Analysis of COVID-19 cases vs. widespread prophylactic use of ivermectin for parasitic infections showing significantly lower incidence of COVID-19 cases.
This is the
22nd of 99 COVID-19 controlled studies for ivermectin, which collectively show efficacy with
p<0.0000000001 (1 in 2 sextillion).
46 studies are RCTs, which show efficacy with
p=0.00000014.
This study is excluded in the after exclusion results of meta
analysis:
not a typical trial, analysis of African countries that used or did not use ivermectin prophylaxis for parasitic infections.
|
risk of case, 78.0% lower, RR 0.22, p < 0.02, African countries, PCTI vs. no PCT, relative cases per capita.
|
|
risk of case, 80.0% lower, RR 0.20, p < 0.001, worldwide, PCTI vs. no PCT, relative cases per capita.
|
|
Effect extraction follows pre-specified rules prioritizing more serious outcomes. Submit updates
|
Hellwig et al., 28 Nov 2020, retrospective, ecological study, multiple countries, peer-reviewed, 2 authors, dosage 200μg/kg, dose varied, typically 150-200μg/kg.
A COVID-19 prophylaxis? Lower incidence associated with prophylactic administration of ivermectin
Martin D Hellwig, Anabela Maia
International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.106248
Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre -including this research content -immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
Supplementary materials Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020. 106248 .
References
Allcott, Boxell, Conway, Gentzkow, Thaler et al., Polarization and public health: partisan differences in social distancing during the coronavirus pandemic, National Bureau of Economic Research,
doi:10.3386/w26946Greene, Taylor, Cupp, Murphy, White et al., Comparison of ivermectin and diethylcarbamazine in the treatment of onchocerciasis, N Engl J Med,
doi:10.1056/NEJM198507183130301Munster, Koopmans, Van Doremalen, Van Riel, De, A novel coronavirus emerging in China-key questions for impact assessment, N Engl J Med,
doi:10.1056/NEJMp2000929Muñoz, Ballester, Antonijoan, Gich, Rodríguez et al., Safety and pharmacokinetic profile of fixed-dose ivermectin with an innovative 18mg tablet in healthy adult volunteers, PLoS Negl Trop Dis,
doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0006020Rajter, Sherman, Fatteh, Vogel, Sacks et al., ICON (Ivermectin in COvid Nineteen) Study: use of ivermectin is associated with lower mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19,
doi:10.2139/ssrn.3631261Scheim, Ivermectin for COVID-19 treatment: clinical response at quasithreshold doses via hypothesized alleviation of CD147-mediated vascular occlusion,
doi:10.2139/ssrn.3636557Schmith, Zhou, Lohmer, The approved dose of ivermectin alone is not the ideal dose for the treatment of COVID-19, Clin Pharmacol Ther,
doi:10.1002/cpt.1889Zhou, Hou, Shen, Huang, Martin et al., Network-based drug repurposing for novel coronavirus 2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2, Cell Discov,
doi:10.1038/s41421-020-0153-3
