Trial reportThe Journal of allergy and clinical immunology2020
Ruxolitinib in treatment of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A multicenter, single-blind, randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 281 papers, 21 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
281 citing papers in PubMed, 21 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 475 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of vitamin C on the risk of mortality in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Inflammopharmacology · 2023Pooled it
- Interleukin-6 blocking agents for treating COVID-19: a living systematic review.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Oral Janus kinase inhibitors for treating hospitalized patients with COVID-19: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of microbiology, immunology, and infection = Wei mian yu gan ran za zhi · 2022Pooled it
- Baricitinib in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial and updated meta-analysis.Lancet (London, England) · 2022Pooled it
- Janus kinase inhibitors for the treatment of COVID-19.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Janus kinase inhibitors for hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Expert review of anti-infective therapy · 2022Pooled it
- JAK inhibitors and COVID-19.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2022Pooled it
- Janus kinase (JAK)-inhibitors and coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Expert review of anti-infective therapy · 2022Pooled it
- Janus kinases inhibitors for coronavirus disease-2019: A pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- COVID-19-Associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS): Mechanistic insights on therapeutic intervention and emerging trends.International immunopharmacology · 2021Pooled it
- Clinical trials in COVID-19 management & prevention: A meta-epidemiological study examining methodological quality.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2021Pooled it
- Janus kinase inhibitors and major COVID-19 outcomes: time to forget the two faces of Janus! A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Clinical rheumatology · 2021Pooled it
- Clinical efficacy and safety of Janus kinase inhibitors for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.International immunopharmacology · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Dietary supplements and herbal medicine for COVID-19: A systematic review of randomized control trials.Clinical nutrition ESPEN · 2021Pooled it
- Evaluating the methodology of studies conducted during the global COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Journal of integrative medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Immunomodulation as Treatment for Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review of Current Modalities and Future Directions.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2021Pooled it
- Immunomodulatory therapies for SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic literature review to inform EULAR points to consider.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2021Pooled it
- Antibiotic prescribing in patients with COVID-19: rapid review and meta-analysis.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2021Pooled it
- Current evidence for COVID-19 therapies: a systematic literature review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2021Pooled it
221 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on byReply.2020
Authors and funding
21 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccumulating evidence proposed Janus-associated kinase (JAK) inhibitors as therapeutic targets warranting rapid investigation.
objectiveThis study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib, a JAK1/2 inhibitor, for coronavirus disease 2019.
methodsWe conducted a prospective, multicenter, single-blind, randomized controlled phase II trial involving patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019.
resultsForty-three patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ruxolitinib plus standard-of-care treatment (22 patients) or placebo based on standard-of-care treatment (21 patients). After exclusion of 2 patients (1 ineligible, 1 consent withdrawn) from the ruxolitinib group, 20 patients in the intervention group and 21 patients in the control group were included in the study. Treatment with ruxolitinib plus standard-of-care was not associated with significantly accelerated clinical improvement in severe patients with coronavirus disease 2019, although ruxolitinib recipients had a numerically faster clinical improvement. Eighteen (90%) patients from the ruxolitinib group showed computed tomography improvement at day 14 compared with 13 (61.9%) patients from the control group (P = .0495). Three patients in the control group died of respiratory failure, with 14.3% overall mortality at day 28; no patients died in the ruxolitinib group. Ruxolitinib was well tolerated with low toxicities and no new safety signals. Levels of 7 cytokines were significantly decreased in the ruxolitinib group in comparison to the control group.
conclusionsAlthough no statistical difference was observed, ruxolitinib recipients had a numerically faster clinical improvement. Significant chest computed tomography improvement, a faster recovery from lymphopenia, and favorable side-effect profile in the ruxolitinib group were encouraging and informative to future trials to test efficacy of ruxolitinib in a larger population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.