ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2026
REGEN-COV as the First Line of Defense-A Single-Centre Experience.
Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCasirivimab-imdevimab (REGEN-COV) is a neutralizing antibody cocktail that has been shown to prevent the progression of COVID-19 and serious adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 disease. During the period preceding the emergence of the Omicron variant, REGEN-COV demonstrated clinical activity against several circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants. The delta variant was dominant worldwide during much of the study period.
aimThis retrospective observational study aimed to show the single centre's results in treating patients with REGEN-COV.
methodsThis study included adult patients who received REGEN-COV at our COVID-19 centre from 01 June 2021 to 31 January 2022 (REGEN-COV group) and a comparison group that included patients who did not meet the eligibility criteria for REGEN-COV (non-REGEN-COV group). The primary end-point was the need for hospitalization. The secondary end-point was all-cause mortality. Intensive care unit admission was also evaluated.
resultsThis study included 206 patients, of whom 69 received REGEN-COV, and 137 comprised the non-REGEN-COV group. During follow-up, 128 patients (62%) required hospitalization, including 11 (15.9%) in the REGEN-COV group and 117 (85.4%) in the non-REGEN-COV group (
conclusionsOur study showed that in high-risk patients, with specific variants of SARS-CoV-2, the use of REGEN-COV was associated with a lower risk of hospitalization, and it was associated with better disease outcomes. One of the limitations of this study was the variant-specific effectiveness of REGEN-COV, which may limit generalizability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.