TY - JOUR T1 - Favipiravir versus Arbidol for COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2020.03.17.20037432 SP - 2020.03.17.20037432 AU - Chang Chen AU - Jianying Huang AU - Zhenshun Cheng AU - Jianyuan Wu AU - Song Chen AU - Yongxi Zhang AU - Bo Chen AU - Mengxin Lu AU - Yongwen Luo AU - Jingyi Zhang AU - Ping Yin AU - Xinghuan Wang Y1 - 2020/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/03/27/2020.03.17.20037432.abstract N2 - Importance WHO has made the assessment that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can be characterized as a pandemic. So far, there is no clinically proven effective antiviral drug for COVID-19.Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of favipiravir and arbidol to treat COVID-19 patients on clinical recovery rate of day 7.Design Prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized superiority trial in February, 2020.Setting Multicenter study.Participants Patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to 3 hospitals from Feb. 20, 2020 to Mar. 12, 2020.Interventions Conventional therapy + favipiravir or arbidol.Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was clinical recovery rate of day 7. Duration of fever, cough relief time and auxiliary oxygen therapy or noninvasive mechanical ventilation rate were the secondary outcomes. The patients with chest CT imaging and laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection, aged 18 years or older were randomly assigned to receive favipiravir or arbidol. Safety data were collected for further follow-up for a week.Results 120 patients were assigned to favipiravir group (116 assessed) and 120 to arbidol group (120 assessed). In full analysis set (FAS) cohort, for moderate patients with COVID-19, clinical recovery rate of day 7 was 55.86% in the arbidol group and 71.43% in the favipiravir group (P=0.0199). For moderate COVID-19 patients and COVID-19 patients with hypertension and/or diabetes, the latency to fever reduction and cough relief in favipiravir group was significantly shorter than that in arbidol group (both P<0.001), but there was no statistical difference was observed of auxiliary oxygen therapy or noninvasive mechanical ventilation rate (both P>0.05). The most frequently observed treatment-associated adverse events were abnormal LFT, psychiatric symptom reactions, digestive tract reactions and raised serum uric acid (3 [2.50%] in arbidol group vs 16 [13.79%] in favipiravir group, P<0.0001).Conclusions and Relevance In moderate COVID-19 patients untreated with antiviral previously, favipiravir can be considered as a preferred treatment compared to arbidol because of superior clinical recovery rate of day 7 and more effectively reduced incidence of fever, cough besides some manageable antiviral-associated adverse effects.Trial Registration This study is registered with Chictr.org.cn, number ChiCTR2000030254.Question How about the efficacy and safety of favipiravir to treat COVID-19 patients?Findings Compared to arbidol, in moderate COVID-19 patients untreated with antiviral previously, favipiravir shown superior efficacy in terms of clinical recovery rate of day 7 and reduced incidence of fever, cough with manageable antiviral-associated adverse effects.Meaning Favipiravir can be considered as a preferred treatment approach to moderate COVID-19 pneumonia.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialThis study is registered with Chictr.org.cn, number ChiCTR2000030254.Funding StatementThis work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2020YFC0844400).Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesWith the permission of the corresponding author, we can provide participant data, statistical analysis. ER -