The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Favipiravir Versus Arbidol for Clinical Recovery Rate in Moderate and Severe Adult COVID-19 Patients: A Prospective, Multicenter, Open-Label, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Background: In addition to supportive therapy, antiviral therapy is an effective treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of favipiravir and umifenovir (Arbidol) to treat COVID-19 patients. Methods: We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label multicenter trial involving adult patients with COVID-19. Enrolled patients with initial symptoms within 12 days were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive conventional therapy plus Arbidol (200 mg*3/day) or favipiravir (1600 mg*2/first day followed by 600 mg*2/day) for 7 days. The primary outcome was the clinical recovery rate at day 7 of drug administration (relief for pyrexia and cough, respiratory frequency ≤24 times/min; oxygen saturation ≥98%). Latency to relief for pyrexia and cough and the rate of auxiliary oxygen therapy (AOT) or noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NMV)/mechanical ventilation (MV) were the secondary outcomes. Safety data were collected for 17 days. Results: A total of 240 enrolled COVID-19 patients underwent randomization; 120 patients were assigned to receive favipiravir (116 assessed), and 120 patients were assigned to receive Arbidol (120 assessed). The clinical recovery rate at day 7 of drug administration did not significantly differ between the favipiravir group (71/116) and Arbidol group (62/120) ( p = 0.1396, difference in recovery rate: 0.0954; 95% CI: −0.0305∼0.2213). Favipiravir contributed to relief for both pyrexia (difference: 1.70 days, p < 0.0001) and cough (difference: 1.75 days, p < 0.0001). No difference was observed in the AOT or NMV/MV rate (both p > 0.05). The most frequently observed favipiravir-associated adverse event was increased serum uric acid (16/116, OR: 5.52, p = 0.0014). Conclusion: Among patients with COVID-19, favipiravir, compared to Arbidol, did not significantly improve the clinical recovery rate at day 7. Favipiravir significantly improved the latency to relieve pyrexia and cough. Adverse effects caused by favipiravir are mild and manageable.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China
Huang, C., Wang, Y., Li, X., Ren, L., Zhao, J., Hu, Y., Zhang, L., Fan, G., Xu, J., Gu, X., et al. (2020) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30183-5 · Cited by 48,884
Self-citationClinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 in China
Guan, W.-J., Ni, Z.-Y., Hu, Y., Liang, W.-H., Ou, C.-Q., He, J.-X., Liu, L., Shan, H., Lei, C.-L., Hui, D. S. C., et al. (2020) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2002032 · Cited by 30,246
Zhou, F., Yu, T., Du, R., Fan, G., Liu, Y., Liu, Z., Xiang, J., Wang, Y., Song, B., Gu, X., et al. (2020) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30566-3 · Cited by 27,263
Self-citationWang, D., Hu, B., Hu, C., Zhu, F., Liu, X., Zhang, J., Wang, B., Xiang, H., Cheng, Z., Xiong, Y., et al. (2020) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2020.1585 · Cited by 20,148
Self-citationLa certeza de lo impredecible: Cultura Educación y Sociedad en tiempos de COVID19
Martínez González, M. (2020) · DSPACE System - Metalibrary (University of the Coast) · Cited by 18,463
Early transmission dynamics in Wuhan, China, of novel coronavirus-infected pneumonia
Li, Q., Guan, X., Wu, P., Wang, X., Zhou, L., Tong, Y., Ren, R., Leung, K. S. M., Lau, E. H. Y., Wong, J. Y., et al. (2020) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2001316 · Cited by 16,575
Self-citationDiscovering drugs to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)
Dong, L., Hu, S., & Gao, J. (2020) · Drug Discoveries & Therapeutics · doi:10.5582/ddt.2020.01012 · Cited by 1,390
Zhang, H., Kang, Z., Gong, H., Xu, D., Wang, J., Li, Z., Cui, X., Xiao, J., Meng, T., Zhou, W., et al. (2020) · doi:10.1101/2020.01.30.927806 · Cited by 658
In Vitro and In Vivo Activities of Anti-Influenza Virus Compound T-705
Furuta, Y., Takahashi, K., Fukuda, Y., Kuno, M., Kamiyama, T., Kozaki, K., Nomura, N., Egawa, H., Minami, S., Watanabe, Y., et al. (2002) · Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy · doi:10.1128/aac.46.4.977-981.2002 · Cited by 501
Favipiravir: Pharmacokinetics and Concerns About Clinical Trials for 2019‐nCoV Infection
Du, Y., & Chen, X. (2020) · Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · doi:10.1002/cpt.1844 · Cited by 418
Cited by
Wang, Y., Zhang, D., Du, G., Du, R., Zhao, J., Jin, Y., Fu, S., Gao, L., Cheng, Z., Lu, Q., et al. (2020) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)31022-9 · Cited by 3,440
Self-citationImmunology of COVID-19: Current State of the Science
Vabret, N., Britton, G. J., Gruber, C., Hegde, S., Kim, J., Kuksin, M., Levantovsky, R., Malle, L., Moreira, A., Park, M. D., et al. (2020) · Immunity · doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2020.05.002 · Cited by 1,623
Self-citationStructure of the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase from COVID-19 virus
Gao, Y., Yan, L., Huang, Y., Liu, F., Zhao, Y., Cao, L., Wang, T., Sun, Q., Ming, Z., Zhang, L., et al. (2020) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abb7498 · Cited by 1,609
Self-citationDrug treatments for covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis
Siemieniuk, R. A., Bartoszko, J. J., Zeraatkar, D., Kum, E., Qasim, A., Díaz Martinez, J. P., Izcovich, A., Rochwerg, B., Lamontagne, F., Han, M. A., et al. (2020) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.m2980 · Cited by 846
A Review of SARS-CoV-2 and the Ongoing Clinical Trials
Tu, Y.-F., Chien, C.-S., Yarmishyn, A. A., Lin, Y.-Y., Luo, Y.-H., Lin, Y.-T., Lai, W.-Y., Yang, D.-M., Chou, S.-J., Yang, Y.-P., et al. (2020) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms21072657 · Cited by 686
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, C., Zhang, Y., Huang, J., Yin, P., Cheng, Z., Wu, J., Chen, S., Zhang, Y., Chen, B., Lu, M., Luo, Y., Ju, L., Zhang, J., & Wang, X.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Pharmacology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2021-09-02
- Volume
- 12
- Pages
- 683296-683296
- ISSN
- 1663-9812 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3197627421
- Cited by
- 849
- References
- 16
- FWCI
- 33.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Favipiravir Versus Arbidol for Clinical Recovery Rate in Moderate and Severe Adult COVID-19 Patients: A Prospective, Multicenter, Open-Label, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fphar.2021.683296
- The paper
- Chen, C., Zhang, Y., Huang, J., Yin, P., Cheng, Z., Wu, J., Chen, S., Zhang, Y., Chen, B., Lu, M., Luo, Y., Ju, L., Zhang, J., & Wang, X. (2021). Favipiravir Versus Arbidol for Clinical Recovery Rate in Moderate and Severe Adult COVID-19 Patients: A Prospective, Multicenter, Open-Label, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Frontiers in Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2021.683296
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
