雷米替韦和莫仑替韦对轻度至中度 COVID-19 肺移植受者的疗效相当:单中心经验。

Frontiers in transplantation Pub Date : 2024-07-04 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/frtra.2024.1408289
Deepika Razia, Devika Sindu, Lauren Cherrier, Katherine Grief, Rajat Walia, Sofya Tokman
{"title":"雷米替韦和莫仑替韦对轻度至中度 COVID-19 肺移植受者的疗效相当:单中心经验。","authors":"Deepika Razia, Devika Sindu, Lauren Cherrier, Katherine Grief, Rajat Walia, Sofya Tokman","doi":"10.3389/frtra.2024.1408289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Remdesivir (REM) and molnupiravir (MOL) are commonly used to treat lung transplant recipients (LTRs) with COVID-19; however, the clinical efficacy of these medications is yet to be compared. In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the clinical outcomes between LTRs with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 treated with REM and those treated with MOL.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>Between March 2020 and August 2022, 195 LTRs developed COVID-19 at our center. After excluding 82 who presented with severe disease requiring hospitalization, the remaining 113 were included in the analysis: 54 did not receive antiviral treatment, 30 were treated with REM, and 29 were treated with MOL. Adjusted multivariable logistic regression analysis showed similar rates of hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.169, [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.105-12.997, <i>p</i> = 0.899], ICU admission (aOR 0.822, 95% CI 0.042-16.220, <i>p</i> = 0.898), mechanical ventilation (aOR 0.903, 95% CI 0.015-55.124, <i>p</i> = 0.961), and COVID-19-related mortality (aOR 0.822, 95% CI 0.042-16.220, <i>p</i> = 0.898) between LTRs treated with REM and those treated with MOL for mild-to-moderate COVID-19, irrespective of SARS-CoV-2 strain.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>MOL may be a suitable alternative to REM to treat LTRs with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, and the choice of antiviral therapy can be driven by practical considerations such as route of administration and drug availability.</p>","PeriodicalId":519976,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in transplantation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11235218/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Remdesivir and molnupiravir had comparable efficacy in lung transplant recipients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19: a single center experience.\",\"authors\":\"Deepika Razia, Devika Sindu, Lauren Cherrier, Katherine Grief, Rajat Walia, Sofya Tokman\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frtra.2024.1408289\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Remdesivir (REM) and molnupiravir (MOL) are commonly used to treat lung transplant recipients (LTRs) with COVID-19; however, the clinical efficacy of these medications is yet to be compared. In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the clinical outcomes between LTRs with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 treated with REM and those treated with MOL.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>Between March 2020 and August 2022, 195 LTRs developed COVID-19 at our center. After excluding 82 who presented with severe disease requiring hospitalization, the remaining 113 were included in the analysis: 54 did not receive antiviral treatment, 30 were treated with REM, and 29 were treated with MOL. Adjusted multivariable logistic regression analysis showed similar rates of hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.169, [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.105-12.997, <i>p</i> = 0.899], ICU admission (aOR 0.822, 95% CI 0.042-16.220, <i>p</i> = 0.898), mechanical ventilation (aOR 0.903, 95% CI 0.015-55.124, <i>p</i> = 0.961), and COVID-19-related mortality (aOR 0.822, 95% CI 0.042-16.220, <i>p</i> = 0.898) between LTRs treated with REM and those treated with MOL for mild-to-moderate COVID-19, irrespective of SARS-CoV-2 strain.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>MOL may be a suitable alternative to REM to treat LTRs with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, and the choice of antiviral therapy can be driven by practical considerations such as route of administration and drug availability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":519976,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in transplantation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11235218/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in transplantation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frtra.2024.1408289\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frtra.2024.1408289","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:雷米替韦(REM)和莫鲁吡韦(MOL)是治疗COVID-19肺移植受者(LTR)的常用药物,但这两种药物的临床疗效尚未进行比较。在这项回顾性队列研究中,我们比较了轻度至中度COVID-19肺移植受者接受REM治疗与接受MOL治疗的临床疗效:2020年3月至2022年8月期间,本中心有195名LTR患者出现COVID-19。在排除了82名需要住院治疗的重症患者后,其余113人被纳入分析:54人未接受抗病毒治疗,30人接受了REM治疗,29人接受了MOL治疗。调整后的多变量逻辑回归分析显示,住院率(调整后的几率比(aOR)1.169,[95% 置信区间(95% CI)0.105-12.997,p = 0.899]、入住 ICU(aOR 0.822,95% CI 0.042-16.220,p = 0.898)、机械通气(aOR 0.903,95% CI 0.015-55.124,p = 0.961)和 COVID-19 相关死亡率(aOR 0.822,95% CI 0.042-16.220,p = 0.898):结论:在治疗轻度至中度 COVID-19 的 LTR 时,MOL 可能是 REM 的合适替代品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Remdesivir and molnupiravir had comparable efficacy in lung transplant recipients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19: a single center experience.

Introduction: Remdesivir (REM) and molnupiravir (MOL) are commonly used to treat lung transplant recipients (LTRs) with COVID-19; however, the clinical efficacy of these medications is yet to be compared. In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the clinical outcomes between LTRs with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 treated with REM and those treated with MOL.

Methods and results: Between March 2020 and August 2022, 195 LTRs developed COVID-19 at our center. After excluding 82 who presented with severe disease requiring hospitalization, the remaining 113 were included in the analysis: 54 did not receive antiviral treatment, 30 were treated with REM, and 29 were treated with MOL. Adjusted multivariable logistic regression analysis showed similar rates of hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.169, [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.105-12.997, p = 0.899], ICU admission (aOR 0.822, 95% CI 0.042-16.220, p = 0.898), mechanical ventilation (aOR 0.903, 95% CI 0.015-55.124, p = 0.961), and COVID-19-related mortality (aOR 0.822, 95% CI 0.042-16.220, p = 0.898) between LTRs treated with REM and those treated with MOL for mild-to-moderate COVID-19, irrespective of SARS-CoV-2 strain.

Conclusion: MOL may be a suitable alternative to REM to treat LTRs with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, and the choice of antiviral therapy can be driven by practical considerations such as route of administration and drug availability.

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
期刊最新文献
Antibiotic subclasses differentially perturb the gut microbiota in kidney transplant recipients. Walter Brendel and the dawn of transplantation research in Germany. Propionic acid supplementation promotes the expansion of regulatory T cells in patients with end-stage renal disease but not in renal transplant patients. Impact of donor transaminases on liver transplant utilisation and unnecessary organ discard: national registry cohort study. The role of C4d and donor specific antibodies in face and hand transplantation-a 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