Evaluation of Strategies to Improve Uptake of Expedited Partner Therapy for Chlamydia trachomatis Treatment in Minnesota: A Decision Analytic Model.

Background. Despite the established effectiveness of expedited partner therapy (EPT) in partner treatment of bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STI), the practice is underutilized. Objective. To estimate the relative effectiveness of strategies to increase EPT uptake (numbers of partners treated for chlamydia). Methods. We developed a care cascade model of cumulative probabilities to estimate the number of partners treated under strategies to increase EPT uptake in Minnesota. The care cascade model used data from clinical trials, population-based studies, and Minnesota chlamydia surveillance as well as in-depth interviews of health providers who regularly treat STI patients and a statewide survey of health providers across Minnesota. Results. Several strategies could improve EPT uptake among providers, including facilitating treatment payment (additional 1,932 partners treated) and implementing electronic health record reminders (additional 1,755 partners treated). Addressing concerns about liability would have the greatest effect, resulting in 2,187 additional partners treated. Conclusions. Providers expressed openness to offering EPT under several scenarios, which reflect differences in knowledge about EPT, its legality, and potential risks to patients. While addressing concerns about provider liability would have the greatest effect on number of partners treated, provider education and procedural changes could make a substantial impact. Highlights: Addressing provider concerns about expedited partner therapy (EPT) legality and its potential risks would result in the most partners treated for chlamydia.EPT alerts and electronic EPT prescriptions may also streamline partner treatment.Provider education about the legality of EPT and its potential risks and training in counseling patients on EPT could also increase uptake.

Recurrence of Symptoms Following Cryptococcal Meningitis: Characterizing a Diagnostic Conundrum With Multiple Etiologies.

BACKGROUND: Cryptococcal meningitis is a common cause of AIDS-related mortality. Although symptom recurrence after initial treatment is common, the etiology is often difficult to decipher. We sought to summarize characteristics, etiologies, and outcomes among persons with second-episode symptomatic recurrence. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled Ugandans with cryptococcal meningitis and obtained patient characteristics, antiretroviral therapy (ART) and cryptococcosis histories, clinical outcomes, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis results. We independently adjudicated cases of second-episode meningitis to categorize patients as (1) microbiological relapse, (2) paradoxical immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS), (3) persistent elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) only, or (4) persistent symptoms only, along with controls of primary cryptococcal meningitis. We compared groups with chi-square or Kruskal-Wallis tests as appropriate. RESULTS: 724 participants were included (n = 607 primary episode, 81 relapse, 28 paradoxical IRIS, 2 persistently elevated ICP, 6 persistent symptoms). Participants with culture-positive relapse had lower CD4 (25 cells/µL; IQR: 9-76) and lower CSF white blood cell (WBC; 4 cells/µL; IQR: 4-85) counts than paradoxical IRIS (CD4: 78 cells/µL; IQR: 47-142; WBC: 45 cells/µL; IQR: 8-128). Among those with CSF WBC <5 cells/µL, 86% (43/50) had relapse. Among those with CD4 counts <50 cells/µL, 91% (39/43) had relapse. Eighteen-week mortality (from current symptom onset) was 47% among first episodes of cryptococcal meningitis, 31% in culture-positive relapses, and 14% in paradoxical IRIS. CONCLUSIONS: Poor immune reconstitution was noted more often in relapse than IRIS as evidenced by lower CSF WBC and blood CD4 counts. These easily obtained laboratory values should prompt initiation of antifungal treatment while awaiting culture results. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01802385.

Differences in Reasons for Late Presentation to HIV Care in Uganda Among Men and Women.

Late presentation to HIV care, i.e., presenting with < 200 CD4 cells/mL, is associated with higher mortality and worse outcomes. Despite that, a quarter of people living with HIV in Uganda still present late to care. We surveyed Ugandans living with HIV who enrolled in clinic ≤ 90 days prior. We compared groups who presented 'late' with CD4 < 200 and 'early' with CD4 > 350, stratifying by sex. We found men who presented late had higher externalized stigma than early presenters. Thirty-six percent of the entire cohort were depressed. Social support was stronger in late presenters versus early, although weak overall. Social support was inversely correlated with depression, with social support dropping as depression increased. Interventions to improve clinic privacy, reduce stigma, improve social support, and help women disclose their HIV status to male partners are needed to reduce late presentation to HIV care.

A Statewide Mixed-Methods Study of Provider Knowledge and Behavior Administering Expedited Partner Therapy for Chlamydia and Gonorrhea.

BACKGROUND: Expedited partner therapy (EPT) refers to the practice of having patients diagnosed with chlamydia or gonorrhea deliver medication directly to their partner(s) to treat them presumptively for infection. Although EPT facilitates timely treatment and prevents reinfection, it remains underused. We used findings from key informant interviews to design and implement a statewide survey to estimate knowledge and utilization of EPT and to identify barriers and facilitators to EPT among Minnesota providers. METHODS: From November to December 2020, we carried out 15 interviews with health providers who currently provide EPT and coded interviews by recurring themes. We then conducted a statewide online survey on sexually transmitted infection treatment and barriers to EPT, from December 2020 to March 2021. We disseminated the survey to all licensed Minnesota health providers, and those who reported treating bacterial sexually transmitted infections in the past year were included in the study. RESULTS: Interview themes included the importance of direct provision of partner medication, administrative/pharmacy barriers to treatment, inclusive EPT eligibility, and patient counseling. Of the 623 health providers who completed the online survey, only 70% thought EPT was legal and only 37% currently offer EPT. Of those who did not provide EPT, 78% said they would under certain circumstances. Barriers included concerns about safety/liability of prescribing without a medical examination, administrative concerns about prescriptions, and patient acceptance. CONCLUSIONS: Given that over a quarter of respondents did not know expedited partner therapy (EPT)'s legal status, improving provider education may increase EPT provision. More research is needed on system-level barriers and patient acceptance of solutions identified in this study.

Systematic review of sex differences in the relationship between hormones and depression in HIV.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder is the most common neuropsychiatric comorbidity of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and women are more frequently affected in the general population and among those with HIV. The rate of depression in HIV is three times higher than the general population. Differences in biomarkers in neuroendocrine and inflammatory pathways are one possible explanation for the increased prevalence of depression in individuals with HIV, especially biological women. Therefore, we aimed to perform a systematic review identifying differences in neuroendocrine factors leading to depression in men versus women with HIV. METHODS: A comprehensive search of 8 databases was performed, followed by title and abstract screening and later full-text screening by two independent researchers. A risk of bias assessment was completed. RESULTS: Twenty-six full-text articles were included in the review. Significant correlations between depression and neuroendocrine marker levels were found for cortisol (both sexes), testosterone (only in men), oxytocin (only tested in women), and estradiol (only in women). No significant correlation between depression and hormone level was found for prolactin, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEAS), or sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG). Nearly all studies included only men or women and did not directly compare neuroendocrine markers between the two sexes. One study found that the correlation between cortisol levels and depression scores was stronger in women than men. CONCLUSION: Neuroendocrine systems are highly active in the brain and important in the development and persistence of mental illness. Given that HIV can, directly and indirectly, impact hormone signaling, it is likely contributing to the high rate of depression in individuals with HIV. However, few studies explore neuroactive hormones in depression and HIV, nor how this connection may differ between the sexes. More high-quality research is needed in this area to explore the link further and inform possible avenues of treatment.

Barriers to HIV care in Uganda and implications for universal test-and-treat: a qualitative study.

Achieving universal HIV test-and-treat will require targeted interventions for those with worse outcomes, including advanced HIV. We conducted qualitative, semi-structured interviews with healthcare workers (HCWs) and people living with HIV (PLWH) at 5 HIV clinics in Kampala, Uganda, to understand barriers to care. PLWH enrolled started/restarted on HIV treatment ≤3 months prior. PLWH were grouped as 1) "ART-experienced" or those restarted therapy after ≥12 months off, 2) ART naïve CD4 count <100 cells/uL "late presenters" or 3) ART naïve CD4 count >350 cells/uL "early presenters". In-depth interviews were conducted in Luganda, translated, and transcribed verbatim. Between May and August 2017, 58 PLWH and 20 HCWs were interviewed. High stigma and low social support emerged as themes among all as barriers to care. Alcohol abuse was a barrier for men. Fear of domestic violence and abandonment were barriers for women, limiting disclosure of their HIV status to their male partners. Clinic factors such as rapport with staff, distance, efficiency, and privacy impacted care. Future interventions to decrease delayed ART initiation should target stigma and social support. Assisted disclosure, contact tracing, and alcohol abuse treatment should be implemented. Strengthening client support, reducing wait times, and increasing privacy assurances would improve care-seeking behaviors.

Short Communication: A Descriptive Analysis of Dried Blood Spot Adherence Testing Among Ugandans with HIV Presenting with Cryptococcal Meningitis.

Early antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation after cryptococcal meningitis increases mortality, and those unmasking cryptococcosis after <2 weeks of ART have higher mortality. However, it is unknown if those presenting as ART experienced are actually adherent to their ART. Unknowingly, restarting ART in persons, who have discontinued ART, may be a fatal iatrogenic error. To evaluate ART adherence in an exploratory analysis, we collected dried blood spots on 44 HIV-infected persons presenting with cryptococcal meningitis. We quantified tenofovir diphosphate (TFV-DP) and lamivudine (3TC) from dried blood spots. We quantified cumulative ART adherence over the preceding 6-8 weeks based on TFV-DP concentrations and adherence over the last few days based on 3TC concentrations. Of 22 ART experienced, 20 (91%) had quantifiable concentrations. Of 18 receiving tenofovir, 15 (83%) had TFV-DP consistent with drug intake of ≥4 doses/week or moderate adherence. With 3TC, 72% (18/22) had detectable levels consistent with adherence over the last 3 days before measurement. Only three ART-experienced subjects were alive and virally suppressed at 4 months (n = 2 on ART for <30 days; n = 1 with undetectable antiretrovirals). Surprisingly, of 22 who reported not receiving ART, 4 (18%) had quantifiable tenofovir. Most ART-experienced subjects were taking their ART with moderate to good adherence with the majority likely having viral resistance given generally at good ART levels, receipt of intensive adherence counseling, and lack of subsequent viral suppression. The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines recommend adherence counseling with ART continuation and repeat viral loads in 1-3 months before switching to second-line ART. These recommendations are likely inappropriate in those with central nervous system infections given the additional possible harm of central nervous system immune reconstitution syndrome. Further study to evaluate continuation of ART regimens when presenting with cryptococcosis has benefit, with checking blood levels at presentation potentially being a helpful option. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01802385.

Lessons Learned From Conducting Internet-Based Randomized Clinical Trials During a Global Pandemic.

As the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic evolved, it was apparent that well designed and rapidly conducted randomized clinical trials were urgently needed. However, traditional clinical trial design presented several challenges. Notably, disease prevalence initially varied by time and region, and the pockets of outbreaks evolved geographically over time. Coupled with an occupational hazard from in-person study visits, timely recruitment would prove difficult in a traditional in-person clinical trial. Thus, our team opted to launch nationwide internet-based clinical trials using patient-reported outcome measures. In total, 2795 participants were recruited using traditional and social media, with screening and enrollment performed via an online data capture system. Follow-up surveys and survey reminders were similarly managed through this online system with manual participant outreach in the event of missing data. In this report, we present a narrative of our experience running internet-based clinical trials and provide recommendations for the design of future clinical trials during a world pandemic.

Feasibility of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Testing in Remote Outpatient Trials.

Background: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, clinical trials necessitated rapid testing to be performed remotely. Dried blood spot (DBS) techniques have enabled remote HIV virologic testing globally, and more recently, antibody testing as well. We evaluated DBS testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody testing in outpatients to assess seropositivity. Methods: In 2020, we conducted 3 internet-based randomized clinical trials and offered serologic testing via self-collected DBS as a voluntary substudy. COVID-19 diagnosis was based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention case definition with epidemiological link to cases. A minority reported polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing at an outside facility. We tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin via antibody detection by agglutination-PCR (ADAP) and compared the results with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Results: Of 2727 participants in the primary studies, 60% (1648/2727) consented for serology testing; 56% (931/1648) returned a usable DBS sample. Of those who were asymptomatic, 5% (33/707) had positive ADAP serology. Of participants with a positive PCR, 67% (36/54) had positive SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. None of those who were PCR-positive and asymptomatic were seropositive (0/7). Of 77 specimens tested for concordance via ELISA, 83% (64/77) were concordant. The challenges of completing a remote testing program during a pandemic included sourcing and assembling collection kits, delivery and return of the kits, and troubleshooting testing. Self-collection was successful for >95% of participants. Delays in US mail with possible sample degradation and timing of DBS collection complicated the analysis. Conclusions: We found remote antibody testing during a global pandemic feasible although challenging. We identified an association between symptomatic COVID-19 and positive antibody results at a similar prevalence as other outpatient cohorts.

Hydroxychloroquine as Pre-exposure Prophylaxis for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Healthcare Workers: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a rapidly emerging virus causing the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with no known effective prophylaxis. We investigated whether hydroxychloroquine could prevent SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare workers at high risk of exposure. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of healthcare workers with ongoing exposure to persons with SARS-CoV-2, including those working in emergency departments, intensive care units, COVID-19 hospital wards, and first responders. Participants across the United States and in the Canadian province of Manitoba were randomized to hydroxychloroquine loading dose then 400 mg once or twice weekly for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was confirmed or probable COVID-19-compatible illness. We measured hydroxychloroquine whole-blood concentrations. RESULTS: We enrolled 1483 healthcare workers, of whom 79% reported performing aerosol-generating procedures. The incidence of COVID-19 (laboratory-confirmed or symptomatic compatible illness) was 0.27 events/person-year with once-weekly and 0.28 events/person-year with twice-weekly hydroxychloroquine compared with 0.38 events/person-year with placebo. For once-weekly hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis, the hazard ratio was .72 (95% CI, .44-1.16; P = .18) and for twice-weekly was .74 (95% CI, .46-1.19; P = .22) compared with placebo. Median hydroxychloroquine concentrations in whole blood were 98 ng/mL (IQR, 82-120) with once-weekly and 200 ng/mL (IQR, 159-258) with twice-weekly dosing. Hydroxychloroquine concentrations did not differ between participants who developed COVID-19-compatible illness (154 ng/mL) versus participants without COVID-19 (133 ng/mL; P = .08). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-exposure prophylaxis with hydroxychloroquine once or twice weekly did not significantly reduce laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 or COVID-19-compatible illness among healthcare workers. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04328467.

Safety of Hydroxychloroquine Among Outpatient Clinical Trial Participants for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Use of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), especially in combination with azithromycin, has raised safety concerns. Here, we report safety data from 3 outpatient randomized clinical trials. METHODS: We conducted 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials investigating hydroxychloroquine as pre-exposure prophylaxis, postexposure prophylaxis, and early treatment for COVID-19 using an internet-based design. We excluded individuals with contraindications to hydroxychloroquine. We collected side effects and serious adverse events. We report descriptive analyses of our findings. RESULTS: We enrolled 2795 participants. The median age of research participants (interquartile range) was 40 (34-49) years, and 59% (1633/2767) reported no chronic medical conditions. Overall 2544 (91%) participants reported side effect data, and 748 (29%) reported at least 1 medication side effect. Side effects were reported in 40% with once-daily, 36% with twice-weekly, 31% with once-weekly hydroxychloroquine, compared with 19% with placebo. The most common side effects were upset stomach or nausea (25% with once-daily, 19% with twice-weekly, and 18% with once-weekly hydroxychloroquine, vs 11% for placebo), followed by diarrhea, vomiting, or abdominal pain (23% for once-daily, 17% twice-weekly, and 13% once-weekly hydroxychloroquine, vs 7% for placebo). Two individuals were hospitalized for atrial arrhythmias, 1 on placebo and 1 on twice-weekly hydroxychloroquine. No sudden deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Data from 3 outpatient COVID-19 trials demonstrated that gastrointestinal side effects were common but mild with the use of hydroxychloroquine, while serious side effects were rare. No deaths occurred related to hydroxychloroquine. Randomized clinical trials, in cohorts of healthy outpatients, can safely investigate whether hydroxychloroquine is efficacious for COVID-19. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04308668 for postexposure prophylaxis and early treatment trials; NCT04328467 for pre-exposure prophylaxis trial.

Symptoms of COVID-19 Outpatients in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel pathogen causing the current worldwide coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Due to insufficient diagnostic testing in the United States, there is a need for clinical decision-making algorithms to guide testing prioritization. METHODS: We recruited participants nationwide for a randomized clinical trial. We categorized participants into 3 groups: (1) those with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, (2) those with probable SARS-CoV-2 infection (pending test or not tested but with a confirmed COVID-19 contact), and (3) those with possible SARS-CoV-2 infection (pending test or not tested and with a contact for whom testing was pending or not performed). We compared the frequency of self-reported symptoms in each group and categorized those reporting symptoms in early infection (0-2 days), midinfection (3-5 days), and late infection (>5 days). RESULTS: Among 1252 symptomatic persons screened, 316 had confirmed, 393 had probable, and 543 had possible SARS-CoV-2 infection. In early infection, those with confirmed and probable SARS-CoV-2 infection shared similar symptom profiles, with fever most likely in confirmed cases (P = .002). Confirmed cases did not show any statistically significant differences compared with unconfirmed cases in symptom frequency at any time point. The most commonly reported symptoms in those with confirmed infection were cough (82%), fever (67%), fatigue (62%), and headache (60%), with only 52% reporting both fever and cough. CONCLUSIONS: Symptomatic persons with probable SARS-CoV-2 infection present similarly to those with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. There was no pattern of symptom frequency over time.

Hydroxychloroquine as pre-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19 in healthcare workers: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a rapidly emerging virus causing the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic with no known effective prophylaxis. We investigated whether hydroxychloroquine could prevent SARS CoV-2 in healthcare workers at high-risk of exposure. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of healthcare workers with ongoing exposure to persons with Covid-19, including those working in emergency departments, intensive care units, Covid-19 hospital wards, and first responders. Participants across the United States and in the Canadian province of Manitoba were randomized to hydroxychloroquine 400mg once weekly or twice weekly for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was confirmed or probable Covid-19-compatible illness. We measured hydroxychloroquine whole blood concentrations. RESULTS: We enrolled 1483 healthcare workers, of which 79% reported performing aerosol-generating procedures. The incidence of Covid-19 (laboratory-confirmed or symptomatic compatible illness) was 0.27 events per person-year with once-weekly and 0.28 events per person-year with twice-weekly hydroxychloroquine compared with 0.38 events per person-year with placebo. For once weekly hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis, the hazard ratio was 0.72 (95%CI 0.44 to 1.16; P=0.18) and for twice weekly was 0.74 (95%CI 0.46 to 1.19; P=0.22) as compared with placebo. Median hydroxychloroquine concentrations in whole blood were 98 ng/mL (IQR, 82-120) with once-weekly and 200 ng/mL (IQR, 159-258) with twice-weekly dosing. Hydroxychloroquine concentrations did not differ between participants who developed Covid-19 (154 ng/mL) versus participants without Covid-19 (133 ng/mL; P=0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-exposure prophylaxis with hydroxychloroquine once or twice weekly did not significantly reduce laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 or Covid-19-compatible illness among healthcare workers.

Safety of Hydroxychloroquine among Outpatient Clinical Trial Participants for COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Use of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, especially in combination with azithromycin, has raised safety concerns. Here, we report safety data from three outpatient randomized clinical trials. METHODS: We conducted three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials investigating hydroxychloroquine as pre-exposure prophylaxis, post-exposure prophylaxis and early treatment for COVID-19. We excluded individuals with contraindications to hydroxychloroquine. We collected side effects and serious adverse events. We report descriptive analyses of our findings. RESULTS: We enrolled 2,795 participants. The median age of research participants was 40 (IQR 34-49) years, and 59% (1633/2767) reported no chronic medical conditions. Overall 2,324 (84%) participants reported side effect data, and 638 (27%) reported at least one medication side effect. Side effects were reported in 29% with daily, 36% with twice weekly, 31% with once weekly hydroxychloroquine compared to 19% with placebo. The most common side effects were upset stomach or nausea (25% with daily, 18% with twice weekly, 16% with weekly, vs. 10% for placebo), followed by diarrhea, vomiting, or abdominal pain (23% for daily, 16% twice weekly, 12% weekly, vs. 6% for placebo). Two individuals were hospitalized for atrial arrhythmias, one on placebo and one on twice weekly hydroxychloroquine. No sudden deaths occurred. CONCLUSION: Data from three outpatient COVID-19 trials demonstrated that gastrointestinal side effects were common but mild with the use of hydroxychloroquine, while serious side effects were rare. No deaths occurred related to hydroxychloroquine. Randomized clinical trials can safely investigate whether hydroxychloroquine is efficacious for COVID-19.

Hydroxychloroquine in Nonhospitalized Adults With Early COVID-19 : A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: No effective oral therapy exists for early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether hydroxychloroquine could reduce COVID-19 severity in adult outpatients. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from 22 March through 20 May 2020. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04308668). SETTING: Internet-based trial across the United States and Canada (40 states and 3 provinces). PARTICIPANTS: Symptomatic, nonhospitalized adults with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 or probable COVID-19 and high-risk exposure within 4 days of symptom onset. INTERVENTION: Oral hydroxychloroquine (800 mg once, followed by 600 mg in 6 to 8 hours, then 600 mg daily for 4 more days) or masked placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Symptoms and severity at baseline and then at days 3, 5, 10, and 14 using a 10-point visual analogue scale. The primary end point was change in overall symptom severity over 14 days. RESULTS: Of 491 patients randomly assigned to a group, 423 contributed primary end point data. Of these, 341 (81%) had laboratory-confirmed infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or epidemiologically linked exposure to a person with laboratory-confirmed infection; 56% (236 of 423) were enrolled within 1 day of symptoms starting. Change in symptom severity over 14 days did not differ between the hydroxychloroquine and placebo groups (difference in symptom severity: relative, 12%; absolute, -0.27 point [95% CI, -0.61 to 0.07 point]; P = 0.117). At 14 days, 24% (49 of 201) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine had ongoing symptoms compared with 30% (59 of 194) receiving placebo (P = 0.21). Medication adverse effects occurred in 43% (92 of 212) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine versus 22% (46 of 211) receiving placebo (P < 0.001). With placebo, 10 hospitalizations occurred (2 non-COVID-19-related), including 1 hospitalized death. With hydroxychloroquine, 4 hospitalizations occurred plus 1 nonhospitalized death (P = 0.29). LIMITATION: Only 58% of participants received SARS-CoV-2 testing because of severe U.S. testing shortages. CONCLUSION: Hydroxychloroquine did not substantially reduce symptom severity in outpatients with early, mild COVID-19. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Private donors.

A Randomized Trial of Hydroxychloroquine as Postexposure Prophylaxis for Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) occurs after exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). For persons who are exposed, the standard of care is observation and quarantine. Whether hydroxychloroquine can prevent symptomatic infection after SARS-CoV-2 exposure is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial across the United States and parts of Canada testing hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis. We enrolled adults who had household or occupational exposure to someone with confirmed Covid-19 at a distance of less than 6 ft for more than 10 minutes while wearing neither a face mask nor an eye shield (high-risk exposure) or while wearing a face mask but no eye shield (moderate-risk exposure). Within 4 days after exposure, we randomly assigned participants to receive either placebo or hydroxychloroquine (800 mg once, followed by 600 mg in 6 to 8 hours, then 600 mg daily for 4 additional days). The primary outcome was the incidence of either laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 or illness compatible with Covid-19 within 14 days. RESULTS: We enrolled 821 asymptomatic participants. Overall, 87.6% of the participants (719 of 821) reported a high-risk exposure to a confirmed Covid-19 contact. The incidence of new illness compatible with Covid-19 did not differ significantly between participants receiving hydroxychloroquine (49 of 414 [11.8%]) and those receiving placebo (58 of 407 [14.3%]); the absolute difference was -2.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval, -7.0 to 2.2; P = 0.35). Side effects were more common with hydroxychloroquine than with placebo (40.1% vs. 16.8%), but no serious adverse reactions were reported. CONCLUSIONS: After high-risk or moderate-risk exposure to Covid-19, hydroxychloroquine did not prevent illness compatible with Covid-19 or confirmed infection when used as postexposure prophylaxis within 4 days after exposure. (Funded by David Baszucki and Jan Ellison Baszucki and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04308668.).

Review: Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine for Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19).

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a rapidly emerging viral infection causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have garnered unprecedented attention as potential therapeutic agents against COVID-19 following several small clinical trials, uncontrolled case series, and public figure endorsements. While there is a growing body of scientific data, there is also concern for harm, particularly QTc prolongation and cardiac arrhythmias. Here, we perform a rapid narrative review and discuss the strengths and limitations of existing in vitro and clinical studies. We call for additional randomized controlled trial evidence prior to the widespread incorporation of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine into national and international treatment guidelines.

Post-exposure prophylaxis or pre-emptive therapy for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2): study protocol for a pragmatic randomized-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in December 2019 causing the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Currently, there is a lack of evidence-based therapies to prevent COVID-19 following exposure to the virus, or to prevent worsening of symptoms following confirmed infection. We describe the design of a clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine for post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) and pre-emptive therapy (PET) for COVID-19. METHODS: We will conduct two nested multicentre international double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine for: 1) PEP of asymptomatic household contacts or healthcare workers exposed to COVID-19 within the past four days, and 2) PET for symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 showing symptoms for less than four days. We will recruit 1,500 patients each for the PEP and PET trials. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive five days of hydroxychloroquine or placebo. The primary PEP trial outcome will be the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19. The primary PET trial outcome will be an ordinal scale of disease severity (not hospitalized, hospitalized without intensive care, hospitalization with intensive care, or death). Participant screening, informed consent, and follow-up will be exclusively internet-based with appropriate regulatory and research ethics board approvals in Canada and the United States. DISCUSSION: These complementary randomized-controlled trials are innovatively designed and adequately powered to rapidly answer urgent questions regarding the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine to reduce virus transmission and disease severity of COVID-19 during a pandemic. In-person participant follow-up will not be conducted to facilitate social distancing strategies and reduce risks of exposure to study personnel. Innovative trial approaches are needed to urgently assess therapeutic options to mitigate the global impact of this pandemic. TRIALS REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04308668); registered 16 March, 2020.

RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: Le syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère du coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) est apparu en décembre 2019, provoquant la pandémie de la COVID-19. À l'heure actuelle, il n'existe aucun traitement fondé sur des données probantes permettant de prévenir la COVID-19 suite à une exposition au virus ou de prévenir l'aggravation des symptômes suite à une infection confirmée. Nous décrivons la conception d'une étude clinique examinant l'utilisation d'hydroxychloroquine en tant que prophylaxie post-exposition (PPE) et de traitement préventif (TP) pour la COVID-19. MéTHODE: Nous réaliserons deux études cliniques imbriquées contrôlées par placebo, randomisées, à double insu, internationales et multicentriques examinant l'utilisation d'hydroxychloroquine pour : 1) la prophylaxie post-exposition des contacts asymptomatiques dans un même foyer ou les travailleurs de la santé exposés à la COVID-19 au cours des quatre derniers jours, et 2) le traitement préventif des patients symptomatiques en ambulatoire atteints de COVID-19 et présentant des symptômes pour une durée totale de moins de quatre jours. Nous recruterons 1500 patients pour chaque bras de l'étude (PPE et TP). Les participants seront randomisés à un ratio de 1 : 1 pour recevoir cinq jours d'hydroxychloroquine ou de placebo. Le critère d'évaluation principal de l'étude PPE sera l'incidence de COVID-19 symptomatique. Le critère d'évaluation principal de l'étude TP consistera en une échelle ordinale de la gravité de la maladie (pas d'hospitalisation, hospitalisation sans soins intensifs, hospitalisation avec soins intensifs, ou décès). La sélection des participants, le consentement éclairé et le suivi se feront exclusivement en ligne après avoir obtenu les consentements réglementaires et des comités d'éthique de la recherche appropriés au Canada et aux États-Unis. DISCUSSION: Ces études randomisées contrôlées complémentaires sont conçues de façon innovatrice et disposent de la puissance nécessaire pour répondre rapidement aux questions urgentes quant à l'efficacité de l'hydroxychloroquine pour réduire la transmission et la gravité de la maladie de la COVID-19 pendant une pandémie. Le suivi des participants ne sera pas réalisé en personne afin de faciliter les stratégies de distanciation sociale et de réduire le risque d'exposition du personnel de l'étude. Des approches innovatrices d'études sont nécessaires afin d'évaluer rapidement les options thérapeutiques pour mitiger l'impact global de cette pandémie. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04308668); enregistrées le 16 mars 2020.

Cytomegalovirus Viremia Associated With Increased Mortality in Cryptococcal Meningitis in Sub-Saharan Africa.

BACKGROUND: Cryptococcal meningitis and tuberculosis are both important causes of death in persons with advanced human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). Cytomegalovirus (CMV) viremia may be associated with increased mortality in persons living with HIV who have tuberculosis. It is unknown whether concurrent CMV viremia is associated with mortality in other AIDS-related opportunistic infections. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled Ugandans living with HIV who had cryptococcal meningitis from 2010-2012. Subsequently, we analyzed stored baseline plasma samples from 111 subjects for CMV DNA. We compared 10-week survival rates among those with and without CMV viremia. RESULTS: Of 111 participants, 52% (58/111) had detectable CMV DNA (median plasma viral load 498 IU/mL, interquartile range [IQR] 259-2390). All samples tested were positive on immunoglobin G serology. The median CD4+ T cell count was 19 cells/µL (IQR 9-70) and did not differ by the presence of CMV viremia (P = .47). The 10-week mortality rates were 40% (23/58) in those with CMV viremia and 21% (11/53) in those without CMV viremia (hazard ratio 2.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-4.49; P = .03), which remained significant after a multivariate adjustment for known risk factors of mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 3.25, 95% CI 1.49-7.10; P = .003). Serum and cerebrospinal fluid cytokine levels were generally similar and cryptococcal antigen-specific immune stimulation responses did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Half of persons with advanced AIDS and cryptococcal meningitis had detectable CMV viremia. CMV viremia was associated with an over 2-fold higher mortality rate. It remains unclear whether CMV viremia in severely immunocompromised persons with cryptococcal meningitis contributes directly to this mortality or may reflect an underlying immune dysfunction (ie, cause vs effect). CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01075152.