Evidence Hub

Ruxolitinib in treatment of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A multicenter, single-blind, randomized controlled trial

Yang Cao, Jia-Ming Wei, Liang Zou, Tie-Bin Jiang, Gao-Xiang Wang, Liting Chen, Liang Huang, Fan-Kai Meng et al.

Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2020

22 participants · 396 citations

Abstract

Background Accumulating evidence proposed Janus-associated kinase (JAK) inhibitors as therapeutic targets warranting rapid investigation. Objective This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib, a JAK1/2 inhibitor, for coronavirus disease 2019. Methods We conducted a prospective, multicenter, single-blind, randomized controlled phase II trial involving patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019. Results Forty-three patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ruxolitinib plus standard-of-care treatment (22 patients) or placebo based on standard-of-care treatment (21 patients). After exclusion of 2 patients (1 ineligible, 1 consent withdrawn) from the ruxolitinib group, 20 patients in the intervention group and 21 patients in the control group were included in the study. Treatment with ruxolitinib plus standard-of-care was not associated with significantly accelerated clinical improvement in severe patients with coronavirus disease 2019, although ruxolitinib recipients had a numerically faster clinical improvement. Eighteen (90%) patients from the ruxolitinib group showed computed tomography improvement at day 14 compared with 13 (61.9%) patients from the control group (P = .0495). Three patients in the control group died of respiratory failure, with 14.3% overall mortality at day 28; no patients died in the ruxolitinib group. Ruxolitinib was well tolerated with low toxicities and no new safety signals. Levels of 7 cytokines were significantly decreased…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 22 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free