Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
EuropePMC; 2020.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-315433

ABSTRACT

Background: Drug repurposing is an attractive strategy to rapidly develop affordable therapy against COVID-19. The antifungal drug itraconazole exerts in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 comparable to that of hydroxychloroquine. Preclinical and clinical studies are required to investigate if itraconazole is effective for the treatment and/or prevention of COVID-19. Methods: Due to the initial absence of preclinical models the effect of itraconazole was explored in a clinical, proof-of-concept, open-label, single-center study, in which hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were randomly assigned to receive standard of care with or without itraconazole. The primary outcome was the cumulative score of the clinical status until day 15 based on the 7-point ordinal scale of the World Health Organization. Other outcomes included time to sustained clinical improvement, duration of supplemental oxygen and evolution of nasopharyngeal viral load. In parallel, itraconazole was evaluated in a newly established hamster model of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission, as soon as the model was validated. Findings: In the hamster acute infection model, itraconazole did not reduce viral load in lungs, stools or ileum, despite adequate plasma and lung drug concentrations. In the transmission model, itraconazole failed to prevent viral transmission. The clinical trial was prematurely discontinued after evaluation of the preclinical studies and interim analysis that showed no trends for a more favorable outcome with itraconazole: mean cumulative score of the clinical status 49 vs 47, ratio of geometric means 1.01 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.19), median time to clinical improvement 10 vs 9 days, hazard ratio 0.94 (95% CI 0.56 to 1.60) for itraconazole vs standard of care. Interpretation: Despite in vitro activity, itraconazole was not effective in a preclinical COVID-19 hamster model. A proof-of-concept clinical study was ended prematurely because of futility. Trial Registration: (EudraCT 2020-001243-15)Funding: Covid-19-Fund KU Leuven, Research Foundation - Flanders (FWO), Horizon 2020, Bill and Melinda Gates FoundationDeclaration of Interests: Initial dug screening and discovery of the antiviral effect of itraconazole was done in collaboration with Johnson & Johnson and described in a separate manuscript. Scientists from Johnson & Johnson also performed drug measurements on hamster samples and provided guidance on the dosing regimens for the preclinical studies. The company had no role in the design, execution, analysis, publication or funding of the clinical trial.Author Conflict of Interests: None to declare.Ethics Approval Statement: The institutional Ethical Committee approved all animal experiments (license P065-2020).The study was conducted in accordance with the International Conference on Harmonization Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice and the Declaration of Helsinki. The protocol was approved by the institutional Ethics Committee and by the Belgian Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products (EudraCT 2020-001243-15). The trial was part of the DAWn clinical studies.

2.
EuropePMC; 2020.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-309410

ABSTRACT

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed an enormous burden on health care systems around the world. In the past, the administration of convalescent plasma of patients having recovered from SARS and severe influenza to patients actively having the disease, showed promising effects on mortality and appeared safe. Whether or not this also holds true for the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus is currently unknown. Methods: DAWn-Plasma is a multicentre nation-wide, randomized, open-label, phase II proof-of-concept clinical trial, evaluating the clinical efficacy and safety of the addition of convalescent plasma to the standard of care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Belgium. Patients hospitalized with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 are eligible when they are symptomatic (i.e. clinical or radiological signs) and have been diagnosed with COVID-19 in the 72 hours before study inclusion through a PCR (nasal/nasopharyngeal swab or bronchoalveolar lavage) or a chest-CT scan showing features compatible with COVID-19 in the absence of an alternative diagnosis. Patients are randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either standard of care and convalescent plasma (active treatment group) or standard of care only. The active treatment group receives 2 units of 200 to 250 mL of convalescent plasma within 12 hours after randomization, with a second administration of 2 units 24 to 36 hours after ending the first administration. The trial aims to include 483 patients and will recruit from 25 centres across Belgium. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients that require mechanical ventilation or have died at day 15. The main secondary endpoints are clinical status on day 15 and day 30 after randomization, as defined by the WHO Progression 10-point ordinal scale, and safety of the administration of convalescent plasma. Discussion: This trial will either provide support or discourage the use of convalescent plasma as early intervention for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier: NCT04429854. Registered 12 June 2020 - Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04429854.

4.
EBioMedicine ; 66: 103288, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1141720

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The antifungal drug itraconazole exerts in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 in Vero and human Caco-2 cells. Preclinical and clinical studies are required to investigate if itraconazole is effective for the treatment and/or prevention of COVID-19. METHODS: Due to the initial absence of preclinical models, the effect of itraconazole was explored in a clinical, proof-of-concept, open-label, single-center study, in which hospitalized COVID-19 patients were randomly assigned to standard of care with or without itraconazole. Primary outcome was the cumulative score of the clinical status until day 15 based on the 7-point ordinal scale of the World Health Organization. In parallel, itraconazole was evaluated in a newly established hamster model of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission, as soon as the model was validated. FINDINGS: In the hamster acute infection model, itraconazole did not reduce viral load in lungs, stools or ileum, despite adequate plasma and lung drug concentrations. In the transmission model, itraconazole failed to prevent viral transmission. The clinical trial was prematurely discontinued after evaluation of the preclinical studies and because an interim analysis showed no signal for a more favorable outcome with itraconazole: mean cumulative score of the clinical status 49 vs 47, ratio of geometric means 1.01 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.19) for itraconazole vs standard of care. INTERPRETATION: Despite in vitro activity, itraconazole was not effective in a preclinical COVID-19 hamster model. This prompted the premature termination of the proof-of-concept clinical study. FUNDING: KU Leuven, Research Foundation - Flanders (FWO), Horizon 2020, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/pharmacology , COVID-19/drug therapy , Itraconazole/pharmacology , Animals , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Antiviral Agents/pharmacokinetics , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/etiology , COVID-19/transmission , Chlorocebus aethiops , Disease Models, Animal , Drug Evaluation, Preclinical , Female , Humans , Itraconazole/administration & dosage , Itraconazole/pharmacokinetics , Itraconazole/therapeutic use , Male , Mesocricetus , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/pathology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Proof of Concept Study , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Treatment Outcome , Vero Cells
6.
Trials ; 21(1): 981, 2020 Nov 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-947944

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed an enormous burden on health care systems around the world. In the past, the administration of convalescent plasma of patients having recovered from SARS and severe influenza to patients actively having the disease showed promising effects on mortality and appeared safe. Whether or not this also holds true for the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus is currently unknown. METHODS: DAWn-Plasma is a multicentre nation-wide, randomized, open-label, phase II proof-of-concept clinical trial, evaluating the clinical efficacy and safety of the addition of convalescent plasma to the standard of care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Belgium. Patients hospitalized with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 are eligible when they are symptomatic (i.e. clinical or radiological signs) and have been diagnosed with COVID-19 in the 72 h before study inclusion through a PCR (nasal/nasopharyngeal swab or bronchoalveolar lavage) or a chest-CT scan showing features compatible with COVID-19 in the absence of an alternative diagnosis. Patients are randomized in a 2:1 ratio to either standard of care and convalescent plasma (active treatment group) or standard of care only. The active treatment group receives 2 units of 200 to 250 mL of convalescent plasma within 12 h after randomization, with a second administration of 2 units 24 to 36 h after ending the first administration. The trial aims to include 483 patients and will recruit from 25 centres across Belgium. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients that require mechanical ventilation or have died at day 15. The main secondary endpoints are clinical status on day 15 and day 30 after randomization, as defined by the WHO Progression 10-point ordinal scale, and safety of the administration of convalescent plasma. DISCUSSION: This trial will either provide support or discourage the use of convalescent plasma as an early intervention for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04429854 . Registered on 12 June 2020 - Retrospectively registered.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/therapy , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Adult , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Belgium/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/virology , Combined Modality Therapy/methods , Female , Global Burden of Disease , Hospitalization/trends , Humans , Immunization, Passive/methods , Male , Mortality , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Safety , Standard of Care/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome
7.
ESMO Open ; 5(5): e000947, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-796349

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cancer seems to have an independent adverse prognostic effect on COVID-19-related mortality, but uncertainty exists regarding its effect across different patient subgroups. We report a population-based analysis of patients hospitalised with COVID-19 with prior or current solid cancer versus those without cancer. METHODS: We analysed data of adult patients registered until 24 May 2020 in the Belgian nationwide database of Sciensano. The primary objective was in-hospital mortality within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis among patients with solid cancer versus patients without cancer. Severe event occurrence, a composite of intensive care unit admission, invasive ventilation and/or death, was a secondary objective. These endpoints were analysed across different patient subgroups. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to analyse the association between cancer and clinical characteristics (baseline analysis) and the effect of cancer on in-hospital mortality and on severe event occurrence, adjusting for clinical characteristics (in-hospital analysis). RESULTS: A total of 13 594 patients (of whom 1187 with solid cancer (8.7%)) were evaluable for the baseline analysis and 10 486 (892 with solid cancer (8.5%)) for the in-hospital analysis. Patients with cancer were older and presented with less symptoms/signs and lung imaging alterations. The 30-day in-hospital mortality was higher in patients with solid cancer compared with patients without cancer (31.7% vs 20.0%, respectively; adjusted OR (aOR) 1.34; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.58). The aOR was 3.84 (95% CI 1.94 to 7.59) among younger patients (<60 years) and 2.27 (95% CI 1.41 to 3.64) among patients without other comorbidities. Severe event occurrence was similar in both groups (36.7% vs 28.8%; aOR 1.10; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.29). CONCLUSIONS: This population-based analysis demonstrates that solid cancer is an independent adverse prognostic factor for in-hospital mortality among patients with COVID-19. This adverse effect was more pronounced among younger patients and those without other comorbidities. Patients with solid cancer should be prioritised in vaccination campaigns and in tailored containment measurements.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Hospital Mortality , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Belgium/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/diagnostic imaging , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Prognosis , Respiration, Artificial , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL