对照组(常规治疗)新冠肺炎患者羟氯喹病毒学清除率、有效性和安全性的核对——系统回顾和Meta-Analysis

Athira Mohan S, Shaiju S. Dharan
{"title":"对照组(常规治疗)新冠肺炎患者羟氯喹病毒学清除率、有效性和安全性的核对——系统回顾和Meta-Analysis","authors":"Athira Mohan S, Shaiju S. Dharan","doi":"10.52793/acmr.2021.2(2)-18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Destitute of an effective treatment, several potential repurposed drugs have been tried in COVID-19. Despite unavailability of anecdotal evidence, several guidelines granted both Chloroquine (CQ) and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in treatment. Clinical studies relating to those in COVID-19 disease has reported conflicting results. We sought to systematically evaluate the clinical effects contact, mainly in health workers [8]. On March 30, 2020 FDA issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) in order to use both CQ and HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19. FDA issued EUA for the second time in the history. Formerly it was given for an investigational neuraminidase inhibitor, Peramivir during 2009-2010 to treat severely ill patients with H1N1 influenza [9]. The meta-analysis of 5 studies that reported rate of virological clearance or PCR negativity (n=312) found no benefit in HCQ arm. {OR, 1.863; 95% CI, 1.024 to 3.389; p=0.041} with a moderate heterogeneity (I 2 =70.3%, P=0.009). meta-analysis of 5 studies (n=1710) that reported about ADR outcomes found that, there exist an increased risk of ADRs in HCQ arm. {OR, 2.648; 95% CI, 2.068 to 7.717; p=0.000}, with no heterogeneity (I 2 = 0%, P=0.417). 6 studies (n=4,341) showed a significant increase in mortality in HCQ arm when compared with control arm {OR, 1.182; 95% CI, 0.981 to 1.425; p=0.079}, with substantial heterogeneity (I 2 = 82.0%, P=0.000). Conclusions: The systematic review and meta-analysis revealed a reduced antiviral efficacy in reducing mortality, ADR occurrence and has a decreased virological clearance in patients with COVID-19. in COVID-19 patients.","PeriodicalId":72085,"journal":{"name":"Advances in clinical and medical research (Chandigarh, India)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Collation Of Hydroxychloroquine Virological Clearance, Effectiveness, Safety In Covid-19 Patients With Control Group (Conventional Therapy) – A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Athira Mohan S, Shaiju S. Dharan\",\"doi\":\"10.52793/acmr.2021.2(2)-18\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives: Destitute of an effective treatment, several potential repurposed drugs have been tried in COVID-19. Despite unavailability of anecdotal evidence, several guidelines granted both Chloroquine (CQ) and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in treatment. Clinical studies relating to those in COVID-19 disease has reported conflicting results. We sought to systematically evaluate the clinical effects contact, mainly in health workers [8]. On March 30, 2020 FDA issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) in order to use both CQ and HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19. FDA issued EUA for the second time in the history. Formerly it was given for an investigational neuraminidase inhibitor, Peramivir during 2009-2010 to treat severely ill patients with H1N1 influenza [9]. The meta-analysis of 5 studies that reported rate of virological clearance or PCR negativity (n=312) found no benefit in HCQ arm. {OR, 1.863; 95% CI, 1.024 to 3.389; p=0.041} with a moderate heterogeneity (I 2 =70.3%, P=0.009). meta-analysis of 5 studies (n=1710) that reported about ADR outcomes found that, there exist an increased risk of ADRs in HCQ arm. {OR, 2.648; 95% CI, 2.068 to 7.717; p=0.000}, with no heterogeneity (I 2 = 0%, P=0.417). 6 studies (n=4,341) showed a significant increase in mortality in HCQ arm when compared with control arm {OR, 1.182; 95% CI, 0.981 to 1.425; p=0.079}, with substantial heterogeneity (I 2 = 82.0%, P=0.000). Conclusions: The systematic review and meta-analysis revealed a reduced antiviral efficacy in reducing mortality, ADR occurrence and has a decreased virological clearance in patients with COVID-19. in COVID-19 patients.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72085,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in clinical and medical research (Chandigarh, India)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in clinical and medical research (Chandigarh, India)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52793/acmr.2021.2(2)-18\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in clinical and medical research (Chandigarh, India)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52793/acmr.2021.2(2)-18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在新冠肺炎中,已经尝试了几种潜在的再利用药物来代替有效的治疗方法。尽管没有传闻证据,但一些指南同时批准了氯喹(CQ)和羟氯喹(HCQ)的治疗。与新冠肺炎相关的临床研究报告了相互矛盾的结果。我们试图系统地评估主要在卫生工作者中接触的临床效果[8]。2020年3月30日,美国食品药品监督管理局发布了紧急使用授权(EUA),以便在治疗新冠肺炎时同时使用CQ和HCQ。美国食品药品监督管理局历史上第二次发布EUA。以前,2009-2010年期间,它被用于研究神经氨酸酶抑制剂佩拉米韦,用于治疗H1N1流感的重症患者[9]。对5项报告病毒学清除率或PCR阴性率的研究(n=312)进行的荟萃分析发现,HCQ组没有任何益处。{OR,1.863;95%CI,1.024至3.389;p=0.041}具有中度异质性(I2=70.3%,p=0.009)。对5项报告ADR结果的研究(n=1710)的荟萃分析发现,HCQ组发生ADR的风险增加。{OR,2.648;95%CI,2.068至7.717;p=0.000},无异质性(I2=0%,p=0.417)。6项研究(n=4341)显示,与对照组相比,HCQ组的死亡率显著增加{OR,1.182;95%CI,0.981至1.425;p=0.079},具有显著的异质性(I2=82.0%,P=0.000)。结论:系统回顾和荟萃分析显示,新冠肺炎患者在降低死亡率、ADR发生率和病毒学清除率方面的抗病毒疗效降低。新冠肺炎患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Collation Of Hydroxychloroquine Virological Clearance, Effectiveness, Safety In Covid-19 Patients With Control Group (Conventional Therapy) – A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis
Objectives: Destitute of an effective treatment, several potential repurposed drugs have been tried in COVID-19. Despite unavailability of anecdotal evidence, several guidelines granted both Chloroquine (CQ) and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in treatment. Clinical studies relating to those in COVID-19 disease has reported conflicting results. We sought to systematically evaluate the clinical effects contact, mainly in health workers [8]. On March 30, 2020 FDA issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) in order to use both CQ and HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19. FDA issued EUA for the second time in the history. Formerly it was given for an investigational neuraminidase inhibitor, Peramivir during 2009-2010 to treat severely ill patients with H1N1 influenza [9]. The meta-analysis of 5 studies that reported rate of virological clearance or PCR negativity (n=312) found no benefit in HCQ arm. {OR, 1.863; 95% CI, 1.024 to 3.389; p=0.041} with a moderate heterogeneity (I 2 =70.3%, P=0.009). meta-analysis of 5 studies (n=1710) that reported about ADR outcomes found that, there exist an increased risk of ADRs in HCQ arm. {OR, 2.648; 95% CI, 2.068 to 7.717; p=0.000}, with no heterogeneity (I 2 = 0%, P=0.417). 6 studies (n=4,341) showed a significant increase in mortality in HCQ arm when compared with control arm {OR, 1.182; 95% CI, 0.981 to 1.425; p=0.079}, with substantial heterogeneity (I 2 = 82.0%, P=0.000). Conclusions: The systematic review and meta-analysis revealed a reduced antiviral efficacy in reducing mortality, ADR occurrence and has a decreased virological clearance in patients with COVID-19. in COVID-19 patients.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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