Implementation of the Randomized Embedded Multifactorial Adaptive Platform for COVID-19 (REMAP-COVID) trial in a US health system-lessons learned and recommendations

The Integration of Clinical Trials With the Practice of Medicine: Repairing a House Divided

Importance

Optimal health care delivery, both now and in the future, requires a continuous loop of knowledge generation, dissemination, and uptake on how best to provide care, not just determining what interventions work but also how best to ensure they are provided to those who need them. The randomized clinical trial (RCT) is the most rigorous instrument to determine what works in health care. However, major issues with both the clinical trials enterprise and the lack of integration of clinical trials with health care delivery compromise medicine's ability to best serve society.

Observations

In most resource-rich countries, the clinical trials and health care delivery enterprises function as separate entities, with siloed goals, infrastructure, and incentives. Consequently, RCTs are often poorly relevant and responsive to the needs of patients and those responsible for care delivery. At the same time, health care delivery systems are often disengaged from clinical trials and fail to rapidly incorporate knowledge generated from RCTs into practice. Though longstanding, these issues are more pressing given the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic, heightened awareness of the disproportionate impact of poor access to optimal care on vulnerable populations, and the unprecedented opportunity for improvement offered by the digital revolution in health care. Four major areas must be improved. First, especially in the US, greater clarity is required to ensure appropriate regulation and oversight of implementation science, quality improvement, embedded clinical trials, and learning health systems. Second, greater adoption is required of study designs that improve statistical and logistical efficiency and lower the burden on participants and clinicians, allowing trials to be smarter, safer, and faster. Third, RCTs could be considerably more responsive and efficient if they were better integrated with electronic health records. However, this advance first requires greater adoption of standards and processes designed to ensure health data are adequately reliable and accurate and capable of being transferred responsibly and efficiently across platforms and organizations. Fourth, tackling the problems described above requires alignment of stakeholders in the clinical trials and health care delivery enterprises through financial and nonfinancial incentives, which could be enabled by new legislation. Solutions exist for each of these problems, and there are examples of success for each, but there is a failure to implement at adequate scale.

Conclusions and Relevance

The gulf between current care and that which could be delivered has arguably never been wider. A key contributor is that the 2 limbs of knowledge generation and implementation-the clinical trials and health care delivery enterprises-operate as a house divided. Better integration of these 2 worlds is key to accelerated improvement in health care delivery.

Automatic Population of the Case Report Forms for an International Multifactorial Adaptive Platform Trial Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic

OBJECTIVES

To automatically populate the case report forms (CRFs) for an international, pragmatic, multifactorial, response-adaptive, Bayesian COVID-19 platform trial.

METHODS

The locations of focus included 27 hospitals and 2 large electronic health record (EHR) instances (1 Cerner Millennium and 1 Epic) that are part of the same health system in the United States. This paper describes our efforts to use EHR data to automatically populate four of the trial's forms: baseline, daily, discharge, and response-adaptive randomization.

RESULTS

Between April 2020 and May 2022, 417 patients from the UPMC health system were enrolled in the trial. A MySQL-based extract, transform, and load pipeline automatically populated 499 of 526 CRF variables. The populated forms were statistically and manually reviewed and then reported to the trial's international data coordinating center.

CONCLUSIONS

We accomplished automatic population of CRFs in a large platform trial and made recommendations for improving this process for future trials.

Progress with the Learning Health System 2.0: a rapid review of Learning Health Systems' responses to pandemics and climate change

BACKGROUND

Pandemics and climate change each challenge health systems through increasing numbers and new types of patients. To adapt to these challenges, leading health systems have embraced a Learning Health System (LHS) approach, aiming to increase the efficiency with which data is translated into actionable knowledge. This rapid review sought to determine how these health systems have used LHS frameworks to both address the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change, and to prepare for future disturbances, and thus transition towards the LHS2.0.

METHODS

Three databases (Embase, Scopus, and PubMed) were searched for peer-reviewed literature published in English in the five years to March 2023. Publications were included if they described a real-world LHS's response to one or more of the following: the COVID-19 pandemic, future pandemics, current climate events, future climate change events. Data were extracted and thematically analyzed using the five dimensions of the Institute of Medicine/Zurynski-Braithwaite's LHS framework: Science and Informatics, Patient-Clinician Partnerships, Continuous Learning Culture, Incentives, and Structure and Governance.

RESULTS

The search yielded 182 unique publications, four of which reported on LHSs and climate change. Backward citation tracking yielded 13 additional pandemic-related publications. None of the climate change-related papers met the inclusion criteria. Thirty-two publications were included after full-text review. Most were case studies (n = 12, 38%), narrative descriptions (n = 9, 28%) or empirical studies (n = 9, 28%). Science and Informatics (n = 31, 97%), Continuous Learning Culture (n = 26, 81%), Structure and Governance (n = 23, 72%) were the most frequently discussed LHS dimensions. Incentives (n = 21, 66%) and Patient-Clinician Partnerships (n = 18, 56%) received less attention. Twenty-nine papers (91%) discussed benefits or opportunities created by pandemics to furthering the development of an LHS, compared to 22 papers (69%) that discussed challenges.

CONCLUSIONS

An LHS 2.0 approach appears well-suited to responding to the rapidly changing and uncertain conditions of a pandemic, and, by extension, to preparing health systems for the effects of climate change. LHSs that embrace a continuous learning culture can inform patient care, public policy, and public messaging, and those that wisely use IT systems for decision-making can more readily enact surveillance systems for future pandemics and climate change-related events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO pre-registration: CRD42023408896.

Designing and Implementing "Living and Breathing" Clinical Trials: An Overview and Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic

The practice of medicine is characterized by uncertainty, and the findings of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are meant to help curb that uncertainty. Traditional RCTs, however, have many limitations. To overcome some of these limitations, new trial paradigms rooted in the origins of evidence-based medicine are beginning to disrupt the traditional mold. These new designs recognize uncertainty permeates medical decision making and aim to capitalize on modern health system infrastructure to integrate investigation as a component of care delivery. This article provides an overview of "living, breathing" trials, including current state, anticipated developments, and areas of controversy.

How Electronic Medical Record Integration Can Support More Efficient Critical Care Clinical Trials

Large volumes of data are collected on critically ill patients, and using data science to extract information from the electronic medical record (EMR) and to inform the design of clinical trials represents a new opportunity in critical care research. Using improved methods of phenotyping critical illnesses, subject identification and enrollment, and targeted treatment group assignment alongside newer trial designs such as adaptive platform trials can increase efficiency while lowering costs. Some tools such as the EMR to automate data collection are already in use. Refinement of data science approaches in critical illness research will allow for better clinical trials and, ultimately, improved patient outcomes.

The Learning Electronic Health Record

Electronic medical records (EMRs) constitute the electronic version of all medical information included in a patient's paper chart. The electronic health record (EHR) technology has witnessed massive expansion in developed countries and to a lesser extent in underresourced countries during the last 2 decades. We will review factors leading to this expansion, how the emergence of EHRs is affecting several health-care stakeholders; some of the growing pains associated with EHRs with a particular emphasis on the delivery of care to the critically ill; and ongoing developments on the path to improve the quality of research, health-care delivery, and stakeholder satisfaction.

Add-on therapy for pulmonary fibrosis, a forthcoming era with implications for practice: the BI 101550 and RELIEF trials

The therapeutic landscape for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease (PFILD) is increasingly complex, with add-on antifibrotic options now in clinical trials, or available for patients progressing on first-line therapy in both conditions. Here, we review two recent trials of potential add-on therapeutic options, the BI 101550 and RELIEF trials. BI 101550 was a phase 2 randomised control trial (RCT) of a novel phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor in patients with IPF, with a primary end-point of change in forced vital capacity (ΔFVC) (in mL) at 12 weeks. The RELIEF trial was a phase 2 RCT in patients with PFILD, with a primary end-point of ΔFVC (absolute % predicted) over 48 weeks. Whilst the BI 101550 and RELIEF trials showed positive results in their primary end-points, the strengths and weaknesses of both trials are discussed with importance for their interpretation and clinical impact. We review current clinical practice in IPF and PFILD and place the BI101550 and RELIEF trial results in context, highlighting advances and problems with antifibrotic therapies.

Commentary on

Richeldi L, et al. Trial of a preferential phosphodiesterase 4B inhibitor for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. N Engl J Med 2022; 386: 2178-2187.Behr J, et al. Pirfenidone in patients with progressive fibrotic interstitial lung diseases other than idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (RELIEF): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial. Lancet Respir Med 2021; 9: 476-486.

A rapid review of community engagement and informed consent processes for adaptive platform trials and alternative design trials for public health emergencies

Background : Public Health Emergencies (PHE) demand expeditious research responses to evaluate new or repurposed therapies and prevention strategies. Alternative Design Trials (ADTs) and Adaptive Platform Trials (APTs) have enabled efficient large-scale testing of biomedical interventions during recent PHEs. Design features of these trials may have implications for engagement and/or informed consent processes. We aimed to rapidly review evidence on engagement and informed consent for ADTs and APTs during PHE to consider what (if any) recommendations can inform practice. Method : In 2022, we searched 8 prominent databases for relevant peer reviewed publications and guidelines for ADTs/APTs in PHE contexts. Articles were selected based on pre-identified inclusion and exclusion criteria. We reviewed protocols and informed consent documents for a sample of large platform trials and consulted with key informants from ADTs/APT trial teams. Data were extracted and summarised using narrative synthesis. Results : Of the 49 articles included, 10 were guidance documents, 14 discussed engagement, 10 discussed informed consent, and 15 discussed both. Included articles addressed ADTs delivered during the West African Ebola epidemic and APTs delivered during COVID-19. PHE clinical research guidance documents highlight the value of ADTs/APTs and the importance of community engagement, but do not provide practice-specific guidance for engagement or informed consent. Engagement and consent practice for ADTs conducted during the West African Ebola epidemic have been well-documented. For COVID-19, engagement and consent practice was described for APTs primarily delivered in high income countries with well-developed health service structures. A key consideration is strong communication of the complexity of trial design in clear, accessible ways. Conclusion: We highlight key considerations for best practice in community engagement and informed consent relevant to ADTs and APTs for PHEs which may helpfully be included in future guidance. Protocol: The review protocol is published online at Prospero on 15/06/2022: registration number CRD42022334170.

Implementing an outpatient clinical trial on COVID-19 treatment in an emergency epidemic context: a mixed methods study among operational and research stakeholders within the Coverage trial, Bordeaux (France)

BACKGROUND

The emergency set-up and implementation of outpatient clinical trials on epidemic emerging infectious diseases such as COVID-19 raise many issues in terms of research structuration, regulations, and health systems organization. We aimed to describe the experience and points of view of different stakeholders involved in a French home-based outpatient trial on COVID-19 and to identify the early barriers and facilitators to the trial implementation.

METHODS

We conducted a mixed-methods study in July 2020. A self-administered questionnaire was emailed to 213 clinical, operational and research stakeholders involved in the Coverage trial; individual semi-directed interviews were conducted among 14 stakeholders. Questionnaire data and written interview notes are presented together by key theme.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty six stakeholders responded to the questionnaire. 53.4% did not have prior experience in clinical research. The motivation of most stakeholders to participate in the Coverage trial was to feel useful during the pandemic. 87.9% agreed that the trial had an unusual set-up timeframe, and many regretted a certain lack of regulatory flexibility. Mobile medical teams and specific professional skills were perceived as instrumental for outpatient research.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a home-based outpatient clinical trial on COVID-19 was perceived as relevant and innovative although requiring important adaptations of usual professional responsibilities and standard research procedures. Lessons learned from the Coverage trial underline the need for improved networks between hospital and community medicine, and call for a dedicated and reactive outpatient research platform on emerging or threatening infectious diseases.

Immune Modulation in Sepsis, ARDS, and Covid-19 - The Road Traveled and the Road Ahead

Immune Modulation in Sepsis, ARDS, and Covid-19Leligdowicz et al. consider the history and future of immunomodulating therapies in sepsis and ARDS, including ARDS due to Covid-19, and remark on the larger challenge of clinical research on therapies for syndromes with profound clinical and biologic heterogeneity.

Treating COVID-19: Evolving approaches to evidence in a pandemic

The rapid pace of the COVID-19 pandemic precluded traditional approaches to evaluating clinical research and guidelines. We highlight notable successes and pitfalls of clinicians' new approaches to managing evidence amidst an unprecedented crisis. In "Era 1" (early 2020), clinicians relied on anecdote and social media, which democratized conversations on guidelines, but also led clinicians astray. "Era 2" (approximately late 2020 to early 2021) saw preprints that accelerated new interventions but suffered from a surfeit of poor-quality data. In the current era, clinicians consolidate the evidentiary gains of Era 2 with living, online clinical guidelines, but the public suffers from misinformation. The COVID-19 pandemic is a laboratory on how clinicians adapt to an absence of clinical guidance amidst an informational and healthcare crisis. Challenges remain as we integrate new approaches to innovations made in the traditional guideline process to confront both the long tail of COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Clinical Evidence Generation During a Pandemic: Lessons Learned for Sustaining Progress

Because of significant adaptations forced by the COVID-19 pandemic, resultant changes within health care delivery and clinical research introduced the potential for evaluation of novel evidence generation approaches in oncology. On July 26 and 27, 2021, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, National Cancer Policy Forum hosted a virtual workshop entitled “Cancer Care and Cancer Research in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Workshop on Lessons Learned.” This workshop examined changes in cancer care and cancer research that occurred in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and considered lessons learned from that experience. The goal was to identify what changes could improve the delivery of high-quality cancer care and the conduct of cancer clinical trials in the postpandemic era, with an emphasis on health equity. How can we sustain the valuable lessons learned that might accelerate progress and enhance clinical evidence generation for patients and clinicians? In this overview, we discuss ways in which the COVID-19 experience has catalyzed research efficiencies as well as fostered a broader array of trial design and research methods that may facilitate improved cancer drug development during the pandemic and beyond.

A transition to the AASM recommended hypopnea definition in adults: initiatives of the Hypopnea Scoring Rule Task Force

The American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) recommends that hypopneas be identified using a definition that is based on a ≥30% decrease in airflow associated with a ≥3% reduction in the oxygen saturation or an arousal (H3A) for diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in adults. This conflicts with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) definition, which requires a ≥4% decrease in the oxygen saturation to identify a hypopnea (H4) and does not acknowledge arousals. In 2018, the AASM board of directors constituted a Hypopnea Scoring Rule Task Force (HSRTF) with a mandate to "create a strategy for adoption and implementation of the AASM recommended adult hypopnea scoring criteria among members, payers and device manufacturers." The task force initiated several activities including a survey of AASM accredited laboratories and discussions with polysomnography software vendors. Survey results indicated that most laboratories scored polysomnograms using only the CMS definition. Vendors indicated that they could easily support dual scoring. Informal testing among task force members' laboratories confirmed there would be little additional work if dual scoring was performed. The task force convened several meetings of a working group of OSA content experts and interested parties, with the purpose of creating research recommendations to study the impact on relevant clinical outcomes using the different definitions of hypopnea. Several possible prospective and retrospective approaches were discussed with emphasis on the group of patients diagnosed with OSA based on an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) using H3A but NOT H4. Based on the deliberations of the working group, the HSRTF submitted recommendations to the AASM Foundation concerning research project strategies for potential grant funding. Further discussions within the HSRTF focused on developing advocacy initiatives among patient stakeholder groups to change payer policy.

Erythrocytes increase endogenous sphingosine 1-phosphate levels as an adaptive response to SARS-CoV-2 infection

Low plasma levels of the signaling lipid metabolite sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P) are associated with disrupted endothelial cell (EC) barriers, lymphopenia and reduced responsivity to hypoxia. Total S1P levels were also reduced in 23 critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and the two main S1P carriers, serum albumin (SA) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) were dramatically low. Surprisingly, we observed a carrier-changing shift from SA to HDL, which probably prevented an even further drop in S1P levels. Furthermore, intracellular S1P levels in red blood cells (RBCs) were significantly increased in COVID-19 patients compared with healthy controls due to up-regulation of S1P producing sphingosine kinase 1 and down-regulation of S1P degrading lyase expression. Cell culture experiments supported increased sphingosine kinase activity and unchanged S1P release from RBC stores of COVID-19 patients. These observations suggest adaptive mechanisms for maintenance of the vasculature and immunity as well as prevention of tissue hypoxia in COVID-19 patients.

Antirheumatic Drugs against COVID-19 from the Perspective of Rheumatologists

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains a global threat to humanity. Its pathogenesis and different phases of disease progression are being elucidated under the pandemic. Active viral replication activates various immune cells and produces large amounts of inflammatory cytokines, which leads to the cytokine storm, a major cause of patient death. Therefore, viral inhibition is expected to be the most effective early in the course of the disease, while immunosuppressive treatment may be useful in the later stages to prevent disease progression. Based on the pathophysiology of rheumatic diseases, various immunomodulatory and immunosuppressive drugs are used for the diseases. Due to their mechanism of action, the antirheumatic drugs, including hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, colchicine, calcineurin inhibitors (e.g., cyclosporine A and tacrolimus), glucocorticoids, cytokines inhibitors, such as anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (e.g., infliximab), anti-interleukin (IL)-6 (e.g., tocilizumab, sarilumab, and siltuximab), anti-IL-1 (e.g., anakinra and canakinumab) and Janus kinase inhibitors (e.g., baricitinib and tofacitinib), cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 blockade agents (e.g., abatacept), and phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitors (e.g., apremilast), have been tried as a treatment for COVID-19. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms of action and clinical impact of these agents in the management of COVID-19.

Implementation of platform trials in the COVID-19 pandemic: A rapid review

Motivation

Platform designs - master protocols that allow for new treatment arms to be added over time - have gained considerable attention in recent years. Between 2001 and 2019, 16 platform trials were initiated globally. The COVID-19 pandemic seems to have provided a new motivation for these designs. We conducted a rapid review to quantify and describe platform trials used in COVID-19.

Methods

We cross-referenced PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cytel COVID-19 Clinical Trials Tracker to identify platform trials, defined by their stated ability to add future arms.

Results

We identified 58 COVID-19 platform trials globally registered between January 2020 and May 2021. According to trial registries, 16 trials have added new therapies (median 3, IQR 4) and 11 have dropped arms (median 3, IQR 2.5). About 50% of trials publicly share their protocol, and 31 trials (53%) intend to share trial data. Forty-nine trials (84%) explicitly report adaptive features, and 21 trials (36%) state Bayesian methods.

Conclusions

During the pandemic, there has been a surge in the number of platform trials compared to historical use. While transparency in statistical methods and clarity of data sharing policies needs improvement, platform trials appear particularly well-suited for rapid evidence generation. Trials secured funding quickly and many succeeded in adding new therapies in a short time period, thus demonstrating the potential for these trial designs to be implemented beyond the pandemic. The evidence gathered here may provide ample insight to further inform operational, statistical, and regulatory aspects of future platform trial conduct.

A Research Agenda for Precision Medicine in Sepsis and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement

Background: Precision medicine focuses on the identification of therapeutic strategies that are effective for a group of patients based on similar unifying characteristics. The recent success of precision medicine in non-critical care settings has resulted from the confluence of large clinical and biospecimen repositories, innovative bioinformatics, and novel trial designs. Similar advances for precision medicine in sepsis and in the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are possible but will require further investigation and significant investment in infrastructure. Methods: This project was funded by the American Thoracic Society Board of Directors. A multidisciplinary and diverse working group reviewed the available literature, established a conceptual framework, and iteratively developed recommendations for the Precision Medicine Research Agenda for Sepsis and ARDS. Results: The following six priority recommendations were developed by the working group: 1) the creation of large richly phenotyped and harmonized knowledge networks of clinical, imaging, and multianalyte molecular data for sepsis and ARDS; 2) the implementation of novel trial designs, including adaptive designs, and embedding trial procedures in the electronic health record; 3) continued innovation in the data science and engineering methods required to identify heterogeneity of treatment effect; 4) further development of the tools necessary for the real-time application of precision medicine approaches; 5) work to ensure that precision medicine strategies are applicable and available to a broad range of patients varying across differing racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and demographic groups; and 6) the securement and maintenance of adequate and sustainable funding for precision medicine efforts. Conclusions: Precision medicine approaches that incorporate variability in genomic, biologic, and environmental factors may provide a path forward for better individualizing the delivery of therapies and improving care for patients with sepsis and ARDS.

Four consecutive yearly point-prevalence studies in Wales indicate lack of improvement in sepsis care on the wards

The ‘Sepsis Six’ bundle was promoted as a deliverable tool outside of the critical care settings, but there is very little data available on the progress and change of sepsis care outside the critical care environment in the UK. Our aim was to compare the yearly prevalence, outcome and the Sepsis Six bundle compliance in patients at risk of mortality from sepsis in non-intensive care environments. Patients with a National Early Warning Score (NEWS) of 3 or above and suspected or proven infection were enrolled into four yearly 24-h point prevalence studies, carried out in fourteen hospitals across Wales from 2016 to 2019. We followed up patients to 30 days between 2016–2019 and to 90 days between 2017 and 2019. Out of the 26,947 patients screened 1651 fulfilled inclusion criteria and were recruited. The full ‘Sepsis Six’ care bundle was completed on 223 (14.0%) occasions, with no significant difference between the years. On 190 (11.5%) occasions none of the bundle elements were completed. There was no significant correlation between bundle element compliance, NEWS or year of study. One hundred and seventy (10.7%) patients were seen by critical care outreach; the ‘Sepsis Six’ bundle was completed significantly more often in this group (54/170, 32.0%) than for patients who were not reviewed by critical care outreach (168/1385, 11.6%; p < 0.0001). Overall survival to 30 days was 81.7% (1349/1651), with a mean survival time of 26.5 days (95% CI 26.1–26.9) with no difference between each year of study. 90-day survival for years 2017–2019 was 74.7% (949/1271), with no difference between the years. In multivariate regression we identified older age, heart failure, recent chemotherapy, higher frailty score and do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation orders as significantly associated with increased 30-day mortality. Our data suggests that despite efforts to increase sepsis awareness within the NHS, there is poor compliance with the sepsis care bundles and no change in the high mortality over the study period. Further research is needed to determine which time-sensitive ward-based interventions can reduce mortality in patients with sepsis and how can these results be embedded to routine clinical practice.

Trial registration Defining Sepsis on the Wards ISRCTN 86502304 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN86502304 prospectively registered 09/05/2016.

The Fight against COVID-19 on the Multi-Protease Front and Surroundings: Could an Early Therapeutic Approach with Repositioning Drugs Prevent the Disease Severity?

The interaction between the membrane spike (S) protein of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the transmembrane angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor of the human epithelial host cell is the first step of infection, which has a critical role for viral pathogenesis of the current coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Following the binding between S1 subunit and ACE2 receptor, different serine proteases, including TMPRSS2 and furin, trigger and participate in the fusion of the viral envelope with the host cell membrane. On the basis of the high virulence and pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2, other receptors have been found involved for viral binding and invasiveness of host cells. This review comprehensively discusses the mechanisms underlying the binding of SARS-CoV2 to ACE2 and putative alternative receptors, and the role of potential co-receptors and proteases in the early stages of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Given the short therapeutic time window within which to act to avoid the devastating evolution of the disease, we focused on potential therapeutic treatments-selected mainly among repurposing drugs-able to counteract the invasive front of proteases and mild inflammatory conditions, in order to prevent severe infection. Using existing approved drugs has the advantage of rapidly proceeding to clinical trials, low cost and, consequently, immediate and worldwide availability.