Trial reportThe Lancet. Respiratory medicine2021
Sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with severe or critical COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.
Trial report in The Lancet. Respiratory medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04327388 (An Adaptive Phase 3, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study Assessing Efficacy and Safety of Sarilumab for Hospitalized Patients With COVID19), which is not on this map. Cited by 156 papers, 14 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.
An Adaptive Phase 3, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study Assessing Efficacy and Safety of Sarilumab for Hospitalized Patients With COVID19
Who cites it
156 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 246 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adverse events associated with monoclonal antibodies used for treatment of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Assessment of the available therapeutic approaches for severe COVID-19: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- Interleukin-6 blocking agents for treating COVID-19: a living systematic review.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison of Preprint Postings of Randomized Clinical Trials on COVID-19 and Corresponding Published Journal Articles: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2023Pooled it
- Effect of tocilizumab, sarilumab, and baricitinib on mortality among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 treated with corticosteroids: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2023Pooled it
- Clinical efficacy and safety of interleukin-6 receptor antagonists (tocilizumab and sarilumab) in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Emerging microbes & infections · 2022Pooled it
- Beneficial and Harmful Effects of Monoclonal Antibodies for the Treatment and Prophylaxis of COVID-19: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The American journal of medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Interleukin-6 inhibitors reduce mortality in coronavirus disease-2019: An individual patient data meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials.European journal of internal medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Comparative effectiveness of pharmacological interventions on mortality and the average length of hospital stay of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Expert review of anti-infective therapy · 2022Pooled it
- The impact of therapeutics on mortality in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: systematic review and meta-analyses informing the European Respiratory Society living guideline.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2021Guideline
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Shared inflammatory pathways and therapeutic strategies in COVID-19 and cancer immunotherapy.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2021Pooled it
- Efficacy of COVID-19 Treatments: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Frontiers in public health · 2021Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of MAS825 (anti-IL-1β/IL-18) in COVID-19 patients with pneumonia and impaired respiratory function.Clinical and experimental immunology · 2023Trial
- Efficacy and safety of CD24Fc in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2022Trial
- Relationship between gene expression patterns from nasopharyngeal swabs and serum biomarkers in patients hospitalized with COVID-19, following treatment with the neutralizing monoclonal antibody bamlanivimab.Journal of translational medicine · 2022Trial
- Early Use of Sarilumab in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19 Pneumonia and Features of Systemic Inflammation: the SARICOR Randomized Clinical Trial.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Effect of anti-interleukin drugs in patients with COVID-19 and signs of cytokine release syndrome (COV-AID): a factorial, randomised, controlled trial.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2021Trial
96 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 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundElevated proinflammatory cytokines are associated with greater COVID-19 severity. We aimed to assess safety and efficacy of sarilumab, an interleukin-6 receptor inhibitor, in patients with severe (requiring supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula or face mask) or critical (requiring greater supplemental oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal support) COVID-19.
methodsWe did a 60-day, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial at 45 hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Russia, and Spain. We included adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia, who required oxygen supplementation or intensive care. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1 with permuted blocks of five) to receive intravenous sarilumab 400 mg, sarilumab 200 mg, or placebo. Patients, care providers, outcome assessors, and investigators remained masked to assigned intervention throughout the course of the study. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement of two or more points (seven point scale ranging from 1 [death] to 7 [discharged from hospital]) in the modified intention-to-treat population. The key secondary endpoint was proportion of patients alive at day 29. Safety outcomes included adverse events and laboratory assessments. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04327388; EudraCT, 2020-001162-12; and WHO, U1111-1249-6021.
findingsBetween March 28 and July 3, 2020, of 431 patients who were screened, 420 patients were randomly assigned and 416 received placebo (n=84 [20%]), sarilumab 200 mg (n=159 [38%]), or sarilumab 400 mg (n=173 [42%]). At day 29, no significant differences were seen in median time to an improvement of two or more points between placebo (12·0 days [95% CI 9·0 to 15·0]) and sarilumab 200 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 12·0]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·40]; log-rank p=0·96) or sarilumab 400 mg (10·0 days [9·0 to 13·0]; HR 1·14 [95% CI 0·84 to 1·54]; log-rank p=0·34), or in proportions of patients alive (77 [92%] of 84 patients in the placebo group; 143 [90%] of 159 patients in the sarilumab 200 mg group; difference -1·7 [-9·3 to 5·8]; p=0·63 vs placebo; and 159 [92%] of 173 patients in the sarilumab 400 mg group; difference 0·2 [-6·9 to 7·4]; p=0·85 vs placebo). At day 29, there were numerical, non-significant survival differences between sarilumab 400 mg (88%) and placebo (79%; difference +8·9% [95% CI -7·7 to 25·5]; p=0·25) for patients who had critical disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were 65% (55 of 84) in the placebo group, 65% (103 of 159) in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 70% (121 of 173) in the sarilumab 400 mg group, and of those leading to death 11% (nine of 84) were in the placebo group, 11% (17 of 159) were in the sarilumab 200 mg group, and 10% (18 of 173) were in the sarilumab 400 mg group.
interpretationThis trial did not show efficacy of sarilumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and receiving supplemental oxygen. Adequately powered trials of targeted immunomodulatory therapies assessing survival as a primary endpoint are suggested in patients with critical COVID-19.
fundingSanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.
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.