[Problems and thoughts in clinical safety evaluation of traditional Chinese medicine].

Amid the modernization and internationalization of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM), the safety of TCM has attracted much attention. At the moment, the government, scientific research teams, and pharmaceutical enterprises have made great efforts to explore methods and techniques for clinical safety evaluation of TCM. Although considerable achievements have been made, there are still many problems, such as the non-standard terms of adverse reactions of TCM, unclear evaluation indicators, unreasonable judgment methods, lack of evaluation models, out-of-date evaluation standards, and unsound reporting systems. Therefore, it is urgent to further deepen the research mode and method of clinical safety evaluation of TCM. Based on the current national requirements for the life-cycle management of drugs, this study focused on the problems in the five dimensions of clinical safety evaluation of TCM, including normative terms, evaluation modes, judgment methods, evaluation standards, and reporting systems, and proposed suggestions on the development of a life-cycle clinical safety evaluation method that conformed to the characteristics of TCM, hoping to provide a reference for future research.

Artificial intelligence-enhanced drug design and development: Toward a computational precision medicine.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) relies upon a convergence of technologies with further synergies with life science technologies to capture the value of massive multi-modal data in the form of predictive models supporting decision-making. AI and machine learning (ML) enhance drug design and development by improving our understanding of disease heterogeneity, identifying dysregulated molecular pathways and therapeutic targets, designing and optimizing drug candidates, as well as evaluating in silico clinical efficacy. By providing an unprecedented level of knowledge on both patient specificities and drug candidate properties, AI is fostering the emergence of a computational precision medicine allowing the design of therapies or preventive measures tailored to the singularities of individual patients in terms of their physiology, disease features, and exposure to environmental risks.

Evaluating the performance of drug-repurposing technologies.

Drug-repurposing technologies are growing in number and maturing. However, comparisons to each other and to reality are hindered because of a lack of consensus with respect to performance evaluation. Such comparability is necessary to determine scientific merit and to ensure that only meaningful predictions from repurposing technologies carry through to further validation and eventual patient use. Here, we review and compare performance evaluation measures for these technologies using version 2 of our shotgun repurposing Computational Analysis of Novel Drug Opportunities (CANDO) platform to illustrate their benefits, drawbacks, and limitations. Understanding and using different performance evaluation metrics ensures robust cross-platform comparability, enabling us to continue to strive toward optimal repurposing by decreasing the time and cost of drug discovery and development.

Simplified ex-vivo drug evaluation in ocular surface cells: Culture on cellulose filters of cells obtained by impression cytology.

Drug development, resource- and time-intensive, extensively employs cell-based assays to assess the efficacy and safety of candidate drugs. The widely used immortalized cell lines, experimentally convenient, have limited predictive value. In contrast, ex-vivo models more faithfully reproduce diseases but are technically challenging to establish. To address this need, we developed a simplified process for ex-vivo cell culture, demonstrating its feasibility in ocular surface cells. Conjunctival cells were harvested by impression cytology and grown on mixed cellulose ester membrane filters (MCFs). Human and rabbit conjunctival cells cultured on MCFs are 100% viable at 24 h, and 43% viable at 72 h. A gene expression study evaluating 84 genes involved in ocular inflammation demonstrated that ex-vivo culturing maintains intact the expression of two thirds of these genes in human cells. That these cells are suitable for the assessment of ocular drugs was demonstrated by studying the effect of phosphosulindac (PS), a small molecule under development for the treatment of dry eye disease, in both human and rabbit conjunctival cells. PS, for example, suppressed the expression of CXCL10, a cytokine participating in the pathogenesis of dry eye disease, in human and in rabbit conjunctival cells cultured ex-vivo by 32% and 70%, respectively. Conjunctival cells cultured ex-vivo can be transfected to evaluate mechanistic questions. We successfully transfected such cells with a plasmid expressing luciferase under the control of an IFN-γ-responsive promoter or its control plasmid. IFN-γ stimulated luciferase expression by 85% in cells with the responsive plasmid but not in controls; PS significantly suppressed this induction by 37% without affecting the control plasmid. These findings demonstrate that human and rabbit conjunctival cells cultured ex-vivo with our method are viable and maintain their biological integrity; respond to biological and pharmacological agents; and are transfectable with informative plasmids. The unique advantage of this method is to potentially accelerate the development of novel drugs for the treatment of ocular surface diseases, and to advance our understanding of ocular surface pathophysiology.

Drug evaluation based on phosphomimetic PDHA1 reveals the complexity of activity-related cell death in A549 non-small cell lung cancer cells.

Cancer cells predominantly generate energy via glycolysis, even in the presence of oxygen, to support abnormal cell proliferation. Suppression of PDHA1 by PDK1 prevents the conversion of cytoplasmic pyruvate into Acetyl-CoA. Several PDK inhibitors have been identified, but their clinical applications have not been successful for unclear reasons. In this study, endogenous PDHA1 in A549 cells was silenced by the CRISPR/Cas9 system, and PDHA1WT and PDHA13SD were transduced. Since PDHA13SD cannot be phosphorylated by PDKs, it was used to evaluate the specific activity of PDK inhibitors. This study highlights that PDHA1WT and PDHA13SD A549 cells can be used as a cell-based PDK inhibitor-distinction system to examine the relationship between PDH activity and cell death by established PDK inhibitors. Leelamine, huzhangoside A and otobaphenol induced PDH activity-dependent apoptosis, whereas AZD7545, VER-246608 and DCA effectively enhanced PDHA1 activity but little toxic to cancer cells. Furthermore, the activity of phosphomimetic PDHA1 revealed the complexity of its regulation, which requires further in-depth investigation. [BMB Reports 2021; 54(11): 563-568].

Some effects of putative G-protein biased mu-opioid receptor agonists in male rhesus monkeys.

G-protein-biased mu-opioid receptor (GPB-MOR) agonists are an emerging class of compounds being evaluated as candidate analgesics and agonist medications for opioid use disorder. Most of the basic pharmacology of GPB-MOR agonists has been conducted in rodents and much less is known how the basic behavioral pharmacology of these compounds translates to nonhuman primates. The present study determined the antinociceptive potency and time course of three putative GPB-MOR agonists: (+)-oliceridine (i.e. TRV130), SR14968, and SR17018 in male rhesus monkeys (n = 3). In addition, the respiratory effects of these compounds were also indirectly determined using a pulse oximeter to measure percent peripheral oxygen saturation (%SpO2). The largest intramuscular oliceridine dose (3.2 mg/kg) produced significant antinociception at 50°C, but not 54°C, and peak effects were between 10 and 30 min. Oliceridine also decreased SpO2 below the 90% threshold that would be clinically categorized as hypoxia in two out of three monkeys. The largest intramuscular SR14968 dose (0.32 mg/kg) produced 100% MPE at 50°C, but not 54°C, in two out of three monkeys, and peak effects were between 30 and 100 min. The largest intravenous SR17018 dose (1 mg/kg) produced 100% MPE at 50°C, but not 54°C, in the same two out of three monkeys, and peak effects were between 30 and 100 min. Solubility limitations for both SR14968 and SR17018 impaired our ability to determine in-vivo potency and effectiveness on antinociceptive and %SpO2 measures for these two compounds.

Biases in Evaluating the Safety and Effectiveness of Drugs for the Treatment of COVID-19: Designing Real-World Evidence Studies.

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, which was caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, has led to an unprecedented effort to generate real-world evidence on the safety and effectiveness of various treatments. A growing number of observational studies in which the effects of certain drugs were evaluated have been conducted, including several in which researchers assessed whether hydroxychloroquine improved outcomes in infected individuals and whether renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors have detrimental effects. In the present article, we review and illustrate how immortal time bias and selection bias were present in several of these studies. Understanding these biases and how they can be avoided may prove important for future observational studies assessing the effectiveness and safety of potentially promising drugs during the coronavirus 19 pandemic.

Remdesivir y reducción de mortalidad en pacientes con COVID-19: análisis sistematizado de subgrupos de los ensayos clínicos / Remdesivir and mortality reduction in COVID-19 patients: a systematized subgroup analysis of clinical trials

OBJETIVO: Remdesivir no ha mostrado beneficio en supervivencia para pacientes con COVID-19 grave. Sin embargo, el análisis por subgrupos del estudio ACTT-1 mostró aparente reducción de mortalidad en pacientes que requerían oxígeno -no de alto flujo-. La difusión de resultados del estudio SOLIDARITY se acompañó de un metaanálisis que combinó resultados de mortalidad por subgrupos de los ensayos clínicos aleatorizados. El objetivo del presente estudio es analizar metodológicamente la fiabilidad y aplicabilidad clínica de los hallazgos por subgrupos sobre el efecto de remdesivir en mortalidad en pacientes con COVID-19. MÉTODO: Se usó una herramienta validada para valorar los hallazgos de los análisis por subgrupos en ensayos clínicos aleatorizados, incluido el metaanálisis anexo al estudio SOLIDARITY. La herramienta utilizada está estructurada en cuestiones preliminares para descartar análisis por subgrupos sin condiciones mínimas relevantes, y un cuestionario específico. Este último considera determinados criterios: asociación estadística, incluyendo p de interacción, preespecificación de subgrupos, tamaño muestral, número de factores valorados y resultado global del estudio; plausibilidad biológica de las diferencias observadas; y consistencia entre resultados de estudios similares. Se asignó una puntuación a cada criterio y la herramienta relacionó el sumatorio global con una recomendación sobre la aplicabilidad de los resultados de los subgrupos en la toma de decisiones clínicas. RESULTADOS: Las cuestiones preliminares tuvieron respuestas positivas, aplicándose el cuestionario. La asociación estadística obtuvo valoración "nula" (-3 puntos), con p de interacción dudosa (p = 0,0650) y resultado de mortalidad no significativo en población global, restando fiabilidad al análisis de subgrupos. La plausibilidad biológica fue considerada "probable" (+3 puntos), ya que el antiviral pudiera tener mayor efecto antes del proceso inflamatorio y empeoramiento clínico. La consistencia se valoró "posible" (+2 puntos) por compatibilidad de resultados del estudio ACTT-1 y SOLIDARITY. La recomendación de aplicación del análisis por subgrupos según el riesgo de los pacientes fue "nula". CONCLUSIONES: Esta interpretación estructurada de análisis por subgrupos sugiere que la hipótesis de que remdesivir podría reducir la mortalidad en pacientes con COVID-19 grave que precisan oxígeno -no de alto flujo- presenta demasiada incertidumbre, y es probable que sea un hallazgo casual. Por tanto, es imprescindible la realización de un ensayo clínico aleatorizado sobre mortalidad en pacientes con oxígeno -no de alto flujo-

OBJECTIVE: Remdesivir has not shown survival benefit for patients with severe COVID-19. However, subgroup analysis of ACTT-1 Study Group showed an apparent reduction in mortality for patients who required non-high-flow oxygen. Presentation of SOLIDARITY study results were associated by a meta-analysis combining mortality results by subsets from randomized clinical trials. The aim is a methodological assessment of reliability and clinical applicability about findings by subgroups on the effect of remdesivir on mortality in patients with COVID-19. METHOD: A validated tool was used to evaluate the findings of subgroup analyses in randomized clinical trials, including meta-analysis attached to SOLIDARITY study. It is structured in preliminary questions to reject subset analyses without relevant minimum conditions, and a specific checklist. The latter considers certain criteria: statistical association, which encompassed p of interaction, prespecification of subgroups, sample size, number of factors analyzed, and overall study result; biological plausibility of observed differences; and consistency between results of similar studies. A score was assigned to each criterion and the tool related global summation to a recommendation on the applicability of subset results in clinical decision making. RESULTS: Preliminary questions had positive answers, so checklist was applied. Statistical association obtained "null" assessment (-3 points), including a "doubtful" p of interaction (p = 0.0650) among subgroups and mortality reached no statistical significance for global population. These findings reduced the reliability of subset analysis. Biological plausibility was considered "probable" (+3 points) because antiviral could have a greater effect before the inflammatory process and clinical worsening. Consistency between results of similar studies was evaluated as "possible" (+2 points) analysis for compatibility of ACTT-1 and SOLIDARITY study results. The recommendation about application of subset analysis results according to the risk of patients was "null". CONCLUSIONS: This structured interpretation of subgroup analysis suggested too much uncertainty in hypothesis about remdesivir could reduce mortality in patients with severe COVID-19 who required non-high-flow oxygen. It was probably a random finding. Therefore, a randomized clinical trial about effect of remdesivir in mortality in patients with COVID-19 and non-high-flow oxygen is essential

SARS-CoV-2: vaccines in the pandemic era.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has caused millions of infections and deaths worldwide since its emergence in December 2019. As there is little or no natural immunity in the human population or specific anti-COVID-19 drugs, researchers from the government, academia and industry are developing vaccines at an unprecedented speed to halt the pandemic. In this review, the results of animal experiments and clinical trials on several vaccine technical platforms are summarized, and several challenges are also discussed to further promote the development, evaluation and application of vaccines during the challenging situation of the global pandemic.

A review of the experience with pediatric written requests issued for oncology drug products.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric anticancer drug development has numerous challenges. The Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA) and the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (BPCA) were passed to address pediatric drug development deficiencies in general. Until recently, the requirements for pediatric evaluation of most oncology products developed for adult cancers have been waived. Because children typically do not have the same type of cancers, which occur commonly in adults, or the indication or drug had been granted an orphan designation, PREA therefore has had no impact. Pediatric studies for labeling updates are largely done through BPCA by a written request (WR) issued by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Because the cancers that occur in pediatric and adult populations do not share the same etiology or natural history, there are limited opportunities to extrapolate adult efficacy and safety to the pediatric population. The characteristics of individual pediatric studies included in WRs have varied greatly over time. PROCEDURE: In this study, we searched WRs that were issued by the FDA since 2001. We found 40 such requests issued for oncology drugs and biologics, which had been accepted by sponsors. RESULTS: Clinical trials included in 23 of the WRs have been concluded, 19 have resulted in exclusivity, and three drugs that were studied have been approved for use in pediatric populations. Herein, we present the spectrum of WRs from a regulatory, study design, dosing, formulation, analysis plan, evidentiary standard of efficacy, and safety perspective. CONCLUSIONS: This provides information on requests issued in the past nearly 20 years and studies that are completed. As WRs have provided the only regulatory mechanism to assure pediatric cancer drug development, this can potentially provide insight on how pediatric cancer drug development may change in the future.

Drug-Drug Interaction Surveillance Study: Comparing Self-Controlled Designs in Five Empirical Examples in Real-World Data.

Self-controlled designs, specifically the case-crossover (CCO) and the self-controlled case series (SCCS), are increasingly utilized to generate real-world evidence (RWE) on drug-drug interactions (DDIs). Although these designs share the advantages and limitations of within-individual comparison, they also have design-specific assumptions. It is not known to what extent the differences in assumptions lead to different results in RWE DDI analyses. Using a nationwide US commercial healthcare insurance database (2006-2016), we compared the CCO and SCCS designs, as they are implemented in DDI studies, within five DDI-outcome examples: (1) simvastatin + clarithromycin and muscle-related toxicity; (2) atorvastatin + valsartan, and muscle-related toxicity; and (3-5) dabigatran + P-glycoprotein inhibitor (clarithromycin, amiodarone, and verapamil) and bleeding. Analyses were conducted within person-time exposed to the object drug (statins and dabigatran) and adjusted for bias associated with the inhibiting drugs via control groups of individuals unexposed to the object drug. The designs yielded similar estimates in most examples, with SCCS displaying better statistical efficiency. With both designs, results varied across sensitivity analyses, particularly in CCO analyses with small number of exposed individuals. Analyses in controls revealed substantial bias that may be differential across DDI-exposed and control individuals. Thus, both designs showed no association between amiodarone or verapamil and bleeding in dabigatran-exposed but revealed strong positive associations in controls. Overall, bias adjustment via a control group had a larger impact on results than the choice of a design, highlighting the importance and challenges of appropriate control group selection for adequate bias control in self-controlled analyses of DDIs.

Initiator Types and the Causal Question of the Prevalent New-User Design: A Simulation Study.

New-user designs restricting to treatment initiators have become the preferred design for studying drug comparative safety and effectiveness using nonexperimental data. This design reduces confounding by indication and healthy-adherer bias at the cost of smaller study sizes and reduced external validity, particularly when assessing a newly approved treatment compared with standard treatment. The prevalent new-user design includes adopters of a new treatment who switched from or previously used standard treatment (i.e., the comparator), expanding study sample size and potentially broadening the study population for inference. Previous work has suggested the use of time-conditional propensity-score matching to mitigate prevalent user bias. In this study, we describe 3 "types" of initiators of a treatment: new users, direct switchers, and delayed switchers. Using these initiator types, we articulate the causal questions answered by the prevalent new-user design and compare them with those answered by the new-user design. We then show, using simulation, how conditioning on time since initiating the comparator (rather than full treatment history) can still result in a biased estimate of the treatment effect. When implemented properly, the prevalent new-user design estimates new and important causal effects distinct from the new-user design.

Pharmacology-Guided Rule-Based Adaptive Dose Escalation in First-in-Human Studies.

First-in-human (FIH) studies typically progress through cohorts of fixed, standard size throughout the escalation scheme. This work presents and tests a pharmacology-guided rule-based adaptive dose escalation design that aims at making "best use" of participants in early clinical drug evaluation; it is paper based, not requiring real-time access to computational methods. The design minimizes the number of participants exposed to dose levels with low likelihood of being therapeutically relevant. Using criteria based on dose-limiting adverse event rate and on target exposure or target pharmacodynamics, the design increases the sample size when approaching the dose range of potential clinical relevance. The adaptive escalation design was retrospectively tested on actual data from a sample of 40 recently executed FIH studies with novel small and large molecules, and it was evaluated by simulating trials with three compounds with different therapeutic windows, i.e., representing a promising, unacceptable, and dubious profile. In retrospective evaluation of the adaptive escalation design, none of the cases overshot the actually reported top dose; one case resulted in a top dose that was within 20% under the estimated maximum tolerated dose in the original study. The median reduction of total number of participants per study was 38%. Trial simulations confirmed the retrospective evaluation, showing a similar performance of the adaptive escalation design compared with the conventional 6 + 2 design, at a reduced study size for compounds with a presumed acceptable therapeutic window. The adaptive escalation design was shown to make "best use" of participants in FIH studies without compromising safety.

Assessing Transporter-Mediated Natural Product-Drug Interactions Via In vitro-In Vivo Extrapolation: Clinical Evaluation With a Probe Cocktail.

The botanical natural product goldenseal can precipitate clinical drug interactions by inhibiting cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A and CYP2D6. Besides P-glycoprotein, effects of goldenseal on other clinically relevant transporters remain unknown. Established transporter-expressing cell systems were used to determine the inhibitory effects of a goldenseal extract, standardized to the major alkaloid berberine, on transporter activity. Using recommended basic models, the extract was predicted to inhibit the efflux transporter BCRP and uptake transporters OATP1B1/3. Using a cocktail approach, effects of the goldenseal product on BCRP, OATP1B1/3, OATs, OCTs, MATEs, and CYP3A were next evaluated in 16 healthy volunteers. As expected, goldenseal increased the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC0-inf ) of midazolam (CYP3A; positive control), with a geometric mean ratio (GMR) (90% confidence interval (CI)) of 1.43 (1.35-1.53). However, goldenseal had no effects on the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin (BCRP and OATP1B1/3) and furosemide (OAT1/3); decreased metformin (OCT1/2, MATE1/2-K) AUC0-inf (GMR, 0.77 (0.71-0.83)); and had no effect on metformin half-life and renal clearance. Results indicated that goldenseal altered intestinal permeability, transport, and/or other processes involved in metformin absorption, which may have unfavorable effects on glucose control. Inconsistencies between model predictions and pharmacokinetic outcomes prompt further refinement of current basic models to include differential transporter expression in relevant organs and intestinal degradation/metabolism of the precipitant(s). Such refinement should improve in vitro-in vivo prediction accuracy, contributing to a standard approach for studying transporter-mediated natural product-drug interactions.

Window of Opportunity Clinical Trials to Evaluate Novel Therapies for Brain Tumors.

Despite significant improvement in understanding of molecular underpinnings driving glioblastoma, there is minimal improvement in overall survival of patients. This poor outcome is caused in part by traditional designs of early phase clinical trials, which focus on clinical assessments of drug toxicity and response. Window of opportunity trials overcome this shortcoming by assessing drug-induced on-target molecular alterations in post-treatment human tumor specimens. This article provides an overview of window of opportunity trials, including novel designs for incorporating biologic end points into early stage trials in context of brain tumors, and examples of successfully executed window of opportunity trials for glioblastoma.

A workflow to build PBTK models for novel species.

Physiology-based pharmacokinetic and toxicokinetic (PBPK/TK) models allow us to simulate the concentration of xenobiotica in the plasma and different tissues of an organism. PBPK/TK models are therefore routinely used in many fields of life sciences to simulate the physiological concentration of exogenous compounds in plasma and tissues. The application of PBTK models in ecotoxicology, however, is currently hampered by the limited availability of models for focal species. Here, we present a best practice workflow that describes how to build PBTK models for novel species. To this end, we extrapolated eight previously established rabbit models for several drugs to six additional mammalian species (human, beagle, rat, monkey, mouse, and minipig). We used established PBTK models for these species to account for the species-specific physiology. The parameter sensitivity in the resulting 56 PBTK models was systematically assessed to rank the relevance of the parameters on overall model performance. Interestingly, more than 80% of the 609 considered model parameters showed a negligible sensitivity throughout all models. Only approximately 5% of all parameters had a high sensitivity in at least one of the PBTK models. This approach allowed us to rank the relevance of the various parameters on overall model performance. We used this information to formulate a best practice guideline for the efficient development of PBTK models for novel animal species. We believe that the workflow proposed in this study will significantly support the development of PBTK models for new animal species in the future.

Association between FDA and EMA expedited approval programs and therapeutic value of new medicines: retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the therapeutic value of new drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the association between these ratings and regulatory approval through expedited programs. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: New drugs approved by the FDA and EMA between 2007 and 2017, with follow-up through 1 April 2020. DATA SOURCES: Therapeutic value was measured using ratings of new drugs by five independent organizations (Prescrire and health authorities of Canada, France, Germany, and Italy). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of new drugs rated as having high therapeutic value; association between high therapeutic value rating and expedited status. RESULTS: From 2007 through 2017, the FDA and EMA approved 320 and 268 new drugs, respectively, of which 181 (57%) and 39 (15%) qualified for least one expedited program. Among 267 new drugs with a therapeutic value rating, 84 (31%) were rated as having high therapeutic value by at least one organization. Compared with non-expedited drugs, a greater proportion of expedited drugs were rated as having high therapeutic value among both FDA approvals (45% (69/153) v 13% (15/114); P<0.001) and EMA approvals (67% (18/27) v 27% (65/240); P<0.001). The sensitivity and specificity of expedited program for a drug being independently rated as having high therapeutic value were 82% (95% confidence interval 72% to 90%) and 54% (47% to 62%), respectively, for the FDA, compared with 25.3% (16.4% to 36.0%) and 90.2% (85.0% to 94.1%) for the EMA. CONCLUSIONS: Less than a third of new drugs approved by the FDA and EMA over the past decade were rated as having high therapeutic value by at least one of five independent organizations. Although expedited drugs were more likely than non-expedited drugs to be highly rated, most expedited drugs approved by the FDA but not the EMA were rated as having low therapeutic value.

The 2020 Pandemic: Current SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Development.

Coronaviruses are enveloped viruses with a positive-sense single-stranded RNA genome infecting animals and humans. Coronaviruses have been described more than 70 years ago and contain many species. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) are lethal species caused by human coronaviruses (HCoVs). Currently, a novel strain of HCoVs, named Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). SARS-CoV-2 was first identified in December 2019 in Wuhan, the capital city of the Hubei province of China, and has since spread worldwide causing an outbreak in more than 200 countries. The SARS-CoV-2 outbreak was declared a pandemic on March 11th, 2020 and a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) in late January 2020 by the World Health Organization (WHO). SARS-CoV-2 infects the respiratory tract causing flu-like symptoms and, in some, may cause severe illness like pneumonia and multi-organ failure leading to death. Today, Covid-19 cases almost reaching 9 million, with more than 450 thousand deaths. There is an urgent demand for developing a vaccine since no effective therapies or vaccines have been approved to this day to prevent or minimize the spread of the infection. In this review, we summarized the furthest vaccines in the clinical pipeline.

Evaluación positiva de medicamentos: enero, febrero y marzo de 2020 / Positive assessment of drugs: January, February, March 2020

Se reseñan los medicamentos evaluados y con dictamen positivo por comisión de expertos de la Agencia Española de Medicamentos y Productos Sanitarios o de la Agencia Europea del Medicamento hechos públicos en abril y junio de 2020, y considerados de mayor interés para el profesional sanitario. Se trata de opiniones técnicas positivas que son previas a la autorización y puesta en el mercado del medicamento

The drugs assessed by the Spanish Agency for Medicines and Health Products or European Medicines Agency made public in April and June of 2020, and considered of interest to the healthcare professional, are reviewed. These are positive technical reports prior to the authorization and placing on the market of the product