Small RCT of hospitalized patients in India with 19 ivermectin patients and 13 control patients, with all receiving SOC including HCQ, showing no significant differences. The patient population is biased because the study recruited patients that did not respond to standard treatment.
Authors do not specify the treatment delay but it is likely relatively late because the patients had already undergone standard treatment. Criteria for discharge are not provided. The time of discharge status is not specified and may not have been an equal time since treatment initiation for all patients.
Authors indicate 19 treatment and 16 control patients, but the results only show 13 control patients. Authors do not indicate why the other 3 are missing.
Randomization in this small sample resulted in very large differences in the groups, with over twice as many in the ivermectin group with age >40, and the only 2 patients with age >60 both in the ivermectin group. Authors did not adjust for these differences.
Kishoria et al., 8/31/2020, Randomized Controlled Trial, India, South Asia, peer-reviewed, 7 authors, dosage 12mg single dose.
risk of no hospital discharge, 7.5% higher, RR 1.08, p = 1.00, treatment 11 of 19 (57.9%), control 7 of 13 (53.8%).
risk of no virological cure, 7.5% higher, RR 1.08, p = 1.00, treatment 11 of 19 (57.9%), control 7 of 13 (53.8%), day 3.
risk of no virological cure, 220.0% higher, RR 3.20, p = 0.45, treatment 1 of 5 (20.0%), control 0 of 6 (0.0%), continuity correction due to zero event (with reciprocal of the contrasting arm), day 5.
This study is excluded in meta analysis: excessive unadjusted differences between groups.
Effect extraction follows pre-specified rules
prioritizing more serious outcomes. For an individual study the most serious
outcome may have a smaller number of events and lower statistical signficance,
however this provides the strongest evidence for the most serious outcomes
when combining the results of many trials.