Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Lancet Reg Health Am ; 11: 100243, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1768385

ABSTRACT

Background: Previous Randomised controlled trials (RCT) evaluating chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in non-hospitalised COVID-19 patients have found no significant difference in hospitalisation rates. However, low statistical power precluded definitive answers. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, RCT in 56 Brazilian sites. Adults with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 presenting with mild or moderate symptoms with ≤ 07 days prior to enrollment and at least one risk factor for clinical deterioration were randomised (1:1) to receive hydroxychloroquine 400 mg twice a day (BID) in the first day, 400 mg once daily (OD) thereafter for a total of seven days, or matching placebo. The primary outcome was hospitalisation due to COVID-19 at 30 days, which was assessed by an adjudication committee masked to treatment allocation and following the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle. An additional analysis was performed only in participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by molecular or serology testing (modified ITT [mITT] analysis). This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04466540. Findings: From May 12, 2020 to July 07, 2021, 1372 patients were randomly allocated to hydroxychloroquine or placebo. There was no significant difference in the risk of hospitalisation between hydroxychloroquine and placebo groups (44/689 [6·4%] and 57/683 [8·3%], RR 0·77 [95% CI 0·52-1·12], respectively, p=0·16), and similar results were found in the mITT analysis with 43/478 [9·0%] and 55/471 [11·7%] events, RR 0·77 [95% CI 0·53-1·12)], respectively, p=0·17. To further complement our data, we conducted a meta-analysis which suggested no significant benefit of hydroxychloroquine in reducing hospitalisation among patients with positive testing (69/1222 [5·6%], and 88/1186 [7·4%]; RR 0·77 [95% CI 0·57-1·04]). Interpretation: In outpatients with mild or moderate forms of COVID-19, the use of hydroxychloroquine did not reduce the risk of hospitalisation compared to the placebo control. Our findings do not support the routine use of hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19 in the outpatient setting. Funding: COALITION COVID-19 Brazil and EMS.

2.
Nat Commun ; 12(1): 5861, 2021 10 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1454761

ABSTRACT

Several COVID-19 vaccines have shown good efficacy in clinical trials, but there remains uncertainty about the efficacy of vaccines against different variants. Here, we investigate the efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) against symptomatic COVID-19 in a post-hoc exploratory analysis of a Phase 3 randomised trial in Brazil (trial registration ISRCTN89951424). Nose and throat swabs were tested by PCR in symptomatic participants. Sequencing and genotyping of swabs were performed to determine the lineages of SARS-CoV-2 circulating during the study. Protection against any symptomatic COVID-19 caused by the Zeta (P.2) variant was assessed in 153 cases with vaccine efficacy (VE) of 69% (95% CI 55, 78). 49 cases of B.1.1.28 occurred and VE was 73% (46, 86). The Gamma (P.1) variant arose later in the trial and fewer cases (N = 18) were available for analysis. VE was 64% (-2, 87). ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 provided 95% protection (95% CI 61%, 99%) against hospitalisation due to COVID-19. In summary, we report that ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 protects against emerging variants in Brazil despite the presence of the spike protein mutation E484K.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Phylogeny , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Brazil , Cohort Studies , Dose-Response Relationship, Immunologic , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Treatment Outcome , Vaccination , Viral Load/immunology , Young Adult
3.
Int J Infect Dis ; 110: 281-308, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1324151

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The majority of available scores to assess mortality risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in the emergency department have high risk of bias. Therefore, this cohort aimed to develop and validate a score at hospital admission for predicting in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients and to compare this score with other existing ones. METHODS: Consecutive patients (≥ 18 years) with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to the participating hospitals were included. Logistic regression analysis was performed to develop a prediction model for in-hospital mortality, based on the 3978 patients admitted between March-July, 2020. The model was validated in the 1054 patients admitted during August-September, as well as in an external cohort of 474 Spanish patients. RESULTS: Median (25-75th percentile) age of the model-derivation cohort was 60 (48-72) years, and in-hospital mortality was 20.3%. The validation cohorts had similar age distribution and in-hospital mortality. Seven significant variables were included in the risk score: age, blood urea nitrogen, number of comorbidities, C-reactive protein, SpO2/FiO2 ratio, platelet count, and heart rate. The model had high discriminatory value (AUROC 0.844, 95% CI 0.829-0.859), which was confirmed in the Brazilian (0.859 [95% CI 0.833-0.885]) and Spanish (0.894 [95% CI 0.870-0.919]) validation cohorts, and displayed better discrimination ability than other existing scores. It is implemented in a freely available online risk calculator (https://abc2sph.com/). CONCLUSIONS: An easy-to-use rapid scoring system based on characteristics of COVID-19 patients commonly available at hospital presentation was designed and validated for early stratification of in-hospital mortality risk of patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Humans , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
4.
PLoS One ; 16(4): e0249672, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1197375

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Limited data is available regarding the frequency of COVID-19 in populations that are highly exposed to SARS-CoV-2. In this cross-section study we evaluated COVID-19 seroprevalence in military police forces of 10 major cities in Rio Grande do Sul, South of Brazil. METHODS: Sampling was randomly performed in clusters, in respect to the number of professionals at service per city and military unit. Research subjects were evaluated on July 23, 2020 (first wave peak in Brazil). Clinical information was obtained, and venous blood was taken for ELISA testing (IgA, and IgG antibodies). Sample size consisted of 1,592 military workers (33.6% of study population). They were mostly man (81.2%) and young (median 34 years-old). Most had been asymptomatic (75.3%) during pandemic, and 27.5% reported close contact with COVID-19 cases (after a median time of 21 days). Antibodies were detected in 3.3% of the participants, mostly IgA (2.7%), and IgG (1.7%). After 3 weeks, 66.7% of IgA and IgG results turned negative, in addition to 78.3% and 100% of borderline IgA and IgG results, respectively. CONCLUSION: The seroprevalence of COVID-19 amongst military police was at least 3.4 higher than the findings of other studies performed in the general population, in the same cities and dates. Most detectable antibodies were of IgA class, which implies recent exposure. Asymptomatic people were more prone to have negative antibody titters in the second run.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Adult , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Serological Testing , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Military Personnel , Pandemics , Police , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Seroepidemiologic Studies
5.
SSRN; 2021.
Preprint in English | SSRN | ID: ppcovidwho-6412
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL