Comparison of effectiveness and safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir versus sotrovimab for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-08 DOI:10.1080/14787210.2024.2326561
Behnam Amani, Bahman Amani
{"title":"Comparison of effectiveness and safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir versus sotrovimab for COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Behnam Amani, Bahman Amani","doi":"10.1080/14787210.2024.2326561","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) and sotrovimab for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to explore relevant studies from January 2021 to November 2023. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Data analysis was conducted using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software (version 3.0).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifteen retrospective studies involving 13, 306 patients were included. The meta-analysis revealed no significant difference between the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and sotrovimab groups in terms of mortality rate (odds ratio [OR] = 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28 to 1.38), hospitalization rate (OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.22), death or hospitalization rate (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.51 to 1.10), and intensive unit care admission (OR = 1.97, 95% CI: 0.38 to 10.07). In terms of safety, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was associated with a higher incidence of adverse events (OR = 3.44, 95% CI: 1.29 to 9.17).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The meta-analysis showed that nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and sotrovimab have similar effectiveness in treating COVID-19 patients. However, the certainty of evidence supporting these findings is low. High-quality research is needed to better compare these interventions in COVID-19.</p>","PeriodicalId":12213,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"547-555"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14787210.2024.2326561","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) and sotrovimab for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Methods: A search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to explore relevant studies from January 2021 to November 2023. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Data analysis was conducted using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software (version 3.0).

Results: Fifteen retrospective studies involving 13, 306 patients were included. The meta-analysis revealed no significant difference between the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and sotrovimab groups in terms of mortality rate (odds ratio [OR] = 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28 to 1.38), hospitalization rate (OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.22), death or hospitalization rate (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.51 to 1.10), and intensive unit care admission (OR = 1.97, 95% CI: 0.38 to 10.07). In terms of safety, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was associated with a higher incidence of adverse events (OR = 3.44, 95% CI: 1.29 to 9.17).

Conclusions: The meta-analysis showed that nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and sotrovimab have similar effectiveness in treating COVID-19 patients. However, the certainty of evidence supporting these findings is low. High-quality research is needed to better compare these interventions in COVID-19.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
尼马瑞韦/利托那韦与索妥单抗治疗 COVID-19 的有效性和安全性比较:系统综述和荟萃分析。
背景:本研究旨在比较尼马瑞韦/利托那韦(帕克洛维)和索曲单抗治疗冠状病毒病2019(COVID-19)的有效性和安全性:本研究旨在比较尼马瑞韦/利托那韦(Paxlovid)和索罗维单抗治疗2019年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)的有效性和安全性:在 PubMed、Cochrane Library 和 Web of Science 上进行了检索,以探究 2021 年 1 月至 2023 年 11 月期间的相关研究。使用 Cochrane 协作工具评估了纳入研究的偏倚风险。数据分析采用综合荟萃分析软件(3.0 版)进行:结果:共纳入 15 项回顾性研究,涉及 13 306 名患者。38)、住院率(OR = 0.76,95% CI:0.48 至 1.22)、死亡或住院率(OR = 0.75,95% CI:0.51 至 1.10)和入住重症监护室(OR = 1.97,95% CI:0.38 至 10.07)。在安全性方面,尼马瑞韦/利托那韦与较高的不良事件发生率相关(OR = 3.44,95% CI:1.29 至 9.17):荟萃分析表明,尼瑞韦酯/利托那韦和索罗单抗治疗COVID-19患者的疗效相似。然而,支持这些发现的证据的确定性较低。需要进行高质量的研究,以更好地比较这些对COVID-19的干预措施。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
66
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Anti-Infective Therapy (ISSN 1478-7210) provides expert reviews on therapeutics and diagnostics in the treatment of infectious disease. Coverage includes antibiotics, drug resistance, drug therapy, infectious disease medicine, antibacterial, antimicrobial, antifungal and antiviral approaches, and diagnostic tests.
期刊最新文献
Could the next "disease X" be a pandemic of virus-induced encephalitis? What should our first medical response be? The opportunities and challenges of epigenetic approaches to manage herpes simplex infections. Potential activity of nanomaterials to combat SARS-CoV-2 and mucormycosis ‎coinfection‎. Clinical effectiveness of oral antivirals for non-hospitalized adult COVID-19 patients aged 18-60 years. Is self-medication with antibiotics among the public a global concern: a mixed-methods systematic review.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1