Casirivimab/imdevimab vs placebo: Adverse events: all grades
- Population
- SARS‐CoV‐2 uninfected people without defined exposure, or with potential exposure to SARS‐CoV‐2
- Intervention
- Casirivimab/imdevimab
- Comparison
- placebo
- Outcome
- Adverse events: all grades
Casirivimab/imdevimab showed no clear difference in adverse events: all grades within 6 months compared with placebo (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Casirivimab/imdevimab vs placebo Adverse events: all grades within 6 months · SARS‐CoV‐2 uninfected people without defined exposure, or with potential exposure to SARS‐CoV‐2 Casirivimab/imdevimab showed no clear difference in adverse events: all grades within 6 months compared with placebo (low certainty). SARS‐CoV‐2‐neutralising monoclonal antibodies to prevent COVID‐19 (2022) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.14 [0.98, 1.31] | 1 study · 969 participants | Low |
Casirivimab/imdevimab vs placebo Adverse events: all grade until data cut‐offb · SARS‐CoV‐2 uninfected people without defined exposure, or with potential exposure to SARS‐CoV‐2 Casirivimab/imdevimab leads to lower adverse events: all grade until data cut‐offb compared with placebo (high certainty). SARS‐CoV‐2‐neutralising monoclonal antibodies to prevent COVID‐19 (2022) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.7 [0.61, 0.8] | 1 study · 2617 participants | High |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| SARS‐CoV‐2‐neutralising monoclonal antibodies to prevent COVID‐19 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Casirivimab/imdevimab vs placebo · non‐hospitalised individuals with COVID‐19 (asymptomatic and mild disease) · 1 review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.