ABSTRACT
Background There is accumulating evidence for an overly activated immune response in severe Covid-19. Several studies exploring the role of immunomodulation as a potential therapeutic strategy have been published. Through systematic review and meta-analysis, we assess the effectiveness of specific interleukin inhibitors for the treatment of Covid-19.
Methods Electronic databases, preprint servers and clinical trial registries were searched on 23rd October 2020 to identify studies of immunomodulatory agents (anakinra, sarilumab, siltuximab and tocilizumab) for the treatment of Covid-19. The primary outcomes were severity on an ordinal scale measured at day 15 and days to hospital discharge. Key secondary endpoints included overall mortality.
Results Sixty studies totalling 16588 patients were included, four were randomised controlled studies. Most explored outcomes in patients who received tocilizumab (50/60), followed by anakinra (5/60), sarilumab (4/60) and siltuximab (1/60). There was substantial heterogeneity in meta-analysis and pooled effect estimates should be interpreted with caution. In retrospective studies, tocilizumab was associated with less severe outcomes on an ordinal scale (Generalised odds ratio 1.23 95%CI 1.10;1.37, I2=97%) and reduced mortality (HR 0.58 95%CI 0.43;0.78, I2 =80.3%) but consistent outcome benefit was not shown in prospective studies. The mean difference with control in the duration of hospitalisation was 0.26 days (95%CI −0.10;0.62, I2 =85%). Insufficient data precluded meta-analysis for other immunomodulatory agents.
Conclusion Meta-analysis revealed substantial heterogeneity in reported findings of tocilizumab and an inconclusive effect from prospective studies. Currently available evidence for the efficacy of anakinra, siltuximab or sarilumab in Covid-19 is insufficient. Results from adequately powered, high-quality randomised studies are urgently needed.
Competing Interest Statement
Dr Gisli Jenkins reports grants from Astra Zeneca, grants from Biogen, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Daewoong, personal fees from Galapagos, grants from Galecto, grants from GlaxoSmithKline, personal fees from Heptares, non-financial support from NuMedii, grants and personal fees from Pliant, personal fees from Promedior, non-financial support from Redx, personal fees from Roche, other from Action for Pulmonary Fibrosis, outside the submitted work The remaining authors have no actual or potential conflict of interest to declare in relation to this study.
Clinical Trial
PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020176375
Clinical Protocols
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=176375
Funding Statement
FK/LF/IS/AS are supported by the Nottingham National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre. RGJ is supported by an NIHR Research Professorship (RP-2017-08-ST2-014).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
N/A
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Since the original submission the literature in this area has progressed significantly, with a large number of newly published studies. Therefore, we have carried out updated searches and comprehensively undertaken the review to reflect this update, with meta-analysis now possible and a number of recent RCTs included.
Data Availability
Not applicable
