Definition and research guide
This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.
Content available: 4 complete abstracts (965 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.
Definition
An HIV protease inhibitor that works by interfering with the reproductive cycle of HIV. It also inhibits cytochrome p-450 cyp3a.
Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.
Also known as: Norvir; ABT 538; ABT-538; ABT538.
Where it fits in the MeSH classification
- Broader topics
- Thiazoles
Related concepts
- Cytochrome P-450 Cyp3A
Research landscape
PubMed indexes 6,009 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Ritonavir” (counts retrieved 2026-10-31). 1,809 of them (30.1%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is 2010-2019 with 2,002 records.
Reviews account for 507 records (8.4%) and meta-analyses for 86. Randomized controlled trials number 783 (13.0%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up a comparatively large share of this literature, which means many treatment questions have been tested directly.
Show the data
| Period | Records |
|---|---|
| through 1999 | 446 |
| 2000-2009 | 1,752 |
| 2010-2019 | 2,002 |
| 2020 onward | 1,809 |
Publication-type chart data
| Type | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 507 | 8.4% |
| Meta-analyses | 86 | 1.4% |
| Randomized controlled trials | 783 | 13.0% |
Method: PubMed query "Ritonavir"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-31.
Reading the evidence in drugs and chemicals
Studies of a chemical or drug can answer very different questions: what it is and how it behaves in cells and animals, how the body handles it, and whether it changes outcomes in people. Laboratory and animal findings often do not carry over to patients, and observational studies of exposures are confounded by who uses a substance and why. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to use, avoid, start or stop any substance or medicine; talk to a qualified clinician or pharmacist about your own situation. Check the dose, the species, the comparison group and whether a patient-relevant outcome was measured.
Evidence from open-access studies
These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.
A systematic review of lopinavir therapy for SARS coronavirus and MERS coronavirus-A possible reference for coronavirus disease-19 treatment option [1]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- In the past few decades, coronaviruses have risen as a global threat to public health.
- Closing excerpt
- In this review, we discuss the literature on the efficacy of LPV in vitro and in vivo, especially in patients with SARS and MERS, so that we might clarify the potential for the use of LPV in patients with COVID-19.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (117 words)
In the past few decades, coronaviruses have risen as a global threat to public health. Currently, the outbreak of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) from Wuhan caused a worldwide panic. There are no specific antiviral therapies for COVID-19. However, there are agents that were used during the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) epidemics. We could learn from SARS and MERS. Lopinavir (LPV) is an effective agent that inhibits the protease activity of coronavirus. In this review, we discuss the literature on the efficacy of LPV in vitro and in vivo, especially in patients with SARS and MERS, so that we might clarify the potential for the use of LPV in patients with COVID-19.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 32104907 · DOI · PMC7217143
Treatment of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome with a combination of lopinavir-ritonavir and interferon-β1b (MIRACLE trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial [2]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundIt had been more than 5 years since the first case of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus infection (MERS-CoV) was recorded, but no specific treatment has been investigated in randomized clinical trials.
- Closing excerpt
- Registered on 27 July 2016.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (236 words)
BackgroundIt had been more than 5 years since the first case of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus infection (MERS-CoV) was recorded, but no specific treatment has been investigated in randomized clinical trials. Results from in vitro and animal studies suggest that a combination of lopinavir/ritonavir and interferon-β1b (IFN-β1b) may be effective against MERS-CoV. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy of treatment with a combination of lopinavir/ritonavir and recombinant IFN-β1b provided with standard supportive care, compared to treatment with placebo provided with standard supportive care in patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS requiring hospital admission.MethodsThe protocol is prepared in accordance with the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) guidelines. Hospitalized adult patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS will be enrolled in this recursive, two-stage, group sequential, multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind randomized controlled trial. The trial is initially designed to include 2 two-stage components. The first two-stage component is designed to adjust sample size and determine futility stopping, but not efficacy stopping. The second two-stage component is designed to determine efficacy stopping and possibly readjustment of sample size. The primary outcome is 90-day mortality.DiscussionThis will be the first randomized controlled trial of a potential treatment for MERS. The study is sponsored by King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Enrollment for this study began in November 2016, and has enrolled thirteen patients as of Jan 24-2018.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02845843 . Registered on 27 July 2016.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 29382391 · DOI · PMC5791210
A Retrospective Controlled Cohort Study of the Impact of Glucocorticoid Treatment in SARS-CoV-2 Infection Mortality [3]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Evidence to support the use of steroids in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia is lacking.
- Closing excerpt
- Rates of in-hospital mortality were not different between initial regimens of 1 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone and glucocorticoid pulses.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (298 words)
Evidence to support the use of steroids in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia is lacking. We aim to determine the impact of steroid use for COVID-19 pneumonia on hospital mortality. We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study in a university hospital in Madrid, Spain, during March of 2020. To determine the role of steroids in in-hospital mortality, patients admitted with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia and treated with steroids were compared to patients not treated with steroids, and we adjusted with a propensity score for patients on steroid treatment. Survival times were compared using the log rank test. Different steroid regimens were compared and adjusted with a second propensity score. During the study period, 463 out of 848 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia fulfilled inclusion criteria. Among them, 396 (46.7%) patients were treated with steroids and 67 patients were not. Global mortality was 15.1%. The median time to steroid treatment from symptom onset was 10 days (interquartile range [IQR], 8 to 13 days). In-hospital mortality was lower in patients treated with steroids than in controls (13.9% [55/396] versus 23.9% [16/67]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.51 [95% confidence interval, 0.27 to 0.96]; P = 0.044). Steroid treatment reduced mortality by 41.8% relative to the mortality with no steroid treatment (relative risk reduction, 0.42 [95% confidence interval, 0.048 to 0.65]). Initial treatment with 1 mg/kg of body weight/day of methylprednisolone versus steroid pulses was not associated with in-hospital mortality (13.5% [42/310] versus 15.1% [13/86]; odds ratio [OR], 0.880 [95% confidence interval, 0.449 to 1.726]; P = 0.710). Our results show that the survival of patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia is higher in patients treated with glucocorticoids than in those not treated. Rates of in-hospital mortality were not different between initial regimens of 1 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone and glucocorticoid pulses.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 32571831 · DOI · PMC7449182
Oral Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir for Covid-19 in Higher-Risk Outpatients [4]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundNirmatrelvir-ritonavir has been shown to reduce progression to severe illness from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in unvaccinated high-risk outpatients.
- Closing excerpt
- ).
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (314 words)
BackgroundNirmatrelvir-ritonavir has been shown to reduce progression to severe illness from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in unvaccinated high-risk outpatients. The effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in persons who have been vaccinated, infected naturally, or both is unclear.MethodsIn two open-label platform trials (PANORAMIC in the United Kingdom and CanTreatCOVID in Canada), we enrolled higher-risk adults (≥50 years of age or ≥18 years of age with coexisting conditions) in the community who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and had been unwell for 5 days or less. The participants were randomly assigned to receive usual care plus nirmatrelvir (300 mg)-ritonavir (100 mg) twice a day for 5 days or to receive usual care alone. The primary outcome was hospitalization or death from any cause within 28 days after randomization.ResultsFrom December 8, 2021, to September 30, 2024, a total of 3516 participants in the PANORAMIC trial and 716 participants in the CanTreatCOVID trial underwent randomization. In the PANORAMIC trial, 14 of 1698 participants (0.8%) in the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group and 11 of 1673 participants (0.7%) in the usual-care group were hospitalized or died (adjusted odds ratio, 1.18; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.55 to 2.62; probability of superiority, 0.334). In the CanTreatCOVID trial, 2 of 343 participants (0.6%) in the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group and 4 of 324 participants (1.2%) in the usual-care group were hospitalized or died (adjusted odds ratio, 0.48; 95% Bayesian credible interval, 0.08 to 2.23; probability of superiority, 0.830). In a substudy involving 634 participants, viral load was reduced by the end of treatment with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir. Serious adverse events with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir were reported in 9 participants in the PANORAMIC trial and in 4 participants in the CanTreatCOVID trial.ConclusionsIn two open-label trials, nirmatrelvir-ritonavir did not reduce the incidence of hospitalization or death among vaccinated higher-risk participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection. (Funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research, and others; PANORAMIC ISRCTN number, 2021-005748-31; CanTreatCOVID ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05614349.).
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 42019019 · DOI · PMC7619176
Key reviews and meta-analyses
The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.
- Research article Ritonavir. Clinical pharmacokinetics and interactions with other anti-HIV agents [5]
- Research article Urgent Guidance for Navigating and Circumventing the QTc-Prolonging and Torsadogenic Potential of Possible Pharmacotherapies for Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) [6]
- Research article Lopinavir/ritonavir: a review of its use in the management of HIV infection [7]
- Research article Compounds with Therapeutic Potential against Novel Respiratory 2019 Coronavirus [8]
- Research article Nirmatrelvir Plus Ritonavir: First Approval [9]
- Research article Pharmacological and therapeutic properties of ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor therapy in HIV-infected patients [10]
References
- Yao TT, Qian JD, Zhu WY, Wang Y, Wang GQ. A systematic review of lopinavir therapy for SARS coronavirus and MERS coronavirus-A possible reference for coronavirus disease-19 treatment option. . 2020. PMID 32104907 · DOI · PMC7217143
- Arabi YM, Alothman A, Balkhy HH, Al-Dawood A, AlJohani S, Al Harbi S, et al.. Treatment of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome with a combination of lopinavir-ritonavir and interferon-β1b (MIRACLE trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. . 2018. PMID 29382391 · DOI · PMC5791210
- Fernández-Cruz A, Ruiz-Antorán B, Muñoz-Gómez A, Sancho-López A, Mills-Sánchez P, Centeno-Soto GA, et al.. A Retrospective Controlled Cohort Study of the Impact of Glucocorticoid Treatment in SARS-CoV-2 Infection Mortality. . 2020. PMID 32571831 · DOI · PMC7449182
- Butler CC, Pinto AD, Harris V, Holmes J, Rahman NM, Cureton L, et al.. Oral Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir for Covid-19 in Higher-Risk Outpatients. . 2026. PMID 42019019 · DOI · PMC7619176
- Hsu A, Granneman GR, Bertz RJ. Ritonavir. Clinical pharmacokinetics and interactions with other anti-HIV agents. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1998. PMID 9812178 · DOI
- Giudicessi JR, Noseworthy PA, Friedman PA, Ackerman MJ. Urgent Guidance for Navigating and Circumventing the QTc-Prolonging and Torsadogenic Potential of Possible Pharmacotherapies for Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19). Mayo Clin Proc. 2020. PMID 32359771 · DOI · PMC7141471
- Cvetkovic RS, Goa KL. Lopinavir/ritonavir: a review of its use in the management of HIV infection. Drugs. 2003. PMID 12662125 · DOI
- Martinez MA. Compounds with Therapeutic Potential against Novel Respiratory 2019 Coronavirus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2020. PMID 32152082 · DOI · PMC7179632
- Lamb YN. Nirmatrelvir Plus Ritonavir: First Approval. Drugs. 2022. PMID 35305258 · DOI · PMC8933659
- Zeldin RK, Petruschke RA. Pharmacological and therapeutic properties of ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitor therapy in HIV-infected patients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2004. PMID 14657084 · DOI
About this article
- Sources
- NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
- Verification
- Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
- Review state
- automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
- Version
- 1, last updated 2026-10-31.
See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.
Evidence strength
EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.