Immunity, inflammation and disease · 2025
Comparing the Effectiveness and Safety of Remdesivir and Molnupiravir in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Moghadam Seyed Hamid Pakzad, Sarkoohi Ali, Navidi Zia, Amani Bahman, Amani Behnam, Khorramnia Saeed
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Remdesivir and molnupiravir have been approved and are being used as viable treatment options for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to evaluate and compare the safety and effectiveness of these two antiviral drugs in the treatment of COVID-19.
METHODS: An extensive search was conducted across several databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and medRxiv, up to July 1, 2024. To evaluate the risk of bias, a standardized bias assessment tool was used. Data from the selected studies were analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software.
RESULTS: The analysis included data from 10 studies, encompassing a total of 5766 patients. According to the meta-analysis, remdesivir and molnupiravir showed no statistically significant differences in mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 2.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67, 9.57), hospitalizations (OR = 2.43, 95% CI: 0.81, 7.24), viral clearance rates (OR = 1.49, 95% CI: 0.64, 3.46), or average time to viral clearance (standardized mean difference = 0.02, 95% CI: -0.40, 0.46). However, the incidence of adverse events was lower in the remdesivir group (OR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.26, 0.93). The certainty of evidence for these findings was evaluated and determined to be low or moderate.
CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that remdesivir and molnupiravir have similar effectiveness in treating COVID-19 outpatients; however, molnupiravir is associated with a higher rate of adverse events. Additional studies are required to enable a more thorough evaluation of these treatments for COVID-19.
METHODS: An extensive search was conducted across several databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and medRxiv, up to July 1, 2024. To evaluate the risk of bias, a standardized bias assessment tool was used. Data from the selected studies were analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software.
RESULTS: The analysis included data from 10 studies, encompassing a total of 5766 patients. According to the meta-analysis, remdesivir and molnupiravir showed no statistically significant differences in mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 2.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67, 9.57), hospitalizations (OR = 2.43, 95% CI: 0.81, 7.24), viral clearance rates (OR = 1.49, 95% CI: 0.64, 3.46), or average time to viral clearance (standardized mean difference = 0.02, 95% CI: -0.40, 0.46). However, the incidence of adverse events was lower in the remdesivir group (OR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.26, 0.93). The certainty of evidence for these findings was evaluated and determined to be low or moderate.
CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that remdesivir and molnupiravir have similar effectiveness in treating COVID-19 outpatients; however, molnupiravir is associated with a higher rate of adverse events. Additional studies are required to enable a more thorough evaluation of these treatments for COVID-19.