Acquired long QT syndrome due to antiemetics, COVID-19 and Blastocystis hominis induced exacerbation of congenital chloride losing diarrhoea.

Congenital chloride losing diarrhoea (CCLD) is a rare disease caused by mutations in an intestinal chloride/bicarbonate ion exchange channel. Few reports describe CCLD in adults and none has described the impact of a parasitic infection on CCLD. Severe diarrhoea may result in hypokalaemia with QT interval prolongation. Treatment with antiemetics may further increase the QT interval. To raise awareness of this preventable complication, we describe the course of a woman in her 20s with CCLD who developed COVID-19 and a Blastocystis hominis infestation. Treatment with antiemetics and hypokalaemia resulted in prolongation of the QT interval to 640 ms. While, the QT interval normalised with discontinuation of antiemetics and electrolyte replacement, patients with CCLD must take precautions to prevent gastrointestinal infections. Regardless, whenever patients with CCLD present to hospital, the authors recommend monitoring the QT interval and avoiding medications that predispose to torsade de pointes.

Two consecutive attacks of diarrhea in 15 COVID-19 patients: An antibiotic-associated one following the viral one.

Of the 971 patients admitted to our Clinic with suspected COVID-19, 15 (1.5%) presented with two consecutive attacks of diarrhea. One of those patients (a 47-year-old woman) required admission to the intensive care unit and mechanical ventilation. She died on the 11th day of hospitalization (18th day of illness). The first attack of diarrhea in those patients occurred on the 6th (4th-7th) day of disease and lasted 3 (3-5) days. The second attack of diarrhea developed 11 (8-12) days after the initial onset of diarrhea. Despite the existing trend, the difference in the duration of the diarrhea and the maximum number of bowel movements per day between the first and second attacks was not statistically significant (p = 0.130; p = 0.328). There was no significant difference between the patients with a double attack of diarrhea and those with no diarrhea, regarding the results of the complete blood count, biochemical blood tests, and inflammation biomarkers.

Reactogenicity and immunogenicity of heterologous prime-boost immunization with COVID-19 vaccine.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the present work was to assess the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of heterologous COVID-19 vaccination regimens in clinical trials and observational studies. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, MedRxiv, BioRxiv databases were searched in September 29, 2021. The PRISMA instruction for systemic review was followed. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted the data and assessed risk of bias. The quality of studies was evaluated using the New Castle-Ottawa and Cochrane risk of instrument. The characteristics and study outcome (e.g., adverse events, immune response, and variant of concern) were extracted. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included in the final data synthesis with 5 clinical trials and 14 observational studies. Heterologous vaccine administration showed a trend toward more frequent systemic reactions. However, the total reactogenicity was tolerable and manageable. Importantly, the heterologous prime-boost vaccination regimens provided higher immunogenic effect either vector/ mRNA-based vaccine or vector/ inactivated vaccine in both humoral and cellular immune response. Notably, the heterologous regimens induced the potential protection against the variant of concern, even to the Delta variant. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings provided evidence about the higher induction of robust immunogenicity and tolerated reactogenicity of heterologous vaccination regimens (vector-based/mRNA vaccine or vector-based/inactivated vaccine). Also, this study supports the application of heterologous regimens against COVID-19 which may provide more opportunities to speed up the global vaccination campaign and maximize the capacity to control the pandemic.

Off-Label Use of Hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19: Analysis of Reports of Suspected Adverse Reactions From the Italian National Network of Pharmacovigilance.

This study aimed to characterize adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to hydroxychloroquine in the setting of COVID-19, occurring in Italy in the period March to May 2020. The analysis of the combination therapy with azithromycin or/and lopinavir/ritonavir as well as a comparison with ADRs reported throughout 2019 was performed. ADRs collected by the Italian National Network of Pharmacovigilance were analyzed for their incidence, seriousness, outcome, coadministered drugs, and Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities classification. A total of 306 reports were gathered for the quarter of 2020: 54% nonserious and 46% serious, and half of the latter required either the hospitalization or its prolongation. However, most of them were either completely recovered (26%) or in the process of recovery (45%), except for 9 fatal cases. Throughout 2019, 38 reports were collected, 53% nonserious and 47% serious, but no deaths had been reported. Diarrhea, prolonged QT interval, and hypertransaminasemia were the most frequently ADRs reported in 2020, significantly higher than 2019 and specific for COVID-19 subjects treated with hydroxychloroquine. The logistic regression analyses demonstrated that the likelihood of serious ADRs, QT prolongation, and diarrhea significantly increased with hydroxychloroquine dosage. Coadministration of lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine showed a positive correlation with diarrhea and hypertransaminasemia and a negative relationship with the ADR seriousness. The combination therapy with azithromycin was another independent predictor of a serious ADR. Off-label use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19, alone or in combination regimens, was associated with increased incidence and/or seriousness of specific ADRs in patients with additional risk factors caused by the infection.

Early viral versus late antibiotic-associated diarrhea in novel coronavirus infection.

ABSTRACT: Diarrhea is one of the manifestations of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), but it also develops as a complication of massive antibiotic therapy in this disease. This study aimed to compare these types of diarrhea.We included patients with COVID-19 in a cohort study and excluded patients with chronic diarrhea, laxative use, and those who died during the first day of hospitalization.There were 89 (9.3%), 161 (16.7%), and 731 (75.7%) patients with early viral, late antibiotic-associated, and without diarrhea, respectively. Late diarrhea lasted longer (6 [4-10] vs 5 [3-7] days, P < .001) and was more severe. Clostridioides difficile was found in 70.5% of tested patients with late diarrhea and in none with early diarrhea. Presence of late diarrhea was associated with an increased risk of death after 20 days of disease (P = .009; hazard ratio = 4.7). Patients with late diarrhea had a longer hospital stay and total disease duration, and a higher proportion of these patients required intensive care unit admission. Oral amoxicillin/clavulanate (odds ratio [OR] = 2.23), oral clarithromycin (OR = 3.79), and glucocorticoids (OR = 4.41) use was a risk factor for the development of late diarrhea, while ceftriaxone use (OR = 0.35) had a protective effect. Before the development of late diarrhea, decrease in C-reactive protein levels and increase in lymphocyte count stopped but the white blood cell and neutrophil count increased. An increase in neutrophils by >0.6 × 109 cells/L predicted the development of late diarrhea in the coming days (sensitivity 82.0%, specificity 70.8%, area under the curve = 0.791 [0.710-0.872]).Diarrhea in COVID-19 is heterogeneous, and different types of diarrhea require different management.

Diarrhoea and preadmission antibiotic exposure in COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study of 1153 hospitalised patients.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to describe community antibiotic prescribing patterns in individuals hospitalised with COVID-19, and to determine the association between experiencing diarrhoea, stratified by preadmission exposure to antibiotics, and mortality risk in this cohort. DESIGN/METHODS: Retrospective study of the index presentations of 1153 adult patients with COVID-19, admitted between 1 March 2020 and 29 June 2020 in a South London NHS Trust. Data on patients' medical history (presence of diarrhoea, antibiotic use in the previous 14 days, comorbidities); demographics (age, ethnicity, and body mass index); and blood test results were extracted. Time to event modelling was used to determine the risk of mortality for patients with diarrhoea and/or exposure to antibiotics. RESULTS: 19.2% of the cohort reported diarrhoea on presentation; these patients tended to be younger, and were less likely to have recent exposure to antibiotics (unadjusted OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.97). 19.1% of the cohort had a course of antibiotics in the 2 weeks preceding admission; this was associated with dementia (unadjusted OR 2.92, 95% CI 1.14 to 7.49). After adjusting for confounders, neither diarrhoea nor recent antibiotic exposure was associated with increased mortality risk. However, the absence of diarrhoea in the presence of recent antibiotic exposure was associated with a 30% increased risk of mortality. CONCLUSION: Community antibiotic use in patients with COVID-19, prior to hospitalisation, is relatively common, and absence of diarrhoea in antibiotic-exposed patients may be associated with increased risk of mortality. However, it is unclear whether this represents a causal physiological relationship or residual confounding.

Add-on effect of Chinese herbal medicine in the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged as a global pandemic since its outbreak in Wuhan, China. It is an urgent task to prevent and treat COVID-19 effectively early. In China's experience combating the COVID-19 pandemic, Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) has played an indispensable role. A large number of epidemiological investigations have shown that mild to moderate COVID-19 accounts for the largest proportion of cases. It is of great importance to treat such COVID-19 cases, which can help control epidemic progression. Many trials have shown that CHM combined with conventional therapy in the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 was superior to conventional therapy alone. This review was designed to evaluate the add-on effect of CHM in the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19. METHODS: Eight electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Clinical Trials.gov website, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), Wanfang Database and China Biology Medicine (CBM) were searched from December 2019 to March 2021 without language restrictions. Two reviewers searched and selected studies, and extracted data according to inclusion and exclusion criteria independently. Cochrane Risk of Bias (ROB) tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the included RCTs. Review Manager 5.3.0 software was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Twelve eligible RCTs including 1393 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Our meta-analyses found that lung CT parameters [RR = 1.26, 95% CI (1.15, 1.38), P<0.00001] and the clinical cure rate [RR = 1.26, 95%CI (1.16, 1.38), P<0.00001] of CHM combined with conventional therapy in the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 were better than those of conventional therapy. The rate of conversion to severe cases [RR = 0.48, 95%CI (0.32, 0.73), P = 0.0005], TCM symptom score of fever [MD = -0.62, 95%CI (-0.79, -0.45), P<0.00001], cough cases [RR = 1.43, 95%CI (1.16, 1.75), P = 0.0006], TCM symptom score of cough[MD = -1.07, 95%CI (-1.29, -0.85), P<0.00001], TCM symptom score of fatigue[MD = -0.66, 95%CI (-1.05, -0.28), P = 0.0007], and CRP[MD = -5.46, 95%CI (-8.19, -2.72), P<0.0001] of combination therapy was significantly lower than that of conventional therapy. The WBC count was significantly higher than that of conventional therapy[MD = 0.38, 95%CI (0.31, 0.44), P<0.00001]. Our meta-analysis results were robust through sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION: Chinese herbal medicine combined with conventional therapy may be effective and safe in the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19. More high-quality RCTs are needed in the future.

Anti-IL-17 monoclonal antibodies in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19: A pilot study.

BACKGROUND: One of the main pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the severe course of COVID-19 is the hyper-inflammatory syndrome associated with progressive damage of lung tissue and multi-organ dysfunction. IL-17 has been suggested to be involved in hyper-inflammatory syndrome. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the IL-17 inhibitor netakimab in patients with severe COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN: In our retrospective case-control study we evaluated the efficacy of netakimab in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 outside the intensive care unit (ICU). Patients in the experimental group were treated with standard of care therapy and netakimab at a dose of 120 mg subcutaneously. RESULTS: 171 patients with severe COVID-19 were enrolled in our study, and 88 of them received netakimab. On the 3 day of therapy, body temperature, SpO2/FiO2, NEWS2 score, and CRP improved significantly in the netakimab group compared to the control group. Other clinical outcomes such as transfer to ICU (11.4% vs 9.6%), need for mechanical ventilation (10.2% vs 9.6%), 28-day mortality (10.2% vs 8.4%), did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: In hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19, anti-IL-17 therapy might mitigate the inflammatory response and improve oxygenation, but do not affect the need for mechanical ventilation and mortality.

High-Dose vs Standard-Dose Amoxicillin Plus Clavulanate for Adults With Acute Sinusitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Acute bacterial sinusitis is common, but currently recommended antibiotic treatment provides minimal benefit. Objective: To confirm the previous finding that high-dose amoxicillin plus clavulanate (with double the amount of amoxicillin) may be superior to standard-dose amoxicillin plus clavulanate in adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind, comparative-effectiveness randomized clinical trial was conducted from February 26, 2018, through May 10, 2020, at the academic primary care internal medicine and pediatrics practice of Albany Medical Center, located in Cohoes, New York. Participants included adults aged 18 years or older who were prescribed amoxicillin plus clavulanate for acute bacterial sinusitis diagnosed in accordance with the Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines. Interventions: Amoxicillin 875 mg with clavulanate 125 mg plus either placebo (standard dose) or amoxicillin 875 mg (high dose) twice a day for 7 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy outcome was a global rating of "a lot better" or "no symptoms" at the end of 3 days of treatment using a Global Rating of Improvement scale, with outcomes ranging from 1 (a lot worse) to 6 (no symptoms). The primary adverse effect outcome was severe diarrhea at 3 or 10 days after the start of treatment. Results: At an unplanned interim analysis prompted by COVID-19 restrictions, 157 of a projected 240 participants had been enrolled (mean age, 48.5 [range, 18.7-84.0] years; 117 women [74.5%]), with 79 randomized to the standard dose and 78 to the high dose; 9 and 12, respectively, withdrew or were lost to follow-up before the assessment of the primary outcome. At day 3, 31 of 70 participants (44.3%) in the standard-dose group reported a global rating of "a lot better" or "no symptoms," as did 24 of 66 (36.4%) in the high-dose group, for a difference of -7.9% (95% CI, -24.4% to 8.5%; P = .35). The study was, therefore, stopped for futility. Diarrhea was common in both groups by day 3, with any diarrhea reported in 29 of 71 participants (40.8%) receiving the standard dose and 28 of 65 (43.1%) receiving the high dose and severe diarrhea reported in 5 of 71 (7.0%) and 5 of 65 (7.7%), respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this randomized clinical trial suggest that adults treated for clinically diagnosed acute sinusitis did not appear to benefit from taking high-dose compared with standard-dose amoxicillin plus clavulanate. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03431337.

Once-Weekly Semaglutide in Adults with Overweight or Obesity.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a global health challenge with few pharmacologic options. Whether adults with obesity can achieve weight loss with once-weekly semaglutide at a dose of 2.4 mg as an adjunct to lifestyle intervention has not been confirmed. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we enrolled 1961 adults with a body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) of 30 or greater (≥27 in persons with ≥1 weight-related coexisting condition), who did not have diabetes, and randomly assigned them, in a 2:1 ratio, to 68 weeks of treatment with once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide (at a dose of 2.4 mg) or placebo, plus lifestyle intervention. The coprimary end points were the percentage change in body weight and weight reduction of at least 5%. The primary estimand (a precise description of the treatment effect reflecting the objective of the clinical trial) assessed effects regardless of treatment discontinuation or rescue interventions. RESULTS: The mean change in body weight from baseline to week 68 was -14.9% in the semaglutide group as compared with -2.4% with placebo, for an estimated treatment difference of -12.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -13.4 to -11.5; P<0.001). More participants in the semaglutide group than in the placebo group achieved weight reductions of 5% or more (1047 participants [86.4%] vs. 182 [31.5%]), 10% or more (838 [69.1%] vs. 69 [12.0%]), and 15% or more (612 [50.5%] vs. 28 [4.9%]) at week 68 (P<0.001 for all three comparisons of odds). The change in body weight from baseline to week 68 was -15.3 kg in the semaglutide group as compared with -2.6 kg in the placebo group (estimated treatment difference, -12.7 kg; 95% CI, -13.7 to -11.7). Participants who received semaglutide had a greater improvement with respect to cardiometabolic risk factors and a greater increase in participant-reported physical functioning from baseline than those who received placebo. Nausea and diarrhea were the most common adverse events with semaglutide; they were typically transient and mild-to-moderate in severity and subsided with time. More participants in the semaglutide group than in the placebo group discontinued treatment owing to gastrointestinal events (59 [4.5%] vs. 5 [0.8%]). CONCLUSIONS: In participants with overweight or obesity, 2.4 mg of semaglutide once weekly plus lifestyle intervention was associated with sustained, clinically relevant reduction in body weight. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; STEP 1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03548935).

Sex Differences in Reported Adverse Drug Reactions to COVID-19 Drugs in a Global Database of Individual Case Safety Reports.

INTRODUCTION: In late 2019, a new coronavirus-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-was discovered in Wuhan, China, and the World Health Organization later declared coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) a pandemic. Numerous drugs have been repurposed and investigated for therapeutic effectiveness in the disease, including those from "Solidarity," an international clinical trial (azithromycin, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, the fixed combination lopinavir/ritonavir, and remdesivir). OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to evaluate adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting for drugs when used in the treatment of COVID-19 compared with use for other indications, specifically focussing on sex differences. METHOD: We extracted reports on COVID-19-specific treatments from the global ADR database, VigiBase, using an algorithm developed to identify reports that listed COVID-19 as the indication. The Solidarity trial drugs were included, as were any drugs reported ≥ 100 times. We performed a descriptive comparison of reports for the same drugs used in non-COVID-19 indications. The data lock point date was 7 June 2020. RESULTS: In total, 2573 reports were identified for drugs used in the treatment of COVID-19. In order of frequency, the most reported ADRs were electrocardiogram QT-prolonged, diarrhoea, nausea, hepatitis, and vomiting in males and diarrhoea, electrocardiogram QT-prolonged, nausea, vomiting, and upper abdominal pain in females. Other hepatic and kidney-related events were included in the top ten ADRs in males, whereas no hepatic or renal terms were reported for females. COVID-19-related reporting patterns differed from non-pandemic reporting for these drugs. CONCLUSION: Review of a global database of suspected ADR reports revealed sex differences in the reporting patterns for drugs used in the treatment of COVID-19. Patterns of ADR sex differences need further elucidation.

Beneficial effects of colchicine for moderate to severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the addition of colchicine to standard treatment for COVID-19 results in better outcomes. DESIGN: We present the results of a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial of colchicine for the treatment of moderate to severe COVID-19, with 75 patients allocated 1:1 from 11 April to 30 August 2020. Colchicine regimen was 0.5 mg thrice daily for 5 days, then 0.5 mg twice daily for 5 days. The primary endpoints were the need for supplemental oxygen, time of hospitalisation, need for admission and length of stay in intensive care unit and death rate. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients (36 for placebo and 36 for colchicine) completed the study. Median (and IQR) time of need for supplemental oxygen was 4.0 (2.0-6.0) days for the colchicine group and 6.5 (4.0-9.0) days for the placebo group (p<0.001). Median (IQR) time of hospitalisation was 7.0 (5.0-9.0) days for the colchicine group and 9.0 (7.0-12.0) days for the placebo group (p=0.003). At day 2, 67% versus 86% of patients maintained the need for supplemental oxygen, while at day 7, the values were 9% versus 42%, in the colchicine and the placebo groups, respectively (log rank; p=0.001). Two patients died, both in placebo group. Diarrhoea was more frequent in the colchicine group (p=0.26). CONCLUSION: Colchicine reduced the length of both, supplemental oxygen therapy and hospitalisation. The drug was safe and well tolerated. Once death was an uncommon event, it is not possible to ensure that colchicine reduced mortality of COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: RBR-8jyhxh.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in pediatric emergency. Presentation and disposition.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the demographics and common presentations of pediatric coronavirus disease 2019  patients in the emergency department (ED), as well as their contact with positive COVID-19 cases, return visits, and patients' disposition from the ED. Methods: A retrospective chart review of confirmed cases of COVID-19 presenting to the Pediatric ED from March 2020 until June 2020 was conducted. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were identified, with a higher frequency of male patients. Forty-four (85%) patients were discharged from the ED, and 8 (15%) required admission. Three patients were admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit and 2 died, resulting in a mortality rate of 3.8%. The most frequent presentations were fever (85%), cough (48%), and diarrhea (23%). Conclusion:  In our study, the second most affected system after the respiratory tract was the gastrointestinal tract, which was also the system responsible for the most return visits due to diarrhea. Coronavirus disease 2019 poses clinical and operational challenges given its variable clinical presentations.

Effect of Colchicine vs Standard Care on Cardiac and Inflammatory Biomarkers and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019: The GRECCO-19 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection has evolved into a global pandemic. Low-dose colchicine combines anti-inflammatory action with a favorable safety profile. Objective: To evaluate the effect of treatment with colchicine on cardiac and inflammatory biomarkers and clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Design, Setting, and Participants: In this prospective, open-label, randomized clinical trial (the Greek Study in the Effects of Colchicine in COVID-19 Complications Prevention), 105 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were randomized in a 1:1 allocation from April 3 to April 27, 2020, to either standard medical treatment or colchicine with standard medical treatment. The study took place in 16 tertiary hospitals in Greece. Intervention: Colchicine administration (1.5-mg loading dose followed by 0.5 mg after 60 min and maintenance doses of 0.5 mg twice daily) with standard medical treatment for as long as 3 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end points were (1) maximum high-sensitivity cardiac troponin level; (2) time for C-reactive protein to reach more than 3 times the upper reference limit; and (3) time to deterioration by 2 points on a 7-grade clinical status scale, ranging from able to resume normal activities to death. Secondary end points were (1) the percentage of participants requiring mechanical ventilation, (2) all-cause mortality, and (3) number, type, severity, and seriousness of adverse events. The primary efficacy analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. Results: A total of 105 patients were evaluated (61 [58.1%] men; median [interquartile range] age, 64 [54-76] years) with 50 (47.6%) randomized to the control group and 55 (52.4%) to the colchicine group. Median (interquartile range) peak high-sensitivity cardiac troponin values were 0.0112 (0.0043-0.0093) ng/mL in the control group and 0.008 (0.004-0.0135) ng/mL in the colchicine group (P = .34). Median (interquartile range) maximum C-reactive protein levels were 4.5 (1.4-8.9) mg/dL vs 3.1 (0.8-9.8) mg/dL (P = .73), respectively. The clinical primary end point rate was 14.0% in the control group (7 of 50 patients) and 1.8% in the colchicine group (1 of 55 patients) (odds ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.01-0.96; P = .02). Mean (SD) event-free survival time was 18.6 (0.83) days the in the control group vs 20.7 (0.31) in the colchicine group (log rank P = .03). Adverse events were similar in the 2 groups, except for diarrhea, which was more frequent with colchicine group than the control group (25 patients [45.5%] vs 9 patients [18.0%]; P = .003). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, participants who received colchicine had statistically significantly improved time to clinical deterioration. There were no significant differences in high-sensitivity cardiac troponin or C-reactive protein levels. These findings should be interpreted with caution. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04326790.