Arrhythmogenesis and COVID-19.

The ongoing coronavirus infection-2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic has had devastating impacts on the global population since 2019. Cardiac complications are a well-documented sequala of COVID-19, with exposed patients experiencing complications such as myocardial infarction, myocarditis, and arrythmias. This article aims to review prominent literature regarding COVID-19 and its link with arrhythmias, as well as to discuss some of the possible mechanisms by which arrhythmogenesis may occur in patients with COVID-19.

Cutaneous side effects of hydroxychloroquine in health care workers in a COVID referral hospital - implications for clinical practice.

The utility of hydroxychloroquine for the prophylaxis and treatment of alarmingly rising COVID-19 infection has been widely explored in several studies. However, its cutaneous adverse effects among health care workers and COVID patients taking prophylactic doses has not been reported. We report cases of palmoplantar among health care workers who were on prophylactic doses of hydroxychloroquine and their management with cetirizine and methylprednisolone.

Cardiovascular Safety of Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromycin in 424 COVID-19 Patients.

Background and Objectives: Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) combined with azithromycin (AZM) has been widely administered to patients with COVID-19 despite scientific controversies. In particular, the potential of prolong cardiac repolarization when using this combination has been discussed. Materials and Methods: We report a pragmatic and simple safety approach which we implemented among the first patients treated for COVID-19 in our center in early 2020. Treatment contraindications were the presence of severe structural or electrical heart disease, baseline corrected QT interval (QTc) > 500 ms, hypokalemia, or other drugs prolonging QTc that could not be interrupted. Electrocardiogram and QTc was evaluated at admission and re-evaluated after 48 h of the initial prescription. Results: Among the 424 consecutive adult patients (mean age 46.3 ± 16.1 years; 216 women), 21.5% patients were followed in conventional wards and 78.5% in a day-care unit. A total of 11 patients (2.6%) had contraindications to the HCQ-AZ combination. In the remaining 413 treated patients, there were no arrhythmic events in any patient during the 10-day treatment regimen. QTc was slightly but statistically significantly prolonged by 3.75 ± 25.4 ms after 2 days of treatment (p = 0.003). QTc prolongation was particularly observed in female outpatients <65 years old without cardiovascular disease. Ten patients (2.4%) developed QTc prolongation > 60 ms, and none had QTc > 500 ms. Conclusions: This report does not aim to contribute to knowledge of the efficacy of treating COVID-19 with HCQ-AZ. However, it shows that a simple initial assessment of patient medical history, electrocardiogram (ECG), and kalemia identifies contraindicated patients and enables the safe treatment of COVID-19 patients with HCQ-AZ. QT-prolonging anti-infective drugs can be used safely in acute life-threatening infections, provided that a strict protocol and close collaboration between infectious disease specialists and rhythmologists are applied.

Management of pharmacovigilance during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis by the safety department of an academic sponsor: Lessons learnt and challenges from the EU DisCoVeRy clinical trial.

The current COVID-19 pandemic was an exceptional health situation, including for drug use. As there was no known effective drug for COVID-19 at the beginning of the pandemic, different drug candidates were proposed. In this article, we present the challenges for an academic Safety Department to manage the global safety of a European trial during the pandemic. The National Institute for Health and Medical Research (Inserm) conducted a European multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial involving three repurposed and one-in development drugs (lopinavir/ritonavir, IFN-ß1a, hydroxychloroquine, and remdesivir) in adults hospitalized with COVID-19. From 25 March 2020 to 29 May 2020, the Inserm Safety Department had to manage 585 Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) initial notification and 396 follow-up reports. The Inserm Safety Department's staff was mobilized to manage these SAEs and to report Expedited safety reports to the competent authorities within the legal timeframes. More than 500 queries were sent to the investigators due to a lack of or incoherent information on SAE forms. At the same time, the investigators were overwhelmed by the management of patients suffering from COVID-19 infection. These particular conditions of missing data and lack of accurate description of adverse events made evaluation of the SAEs very difficult, particularly the assessment of the causal role of each investigational medicinal product. In parallel, working difficulties were accentuated by the national lockdown, frequent IT tool dysfunctions, delayed implementation of monitoring and the absence of automatic alerts for SAE form modification. Although COVID-19 is a confounding factor per se, the delay in and quality of SAE form completion and the real-time medical analysis by the Inserm Safety Department were major issues in the quick identification of potential safety signals. To conduct a high-quality clinical trial and ensure patient safety, all stakeholders must take their roles and responsibilities.

The HAVEN study-hydroxychloroquine in ANCA vasculitis evaluation-a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial: study protocol and statistical analysis plan.

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-severe ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) are often prescribed immunosuppressive medications that are associated with severe side effects and a reduced quality of life. There is an unmet need for safer effective treatments for these patients. Hydroxychloroquine is being explored due to its effect in similar autoimmune conditions such as systemic lupus erythematosus. METHODS: Double-blind, placebo-controlled multicentre trial recruiting 76 patients across 20 sites. Participants will be randomised 1:1 to hydroxychloroquine or placebo in addition to standard of care immunosuppressive therapies over the course of 52 weeks. A phase II selection design will be used to determine hdroxychloroquine's efficacy, using prednisolone dosage and Birmingham Vasculitis Activity Score as a measure of disease activity. Secondary outcomes will explore other elements of AAV progression, including disease flares and time to remission. DISCUSSION: This trial aims to explore Hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for patients with AAV. If effective, the need for immunosuppressive treatments such as prednisolone could be reduced. Hydroxychloroquine is safer, cheaper and has fewer adverse effects than conventional immunosuppressive treatments. This could improve patient outcomes while saving money for the NHS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: ISRCTN79334891. Registered 07 June 2021. EudraCT: 2018-001268-40. Registered 13 September 2019. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT04316494. Registered 20 March 2020.

A linked physiologically based pharmacokinetic model for hydroxychloroquine and metabolite desethylhydroxychloroquine in SARS-CoV-2(-)/(+) populations.

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved for malaria, systemic and chronic discoid lupus erythematosus, and rheumatoid arthritis. Because HCQ has a proposed multimodal mechanism of action and a well-established safety profile, it is often investigated as a repurposed therapeutic for a range of indications. There is a large degree of uncertainty in HCQ pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters which complicates dose selection when investigating its use in new disease states. Complications with HCQ dose selection emerged as multiple clinical trials investigated HCQ as a potential therapeutic in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to uncertainty in baseline HCQ PK parameters, it was not clear if disease-related consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection/COVID-19 would be expected to impact the PK of HCQ and its primary metabolite desethylhydroxychloroquine (DHCQ). To address the question whether SARS-CoV-2 infection/COVID-19 impacted HCQ and DHCQ PK, dried blood spot samples were collected from SARS-CoV-2(-)/(+) participants administered HCQ. When a previously published physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model was used to fit the data, the variability in exposure of HCQ and DHCQ was not adequately captured and DHCQ concentrations were overestimated. Improvements to the previous PBPK model were made by incorporating the known range of blood to plasma concentration ratios (B/P) for each compound, adjusting HCQ and DHCQ distribution settings, and optimizing DHCQ clearance. The final PBPK model adequately captured the HCQ and DHCQ concentrations observed in SARS-CoV-2(-)/(+)participants, and incorporating COVID-19-associated changes in cytochrome P450 activity did not further improve model performance for the SARS-CoV-2(+) population.

Early experimental COVID-19 therapies: associations with length of hospital stay, mortality and related costs.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: Hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir have been used as experimental therapies to treat COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic. Randomised controlled trials have recently shown that there are no meaningful benefits of these two therapies in hospitalised patients. Uncertainty remains regarding the potential harmful impact of these therapies as very early treatments and their burden to the health care system. The present study investigated the length of hospital stay (LOS), mortality, and costs of hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir or their combination in comparison with standard of care among patients hospitalised for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study took place in the Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland (n = 840) between 26 February and 31 May 2020. Demographics, treatment regimens, comorbidities, the modified National Early Warning Score (mNEWS) on admission, and contraindications to COVID-19 treatment options were assessed. Outcomes included LOS, in-hospital mortality, and drug and LOS costs. RESULTS: After successful propensity score matching, patients treated with (1) hydroxychloroquine, (2) lopinavir/ritonavir or (3) their combination had on average 3.75 additional hospitalisation days (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.37–6.12, p = 0.002), 1.23 additional hospitalisation days (95% CI −1.24 – 3.51, p = 0.319), and 4.19 additional hospitalisation days (95% CI 1.52–5.31, p <0.001), respectively, compared with patients treated with the standard of care. Neither experimental therapy was significantly associated with mortality. These additional hospital days amounted to 1010.77 additional days for hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine combined with lopinavir/ritonavir, resulting in an additional cost of US$ 2,492,214 (95%CI US$ 916,839–3,450,619). CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing experimental therapies for COVID-19 was not associated with a reduced LOS and might have increased the pressure put on healthcare systems.

Case Series of Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pneumonia Treated with Hydroxychloroquine.

The efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) therapy, a previous candidate drug for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), was denied in the global guideline. The risk of severe cardiac events associated with HCQ was inconsistent in previous reports. In the present case series, we show the tolerability of HCQ therapy in patients treated in our hospital, and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of HCQ therapy for patients with COVID-19. A representative case was a 66-year-old woman who had become infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and was diagnosed as having COVID-19 pneumonia via polymerase chain reaction. She was refractory to treatment with levofloxacin, lopinavir, and ritonavir, while her condition improved after beginning HCQ therapy without severe side effects. We show the tolerability of HCQ therapy for 27 patients treated in our hospital. In total, 21 adverse events occurred in 20 (74%) patients, namely, diarrhea in 11 (41%) patients, and elevated levels of both aspartate aminotransferase and alanine transaminase in 10 (37%) patients. All seven grade ≥ 4 adverse events were associated with the deterioration in COVID-19 status. No patients discontinued HCQ treatment because of HCQ-related adverse events. Two patients (7%) died of COVID-19 pneumonia. In conclusion, HCQ therapy that had been performed for COVID-19 was well-tolerated in our case series.

Hydroxychloroquine for pre-exposure prophylaxis of COVID-19 in health care workers: a randomized, multicenter, placebo-controlled trial Healthcare Worker Exposure Response and Outcomes of Hydroxychloroquine (HERO-HCQ).

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is safe and effective at preventing COVID-19 infections among health care workers (HCWs). METHODS: In a 1: 1 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, superiority trial at 34 US clinical centers, 1360 HCWs at risk for COVID-19 infection were enrolled between April and November 2020. Participants were randomized to HCQ or matched placebo. The HCQ dosing included a loading dose of HCQ 600 mg twice on day 1, followed by 400 mg daily for 29 days. The primary outcome was a composite of confirmed or suspected COVID-19 clinical infection by day 30, defined as new-onset fever, cough, or dyspnea and either a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test (confirmed) or a lack of confirmatory testing due to local restrictions (suspected). RESULTS: Study enrollment closed before full accrual due to recruitment challenges. The primary end point occurred in 41 (6.0%) participants receiving HCQ and 53 (7.8%) participants receiving placebo. No difference in the proportion of participants experiencing clinical infection (estimated difference of -1.8%, 95% confidence interval -4.6-0.9%, P = 0.20) was identified nor any significant safety issues. CONCLUSION: Oral HCQ taken as prescribed appeared safe among HCWs. No significant clinical benefits were observed. The study was not powered to detect a small but potentially important reduction in infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04334148.

Generalized Pustular Figurate Erythema in Patients with COVID-19 Treated with Hydroxychloroquine: A Systematic Review.

severe distinctive cutaneous drug reaction, generalized pustular figurate erythema, closely linked with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), has been documented. It is distinguishable from AGEP by its longer incubation, more varied morphology (initially urticarial and later targetoid, arcuate plaques), recalcitrance to therapy and longer disease course. Aim of the article is to review the recognized entity associated with ingestion of hydroxychloroquine in patients infected with COVID-19. A systematic review using electronic search was performed. Inclusion criteria: n patients with COVID-19 demonstrated by PCR, with typical clinical features of AGEP/GPFE or atypical features associated with typical histopathology. We used the (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Reports for the qualitive assessment. We included 13 publications. Their overall quality was good to moderate. Only 27.3% of the patients had a severe COVID-19 course. The mean lag time between trigger exposure and rash development was 24 days. Only 15.38% of the reported AGEP were clinically typical, while the remaining 69.23 % were suggestive of GPFE. Unfortunately, 2 patients died secondary to massive pulmonary embolism. In COVID-19 infection, we suggest reconsidering treating established COVID-19 empirically with HCQ, as both triggers can augment the subsequent cytokine storm, inducing a severe drug reaction and possibly increasing the risk of thrombo-embolic events.

Safety considerations of chloroquine in the treatment of patients with diabetes and COVID-19.

Patients with underlying diseases and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at increased risk of death. Using the recommended anti-COVID-19 drug, chloroquine phosphate (CQ), to treat patients with severe cases and type 2 diabetes (T2D) could potentially cause harm. We aimed to understand the safety of CQ in patients with T2D by administrating the recommended dose (63 mg/kg twice daily for 7 days) and a high dose (126 mg/kg twice daily for 7 days) of CQ in T2D rats. We found that CQ increased the total mortality of the T2D rats from 27.3% to 72.7% in the recommended and high-dose groups during the whole period. CQ also induced hematotoxicity of T2D rats in the high-dose group; the hepatic enzymes in T2D rats were significantly elevated. CQ also changed the electrocardiograms, prolonged the QTc intervals, and produced urinary leukocytes and proteins in the T2D rats. Histopathological observations revealed that CQ caused severe damage to the rats' heart, jejunum, liver, kidneys, spleen, and retinas. Furthermore, CQ significantly decreased the serum IL-1ß and IL-6 levels. In conclusion, the CQ dosage and regimen used to treat COVID-19 induced adverse effects in diabetic rats, suggesting the need to reevaluate the effective dose of CQ in humans.

Hydroxychloroquine to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers: early termination of a phase 3, randomised, open-label, controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness and safety of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) prophylaxis for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare workers (HCW) on duty during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: A total of 68 HCWs met the eligibility criteria were randomly allocated to receive HCQ (n = 36) or not (n = 32). There were no significant differences between groups in respects to age, gender, or medical history. Eight participants met the primary efficacy endpoint of SAR-CoV-2 infection during the study period; there was no difference in incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections between both study arms (HCQ: 5 vs Control: 3, p = 0.538). The relative risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the HCQ arm was 1.69 compared to the control group (95%CI 0.41-7.11, p = 0.463); due to poor participant accrual, the resulting statistical power of the primary efficacy outcome was 11.54%. No serious adverse events occurred; however, two (2/36, 5.6%) participants no longer wished to participate in the study and withdrew consent due to recurring grade 1 and 2 adverse events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04414241. (Registered on June 4, 2020).

Association of Treatment With Hydroxychloroquine or Azithromycin With In-Hospital Mortality in Patients With COVID-19 in New York State.

Importance: Hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, has been considered as a possible therapeutic agent for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, there are limited data on efficacy and associated adverse events. Objective: To describe the association between use of hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, and clinical outcomes among hospital inpatients diagnosed with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective multicenter cohort study of patients from a random sample of all admitted patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in 25 hospitals, representing 88.2% of patients with COVID-19 in the New York metropolitan region. Eligible patients were admitted for at least 24 hours between March 15 and 28, 2020. Medications, preexisting conditions, clinical measures on admission, outcomes, and adverse events were abstracted from medical records. The date of final follow-up was April 24, 2020. Exposures: Receipt of both hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine alone, azithromycin alone, or neither. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were cardiac arrest and abnormal electrocardiogram findings (arrhythmia or QT prolongation). Results: Among 1438 hospitalized patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 (858 [59.7%] male, median age, 63 years), those receiving hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or both were more likely than those not receiving either drug to have diabetes, respiratory rate >22/min, abnormal chest imaging findings, O2 saturation lower than 90%, and aspartate aminotransferase greater than 40 U/L. Overall in-hospital mortality was 20.3% (95% CI, 18.2%-22.4%). The probability of death for patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin was 189/735 (25.7% [95% CI, 22.3%-28.9%]), hydroxychloroquine alone, 54/271 (19.9% [95% CI, 15.2%-24.7%]), azithromycin alone, 21/211 (10.0% [95% CI, 5.9%-14.0%]), and neither drug, 28/221 (12.7% [95% CI, 8.3%-17.1%]). In adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, compared with patients receiving neither drug, there were no significant differences in mortality for patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (HR, 1.35 [95% CI, 0.76-2.40]), hydroxychloroquine alone (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.63-1.85]), or azithromycin alone (HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.26-1.21]). In logistic models, compared with patients receiving neither drug cardiac arrest was significantly more likely in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (adjusted OR, 2.13 [95% CI, 1.12-4.05]), but not hydroxychloroquine alone (adjusted OR, 1.91 [95% CI, 0.96-3.81]) or azithromycin alone (adjusted OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.27-1.56]), . In adjusted logistic regression models, there were no significant differences in the relative likelihood of abnormal electrocardiogram findings. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients hospitalized in metropolitan New York with COVID-19, treatment with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or both, compared with neither treatment, was not significantly associated with differences in in-hospital mortality. However, the interpretation of these findings may be limited by the observational design.