Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 145
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
Syst Rev ; 10(1): 294, 2021 11 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1504827

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Despite the expectations regarding the effectiveness of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) management, concerns about their adverse events have remained. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the safety of CQ and HCQ from malarial and non-malarial randomized clinical trials (RCTs). METHODS: The primary outcomes were the frequencies of serious adverse events (SAEs), retinopathy, and cardiac complications. Search strategies were applied to MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL, Scopus, and Trip databases. We used a random-effects model to pool results across studies and Peto's one-step odds ratio (OR) for event rates below 1%. Both-armed zero-event studies were excluded from the meta-analyses. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system to evaluate the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: One hundred and six RCTs were included. We found no significant difference between CQ/HCQ and control (placebo or non-CQ/HCQ) in the frequency of SAEs (OR: 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76-1.26, 33 trials, 15,942 participants, moderate certainty of evidence). However, there was a moderate certainty of evidence that CQ/HCQ increases the incidence of cardiac complications (RR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.10-2.38, 16 trials, 9908 participants). No clear relationship was observed between CQ/HCQ and retinopathy (OR: 1.63, 95% CI: - 0.4-6.57, 5 trials, 344 participants, very low certainty of evidence). CONCLUSIONS: CQ and HCQ probably do not increase SAEs, with low frequency of these adverse events on malarial and non-malarial conditions. However, they may increase cardiac complications especially in patients with COVID-19. No clear effect of their use on the incidence of retinopathy was observed. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020177818.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hydroxychloroquine , COVID-19/drug therapy , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(28): e26538, 2021 Jul 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1494086

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Corrected QT (QTc) interval prolongation has been associated with poor patient prognosis. In this study, we assessed the effects of different drugs and cardiac injury on QTc interval prolongation in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).The study cohort consisted of 395 confirmed COVID-19 cases from the Wuhan Union Hospital West Campus. All hospitalized patients were treated with chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine (CQ/HCQ), lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r), quinolones, interferon, Arbidol, or Qingfei Paidu decoction (QPD) and received at least 1 electrocardiogram after drug administration.Fifty one (12.9%) patients exhibited QTc prolongation (QTc ≥ 470 ms). QTc interval prolongation was associated with COVID-19 severity and mortality (both P < .001). Administration of CQ/HCQ (odds ratio [OR], 2.759; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.318-5.775; P = .007), LPV/r (OR, 2.342; 95% CI, 1.152-4.760; P = .019), and quinolones (OR, 2.268; 95% CI, 1.171-4.392; P = .015) increased the risk of QTc prolongation. In contrast, the administration of Arbidol, interferon, or QPD did not increase the risk of QTc prolongation. Notably, patients treated with QPD had a shorter QTc duration than those without QPD treatment (412.10 [384.39-433.77] vs 420.86 [388.19-459.58]; P = .042). The QTc interval was positively correlated with the levels of cardiac biomarkers (creatine kinase-MB fraction [rho = 0.14, P = .016], high-sensitivity troponin I [rho = .22, P < .001], and B-type natriuretic peptide [rho = 0.27, P < .001]).In conclusion, QTc prolongation was associated with COVID-19 severity and mortality. The risk of QTc prolongation was higher in patients receiving CQ/HCQ, LPV/r, and quinolones. QPD had less significant effects on QTc prolongation than other antiviral agents.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/mortality , Long QT Syndrome/mortality , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , COVID-19/virology , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Drug Therapy, Combination , Drugs, Chinese Herbal/adverse effects , Electrocardiography , Female , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Indoles/adverse effects , Interferons/adverse effects , Long QT Syndrome/chemically induced , Lopinavir/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Quinolones/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Ritonavir/adverse effects , Severity of Illness Index
3.
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci ; 25(19): 6003-6012, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1478938

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The present study aims to identify potential safety signals of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), over the period preceding their repurpose as COVID-19 treatment options, through the analysis of safety data retrieved from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) pharmacovigilance database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a disproportionality analysis of FAERS data between the first quarter of 2004 and December 2019 using the OpenVigil2.1-MedDRA software. Disproportionality was quantified using the reporting odds ratio (ROR) and its 95% confidence interval (CIs). The reported mortality of CQ and HCQ was also investigated. RESULTS: The dataset contained 6,635,356 reports. Comparison of the RORs revealed significant differences between CQ and HCQ for the following adverse events: cardiomyopathy, cardiac arrhythmias, retinal disorders, corneal disorders, hearing disorders, headache, hepatic disorders, severe cutaneous reactions, musculoskeletal disorders, and cytopenia. Only CQ was associated with psychotic disorders, suicide, self-injury, convulsions, peripheral neuropathy, and decreased appetite. In multivariable logistic regression, death was more frequently associated with CQ use, advanced age, male sex, co-reported suicide and self-injury, cardiomyopathy, cardiac arrhythmias, and decreased appetite. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm previously published evidence and suggest that HCQ has a safer clinical profile compared to CQ, and thus could serve as the drug of choice for future therapeutic purposes.


Subject(s)
Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , United States Food and Drug Administration , COVID-19/drug therapy , Confidence Intervals , Databases, Factual , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Pharmacovigilance , Suicide , United States
4.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 19998, 2021 10 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462031

ABSTRACT

Understanding the effects of metabolism on the rational design of novel and more effective drugs is still a considerable challenge. To the best of our knowledge, there are no entirely computational strategies that make it possible to predict these effects. From this perspective, the development of such methodologies could contribute to significantly reduce the side effects of medicines, leading to the emergence of more effective and safer drugs. Thereby, in this study, our strategy is based on simulating the electron ionization mass spectrometry (EI-MS) fragmentation of the drug molecules and combined with molecular docking and ADMET models in two different situations. In the first model, the drug is docked without considering the possible metabolic effects. In the second model, each of the intermediates from the EI-MS results is docked, and metabolism occurs before the drug accesses the biological target. As a proof of concept, in this work, we investigate the main antiviral drugs used in clinical research to treat COVID-19. As a result, our strategy made it possible to assess the biological activity and toxicity of all potential by-products. We believed that our findings provide new chemical insights that can benefit the rational development of novel drugs in the future.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/metabolism , COVID-19/drug therapy , Drug Discovery , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Adenine/adverse effects , Adenine/analogs & derivatives , Adenine/metabolism , Adenine/pharmacology , Adenosine/adverse effects , Adenosine/analogs & derivatives , Adenosine/metabolism , Adenosine/pharmacology , Adenosine Monophosphate/adverse effects , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adenosine Monophosphate/metabolism , Adenosine Monophosphate/pharmacology , Alanine/adverse effects , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/metabolism , Alanine/pharmacology , Amides/adverse effects , Amides/metabolism , Amides/pharmacology , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Antiviral Agents/pharmacology , COVID-19/metabolism , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Chloroquine/analogs & derivatives , Chloroquine/metabolism , Chloroquine/pharmacology , Drug Design , Humans , Metabolic Networks and Pathways , Molecular Docking Simulation , Nitro Compounds/adverse effects , Nitro Compounds/metabolism , Nitro Compounds/pharmacology , Pyrazines/adverse effects , Pyrazines/metabolism , Pyrazines/pharmacology , Pyrrolidines/adverse effects , Pyrrolidines/metabolism , Pyrrolidines/pharmacology , Ribavirin/adverse effects , Ribavirin/metabolism , Ribavirin/pharmacology , SARS-CoV-2/metabolism , Thiazoles/adverse effects , Thiazoles/metabolism , Thiazoles/pharmacology
5.
Pharmacotherapy ; 40(5): 416-437, 2020 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1449937

ABSTRACT

The outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has evolved into an emergent global pandemic. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can manifest on a spectrum of illness from mild disease to severe respiratory failure requiring intensive care unit admission. As the incidence continues to rise at a rapid pace, critical care teams are faced with challenging treatment decisions. There is currently no widely accepted standard of care in the pharmacologic management of patients with COVID-19. Urgent identification of potential treatment strategies is a priority. Therapies include novel agents available in clinical trials or through compassionate use, and other drugs, repurposed antiviral and immunomodulating therapies. Many have demonstrated in vitro or in vivo potential against other viruses that are similar to SARS-CoV-2. Critically ill patients with COVID-19 have additional considerations related to adjustments for organ impairment and renal replacement therapies, complex lists of concurrent medications, limitations with drug administration and compatibility, and unique toxicities that should be evaluated when utilizing these therapies. The purpose of this review is to summarize practical considerations for pharmacotherapy in patients with COVID-19, with the intent of serving as a resource for health care providers at the forefront of clinical care during this pandemic.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Immunomodulation , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adenosine Monophosphate/administration & dosage , Adenosine Monophosphate/adverse effects , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adrenal Cortex Hormones , Alanine/administration & dosage , Alanine/adverse effects , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Azetidines/administration & dosage , Azetidines/adverse effects , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Chloroquine/administration & dosage , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Drug Combinations , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/administration & dosage , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Immunization, Passive , Interferon-alpha/administration & dosage , Interferon-alpha/adverse effects , Lopinavir/administration & dosage , Lopinavir/adverse effects , Nelfinavir/administration & dosage , Nelfinavir/adverse effects , Nitro Compounds , Pandemics , Purines , Pyrazoles , Ribavirin/administration & dosage , Ribavirin/adverse effects , Ritonavir/administration & dosage , Ritonavir/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2 , Sulfonamides/administration & dosage , Sulfonamides/adverse effects , Thiazoles/administration & dosage , Thiazoles/adverse effects
8.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0256035, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1359100

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Chloroquine was promoted as a COVID-19 therapeutic early in the pandemic. Most countries have since discontinued the use of chloroquine due to lack of evidence of any benefit and the risk of severe adverse events. The primary aim of this study was to examine if administering chloroquine during COVID-19 imposed an increased risk of ischemic heart injury or heart failure. METHODS: Medical records, laboratory findings, and electrocardiograms of patients with COVID-19 who were treated with 500 mg chloroquine phosphate daily and controls not treated with chloroquine were reviewed retrospectively. Controls were matched in age and severity of disease. RESULTS: We included 20 patients receiving chloroquine (500 mg twice daily) for an average of five days, and 40 controls. The groups were comparable regarding demographics and biochemical analyses including C-reactive protein, thrombocytes, and creatinine. There were no statistically significant differences in cardiac biomarkers or in electrocardiograms. Median troponin T was 10,8 ng/L in the study group and 17.9 ng/L in the control group, whereas median NT-proBNP was 399 ng/L in patients receiving chloroquine and 349 ng/L in the controls. CONCLUSIONS: We found no increased risk of ischemic heart injury or heart failure as a result of administering chloroquine. However, the use of chloroquine to treat COVID-19 outside of clinical trials is not recommended, considering the lack of evidence of its effectiveness, as well as the elevated risk of fatal arrythmias.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Biomarkers/analysis , Chloroquine/analogs & derivatives , Heart Failure/etiology , Heart Injuries/etiology , Aged , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , C-Reactive Protein/analysis , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/pathology , COVID-19/virology , Case-Control Studies , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Chloroquine/therapeutic use , Creatinine/analysis , Electrocardiography , Female , Heart Failure/metabolism , Heart Injuries/metabolism , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Natriuretic Peptide, Brain/analysis , Peptide Fragments/analysis , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Severity of Illness Index , Troponin T/analysis
9.
J Clin Lab Anal ; 35(9): e23923, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1353465

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The dynamic alteration and comparative study of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA shedding pattern during treatment are limited. This study explores the potential risk factors influencing prolonged viral shedding in COVID-19. METHODS: A total of 126 COVID-19 patients were enrolled in this retrospective longitudinal study. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was carried out to estimate the potential risk factors. RESULTS: 38.1% (48/126) cases presented prolonged respiratory tract viral shedding, and 30 (23.8%) cases presented prolonged rectal swab viral shedding. Obesity (OR, 3.31; 95% CI, 1.08-10.09), positive rectal swab (OR, 3.43; 95% CI, 1.53-7.7), treatment by lopinavir/ritonavir with chloroquine phosphate (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.04-6.03), the interval from onset to antiviral treatment more than 7 days (OR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.04-4.93), lower CD4+ T cell (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.99) and higher NK cells (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.02-1.20) were significantly associated with prolonged respiratory tract viral shedding. CD3-CD56+ NK cells (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-0.99) were related with prolonged fecal shedding. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity, delayed antiviral treatment, and positive SARS-CoV-2 for stool were independent risk factors for prolonged SARS-CoV-2 RNA shedding of the respiratory tract. A combination of LPV/r and abidol as the initial antiviral regimen was effective in shortening the duration of viral shedding compared with LPV/r combined with chloroquine phosphate. CD4+ T cell and NK cells were significantly associated with prolonged viral shedding, and further studies are to be warranted to determine the mechanism of immunomodulatory response in virus clearance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/virology , Feces/virology , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Virus Shedding/physiology , Adult , Animals , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , CD4 Lymphocyte Count , COVID-19/epidemiology , Chloroquine/administration & dosage , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Chloroquine/analogs & derivatives , Female , Humans , Killer Cells, Natural , Longitudinal Studies , Lopinavir/administration & dosage , Lynx , Male , Obesity/epidemiology , Respiratory System/virology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Ritonavir/administration & dosage , Time Factors , Virus Shedding/drug effects
10.
Travel Med Infect Dis ; 43: 102135, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1307224

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To synthesize findings from systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the efficacy and safety of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) with or without Azithromycin for treating COVID-19, and to update the evidence using a meta-analysis. METHODS: A comprehensive search was carried out in electronic databases for systematic reviews, meta-analyses and experimental studies which investigated the efficacy and safety of CQ, HCQ with or without Azithromycin to treat COVID-19. Findings from the reviews were synthesised using tables and forest plots and the quality effect model was used for the updated meta-analysis. The main outcomes were mortality, the need for intensive care services, disease exacerbation, viral clearance and occurrence of adverse events. RESULTS: Thirteen reviews with 40 primary studies were included. Two meta-analyses reported a high risk of mortality, with ORs of 2.2 and 3.0, and the two others found no association between HCQ and mortality. Findings from two meta-analyses showed that HCQ with Azithromycin increased the risk of mortality, with similar ORs of 2.5. The updated meta-analysis of experimental studies showed that the drugs were not effective in reducing mortality (RR 1.1, 95%CI 1.0-1.3, I2 = 0.0%), need for intensive care services (OR 1.1, 95%CI 0.9-1.4, I2 = 0.0%), virological cure (OR 1.5, 95%CI 0.5-4.4, I2 = 39.6%) or disease exacerbation (OR 1.2, 95%CI 0.3-5.9, I2 = 31.9%) but increased the odds of adverse events (OR 12,3, 95%CI 2.5-59.9, I2 = 76.6%). CONCLUSION: There is conclusive evidence that CQ and HCQ, with or without Azithromycin are not effective in treating COVID-19 or its exacerbation. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42020191353.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hydroxychloroquine , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2 , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Treatment Outcome
11.
Food Chem Toxicol ; 151: 112106, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1235893

ABSTRACT

The review summarizes chloroquine (CQ) and its safer derivative hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and its utility in Covid-19. Recently this well-established drug made its way back to the headlines during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This led to an upsurge in the scientific arena with multiple research and review articles along with expert opinions and commentaries. The HCQ has received mixed judgements so far about its efficacy to be used in Covid-19 patients in a limited trial conducted all across the Globe. The purpose of our article is to put forth the history, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacokinetics, along with the existing studies favouring and disapproving the role of HCQ in the treatment of Covid-19. We grouped HCQ use at three stages, this includes HCQ for i. prophylactic use by asymptomatic health workers or peoples at higher risk; ii. patients having mild symptoms; iii. patients with extreme symptoms. The review critically discusses the underlying plausible reasons and mechanisms exploring HCQ in prophylactic management or treatment of SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, we have critically analysed the reported pharmacokinetic parameters and compiled the proponent, opponent, or neutral opinions on the use of HCQ in Covid-19. Authors discretion is to conduct more studies considering the optimal dosing regimen and pharmacokinetics assessment.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Animals , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/prevention & control , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Chloroquine/therapeutic use , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Pandemics
12.
Epilepsy Res ; 174: 106675, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1233420

ABSTRACT

In regard to the global pandemic of COVID-19, it seems that persons with epilepsy (PWE) are not more vulnerable to get infected by SARS-CoV-2, nor are they more susceptible to a critical course of the disease. However, management of acute seizures in patients with COVID-19 as well as management of PWE and COVID-19 needs to consider potential drug-drug interactions between antiseizure drugs and candidate drugs currently assessed as therapeutic options for COVID-19. Repurposing of several licensed and investigational drugs is discussed for therapeutic management of COVID-19. While for none of these approaches, efficacy and tolerability has been confirmed yet in sufficiently powered and controlled clinical studies, testing is ongoing with multiple clinical trials worldwide. Here, we have summarized the possible mechanisms of action of drugs currently considered as potential therapeutic options for COVID-19 management along with possible and confirmed drug-drug interactions that should be considered for a combination of antiseizure drugs and COVID-19 candidate drugs. Our review suggests that potential drug-drug interactions should be taken into account with drugs such as chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir while remdesivir and tocilizumab may be less prone to clinically relevant interactions with ASMs.


Subject(s)
Anti-Inflammatory Agents/adverse effects , Anticonvulsants/adverse effects , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/drug therapy , Enzyme Inhibitors/adverse effects , Epilepsy/drug therapy , Adenosine Monophosphate/adverse effects , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/adverse effects , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Amides/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , COVID-19/complications , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A Inducers/adverse effects , Dexamethasone/adverse effects , Drug Combinations , Drug Interactions , Epilepsy/complications , Glucocorticoids/adverse effects , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein/adverse effects , Ivermectin/adverse effects , Lopinavir , Pyrazines/adverse effects , Ritonavir , SARS-CoV-2
14.
Front Immunol ; 12: 580147, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1211807

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is widely spread and remains a global pandemic. Limited evidence on the systematic evaluation of the impact of treatment regimens on antibody responses exists. Our study aimed to analyze the role of antibody response on prognosis and determine factors influencing the IgG antibodies' seroconversion. A total of 1,111 patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 symptoms admitted to Leishenshan Hospital in Wuhan were retrospectively analyzed. A serologic SARS-CoV-2 IgM/IgG antibody test was performed on all the patients 21 days after the onset of symptoms. Patient clinical characteristics were compared. In the study, 42 patients progressed to critical illness, with 6 mortalities reported while 1,069 patients reported mild to moderate disease. Advanced age (P = 0.028), gasping (P < 0.001), dyspnea (P = 0.024), and IgG negativity (P = 0.006) were associated with progression to critical illness. The mortality rate in critically ill patients with IgG antibody was 6.45% (95% CI 1.12-22.84%) and 36.36% (95% CI 12.36-68.38%) in patients with no IgG antibody (P = 0.003). Symptomatic patients were more likely to develop IgG antibody responses than asymptomatic patients. Using univariable analysis, fever (P < 0.001), gasping (P = 0.048), cancer (P < 0.001), cephalosporin (P = 0.015), and chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine (P = 0.021) were associated with IgG response. In the multivariable analysis, fever, cancer, cephalosporins, and chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine correlated independently with IgG response. We determined that the absence of SARS-CoV-2 antibody IgG in the convalescent stage had a specific predictive role in critical illness progression. Importantly, risk factors affecting seropositivity were identified, and the effect of antimalarial drugs on antibody response was determined.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Antimalarials/adverse effects , COVID-19/immunology , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/mortality , Cephalosporins/adverse effects , China , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Convalescence , Female , Fever/complications , Fever/virology , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Immunoglobulin M/immunology , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/virology , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroconversion , Serologic Tests
15.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(16): e25532, 2021 Apr 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1195755

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread almost all regions of the world and caused great loss to the whole body of mankind. Thus, numerous clinical trials were conducted to find specific medicine for COVID-19 recently. However, it remains unanswered whether they are beneficial. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficiency and safety of the COVID-19 medicine. METHODS: Studies were determined through searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Medline. The studies of COVID-19 medicine were involved with eligible end points containing mortality, discharge rate, rate of clinical improvement, and rate of serious adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 33 studies involving 37,879 patients were included in our study, whose intervening measures contained three major types of COVID-19 medicine, ACEI/ARB, antiviral medicine, and chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine. Compared to control group, COVID-19 drugs have no distinct effect on mortality (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.79-1.11, P = .43) and discharge rate (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.98-1.14, P = .13). However, antiviral medicine presents the obvious advantage in clinical improvement (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.23, P < .05). In addition, the serious adverse events rate (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.88, P < .05) of COVID-19 medicine is lower than control group. CONCLUSION: The results indicated antiviral medicine was potential specific medicine for COVID-19 treatment by improving clinical symptoms, but it failed to increase the discharge rate and reduce mortality. Chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine and ACEI/ARB had no significant effect on treatment of COVID-19, thus they were not recommended for routine medication. Moreover, more trials are needed to find effective drugs to lower the mortality of COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/adverse effects , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/adverse effects , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , COVID-19/mortality , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Chloroquine/therapeutic use , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
16.
Nat Commun ; 12(1): 2349, 2021 04 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1189222

ABSTRACT

Substantial COVID-19 research investment has been allocated to randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, which currently face recruitment challenges or early discontinuation. We aim to estimate the effects of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine on survival in COVID-19 from all currently available RCT evidence, published and unpublished. We present a rapid meta-analysis of ongoing, completed, or discontinued RCTs on hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine treatment for any COVID-19 patients (protocol: https://osf.io/QESV4/ ). We systematically identified unpublished RCTs (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Cochrane COVID-registry up to June 11, 2020), and published RCTs (PubMed, medRxiv and bioRxiv up to October 16, 2020). All-cause mortality has been extracted (publications/preprints) or requested from investigators and combined in random-effects meta-analyses, calculating odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), separately for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine. Prespecified subgroup analyses include patient setting, diagnostic confirmation, control type, and publication status. Sixty-three trials were potentially eligible. We included 14 unpublished trials (1308 patients) and 14 publications/preprints (9011 patients). Results for hydroxychloroquine are dominated by RECOVERY and WHO SOLIDARITY, two highly pragmatic trials, which employed relatively high doses and included 4716 and 1853 patients, respectively (67% of the total sample size). The combined OR on all-cause mortality for hydroxychloroquine is 1.11 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.20; I² = 0%; 26 trials; 10,012 patients) and for chloroquine 1.77 (95%CI: 0.15, 21.13, I² = 0%; 4 trials; 307 patients). We identified no subgroup effects. We found that treatment with hydroxychloroquine is associated with increased mortality in COVID-19 patients, and there is no benefit of chloroquine. Findings have unclear generalizability to outpatients, children, pregnant women, and people with comorbidities.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/mortality , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/mortality , Adult , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/virology , Child , Chloroquine/administration & dosage , Combined Modality Therapy/adverse effects , Combined Modality Therapy/methods , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/administration & dosage , International Cooperation , Odds Ratio , Patient Participation/statistics & numerical data , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/drug therapy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/virology , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2
17.
Eur J Intern Med ; 88: 63-72, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1174205

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) of adverse events (AE) in chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine users. METHODS: We systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs), using MEDLINE (2010-2020) and EMBASE (2010-2020) databases, reporting AE in chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine users during treatment for lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, malaria and COVID-19. The protocol for this systematic review is registered at the PROSPERO database (CRD42020197938). The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-Bias tool and relevant data were extracted though a customized data collection form, independently, by two authors. The IRR of AE was estimated using a random-effect model meta-analysis and heterogeneity was evaluated by T2 and I2. Subgroup analysis was performed, and publication bias was assessed by funnel-plot. RESULTS: Forty-six RCTs met our eligibility criteria and were included in our analysis (23132 patients). There was not a single death attributed to chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine use in the included RCTs. The IRR of general AE during antimalarial use was 1.15 [CI 95% 1.01-1.31]. COVID-19 patients treated with either antimalarial presented an 83% and 165% higher risk of developing general and gastrointestinal AE, respectively, in comparison with controls. The use of antimalarial increased the risk of developing dermatological AE by 92% in malarial studies and reduced by 65% in lupus studies. We did not find a significatively higher risk of cardiovascular nor ophthalmological AE in antimalarial users. CONCLUSIONS: Our data reinforces that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have a good safety profile though caution is advised when using higher than usual doses in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hydroxychloroquine , COVID-19/drug therapy , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2
18.
Glob Heart ; 16(1): 18, 2021 03 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1175699

ABSTRACT

The current pandemic of SARS-COV 2 infection (Covid-19) is challenging health systems and communities worldwide. At the individual level, the main biological system involved in Covid-19 is the respiratory system. Respiratory complications range from mild flu-like illness symptoms to a fatal respiratory distress syndrome or a severe and fulminant pneumonia. Critically, the presence of a pre-existing cardiovascular disease or its risk factors, such as hypertension or type II diabetes mellitus, increases the chance of having severe complications (including death) if infected by the virus. In addition, the infection can worsen an existing cardiovascular disease or precipitate new ones. This paper presents a contemporary review of cardiovascular complications of Covid-19. It also specifically examines the impact of the disease on those already vulnerable and on the poorly resourced health systems of Africa as well as the potential broader consequences on the socio-economic health of this region.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/physiopathology , Cardiovascular Diseases/physiopathology , Acute Coronary Syndrome/economics , Acute Coronary Syndrome/etiology , Acute Coronary Syndrome/physiopathology , Africa , Antimalarials/adverse effects , Arrhythmias, Cardiac/economics , Arrhythmias, Cardiac/etiology , Arrhythmias, Cardiac/physiopathology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/economics , Cardiovascular Diseases/economics , Cardiovascular Diseases/etiology , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Delivery of Health Care/economics , Economic Factors , Economic Recession , Gross Domestic Product , Health Resources/economics , Health Resources/supply & distribution , Heart Failure/economics , Heart Failure/etiology , Heart Failure/physiopathology , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Inflammation , Myocardial Ischemia/economics , Myocardial Ischemia/etiology , Myocardial Ischemia/physiopathology , Myocarditis/economics , Myocarditis/etiology , Myocarditis/physiopathology , SARS-CoV-2 , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/complications , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/physiopathology , Socioeconomic Factors , Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy/economics , Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy/etiology , Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy/physiopathology
19.
Ann Palliat Med ; 10(3): 3307-3312, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1168323

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was broken out in December 2019 and soon became a global health emergency. Effective treatment for COVID-19 is urgently needed. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the antiviral effect of Arbidol vs. Chloroquine in treating COVID-19. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 62 patients with COVID-19 diagnosed according to the guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19 in China. They were divided into two groups depending on the antiviral drugs that they received. Participants in the Arbidol group (n=42) received 0.2 g Arbidol, tid for 10 days,and those in Chloroquine group (n=20) received 500 mg Chloroquine, bid for 10 days. The coronavirus negative conversion time and the length of hospital stay were analyzed and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in demographic and clinical characteristics between the two groups. After antiviral treatment, the nasopharyngeal specimen negative conversion time of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the length of hospital stay in the Arbidol group were significantly shorter than those in the Chloroquine group (18.50 vs. 25.05 days, P=0.001; 23.52 vs. 28.75 days, P=0.001). Adverse events observed during the antiviral treatment period were comparable between the two groups. Overall, 3 (7.14%) participants in the Arbidol group and 4 (20.0%) in the Chloroquine group experienced adverse events during antiviral treatment. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that Arbidol is advantageous over Chloroquine in terms of the SARS-CoV-2 negative conversion and the length of hospital stay in treating COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Chloroquine/therapeutic use , Indoles/therapeutic use , China , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Humans , Length of Stay , Retrospective Studies
20.
Ann Agric Environ Med ; 28(1): 122-126, 2021 Mar 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1156231

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic causes vital concerns due to the lack of proved, effective, and safe therapy. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine seem to be useful, but recently serious concerns regarding their adverse events have risen. The aim of the study was to broaden the general perspective of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine use in COVID-19 treatment, based on an analysis of their current safety profile among patients with rheumatic diseases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was based on a group of 152 patients with rheumatic diseases, aged 20-78 years, treated either with chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine. Analyzed data included age, gender, comorbidities, type of drug, dosage, treatment duration, and reported adverse events. Cases of drug withdrawal related to adverse events were also recorded. RESULTS: The dosage was consistent in both groups: 250 mg of chloroquine or 200 mg of hydroxychloroquine daily. 77.6% of patients did not experience any adverse reactions to the treatment. Hydroxychloroquine showed better safety profile, with 10.9% of patients reporting side-ffects, compared to 28.9% in patients treated with chloroquine. The overall incidence of ophthalmic complications was 6.6%. For both drugs, no statistically significant correlation between adverse events and age, chronic heart or liver disease, or hypertension was found. CONCLUSIONS: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine at lower doses, as used in rheumatic diseases, prove to be relatively safe. Data from the literature show that high dosage as recommended in COVID-19 treatment may pose a risk of toxicity and require precise management, but prophylactic, long-term use of lower, safe doses might be a promising solution.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents/adverse effects , Chloroquine/adverse effects , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Antirheumatic Agents/administration & dosage , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Chloroquine/administration & dosage , Chloroquine/therapeutic use , Eye/drug effects , Female , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/administration & dosage , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Male , Middle Aged
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...