Top
Main
 
All Outcomes
 
RCT vs. Obs.
 
Feedback
Home
c19early.org COVID-19 treatment researchSotrovimabSotrovimab (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

Loading...
More

Supplementary Data — Sotrovimab for COVID-19: real-time meta analysis of 25 studies

@CovidAnalysis, October 2024, Version 43V43
 
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2+ COMET-ICE Gupta (DB RCT) 80% 0.20 [0.01-4.16] death 0/528 2/529 Improvement, RR [CI] Treatment Control COMET-ICE Gupta (DB RCT) 89% 0.11 [0.01-2.06] ventilation 0/528 4/529 COMET-ICE Gupta (DB RCT) 75% 0.25 [0.11-0.57] progression 7/528 28/529 COMET-ICE Gupta (DB RCT) 79% 0.21 [0.09-0.50] death/hosp. 6/528 30/529 Ong 61% 0.39 [0.05-2.90] death 1/19 10/75 Ong 56% 0.44 [0.11-1.73] ICU 2/19 18/75 Ong 59% 0.41 [0.17-0.99] progression 19 (n) 75 (n) Aggarwal (PSM) 89% 0.11 [0.00-0.79] death 0/522 15/1,563 Aggarwal (PSM) 62% 0.38 [0.20-0.67] hosp. 11/522 89/1,563 Aggarwal (PSM) -11% 1.11 [0.78-1.53] progression 44/522 119/1,563 Zaqout -165% 2.65 [0.60-11.3] progression 4/345 3/583 Aggarwal 38% 0.62 [0.07-2.77] death 1/1,542 7/3,663 Aggarwal 18% 0.82 [0.56-1.18] hosp. 39/1,542 116/3,663 Aggarwal -3% 1.03 [0.80-1.29] progression 93/1,542 224/3,663 Piccicacco 66% 0.34 [0.01-8.13] death 0/88 1/90 Piccicacco 35% 0.65 [0.26-1.60] hosp. 7/88 11/90 Piccicacco 66% 0.34 [0.14-0.76] hosp./ER 7/88 21/90 Piccicacco 90% 0.10 [0.01-0.78] progression 1/88 10/90 Kneidinger -20% 1.20 [0.64-2.27] severe case 21/125 13/93 Suzuki -8% 1.08 [0.69-1.70] progression 672 (n) 1,257 (n) Brown -258% 3.58 [0.73-17.5] hosp. 6/186 2/222 Zheng 50% 0.50 [0.31-0.81] death/hosp. 34/3,331 61/2,689 OT​1 Zheng 46% 0.54 [0.33-0.88] death/hosp. 32/3,331 55/2,689 OT​1 Zheng (PSW) 4% 0.96 [0.52-1.79] death/hosp. 2,847 (n) 4,836 (n) OT​1 Zheng (PSW) -14% 1.14 [0.58-2.22] death/hosp. 19/2,847 33/4,836 OT​1 Evans 27% 0.73 [0.55-0.98] death/hosp. 1,079 (n) 4,973 (n) Goodwin 75% 0.25 [0.01-5.17] death 0/169 2/336 Goodwin 60% 0.40 [0.09-1.79] hosp. 2/169 10/336 Goodwin -21% 1.21 [0.59-2.51] hosp. 11/169 18/336 Kip 30% 0.70 [0.43-1.12] death/hosp. 22/500 63/999 Tazare 16% 0.84 [0.75-0.93] death/hosp. Miyashita 60% 0.40 [0.08-2.06] ventilation 2/844 5/844 Miyashita 33% 0.67 [0.11-3.98] ventilation 2/642 3/642 Miyashita 80% 0.20 [0.01-4.14] ventilation 0/202 2/202 Miyashita 55% 0.45 [0.30-0.66] oxygen 34/844 76/844 Miyashita 54% 0.46 [0.30-0.73] oxygen 26/642 56/642 Miyashita 60% 0.40 [0.18-0.89] oxygen 8/202 20/202 Drysdale (PSW) 29% 0.71 [0.16-3.20] death 599 (n) 5,191 (n) Drysdale (PSW) 50% 0.50 [0.24-1.06] death/hosp. 599 (n) 5,191 (n) Drysdale (PSW) 57% 0.43 [0.18-1.00] hosp. 599 (n) 5,191 (n) De Vito 81% 0.19 [0.07-0.47] death 18/341 63/348 De Vito 92% 0.08 [0.03-0.17] oxygen 17/341 144/348 Behzad 74% 0.26 [0.11-0.59] death/ICU 569 (n) 611 (n) Bell (PSW) 24% 0.76 [0.66-0.88] death/hosp. population-based cohort Bell (PSW) 21% 0.79 [0.68-0.90] hosp. population-based cohort Farmer (PSM) -20% 1.20 [0.91-1.58] death/hosp. 1,603 (n) 6,299 (n) Bell (PSM) 50% 0.50 [0.19-1.33] death 5/854 20/1,708 Bell (PSM) 12% 0.88 [0.53-1.45] death/hosp. 21/854 48/1,708 Bell (PSM) 74% 0.26 [0.09-0.73] ICU 4/854 31/1,708 Bell (PSM) 59% 0.41 [0.28-0.60] oxygen 30/854 148/1,708 Bell (PSM) -20% 1.20 [0.67-2.14] hosp. 18/854 30/1,708 Maria (PSW) 72% 0.28 [0.04-1.42] death 39 (n) 42 (n) Maria (PSW) 77% 0.23 [0.05-0.83] progression 39 (n) 42 (n) TICO Self (DB RCT) -2% 1.02 [0.48-2.17] death 14/182 13/178 TICO Self (DB RCT) 11% 0.89 [0.73-1.10] no recov. 22/182 27/178 TICO Self (DB RCT) 7% 0.93 [0.63-1.35] no recov. 181 (n) 178 (n) Woo (PSM) -140% 2.40 [0.78-7.41] death 4/60 10/360 Woo (PSM) -50% 1.50 [0.98-2.29] death 36/87 24/87 Sotrovimab COVID-19 outcomes c19early.org October 2024 1 OT: comparison with other treatment Favors sotrovimab 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