The efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir and arbidol in patients with coronavirus disease 2019

Wen et al., Zhonghua Nei Ke Za Zhi, doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn112138-20200227-00147, Aug 2020
Late treatmentRetrospective · 117 patients · China · Jan – Feb 2020
Lopinavir/r.. for COVID-19
Wen et al. Zhonghua Nei Ke Za Zhi · August 2020
Outcome
Improvement
Relative Risk · 95% CI
Severe case
-4%1.04 · 0.22–4.92
Time to viral clearance
-21%1.21 · 1.05–1.39
00.511.52+
← Lopinavir/
ritonavir
reduces riskLopinavir/ritonavir
increases risk →
Slower viral clearance with lopinavir/ritonavir
p = 0.0076
Retrospective 178 hospitalized COVID-19 patients in China
Standard of Care (SOC) for COVID-19 in the study country, China, is average with moderate efficacy for approved treatments1.
Important missing comments or errors? Let us know.
risk of severe case, 3.6% higher, RR 1.04, p = 1.00, treatment 3 of 56 (5.4%), control 3 of 58 (5.2%).
time to viral-, 20.9% higher, relative time 1.21, p = 0.008, treatment mean 10.2 (±3.49) n=59, control mean 8.44 (±3.51) n=58.
Effect extraction follows pre-specified rules prioritizing more serious outcomes. Submit updates
Wen et al., 1 Aug 2020, retrospective, China, peer-reviewed, 11 authors, study period 20 January, 2020 - 10 February, 2020.
$0 $500 $1,000+ Efficacy vs. cost for COVID-19 treatment protocols c19early.org October 2026 China Angola Colombia Kenya Mozambique Myanmar South Africa Peru Philippines USA Brazil France Italy Canada Pakistan Spain Vietnam Japan Nepal Iran Bangladesh Ethiopia Ghana Germany Mexico South Korea United Kingdom Saudi Arabia Algeria Morocco Yemen Poland Thailand Uganda Egypt Nigeria Taiwan Fiji Zambia Bosnia-Herzegovina Dominican Republic Bolivia Côte d'Ivoire Eritrea Togo Bulgaria Greece Slovakia Iceland New Zealand Trinidad and Tobago Mongolia Czechia Belarus Israel Haiti North Macedonia Hong Kong Qatar Panama Serbia Benin Burundi Cameroon CAR China favored low-cost treatments.The average efficacy of treatments was moderate.Low-cost treatments improve early treatment, andprovide 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 October 2026 China Angola Colombia Kenya Mozambique Myanmar South Africa Peru Philippines USA Brazil France Italy Canada Pakistan Spain Vietnam Japan Iran Bangladesh Ethiopia Ghana Germany Mexico South Korea United Kingdom Saudi Arabia Algeria Morocco Yemen Poland Thailand Uganda Egypt Nigeria Taiwan Fiji Zambia Dominican Rep. Bolivia Côte d'Ivoire Eritrea Togo Sri Lanka Bulgaria Greece Slovakia New Zealand Trinidad and Tobago Mongolia Czechia Belarus Israel North Macedonia Hong Kong Qatar Panama Serbia Benin Burundi CAR Syria China favored low-cost treatments.The average efficacy was moderate.Low-cost protocols improve early treatment,and add complementary/synergistic benefits. More effective More expensive 75% 50% 25% ≤0%
Late treatment
is less effective
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    
Post
Share
@CovidAnalysis
FAQ
Public domain CC0 1.0