Ivermectin compared with placebo in the clinical course in Mexican patients with asymptomatic and mild COVID-19: a randomized clinical trial
et al., BMC Infectious Diseases, doi:10.1186/s12879-022-07890-6 (date from earlier preprint), NCT04407507 (history)
, Ivermectin compared with placebo in the clinical course in Mexican patients with asymptomatic and mild.., BMC Infectious Diseases, doi:10.1186/s12879-022-07890-6 (date from earlier preprint), NCT04407507
Small low-risk patient RCT with 30 low-dose ivermectin and 26 control patients, with no primary outcome events in either arm. Viral load was significantly better with ivermectin on day 5, while there was no significant difference on day 1 or day 14. There was no significant difference in combined symptoms, however authors include cough which was the most frequent symptom and may persist long after infection has been cleared. Ivermectin patients were 4 years older with a higher standard deviation, had higher prevalence of obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease, and lower prevalence of hepatic and kidney disease.SOC included acetaminophen, which shows 27% [9‑47%] higher risk from 18 studies to date. The slow viral clearance seen may be in part due to acetaminophen use.Authors conclude that "ivermectin is not effective to prevent progression to a severe state". This is false, there was no progression to severe in either group.Authors report 92.9% of ivermectin patients compliant with the symptom diary, however there is no number of 30 patients that is 92.9%.Authors report 45.8% asymptomatic placebo patients on day 14, howevere there is no number of 25 (exc. diary non-compliance) or 26 patients that is 45.8%.Authors report 37% asymptomatic ivermectin patients on day 14, howevere there is no number of 28 (exc. diary non-compliance) patients that is 37%.Authors report 28% viral- for ivermectin on day 14, however there is no number of 30 patients that is 28%.Authors have not yet responded to a data query.The pre-registered outcome had no events. All other outcomes reported are post-hoc, added after completion of the study: [clinicaltrials.gov]External influences may have altered the paper. For example, in the preprint authors state: "Taken together, these data do not show that ivermectin is effective in the treatment of COVID-19 by "accelerating" viral clearance in the first week, which may translate into a lower rate of complications." Elsewhere, authors note faster viral clearance at day 5, which is a positive result. This sentence may have been modified to be negative, while not fully updating the new sentence to be logical.
This study is excluded in the after exclusion results of meta
analysis:
data mismatch, no response from authors.
|
risk of progression to serious adverse events, 186.7% higher, RR 2.87, p = 1.00, treatment 1 of 30 (3.3%), control 0 of 26 (0.0%), continuity correction due to zero event (with reciprocal of the contrasting arm).
|
|
risk of no recovery, 14.8% higher, RR 1.15, p = 0.58, treatment 18 of 28 (64.3%), control 14 of 25 (56.0%), day 14.
|
|
risk of no recovery, 6.7% lower, RR 0.93, p = 0.71, treatment 23 of 28 (82.1%), control 22 of 25 (88.0%), NNT 17, day 5.
|
|
viral load, 2.4% lower, relative load 0.98, p = 0.64, treatment mean 33.74 (±4.77) n=30, control mean 32.94 (±7.74) n=26, day 14.
|
|
viral load, 7.8% lower, relative load 0.92, p = 0.04, treatment mean 30.64 (±3.74) n=30, control mean 28.25 (±4.21) n=26, mid-recovery, day 5.
|
|
risk of no viral clearance, 4.7% lower, RR 0.95, p = 1.00, treatment 22 of 30 (73.3%), control 20 of 26 (76.9%), NNT 28, day 14.
|
|
risk of no viral clearance, 6.1% lower, RR 0.94, p = 0.67, treatment 26 of 30 (86.7%), control 24 of 26 (92.3%), NNT 18, mid-recovery, day 5.
|
| Effect extraction follows pre-specified rules prioritizing more serious outcomes. Submit updates |
de la Rocha et al., 23 May 2022, Double Blind Randomized Controlled Trial, placebo-controlled, Mexico, peer-reviewed, 21 authors, dosage 12mg days 1-3, trial NCT04407507 (history).
Contact:
arieh.mercado@academicos.udg.mx (corresponding author).
Abstract: (2022) 22:917
de la Rocha et al. BMC Infectious Diseases
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-022-07890-6
Open Access
RESEARCH
Ivermectin compared with placebo
in the clinical course in Mexican patients
with asymptomatic and mild COVID‑19:
a randomized clinical trial
Carmen de la Rocha1,5, Marco A. Cid‑López1, Blanca I. Venegas‑López1, Sandra C. Gómez‑Méndez1,
Adriana Sánchez‑Ortiz1, Alma M. Pérez‑Ríos2, Ricardo A. Llamas‑Velázquez3, Aidé I. Meza‑Acuña2,
Bárbara Vargas‑Íñiguez1, Daniela Rosales‑Galván1, Alejandra Tavares‑Váldez1, Nizdali Luna‑Gudiño1,
Cinthia V. Hernández‑Puente1, Jovana Milenkovic1, Cecilia Iglesias‑Palomares1, Miriam Méndez‑del Villar4,
Gerardo A. Gutiérrez‑Dieck1, Carlos G. Valderrábano‑Roldán1, Jennefer Mercado‑Cerda1,
Jocelyn G. Robles‑Bojórquez1 and Arieh R. Mercado‑Sesma1,4*
Abstract
Background: Despite the development and application of vaccines against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome
Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) around the world, the scientific community is still trying to find some therapies to avoid
or ameliorate the fatal evolution of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Since the publication of the potential
use of ivermectin as a treatment against the disease, a pleiad of information about it has been published. However,
the evidence is not strong or weak enough to conclude its usefulness in the clinical evolution of patients infected
with SARS-CoV-2. We evaluate the efficacy and safety of ivermectin in the treatment of Mexican patients with asymp‑
tomatic and mild COVID-19 in a three-day administration in comparison to placebo.
Methods: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was carried out in 66 adults with asymptomatic and
mild COVID-19. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 ratio to ivermectin plus acetaminophen or placebo plus acetami‑
nophen. The primary endpoint was the proportion of subjects without a disease progression to severity according to
COVID-19 guidelines by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) since randomization to 14 days.
Results: None of the participants presented progression to a severe state in either group. Viral load was measured
on Days 1, 5, and 14. No significant differences were observed in baseline or 14-day between groups (p = 0.720 and
0.362, respectively). However, on Day 5, a significant difference in viral load was observed between groups (p = 0.039).
The frequency of symptoms was similar between groups, and no significant differences were observed. The most
frequent symptom was cough. One severe adverse event associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection was observed in the
ivermectin group.
*Correspondence: arieh.mercado@academicos.udg.mx
4
Centro de Investigación Multidisciplinaria en Salud, Centro Universitario de
Tonalá, Universidad de Guadalajara, Av. Nuevo Periférico 555, Ejido San José
Tateposco, CP45425 Tonalá, Jalisco, México
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
© The Author(s) 2022. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which
permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the
original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or
other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line
to the material. If..
Loading..
Please send us corrections, updates, or comments. Vaccines and
treatments are complementary. All practical, effective, and safe means should
be used based on risk/benefit analysis. No treatment, vaccine, or intervention
is 100% available and effective for all current and future variants. We do not
provide medical advice. Before taking any medication, consult a qualified
physician who can provide personalized advice and details of risks and
benefits based on your medical history and situation. FLCCC and WCH
provide treatment protocols.