Objective: To answer questions related to the use of anticoagulants in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Methods: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of phase 3 randomized controlled trials comparing the use of anticoagulants in non-hospitalized and hospitalized COVID-19 patients. We searched the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov from their inception to January 22, 2022. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, and the quality of evidence was assessed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Results: A total of 401 studies were initially selected. Of those, 9 met the inclusion criteria and were therefore analyzed (a total of 6,004 patients being analyzed). In non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients, no significant difference was found between post-discharge prophylactic anticoagulation and no intervention regarding venous thromboembolism or bleeding at 30 days. In hospitalized COVID-19 patients, full anticoagulation resulted in a slight reduction in thrombotic events at 30 days (risk difference, -0.03; 95% CI, -0.06 to -0.00; p = 0.04; I2 = 78%), the quality of evidence being moderate. However, no significant difference was found between full anticoagulation and no intervention regarding the risk of major bleeding, the quality of evidence being very low. No significant difference was found between intermediate- and standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (risk difference, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.06; p = 0.81; I2 = 0%), the quality of evidence being very low. Conclusions: Therapeutic anticoagulation appears to have no effect on mortality in COVID-19 patients, resulting in a slight reduction in venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients.
Neutralizing monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies targeting with high specificity to SARS-CoV-2 has been considered as one of the potential therapies for COVID-19 since the beginning of the pandemic. Preclinical studies demonstrated a marked reduction in viral loads in the upper and lower respiratory tract with the use of neutralizing mAbs 1 .The mAbs have the ability to coordinate the immune defense to link to the virus and control the virus load. The mAbs are defined as an antibody derived from a single B-cell clone and recognize a single and unique epitope that can link to their specific epitope on target antigens and can mediate multiple effects such as disruption of the function and eliminate cells or pathogens 2 . These mAbs for COVID-19 are fully human and were discovered from COVID-19 patient' donors, and one of their targets is to block the S protein of the SARS-CoV-2, preventing viral entry into host cells 3 .The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an emergency use authorization for mAbs to be used as pre-exposure prophylaxis and mild-moderate COVID-19. However, given to the Omicron variant, the FDA did not recommend using casirivimab+imdevimab. In Brazil, mAbs were approved by the Brazilian regulatory agency, i.e., The National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA), for use in patients with mild-to-moderate nonhospitalized COVID-19 patients and for the prevention of COVID-19 infection.This systematic review aimed to identify, describe, evaluate, and synthesize evidence of effectiveness of mAbs in clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients. METHODSThis systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations 4 . Eligibility criteriaThe study protocol followed the patients of interest, intervention to be studied, comparison of interventions, and outcome of interest (PICO) methodology. With the use of a mAb as the main study point, the PICO framework was as follows: patients, adult COVID-19 patients; intervention, use of an mAb (casiriv-imab+imdevimab, bamlanivimab, bamlanivimab+etesevimab, sotrovimab, regdanvimab, and tixagevimab+cilgavimab); comparison between the standard of care (SOC) and placebo; and outcome, symptomatic COVID-19 infection, symptom resolution, adverse event, severe adverse event, hospitalization, and the mortality rate due to any cause in 29 days. The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews: CRD42022320972.All phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the topic were included. No restrictions were imposed with regard to the date of publication, language, or availability of the full text of the article. Information sources and search strategyTwo authors developed a search strategy that was revised and approved by the team, selected information sources, and systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Central Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Specific search strategies were used for each database: ("COVID-19" OR "COVID" OR "coronavirus" OR
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.