Statistical Decision Properties of Imprecise Trials Assessing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Drugs.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
Researchers studying treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have reported findings of randomized trials comparing standard care with care augmented by experimental drugs. Many trials have small sample sizes, so estimates of treatment effects are imprecise. Hence, clinicians may find it difficult to decide when to treat patients with experimental drugs. A conventional practice when comparing standard care and an innovation is to choose the innovation only if the estimated treatment effect is positive and statistically significant. This practice defers to standard care as the status quo. We study treatment choice from the perspective of statistical decision theory, which considers treatment options symmetrically when assessing trial findings.Methods
We use the concept of near-optimality to evaluate criteria for treatment choice. This concept jointly considers the probability and magnitude of decision errors. An appealing criterion from this perspective is the empirical success rule, which chooses the treatment with the highest observed average patient outcome in the trial.Results
Considering the design of some COVID-19 trials, we show that the empirical success rule yields treatment choices that are much closer to optimal than those generated by prevailing decision criteria based on hypothesis tests.Conclusion
Using trial findings to make near-optimal treatment choices rather than perform hypothesis tests should improve clinical decision making.
SUBMITTER: Manski CF
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7942186 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The purpose of this study was to identify miRNAs that were dysregulated after the onset of COVID-19 and thus potentially be used for risk stratification (i.e., mortality). Therefore, we conducted a multi-center, retrospective longitudinal cohort study enrolling 142 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who presented to two Canadian hospitals from May 2020 – December 2020 along with a cohort of 27 SARS-CoV-2 patients with mild upper respiratory tract symptoms and 69 SARS-CoV-2-negative patients from the ICU. Blood was biobanked from SARS-CoV-2 positive patients in the emergency department (mild), ward (moderate) or intensive care unit (severe). Assessment of miRNA expression and co-regulatory network generation revealed significant transcriptome dyregulation in pateints with severe COVID-19 that was largely different from SARS-CoV-2 negative patients in the ICU.
2022-04-08 | GSE178246 | GEO
Project description:BackgroundSince the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many researchers in China have performed related clinical research. However, systematic reviews of the registered clinical trials are still lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of clinical trials for COVID-19 to summarize their characteristics.MethodsThis study is based on the PRISMA recommendations in the Cochrane handbook. The Chinese Clinical Registration Center and the ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched to identify registered clinical trials related to COVID-19. The retrieval inception date was February 9, 2020. Two researchers independently selected the literature based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias.ResultsA total of 75 registered clinical trials (63 interventional studies and 12 observational studies) for COVID-19 were identified. The majority of clinical trials were sponsored by Chinese hospitals. Only 11 trials have begun to recruit patients, and none of the registered clinical trials have been completed; 34 trials were early clinical exploratory trials or in the pre-experiment stage, 13 trials were phase III, and four trials were phase IV. The intervention methods included traditional Chinese medicine in 26 trials, Western medicine in 30 trials, and integrated traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine in 19 trials. The subjects were primarily non-critical adult patients (≥ 18 years old). The median sample size of the trials was 100 (IQR: 60-200), and the median length of the trial periods was 179 d (IQR: 94-366 d). The main outcomes were clinical observation and examinations. Overall, the methodological quality of both the interventional trials and observational studies was low.ConclusionsIntensive clinical trials on the treatment of COVID-19 using traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine are ongoing or will be performed in China. However, based on the uncertain methodological quality, small sample size, and long trial duration, we will not be able to obtain reliable, high-quality clinical evidence regarding the treatment of COVID-19 in the near future. Improving the quality of study design, prioritizing promising drugs, and using different designs and statistical methods are worth advocating and recommending for clinical trials of COVID-19 in the future.
| S-EPMC7338108 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Estimation of the effective reproduction number, R(t), of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in real-time is a continuing challenge. R(t) reflects the epidemic dynamics based on readily available illness onset data, and is useful for the planning and implementation of public health and social measures. In the present study, we proposed a method for computing the R(t) of COVID-19, and applied this method to the epidemic in Osaka prefecture from February to September 2020. We estimated R(t) as a function of the time of infection using the date of illness onset. The epidemic in Osaka came under control around 2 April during the first wave, and 26 July during the second wave. R(t) did not decline drastically following any single intervention. However, when multiple interventions were combined, the relative reductions in R(t) during the first and second waves were 70% and 51%, respectively. Although the second wave was brought under control without declaring a state of emergency, our model comparison indicated that relying on a single intervention would not be sufficient to reduce R(t) < 1. The outcome of the COVID-19 pandemic continues to rely on political leadership to swiftly design and implement combined interventions capable of broadly and appropriately reducing contacts.
| S-EPMC8003080 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Designing and producing an effective vaccine is the best possible way to reduce the burden and spread of a disease. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, many large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies invested a great deal of time and money in trying to control and combat the disease. In this regard, due to the urgent need, many vaccines are now available earlier than scheduled. Based on their manufacturing technology, the vaccines available for COVID-19 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SAR-CoV2)) infection can be classified into four platforms: RNA vaccines, adenovirus vector vaccines, subunit (protein-based) vaccines, and inactivated virus vaccines. Moreover, various drugs have been deemed to negatively affect the progression of the infection via various actions. However, adaptive variants of the SARS-CoV-2 genome can alter the pathogenic potential of the virus and increase the difficulty of both drug and vaccine development. In this review, along with drugs used in COVID-19 treatment, currently authorized COVID-19 vaccines as well as variants of the virus are described and evaluated, considering all platforms.
| S-EPMC9100302 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the role of procalcitonin (PCT) results in antibiotic decisions for COVID-19 patients at hospital presentation.Design, setting, and participantsMulticenter retrospective observational study of patients ≥18 years hospitalized due to COVID-19 at the Johns Hopkins Health system. Patients who were transferred from another facility with >24 hours stay and patients who died within 48 hours of hospitalization were excluded.MethodsElevated PCT values were determined based on each hospital's definition. Antibiotic therapy and PCT results were evaluated for patients with no evidence of bacterial community-acquired pneumonia (bCAP) and patients with confirmed, probable, or possible bCAP. The added value of PCT testing to clinical criteria in detecting bCAP was evaluated using receiving operating curve characteristics (ROC).ResultsOf 962 patients, 611 (64%) received a PCT test. ROC curves for clinical criteria and clinical criteria plus PCT test were similar (at 0.5 ng/mL and 0.25 ng/mL). By bCAP group, median initial PCT values were 0.58 ng/mL (interquartile range [IQR], 0.24-1.14), 0.23 ng/mL (IQR, 0.1-0.63), and 0.15 ng/mL (IQR, 0.09-0.35) for proven/probable, possible, and no bCAP groups, respectively. Among patients without bCAP, an elevated PCT level was associated with 1.8 additional days of CAP therapy (95% CI, 1.01-2.75; P < .01) compared to patients with a negative PCT result after adjusting for potential confounders. Duration of CAP therapy was similar between patients without a PCT test ordered and a low PCT level for no bCAP and possible bCAP groups.ConclusionsPCT results may be abnormal in COVID-19 patients without bCAP and may result in receipt of unnecessary antibiotics.
| S-EPMC8485015 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SUMMARYIn recent decades, several new diseases have emerged in different geographical areas, with pathogens including Ebola virus, Zika virus, Nipah virus, and coronaviruses (CoVs). Recently, a new type of viral infection emerged in Wuhan City, China, and initial genomic sequencing data of this virus do not match with previously sequenced CoVs, suggesting a novel CoV strain (2019-nCoV), which has now been termed severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is suspected to originate from an animal host (zoonotic origin) followed by human-to-human transmission, the possibility of other routes should not be ruled out. Compared to diseases caused by previously known human CoVs, COVID-19 shows less severe pathogenesis but higher transmission competence, as is evident from the continuously increasing number of confirmed cases globally. Compared to other emerging viruses, such as Ebola virus, avian H7N9, SARS-CoV, and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), SARS-CoV-2 has shown relatively low pathogenicity and moderate transmissibility. Codon usage studies suggest that this novel virus has been transferred from an animal source, such as bats. Early diagnosis by real-time PCR and next-generation sequencing has facilitated the identification of the pathogen at an early stage. Since no antiviral drug or vaccine exists to treat or prevent SARS-CoV-2, potential therapeutic strategies that are currently being evaluated predominantly stem from previous experience with treating SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and other emerging viral diseases. In this review, we address epidemiological, diagnostic, clinical, and therapeutic aspects, including perspectives of vaccines and preventive measures that have already been globally recommended to counter this pandemic virus.
| S-EPMC7405836 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo better inform clinical practice, we summarized the findings from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of antivirals for COVID-19.MethodsWe systematically searched for literature up to September 2020, and included English-language publications of RCTs among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. We conducted network meta-analysis combining results of both the direct and indirect comparisons of interventions. The efficacy outcomes were clinical progression, all-cause mortality, and viral clearance, and safety outcomes were diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting. We generated treatment rankings (best to worst) and summarized rank probabilities using rankogram.ResultsWe included 15 RCTs (14,418 patients) from 7,237 retrieved citations. There was no evidence for efficacy of the assessed antivirals compared with placebo/no treatment or with another antiviral for all efficacy outcomes. Lopinavir (400 mg)/ritonavir (100 mg) significantly increased diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting compared with placebo/no treatment and other antivirals, and was ranked worst for these outcomes, while triazavirin (250 mg), baloxavir marboxil (80 mg), and remdesivir (100 mg - 10 days) ranked best, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceThe available evidence does not support the use of any antiviral drugs for COVID-19. Cautious interpretations of the findings are, however, advised considering the paucity of the evidence. More RCTs are needed for a stronger evidence base.
| S-EPMC8477589 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Medicines for the treatment of 2019-novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infections are urgently needed. However, drug screening using live 2019-nCoV requires high-level biosafety facilities, which imposes an obstacle for those institutions without such facilities or 2019-nCoV. This study aims to repurpose the clinically approved drugs for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a 2019-nCoV-related coronavirus model. METHODS:A 2019-nCoV-related pangolin coronavirus GX_P2V/pangolin/2017/Guangxi was described. Whether GX_P2V uses angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) as the cell receptor was investigated by using small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated silencing of ACE2. The pangolin coronavirus model was used to identify drug candidates for treating 2019-nCoV infection. Two libraries of 2406 clinically approved drugs were screened for their ability to inhibit cytopathic effects on Vero E6 cells by GX_P2V infection. The anti-viral activities and anti-viral mechanisms of potential drugs were further investigated. Viral yields of RNAs and infectious particles were quantified by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and plaque assay, respectively. RESULTS:The spike protein of coronavirus GX_P2V shares 92.2% amino acid identity with that of 2019-nCoV isolate Wuhan-hu-1, and uses ACE2 as the receptor for infection just like 2019-nCoV. Three drugs, including cepharanthine (CEP), selamectin, and mefloquine hydrochloride, exhibited complete inhibition of cytopathic effects in cell culture at 10 ?mol/L. CEP demonstrated the most potent inhibition of GX_P2V infection, with a concentration for 50% of maximal effect [EC50] of 0.98 ?mol/L. The viral RNA yield in cells treated with 10 ?mol/L CEP was 15,393-fold lower than in cells without CEP treatment ([6.48?±?0.02]?×?10vs. 1.00?±?0.12, t?=?150.38, P?<?0.001) at 72 h post-infection (p.i.). Plaque assays found no production of live viruses in media containing 10 ?mol/L CEP at 48 h p.i. Furthermore, we found CEP had potent anti-viral activities against both viral entry (0.46?±?0.12, vs.1.00?±?0.37, t?=?2.42, P?<?0.05) and viral replication ([6.18?±?0.95]?×?10vs. 1.00?±?0.43, t?=?3.98, P?<?0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Our pangolin coronavirus GX_P2V is a workable model for 2019-nCoV research. CEP, selamectin, and mefloquine hydrochloride are potential drugs for treating 2019-nCoV infection. Our results strongly suggest that CEP is a wide-spectrum inhibitor of pan-betacoronavirus, and further study of CEP for treatment of 2019-nCoV infection is warranted.
| S-EPMC7147283 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIsolation of hospitalized persons under investigation (PUIs) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reduces nosocomial transmission risk. Efficient evaluation of PUIs is needed to preserve scarce healthcare resources. We describe the development, implementation, and outcomes of an inpatient diagnostic algorithm and clinical decision support system (CDSS) to evaluate PUIs.MethodsWe conducted a pre-post study of CORAL (COvid Risk cALculator), a CDSS that guides frontline clinicians through a risk-stratified COVID-19 diagnostic workup, removes transmission-based precautions when workup is complete and negative, and triages complex cases to infectious diseases (ID) physician review. Before CORAL, ID physicians reviewed all PUI records to guide workup and precautions. After CORAL, frontline clinicians evaluated PUIs directly using CORAL. We compared pre- and post-CORAL frequency of repeated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs), time from NAAT result to PUI status discontinuation, total duration of PUI status, and ID physician work hours, using linear and logistic regression, adjusted for COVID-19 incidence.ResultsFewer PUIs underwent repeated testing after an initial negative NAAT after CORAL than before CORAL (54% vs 67%, respectively; adjusted odd ratio, 0.53 [95% confidence interval, .44-.63]; P < .01). CORAL significantly reduced average time to PUI status discontinuation (adjusted difference [standard error], -7.4 [0.8] hours per patient), total duration of PUI status (-19.5 [1.9] hours per patient), and average ID physician work-hours (-57.4 [2.0] hours per day) (all P < .01). No patients had a positive NAAT result within 7 days after discontinuation of precautions via CORAL.ConclusionsCORAL is an efficient and effective CDSS to guide frontline clinicians through the diagnostic evaluation of PUIs and safe discontinuation of precautions.
| S-EPMC7929052 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The newly emerged 2019 novel coronavirus (CoV), named as severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV-2 (SARS-CoV-2), like SARS-CoV (now, SARS-CoV-1) and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV), has been associated with high infection rates with over 36,405 deaths. In the absence of approved marketed drugs against coronaviruses, the treatment and management of this novel CoV disease (COVID-19) worldwide is a challenge. Drug repurposing that has emerged as an effective drug discovery approach from earlier approved drugs could reduce the time and cost compared to de novo drug discovery. Direct virus-targeted antiviral agents target specific nucleic acid or proteins of the virus while host-based antivirals target either the host innate immune responses or the cellular machineries that are crucial for viral infection. Both the approaches necessarily interfere with viral pathogenesis. Here we summarize the present status of both virus-based and host-based drug repurposing perspectives for coronaviruses in general and the SARS-CoV-2 in particular.
| S-EPMC7357399 | biostudies-literature