About: Background & Objective: The efficacy and safety of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in treating coronavirus disease COVID-19 pandemic is disputed. This study aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of HCQ plus standard of care in COVID-19 patients. Methods: PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Embase, and web of sciences were searched up to June 1, 2020. The references list of the key studies was reviewed for additional relevant resources. Clinical studies registry databases were searched for identifying potential clinical trials. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaborations tool. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan software (version 5.3). Results: Three randomized controlled trials with total number of 242 patients were identified eligible for meta-analysis. No significant differences were observed between HCQ and standard care in terms of viral clearance (Risk ratio [RR] = 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.91, 1.16; P= 0.68), disease progression (RR=0.92; 95% CI= 0.10, 0.81; P=0.94), Chest CT (RR=1.40; 95% CI= 1.03, 1.91; P=0.03). There is a significant difference between HCQ and standard care for adverse events (RR=2.88; 95% CI= 1.50, 5.54; P=0.002). Conclusion: Although the current meta-analysis failed to confirm the efficacy and safety of HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, further rigorous randomized clinical trials are necessary to evaluate conclusively the efficacy and safety of HCQ against COVID-19. Keyword: Coronavirus Disease; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Hydroxychloroquine; Efficacy; Safety   Goto Sponge  NotDistinct  Permalink

An Entity of Type : fabio:Abstract, within Data Space : covidontheweb.inria.fr associated with source document(s)

AttributesValues
type
value
  • Background & Objective: The efficacy and safety of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in treating coronavirus disease COVID-19 pandemic is disputed. This study aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of HCQ plus standard of care in COVID-19 patients. Methods: PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Embase, and web of sciences were searched up to June 1, 2020. The references list of the key studies was reviewed for additional relevant resources. Clinical studies registry databases were searched for identifying potential clinical trials. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaborations tool. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan software (version 5.3). Results: Three randomized controlled trials with total number of 242 patients were identified eligible for meta-analysis. No significant differences were observed between HCQ and standard care in terms of viral clearance (Risk ratio [RR] = 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.91, 1.16; P= 0.68), disease progression (RR=0.92; 95% CI= 0.10, 0.81; P=0.94), Chest CT (RR=1.40; 95% CI= 1.03, 1.91; P=0.03). There is a significant difference between HCQ and standard care for adverse events (RR=2.88; 95% CI= 1.50, 5.54; P=0.002). Conclusion: Although the current meta-analysis failed to confirm the efficacy and safety of HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, further rigorous randomized clinical trials are necessary to evaluate conclusively the efficacy and safety of HCQ against COVID-19. Keyword: Coronavirus Disease; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Hydroxychloroquine; Efficacy; Safety
subject
  • Quinolines
  • Antirheumatic products
  • Chloroarenes
  • Primary alcohols
  • RTT
  • World Health Organization essential medicines
  • Antimalarial agents
  • Nursing ethics
  • 2019 health disasters
part of
is abstract of
is hasSource of
Faceted Search & Find service v1.13.91 as of Mar 24 2020


Alternative Linked Data Documents: Sponger | ODE     Content Formats:       RDF       ODATA       Microdata      About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data]
OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3229 as of Jul 10 2020, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Single-Server Edition (94 GB total memory)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2025 OpenLink Software