Biomarkers of COVID-19 and technologies to combat SARS-CoV-2.

Due to the unprecedented public health crisis caused by COVID-19, our first contribution to the newly launching journal, Advances in Biomarker Sciences and Technology, has abruptly diverted to focus on the current pandemic. As the number of new COVID-19 cases and deaths continue to rise steadily around the world, the common goal of healthcare providers, scientists, and government officials worldwide has been to identify the best way to detect the novel coronavirus, named SARS-CoV-2, and to treat the viral infection - COVID-19. Accurate detection, timely diagnosis, effective treatment, and future prevention are the vital keys to management of COVID-19, and can help curb the viral spread. Traditionally, biomarkers play a pivotal role in the early detection of disease etiology, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. To assist myriad ongoing investigations and innovations, we developed this current article to overview known and emerging biomarkers for SARS-CoV-2 detection, COVID-19 diagnostics, treatment and prognosis, and ongoing work to identify and develop more biomarkers for new drugs and vaccines. Moreover, biomarkers of socio-psychological stress, the high-technology quest for new virtual drug screening, and digital applications are described.

A Narrative Review of Emerging Therapeutics for COVID-19.

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the causal agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), quickly spread around the world, resulting in the most aggressive pandemic experienced in more than 100 years. Research on targeted therapies and vaccines has been initiated on an unprecedented scale and speed but will take months and even years to come to fruition. Meanwhile, the efficacy of emerging therapeutics for use in treating COVID-19 is feverishly being investigated to identify the best available treatment options for dealing with the current wave of disease. This review of publications with a "treatment" tag through June 29, 2020 in the National Library of Medicine's LitCovid literature hub, provides frontline clinicians with a pragmatic summary of the current state of the rapidly evolving evidence supporting emerging candidate therapeutics for COVID-19. Two main categories of pharmaceutical therapeutics are showing promise: those with antiviral activity directly addressing infection and those that counteract the inflammatory cytokine storm induced by severe disease. Preliminary results suggest that other approaches such as convalescent plasma therapy and lung radiation therapy may have some efficacy. The current clinical evidence for potential treatments is preliminary-often small retrospective series or early results of randomized trials-and the science is evolving rapidly. The long-term results from large, well-designed randomized controlled trials will provide definitive evidence for therapeutic effectiveness and are likely months away. The trial landscape for promising therapies is described.

Application of the PHENotype SIMulator for rapid identification of potential candidates in effective COVID-19 drug repurposing.

The current, rapidly diversifying pandemic has accelerated the need for efficient and effective identification of potential drug candidates for COVID-19. Knowledge on host-immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection, however, remains limited with few drugs approved to date. Viable strategies and tools are rapidly arising to address this, especially with repurposing of existing drugs offering significant promise. Here we introduce a systems biology tool, the PHENotype SIMulator, which -by leveraging available transcriptomic and proteomic databases-allows modeling of SARS-CoV-2 infection in host cells in silico to i) determine with high sensitivity and specificity (both>96%) the viral effects on cellular host-immune response, resulting in specific cellular SARS-CoV-2 signatures and ii) utilize these cell-specific signatures to identify promising repurposable therapeutics. Powered by this tool, coupled with domain expertise, we identify several potential COVID-19 drugs including methylprednisolone and metformin, and further discern key cellular SARS-CoV-2-affected pathways as potential druggable targets in COVID-19 pathogenesis.

Low SARS-CoV-2 Cq values in healthcare workers with symptomatic COVID-19 infections, regardless of symptom severity, The Netherlands, January to August 2022.

We analysed SARS-CoV-2 PCR Cq values from 3,183 healthcare workers who tested positive between January and August 2022. Median Cq values were lower in symptomatic than in asymptomatic HCW. The difference in Cq values between HCW with mild vs moderate/severe symptoms was statistically significant but negligibly small. To prevent nosocomial infections, all symptomatic HCW should be tested irrespective of symptom severity. This information can support decisions on testing and isolation, in the context of ongoing pressure on healthcare systems.

SARS-COV-2 - the pandemic of the XXI century, clinical manifestations - neurological implications.

In December 2019, in Wuhan, China, the first cases of infection with SARS-CoV 2 responsible for COVID-19 disease were identified. SARS-CoV 2 was declared a pandemic on March 11, 2020, and since then has attracted the medical world's attention. The threat to humans' health that this emerging pandemic could leave raises awareness on the importance of understanding the mechanisms that underlie the developing conditions. The epidemiology, clinical picture, and pathogenesis of COVID-19 show that this virus presents new strategies to overcome the past defensive medicine. While all the current data has focused on the pulmonary and cardiovascular manifestations, little has been written about the neurological implications of the disease. This review updates new clinical aspects that SARS-CoV 2 expresses in humans by focusing primarily on neurological manifestations. The damage to the nervous system became more apparent - anosmia, ageusia, polyneuritis, meningitis, meningoencephalitis, stroke, acute necrotizing encephalopathy. Oxygen therapy is vital for those in critical health situations. Finally, prevention is the most important element in breaking the epidemiological chain.

Digital PCR can augment the interpretation of RT-qPCR Cq values for SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious, acute respiratory disease caused mainly by person-to-person transmission of the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Its emergence has caused a world-wide acute health crisis, intensified by the challenge of reliably identifying individuals likely to transmit the disease. Diagnosis is hampered by the many unknowns surrounding this disease, including those relating to infectious viral burden. This uncertainty is exacerbated by disagreement surrounding the clinical relevance of molecular testing using reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) for the presence of viral RNA, most often based on the reporting of quantification cycles (Cq), which is also termed the cycle threshold (Ct) or crossing point (Cp). Despite it being common knowledge that Cqs are relative values varying according to a wide range of different parameters, there have been efforts to use them as though they were absolute units, with Cqs below an arbitrarily determined value, deemed to signify a positive result and those above, a negative one. Our results investigated the effects of a range of common variables on Cq values. These data include a detailed analysis of the effect of different carrier molecules on RNA extraction. The impact of sample matrix of buccal swabs and saliva on RNA extraction efficiency was demonstrated in RT-qPCR and the impact of potentially inhibiting compounds in urine along with bile salts were investigated in RT-digital PCR (RT-dPCR). The latter studies were performed such that the impact on the RT step could be separated from the PCR step. In this way, the RT was shown to be more susceptible to inhibitors than the PCR. Together, these studies demonstrate that the consequent variability of test results makes subjective Cq cut-off values unsuitable for the identification of infectious individuals. We also discuss the importance of using reliable control materials for accurate quantification and highlight the substantial role played by dPCR as a method for their development.

Hydroxychloroquine/Chloroquine as Therapeutics for COVID-19: Truth under the Mystery.

The outbreak of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has rapidly evolved into a global pandemic. One major challenge in the battle against this deadly disease is to find effective therapy. Due to the availability and proven clinical record of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) in various human diseases, there have been enormous efforts in repurposing these two drugs as therapeutics for COVID-19. To date, substantial amount of work at cellular, animal models and clinical trials have been performed to verify their therapeutic potential against COVID-19. However, neither lab-based studies nor clinical trials have provided consistent and convincing evidence to support the therapeutic value of HCQ/CQ in the treatment of COVID-19. In this mini review we provide a systematic summary on this important topic and aim to reveal some truth covered by the mystery regarding the therapeutic value of HCQ/CQ in COVID-19.

Development of a SARS-CoV-2-derived receptor-binding domain-based ACE2 biosensor.

The global outbreak of coronavirus disease and rapid spread of the causative severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) represent a significant threat to human health. A key mechanism of human SARS-CoV-2 infection is initiated by the combination of human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (hACE2) and the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2-derived spike glycoprotein. Despite the importance of these protein interactions, there are still insufficient detection methods to observe their activity at the cellular level. Herein, we developed a novel fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET)-based hACE2 biosensor to monitor the interaction between hACE2 and SARS-CoV-2 RBD. This biosensor facilitated the visualization of hACE2-RBD activity with high spatiotemporal resolutions at the single-cell level. Further studies revealed that the FRET-based hACE2 biosensors were sensitive to both exogenous and endogenous hACE2 expression, suggesting that they might be safely applied to the early stage of SARS-CoV-2 infection without direct virus use. Therefore, our novel biosensor could potentially help develop drugs that target SARS-CoV-2 by inhibiting hACE2-RBD interaction.

Residual SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasal swabs of convalescent COVID-19 patients: Is prolonged quarantine always justified?

Real-time reverse transcription PCR is currently the most sensitive method to detect severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Defining whether a patient could be contagious or not contagious in the presence of residual SARS-CoV-2 RNA is of extreme importance in the context of public health. In this prospective multicenter study, virus isolation was prospectively attempted in 387 nasal swabs from clinically recovered patients showing low viral load (quantification cycle, Cq, value greater than 30). The median Cq value was 36.8 (range 30.0-39.4). Overall, a cytopathic effect was detected in nine samples, corresponding to a culture positivity rate of 2.3% (9/387). The results of this study help to dissect true virus replication and residual viral RNA detection in recovered patients.

Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of malaria and repurposing in treating COVID-19.

Chloroquine (CQ) and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have been commonly used for the treatment and prevention of malaria, and the treatment of autoimmune diseases for several decades. As their new mechanisms of actions are identified in recent years, CQ and HCQ have wider therapeutic applications, one of which is to treat viral infectious diseases. Since the pandemic of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), CQ and HCQ have been subjected to a number of in vitro and in vivo tests, and their therapeutic prospects for COVID-19 have been proposed. In this article, the applications and mechanisms of action of CQ and HCQ in their conventional fields of anti-malaria and anti-rheumatism, as well as their repurposing prospects in anti-virus are reviewed. The current trials and future potential of CQ and HCQ in combating COVID-19 are discussed.

Prevalence and 30-Day Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With Covid-19 and Prior Lung Diseases.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with pre-existing respiratory diseases in the setting of COVID-19 may have a greater risk of severe complications and even death. METHODS: A retrospective, multicenter, cohort study with 5847 COVID-19 patients admitted to hospitals. Patients were separated in two groups, with/without previous lung disease. Evaluation of factors associated with survival and secondary composite end-point such as ICU admission and respiratory support, were explored. RESULTS: 1,271 patients (22%) had a previous lung disease, mostly COPD. All-cause mortality occurred in 376 patients with lung disease (29.5%) and in 819 patients without (17.9%) (p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier curves showed that patients with lung diseases had a worse 30-day survival (HR = 1.78; 95%C.I. 1.58-2.01; p < 0.001) and COPD had almost 40% mortality. Multivariable Cox regression showed that prior lung disease remained a risk factor for mortality (HR, 1.21; 95%C.I. 1.02-1.44; p = 0.02). Variables independently associated with all-cause mortality risk in patients with lung diseases were oxygen saturation less than 92% on admission (HR, 4.35; 95% CI 3.08-6.15) and elevated D-dimer (HR, 1.84; 95% CI 1.27-2.67). Age younger than 60 years (HR 0.37; 95% CI 0.21-0.65) was associated with decreased risk of death. CONCLUSIONS: Previous lung disease is a risk factor for mortality in patients with COVID-19. Older age, male gender, home oxygen therapy, and respiratory failure on admission were associated with an increased mortality. Efforts must be done to identify respiratory patients to set measures to improve their clinical outcomes.

INTRODUCCIÓN: Los pacientes con enfermedades respiratorias preexistentes pueden tener en el contexto de la covid-19 un mayor riesgo de complicaciones graves e incluso de muerte. MÉTODOS: Estudio de cohortes multicéntrico y retrospectivo de 5.847 pacientes con covid-19 ingresados en hospitales. Los pacientes se separaron en 2 grupos, sin y con enfermedad pulmonar previa. Se evaluaron factores asociados con la supervivencia y criterios combinados de valoración secundarios, como el ingreso en la UCI y la necesidad de asistencia respiratoria. RESULTADOS: Mil doscientos setenta y un (1.271) pacientes (22%) tenían una enfermedad pulmonar previa, principalmente EPOC. La mortalidad por todas las causas ocurrió en 376 pacientes con enfermedad pulmonar (29,5%) y en 819 pacientes sin enfermedad pulmonar (17,9%; p < 0,001). Las curvas de Kaplan-Meier mostraron que los pacientes con enfermedades pulmonares tenían una peor supervivencia a los 30 días (HR: 1,78; IC del 95%: 1,58-2,01; p < 0,001) y la EPOC tenía una mortalidad de casi el 40%. La regresión de Cox multivariante mostró que la enfermedad pulmonar previa seguía siendo un factor de riesgo de mortalidad (HR: 1,21; IC del 95%: 1,02-1,44; p = 0,02). Las variables asociadas de forma independiente con el riesgo de muerte por todas las causas en pacientes con enfermedades pulmonares fueron la saturación de oxígeno inferior al 92% al ingreso (HR: 4,35; IC del 95%: 3,08-6,15) y el dímero D elevado (HR: 1,84; IC del 95%: 1,27-2,67). La edad menor de 60 años (HR: 0,37; IC del 95%: 0,21-0,65) se asoció con una disminución del riesgo de muerte. CONCLUSIONES: La enfermedad pulmonar previa es un factor de riesgo de muerte en pacientes con covid-19. La edad avanzada, el sexo masculino, la oxigenoterapia domiciliaria y la insuficiencia respiratoria al ingreso se asociaron con un aumento de la mortalidad. Se deben realizar esfuerzos para identificar a los pacientes respiratorios y establecer medidas para mejorar sus resultados clínicos.

Chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and COVID-19: Systematic review and narrative synthesis of efficacy and safety.

The COVID-19 pandemic has required clinicians to urgently identify new treatment options or the re-purposing of existing drugs. Of particular interest are chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). The aims of this systematic review are to systematically identify and collate 24 studies describing the use of CQ and HCQ in human clinical trials and to provide a detailed synthesis of evidence of its efficacy and safety. Of clinical trials, 100% showed no significant difference in the probability of viral transmission or clearance in prophylaxis or therapy, respectively, compared to the control group. Among observational studies employing an endpoint specific to efficacy, 58% concurred with the finding of no significant difference in the attainment of outcomes. Three-fifths of clinical trials and half of observational studies examining an indicator unique to drug safety discovered a higher probability of adverse events in those treated patients suspected of, and diagnosed with, COVID-19. Of the total papers focusing on cardiac side-effects, 44% found a greater incidence of QTc prolongation and/or arrhythmias, 44% found no evidence of a significant difference, and 11% mixed results. The strongest available evidence points towards the inefficacy of CQ and HCQ in prophylaxis or in the treatment of hospitalised COVID-19 patients.

Cardiac Toxicity of Chloroquine or Hydroxychloroquine in Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-regression Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature and to estimate the risk of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) cardiac toxicity in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We searched multiple data sources including PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid EBM Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science and medrxiv.org from November 2019 through May 27, 2020. We included studies that enrolled patients with COVID-19 treated with CQ or HCQ, with or without azithromycin, and reported on cardiac toxic effects. We performed a meta-analysis using the arcsine transformation of the different incidences. RESULTS: A total of 19 studies with a total of 5652 patients were included. The pooled incidence of torsades de pointes arrhythmia, ventricular tachycardia, or cardiac arrest was 3 per 1000 (95% CI, 0-21; I 2 =96%) in 18 studies with 3725 patients. Among 13 studies of 4334 patients, the pooled incidence of discontinuation of CQ or HCQ due to prolonged QTc or arrhythmias was 5% (95% CI, 1-11; I 2 =98%). The pooled incidence of change in QTc from baseline of 60 milliseconds or more or QTc of 500 milliseconds or more was 9% (95% CI, 3-17; I 2 =97%). Mean or median age, coronary artery disease, hypertension, diabetes, concomitant QT-prolonging medications, intensive care unit admission, and severity of illness in the study populations explained between-studies heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Treatment of patients with COVID-19 with CQ or HCQ is associated with an important risk of drug-induced QT prolongation and relatively higher incidence of torsades de pointes, ventricular tachycardia, or cardiac arrest. Therefore, these agents should not be used routinely in the management of COVID-19 disease. Patients with COVID-19 who are treated with antimalarials for other indications should be adequately monitored.

Safety and efficacy of lopinavir/ritonavir combination in COVID-19: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression analysis.

BACKGROUND: Being protease inhibitors and owing to their efficacy in SARS-CoV, lopinavir + ritonavir (L/R) combination is being used in the management of COVID-19. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we have evaluated the comparative safety and efficacy of L/R combination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Comparative, observational studies and controlled clinical trials comparing L/R combination to standard of care (SOC)/control or any other antiviral agent/combinations were included. A total of 10 databases were searched to identify 13 studies that fulfilled the predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. RESULTS: No discernible beneficial effect was seen in the L/R group in comparison to SOC/control in terms of "progression to more severe state" (4 studies, odds ratio [OR]: 1.446 [0.722-2.895]), "mortality" (3 studies, OR: 1.208 [0.563-2.592]), and "virological cure on days 7-10" (3 studies, OR: 0.777 [0.371-1.630]), while the L/R combination arm performed better than the SOC/control arm in terms of "duration of hospital stay" (3 studies, mean difference (MD): -1.466 [-2.403 to - 0.529]) and "time to virological cure" (3 studies, MD: -3.272 [-6.090 to - 0.454]). No difference in efficacy was found between L/R versus hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and L/R versus arbidol. However, in a single randomized controlled trail (open label), chloroquine (CQ) performed better than L/R. The combination L/R with arbidol may be beneficial (in terms of virological clearance and radiological improvement); however, we need more dedicated studies. Single studies report efficacy of L/R + interferon (IFN, either alpha or 1-beta) combination. We need more studies to delineate the proper effect size. Regarding adverse effects, except occurrence of diarrhea (higher in the L/R group), safety was comparable to SOC. CONCLUSION: In our study, no difference was seen between the L/R combination and the SOC arm in terms of "progression to more severe state," "mortality," and virological cure on days 7-10;" however, some benefits in terms of "duration of hospital stay" and "time to virological cure" were seen. No significant difference in efficacy was seen when L/R was compared to arbidol and HCQ monotherapy. Except for the occurrence of diarrhea, which was higher in the L/R group, safety profile of L/R is comparable to SOC. Compared to L/R combination, CQ, L/R + arbidol, L/R + IFN-α, and L/R + IFN-1ß showed better efficacy, but the external validity of these findings is limited by limited number of studies (1 study each).

Hydroxychloroquine and QTc prolongation in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Among many drugs that hold potential in COVID-19 pandemic, chloroquine (CQ), and its derivative hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have generated unusual interest. With increasing usage, there has been growing concern about the prolongation of QTc interval and Torsades de Pointes (TdP) with HCQ, especially in combination with azithromycin. AIMS: This meta-analysis is planned to study the risk of QTc prolongation and Torsades de pointes (TdP) by a well-defined criterion for HCQ, CQ alone, and in combination with Azithromycin in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was made in two databases (PubMed, Embase). Three outcomes explored in the included studies were frequency of QTc > 500 ms (ms) or ΔQTc > 60 ms (Outcome 1), frequency of QTc > 500 ms (Outcome 2) and frequency of TdP (Outcome 3). Random effects method with inverse variance approach was used for computation of pooled summary and risk ratio. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies comprising of 2138 patients were included in the final analysis. The pooled prevalence of outcome 1, outcome 2 and outcome 3 for HCQ, CQ with or without Azithromycin were 10.18% (5.59-17.82%, I2 - 92%), 10.22% (6.01-16.85%, I2 - 79%), and 0.72% (0.34-1.51, I2 - 0%) respectively. The prevalence of outcome 2 in subgroup analysis for HCQ and HCQ + Azithromycin was 7.25% (3.22-15.52, I2 - 59%) and 8.61% (4.52-15.79, I2 - 76%), respectively. The risk ratio (RR) for outcome 1 and outcome 2 between HCQ + Azithromycin and HCQ was 1.22 (0.77-1.93, I2 - 0%) & 1.51 (0.79-2.87, I2 - 13%), respectively and was not significant. Heterogeneity was noted statistically as well clinically (regimen types, patient numbers, study design, and outcome definition). CONCLUSION: The use of HCQ/CQ is associated with a high prevalence of QTc prolongation. However, it is not associated with a high risk of TdP.

Safety and Efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: During the initial phases of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic, there was an unfounded fervor surrounding the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ); however, recently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has recommended against routine use of HCQ outside of study protocols citing possible adverse outcomes. METHODS: Multiple databases were searched to identify articles on COVID-19. An unadjusted odds ratio (OR) was used to calculate the safety and efficacy of HCQ on a random effect model. RESULTS: Twelve studies comprising 3,912 patients (HCQ 2,512 and control 1400) were included. The odds of all-cause mortality (OR: 2.23, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.58 - 3.13, P value < 0.00001) were significantly higher in patients on HCQ compared to patients on control agent. The response to therapy assessed by negative repeat polymerase chain reaction (PCR) (OR: 1.83, 95% CI: 0.50 - 6.75, P = 0.36), radiological resolution (OR: 1.98, 95% CI: 0.47 - 8.36, P value = 0.36) and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) (OR: 1.21, 95% CI: 0.34 - 4.33, P value = 0.76) were identical between the two groups. Overall, four times higher odds of net adverse events (NAEs) were observed in the HCQ group (OR: 4.59, 95% CI 1.73 - 12.20, P value = 0.02). The measures for individual safety endpoints were also numerically lower in the control arm; however, none of these values reached the level of statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: HCQ might offer no benefits in terms of decreasing the viral load and radiological improvement in patients with COVID-19. HCQ appears to be associated with higher odds of all-cause mortality and NAEs.

[Point-of-care testing: place of France in the world National survey in healthcare establisments in 2019]. / Examens de biologie médicale délocalisée : place de la France dans le monde Enquête nationale en 2019 dans les établissements de santé.

The point-of-care tests (POCT) are subject to accreditation. A national inventory survey provides a synthesis of knowledge. The survey distributed 31 questions in 2019. 147 responses were received (75% biologists, 49% CHU, 42% CHG). Only 20.41% are accredited ISO22870, the majority for <50% of the medical departments; 70% say they are going there at the end of 2019 or in 2020. The maps are unknown for 32% (EBMD) and 82% (TROD). Visibility is poor with: medical establishment committee (40%), IT department (31%). Connection is necessary for 87-95% depending on the criterion (QC, authorizations, etc.) and 66% of answers highlight that less than 50% of connexion is effective. The major advantage is the delay of the result (62.5%), then the relationship with the health teams (33.3%). The disadvantages: difficulty of the quality approach (45%), cost of tests (34.3%). Human resource requirements are identified for technicians (82%) and biologists (76%). The multiplicity of sites, devices and operators means that it is difficult to set up and maintain. Biology outside the laboratories, under biological responsibility, must meet a rigorous imperative quality approach.

Treatment Armamentarium of COVID-19: Evolving Strategies and Evidence So Far.

The outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 started in Hubei province of China in December 2019 and rapidly spread all over the world. It has infected more than 7 million people worldwide and has pushed half of the world in a state of lockdown. There is an urgent unmet need of interventions both for prevention and treatment of this disease and more than 500 clinical trials are ongoing in this regard. At present, no study with robust methodology have clearly demonstrated benefits of hydroxychloroquine for treatment, preexposure prophylaxis in healthcare workers or post exposure prophylaxis in COrona VIrus Disease-2019. Remdesivir has been shown to have modest benefits in moderate to severe disease, if administered early. Given the rapid pace of clinical information and discoveries, it is important for clinicians to be up to date with the latest, evidence-based treatment options available for this novel disease. Keeping up with this current pace of information, we review the clinical studies of different therapeutic options available to treat SARS-CoV-2.

Rheumotologitsts' view on the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19.

The current pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) calls urgently for effective therapies. Anti-malarial medicine chloroquine (CQ) and particularly its chemical analogue hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have been recommended as promising candidate therapeutics that are now under either compassionate off-label use or clinical trials for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. However, there are public concerns and disputes about both the safety and efficacy of CQ and HCQ for this new application. Given the fact that for decades HCQ has been approved as an immunomodulatory drug for the long term treatment of chronic rheumatic diseases, as experienced rheumatologists, we would like to share our thoughts in this regard and trigger a brainstorm among clinical care providers for exchanging their diverse opinions on this urgent topic.