Evidence Hub

Impact of most promising Ebola therapies on survival: a secondary analysis during the tenth outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo

Esther Mamu Kikwango, P. Akilimali, T. Nguyen

Virology Journal, 2025

781 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

MAb114, REGN-EB3, Remdesivir, and ZMapp, which are monoclonal antibody-based treatments, have been compared and shown to be promising therapies against the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD). There has been no comparison between these medications and standard treatment (without antiviral). Our study aimed to examine the contribution of each regimen compared to standard treatment on the survival of EVD patients and assess whether this association was modified by EVD vaccination (rVSV-ZEBOV Ebola vaccine) status. Methodology: We performed a secondary analysis study using retrospective cohort data obtained from four EVD treatment centers located in Katwa, Mangina, Butembo, and Beni in the North Kivu region. The main outcome measure was mortality within a 28-day period among 781 included patients. A Cox model was used to identify predictors of survival in hospitalized EVD patients. Results: Vaccinated EVD patients were 1.7 times less likely to die compared to unvaccinated patients (3.70 days vs. 5.00 days; p = 0.0002). Delaying care and treatment at EVD treatment centres increased mortality risk by 5% for each day following symptom onset. Compared to the standard treatment group, adjusted mortality rates were significantly reduced in the groups receiving MAb114 (0.27, p < 0.001), REGN-EB3 (0.26, p < 0.001), and Remdesivir (0.38, p = 0.005). ZMapp also showed a reduction, though with borderline statistical significance (0.47, p = 0.032). Conclusions: Prompt identification and treatment,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, 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: 781 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