Abstract
Background The rising number of trials on repurposed dugs in COVID-19 has led to duplication and a need for curation of available outcomes from treatments that have been followed across the world. We have conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis that focus on evaluating the clinical outcomes of repurposed interventions against COVID-19.
Methods Random effects model was adopted to estimate overall treatment effect and heterogeneity. Meta- regression was performed to study the correlation between comorbid conditions and non- invasive or invasive ventilation requirement.
Results Twenty-nine articles met our eligibility criteria. In subgroup analysis, Tocilizumab was highly significant with lower mortality rate (OR 27.50; 95%CI [5.39-140.24]) of severe COVID-19 patients. Hydroxychloroquine and Lopinavir-ritonavir was found to be inefficacious in severe patients (OR 0.64; 95%CI [0.47-0.86] and 1.40 [0.71-2.76]). Dexamethasone had marginal effect on overall mortality rate (OR 1.19; 95%CI [1.05-1.35]). The meta-regression shows a positive correlation between prevalence of patients on Tocilizumab in non invasive support and hypertension condition (P = 0.02), whereas a negative correlation was identified with patients having lung disease (P = 0.03).
Conclusion Overall, our study confirmed that tocilizumab may probably reduce the mortality rate (<10%) of severe COVID-19 patients than other interventions. Further, reduce the risk of requiring non- invasive ventilator support in patients with comorbid condition of lung disease. Hydroxychloroquine and Lopinavir-ritonavir has no clinical benefits in severe COVID-19. A high quality evidence is required to evaluate the usage of Serpin + Favipiravir combination in severe or critical COVID-19.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The authors received no funding for this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This analysis do not require approval from ethical guidelines as the work did not involve patients directly
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data can be accessed on request