Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Efficacy of inhaled nebulised unfractionated heparin to prevent intubation or death in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: an investigator-initiated international meta-trial of randomised clinical studies

  • Frank M.P. van Haren
  • , Sarah J. Valle
  • , Ary Serpa Neto
  • , Marcus J. Schultz
  • , John G. Laffey
  • , Antonio Artigas
  • , Barry Dixon
  • , Alicia B. Vilaseca
  • , Ruben A. Barbera
  • , Tarek I. Ismail
  • , Rabab S. Mahrous
  • , Mohamed Badr
  • , Gilberto DeNucci
  • , Carlos Sverdloff
  • , Marta Camprubi-Rimblas
  • , David W. Cosgrave
  • , Bairbre McNicholas
  • , Catriona Cody
  • , Gerard Curley
  • , Thomas L. Smoot
  • Sabrina Staas, Khine Sann, Caitlin Sas, Anusha Belani, Christopher Hillman, Sidharta Kusuma Manggala, Dita Aditianingsih, Adhrie Sugiarto, Mira Yulianti, Herikurniawan Herikurniawan, Robert Sinto, Aino Nindya Auerkari, Septian Adi Permana, Ashley Woodcock, Mary Carroll, Tom Wilkinson, Dave Singh, Janis Kay Shute, Miles Carroll, Clive Page

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Inhaled nebulised unfractionated heparin (UFH) has a strong rationale as a treatment for severe respiratory infections, including COVID-19, due to its antiviral, anti-inflammatory, and anti-coagulant properties, which may prevent viral entry, lung injury progression, and pulmonary thrombosis. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of inhaled nebulised UFH to prevent intubation or death in hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Methods: In this prospective, a priori set up and defined, collaborative meta-trial of six randomised clinical studies, adult hospitalised but not intubated COVID-19 patients were randomly assigned to inhaled nebulised UFH on top of standard of care or standard of care alone. The dose and method of nebulisation was specific to each study. The primary outcome was intubation or death, assessed at the longest follow-up after randomisation. The meta-trial was registered atClinicalTrials.govIDNCT04635241. Findings: Between June 2020 and December 2022, 478 patients from 10 hospitals in six countries (Argentina, Brazil, Egypt, Indonesia, Ireland and USA) were enrolled. The odds ratio (OR) for intubation or death was 0.43 (0.26–0.73, p = 0.001); the OR for in-hospital mortality was 0.26 (0.13–0.54, p < 0.001) with inhaled nebulised UFH compared to standard of care alone. There were no safety issues reported, including no instances of pulmonary or systemic bleeding in the nebulised UFH group. Interpretation: In patients hospitalised but not intubated for COVID-19, inhaled nebulised UFH prevented intubation and reduced mortality, without causing pulmonary or systemic bleeding. Funding: The Sponsor of the meta-trial was the INHALE-HEP Collaborative Research Group (CRG); investigators of each contributing study were members of the INHALE-HEP CRG. No funding was received for the meta-trial. The Brazilian study was funded by The J.R. Moulton Charity Trust. The Irish study was funded by a Grant from Science Foundation Ireland to Cúram, the SFI's Centre for Research in Medical Devices (Research Centre Award Reference:13/RC/2073).

Original languageEnglish
Article number103339
JournalEClinicalMedicine
Volume88
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2025

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • ARDS
  • COVID-19
  • Inhaled heparin
  • Intubation
  • Meta-trial
  • Mortality
  • Nebulised heparin
  • Pandemic
  • Randomised trial
  • Respiratory failure
  • SARS-CoV-2
  • Unfractionated heparin

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Efficacy of inhaled nebulised unfractionated heparin to prevent intubation or death in hospitalised patients with COVID-19: an investigator-initiated international meta-trial of randomised clinical studies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this