《SSRN,2月25日,Clinical Efficacy of Arbidol in Patients with 2019 Novel Coronavirus-Infected Pneumonia: A Retrospective Cohort Study》

  • 来源专题:COVID-19科研动态监测
  • 编译者: zhangmin
  • 发布时间:2020-02-26
  • Clinical Efficacy of Arbidol in Patients with 2019 Novel Coronavirus-Infected Pneumonia: A Retrospective Cohort Study

    28 Pages Posted: 25 Feb 2020

    Kaijin Xu

    Zhejiang University - State Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases

    Yanfei Chen

    Zhejiang University - State Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases

    Abstract

    Background: The urgency of the 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak has led to demand of effective antiviral agents. Preliminary experiment indicated that Arbidol concentrations might inhibit the replication of coronavirus in vitro. However, there was limited data about the clinical efficacy of Arbidol in 2019 novel coronavirus-infected pneumonia (NCP).

  • 原文来源:https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3542148
相关报告
  • 《SSRN,3月2日,Clinical Features of 81 Hospitalized Patients with 2019 Novel Coronavirus-Infected Pneumonia in Jingzhou, China: A Descriptive Study》

    • 来源专题:COVID-19科研动态监测
    • 编译者:zhangmin
    • 发布时间:2020-03-03
    • Clinical Features of 81 Hospitalized Patients with 2019 Novel Coronavirus-Infected Pneumonia in Jingzhou, China: A Descriptive Study 33 Pages Posted: 2 Mar 2020 Fengqin Zhang Huazhong University of Science and Technology (Formerly Tongi Medical University) - Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine Li He Huazhong University of Science and Technology (Formerly Tongi Medical University) - Department of Respiratory Medicine Abstract Background: Since the outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan, a large number of people have been infected. However the majority of existing medical institutions could not report the Ct value (Cycle threshold), can only distinguish between positive and negative. In fact, our prediction of viral load is absolutely critical to the severity of the disease and the clinical diagnosis.
  • 《SSRN,2月6日,Clinical Course and Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients of 2019 Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia》

    • 来源专题:COVID-19科研动态监测
    • 编译者:xuwenwhlib
    • 发布时间:2020-02-07
    • Clinical Course and Outcomes of Critically Ill Patients of 2019 Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia 19 Pages Posted: 6 Feb 2020 Corresponding Author: You Shang, Ph.D., M.D. Wuhan Union Hospital Wuhan, Hubei CHINA First Author: Xiaobo Yang Abstract Background: An ongoing outbreak of pneumonia associated with the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) started in December 2019, in Wuhan, China. Information on critically ill patients of 2019-nCoV infection is extremely limited. We aimed to describe the clinical course and outcomes of critically ill patients of 2019-nCoV pneumonia. Methods: In this retrospective study, 52 critically ill patients out of 710 patients, who were diagnosed with 2019-nCoV pneumonia in Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital between the onset of the outbreak and January 26, 2020, were investigated. Only patients treated with high flow nasal cannula or mechanical ventilator were included. Patients who were deceased or who had been hospitalized for at least 14 days were considered for the case reviewed. Epidemiological, demographic, clinical and laboratory data were collected and analyzed to explore the differences between survivors and non-survivors. Findings: Of the 52 critically ill patients, the average age was 59.7 ±13.3 years(mean ± standard deviation), 35 (67.3%) were male, 21 (40.4%) had chronic illness, 51 (98.1%) had fever, 35 (67.3%) had ARDS and 37 (71.2%) required mechanical ventilation. The duration from onset of symptoms to radiological diagnosis of pneumonia was 5 [3-7] (median [interquartile range]) days. Thirty-three (57.7%) patients deceased, and the duration from hospital admission to death was 7 [3 - 11] days. Compared with survivors, non-survivors were older (64.7 ± 11.1 years vs 59.7 ± 13.3 years, p = 0.001), received higher fraction of oxygen therapy (0.87 ± 0.16 vs 0.70 ± 0.18, p = 0.004), developed more ARDS (83.3% vs 45.4%, p = 0.007), required more mechanical ventilation (93.3% vs 40.9%, p = 0.003) and were more likely to be on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (16.7% vs 4.6%, p = 0.06).