Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36989209›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2023

Clinical efficacy and safety of interferon (Type I and Type III) therapy in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Seungeun Ryoo, Dae-Hyup Koh, Su-Yeon Yu, Miyoung Choi, Kyungmin Huh, Joon-Sup Yeom, Jung Yeon Heo

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Immunity and Coagulation in COVID-19.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Seungeun RyooDivision for Healthcare Technology Assessment Research, National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-0604-5141
Dae-Hyup KohDivision for Healthcare Technology Assessment Research, National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-2720-4006
Su-Yeon YuDivision for Healthcare Technology Assessment Research, National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-5488-5068
Miyoung ChoiDivision for Healthcare Technology Assessment Research, National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency, Seoul, Korea.
Kyungmin HuhDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Joon-Sup YeomDepartment of Internal Medicine, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Jung Yeon HeoDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-6548-1939
Yonsei University · KRAjou University · KRKongju National University · KRKorea University · KRNational Evidenc- based healthcare Collaborating Agency · KRSamsung Medical Center · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interferon (IFN) has been highlighted in several randomized controlled trials as an attractive therapeutic candidate based plausible mode of action, suppressed response in severe COVID-19, and inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 replication. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of IFN in patients with COVID-19 according to clinical severity. Randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of IFN (systemic or inhaled IFN-α, -β, and -λ) treatment in adult patients with COVID-19 were identified by systematically searching electronic databases until January 2023. Risk of bias were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, meta-analysis, and certainty of evidence grading were followed for the systematic review. We included 11 trials comprising 6,124 patients. Compared with exclusive standard care or placebo, IFN therapy did not provide significant clinical benefits for mortality at day 28 (pooled risk ratio [RR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-1.18, 9 studies, low-certainty evidence) and progression to mechanical ventilation (pooled RR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.81-1.43, 6 studies, low-certainty evidence) in patients with COVID-19. IFN therapy resulted in significantly increased hospital discharge on day 14 relative to the control arm (pooled RR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.04-1.59). These results were inconsistent compared to other comparable outcomes such as recovery at day 14 and time to clinical improvement. The IFN-treated arm was as safe as the control arm, regardless of clinical severity (pooled RR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.64-1.19, 9 studies, low-certainty evidence). In conclusion, IFN therapy was safe but did not demonstrate favorable outcomes for major clinical indices in patients with COVID-19, particularly those with higher than moderate severity. IFN therapy was not associated with worsening outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19. Future clinical trials should evaluate the clinical efficacy of IFN therapy in patients with mild COVID-19 or at an earlier stage. Trial registration: The protocol for this review was prospectively registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under the registration number CRD42022301413.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultHumansInterferon-alphaRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSARS-CoV-2Treatment OutcomeInterferon-alpha

Identifiers

PMID36989209
PMCPMC10057835
OpenAlexW4361292565

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.