Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2022 Apr:144:43-55.
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.12.018. Epub 2021 Dec 18.

Bias as a source of inconsistency in ivermectin trials for COVID-19: A systematic review. Ivermectin's suggested benefits are mainly based on potentially biased results

Ariel Izcovich  1 , Sasha Peiris  2 , Martín Ragusa  3 , Fernando Tortosa  3 , Gabriel Rada  4 , Sylvain Aldighieri  2 , Ludovic Reveiz  2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Bias as a source of inconsistency in ivermectin trials for COVID-19: A systematic review. Ivermectin's suggested benefits are mainly based on potentially biased results

Ariel Izcovich et al. J Clin Epidemiol. 2022 Apr.

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this systematic review is to summarize the effects of ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of patients with COVID-19 and to assess inconsistencies in results from individual studies with focus on risk of bias due to methodological limitations.

Methods: We searched the L.OVE platform through July 6, 2021 and included randomized trials (RCTs) comparing ivermectin to standard or other active treatments. We conducted random-effects pairwise meta-analysis, assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach and performed sensitivity analysis excluding trials with risk of bias.

Results: We included 29 RCTs which enrolled 5592 cases. Overall, the certainty of the evidence was very low to low suggesting that ivermectin may result in important benefits. However, after excluding trials classified as "high risk" or "some concerns" in the risk of bias assessment, most estimates of effect changed substantially: Compared to standard of care, low certainty evidence suggests that ivermectin may not reduce mortality (RD 7 fewer per 1000) nor mechanical ventilation (RD 6 more per 1000), and moderate certainty evidence shows that it probably does not increase symptom resolution or improvement (RD 14 more per 1000) nor viral clearance (RD 12 fewer per 1000).

Conclusion: Ivermectin may not improve clinically important outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and its effects as a prophylactic intervention in exposed individuals are uncertain. Previous reports concluding important benefits associated with ivermectin are based on potentially biased results reported by studies with substantial methodological limitations. Further research is needed.

Keywords: COVID-19; Coronavirus Infections; SARS-CoV-2; Systematic review; bias; ivermectin.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig 1
Fig. 1
Results of primary analysis and sensitivity analysis excluding trials with significant methodological limitations.
Fig2
Fig. 2
Comparison: ivermectin vs. Standard of care; Outcome: mortality; Analysis: subgroups by risk of bias classification.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Hu Y, Sun J, Dai Z, Deng H, Li X, Huang Q, et al. Prevalence and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Virol. 2020;127 - PMC - PubMed
    1. The lancet infectious diseases null. The COVID-19 infodemic. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020;20:875. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pearson H. How COVID broke the evidence pipeline. Nature. 2021;593:182–185. - PubMed
    1. WHO international registry of clinical trials platform (ICTRP). Available at: https://www.who.int/clinical-trials-registry-platform. Accessed June 27, 2021.
    1. WHO essentials medicine list. Available at: https://list.essentialmeds.org/medicines/58. Accessed on June 27, 2021.