Evidence Hub

Efficacy and Safety of Adjunctive Corticosteroids in Non-HIV Pneumocystis jirovecii Pneumonia with Respiratory Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Observational Studies

Reza Rahmadinata, Rohani Lasmaria

Bioscientia Medicina : Journal of Biomedicine and Translational Research, 2025

2,900 participants

Abstract

Background: Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in HIV-negative immunocompromised patients carries a mortality rate significantly higher than in the HIV-positive population. While adjunctive corticosteroids are the standard of care for HIV-associated pneumonia to prevent Immune Reconstitution Inflammatory Syndrome, their efficacy in non-HIV patients remains controversial due to differing immunopathogenesis. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of adjunctive corticosteroids in non-HIV patients with respiratory failure, specifically addressing the discordance between historical observational data and recent randomized evidence.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, searching databases from January 2014 to July 2025. We included randomized controlled trials and observational studies of non-HIV adults with pneumonia receiving adjunctive corticosteroids. To address methodological heterogeneity, we performed stratified analyses separating randomized trial data from observational cohorts and conducted sensitivity analyses to account for outliers. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane RoB-2 and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Results: Ten studies comprising 2,900 patients were analyzed. The randomized trial demonstrated no statistically significant reduction in 28-day mortality with corticosteroids (21.5% vs 32.4%, p=0.069). In the observational arm, initial pooled analysis suggested benefit, but sensitivity analysis…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 2,900 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