Intrapatient variability of tacrolimus trough concentrations and its effect on serum creatinine level in kidney transplant recipients treated with nematvir/ritonavir / 器官移植

Objective To investigate the intra-patient variability (IPV) of tacrolimus trough concentrations and its effect on serum creatinine (Scr) level in kidney transplant recipients treated with nematvir/ritonavir. Methods Clinical data of 41 kidney transplant recipients infected by SARS-CoV-2 and treated with nematvir/ritonavir were collected. The usage of nematvir/ritonavir and tacrolimus was summarized. The distribution of tacrolimus trough concentrations and the attainment rate of target concentration were analyzed. The correlation between the IPV distribution of tacrolimus trough concentrations and the changes of Scr level was determined. Results Among 41 kidney transplant recipients, 46%(19/41) were given with full- and low-dose nematvir/ritonavir, and 7%(3/41) were given with high-dose nematvir/ritonavir. Use of tacrolimus was discontinued at 24 h before nematvir/ritonavir treatment in 95%(39/41) patients, and at 24 h after use of nematvir/ritonavir in 5%(2/41) patients. Tacrolimus was given at least 3 d after the 5-d course of nematvir/ritonavir in all patients. The attainment rate of tacrolimus trough concentration was 73%(30/41), 30%(3/10), 48%(15/31), 35%(11/31) and 53%(16/30) before, during, 1 week, 2 weeks and 1 month after use of nematvir/ritonavir, respectively. The median IPV was 35%(23%, 51%). Spearman correlation analysis showed that the increase of Scr level was positively correlated with IPV (rs=0.400 7, P=0.028 2). Conclusions The attainment rate of tacrolimus trough concentration is declined in kidney transplant recipients treated with nematvir/ritonavir. The IPV of tacrolimus trough concentrations is elevated. The recipients with higher IPV are prone to an elevation in Scr level.

Diagnosis and treatment strategies for solid organ transplant recipients with SARS-CoV-2 infection / 器官移植

Due to long-term use of immunosuppressive agents, solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR) belong to high-risk populations of multiple pathogenic infection, including SARS-CoV-2. In addition, SOTR are constantly complicated by chronic diseases, such as hypertension and diabetes mellitus, etc. After infected with SARS-CoV-2, the critically ill rate and fatality of SOTR are higher than those of the general population, which captivates widespread attention from experts in the field of organ transplantation. Omicrone variant is currently the significant pandemic strain worldwide, rapidly spreading to more than 100 countries worldwide and causing broad concern. According to the latest international guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection and relevant expert consensus in China combined with current domestic situation of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and China's "diagnosis and treatment regimen for SARS-CoV-2 infection (Trial Version 10)", the epidemiology, clinical manifestations and prognosis, diagnosis, clinical classification and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection were briefly reviewed.

Post nirmatrelvir/ritonavir erythema multiforme in a patient with coronavirus disease infection

ABSTRACT Erythema multiforme (EM), an immune-mediated skin condition, can occur after infection or following the use of medications. In this study, we describe a patient who developed EM after nirmatrelvir/ritonavir administration. An 81-year-old woman presented with fever and dyspnea. Laboratory investigations showed positive coronavirus disease (COVID-19) based on polymerase chain reaction assay, and she received a 5-day regimen of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. We observed development of EM after this treatment and initiated prednisone (1 mg/kg) therapy, which led to rapid improvement. Our study is the first to report EM in a patient with COVID-19, who received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and showed a favorable response.

SARS -CoV -2 Omicron BA.5 infection recurrence after Paxlovid treatment: The first case report in Hunan Province / 中南大学学报(医学版)

We report a case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patient who was cured by oral administration of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid). The patient was treated with Paxlovid after being first infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron BA.5 variant. On the 11th day after SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test turned negative, SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test was positive again, and the threshold of nucleic acid cycle number was equivalent to that of the first infection. The results of two whole gene sequencing showed that it was the same virus strain infection, suggesting that the case was re-positive. Without specific treatment, SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection in nasopharyngeal swab turned negative. It is not uncommon for Paxlovid to recover after treating COVID-19, and most of the patients can recover without specific treatment. However, it is necessary to further study the mechanism that may lead to the recovery of SARS-CoV-2.

Influence of traditional Chinese medicines on the in vivo metabolism of lopinavir/ritonavir based on UHPLC-MS/MS analysis / 药物分析学报

A fast,reliable,and cost-effective liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method was established to determine the effects of the traditional Chinese medicine employed to treat coronavirus disease 2019,namely,Lianhua Qingwen granules,Huoxiang Zhengqi capsules,Jinhua Qinggan granules,Shufeng Jiedu capsules,and Angong Niuhuang pills,on the pharmacokinetics of lopinavir/ritonavir in rats.Blood samples were prepared using the protein precipitation method and atazanavir was selected as the internal standard(IS).Separation was performed on an Agilent ZORBAX eclipse plus C18(2.1 mm x 50 mm,1.8 μm)column using acetonitrile and water containing 0.1％formic acid as the mobile phase for gradient elution.The flow rate was 0.4 mL/min and the injection volume was 2 μL Agilent Jet Stream electrospray ionization was used for mass spectrometry detection under positive ion multiple reaction monitoring mode at a transition of m/z 629.3→447.3 for lopinavir,m/z 721.3→296.1 for rito-navir,and m/z 705.4→168.1 for the IS.The method showed good linearity in the concentration range of 25-2500 ng/mL(r=0.9981)for lopinavir and 5-500 ng/mL(r=0.9984)for ritonavir.The intra-day and inter-day precision and accuracy were both within±15％.Items,such as dilution reliability and residual effect,were also within the acceptable limits.The method was used to determine the effects of five types of traditional Chinese medicines on the pharmacokinetics of lopinavir/ritonavir in rats.The pharmaco-kinetic results showed that the half-life of ritonavir in the groups administered Lianhua Qingwen granules and Huoxiang Zhengqi capsules combined with lopinavir/ritonavir was prolonged by approx-imately 1.5-to 2-fold relative to that in the control group.Similarly,the pharmacokinetic parameters of lopinavir were altered.Overall,the results of this study offer important theoretical parameters for the effective clinical use of five types of traditional Chinese medicines combined with lopinavir/ritonavir to reduce the occurrence of clinical adverse reactions.

The protective effect of ritonavir against Gynura japonica-induced liver injury in rats / 药学学报

Numerous in vitro studies have shown that most pyrrolizidine alkaloids (PAs) are hepatotoxic after being metabolically activated by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4. However, the key role of CYP3A4 has not been confirmed in vivo. Therefore, the CYP3A4 chemical inhibitor ritonavir was employed in this work and the effect of ritonavir on Gynura japonica-induced liver injury in rats was investigated. All experiments were approved by the Animal Research Committee of Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine. Animal welfare and the animal experimental protocols were strictly consistent with related ethics regulations of Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine. Acute liver injury was induced by a single gavage of Gynura japonica extracts (GJE, 8 g·kg-1); rats in the protection group were gavaged with ritonavir (RIT, 30 mg·kg-1) 1 h before GJE treatment. The results show that RIT could significantly attenuate GJE-induced liver injury in rats. Rats in the protection group showed decreased serum activities for alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase, as well as lower total bile acids. In addition, the infiltration of inflammatory cells, sinusoidal hemorrhage, and hepatic necrosis in GJE-treated rats were markedly attenuated in the protection group. The content of pyrrole-protein adducts (PPAs), a recommended biomarker for PA-induced hepatotoxicity in clinics, was determined at 10 min to 24 h after GJE treatment. The content of 13 bile acids was also quantified. RIT treatment reduced the content of PPAs in serum dramatically and restored the impaired bile acid homeostasis caused by GJE. These studies indicate that RIT attenuated Gynura japonica-induced liver injury in rats, which was closely related to the inhibition of the metabolic activation of PAs and the regulation of bile acid metabolism. These results provide a better understanding of the relationship between CYP3A4 and PA-induced toxicity. This work will also be helpful in developing effective treatments for PA-induced liver injury and making a reasonable evaluation of the safety of drugs containing PAs in clinic.

Three regimens for re-treatment failure of Sofosbuvir-based therapy for chronic hepatitis-C genotype-4: a cohort study

ABSTRACT Despite the high sustained virologic response (SVR) rates of direct-acting antiviral (DAAs) therapy, a small number of patients does not eradicate the virus, and these patients represent a challenge. This study aims to compare the outcomes of three second-line regimens for DAAs-experienced patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC). This prospective observational study was conducted at the Damanhur Viral Hepatitis Center from January 2017 to February 2020. We included patients with CHC who did not achieve SVR after the complete course of Sofosbuvir/Daclatasvir±Ribavirin (SOF/DAC±RBV). The primary endpoint was SVR-12 after re-treatment. This study included 360 patients (with a mean age of 51.53±11.38 years). Approximately 51.1% of the patients were males, and 65.5% had liver cirrhosis. All patients of group 1 (45 patients) received SOF/VEL/VOX over 12-weeks; SVR-12 was achieved in 44 patients (97.8%). Group 2 (28 patients) received SOF/DAC/RBV over 24-weeks; (one patient was lost during follow-ups and one patient discontinued treatment due to hepatic decompensation). SVR-12 was achieved in 25 patients (96.2%). Group 3 (287 patients) received SOF/Ombitasvir/Paritaprevir/Ritonavir/RBV) over 12-weeks. Eight patients were lost during follow-ups, and one patient discontinued treatment due to grade 4 adverse events. SVR-12 was achieved in 276 patients (99.3%). There was no difference between the groups regarding their age, gender distribution, baseline viral load or comorbidities. Adverse events (thrombocytopenia, anemia, hyperbilirubinaemia and prolonged INR) were significantly higher in group 3, while group 1 did not experience any. The three studied retreatment regimens can be used for DAAs treatment-experienced patients considering availability. The SOF/VEL/VOX combination had the least adverse events.

Smartphone electrocardiogram for QT interval monitoring in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients treated with Hydroxychloroquine

@#Introduction: The global pandemic of Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to the re-purposing of medications, such as hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir-ritonavir in the treatment of the earlier phase of COVID-19 before the recognized benefit of steroids and antiviral. We aim to explore the corrected QT (QTc) interval and ‘torsadogenic’ potential of hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir-ritonavir utilising a combination of smartphone electrocardiogram and 12-lead electrocardiogram monitoring. Materials and Methods: Between 16-April-2020 to 30-April2020, patients with suspected or confirmed for COVID-19 indicated for in-patient treatment with hydroxychloroquine with or without lopinavir-ritonavir to the Sarawak General Hospital were monitored with KardiaMobile smartphone electrocardiogram (AliveCor®, Mountain View, CA) or standard 12-lead electrocardiogram. The baseline and serial QTc intervals were monitored till the last dose of medications or until the normalization of the QTc interval. Results: Thirty patients were treated with hydroxychloroquine, and 20 (66.7%) patients received a combination of hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir-ritonavir therapy. The maximum QTc interval was significantly prolonged compared to baseline (434.6±28.2msec vs. 458.6±47.1msec, p=0.001). The maximum QTc interval (456.1±45.7msec vs. 464.6±45.2msec, p=0.635) and the delta QTc (32.6±38.5msec vs. 26.3±35.8msec, p=0.658) were not significantly different between patients on hydroxychloroquine or a combination of hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir-ritonavir. Five (16.7%) patients had QTc of 500msec or more. Four (13.3%) patients required discontinuation of hydroxychloroquine and 3 (10.0%) patients required discontinuation of lopinavirritonavir due to QTc prolongation. However, no torsade de pointes was observed. Conclusions: QTc monitoring using smartphone electrocardiogram was feasible in COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine with or without lopinavir-ritonavir. The usage of hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir-ritonavir resulted in QTc prolongation, but no torsade de pointes or arrhythmogenic death was observed.

Lopinavir/ritonavir: is early administration better in Covid-19?

Background: To share the data of coronavirus 2019 (Covid-19) patients started on lopinavir-ritonavir (lopi/r) in relation to time period from the onset of symptoms.Method: Observational descriptive study of 23 Covid-19 patients admitted in a tertiary care center in India from March 2020 to May 2020. Patients categorized into 2 groups based on the timing of initiation of lopi/r from the onset of symptoms. Group 1 were given the drug early (≤7 days) and group 2 late (>7 days). The clinical events (oxygen requirement days and ICU stay) and outcomes of hospital stay between the two groups were evaluated.Results: Patients were started on lopi/r for a period of 14 days on admission, out of which 12 patients were in group 1 and 11 patients in group 2. Underlying co-morbidities were present in 15 patients (65.21%). The mean duration from onset of symptoms to lopi/r initiation was 4 days and 11.1 days in Group 1 and 2 respectively. Requirement for oxygen support (2.16 versus 6.54 days), mean duration of hospitalization (8.58 versus 11.54 days) and mean duration of obtaining first Covid-19 negative report from the onset of symptoms (10.5 versus 19.57 days) were all significantly lesser in group 1 (p<0.05). All patients belonging to Group 1 and eight patients of group 2 recovered completely and were discharged whereas 3 patients of group 2 expired. Diarrhea was the most commonly observed adverse effect of lopi/r in our patients.Conclusion: With no approved weapon to tackle the Covid-19 pandemic, we should keep lopi/r in our armamentarium of drugs and use it at the earliest. More clinical trials are needed in future to ascertain if lopi/r can reduce hospital stay, prompt faster recovery and result in better clinical outcome.

Efectos adversos de lopinavir/ritonavir en enfermedad grave por coronavirus (COVID-19) / Adverse effects of lopinavir/ritonavir in critically ill patients with COVID-19

Resumen Durante el transcurso de la pandemia causada por el virus SARS-CoV-2 se han utilizado diferentes fármacos como potenciales tratamientos específicos con el objetivo de lograr mejoría clínica y/o disminuir la mortalidad de los afectados, pero al tratarse de una enfermedad hasta ahora desconocida, la evidencia acerca de su seguridad y eficacia se va construyendo a medida que se los prescribe. La farmacovigilancia intensiva en este contexto permite detectar eventos adversos y mediante su reporte y análisis inferir el perfil de seguridad en cada indicación. Se realizó un estudio observacional, retrospectivo, en un único centro, en el cual se relevaron los eventos adversos en 23 pacientes adultos en estado crítico, de los cuales 18 recibieron lopinavir/ ritonavir como tratamiento empírico, entre el 15 de marzo y el 15 de junio de 2020, durante su internación en una Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos. Se describe el tipo de eventos adversos, su gravedad y si fueron motivo de suspensión del tratamiento. Los resultados del presente análisis muestran una alta tasa de eventos adversos (10/23, 43%) entre los que recibieron lopinavir/ritonavir, llevando en la mayoría de los casos a la decisión de suspender el mismo antes de completar el tratamiento. Aun con las limitaciones propias del reducido número de casos, la divulgación de dichos resultados aporta evidencia para definir el perfil de seguridad de la combinación lopinavir / ritonavir usado en enfermedad grave por SARS-CoV-2.

Abstract During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic many drugs have been used as potential treatments in order to improve the clinical outcome and reduce the mortality. But since it is a currently unknown disease, the evidence about efficacy and safety is built as the drugs are prescribed. In this context, intensive pharmacovigilance allows early detection of adverse events, and thereby infer the safety profile of the indication. We conducted an observational, retrospective, single-center study involving adult patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. All adverse events detected in 23 patients in the Intensive Care Unit between March 15 and June 15, 2020 were registered. We describe type and severity of the adverse events and if treatment suspension was needed. The results show a high rate of adverse events (10/23, 43%) in treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir. In most cases early treatment suspension was required. Even though the limitations of our study derived from the small sample size, these results could help in building evidence about the safety of using lopinavir/ritonavir for severe SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Lopinavir/ritonavir for COVID-19: a living systematic review / Lopinavir/ritonavir para COVID-19: una revisión sistemática viva

Objective: Provide a timely, rigorous, and continuously updated summary of the evidence on the role of lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. Methods: We conducted searches in the special L·OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence) platform for COVID-19, a system that performs regular searches in PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and other 33 sources. We searched for randomized trials and non-randomized studies evaluating the effect of lopinavir/ritonavir versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Two reviewers independently evaluated potentially eligible studies, according to predefined selection criteria, and extracted data using a predesigned standardized form. We performed meta-analyses using random-effect models and assessed overall certainty in evidence using the GRADE approach. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Our search strategy yielded 862 references. Finally, we identified 12 studies, including two randomized trials, evaluating lopinavir/ritonavir, in addition to standard care versus standard care alone in 250 adult inpatients with COVID-19. The evidence from randomized trials shows lopinavir/ritonavir may reduce mortality (relative risk: 0.77; 95% confidence interval: 0.45 to 1.3; low certainty evidence), but the anticipated magnitude of the absolute reduction in mortality, varies across different risk groups. Lopinavir/ritonavir also had a slight reduction in the risk of requiring invasive mechanical ventilation, developing respiratory failure, or acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, it did not lead to any difference in the duration of hospitalization and may lead to an increase in the number of total adverse effects. The overall certainty of the evidence was low or very low. Conclusions: For severe and critical patients with COVID-19, lopinavir/ritonavir might play a role in improving outcomes, but the available evidence is still limited. A substantial number of ongoing studies should provide valuable evidence to inform researchers and decision-makers soon.

Objetivo: Esta revisión sistemática viva tiene como objetivo entregar un resumen oportuno, riguroso y constantemente actualizado de la evidencia disponible sobre los efectos de lopinavir/ritonavir en pacientes con COVID-19. Métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda en la plataforma L·OVE COVID-19 (Living OVerview of Evidence), un sistema que mantiene búsquedas regulares en PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) y otras 33 fuentes. Se buscaron ensayos aleatorios y estudios no aleatorios que evaluaran el uso de lopinavir/ritonavir versus placebo o ningún tratamiento en pacientes con COVID-19. Dos revisores evaluaron de forma independiente los artículos potencialmente elegibles, de acuerdo con criterios de selección predefinidos, y extrajeron los datos mediante un formulario estandarizado. Los resultados fueron combinados mediante un metanálisis utilizando modelos de efectos aleatorios y evaluamos la certeza de la evidencia utilizando el método GRADE. Una versión viva de esta revisión estará disponible durante la pandemia de COVID-19. Resultados: La búsqueda inicial arrojó 862 referencias. Finalmente, identificamos 12 estudios incluyendo 2 ensayos aleatorios, que evaluaban lopinavir/ritonavir adicionado al tratamiento estándar versus tratamiento estándar en 250 pacientes adultos hospitalizados con COVID-19. Los resultados provenientes de los ensayos aleatorios muestran que el uso de lopinavir/ritonavir puede reducir la mortalidad (riesgo relativo: 0,77; intervalo de confianza 95%: 0,45 a 1,3; certeza de evidencia baja), pero la magnitud de la reducción absoluta de la mortalidad varía según los diferentes grupos de riesgo. El uso de lopinavir/ritonavir mostró además una ligera reducción en el riesgo de requerir ventilación mecánica invasiva, desarrollar insuficiencia respiratoria o síndrome de dificultad respiratoria aguda. No se observó diferencias en la duración de la hospitalización y su uso puede producir un aumento en el número de efectos adversos totales. La certeza global de la evidencia fue baja o muy baja. Conclusiones: Para pacientes graves y críticos con COVID-19, el uso de lopinavir/ritonavir podría desempeñar un papel en la mejora de los resultados, pero la evidencia disponible aún es limitada. La gran cantidad de estudios en curso deberían proporcionar evidencia valiosa para informar a los investigadores y los tomadores de decisiones en el futuro cercano.

Síndrome de Cushing exógeno por interacción medicamentosa de ritonavir y fluticasona inhalada. Reporte de tres casos pediátricos / Exogenous Cushing syndrome due to drug interaction of ritonavir and inhaled fluticasone. Report of three pediatric cases

El incremento de la expectativa de vida con el advenimiento de la terapia antirretroviral de alta eficacia plantea desafíos en cuanto a la toxicidad e interacciones medicamentosas. El síndrome de Cushing exógeno por interacción entre ritonavir y fluticasona inhalada en niños con diagnóstico de infección por virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana y patología pulmonar crónica es infrecuente. Hasta el momento, hay 20 casos reportados. Se describen 3 casos pediátricos con diagnóstico de infección por virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana y patología pulmonar crónica que presentaron síndrome de Cushing exógeno con fluticasona inhalada en dosis habituales por la interacción medicamentosa entre esta y ritonavir. Los pacientes resolvieron el cuadro clínico luego de 2-4 meses de suspensión de la fluticasona y permanecieron asintomáticos en el seguimiento

The increase in life expectancy with the advent of highly effective antiretroviral therapy poses challenges in terms of toxicity and drug interactions. Exogenous Cushing syndrome by interaction between ritonavir and inhaled fluticasone in children diagnosed with human immunodeficiency virus infection and chronic pulmonary pathology is rare. So far, there are 20 cases reported. Three pediatric cases are reported, with a diagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus infection and chronic pulmonary pathology who presented exogenous Cushing syndrome with inhaled fluticasone at usual doses due to drug interaction between it and ritonavir. The patients resolved the clinical Síndrome de Cushing exógeno por interacción medicamentosa de ritonavir y fluticasona inhalada. Reporte de tres casos pediátricos Exogenous Cushing syndrome due to drug interaction of ritonavir and inhaled fluticasone. Report of three pediatric cases picture after 2-4 months of fluticasone suspension and remain asymptomatic in the follow-up.

Repurposing antivirals as potential treatments for SARS-CoV-2: From SARS to COVID-19

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the agent of the current pandemic of therespiratory disease known as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The government and health authorities aroundthe world have advocated social distancing, containment measures, and effective diagnosis as the first measuresto slow down the spread of the disease, but, still, treatment options are urgent, especially for patients evolving tosevere pneumonia. Several pharmaceuticals with antiviral effects were identified and tested, to some extent, duringthe previous SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus outbreaks. Type I interferons (IFNs),ribavirin, lopinavir/ritonavir, chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, and remdesivir emerge as the primary options forin-hospital treatment of patients with COVID-19, focused on reducing the viral load. Although more experimental andclinical evidence is required, the accumulated in vitro and clinical knowledge discussed here supports those drugs asfeasible alternatives to face the SARS-CoV infection in the short term, whereas more effective measures arise fromthe world scientific community

Posibles estrategias de tratamiento para COVID-19 / Possible treatment strategies for COVID-19

No hay tratamiento antiviral específico para el COVID-19. Sin embargo, conocimientos adquiridos durante los brotes del SARS y el MERS, en conjunto con la información obtenida con COVID-19, han permitido detectar varios objetivos terapéuticos en el ciclo de replicación del virus, y en su patogénesis. Se incluye la evidencia actual con respecto a los principales tratamientos propuestos para COVID-19, reutilizados o experimentales, mediante una revisión de la literatura científica a la fecha. Debido a la falta de ensayos controlados aleatorios, se incluyeron: informes de casos, series de casos y artículos de revisión. Globalmente se están llevando a cabo múltiples estudios con el fin de identificar agentes que sean efectivos ante COVID-19, en los siguientes objetivos estratégicos: inhibición de la entrada/fusión del virus (anticuerpos neutralizantes, inhibidores de proteasa de serina transmembrana 2, cloroquina, hidroxicloroquina y umifenovir); interrupción de la replicación viral (remdesivir, favipiravir, lopinavir/ritonavir e ivermectina) y supresión de la respuesta inflamatoria excesiva (corticosteroides, tocilizumab, e inmunoglobulina). Aún no existe un tratamiento efectivo y seguro contra COVID-19; los fármacos descritos en esta revisión se administran como uso compasivo de drogas, o bien, como parte de un ensayo clínico. La terapia de soporte continúa siendo el pilar del manejo de COVID-19.(AU)

There is no specific antiviral treatment for COVID-19. However, knowledge acquired during the SARS and MERS outbreaks, together with the information obtained with COVID-19, have allowed the detection of various therapeutic targets in the virus replication cycle, and in its pathogenesis. The current evidence regarding the leading treatments proposed for COVID-19, reused or experimental, is included through a review of the scientific literature to date. Due to the lack of randomized controlled trials, the following were involved: case reports, case series and review articles. Globally, multiple studies are being carried out in order to identify agents that are effective against COVID-19, upon the following strategic objectives: inhibition of viral entry/fusion (neutralizing antibodies, transmembrane serine protease 2 inhibitors, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and umifenovir); interruption of viral replication (remdesivir, favipiravir, lopinavir/ritonavir and ivermectin), and suppression of excessive inflammatory response (corticosteroids, tocilizumab, and immunoglobulin). There is still no effective and safe treatment against COVID-19; the medications described in this review are given as compassionate drug use, or as part of a clinical trial. Support therapy continues to be COVID-19 management cornerstone.(AU)

Intervenciones farmacológicas para el tratamiento de la Enfermedad por Coronavirus (COVID-19) / Pharmacological interventions for the treatment of Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19)

RESUMEN Varios fármacos han sido propuestos como alternativas terapéuticas para COVID-19. Se efectuó una búsqueda sistematica en MEDLINE (vía PubMed) hasta el 20 de marzo de 2020, con el fin de identificar la evidencia disponible sobre intervenciones farmacológicas para tratamiento específico de COVID-19. 947 publicaciones fueron identificadas y 15 estudios seleccionados: 3 ensayos clínicos, 5 series de casos y 7 reportes de casos. La calidad de la evidencia procedente de ensayos clínicos fue evaluada según la metodología GRADE. La evidencia existente para hidroxicloroquina, favipiravir y lopinavir/ritonavir procede de ensayos clínicos que reportan resultados favorables para los dos primeros fármacos en tanto que no se observó ningún beneficio al adicionar lopinavir/ritonavir al tratamiento estándar. Sin embargo, debido a las limitaciones metodológicas, la evidencia es de muy baja certeza para hidroxicloroquina y de baja certeza para favipiravir y lopinavir/ritonavir. Respecto al uso de arbidol interferón, o el uso combinado de estos con lopinavir/ritonavir, la evidencia es limitada ya que deriva de serie de casos o reporte de casos con resultados no determinantes. No se identificaron estudios que permitan determinar la eficacia y seguridad de intervenciones farmacológicas frente a COVID-19.

ABSTRACT Several drugs have been proposed as therapeutic alternatives for COVID-19. An electronic systematic search of MEDLINE (via PubMed) was carried out until March 20th 2020, in order to identify the available evidence on pharmacological interventions for specific treatment of COVID-19. The quality of the evidence from clinical trials was evaluated according to the GRADE methodology. 947 publications were identified and 15 studies were selected: 3 clinical trials, 5 case series and 7 case reports. The existing evidence for hydroxychloroquine, favipiravir and lopinavir/ritonavir comes from clinical trials reporting favorable results for the first two drugs, while no benefit was observed when lopinavir/ritonavir was added to standard treatment. However, due to methodological issues, the evidence for hydroxychloroquine is very low. For favipiravir and lopinavir/ritonavir the evidence is low. Regarding the use of arbidol interferon, or the combined use of these with lopinavir/ritonavir, the evidence is limited since it derives from case series or case report with non-determining results. No studies were identified that reliably demonstrate the efficacy and safety of any pharmacological intervention against COVID-19.

COVID-19: En este momento podría ser útil el tratamiento antiviral en casos leves / COVID-19: Antiviral treatment in mild cases could be useful at this time

RESUMEN La letalidad por COVID-19 así como su rápida diseminación son responsables de la actual crisis mundial; por ello, desde un inicio se buscaron medicamentos con acción antiviral frente a este agente. Es imposible, por ahora, saber qué persona en estado leve desarrollará una elevada carga viral o tiene una predisposición a desarrollar una respuesta extremada del sistema inmune, pero un tratamiento temprano en los casos leves no sólo garantizaría una mayor eficacia, sino que se evitarían los casos severos. En la actualidad no se dispone de ensayos clínicos, doble ciego, aleatroizados, ni metaanálisis para tomar decisiones seguras; mientras tanto, la pandemia avanza en nuestro país, generando dolor y muerte. En este contexto, en el Perú, las sociedades científicas han manifestado la necesidad del uso de medicamentos antivirales, aún con poca evidencia, basado en la probabilidad de éxito previo a un tratamiento, por sus efectos in vitro y por sus efectos clínicos tempranos, tales como: cloroquina, hidroxicloroquina, azitromicina, lopinavir, ritonavir. De esta manera, en el país desde el 29 de marzo de 2020, se dispone de una norma técnica del Ministerio de Salud, que facilita el uso de estos a nivel nacional para los casos moderados y severos. Consideramos que bajo un sistema estructurado, los centros de primer nivel de atención podrían tratar los casos leves de COVID-19. Nuestro país, a través de las estrategias de prevención y control de TB y de ITS/VIH/SIDA, tiene experiencia en el manejo de programas de tratamiento en dicho nivel. Los costos serán menores que los requeridos en el fortalecimiento del tercer nivel de atención.

ABSTRACT COVID-19's lethality as well as its rapid spread are responsible for the current world crisis; therefore, from the beginning, drugs with antiviral action against this agent were sought. It is impossible, for now, to know which person in a mild state will develop a high viral load or have a predisposition to develop an extreme response from the immune system, but early treatment in mild cases would not only guarantee greater efficacy, but would avoid severe cases. Currently, there are no double blind, randomized clinical trials or meta-analyzes available to make safe decisions; meanwhile, the pandemic is advancing in our country, generating pain and death. In this context, in Peru, scientific societies have expressed the need for the use of antiviral drugs, even with little evidence, based on the probability of success prior to treatment, for their in vitro effects and for their early clinical effects, such as: chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, lopinavir, ritonavir. Thus, in the country since march 29, 2020, there is a technical standard from the Ministry of Health, which facilitates the use of these at the national level for moderate and severe cases. We believe that under a structured system, first-level care centers could treat mild cases of COVID-19. Our country, through strategies for the prevention and control of TB and ITS/HIV/AIDS, has experience in managing treatment programs at this level. The costs will be less than those required to strengthen the third level of care.

Efficacies of lopinavir/ritonavir and abidol in the treatment of novel coronavirus pneumonia / 中华传染病杂志

Objective@#To evaluate the efficacies of lopinavir/ritonavir and abidol in the treatment of NCP.@*Methods@#The clinical data of 134 patients with NCP receiving treatment at Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center during Jan 20 to Feb 6, 2020 were retrospectively collected. All the patients received interferon-α2b spray and symptomatic supportive treatment, and 52 cases received oral lopinavir/ritonavir treatment, 34 cases received oral abidol treatment, the remaining 48 cases did not take any antiviral drugs. The efficacies at median day 7 among the three groups were compared by using Kruskal-Wallis or chi-square tests.@*Results@#The 134 patients included 69 males (51.5%) and 65 females, aged 35-62 years with the average of 48 years. The median time to temperature normalization in patients receiving abidol or lopinavir/ritonavir treatment was both 6 days after admission, and that was 4 days in the control group, with no significant difference (χ2=2.37, P=0.31). The median time to PCR negative in the respiratory specimens in the three groups was all 7 days after admission, and the PCR negative rates at day 7 after admission in lopinavir/ritonavir, abidol and control groups were 71.8% (28/39), 82.6% (19/23) and 77.1% (27/35), respectively, which were not significantly different (χ2=0.46, P=0.79). Radiological worsening at day 7 was observed in comparable proportions of patients in the three groups, which were 42.3% (n=22), 35.3% (n=12) and 52.1% (n=25), respectively (χ2=2.38, P=0.30) . Adverse reactions occurred in 17.3% (n=9), 8.8% (n=3) and 8.3% (n=4) patients, respectively in the three groups (χ2=2.33, P=0.33).@*Conclusions@#This study did not find any effects of lopinavir/ritonavir and abidol on relieving symptoms or accelerating virus clearance. The efficacies of these two drugs in NCP treatment need further investigation.

Early antiviral therapy of abidor combined with lopinavir/ritonavir and re-combinant interferonα-2b in patients with novel coronavirus pneumonia in Zhejiang: A multicenter and prospective study / 中华临床感染病杂志

Objective@#Comparing the benefit of Abidor, lopinavir/ritonavir and recombinant interferon α-2b triple combination antiviral therapy and lopinavir/ritonavir and interferon dual combination antiviral therapy to hospitalized novel coronavirus pneumonia 2019 in Zhejiang province.@*Methods@#A multi-center prospective study was carried out to compare the effect of triple combination antiviral therapy with dual combination antiviral therapy in 15 medical institutions of Zhejiang Province. All patients were treated with recombinant interferon α-2b (5 million U, 2 times/d) aerosol inhalation. 196 patients were treated with abidol (200 mg, 3 times/d) + lopinavir / ritonavir (2 tablets, 1 time/12 h) as the triple combination antiviral treatment group. 41 patients were treated with lopinavir / ritonavir (2 tablets, 1 time/12 h) as the dual combination antiviral treatment group. The patients who received triple combination antiviral therapy were divided into three groups: within 48 hours, 3-5 days and > 5 days after the symptom onset. To explore the therapeutic effects of triple combination antiviral drugs and dual combination antiviral drugs, as well as triple combination antiviral drugs with different antiviral initiate time. SPSS17.0 software was used to analyze the data.@*Results@#The time of virus nucleic acid turning negative was (12.2 ± 4.7) days in the triple combination antiviral drug group, which was shorter than that in the dual combination antiviral drug group [(15.0 ± 5.0) days] (t = 6.159, P < 0.01 ). The length of hospital stay [12 (9, 17) d] in the triple combination antiviral drug group was also shorter than that in the dual combination antiviral drug group [15 (10, 18) d] (H = 2.073, P < 0.05). Comparing the antiviral treatment which was started within 48 hours, 3-5 days and > 5 days after the symptom onset of triple combination antiviral drug group, the time from the symptom onset to the negative of viral shedding was 13 (10,16.8), 17 (13,22) and 21 (18-24) days respectively (Z = 32.983, P < 0.01), and the time from antiviral therapy to the negative of viral shedding was (11.8±3.9) , (13.5±5.1) and (11.2±4.3) d. The differences among the three groups were statistically significant (Z=32.983 and 6.722, P<0.01 or<0.05).@*Conclusions@#The triple combination antiviral therapy of Abidor, Lopinavir/Litonavir and recombinant interferon α-2b showed shorter viral shedding time and hospitalization time compared with the dual combination antiviral therapy. The earlier the time to initiate triple antiviral treatment, the shorter the time of virus shedding.

Efficacy and safety of ritonavir-boosted danoprevir combined with daclatasvir in treatment of patients with genotype 1b chronic hepatitis C / 中华临床感染病杂志

Objective To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of ritonavir-boosted danoprevir (DNVr) combined with daclatasvir (DCV) in the treatment of patients with genotype 1b chronic hepatitis C (CHC).Methods Thirty-three patients with genotype 1b CHC admitted in the Department of Infectious Diseases of the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University from August 2018 to February 2019 were enrolled.All the patients received DNVr +DCV antiviral treatment.HCV RNA levels were detected before and 2, 4, 12 weeks after treatment, and after drug withdrawal , respectively.Indicators of liver and kidney function and adverse events were observed.ANOVAV of repeated measurement was used to analyze the data. Results The baseline viral loads of 33 patients ranged from 1.12×104 to 1.76×107 IU／mL.Two weeks after treatment the viral loads of all patients were down to the lowest limit of detection (＜500 IU／mL). Serum ALT, AST and TBil levels returned to norml ( F＝58.26, 14.49 and 20.16, all P＜0.05) and sustained virologic response reached 100%12 weeks after drug withdrawal.Three cases had minor adverse reactions during the treatment.Conclusion DNVr combined with DCV can achieve a rapid and strong virological response in the treatment of patients with genotype 1b CHC with good safety.

Economic evaluation of novel direct-acting antivirals in the treatment of chronic hepatitis c virus genotype 1b in china based on markov model / 中国药学杂志

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of combinations of different direct-acting antivirals(DAAs) for treatment-naive patients infected with chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 1b in China, which would provide pharmacoeconomic evidence for relevant health care decisions. METHODS: A Markov model was constructed based on the natural history of chronic hepatitis C to evaluate the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and direct medical costs for noncirrhotic patients and compensated cirrhotic patients from the payer perspective, and to further calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of different regimens. Lifetime horizon(100 years of age) and one year cycle length were adopted. A 5% discount rate was applied to both QALYs and costs. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed. RESULTS: Base-case analysis showed that six DAAs regimens not only gained QALYs but also reduced medical costs compared with no treatment and PR regimen. Among all the DAAs regimens, the combination of paritaprevir/ombitasvir/ritonavir+dasabuvir± ribavirin (POR+DAS±RBV) was the most cost-effective alternative for all the target population. The findings from the base-case analysis were confirmed by the sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Among all the regimens, the combination of POR+DAS±RBV is the economically dominant regimen in the treatment of treatment-naive patients infected with chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 1b in China.