A linked physiologically based pharmacokinetic model for hydroxychloroquine and metabolite desethylhydroxychloroquine in SARS-CoV-2(-)/(+) populations.

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved for malaria, systemic and chronic discoid lupus erythematosus, and rheumatoid arthritis. Because HCQ has a proposed multimodal mechanism of action and a well-established safety profile, it is often investigated as a repurposed therapeutic for a range of indications. There is a large degree of uncertainty in HCQ pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters which complicates dose selection when investigating its use in new disease states. Complications with HCQ dose selection emerged as multiple clinical trials investigated HCQ as a potential therapeutic in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to uncertainty in baseline HCQ PK parameters, it was not clear if disease-related consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection/COVID-19 would be expected to impact the PK of HCQ and its primary metabolite desethylhydroxychloroquine (DHCQ). To address the question whether SARS-CoV-2 infection/COVID-19 impacted HCQ and DHCQ PK, dried blood spot samples were collected from SARS-CoV-2(-)/(+) participants administered HCQ. When a previously published physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model was used to fit the data, the variability in exposure of HCQ and DHCQ was not adequately captured and DHCQ concentrations were overestimated. Improvements to the previous PBPK model were made by incorporating the known range of blood to plasma concentration ratios (B/P) for each compound, adjusting HCQ and DHCQ distribution settings, and optimizing DHCQ clearance. The final PBPK model adequately captured the HCQ and DHCQ concentrations observed in SARS-CoV-2(-)/(+)participants, and incorporating COVID-19-associated changes in cytochrome P450 activity did not further improve model performance for the SARS-CoV-2(+) population.

A Simultaneous Extraction/Derivatization Strategy for Quantitation of Vitamin D in Dried Blood Spots Using LC-MS/MS: Application to Biomarker Study in Subjects Tested for SARS-CoV-2.

Vitamin D plays a critical role in bone development and maintenance, and in other physiological functions. The quantitation of endogenous levels of individual vitamin D and its metabolites is crucial for assessing several disease state conditions. With cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) leading to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there are several studies that have associated lower levels of serum vitamin D with severity of infection in COVID-19 patients. In this context, we have developed and validated a robust LC-MS/MS method for simultaneous quantitation of vitamin D and its metabolites in human dried blood spot (DBS) obtained from participants tested for COVID-19. The chromatographic separation for vitamin D and metabolites was performed using an ACE Excel C18 PFP column protected with a C18 guard column (Phenomenex, Torrance, CA, USA). The mobile phase consisted of formic acid in water (0.1% v/v) as mobile phase A and formic acid in methanol (0.1% v/v) as mobile phase B, operated at a flow rate of 0.5 mL/min. Analysis was performed utilizing the LC-MS/MS technique. The method was sensitive with a limit of quantification of 0.78 ng/mL for all analytes, and had a large dynamic range (200 ng/mL) with a total run time of 11 min. The inter- and intraday accuracy and precision values met the acceptance criteria per the US Food and Drug Administration guidelines. Blood concentrations of 25(OH)D3, vitamin D3, 25(OH)D2, and vitamin D2 over a range of 2-195.6, 0.5-121.5, 0.6-54.9, and 0.5-23.9 ng/mL, respectively, were quantified in 909 DBS samples. In summary, our developed LC-MS/MS method may be used for quantification of vitamin D and its metabolites in DBS, and may be applied to investigations of the emerging role of these compounds in various physiological processes.

Hydroxychloroquine for treatment of non-hospitalized adults with COVID-19: A meta-analysis of individual participant data of randomized trials.

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was initially promoted as an oral therapy for early treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Conventional meta-analyses cannot fully address the heterogeneity of different designs and outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of HCQ in outpatients with mild COVID-19. We conducted a pooled analysis of individual participant data from RCTs that evaluated the effect of HCQ on hospitalization and viral load reduction in outpatients with confirmed COVID-19. We evaluated the overall treatment group effect by log-likelihood ratio test (-2LL) from a generalized linear mixed model to accommodate correlated longitudinal binary data. The analysis included data from 11 RCTs. The outcome of virological effect, assessed in 1560 participants (N = 795 HCQ, N = 765 control), did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups (-2LL = 7.66; p = 0.18) when adjusting for cohort, duration of symptoms, and comorbidities. The decline in polymerase chain reaction positive tests from day 1 to 7 was 42.0 and 41.6 percentage points in the HCQ and control groups, respectively. Among the 2037 participants evaluable for hospitalization (N = 1058 HCQ, N = 979 control), we found no significant differences in hospitalization rate between participants receiving HCQ and controls (odds ratio 0.995; 95% confidence interval 0.614-1.610; -2LL = 0.0; p = 0.98) when adjusting for cohort, duration of symptoms, and comorbidities. This individual participant data meta-analysis of 11 HCQ trials that evaluated severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 viral clearance and COVID-19 hospitalization did not show a clinical benefit of HCQ. Our meta-analysis provides evidence to support the interruption in the use of HCQ in mild COVID-19 outpatients to reduce progression to severe disease.

Using time-weighted average change from baseline of SARS-CoV-2 viral load to assess impact of hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis and early treatment for COVID-19.

Two randomized controlled trials demonstrated no clinical benefit of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for either postexposure prophylaxis or early treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Using data from these studies, we calculated the time-weighted average change from baseline SARS-CoV-2 viral load and demonstrated that HCQ did not affect viral clearance.

Rapid decline in vaccine-boosted neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant.

The Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exhibits reduced susceptibility to vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies, requiring a boost to generate protective immunity. We assess the magnitude and short-term durability of neutralizing antibodies after homologous and heterologous boosting with mRNA and Ad26.COV2.S vaccines. All prime-boost combinations substantially increase the neutralization titers to Omicron, although the boosted titers decline rapidly within 2 months from the peak response compared with boosted titers against the prototypic D614G variant. Boosted Omicron neutralization titers are substantially higher for homologous mRNA vaccine boosting, and for heterologous mRNA and Ad26.COV2.S vaccine boosting, compared with homologous Ad26.COV2.S boosting. Homologous mRNA vaccine boosting generates nearly equivalent neutralizing activity against Omicron sublineages BA.1, BA.2, and BA.3 but modestly reduced neutralizing activity against BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5 compared with BA.1. These results have implications for boosting requirements to protect against Omicron and future variants of SARS-CoV-2. This trial was conducted under ClincalTrials.gov: NCT04889209.

Implementation of a fully remote randomized clinical trial with cardiac monitoring.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has challenged researchers performing clinical trials to develop innovative approaches to mitigate infectious risk while maintaining rigorous safety monitoring. Methods: In this report we describe the implementation of a novel exclusively remote randomized clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04354428) of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin for the treatment of the SARS-CoV-2-mediated COVID-19 disease which included cardiovascular safety monitoring. All study activities were conducted remotely. Self-collected vital signs (temperature, respiratory rate, heart rate, and oxygen saturation) and electrocardiographic (ECG) measurements were transmitted digitally to investigators while mid-nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing were shipped. ECG collection relied on a consumer device (KardiaMobile 6L, AliveCor Inc.) that recorded and transmitted six-lead ECGs via participants' internet-enabled devices to a central core laboratory, which measured and reported QTc intervals that were then used to monitor safety. Results: Two hundred and thirty-one participants uploaded 3245 ECGs. Mean daily adherence to the ECG protocol was 85.2% and was similar to the survey and mid-nasal swab elements of the study. Adherence rates did not differ by age or sex assigned at birth and were high across all reported race and ethnicities. QTc prolongation meeting criteria for an adverse event occurred in 28 (12.1%) participants, with 2 occurring in the placebo group, 19 in the hydroxychloroquine group, and 7 in the hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin group. Conclusions: Our report demonstrates that digital health technologies can be leveraged to conduct rigorous, safe, and entirely remote clinical trials.

Self-Assessed Severity as a Determinant of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Symptom Specificity: A Longitudinal Cohort Study.

Coronavirus disease 2019 symptom definitions rarely include symptom severity. We collected daily nasal swab samples and symptom diaries from contacts of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) case patients. Requiring ≥1 moderate or severe symptom reduced sensitivity to predict SARS-CoV-2 shedding from 60.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52.9%-66.7%) to 31.5% (95% CI, 25.7%- 38.0%) but increased specificity from 77.5% (95% CI, 75.3%-79.5%) to 93.8% (95% CI, 92.7%-94.8%).

Detection and Kinetics of Subgenomic Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 RNA Viral Load in Longitudinal Diagnostic RNA-Positive Samples.

While detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by diagnostic reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is highly sensitive for viral RNA, the nucleic acid amplification of subgenomic RNAs (sgRNAs) that are the product of viral replication may more accurately identify replication. We characterized the diagnostic RNA and sgRNA detection by RT-PCR from nasal swab samples collected daily by participants in postexposure prophylaxis or treatment studies for SARS-CoV-2. Among 1932 RT-PCR-positive swab samples with sgRNA tests, 40% (767) had detectable sgRNA. Above a diagnostic RNA viral load (VL) threshold of 5.1 log10 copies/mL, 96% of samples had detectable sgRNA with VLs that followed a linear trend. The trajectories of diagnostic RNA and sgRNA VLs differed, with 80% peaking on the same day but duration of sgRNA detection being shorter (8 vs 14 days). With a large sample of daily swab samples we provide comparative sgRNA kinetics and a diagnostic RNA threshold that correlates with replicating virus independent of symptoms or duration of illness.

Comparison of Racial, Ethnic, and Geographic Location Diversity of Participants Enrolled in Clinic-Based vs 2 Remote COVID-19 Clinical Trials.

Importance: Racial and ethnic diversity among study participants is associated with improved generalizability of clinical trial results and may address inequities in evidence that informs public health strategies. Novel strategies are needed for equitable access and recruitment of diverse clinical trial populations. Objective: To investigate demographic and geographical location data for participants in 2 remote COVID-19 clinical trials with online recruitment and compare with those of a contemporaneous clinic-based COVID-19 study. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was conducted using data from 3 completed, prospective randomized clinical trials conducted at the same time: 2 remotely conducted studies (the Early Treatment Study and Hydroxychloroquine COVID-19 Postexposure Prophylaxis [PEP] Study) and 1 clinic-based study of convalescent plasma (the Expanded Access to Convalescent Plasma for the Treatment of Patients With COVID-19 study). Data were collected from March to August 2020 with 1 to 28 days of participant follow-up. All studies had clinical sites in Seattle, Washington; the 2 remote trials also had collaborating sites in New York, New York; Syracuse, New York; Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Massachusetts; Chicago, Illinois; New Orleans, Louisiana; and Los Angeles, California. Two remote trials with inclusive social media strategies enrolled 929 participants with recent SARS-CoV-2 exposure (Hydroxychloroquine COVID-19 PEP Trial) and 231 participants with COVID-19 infection (Early Treatment Study); the clinic-based Expanded Access to Convalescent Plasma for the Treatment of Patients With COVID-19 study enrolled 250 participants with recent COVID-19 infection. Data were analyzed from April to August 2021. Interventions: Remote trials used inclusive social media strategies and clinician referral for recruitment and telehealth, courier deliveries, and self-collected nasal swabs for remotely conducted study visits. For the clinic-based study, participants were recruited via clinician referral and attended in-person visits. Main Outcomes and Measures: Google Analytics data were used to measure online participant engagement and recruitment. Participant demographics and geographical location data from remote trials were pooled and compared with those of the clinic-based study. Statistical comparison of demographic data was limited to participants with COVID infections (ie, those in the remotely conducted Early Treatment Study vs those in the clinic-based study) to improve accuracy of comparison given that the Hydroxychloroquine COVID-19 PEP Trial enrolled participants with COVID-19 exposures and thus had different enrollment criteria. Results: A total of 1410 participants were included. Among 1160 participants in remote trials and 250 participants in the clinic-based trial, the mean (range) age of participants was 39 (18-80) years vs 50 (19-79) years and 676 individuals (58.3%) vs 131 individuals (52.4%) reported female sex. The Early Treatment Study with inclusive social media strategies enrolled 231 participants in 41 US states with increased rates of racial, ethnic, and geographic diversity compared with participants in the clinic-based study. Among 228 participants in the remotely conducted Early Treatment Study with race data vs participants in the clinic-based study, 39 individuals (17.1%) vs 1 individual (0.4%) identified as Alaska Native or American Indian, 11 individuals (4.8%) vs 22 individuals (8.8%) identified as Asian, 26 individuals (11.4%) vs 4 individuals (1.6%) identified as Black, 3 individuals (1.3%) vs 1 individual identified as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 117 individuals (51.3%) vs 214 individuals (85.6%) identified as White, and 32 individuals (14.0%) vs 8 individuals (3.2%) identified as other race (P < .001). Among 230 individuals in the Early Treatment Study vs 236 individuals in the clinic-based trial with ethnicity data, 71 individuals (30.9%) vs 11 individuals (4.7%) identified as Hispanic or Latinx (P<.001). There were 29 individuals in the Early Treatment Study with nonurban residences (ie, rural, small town, or peri-urban; 12.6%) vs 6 of 248 individuals in the clinic-based trial with residence data (2.4%) (P < .001). In remote trial online recruitment, the highest engagement was with advertisements on social media platforms; among 125 147 unique users with age demographics who clicked on online recruitment advertisements, 84 188 individuals (67.3%) engaged via Facebook. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that remote clinical trials with online advertising may be considered as a strategy to improve diversity among clinical trial participants.

Homologous and Heterologous Covid-19 Booster Vaccinations.

BACKGROUND: Although the three vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) that have received emergency use authorization in the United States are highly effective, breakthrough infections are occurring. Data are needed on the serial use of homologous boosters (same as the primary vaccine) and heterologous boosters (different from the primary vaccine) in fully vaccinated recipients. METHODS: In this phase 1-2, open-label clinical trial conducted at 10 sites in the United States, adults who had completed a Covid-19 vaccine regimen at least 12 weeks earlier and had no reported history of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection received a booster injection with one of three vaccines: mRNA-1273 (Moderna) at a dose of 100 µg, Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson-Janssen) at a dose of 5×1010 virus particles, or BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) at a dose of 30 µg. The primary end points were safety, reactogenicity, and humoral immunogenicity on trial days 15 and 29. RESULTS: Of the 458 participants who were enrolled in the trial, 154 received mRNA-1273, 150 received Ad26.COV2.S, and 153 received BNT162b2 as booster vaccines; 1 participant did not receive the assigned vaccine. Reactogenicity was similar to that reported for the primary series. More than half the recipients reported having injection-site pain, malaise, headache, or myalgia. For all combinations, antibody neutralizing titers against a SARS-CoV-2 D614G pseudovirus increased by a factor of 4 to 73, and binding titers increased by a factor of 5 to 55. Homologous boosters increased neutralizing antibody titers by a factor of 4 to 20, whereas heterologous boosters increased titers by a factor of 6 to 73. Spike-specific T-cell responses increased in all but the homologous Ad26.COV2.S-boosted subgroup. CD8+ T-cell levels were more durable in the Ad26.COV2.S-primed recipients, and heterologous boosting with the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine substantially increased spike-specific CD8+ T cells in the mRNA vaccine recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Homologous and heterologous booster vaccines had an acceptable safety profile and were immunogenic in adults who had completed a primary Covid-19 vaccine regimen at least 12 weeks earlier. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; DMID 21-0012 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04889209.).

Trajectory of Viral RNA Load Among Persons With Incident SARS-CoV-2 G614 Infection (Wuhan Strain) in Association With COVID-19 Symptom Onset and Severity.

Importance: The SARS-CoV-2 viral trajectory has not been well characterized in incident infections. These data are needed to inform natural history, prevention practices, and therapeutic development. Objective: To characterize early SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA load (hereafter referred to as viral load) in individuals with incident infections in association with COVID-19 symptom onset and severity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study was a secondary data analysis of a remotely conducted study that enrolled 829 asymptomatic community-based participants recently exposed (<96 hours) to persons with SARS-CoV-2 from 41 US states from March 31 to August 21, 2020. Two cohorts were studied: (1) participants who were SARS-CoV-2 negative at baseline and tested positive during study follow-up, and (2) participants who had 2 or more positive swabs during follow-up, regardless of the initial (baseline) swab result. Participants collected daily midturbinate swab samples for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection and maintained symptom diaries for 14 days. Exposure: Laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main Outcomes and Measures: The observed SARS-CoV-2 viral load among incident infections was summarized, and piecewise linear mixed-effects models were used to estimate the characteristics of viral trajectories in association with COVID-19 symptom onset and severity. Results: A total of 97 participants (55 women [57%]; median age, 37 years [IQR, 27-52 years]) developed incident infections during follow-up. Forty-two participants (43%) had viral shedding for 1 day (median peak viral load cycle threshold [Ct] value, 38.5 [95% CI, 38.3-39.0]), 18 (19%) for 2 to 6 days (median Ct value, 36.7 [95% CI, 30.2-38.1]), and 31 (32%) for 7 days or more (median Ct value, 18.3 [95% CI, 17.4-22.0]). The cycle threshold value has an inverse association with viral load. Six participants (6%) had 1 to 6 days of viral shedding with censored duration. The peak mean (SD) viral load was observed on day 3 of shedding (Ct value, 33.8 [95% CI, 31.9-35.6]). Based on the statistical models fitted to 129 participants (60 men [47%]; median age, 38 years [IQR, 25-54 years]) with 2 or more SARS-CoV-2-positive swab samples, persons reporting moderate or severe symptoms tended to have a higher peak mean viral load than those who were asymptomatic (Ct value, 23.3 [95% CI, 22.6-24.0] vs 30.7 [95% CI, 29.8-31.4]). Mild symptoms generally started within 1 day of peak viral load, and moderate or severe symptoms 2 days after peak viral load. All 535 sequenced samples detected the G614 variant (Wuhan strain). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study suggests that having incident SARS-CoV-2 G614 infection was associated with a rapid viral load peak followed by slower decay. COVID-19 symptom onset generally coincided with peak viral load, which correlated positively with symptom severity. This longitudinal evaluation of the SARS-CoV-2 G614 with frequent molecular testing serves as a reference for comparing emergent viral lineages to inform clinical trial designs and public health strategies to contain the spread of the virus.

Leveraging E-Learning Infrastructure in Times of Rapid Change: Use of the National Sexually Transmitted Diseases Curriculum in the Era of COVID-19.

ABSTRACT: The National Sexually Transmitted Diseases Curriculum is an e-learning platform. New registrations and learning group creations in March to April 2020 were compared with previous 12-month data. Substantial increases in registrations and learning groups demonstrate that the National Sexually Transmitted Diseases Curriculum was successfully leveraged to meet rapidly shifting training needs due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Tocilizumab in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: Clinical outcomes, inflammatory marker kinetics, and safety.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 causes substantial morbidity. Tocilizumab, an interleukin-6 receptor antagonist, might improve outcomes by mitigating inflammation. We conducted a retrospective study of patients admitted to the University of Washington Hospital system with COVID-19 and requiring supplemental oxygen. Outcomes included clinical improvement, defined as a two-point reduction in severity on a six-point ordinal scale or discharge, and mortality within 28 days. We used Cox proportional-hazards models with propensity score inverse probability weighting to compare outcomes in patients who did and did not receive tocilizumab. We evaluated 43 patients who received tocilizumab and 45 who did not. Patients receiving tocilizumab were younger with fewer comorbidities but higher baseline oxygen requirements. Tocilizumab treatment was associated with reduced C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, and temperature, but there were no meaningful differences in time to clinical improvement (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-2.22) or mortality (aHR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.21-1.52). A numerically higher proportion of tocilizumab-treated patients had subsequent infections, transaminitis, and cytopenias. Tocilizumab did not improve outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. However, this study was not powered to detect small differences, and there remains the possibility for a survival benefit.

Hydroxychloroquine as Postexposure Prophylaxis to Prevent Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection : A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective prevention against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is currently limited to nonpharmaceutical strategies. Laboratory and observational data suggested that hydroxychloroquine had biological activity against SARS-CoV-2, potentially permitting its use for prevention. OBJECTIVE: To test hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis for SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN: Household-randomized, double-blind, controlled trial of hydroxychloroquine postexposure prophylaxis. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04328961). SETTING: National U.S. multicenter study. PARTICIPANTS: Close contacts recently exposed (<96 hours) to persons with diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection. INTERVENTION: Hydroxychloroquine (400 mg/d for 3 days followed by 200 mg/d for 11 days) or ascorbic acid (500 mg/d followed by 250 mg/d) as a placebo-equivalent control. MEASUREMENTS: Participants self-collected mid-turbinate swabs daily (days 1 to 14) for SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing. The primary outcome was PCR-confirmed incident SARS-CoV-2 infection among persons who were SARS-CoV-2 negative at enrollment. RESULTS: Between March and August 2020, 671 households were randomly assigned: 337 (407 participants) to the hydroxychloroquine group and 334 (422 participants) to the control group. Retention at day 14 was 91%, and 10 724 of 11 606 (92%) expected swabs were tested. Among the 689 (89%) participants who were SARS-CoV-2 negative at baseline, there was no difference between the hydroxychloroquine and control groups in SARS-CoV-2 acquisition by day 14 (53 versus 45 events; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.73 to 1.66]; P > 0.20). The frequency of participants experiencing adverse events was higher in the hydroxychloroquine group than the control group (66 [16.2%] versus 46 [10.9%], respectively; P = 0.026). LIMITATION: The delay between exposure, and then baseline testing and the first dose of hydroxychloroquine or ascorbic acid, was a median of 2 days. CONCLUSION: This rigorous randomized controlled trial among persons with recent exposure excluded a clinically meaningful effect of hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin for treatment of early SARS-CoV-2 infection among high-risk outpatient adults: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for outpatients with COVID-19 could reduce morbidity and prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, three-arm (1:1:1) placebo-equivalent controlled trial conducted remotely throughout the United States, adult outpatients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were recruited. Participants were randomly assigned to receive hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) (400 mg BID x1day, followed by 200 mg BID x9days) with or without azithromycin (AZ) (500 mg, then 250 mg daily x4days) or placebo-equivalent (ascorbic acid (HCQ) and folic acid (AZ)), stratified by risk for progression to severe COVID-19 (high-risk vs. low-risk). Self-collected nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 PCR, FLUPro symptom surveys, EKGs and vital signs were collected daily. Primary endpoints were: (a) 14-day progression to lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI), 28-day COVID-19 related hospitalization, or death; (b) 14-day time to viral clearance; secondary endpoints included time to symptom resolution (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04354428). Due to the low rate of clinical outcomes, the study was terminated for operational futility. FINDINGS: Between 15th April and 27th July 2020, 231 participants were enrolled and 219 initiated medication a median of 5.9 days after symptom onset. Among 129 high-risk participants, incident LRTI occurred in six (4.7%) participants (two control, four HCQ/AZ) and COVID-19 related hospitalization in seven (5.4%) (four control, one HCQ, two HCQ/AZ); no LRTI and two (2%) hospitalizations occurred in the 102 low-risk participants (one HCQ, one HCQ/AZ). There were no deaths. Among 152 participants with viral shedding at enrollment, median time to clearance was 5 days (95% CI=4-6) in HCQ, 6 days (95% CI=4-8) in HCQ/AZ, and 8 days (95% CI=6-10) in control. Viral clearance was faster in HCQ (HR=1.62, 95% CI=1.01-2.60, p = 0.047) but not HCQ/AZ (HR=1.25, p = 0.39) compared to control. Among 197 participants who met the COVID-19 definition at enrollment, time to symptom resolution did not differ by group (HCQ: HR=1.02, 95% CI-0.63-1.64, p = 0.95, HCQ/AZ: HR=0.91, 95% CI=0.57-1.45, p = 0.70). INTERPRETATION: Neither HCQ nor HCQ/AZ shortened the clinical course of outpatients with COVID-19, and HCQ, but not HCQ/AZ, had only a modest effect on SARS-CoV-2 viral shedding. HCQ and HCQ/AZ are not effective therapies for outpatient treatment of SARV-CoV-2 infection. FUNDING: The COVID-19 Early Treatment Study was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-017062) through the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator. University of Washington Institute of Translational Health Science (ITHS) grant support (UL1 TR002319), KL2 TR002317, and TL1 TR002318 from NCATS/NIH funded REDCap. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the views, decisions, or policies of the institutions with which they are affiliated. PAN and MJA were supported by the Mayo Clinic Windland Smith Rice Comprehensive Sudden Cardiac Death Program.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT04354428.

An Early Test-and-Treat Strategy for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2.

As coronavirus disease 2019 cases and deaths continue to expand globally, there is an urgent need to develop, test, and approve effective antiviral therapies. Currently, a majority of clinical trials are evaluating therapies in patients who are already hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2) infection. Given that the median time between development of symptoms and need for hospitalization is 1 week, a golden opportunity to intervene early is being missed. Indeed, for many other viral infections, early treatment soon after development of symptoms is associated with decreased mortality, lower hospitalization rates, and lower likelihood of transmission to others. In this study, we advocate for randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, clinical trials to evaluate promising agents early during SARS CoV-2 infection.