Abstract
..
Main
..
RCT vs. Obs.
..
Feedback
Home
c19early.org COVID-19 treatment researchCamostatCamostat (more..)
Melatonin Meta
Metformin Meta
Antihistamines Meta
Azvudine Meta Molnupiravir Meta
Bromhexine Meta
Budesonide Meta
Colchicine Meta Nigella Sativa Meta
Conv. Plasma Meta Nitazoxanide Meta
Curcumin Meta PPIs Meta
Famotidine Meta Paxlovid Meta
Favipiravir Meta Quercetin Meta
Fluvoxamine Meta Remdesivir Meta
Hydroxychlor.. Meta Thermotherapy Meta
Ivermectin Meta
Home Adoption Other Treatments
@CovidAnalysis
Loading...
 
Analgesics⏵
Antiandrogens⏵
Antihistamines
Azvudine
Bromhexine
Budesonide
Colchicine
Conv. Plasma
Curcumin
Famotidine
Favipiravir
Fluvoxamine
Hydroxychlor..
Ivermectin
Lifestyle⏵
Melatonin
Metformin
Minerals⏵
Molnupiravir
Monoclonals⏵
Naso/orophar..⏵
Nigella Sativa
Nitazoxanide
PPIs
Paxlovid
Quercetin
Remdesivir
Thermotherapy
Vitamins⏵
More⏵

Supplementary Data — Camostat for COVID-19: real-time meta analysis of 16 studies

@CovidAnalysis, December 2024, Version 6V6
Post
Share
PDF
Studies
Feedback
https://c19early.org/cmmeta.html
 
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2+ Sagent P.. (DB RCT) -152% 2.52 [0.10-61.3] death 1/194 0/101 Improvement, RR [CI] Treatment Control Sagent P.. (DB RCT) 13% 0.87 [0.32-2.32] progression 10/194 6/101 Sagent P.. (DB RCT) 16% 0.84 [0.60-1.18] viral+ 58/194 36/101 COPS-2003 Parsonnet (DB RCT) -392% 4.92 [0.25-97.5] progression 2/25 0/24 COPS-2003 Parsonnet (DB RCT) 35% 0.65 [0.32-1.33] no recov. 25 (n) 24 (n) COPS-2003 Parsonnet (DB RCT) 86% 0.14 [0.01-2.58] misc. 0/25 3/24 COPS-2003 Parsonnet (DB RCT) 41% 0.59 [0.24-1.43] viral+ 25 (n) 24 (n) Chupp (DB RCT) 0% 1.00 [0.07-15.4] hosp. 1/35 1/35 Chupp (DB RCT) 37% 0.63 [0.36-1.09] no recov. 12/35 19/35 SPIKE-1 Dhaliwal (RCT) 14% 0.86 [0.17-4.45] hosp. 2/14 3/18 CANDLE Kinoshita (DB RCT) 67% 0.33 [0.01-8.05] progression 0/74 1/74 CANDLE Kinoshita (DB RCT) 50% 0.50 [0.16-1.59] oxygen 4/74 8/74 CANDLE Kinoshita (DB RCT) -1% 1.01 [0.72-1.42] no recov. 30/53 29/52 CANDLE Kinoshita (DB RCT) -1% 1.01 [0.71-1.67] viral+ 78 (n) 77 (n) Tobback (RCT) -36% 1.36 [0.15-12.6] hosp. 3/66 1/30 Tobback (RCT) 8% 0.92 [0.46-1.87] no recov. 61 (n) 29 (n) Kim (DB RCT) 8% 0.92 [0.70-1.19] no recov. 161 (n) 162 (n) Kim (DB RCT) 25% 0.75 [0.43-1.30] no recov. 109 (n) 104 (n) Kim (DB RCT) 46% 0.54 [0.28-1.03] no recov. 77 (n) 78 (n) Kim (DB RCT) 40% 0.60 [0.26-1.33] no recov. 109 (n) 104 (n) Kim (DB RCT) 58% 0.42 [0.17-1.03] no recov. 77 (n) 78 (n) DAWN Tare (DB RCT) 33% 0.67 [0.22-2.09] no recov. 4/19 5/16 DAWN Tare (DB RCT) 23% 0.77 [0.48-1.24] no recov. 11/19 12/16 Hofmann-Wi.. (ICU) 58% 0.42 [0.05-3.36] death 1/6 2/5 ICU patients OT​1​ Sakr (PSM) 69% 0.31 [0.15-0.60] death 6/61 18/61 Sakr (PSM) 10% 0.90 [0.39-2.06] ventilation 9/61 10/61 Sakr (PSM) -17% 1.17 [0.85-1.61] hosp. time 61 (n) 61 (n) CamoCO-19 Gunst (DB RCT) 18% 0.82 [0.24-2.79] death 8/137 4/68 CamoCO-19 Gunst (DB RCT) 31% 0.69 [0.14-3.44] ventilation 13/137 3/68 CamoCO-19 Gunst (DB RCT) 20% 0.80 [0.34-1.91] ICU 14/137 8/68 CamoCO-19 Gunst (DB RCT) 15% 0.85 [0.62-1.15] no recov. 137 (n) 68 (n) Terada (RCT) 54% 0.46 [0.04-4.92] death 1/61 2/56 CT​2​ Terada (RCT) 8% 0.92 [0.37-2.28] progression 8/61 8/56 CT​2​ Terada (RCT) 40% 0.60 [0.37-0.97] no disch. 61 (n) 56 (n) CT​2​ ACOVACT Karolyi (RCT) 72% 0.28 [0.06-1.33] death 2/101 7/100 OT​1​ ACOVACT Karolyi (RCT) 70% 0.30 [0.10-0.90] ventilation 4/101 13/100 OT​1​ ACOVACT Karolyi (RCT) 60% 0.40 [0.16-0.98] death/int. 6/101 15/100 OT​1​ ACOVACT Karolyi (RCT) 18% 0.82 [0.71-0.94] recov. time 101 (n) 100 (n) OT​1​ ACOVACT Karolyi (RCT) 8% 0.92 [0.86-0.99] recov. time 101 (n) 100 (n) OT​1​ ACOVACT Karolyi (RCT) 14% 0.86 [0.75-0.98] hosp. time 101 (n) 100 (n) OT​1​ ACTIV-2 Jilg (RCT) -198% 2.98 [0.12-72.4] death 1/109 0/107 ACTIV-2 Jilg (RCT) -18% 1.18 [0.37-3.74] hosp. 6/109 5/107 RECOVER Bryce (DB RCT) 25% 0.75 [0.18-3.18] death 3/50 4/50 Huh -14% 1.14 [0.31-4.18] cases case control Camostat COVID-19 outcomes c19early.org December 2024 ​1​ OT: comparison with other treatment​2​ CT: study uses combined treatment Favors camostat Favors control
Figure S1. All outcomes.
Loading..
Figure S2. Comparison of results for RCTs versus observational studies. For COVID-19 treatments, there is no significant difference between the results of RCTs and observational studies. Observational studies do not systematically over or underestimate efficacy. For high-cost treatments, there is a non-significant trend towards RCTs showing greater efficacy.
Please send us corrections, updates, or comments. c19early involves the extraction of 100,000+ 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. FLCCC and WCH provide treatment protocols.
  or use drag and drop   
Submit    
Post
Share
@CovidAnalysis
FAQ
Public domain CC0 1.0