Prevention and early treatment of depression through the life course

This book presents current evidence of new perspectives for the prevention and appropriate management of depression in people across the life course. Special attention has been dedicated to facilitating factors for the development of health system capacity and the effectiveness of the different types of interventions. The first part of the book reviews the innovations in global prevention and non-pharmacological treatments for children, adolescents, and youths. The second part reviews interventions for adults across the lifespan, including older adults and caregivers. Despite the efforts to tackle depression, the COVID-19 pandemic directly or indirectly affected the mental health of the population, including an increase in the incidence of depressive disorders, which are underdiagnosed and undertreated in young and older people. Because of the characteristics of adolescence and older adulthood, people can consider depression signs and symptoms as natural, neglecting a proper diagnosis. To address these challenges in the clinical management of depression, Prevention and Early Treatment of Depression Through the Life Course presents a life course perspective on the analysis and treatment of depression to help clinical psychologists, psychiatrists and other mental health professionals understand the mechanisms associated with the onset of depression and identify/develop proper evidence-based treatments for different ages and in different circumstances. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

COVID-19 pharmaceuticals in aquatic matrices: The threatening effects over cyanobacteria and microalgae.

Water contamination by pharmaceuticals is a global concern due to their potential negative effects on aquatic ecosystems and human health. This study examined the presence of three repositioned drugs used for COVID-19 treatment: azithromycin (AZI), ivermectin (IVE) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in water samples collected from three urban rivers in Curitiba, Brazil, during August and September 2020. We conducted a risk assessment and evaluated the individual (0, 2, 4, 20, 100 and 200 µg.L-1) and combined (mix of the drugs at 2 µg.L-1) effects of the antimicrobials on the cyanobacterium Synechococcus elongatus and microalga Chlorella vulgaris. The liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry results showed that AZI and IVE were present in all collected samples, while HCQ occurred in 78 % of them. In all the studied sites, the concentrations found of AZI (up to 2.85 µg.L-1) and HCQ (up to 2.97 µg.L-1) represent environmental risks for the studied species, while IVE (up to 3.2 µg.L-1) was a risk only for Chlorella vulgaris. The hazard quotients (HQ) indices demonstrated that the microalga was less sensitive to the drugs than the cyanobacteria. HCQ and IVE had the highest values of HQ for the cyanobacteria and microalga, respectively, being the most toxic drugs for each species. Interactive effects of drugs were observed on growth, photosynthesis and antioxidant activity. The treatment with AZI + IVE resulted in cyanobacteria death, while exposure to the mixture of all three drugs led to decreased growth and photosynthesis in the cells. On the other hand, no effect on growth was observed for C. vulgaris, although photosynthesis has been negatively affected by all treatments. The use of AZI, IVE and HCQ for COVID-19 treatment may have generated surface water contamination, which could increased their potential ecotoxicological effects. This raises the need to further investigation into their effects on aquatic ecosystems.

Risk of hospitalization and sequelae in patients with COVID-19 treated with 3-day early remdesivir vs. controls in the vaccine and Omicron era: A real-life cohort study.

Recently, a benefit from administration of a 3-day course of early remdesivir (ER) in the outpatients' setting was reported. However, real-life data on its use is scarce. Therefore, we explored the ER clinical outcome in our outpatients' s cohort, compared to untreated controls. We included all patients who were prescribed ER from February to May 2022 and followed them up for 3 months and compared patients who received treatment with untreated controls. In the two groups the following outcomes were investigated: hospitalization and mortality rate, time of negativization and symptom's resolution, and postacute coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) syndrome prevalence. Overall, 681 patients were analyzed, mostly females (53.6%), and with a median age of 66 years (interquartile range: 54-77), 316 (46.4%) patients received ER, and 365 (53.6%) did not receive antiviral treatment (control group). Overall, 8.5% patients eventually required oxygen support, 8.7% were hospitalized for COVID-19, and 1.5% died. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunization and ER (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.049 [0.015; 0.16], p < 0.001) independently reduced hospitalization risk. ER was significantly associated with a shorter duration of SARS-CoV-2 positivity at nasopharyngeal swabs (aß -8.15 [-9.21; -7.09], p < 0.001) and of symptoms (aß -5.11 [-5.82; -4.39], p < 0.001), and with lower rate of COVID-19 sequelae compared to control group (aOR: 0.18 [0.10; 0.31], p < 0.001). Even in the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and Omicron era, in patients at high risk of developing severe disease, ER demonstrated to have a good safety profile and to significantly reduce the risk of disease progression and COVID-19 sequelae compared to untreated controls.

Early 3-day course of remdesivir to prevent progression to severe Covid-19 in high-risk patients with hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection: preliminary results from two Italian outbreaks.

In multimorbid, unvaccinated and non-hospitalized patients, early administration of remdesivir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir was effective in reducing the risk of hospitalization or death from any cause. Similar data are lacking with regard to patients already hospitalized and who acquire in-hospital SARS-CoV-2 infection. We conducted a retrospective study during two outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 infections involving 90 inpatients already hospitalized for medical or surgical conditions, in order to assess the effectiveness of early administration of remdesivir. Forty-seven cases were treated with a 3-day course of remdesivir (200 mg on day 1 and 100 mg on days 2 and 3) within a median time of 1.4 day from testing positive, and were compared to a matched case-control cohort of 43 untreated patients; matching was based on age, sex, vaccination status, previous symptomatic infections by SARS-CoV-2, reasons for hospitalization (no significant differences). No case presented adverse events to remdesivir or death from COVID-19. No significant difference in overall in-hospital mortality was observed in cases compared to controls (17% vs 16.3%, p=0.925), but progression to severe pneumonia, although the difference was still not significant, showed an evident trend of a better outcome (8.5% vs 16.3%, p=0.261). Moreover, cases had a median discharge delay of 3 days (p=0.008).

Real-world effectiveness of sotrovimab and remdesivir for early treatment of high-risk hospitalized COVID-19 patients: A propensity score adjusted retrospective cohort study.

Early treatment of high-risk COVID-19 patients may prevent disease progression. However, there are limited data to support treatment of hospitalized or fully vaccinated patients with mild-to-moderate disease. In this retrospective cohort study, we studied the effect of early use of sotrovimab and remdesivir in high-risk hospitalized COVID-19 patients. We included PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted to the National Centre for Infectious Diseases who presented within the first 5 days of illness, and who were not requiring oxygen or ICU care at presentation. Sotrovimab- and remdesivir-treated groups were compared with control (no early treatment). A multiple propensity-score adjusted multivariable regression analysis was conducted with a composite primary endpoint of in-hospital deterioration (oxygen requirement, ICU admission, or mortality). Of 1118 patients, 841 were in the control group, 106 in the sotrovimab group and 169 in the remdesivir group. The median age was 63 years (IQR 46-74 years) and 505 (45.2%) were female. In unvaccinated patients, both remdesivir and sotrovimab treatment were protective (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.19, 95% CI 0.064-0.60 and 0.18 [95% CI 0.066-0.47]), respectively. Contrarily, among the vaccinated patients there was no significant treatment effect with early remdesivir treatment (aOR 2.51, 95% CI 0.83-7.57, p = 0.10). Remdesivir and sotrovimab treatment, given early in the disease course to unvaccinated high-risk patients, was effective in reducing the risk of in-hospital deterioration and severe disease. This effect was not seen in fully vaccinated patients, which may be due to a small sample size or residual confounding.

Relationship between fever and early clinical diagnosis and treatment in mild COVID-2019 patients

Objective: To investigate the relationship between clinical manifestations, blood testing, chest CT, treatment and fever of 457 mild cases of COVID-19.

A 98-Year-Old Male With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Treated for COVID-19 at Home.

In the absence of evidenced-based guidelines for early home treatment of COVID-19, some Italian groups of volunteer physicians (both general practitioners (GPs) and hospital doctors) virtually gathered themselves to discuss the best available evidence and develop shared schemes of therapy. We present the case of a 98-year-old unvaccinated male on chronic anticoagulant therapy with dabigatran for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF), who has been successfully treated for COVID-19 at home, according to one of the multidrug treatments proposed, since hospital admission was not feasible. At the very beginning of symptoms, anti-inflammatory drugs, vitamin D, and adjuvant dietary supplements (quercetin, vitamin C, zinc, and vitamin K2) were administered, followed by dexamethasone and antibiotic therapy, according to the evolving clinical conditions. Gastroprotection with omeprazole was added. Eventually, our patient fully recovered, thus suggesting that careful home assistance under strict medical supervision can be successful, even in a very old subject with comorbidities, particularly if early treatment simultaneously addressing inflammation, hypercoagulation, and viral replication is started.

Monoclonal Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 Infection: Results from a Real-Life Study before the Omicron Surge.

Despite the lightning-fast advances in the management of SARS-CoV after 2 years of pandemic, COVID-19 continues to pose a challenge for fragile patients, who could benefit from early administration of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) to reduce the risk of severe disease progression. We conducted a prospective study to evaluate the effectiveness of mAbs against SARS-CoV-2 among patients at risk for severe disease progression, namely elderly and those with comorbidities, before the omicron variant surge. Patients were treated with either casirivimab/imdevimab, sotrovimab, or bamlanivimab/etesevimab. The rates and risk factors for clinical worsening, hospitalization, ICU admission and death (unfavorable outcomes) were evaluated. A stratified analysis according to the presence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG was also performed. Among 185 included patients, we showed low rates of unfavorable outcomes (9.2%), which were more frequent in patients with chronic kidney disease (aOR: 10.44, 95% CI: 1.73-63.03; p < 0.05) and basal D-dimer serum concentrations > 600 ng/mL (aOR 21.74, 95% CI: 1.18-397.70; p < 0.05). Patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 serology at baseline showed higher C-reactive protein values compared with patients with positive serology (p < 0.05) and a trend toward a higher admission rate to SICU and ICU compared with patients with positive serology. Our results thus showed, in a real-life setting, the efficacy of mAbs against SARS-CoV-2 before an Omicron surge when the available mabs become not effective.

Using time-weighted average change from baseline of SARS-CoV-2 viral load to assess impact of hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis and early treatment for COVID-19.

Two randomized controlled trials demonstrated no clinical benefit of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for either postexposure prophylaxis or early treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Using data from these studies, we calculated the time-weighted average change from baseline SARS-CoV-2 viral load and demonstrated that HCQ did not affect viral clearance.

Remdesivir Treatment in Moderately Ill COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Single Center Study.

Almost two years after remdesivir was approved and extensively used in numerous clinical studies for the treatment of COVID-19 patients, there is still no clear recommendation for the time and phase of the disease of remdesivir administration. This retrospective observational study included adults (≥18 years) with severe COVID-19, radiologically confirmed pneumonia, a need for supplemental oxygen and an interval from symptom onset to enrolment of 10 days or less. All patients were treated with remdesivir for 5 to 10 days, or with clinical improvement within that period. The primary goal was the outcome in patients treated with remdesivir during the early stage of the disease considering the different disease severity. The median time from symptom onset to treatment was 8.4 days (3-10). Clinical improvements and good outcomes were observed in 104 of 137 patients (75.9%); 33 (24.1%) of 137 patients died. Subgroup analyses showed that the mortality rate was significantly lower in moderately ill patients (3 out of 51 patients; 5.9%) than in the group of severely/critically ill patients (30 out of 86 patients; 34.8%; p < 0.005). Older age, rise of CRP and CT score were shown to be significant predictors of disease outcome. Overall, remdesivir was well tolerated, and the treatment was discontinued in only four patients. The results of this observational study in 137 patients with different disease severity contribute to the attitude concerning remdesivir administration in the early stage of COVID-19, at least in moderately ill patients with a high risk of progression, before the transition to a more severe stage.

Clinical Impact of Monoclonal Antibodies in the Treatment of High-Risk Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Breakthrough Infections: The ORCHESTRA Prospective Cohort Study.

The clinical impact of anti-spike monoclonal antibodies (mAb) in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) breakthrough infections is unclear. We present the results of an observational prospective cohort study assessing and comparing COVID-19 progression in high-risk outpatients receiving mAb according to primary or breakthrough infection. Clinical, serological and virological predictors associated with 28-day COVID-19-related hospitalization were identified using multivariate logistic regression and summarized with odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of 847 COVID-19 outpatients were included: 414 with primary and 433 with breakthrough infection. Hospitalization was observed in 42/414 (10.1%) patients with primary and 8/433 (1.8%) patients with breakthrough infection (p < 0.001). aOR for hospitalization was significantly lower for breakthrough infection (aOR 0.12, 95%CI: 0.05-0.27, p < 0.001) and higher for immunocompromised status (aOR:2.35, 95%CI:1.08-5.08, p = 0.003), advanced age (aOR:1.06, 95%CI: 1.03-1.08, p < 0.001), and male gender (aOR:1.97, 95%CI: 1.04-3.73, p = 0.037). Among the breakthrough infection group, the median SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgGs was lower (p < 0.001) in immunocompromised and elderly patients >75 years compared with that in the immunocompetent patients. Our findings suggest that, among mAb patients, those with breakthrough infection have significantly lower hospitalization risk compared with patients with primary infection. Prognostic algorithms combining clinical and immune-virological characteristics are needed to ensure appropriate and up-to-date clinical protocols targeting high-risk categories.

Antiviral effect and anti-COVID-19 potential of immunobiotics

Immunobiotics, a group of probiotics, have the effect of anti-infection by regulating immune function, which can be added in in foods or used to make adjuvants or medicines (biologics). Immunobiotics can stimulate the mucosal immune system of the body, regulate innate and acquired immunity and exert non-specific anti-microbial (bacterial and viral) infection effects through oral, nasal mucosa, sublingual and other routes, but the immune regulation function of immunobiotics is species-specific. Oral administration of Lactobacillus plantarum GUANKE stimulated the increase and maintenance of SARS-CoV-2 neutralization antibodies in mice even 6 months after immunization. When L. plantarum GUANKE was given immediately after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, the level of SARS-COV-2 specific neutralizing antibody in bronchoalveolar lavage increased by 8 times in mice, which improved the local and systematic cellular immune response to SARS-CoV-2 of mice. Clinical studies have found that immunobiotics have the auxiliary effect in the treatment of COVID-19 by mitigating the symptoms and increase the level of SARS-CoV-2 specific antibody of the patients. It is necessary to conduct research and evaluation for the appropriate guideline of immunobiotics use as erly as possible to provide a new option for the prevention and control of COVID-19.

Facing the Pandemic in Brazil: controversies surrounding “early treatment” and vaccination

The article investigates the controversies that emerge with the production of the CoronaVac vaccine, the first Covid-19 vaccine available in Brazil, on June 11th, 2020. Based on Actor-Network Theory, this study is inspired by virtual ethnography. We thus privilege digital documents from government agencies and medical entities, specialized publications, publications in Facebook groups, and the writing of a virtual field diary. Our investigation ends with the approval of the CoronaVac and Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccines by the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa). We identify the construction of factoids by groups that were critical of social distancing measures, basing themselves on the use of purportedly scientific arguments. The alliances established between doctors and the federal government through the Ministry of Health challenged the vaccine as a technoscientific artifact, and advocated for drugs that were part of the so-called “early treatment” as the “cure” for the pandemic in Brazil. © 2022, Brazilian Anthropology Association. All rights reserved.

A hemodialysis patient who escaped aggravation of COVID-19 after SARS-CoV-2 infection

Dialysis patients are compromised hosts;thus, they might become even more seriously ill in the case of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2). A man in his 50s under maintenance dialysis was accidentally a close contact of someone with SARS-COV-2 infection. Therefore, he received the PCR test for SARS-COV-2 three days a week at the time of his visit to our hospital for his hemodialysis session. He was admitted the day after the result of the PCR test was positive. This patient belongs to a high-risk group with severe illnesses, including the fact that he had not been vaccinated against SARS-COV-2. He received antibody cocktail therapy (casirivimab/imdevimab) on the day he was hospitalized. As a result, he escaped aggravation of COVID-19. This case suggests the important of early diagnosis and early treatment with this cocktail therapy for prevention of aggravation of COVID19 in high-risk hemodialysis patients.

Favipiravir and/or nitazoxanide: a randomized, double-blind, 2×2 design, placebo-controlled trial of early therapy in COVID-19 in health workers, their household members, and patients treated at IMSS (FANTAZE).

BACKGROUND: The 2020 pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 causing COVID-19 disease is an unprecedented global emergency. COVID-19 appears to be a disease with an early phase where the virus replicates, coinciding with the first presentation of symptoms, followed by a later 'inflammatory' phase which results in severe disease in some individuals. It is known from other rapidly progressive infections such as sepsis and influenza that early treatment with antimicrobials is associated with a better outcome. The hypothesis is that this holds for COVID-19 and that early antiviral treatment may prevent progression to the later phase of the disease. METHODS: Trial design: Phase IIA randomised, double-blind, 2 × 2 design, placebo-controlled, interventional trial. RANDOMISATION: Participants will be randomised 1:1 by stratification, with the following factors: gender, obesity, symptomatic or asymptomatic, current smoking status presence or absence of comorbidity, and if the participant has or has not been vaccinated. BLINDING: Participants and investigators will both be blinded to treatment allocation (double-blind). DISCUSSION: We propose to conduct a proof-of-principle placebo-controlled clinical trial of favipiravir plus or minus nitazoxanide in health workers, their household members and patients treated at the Mexican Social Security Institute (IMSS) facilities. Participants with or without symptomatic COVID-19 or who tested positive will be assigned to receive favipiravir plus nitazoxanide or favipiravir plus nitazoxanide placebo. The primary outcome will be the difference in the amount of virus ('viral load') in the upper respiratory tract after 5 days of therapy. Secondary outcomes will include hospitalization, major morbidity and mortality, pharmacokinetics, and impact of antiviral therapy on viral genetic mutation rate. If favipiravir with nitazoxanide demonstrates important antiviral effects without significant toxicity, there will be a strong case for a larger trial in people at high risk of hospitalization or intensive care admission, for example older patients and/or those with comorbidities and with early disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04918927 . Registered on June 9, 2021.

Safety and efficacy of molnupiravir in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients: A real-life experience.

Since the start of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, several treatments have been proposed to cure coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and prevent it. Molnupiravir is a ribonucleoside prodrug of N-hydroxycytidine with an in vitro and in vivo activity against SARS-CoV-2. We conducted a retrospective cohort study that included all people treated with molnupiravir between January 10, 2022, and March 31, 2022, at the University Hospital of Sassari. Molnupiravir was prescribed, according to the Italian Agency of Drug indications, to patients with recent symptom onset (≤5 days), no need for oxygen supplementation, and with a high risk of disease progression for the presence of chronic diseases. We included 192 people with a mean age of 70.4 ± 15.4 years, with 144 (75%) patients over 60 years. During the follow-up, 20 (10.4%) patients showed a disease progression. At the multivariate analysis, older age, having neurological disease, having dyspnea at the onset of the symptoms, and acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospital admission were associated with an increased risk of progression. In contrast, an early start of treatment was associated with a reduced risk of disease progression. Molnupiravir was also extremely safe since 13 (6.8%) adverse events were reported, with only one interruption. Our study shows that monlupiravir confirmed its efficacy and safety in a real-life cohort that included a high percentage of elderly people with a high comorbidity burden.

Investigation of COVID-19 exposure, risk category and subsequent clinical picture and prognosis in healthcare professionals: early pandemic experience

Aim: Healthcare workers are the most risky group in terms of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission. The aim of this study was to reveal the relationships related to the departments in which contact healthcare workers work, personal protective equipment (PPE) use status, risk category, clinical picture and prognosis in follow-up. Materials and Methods: Healthcare workers who had contact with COVID-19 cases in our hospital between March 23, 2020 and June 1, 2020 were included in the study. The healthcare workers included in the study were divided into 3 groups according to their main departments and evaluated. In addition, healthcare workers included in the study were divided into groups and evaluated according to PPE use and risk categories, regardless of the departments they work in.

Efficacy of early treatment with hydroxychloroquine in people with mild to moderate COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction: No early treatment intervention for COVID-19 has proven effective to date. We systematically reviewed the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine as early treatment for COVID-19. Material and methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating hydroxychloroquine for early treatment of COVID-19 were searched in five engines and preprint websites until September 14, 2021. Primary outcomes were hospitalization and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included COVID-19 symptom resolution, viral clearance, and adverse events. Inverse variance random-effects meta-analyses were performed and quality of evidence (QoE) per outcome was assessed with GRADE methods. Results: Five RCTs (n = 1848) were included. The comparator was placebo in four RCTs and usual care in one RCT. The RCTs used hydroxychloroquine total doses between 1,600 and 4,400 mg and had follow-up times between 14 and 90 days. Compared to the controls, early treatment with hydroxychloroquine did not reduce hospitalizations (RR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.47-1.36, I 2 = 2%, 5 RCTs, low QoE), all-cause mortality (RR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.16-3.68, I 2 = 0%, 5 RCTs, very low QoE), symptom resolution (RR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.77-1.16, I 2 = 71%, 3 RCTs, low QoE) or viral clearance at 14 days (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.82-1.27, I 2 = 65%, 2 RCTs, low QoE). There was a larger non-significant increase of adverse events with hydroxychloroquine vs. controls (RR = 2.17, 95% CI: 0.86-5.45, I 2 = 92%, 5 RCTs, very low QoE). Conclusions: Hydroxychloroquine was not efficacious as early treatment for COVID-19 infections in RCTs with low to very low quality of evidence for all outcomes. More RCTs are needed to elucidate the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine as early treatment intervention.

Heparin-induced rectus sheath hematoma in a COVID-19 patient with pulmonary emboli: a case report and literature review

Introduction: Rectus sheath hematoma (RSH) is an uncommon cause of acute abdominal pain that is often misinterpreted. Only about 2% of patients who present with acute abdominal pain display this condition. Damage to the superior or inferior epigastric arteries or their branches, as well as direct rupture of the rectus abdominis muscle, causes bleeding into the rectus sheath. In hospitalized COVID-19 patients, anticoagulant prophylaxis with heparin has become a standard part of medical care. This method may raise the risk of bleeding in older people with comorbidities. Case presentation: The patient was a 60-year-old woman with a history of asthma and diabetes mellitus who was referred to the emergency department with shortness of breath and cough. Chest X-Ray demonstrated Covid-19 pneumonia. On the second day of hospitalization, after the exacerbation of tachypnea, computed tomography (CT) angiography was performed, and the results confirmed pulmonary embolism;therefore, the therapeutic dose of heparin was initiated. On the 21st day of hospitalization, the patient experienced abdominal pain and was visited by a general surgeon. A large ecchymosis was observed in the periumbilical;nonetheless, there was no significant tenderness in the abdominal exam. The patient's hemoglobin dropped to 7.9 mg/dl at this time. An abdominal and pelvic CT scan showed a 45 mm hematoma in the left rectus muscle.

A multi-center, adaptive, randomized, platform trial to evaluate the effect of repurposed medicines in outpatients with early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and high-risk for complications: the TOGETHER master trial protocol

Background: There remains a need for an effective and affordable outpatient treatment for early COVID-19. Multiple repurposed drugs have shown promise in treating COVID-19. We describe a master protocol that will assess the efficacy of different repurposed drugs as treatments for early COVID-19 among outpatients at a high risk for severe complications. Methods: The TOGETHER Trial is a multi-center platform adaptive randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. Patients are included if they are at least 18 years of age, have a positive antigen test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and have an indication for high risk of disease severity, including co-morbidities, older age, or high body mass index. Eligible patients are randomized with equal chance to an investigational product (IP) or to placebo.The primary endpoint is hospitalization defined as either retention in a COVID-19 emergency setting for greater than 6 hours or transfer to tertiary hospital due to COVID-19. Secondary outcomes include mortality, adverse events, adherence, and viral clearance. Scheduled interim analyses are conducted and reviewed by the Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC), who make recommendations on continuing or stopping each IP. The platform adaptive design go-no-go decision rules are extended to dynamically incorporate external evidence on COVID-19 interventions from ongoing independent randomized clinical trials. Discussion: Results from this trial will assist in the identification of therapeutics for the treatment of early diagnosed COVID-19. The novel methodological extension of the platform adaptive design to dynamically incorporate external evidence is one of the first of its kind and may provide highly valuable information for all COVID-19 trials going forward. Clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT04727424 (27/01/2021)