Hydroxychloroquine for Non-Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. / Hidroxicloroquina para Pacientes com COVID-19 não Hospitalizados: Uma Revisão Sistemática e Metanálise de Ensaios Clínicos Randomizados.

BACKGROUND: Previous systematic reviews have identified no benefit of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. After publication of these reviews, the results of COPE, the largest randomized trial conducted to date, became available. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to synthesize the evidence on the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients compared to placebo or standard of care. METHODS: Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov complemented by manual search. Pairwise meta-analyses, risk of bias, and evidence certainty assessments were conducted, including optimal information size analysis (OIS). A level of significance of 0.05 was adopted in the meta-analysis. PROSPERO: CRD42021265427. RESULTS: Eight RCTs with 3,219 participants were included. COVID-19 hospitalization and any adverse events rates were not significantly different between hydroxychloroquine (5.6% and 35.1%) and control (7.4% and 20.4%) (risk ratio, RR, 0.77, 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.57-1.04, I2: 0%; RR 1.78, 95%-CI 0.90; 3.52, I2: 93%, respectively). The OIS (7,880) was not reached for COVID-19 hospitalization, independently of the simulation for anticipated event rate and RR reduction estimate. CONCLUSION: Evidence of very low certainty showed lack of benefit with hydroxychloroquine in preventing COVID-19 hospitalizations. Despite being the systematic review with the largest number of participants included, the OIS, considering pre-vaccination response to infection, has not yet been reached.

FUNDAMENTO: Revisões sistemáticas anteriores não identificaram benefício do uso da hidroxicloroquina ou da cloroquina em pacientes com COVID-19 não hospitalizados. Após a publicação dessas revisões, os resultados do COPE, o maior ensaio clínico randomizado até hoje, tornaram-se disponíveis. OBJETIVOS: Conduzir uma revisão sistemática e metanálise de ensaios clínicos randomizados (ECRs) para sintetizar as evidências sobre a eficácia e a segurança da hidroxicloroquina e da cloroquina em pacientes com COVID-19 não hospitalizados em comparação a controle ou tratamento padrão. MÉTODOS: As buscas foram conduzidas nos bancos de dados PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library e ClinicalTrials.gov, e complementadas por busca manual. Foram realizadas metanálises diretas e avaliações de risco de viés e certeza da evidência, incluindo análise do tamanho ótimo da informação (OIS, optimal information size). Um nível de significância de 0,05 foi adotado na metanálise. PROSPERO: CRD42021265427. RESULTADOS: Oito ECRs com 3219 participantes foram incluídos. As taxas de internação por COVID-19 e de eventos adversos não foram significativamente diferentes entre hidroxicloroquina (5,6% e 5,1%) e controle (7,4% e 20,4%) [risco relativo (RR) 0,77, intervalo de confiança 95% (IC95%), 0,57-1,04, I2: 0%; RR 1,78, IC95% 0,90; 3,52, I2: 93%, respectivamente)]. O OIS (7880) não foi alcançado para hospitalização por COVID-19, independentemente da simulação para a taxa de evento e redução do RR estimados. CONCLUSÃO: A evidência de muito baixa qualidade indicou falta de benefício com hidroxicloroquina em prevenir internações por COVID-19. Apesar de ser a revisão sistemática com o maior número de participantes incluídos, o OIS, considerando a resposta à infecção anterior à vacinação, não foi atingido.

Cardiac effects and toxicity of chloroquine: a short update.

There is currently increased interest in the use of the antimalarial drugs chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of other diseases, including cancer and viral infections such as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the risk of cardiotoxic effects tends to limit their use. In this review, the effects of these drugs on the electrical and mechanical activities of the heart as well as on remodelling of cardiac tissue are presented and the underlying molecular and cellular mechanisms are discussed. The drugs can have proarrhythmic as well as antiarrhythmic actions resulting from their inhibition of ion channels, including voltage-dependent Na+ and Ca2+ channels, background and voltage-dependent K+ channels, and pacemaker channels. The drugs also exert a vagolytic effect due at least in part to a muscarinic receptor antagonist action. They also interfere with normal autophagy flux, an effect that could aggravate ischaemia/reperfusion injury or post-infarct remodelling. Most of the toxic effects occur at high concentrations, following prolonged drug administration or in the context of drug associations.

Hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: An individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Results from observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have led to the consensus that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) are not effective for COVID-19 prevention or treatment. Pooling individual participant data, including unanalyzed data from trials terminated early, enables more detailed investigation of the efficacy and safety of HCQ/CQ among subgroups of hospitalized patients. METHODS: We searched ClinicalTrials.gov in May and June 2020 for US-based RCTs evaluating HCQ/CQ in hospitalized COVID-19 patients in which the outcomes defined in this study were recorded or could be extrapolated. The primary outcome was a 7-point ordinal scale measured between day 28 and 35 post enrollment; comparisons used proportional odds ratios. Harmonized de-identified data were collected via a common template spreadsheet sent to each principal investigator. The data were analyzed by fitting a prespecified Bayesian ordinal regression model and standardizing the resulting predictions. RESULTS: Eight of 19 trials met eligibility criteria and agreed to participate. Patient-level data were available from 770 participants (412 HCQ/CQ vs 358 control). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. We did not find evidence of a difference in COVID-19 ordinal scores between days 28 and 35 post-enrollment in the pooled patient population (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% credible interval, 0.76-1.24; higher favors HCQ/CQ), and found no convincing evidence of meaningful treatment effect heterogeneity among prespecified subgroups. Adverse event and serious adverse event rates were numerically higher with HCQ/CQ vs control (0.39 vs 0.29 and 0.13 vs 0.09 per patient, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this individual participant data meta-analysis reinforce those of individual RCTs that HCQ/CQ is not efficacious for treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients.

Review of Hydroxychloroquine Cardiotoxicity: Lessons From the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has popularized the usage of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine (HCQ/CQ) as treatments for COVID-19. Previously used as anti-malarial and now commonly used in rheumatologic conditions, preliminary in vitro studies have demonstrated these medications also have anti-viral properties. Retinopathy and neuromyopathy are well recognized complications of using these treatments; however, cardiotoxicity is under-recognized. This review will discuss the implications and cardiotoxicity of HCQ/CQ, their mechanisms of action, and their utility in COVID-19. RECENT FINDINGS: Early clinical trials demonstrated a modest benefit of HCQ in COVID-19, causing a push for the usage of it. However, further large multi-center randomized control centers, demonstrated no benefit, and even a trend towards worse outcomes. The predominant cardiac complication observed with HCQ in COVID-19 was cardiac arrhythmias and prolonging of the QT interval. However, with chronic usage of HCQ/CQ, the development of heart failure (HF) and cardiomyopathy (CM) can occur. Although, most adverse cardiac events related to HCQ/CQ usage in COVID-19 were secondary to conduction disorders given the short duration of treatment, HCQ/CQ can cause CM and HF, with chronic usage. Given the insufficient evidence, HCQ/CQ usage in COVID-19 is not routinely recommended, especially with novel therapies now being developed and used. Additionally, usage of HCQ/CQ should prompt initial cardiac evaluation with ECG, and yearly monitoring, with consideration for advanced imaging if clinically warranted. The diagnosis of HCQ/CQ cardiomyopathy is important, as prompt cessation can allow for recovery when these changes are still reversible.

Torsade de pointes associated with chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and azithromycin: a retrospective analysis of individual case safety reports from VigiBase.

PURPOSE: To analyze the cases of torsade de pointes (TdP) and related symptoms reported in association with chloroquine (CQ), hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), and azithromycin (AZT) to the World Health Organization (WHO) global database of individual case safety reports (ICSRs) for drug monitoring (VigiBase) using qualitative and quantitative pharmacovigilance approaches. METHODS: The main characteristics of the ICSRs reporting TdP with CQ, HCQ, and AZT have been summarized. Co-reported drugs with risk to cause QT prolongation have been described. Reporting odds ratios (RORs) as a measure of disproportionality for reported TdP and individual drugs have been calculated. RESULTS: One hundred seventy ICSRs reporting TdP in association with the drugs of interest were identified (CQ: 11, HCQ: 31, CQ + HCQ: 1, HCQ + AZT: 27, AZT: 100). From these, 41 (24.3%) were received during the pandemic period (December 2019 to February 2021). The median age of the patients was 63, 53, and 63 years old for CQ, HCQ, and AZT, respectively. Reports included concomitant use of other QT-prolonging drugs (CQ 25.0%, HCQ 71.2%, AZT 64.6%). A proportion of the cases were fatal (CQ 25.0%, HCQ 8.6%, AZT 16.1%). Increased disproportionality has been found for the individual drugs and TdP: CQ (ROR: 7.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.82, 12.96), HCQ (ROR: 8.49, 95% CI: 6.57, 10.98), azithromycin (ROR: 8.06, 95% CI: 6.76, 9.61). Disproportionality was also found for other related symptoms, Standardized MedDRA Query for torsade de pointes/QT prolongation (narrow): CQ (ROR: 11.95, 95% CI: 10.04-14.22); HCQ (ROR: 20.43, 95% CI: 19.13, 21.83), AZT (ROR: 7.78, 95% CI: 7.26, 8.34). CONCLUSIONS: The prescription of CQ, HCQ, and AZT should be restricted to therapeutic indications with established positive benefit/risk profile. Doctors and patients should be aware of this potential adverse reaction especially when several risk factors are present.

Prevalence of ECG testing and characteristics among new hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine users within a multi-center tertiary care center.

COVID-19 raised concern regarding cardiotoxicity and QTc prolongation of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ). We examined the frequency and patient factors associated with ECG testing and the detection of prolonged QTc among new HCQ/CQ users in a large academic medical system. 10,248 subjects with a first HCQ/CQ prescription (1/2015-3/2020) were included. We assessed baseline (1 year prior to and including day of initiation of HCQ/CQ through 2 months after initial HCQ/CQ prescription) and follow-up (10 months after the baseline period) patient characteristics and ECGs obtained from electronic health records. Among 8384 female HCQ/CQ new users, ECGs were obtained for 22.3%, 14.3%, and 7.6%, at baseline, follow, and both periods, respectively. Among 1864 male HCQ/CQ new users, ECGs were obtained more frequently at baseline (29.7%), follow-up (18.0%), and both periods (11.3%). Female HCQ/CQ users with a normal QTc at baseline but prolonged QTc (> 470 ms) at follow-up (13.1%) were older at HCQ/CQ initiation [mean 64.7 (SD 16.5) vs. 58.7 (SD 16.9) years, p = 0.004] and more likely to have history of myocardial infarction (41.0% vs. 21.6%, p = 0.0003) compared to those who had normal baseline and follow-up QTc. The frequency of prolonged QTc development was similar (12.4%) among male HCQ/CQ new users (> 450 ms). Prior to COVID-19, ECG testing before and after HCQ/CQ prescription was infrequent, particularly for females who are disproportionately affected by rheumatic diseases and were just as likely to develop prolonged QTc (> 1/10 new users). Prospective studies are needed to guide future management of HCQ/CQ therapy in rheumatic populations.

Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in the prevention of thromboembolic events: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the risk ratio (RR) of thromboembolic events in chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine users compared to non-users. METHODS: We systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs), using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception to the present, reporting thromboembolic events in chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine users compared to non-users. Four authors independently screened all the records obtained through our search strategy and later revised the selected full-text articles for eligibility, according to our inclusion criteria. The same four authors independently extracted relevant data through a customized data collection form while two other authors assessed the quality of the included RCTs using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (Version 2.0). All the disagreements were resolved through discussions among the authors. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and its respective standard error of developing thromboembolic events in hydroxychloroquine users and non-users for each individual study and pooled the results using a random effects model meta-analysis. We assessed Heterogeneity using the Tau2 and I2, and publication bias using funnel plotting and Egger's regression. The protocol for this systematic review is registered at the PROSPERO database (CRD42021247902). RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs met our eligibility criteria and were included in our analysis (2663 patients). We found that hydroxychloroquine-no study on chloroquine was found-reduced the risk of thromboembolic events by 49% (RR 0.51[IC 95% 0.31-0.84]) with a medium heterogeneity (I2 = 67% and T2 = 0.4948). We did find some asymmetry in the inspection of the funnel plot, which was ruled out through an Egger's regression (p-value = 0.1025). CONCLUSION: Our data reinforce the idea that hydroxychloroquine reduces the risk of thromboembolic events.

Safety profile of COVID-19 drugs in a real clinical setting.

PURPOSE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus has affected millions all over the world and has been declared pandemic, as of 11 March 2020. In addition to the ongoing research and development of vaccines, there is still a dire need for safe and effective drugs for the control and treatment against the SARS-CoV-2 virus infection. Numerous repurposed drugs are under clinical investigations whose reported adverse events can raise worries about their safety. The aim of this review is to illuminate the associated adverse events related to the drugs used in a real COVID-19 setting along with their relevant mechanism(s). METHOD: Through a literature search conducted on PubMed and Google Scholar database, various adverse events suspected to be induced by eight drugs, including dexamethasone, hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, remdesivir, favipiravir, lopinavir/ritonavir, ivermectin, and tocilizumab, administered in COVID-19 patients in clinical practice and studies were identified in 30 case reports, 3 case series, and 10 randomized clinical trials. RESULTS: Mild, moderate, or severe adverse events of numerous repurposed and investigational drugs caused by various factors and mechanisms were observed. Gastrointestinal side effects such as nausea, abdominal cramps, diarrhea, and vomiting were the most frequently followed by cardiovascular, cutaneous, and hepatic adverse events. Few other rare adverse drug reactions were also observed. CONCLUSION: In light of their ineffectiveness against COVID-19 as evident in large clinical studies, drugs including hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, and ivermectin should neither be used routinely nor in clinical studies. While lack of sufficient data, it creates doubt regarding the reliability of chloroquine and favipiravir use in COVID-19 patients. Hence, these two drugs can only be used in clinical studies. In contrast, ample well-conducted studies have approved the use of remdesivir, tocilizumab, and dexamethasone under certain conditions in COVID-19 patients. Consequently, it is significant to establish a strong surveillance system in order to monitor the proper safety and toxicity profile of the potential anti-COVID-19 drugs with good clinical outcomes.

Pathophysiological metabolic changes associated with disease modify the proarrhythmic risk profile of drugs with potential to prolong repolarisation.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine and azithromycin are three drugs that were proposed to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). While concern already existed around their proarrhythmic potential, there are little data regarding how altered physiological states encountered in patients such as febrile state, electrolyte imbalances or acidosis might change their risk profiles. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: Potency of human ether-à-go-go related gene (hERG) block was measured using high-throughput electrophysiology in the presence of variable environmental factors. These potencies informed simulations to predict population risk profiles. Effects on cardiac repolarisation were verified in human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes from multiple individuals. KEY RESULTS: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine blocked hERG with IC50 of 1.47 ± 0.07 and 3.78 ± 0.17 µM, respectively, indicating proarrhythmic risk at concentrations effective against severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronovirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro. Hypokalaemia and hypermagnesaemia increased potency of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, indicating increased proarrhythmic risk. Acidosis significantly reduced potency of all drugs, whereas increased temperature decreased potency of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine against hERG but increased potency for azithromycin. In silico simulations demonstrated that proarrhythmic risk was increased by female sex, hypokalaemia and heart failure and identified specific genetic backgrounds associated with emergence of arrhythmia. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Our study demonstrates how proarrhythmic risk can be exacerbated by metabolic changes and pre-existing disease. More broadly, the study acts as a blueprint for how high-throughput in vitro screening, combined with in silico simulations, can help guide both preclinical screening and clinical management of patients in relation to drugs with potential to prolong repolarisation.

G6PD distribution in sub-Saharan Africa and potential risks of using chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine based treatments for COVID-19.

Chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine have been proposed as potential treatments for COVID-19. These drugs have warning labels for use in individuals with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency. Analysis of whole genome sequence data of 458 individuals from sub-Saharan Africa showed significant G6PD variation across the continent. We identified nine variants, of which four are potentially deleterious to G6PD function, and one (rs1050828) that is known to cause G6PD deficiency. We supplemented data for the rs1050828 variant with genotype array data from over 11,000 Africans. Although this variant is common in Africans overall, large allele frequency differences exist between sub-populations. African sub-populations in the same country can show significant differences in allele frequency (e.g. 16.0% in Tsonga vs 0.8% in Xhosa, both in South Africa, p = 2.4 × 10-3). The high prevalence of variants in the G6PD gene found in this analysis suggests that it may be a significant interaction factor in clinical trials of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19 in Africans.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the safety of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine from randomized controlled trials on malarial and non-malarial conditions.

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.

Corrected QT interval in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019: Focus on drugs therapy.

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.

American College of Rheumatology White Paper on Antimalarial Cardiac Toxicity.

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) are well-established medications used in treating systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis, as well as skin conditions such as cutaneous lupus erythematosus. In rare cases, arrhythmias and conduction system abnormalities, as well as cardiomyopathy, have been reported in association with HCQ/CQ use. Recently, however, the corrected QT interval (QTc)-prolonging potential of these medications, and risk of torsade de pointes (TdP) in particular, have been highlighted in the setting of their experimental use for COVID-19 infection. This report was undertaken to summarize the current understanding of HCQ/CQ cardiac toxicity, describe QTc prolongation and TdP risks, and discuss areas of priority for future research. A working group of experts across rheumatology, cardiology, and dermatology performed a nonsystematic literature review and offered a consensus-based expert opinion. Current data clearly indicate that HCQ and CQ are invaluable medications in the management of rheumatic and dermatologic diseases, but they are associated with QTc prolongation by directly affecting cardiac repolarization. Prescribing clinicians should be cognizant of this small effect, especially in patients taking additional medications that prolong the QTc interval. Long-term use of HCQ/CQ may lead to a cardiomyopathy associated with arrhythmias and heart failure. Risk and benefit assessment should be considered prior to initiation of any medication, and both initial and ongoing risk-benefit assessments are important with regard to prescription of HCQ/CQ. While cardiac toxicity related to HCQ/CQ treatment of rheumatic diseases is rarely reported, it can be fatal. Awareness of the potential adverse cardiac effects of HCQ and CQ can increase the safe use of these medications. There is a clear need for additional research to allow better understanding of the cardiovascular risk and safety profile of these therapies used in the management of rheumatic and cutaneous diseases.

Safety profile of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine: a disproportionality analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System database.

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.

Effect of drug metabolism in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 from an entirely computational perspective.

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.

Review of Emerging Pharmacotherapy for the Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019.

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.