A trial of arbidol hydrochloride in adults with COVID-19
To date, there is no effective medicine to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and the antiviral efficacy of arbidol in the treatment for COVID-19 remained equivocal and controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of arbidol tablets in the treatment of COV...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Chinese medical journal 2022-07, Vol.135 (13), p.1531-1538 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | To date, there is no effective medicine to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and the antiviral efficacy of arbidol in the treatment for COVID-19 remained equivocal and controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of arbidol tablets in the treatment of COVID-19.
This was a prospective, open-label, controlled and multicenter investigator-initiated trial involving adult patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Patients were stratified 1:2 to either standard-of-care (SOC) or SOC plus arbidol tablets (oral administration of 200 mg per time, three times a day for 14 days). The primary endpoint was negative conversion of SARS-CoV-2 within the first week. The rates and 95% confidential intervals were calculated for each variable.
A total of 99 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were enrolled; 66 were assigned to the SOC plus arbidol tablets group, and 33 to the SOC group. The negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2 within the first week in patients receiving arbidol tablets was significantly higher than that of the SOC group (70.3% [45/64] vs. 42.4% [14/33]; difference of conversion rate 27.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.7%-48.1%; P = 0.008). Compared to those in the SOC group, patients receiving arbidol tablets had a shorter duration of clinical recovery (median 7.0 days vs. 12.0 days; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.877, 95% CI: 1.151-3.060, P = 0.006), symptom of fever (median 3.0 days vs. 12.0 days; HR: 18.990, 95% CI: 5.350-67.410, P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2542-5641 0366-6999 2542-5641 |
DOI: | 10.1097/CM9.0000000000002104 |