瑞德西韦与索罗维单抗在2019冠状病毒病中的应用:系统综述和荟萃分析

IF 2.1 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Saeed Khorramnia, Zia Navidi, Ali Sarkoohi, Mojgan Mohajeri Iravani, Amirhossein Orandi, Amirali Orandi, Samrand Fattah Ghazi, Ehsan Fallah, Ebadallah Shiri Malekabad, Seyed Hamid Pakzad Moghadam
{"title":"瑞德西韦与索罗维单抗在2019冠状病毒病中的应用:系统综述和荟萃分析","authors":"Saeed Khorramnia,&nbsp;Zia Navidi,&nbsp;Ali Sarkoohi,&nbsp;Mojgan Mohajeri Iravani,&nbsp;Amirhossein Orandi,&nbsp;Amirali Orandi,&nbsp;Samrand Fattah Ghazi,&nbsp;Ehsan Fallah,&nbsp;Ebadallah Shiri Malekabad,&nbsp;Seyed Hamid Pakzad Moghadam","doi":"10.1002/hsr2.71118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background and Aim</h3>\n \n <p>Remdesivir and Sotrovimab have emerged as potential treatment options for patients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to evaluate and compare the effectiveness and safety of these two drugs in the context of COVID-19 management.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and Google Scholar up to July 2024. The effectiveness outcomes examined included mortality rate, hospitalization rate, emergency department visits, ICU admission, and adverse events. The risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions was evaluated using a standardized tool, and data from the identified studies were meticulously analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) software.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The analysis incorporated a total of 9 studies involving 7841 patients. The meta-analysis findings indicated no significant disparity between the Remdesivir and Sotrovimab groups concerning mortality rate (odds ratio [OR] = 3.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50–24.11, <i>p</i> = 0.20), hospitalization rate (OR = 2.11, 95% CI: 0.85–5.22, <i>p</i> = 0.10), emergency department visit (OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.11–5.62, <i>p</i> = 0.82), and intensive care unit (2.37, 95% CI: 0.18–29.90, <i>p</i> = 0.50). Moreover, comparable rates of adverse events were observed across both groups (OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.39–2.47, <i>p</i> = 0.97). The certainty of evidence for these findings was rated as low or moderate.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The study findings suggest that there is no significant difference in effectiveness between Remdesivir and Sotrovimab in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Further research is needed to provide a more comprehensive comparison of these interventions for COVID-19.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36518,"journal":{"name":"Health Science Reports","volume":"8 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hsr2.71118","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Remdesivir Versus Sotrovimab in Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Saeed Khorramnia,&nbsp;Zia Navidi,&nbsp;Ali Sarkoohi,&nbsp;Mojgan Mohajeri Iravani,&nbsp;Amirhossein Orandi,&nbsp;Amirali Orandi,&nbsp;Samrand Fattah Ghazi,&nbsp;Ehsan Fallah,&nbsp;Ebadallah Shiri Malekabad,&nbsp;Seyed Hamid Pakzad Moghadam\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/hsr2.71118\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background and Aim</h3>\\n \\n <p>Remdesivir and Sotrovimab have emerged as potential treatment options for patients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to evaluate and compare the effectiveness and safety of these two drugs in the context of COVID-19 management.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and Google Scholar up to July 2024. The effectiveness outcomes examined included mortality rate, hospitalization rate, emergency department visits, ICU admission, and adverse events. The risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions was evaluated using a standardized tool, and data from the identified studies were meticulously analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) software.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The analysis incorporated a total of 9 studies involving 7841 patients. The meta-analysis findings indicated no significant disparity between the Remdesivir and Sotrovimab groups concerning mortality rate (odds ratio [OR] = 3.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50–24.11, <i>p</i> = 0.20), hospitalization rate (OR = 2.11, 95% CI: 0.85–5.22, <i>p</i> = 0.10), emergency department visit (OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.11–5.62, <i>p</i> = 0.82), and intensive care unit (2.37, 95% CI: 0.18–29.90, <i>p</i> = 0.50). Moreover, comparable rates of adverse events were observed across both groups (OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.39–2.47, <i>p</i> = 0.97). The certainty of evidence for these findings was rated as low or moderate.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>The study findings suggest that there is no significant difference in effectiveness between Remdesivir and Sotrovimab in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Further research is needed to provide a more comprehensive comparison of these interventions for COVID-19.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36518,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Science Reports\",\"volume\":\"8 7\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hsr2.71118\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Science Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hsr2.71118\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Science Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hsr2.71118","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的Remdesivir和Sotrovimab已成为2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)患者的潜在治疗选择。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估和比较这两种药物在COVID-19治疗中的有效性和安全性。方法系统检索截至2024年7月PubMed、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、medRxiv、谷歌Scholar等数据库。检查的有效性结果包括死亡率、住院率、急诊科访问量、ICU入院率和不良事件。使用标准化工具评估干预措施的非随机研究的偏倚风险,并使用综合荟萃分析(CMA)软件仔细分析来自确定研究的数据。结果本分析共纳入9项研究,涉及7841例患者。meta分析结果显示,在死亡率(优势比[OR] = 3.49, 95%可信区间[CI]: 0.50 - 24.11, p = 0.20)、住院率(OR = 2.11, 95% CI: 0.85-5.22, p = 0.10)、急诊科就诊率(OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.11-5.62, p = 0.82)和重症监护病房(OR = 2.37, 95% CI: 0.18-29.90, p = 0.50)方面,Remdesivir组和Sotrovimab组之间无显著差异。此外,两组不良事件发生率相当(OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.39-2.47, p = 0.97)。这些发现的证据的确定性被评为低或中等。结论研究结果表明,瑞德西韦与索罗维单抗治疗COVID-19患者的疗效无显著差异。需要进一步研究,对这些针对COVID-19的干预措施进行更全面的比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Remdesivir Versus Sotrovimab in Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Remdesivir Versus Sotrovimab in Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Aim

Remdesivir and Sotrovimab have emerged as potential treatment options for patients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to evaluate and compare the effectiveness and safety of these two drugs in the context of COVID-19 management.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and Google Scholar up to July 2024. The effectiveness outcomes examined included mortality rate, hospitalization rate, emergency department visits, ICU admission, and adverse events. The risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions was evaluated using a standardized tool, and data from the identified studies were meticulously analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) software.

Results

The analysis incorporated a total of 9 studies involving 7841 patients. The meta-analysis findings indicated no significant disparity between the Remdesivir and Sotrovimab groups concerning mortality rate (odds ratio [OR] = 3.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50–24.11, p = 0.20), hospitalization rate (OR = 2.11, 95% CI: 0.85–5.22, p = 0.10), emergency department visit (OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.11–5.62, p = 0.82), and intensive care unit (2.37, 95% CI: 0.18–29.90, p = 0.50). Moreover, comparable rates of adverse events were observed across both groups (OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.39–2.47, p = 0.97). The certainty of evidence for these findings was rated as low or moderate.

Conclusion

The study findings suggest that there is no significant difference in effectiveness between Remdesivir and Sotrovimab in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Further research is needed to provide a more comprehensive comparison of these interventions for COVID-19.

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
Health Science Reports
Health Science Reports Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
458
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信