Early experimental COVID-19 therapies: associations with length of hospital stay, mortality and related costs.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: Hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir have been used as experimental therapies to treat COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic. Randomised controlled trials have recently shown that there are no meaningful benefits of these two therapies in hospitalised patients. Uncertainty remains regarding the potential harmful impact of these therapies as very early treatments and their burden to the health care system. The present study investigated the length of hospital stay (LOS), mortality, and costs of hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir or their combination in comparison with standard of care among patients hospitalised for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study took place in the Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland (n = 840) between 26 February and 31 May 2020. Demographics, treatment regimens, comorbidities, the modified National Early Warning Score (mNEWS) on admission, and contraindications to COVID-19 treatment options were assessed. Outcomes included LOS, in-hospital mortality, and drug and LOS costs. RESULTS: After successful propensity score matching, patients treated with (1) hydroxychloroquine, (2) lopinavir/ritonavir or (3) their combination had on average 3.75 additional hospitalisation days (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.37–6.12, p = 0.002), 1.23 additional hospitalisation days (95% CI −1.24 – 3.51, p = 0.319), and 4.19 additional hospitalisation days (95% CI 1.52–5.31, p <0.001), respectively, compared with patients treated with the standard of care. Neither experimental therapy was significantly associated with mortality. These additional hospital days amounted to 1010.77 additional days for hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine combined with lopinavir/ritonavir, resulting in an additional cost of US$ 2,492,214 (95%CI US$ 916,839–3,450,619). CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing experimental therapies for COVID-19 was not associated with a reduced LOS and might have increased the pressure put on healthcare systems.

COVID-19 in solid organ transplant recipients: A single-center case series from Spain.

The clinical characteristics, management, and outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) after solid organ transplant (SOT) remain unknown. We report our preliminary experience with 18 SOT (kidney [44.4%], liver [33.3%], and heart [22.2%]) recipients diagnosed with COVID-19 by March 23, 2020 at a tertiary-care center at Madrid. Median age at diagnosis was 71.0 ± 12.8 years, and the median interval since transplantation was 9.3 years. Fever (83.3%) and radiographic abnormalities in form of unilateral or bilateral/multifocal consolidations (72.2%) were the most common presentations. Lopinavir/ritonavir (usually associated with hydroxychloroquine) was used in 50.0% of patients and had to be prematurely discontinued in 2 of them. Other antiviral regimens included hydroxychloroquine monotherapy (27.8%) and interferon-ß (16.7%). As of April 4, the case-fatality rate was 27.8% (5/18). After a median follow-up of 18 days from symptom onset, 30.8% (4/13) of survivors developed progressive respiratory failure, 7.7% (1/13) showed stable clinical condition or improvement, and 61.5% (8/13) had been discharged home. C-reactive protein levels at various points were significantly higher among recipients who experienced unfavorable outcome. In conclusion, this frontline report suggests that SARS-CoV-2 infection has a severe course in SOT recipients.

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.

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of COVID-19 in Turkish Patients with Hematological Malignancies

Objective: Patients with solid malignancies are more vulnerable to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection than the healthy population. The outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection in highly immunosuppressed populations, such as in patients with hematological malignancies, is a point of interest. We aimed to analyze the symptoms, complications, intensive care unit admissions, and mortality rates of patients with hematological malignancies infected with SARS-CoV-2 in Turkey. Materials and Methods: In this multicenter study, we included 340 adult and pediatric patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 from March to November 2020. Diagnosis and status of primary disease, treatment schedules for hematological malignancies, time from last treatment, life expectancy related to the hematological disease, and comorbidities were recorded, together with data regarding symptoms, treatment, and outcome of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results: Forty four patients were asymptomatic at diagnosis of SARS-CoV- 2 infection. Among symptomatic patients, fever, cough, and dyspnea were observed in 62.6%, 48.8%, and 41.8%, respectively. Sixty-nine (20%) patients had mild SARS-CoV-2 disease, whereas moderate, severe, and critical disease was reported in 101 (29%), 71 (20%), and 55 (16%) patients, respectively. Of the entire cohort, 251 (73.8%) patients were hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2. Mortality related to SARS-CoV-2 infection was 26.5% in the entire cohort; this comprised 4.4% of those patients with mild disease, 12.4% of those with moderate disease, and 83% of those with severe or critical disease. Active hematological disease, lower life expectancy related to primary hematological disease, neutropenia at diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, ICU admission, and first-line therapy used for coronavirus disease-2019 treatment were found to be related to higher mortality rates. Treatments with hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin were associated with a higher rate of mortality in comparison to favipiravir use. Conclusion: Patients with hematological malignancy infected with SARS-CoV-2 have an increased risk of severe disease and mortality.

Pulmonary Delivery of Aerosolized Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine to Treat COVID-19: In Vitro Experimentation to Human Dosing Predictions.

In vitro screening for pharmacological activity of existing drugs showed chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine to be effective against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Oral administration of these compounds to obtain desired pulmonary exposures resulted in dose-limiting systemic toxicity in humans. However, pulmonary drug delivery enables direct and rapid administration to obtain higher local tissue concentrations in target tissue. In this work, inhalable formulations for thermal aerosolization of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine were developed, and their physicochemical properties were characterized. Thermal aerosolization of 40 mg/mL chloroquine and 100 mg/mL hydroxychloroquine formulations delivered respirable aerosol particle sizes with 0.15 and 0.33 mg per 55 mL puff, respectively. In vitro toxicity was evaluated by exposing primary human bronchial epithelial cells to aerosol generated from Vitrocell. An in vitro exposure to 7.24 µg of chloroquine or 7.99 µg hydroxychloroquine showed no significant changes in cilia beating, transepithelial electrical resistance, and cell viability. The pharmacokinetics of inhaled aerosols was predicted by developing a physiologically based pharmacokinetic model that included a detailed species-specific respiratory tract physiology and lysosomal trapping. Based on the model predictions, inhaling emitted doses comprising 1.5 mg of chloroquine or 3.3 mg hydroxychloroquine three times a day may yield therapeutically effective concentrations in the lung. Inhalation of higher doses further increased effective concentrations in the lung while maintaining lower systemic concentrations. Given the theoretically favorable risk/benefit ratio, the clinical significance for pulmonary delivery of aerosolized chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 needs to be established in rigorous safety and efficacy studies. Graphical abstract.

Translational Modeling of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine Dosimetry in Human Airways for Treating Viral Respiratory Infections.

PURPOSE: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are effective against respiratory viruses in vitro. However, they lack antiviral efficacy upon oral administration. Translation of in vitro to in vivo exposure is necessary for understanding the disconnect between the two to develop effective therapeutic strategies. METHODS: We employed an in vitro ion-trapping kinetic model to predict the changes in the cytosolic and lysosomal concentrations of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in cell lines and primary human airway cultures. A physiologically based pharmacokinetic model with detailed respiratory physiology was used to predict regional airway exposure and optimize dosing regimens. RESULTS: At their reported in vitro effective concentrations in cell lines, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine cause a significant increase in their cytosolic and lysosomal concentrations by altering the lysosomal pH. Higher concentrations of the compounds are required to achieve similar levels of cytosolic and lysosomal changes in primary human airway cells in vitro. The predicted cellular and lysosomal concentrations in the respiratory tract for in vivo oral doses are lower than the in vitro effective levels. Pulmonary administration of aerosolized chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine is predicted to achieve high bound in vitro-effective concentrations in the respiratory tract, with low systemic exposure. Achieving effective cytosolic concentrations for activating immunomodulatory effects and adequate lysosomal levels for inhibiting viral replication could be key drivers for treating viral respiratory infections. CONCLUSION: Our analysis provides a framework for extrapolating in vitro effective concentrations of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine to in vivo dosing regimens for treating viral respiratory infections.

Hydroxychloroquine pre-exposure prophylaxis provides no protection against COVID-19 among health care workers: a cross-sectional study in a tertiary care hospital in North India.

OBJECTIVES: The use of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) prophylaxis has been recommended by the National task force constituted by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) for the prevention of corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among healthcare workers (HCWs). However, this recommendation was based essentially on the preclinical data and limited clinical experience. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of HCQ as a pre-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19 infection among Indian HCWs. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among HCWs of a tertiary care hospital in north India. The HCQ prophylaxis was initiated among 996 HCWs and they were followed up to 8 weeks for conversion to COVID-19 positive status and any adverse drug reaction (ADR). RESULTS: About 10.3% of the study participants were tested positive for COVID-19 which was comparable to the positivity rate among HCWs not taking HCQ prophylaxis (9.7%). CONCLUSIONS: HCQ was well tolerated at a weekly dose of 400 mg for 8 weeks but provided no additional benefit in prevention of COVID-19 among HCWs.

[Chronic inflammatory bowel diseases: what happens when SARS-CoV-2 occurs? Preliminary results from a study conducted at the Hassan II University Teaching Hospital in Fes, Morocco (a case report)]. / Les maladies inflammatoires chroniques de l'intestin: que se passe-t-il quand le SARS-CoV-2 arrive? Résultats préliminaires du Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Hassan II de Fès, Maroc (à propos d'un cas).

SARS-CoV-2 infection is a major concern and a new threat to immunocompromised patients. Patients with chronic inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are at increased risk of infections, in particular when they have active disease and are on immunosuppressive treatment. The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical, biological and radiological features of three patients with COVID-19 associated with chronic IBD as well as their management and outcomes. The study was conducted at the Hassan II University Teaching Hospital in Fes, Morocco over a 3-month period. We assessed all patients with disease onset. All patients had mild symptoms or were asymptomatic. No changes or delays in treatment regimens occurred and none of patients developed severe COVID-19. Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test results were positive in all patients. Radiological examinations were conducted. Chest scanner showed ground-glass opacities in one case. Treatment was based on hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin. Outcome was good in all cases. This preliminary report suggests that patients with chronic IBD aren't at higher risk of developing COVID-19 compared to the general population.

Comparing the effectiveness of Atazanavir/Ritonavir/Dolutegravir/Hydroxychloroquine and Lopinavir/Ritonavir/Hydroxychloroquine treatment regimens in COVID-19 patients.

The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of Atazanavir/Ritonavir/Dolutegravir/Hydroxychloroquine and Lopinavir/Ritonavir/Hydroxychloroquine treatment regimens in COVID-19 patients based on clinical and laboratory parameters. We prospectively evaluated the clinical and laboratory outcomes of 62 moderate to severe COVID-19 patients during a 10-day treatment plan. Patients were randomly assigned to either KH (receiving Lopinavir/Ritonavir [Kaletra] plus Hydroxychloroquine) or ADH (receiving Atazanavir/Ritonavir, Dolutegravir, and Hydroxychloroquine) groups. During this period, clinical and laboratory parameters and outcomes such as intensive care unit (ICU) admission or mortality rate were recorded. Compared to the KH group, after the treatment period, patients in the ADH group had higher activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) (12, [95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.97, 17.06), p = <0.01), international normalized ratio (INR) (0.17, [95% CI: 0.07, 0.27), p = <0.01) and lower C-reactive protein (CRP) (-14.29, (95% CI: -26.87, -1.71), p = 0.03) and potassium (-0.53, (95% CI: -1.03, -0.03), p = 0.04) values. Moreover, a higher number of patients in the KH group needed invasive ventilation (6 (20%) vs. 1 (3.1%), p = 0.05) and antibiotic administration (27 (90%) vs. 21(65.6), p = 0.02) during hospitalization while patients in the ADH group needed more corticosteroid administration (9 (28.1%) vs. 2 (6.7%), p = 0.03). There was no difference in mortality rate, ICU admission rate, and hospitalization period between the study groups. Our results suggest that the Atazanavir/Dolutegravir treatment regimen may result in a less severe disease course compared to the Lopinavir/Ritonavir treatment regimen and can be considered as an alternative treatment option beside standard care. However, to confirm our results, larger-scale studies are recommended.

Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin used alone or combined are not effective against SARS-CoV-2 ex vivo and in a hamster model.

Drug repositioning has been used extensively since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in an attempt to identify antiviral molecules for use in human therapeutics. Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin have shown inhibitory activity against SARS-CoV-2 replication in different cell lines. Based on such in vitro data and despite the weakness of preclinical assessment, many clinical trials were set up using these molecules. In the present study, we show that hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin alone or combined does not block SARS-CoV-2 replication in human bronchial airway epithelia. When tested in a Syrian hamster model, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin administrated alone or combined displayed no significant effect on viral replication, clinical course of the disease and lung impairments, even at high doses. Hydroxychloroquine quantification in lung tissues confirmed strong exposure to the drug, above in vitro inhibitory concentrations. Overall, this study does not support the use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as antiviral drugs for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Urgent Guidance for Navigating and Circumventing the QTc-Prolonging and Torsadogenic Potential of Possible Pharmacotherapies for Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19).

As the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) global pandemic rages across the globe, the race to prevent and treat this deadly disease has led to the "off-label" repurposing of drugs such as hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir, which have the potential for unwanted QT-interval prolongation and a risk of drug-induced sudden cardiac death. With the possibility that a considerable proportion of the world's population soon could receive COVID-19 pharmacotherapies with torsadogenic potential for therapy or postexposure prophylaxis, this document serves to help health care professionals mitigate the risk of drug-induced ventricular arrhythmias while minimizing risk of COVID-19 exposure to personnel and conserving the limited supply of personal protective equipment.

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.

Safety and efficacy of Favipiravir in moderate to severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: We examined the safety and efficacy of a treatment protocol containing Favipiravir for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We did a multicenter randomized open-labeled clinical trial on moderate to severe cases infections of SARS-CoV-2. Patients with typical ground glass appearance on chest computerized tomography scan (CT scan) and oxygen saturation (SpO2) of less than 93% were enrolled. They were randomly allocated into Favipiravir (1.6 gr loading, 1.8 gr daily) and Lopinavir/Ritonavir (800/200 mg daily) treatment regimens in addition to standard care. In-hospital mortality, ICU admission, intubation, time to clinical recovery, changes in daily SpO2 after 5 min discontinuation of supplemental oxygen, and length of hospital stay were quantified and compared in the two groups. RESULTS: 380 patients were randomly allocated into Favipiravir (193) and Lopinavir/Ritonavir (187) groups in 13 centers. The number of deaths, intubations, and ICU admissions were not significantly different (26, 27, 31 and 21, 17, 25 respectively). Mean hospital stay was also not different (7.9 days [SD = 6] in the Favipiravir and 8.1 [SD = 6.5] days in Lopinavir/Ritonavir groups) (p = 0.61). Time to clinical recovery in the Favipiravir group was similar to Lopinavir/Ritonavir group (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.75 - 1.17) and likewise the changes in the daily SpO2 after discontinuation of supplemental oxygen (p = 0.46) CONCLUSION: Adding Favipiravir to the treatment protocol did not reduce the number of ICU admissions or intubations or In-hospital mortality compared to Lopinavir/Ritonavir regimen. It also did not shorten time to clinical recovery and length of hospital stay.