ABSTRACT
Introduction: Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine (HQ), and darunavir/ritonavir are widely prescribed as an oral treatment for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection despite their uncertainty of clinical benefit. The objective is to determine the safety and the efficacies of two treatment regimens against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: We conducted an open-labeled, randomized, controlled trial to compare the efficacy between a 3-day course of once-daily high-dose oral ivermectin plus zinc sulfate (Group A) and a combination of HQ, darunavir/ritonavir, and zinc sulfate (HQ + antiretroviral, Group B) for 5 days in asymptomatic or mild SARS-CoV-2 infection. The study period was between December 2020 and April 2021. Results: Overall, 113 patients were randomized and analyzed (57 patients in Group A and 56 patients in Group B). The median duration to achieve the virological outcome of either undetected or cycle threshold (Ct) for N gene of SARS-CoV-2 by real-time polymerase chain reaction was 6 days (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.3-6.7) versus 7 days (95% CI: 5.4-8.6) in Group A and Group B, respectively (P = 0.419) in the modified intention-to-treat population. All patients were discharged from hospital quarantine as planned. Two patients in Group A and one patient in Group B were considered clinically worsening and received 10 days of favipiravir treatment. There was no serious adverse event found in both groups. Conclusion: We demonstrated that both treatment regimens were safe, but both treatment regimens had no virological or clinical benefit. Based on this result and current data, there is no supporting evidence for the clinical benefit of ivermectin for coronavirus-19.
ABSTRACT
Detection and epidemiologic characterization of infectious disease outbreaks are key for early identification and response to potential pandemic threats. The rapid global spread of severe SARS-CoV-2 in 2020 highlighted the critical role of diagnostics in understanding the epidemiology of the virus early in the pandemic. As a natural extension of Abbott's work in diagnostics, virus discovery, and virus surveillance, the Abbott Pandemic Defense Coalition (APDC) was launched in early 2021. The APDC is a global multisector scientific and public health partnership whose primary objective is the early detection and mitigation of infectious disease threats of pandemic potential. As of January 2022, the APDC network has partners on 5 continents including academic institutions, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations. A novel element of the APDC is the capacity for early development and rapid deployment of scalable, quality diagnostics targeting newly identified pathogens of pandemic potential.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The epidemiology and outcomes of COVID-19 patients in Thailand are scarce. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adult hospitalized patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 at Siriraj Hospital during February 2020 to April 2020. RESULTS: The prevalence of COVID-19 was 7.5% (107 COVID-19 patients) among 1409 patients who underwent RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 detection at our hospital during the outbreak period. Patients with COVID-19 presented with symptoms in 94.4%. Among the 104 patients who were treated with antiviral medications, 78 (75%) received 2-drug regimen (lopinavir/ritonavir or darunavir/ritonavir plus chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine), and 26 (25%) received a 3-drug regimen with favipiravir added to the 2-drug regimen. Disease progression was observed in 18 patients (16.8%). All patients with COVID-19 were discharged alive. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of COVID-19 was 7.5% among patients who underwent RT-PCR testing, and 10% among those having risk factors for COVID-19 acquisition. Combination antiviral therapies for COVID-19 patients were well-tolerated and produced a favorable outcome.