ArticleClinical transplantation and research2024
Remdesivir in solid organ transplant recipients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Clinical transplantation and research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness and Safety of Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir (Paxlovid) Versus Remdesivir in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Retrospective Studies.Health science reports · 2026Review
- Impact of COVID-19 on Kidney Transplant Outcomes: An 8-Year Study From the Czech Republic.Annals of transplantation · 2025Article
- The Impact and Evolution of COVID-19 on Liver Transplant Recipients Throughout the Pandemic "Waves" in a Single Center.Viruses · 2025Observational
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
Background: The use of remdesivir in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been studied. The present systematic review and analysis aimed to assess its effectiveness in this population. Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, medRxiv, and Google Scholar was conducted to identify relevant articles published up to April 2024. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane assessment tool. Data analysis was performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software ver. 3.0. Results: The meta-analysis included seven eligible retrospective studies, involving a total of 574 SOTRs. The findings indicated no significant differences in mortality rate (odds ratio [OR], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-2.39), hospitalization rate (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.10-4.79), need for mechanical ventilation (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.44-2.18), or need for oxygen therapy (OR, 3.73; 95% CI, 0.75-18.34) between the groups that received remdesivir and those that did not. However, a statistically significant difference was observed in the rate of intensive care unit admissions between the two groups (OR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.24-4.57). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis found that remdesivir offers no clinical benefits to SOTRs infected with COVID-19. Additional high-quality research is required to assess the potential clinical advantages of remdesivir for SOTRs with 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.