Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2020
Effect of Arbidol (Umifenovir) on COVID-19: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC infectious diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers, 8 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
91 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 171 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis of arbidol versus lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019.Journal of medical virology · 2022Pooled it
- Efficacy of antiviral therapies for COVID-19: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of arbidol (umifenovir) in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Immunity, inflammation and disease · 2021Pooled 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
- Clinical efficacy of antiviral agents against coronavirus disease 2019: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Journal of microbiology, immunology, and infection = Wei mian yu gan ran za zhi · 2021Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of lopinavir-ritonavir in COVID-19: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Journal of infection and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Comparative clinical trial of Langenlianqiao oral liquid and Lianhuaqingwen capsule in the treatment of mild cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2024Trial
- Enhanced Antiviral Activity of Novel Umifenovir Derivatives against SARS-CoV-2: Insights from an International Collaborative Study.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Supercomputing Multi-Ligand Modeling, Simulation, Wavelet Analysis and Surface Plasmon Resonance to Develop Novel Combination Drugs: A Case Study of Arbidol and Baicalein Against Main Protease of SARS-CoV-2.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Potential Broad-Spectrum Antiviral Agents: A Key Arsenal Against Newly Emerging and Reemerging Respiratory RNA Viruses.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Antivirals in COVID-19: A Focus on Pediatric Cardiac Patients.The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2025Review
- Plausible mechanism of drug resistance and side-effects of COVID-19 therapeutics: a bottleneck for its eradication.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2024Review
- Adverse drug reactions associated with COVID-19 management.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2024Review
- Protective Effect of Indole-3-Aldehyde in Murine COVID-19-Associated Pulmonary Aspergillosis.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Clinical development of antivirals against SARS-CoV-2 and its variants.Current research in microbial sciences · 2024Review
- Comparative efficacy of repurposed drugs lopinavir-ritonavir and darunavir-ritonavir in hospitalised COVID-19 patients: insights from a tertiary centre cohort.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
- An Update on SARS-CoV-2 Clinical Trial Results-What We Can Learn for the Next Pandemic.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Indole-Based Compounds as Potential Drug Candidates for SARS-CoV-2.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
31 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTreatment of patients with COVID-19 has included supportive care to mainly relief symptoms of the disease. Although World Health Organization (WHO) has not recommended any effective treatments for COVID-19, there are some reports about use of antiviral drugs. The aim of this study is to determine the effect of Arbidol (ARB) on COVID-19 disease.
methodsUsing an open-label randomized controlled trial, we examined the efficacy of ARB in patients with COVID-19 in a teaching hospital. One hundred eligible patients with diagnosis of COVID-19 were recruited in the study and assigned randomly to two groups of either hydroxychloroquine followed by KALETRA (Lopinavir/ritonavir) or hydroxychloroquine followed by ARB. The primary outcome was hospitalization duration and clinical improvement 7 days after admission. The criteria of improvement were relief of cough, dyspnea, and fever. Time to relief from fever was also assessed across the two groups. Without any dropouts, 100 patients were entered into the study for the final analysis at significance level of 0.05.
resultsThe mean age of patients was 56.6 (17.8) years and 56.2 (14.8) years in ARB and KALETRA groups, respectively. Majority of patients were male across two groups (66 and 54%). The duration of hospitalization in ARB group was significantly less than KALETRA arm (7.2 versus 9.6 days; P = 0.02). Time to relief fever was almost similar across two groups (2.7 versus 3.1 days in ARB and KALETRA arms, respectively). Peripheral oxygen saturation rate was significantly different after 7 days of admission across two groups (94% versus 92% in ARB and KALETRA groups respectively) (P = 0.02). Based on multiple linear regression analysis, IHD, Na level, and oxygen saturation at the time of admission and type of therapy were the independent adjusted variables that determined the duration of hospitalization in patients with COVID-19.
conclusionOur findings showed that Arbidol, compared to KALETRA, significantly contributes to clinical and laboratory improvements, including peripheral oxygen saturation, requiring ICU admissions, duration of hospitalization, chest CT involvements, WBC, and ESR. We suggest further studies on ARB against COVID-19 using larger sample size and multicenter design.
trial registrationIRCT20180725040596N2 on 18 April 2020.
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.