Cardiovascular Outcomes in COVID-19 Patients Treated with Paxlovid: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

Chen et al., Acta Cardiol Sin, doi:10.6515/ACS.202601_42(1).20250726A, Jan 2026
Mortality, day 365 11% improvement lower risk ← → higher risk Mortality, day 180 19% Mortality, day 90 25% Paxlovid for COVID-19  Chen et al.  EARLY TREATMENT Is early treatment with paxlovid beneficial for COVID-19? PSM retrospective 2,415 patients in Taiwan Lower mortality with paxlovid (not stat. sig., p=0.21) c19early.org Chen et al., Acta Cardiol Sin, January 2026 0 0.5 1 1.5 2+ RR
Retrospective 606 COVID-19 patients treated with paxlovid and 1,809 propensity score-matched controls in Taiwan, showing short-term mortality benefits at 3 months, but reduced benefit at 6 months, and no significant benefit at 12 months. The study also found significantly higher risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) at 6 months and 12 months. Authors excluded patients with pre-existing cardiovascular conditions (potentially at higher risk of increased issues with paxlovid use).
Resistance. Variants may be resistant to paxlovid1-8. Use may promote the emergence of variants that weaken host immunity and potentially contribute to long COVID9.
Confounding by contraindication. Hoertel et al. find that over 50% of patients that died had a contraindication for the use of Paxlovid10. Retrospective studies that do not exclude contraindicated patients may significantly overestimate efficacy.
Black box warning. The FDA notes that severe, life-threatening, and/or fatal adverse reactions due to drug interactions have been reported in patients treated with paxlovid11.
Kidney and liver injury. Studies show significantly increased risk of acute kidney injury12 and liver injury13,14.
Viral rebound. Studies show significantly increased risk of replication-competent viral rebound15-17.
risk of death, 11.0% lower, RR 0.89, p = 0.21, treatment 117 of 606 (19.3%), control 393 of 1,809 (21.7%), NNT 41, propensity score matching, day 365.
risk of death, 19.0% lower, RR 0.81, p = 0.049, treatment 94 of 606 (15.5%), control 345 of 1,809 (19.1%), NNT 28, propensity score matching, day 180.
risk of death, 25.0% lower, RR 0.75, p = 0.02, treatment 66 of 606 (10.9%), control 264 of 1,809 (14.6%), NNT 27, propensity score matching, day 90.
Effect extraction follows pre-specified rules prioritizing more serious outcomes. Submit updates
Chen et al., 30 Jan 2026, retrospective, Taiwan, peer-reviewed, 11 authors.
$0 $500 $1,000+ Efficacy vs. cost for COVID-19 treatment protocols c19early.org February 2026 Taiwan USA Russia Sudan Angola Colombia Kenya Mozambique Pakistan Peru Philippines Vietnam Spain Brazil Italy France Japan Canada China Uzbekistan Nepal Ethiopia Iran Mexico South Korea Ghana Germany Bangladesh Saudi Arabia Algeria Morocco Yemen Poland India DR Congo Madagascar Thailand Uganda Venezuela Nigeria Egypt Bolivia Zambia Fiji Bosnia-Herzegovina Ukraine Côte d'Ivoire Bulgaria Greece Slovakia Singapore Iceland New Zealand Mongolia Czechia Israel Trinidad and Tobago Hong Kong Belarus North Macedonia Qatar Panama Serbia CAR Taiwan favored high-profit treatments.The average efficacy of treatments was very low.High-cost protocols reduce early treatment, andforgo complementary/synergistic benefits. More effective More expensive 75% 50% 25% ≤0%
$0 $500 $1,000+ Efficacy vs. cost for COVID-19treatment protocols worldwide c19early.org February 2026 Taiwan USA Russia Sudan Angola Colombia Kenya Mozambique Pakistan Peru Argentina Vietnam Spain Brazil Italy France Japan Canada China Uzbekistan Nepal Ethiopia Iran Mexico South Korea Ghana Germany Bangladesh Saudi Arabia Algeria Morocco Yemen Poland India DR Congo Madagascar Thailand Uganda Venezuela Nigeria Egypt Bolivia Zambia Fiji Ukraine Côte d'Ivoire Eritrea Bulgaria Greece Slovakia Singapore Iceland New Zealand Mongolia Czechia Israel Trinidad and Tobago Hong Kong Belarus North Macedonia Qatar Panama Serbia Syria Taiwan favored high-profit treatments.The average efficacy was very low.High-cost protocols reduce early treatment,and forgo complementary/synergistic benefits. More effective More expensive 75% 50% 25% ≤0%
DOI record: { "DOI": "10.6515/ACS.202601_42(1).20250726A", "URL": "", "abstract": "", "author": [ { "literal": "Wei-Lun Chen" }, { "literal": "Victor Chien-Chia Wu" }, { "literal": "Chun-Li Wang" }, { "literal": "Yu-Ching Wang" }, { "literal": "Yu-Tung Huang" }, { "literal": "Chien-Hao Huang" }, { "literal": "Chih-Hsiang Chang" }, { "literal": "Shao-Wei Chen" }, { "literal": "Shang-Hung Chang" }, { "literal": "Cheng-Hsun Chiu" }, { "literal": "Pao-Hsien Chu" } ], "container-title": "Acta Cardiologica Sinica", "issue": "1", "issued": { "date-parts": [ [ "2026", "1", "31" ] ] }, "language": "en", "page-first": "87", "title": "Cardiovascular Outcomes in COVID-19 Patients Treated with Paxlovid: A Multicenter Retrospective Study", "type": "article-journal", "volume": "42" }
Please send us corrections, updates, or comments. c19early involves the extraction of 200,000+ datapoints from thousands of papers. Community updates help ensure high accuracy. Treatments and other interventions are complementary. All practical, effective, and safe means should be used based on risk/benefit analysis. No treatment or intervention is 100% available and effective for all current and future variants. We do not provide medical advice. Before taking any medication, consult a qualified physician who can provide personalized advice and details of risks and benefits based on your medical history and situation. IMA and WCH provide treatment protocols.
  or use drag and drop   
Submit