Supplementary Data — Tixagevimab/cilgavimab reduced COVID-19 risk: real-time meta analysis of 19 studies

@CovidAnalysis, November 2025, Version 32V32
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2+ TACKLE Montgom.. (DB RCT) 0% 1.00 [0.32-3.07] death 6/452 6/451 Improvement, RR [CI] Treatment Control TACKLE Montgom.. (DB RCT) 50% 0.50 [0.13-1.98] death 3/452 6/451 TACKLE Montgom.. (DB RCT) 50% 0.50 [0.29-0.86] severe case 18/407 37/415 TACKLE Montgom.. (DB RCT) 57% 0.43 [0.25-0.75] hosp. 17/413 40/421 Lombardi -368% 4.68 [0.31-71.6] death 1/19 1/89 Immunocompromised OT​1​ Lombardi 33% 0.67 [0.09-5.13] hosp. 1/19 7/89 Immunocompromised OT​1​ Lombardi -24% 1.24 [0.90-1.70] viral+ 14/19 53/89 Immunocompromised OT​1​ ACTIV-3/TICO Holland (DB RCT) 23% 0.77 [0.57-1.03] death 80/710 101/707 ACTIV-3/TICO Holland (DB RCT) 30% 0.70 [0.50-0.97] death 61/710 86/707 ACTIV-3/TICO Holland (DB RCT) 3% 0.97 [0.80-1.17] death/hosp. 212/710 213/707 ACTIV-3/TICO Holland (DB RCT) 7% 0.93 [0.83-1.03] no recov. 710 (n) 707 (n) DisCoVeRy Hites (DB RCT) 40% 0.60 [0.28-1.23] death 12/123 16/103 DisCoVeRy Hites (DB RCT) -18% 1.18 [0.73-1.92] 7-point status 123 (n) 103 (n) DisCoVeRy Hites (DB RCT) 1% 0.99 [0.75-1.30] recov. time 123 (n) 103 (n) DisCoVeRy Hites (DB RCT) 9% 0.91 [0.70-1.19] no disch. 123 (n) 103 (n) Chua (PSM) -50% 1.50 [0.28-8.04] ventilation 2/83 4/249 Chua (PSM) 8% 0.92 [0.31-2.75] ICU 4/83 13/249 Chua (PSM) 33% 0.67 [0.39-1.16] oxygen 13/83 58/249 STORM CHASER Levin (DB RCT) 42% 0.58 [0.34-1.00] symp. case 27/749 23/372 STORM CHASER Levin (DB RCT) 33% 0.67 [0.36-1.24] symp. case 23/749 17/372 PROVENT Levin (DB RCT) 86% 0.14 [0.01-2.98] death 0/3,441 2/1,731 PROVENT Levin (DB RCT) 82% 0.18 [0.09-0.35] symp. case 11/3,441 31/1,731 PROVENT Levin (DB RCT) 76% 0.24 [0.10-0.55] symp. case 8/3,441 17/1,731 Young-Xu (PSM) 64% 0.36 [0.18-0.73] death 1,733 (n) 6,354 (n) Immunocompromised Young-Xu (PSM) 69% 0.31 [0.18-0.53] cases/death/hosp. 17/1,733 206/6,354 Immunocompromised Young-Xu (PSM) 87% 0.13 [0.02-0.99] hosp. 1,733 (n) 6,354 (n) Immunocompromised Young-Xu (PSM) 66% 0.34 [0.13-0.87] cases 1,733 (n) 6,354 (n) Immunocompromised Ollila 76% 0.24 [0.01-5.61] death 0/25 1/12 Immunocompromised Ollila 90% 0.10 [0.01-0.78] cases 0/25 3/12 Immunocompromised Kertes 92% 0.08 [0.01-0.54] death/hosp. 1/825 63/4,299 Immunocompromised Kertes 47% 0.53 [0.32-0.85] cases 29/825 308/4,299 Immunocompromised Najjar-Debbiny 59% 0.41 [0.19-0.89] hosp. 72/703 377/2,812 Immunocompromised Najjar-Debbiny 25% 0.75 [0.58-0.96] cases 72/703 377/2,812 Immunocompromised Kaminski 92% 0.08 [0.01-1.16] death 1/333 2/97 Immunocompromised Kaminski 96% 0.04 [0.01-0.24] ICU 2/333 6/97 Immunocompromised Kaminski 95% 0.05 [0.01-0.16] hosp. 4/333 11/97 Immunocompromised Kaminski 99% 0.01 [0.06-0.20] symp. case 41/333 42/97 Immunocompromised Al Jurdi 86% 0.14 [0.01-2.75] death 0/222 3/222 Immunocompromised Al Jurdi 83% 0.17 [0.02-1.37] hosp. 1/222 6/222 Immunocompromised Al Jurdi 66% 0.34 [0.18-0.66] cases 11/222 32/222 Immunocompromised Sindu (PSM) -1% 1.01 [0.14-7.21] death 2/17 2/17 Immunocompromised Sindu (PSM) -96% 1.96 [0.18-21.6] ventilation n/a n/a Immunocompromised Sindu (PSM) -210% 3.10 [0.32-29.8] ICU n/a n/a Immunocompromised Sindu (PSM) 53% 0.47 [0.16-1.40] hosp. n/a n/a Immunocompromised Sindu 29% 0.71 [0.46-1.11] symp. case 24/203 57/343 Immunocompromised Din 19% 0.81 [0.32-2.04] hosp. 5/23 11/41 Immunocompromised Desai 12% 0.88 [0.33-2.35] hosp. 391 (n) 391 (n) Desai -35% 1.35 [0.87-2.10] cases 391 (n) 391 (n) Solera 26% 0.74 [0.32-1.60] severe case 7/156 283/1,819 Bes-Berlandier -10% 1.10 [0.37-3.31] progression 3/14 15/77 Dluzynski -70% 1.70 [0.93-3.12] cases 70/471 11/126 Immunocompromised Tixagevimab/cilgavimab COVID-19 outcomes c19early.org November 2025 ​1​ OT: comparison with other treatment Favors tixagevimab/ci.. Favors control
Fig. S1. All outcomes.
Loading..
Fig. 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.