Abstract
Background Azithromycin (AZM) has been widely used in the management of Covid-19. However, the evidence on its actual effects remains disperse and difficult to apply in clinical settings. This systematic review and metanalysis summarizes the available evidence to date on the beneficial and adverse effect of AZM in patients with Covid-19.
Methods The PRISMA 2020 statement criteria were followed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing clinical outcomes of patients treated, and not treated, with AZM, indexed until the 5th of July 2021, were searched in PubMed, Embase, The Web of Science, Scopus, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and MedRXivs. We used Random-effects models to estimate pooled effect size from aggregate data.
Results The initial search produced 4950 results. Finally, 16 studies, five RCTs and 11 with an observational design, with a total of 22984 patients, were included. The metanalysis showed no difference in mortality for those treated, or not, with AZM, OR: 0.95 (0.79-1.13). There was also no significant difference for those treated, and not, with AZM in need for hospital admission or time to admission from ambulatory settings, clinical severity, need for intensive care, or adverse effects.
Conclusions These results presented in this review do not support the use of AZM in the management of Covid-19. They also show that any harm caused to the patient who received it is unlikely. Future research on treatment for patients with Covid-19 may need to focus on other drugs.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by a grant from the Claire Wand Fund Salma Ayis was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre based at Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust and Kings College London. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health.
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:
No ethical approval required
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.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
Paper in collection COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos