Response to the use of hydroxychloroquine in combination with azithromycin for patients with COVID-19 is not supported by recent literature.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gautret P
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7779257 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Response to the use of hydroxychloroquine in combination with azithromycin for patients with COVID-19 is not supported by recent literature.
Gautret Philippe P Hoang Van Thuan VT Honoré Stéphane S Roussel Yanis Y Million Matthieu M Lagier Jean-Christophe JC Raoult Didier D
International journal of antimicrobial agents 20210101 1
Similar Datasets
Project description:There are many reports available now, which are mostly observational or registry trial outcomes having varied results on coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) patients put on hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin combination. Some are showing increased in-hospital mortality and ventricular arrhythmia increase, while some are showing overall benefit with significant viral RNA load reduction. Everyday things are getting more complicated with the publication of these different outcomes. This needs to be addressed.
| S-EPMC7320242 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Alarming situation has been caused due to the emergence of COVID-19 infection around the world. There is an urgency of developing a therapeutic strategy in order to control the spread of COVID-19. Towards that initiative, potential drugs like hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin and azithromycin have been tested by diverse group of researchers worldwide for their potential against novel coronavirus. The present report presents together the comprehensive knowledge derived from the major researches about the above drugs altogether in context of the current health emergency around the world. Hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin were known to act by creating the acidic environment and inhibiting the importin (IMPα/β1) mediated viral import. Azithromycin was found to act similar to the hydroxychloroquine as an acidotropic lipophilic weak base. All the three categories of drugs seemed to potentially act against novel coronavirus infection. However, their efficacies need to be studied in detail individually and in combination in-vivo in order to combat COVID-19 infection.
| S-EPMC7175902 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7568487 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHydroxychloroquine and azithromycin have been used to treat patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). However, evidence on the safety and efficacy of these therapies is limited.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label, three-group, controlled trial involving hospitalized patients with suspected or confirmed Covid-19 who were receiving either no supplemental oxygen or a maximum of 4 liters per minute of supplemental oxygen. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive standard care, standard care plus hydroxychloroquine at a dose of 400 mg twice daily, or standard care plus hydroxychloroquine at a dose of 400 mg twice daily plus azithromycin at a dose of 500 mg once daily for 7 days. The primary outcome was clinical status at 15 days as assessed with the use of a seven-level ordinal scale (with levels ranging from one to seven and higher scores indicating a worse condition) in the modified intention-to-treat population (patients with a confirmed diagnosis of Covid-19). Safety was also assessed.ResultsA total of 667 patients underwent randomization; 504 patients had confirmed Covid-19 and were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. As compared with standard care, the proportional odds of having a higher score on the seven-point ordinal scale at 15 days was not affected by either hydroxychloroquine alone (odds ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 2.11; P = 1.00) or hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.73; P = 1.00). Prolongation of the corrected QT interval and elevation of liver-enzyme levels were more frequent in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, than in those who were not receiving either agent.ConclusionsAmong patients hospitalized with mild-to-moderate Covid-19, the use of hydroxychloroquine, alone or with azithromycin, did not improve clinical status at 15 days as compared with standard care. (Funded by the Coalition Covid-19 Brazil and EMS Pharma; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04322123.).
| S-EPMC7397242 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic remains a significant global threat. However, despite urgent need, there remains uncertainty surrounding best practices for pharmaceutical interventions to treat COVID-19. In particular, conflicting evidence has emerged surrounding the use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, alone or in combination, for COVID-19. The COVID-19 Evidence Accelerator convened by the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA, in collaboration with Friends of Cancer Research, assembled experts from the health systems research, regulatory science, data science, and epidemiology to participate in a large parallel analysis of different data sets to further explore the effectiveness of these treatments.MethodsElectronic health record (EHR) and claims data were extracted from seven separate databases. Parallel analyses were undertaken on data extracted from each source. Each analysis examined time to mortality in hospitalized patients treated with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and the two in combination as compared to patients not treated with either drug. Cox proportional hazards models were used, and propensity score methods were undertaken to adjust for confounding. Frequencies of adverse events in each treatment group were also examined.ResultsNeither hydroxychloroquine nor azithromycin, alone or in combination, were significantly associated with time to mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. No treatment groups appeared to have an elevated risk of adverse events.ConclusionAdministration of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and their combination appeared to have no effect on time to mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Continued research is needed to clarify best practices surrounding treatment of COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7968637 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7647442 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to characterize corrected QT (QTc) prolongation in a cohort of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) who were treated with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin (HCQ/AZM).BackgroundHCQ/AZM is being widely used to treat COVID-19 despite the known risk of QT interval prolongation and the unknown risk of arrhythmogenesis in this population.MethodsA retrospective cohort of COVID-19 hospitalized patients treated with HCQ/AZM was reviewed. The QTc interval was calculated before drug administration and for the first 5 days following initiation. The primary endpoint was the magnitude of QTc prolongation, and factors associated with QTc prolongation. Secondary endpoints were incidences of sustained ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation and all-cause mortality.ResultsAmong 415 patients who received concomitant HCQ/AZM, the mean QTc increased from 443 ± 25 ms to a maximum of 473 ± 40 ms (87 [21%] patients had a QTc ≥500 ms). Factors associated with QTc prolongation ≥500 ms were age (p < 0.001), body mass index <30 kg/m2 (p = 0.005), heart failure (p < 0.001), elevated creatinine (p = 0.005), and peak troponin (p < 0.001). The change in QTc was not associated with death over the short period of the study in a population in which mortality was already high (hazard ratio: 0.998; p = 0.607). No primary high-grade ventricular arrhythmias were observed.ConclusionsAn increase in QTc was seen in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 treated with HCQ/AZM. Several clinical factors were associated with greater QTc prolongation. Changes in QTc were not associated with increased risk of death.
| S-EPMC7406234 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has led to widespread use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin despite the lack of conclusive evidence for their safety and efficacy. We evaluated the association between treatment with hydroxychloroquine and/or azithromycin and hospital mortality as the primary outcome. We compared the hospital mortality of patients treated with hydroxychloroquine alone, azithromycin alone, or their combination to the mortality of patients who received neither drug. A logistic multivariate model with overlap weight propensity score was used for estimation of odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). One thousand four hundred and three patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were admitted to the hospital. At the time of the analysis, the outcome was available for 1376 (98%) of them. Five hundred and eighty-seven patients (42%) received azithromycin and 377 patients (27%) received hydroxychloroquine, alone or in combination. In-hospital mortality was 26%. After the adjusted analysis, azithromycin alone was associated with lower mortality (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.42-0.85) compared to no treatment. Hydroxychloroquine alone (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53-1.08) and the combination of azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.77-1.69) were not associated with hospital mortality. In this cohort of patients, azithromycin alone was associated with lower hospital mortality but hydroxychloroquine was not associated with increased or reduced mortality. While we await randomized clinical trials, these data support the use of azithromycin in novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and can contribute to better understanding of its role in further meta-analyses.
| S-EPMC7563535 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, has recently emerged worldwide. In this context, there is an urgent need to identify safe and effective therapeutic strategies for treatment of such highly contagious disease. We recently reported promising results of combining hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as an early treatment option. Although ongoing clinical trials are challenging the efficacy of this combination, many clinicians claim the authorization to or have already begun to use it to treat COVID-19 patients worldwide. The aim of this article is to share pharmacology considerations contributing to the rationale of this combination, and to provide safety information to prevent toxicity and drug-drug interactions, based on available evidence.
| S-EPMC7987362 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionWe sought to determine the effectiveness and safety of hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin (HCQ-AZM) therapy in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of 613 patients hospitalized (integrated health system involving three hospitals) for RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 infection between March 1, 2020 and April 25, 2020. Intervention was treatment with HCQ-AZM in hospitalized patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Outcomes of interest were in-hospital all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, pulseless electrical activity (PEA) arrest, non-lethal arrhythmias, and length of hospital stay. Secondary measures included in-hospital corrected QT (QTc) interval parameters and serum biomarkers levels.ResultsPropensity-matched groups were composed of 173 patients given HCQ-AZM and 173 matched patients who did not receive treatment. There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.52; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-2.89; p = 0.2), PEA arrest (OR 1.68, CI 0.68-4.15; p = 0.27), or incidence of non-lethal arrhythmias (10.4% vs. 6.8%; p = 0.28). Length of hospital stay (10.5 ± 7.4 vs. 5.8 ± 6.1; p < 0.001), peak CRP levels (252 ± 136 vs. 166 ± 124; p < 0.0001), and degree of QTc interval prolongation was higher for the HCQ-AZM group (28 ± 32 vs. 9 ± 32; p < 0.0001), but there was no significant difference in incidence of sustained ventricular arrhythmias (2.8% vs. 1.7%; p = 0.52). HCQ-AZM was stopped in 10 patients because of QT interval prolongation and 1 patient because of drug-related polymorphic ventricular tachycardia.ConclusionIn this propensity-matched study, there was no difference in in-hospital mortality, life-threatening arrhythmias, or incidence of PEA arrest between the HCQ-AZM and untreated control groups. QTc intervals were longer in patients receiving HCQ-AZM, but only one patient developed drug-related ventricular tachycardia.
| S-EPMC7556606 | biostudies-literature