Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 13 de 13
Filter
1.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(7): e1772-e1774, 2021 10 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1584986
2.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 8(11): ofab506, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1584162

ABSTRACT

Background: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, clinical trials necessitated rapid testing to be performed remotely. Dried blood spot (DBS) techniques have enabled remote HIV virologic testing globally, and more recently, antibody testing as well. We evaluated DBS testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody testing in outpatients to assess seropositivity. Methods: In 2020, we conducted 3 internet-based randomized clinical trials and offered serologic testing via self-collected DBS as a voluntary substudy. COVID-19 diagnosis was based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention case definition with epidemiological link to cases. A minority reported polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing at an outside facility. We tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin via antibody detection by agglutination-PCR (ADAP) and compared the results with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Results: Of 2727 participants in the primary studies, 60% (1648/2727) consented for serology testing; 56% (931/1648) returned a usable DBS sample. Of those who were asymptomatic, 5% (33/707) had positive ADAP serology. Of participants with a positive PCR, 67% (36/54) had positive SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. None of those who were PCR-positive and asymptomatic were seropositive (0/7). Of 77 specimens tested for concordance via ELISA, 83% (64/77) were concordant. The challenges of completing a remote testing program during a pandemic included sourcing and assembling collection kits, delivery and return of the kits, and troubleshooting testing. Self-collection was successful for >95% of participants. Delays in US mail with possible sample degradation and timing of DBS collection complicated the analysis. Conclusions: We found remote antibody testing during a global pandemic feasible although challenging. We identified an association between symptomatic COVID-19 and positive antibody results at a similar prevalence as other outpatient cohorts.

3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 72(11): e835-e843, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1249296

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a rapidly emerging virus causing the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with no known effective prophylaxis. We investigated whether hydroxychloroquine could prevent SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare workers at high risk of exposure. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of healthcare workers with ongoing exposure to persons with SARS-CoV-2, including those working in emergency departments, intensive care units, COVID-19 hospital wards, and first responders. Participants across the United States and in the Canadian province of Manitoba were randomized to hydroxychloroquine loading dose then 400 mg once or twice weekly for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was confirmed or probable COVID-19-compatible illness. We measured hydroxychloroquine whole-blood concentrations. RESULTS: We enrolled 1483 healthcare workers, of whom 79% reported performing aerosol-generating procedures. The incidence of COVID-19 (laboratory-confirmed or symptomatic compatible illness) was 0.27 events/person-year with once-weekly and 0.28 events/person-year with twice-weekly hydroxychloroquine compared with 0.38 events/person-year with placebo. For once-weekly hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis, the hazard ratio was .72 (95% CI, .44-1.16; P = .18) and for twice-weekly was .74 (95% CI, .46-1.19; P = .22) compared with placebo. Median hydroxychloroquine concentrations in whole blood were 98 ng/mL (IQR, 82-120) with once-weekly and 200 ng/mL (IQR, 159-258) with twice-weekly dosing. Hydroxychloroquine concentrations did not differ between participants who developed COVID-19-compatible illness (154 ng/mL) versus participants without COVID-19 (133 ng/mL; P = .08). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-exposure prophylaxis with hydroxychloroquine once or twice weekly did not significantly reduce laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 or COVID-19-compatible illness among healthcare workers. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04328467.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis , COVID-19/drug therapy , Canada , Health Personnel , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Ann Intern Med ; 173(8): 623-631, 2020 10 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-981646

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: No effective oral therapy exists for early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether hydroxychloroquine could reduce COVID-19 severity in adult outpatients. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from 22 March through 20 May 2020. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04308668). SETTING: Internet-based trial across the United States and Canada (40 states and 3 provinces). PARTICIPANTS: Symptomatic, nonhospitalized adults with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 or probable COVID-19 and high-risk exposure within 4 days of symptom onset. INTERVENTION: Oral hydroxychloroquine (800 mg once, followed by 600 mg in 6 to 8 hours, then 600 mg daily for 4 more days) or masked placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Symptoms and severity at baseline and then at days 3, 5, 10, and 14 using a 10-point visual analogue scale. The primary end point was change in overall symptom severity over 14 days. RESULTS: Of 491 patients randomly assigned to a group, 423 contributed primary end point data. Of these, 341 (81%) had laboratory-confirmed infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or epidemiologically linked exposure to a person with laboratory-confirmed infection; 56% (236 of 423) were enrolled within 1 day of symptoms starting. Change in symptom severity over 14 days did not differ between the hydroxychloroquine and placebo groups (difference in symptom severity: relative, 12%; absolute, -0.27 point [95% CI, -0.61 to 0.07 point]; P = 0.117). At 14 days, 24% (49 of 201) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine had ongoing symptoms compared with 30% (59 of 194) receiving placebo (P = 0.21). Medication adverse effects occurred in 43% (92 of 212) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine versus 22% (46 of 211) receiving placebo (P < 0.001). With placebo, 10 hospitalizations occurred (2 non-COVID-19-related), including 1 hospitalized death. With hydroxychloroquine, 4 hospitalizations occurred plus 1 nonhospitalized death (P = 0.29). LIMITATION: Only 58% of participants received SARS-CoV-2 testing because of severe U.S. testing shortages. CONCLUSION: Hydroxychloroquine did not substantially reduce symptom severity in outpatients with early, mild COVID-19. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Private donors.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Outpatients , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adult , Antimalarials/therapeutic use , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Double-Blind Method , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Time Factors
6.
Clin Infect Dis ; 72(11): e835-e843, 2021 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-977365

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a rapidly emerging virus causing the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with no known effective prophylaxis. We investigated whether hydroxychloroquine could prevent SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare workers at high risk of exposure. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of healthcare workers with ongoing exposure to persons with SARS-CoV-2, including those working in emergency departments, intensive care units, COVID-19 hospital wards, and first responders. Participants across the United States and in the Canadian province of Manitoba were randomized to hydroxychloroquine loading dose then 400 mg once or twice weekly for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was confirmed or probable COVID-19-compatible illness. We measured hydroxychloroquine whole-blood concentrations. RESULTS: We enrolled 1483 healthcare workers, of whom 79% reported performing aerosol-generating procedures. The incidence of COVID-19 (laboratory-confirmed or symptomatic compatible illness) was 0.27 events/person-year with once-weekly and 0.28 events/person-year with twice-weekly hydroxychloroquine compared with 0.38 events/person-year with placebo. For once-weekly hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis, the hazard ratio was .72 (95% CI, .44-1.16; P = .18) and for twice-weekly was .74 (95% CI, .46-1.19; P = .22) compared with placebo. Median hydroxychloroquine concentrations in whole blood were 98 ng/mL (IQR, 82-120) with once-weekly and 200 ng/mL (IQR, 159-258) with twice-weekly dosing. Hydroxychloroquine concentrations did not differ between participants who developed COVID-19-compatible illness (154 ng/mL) versus participants without COVID-19 (133 ng/mL; P = .08). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-exposure prophylaxis with hydroxychloroquine once or twice weekly did not significantly reduce laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 or COVID-19-compatible illness among healthcare workers. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04328467.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis , COVID-19/drug therapy , Canada , Health Personnel , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 7(11): ofaa500, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-873054

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Use of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), especially in combination with azithromycin, has raised safety concerns. Here, we report safety data from 3 outpatient randomized clinical trials. METHODS: We conducted 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials investigating hydroxychloroquine as pre-exposure prophylaxis, postexposure prophylaxis, and early treatment for COVID-19 using an internet-based design. We excluded individuals with contraindications to hydroxychloroquine. We collected side effects and serious adverse events. We report descriptive analyses of our findings. RESULTS: We enrolled 2795 participants. The median age of research participants (interquartile range) was 40 (34-49) years, and 59% (1633/2767) reported no chronic medical conditions. Overall 2544 (91%) participants reported side effect data, and 748 (29%) reported at least 1 medication side effect. Side effects were reported in 40% with once-daily, 36% with twice-weekly, 31% with once-weekly hydroxychloroquine, compared with 19% with placebo. The most common side effects were upset stomach or nausea (25% with once-daily, 19% with twice-weekly, and 18% with once-weekly hydroxychloroquine, vs 11% for placebo), followed by diarrhea, vomiting, or abdominal pain (23% for once-daily, 17% twice-weekly, and 13% once-weekly hydroxychloroquine, vs 7% for placebo). Two individuals were hospitalized for atrial arrhythmias, 1 on placebo and 1 on twice-weekly hydroxychloroquine. No sudden deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Data from 3 outpatient COVID-19 trials demonstrated that gastrointestinal side effects were common but mild with the use of hydroxychloroquine, while serious side effects were rare. No deaths occurred related to hydroxychloroquine. Randomized clinical trials, in cohorts of healthy outpatients, can safely investigate whether hydroxychloroquine is efficacious for COVID-19. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04308668 for postexposure prophylaxis and early treatment trials; NCT04328467 for pre-exposure prophylaxis trial.

8.
NPJ Genom Med ; 5: 35, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-728982

ABSTRACT

A new global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in high mortality and morbidity. Currently numerous drugs are under expedited investigations without well-established safety or efficacy data. Pharmacogenomics may allow individualization of these drugs thereby improving efficacy and safety. In this review, we summarized the pharmacogenomic literature available for COVID-19 drug therapies including hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, azithromycin, remdesivir, favipiravir, ribavirin, lopinavir/ritonavir, darunavir/cobicistat, interferon beta-1b, tocilizumab, ruxolitinib, baricitinib, and corticosteroids. We searched PubMed, reviewed the Pharmacogenomics Knowledgebase (PharmGKB®) website, Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) pharmacogenomics information in the product labeling, and the FDA pharmacogenomics association table. We found several drug-gene variant pairs that may alter the pharmacokinetics of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine (CYP2C8, CYP2D6, SLCO1A2, and SLCO1B1); azithromycin (ABCB1); ribavirin (SLC29A1, SLC28A2, and SLC28A3); and lopinavir/ritonavir (SLCO1B1, ABCC2, CYP3A). We also identified other variants, that are associated with adverse effects, most notable in hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine (G6PD; hemolysis), ribavirin (ITPA; hemolysis), and interferon ß -1b (IRF6; liver toxicity). We also describe the complexity of the risk for QT prolongation in this setting because of additive effects of combining more than one QT-prolonging drug (i.e., hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine and azithromycin), increased concentrations of the drugs due to genetic variants, along with the risk of also combining therapy with potent inhibitors. In conclusion, although direct evidence in COVID-19 patients is lacking, we identified potential actionable genetic markers in COVID-19 therapies. Clinical studies in COVID-19 patients are deemed warranted to assess potential roles of these markers.

9.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 7(9): ofaa350, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-714017

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Data pertaining to COVID-19 in pregnancy are limited; to better inform clinicians, we collated data from COVID-19 cases during pregnancy and summarized clinical trials enrolling this population. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review of PubMed/MEDLINE to identify cases of COVID-19 in pregnancy or the postpartum period and associated outcomes. We then evaluated the proportion of COVID-19 clinical trials (from ClinicalTrials.gov) excluding pregnant or breastfeeding persons (both through June 29, 2020). RESULTS: We identified 11 308 published cases of COVID-19 during pregnancy. Of those reporting disease severity, 21% (416/1999) were severe/critical. Maternal and neonatal survival were reassuring (98% [10 437/10 597] and 99% [1155/1163], respectively). Neonatal disease was rare, with only 41 possible cases of infection reported in the literature. Of 2351 ongoing COVID-19 therapeutic clinical trials, 1282 were enrolling persons of reproductive age and 65% (829/1282) excluded pregnant persons. Pregnancy was an exclusion criterion for 69% (75/109) of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, 80% (28/35) of lopinavir/ritonavir, and 48% (44/91) of convalescent plasma studies. We identified 48 actively recruiting or completed drug trials reporting inclusion of this population. CONCLUSIONS: There are limited published reports of COVID-19 in pregnancy despite more than 14 million cases worldwide. To date, clinical outcomes appear reassuring, but data related to important long-term outcomes are missing or not yet reported. The large number of clinical trials excluding pregnant persons, despite interventions with safety data in pregnancy, is concerning. In addition to observational cohort studies, pregnancy-specific adaptive clinical trials could be designed to identify safe and effective treatments.

10.
Clin Pharmacol Ther ; 108(6): 1135-1149, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-657047

ABSTRACT

Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are quinoline derivatives used to treat malaria. To date, these medications are not approved for the treatment of viral infections, and there are no well-controlled, prospective, randomized clinical studies or evidence to support their use in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Nevertheless, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are being studied alone or in combination with other agents to assess their effectiveness in the treatment or prophylaxis for COVID-19. The effective use of any medication involves an understanding of its pharmacokinetics, safety, and mechanism of action. This work provides basic clinical pharmacology information relevant for planning and initiating COVID-19 clinical studies with chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine, summarizes safety data from healthy volunteer studies, and summarizes safety data from phase II and phase II/III clinical studies in patients with uncomplicated malaria, including a phase II/III study in pediatric patients following administration of azithromycin and chloroquine in combination. In addition, this work presents data describing the proposed mechanisms of action against the severe acute respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus-2 and summarizes clinical efficacy to date.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Chloroquine/pharmacology , Chloroquine/therapeutic use , Hydroxychloroquine/pharmacology , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Age Factors , Aging , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Chloroquine/pharmacokinetics , Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic , Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic , Drug Interactions , Drug Therapy, Combination , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Hydroxychloroquine/pharmacokinetics , Liver Failure/epidemiology , Malaria/drug therapy , Prospective Studies , Renal Insufficiency/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
11.
N Engl J Med ; 383(6): 517-525, 2020 08 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-505858

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) occurs after exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). For persons who are exposed, the standard of care is observation and quarantine. Whether hydroxychloroquine can prevent symptomatic infection after SARS-CoV-2 exposure is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial across the United States and parts of Canada testing hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis. We enrolled adults who had household or occupational exposure to someone with confirmed Covid-19 at a distance of less than 6 ft for more than 10 minutes while wearing neither a face mask nor an eye shield (high-risk exposure) or while wearing a face mask but no eye shield (moderate-risk exposure). Within 4 days after exposure, we randomly assigned participants to receive either placebo or hydroxychloroquine (800 mg once, followed by 600 mg in 6 to 8 hours, then 600 mg daily for 4 additional days). The primary outcome was the incidence of either laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 or illness compatible with Covid-19 within 14 days. RESULTS: We enrolled 821 asymptomatic participants. Overall, 87.6% of the participants (719 of 821) reported a high-risk exposure to a confirmed Covid-19 contact. The incidence of new illness compatible with Covid-19 did not differ significantly between participants receiving hydroxychloroquine (49 of 414 [11.8%]) and those receiving placebo (58 of 407 [14.3%]); the absolute difference was -2.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval, -7.0 to 2.2; P = 0.35). Side effects were more common with hydroxychloroquine than with placebo (40.1% vs. 16.8%), but no serious adverse reactions were reported. CONCLUSIONS: After high-risk or moderate-risk exposure to Covid-19, hydroxychloroquine did not prevent illness compatible with Covid-19 or confirmed infection when used as postexposure prophylaxis within 4 days after exposure. (Funded by David Baszucki and Jan Ellison Baszucki and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04308668.).


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Post-Exposure Prophylaxis , Adult , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Canada , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Inhalation Exposure , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Failure , United States
12.
Clin Pharmacol Ther ; 108(4): 766-769, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-133605

ABSTRACT

Hydroxychloroquine is an antimalarial drug being tested as a potential treatment for the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Although the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 remains uncertain, it may serve as a potential prophylactic agent especially in those at high risk, such as healthcare workers, household contacts of infected patients, and the immunocompromised. Our aim was to identify possible hydroxychloroquine dosing regimens through simulation in those at high risk of infections by optimizing exposures above the in vitro generated half maximal effective concentration (EC50 ) and to help guide researchers in dose-selection for COVID-19 prophylactic studies. To maintain weekly troughs above EC50 in > 50% of subjects at steady-state in a pre-exposure prophylaxis setting, an 800 mg loading dose followed by 400 mg twice or 3 times weekly is required. In an exposure driven, post-exposure prophylaxis setting, 800 mg loading dose followed in 6 hours by 600 mg, then 600 mg daily for 4 more days achieved daily troughs above EC50 in > 50% subjects. These doses are higher than recommended for malaria chemoprophylaxis, and clinical trials are needed to establish safety and efficacy.


Subject(s)
Antimalarials/administration & dosage , Betacoronavirus/drug effects , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Hydroxychloroquine/administration & dosage , Malaria/drug therapy , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis/methods , Antimalarials/blood , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/blood , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/blood , Malaria/blood , Models, Biological , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
13.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 7(4): ofaa130, 2020 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-60353

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a rapidly emerging viral infection causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have garnered unprecedented attention as potential therapeutic agents against COVID-19 following several small clinical trials, uncontrolled case series, and public figure endorsements. While there is a growing body of scientific data, there is also concern for harm, particularly QTc prolongation and cardiac arrhythmias. Here, we perform a rapid narrative review and discuss the strengths and limitations of existing in vitro and clinical studies. We call for additional randomized controlled trial evidence prior to the widespread incorporation of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine into national and international treatment guidelines.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL