Compassionate use of hydroxychloroquine in clinical practice for patients with mild to severe Covid-19 in a French university hospital

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.

Pulmonary Delivery of Aerosolized Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine to Treat COVID-19: In Vitro Experimentation to Human Dosing Predictions

In vitro screening for pharmacological activity of existing drugs showed chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine to be effective against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Oral administration of these compounds to obtain desired pulmonary exposures resulted in dose-limiting systemic toxicity in humans. However, pulmonary drug delivery enables direct and rapid administration to obtain higher local tissue concentrations in target tissue. In this work, inhalable formulations for thermal aerosolization of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine were developed, and their physicochemical properties were characterized. Thermal aerosolization of 40 mg/mL chloroquine and 100 mg/mL hydroxychloroquine formulations delivered respirable aerosol particle sizes with 0.15 and 0.33 mg per 55 mL puff, respectively. In vitro toxicity was evaluated by exposing primary human bronchial epithelial cells to aerosol generated from Vitrocell. An in vitro exposure to 7.24 μg of chloroquine or 7.99 μg hydroxychloroquine showed no significant changes in cilia beating, transepithelial electrical resistance, and cell viability. The pharmacokinetics of inhaled aerosols was predicted by developing a physiologically based pharmacokinetic model that included a detailed species-specific respiratory tract physiology and lysosomal trapping. Based on the model predictions, inhaling emitted doses comprising 1.5 mg of chloroquine or 3.3 mg hydroxychloroquine three times a day may yield therapeutically effective concentrations in the lung. Inhalation of higher doses further increased effective concentrations in the lung while maintaining lower systemic concentrations. Given the theoretically favorable risk/benefit ratio, the clinical significance for pulmonary delivery of aerosolized chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 needs to be established in rigorous safety and efficacy studies.

In silico screening of potent inhibitors against COVID-19 key targets from a library of FDA-approved drugs

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an emerging pandemic that threatens the world since the early days of 2020. Development of vaccines or new drugs against COVID-19 comprises several stages of investigation including efficacy, safety, and approval studies. A shortcut to this delicate pathway is computational-based analysis of FDA-approved drugs against assigned molecular targets of the coronavirus. In this study, we virtually screened a library of FDA-approved drugs prescribed for different therapeutic purposes against versatile COVID-19 specific proteins which are crucial for the virus life cycle. Three antibiotics in our screening polymyxin B, bafilomycin A, and rifampicin show motivating binding stability with more than one target of the virus. Another category of tested drugs is oral antiseptics of mouth rinsing solutions that unexpectedly exhibited significant affinity to the target proteins employed by the virus for attachment and cell internalization. Other OTC drugs widely used and tested in our study are heartburn drugs and they show no significant binding. We tested also some other drugs falling under the scope of investigation regarding interference with a degree of severity of COVID-19 like angiotensin II blockers used as antihypertensive, and our study suggests a therapeutic rather than predisposing effect of these drugs against COVID-19.

Translational Modeling of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine Dosimetry in Human Airways for Treating Viral Respiratory Infections

Purpose

Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are effective against respiratory viruses in vitro. However, they lack antiviral efficacy upon oral administration. Translation of in vitro to in vivo exposure is necessary for understanding the disconnect between the two to develop effective therapeutic strategies.

Methods

We employed an in vitro ion-trapping kinetic model to predict the changes in the cytosolic and lysosomal concentrations of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in cell lines and primary human airway cultures. A physiologically based pharmacokinetic model with detailed respiratory physiology was used to predict regional airway exposure and optimize dosing regimens.

Results

At their reported in vitro effective concentrations in cell lines, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine cause a significant increase in their cytosolic and lysosomal concentrations by altering the lysosomal pH. Higher concentrations of the compounds are required to achieve similar levels of cytosolic and lysosomal changes in primary human airway cells in vitro. The predicted cellular and lysosomal concentrations in the respiratory tract for in vivo oral doses are lower than the in vitro effective levels. Pulmonary administration of aerosolized chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine is predicted to achieve high bound in vitro-effective concentrations in the respiratory tract, with low systemic exposure. Achieving effective cytosolic concentrations for activating immunomodulatory effects and adequate lysosomal levels for inhibiting viral replication could be key drivers for treating viral respiratory infections.

Conclusion

Our analysis provides a framework for extrapolating in vitro effective concentrations of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine to in vivo dosing regimens for treating viral respiratory infections.

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11095-021-03152-3.

Hydroxychloroquine: a comprehensive review and its controversial role in coronavirus disease 2019

Hydroxychloroquine, initially used as an antimalarial, is used as an immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory agent for the management of autoimmune and rheumatic diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus. Lately, there has been interest in its potential efficacy against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, with several speculated mechanisms. The purpose of this review is to elaborate on the mechanisms surrounding hydroxychloroquine. The review is an in-depth analysis of the antimalarial, immunomodulatory, and antiviral mechanisms of hydroxychloroquine, with detailed and novel pictorial explanations. The mechanisms of hydroxychloroquine are related to potential cardiotoxic manifestations and demonstrate potential adverse effects when used for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Finally, current literature associated with hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19 has been analyzed to interrelate the mechanisms, adverse effects, and use of hydroxychloroquine in the current pandemic. Currently, there is insufficient evidence about the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19. KEY MESSAGES HCQ, initially an antimalarial agent, is used as an immunomodulatory agent for managing several autoimmune diseases, for which its efficacy is linked to inhibiting lysosomal antigen processing, MHC-II antigen presentation, and TLR functions. HCQ is generally well-tolerated although severe life-threatening adverse effects including cardiomyopathy and conduction defects have been reported. HCQ use in COVID-19 should be discouraged outside clinical trials under strict medical supervision.

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.

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.

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

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

The Rise and Fall of Hydroxychloroquine with the COVID-19 Pandemic: Narrative Review of Selected Data

Since the first outbreak of Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) in January 2020, the medical community has been pursuing effective countermeasures. Early in the pandemic, several small clinical and in vitro studies from France and China reported on the efficacy of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) against SARS-CoV-2 infections, which generated global attention towards these decades-old antimalarials (AM) and heralded numerous studies investigating their role in treating COVID-19. Despite several observational studies early in the pandemic affirming their beneficial role in treating COVID-19, 12 clinical studies reported no mortality benefits for CQ/HCQ in COVID-19 patients. The excitement over CQ/HCQ was ultimately quenched after three large randomized clinical trials, the COALITION-I trial in Brazil, the RECOVERY trial in the United Kingdom (UK), and the SOLIDARITY trial from World Health Organization (WHO) consistently reported no beneficial effects for CQ/HCQ in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. While initial studies suggested that CQ/HCQ might have a role in treating the early phases of infection, the results from three rigorously designed studies investigating their role in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients were equivocal and inconsistent. Here we review the major social events related to the therapeutic use of CQ/HCQ in COVID-19, and the data from selected clinical studies evaluating their efficacy in hospitalized and non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients along with the major safety concerns.

The therapeutic effect and safety of the drugs for COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread almost all regions of the world and caused great loss to the whole body of mankind. Thus, numerous clinical trials were conducted to find specific medicine for COVID-19 recently. However, it remains unanswered whether they are beneficial.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the efficiency and safety of the COVID-19 medicine.

METHODS

Studies were determined through searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Medline. The studies of COVID-19 medicine were involved with eligible end points containing mortality, discharge rate, rate of clinical improvement, and rate of serious adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies involving 37,879 patients were included in our study, whose intervening measures contained three major types of COVID-19 medicine, ACEI/ARB, antiviral medicine, and chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine. Compared to control group, COVID-19 drugs have no distinct effect on mortality (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.79-1.11, P = .43) and discharge rate (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.98-1.14, P = .13). However, antiviral medicine presents the obvious advantage in clinical improvement (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.23, P < .05). In addition, the serious adverse events rate (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.88, P < .05) of COVID-19 medicine is lower than control group.

CONCLUSION

The results indicated antiviral medicine was potential specific medicine for COVID-19 treatment by improving clinical symptoms, but it failed to increase the discharge rate and reduce mortality. Chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine and ACEI/ARB had no significant effect on treatment of COVID-19, thus they were not recommended for routine medication. Moreover, more trials are needed to find effective drugs to lower the mortality of COVID-19 patients.

QTc prolongation in COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, azithromycin, or lopinavir/ritonavir: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, azithromycin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are drugs that were used for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) during the early pandemic period. It is well‐known that these agents can prolong the QTc interval and potentially induce Torsades de Pointes (TdP). We aim to assess the prevalence and risk of QTc prolongation and arrhythmic events in COVID‐19 patients treated with these drugs.

Methods

We searched electronic databases from inception to September 30, 2020 for studies reporting peak QTc ≥500 ms, peak QTc change ≥60 ms, peak QTc interval, peak change of QTc interval, ventricular arrhythmias, TdP, sudden cardiac death, or atrioventricular block (AVB). All meta‐analyses were conducted using a random‐effects model.

Results

Forty‐seven studies (three case series, 35 cohorts, and nine randomized controlled trials [RCTs]) involving 13 087 patients were included. The pooled prevalence of peak QTc ≥500 ms was 9% (95% confidence interval [95%CI], 3%–18%) and 8% (95%CI, 3%–14%) in patients who received hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin, respectively. Likewise, the use of hydroxychloroquine (risk ratio [RR], 2.68; 95%CI, 1.56–4.60) and hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (RR, 3.28; 95%CI, 1.16–9.30) was associated with an increased risk of QTc prolongation compared to no treatment. Ventricular arrhythmias, TdP, sudden cardiac death, and AVB were reported in <1% of patients across treatment groups. The only two studies that reported individual data of lopinavir/ritonavir found no cases of QTc prolongation.

Conclusions

COVID‐19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine with or without azithromycin had a relatively high prevalence and risk of QTc prolongation. However, the prevalence of arrhythmic events was very low, probably due to underreporting. The limited information about lopinavir/ritonavir showed that it does not prolong the QTc interval.

The efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in treatment of COVID19 -a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The treatment of SARS CoV2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome corona virus 2) also known as COVID-19 (corona virus disease 2019) continues to remain an enigma even after six months of the pandemic. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has been one of the most widely tested drugs for SARS CoV2 on account of its antiviral properties. However the results so far have been far from categorical. The meta-analyses conducted till date are also lacking in precision and appropriateness. This systematic review and meta-analysis addresses the efficacy and safety of HCQ in SARS CoV2 by overcoming the limitations of earlier meta-analysis.

METHODS

A total of 5 prominent medical databases were searched and fourteen studies (n = 12455) were included in the systematic review and meta-analyses. The data on survival, alleviation of symptoms, conversion of RT PCR positivity to negativity, use and efficacy in presence of co-morbidities (Hypertension, diabetes and heart disease) and cardiac and gastrointestinal side effects were extracted. Meta-analysis was applied to calculate the pooled estimates. Fixed-effects model results were chosen since I² was <25%.Meta-analysis was conducted using STATA version 13 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA).

RESULTS

The pooled estimates showed that HCQ treatment did not significantly affect survival at 14 and 28 days in COVID-19 patients with respect to the control population (RR: 1.003, 95% CI: 0.983-1.022), alleviation of symptoms at day 10 (RR: 1.044, 95% CI: 0.911 1.196), success in presence of co-morbidities (RR: 1.058, 95% CI: 1.035-1.082) and conversion from RT PCR positive to RT PCR negative on day 6 (RR:1.123, 95% CI: 1.041 1.212). There was higher risk for cardiac side effects (RR: 2.012, 95% CI: 1.428 2.833) and gastrointestinal side effects (RR: 1.318, 95% CI: 0.730 2.380) in HCQ recipients.

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence on the safety and efficacy of HCQ either alone or in combination with other drugs in SARS CoV2 infection.

Revised Korean Society of Infectious Diseases/National Evidence-based Healthcarea Collaborating Agency Guidelines on the Treatment of Patients with COVID-19

Despite the global effort to mitigate the spread, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a pandemic that took more than 2 million lives. There are numerous ongoing clinical studies aiming to find treatment options and many are being published daily. Some effective treatment options, albeit of variable efficacy, have been discovered. Therefore, it is necessary to develop an evidence-based methodology, to continuously check for new evidence, and to update recommendations accordingly. Here we provide guidelines on pharmaceutical treatment for COVID-19 based on the latest evidence.

From hydroxychloroquine to ivermectin: what are the anti-viral properties of anti-parasitic drugs to combat SARS-CoV-2?

BACKGROUND

Nearly a year into the COVID-19 pandemic, we still lack effective anti-SARS-CoV-2 drugs with substantial impact on mortality rates except for dexamethasone. As the search for effective antiviral agents continues, we aimed to review data on the potential of repurposing antiparasitic drugs against viruses in general, with an emphasis on coronaviruses.

METHODS

We performed a review by screening in vitro and in vivo studies that assessed the antiviral activity of several antiparasitic agents: chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), mefloquine, artemisinins, ivermectin, nitazoxanide (NTZ), niclosamide, atovaquone and albendazole.

RESULTS

For HCQ and chloroquine we found ample in vitro evidence of antiviral activity. Cohort studies that assessed the use of HCQ for COVID-19 reported conflicting results, but randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrated no effect on mortality rates and no substantial clinical benefits of HCQ used either for prevention or treatment of COVID-19. We found two clinical studies of artemisinins and two studies of NTZ for treatment of viruses other than COVID-19, all of which showed mixed results. Ivermectin was evaluated in one RCT and few observational studies, demonstrating conflicting results. As the level of evidence of these data is low, the efficacy of ivermectin against COVID-19 remains to be proven. For chloroquine, HCQ, mefloquine, artemisinins, ivermectin, NTZ and niclosamide, we found in vitro studies showing some effects against a wide array of viruses. We found no relevant studies for atovaquone and albendazole.

CONCLUSIONS

As the search for an effective drug active against SARS-CoV-2 continues, we argue that pre-clinical research of possible antiviral effects of compounds that could have antiviral activity should be conducted. Clinical studies should be conducted when sufficient in vitro evidence exists, and drugs should be introduced into widespread clinical use only after being rigorously tested in RCTs. Such a search may prove beneficial in this pandemic or in outbreaks yet to come.

Hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin in patients hospitalized for mild and moderate COVID-19

Objectives

To assess the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in combination with azithromycin in terms of clinical and biochemical outcomes in adult patients with COVID-19 hospitalized for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and to describe the occurrence of adverse events.

Method

Retrospective comparative study, based in a quaternary private hospital in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, involving 193 adult patients hospitalized for mild and moderate COVID-19 related ARSD, analyzing treatment efficacy based on clinical and biochemical outcomes.

Results

The active group comprised 101 (52.3%) patients using hydroxychloroquine associated with azithromycin and the control group 92 (47.7%) patients who did not take these medications. Median age was 59 (47–70) in the active group and 65 (47−77) in the control group (p < 0.05). Patients in the control group had greater extent of pulmonary involvement on baseline chest CT scans (p < 0.05). All other baseline variables (BMI, comorbidities, previous use of medications and biochemical assessments) were similar between groups. In the medication group, 25% (25 out of 101) were admitted to the ICU, compared to 21% (19 out of 92) in the control group (p > 0.05). No difference in mortality, duration of non-invasive oxygen use or duration of hospitalization was seen between groups. The therapeutic regimen was well tolerated, with only eight (7.9%) patients presenting gastrointestinal symptoms and eight (7.9%) patients withdrawn treatment due to QTc prolongation.

Conclusions

Patients treated with hydroxychloroquine combined with azithromycin and the control group had similar clinical outcomes. This therapeutic regimen was considered ineffective in hospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 related ARDS and was associated with few non-severe adverse events.

Hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19: a Rheumatologist's Take on the Lessons Learned

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Told from the viewpoint of rheumatologists, this review tells the story of hydroxychloroquine and its swift ascent to become a household name as a therapeutic strategy against the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus. This review describes the history, mechanisms, pharmacokinetics, therapeutic applications, and safety profile of hydroxychloroquine as an immunomodulatory and antiviral agent. It also summarizes the major studies that launched and assessed the use of hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19 infection.

RECENT FINDINGS

More recent literature calls into question the long-held dogma that endolysosomal alkalinization is the primary mode of action of hydroxychloroquine. Ongoing uncertainty about the multiple potential mechanisms contributing to the therapeutic effect of hydroxychloroquine in rheumatic and viral disease led to a natural avenue for exploration in the treatment of COVID-19. Taken as a whole, the literature does not support utilizing hydroxychloroquine to treat or prevent infection from the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This is, at least in part, due to the wide variability in hydroxychloroquine pharmacokinetics between patients and difficulty achieving adequate target tissue concentrations of hydroxychloroquine without encountering unacceptable toxicities. Hydroxychloroquine continues to be a routinely prescribed, well-tolerated, effective, and low-cost treatment for rheumatic disease. Its therapeutic versatility has led to frequent repurposing for other conditions, most recently as an investigative treatment against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Despite overall negative findings, the intense study of hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19 infection has enhanced our overall understanding of how hydroxychloroquine operates in autoimmune disease and beyond.

Clinical, biological and radiological features, 4-week outcomes and prognostic factors in COVID-19 elderly inpatients

Objective

To describe clinical, biological, radiological presentation and W4 status in COVID-19 elderly patients.

Patients and methods

All patients ≥ 70 years with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospitalized in the Infectious Diseases department of the Pitié-Salpêtrière hospital, Paris, France, from March 1st to April 15th 2020 were included. The primary outcome was death four weeks after hospital admission. Data on demographics, clinical features, laboratory tests, CT-scan findings, therapeutic management and complications were collected.

Results

All in all, 100 patients were analyzed, including 49 patients ≥ 80 years. Seventy percent had ≥2 comorbidities. Respiratory features were often severe as 48% needed oxygen support upon admission. Twenty-eight out of 43 patients (65%) with a CT-scan had mild to severe parenchymal impairment, and 38/43 (88%) had bilateral impairment. Thirty-two patients presented respiratory distress requiring oxygen support ≥ 6 liters/minute. Twenty-four deaths occurred, including 21 during hospitalization in our unit, 2 among the 8 patients transferred to ICU, and one at home after discharge from hospital, leading to a global mortality rate of 24% at W4. Age, acute renal failure and respiratory distress were associated with mortality at W4.

Conclusion

A substantial proportion of elderly COVID-19 patients with several comorbidities and severe clinical features survived, a finding that could provide arguments against transferring the most fragile patients to ICU.

COVID-19 pathogenesis, prognostic factors, and treatment strategy: Urgent recommendations

The pandemic of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is not yet close to being over, more than 8 months after the first cases, but researchers are making great progress in fighting the disease. We have conducted a brief review of the geographic differences in the prevalence of COVID-19, the updated pathological findings, prognostic factors, and treatments for disease prevention and improvement of prognosis. Although hydroxychloroquine and tocilizumab have been recommended by some researchers, many clinical trials have failed to confirm any beneficial effect of these and other drugs on COVID-19, in terms of improved clinical status or reduced patient mortality. Currently, glucocorticoid is the only drug that reduces the mortality of COVID-19 in a randomized controlled trial; however, it is still necessary to establish the optimal timing of administration. It is also urgent to set up an international or national cohort to address the risk factors associated with infection, the natural history of COVID-19, including the disease type, surrogate markers for critically ill, long-term sequelae, and reinfection after exposure, identify responders to glucocorticoid, and establish optimal treatment strategies for disease control.

Effect of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin on the mortality of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without azithromycin have been widely promoted to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) following early in vitro antiviral effects against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess whether chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin decreased COVID-19 mortality compared with the standard of care.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase Cochrane Library, Google Scholar and MedRxiv were searched up to 25 July 2020.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included published and unpublished studies comparing the mortality rate between patients treated with chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin and patients managed with standard of care.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients ≥18 years old with confirmed COVID-19.

INTERVENTIONS

Chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin.

METHODS

Effect sizes were pooled using a random-effects model. Multiple subgroup analyses were conducted to assess drug safety.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 839 articles, of which 29 met our inclusion criteria. All studies except one were conducted on hospitalized patients and evaluated the effects of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin. Among the 29 articles, three were randomized controlled trials, one was a non-randomized trial and 25 were observational studies, including 11 with a critical risk of bias and 14 with a serious or moderate risk of bias. After excluding studies with critical risk of bias, the meta-analysis included 11 932 participants for the hydroxychloroquine group, 8081 for the hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin group and 12 930 for the control group. Hydroxychloroquine was not significantly associated with mortality: pooled relative risk (RR) 0.83 (95% CI 0.65-1.06, n = 17 studies) for all studies and RR = 1.09 (95% CI 0.97-1.24, n = 3 studies) for randomized controlled trials. Hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin was associated with an increased mortality (RR = 1.27; 95% CI 1.04-1.54, n = 7 studies). We found similar results with a Bayesian meta-analysis.

CONCLUSION

Hydroxychloroquine alone was not associated with reduced mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients but the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin significantly increased mortality.

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

OBJECTIVES

Clinical studies of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in COVID-19 disease reported conflicting results. We sought to systematically evaluate the effect of CQ and HCQ with or without azithromycin on outcomes of COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

We searched multiple databases, preprints and grey literature up to 17 July 2020. We pooled only adjusted-effect estimates of mortality using a random-effect model. We summarized the effect of CQ or HCQ on viral clearance, ICU admission/mechanical ventilation and hospitalization.

RESULTS

Seven randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 14 cohort studies were included (20 979 patients). Thirteen studies (1 RCT and 12 cohort studies) with 15 938 hospitalized patients examined the effect of HCQ on short-term mortality. The pooled adjusted OR was 1.05 (95% CI 0.96-1.15, I2 = 0%). Six cohort studies examined the effect of the HCQ+azithromycin combination with a pooled adjusted OR of 1.32 (95% CI 1.00-1.75, I2 = 68.1%). Two cohort studies and four RCTs found no effect of HCQ on viral clearance. One small RCT demonstrated improved viral clearance with CQ and HCQ. Three cohort studies found that HCQ had no significant effect on mechanical ventilation/ICU admission. Two RCTs found no effect for HCQ on hospitalization risk in outpatients with COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate certainty evidence suggests that HCQ, with or without azithromycin, lacks efficacy in reducing short-term mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 or risk of hospitalization in outpatients with COVID-19.

The Role of Hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out to examine the role of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the treatment of COVID-19. Methods: We performed a systematic search in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane- Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and medRxiv pre-print databases using available MeSH terms for COVID-19 and hydroxychloroquine. Data from all studies that focused on the effectiveness of HCQ with or without the addition of azithromycin (AZM) in confirmed COVID-19 patients, which were published up to 12 September 2020, were collated for analysis using CMA v.2.2.064. Results: Our systematic review retrieved 41 studies. Among these, 37 studies including 45,913 participants fulfilled the criteria for subsequent meta-analysis. The data showed no significant difference in treatment efficacy between the HCQ and control groups (RR: 1.02, 95% CI, 0.81–1.27). Combination of HCQ with AZM also did not lead to improved treatment outcomes (RR: 1.26, 95% CI, 0.91–1.74). Furthermore, the mortality difference was not significant, neither in HCQ treatment group (RR: 0.86, 95% CI, 0.71–1.03) nor in HCQ plus AZM treatment group (RR: 1.28, 95% CI, 0.76–2.14) in comparison to controls. Meta-regression analysis showed that age was the factor that significantly affected mortality (P<0.00001). Conclusion: The meta-analysis found that there was no clinical benefit of using either HCQ by itself or in combination with AZM for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Hence, it may be prudent for clinicians and researchers to focus on other therapeutic options that may show greater promise in this disease. Keywords: Azithromycin, coronavirus outbreaks, pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 disease

Impact of Hydroxychloroquine on Mortality in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused significant health and economic havoc around the globe. One of the early agents targeted for repurposing to treat and prevent COVID-19 was hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, HCQ is evaluated for its potential role in decreasing mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and medRxiv databases using combinations of the terms “COVID-19”, “SARS-CoV-2”, “coronavirus”, “hydroxychloroquine”, and “mortality”. Articles were selected for further review based on the content of their abstracts. Studies were excluded if they were of poor methodological quality, were not based in the inpatient setting, or did not have available data to assess the primary outcome of death between patients treated with HCQ versus standard of care. Once the final dataset was compiled, a meta-analysis using the random-effects model was performed. Our search identified 14 studies involving 24,780 patients of whom 12,707 patients were on HCQ alone or in combination with other adjuvant therapies. HCQ alone or in combination with other drugs did not significantly decrease mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (odds ratio [OR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.72–1.26; p = 0.732; I² = 91.05). Similar findings were observed in all subgroup analyses. HCQ did not significantly impact mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Additional well-designed studies are essential due to the heterogeneity in available studies.

Hydroxychloroquine is effective, and consistently so when provided early, for COVID-19: a systematic review

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has shown efficacy against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in some but not all studies. We hypothesized that a systematic review would show HCQ to be effective against COVID-19, more effective when provided earlier, not associated with worsening disease and safe. We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Google Scholar and Google for all reports on HCQ as a treatment for COVID-19 patients. This included preprints and preliminary reports on larger COVID-19 studies. We examined the studies for efficacy, time of administration and safety. HCQ was found to be consistently effective against COVID-19 when provided early in the outpatient setting. It was also found to be overall effective in inpatient studies. No unbiased study found worse outcomes with HCQ use. No mortality or serious safety adverse events were found. HCQ is consistently effective against COVID-19 when provided early in the outpatient setting, it is overall effective against COVID-19, it has not produced worsening of disease and it is safe.

In Vitro Antiviral Activity of Doxycycline against SARS-CoV-2

In December 2019, a new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), emerged in Wuhan, China. Despite containment measures, SARS-CoV-2 spread in Asia, Southern Europe, then in America and currently in Africa. Identifying effective antiviral drugs is urgently needed. An efficient approach to drug discovery is to evaluate whether existing approved drugs can be efficient against SARS-CoV-2. Doxycycline, which is a second-generation tetracycline with broad-spectrum antimicrobial, antimalarial and anti-inflammatory activities, showed in vitro activity on Vero E6 cells infected with a clinically isolated SARS-CoV-2 strain (IHUMI-3) with median effective concentration (EC₅₀) of 4.5 ± 2.9 µM, compatible with oral uptake and intravenous administrations. Doxycycline interacted both on SARS-CoV-2 entry and in replication after virus entry. Besides its in vitro antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2, doxycycline has anti-inflammatory effects by decreasing the expression of various pro-inflammatory cytokines and could prevent co-infections and superinfections due to broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity. Therefore, doxycycline could be a potential partner of COVID-19 therapies. However, these results must be taken with caution regarding the potential use in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients: it is difficult to translate in vitro study results to actual clinical treatment in patients. In vivo evaluation in animal experimental models is required to confirm the antiviral effects of doxycycline on SARS-CoV-2 and more trials of high-risk patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 infections must be initiated.

Short-term Hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 Infection in People With or Without Metabolic Syndrome - Clearing Safety Issues and Good Clinical Practice

Hydroxychloroquine has been used in rheumatology for decades. This review highlights the mechanistic, clinical and safety data with regards to hydroxychloroquine use in novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in people with or without metabolic syndrome. PubMed and Medline were searched for articles published from January 1970 to March 2020 using the terms 'COVID-19', 'corona-virus 2019', 'hydroxychloroquine', 'hypertension', 'diabetes', 'cardiac disease', 'retina' and 'kidney disease'. Hypertension, diabetes and cardiovascular disease are the three most common comorbidities in people with COVID-19, meaning that such people have greater morbidity and mortality. Mechanistically, hydroxychloroquine inhibits SARS-CoV-2 virus uptake into cells by inhibiting angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 glycosylation. This inhibits lysosome activation and the associated cytokine storm, thus reducing the risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, which is the primary cause of death. Small, in-human studies have shown hydroxychloroquine to improve outcomes in COVID-19, either alone or in combination with azathioprine and other antiviral medications. Retina safety is not an issue with short term use of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19. Dose reduction is warranted when glomerular filtration rate is <50 mL/min. Cardiac monitoring is warranted in people with established cardiac disease, and cardiac rhythm should be closely monitored when hydroxychloroquine is used with azithromycin, lopinavir, ritonavir or remdesivir. Anti-diabetes medication doses may need to be reduced during treatment with hydroxychloroquine. While we await data from large, in-human trials, short-term use of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 is justified, as this molecule has stood the test of time with regards to use in humans for other indications.

Antimalarial drugs inhibit the replication of SARS-CoV-2: An in vitro evaluation

In December 2019, a new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) causing coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) emerged in Wuhan, China. African countries see slower dynamic of COVID-19 cases and deaths. One of the assumptions that may explain this later emergence in Africa, and more particularly in malaria endemic areas, would be the use of antimalarial drugs. We investigated the in vitro antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2 of several antimalarial drugs. Chloroquine (EC50 = 2.1 μM and EC90 = 3.8 μM), hydroxychloroquine (EC50 = 1.5 μM and EC90 = 3.0 μM), ferroquine (EC50 = 1.5 μM and EC90 = 2.4 μM), desethylamodiaquine (EC50 = 0.52 μM and EC90 = 1.9 μM), mefloquine (EC50 = 1.8 μM and EC90 = 8.1 μM), pyronaridine (EC50 = 0.72 μM and EC90 = 0.75 μM) and quinine (EC50 = 10.7 μM and EC90 = 38.8 μM) showed in vitro antiviral effective activity with IC50 and IC90 compatible with drug oral uptake at doses commonly administered in malaria treatment. The ratio Clung/EC90 ranged from 5 to 59. Lumefantrine, piperaquine and dihydroartemisinin had IC50 and IC90 too high to be compatible with expected plasma concentrations (ratio Cmax/EC90 < 0.05). Based on our results, we would expect that countries which commonly use artesunate-amodiaquine or artesunate-mefloquine report fewer cases and deaths than those using artemether-lumefantrine or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. It could be necessary now to compare the antimalarial use and the dynamics of COVID-19 country by country to confirm this hypothesis.

Hydroxychloroquine and Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Systematic Review of a Scientific Failure

INTRODUCTION

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) emerged early in the course of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic as a possible drug with potential therapeutic and prophylactic benefits. It was quickly adopted in China, Europe, and the USA. We systematically reviewed the existing clinical evidence of HCQ use for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.

METHODS

We screened for clinical studies describing HCQ administration to treat or prevent COVID-19 in PubMed. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized comparative cohorts, and case series studies that had all undergone peer review.

RESULTS

A total of 623 studies were screened; 17 studies evaluating HCQ treatment were included. A total of 13 were observational studies, and 4 were RCTs. In terms of effect on mortality rates, observational studies provided conflicting results. As a whole, RCTs, including one large British RCT that has not yet been published, showed no significant effect of HCQ on mortality rates, clinical cure, and virologic response. The use of HCQ as a post-exposure prophylactic agent was found to be ineffective in one RCT.

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence supporting HCQ for prophylaxis or treatment of COVID-19. Many observational trials were methodologically flawed. Scientific efforts have been disappointingly fragmented, and well-conducted trials have only recently been completed, more than 7 months and 600,000 deaths into the pandemic.