Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It was urgent and necessary to synthesize the evidence for vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide a comprehensive overview of the effectiveness profile of COVID-19 vaccines against VOC. METHODS: Published randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case-control studies that evaluated the VE against VOC (Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, or Omicron) were searched until 4 March 2022. Pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis. VE was defined as (1-estimate). RESULTS: Eleven RCTs (161,388 participants), 20 cohort studies (52,782,321 participants), and 26 case-control studies (2,584,732 cases) were included. Eleven COVID-19 vaccines (mRNA-1273, BNT162b2, ChAdOx1, Ad26.COV2.S, NVX-CoV2373, BBV152, CoronaVac, BBIBP-CorV, SCB-2019, CVnCoV, and HB02) were included in this analysis. Full vaccination was effective against Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, and Omicron variants, with VE of 88.0% (95% CI, 83.0-91.5), 73.0% (95% CI, 64.3-79.5), 63.0% (95% CI, 47.9-73.7), 77.8% (95% CI, 72.7-82.0), and 55.9% (95% CI, 40.9-67.0), respectively. Booster vaccination was more effective against Delta and Omicron variants, with VE of 95.5% (95% CI, 94.2-96.5) and 80.8% (95% CI, 58.6-91.1), respectively. mRNA vaccines (mRNA-1273/BNT162b2) seemed to have higher VE against VOC over others; significant interactions (pinteraction < 0.10) were observed between VE and vaccine type (mRNA vaccines vs. not mRNA vaccines). CONCLUSIONS: Full vaccination of COVID-19 vaccines is highly effective against Alpha variant, and moderate effective against Beta, Gamma, and Delta variants. Booster vaccination is more effective against Delta and Omicron variants. mRNA vaccines seem to have higher VE against Alpha, Beta, Gamma, and Delta variants over others.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of 32 pharmacological interventions recommended by guidelines for coronavirus disease 2019: a systematic review and network meta-analysis combining 66 trials.

BACKGROUND: The global pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a major public health problem and presents an unprecedented challenge. However, no specific drugs were currently proven. This study aimed to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)/SARS-CoV. Random-effects network meta-analysis within the Bayesian framework was performed, followed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system assessing the quality of evidence. The primary outcome of interest includes mortality, cure, viral negative conversion, and overall adverse events (OAEs). Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated as the measure of effect size. RESULTS: Sixty-six RCTs with 19,095 patients were included, involving standard of care (SOC), eight different antiviral agents, six different antibiotics, high and low dose chloroquine (CQ_HD, CQ_LD), traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), corticosteroids (COR), and other treatments. Compared with SOC, a significant reduction of mortality was observed for TCM (OR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.20-0.56, moderate quality) and COR (OR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.75-0.96, low quality) with improved cure rate (OR = 2.16, 95% CI: 1.60-2.91, low quality for TCM; OR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.05-1.30, low quality for COR). However, an increased risk of mortality was found for CQ_HD vs. SOC (OR = 3.20, 95% CI: 1.18-8.73, low quality). TCM was associated with decreased risk of OAE (OR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.38-0.70, very low quality) but CQ_HD (OR = 2.51, 95% CI: 1.20-5.24) and interferons (IFN) (OR = 2.69, 95% CI: 1.02-7.08) vs. SOC with very low quality were associated with an increased risk. CONCLUSIONS: COR and TCM may reduce mortality and increase cure rate with no increased risk of OAEs compared with standard care. CQ_HD might increase the risk of mortality. CQ, IFN, and other antiviral agents could increase the risk of OAEs. The current evidence is generally uncertain with low-quality and further high-quality trials are needed.

An analytical study of drug utilization, disease progression, and adverse events among 165 COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic has lasted for nearly 4 months by this study was conducted. We aimed to describe drug utilization, disease progression, and adverse drug events of COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective, single-center case series study enrolled 165 consecutive hospitalized COVID-19 patients who were followed up until March 25, 2020, from a designated hospital in Wuhan. Patients were grouped by a baseline degree of severity: non-severe and severe. An analytical study of drug utilization, disease progression, and adverse events (AEs) of COVID-19 was conducted. RESULTS: Of the 165 COVID-19 cases, antivirals, antibacterials, glucocorticoids, and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) were administered to 92.7%, 98.8%, 68.5%, and 55.2% of patients, respectively. The total kinds of drugs administered to the severe subgroup [26, interquartile range (IQR) 18-39] were 11 more than the non-severe subgroup (15, IQR 10-24), regardless of comorbidities. The 2 most common combinations of medications in the 165 cases were 'antiviral therapy + glucocorticoids + TCM' (81, 49.1%) and 'antiviral therapy + glucocorticoids' (23, 13.9%). Compared with non-severe cases, severe cases received more glucocorticoids (88.5% vs. 66.2%, P=0.02), but less TCM (50.0% vs. 63.3%, P=0.20), and suffered a higher percentage of death (34.6% vs. 7.2%, P=0.001). At the end of the follow-up, 130 (78.8%) patients had been discharged, and 24 (14.5%) died. There were 13 patients (7.9%) who had elevated liver enzymes, and 49 patients (29.7%) presented with worsening kidney function during the follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 165 COVID-19 patients, the fatality rate remained high (14.5%). Drug utilization for COVID-19 was diverse and generally complied with the existing guidelines. Combination regimens containing antiviral drugs might be beneficial to assist COVID-19 recovery. Additionally, liver and kidney AEs should not be ignored.