A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of remdesivir to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitalized patients: have the guidelines evolved with the evidence?

IF 8.2 1区 医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY Clinical Infectious Diseases Pub Date : 2025-03-11 DOI:10.1093/cid/ciaf111
Michele Bartoletti, Essy Mozaffari, Alpesh N Amin, Yohei Doi, Paul Loubet, Christina G Rivera, Michael Roshon, Aaditya Rawal, Emily Kaiser, Maria Vutcovici Nicolae, Shuai Fu, Thomas F Oppelt, Mel Chiang, Paul E Sax, Andre C Kalil
{"title":"A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of remdesivir to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitalized patients: have the guidelines evolved with the evidence?","authors":"Michele Bartoletti, Essy Mozaffari, Alpesh N Amin, Yohei Doi, Paul Loubet, Christina G Rivera, Michael Roshon, Aaditya Rawal, Emily Kaiser, Maria Vutcovici Nicolae, Shuai Fu, Thomas F Oppelt, Mel Chiang, Paul E Sax, Andre C Kalil","doi":"10.1093/cid/ciaf111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background With progressive accumulation of knowledge on SARS-CoV-2 infection clinical management, treatment guidelines recommended several options including remdesivir (RDV), a broad-spectrum antiviral. Given the evolving nature of COVID-19, capturing the totality of scientific evidence from clinical trials and observational studies is critical to inform clinical decision making. We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) with meta-analysis (MA) to summarize RDV effectiveness among hospitalized adults. Methods We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases for interventional and observational studies examining RDV efficacy. A rigorous double-reviewer approach was used for source identification, screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. A hierarchical random-effects model MA was used, with subgroup analyses for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and real-world (RW) studies. Results From January 2019 to December 2023 over 18,000 sources were screened and 122 unique studies were identified, reporting on 25,174 participants in RCTs and 1,279,859 in RW studies. Remdesivir significantly increased survival in the overall population [OR: 0.69 (0.55-0.86); p=0.001] across SARS-CoV-2 variants and disease severity levels: no supplemental oxygen [OR: 0.81 (0.75-0.88)], low-flow oxygen [OR: 0.71 (0.64-0.79)], high-flow oxygen [OR: 0.87 (0.83-0.91)] and invasive mechanical ventilation [OR: 0.78 (0.68-0.90)]. Rehospitalization risk was significantly reduced in patients receiving remdesivir [OR: 0.72 (0.64-0.81)]. Conclusion Our comprehensive SLR, capturing the totality of evidence, showed a significant survival benefit among patients hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2 infection receiving RDV across all disease severity levels. To assure that healthcare providers are aware of and deploy evidence-based optimal care, recommendations should rely on both RCT and RW data.","PeriodicalId":10463,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Infectious Diseases","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaf111","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background With progressive accumulation of knowledge on SARS-CoV-2 infection clinical management, treatment guidelines recommended several options including remdesivir (RDV), a broad-spectrum antiviral. Given the evolving nature of COVID-19, capturing the totality of scientific evidence from clinical trials and observational studies is critical to inform clinical decision making. We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) with meta-analysis (MA) to summarize RDV effectiveness among hospitalized adults. Methods We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library databases for interventional and observational studies examining RDV efficacy. A rigorous double-reviewer approach was used for source identification, screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. A hierarchical random-effects model MA was used, with subgroup analyses for randomized controlled trials (RCT) and real-world (RW) studies. Results From January 2019 to December 2023 over 18,000 sources were screened and 122 unique studies were identified, reporting on 25,174 participants in RCTs and 1,279,859 in RW studies. Remdesivir significantly increased survival in the overall population [OR: 0.69 (0.55-0.86); p=0.001] across SARS-CoV-2 variants and disease severity levels: no supplemental oxygen [OR: 0.81 (0.75-0.88)], low-flow oxygen [OR: 0.71 (0.64-0.79)], high-flow oxygen [OR: 0.87 (0.83-0.91)] and invasive mechanical ventilation [OR: 0.78 (0.68-0.90)]. Rehospitalization risk was significantly reduced in patients receiving remdesivir [OR: 0.72 (0.64-0.81)]. Conclusion Our comprehensive SLR, capturing the totality of evidence, showed a significant survival benefit among patients hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2 infection receiving RDV across all disease severity levels. To assure that healthcare providers are aware of and deploy evidence-based optimal care, recommendations should rely on both RCT and RW data.
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
雷米替韦治疗住院病人 SARS-CoV-2 感染疗效的系统回顾和荟萃分析:指南是否与时俱进?
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
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Clinical Infectious Diseases 医学-传染病学
CiteScore
25.00
自引率
2.50%
发文量
900
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Infectious Diseases (CID) is dedicated to publishing original research, reviews, guidelines, and perspectives with the potential to reshape clinical practice, providing clinicians with valuable insights for patient care. CID comprehensively addresses the clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of a wide spectrum of infectious diseases. The journal places a high priority on the assessment of current and innovative treatments, microbiology, immunology, and policies, ensuring relevance to patient care in its commitment to advancing the field of infectious diseases.
期刊最新文献
Development and Evaluation of a Novel Algorithm to Identify Doxy-PEP Users at a Large Healthcare System in the Bronx, New York. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of remdesivir to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection in hospitalized patients: have the guidelines evolved with the evidence? Quantitative Microbial Cell-Free DNA Sequencing from Plasma: A Potential Biomarker for the Diagnosis of Staphylococcal Infection of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices No evidence for time-dependent treatment effect of oseltamivir for adults hospitalized with influenza A. Validation of the proposed definition for complicated coagulase negative staphylococcal bacteremia
×
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