Systematic Review of the Registered Clinical Trials of Coronavirus Diseases 2019 (COVID-19)
===========================================================================================

* Rui-fang Zhu
* Yu-lu Gao
* Sue-Ho Robert
* Jin-ping Gao
* Shi-gui Yang
* Chang-tai Zhu

## Abstract

**Background** Since the outbreak of coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19), many researchers in China have immediately carried out clinical research scheme of the COVID-19. But, there is still a lack of systematic review of registered clinical trials. Therefore, we made the first systematic review of the clinical trials of COVID-19 in order to provide evidence for the control of the COVID-19.

**Methods** The database from the Chinese Clinical Registration Center and the [ClinicalTrials.gov](http://ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched to collect the registered clinical trials of COVID-19. The retrieval inception date is February 9, 2020. Two evaluators independently selected literature, extracted data and evaluated the risk of bias. This study is based on the recommendations of PRISMA in Cochrane handbook.

**Results** A total of 75 COVID-19 registered clinical trials (63 interventional studies and 12 observational studies) were obtained. 97.3% of clinical trials were initiated by Chinese organizations. Only 11 trials have begun to recruit patients, and all registered clinical trials have not been completed. Most of the trials are early clinical exploratory trials or in pre-experiment stage (only two trials of Remdesivir in III stage), and the sample size of subjects recruited is small. The main intervention methods include traditional Chinese medicine treatment, western medicine treatment and integrated Chinese and Western medicine treatment. The subjects were mainly non severe adult patients (≥ 18 years old). The main outcomes were clinical observation and examination. The duration of most trials was more than 5 months, and the median of the intervention study was 180 d (95% CI: 146.3 - 328.9 d); the median of the observation period was 334 d (95% CI: 166.6 - 363.4 d). Overall, both the methodology quality of intervention register trials and observational trials are low.

**Conclusions** Disorderly and intensive clinical trials of COVID-19 using traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine are ongoing or will be carried out in China. However, based on the poor quality and small sample size and long completion period, we will not be able to obtain reliable, high-quality clinical evidence about COVID-19 treatment for quite a long time in the future. Improving the quality of study design, prioritizing promising drugs, and using different designs and statistical methods are worth advocating and recommending for the clinical trials of COVID-19 in China.

Keywords
*   COVID-19
*   2019-nCoV
*   new coronavirus pneumonia
*   registered clinical trial
*   intervention trial
*   observational trial
*   systematic review

As an emerging infectious diseases, coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) seriously threatens human health 1-3. In December 2019, the initial outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan city, Hubei province of China, was suspected to be related to the seafood market, while the host of novel coronavirus was suspected to be the chrysanthemum head bat 4-7. Patients with COVID-19 will have different respiratory tract infection symptoms, such as fever, cough, pneumonia, and even death 8-9. It is estimated that the death rate of the virus disease is about 2% - 4% according to a recent survey 8, 10. By Feb 30, 2020, more than 80,000 people have been infected around the world, most of them are in China (Figure 1). At present, there are different numbers of infected people in all provinces of China, and Hubei province is the most serious regions (Figure 2), and the signs of infection outbreak are obvious. In addition, more than 40 countries around the world have also seen new cases of COVID-19 11-15. As a result, the COVID-19 brings great challenges to public health in the world 10, 16.

![Figure 1](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/F1.medium.gif)

[Figure 1](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/F1)

Figure 1 
Polyline chart of the prevalence trend of COVID-19 in China in 2020.

Note: The data are from the official website of the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China, [http://www.nhc.gov.cn/xcs/xxgzbd/gzbd\_index.shtml](http://www.nhc.gov.cn/xcs/xxgzbd/gzbd_index.shtml).

![Figure 2](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/F2.medium.gif)

[Figure 2](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/F2)

Figure 2 
Polyline chart of the prevalence trend of COVID-19 in Hubei province and non-Hubei regions of China.

Note: The data are from the official website of the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China, [http://www.nhc.gov.cn/xcs/xxgzbd/gzbd\_index.shtml](http://www.nhc.gov.cn/xcs/xxgzbd/gzbd_index.shtml).

Given the COVID-19 is a new infectious disease, scientists still know little about it. At present, the COVID-19 lacks effective treatment drugs. To date, no clinical intervention trial has been completed and reported. Due to the urgent situation of treatment and prevention and control of the disease, it is necessary to research and develop effective intervention methods of COVID-19 to facilitate disease control. Since the outbreak of the COVID-19, many researchers in China have immediately carried out clinical research scheme, aiming to solve the treatment, prevention and diagnosis of the COVID-19. However, up to now, there is still a lack of systematic review to analyze the characteristics and existing problems of registered clinical trials. Therefore, we conduct the first systematic review of the clinical trials of COVID-19 in order to provide evidence for the control of the COVID-19.

## Materials and methods

### Inclusion criteria

This review was performed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 17 and presented based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines 18.

The inclusion criteria of this study are: patients with COVID-19; clinical trial with protocol; involves the diagnosis, prevention and treatment of COVID-19; have clear and specific end-point outcomes; design type can be any type of study design.

### Exclusion criteria

The exclusion criteria of this study are: animal trials; theoretical research; and unregistered clinical trials.

### Retrieval strategies

The literature retrieval was independently completed by two researchers. The databases of the Chinese Clinical Trial Registration Center and the [ClinicalTrials.gov](http://ClinicalTrials.gov) were included. There was no language limit for the search, and the search deadline was February 9, 2020. The key words were as following: novel coronavirus, COVID-19, 2019-nCoV pneumonia, novel coronavirus pneumonia, 2019-nCoV infection, new coronavirus, etc.

### Data extraction

The extracted data mainly include registration number, project name, research leader, age, research type, study design, sponsor, implementation unit, start time, completion period, research site, research institute, stage, research object, inclusion standard, exclusion standard, sample size, setting, location, recruitment period, intervention group measures, control group measures, random methods, blind methods, distribution concealment and measurement indicators. All the evaluated literature was independently conducted by two researchers.

### Methodology quality assessment

The quality evaluation and data extraction of each literature that met the inclusion criteria was conducted independently and cross-check was carried out by two researchers. When the opinions were inconsistent, final decisions were decided by two researchers through discussion. The Interventional clinical trial was based on Cochrane risk of bias items: randomization sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel, blinding of outcome assessment, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and other bias [19]. The observational study was based on the quality evaluation by Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) [20].

### Summary and synthesis

This review presented a narrative synthesis. This study mainly analyzed and summarized the types of studies, intervention, host organization and address, sample size, research stage, research status, excepted completion time, inclusion and exclusion criteria, outcome measurement and observation time, methodology quality and describes the results with statistics and characteristics respectively. Nonparametric data was represented by median and 95% CI and the statistical analysis used MedCalc statistical software (version 15.2.2, MedCalc Software bvba, Ostend, Belgium; [http://www.medcalc.org](http://www.medcalc.org); 2015). The bias plot was performed by Review Manager (RevMan) [Computer program](version 5.2, Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2012).

## Results

### Trial search results

Up to February 9, 2020, we retrieved 57 clinical trials of COVID-19 from the Chinese clinical registration center, and 18 clinical trials of COVID-19 from the [ClinicalTrails.gov](http://ClinicalTrails.gov), and a total of 75 clinical trials of COVID-19 were obtained (Table 1 and Table 2). The retrieval process is shown in Figure 3.

View this table:
[Table 1](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/T1)

Table 1 
Summary of intervention registered clinical trials.

View this table:
[Table 2](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/T2)

Table 2 
Summary of observational registered clinical trials.

![Figure 3](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/F3.medium.gif)

[Figure 3](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/F3)

Figure 3 
The flowchart of retrieval of the registered clinical trials.

### General characteristics of the clinical trials

In addition to the two observational trials from France ([NCT04262921](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?link\_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT04262921&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F03%2F03%2F2020.03.01.20029611.atom), [NCT04259892](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT04259892&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F03%2F03%2F2020.03.01.20029611.atom)), the others were sponsored by Chinese organizations. These organizations are responsible for three or more: the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University, Xinhua Hospital of Hubei University of Traditional Chinese medicine, Hubei Integrated Hospital of Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated Hospital, Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese medicine, Zhejiang University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, and Tongji Hospital, etc., among which the most undertakers were the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University, 7 items in total. The addresses of the organizers are Hubei, Beijing, Zhejiang, Guangdong, Sichuan, Shanghai, etc., with the largest number of Hubei Province, totalling 25 (Figure 4). From the perspective of research types, most of them are intervention control studies aiming at drug therapy, followed by observation studies totalling 12 (6 studies on the efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine, 2 preventive studies, 4 studies on prognosis, rehabilitation and devices).

![Figure 4](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/F4.medium.gif)

[Figure 4](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/F4)

Figure 4 
Addresses of the sponsors of the registered clinical trials by region.

Most of the trials have passed the ethical review, most of the studies are still in the preparation stage, only 11 trials have started to recruit patients, and all the registered clinical trials have not been completed. The first to register was on January 3, 2020 was a randomized controlled trial of “Chinese medicine for severe pneumonia with severe coronavirus pneumonia” on January 3, 2020, which is sponsored by Dongzhimen Hospital of Beijing University of Traditional Chinese Medicine.

In terms of trial stages, 20 trials are exploratory studies or in the preliminary experiment stage, 9 items in the extended validation of drugs on the market, only 2 trials in □ stage ([NCT04252664](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?link\_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT04252664&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F03%2F03%2F2020.03.01.20029611.atom), “Mild/Moderate 2019-nCoV Remdesivir RCT” and [NCT04257656](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT04257656&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F03%2F03%2F2020.03.01.20029611.atom), “Severe 2019-nCoV Remdesivir RCT” by Cao et al), and other unspecified items. In terms of sample size, the median sample size of the intervention study group (cases) was 60 (95% CI: 50 – 80), and the median sample size of the control group (cases) was 50 (95% CI: 30 – 60). The median (days) of intervention study was 180 (95% CI: 146.3 – 328.9) and the median (days) of the observation period was 334 (95% CI: 166.6 – 363.4).

### Characteristics of inclusion criteria

The common characteristics of inclusion criteria included: signing informed consent; age over 18 years; laboratory test (RT-PCR) confirmed infection of COVID-19 (diagnostic criteria for pneumonia diagnosis in line with “Protocol of Prevention and Control of Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia”); chest imaging confirmed lung involvement; participants were willing to be assigned to any designated treatment group randomly; agree not to participate in another study of the investigator until the study was completed. Most of the subjects were limited to light (ordinary subjects), and few of the studies included severe patients.

### Characteristics of exclusion criteria

The common characteristics of the exclusion criteria are: severe and critical patients with COVID-19; pregnant and lactating women; allergic patients; patients with serious heart, brain, kidney, tumor, hemoglobin disease and other diseases; patients with mental disorders, drug abuse or dependence history; those who do not get informed consent; the researchers think the subject is not suitable.

### Intervention and comparison

The main intervention methods of registered clinical trials include traditional Chinese medicine treatment, western medicine treatment and integrated traditional and Western medicine treatment, etc.; the outcome of treatment observation mainly includes clinical rehabilitation time, the incidence of using mechanical ventilation, the incidence in ICU, mortality, all kinds of complications and virological detection indicators, etc.; the medication methods mainly include oral, injection, atomization inhalation, etc.; the majority of medication time is more than one week. The time limit of outcome observation was more than 2-4 weeks. The controls were mainly treated with placebo or routine treatment

In the registered clinical trials, there are 32 western medicine treatments, and the intervention methods mainly include: i) antiviral drugs, such as: rhetcivir, abidol, fabiravir, chloroquine phosphate, asc09/ritonavir compound tablets, lopinavir/ritonavir (Coriolus), hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, baloxavir, darunavir/Corbis, etutabine/propofol tenofovir, etc.; ii) antiviral drug combination biological agents, for example: lucotinib combined with mesenchymal stem cell therapy, recombinant cytokine-gene derived protein injection combined with abidol or lopinavir/ritonavir, recombinant virus macrophage inflammatory protein for aerosol inhalation injection or lopinavir/ritonavir tablets combined with thymosin A1, lopinavir/ritonavir and interferon-α2b; iii) biological agents (products), for example: uterine blood stem cells, interferon, cord blood mononuclear cells, cord mesenchymal stem cell-conditioned medium, recombinant cytokine gene-derived protein, immunoglobulin, etc.; and iv) steroid therapy, for example, glucocorticoid (intervention in critical patients).

There are 22 clinical registration trials treated with traditional Chinese medicine. Traditional Chinese medicine treatment drugs are mainly various kinds of compound Chinese herbal medicines (decoction, capsule, granule, etc.), including Feiyanyihao, Qingfeijiedutang, Xinguanyihao, Lianhuaqingwen capsule, etc. The main ingredients are antiviral and immunomodulatory Chinese herbal formulas. In addition, traditional Chinese medicine treatment also involves some injections from herbal extract, such as Shuanghuanglian Injection, Xue-Bi-Jing Injection and Tanreqing Injection.

There are 6 clinical registration trials of the combination of Chinese medicine and Western medicine, and the intervention means is to use the combination of the above Chinese herbs and Western medicine antiviral drugs.

### Observation outcomes and measure timing

The observation outcomes included: cure rate, cure time, incidence of adverse outcomes, clinical improvement time, ratio of normal progression to severe disease, time to heavy progression, death, virus nucleic acid copies, coronavirus nucleic acid conversion time, pneumonia severity index, Murray lung injury score, chest CT, the survival rate and mortality of patients.

Additionally, some laboratory tests novel coronavirus were also selected, including routine blood test, urine routine test, C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, muscle enzyme, troponin, myoglobin, D dimer, blood gas analysis, coagulation routine, new coronavirus nucleic acid examination, and T cell subgroup analysis, hospital length etc.

The follow-up timing of the outcome measure is mostly 2-4 weeks, but some studies do not set forth a plan.

### Methodology quality

According to the Cochrane bias risk assessment results (Figure 5), the quality assessment of the interventional study methodology is generally low. Most trials reported randomization, while the other trials had high risk of biases in randomization (17 trials did not mention randomization and 6 trials were judged as non-randomized trials);Few trials conducted distribution concealment; only nine trials implemented blinding of participants, personnel and outcome assessment; None of the 63 trials clarified drop-out and follow-up bias. However, other bias risks, such as the risk of conflict of interest among drug manufacturers, are unclear.

![Figure 5](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/F5.medium.gif)

[Figure 5](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/F5)

Figure 5 
Risk of bias graph across all included interventional clinical trials.

The NOS scores of the observational trials are from 4 to 6 (Table 3). Most of the observational trials have high risk of biases in assessment outcome, follow-up of outcome and adequacy of follow up of cohorts (Figure 6). Therefore, the overall quality of registered observational trials is low.

View this table:
[Table 3](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/T3)

Table 3 
The methodology quality of the observational trials using Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

![Figure 6](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/F6.medium.gif)

[Figure 6](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/03/03/2020.03.01.20029611/F6)

Figure 6 
Risk of bias graph across all included observational studies.

## Discussion

COVID-19 is a new infectious disease, which is still poorly understood, so there is no recognized effective treatment. This sudden health incident has caused great harm to China and seriously threatened people’s health 21-23. In order to deal with the disease, researchers have carried out many clinical studies intensively. According to the search results, the current studies are concentrated in China, mainly involving the treatment and intervention of traditional Chinese medicine, Western medicine and the combination of traditional Chinese and Western medicine. Clinical research institutes are mainly hospitals of China. As far as the stage was concerned, most of the studies are still the exploratory research or in pre-experiment stage, and there are nine extended validation studies of the indications of drugs on the market (chloroquine phosphate, abidol, fabiravir, asc09/ritonavir compound tablets, lopinavir/ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine), etc., while only two of the three-phase clinical trials. From the perspective of sample size, the intervention trials are small sample studies, hence, the evidence level is low and the clinical significance will be limited.

At present, the treatment of this disease is mainly antiviral, improving patients’ immunity, intervening in autoimmune damage (against immune storm caused by cytokines) and symptomatic treatment. According to the in vitro cell test, the antiviral effect of Western drugs is obviously superior to that of traditional Chinese medicine (the concentration value of the inhibitory effect is low). But considering that Chinese herbs have both antiviral and immunomodulatory effects, it has a certain application prospect in disease prevention and treatment; at present, the combination of Chinese and Western Medicine (Qingfeipaidutang and chloroquine phosphate, abidol, lopinavir/Rito) is considered as a better treatment method by experts, and has been listed in “Protocol of Prevention and Control of Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia”, but there is still a lack of high-quality evidence, which needs clinical verification.

According to the existing preliminary evidence, the antiviral drug Remdesivir (two three-phase clinical trials for light, moderate and heavy patients respectively, expected to end on April 27, 2020) has a promising application prospect. The reasons are as follows: i) cell test results both in vitro and in vivo showed that very low concentration can play an antiviral role24-25; ii) animal test is safe 26; and iii) clinical test is anti-Ebola (the same as new coronavirus) RNA virus is effective 27-28; and iv) clinical case report is effective 29. In addition, some of the validation drugs, such as Chloroquine Phosphate, Abidol, Darunavir, and Lopinavir/Ritonavir (Coriolus Versicolor), have been proved to be safe and have strong antiviral potential in vitro 25. Therefore, these Western antiviral drugs have an application potential and need to be verified in clinical practice.

In this review, we found that many trials used biological products for immunotherapy of the disease. In light of the experience and lessons of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), 30-31, steroid therapy has been used cautiously in the treatment of the disease, so there are few trials based on the retrieval results.

From the perspective of inclusion and exclusion criteria, some people were excluded, such as children and adolescents, pregnant women, patients with serious liver and kidney damage. Therefore, this will lead to the lack of clinical evidence in this part of the population.

The outcomes of clinical trial observation includes clinical observation outcomes, physical examination and laboratory test results, but some outcomes are subjective, which may cause measurement bias.

Based on Cochrane risk of bias items and NOS, we evaluated the quality of intervention trials and observational trials, respectively. The evaluation results showed that the overall quality of registered clinical research was low. Therefore, it indicates that most of the registered clinical studies have a greater risk of bias, and the level of evidence is relatively low in the future, which belittles the practice significance of the research. We believed that the main reasons for the low quality of the registered clinical trial protocols are: i) the researchers’ clinical research ability is not enough, and ii) the researchers lack experience in dealing with sudden health events.

We believed that it is necessary to improve the quality of research and to the registered clinical research programmes in strict accordance with the guidelines for clinical trials 32-35. In addition, current clinical trials by different hospitals conducted spontaneously are not effectively organized and coordinated, so more scattered and disorderly. Some drugs that have not been tested in vitro or whose safety is of great concern are also being tested in clinical trials, which not only increase the risk of clinical trials, but also waste research resources. Hence, the National Administration of scientific research should strengthen their management and coordination and a small number of promising drugs, such as Remdesivir, should be prioritized for clinical trials and allowed to run smoothly.

From these registered clinical studies, we found a serious limitation: most of the registered clinical research did not consider the “timeliness”, and still followed the conservative traditional study design paradigm. The research duration was more than 5 months, and the median (days) of the intervention research was 180 (95% CI: 146.3 – 328.9), which is very unfavorable for the current urgent situation. We believed that, in the current situation, we should pay more attention to “timeliness” in the design of clinical trials (otherwise, the epidemic situation may have ended after drug approval; the research also lost its social significance). Therefore, in response to this emerging public health event, we can refer to the “sequential design” for clinical trials; “sequential design” not only saves the sample size, but also significantly shortens the research period, so it is very conducive to the screening and discovery of some drugs with significant efficacy 36-37. In addition, a very difficult problem is the treatment of severe and critical patients with COVID-19. For these patients, we suggested that: based on the “compassionate use drug” principle, with safe and obvious antiviral potential drugs, to conduct a staged small batch and single-arm clinical trials is feasible. We believed that “compassionate use drug” can not only meet the special needs of patients but also carry out clinical effectiveness observation, research and analysis, so as to improve the research efficiency and benefit patients 38-42. Also, given a large number of clinical cases have accumulated information, and using available existing data for statistics and analysis with the help of new statistical methods such as clinical data-mining 43-45 and real-world study 46-48, etc., can also quickly obtain some very valuable information and save research time.

In brief, under the condition that there are a large number of cases to be selected at present, it is of great value for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 to try to complete various clinical trial designs and data analysis scientifically and efficiently with a variety of clinical research designs and statistical analysis methods, and researchers should try in future.

## Conclusions

Disorderly and intensive clinical trials of COVID-19 using traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine are ongoing or will be carried out in China. However, based on the poor quality and small sample size and long completion period, we will not be able to obtain reliable, high-quality clinical evidence about COVID-19 treatment for quite a long time in the future. In order to effectively deal with the current sudden health emergencies, the National Administration of scientific research should strengthen their management and coordination to improve the study quality based on the guidelines for clinical trials. Also, it is important to ensure that some promising projects are prioritized. In addition, we suggest that using a variety of study designs and statistical methods to scientifically and efficiently conduct the clinical trials, which has an extremely important value for the control of COVID-19.

## Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are included within the study.

## Declaration of interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

## Footnotes

*   Conflict of interest: None.

*   Received March 1, 2020.
*   Revision received March 1, 2020.
*   Accepted March 3, 2020.


*   © 2020, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International), CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

## References

1.  1.The LID. Challenges of coronavirus disease 2019. LANCET INFECT DIS 2020.[PubMed: 32078810]
    
    

2.  2.Burki T. Outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019. LANCET INFECT DIS 2020.[PubMed: 32078809]
    
    

3.  3.The Novel Coronavirus Outbreak: What We Know and What We Don’t. CELL 2020.[PubMed: 32078801]
    
    

4.  4.She J, Jiang J, Ye L, Hu L, Bai C, Song Y. 2019 novel coronavirus of pneumonia in Wuhan, China: emerging attack and management strategies. Clin Transl Med 2020; 9(1): 19.[PubMed: 32078069]
    
    

5.  5.Zhou P, Yang XL, Wang XG, et al. A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin. NATURE 2020.[PubMed: 32015507]
    
    

6.  6.Ribeiro J, Bingre P, Strubbe D, Reino L. Coronavirus: why a permanent ban on wildlife trade might not work in China. NATURE 2020; 578(7794): 217.[PubMed: 32047312]
    
    

7.  7.York A. Novel coronavirus takes flight from bats? NAT REV MICROBIOL 2020.[PubMed: 32051570]
    
    

8.  8.Wang D, Hu B, Hu C, et al. Clinical Characteristics of 138 Hospitalized Patients With 2019 Novel Coronavirus-Infected Pneumonia in Wuhan, China. JAMA 2020.[PubMed: 32031570]
    
    

9.  9.Xu XW, Wu XX, Jiang XG, et al. Clinical findings in a group of patients infected with the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-Cov-2) outside of Wuhan, China: retrospective case series. BMJ 2020; 368: m606.[PubMed: 32075786]
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjE2OiIzNjgvZmViMTlfNC9tNjA2IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDMvMDMvMjAyMC4wMy4wMS4yMDAyOTYxMS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

10. 10.Mahase E. Coronavirus covid-19 has killed more people than SARS and MERS combined, despite lower case fatality rate. BMJ 2020; 368: m641.[PubMed: 32071063]
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjE3OiIzNjgvZmViMThfMTEvbTY0MSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIwLzAzLzAzLzIwMjAuMDMuMDEuMjAwMjk2MTEuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

11. 11.Silverstein WK, Stroud L, Cleghorn GE, Leis JA. First imported case of 2019 novel coronavirus in Canada, presenting as mild pneumonia. LANCET 2020.[PubMed: 32061312]
    
    

12. 12.Pongpirul WA, Pongpirul K, Ratnarathon AC, Prasithsirikul W. Journey of a Thai Taxi Driver and Novel Coronavirus. N Engl J Med 2020.[PubMed: 32050060]
    
    

13. 13.Malik MR, Mafi AR, Mahjour J, Opoka M, Elhakim M, Muntasir MO. Novel coronavirus infection in the eastern mediterranean region: time to act. East Mediterr Health J 2013; 19 Suppl 1: S31-8.[PubMed: 23888793]
    
    

14. 14.Bastola A, Sah R, Rodriguez-Morales AJ, et al. The first 2019 novel coronavirus case in Nepal. LANCET INFECT DIS 2020.[PubMed: 32057299]
    
    

15. 15.Gostin LO, Hodge JJ. US Emergency Legal Responses to Novel Coronavirus: Balancing Public Health and Civil Liberties. JAMA 2020.[PubMed: 32053150]
    
    

16. 16.Mallapaty S. Scientists fear coronavirus spread in countries least able to contain it. NATURE 2020; 578(7795): 348.[PubMed: 32071443]
    
    

17. 17.Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, et al. Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 10: ED000142.[PubMed: 31643080]
    
    

18. 18.Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ 2009; 339: b2700.[PubMed: 19622552]
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjE3OiIzMzkvanVsMjFfMS9iMjcwMCI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIwLzAzLzAzLzIwMjAuMDMuMDEuMjAwMjk2MTEuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

19. 19.Communication, collaboration and cooperation can stop the 2019 coronavirus. NAT MED 2020; 26(2): 151.[PubMed: 32015560]
    
    

20. 20.Chen N, Zhou M, Dong X, et al. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. LANCET 2020; 395(10223): 507-513.[PubMed: 32007143]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30211-7&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F03%2F03%2F2020.03.01.20029611.atom) 

21. 21.Wu JT, Leung K, Leung GM. Nowcasting and forecasting the potential domestic and international spread of the 2019-nCoV outbreak originating in Wuhan, China: a modelling study. LANCET 2020.[PubMed: 32014114]
    
    

22. 22.de Wit E, Feldmann F, Cronin J, et al. Prophylactic and therapeutic remdesivir (GS-5734) treatment in the rhesus macaque model of MERS-CoV infection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2020.[PubMed: 32054787]
    
    

23. 23.Wang M, Cao R, Zhang L, et al. Remdesivir and chloroquine effectively inhibit the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in vitro. CELL RES 2020.[PubMed: 32020029]
    
    

24. 24.Sheahan TP, Sims AC, Leist SR, et al. Comparative therapeutic efficacy of remdesivir and combination lopinavir, ritonavir, and interferon beta against MERS-CoV. NAT COMMUN 2020; 11(1): 222.[PubMed: 31924756]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/s41467-019-13940-6&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=31924756&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F03%2F03%2F2020.03.01.20029611.atom) 

25. 25.Brown AJ, Won JJ, Graham RL, et al. Broad spectrum antiviral remdesivir inhibits human endemic and zoonotic deltacoronaviruses with a highly divergent RNA dependent RNA polymerase. Antiviral Res 2019; 169: 104541.[PubMed: 31233808]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.antiviral.2019.104541&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=31233808&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F03%2F03%2F2020.03.01.20029611.atom) 

26. 26.Tchesnokov EP, Feng JY, Porter DP, Gotte M. Mechanism of Inhibition of Ebola Virus RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase by Remdesivir. Viruses 2019; 11(4).[PubMed: 30987343]
    
    

27. 27.Holshue ML, Debolt C, Lindquist S, et al. First Case of 2019 Novel Coronavirus in the United States. N Engl J Med 2020.[PubMed: 32004427]
    
    

28. 28.Zhao FC, Guo KJ, Li ZR. Osteonecrosis of the femoral head in SARS patients: seven years later. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2013; 23(6): 671-7.[PubMed: 23412187]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s00590-012-1054-4&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23412187&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F03%2F03%2F2020.03.01.20029611.atom) 

29. 29.Zhao R, Wang H, Wang X, Feng F. Steroid therapy and the risk of osteonecrosis in SARS patients: a dose-response meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 2017; 28(3): 1027-1034.[PubMed: 27844132]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s00198-016-3824-z&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=27844132&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2020%2F03%2F03%2F2020.03.01.20029611.atom) 

30. 30.Li J, Hu JY, Zhai JB, et al. CONSORT extension for reporting N-of-1 trials for traditional Chinese medicine (CENT for TCM) : Recommendations, explanation and elaboration. COMPLEMENT THER MED 2019; 46: 180-188.[PubMed: 31519276]
    
    

31. 31.Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Gotzsche PC, et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ 2013; 346: e7586.[PubMed: 23303884]
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjE4OiIzNDYvamFuMDhfMTUvZTc1ODYiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMC8wMy8wMy8yMDIwLjAzLjAxLjIwMDI5NjExLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

32. 32.Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010; 340: c332.[PubMed: 20332509]
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjE2OiIzNDAvbWFyMjNfMS9jMzMyIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjAvMDMvMDMvMjAyMC4wMy4wMS4yMDAyOTYxMS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

33. 33.von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ 2007; 335(7624): 806-8.[PubMed: 17947786]
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEyOiIzMzUvNzYyNC84MDYiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyMC8wMy8wMy8yMDIwLjAzLjAxLjIwMDI5NjExLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

34. 34.Zhu H, Yu Q, Mercante DE. A Bayesian sequential design with binary outcome. PHARM STAT 2017; 16(3): 192-200.[PubMed: 28251815]
    
    

35. 35.Cui L, Zhang L, Yang B. Optimal adaptive group sequential design with flexible timing of sample size determination. CONTEMP CLIN TRIALS 2017; 63: 8-12.[PubMed: 28455234]
    
    

36. 36.Puthumana J, Miller JE, Kim J, Ross JS. Availability of Investigational Medicines Through the US Food and Drug Administration’s Expanded Access and Compassionate Use Programs. JAMA Netw Open 2018; 1(2): e180283.[PubMed: 30646072]
    
    

37. 37.Edgeworth JD, Merante D, Patel S, et al. Compassionate Use of Cefiderocol as Adjunctive Treatment of Native Aortic Valve Endocarditis Due to Extremely Drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa. CLIN INFECT DIS 2019; 68(11): 1932-1934.[PubMed: 30418554]
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/cid/ciy963&link_type=DOI) 

38. 38.Van Norman GA. Expanding Patient Access to Investigational Drugs: Single Patient Investigational New Drug and the “Right to Try”. JACC Basic Transl Sci 2018; 3(2): 280-293.[PubMed: 30062214]
    
    

39. 39.Lardizabal AA, Khan AN, Bamrah MS, Goswami ND. Notes from the Field: Acquisition of Delamanid Under a Compassionate Use Program for Extensively Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis - United States, 2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2018; 67(35): 996-997.[PubMed: 30188880]
    
    

40. 40.Holbein M, Weatherwax KJ, Gravelin M, Hutchinson R, Mashour GA. Right now, in the right way: U. S. Food and Drug Administration’s expanded access program and patient rights. J Clin Transl Sci 2018; 2(3): 115-117.[PubMed: 30370061]
    
    

41. 41.Zeng QT, Fodeh S. Clinical data mining. COMPUT BIOL MED 2015; 62: 293.[PubMed: 26067752]
    
    

42. 42.Ghaibeh AA, Kasem A, Ng XJ, Nair H, Hirose J, Thiruchelvam V. Gaining Insights on Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Treatment Outcome Using Clinical Data Mining Techniques. Stud Health Technol Inform 2018; 247: 386-390.[PubMed: 29677988]
    
    

43. 43.Larsson K, Fredriksson RK, Sjogren FK. Health social workers’ assessments as part of a specialized pain rehabilitation: a clinical data-mining study. SOC WORK HEALTH CARE 2019; 58(10): 936-951.[PubMed: 31657278]
    
    

44. 44.Galffy G, Szilasi M, Tamasi L. Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction with Budesonide/Formoterol Easyhaler((R)) Among Patients with Asthma or COPD Switching from Previous Treatment: a Real-World Study of Patient-Reported Outcomes. Pulm Ther 2019; 5(2): 165-177.[PubMed: 32026408]
    
    

45. 45.Gustafson WL, Saunders J, Vazquez SR, Jones AE, Witt DM. Real-world study of direct oral anticoagulant dosing patterns in patients with atrial fibrillation. Pharm Pract (Granada) 2019; 17(4): 1709.[PubMed: 31897264]
    
    

46. 46.Lv XY, Ding HG, Zheng JF, Fan CL, Li L. Rifaximin improves survival in cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites: A real-world study. World J Gastroenterol 2020; 26(2): 199-218.[PubMed: 31988585]