Homeopathy for COVID-19 in primary care: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (COVID-Simile study) / 中西医结合学报

BACKGROUND@#Different homeopathic approaches have been used as supportive care for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases, but none has been tested in a clinical trial.@*OBJECTIVES@#To investigate the effectiveness and safety of the homeopathic medicine, Natrum muriaticum LM2, for mild cases of COVID-19.@*DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS@#A randomized, double-blind, two-armed, parallel, single-center, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted from June 2020 to April 2021 in São-Carlos, Brazil. Participants aged > 18 years, with influenza-like symptoms and positive result from a real-time polymerase chain reaction test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 were recruited and randomized (1:1) into two groups that received different treatments during a period of at-home-isolation. One group received the homeopathic medicine Natrum muriaticum, prepared with the second degree of the fifty-millesimal dynamization (LM2; Natrum muriaticum LM2), while the other group received a placebo.@*OUTCOME MEASURES@#The primary endpoint was time until recovery from COVID-19 influenza-like symptoms. Secondary measures included a survival analysis of the number and severity of COVID-19 symptoms (influenza-like symptoms plus anosmia and ageusia) from a symptom grading scale that was informed by the participant, hospital admissions, and adverse events. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate time-to-event (survival) measures.@*RESULTS@#Data from 86 participants were analyzed (homeopathy, n = 42; placebo, n = 44). There was no difference in time to recovery between two groups among participants who were reporting influenza-like symptoms at the beginning of monitoring (homeopathy, n = 41; placebo, n = 41; P = 0.56), nor in a sub-group that had at least 5 moderate to severe influenza-like symptoms at the beginning of monitoring (homeopathy, n = 15; placebo, n = 17; P = 0.06). Secondary outcomes indicated that a 50% reduction in symptom score was achieved significantly earlier in the homeopathy group (homeopathy, n = 24; placebo, n = 25; P = 0.04), among the participants with a basal symptom score ≥ 5. Moreover, values of restricted mean survival time indicated that patients receiving homeopathy might have improved 0.9 days faster during the first five days of follow-up (P = 0.022). Hospitalization rates were 2.4% in the homeopathy group and 6.8% in the placebo group (P = 0.62). Participants reported 3 adverse events in the homeopathy group and 6 in the placebo group.@*CONCLUSION@#Results showed that Natrum muriaticum LM2 was safe to use for COVID-19, but there was no statistically significant difference in the primary endpoints of Natrum muriaticum LM2 and placebo for mild COVID-19 cases. Although some secondary measures do not support the null hypothesis, the wide confidence intervals suggest that further studies with larger sample sizes and more symptomatic participants are needed to test the effectiveness of homeopathic Natrum muriaticum LM2 for COVID-19.@*TRIAL REGISTRATION@#UMIN Clinical Trials Registry ID: JPRN-UMIN000040602.

Double-blind evaluation of homeopathy on cocaine craving: a randomized controlled pilot study / 中西医结合学报

<p><b>BACKGROUND</b>Brazil is among the nations with the greatest rates of annual cocaine usage. Pharmacological treatment of cocaine addiction is still limited, opening space for nonconventional interventions. Homeopathic Q-potencies of opium and Erythroxylum coca have been tested in the integrative treatment of cocaine craving among homeless addicts, but this setting had not proven feasible, due to insufficient recruitment.</p><p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>This study investigates the effectiveness and tolerability of homeopathic Q-potencies of opium and E. coca in the integrative treatment of cocaine craving in a community-based psychosocial rehabilitation setting.</p><p><b>DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS</b>A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, eight-week pilot trial was performed at the Psychosocial Attention Center for Alcohol and Other Drugs (CAPS-AD), Sao Carlos/SP, Brazil. Eligible subjects included CAPS-AD patients between 18 and 65 years of age, with an International Classification of Diseases-10 diagnosis of cocaine dependence (F14.2). The patients were randomly assigned to two treatment groups: psychosocial rehabilitation plus homeopathic Q-potencies of opium and E. coca (homeopathy group), and psychosocial rehabilitation plus indistinguishable placebo (placebo group).</p><p><b>MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES</b>The main outcome measure was the percentage of cocaine-using days. Secondary measures were the Minnesota Cocaine Craving Scale and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey scores. Adverse events were reported in both groups.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The study population comprised 54 patients who attended at least one post-baseline assessment, out of the 104 subjects initially enrolled. The mean percentage of cocaine-using days in the homeopathy group was 18.1% (standard deviation (SD): 22.3%), compared to 29.8% (SD: 30.6%) in the placebo group (P < 0.01). Analysis of the Minnesota Cocaine Craving Scale scores showed no between-group differences in the intensity of cravings, but results significantly favored homeopathy over placebo in the proportion of weeks without craving episodes and the patients' appraisal of treatment efficacy for reduction of cravings. Analysis of 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey scores found no significant differences. Few adverse events were reported: 0.57 adverse events/patient in the homeopathy group compared to 0.69 adverse events/patient in the placebo group (P = 0.41).</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>A psychosocial rehabilitation setting improved recruitment but was not sufficient to decrease dropout frequency among Brazilian cocaine treatment seekers. Psychosocial rehabilitation plus homeopathic Q-potencies of opium and E. coca were more effective than psychosocial rehabilitation alone in reducing cocaine cravings. Due to high dropout rate and risk of bias, further research is required to confirm our findings, with specific focus on strategies to increase patient retention.</p><p><b>TRIAL REGISTRATION</b>RBR-2xzcwz (http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br).</p>