Efficacy of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Exploring diverse frontiers: Advancements of bioactive 4-aminoquinoline-based molecular hybrids in targeted therapeutics and beyond

Amongst heterocyclic compounds, quinoline and its derivatives are advantaged scaffolds that appear as a significant assembly motif for developing new drug entities. Aminoquinoline moiety has gained significant attention among researchers in the 21stcentury. Considering the biological and pharmaceutical importance of aminoquinoline derivatives, herein, we review the recent developments (since 2019) in various biological activities of the 4-aminoquinoline scaffold hybridized with diverse heterocyclic moieties such as quinoline, pyridine, pyrimidine, triazine, dioxine, piperazine, pyrazoline, piperidine, imidazole, indole, oxadiazole, carbazole, dioxole, thiazole, benzothiazole, pyrazole, phthalimide, adamantane, benzochromene, and pyridinone. Moreover, by gaining knowledge about SARs, structural insights, and molecular targets, this review may help medicinal chemists design cost-effective, selective, safe, and more potent 4-aminoquinoline hybrids for diverse biological activities.

Proposed triggers for retiring a living systematic review

Living systematic reviews (LSRs) are systematic reviews that are continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. LSRs are critical for decision-making in topics where the evidence continues to evolve. It is not feasible to continue to update LSRs indefinitely; however, guidance on when to retire LSRs from the living mode is not clear. We propose triggers for making such a decision. The first trigger is to retire LSRs when the evidence becomes conclusive for the outcomes that are required for decision-making. Conclusiveness of evidence is best determined based on the GRADE certainty of evidence construct, which is more comprehensive than solely relying on statistical considerations. The second trigger to retire LSRs is when the question becomes less pertinent for decision-making as determined by relevant stakeholders, including people affected by the problem, healthcare professionals, policymakers and researchers. LSRs can also be retired from a living mode when new studies are not anticipated to be published on the topic and when resources become unavailable to continue updating. We describe examples of retired LSRs and apply the proposed approach using one LSR about adjuvant tyrosine kinase inhibitors in high-risk renal cell carcinoma that we retired from a living mode and published its last update.

Real-Life Data on Hydroxychloroquine or Chloroquine with or Without Azithromycin in COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Analysis in Brazil

BACKGROUND

Despite no evidence showing benefits of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine with or without azithromycin for COVID-19 treatment, these medications have been largely prescribed in Brazil.

OBJECTIVES

To assess outcomes, including in-hospital mortality, electrocardiographic abnormalities, hospital length-of-stay, admission to the intensive care unit, and need for dialysis and mechanical ventilation, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients who received chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine, and to compare outcomes between those patients and their matched controls.

METHODS

A retrospective multicenter cohort study that included consecutive laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients from 37 Brazilian hospitals from March to September 2020. Propensity score was used to select matching controls by age, sex, cardiovascular comorbidities, and in-hospital use of corticosteroid. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

From 7,850 COVID-19 patients, 673 (8.6%) received hydroxychloroquine and 67 (0.9%) chloroquine. The median age in the study group was 60 years (46 - 71) and 59.1% were women. During hospitalization, 3.2% of patients presented side effects and 2.2% required therapy discontinuation. Electrocardiographic abnormalities were more prevalent in the chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine group (13.2% vs. 8.2%, p=0.01), and the long corrected QT interval was the main difference (3.6% vs. 0.4%, p<0.001). The median hospital length of stay was longer in the HCQ/CQ + AZT group than in controls (9.0 [5.0, 18.0] vs. 8.0 [4.0, 14.0] days). There was no statistical differences between groups in intensive care unit admission (35.1% vs. 32.0%; p=0.282), invasive mechanical ventilation support (27.0% vs. 22.3%; p=0.074) or mortality (18.9% vs. 18.0%; p=0.682).

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 patients treated with chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine had a longer hospital length of stay, when compared to matched controls. Intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, dialysis and in-hospital mortality were similar.

Does Widespread Use of Hydroxychloroquine Reduce the Transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19? An Ecological Correlational Study

BACKGROUND

At the beginning of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was widely used as a possible antiviral agent. Current knowledge indicates that HCQ has little or no effect on individual clinical outcomes of COVID-19, but populational effects on disease transmissibility are still unknown.

OBJECTIVE

This study investigates the hypothesis that massive HCQ consumption by a population may contribute to reducing the transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 spread by reducing the viral load of infected individuals.

METHODS

Public database of seven states from Brazil in 2020 were assessed, before the start of COVID-19 vaccination. The daily values of the COVID-19 effective reproduction number (Rt) were obtained. Associations between Rt values and the proposed predictor variables (prevalence of COVID-19 as a marker of collective immunity; social isolation indices; consumption of HCQ) were tested using multiple linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

In all seven states, consumption of HCQ was a significant negative predictor of Rt (β ranged from -0.295 to -0.502, p = 0.001). Furthermore, the mean derivative of Rt during the declining period of the COVID-19 incidence (the mean rate of variation) was also significantly negatively related to the mean HCQ consumption in that period (R2 = 0.895; β = -0.783; p = 0.011), meaning that the higher the HCQ consumption, the faster the decline of COVID-19 Rt. It suggests a dose-response phenomenon and a causal relationship in this association.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study are compatible with the hypothesis that HCQ has small but significant in vivo antiviral effects that are able to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmissibility at the populational level.

pH-dependent endocytosis mechanisms for influenza A and SARS-coronavirus

The ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the influenza epidemics have revived the interest in understanding how these highly contagious enveloped viruses respond to alterations in the physicochemical properties of their microenvironment. By understanding the mechanisms and conditions by which viruses exploit the pH environment of the host cell during endocytosis, we can gain a better understanding of how they respond to pH-regulated anti-viral therapies but also pH-induced changes in extracellular environments. This review provides a detailed explanation of the pH-dependent viral structural changes preceding and initiating viral disassembly during endocytosis for influenza A (IAV) and SARS coronaviruses. Drawing upon extensive literature from the last few decades and latest research, I analyze and compare the circumstances in which IAV and SARS-coronavirus can undertake endocytotic pathways that are pH-dependent. While there are similarities in the pH-regulated patterns leading to fusion, the mechanisms and pH activation differ. In terms of fusion activity, the measured activation pH values for IAV, across all subtypes and species, vary between approximately 5.0 to 6.0, while SARS-coronavirus necessitates a lower pH of 6.0 or less. The main difference between the pH-dependent endocytic pathways is that the SARS-coronavirus, unlike IAV, require the presence of specific pH-sensitive enzymes (cathepsin L) during endosomal transport. Conversely, the conformational changes in the IAV virus under acidic conditions in endosomes occur due to the specific envelope glycoprotein residues and envelope protein ion channels (viroporins) getting protonated by H+ ions. Despite extensive research over several decades, comprehending the pH-triggered conformational alterations of viruses still poses a significant challenge. The precise mechanisms of protonation mechanisms of certain during endosomal transport for both viruses remain incompletely understood. In absence of evidence, further research is needed.

Potential treatments of COVID-19: Drug repurposing and therapeutic interventions

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The infection is caused when Spike-protein (S-protein) present on the surface of SARS-CoV-2 interacts with human cell surface receptor, Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). This binding facilitates SARS-CoV-2 genome entry into the human cells, which in turn causes infection. Since the beginning of the pandemic, many different therapies have been developed to combat COVID-19, including treatment and prevention. This review is focused on the currently adapted and certain other potential therapies for COVID-19 treatment, which include drug repurposing, vaccines and drug-free therapies. The efficacy of various treatment options is constantly being tested through clinical trials and in vivo studies before they are made medically available to the public.

Hydroxychloroquine for treatment of non-hospitalized adults with COVID-19: A meta-analysis of individual participant data of randomized trials

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was initially promoted as an oral therapy for early treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Conventional meta-analyses cannot fully address the heterogeneity of different designs and outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of HCQ in outpatients with mild COVID-19. We conducted a pooled analysis of individual participant data from RCTs that evaluated the effect of HCQ on hospitalization and viral load reduction in outpatients with confirmed COVID-19. We evaluated the overall treatment group effect by log-likelihood ratio test (-2LL) from a generalized linear mixed model to accommodate correlated longitudinal binary data. The analysis included data from 11 RCTs. The outcome of virological effect, assessed in 1560 participants (N = 795 HCQ, N = 765 control), did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups (-2LL = 7.66; p = 0.18) when adjusting for cohort, duration of symptoms, and comorbidities. The decline in polymerase chain reaction positive tests from day 1 to 7 was 42.0 and 41.6 percentage points in the HCQ and control groups, respectively. Among the 2037 participants evaluable for hospitalization (N = 1058 HCQ, N = 979 control), we found no significant differences in hospitalization rate between participants receiving HCQ and controls (odds ratio 0.995; 95% confidence interval 0.614-1.610; -2LL = 0.0; p = 0.98) when adjusting for cohort, duration of symptoms, and comorbidities. This individual participant data meta-analysis of 11 HCQ trials that evaluated severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 viral clearance and COVID-19 hospitalization did not show a clinical benefit of HCQ. Our meta-analysis provides evidence to support the interruption in the use of HCQ in mild COVID-19 outpatients to reduce progression to severe disease.

COVID-19-Associated Liver Injury

This review analyzes data regarding liver injury associated with COVID-19 infection. We discuss reported effects on the liver from both COVID-19 and COVID-19 treatment as well as pathophysiology, review the potential role of drug-induced liver injury as an etiology of COVID-19-associated liver injury, and touch on other reports of significant outcomes including COVID-19 cholangiopathy and autoimmune hepatitis. Finally, we review the implications of COVID-19 infection in liver transplant recipients.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 on Provision of Medical Care to Patients With Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Disease and the Practice of Rheumatology

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has had a significant impact on the healthcare field that resulted in changes to the way safe and effective medical care is delivered. The effects range from service disruption including ambulatory clinic closure due to both patient and provider concerns, to lack of capacity in hospital services. In rheumatology, there were other effects including viral infection-related autoantibody production, concerns about the use of systemic immunosuppression in the presence of an infectious pandemic and even concerns for viral infection-induced flares of rheumatic disease. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) led to the rapid adoption of innovative technologies that permitted the introduction and increased use of telemedicine via a number of platforms. Rapid discoveries and innovations led to the development of diagnostic and therapeutic agents in the management of COVID-19. Scientific advancement and discoveries around COVID-19 infection, symptoms, autoantibody production, chronic sequela and the repurposing of rheumatic immunosuppressive agents led to improved survival and an expanded role for the rheumatologist. Rheumatologists may sometimes be involved in the diagnosis and management of the hospitalized COVID-19 patient. In the ambulatory clinic, a rheumatologist also helps to differentiate between symptoms of long COVID and those of systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease (SARD). Rheumatologists must also grapple with the concerns related to immunosuppressive therapy and the risk of COVID-19 infections. In addition, there are concerns around vaccine effectiveness in people with SARD and those on immunosuppressive medications. Although the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the effects on healthcare resulted in difficulties, both patients and providers have risen to the challenge. The long-term outcome of COVID-19 for the medical system and rheumatologists in particular is not yet fully understood and will need further study. This review concentrates on the changing role of the rheumatologists, improved understanding of rheumatic disease and immunosuppressive therapies in the wake of the pandemic and how this has led to an improvement in the care of patients with COVID-19.

Combating the Progression of Novel Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 Infectious Disease: Current State and Future Prospects in Molecular Diagnostics and Drug Discovery

A highly infectious and life-threatening virus was first reported in Wuhan, China, in late 2019, and it rapidly spread all over the world. This novel virus belongs to the coronavirus family and is associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), causing respiratory disease known as COVID-19. In March 2020, WHO has declared the COVID-19 outbreak a global pandemic. Its morbidity and mortality rates are swiftly rising day by day, with the situation becoming more severe and fatal for the comorbid population. Many COVID-19 patients are asymptomatic, but they silently spread the infection. There is a need for proper screening of infected patients to prevent the epidemic transmission of disease and for early curative interventions to reduce the risk of developing severe complications from COVID-19. To date, the diagnostic assays are of two categories, molecular detection of viral genetic material by real-time RTpolymerase chain reaction and serological test, which relies on detecting antiviral antibodies. Unfortunately, there are no effective prophylactics and therapeutics available against COVID-19. However, a few drugs have shown promising antiviral activity against it, and these presently are being referred for clinical trials, albeit FDA has issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the emergency use of a few drugs for SARSCoV- 2 infection. This review provides an insight into current progress, challenges and future prospects of laboratory detection methods of COVID-19, and highlights the clinical stage of the major evidence-based drugs/vaccines recommended against the novel SARS-CoV-2 pandemic virus.

Development of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with rheumatic conditions on hydroxychloroquine monotherapy vs. patients without rheumatic conditions: A retrospective, propensity-matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

The primary purpose of the current study was to examine whether patients with rheumatologic conditions receiving only chronic hydroxychloroquine therapy for their disease are at less risk of developing SARS-CoV-2 infection than a comparative group of patients without rheumatologic conditions.

METHODS

A retrospective, observational, nationwide stratified propensity analysis was conducted comparing patients only on chronic treatment with hydroxychloroquine for their rheumatologic condition to a random sample of patients without rheumatologic conditions and not receiving hydroxychloroquine, utilizing a Veterans Health Administration nationwide clinical administrative database.

RESULTS

The 1-to-1 stratified propensity analysis was undertaken using a random sample of patients without rheumatoid conditions and not receiving hydroxychloroquine (n  33,081) and patients with rheumatoid conditions receiving hydroxychloroquine as the lone medication for their condition (n  6047). A total of 5,474 patients in each group were successfully matched. The incidence of documented SARS-CoV-2 infections during the study period did not differ between patients receiving hydroxychloroquine and patients not receiving hydroxychloroquine (41/5,474 [0.749%] vs. 36/5,474 [0.658%], respectively, p = 0.57; Odds ratio [OR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-1.79). There were no statistically-significant differences in secondary outcomes between the two groups in patients who developed active SARS-CoV-2 infection. Multivariate logistic regression to determine independent variables associated with the development of active SARS-CoV-2 infection failed to include receipt of hydroxychloroquine (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.62-1.56).

CONCLUSIONS

Hydroxychloroquine failed to demonstrate a preventative effect against SARS-CoV-2 infection in a large group of patients with rheumatologic conditions compared to patients without rheumatologic conditions.

COVID-19 in pediatric nephrology centers in Turkey

BACKGROUND

There is limited data on COVID-19 disease in children with kidney disease. We aimed to investigate the characteristics and prognosis of COVID-19 in pediatric nephrology patients in Turkey.

METHODS

This was a national, multicenter, retrospective cohort study based on an online survey evaluating the data between 11th March 2020 and 11th March 2021 as an initial step of a detailed pediatric nephrology COVID-19 registry.

RESULTS

Two hundred and three patients (89 girls and 114 boys) were diagnosed with COVID-19. One-third of these patients (36.9%) were between 10-15 years old. Half of the patients were on kidney replacement therapy: kidney transplant (KTx) recipients (n = 56, 27.5%), patients receiving chronic hemodialysis (n = 33, 16.3%) and those on peritoneal dialysis (PD) (n = 18, 8.9%). Fifty-four (26.6%) children were asymptomatic. Eighty-two (40.3%) patients were hospitalized and 23 (28%) needed intensive care unit admission. Fifty-five percent of the patients were not treated, while the remaining was given favipiravir (20.7%), steroid (16.3%), and hydroxychloroquine (11.3%). Acute kidney injury developed in 19.5% of hospitalized patients. Five (2.4%) had MIS-C. Eighty-three percent of the patients were discharged without any apparent sequelae, while 7 (3.4%) died. One hundred and eight health care staff were infected during the study period.

DISCUSSION

COVID-19 was most commonly seen in patients who underwent KTx and received HD. The combined immunosuppressive therapy and frequent exposure to the hospital setting may increase these patients' susceptibility. Staff infections before vaccination era were alarming, various precautions should be taken for infection control, particularly optimal vaccination coverage.

Evaluation of the anti-diabetic drug sitagliptin as a novel attenuate to SARS-CoV-2 evidence-based in silico: molecular docking and molecular dynamics

The current outbreak of COVID-19 cases worldwide has been responsible for a significant number of deaths, especially in hospitalized patients suffering from comorbidities, such as obesity, diabetes, hypertension. The disease not only has prompted an interest in the pathophysiology, but also it has propelled a massive race to find new anti-SARS-CoV-2 drugs. In this scenario, known drugs commonly used to treat other diseases have been suggested as alternative or complementary therapeutics. Herein we propose the use of sitagliptin, an inhibitor of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP₄) used to treat type-II diabetes, as an agent to block and inhibit the activity of two proteases, 3CL^pro and PL^pro, related to the processing of SARS-CoV-2 structural proteins. Inhibition of these proteases may possibly reduce the viral load and infection on the host by hampering the synthesis of new viruses, thus promoting a better outcome. In silico assays consisting in the modeling of the ligand sitagliptin and evaluation of its capacity to interact with 3CL^pro and PL^pro through the prediction of the ligand bioactivity, molecular docking, overlapping of crystal structures, and molecular dynamic simulations were conducted. The experiments indicate that sitagliptin can interact and bind to both targets. However, this interaction seems to be stronger and more stable to 3CL^pro (ΔG = −7.8 kcal mol⁻¹), when compared to PL^pro (ΔG = −7.5 kcal mol⁻¹). This study suggests that sitagliptin may be suitable to treat COVID-19 patients, beyond its common use as an anti-diabetic medication. In vivo studies may further support this hypothesis.

The Allergic Rhinitis and Its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) Approach of Value-Added Medicines: As-Needed Treatment in Allergic Rhinitis

Drug repurposing is a major field of value-added medicine. It involves investigating and evaluating existing drugs for new therapeutic purposes that address unmet healthcare needs. Several unmet needs in allergic rhinitis could be improved by drug repurposing. This could be game-changing for disease management. Current medications for allergic rhinitis are centered on continuous long-term treatment, and medication registration is based on randomized controlled trials carried out for a minimum of 14 days with adherence of 70% or greater. A new way of treating allergic rhinitis is to propose as-needed treatment depending on symptoms, rather than classical continuous treatment. This rostrum will discuss existing clinical trials on as-needed treatment for allergic rhinitis and real-world data obtained by the mobile health app MASK-air, which focuses on digitally-enabled, patient-centered care pathways.

Pseudoscience and fraudulent products for COVID-19 management

As of now, the COVID-19 pandemic has become uncontrolled and is spreading widely throughout the world. Additionally, new variants of the mutated viral variants have been found in some countries that are more dangerous than the original strain. Even vaccines cannot produce complete protective immunity against the newer strains of SARS-CoV-2. Due to such a dreadful situation, lots of fear and depression have been created among the public. People are looking for the treatment of the disease at any cost and there is a race in the market to provide treatment and make money, whether it is effective or not! In such a condition, many fraud products, remedies, and myths have come into the market, which is falsely claimed to be effective for the disease and can harm the patients. Hence, FDA has banned such products and remedies. In this review, we have compiled all such fraudulent and pseudosciences identified for COVID-19. Currently, in the pandemic time, health agencies are approving the repurposed medicines based on the small-scale clinical data for emergency uses that become ineffective (most of the cases) after large randomized clinical studies. Proper vigilance strategies need to be defined by the regulatory agencies of the nation and routine awareness programs shall be arranged for educating the people and healthcare workers on routine updates.

Development and optimization of a high-throughput screening assay for in vitro anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity: Evaluation of 5676 Phase 1 Passed Structures

Although vaccines are currently used to control the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, treatment options are urgently needed for those who cannot be vaccinated and for future outbreaks involving new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) strains or coronaviruses not covered by current vaccines. Thus far, few existing antivirals are known to be effective against SARS-CoV-2 and clinically successful against COVID-19. As part of an immediate response to the COVID-19 pandemic, a high-throughput, high content imaging-based SARS-CoV-2 infection assay was developed in VeroE6 African green monkey kidney epithelial cells expressing a stable enhanced green fluorescent protein (VeroE6-eGFP cells) and was used to screen a library of 5676 compounds that passed Phase 1 clinical trials. Eight drugs (nelfinavir, RG-12915, itraconazole, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, sematilide, remdesivir, and doxorubicin) were identified as inhibitors of in vitro anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity in VeroE6-eGFP and/or Caco-2 cell lines. However, apart from remdesivir, toxicity and pharmacokinetic data did not support further clinical development of these compounds for COVID-19 treatment.

Neutrophil Extracellular Traps, Sepsis and COVID-19 - A Tripod Stand

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is responsible for the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Majority of COVID-19 patients have mild disease but about 20% of COVID-19 patients progress to severe disease. These patients end up in the intensive care unit (ICU) with clinical manifestations of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and sepsis. The formation of neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) has also been associated with severe COVID-19. Understanding of the immunopathology of COVID-19 is critical for the development of effective therapeutics. In this article, we discuss evidence indicating that severe COVID-19 has clinical presentations consistent with the definitions of viral sepsis. We highlight the role of neutrophils and NETs formation in the pathogenesis of severe COVID-19. Finally, we highlight the potential of therapies inhibiting NETs formation for the treatment of COVID-19.

The Role of Biomarkers in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients With Systemic Manifestations

The following article aims to review COVID-19 biomarkers used in hospital practice. It is apparent that COVID-19 is not simply a pulmonary disease but has systemic manifestations. For this reason, biomarkers must be used in the management of diagnosed patients to provide holistic care. Patients with COVID-19 have been shown to have pulmonary, hepatobiliary, cardiovascular, neurologic, and renal injury, along with coagulopathy and a distinct cytokine storm. Biomarkers can effectively inform clinicians of systemic organ injury due to COVID-19. Furthermore, biomarkers can be used in predictive models for severe COVID-19 in admitted patients. The utility of doing so is to allow for risk stratification and utilization of proper treatment protocols. In addition, COVID-19 biomarkers in the pediatric population are discussed, specifically in predicting Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome. Ultimately, biomarkers can be used as predictive tools to allow clinicians to identify and adequately manage patients at increased risk for worse outcomes from COVID-19. Both literature review and anecdotal evidence has shown that severe COVID-19 is a systemic disease, and understanding associated biomarkers are crucial for hospitalized patients’ proper clinical decision-making. For example, the cytokine storm releases inflammatory markers in different organ systems such as the pulmonary, hepatobiliary, hematological, cardiac, neurological, and renal systems. This review summarizes the latest research of COVID-19 that can help inform healthcare professionals how to better mitigate morbidity and mortality associated with this disease and provides information about certain systemic biomarkers that can be incorporated into hospital practice to provide more comprehensive care for hospitalized COIVD-19 patients.

Clinical and Genetic Characteristics of Coronaviruses with Particular Emphasis on SARS-CoV-2 Virus

The rapidly spreading Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a global health crisis and has left a deep mark on society, culture, and the global economy. Despite considerable efforts made to contain the disease, SARS-CoV-2 still poses a threat on a global scale. The current epidemiological situation caused an urgent need to understand the basic mechanisms of the virus transmission and COVID-19 severe course. This review summarizes current knowledge on clinical courses, diagnostics, treatment, and prevention of COVID-19. Moreover, we have included the latest research results on the genetic characterization of SARS-CoV-2 and genetic determinants of susceptibility and severity to infection.

Characteristics, quality and volume of the first 5 months of the COVID-19 evidence synthesis infodemic: a meta-research study

OBJECTIVE

The academic and scientific community has reacted at pace to gather evidence to help and inform about COVID-19. Concerns have been raised about the quality of this evidence. The aim of this review was to map the nature, scope and quality of evidence syntheses on COVID-19 and to explore the relationship between review quality and the extent of researcher, policy and media interest.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A meta-research: systematic review of reviews.

INFORMATION SOURCES

PubMed, Epistemonikos COVID-19 evidence, the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection and the WHO COVID-19 database, searched between 10 June 2020 and 15 June 2020.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Any peer-reviewed article reported as a systematic review, rapid review, overview, meta-analysis or qualitative evidence synthesis in the title or abstract addressing a research question relating to COVID-19. Articles described as meta-analyses but not undertaken as part of a systematic or rapid review were excluded.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Abstract and full text screening were undertaken by two independent reviewers. Descriptive information on review type, purpose, population, size, citation and attention metrics were extracted along with whether the review met the definition of a systematic review according to six key methodological criteria. For those meeting all criteria, additional data on methods and publication metrics were extracted.

RISK OF BIAS

For articles meeting all six criteria required to meet the definition of a systematic review, AMSTAR-2 ((A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews, version 2.0) was used to assess the quality of the reported methods.

RESULTS

2334 articles were screened, resulting in 280 reviews being included: 232 systematic reviews, 46 rapid reviews and 2 overviews. Less than half reported undertaking critical appraisal and a third had no reproducible search strategy. There was considerable overlap in topics, with discordant findings. Eighty-eight of the 280 reviews met all six systematic review criteria. Of these, just 3 were rated as of moderate or high quality on AMSTAR-2, with the majority having critical flaws: only a third reported registering a protocol, and less than one in five searched named COVID-19 databases. Review conduct and publication were rapid, with 52 of the 88 systematic reviews reported as being conducted within 3 weeks, and a half published within 3 weeks of submission. Researcher and media interest, as measured by altmetrics and citations, was high, and was not correlated with quality.

DISCUSSION

This meta-research of early published COVID-19 evidence syntheses found low-quality reviews being published at pace, often with short publication turnarounds. Despite being of low quality and many lacking robust methods, the reviews received substantial attention across both academic and public platforms, and the attention was not related to the quality of review methods.

INTERPRETATION

Flaws in systematic review methods limit the validity of a review and the generalisability of its findings. Yet, by being reported as 'systematic reviews', many readers may well regard them as high-quality evidence, irrespective of the actual methods undertaken. The challenge especially in times such as this pandemic is to provide indications of trustworthiness in evidence that is available in 'real time'.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020188822.

Safety of Short-Term Treatments with Oral Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine in Patients with and without COVID-19: A Systematic Review

Chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have recently become the focus of global attention as possible treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). The current systematic review aims to assess their safety in short treatments (≤14 days), whether used alone or in combination with other drugs. Following the PRISMA and SWiM recommendations, a search was conducted using four health databases for all relevant English-, Chinese-, and Spanish-language studies from inception through 30 July 2021. Patients treated for any condition and with any comparator were included. The outcomes of interest were early drug adverse effects and their frequency. A total of 254 articles met the inclusion criteria, including case and case-control reports as well as cross-sectional, cohort, and randomised studies. The results were summarised either qualitatively in table or narrative form or, when possible (99 studies), quantitatively in terms of adverse event frequencies. Quality evaluation was conducted using the CARE, STROBE, and JADAD tools. This systematic review showed that safety depended on drug indication. In COVID-19 patients, cardiac adverse effects, such as corrected QT interval prolongation, were relatively frequent (0–27.3% and up to 33% if combined with azithromycin), though the risk of torsade de pointes was low. Compared to non-COVID-19 patients, COVID-19 patients experienced a higher frequency of cardiac adverse effects regardless of the regimen used. Dermatological adverse effects affected 0–10% of patients with autoimmune diseases and COVID-19. A broad spectrum of neuropsychiatric adverse effects affected patients treated with CQ for malaria with variable frequencies and some cases were reported in COVID-19 patients. Gastrointestinal adverse effects occurred regardless of drug indication affecting 0–50% of patients. In conclusion, CQ and HCQ are two safe drugs widely used in the treatment of malaria and autoimmune diseases. However, recent findings on their cardiac and neuropsychiatric adverse effects should be considered if these drugs were to be proposed as antivirals again.

Covid-19 and its implications for the provision of gynecological services globally

Covid-19 took the world by surprise and has completely changed the way humans live and work. There is hardly an aspect of life that has not been affected. Whether social, economic, physical, psychological, cultural or religious, this pandemic has revolutionized every aspect of our lives and some of these changes are here to stay for the unforeseeable time. Although much has been written about the negative effects of Covid-19 on our social lives, some technological advances on COVID-19 have profoundly affected various aspects of our lives. These are mostly to do with how we communicate, deliver health services, innovate and investigate new preventative measures and treatments, travel and indeed influenced the carbon footprint of the planet. Although most of gynaecology is elective and was therefore not considered a priority in the early phases of COVI-19, there are considerable consequences of delaying treatment for some of these elective conditions. Of particular importance are infertility, pre-malignant conditions, chronic pelvic pain, sexual disorders and those affecting the psychological and social aspects of women and families. The pandemic forced a rethink of how healthcare is delivered with wide adoption of remote/virtual consultation and triaging of clinical presentations. The rapid development of immunization and drugs against the virus was met with doubts by a large proportion of the population with reluctance to accept these. Consequently, there remains unvaccinated portions of both low and high-risk populations, some of whom may be denied access to gynaecological care. On the other hand, some pregnant women who are frightened of the impact of vaccination on pregnancy put their own lives at risk. While significant progress has been made to combat the pandemic, lessons about healthcare delivery (face-to-face versus virtual), education of the end users and introduction of new technologies into the development of drugs and vaccines must be evaluated and improved moving forward not only during the ongoing epidemic but with future outbreaks.

Drug repositioning: Progress and challenges in drug discovery for various diseases

Compared with traditional de novo drug discovery, drug repurposing has become an attractive drug discovery strategy due to its low-cost and high efficiency. Through a comprehensive analysis of the candidates that have been identified with drug repositioning potentials, it is found that although some drugs do not show obvious advantages in the original indications, they may exert more obvious effects in other diseases. In addition, some drugs have a synergistic effect to exert better clinical efficacy if used in combination. Particularly, it has been confirmed that drug repositioning has benefits and values on the current public health emergency such as the COVID-19 pandemic, which proved the great potential of drug repositioning. In this review, we systematically reviewed a series of representative drugs that have been repositioned for different diseases and illustrated successful cases in each disease. Especially, the mechanism of action for the representative drugs in new indications were explicitly explored for each disease, we hope this review can provide important insights for follow-up research.

Consumption Trends of Antibiotics in Brazil During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background: In 2019, a new type of coronavirus emerged and spread to the rest of the world. Numerous drugs were identified as possible treatments. Among the candidates for possible treatment was azithromycin alone or in combination with other drugs. As a result, many clinicians in Brazil have prescribed azithromycin in an attempt to combat or minimize the effects of COVID19. Aim: This study analyzed the sales data of the main antibiotics prescribed in Brazil to verify the change in consumption trends of these drugs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This is an interrupted time series that analyzed antimicrobial sales data between January 2014 and July 2021, publicly accessible information obtained from the Brazilian government's website. Monthly means of "defined daily doses of DDDs" (DDDs per 1,000 inhabitants per day) of antibiotics were compared by analysis of variance, followed by the Dunnett Multiple Comparisons Test. Monthly trend changes in antibiotic use were verified using Joinpoint regression. Results: Amoxicillin (31.97%), azithromycin (18.33%), and cefalexin (16.61%) were the most sold antibiotics in Brazil during the evaluation period. Azithromycin consumption rose from 1.40 DDDs in February 2020 to 3.53 DDDs in July 2020. Azithromycin sales showed a significant increase in the pandemic period [Monthly Percent Change (MPC) 5.83%, 95% 1.80; 10.00], whereas there was a fall in amoxicillin sales (MPC -9.00%, 95% CI -14.70; -2.90) and cefalexin [MPC-2.70%, 95% (CI -6.30; -1.10)] in this same period. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic changed the pattern of antibiotic consumption in Brazil, with a decrease in the use of amoxicillin and cefalexin and an increase in the consumption of azithromycin.

Systemic lupus erythematosus: overview, management and COVID-19

Systemic lupus erythematosus is a complex multi-system disease affecting various systems of the body. The aetiology remains unclear; however, it is thought that immune system dysregulation, environmental factors and viral susceptibility can trigger the disease. Mortality remains high due to cardiovascular disease, infection and lupus nephritis. Clinical assessment should comprise an extensive history, detailed physical examination and relevant laboratory tests. Management begins with an in-depth understanding of disease-specific complications and associated comorbidities. Treatments should be based on a shared decision-making process between the patient and the clinician. Review by a specialist nurse is vital for ongoing support and education. Current treatments can increase the risk of COVID-19 infection and disease severity, so caution is needed in the current climate. New treatments are emerging and offer hope to those with refractory disease.

Clinical progress of therapeutics and vaccines: Rising hope against COVID-19 treatment

Cases of deaths due to COVID-19 (COrona VIrus Disease-19) infection are increasing gradually worldwide. Immense research is ongoing to control this pandemic condition. Continual research outcomes are indicating that therapeutic and prophylactic agents are the possible hope to prevent the pandemic from spreading and to combat this increasing death count. Experience gained from previous coronavirus infections (eg., SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome), MERS (Middle Ease Respiratory Syndrome), accumulated clinical knowledge during this pandemic, and research helped to identify a few therapeutic agents for emergency treatment of COVID-19. Thereby, monoclonal antibodies, antivirals, broad-spectrum antimicrobials, immunomodulators, and supplements are being suggested for treatment depending on the stage of the disease. These recommended treatments are authorized under medical supervision in emergency conditions only. Urgent need to control the pandemic condition had resulted in various approaches of repurposing the existing drugs, However, poorly designed clinical trials and associated outcomes do not provide enough evidence to fully approve treatments against COVID-19. So far, World Health Organization (WHO) authorized three vaccines as prophylactic against SARS-CoV-2. Here, we discussed about various therapeutic agents, their clinical trials, and limitations of trials for the management of COVID-19. Further, we have also spotlighted different vaccines in research in combating COVID-19.

Therapeutic strategies for COVID-19 patients: An update

The novel coronavirus SARS-coV-2, which emerged in Wuhan in November 2019, has increasingly spread causing a global pandemic that infected more than 444 million people, resulting in severe social and economic ramifications, and claimed more than 6,010,000 lives by March 5, 2022. The pandemic attracted global attention with consequential multiple economic, social, and clinical studies. Among causes of poor clinical outcome of the disease are therapeutic challenges, leading to spirals of studies in search for better therapeutic alternatives. Despite the worsening circumstances of the pandemic, no drug has yet shown remarkable efficacy in the clinical management of COVID-19 patients in large-scale trials. Many potential therapeutic strategies, including the use of nucleotide analogs, chloroquine phosphate, arbidol, protease inhibitors (lopinavir/ritonavir), plasma, monoclonal antibodies, plastic antibodies based on Molecularly Imprinted Polymers (MIPs), traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), nanomaterials, vaccine, and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), have emerged with various degrees of successes. Remdesivir and dexamethasone have now been licensed based on the results of randomized controlled trials. Baricitinib, the Janus kinase (JAK) 1/2 inhibitor, is also an attractive candidate due to its properties as a potent anti-inflammatory agent and its hypothesized off-target antiviral effects against SARS-CoV-2. Besides, human plasma from recovered COVID-19 patients is theoretically expected to be safe and effective for both therapy and post-exposure prophylaxis. In light of the literature, the correlation between the reduction of C5aR1/C5aR2 and IL6-IL6R axis, using the available anti-IL6R mAb would be crucial. More, MSCs are a potential therapeutic choice for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. The coronavirus spike (S) protein that mediates the process of the infection via binding of host cells to the virus receptor is an essential focus for vaccine development. Importantly, with the number of patients increasing daily, there is an urgent need for effective therapeutic intervention. In this review, we expatiated on several strategies deployed for the treatment of COVID-19 infection.

Inventions of Interventions: Data Driven Strategies in Pandemic Research and Control

Faced with a rapidly evolving virus, inventors must seek to experiment, iterate and deploy both creative and effective solutions. Supported by empirical model-driven analysis, this paper delves into fundamental paradoxes and biases in the context of epidemic research, increasing awareness at every stage of the clinical trial; ranging from hypothesizing to sampling, and analyses to fake data detection. Critically, the paper also presents novel ideas that demonstrate how the paradoxes and biases covered play into technology development and deployment to combat the surging pandemic, COVID-19.

COVID-19 Cardiovascular Connection: A Review of Cardiac Manifestations in COVID-19 Infection and Treatment Modalities

The coronavirus pandemic has crippled healthcare system since its outbreak in 2020, and has led to over 2.6 million deaths worldwide. Clinical manifestations of COVID-19 range from asymptomatic carrier to severe pneumonia, to life-threatening acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The early efforts of the pandemic surrounded treating the pulmonary component of COVID-19, however, there has been robust data surrounding the cardiac complications associated with the virus. This is suspected to be from a marked inflammatory response as well as direct viral injury. Arrhythmias, acute myocardial injury, myocarditis, cardiomyopathy, thrombosis, and myocardial fibrosis are some of the observed cardiac complications. There have been high morbidity and mortality rates in those affected by cardiac conditions associated with COVID-19. Additionally, there have been documented cases of patients presenting with typical cardiac symptoms who are subsequently discovered to have COVID-19 infection. In those who test positive for COVID-19, clinical awareness of the significant cardiac components of the virus is pertinent to prevent morbidity and mortality. Unfortunately, treatment and preventative measures developed for COVID-19 have been shown to be also be associated with cardiac complications. This is a comprehensive review of the cardiac complications and manifestations of COVID-19 infection in addition to those associated with both treatment and vaccination.

TREATMENT OF MYASTHENIA GRAVIS PATIENTS WITH COVID-19: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the late 2019 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), causes a respiratory disease which could put myasthenia gravis (MG) patients at a greater risk of developing severe disease course, since infections and some drugs are a well-recognized trigger of symptom exacerbation in MG patients. Out of ten most commonly used past and present drugs used in COVID-19 treatment, two (quinolone derivatives and azithromycin) are known to worsen MG symptoms, whereas another two (tocilizumab and eculizumab) might have positive effect on MG symptoms. Colchicine, remdesivir, lopinavir, ritonavir and favipiravir seem to be safe to use, while data are insufficient for bamlanivimab, although it is also probably safe to use. Considering MG treatment options in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, acetylcholine esterase inhibitors are generally safe to use with some preliminary studies even demonstrating therapeutic properties in regard to COVID-19. Corticosteroids are in general safe to use, even recommended in specific circumstances, whereas other immunosuppressive medications (mycophenolate mofetil, azathioprine, cyclosporine, methotrexate) are probably safe to use. The only exception is rituximab since the resulting B cell depletion can lead to more severe COVID-19 disease. Concerning plasmapheresis and intravenous immunoglobulins, both can be used in COVID-19 while taking into consideration thromboembolic properties of the former and hemodynamic disturbances of the latter. As current data suggest, all known COVID-19 vaccines are safe to use in MG patients.

Efficacy of early treatment with hydroxychloroquine in people with mild to moderate COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

No early treatment intervention for COVID-19 has proven effective to date. We systematically reviewed the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine as early treatment for COVID-19.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating hydroxychloroquine for early treatment of COVID-19 were searched in five engines and preprint websites until September 14, 2021. Primary outcomes were hospitalization and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included COVID-19 symptom resolution, viral clearance, and adverse events. Inverse variance random-effects meta-analyses were performed and quality of evidence (QoE) per outcome was assessed with GRADE methods.

RESULTS

Five RCTs (n = 1848) were included. The comparator was placebo in four RCTs and usual care in one RCT. The RCTs used hydroxychloroquine total doses between 1,600 and 4,400 mg and had follow-up times between 14 and 90 days. Compared to the controls, early treatment with hydroxychloroquine did not reduce hospitalizations (RR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.47-1.36, I ² = 2%, 5 RCTs, low QoE), all-cause mortality (RR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.16-3.68, I ² = 0%, 5 RCTs, very low QoE), symptom resolution (RR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.77-1.16, I ² = 71%, 3 RCTs, low QoE) or viral clearance at 14 days (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.82-1.27, I ² = 65%, 2 RCTs, low QoE). There was a larger non-significant increase of adverse events with hydroxychloroquine vs. controls (RR = 2.17, 95% CI: 0.86-5.45, I ² = 92%, 5 RCTs, very low QoE).

CONCLUSIONS

Hydroxychloroquine was not efficacious as early treatment for COVID-19 infections in RCTs with low to very low quality of evidence for all outcomes. More RCTs are needed to elucidate the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine as early treatment intervention.

Efficacy of the early treatment with tocilizumab-hydroxychloroquine and tocilizumab-remdesivir in severe COVID-19 Patients

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of the best combination between different antiviral and anti-inflammatory drugs stills an interest in the treatment of COVID19 infection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective randomized cohort study comprised 108 adult patients with confirmed PCR COVID 19 infection with systemic hyper inflammation state, divided into two groups according to the treatment regimen, 56 in the tocilizumab- hydroxychloroquine (TCZ-HCQ) treatment, and 52 in the tocilizumab-remdesivir (TCZ-RMV) treatment. The first group received a combination of I.V. TCZ (400-800 mg every 24 h for only two doses) and HCQ (400 mg twice in the first day then 200 mg twice for 5 days) while the second group of patients received I.V. RMV of 200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg once daily infused over 60 min for 5 days with the same TCZ regimen used in the first group. All clinical parameters and laboratory investigations were assessed before and after treatment.

RESULTS

The CRP was significantly decreased while PaO2/FiO2 (P/F) ratio post-treatment was significantly improved in both treatment groups. TCZ-HCQ group showed a significant decrease in the ferritin, LDH, and D. Dimer levels. The median days of hospitalization with interquartile range (IQR) were 10 (6-16) and 8 (5-12) for TCZ-HCQ and TCZ-RMV groups, respectively. The numbers of mechanically ventilated patients were 25 and 43 for TCZ-HCQ and TCZ-RMV groups, respectively. Therapeutic failure was about 26.8% in the TCZ-HCQ group and 30.8% in the TCZ-RMV group but there was no significant difference between both groups. Some complications were recognized only in TCZ-RMV following treatment including secondary bacterial infections (42.3%), myocarditis (15.4%), and finally pulmonary embolism (7.7%).

CONCLUSION

Efficacy of both TCZ-RMV and TCZ-HCQ combinations are observed in the treatment of severe COVID-19 patients; however the increased need for ICU or mechanical ventilation in the TCZ-RMV arm contributed to the appearance of cardiac and thrombotic events. The study was registered at the Clinical Trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT04779047).

Physiologically Based Modelling Framework for Prediction of Pulmonary Pharmacokinetics of Antimicrobial Target Site Concentrations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Prediction of antimicrobial target-site pharmacokinetics is of relevance to optimize treatment with antimicrobial agents. A physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model framework was developed for prediction of pulmonary pharmacokinetics, including key pulmonary infection sites (i.e. the alveolar macrophages and the epithelial lining fluid).

METHODS

The modelling framework incorporated three lung PBPK models: a general passive permeability-limited model, a drug-specific permeability-limited model and a quantitative structure-property relationship (QSPR)-informed perfusion-limited model. We applied the modelling framework to three fluoroquinolone antibiotics. Incorporation of experimental drug-specific permeability data was found essential for accurate prediction.

RESULTS

In the absence of drug-specific transport data, our QSPR-based model has generic applicability. Furthermore, we evaluated the impact of drug properties and pathophysiologically related changes on pulmonary pharmacokinetics. Pulmonary pharmacokinetics were highly affected by physiological changes, causing a shift in the main route of diffusion (i.e. paracellular or transcellular). Finally, we show that lysosomal trapping can cause an overestimation of cytosolic concentrations for basic compounds when measuring drug concentrations in cell homogenate.

CONCLUSION

The developed lung PBPK model framework constitutes a promising tool for characterization of pulmonary exposure of systemically administrated antimicrobials.

Efficacy and safety of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Ivermectin became a popular choice for COVID-19 treatment among clinicians and the public following encouraging results from pre-print trials and in vitro studies. Early reviews recommended the use of ivermectin based largely on non-peer-reviewed evidence, which may not be robust. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of ivermectin for treating COVID-19 based on peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (OSs).

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed were searched from 1 January 2020 to 1 September 2021 for relevant studies. Outcomes included time to viral clearance, duration of hospitalization, mortality, incidence of mechanical ventilation and incidence of adverse events. RoB2 and ROBINS-I were used to assess risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted. GRADE was used to evaluate quality of evidence.

RESULTS

Three OSs and 14 RCTs were included in the review. Most RCTs were rated as having some concerns in regards to risk of bias, while OSs were mainly rated as having a moderate risk of bias. Based on meta-analysis of RCTs, the use of ivermectin was not associated with reduction in time to viral clearance, duration of hospitalization, incidence of mortality and incidence of mechanical ventilation. Ivermectin did not significantly increase incidence of adverse events. Meta-analysis of OSs agrees with findings from RCT studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low to moderate quality of evidence, ivermectin was not efficacious at managing COVID-19. Its safety profile permits its use in trial settings to further clarify its role in COVID-19 treatment.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

The review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021275302).

Safety and efficacy of hydroxychloroquine for treatment of non-severe COVID-19 among adults in Uganda: a randomized open label phase II clinical trial

Background

Several repurposed drugs such as hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have been investigated for treatment of COVID-19, but none was confirmed to be efficacious. While in vitro studies have demonstrated antiviral properties of HCQ, data from clinical trials were conflicting regarding its benefit for COVID-19 treatment. Drugs that limit viral replication may be beneficial in the earlier course of the disease thus slowing progression to severe and critical illness.

Design

We conducted a randomized open label Phase II clinical trial from October–December 2020.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 using RT-PCR were included in the study if they were 18 years and above and had a diagnosis of COVID-19 made in the last 3 days. Patients were randomized in blocks, to receive either HCQ 400 mg twice a day for the first day followed by 200 mg twice daily for the next 4 days plus standard of care (SOC) treatment or SOC treatment alone. SARS COV-2 viral load (CT values) from RT-PCR testing of samples collected using nasal/orapharyngeal swabs was performed at baseline, day 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10. The primary outcome was median time from randomization to SARS COV-2 viral clearance by day 6.

Results

Of the 105 participants enrolled, 55 were assigned to the intervention group (HCQ plus SOC) and 50 to the control group (SOC only). Baseline characteristics were similar across treatment arms. Viral clearance did not differ by treatment arm, 20 and 19 participants respectively had SARS COV-2 viral load clearance by day 6 with no significant difference, median (IQR) number of days to viral load clearance between the two groups was 4(3–4) vs 4(2–4): p = 0.457. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes (symptom resolution and adverse events) between the intervention group and the control group. There were no significant differences in specific adverse events such as elevated alkaline phosphatase, prolonged QTc interval on ECG, among patients in the intervention group as compared to the control group.

Conclusion

Our results show that HCQ 400 mg twice a day for the first day followed by 200 mg twice daily for the next 4 days was safe but not associated with reduction in viral clearance or symptom resolution among adults with COVID-19 in Uganda.

Trial registration: NCT04860284.

Discovery of juglone and its derivatives as potent SARS-CoV-2 main proteinase inhibitors

SARS-CoV-2 as a positive-sense single-stranded RNA coronavirus caused the global outbreak of COVID-19. The main protease (Mpro) of the virus as the major enzyme processing viral polyproteins contributed to the replication and transcription of SARS-CoV-2 in host cells, and has been characterized as an attractive target in drug discovery. Herein, a set of 1,4-naphthoquinones with juglone skeleton were prepared and evaluated for the inhibitory efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 Mpro. More than half of the tested naphthoquinones could effectively inhibit the target enzyme with an inhibition rate of more than 90% at the concentration of 10 μM. In the structure-activity relationships (SARs) analysis, the characteristics of substituents and their position on juglone core scaffold were recognized as key ingredients for enzyme inhibitory activity. The most active compound, 2-acetyl-8-methoxy-1,4-naphthoquinone (15), which exhibited much higher potency in enzyme inhibitions than shikonin as the positive control, displayed an IC50 value of 72.07 ± 4.84 nM towards Mpro-mediated hydrolysis of the fluorescently labeled peptide. It fit well into the active site cavity of the enzyme by forming hydrogen bonds with adjacent amino acid residues in molecular docking studies. The results from in vitro antiviral activity evaluation demonstrated that the most potent Mpro inhibitor could significantly suppress the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in Vero E6 cells within the low micromolar concentrations, with its EC50 value of about 4.55 μM. It was non-toxic towards the host Vero E6 cells under tested concentrations. The present research work implied that juglone skeleton could be a primary template for the development of potent Mpro inhibitors.

Clinical Management of Adult Patients with COVID-19 Outside Intensive Care Units: Guidelines from the Italian Society of Anti-Infective Therapy (SITA) and the Italian Society of Pulmonology (SIP)

INTRODUCTION

The Italian Society of Anti-Infective Therapy (SITA) and the Italian Society of Pulmonology (SIP) constituted an expert panel for developing evidence-based guidance for the clinical management of adult patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outside intensive care units.

METHODS

Ten systematic literature searches were performed to answer ten different key questions. The retrieved evidence was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology (GRADE).

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The literature searches mostly assessed the available evidence on the management of COVID-19 patients in terms of antiviral, anticoagulant, anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP)/non-invasive ventilation (NIV) treatment. Most evidence was deemed as of low certainty, and in some cases, recommendations could not be developed according to the GRADE system (best practice recommendations were provided in similar situations). The use of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies may be considered for outpatients at risk of disease progression. For inpatients, favorable recommendations were provided for anticoagulant prophylaxis and systemic steroids administration, although with low certainty of evidence. Favorable recommendations, with very low/low certainty of evidence, were also provided for, in specific situations, remdesivir, alone or in combination with baricitinib, and tocilizumab. The presence of many best practice recommendations testified to the need for further investigations by means of randomized controlled trials, whenever possible, with some possible future research directions stemming from the results of the ten systematic reviews.

Assessment of proarrhythmogenic risk for chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine using the CiPA concept

Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have been proposed recently as therapy for SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, but during 3 months of extensive use concerns were raised related to their clinical effectiveness and arrhythmogenic risk. Therefore, we estimated for these compounds several proarrhythmogenic risk predictors according to the Comprehensive in vitro Proarrhythmia Assay (CiPA) paradigm. Experiments were performed with either CytoPatch™2 automated or manual patch-clamp setups on HEK293T cells stably or transiently transfected with hERG1, hNav1.5, hKir2.1, hKv7.1+hMinK, and on Pluricyte® cardiomyocytes (Ncardia), using physiological solutions. Dose-response plots of hERG1 inhibition fitted with Hill functions yielded IC50 values in the low micromolar range for both compounds. We found hyperpolarizing shifts of tens of mV, larger for chloroquine, in the voltage-dependent activation but not inactivation, as well as a voltage-dependent block of hERG current, larger at positive potentials. We also found inhibitory effects on peak and late I_Na and on I_K1, with IC50 of tens of μM and larger for chloroquine. The two compounds, tested on Pluricyte® cardiomyocytes using the β-escin-perforated method, inhibited I_Kr, I_CaL, I_{Na peak}, but had no effect on I_f. In current-clamp they caused action potential prolongation. Our data and those from literature for I_to were used to compute proarrhythmogenic risk predictors B_net (Mistry HB, 2018) and Q_net (Dutta S et al., 2017), with hERG1 blocking/unblocking rates estimated from time constants of fractional block. Although the two antimalarials are successfully used in autoimmune diseases, and chloroquine may be effective in atrial fibrillation, assays place these drugs in the intermediate proarrhythmogenic risk group.

Efficacy of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a meta-analysis

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, with or without azithromycin, in treating hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Materials & methods: Data from randomized and observational studies were included in a random-effects meta-analysis. Primary outcomes included time to negative conversion of SARS-CoV-2 tests, length of stay, mortality, incidence of mechanical ventilation, time to normalization of body temperature, incidence of adverse events and incidence of QT prolongations. Results: Fifty-one studies (n = 61,221) were included. Hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine showed no efficacy in all primary efficacy outcomes, but was associated with increased odds of QT prolongations. Conclusion: Due to a lack of efficacy and increased odds of cardiac adverse events, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine should not be used for treating hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Effects of Bacille Calmette Guerin (BCG) vaccination during COVID-19 infection

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by the infection of highly contagious severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), also known as the novel coronavirus. In most countries, the containment of this virus spread is not controlled, which is driving the pandemic towards a more difficult phase. In this study, we investigated the impact of the Bacille Calmette Guerin (BCG) vaccination on the severity and mortality of COVID-19 by performing transcriptomic analyses of SARS-CoV-2 infected and BCG vaccinated samples in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC). A set of common differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified and seeded into their functional enrichment analyses via Gene Ontology (GO)-based functional terms and pre-annotated molecular pathways databases, and their Protein-Protein Interaction (PPI) network analysis. We further analysed the regulatory elements, possible comorbidities and putative drug candidates for COVID-19 patients who have not been BCG-vaccinated. Differential expression analyses of both BCG-vaccinated and COVID-19 infected samples identified 62 shared DEGs indicating their discordant expression pattern in their respected conditions compared to control. Next, PPI analysis of those DEGs revealed 10 hub genes, namely ITGB2, CXCL8, CXCL1, CCR2, IFNG, CCL4, PTGS2, ADORA3, TLR5 and CD33. Functional enrichment analyses found significantly enriched pathways/GO terms including cytokine activities, lysosome, IL-17 signalling pathway, TNF-signalling pathways. Moreover, a set of identified TFs, miRNAs and potential drug molecules were further investigated to assess their biological involvements in COVID-19 and their therapeutic possibilities. Findings showed significant genetic interactions between BCG vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection, suggesting an interesting prospect of the BCG vaccine in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. We hope it may potentially trigger further research on this critical phenomenon to combat COVID-19 spread.

An Umbrella Review of Clinical Efficacy and Adverse Cardiac Events Associated with Hydroxychloroquine or Chloroquine with or Without Azithromycin in Patients with COVID-19

Context

The safety and efficacy of several repurposed drugs, including hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, with or without azithromycin, were presumed to be miraculous in treating patients with COVID-19. However, as it later transpired, these therapeutic agents seem to be associated with critical adverse cardiac events.

Objectives

Given the skepticism around the advantages and disadvantages of the aforementioned treatment strategies, the present study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and cardiac toxicity of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without azithromycin in the setting of COVID-19 infection.

Method

This was an umbrella review conducted on patients with COVID-19 who received hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without azithromycin from January 2020 to November 2020. We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, ProQuest, Web of Science, and Embase databases.

Results

Three studies (systematic review and meta-analysis) were analyzed to evaluate the arrhythmogenic potential of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without azithromycin in patients with COVID-19 and identify the clinical efficacy of such a combination.

Conclusions

We found no benefit for patients with COVID-19 who received hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin. Moreover, it is noteworthy that these medications, particularly when considering co-administration, could result in both statistically and clinically elevated risks of notorious arrhythmias, such as TdP.

Keeping Meta-Analyses Hygienic During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Despite the massive distribution of different vaccines globally, the current pandemic has revealed the crucial need for an efficient treatment against COVID-19. Meta-analyses have historically been extremely useful to determine treatment efficacy but recent debates about the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 patients resulted in contradictory meta-analytical results. Different factors during the COVID-19 pandemic have impacted key features of conducting a good meta-analysis. Some meta-analyses did not evaluate or treat substantial heterogeneity (I² > 75%); others did not include additional analysis for publication bias; none checked for evidence of p–hacking in the primary studies nor used recent methods (i.e., p-curve or p-uniform) to estimate the average population-size effect. These inconsistencies may contribute to contradictory results in the research evaluating COVID-19 treatments. A prominent example of this is the use of hydroxychloroquine, where some studies reported a large positive effect, whereas others indicated no significant effect or even increased mortality when hydroxychloroquine was used with the antibiotic azithromycin. In this paper, we first recall the benefits and fundamental steps of good quality meta-analysis. Then, we examine various meta-analyses on hydroxychloroquine treatments for COVID-19 patients that led to contradictory results and causes for this discrepancy. We then highlight recent tools that contribute to evaluate publication bias and p-hacking (i.e., p-curve, p-uniform) and conclude by making technical recommendations that meta-analyses should follow even during extreme global events such as a pandemic.

COVID-19 Prevalence and Outcomes among Individuals with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Taking Hydroxychloroquine; A Retrospective Analysis

Introduction:

The SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic has resulted in a universal search for potential treatments of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Initial reports of the therapeutic potential of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and early non-randomized non-controlled studies were followed by subsequent trials refuting such properties. The use of CQ and HCQ in diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), prompted us to examine the prevalence of COVID-19 and proposed prophylactic and therapeutic properties of HCQ in this population.

Methods:

A total of 103 patients with RA and SLE aged 18 to 75 diagnosed with COVID-19 were identified. The patients were categorized as those taking HCQ (cases) and those not on HCQ (controls) for at least 6 months. Primary (mechanical ventilation, length of stay, death) and secondary outcomes were defined, data were collected, and results were compared and statistically analyzed between cases and controls.

Results:

No statistical difference was observed in demographic features, baseline comorbidities, and medications. Primary outcomes’ statistical analysis did not reveal any differences between cases and controls. Statistical analysis of secondary outcomes revealed that cases had a statistically higher chance of being tachypneic (p 0.034). D-Dimer (p 0.017) and LDH levels (p 0.044) were found to be significantly lower in cases versus controls.

Conclusion:

This study highlights the lack of clinical prophylactic and therapeutic efficacy of HCQ against COVID-19 when taken at regular doses for patients with RA and SLE. It also shows that the prevalence of COVID-19 was similar in RA and SLE patients regardless of baseline consumption of HCQ.

Hydroxychloroquine and mortality in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and a meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized controlled trials

Background: Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was proposed as potential treatment for COVID-19, but its association with mortality is unclear. We reviewed published literature for evidence of an association between HCQ (with or without azithromycin (AZM)) and total mortality in COVID-19 patients.Methods: Articles were retrieved until April 29th, 2021 by searching in seven databases. Data were combined using the general-variance-based method.Results: A total of 25 cohort studies (N=41,339 patients) and 11 randomized clinical trials (RCTs; N=8,709) were found. The use of HCQ was not associated with mortality in meta-analysis of RCTs (pooled risk ratio (PRR): 1.08, 95%CI: 0.97-1.20; I2=0%), but it was associated with 20% lower mortality risk (PRR=0.80, 95%CI: 0.69-0.93; I2=80%) in pooling of cohort studies. The negative association with mortality was mainly apparent by pooling cohort studies that used lower doses of HCQ (≤400 mg/day; PRR=0.69, 95%CI: 0.57-0.87). Use of HCQ+AZM (11 studies) was associated with 25% non-statistically significant lower mortality risk (PPR=0.75; 0.51-1.10; P=0.15). Use of HCQ was not associated with severe adverse events (PRR=1.12, 95%CI: 0.88-1.44; I2=0%).Conclusions: HCQ use was not associated with mortality in COVID-19 patients in pooling results from RCTs (high level of certainty of evidence), but it was associated with 20% mortality reduction when findings from observational studies were combined (low level of certainty of evidence). The reduction of mortality was mainly apparent in observational studies where lower doses of HCQ were used. These findings might help disentangling the debate on HCQ use in COVID-19.

Scientific evidence in the COVID-19 treatment: A comprehensive review

In December 2019, cases of unknown origin pneumonia appeared in Wuhan, China; the causal agent of this pneumonia was a new virus of the coronaviridae family called severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). According to the clinical severity, symptoms and response to the different treatments, the evolution of the disease is divided in three phases. We analysed the most used treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 and the phase in which they are supposed to be effective. In the viral phase, remdesivir has demonstrated reduction in recovery time but no mortality reduction. Other drugs proposed for viral phase such as convalescent plasma and lopinavir/ritonavir did not demonstrate to be effective. In the inflammatory phase, corticosteroids demonstrated reduction of 28-d mortality in patients who needed oxygen, establishing that a corticosteroid regimen should be part of the standard treatment of critically ill patients. There are other immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory treatments such as anakinra, sarilumab, tocilizumab, colchicine or baricitinib that are being studied. Other treatments that were proposed at the beginning, like hydroxichloroquine or azithromycin, demonstrated no efficacy and increased mortality when combined.

SARS-CoV-2 coinfection with additional respiratory virus does not predict severe disease: a retrospective cohort study

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) claimed over 4 million lives by July 2021 and continues to pose a serious public health threat.

Objectives

Our retrospective study utilized respiratory pathogen panel (RPP) results in patients with SARS-CoV-2 to determine if coinfection (i.e. SARS-CoV-2 positivity with an additional respiratory virus) was associated with more severe presentation and outcomes.

Methods

All patients with negative influenza/respiratory syncytial virus testing who underwent RPP testing within 7 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test at a large, academic medical centre in New York were examined. Patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 with a negative RPP were compared with patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 and positive for a virus by RPP in terms of biomarkers, oxygen requirements and severe COVID-19 outcome, as defined by mechanical ventilation or death within 30 days.

Results

Of the 306 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients with RPP testing, 14 (4.6%) were positive for a non-influenza virus (coinfected). Compared with the coinfected group, patients positive for SARS-CoV-2 with a negative RPP had higher inflammatory markers and were significantly more likely to be admitted (P = 0.01). Severe COVID-19 outcome occurred in 111 (36.3%) patients in the SARS-CoV-2-only group and 3 (21.4%) patients in the coinfected group (P = 0.24).

Conclusions

Patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 along with a non-influenza respiratory virus had less severe disease on presentation and were more likely to be admitted—but did not have more severe outcomes—than those infected with SARS-CoV-2 alone.

Synthesis and pharmacological evaluation of choroquine derivatives bearing long aminated side chains as antivirus and anti-inflammatory agents

Starting from the antimalarial drugs chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, we conducted a structural optimization on the side chain of chloroquine by introducing amino substituted longer chains thus leading to a series of novel aminochloroquine derivatives. Anti-infectious effects against SARS-Cov2 spike glycoprotein as well as immunosuppressive and anti-inflammatory activities of the new compounds were evaluated. Distinguished immunosuppressive activities on the responses of T cell, B cell and macrophages upon mitogen and pathogenic signaling were manifested. Compounds 9–11 displayed the most promising inhibitory effects both on cellular proliferation and on the production of multiple pro-inflammatory cytokines, including IL-17, IFN-γ, IL-6, IL-1β and TNF-α, which might be insightful in the pursuit of treatment for immune disorders and inflammatory diseases.