Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34757578›Full record

ArticleInfectious diseases and therapy2022

Efficacy and Safety of Immunomodulators in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Thundon Ngamprasertchai, Rattagan Kajeekul, Chaisith Sivakorn, Narisa Ruenroegnboon, Viravarn Luvira, Tanaya Siripoon, Nantasit Luangasanatip

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infectious diseases and therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Thundon NgamprasertchaiDepartment of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1602-5435
Rattagan KajeekulDepartment of Medicine, Maharat Nakhon Ratchasima Hospital, 49 Changphuak Rd, Tambon Nai Mueang Nakhon Ratchasima District, Nakhon Ratchasima, 30000, Thailand. rattagan_k@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5067-5389
Chaisith SivakornDepartment of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Narisa RuenroegnboonDepartment of Pharmaceutics (Clinical Pharmacy), Faculty of Pharmacy, Slipakorn University, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand.
Viravarn LuviraDepartment of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Tanaya SiripoonDepartment of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Nantasit LuangasanatipMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Mahidol University · THMaharat Nakhon Ratchasima Hospital · THSilpakorn University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMany immunomodulators have been studied in clinical trials for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, data identifying the most effective and safest treatment are lacking. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to rank immunomodulators in the treatment of COVID-19 according to their efficacy and safety.

methodsPublished and peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of immunomodulators in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were searched up to June 30, 2021. Direct and network meta-analyses were applied to assess the outcomes. The probability of efficacy and safety was estimated, and the drugs were awarded a numerical ranking.

resultsTwenty-six studies were eligible. Compared with standard of care, dexamethasone and tocilizumab had significantly lower mortality rates with pooled risk ratios (RRs) of 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.99) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.82-0.96), respectively. Meanwhile, the most effective corticosteroid, interleukin-6 antagonist, and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor were hydrocortisone, sarilumab, and ruxolitinib, respectively. However, when superimposed infection was considered, ruxolitinib was the best treatment followed by baricitinib. Moreover, methylprednisolone had the worst combined efficacy and safety among the examined treatments.

conclusionsOverall, immunomodulators were more effective than standard of care. Important differences exist among immunomodulators regarding both efficacy and safety in favor of ruxolitinib and baricitinib. Further well-conducted randomized controlled trials should focus on JAK inhibitors. Methylprednisolone use should be discouraged because of its poor efficacy and high risk of superimposed infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration identifier CRD 42021257421.

Indexed as

COVID-19Efficacy and superimposed infectionImmunomodulators

Identifiers

PMID34757578
PMCPMC8579415
OpenAlexW3212207462

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.