Back

Current Evidence of the Pharmacological Treatments for Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) A Scoping Review

Yamaji, N.; Ohde, S.; Kobayashi-Cuya, K. E.; Saito, S.; Takahashi, O.

2020-05-18 infectious diseases
10.1101/2020.05.12.20093997 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundAs of May 2 2020, 3,267,184 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and 229,971 COVID-19-caused deaths have been reported worldwide. Currently, there is limited clarity on the pharmacological treatments available for the novel coronavirus. We systematically identified the current evidence and ongoing research on the pharmacological treatments for COVID-19. MethodsWe conducted a scoping review using PRISMA-ScR. Observational studies, including cohort studies and case series, as well as experimental studies, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs were searched electronically on April 7, 2020 and by hand on May 1, 2020. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases were searched along with seven trial registries. The inclusion criteria were patients with confirmed COVID-19 who received pharmacological therapies, including hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, remdesivir, tocilizumab, and favipiravir. ResultsWe identified 222 studies on pharmacological treatment of the novel coronavirus. We included 11 of these studies in this review, including the ones on hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine (one cohort), lopinavir/ritonavir (one RCT, three cohorts, and two case series), remdesivir (one RCT and one case series), tocilizumab (one case series), and favipiravir (one RCT). In the three RCTs carried out in China, both lopinavir/ritonavir and remdesivir did not show any significant earlier clinical improvement in case of severe infection [Hazard ratio (HR): 1.31, p=0.09 and HR: 1.24, p=0.24, respectively], The clinical recovery rate on day seven was not significantly different between the favipiravir and arbidol groups (p=0.14) for moderate patients, although the duration of pyrexia and cough in the favipiravir group was significantly shorter as compared to the arbidol group (p<0.01). There are 135 ongoing RCTs, including 72 for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, 29 for lopinavir/ritonavir, 14 for remdesivir, 16 for tocilizumab, and 4 for favipiravir. ConclusionThe clinical effectiveness and safety of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 remains unclear owing to the lack of large, high-quality RCTs. However, in the event of emerging infectious diseases, we need to repeatedly and systematically update the best available evidence to avoid misleading information.

Matching journals

The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Infection and Public Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.5%
2
Annals of Translational Medicine
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.9%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 31%
4.9%
4
Journal of Medical Virology
137 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.9%
5
International Journal of Infectious Diseases
126 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.9%
6
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.3%
7
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 31%
4.0%
8
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
60 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.0%
9
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
10
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.3%
11
Frontiers in Pharmacology
100 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.1%
50% of probability mass above
12
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.6%
13
Medicine
30 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.1%
14
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.1%
15
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
71 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
16
Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
17
Journal of Clinical Virology
62 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.8%
18
Virologica Sinica
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
19
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
20
Cell Discovery
54 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
21
Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
22
BioMed Research International
25 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
23
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
167 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
24
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
134 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
25
Journal of Translational Medicine
46 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
26
The Innovation
12 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.8%
27
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.8%
28
National Science Review
22 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
29
International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
15 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
30
Health Science Reports
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%