Back

Observational Study of the Efficiency of Treatments in Patients Hospitalized with Covid-19 in Madrid

Bernaola, N.; Mena, R.; Bernaola, A.; Lara, A.; Carballo, C.; Larranaga, P.; Bielza, C.

2020-07-21 public and global health
10.1101/2020.07.17.20155960 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundMany different treatments were heavily administered to patients with COVID-19 during the peak of the pandemic in Madrid without robust evidence supporting them. MethodsWe examined the association between sixteen treatments in four groups (steroids, antivirals, antibiotics and immunomodulators) and intubation or death. Data were obtained from patients that were admitted to an HM hospital with suspicion of COVID-19 until 24/04/2020, excluding unconfirmed diagnosis, those who were admitted before the epidemic started in Madrid, had an outcome that was not discharge or death or died within 24 hours of presentation. We compared outcomes between treated and untreated patients using propensity-score caliper matching. ResultsOf 2,307 patients in the dataset, 679 were excluded. Of the remaining 1,645 patients, 263 (16%) died and 311 (18.9%) died or were intubated. Except for hydroxychloroquine and prednisone, patients that were treated with any of the medications were more likely to go through an outcome of death or intubation at baseline. After propensity matching we found an association between treatment with hydroxychloroquine and prednisone and better outcomes (hazard ratios with 95% CI of 0.83 {+/-} 0.06 and 0.85 {+/-} 0.03). Results were similar in multiple sensitivity analyses. ConclusionsIn this multicenter study of patients admitted with COVID-19 hydroxychloroquine and prednisone administration was found to be associated with improved outcomes. Other treatments were associated with no effect or worse outcomes. Randomized, controlled trials of these medications in patients with COVID-19 are needed to avoid heavy administration of treatments with no strong evidence to support them.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.