Author: Bhattacharyya, Anusuya; Kumar, Subodh; Sarma, Phulen; Kaur, Hardeep; Prajapat, Manisha; Shekhar, Nishant; Bansal, Seema; Avti, Pramod; Hazarika, Mythili; Sharma, Saurabh; Mahendru, Dhruv; Prakash, Ajay; Medhi, Bikash
Title: Safety and efficacy of lopinavir/ritonavir combination in COVID-19: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis Cord-id: 1xe1r0us Document date: 2020_10_14
ID: 1xe1r0us
Snippet: BACKGROUND: Being protease inhibitors and owing to their efficacy in SARS-CoV, lopinavir + ritonavir (L/R) combination is being used in the management of COVID-19. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we have evaluated the comparative safety and efficacy of L/R combination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Comparative, observational studies and controlled clinical trials comparing L/R combination to standard of care (SOC)/control or any other antiviral agent/combinations were included. A total of
Document: BACKGROUND: Being protease inhibitors and owing to their efficacy in SARS-CoV, lopinavir + ritonavir (L/R) combination is being used in the management of COVID-19. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we have evaluated the comparative safety and efficacy of L/R combination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Comparative, observational studies and controlled clinical trials comparing L/R combination to standard of care (SOC)/control or any other antiviral agent/combinations were included. A total of 10 databases were searched to identify 13 studies that fulfilled the predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. RESULTS: No discernible beneficial effect was seen in the L/R group in comparison to SOC/control in terms of “progression to more severe state†(4 studies, odds ratio [OR]: 1.446 [0.722–2.895]), “mortality†(3 studies, OR: 1.208 [0.563–2.592]), and “virological cure on days 7–10†(3 studies, OR: 0.777 [0.371–1.630]), while the L/R combination arm performed better than the SOC/control arm in terms of “duration of hospital stay†(3 studies, mean difference (MD): −1.466 [−2.403 to − 0.529]) and “time to virological cure†(3 studies, MD: −3.272 [−6.090 to − 0.454]). No difference in efficacy was found between L/R versus hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and L/R versus arbidol. However, in a single randomized controlled trail (open label), chloroquine (CQ) performed better than L/R. The combination L/R with arbidol may be beneficial (in terms of virological clearance and radiological improvement); however, we need more dedicated studies. Single studies report efficacy of L/R + interferon (IFN, either alpha or 1-beta) combination. We need more studies to delineate the proper effect size. Regarding adverse effects, except occurrence of diarrhea (higher in the L/R group), safety was comparable to SOC. CONCLUSION: In our study, no difference was seen between the L/R combination and the SOC arm in terms of “progression to more severe state,†“mortality,†and virological cure on days 7–10;†however, some benefits in terms of “duration of hospital stay†and “time to virological cure†were seen. No significant difference in efficacy was seen when L/R was compared to arbidol and HCQ monotherapy. Except for the occurrence of diarrhea, which was higher in the L/R group, safety profile of L/R is comparable to SOC. Compared to L/R combination, CQ, L/R + arbidol, L/R + IFN-α, and L/R + IFN-1β showed better efficacy, but the external validity of these findings is limited by limited number of studies (1 study each).
Search related documents:
Co phrase search for related documents- abdominal pain and liver enzyme: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
- abdominal pain and low quality: 1, 2, 3
Co phrase search for related documents, hyperlinks ordered by date