Cargando…
A review of the safety of favipiravir – a potential treatment in the COVID-19 pandemic?
BACKGROUND: Repurposing broad-spectrum antivirals is an immediate treatment opportunity for 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Favipiravir is an antiviral previously indicated for influenza and Ebola, which has shown some promise in early trials for treatment of COVID-19. We aim to review existing...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Mediscript Ltd
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7331506/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32405421 |
_version_ | 1783553341339467776 |
---|---|
author | Pilkington, Victoria Pepperrell, Toby Hill, Andrew |
author_facet | Pilkington, Victoria Pepperrell, Toby Hill, Andrew |
author_sort | Pilkington, Victoria |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Repurposing broad-spectrum antivirals is an immediate treatment opportunity for 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Favipiravir is an antiviral previously indicated for influenza and Ebola, which has shown some promise in early trials for treatment of COVID-19. We aim to review existing favipiravir safety evidence, which is vital to informing the potential future use of favipiravir in COVID-19. METHODS: A search was conducted across EMBASE and MEDLINE databases, supplemented by relevant grey-literature and ClinicalTrials.gov. All studies assessing the use of favipiravir in humans by 27 March 2020 were considered for inclusion. Further analysis of available safety data from phase 2 and 3 studies was undertaken. Data extracted were adverse events (AEs) grade 1–4, serious AEs and discontinuation for AEs. Specific AEs of interest highlighted in early-phase studies, including gastrointestinal AEs and hyperuricaemia, were also examined. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were identified as potential sources of evidence of the clinical safety of favipiravir. Six were phase 2 and 3 studies reporting relevant safety data for statistical comparison, representing a total of 4299 participants, an estimated 175 person-years-of-follow-up (PYFU). Comparator drugs were oseltamivir, umifenovir, lopinavir/ritonavir or placebo. Study follow-up was between 5 and 21 days. The proportions of grade 1–4 AEs on favipiravir was 28.2% vs 28.4% (P = n.s.) in the comparison arms. The proportion of discontinuations due to AEs on favipiravir was 1.1% vs 1.2% (P = n.s.) in the comparison arms. For serious AEs the proportion was 0.4% in both arms (P = n.s.). There were significantly fewer gastrointestinal AEs occurring on favipiravir vs comparators [8.7% vs 11.5%; P = 0.003]. Favipiravir showed significantly more uric acid elevations than comparators [5.8% vs 1.3%; P<0.0001]. CONCLUSIONS: Favipiravir demonstrates a favourable safety profile regarding total and serious AEs. However, safety concerns remain: hyperuricaemia, teratogenicity and QTc prolongation have not yet been adequately studied. Favipiravir may be safe and tolerable in short-term use, but more evidence is needed to assess the longer-term effects of treatment. Given the limitations of the evidence and unresolved safety concerns, caution is warranted in the widespread use of favipiravir against pandemic COVID-19. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7331506 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Mediscript Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73315062020-07-06 A review of the safety of favipiravir – a potential treatment in the COVID-19 pandemic? Pilkington, Victoria Pepperrell, Toby Hill, Andrew J Virus Erad Review BACKGROUND: Repurposing broad-spectrum antivirals is an immediate treatment opportunity for 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Favipiravir is an antiviral previously indicated for influenza and Ebola, which has shown some promise in early trials for treatment of COVID-19. We aim to review existing favipiravir safety evidence, which is vital to informing the potential future use of favipiravir in COVID-19. METHODS: A search was conducted across EMBASE and MEDLINE databases, supplemented by relevant grey-literature and ClinicalTrials.gov. All studies assessing the use of favipiravir in humans by 27 March 2020 were considered for inclusion. Further analysis of available safety data from phase 2 and 3 studies was undertaken. Data extracted were adverse events (AEs) grade 1–4, serious AEs and discontinuation for AEs. Specific AEs of interest highlighted in early-phase studies, including gastrointestinal AEs and hyperuricaemia, were also examined. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were identified as potential sources of evidence of the clinical safety of favipiravir. Six were phase 2 and 3 studies reporting relevant safety data for statistical comparison, representing a total of 4299 participants, an estimated 175 person-years-of-follow-up (PYFU). Comparator drugs were oseltamivir, umifenovir, lopinavir/ritonavir or placebo. Study follow-up was between 5 and 21 days. The proportions of grade 1–4 AEs on favipiravir was 28.2% vs 28.4% (P = n.s.) in the comparison arms. The proportion of discontinuations due to AEs on favipiravir was 1.1% vs 1.2% (P = n.s.) in the comparison arms. For serious AEs the proportion was 0.4% in both arms (P = n.s.). There were significantly fewer gastrointestinal AEs occurring on favipiravir vs comparators [8.7% vs 11.5%; P = 0.003]. Favipiravir showed significantly more uric acid elevations than comparators [5.8% vs 1.3%; P<0.0001]. CONCLUSIONS: Favipiravir demonstrates a favourable safety profile regarding total and serious AEs. However, safety concerns remain: hyperuricaemia, teratogenicity and QTc prolongation have not yet been adequately studied. Favipiravir may be safe and tolerable in short-term use, but more evidence is needed to assess the longer-term effects of treatment. Given the limitations of the evidence and unresolved safety concerns, caution is warranted in the widespread use of favipiravir against pandemic COVID-19. Mediscript Ltd 2020-04-30 /pmc/articles/PMC7331506/ /pubmed/32405421 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Virus Eradication published by Mediscript http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an open access article published under the terms of a Creative Commons License. |
spellingShingle | Review Pilkington, Victoria Pepperrell, Toby Hill, Andrew A review of the safety of favipiravir – a potential treatment in the COVID-19 pandemic? |
title | A review of the safety of favipiravir – a potential treatment in the COVID-19 pandemic? |
title_full | A review of the safety of favipiravir – a potential treatment in the COVID-19 pandemic? |
title_fullStr | A review of the safety of favipiravir – a potential treatment in the COVID-19 pandemic? |
title_full_unstemmed | A review of the safety of favipiravir – a potential treatment in the COVID-19 pandemic? |
title_short | A review of the safety of favipiravir – a potential treatment in the COVID-19 pandemic? |
title_sort | review of the safety of favipiravir – a potential treatment in the covid-19 pandemic? |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7331506/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32405421 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pilkingtonvictoria areviewofthesafetyoffavipiravirapotentialtreatmentinthecovid19pandemic AT pepperrelltoby areviewofthesafetyoffavipiravirapotentialtreatmentinthecovid19pandemic AT hillandrew areviewofthesafetyoffavipiravirapotentialtreatmentinthecovid19pandemic AT pilkingtonvictoria reviewofthesafetyoffavipiravirapotentialtreatmentinthecovid19pandemic AT pepperrelltoby reviewofthesafetyoffavipiravirapotentialtreatmentinthecovid19pandemic AT hillandrew reviewofthesafetyoffavipiravirapotentialtreatmentinthecovid19pandemic |