Mahanonda
{"title":"揭示治疗动态:中和单克隆抗体与法非拉韦在减轻 COVID-19 门诊病人对中年和特殊人群(MA-FAST)的影响方面的深入比较分析。","authors":"Taweegrit Siripongboonsitti ,&nbsp;Kriangkrai Tawinprai ,&nbsp;Thachanun Porntharukcharoen ,&nbsp;Supamas Sirisreetreerux ,&nbsp;Thitapha Thongchai ,&nbsp;Kamonwan Soonklang ,&nbsp;Nithi Mahanonda","doi":"10.1016/j.jiph.2024.102471","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (NMabs) are recognized for their efficacy against non-severe COVID-19. However, spike protein mutations may confer resistance. This study evaluates the effectiveness of favipiravir (FPV) versus NMabs in preventing severe COVID-19 in special populations.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A retrospective cohort was conducted on middle-aged, elderly, diabetic, or obese patients with COVID-19 treated with either FPV or NMabs. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used for analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The study included 1410 patients, resulting in four cohorts: middle-aged (36), elderly (48), diabetic (46), and obese (28) post-PSM. No significant differences were noted in 28-day emergency department (ED) visits across all groups between NMabs and FPV treatments, despite lower immunity in the FPV group. However, the diabetic group treated with FPV had higher 28-day hospitalization and oxygen supplemental, with no differences in the other groups. Intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, invasive mechanical ventilation, and mortality rates were similar between the two treatments.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Early dose-adjusted FPV showed no difference from NMabs in preventing ED visits, ICU admissions, ventilator needs, or mortality among patients with major comorbidities. Diabetic patients on FPV experienced higher hospitalizations and oxygen needs, with no observed differences in other groups. FPV may be a viable alternative, especially in settings with limited resources.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16087,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Infection and Public Health","volume":"17 7","pages":"Article 102471"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876034124002053/pdfft?md5=f2b1104ae8991dc418c3268bbbcf876b&pid=1-s2.0-S1876034124002053-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unveiling therapeutic dynamics: An in-depth comparative analysis of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies and favipiravir in alleviating COVID-19 outpatients impacts among middle-aged and special populations (MA-FAST)\",\"authors\":\"Taweegrit Siripongboonsitti ,&nbsp;Kriangkrai Tawinprai ,&nbsp;Thachanun Porntharukcharoen ,&nbsp;Supamas Sirisreetreerux ,&nbsp;Thitapha Thongchai ,&nbsp;Kamonwan Soonklang ,&nbsp;Nithi Mahanonda\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jiph.2024.102471\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (NMabs) are recognized for their efficacy against non-severe COVID-19. However, spike protein mutations may confer resistance. This study evaluates the effectiveness of favipiravir (FPV) versus NMabs in preventing severe COVID-19 in special populations.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A retrospective cohort was conducted on middle-aged, elderly, diabetic, or obese patients with COVID-19 treated with either FPV or NMabs. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used for analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The study included 1410 patients, resulting in four cohorts: middle-aged (36), elderly (48), diabetic (46), and obese (28) post-PSM. No significant differences were noted in 28-day emergency department (ED) visits across all groups between NMabs and FPV treatments, despite lower immunity in the FPV group. However, the diabetic group treated with FPV had higher 28-day hospitalization and oxygen supplemental, with no differences in the other groups. Intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, invasive mechanical ventilation, and mortality rates were similar between the two treatments.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Early dose-adjusted FPV showed no difference from NMabs in preventing ED visits, ICU admissions, ventilator needs, or mortality among patients with major comorbidities. Diabetic patients on FPV experienced higher hospitalizations and oxygen needs, with no observed differences in other groups. FPV may be a viable alternative, especially in settings with limited resources.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16087,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Infection and Public Health\",\"volume\":\"17 7\",\"pages\":\"Article 102471\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876034124002053/pdfft?md5=f2b1104ae8991dc418c3268bbbcf876b&pid=1-s2.0-S1876034124002053-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Infection and Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876034124002053\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Infection and Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876034124002053","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:中和单克隆抗体(NMabs)对非重症 COVID-19 的疗效已得到认可。然而,尖峰蛋白突变可能会产生耐药性。本研究评估了法非拉韦(FPV)与 NMabs 在预防特殊人群中严重 COVID-19 的有效性:方法:对接受 FPV 或 NMabs 治疗的 COVID-19 中年、老年、糖尿病或肥胖患者进行了回顾性队列研究。分析采用倾向得分匹配法(PSM):研究共纳入 1410 名患者,PSM 后形成四个队列:中年组(36 人)、老年组(48 人)、糖尿病组(46 人)和肥胖组(28 人)。尽管 FPV 组免疫力较低,但 NMabs 和 FPV 治疗在所有组别中的 28 天急诊就诊率均无明显差异。不过,接受 FPV 治疗的糖尿病组 28 天的住院率和氧气补充量较高,其他组别则没有差异。两种治疗方法的重症监护室(ICU)入院率、有创机械通气率和死亡率相似:早期剂量调整后的 FPV 与 NMabs 相比,在预防主要合并症患者的急诊室就诊、重症监护室入院、呼吸机需求或死亡率方面没有差异。使用FPV的糖尿病患者的住院率和氧气需求较高,其他组别则没有观察到差异。FPV 可能是一种可行的替代方案,尤其是在资源有限的情况下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Unveiling therapeutic dynamics: An in-depth comparative analysis of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies and favipiravir in alleviating COVID-19 outpatients impacts among middle-aged and special populations (MA-FAST)

Background

Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (NMabs) are recognized for their efficacy against non-severe COVID-19. However, spike protein mutations may confer resistance. This study evaluates the effectiveness of favipiravir (FPV) versus NMabs in preventing severe COVID-19 in special populations.

Methods

A retrospective cohort was conducted on middle-aged, elderly, diabetic, or obese patients with COVID-19 treated with either FPV or NMabs. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used for analysis.

Results

The study included 1410 patients, resulting in four cohorts: middle-aged (36), elderly (48), diabetic (46), and obese (28) post-PSM. No significant differences were noted in 28-day emergency department (ED) visits across all groups between NMabs and FPV treatments, despite lower immunity in the FPV group. However, the diabetic group treated with FPV had higher 28-day hospitalization and oxygen supplemental, with no differences in the other groups. Intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, invasive mechanical ventilation, and mortality rates were similar between the two treatments.

Conclusions

Early dose-adjusted FPV showed no difference from NMabs in preventing ED visits, ICU admissions, ventilator needs, or mortality among patients with major comorbidities. Diabetic patients on FPV experienced higher hospitalizations and oxygen needs, with no observed differences in other groups. FPV may be a viable alternative, especially in settings with limited resources.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Infection and Public Health
Journal of Infection and Public Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -INFECTIOUS DISEASES
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
1.50%
发文量
203
审稿时长
96 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Infection and Public Health, first official journal of the Saudi Arabian Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences and the Saudi Association for Public Health, aims to be the foremost scientific, peer-reviewed journal encompassing infection prevention and control, microbiology, infectious diseases, public health and the application of healthcare epidemiology to the evaluation of health outcomes. The point of view of the journal is that infection and public health are closely intertwined and that advances in one area will have positive consequences on the other. The journal will be useful to all health professionals who are partners in the management of patients with communicable diseases, keeping them up to date. The journal is proud to have an international and diverse editorial board that will assist and facilitate the publication of articles that reflect a global view on infection control and public health, as well as emphasizing our focus on supporting the needs of public health practitioners. It is our aim to improve healthcare by reducing risk of infection and related adverse outcomes by critical review, selection, and dissemination of new and relevant information in the field of infection control, public health and infectious diseases in all healthcare settings and the community.
×
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