IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/drugsa/v43y2020i7d10.1007_s40264-020-00952-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Remdesivir in Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Benefit–Risk Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Miranda Davies

    (Drug Safety Research Unit
    University of Portsmouth)

  • Vicki Osborne

    (Drug Safety Research Unit
    University of Portsmouth)

  • Samantha Lane

    (Drug Safety Research Unit
    University of Portsmouth)

  • Debabrata Roy

    (Drug Safety Research Unit
    University of Portsmouth)

  • Sandeep Dhanda

    (Drug Safety Research Unit
    University of Portsmouth)

  • Alison Evans

    (Drug Safety Research Unit
    University of Portsmouth)

  • Saad Shakir

    (Drug Safety Research Unit
    University of Portsmouth)

Abstract

Introduction There is a need to identify effective, safe treatments for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease) rapidly, given the current, ongoing pandemic. A systematic benefit–risk assessment was designed and conducted to examine the benefit–risk profile of remdesivir in COVID-19 patients compared with standard of care, placebo or other treatments. A key objective of this study was to provide a platform for a dynamic systematic benefit–risk evaluation, which starts with inevitably limited information (to meet the urgent unmet public health need worldwide), then update the benefit–risk evaluation as more data become available. Methods The Benefit–Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework was used to assess the overall benefit–risk of the use of remdesivir as a treatment for COVID-19 compared with standard of care, placebo or other treatments. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar and government agency websites to identify literature reporting clinical outcomes in patients taking remdesivir for COVID-19. A value tree was constructed and key benefits and risks were ranked by two clinicians in order of considered importance. Results Using the BRAT method, several key benefits and risks for use of remdesivir in COVID-19 compared with placebo have been identified. In one trial, the benefit of time to clinical improvement was not statistically significant (21 vs 23 days, HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.87–1.75), although the study was underpowered. In another trial, a shorter time to recovery in patients treated with remdesivir was observed (11 vs 15 days), with non-significant reduced mortality risk (8% vs 12%). Risk data were only available from one trial. This trial reported fewer serious adverse events in patients taking remdesivir (18%) compared with the placebo group (26%); however, more patients in the remdesivir group discontinued treatment as a result of an adverse event compared with those patients receiving placebo (12% vs 5%). Conclusions Preliminary clinical trial results suggest that there may be a favourable benefit–risk profile for remdesivir compared with placebo in severe COVID-19 infection and further data on benefits would strengthen this evaluation. There is limited safety data for remdesivir, which should be obtained in further studies. The current framework summarises the key anticipated benefits and risks for which further data are needed. Ongoing clinical trial data can be incorporated into the framework when available to provide an updated benefit–risk assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Miranda Davies & Vicki Osborne & Samantha Lane & Debabrata Roy & Sandeep Dhanda & Alison Evans & Saad Shakir, 2020. "Remdesivir in Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Benefit–Risk Assessment," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 43(7), pages 645-656, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:43:y:2020:i:7:d:10.1007_s40264-020-00952-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s40264-020-00952-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-020-00952-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40264-020-00952-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vicki Osborne & Miranda Davies & Samantha Lane & Alison Evans & Jacqueline Denyer & Sandeep Dhanda & Debabrata Roy & Saad Shakir, 2020. "Lopinavir-Ritonavir in the Treatment of COVID-19: A Dynamic Systematic Benefit-Risk Assessment," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 43(8), pages 809-821, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:43:y:2020:i:7:d:10.1007_s40264-020-00952-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40264 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.