Post by Nadica (She/Her) on Sept 2, 2024 21:38:44 GMT
Azvudine versus paxlovid for oral treatment of COVID-19 in Chinese patients - Published Jan 3, 2024
Abstract
Purpose
To explore the effect of azvudine as compared to paxlovid for oral treatment of hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Methods
We analyzed data from a cohort of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection in Shandong provincial hospital between February 15 and March 15, 2023. The primary outcome was time to sustained clinical recovery through Day 28 and secondary outcomes included the percentage of participants who died from any cause by Day 28, the average hospitilization time and expenses, the changes in liver and kidney function and adverse events. The Kaplan–Meier method and Cox regression model was used for statistical analysis.
Results
There was no significant difference between azvudine and paxlovid in terms of time to sustained clinical recovery (p = 0.429) and death rates (p = 0.687). As for hospitalization time and fee, no significant differences were observed between azvudine group and paxlovid group (Hospitalization time: p = 0.633; Hospitalization fee: p = 0.820). In addition, there were no significant differences in the effects of the two drugs on liver and kidney function (p > 0.05).
Conclusion
Among adults who were hospitalised with SARS-CoV-2 infection, azvudine was noninferior to paxlovid in terms of time to sustained clinical recovery, death rates, hospitalization time and cost, with few safety concerns.
Abstract
Purpose
To explore the effect of azvudine as compared to paxlovid for oral treatment of hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Methods
We analyzed data from a cohort of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection in Shandong provincial hospital between February 15 and March 15, 2023. The primary outcome was time to sustained clinical recovery through Day 28 and secondary outcomes included the percentage of participants who died from any cause by Day 28, the average hospitilization time and expenses, the changes in liver and kidney function and adverse events. The Kaplan–Meier method and Cox regression model was used for statistical analysis.
Results
There was no significant difference between azvudine and paxlovid in terms of time to sustained clinical recovery (p = 0.429) and death rates (p = 0.687). As for hospitalization time and fee, no significant differences were observed between azvudine group and paxlovid group (Hospitalization time: p = 0.633; Hospitalization fee: p = 0.820). In addition, there were no significant differences in the effects of the two drugs on liver and kidney function (p > 0.05).
Conclusion
Among adults who were hospitalised with SARS-CoV-2 infection, azvudine was noninferior to paxlovid in terms of time to sustained clinical recovery, death rates, hospitalization time and cost, with few safety concerns.