Selected article for: "bias assessment and methodological tool"

Author: Singh, Surjit; Khera, Daisy; Chugh, Ankita; Khera, Pushpinder Singh; Chugh, Vinay Kumar
Title: Efficacy and safety of remdesivir in COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Cord-id: ai025ds9
  • Document date: 2021_6_24
  • ID: ai025ds9
    Snippet: OBJECTIVES: Evaluation of remdesivir, an RNA polymerase inhibitor, for effectiveness in adults with COVID-19. DATA SOURCES: Electronic search for eligible articles of PubMed, Cochrane Central and clinicaltrials.gov was performed on 20 September 2020. PARTICIPANTS AND STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating efficacy of remdesivir in COVID-19 were included for meta-analysis. INTERVENTIONS: Remdesivir was compared with standard of care. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY
    Document: OBJECTIVES: Evaluation of remdesivir, an RNA polymerase inhibitor, for effectiveness in adults with COVID-19. DATA SOURCES: Electronic search for eligible articles of PubMed, Cochrane Central and clinicaltrials.gov was performed on 20 September 2020. PARTICIPANTS AND STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating efficacy of remdesivir in COVID-19 were included for meta-analysis. INTERVENTIONS: Remdesivir was compared with standard of care. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Primary outcome was mortality and secondary outcomes were time to clinical improvement and safety outcomes like serious adverse events, respiratory failure. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Data synthesis was done with Cochrane review manager 5 (RevMan) V.5.3. Cochrane risk of bias V.2.0 tool was used for methodological quality assessment. The GRADE pro GDT was applied for overall quality of evidence. RESULTS: 52 RCTs were screened and 4 studies were included in analysis, with total of 7324 patients. No mortality benefit was observed with remdesivir versus control group (OR=0.92 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.07), p=0.30, moderate quality evidence). Significantly higher rates of clinical improvement (OR=1.52 (95% CI 1.24 to 1.87), p<0.0001, low quality) and faster time to clinical improvement (HR=1.28 (95% CI 1.12 to 1.46), p=0.0002, very low quality) was observed with remdesivir versus control group. Significant decrease was found in the risk of serious adverse events (RR=0.75 (95% CI 0.62 to 0.90), p=0.0003, low quality); however, no difference was found in the risk of respiratory failure (RR=0.85 (95% CI 0.41 to 1.77), p=0.67, very low quality evidence) with remdesivir. CONCLUSIONS: As per the evidence from current review, remdesivir has shown no mortality benefit (moderate quality evidence) in the treatment of COVID-19. From a cost–benefit perspective, it is our personal opinion that it should not be recommended for use, especially in low and lower middle income countries. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020189517.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • acute respiratory distress syndrome and low evidence quality: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
    • acute respiratory distress syndrome and low evidence quality low: 1, 2
    • acute respiratory distress syndrome and low heterogeneity: 1, 2, 3
    • acute respiratory distress syndrome and low low quality: 1, 2
    • acute respiratory distress syndrome and low moderate: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
    • acute respiratory distress syndrome and low moderate high: 1, 2
    • acute respiratory distress syndrome and low quality evidence: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
    • additional search and low evidence quality: 1
    • additional search and low heterogeneity: 1
    • additional search and low quality evidence: 1