- Library Home /
- Search Collections /
- Open Collections /
- Browse Collections /
- UBC Faculty Research and Publications /
- Anti-Ebola therapy for patients with Ebola virus disease:...
Open Collections
UBC Faculty Research and Publications
Anti-Ebola therapy for patients with Ebola virus disease: a systematic review Lee, James S; Adhikari, Neill K J; Kwon, Henry Y; Teo, Koren; Siemieniuk, Reed; Lamontagne, François; Chan, Adrienne; Mishra, Sharmistha; Murthy, Srinivas; Kiiza, Peter; Hajek, Jan; Bah, Elhadj I; Lamah, Marie-Claire; Kao, Raymond; Fowler, Robert A
Abstract
Background: Management of Ebola virus disease (EVD) has historically focused on infection prevention, case detection and supportive care. Several specific anti-Ebola therapies have been investigated, including during the 2014–2016 West African outbreak. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review of the effect of anti-Ebola virus therapies on clinical outcomes to guide their potential use and future evaluation. Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Global Health, Cochrane Library, African Index Medicus, WHOLIS (inception-9 April 2018), and trial registries for observational studies or clinical trials, in any language, that enrolled patients with confirmed EVD who received therapy targeting Ebola virus and reported on mortality, symptom duration, or adverse effects. Results: From 11,257 citations and registered trials, we reviewed 55 full-text citations, of which 35 met eligibility criteria (1 randomized clinical trial (RCT), 8 non-randomized comparative studies, 9 case series and 17 case reports) and collectively examined 21 anti-Ebola virus agents. The 31 studies performed during the West African outbreak reported on 4.8% (1377/28616) of all patients with Ebola. The only RCT enrolled 72 patients (0.25% of all patients with Ebola) and compared the monoclonal antibody ZMapp vs. standard care (mortality, 22% vs. 37%; 95% confidence interval for risk difference, − 36 to 7%). Studies of convalescent plasma, interferon-β-1a, favipiravir, brincidofovir, artesunate-amodiaquine and TKM-130803 were associated with at least moderate risk of bias. Conclusions: Research evaluating anti-Ebola virus agents has reached very few patients with EVD, and inferences are limited by non-randomized study designs. ZMapp has the most promising treatment signal.
Item Metadata
| Title |
Anti-Ebola therapy for patients with Ebola virus disease: a systematic review
|
| Creator | |
| Publisher |
BioMed Central
|
| Date Issued |
2019-05-02
|
| Description |
Background:
Management of Ebola virus disease (EVD) has historically focused on infection prevention, case detection and supportive care. Several specific anti-Ebola therapies have been investigated, including during the 2014–2016 West African outbreak. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review of the effect of anti-Ebola virus therapies on clinical outcomes to guide their potential use and future evaluation.
Methods:
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Global Health, Cochrane Library, African Index Medicus, WHOLIS (inception-9 April 2018), and trial registries for observational studies or clinical trials, in any language, that enrolled patients with confirmed EVD who received therapy targeting Ebola virus and reported on mortality, symptom duration, or adverse effects.
Results:
From 11,257 citations and registered trials, we reviewed 55 full-text citations, of which 35 met eligibility criteria (1 randomized clinical trial (RCT), 8 non-randomized comparative studies, 9 case series and 17 case reports) and collectively examined 21 anti-Ebola virus agents. The 31 studies performed during the West African outbreak reported on 4.8% (1377/28616) of all patients with Ebola. The only RCT enrolled 72 patients (0.25% of all patients with Ebola) and compared the monoclonal antibody ZMapp vs. standard care (mortality, 22% vs. 37%; 95% confidence interval for risk difference, − 36 to 7%). Studies of convalescent plasma, interferon-β-1a, favipiravir, brincidofovir, artesunate-amodiaquine and TKM-130803 were associated with at least moderate risk of bias.
Conclusions:
Research evaluating anti-Ebola virus agents has reached very few patients with EVD, and inferences are limited by non-randomized study designs. ZMapp has the most promising treatment signal.
|
| Subject | |
| Genre | |
| Type | |
| Language |
eng
|
| Date Available |
2019-05-22
|
| Provider |
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
|
| Rights |
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
|
| DOI |
10.14288/1.0378919
|
| URI | |
| Affiliation | |
| Citation |
BMC Infectious Diseases. 2019 May 02;19(1):376
|
| Publisher DOI |
10.1186/s12879-019-3980-9
|
| Peer Review Status |
Reviewed
|
| Scholarly Level |
Faculty
|
| Copyright Holder |
The Author(s).
|
| Rights URI | |
| Aggregated Source Repository |
DSpace
|
Item Media
Item Citations and Data
Rights
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)