METHODS: A systematic literature search with no language restriction was performed in electronic databases and preprint repositories to identify eligible studies published up to 29 June 2021. The outcomes of interest were hospital admission and all-cause mortality. A random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled odds ratio (OR) for outcomes of interest with the use of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies relative to nonuse of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies, at 95% confidence intervals (CI).
RESULTS: Our systematic literature search identified nine randomized controlled trials. Three trials had an overall low risk of bias, while four trials had some concerns in the overall risk of bias. The meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in the odds of mortality (pooled OR = 0.69; 95% CI 0.33-1.47), but a statistically significant reduction in the odds of hospital admission (pooled OR = 0.29; 95% CI 0.21-0.42), with the administration of a neutralizing monoclonal antibody among patients with COVID-19, relative to non-administration of a neutralizing monoclonal antibody, at the current sample size.
CONCLUSION: The reduced risk of hospital admission with neutralizing monoclonal antibodies use suggests that the timing of neutralizing antibodies administration is key in preventing hospital admission and, ultimately, death. Future randomized trials should aim to determine if the clinical outcomes with neutralizing monoclonal antibodies differ based on serostatus.
METHODS: A pilot study was conducted in four primary healthcare (PHC) centers in Malaysia. The model's key features included on-site HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA) testing using a shared GeneXpert® system; noninvasive biomarkers for cirrhosis diagnosis; and extended care to PWID referred from nearby PHC centers and outreach programs. The feasibility assessment focused on three aspects of the model: demand (i.e., uptake of HCV RNA testing and treatment), implementation (i.e., achievement of each step in the HCV care cascade), and practicality (i.e., ability to identify PWID with HCV and expedite treatment initiation despite resource constraints).
RESULTS: A total of 199 anti-HCV-positive PWID were recruited. They demonstrated high demand for HCV care, with a 100% uptake of HCV RNA testing and 97.4% uptake of direct-acting antiviral treatment. The rates of HCV RNA positivity (78.4%) and sustained virologic response (92.2%) were comparable to standard practice, indicating the successful implementation of the model. The model was also practical, as it covered non-opioid-substitution-therapy-receiving individuals and enabled same-day treatment in 71.1% of the participants.
CONCLUSIONS: The modified same-day test-and-treat model is feasible in improving HCV care for rural PWID. The study finding suggests its potential for wider adoption in HCV care for hard-to-reach populations.
METHODS: This study aimed to conduct a 5-year budget impact analysis of the proposed stratified treatment cascade for HCV treatment in Malaysia. A disease progression model that was developed based on model-predicted HCV epidemiology data was used for the analysis, where all HCV patients in scenario A were treated with SOF/DAC for all disease stages while in scenario B, SOF/DAC was used only for non-cirrhotic patients and SOF/VEL was used for the cirrhotic patients. Healthcare costs associated with DAA therapy and disease stage monitoring were included to estimate the downstream cost implications.
RESULTS: The stratified treatment cascade with 109 in Scenario B was found to be cost-saving compared to Scenario A. The cumulative savings for the stratified treatment cascade was USD 1.4 million over 5 years.
DISCUSSION: A stratified treatment cascade with SOF/VEL was expected to be cost-saving and can result in a budget impact reduction in overall healthcare expenditure in Malaysia.
AREAS COVERED: A literature search was performed using PubMed between December 1, 2019-June 23, 2020. This review highlights the current state of knowledge on the viral replication and pathogenicity, diagnostic and therapeutic strategies, and management of COVID-19. This review will be of interest to scientists and clinicians and make a significant contribution toward development of vaccines and targeted therapies to contain the pandemic.
EXPERT OPINION: The exit strategy for a path back to normal life is required, which should involve a multi-prong effort toward development of new treatment and a successful vaccine to protect public health worldwide and prevent future COVID-19 outbreaks. Therefore, the bench to bedside translational research as well as reverse translational works focusing bedside to bench is very important and would provide the foundation for the development of targeted drugs and vaccines for COVID-19 infections.
METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, and medRxiv (preprint repository) databases (up to 7 January 2021). Pooled effect sizes with 95% confidence interval (CI) were generated using random-effects and inverse variance heterogeneity models. The risk of bias of the included RCTs was appraised using version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials.
RESULTS: Six RCTs were included: two trials with an overall low risk of bias and four trials had some concerns regarding the overall risk of bias. Our meta-analysis did not find significant mortality benefits with the use of tocilizumab among patients with COVID-19 relative to non-use of tocilizumab (pooled hazard ratio = 0.83; 95% CI 0.66-1.05, n = 2,057). Interestingly, the estimated effect of tocilizumab on the composite endpoint of requirement for mechanical ventilation and/or all-cause mortality indicated clinical benefits, with some evidence against our model hypothesis of no significant effect at the current sample size (pooled hazard ratio = 0.62; 95% CI 0.42-0.91, n = 749).
CONCLUSION: Despite no clear mortality benefits in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, tocilizumab appears to reduce the likelihood of progression to mechanical ventilation.