Monoclonal Antibody for the Prevention of Respiratory Syncytial Virus in Infants and Children
Mingyao Sun,Honghao Lai,Feiyang Na,Sheng Li,Xia Qiu,Jinhui Tian,Zhigang Zhang,Long Ge
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.0023
2023-02-19
JAMA Network Open
Abstract:Importance Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the leading cause of acute lower respiratory infection in children younger than 5 years; effective prevention strategies are urgently needed. Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of monoclonal antibodies for the prevention of RSV infection in infants and children. Data Sources In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from database inception to March 2022. Study Selection Randomized clinical trials that enrolled infants at high risk of RSV infection to receive a monoclonal antibody or placebo were included. Keywords and extensive vocabulary related to monoclonal antibodies, RSV, and randomized clinical trials were searched. Data Extraction and Synthesis The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guideline was used. Teams of 2 reviewers independently performed literature screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Developments, and Evaluation approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A random-effects model network meta-analysis was conducted using a consistency model under the frequentist framework. Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcomes were all-cause mortality, RSV-related hospitalization, RSV-related infection, drug-related adverse events, intensive care unit admission, supplemental oxygen use, and mechanical ventilation use. Results Fifteen randomized clinical trials involving 18 395 participants were eligible; 14 were synthesized, with 18 042 total participants (median age at study entry, 3.99 months [IQR, 3.25-6.58 months]; median proportion of males, 52.37% [IQR, 50.49%-53.85%]). Compared with placebo, with moderate- to high-certainty evidence, nirsevimab, palivizumab, and motavizumab were associated with significantly reduced RSV-related infections per 1000 participants (nirsevimab: −123 [95% CI, −138 to −100]; palivizumab: −108 [95% CI, −127 to −82]; motavizumab: −136 [95% CI, −146 to −125]) and RSV-related hospitalizations per 1000 participants (nirsevimab: −54 [95% CI, −64 to −38; palivizumab: −39 [95% CI, −48 to −28]; motavizumab: −48 [95% CI, −58 to −33]). With moderate-certainty evidence, both motavizumab and palivizumab were associated with significant reductions in intensive care unit admissions per 1000 participants (−8 [95% CI, −9 to −4] and −5 [95% CI, −7 to 0], respectively) and supplemental oxygen use per 1000 participants (−59 [95% CI, −63 to −54] and −55 [95% CI, −61 to −41], respectively), and nirsevimab was associated with significantly reduced supplemental oxygen use per 1000 participants (−59 [95% CI, −65 to −40]). No significant differences were found in all-cause mortality and drug-related adverse events. Suptavumab did not show any significant benefits for the outcomes of interest. Conclusions and Relevance In this study, motavizumab, nirsevimab, and palivizumab were associated with substantial benefits in the prevention of RSV infection, without a significant increase in adverse events compared with placebo. However, more research is needed to confirm the present conclusions, especially for safety and cost-effectiveness.
medicine, general & internal