Covid-19 living Data

Pharmacologic treatments for covid-19 patients

Tenofovir + Emtricitabine vs Standard care

This comparison will not be updated. Last search date 14 Dec, 2022.

Outpatients

Forest plots
(last update: 2022-11-18)

Summary of findings
(last update: 2022-11-24)

Patient or population: COVID-19 patients
Setting: Worldwide
Intervention: Tenofovir + Emtricitabine
Comparison: Standard care

Outcome	Relative effect (95% CI)	Absolute effect (95% CI)¹		Certainty of the Evidence (GRADE)
Clinical improvement D28	Outcome not yet measured or reported
Clinical improvement D60	Outcome not yet measured or reported
Hospitalisation or death	RR: 1.35 (0.31 - 5.98)	14 more per 1000 (from 27 fewer to 194 more)		Low certainty Reasons to downgrade Risk of bias: Serious Risk of bias downgraded by 1 level: some concerns regarding adequate randomization, missing data, outcome measurement and selection of the reported results Inconsistency: Not serious Indirectness: Not serious Imprecision: Serious due to wide confidence interval consistent with the possibility for no effect/trivial effect and the possibility for harm
2 trials Arruda EAG, 2021; Parientia JJ, 2021 152 participants		Tenofovir + Emtricitabine 53 per 1,000 (12 - 233)	Standard care 39 per 1,000
WHO progression score (level 7 or above) D28	RR: ( - )	Zero events in both groups		Very low certainty Reasons to downgrade Risk of bias: Not serious Inconsistency: Not serious Indirectness: Serious despite a multicentre design this is a single study from a single country, therefore results in this population might not be generalizable to other settings. Imprecision: Very serious no events in both groups
1 trials Parientia JJ, 2021 60 participants		Tenofovir + Emtricitabine 0 per 1,000 ( - )	Standard care 0 per 1,000
WHO progression score (level 7 or above) D60	Outcome not yet measured or reported
All-cause mortality D28	RR: ( - )	Zero events in both groups		Very low certainty Reasons to downgrade Risk of bias: Serious Risk of bias downgraded by 1 level: some concerns regarding adequate randomization and missing data Inconsistency: Not serious Indirectness: Not serious Imprecision: Very serious no events in both groups
2 trials Arruda EAG, 2021; Parientia JJ, 2021 152 participants		Tenofovir + Emtricitabine 0 per 1,000 ( - )	Standard care 0 per 1,000
All-cause mortality D60	Outcome not yet measured or reported
Viral negative conversion D7	Outcome not yet measured or reported
Adverse events	Outcome not yet measured or reported
Serious adverse events	RR: 1.04 (0.15 - 7.10)	2 more per 1000 (from 36 fewer to 260 more)		Very low certainty Reasons to downgrade Risk of bias: Serious Risk of bias downgraded by 1 level: some concerns regarding adequate randomization, missing data, and selection of the reported results Inconsistency: Not serious Indirectness: Serious single study from a single institution therefore results in this population might not be generalizable to other settings Imprecision: Very serious due to very wide confidence interval consistent with the possibility for benefit and the possibility for harm
1 trials Arruda EAG, 2021 92 participants		Tenofovir + Emtricitabine 44 per 1,000 (6 - 302)	Standard care 43 per 1,000

¹The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI)

CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High certainty: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate certainty: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low certainty: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low certainty: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

Hospitalized patients

Forest plots
(last update: 2022-11-18)

To access all information :

click here for Outpatients
click here for Hospitalized patients

You can print it as a pdf. You can also click on each forest plot with your right mouse button and download.

Permanent URL for this comparison: https://covid-nma.com/living_data/index.php?comparison=428

Back to your research

Trial	Funding	Comparisons		Design	Participants	Sample size	Overall risk of bias Highest assessment	Full description
		Treatment 1	Treatment 2
NCT04712357 Arruda EAG, medRxiv, 2021 Full text Commentary Commentary	Public/non profit	Tenofovir Tenofovir+Emtricitabine Tenofovir	Placebo Placebo Tenofovir+Emtricitabine	RCT	Outpatients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 (mild) treated at a single center in Brazil.	N=139	Some concerns Details	Full description
NCT04359095 Gaitan-Duarte H, eClinicalMedicine, 2021 Full text Full text Commentary Commentary Commentary	Public/non profit	Tenofovir/Emtricitabine Colchicine + Rosuvastatin Emtricitabine/tenofovir + Colchicine + Rosuvastatin	Standard care	RCT	Patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 (mild-critical) admitted to six centers in Colombia.	N=649	Some concerns Details	Full description
NCT04685512; EuraCT 2020-001867-94 Parientia JJ, EClinicalMedicine, 2021 Full text Commentary	Public/non profit	Tenofovir+Emtricitabine	Standard care	RCT	Outpatients with confirmed COVID-19 (mild, symptomatic) treated by 2 centers in France	N=60	Some concerns Details	Full description