Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Int J Infect Dis ; 114: 58-61, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1487754

ABSTRACT

We describe a case of prolonged COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 Gamma variant in a fully vaccinated healthcare worker, 387 days after an infection caused by lineage B.1.1.33. Infections were confirmed by whole-genome sequencing and corroborated by the detection of neutralizing antibodies in convalescent serum samples. Considering the permanent exposure of this healthcare worker to SARS-CoV-2, the waning immunity after the first infection, the low efficacy of the inactivated vaccine at preventing COVID-19, the immune escape of the Gamma variant (VOC), and the burden of post-COVID syndrome, this individual would have benefited from an additional dose of a heterologous vaccine.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Brazil , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Reinfection , Vaccines, Inactivated , COVID-19 Serotherapy , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
2.
One Health ; 12: 100228, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1087214

ABSTRACT

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has affected communities, populations, and countries throughout the world. As the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic developed, the extent to which the disease interacted with already existing endemic, non-communicable and infectious diseases became evident, hence deeply influencing health outcomes. Additionally, a synergistic effect has been demonstrated also with socio-economic, cultural, and contextual determinants of health which seem to contribute to poorer health and accumulating social disadvantages. In this essay, using as a starting point the syndemic theory that translates the cumulative and intertwined factors between different epidemics, we argue that the SARS-CoV-2 is a one health issue of a syndemic nature and that the failure to acknowledge this contributes to weakened policy-making processes and public health responses and ineffective health policies and programs.

3.
JAMA Netw Open ; 3(4): e208857, 2020 04 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-116839

ABSTRACT

Importance: There is no specific antiviral therapy recommended for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In vitro studies indicate that the antiviral effect of chloroquine diphosphate (CQ) requires a high concentration of the drug. Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 2 CQ dosages in patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel, double-masked, randomized, phase IIb clinical trial with 81 adult patients who were hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was conducted from March 23 to April 5, 2020, at a tertiary care facility in Manaus, Brazilian Amazon. Interventions: Patients were allocated to receive high-dosage CQ (ie, 600 mg CQ twice daily for 10 days) or low-dosage CQ (ie, 450 mg twice daily on day 1 and once daily for 4 days). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was reduction in lethality by at least 50% in the high-dosage group compared with the low-dosage group. Data presented here refer primarily to safety and lethality outcomes during treatment on day 13. Secondary end points included participant clinical status, laboratory examinations, and electrocardiogram results. Outcomes will be presented to day 28. Viral respiratory secretion RNA detection was performed on days 0 and 4. Results: Out of a predefined sample size of 440 patients, 81 were enrolled (41 [50.6%] to high-dosage group and 40 [49.4%] to low-dosage group). Enrolled patients had a mean (SD) age of 51.1 (13.9) years, and most (60 [75.3%]) were men. Older age (mean [SD] age, 54.7 [13.7] years vs 47.4 [13.3] years) and more heart disease (5 of 28 [17.9%] vs 0) were seen in the high-dose group. Viral RNA was detected in 31 of 40 (77.5%) and 31 of 41 (75.6%) patients in the low-dosage and high-dosage groups, respectively. Lethality until day 13 was 39.0% in the high-dosage group (16 of 41) and 15.0% in the low-dosage group (6 of 40). The high-dosage group presented more instance of QTc interval greater than 500 milliseconds (7 of 37 [18.9%]) compared with the low-dosage group (4 of 36 [11.1%]). Respiratory secretion at day 4 was negative in only 6 of 27 patients (22.2%). Conclusions and Relevance: The preliminary findings of this study suggest that the higher CQ dosage should not be recommended for critically ill patients with COVID-19 because of its potential safety hazards, especially when taken concurrently with azithromycin and oseltamivir. These findings cannot be extrapolated to patients with nonsevere COVID-19. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04323527.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Chloroquine/analogs & derivatives , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus , Brazil , COVID-19 , Chloroquine/administration & dosage , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Chloroquine/therapeutic use , Disease Outbreaks , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Oseltamivir/therapeutic use , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Care Centers
5.
One Health ; 9: 100131, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-31495

ABSTRACT

Our coalition of public health experts, doctors, and scientists worldwide want to draw attention to the need for high-quality evaluation protocols of the potential beneficial effect of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a post-exposure drug for exposed people. In the absence of an approved, recognized effective pre or post-exposure prophylactic drug or vaccine for COVID-19, nor of any approved and validated therapeutic drug, coupled with social and political pressure raised by publicity both regarding the potential beneficial effect of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as well as potential risks from HCQ, we urge the immediate proper clinical trials. Specifically, we mean using HCQ for post-exposure of people with close contact with patients with positive COVID19 rtPCR, including home and medical caregivers. We have reviewed the mechanisms of antiviral effect of HCQ, the risk-benefit ratio taking into consideration the PK/PD of HCQ and the thresholds of efficacy. We have studied its use as an antimalarial, an antiviral, and an immunomodulating drug and concluded that the use of HCQ at doses matching that of the standard treatment of Systemic Lupus erythematous, which has proven safety and efficacy in terms of HCQ blood and tissue concentration adapted to bodyweight (2,3), at 6 mg/kg/day 1 (loading dose) followed by 5 mg/kg/ day, with a maximum limit of 600 mg/day in all cases should swiftly be clinically evaluated as a post-exposure drug for exposed people.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL