Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37640510›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open respiratory research2023

Repurposed drug studies on the primary prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection during the pandemic: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Guiling Zhou, Stefan Verweij, Maarten J Bijlsma, Stijn de Vos, Katrien Oude Rengerink, Anna Maria Gerdina Pasmooij, Debbie van Baarle, Hubert G M Niesters, Peter Mol, Judith M Vonk and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open respiratory research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Guiling ZhouUnit of PharmacoTherapy, Epidemiology & Economics, Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands g.zhou@rug.nl.ORCID 0000-0003-1872-0084
Stefan VerweijUnit of PharmacoTherapy, Epidemiology & Economics, Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Maarten J BijlsmaUnit of PharmacoTherapy, Epidemiology & Economics, Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Stijn de VosUnit of PharmacoTherapy, Epidemiology & Economics, Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Katrien Oude RengerinkDutch Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Anna Maria Gerdina PasmooijDutch Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Debbie van BaarleVirology and Immunology Research Group, Department of Medical Microbiology and Infection Prevention, University Medical Centre, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Hubert G M NiestersDepartment of Medical Microbiology and Infection Prevention, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Peter MolDutch Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Judith M VonkGroningen Research Institute for Asthma and COPD, University Medical Centre, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Eelko HakUnit of PharmacoTherapy, Epidemiology & Economics, Groningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
University of Groningen · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NLMedicines Evaluation Board · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveCurrent evidence on the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis is inconclusive. We aimed to systematically evaluate published studies on repurposed drugs for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 among healthy adults.

designSystematic review. ELIGIBILITY: Quantitative experimental and observational intervention studies that evaluated the effectiveness of repurposed drugs for the primary prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or COVID-19 disease. DATA SOURCE: PubMed and Embase (1 January 2020-28 September 2022). RISK OF BIAS: Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 and Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions tools were applied to assess the quality of studies. DATA ANALYSIS: Meta-analyses for each eligible drug were performed if ≥2 similar study designs were available.

resultsIn all, 65 (25 trials, 40 observational) and 29 publications were eligible for review and meta-analyses, respectively. Most studies pertained to hydroxychloroquine (32), ACE inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) (11), statin (8), and ivermectin (8). In trials, hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis reduced laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (risk ratio: 0.82 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.90), I

conclusionsResults from our analysis are insufficient to support an evidence-based repurposed drug policy for SARS-CoV-2 prophylaxis because of inconsistency. In the view of scarce supportive evidence on repurposing drugs for COVID-19, alternative strategies such as immunisation of vulnerable people are warranted to prevent the future waves of infection. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021292797.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsHumansHydroxychloroquineIvermectinPandemicsPrimary PreventionSARS-CoV-2Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsHydroxychloroquineIvermectinCOVID-19respiratory infection

Identifiers

PMID37640510
PMCPMC10462970
OpenAlexW4386226703

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.