ArticleExpert review of respiratory medicine2021
Antiviral treatment selection for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia.
Article in Expert review of respiratory medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sequential or Combination Treatments as Rescue Therapies in Immunocompromised Patients with Persistent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in the Omicron Era: A Case Series.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Learning from real world data about combinatorial treatment selection for COVID-19.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2023Article
- A Regional Observational Study on COVID-19-Associated Pulmonary Aspergillosis (CAPA) within Intensive Care Unit: Trying to Break the Mold.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Covid-19: pharmacotherapeutic insights on various curative approaches in terms of vulnerability, comorbidities, and vaccination.Inflammopharmacology · 2022Review
- Codivir suppresses SARS-Cov-2 viral replication and stabilizes clinical outcome: In vitro and Phase I clinical trial results.Discoveries (Craiova, Romania)Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTherapy of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) involves evolving algorithms that include drugs aimed at reducing disease progression by counteracting two different, but intertwined processes: ( AREAS COVERED: Herein, we discuss the available evidence on the efficacy and safety of antiviral agents employed over the past months for the treatment of COVID-19, and the reasons to be considered for antiviral selection. EXPERT OPINION: The available evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCT) currently discourages the use of lopinavir/ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, and interferons, which did not show improved efficacy compared to standard care or placebo. Regarding remdesivir, the current body of evidence may conditionally support its use in COVID-19 patients requiring oxygen supplementation but still not requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. Finally, neutralizing monoclonal antibodies have been proven efficacious in reducing the risk of severe disease development if administered early in the course of the disease to patients at risk of progression. The results of the ongoing RCT will certainly be crucial to further improve our understanding of the optimal place in therapy of antiviral agents for COVID-19.
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.