Efficacy of drug regimen with and without oseltamivir in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A retrospective study

Introduction Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the most critical issue in nowadays medicine. We aimed to evaluate the use and therapeutic outcomes of oseltamivir, an antiviral drug for patients with COVID-19. Materials and method In an observational study conducted at Imam Khomeini Hospital in Amol, Iran, data for 544 patients with laboratory and CT scan result confirmed COVID-19 were retrospectively collected between February 24th and April 13th 2020. To compare the characteristics of patients based on gender, the chi-square test was used. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the effect of oseltamivir on the outcome of treatment. Logrank test were used to compare the length of hospital stay in people treated with oseltamivir and drugs other than oseltamivir. Results Kaplan–Meier and logrank test showed no significant reduction in hospitalization time and survival rate following treatment with oseltamivir. However, a significant increase in lymphocytes count and reduction of C-reactive protein (CRP) level detected. Conclusion Administration of oseltamivir for patients with COVID-19 didn't show any improvement in hospitalization duration and survival rate. Resumen Introducción la enfermedad por coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) es el tema más crítico en la medicina actual. Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar el uso y los resultados terapéuticos de oseltamivir, un medicamento antiviral para pacientes con COVID-19. Materiales y método en un estudio observacional realizado en el Hospital Imam Khomeini en Amol, Irán, los datos de 544 pacientes con resultados de laboratorio y tomografía computarizada confirmados de COVID-19 se recopilaron retrospectivamente entre el 24 de febrero y el 13 de abril de 2020. Para comparar las características de los pacientes en función del género se utilizó la prueba de chi-cuadrado. Se utilizó regresión logística para evaluar el efecto de oseltamivir en el resultado del tratamiento. Se utilizó la prueba de rango logarítmico para comparar la duración de la estancia hospitalaria en personas tratadas con oseltamivir y otros fármacos distintos del oseltamivir. Resultados Kaplan–Meier y la prueba de rango logarítmico no mostraron una reducción significativa en el tiempo de hospitalización y la tasa de supervivencia después del tratamiento con oseltamivir. Sin embargo, se detectó un aumento significativo en el recuento de linfocitos y una reducción del nivel de proteína C reactiva (PCR). Conclusión la administración de oseltamivir para pacientes con COVID-19 no mostró ninguna mejora en la duración de la hospitalización y la tasa de supervivencia.

Inhalation phage therapy as a new approach to preventing secondary bacterial pneumonia in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19: A double-blind clinical trial study

Inhalation phage therapy is proposed as a replacement approach for antibiotics in the treatment of pulmonary bacterial infections. This study investigates phage therapy on bacterial pneumonia in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 via the inhalation route. In this double-blind clinical trial, 60 patients with positive COVID-19 hospitalized in three central Mazandaran hospitals were chosen and randomly divided into two intervention and control groups. Standard country protocol drugs plus 10 mL of phage-free suspension every 12 h with a mesh nebulizer was prescribed for 7 days in the intervention group. The two groups were compared in terms of O2Sat, survival rate, severe secondary pulmonary bacterial infection and duration of hospitalization. Comparing the results between the intervention and control group, in terms of the trend of O2Sat change, negative sputum culture, no fever, no dyspnea, duration of hospitalization, duration of intubation and under ventilation, showed that the difference between these two groups was statistically different (P value < 0.05). In conclusion, inhalation phage therapy may have a potential effect on secondary infection and in the outcome of COVID-19 patients. However, more clinical trials with control confounding factors are needed to further support this concept. Graphical Image 1

Efficacy of drug regimen with and without oseltamivir in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A retrospective study.

Introduction: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the most critical issue in nowadays medicine. We aimed to evaluate the use and therapeutic outcomes of oseltamivir, an antiviral drug for patients with COVID-19. Materials and method: In an observational study conducted at Imam Khomeini Hospital in Amol, Iran, data for 544 patients with laboratory and CT scan result confirmed COVID-19 were retrospectively collected between February 24th and April 13th 2020. To compare the characteristics of patients based on gender, the chi-square test was used. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the effect of oseltamivir on the outcome of treatment. Logrank test were used to compare the length of hospital stay in people treated with oseltamivir and drugs other than oseltamivir. Results: Kaplan-Meier and logrank test showed no significant reduction in hospitalization time and survival rate following treatment with oseltamivir. However, a significant increase in lymphocytes count and reduction of C-reactive protein (CRP) level detected. Conclusion: Administration of oseltamivir for patients with COVID-19 didn't show any improvement in hospitalization duration and survival rate.

Fabrication of silver nanoparticles-deposited fabrics as a potential candidate for the development of reusable facemasks and evaluation of their performance.

Recently, wearing facemasks in public has been raised due to the coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic worldwide. However, the performance and effectiveness of many existing products have raised significant concerns among people and professionals. Therefore, greater attempts have been focused recently to increase the efficacy of these products scientifically and industrially. In this respect, doping or impregnating facemask fabrics with metallic substances or nanoparticles like silver nanoparticles has been proposed. So, in the present study, we aimed to sonochemically coat silver nanoparticles on the non-woven Spunbond substrates at different sonication times and concentrations to develop antibacterial and antiviral facemask. The coated substrates were characterized using Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscope, Energy Dispersive X-Ray, X-ray diffraction, and Thermogravimetry analysis. The amount of silver released from the coated substrates was measured by atomic absorption spectroscopy. The filtration efficiency, pressure drop, and electrical conductivity of the coated samples were also investigated. The antibacterial activity of fabrics was evaluated against Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. Cellular viability of samples assessed by MTT and brine shrimp lethality tests. The results revealed that the higher sonication times and precursor concentrations result in a higher and more stable coating, larger particle size, wider particle size distribution, and lower content of released silver. Coated fabrics also revealed enhanced filtration efficiency (against nanosize particles), desired pressure drop, and antibacterial activity without significant cytotoxicity toward HEK 293 cells and Artemia nauplii. As a result, the coated fabrics could find potential applications in the development of facemasks for protection against different pathogenic entities.

Non-effectiveness of Ivermectin on Inpatients and Outpatients With COVID-19; Results of Two Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials.

Background: Ivermectin which was widely considered as a potential treatment for COVID-19, showed uncertain clinical benefit in many clinical trials. Performing large-scale clinical trials to evaluate the effectiveness of this drug in the midst of the pandemic, while difficult, has been urgently needed. Methods: We performed two large multicenter randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of ivermectin in treating inpatients and outpatients with COVID-19 infection. The intervention group received ivermectin, 0.4mg/kg of body weight per day for 3 days. In the control group, placebo tablets were used for 3 days. Results: Data for 609 inpatients and 549 outpatients were analyzed. In hospitalized patients, complete recovery was significantly higher in the ivermectin group (37%) compared to placebo group (28%; RR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.04-1.66]; p-value = 0.02). On the other hand, the length of hospital stay was significantly longer in the ivermectin group with a mean of 7.98 ± 4.4 days compared to the placebo receiving group with a mean of 7.16 ± 3.2 days (RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.15-1.45]; p-value = 0.02). In outpatients, the mean duration of fever was significantly shorter (2.02 ± 0.11 days) in the ivermectin group versus (2.41 ± 0.13 days) placebo group with p value = 0.020. On the day seventh of treatment, fever (p-value = 0.040), cough (p-value = 0.019), and weakness (p-value = 0.002) were significantly higher in the placebo group compared to the ivermectin group. Among all outpatients, 7% in ivermectin group and 5% in placebo group needed to be hospitalized (RR, 1.36 [95% CI, 0.65-2.84]; p-value = 0.41). Also, the result of RT-PCR on day five after treatment was negative for 26% of patients in the ivermectin group versus 32% in the placebo group (RR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.60-1.09]; p-value = 0.16). Conclusion: Our data showed, ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not have a significant potential effect on clinical improvement, reduced admission in ICU, need for invasive ventilation, and death in hospitalized patients; likewise, no evidence was found to support the prescription of ivermectin on recovery, reduced hospitalization and increased negative RT-PCR assay for SARS-CoV-2 5 days after treatment in outpatients. Our findings do not support the use of ivermectin to treat mild to severe forms of COVID-19. Clinical Trial Registration: www.irct.ir IRCT20111224008507N5 and IRCT20111224008507N4.

Efficacy of drug regimen with and without oseltamivir in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A retrospective study

Introducción. La enfermedad por coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) es el tema más crítico en la medicina actual. Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar el uso y los resultados terapéuticos de oseltamivir, un medicamento antiviral para pacientes con COVID-19. Materiales y método. en un estudio observacional realizado en el Hospital Imam Khomeini en Amol, Irán, los datos de 544 pacientes con resultados de laboratorio y tomografía computarizada confirmados de COVID-19 se recopilaron retrospectivamente entre el 24 de febrero y el 13 de abril de 2020. Para comparar las características de los pacientes en función del género se utilizó la prueba de chi-cuadrado. Se utilizó regresión logística para evaluar el efecto de oseltamivir en el resultado del tratamiento. Se utilizó la prueba de rango logarítmico para comparar la duración de la estancia hospitalaria en personas tratadas con oseltamivir y otros fármacos distintos del oseltamivir. Resultados. Kaplan–Meier y la prueba de rango logarítmico no mostraron una reducción significativa en el tiempo de hospitalización y la tasa de supervivencia después del tratamiento con oseltamivir. Sin embargo, se detectó un aumento significativo en el recuento de linfocitos y una reducción del nivel de proteína C reactiva (PCR). Conclusión. la administración de oseltamivir para pacientes con COVID-19 no mostró ninguna mejora en la duración de la hospitalización y la tasa de supervivencia.

Non-effectiveness of Ivermectin on Inpatients and Outpatients With COVID-19;Results of Two Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials

Background Ivermectin which was widely considered as a potential treatment for COVID-19, showed uncertain clinical benefit in many clinical trials. Performing large-scale clinical trials to evaluate the effectiveness of this drug in the midst of the pandemic, while difficult, has been urgently needed. Methods We performed two large multicenter randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of ivermectin in treating inpatients and outpatients with COVID-19 infection. The intervention group received ivermectin, 0.4mg/kg of body weight per day for 3 days. In the control group, placebo tablets were used for 3 days. Results Data for 609 inpatients and 549 outpatients were analyzed. In hospitalized patients, complete recovery was significantly higher in the ivermectin group (37%) compared to placebo group (28%;RR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.04–1.66];p-value = 0.02). On the other hand, the length of hospital stay was significantly longer in the ivermectin group with a mean of 7.98 ± 4.4 days compared to the placebo receiving group with a mean of 7.16 ± 3.2 days (RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.15–1.45];p-value = 0.02). In outpatients, the mean duration of fever was significantly shorter (2.02 ± 0.11 days) in the ivermectin group versus (2.41 ± 0.13 days) placebo group with p value = 0.020. On the day seventh of treatment, fever (p-value = 0.040), cough (p-value = 0.019), and weakness (p-value = 0.002) were significantly higher in the placebo group compared to the ivermectin group. Among all outpatients, 7% in ivermectin group and 5% in placebo group needed to be hospitalized (RR, 1.36 [95% CI, 0.65–2.84];p-value = 0.41). Also, the result of RT-PCR on day five after treatment was negative for 26% of patients in the ivermectin group versus 32% in the placebo group (RR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.60–1.09];p-value = 0.16). Conclusion Our data showed, ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not have a significant potential effect on clinical improvement, reduced admission in ICU, need for invasive ventilation, and death in hospitalized patients;likewise, no evidence was found to support the prescription of ivermectin on recovery, reduced hospitalization and increased negative RT-PCR assay for SARS-CoV-2 5 days after treatment in outpatients. Our findings do not support the use of ivermectin to treat mild to severe forms of COVID-19. Clinical Trial Registration www.irct.ir IRCT20111224008507N5 and IRCT20111224008507N4.

Pentoxifylline effects on hospitalized patients with COVID19: A randomized, double-blind clinical trial.

Pentoxifylline (PTX) has broad-spectrum properties such as anti-inflammatory, anticoagulant, and antiviral effects. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PTX in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. This double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted on hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The recruited patients were randomly (1:1) assigned to the PTX group and the placebo group. The intervention group received PTX capsules at a dose of 400 mg three times a day for 10 days along with the national regimen, including interferon plus lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine. The primary outcome was the improvement of clinical scores. The secondary outcomes, on the other hand, were improvement in inflammatory and oxidative stress factors and hospital complications. From a total of 102 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 72 individuals completed the study and were analyzed. No significant differences were shown in demographics and baseline clinical characteristics. Clinical scores was not significant between the two groups (P = 0.31 and 0.07 for day 5 and 11, respectively). Although the mean serum levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and glutathione changed significantly after 5 days in the PTX group (P = 0.03 and p = 0.04), ICU admission, intubation, and hospital stay did not differ between the two groups. The results of our study did not show any superiority of PTX over placebo in improving the clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19. Although PTX had a beneficial effect on IL-6 and showed an acceptable safety profile, it did not offer any clinical benefit for COVID-19 complications.

Side effects and Immunogenicity following administration of the Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine in health care workers in Iran.

The Sputnik V is a COVID- 19 vaccine developed by the Gamalia institute of epidemiology and microbiology and released on August 11, 2020. We provided independent evidence on side effects and immunogenicity following the administration of the Sputnik V COVID-19 in Iran. In this observational study, the healthcare workers who were vaccinated with the Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine within February and April 2021 were evaluated. Among a total of 13,435 vaccinated healthcare workers, we received 3236 self-declaration reports of Sputnik V associated adverse events with the mean age 39.32 ± 10.19 years old which 38.8% were men and 61.2% were women. Totally 68.8% of females versus 66.2% of males reported side effects after receiving the first dose and 31.2% of females versus 33.8% of males reported side effects after the second dose of vaccine. The most common side effect was a pain in the injection site (56.9%), fatigue (50.9%), body pain (43.9%), headache (35.7%), fever (32.9%), joint pain (30.3%), chilling (29.8%) and drowsiness (20.3%). Side effects of the vaccine were significantly more frequent in females and younger individuals. Among a total of 238 participants, more than 90% after the first and second dose of vaccine had a detectable level of SARS-CoV-2 RBD antibody and SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody. Although the overall rate of adverse effects was higher than the interim results from randomized controlled trials, our findings support the manufacturer's reports about the high humoral immunogenicity of vaccine against COVID-19.

A comprehensive review of the therapeutic potential of curcumin nanoformulations.

Today, due to the prevalence of various diseases such as the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), diabetes, central nervous system diseases, cancer, cardiovascular disorders, and so on, extensive studies have been conducted on therapeutic properties of natural and synthetic agents. A literature review on herbal medicine and commercial products in the global market showed that curcumin (Cur) has many therapeutic benefits compared to other natural ingredients. Despite the unique properties of Cur, its use in clinical trials is very limited. The poor biopharmaceutical properties of Cur such as short half-life in plasma, low bioavailability, poor absorption, rapid metabolism, very low solubility (at acidic and physiological pH), and the chemical instability in body fluids are major concerns associated with the clinical applications of Cur. Recently, nanoformulations are emerging as approaches to develop and improve the therapeutic efficacy of various drugs. Many studies have shown that Cur nanoformulations have tremendous therapeutic potential against various diseases such as SARS-CoV-2, cancer, inflammatory, osteoporosis, and so on. These nanoformulations can inhibit many diseases through several cellular and molecular mechanisms. However, successful long-term clinical results are required to confirm their safety and clinical efficacy. The present review aims to update and explain the therapeutic potential of Cur nanoformulations.

Melatonin effects on sleep quality and outcomes of COVID-19 patients: An open-label, randomized, controlled trial.

This trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness of adding melatonin to the treatment protocol of hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. This was an open-label, randomized controlled clinical trial in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Patients were randomized into a treatment arm receiving melatonin plus standard care or a control arm receiving standard care alone. The trial's primary endpoint was sleep quality examined by the Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire (LSEQ). The trial's secondary endpoints were symptoms alleviation by Day 7, intensive care unit admission, 10-day mortality, white blood cell count, lymphocyte count, C-reactive protein status, and peripheral capillary oxygen saturation. Ninety-six patients were recruited and allocated to either the melatonin arm (n = 48) or control arm (n = 48). Baseline characteristics were similar across treatment arms. There was no significant difference in symptoms on Day 7. The mean of the LSEQ scores was significantly higher in the melatonin group (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in laboratory data, except for blood oxygen saturation, which has improved significantly in the melatonin group compared with the control group (95.81% vs. 93.65% respectively, p = 0.003). This clinical trial study showed that the combination of oral melatonin tablets and standard treatment could substantially improve sleep quality and blood oxygen saturation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Sofosbuvir and daclatasvir for the treatment of COVID-19 outpatients: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Effective treatments are urgently needed to tackle the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This trial aims to evaluate sofosbuvir and daclatasvir versus standard care for outpatients with mild COVID-19 infection. METHODS: This was a randomized controlled clinical trial in outpatients with mild COVID-19. Patients were randomized into a treatment arm receiving sofosbuvir/daclatasvir plus hydroxychloroquine or a control arm receiving hydroxychloroquine alone. The primary endpoint of the trial was symptom alleviation after 7 days of follow-up. The secondary endpoint of the trial was hospital admission. Fatigue, dyspnoea and loss of appetite were investigated after 1 month of follow-up. This study is registered with the IRCT.ir under registration number IRCT20200403046926N1. RESULTS: Between 8 April 2020 and 19 May 2020, 55 patients were recruited and allocated to either the sofosbuvir/daclatasvir treatment arm (n = 27) or the control arm (n = 28). Baseline characteristics were similar across treatment arms. There was no significant difference in symptoms at Day 7. One patient was admitted to hospital in the sofosbuvir/daclatasvir arm and four in the control arm, but the difference was not significant. After 1 month of follow-up, two patients reported fatigue in the sofosbuvir/daclatasvir arm and 16 in the control arm; P < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, sofosbuvir/daclatasvir did not significantly alleviate symptoms after 7 days of treatment compared with control. Although fewer hospitalizations were observed in the sofosbuvir/daclatasvir arm, this was not statistically significant. Sofosbuvir/daclatasvir significantly reduced the number of patients with fatigue and dyspnoea after 1 month. Larger, well-designed trials are warranted.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence in the general population and high-risk occupational groups across 18 cities in Iran: a population-based cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Rapid increases in cases of COVID-19 were observed in multiple cities in Iran towards the start of the pandemic. However, the true infection rate remains unknown. We aimed to assess the seroprevalence of antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 18 cities of Iran as an indicator of the infection rate. METHODS: In this population-based cross-sectional study, we randomly selected and invited study participants from the general population (from lists of people registered with the Iranian electronic health record system or health-care centres) and a high-risk population of individuals likely to have close social contact with SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals through their occupation (from employee lists provided by relevant agencies or companies, such as supermarket chains) across 18 cities in 17 Iranian provinces. Participants were asked questions on their demographic characteristics, medical history, recent COVID-19-related symptoms, and COVID-19-related exposures. Iran Food and Drug Administration-approved Pishtaz Teb SARS-CoV-2 ELISA kits were used to detect SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG and IgM antibodies in blood samples from participants. Seroprevalence was estimated on the basis of ELISA test results and adjusted for population weighting (by age, sex, and city population size) and test performance (according to our independent validation of sensitivity and specificity). FINDINGS: From 9181 individuals who were initially contacted between April 17 and June 2, 2020, 243 individuals refused to provide blood samples and 36 did not provide demographic information and were excluded from the analysis. Among the 8902 individuals included in the analysis, 5372 had occupations with a high risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and 3530 were recruited from the general population. The overall population weight-adjusted and test performance-adjusted prevalence of antibody seropositivity in the general population was 17·1% (95% CI 14·6-19·5), implying that 4 265 542 (95% CI 3 659 043-4 887 078) individuals from the 18 cities included were infected by the end of April, 2020. The adjusted seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies varied greatly by city, with the highest estimates found in Rasht (72·6% [53·9-92·8]) and Qom (58·5% [37·2-83·9]). The overall population weight-adjusted and test performance-adjusted seroprevalence in the high-risk population was 20·0% (18·5-21·7) and showed little variation between the occupations included. INTERPRETATIONS: Seroprevalence is likely to be much higher than the reported prevalence of COVID-19 based on confirmed COVID-19 cases in Iran. Despite high seroprevalence in a few cities, a large proportion of the population is still uninfected. The potential shortcomings of current public health policies should therefore be identified to prevent future epidemic waves in Iran. FUNDING: Iranian Ministry of Health and Medical Education. TRANSLATION: For the Farsi translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Evaluation of the efficacy of sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir in combination with ribavirin for hospitalized COVID-19 patients with moderate disease compared with standard care: a single-centre, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: New therapeutic options are urgently needed to tackle the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Repurposing existing pharmaceuticals provides an immediate treatment opportunity. We assessed the efficacy of sofosbuvir and daclatasvir with ribavirin for treating patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This was a single-centre, randomized controlled trial in adults with moderate COVID-19 admitted to the Ghaem Shahr Razi Hospital in Mazandaran Province, Iran. Patients were randomly assigned to 400 mg sofosbuvir, 60 mg daclatasvir and 1200 mg ribavirin (intervention group) or to standard care (control group). The primary endpoint of this study was length of hospital stay. This study is registered by IRCT.ir under the ID: IRCT20200328046886N1. RESULTS: Between 20 March 2020 and 8 April 2020, 48 patients were recruited; 24 patients were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 24 to the control group. The median duration of hospital stay was 6 days in both groups (P = 0.398). The number of ICU admissions in the sofosbuvir/daclatasvir/ribavirin group was not significantly lower than the control group (0 versus 4, P = 0.109). There was no difference in the number of deaths between the groups (0 versus 3, P = 0.234). The cumulative incidence of recovery was higher in the sofosbuvir/daclatasvir/ribavirin arm (Gray's P = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial was too small to make definitive conclusions. There were trends in favour of the sofosbuvir/daclatasvir/ribavirin arm for recovery and lower death rates. However, there was an imbalance in the baseline characteristics between the arms. Larger randomized trials should be conducted to investigate this treatment further.