Efficacy and Safety of Remdesivir for COVID-19 Treatment: An Analysis of Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trials
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Remdesivir, an inhibitor of viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerases, has been identified as a candidate for COVID-19 treatment. However, the therapeutic effect of remdesivir is controversial.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception to June 11, 2020 for randomized controlled trials on the clinical efficacy of remdesivir. The main outcomes were discharge rate, mortality, and adverse events. This study is registered at INPLASY (INPLASY202060046).
RESULTS
Data of 1075 subjects showed that remdesivir significantly increased the discharge rate of patients with COVID-19 compared with the placebo (50.4% vs. 45.29%; relative risk [RR] 1.19 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05–1.34], I 2 = 0.0%, P = 0.754). It also significantly decreased mortality (8.18% vs. 12.70%; RR 0.64 [95% CI, 0.44–0.92], I 2 = 45.7%, P = 0.175) compared to the placebo. Data of 1296 subjects showed that remdesivir significantly decreased the occurrence of serious adverse events (RR 0.77 [95% CI, 0.63–0.94], I 2 = 0.0%, P = 0.716).
CONCLUSION
Remdesivir is efficacious and safe for the treatment of COVID-19.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
This study is registered at the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY202060046).
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.22.20136531: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization Studies were considered eligible if they met the following criteria: (1) presented original data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial; (2) used two comparator groups with one receiving remdesivir and the other receiving a placebo; (3) reported the number of patients discharged from hospital, death, and adverse events as outcomes; and (4) had adequate data to be pooled for the analysis. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources SEARCH STRATEGY AND CRITERIA: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the … SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.22.20136531: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization Studies were considered eligible if they met the following criteria: (1) presented original data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial; (2) used two comparator groups with one receiving remdesivir and the other receiving a placebo; (3) reported the number of patients discharged from hospital, death, and adverse events as outcomes; and (4) had adequate data to be pooled for the analysis. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources SEARCH STRATEGY AND CRITERIA: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from their inception to June 11, 2020, to identify RCTs on remdesivir treatment for COVID-19, with no restrictions on publication type or language. PubMedsuggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)Embasesuggested: (EMBASE, RRID:SCR_001650)STATA software v12.0 (College Station, TX, USA) was used to analyze the data. STATAsuggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:Our analysis had some limitations. First, the small number of studies that were included greatly weakened the reliability of our results. Second, the RR values calculated were unadjusted owing to a lack of raw data, which may lead to bias. Third, the overall sample size is not large enough, which limits statistical power. Thus, larger-scale RCTs are needed, and our pooled analysis findings should be interpreted with caution. However, we will update the analysis as new studies that meet inclusion criteria emerge. Overall, this analysis demonstrated that remdesivir significantly increased the recovery rate, decreased mortality, and decreased the risk of serious adverse events. Our findings highlight the efficacy and safety of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19, which should be incorporated into routine therapy. Furthermore, this analysis also suggests that larger cohorts and randomized controlled trials are needed to more thoroughly investigate the treatment efficacy and safety of remdesivir for COVID-19.
Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-