Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38575338›Full record

ArticleBMJ open respiratory research2024

Comparative effectiveness of sotrovimab versus no treatment in non-hospitalised high-risk COVID-19 patients in north west London: a retrospective cohort study.

Myriam Drysdale, Evgeniy R Galimov, Marcus James Yarwood, Vishal Patel, Bethany Levick, Daniel C Gibbons, Jonathan D Watkins, Sophie Young, Benjamin F Pierce, Emily J Lloyd and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open respiratory research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Real-world evidence: state-of-the-art and future perspectives.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2025
    Review
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

14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Myriam DrysdaleGSK, Brentford, UK myriam.g.drysdale@gsk.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8994-2816
Evgeniy R GalimovImperial College Health Partners, London, UK.
Marcus James YarwoodImperial College Health Partners, London, UK.
Vishal PatelGSK, Brentford, UK.
Bethany LevickEvidence & Access, OPEN Health Communications LLP, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6371-8744
Daniel C GibbonsGSK, Brentford, UK.
Jonathan D WatkinsImperial College Health Partners, London, UK.
Sophie YoungImperial College Health Partners, London, UK.
Benjamin F PierceImperial College Health Partners, London, UK.
Emily J LloydGSK, Brentford, UK.
William KerrGlobal Medical Affairs, GSK, Brentford, Middlesex, UK.
Helen J BirchGSK, Brentford, UK.
Tahereh KamalatiImperial College Health Partners, London, UK.
Stephen J BrettDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Kings Health Partners · GBImperial College London · GBThe Open Group · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe assessed the effectiveness of sotrovimab vs no early COVID-19 treatment in highest-risk COVID-19 patients during Omicron predominance.

methodsRetrospective cohort study using the Discover dataset in North West London. Included patients were non-hospitalised, aged ≥12 years and met ≥1 National Health Service highest-risk criterion for sotrovimab treatment. We used Cox proportional hazards models to compare HRs of 28-day COVID-19-related hospitalisation/death between highest-risk sotrovimab-treated and untreated patients. Age, renal disease and Omicron subvariant subgroup analyses were performed.

resultsWe included 599 sotrovimab-treated patients and 5191 untreated patients. Compared with untreated patients, the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation/death (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.24, 1.06; p=0.07) and the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.18, 1.00; p=0.051) were both lower in the sotrovimab-treated group; however, statistical significance was not reached. In the ≥65 years and renal disease subgroups, sotrovimab was associated with a significantly reduced risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation, by 89% (HR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02, 0.82; p=0.03) and 82% (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.05, 0.62; p=0.007), respectively.

conclusionsRisk of COVID-19 hospitalisation in sotrovimab-treated patients aged ≥65 years and with renal disease was significantly lower compared with untreated patients. Overall, risk of hospitalisation was also lower for sotrovimab-treated patients, but statistical significance was not reached.

Indexed as

Antibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntibodies, NeutralizingCOVID-19COVID-19 Drug TreatmentHumansLondonRetrospective StudiesState MedicineAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntibodies, NeutralizingsotrovimabCOVID-19Respiratory InfectionViral infection

Identifiers

PMID38575338
PMCPMC11002339
OpenAlexW4393929630

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.