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-322458

ABSTRACT

Background: Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is a well-established strategy for the prevention of infectious diseases, in which recently exposed people take a short course of medication to prevent infection. The primary objective of the COVID-19 Ring-based Prevention Trial with lopinavir/ritonavir (CORIPREV-LR) is to evaluate the efficacy of a 14-day course of oral lopinavir/ritonavir as PEP against COVID-19 among individuals with a high-risk exposure to a confirmed case. Methods: : This is an open-label, multicenter, 1:1 cluster-randomized trial of LPV/r versus no intervention, using an adaptive approach to sample size calculation. Participants will be individuals aged >6 months with a high-risk exposure to a confirmed COVID-19 case within the past 7 days. A combination of remote and in-person study visits at days 1, 7, 14, 35 and 90 include comprehensive epidemiological, clinical, microbiologic and serologic sampling. The primary outcome is microbiologically confirmed COVID-19 infection within 14 days after exposure, defined as a positive respiratory tract specimen for SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction. Secondary outcomes include safety, symptomatic COVID-19, seropositivity, hospitalization, respiratory failure requiring ventilator support, mortality, psychological impact, and health-related quality of life. Additional analyses will examine the impact of LPV/r on these outcomes in the subset of participants who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 at baseline. To detect a relative risk reduction of 40% with 80% power at α=0.05, assuming p 0 =15%, 5 contacts per case and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC)=0.05, we require 110 clusters per arm, or 220 clusters overall and approximately 1220 enrollees after accounting for 10% loss-to-follow-up. We will modify the sample size target after 60 clusters, based on preliminary estimates of p0, ICC and cluster size and consider switching to an alternative drug after interim analyses and as new data emerges. The primary analysis will be a generalized linear mixed model with logit link to estimate the effect of LPV/r on the probability of infection. Discussion: Harnessing safe, existing drugs such as LPV/r as PEP could provide an important tool for control of the COVID-19 pandemic. Novel aspects of our design include the ring-based prevention approach, and the incorporation of remote strategies for conducting study visits and biospecimen collection. Trial registration: This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04321174) on March 25, 2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04321174

2.
Ann Intern Med ; 175(2): 226-233, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1579921

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is more severe in transplant recipients. Variants of concern have supplanted wild-type virus. In transplant recipients, data are limited on 2-dose or 3-dose vaccine immunogenicity against variant viruses. OBJECTIVE: To assess neutralizing antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 variants in transplant recipients after 2 and 3 vaccine doses. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial of a third dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine versus placebo. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04885907). SETTING: Single-center transplant program. PATIENTS: Organ transplant recipients. INTERVENTION: Third dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine versus placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Sera were analyzed for neutralization against wild-type virus and the Alpha, Beta, and Delta variants using a surrogate virus neutralization assay and a spike-pseudotyped lentivirus assay. RESULTS: A total of 117 transplant recipients were analyzed (60 in the mRNA-1273 group and 57 in the placebo group). Sera were obtained before and 4 to 6 weeks after the third dose. After 2 doses, the proportion of patients with positive neutralization for all 3 variants was small compared with wild-type virus. After the third dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine, the proportion with a positive neutralization response versus placebo was improved for all 3 variants as measured by both assays. Based on the pseudovirus neutralization assay against the Delta variant, 33 of 60 (55%) patients were positive in the mRNA-1273 group versus 10 of 57 (18%) in the placebo group (difference, 37 [95% CI, 19 to 53] percentage points). The differences were 36 (CI, 17 to 51) percentage points for the Alpha variant and 31 (CI, 15 to 46) percentage points for the Beta variant. In the mRNA-1273 group, lower neutralization values were observed for variants compared with wild-type virus, especially the Beta variant. LIMITATIONS: There is no clear correlate of protection for neutralizing antibody. This was a secondary analysis. CONCLUSION: In organ transplant recipients, a third dose of mRNA vaccine increases neutralizing antibody response against SARS-CoV-2 variants compared with placebo. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Ajmera Transplant Centre.


Subject(s)
/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Organ Transplantation , SARS-CoV-2 , Transplant Recipients , /adverse effects , Aged , COVID-19/virology , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Immunocompromised Host , Male , Middle Aged
4.
Trials ; 22(1): 224, 2021 Mar 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1147039

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is a well-established strategy for the prevention of infectious diseases, in which recently exposed people take a short course of medication to prevent infection. The primary objective of the COVID-19 Ring-based Prevention Trial with lopinavir/ritonavir (CORIPREV-LR) is to evaluate the efficacy of a 14-day course of oral lopinavir/ritonavir as PEP against COVID-19 among individuals with a high-risk exposure to a confirmed case. METHODS: This is an open-label, multicenter, 1:1 cluster-randomized trial of LPV/r 800/200 mg twice daily for 14 days (intervention arm) versus no intervention (control arm), using an adaptive approach to sample size calculation. Participants will be individuals aged > 6 months with a high-risk exposure to a confirmed COVID-19 case within the past 7 days. A combination of remote and in-person study visits at days 1, 7, 14, 35, and 90 includes comprehensive epidemiological, clinical, microbiologic, and serologic sampling. The primary outcome is microbiologically confirmed COVID-19 infection within 14 days after exposure, defined as a positive respiratory tract specimen for SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction. Secondary outcomes include safety, symptomatic COVID-19, seropositivity, hospitalization, respiratory failure requiring ventilator support, mortality, psychological impact, and health-related quality of life. Additional analyses will examine the impact of LPV/r on these outcomes in the subset of participants who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 at baseline. To detect a relative risk reduction of 40% with 80% power at α = 0.05, assuming the secondary attack rate in ring members (p0) = 15%, 5 contacts per case and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.05, we require 110 clusters per arm, or 220 clusters overall and approximately 1220 enrollees after accounting for 10% loss-to-follow-up. We will modify the sample size target after 60 clusters, based on preliminary estimates of p0, ICC, and cluster size and consider switching to an alternative drug after interim analyses and as new data emerges. The primary analysis will be a generalized linear mixed model with logit link to estimate the effect of LPV/r on the probability of infection. Participants who test positive at baseline will be excluded from the primary analysis but will be maintained for additional analyses to examine the impact of LPV/r on early treatment. DISCUSSION: Harnessing safe, existing drugs such as LPV/r as PEP could provide an important tool for control of the COVID-19 pandemic. Novel aspects of our design include the ring-based prevention approach, and the incorporation of remote strategies for conducting study visits and biospecimen collection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04321174 ) on March 25, 2020.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/prevention & control , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Post-Exposure Prophylaxis/methods , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , Drug Combinations , Hospitalization , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome
5.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; : 1-12, 2021 Jan 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1046045

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate risk factors for healthcare worker (HCW) infection in viral respiratory pandemics: severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), SARS CoV-1, influenza A H1N1, influenza H5N1. To improve understanding of HCW risk management amid the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases from conception until July 2020 for studies comparing infected HCWs (cases) and noninfected HCWs (controls) and risk factors for infection. Outcomes included HCW types, infection prevention practices, and medical procedures. Pooled effect estimates with pathogen-specific stratified meta-analysis and inverse variance meta-regression analysis were completed. We used the GRADE framework to rate certainty of evidence. (PROSPERO no. CRD42020176232, 6 April 2020.). RESULTS: In total, 54 comparative studies were included (n = 191,004 HCWs). Compared to nonfrontline HCWs, frontline HCWs were at increased infection risk (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.24-2.22), and the risk was greater for HCWs involved in endotracheal intubations (risk difference, 35.2%; 95% CI, 21.4-47.9). Use of gloves, gown, surgical mask, N95 respirator, face protection, and infection training were each strongly protective against infection. Meta-regression showed reduced infection risk in frontline HCWs working in facilities with infection designated wards (OR, -1.04; 95% CI, -1.53 to -0.33, P = .004) and performing aerosol-generating medical procedures in designated centers (OR, -1.30; 95% CI, -2.52 to -0.08; P = .037). CONCLUSIONS: During highly infectious respiratory pandemics, widely available protective measures such as use of gloves, gowns, and face masks are strongly protective against infection and should be instituted, preferably in dedicated settings, to protect frontline HCW during waves of respiratory virus pandemics.

6.
BMJ ; 370: m2980, 2020 07 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-691120

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: WHO covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature, up to 1 March 2021 and six additional Chinese databases up to 20 February 2021. Studies identified as of 12 February 2021 were included in the analysis. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised clinical trials in which people with suspected, probable, or confirmed covid-19 were randomised to drug treatment or to standard care or placebo. Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles. METHODS: After duplicate data abstraction, a bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool, and the certainty of the evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. For each outcome, interventions were classified in groups from the most to the least beneficial or harmful following GRADE guidance. RESULTS: 196 trials enrolling 76 767 patients were included; 111 (56.6%) trials and 35 098 (45.72%) patients are new from the previous iteration; 113 (57.7%) trials evaluating treatments with at least 100 patients or 20 events met the threshold for inclusion in the analyses. Compared with standard care, corticosteroids probably reduce death (risk difference 20 fewer per 1000 patients, 95% credible interval 36 fewer to 3 fewer, moderate certainty), mechanical ventilation (25 fewer per 1000, 44 fewer to 1 fewer, moderate certainty), and increase the number of days free from mechanical ventilation (2.6 more, 0.3 more to 5.0 more, moderate certainty). Interleukin-6 inhibitors probably reduce mechanical ventilation (30 fewer per 1000, 46 fewer to 10 fewer, moderate certainty) and may reduce length of hospital stay (4.3 days fewer, 8.1 fewer to 0.5 fewer, low certainty), but whether or not they reduce mortality is uncertain (15 fewer per 1000, 30 fewer to 6 more, low certainty). Janus kinase inhibitors may reduce mortality (50 fewer per 1000, 84 fewer to no difference, low certainty), mechanical ventilation (46 fewer per 1000, 74 fewer to 5 fewer, low certainty), and duration of mechanical ventilation (3.8 days fewer, 7.5 fewer to 0.1 fewer, moderate certainty). The impact of remdesivir on mortality and most other outcomes is uncertain. The effects of ivermectin were rated as very low certainty for all critical outcomes, including mortality. In patients with non-severe disease, colchicine may reduce mortality (78 fewer per 1000, 110 fewer to 9 fewer, low certainty) and mechanical ventilation (57 fewer per 1000, 90 fewer to 3 more, low certainty). Azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, and interferon-beta do not appear to reduce risk of death or have an effect on any other patient-important outcome. The certainty in effects for all other interventions was low or very low. CONCLUSION: Corticosteroids and interleukin-6 inhibitors probably confer important benefits in patients with severe covid-19. Janus kinase inhibitors appear to have promising benefits, but certainty is low. Azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, and interferon-beta do not appear to have any important benefits. Whether or not remdesivir, ivermectin, and other drugs confer any patient-important benefit remains uncertain. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review was not registered. The protocol is publicly available in the supplementary material. READERS' NOTE: This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This is the fourth version of the original article published on 30 July 2020 (BMJ 2020;370:m2980), and previous versions can be found as data supplements. When citing this paper please consider adding the version number and date of access for clarity.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , COVID-19 , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S./statistics & numerical data , China/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Databases, Factual/statistics & numerical data , Drug Combinations , Evidence-Based Medicine/methods , Evidence-Based Medicine/statistics & numerical data , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Network Meta-Analysis , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Standard of Care , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology
7.
Trials ; 21(1): 647, 2020 Jul 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-647104

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Primary Objective: To determine if pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with 400mg hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), taken orally once daily reduces microbiologically confirmed COVID-19 among front line health care workers at high risk for SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Secondary Objectives: To compare the following between study arms: adverse events; symptomatic COVID-19; duration of symptomatic COVID-19; days hospitalized attributed to COVID-19; respiratory failure attributable to COVID-19 requiring i) non-invasive ventilation or ii) intubation/mechanical ventilation; mortality attributed to COVID-19, number of days unable to work attributed to COVID-19, seroconversion (COVID-19 negative to COVID-19 positive over the study period); ability of participant plasma to neutralize SARS-CoV-2 virus in vitro; To describe short-term psychological distress associated with risk of COVID-19 exposure at 1, 60, 120 days of the study. To explore laboratory markers within participants with confirmed COVID-19: including circulating markers of host immune and endothelial activation in participant plasma and their correlation with disease severity and outcome TRIAL DESIGN: The HEROS study is a two-arm, parallel-group, individually randomized (1:1 allocation ratio), placebo controlled, participant and investigator-blinded, multi-site superiority trial of oral HCQ 400 mg taken once daily for 90 days as PrEP to prevent COVID-19 in health care workers at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. At 90 days, there is an open label extension wherein all participants are offered a one-month course of HCQ 400mg once daily for PrEP of COVID-19. PARTICIPANTS: Frontline HCWs aged 18 years of age or older, at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure (including staff of emergency departments, intensive care units, intubation teams, COVID-wards, and staff deployed to Long Term Care facilities) of five academic hospitals in downtown Toronto, Canada. Exclusion criteria include: currently pregnant, planning to become pregnant during the study period, and/or breast feeding; known hypersensitivity/allergy to hydroxychloroquine or to 4-aminoquinoline compounds; current use of hydroxychloroquine; known prolonged QT syndrome and/or baseline resting ECG with QTc>450 ms and/or concomitant medications which simultaneously may prolong the QTc that cannot be temporarily suspended/replaced; known pre-existing retinopathy, G6PD deficiency, porphyria, liver disease including cirrhosis, encephalopathy, hepatitis or alcoholism, diabetes on oral hypoglycemics or insulin, or renal insufficiency/failure; disclosure of self-administered use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine within 12 weeks prior to study; confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 at time of enrollment. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention: hydroxychloroquine, 400mg (2 tablets) orally per day. Comparator: placebo, two tablets visually identical to the intervention, orally per day MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is microbiologically confirmed COVID-19 (i.e. SARS-CoV-2 infection). This is a composite endpoint which includes positive results from any validated SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic assay including detection of viral RNA, and/or seroconversion. Participants will be assessed at baseline, and then undergo monthly follow-up at day 30, 60, and 90, 120. At each visit, participants will provide an oropharyngeal sample, blood sample, and will undergo electrocardiogram monitoring of the QTc interval. Secondary outcome measures include: adverse events; symptom duration of COVID-19; days of hospitalization attributed to COVID-19; respiratory failure requiring ventilator support attributed to COVID-19; mortality attributed to COVID-19; total days off work attributed to COVID-19; seropositivity (reactive serology by day 120); and short term psychological impact of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 at day 1, 60, 120 days using the K10, a validated measure of non-specific psychological distress. RANDOMISATION: Within each site, participants will be individually randomized to either the intervention arm with HCQ or the placebo arm using a fixed 1:1 allocation ratio using an interactive web-based response system to ensure concealment of allocation. Randomization schedules will be computer-generated and blocked using variable block sizes. BLINDING (MASKING): All participants, research coordinators, technicians, clinicians and investigators will be blinded to the participant allocation group. Numbers to be randomised (sample size) N=988, randomised into two groups of 494 patients. TRIAL STATUS: This summary describes protocol version No. 1.6, May 15, 2020. Recruitment is ongoing - started April 20, 2020 and anticipated end date is July 30, 2021 TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.com Identifier: ISRCTN14326006, registered April 14, 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Health Personnel , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19 , Humans , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL