RETRACTED ARTICLE: Safety and efficacy of favipiravir versus hydroxychloroquine in management of COVID-19: A randomised controlled trial

Dabbous, Hany; El-Sayed, Manal Hamdy; Assal, Gihan El; Elghazaly, Hesham; Ebeid, Fatma Soliman Elsayed; Sherief, Ahmed Fouad; Elgaafary, Maha; Fawzy, E; Hassany, Sahar M.; Riad, Ahmed R; Tageldin, Mohamed Awad

doi:10.1038/s41598-021-85227-0

Cited by 44 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Risk of bias assessment of the included studies was reported in Table 1. Among the randomized studies, one study [7] has low risk, six studies [8][9][10][11][12][13][14] have moderate risk, and two studies [15,16] have high risk. Observational studies [14,17] are identified as moderate risk, and nonrandomized study [18] is found to have serious risk.…”

Section: Overview Of Randomized Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three trials compared Favipiravir with standard supportive care and one of these administered other antiviral medications outside of Favipiravir [14,16,17]. Three trials compared Favipiravir with Hydroxychloroquine [7,9,13], one compared with Chloroquine [12], two compared with Lopinavir/Ritonavir [10,18], and one compared with Umifenovir (Arbidol) [15]. Favipiravir was used in varying doses (Table 2).…”

Section: Overview Of Randomized Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to patients' baseline severity characteristics, four studies [8,11,13,18] included only moderate patients. Three studies [7,12,16] included mild-to-moderate patients, and five studies [9,10,14,15,17] included moderate-to-severe patients.…”

Section: Overview Of Randomized Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness of favipiravir in COVID-19: a live systematic review

Özlüşen

Kozan

Akcan

et al. 2021

Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for the effectiveness of Favipiravir on the fatality and the requirement of mechanical ventilation for the treatment of moderate to severe COVID-19 patients. We searched available literature and reported it by using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Until June 1, 2021, we searched PubMed, bioRxiv, medRxiv, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google Scholar by using the keywords “Favipiravir” and terms synonymous with COVID-19. Studies for Favipiravir treatment compared to standard of care among moderate and severe COVID-19 patients were included. Risk of bias assessment was performed using Revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) and ROBINS-I assessment tool for non-randomized studies. We defined the outcome measures as fatality and requirement for mechanical ventilation. A total of 2702 studies were identified and 12 clinical trials with 1636 patients were analyzed. Nine out of 12 studies were randomized controlled trials. Among the randomized studies, one study has low risk of bias, six studies have moderate risk of bias, and 2 studies have high risk of bias. Observational studies were identified as having moderate risk of bias and non-randomized study was found to have serious risk of bias. Our meta-analysis did not reveal any significant difference between the intervention and the comparator on fatality rate (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.64–1.94) and mechanical ventilation requirement (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.13–1.95). There is no significant difference in fatality rate and mechanical ventilation requirement between Favipiravir treatment and the standard of care in moderate and severe COVID-19 patients.

show abstract

Section: Overview Of Randomized Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Overview Of Randomized Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effectiveness of favipiravir in COVID-19: a live systematic review

Özlüşen

Kozan

Akcan

et al. 2021

Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Favipiravir is an approved drug for treating in uenza and has been found associated with SARS-CoV-2 clearance if treated early [34]. Favipiravir has been effective for mild and moderate patients, albeit clinical trials are going on for more clinical evidence in favor of the drug [34,43].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19 recovery measures and use of medications among COVID-19 patients at home: A cross- sectional study in Bangladesh

Noman

Joarder

Islam

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The COVID-19 is the greatest catastrophe of the 21st century that ravaged health, economy, and everyday life. Over 90% of the infected individuals in Bangladesh took home treatments following various approaches and consuming different medications. The study aims to identify the recovery measures and the medications used by COVID-19 patients at home. Methods An online-based, cross-sectional survey was conducted between 5 October 2020 and 5 January 2021 among the COVID-19 patients who did not seek care from hospitals and recovered at home. Participants from all the administrative divisions of Bangladesh were recruited via social media. After obtaining consent, subjects were enrolled to complete the questionnaire that included questions on demographic characteristics, clinical itinerary, non-pharmacological and pharmacological approaches. Results Of the 241 respondents, the majority were males (64.3%), aged 21-30 years (42.3%), and urban residents (65.6%). Fever (92.5%), cough (78.4%), and sore throat (62.7%) were the most common symptoms. Hypertension (17.3%), allergic rhinitis (15.3%), and asthma (15.3%) were the most prevalent pre-existing chronic conditions. Most of the respondents adopted some non-pharmacological approaches, such as inhaling steam/gargling warm water (75.1%), drinking any hot drink (85.9%), and consuming vegetables and fruits (67.6%) daily. Among the medicines consumed, paracetamol was the highest (97.1%), followed by antihistamines (77.6%) and antibiotics (61.4%) while corticosteroid, antiparasitic and antiviral drugs were less consumed drugs. Binary logistic regression found, living in the urban area, level of education and pre-existing diabetes were significant factors that impact recovery time from the COVID-19. Conclusions Most of the individuals experienced mild to moderate symptoms and used non-pharmacological approaches, while over-the-counter drugs were the most consumed medicines. Though these measures did not contribute significantly to recovery time, these can be used as a form of home management in the early stage to reduce the disease severity and may be effective for mild and moderate patients.

show abstract

“…Chloroquine Chloroquine is a malaria drug, which passively diffuses into acidic lysosomes, endosomes, and Golgi vesicles. While initial reports and studies were promising for chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 patients, these findings were not confirmed and the NIH discontinued clinical trials investigating the efficiency of chloroquine (3,97). In 2020, the FDA had authorized the administration of chloroquine to certain COVID-19 patients, but shortly thereafter, the agency terminated its use due to the high ambiguity regarding its efficiency and side effects (Table 4).…”

Section: Drugs and Vaccines Drugsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nanomedicine: A Diagnostic and Therapeutic Approach to COVID-19

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The SARS-CoV-2 virus is causing devastating morbidity and mortality worldwide. Nanomedicine approaches have a high potential to enhance conventional diagnostics, drugs and vaccines. In fact, lipid nanoparticle/mRNA vaccines are already widely used to protect from COVID-19. In this review, we present an overview of the taxonomy, structure, variants of concern, epidemiology, pathophysiology and detection methods of SARS-CoV-2. The efforts of repurposing, tailoring, and adapting pre-existing medications to battle COVID-19 and the state of vaccine developments are presented. Next, we discuss the broad concepts and limitations of how nanomedicine could address the COVID-19 threat. Nanomaterials are particles in the nanometer scale (10–100 nm) which possess unique properties related to their size, polarity, structural and chemical composition. Nanoparticles can be composed of precious metals (copper, silver, gold), inorganic materials (graphene, silicon), proteins, carbohydrates, lipids, RNA/DNA, or conjugates, combinations and polymers of all of the aforementioned. The advanced biochemical features of these nanoscale particles allow them to directly interact with virions and irreversibly disrupt their structure, which can render a virus incapable of replicating within the host. Virus-neutralizing coats and surfaces impregnated with nanomaterials can enhance personal protective equipment, hand sanitizers and air filter systems. Nanoparticles can enhance drug-based therapies by optimizing uptake, stability, target cell-specific delivery, and magnetic properties. In fact, recent studies have highlighted the potential of nanoparticles in different aspects of the fight against SARS-CoV-2, such as enhancing biosensors and diagnostic tests, drug therapies, designing new delivery mechanisms, and optimizing vaccines. This article summarizes the ongoing research on diagnostic strategies, treatments, and vaccines for COVID-19, while emphasizing the potential of nanoparticle-based pharmaceuticals and vaccines.

show abstract

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Safety and efficacy of favipiravir versus hydroxychloroquine in management of COVID-19: A randomised controlled trial

Cited by 44 publications

References 26 publications

Effectiveness of favipiravir in COVID-19: a live systematic review

Effectiveness of favipiravir in COVID-19: a live systematic review

COVID-19 recovery measures and use of medications among COVID-19 patients at home: A cross- sectional study in Bangladesh

Nanomedicine: A Diagnostic and Therapeutic Approach to COVID-19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About