Effect of hydroxychloroquine on the cardiac ventricular repolarization: A randomized clinical trial

Electrophysiological Profile of Different Antiviral Therapies in a Rabbit Whole-Heart Model

Antiviral therapies for treatment of COVID-19 may be associated with significant proarrhythmic potential. In the present study, the potential cardiotoxic side effects of these therapies were evaluated using a Langendorff model of the isolated rabbit heart. 51 hearts of female rabbits were retrogradely perfused, employing a Langendorff-setup. Eight catheters were placed endo- and epicardially to perform an electrophysiology study, thus obtaining cycle length-dependent action potential duration at 90% of repolarization (APD90), QT intervals and dispersion of repolarization. After generating baseline data, the hearts were assigned to four groups: In group 1 (HXC), hearts were treated with 1 µM hydroxychloroquine. Thereafter, 3 µM hydroxychloroquine were infused additionally. Group 2 (HXC + AZI) was perfused with 3 µM hydroxychloroquine followed by 150 µM azithromycin. In group 3 (LOP) the hearts were perfused with 3 µM lopinavir followed by 5 µM and 10 µM lopinavir. Group 4 (REM) was perfused with 1 µM remdesivir followed by 5 µM and 10 µM remdesivir. Hydroxychloroquine- and azithromycin-based therapies have a significant proarrhythmic potential mediated by action potential prolongation and an increase in dispersion. Lopinavir and remdesivir showed overall significantly less pronounced changes in electrophysiology. In accordance with the reported bradycardic events under remdesivir, it significantly reduced the rate of the ventricular escape rhythm.

Immunosuppression by hydroxychloroquine: mechanistic proof in in vitro experiments but limited systemic activity in a randomized placebo-controlled clinical pharmacology study

Based on its wide range of immunosuppressive properties, hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is used for the treatment of several autoimmune diseases. Limited literature is available on the relationship between HCQ concentration and its immunosuppressive effect. To gain insight in this relationship, we performed in vitro experiments in human PBMCs and explored the effect of HCQ on T and B cell proliferation and Toll-like receptor (TLR)3/TLR7/TLR9/RIG-I-induced cytokine production. In a placebo-controlled clinical study, these same endpoints were evaluated in healthy volunteers that were treated with a cumulative dose of 2400 mg HCQ over 5 days. In vitro, HCQ inhibited TLR responses with IC50s > 100 ng/mL and reaching 100% inhibition. In the clinical study, maximal HCQ plasma concentrations ranged from 75 to 200 ng/mL. No ex vivo HCQ effects were found on RIG-I-mediated cytokine release, but there was significant suppression of TLR7 responses and mild suppression of TLR3 and TLR9 responses. Moreover, HCQ treatment did not affect B cell and T cell proliferation. These investigations show that HCQ has clear immunosuppressive effects on human PBMCs, but the effective concentrations exceed the circulating HCQ concentrations under conventional clinical use. Of note, based on HCQ's physicochemical properties, tissue drug concentrations may be higher, potentially resulting in significant local immunosuppression. This trial is registered in the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) under study number NL8726.

Systemic exposure to hydroxychloroquine and its relationship with outcome in severely ill COVID-19 patients in New York City

AIM

To investigate the relationship between systemic exposure to hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and its metabolite desethylhydroxychloroquine (DHCQ) and clinical outcome in severely ill patients treated with a standard oral dose regimen of HCQ during the first wave of COVID-19 in New York City.

METHODS

We correlated retrospective clinical data with drug exposure prospectively assessed from convenience samples using population pharmacokinetics and Bayesian estimation. Systemic exposure was assessed in 215 patients admitted to ICU or COVID-ward for whom an interleukin-6 level was requested and who were still alive 24 hours after the last dose of HCQ. Patients received oral HCQ 600 mg twice daily on day 1 followed by 4 days of 400 mg daily.

RESULTS

Fifty-three precent of the patients were intubated at 5.4 ± 6.4 days after admission and 26.5% died at an average of 32.2 ± 19.1 days. QTc at admission was 448 ± 34 ms. Systemic exposure to HCQ and DHCQ demonstrated substantial variability. Cumulative area under the serum concentration-time curve up to infinity for HCQ was 71.4 ± 19.3 h mg/L and for DHCQ 56.5 ± 28.3 h mg/L. Variability in systemic exposure was not clearly explained by renal function, liver function or inflammatory state. In turn, systemic exposure did not correlate with intubation status, survival or QTc prolongation.

CONCLUSION

This study in severely ill patients was not able to find any relationship between systemic exposure to HCQ and DHCQ and clinical outcome at a routine dose regimen and adds to the growing body of evidence that oral HCQ does not alter the course of disease in COVID-19 patients.