Chinese guidelines prioritize the use of Azvudine and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in COVID-19 patients. Nevertheless, the real-world effectiveness of Azvudine versus nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is still lacking, despite clinical trials showing their effectiveness compared with matched controls. To compare the effectiveness of Azvudine versus nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatments in real-world clinical practice, we identified 2118 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, with a follow-up of up to 38 days. After exclusions and propensity score matching, we included 281 Azvudine recipients and 281 nirmatrelvir-ritonavir recipients who did not receive oxygen therapy at admission. The lower crude incidence rate of composite disease progression outcome (7.83 vs. 14.83 per 1000 person-days, p = 0.026) and all-cause death (2.05 vs. 5.78 per 1000 person-days, p = 0.052) were observed among Azvudine recipients. Azvudine was associated with lower risks of composite disease progression outcome (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32-0.94) and all-cause death (HR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.16-1.04). In subgroup analyses, the results of composite outcome retained significance among patients aged <65 years, those having a history of disease, those with severe COVID-19 at admission, and those receiving antibiotics. These findings suggest that Azvudine treatment showed effectiveness in hospitalized COVID-19 patients compared with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in terms of composite disease progression outcome.
Keywords: Azvudine; COVID-19; all-cause death; composite disease progression outcome; nirmatrelvir-ritonavir; real-world evidence.
© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.