Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 604
Filter
1.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 7(10): ofaa446, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2097427

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Effective therapies to combat coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) are urgently needed. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has in vitro antiviral activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), but the clinical benefit of HCQ in treating COVID-19 is unclear. Randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the safety and efficacy of HCQ for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind randomized clinical trial of HCQ among patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. Subjects were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to HCQ or placebo for 5 days and followed for 30 days. The primary efficacy outcome was a severe disease progression composite end point (death, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and/or vasopressor use) at day 14. RESULTS: A total of 128 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Baseline demographic, clinical, and laboratory characteristics were similar between the HCQ (n = 67) and placebo (n = 61) arms. At day 14, 11 (16.4%) subjects assigned to HCQ and 6 (9.8%) subjects assigned to placebo met the severe disease progression end point, but this did not achieve statistical significance (P = .350). There were no significant differences in COVID-19 clinical scores, number of oxygen-free days, SARS-CoV-2 clearance, or adverse events between HCQ and placebo. HCQ was associated with a slight increase in mean corrected QT interval, an increased D-dimer, and a trend toward an increased length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, our data suggest that HCQ does not prevent severe outcomes or improve clinical scores. However, our conclusions are limited by a relatively small sample size, and larger randomized controlled trials or pooled analyses are needed.

2.
Curr Opin Rheumatol ; 32(6): 572-582, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2077899

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is highlighting the most recent evidence on the clinical efficacy and toxicity of antimalarials in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). RECENT FINDINGS: New data confirm the effects of antimalarials in preventing SLE activity, damage and infections and in decreasing mortality. An important reduction in use of health resources is related to continued antimalarial use. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) may prevent preeclampsia in pregnant women with SLE. HCQ ocular toxicity is infrequent and could be associated with blood levels. Gastrointestinal and skin toxicity are underrecognized and could influence adherence. Prolongation of QT interval is extremely unusual with HCQ. Doses of HCQ of 200 mg/day seem to offer a good efficacy/toxicity balance. HCQ protection against herpes zoster and Pneumocystis jirovecii infection has been shown. On the contrary, HCQ prescription by doctors and adherence by patients are both under recommended standards. The recent coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has resulted in a significant shortage of HCQ in many countries with possible consequences in the correct treatment of lupus patients. SUMMARY: Recent evidence reinforces the central role of HCQ in SLE therapy. The reduction in activity, damage accrual and mortality is consistent across studies, countries and ethnical groups. On the contrary, and despite the well established beneficial effects of prolonged regular HCQ therapy, many SLE patients do never take this drug or it is eventually stopped in the setting of severe flares, pregnancy or presumed toxicity. Every effort must be made to assure the correct prescription of HCQ and not to withdraw the drug unless unequivocal signs of toxicity are present.


Subject(s)
Antimalarials/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic/drug therapy , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Comorbidity , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Female , Humans , Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
3.
Korean J Intern Med ; 37(3): 673-680, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1737116

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The preventive role of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of HCQ and other immunosuppressive drugs on the incidence of COVID-19. METHODS: The data were collected from the South Korea National Health Insurance Sharing-COVID-19 database. All individuals who underwent nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swab tests for COVID-19 from January 2020 to May 2020 are included. The association between COVID-19 risk and HCQ use was examined in a propensity score-matched population. Factors associated with COVID-19 were identified using multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Total 8,070 patients with COVID-19 and 121,050 negative controls were included from the database. Among all participants, 381 were HCQ users. In a propensity score-matched population, the incidence of COVID-19 was 7.1% in HCQ users and 6.8% in non-users. The odds ratio (OR) for HCQ use was 1.05 with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.58 to 1.89. Among the subpopulation of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 33 were diagnosed with COVID-19 and 478 were not. Use of HCQ, glucocorticoids, or other immunosuppressive drugs was not associated with COVID-19 risk, whereas abatacept use was. Chronic lung disease was an independent risk factor for COVID-19 diagnosis in patients with RA (adjusted OR, 6.07; 95% CI, 1.10 to 33.59). CONCLUSION: The risk of COVID-19 did not differ between HCQ users and non-users. Glucocorticoids, conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), and biological DMARDs other than abatacept did not increase the risk of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents , Arthritis, Rheumatoid , COVID-19 , Abatacept/therapeutic use , Antirheumatic Agents/adverse effects , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Immunosuppressive Agents/adverse effects
5.
PLoS One ; 16(3): e0248128, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1575679

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic remains a significant global threat. However, despite urgent need, there remains uncertainty surrounding best practices for pharmaceutical interventions to treat COVID-19. In particular, conflicting evidence has emerged surrounding the use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, alone or in combination, for COVID-19. The COVID-19 Evidence Accelerator convened by the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA, in collaboration with Friends of Cancer Research, assembled experts from the health systems research, regulatory science, data science, and epidemiology to participate in a large parallel analysis of different data sets to further explore the effectiveness of these treatments. METHODS: Electronic health record (EHR) and claims data were extracted from seven separate databases. Parallel analyses were undertaken on data extracted from each source. Each analysis examined time to mortality in hospitalized patients treated with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and the two in combination as compared to patients not treated with either drug. Cox proportional hazards models were used, and propensity score methods were undertaken to adjust for confounding. Frequencies of adverse events in each treatment group were also examined. RESULTS: Neither hydroxychloroquine nor azithromycin, alone or in combination, were significantly associated with time to mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. No treatment groups appeared to have an elevated risk of adverse events. CONCLUSION: Administration of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and their combination appeared to have no effect on time to mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Continued research is needed to clarify best practices surrounding treatment of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pandemics/prevention & control , Data Management/methods , Drug Therapy, Combination/methods , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects
6.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(11): e4073-e4081, 2021 12 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1560481

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: No effective treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) exist. We aimed to determine whether early treatment with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) would be efficacious for outpatients with COVID-19. METHODS: Multicenter open-label, randomized, controlled trial conducted in Catalonia, Spain, between 17 March and 26 May 2020. Patients recently diagnosed with <5-day of symptom onset were assigned to receive HCQ (800 mg on day 1 followed by 400 mg once daily for 6 days) or usual care. Outcomes were reduction of viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs up to 7 days after treatment start, disease progression up to 28 days, and time to complete resolution of symptoms. Adverse events were assessed up to 28 days. RESULTS: A total of 293 patients were eligible for intention-to-treat analysis: 157 in the control arm and 136 in the intervention arm. The mean age was 41.6 years (SD, 12.6), mean viral load at baseline was 7.90 log10 copies/mL (SD, 1.82), and median time from symptom onset to randomization was 3 days. No differences were found in the mean reduction of viral load at day 3 (-1.41 vs -1.41 log10 copies/mL in the control and intervention arm, respectively) or at day 7 (-3.37 vs -3.44). Treatment did not reduce risk of hospitalization (7.1% control vs 5.9% intervention) nor shorten the time to complete resolution of symptoms (12 days, control vs 10 days, intervention). No relevant adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mild COVID-19, no benefit was observed with HCQ beyond the usual care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hydroxychloroquine , Adult , COVID-19/drug therapy , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
7.
Front Pediatr ; 8: 580584, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526779

ABSTRACT

Objective: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continue to increase worldwide. Although some data from pediatric series are available, more evidence is required, especially in neonates, a group with specific characteristics that deserve special attention. This study aimed to describe general and clinical characteristics, management, and treatment of postnatal-acquired (community and nosocomial/hospital-acquired) COVID-19 neonatal cases in Spain. Methods: This was a national prospective epidemiological study that included cases from a National Registry supported by the Spanish Society of Neonatology. Neonates with postnatal SARS-CoV-2 infection were included in this study. General data and infection-related information (mode and source of transmission, age at diagnosis, clinical manifestations, need for hospitalization, admission unit, treatment administered, and complementary studies performed, hospital stay associated with the infection) were collected. Results: A total of 40 cases, 26 community-acquired and 14 nosocomial were registered. Ten were preterm newborns (2 community-acquired and 8 nosocomial COVID-19 cases). Mothers (in both groups) and healthcare workers (in nosocomial cases) were the main source of infection. Hospital admission was required in 22 community-acquired cases [18 admitted to the neonatal intermediate care unit (NIMCU) and 4 to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU)]. Among nosocomial COVID-19 cases (n = 14), previously admitted for other reasons, 4 were admitted to the NIMCU and 10 to the NICU. Ten asymptomatic patients were registered (5 in each group). In the remaining cases, clinical manifestations were generally mild in both groups, including upper respiratory airways infection, febrile syndrome or acute gastroenteritis with good overall health. In both groups, most severe cases occurred in preterm neonates or neonates with concomitant pathologies. Most of the cases did not require respiratory support. Hydroxychloroquine was administered to 4 patients in the community-acquired group and to 2 patients in the nosocomial group. Follow-up after hospital discharge was performed in most patients. Conclusions: This is the largest series of COVID-19 neonatal cases in Spain published to date. Although clinical manifestations were generally mild, prevention, treatment, and management in this group are essential.

8.
Drug Saf ; 43(7): 657-660, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1482335

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Hydroxychloroquine was recently promoted in patients infected with COVID-19 infection. A recent experimental study has suggested an increased toxicity of hydroxychloroquine in association with metformin in mice. OBJECTIVE: The present study was undertaken to investigate the reality of this putative drug-drug interaction between hydroxychloroquine and metformin using pharmacovigilance data. METHODS: Using VigiBase®, the WHO pharmacovigilance database, we performed a disproportionality analysis (case/non-case study). Cases were reports of fatal outcomes with the drugs of interest and non-cases were all other reports for these drugs registered between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2019. Data with hydroxychloroquine (or metformin) alone were compared with the association hydroxychloroquine + metformin. Results are reported as ROR (reporting odds ratio) with their 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: Of the 10,771 Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSR) involving hydroxychloroquine, 52 were recorded as 'fatal outcomes'. In comparison with hydroxychloroquine alone, hydroxychloroquine + metformin was associated with an ROR value of 57.7 (23.9-139.3). In comparison with metformin alone, hydroxychloroquine + metformin was associated with an ROR value of 6.0 (2.6-13.8). CONCLUSION: Our study identified a signal for the association hydroxychloroquine + metformin that appears to be more at risk of fatal outcomes (particularly by completed suicides) than one of the two drugs when given alone.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Drug Interactions , Drug Therapy, Combination , Hydroxychloroquine , Metformin , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Adult , Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems/statistics & numerical data , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Drug Therapy, Combination/adverse effects , Drug Therapy, Combination/mortality , Female , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/pharmacokinetics , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Hypoglycemic Agents/pharmacokinetics , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Male , Metformin/pharmacokinetics , Metformin/therapeutic use , Middle Aged , Pharmacovigilance , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 60(SI): SI25-SI36, 2021 10 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462486

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To ascertain if the use of hydroxychloroquine(HCQ)/cloroquine(CLQ) and other conventional DMARDs (cDMARDs) and rheumatic diseases per se may be associated with COVID-19-related risk of hospitalization and mortality. METHODS: This case-control study nested within a cohort of cDMARD users was conducted in the Lombardy, Veneto, Tuscany and Lazio regions and Reggio Emilia province. Claims databases were linked to COVID-19 surveillance registries. The risk of COVID-19-related outcomes was estimated using a multivariate conditional logistic regression analysis comparing HCQ/CLQ vs MTX, vs other cDMARDs and vs non-use of these drugs. The presence of rheumatic diseases vs their absence in a non-nested population was investigated. RESULTS: A total of 1275 patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 were matched to 12 734 controls. Compared with recent use of MTX, no association between HCQ/CLQ monotherapy and COVID-19 hospitalization [odds ratio (OR) 0.83 (95% CI 0.69, 1.00)] or mortality [OR 1.19 (95% CI 0.85, 1.67)] was observed. A lower risk was found when comparing HCQ/CLQ use with the concomitant use of other cDMARDs and glucocorticoids. HCQ/CLQ was not associated with COVID-19 hospitalization as compared with non-use. An increased risk for recent use of either MTX monotherapy [OR 1.19 (95% CI 1.05, 1.34)] or other cDMARDs [OR 1.21 (95% CI 1.08, 1.36)] vs non-use was found. Rheumatic diseases were not associated with COVID-19-related outcomes. CONCLUSION: HCQ/CLQ use in rheumatic patients was not associated with a protective effect against COVID-19-related outcomes. The use of other cDMARDs was associated with an increased risk when compared with non-use and, if concomitantly used with glucocorticoids, also vs HCQ/CLQ, probably due to immunosuppressive action.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Rheumatic Diseases/drug therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/mortality , Case-Control Studies , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Humans , Italy , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Population Surveillance , Rheumatic Diseases/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
10.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 60(SI): SI59-SI67, 2021 10 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462480

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the incidence of COVID-19 hospitalization in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease (IRD); in patients with RA treated with specific DMARDs; and the incidence of severe COVID-19 infection among hospitalized patients with RA. METHODS: A nationwide cohort study from Denmark between 1 March and 12 August 2020. The adjusted incidence of COVID-19 hospitalization was estimated for patients with RA; spondyloarthritis including psoriatic arthritis; connective tissue disease; vasculitides; and non-IRD individuals. Further, the incidence of COVID-19 hospitalization was estimated for patients with RA treated and non-treated with TNF-inhibitors, HCQ or glucocorticoids, respectively. Lastly, the incidence of severe COVID-19 infection (intensive care, acute respiratory distress syndrome or death) among hospital-admitted patients was estimated for RA and non-IRD sp - individudals. RESULTS: Patients with IRD (n = 58 052) had an increased partially adjusted incidence of hospitalization with COVID-19 compared with the 4.5 million people in the general population [hazard ratio (HR) 1.46, 95% CI: 1.15, 1.86] with strongest associations for patients with RA (n = 29 440, HR 1.72, 95% CI: 1.29, 2.30) and vasculitides (n = 4072, HR 1.82, 95% CI: 0.91, 3.64). There was no increased incidence of COVID-19 hospitalization associated with TNF-inhibitor, HCQ nor glucocorticoid use. COVID-19 admitted patients with RA had a HR of 1.43 (95% CI: 0.80, 2.53) for a severe outcome. CONCLUSION: Patients with IRD were more likely to be admitted with COVID-19 than the general population, and COVID-19 admitted patients with RA could be at higher risk of a severe outcome. Treatment with specific DMARDs did not affect the risk of hospitalization.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Rheumatic Diseases/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Adult , Aged , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/complications , Cohort Studies , Denmark/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Rheumatic Diseases/virology
11.
Am J Emerg Med ; 38(7): 1488-1493, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1450042

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has been particularly challenging due to a lack of established therapies and treatment guidelines. With the rapid transmission of disease, even the off-label use of available therapies has been impeded by limited availability. Several antivirals, antimalarials, and biologics are being considered for treatment at this time. The purpose of this literature review is to synthesize the available information regarding treatment options for COVID-19 and serve as a resource for health care professionals. OBJECTIVES: This narrative review was conducted to summarize the effectiveness of current therapy options for COVID-19 and address the controversial use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). PubMed and SCOPUS were queried using a combination of the keywords "COVID 19," "SARS-CoV-2," and "treatment." All types of studies were evaluated including systematic reviews, case-studies, and clinical guidelines. DISCUSSION: There are currently no therapeutic drugs available that are directly active against SARS-CoV-2; however, several antivirals (remdesivir, favipiravir) and antimalarials (chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine) have emerged as potential therapies. Current guidelines recommend combination treatment with hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin or chloroquine, if hydroxychloroquine is unavailable, in patients with moderate disease, although these recommendations are based on limited evidence. Remdesivir and convalescent plasma may be considered in critical patients with respiratory failure; however, access to these therapies may be limited. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) antagonists may be used in patients who develop evidence of cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Corticosteroids should be avoided unless there is evidence of refractory septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), or another compelling indication for their use. ACE inhibitors and ARBs should not be discontinued at this time and ibuprofen may be used for fever. CONCLUSION: There are several ongoing clinical trials that are testing the efficacy of single and combination treatments with the drugs mentioned in this review and new agents are under development. Until the results of these trials become available, we must use the best available evidence for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. Additionally, we can learn from the experiences of healthcare providers around the world to combat this pandemic.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Adrenal Cortex Hormones , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/therapeutic use , Amides/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/drug effects , COVID-19 , Drug Therapy, Combination , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Interleukin-6/antagonists & inhibitors , Pandemics , Pyrazines/therapeutic use , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2
13.
J Med Virol ; 93(2): 755-759, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384219

ABSTRACT

Hydroxychloroquine sulfate (HCQ) is being scrutinized for repositioning in the treatment and prevention of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. This antimalarial drug is also chronically used to treat patients with autoimmune diseases. By analyzing the Portuguese anonymized data on private and public based medical prescriptions we have identified all cases chronically receiving HCQ for the management of diseases, such as systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, and other autoimmune diseases. Additionally, we have detected all laboratory confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection and all laboratory confirmed negative cases in the Portuguese population (mandatorily registered in a centrally managed database). Cross linking the two sets of data has allowed us to compare the proportion of HCQ chronic treatment (at least 2 grams per month) in laboratory confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection with laboratory confirmed negative cases. Out of 26 815 SARS-CoV-2 positive patients, 77 (0.29%) were chronically treated with HCQ, while 1215 (0.36%) out of 333 489 negative patients were receiving it chronically (P = .04). After adjustment for age, sex, and chronic treatment with corticosteroids and/or immunosuppressants, the odds ratio of SARS-CoV-2 infection for chronic treatment with HCQ has been 0.51 (0.37-0.70). Our data suggest that chronic treatment with HCQ confer protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , COVID-19/prevention & control , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic/drug therapy , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis , Adult , Aged , Antimalarials/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/immunology , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/pathology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Drug Administration Schedule , Drug Repositioning , Female , Humans , Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic/immunology , Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic/pathology , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Portugal , Registries , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/immunology
14.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 60(1): 399-407, 2021 01 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1388014

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor baricitinib may block viral entry into pneumocytes and prevent cytokine storm in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. We aimed to assess whether baricitinib improved pulmonary function in patients treated with high-dose corticosteroids for moderate to severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. METHODS: This observational study enrolled patients with moderate to severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia [arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) <200 mmHg] who received lopinavir/ritonavir and HCQ plus either corticosteroids (CS group, n = 50) or corticosteroids and baricitinib (BCT-CS group, n = 62). The primary end point was the change in oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry (SpO2)/FiO2 from hospitalization to discharge. Secondary end points included the proportion of patients requiring supplemental oxygen at discharge and 1 month later. Statistics were adjusted by the inverse propensity score weighting (IPSW). RESULTS: A greater improvement in SpO2/FiO2 from hospitalization to discharge was observed in the BCT-CS vs CS group (mean differences adjusted for IPSW, 49; 95% CI: 22, 77; P < 0.001). A higher proportion of patients required supplemental oxygen both at discharge (62.0% vs 25.8%; reduction of the risk by 82%, OR adjusted for IPSW, 0.18; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.43; P < 0.001) and 1 month later (28.0% vs 12.9%, reduction of the risk by 69%, OR adjusted for IPSW, 0.31; 95% CI: 0.11, 0.86; P = 0.024) in the CS vs BCT-CS group. CONCLUSIONS: . In patients with moderate to severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia a combination of baricitinib with corticosteroids was associated with greater improvement in pulmonary function when compared with corticosteroids alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance, ENCEPP (EUPAS34966, http://www.encepp.eu/encepp/viewResource.htm? id = 34967).


Subject(s)
Azetidines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Hypoxia/therapy , Janus Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Methylprednisolone/therapeutic use , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/statistics & numerical data , Purines/therapeutic use , Pyrazoles/therapeutic use , Sulfonamides/therapeutic use , Aged , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/metabolism , COVID-19/physiopathology , Cohort Studies , Drug Combinations , Drug Therapy, Combination , Endothelium, Vascular , Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Female , Fibrin Fibrinogen Degradation Products/metabolism , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Immunoglobulins, Intravenous/therapeutic use , Immunologic Factors/therapeutic use , Interferon beta-1b/therapeutic use , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Lung/blood supply , Male , Middle Aged , Oximetry , Prospective Studies , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index
15.
Int J Antimicrob Agents ; 56(6): 106212, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1385672

ABSTRACT

Introduction Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has been proposed as a SARS-CoV-2 treatment but the frequency of long QT (LQT) during use is unknown. Objective To conduct a meta-analysis of the frequency of LQT in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection treated with HCQ. Data Sources PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and preprint servers (medRxiv, Research Square) were searched for studies published between December 2019 and June 30, 2020. Methods Effect statistics were pooled using random effects. The quality of observational studies and randomized controlled trials was appraised with STROBE and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment tools, respectively. Outcomes Critical LQT was defined as: (1) maximum QT corrected (QTc)≥500 ms (if QRS<120 ms) or QTc≥550 ms (if QRS≥120 ms), and (2) QTc increase ≥60 ms. Results In the 28 studies included (n=9124), the frequency of LQT during HCQ treatment was 6.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.7-10.2). In 20 studies (n=7825), patients were also taking other QT-prolonging drugs. The frequency of LQT in the other 8 studies (n=1299) was 1.7% (95% CI: 0.3-3.9). Twenty studies (n=6869) reported HCQ discontinuation due to LQT, with a frequency of 3.7% (95% CI: 1.5-6.6). The frequency of ventricular arrhythmias during HCQ treatment was 1.68% (127/7539) and that of arrhythmogenic death was 0.69% (39/5648). Torsades de Pointes occurred in 0.06% (3/5066). Patients aged >60 years were at highest risk of HCQ-associated LQT (P<0.001). Conclusions HCQ-associated cardiotoxicity in SARS-CoV-2 patients is uncommon but requires ECG monitoring, particularly in those aged >60 years and/or taking other QT-prolonging drugs.


Subject(s)
Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Long QT Syndrome/chemically induced , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , Electrocardiography/drug effects , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
16.
Korean J Intern Med ; 36(Suppl 1): S253-S263, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1377027

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The efficacies of lopinavir-ritonavir or hydroxychloroquine remain to be determined in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To compare the virological and clinical responses to lopinavir-ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine treatment in COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included patients with COVID-19 treated with lopinavir-ritonavir or hydroxychloroquine at a single center in Korea from February 17 to March 31, 2020. Patients treated with lopinavir-ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine concurrently and those treated with lopinavir-ritonavir or hydroxychloroquine for less than 7 days were excluded. Time to negative conversion of viral RNA, time to clinical improvement, and safety outcomes were assessed after 6 weeks of follow-up. RESULTS: Of 65 patients (mean age, 64.3 years; 25 men [38.5%]), 31 were treated with lopinavir-ritonavir and 34 were treated with hydroxychloroquine. The median duration of symptoms before treatment was 7 days and 26 patients (40%) required oxygen support at baseline. Patients treated with lopinavir-ritonavir had a significantly shorter time to negative conversion of viral RNA than those treated with hydroxychloroquine (median, 21 days vs. 28 days). Treatment with lopinavir-ritonavir (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24 to 4.21) and younger age (aHR, 2.64; 95% CI 1.43 to 4.87) was associated with negative conversion of viral RNA. There was no significant difference in time to clinical improvement between lopinavir-ritonavir- and hydroxychloroquine-treated patients (median, 18 days vs. 21 days). Lymphopenia and hyperbilirubinemia were more frequent in lopinavir-ritonavir-treated patients compared with hydroxychloroquine-treated patients. CONCLUSION: Lopinavir-ritonavir was associated with more rapid viral clearance than hydroxychloroquine in mild to moderate COVID-19, despite comparable clinical responses. These findings should be confirmed in randomized, controlled trials.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/virology , Drug Combinations , Female , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Lopinavir/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Ritonavir/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Viral Load
17.
Pharmacol Res ; 157: 104872, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1318931

ABSTRACT

The rapidly progressing of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become a global concern. This meta-analysis aimed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of current option of therapies for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS) besides COVID-19, in an attempt to identify promising therapy for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infected patients. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), and WANFANG DATA for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective cohort, and retrospective cohort studies that evaluated therapies (hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir-based therapy, and ribavirin-based therapy, etc.) for SARS, MERS, and COVID-19. The primary outcomes were mortality, virological eradication and clinical improvement, and secondary outcomes were improvement of symptoms and chest radiography results, incidence of acute respiratory disease syndrome (ARDS), utilization of mechanical ventilation, and adverse events (AEs). Summary relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models, and the quality of evidence was appraised using GRADEpro. Eighteen articles (5 RCTs, 2 prospective cohort studies, and 11 retrospective cohort studies) involving 4,941 patients were included. Compared with control treatment, anti-coronary virus interventions significantly reduced mortality (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44-0.96; I2 = 81.3%), remarkably ameliorate clinical improvement (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.05-2.19) and radiographical improvement (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.11-2.36, I2 = 11.0 %), without manifesting clear effect on virological eradication, incidence of ARDS, intubation, and AEs. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that the combination of ribavirin and corticosteroids remarkably decreased mortality (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.27-0.68). The lopinavir/ritonavir-based combination showed superior virological eradication and radiographical improvement with reduced rate of ARDS. Likewise, hydroxychloroquine improved radiographical result. For safety, ribavirin could induce more bradycardia, anemia and transaminitis. Meanwhile, hydroxychloroquine could increase AEs rate especially diarrhea. Overall, the quality of evidence on most outcomes were very low. In conclusion, although we could not draw a clear conclusion for the recommendation of potential therapies for COVID-19 considering the very low quality of evidence and wide heterogeneity of interventions and indications, our results may help clinicians to comprehensively understand the advantages and drawbacks of each anti-coronavirus agents on efficacy and safety profiles. Lopinavir/ritonavir combinations might observe better virological eradication capability than other anti-coronavirus agents. Conversely, ribavirin might cause more safety concerns especially bradycardia. Thus, large RCTs objectively assessing the efficacy of antiviral therapies for SARS-CoV-2 infections should be conducted with high priority.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/drug therapy , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Betacoronavirus/drug effects , COVID-19 , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
18.
J Biomol Struct Dyn ; 39(12): 4243-4255, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1317834

ABSTRACT

Recent outbreak of novel Coronavirus disease () pandemic around the world is associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome. The death toll associated with the pandemic is increasing day by day. SARS-CoV-2 is an enveloped virus and its N terminal domain (NTD) of Nucleocapsid protein (N protein) binds to the viral (+) sense RNA and results in virus ribonucleoprotien complex, essential for the virus replication. The N protein is composed of a serine-rich linker region sandwiched between NTD and C terminal (CTD). These terminals play a role in viral entry and its processing post entry. The NTD of SARS-CoV-2 N protein forms orthorhombic crystals and binds to the viral genome. Therefore, there is always a quest to target RNA binding domain of nucleocapsid phosphoprotein (NTD-N-protein which in turn may help in controlling diseases caused by SARS-CoV-2 in humans. The role of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine as potential treatments for is still under debate globally because of some side effects associated with it. This study involves the In silico interactions of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine with the NTD-N-protein of SARS-CoV-2. With the help of various computational methods, we have explored the potential role of both of these antiviral drugs for the treatment of patients by comparing the efficacy of both of the drugs to bind to NTD-N-protein. In our research Hydroxychloroquine exhibited potential inhibitory effects of NTD-N-protein with binding energy -7.28 kcal/mol than Chloroquine (-6.30 kcal/mol) at SARS-CoV-2 receptor recognition of susceptible cells. The outcomes of this research strongly appeal for in vivo trials of Hydroxychloroquine for the patients infected with . Furthermore, the recommended doses of Hydroxychloroquine may reduce the chances of catching to the healthcare workers and staff who are in contact with or delivering direct care to coronavirus patients as long as they have not been diagnosed with . We further hypothesize that the comparative NTD-N-protein -drug docking interactions may help to understand the comparative efficacy of other candidate repurposing drugs until discovery of a proper vaccine.Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hydroxychloroquine , Antiviral Agents/pharmacology , COVID-19/drug therapy , Chloroquine/pharmacology , Computer Simulation , Drug Repositioning , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/pharmacology , Nucleocapsid , Nucleocapsid Proteins , RNA-Binding Motifs , SARS-CoV-2
19.
Ther Drug Monit ; 43(4): 570-576, 2021 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1305442

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Therapeutic drug monitoring of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has been recommended to optimize the treatment of patients with COVID-19. The authors describe an ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography tandem spectrometry method developed in a context of emergency, to analyze HCQ in both human plasma and blood samples. After adding the labeled internal standard and simple protein precipitation, plasma samples were analyzed using a C18 column. Blood samples required evaporation before analysis. The total chromatographic run time was 4 minutes (including 1.5 minutes of column equilibration). The assay was linear over the calibration range (r2 > 0.99) and up to 1.50 mcg/mL for the plasma samples (5.00 mcg/mL for the blood matrix). The limit of quantification was 0.0150 mcg/mL for plasma samples (0.05 mcg/mL blood matrix) with accuracy and precision ranging from 91.1% to 112% and from 0.750% to 11.1%, respectively. Intraday and interday precision and accuracy values were within 15.0%. No significant matrix effect was observed in the plasma or blood samples. This method was successfully applied to patients treated for COVID-19 infection. A simple and rapid ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography tandem spectrometry method adapted to HCQ therapeutic drug monitoring in the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection was successfully developed and validated.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Drug Monitoring/standards , Emergency Medical Services/standards , Hydroxychloroquine/blood , Tandem Mass Spectrometry/standards , Antirheumatic Agents/blood , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/blood , Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid/methods , Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid/standards , Chromatography, Liquid/methods , Chromatography, Liquid/standards , Drug Monitoring/methods , Emergency Medical Services/methods , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pandemics , Tandem Mass Spectrometry/methods
20.
J Med Virol ; 93(8): 5182-5187, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1298501

ABSTRACT

Infections due to human herpesvirus 6 (HHV-6) are frequent during early childhood. Usually, they have a favorable clinical course. Conversely, HHV-6 congenital infections occur in about 1% of neonates and may present with more severe clinical pictures. HHV-6 can be found in lung tissues and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples from patients with pneumonia and in immunocompromised patients can cause mild to severe pneumonia. In neonates, the role of HHV-6 in the genesis of severe pneumonia is poorly defined still now. We describe a healthy infant with a late-onset (15 days of life) severe interstitial pneumonia and heavy HHV-6 genome load, persistently detected in its BAL fluid. The baby underwent high-frequency oscillatory ventilation, hydroxychloroquine, steroids, and ganciclovir for 6 weeks and at 9 months she died. Next-generation sequencing of genes known to cause neonatal respiratory insufficiency revealed the presence of a "probably pathogenetic" heterozygous variant in the autosomal recessive DRC1 gene, a heterozygous variant of unknown significance (VUS) in the autosomal recessive RSPH9 gene, and a heterozygous VUS in the autosomal recessive MUC5B gene. HHV-6 infection should be considered in the differential diagnosis of late-onset severe respiratory distress in neonates and the co-occurrence of genetic predisposing factors or modifiers should be tested by specific molecular techniques. The intensity of HHV-6 genome load in BAL fluid could be an indicator of the response to antiviral therapy.


Subject(s)
Genetic Predisposition to Disease/genetics , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/genetics , Roseolovirus Infections/genetics , Cytoskeletal Proteins/genetics , Fatal Outcome , Female , Genetic Variation , Herpesvirus 6, Human/genetics , Herpesvirus 6, Human/isolation & purification , Heterozygote , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/therapy , Lung Diseases, Interstitial/virology , Microtubule-Associated Proteins/genetics , Mucin-5B/genetics , Pneumonia, Viral/genetics , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Roseolovirus Infections/therapy , Roseolovirus Infections/virology , Viral Load
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL