The mechanistic rationale of drugs, primary endpoints, geographical distribution of clinical trials against severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-2: A systematic review.

There are numerous ongoing studies assessing treatment options for preventing, treating, and managing complications of coronavirus disease-2019 disease. The objective of this study was to do a systematic review and critical appraisal of the ongoing clinical trials with an aim to provide insight into the various interventions tested, clinical rationale, geographical distribution of the trials as well as the endpoints assessed in the studies. ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and PubMed were assessed till 11 May 2020. The search resulted in 3242 ongoing studies of which 829 studies were included. There are 134 different drug-based interventions being assessed in 463 clinical trials as treatment options China accounts for 35% of all ongoing clinical studies followed by USA 23% and other countries together account for 42%. Amongst the 463 studies assessing drug-based treatment options, studies that are funded by federal and academic institutions are 79.6%, pharmaceutical company-funded studies are 15.11%, and no funding information is available in 5.10%. The definitive outcomes like mortality are being assessed as primary outcome in 22.8% of the studies only and need for ventilator in 6.2% of the studies. Amongst the pharmaceutical company-funded drug-based studies, only 20% of the studies had mortality as the primary outcome. Only 5.5% of the ongoing clinical trials are specifically designed to assess the most vulnerable population like elderly, patients with comorbidities and cancer. Multiple intervention-based clinical studies against severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-2 are being performed throughout the world with a high concentration of clinical trials in the developed world with concern that of elderly and patients with comorbidities are being underrepresented and definite endpoints like mortality are being assessed in only one-fifth of the studies.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness of treatment options against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Treatment options for severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) are limited with no clarity on efficacy and safety profiles. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on patients ≥18 years reporting data on therapeutic interventions in SARS-CoV-2. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality and secondary outcomes were rates of mechanical ventilation, viral clearance, adverse events, discharge, and progression to severe disease. Pooled rates and odds ratios (OR) were calculated. Twenty-nine studies with 5207 patients were included. Pooled all-cause mortality in intervention arm was 12.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.1%-17.4%). Mortality was significantly higher for studies using hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for intervention (OR: 1.36; 95% CI: 0.97-1.89). Adverse events were also higher in HCQ subgroup (OR: 3.88; 95% CI: 1.60-9.45). There was no difference in other secondary outcomes. There is a need for well-designed randomized clinical trials for further investigation of every therapeutic intervention for further insight into different therapeutic options.

Prevalence of Gastrointestinal Symptoms and Fecal Viral Shedding in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic and can involve the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, including symptoms like diarrhea and shedding of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in feces. Objective: To provide a pooled estimate of GI symptoms, liver enzyme levels outside reference ranges, and fecal tests positive for SARS-CoV-2 among patients with COVID-19. Data Sources: An electronic literature search was performed for published (using MEDLINE/PubMed and Embase) and preprint (using bioRxiv and medRxiv) studies of interest conducted from November 1, 2019, to March 30, 2020. Search terms included "COVID-19," "SARS-Cov-2," and/or "novel coronavirus." Study Selection: Eligible studies were those including patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection who reported GI symptoms. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data on patients with GI symptoms (ie, diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting), liver enzyme level changes, and fecal shedding of virus were extracted. Quality of studies was examined using methodological index for nonrandomized studies. Pooled estimates (%) were reported with 95% CIs with level of heterogeneity (I2). Main Outcomes and Measures: Study and patient characteristics with pooled detection rates for diarrhea, nausea or vomiting, liver enzyme levels outside reference ranges, and SARS-CoV-2 positivity in feces tests were analyzed. Results: Of 1484 records reviewed, 23 published and 6 preprint studies were included in the analysis, with a total of 4805 patients (mean [SD] age, 52.2 [14.8] years; 1598 [33.2%] women) with COVID-19. The pooled rates were 7.4% (95% CI, 4.3%-12.2%) of patients reporting diarrhea and 4.6% (95% CI, 2.6%-8.0%) of patients reporting nausea or vomiting. The pooled rate for aspartate aminotransferase levels outside reference ranges was 20% (95% CI, 15.3%-25.6%) of patients, and the pooled rate for alanine aminotransferase levels outside reference ranges was 14.6% (95% CI, 12.8%-16.6%) of patients. Fecal tests that were positive for SARS-CoV-2 were reported in 8 studies, and viral RNA shedding was detected in feces in 40.5% (95% CI, 27.4%-55.1%) of patients. There was high level of heterogeneity (I2 = 94%), but no statistically significant publication bias noted. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that that 12% of patients with COVID-19 will manifest GI symptoms; however, SAR-CoV-2 shedding was observed in 40.5% of patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. This highlights the need to better understand what measures are needed to prevent further spread of this highly contagious pathogen.