27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Systematic review and meta-analysis of ivermectin for treatment of COVID-19: evidence beyond the hype

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The role of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19 is still under debate, yet the drug has been widely used in some parts of the world, as shown by impressive market data. The available body of evidence may have changed over the last months, as studies have been retracted and “standards of care” (SOC) used in control groups have changed with rapidly evolving knowledge on COVID-19. This review aims to summarize and critically appraise the evidence of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ivermectin, assessing clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients.

          Methods

          RCTs evaluating the effects of ivermectin in adult patients with COVID-19 were searched through June 22, 2022, in four databases, L.OVE platform, clinical trial registries and pre-prints platforms. Primary endpoints included all-cause mortality and invasive ventilation requirement. Secondary endpoint was the occurrence of adverse events. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Meta-analysis included only studies which compared ivermectin to placebo or SOC. Random-effects were used to pool the risk ratios (RRs) of individual trials. The quality of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. The protocol was register in PROSPERO (CRD42021257471).

          Results

          Twenty-five RCTs fulfilled inclusion criteria (n = 6310). Of those, 14 compared ivermectin with placebo, in night ivermectin associated with SOC was compared to SOC and two studies compared ivermectin to an active comparator. Most RCTs had some concerns or high risk of bias, mostly due to lack of concealment of the randomization sequence and allocation, lack of blinding and high number of missing cases. Ivermectin did not show an effect in reducing mortality (RR = 0.76; 95%CI: 0.52–1.11) or mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.74; 95%CI: 0.48–1.16). This effect was consistent when comparing ivermectin vs. placebo, and ivermectin associated with SOC vs. SOC, as well as in sensitivity analysis. Additionally, there was very low quality of evidence regarding adverse effects (RR = 1.07; 95%CI: 0.84–1.35).

          Conclusions

          The evidence suggests that ivermectin does not reduce mortality risk and the risk of mechanical ventilation requirement. Although we did not observe an increase in the risk of adverse effects, the evidence is very uncertain regarding this endpoint.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07589-8.

          Related collections

          Most cited references73

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews

              Background Synthesis of multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in a systematic review can summarize the effects of individual outcomes and provide numerical answers about the effectiveness of interventions. Filtering of searches is time consuming, and no single method fulfills the principal requirements of speed with accuracy. Automation of systematic reviews is driven by a necessity to expedite the availability of current best evidence for policy and clinical decision-making. We developed Rayyan (http://rayyan.qcri.org), a free web and mobile app, that helps expedite the initial screening of abstracts and titles using a process of semi-automation while incorporating a high level of usability. For the beta testing phase, we used two published Cochrane reviews in which included studies had been selected manually. Their searches, with 1030 records and 273 records, were uploaded to Rayyan. Different features of Rayyan were tested using these two reviews. We also conducted a survey of Rayyan’s users and collected feedback through a built-in feature. Results Pilot testing of Rayyan focused on usability, accuracy against manual methods, and the added value of the prediction feature. The “taster” review (273 records) allowed a quick overview of Rayyan for early comments on usability. The second review (1030 records) required several iterations to identify the previously identified 11 trials. The “suggestions” and “hints,” based on the “prediction model,” appeared as testing progressed beyond five included studies. Post rollout user experiences and a reflexive response by the developers enabled real-time modifications and improvements. The survey respondents reported 40% average time savings when using Rayyan compared to others tools, with 34% of the respondents reporting more than 50% time savings. In addition, around 75% of the respondents mentioned that screening and labeling studies as well as collaborating on reviews to be the two most important features of Rayyan. As of November 2016, Rayyan users exceed 2000 from over 60 countries conducting hundreds of reviews totaling more than 1.6M citations. Feedback from users, obtained mostly through the app web site and a recent survey, has highlighted the ease in exploration of searches, the time saved, and simplicity in sharing and comparing include-exclude decisions. The strongest features of the app, identified and reported in user feedback, were its ability to help in screening and collaboration as well as the time savings it affords to users. Conclusions Rayyan is responsive and intuitive in use with significant potential to lighten the load of reviewers.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                milenamarc@gmail.com
                karina.meira@ufrn.br
                nasernizon@gmail.com
                paulapmotta7@gmail.com
                victor.schulthais@ufv.br
                silvanakelles@gmail.com
                laurasa2020@gmail.com
                ravalacio@hotmail.com
                patriciakz99@gmail.com
                Journal
                BMC Infect Dis
                BMC Infect Dis
                BMC Infectious Diseases
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2334
                23 July 2022
                23 July 2022
                2022
                : 22
                : 639
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.8430.f, ISNI 0000 0001 2181 4888, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical School and Telehealth Center, , University Hospital, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, ; Avenida Professor Alfredo Balena 190, sala 246, Belo Horizonte, 30130-100 Brazil
                [2 ]Institute for Health Technology Assessment (IATS/CNPq), Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2359, Prédio 21|Sala 507, Porto Alegre, Brazil
                [3 ]GRID grid.411233.6, ISNI 0000 0000 9687 399X, Health School, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, ; Av. Sen. Salgado Filho, s/n-Lagoa Nova, Natal, Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil
                [4 ]GRID grid.8399.b, ISNI 0000 0004 0372 8259, Instituto de Saúde Coletiva da Universidade Federal da Bahia, ; R. Basílio da Gama, s/n-Canela, Salvador, Brazil
                [5 ]GRID grid.8430.f, ISNI 0000 0001 2181 4888, Faculdade de Farmácia da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, ; R. Prof. Moacir Gomes de Freitas S/N-Pampulha, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais Brazil
                [6 ]GRID grid.12799.34, ISNI 0000 0000 8338 6359, Department of Medicine and Nursing, , Universidade Federal de Viçosa, ; Av. Peter Henry Rolfs, University Campus, Viçosa, Brazil
                [7 ]GRID grid.412520.0, ISNI 0000 0001 2155 6671, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais, ; R. do Rosário, 1.081 Bairro Angola, Betim, Brazil
                [8 ]Unimed-BH, Belo Horizonte, MG Brazil
                [9 ]GRID grid.419130.e, ISNI 0000 0004 0413 0953, Faculdade Ciências Médicas de Minas Gerais-FCMMG, ; Alameda Ezequiel Dias, Belo Horizonte, 275 Brazil
                [10 ]Hospital Metropolitano Odilon Behrens, R. Formiga, 50, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
                [11 ]GRID grid.8532.c, ISNI 0000 0001 2200 7498, Epidemiology e Statistics Department, , Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, ; Rua Ramiro Barcelos, Porto Alegre, RS 2400 Brazil
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4278-3771
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1722-5703
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0487-0500
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5757-7255
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9058-2803
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0845-5814
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2666-7092
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2851-2011
                Article
                7589
                10.1186/s12879-022-07589-8
                9308124
                35870876
                69506138-fee6-4920-9710-d7f5f7020286
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 13 January 2022
                : 5 July 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100004901, Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais;
                Award ID: APQ-01154-21
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003593, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico;
                Award ID: 310561/2021-3
                Award ID: 465518/2014-1
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                covid-19,sars-cov-2,novel coronavirus,therapeutics,systematic review,meta-analysis,ivermectin,evidence-based medicine,mortality

                Comments

                Comment on this article