Hydroxychloroquine treatment does not reduce COVID-19 mortality; underdosing to the wrong patients?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ayerbe L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7906731 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Hydroxychloroquine treatment does not reduce COVID-19 mortality; underdosing to the wrong patients?
Ayerbe Luis L Risco-Risco Carlos C Núñez-Gil Iván I Perez-Piñar Maria M Ayis Salma S
The Lancet. Rheumatology 20210127 3
Similar Datasets
Project description:The efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in treating SARS-CoV-2 infection is harshly debated, with observational and experimental studies reporting contrasting results. To clarify the role of HCQ in Covid-19 patients, we carried out a retrospective observational study of 4,396 unselected patients hospitalized for Covid-19 in Italy (February-May 2020). Patients' characteristics were collected at entry, including age, sex, obesity, smoking status, blood parameters, history of diabetes, cancer, cardiovascular and chronic pulmonary diseases, and medications in use. These were used to identify subtypes of patients with similar characteristics through hierarchical clustering based on Gower distance. Using multivariable Cox regressions, these clusters were then tested for association with mortality and modification of effect by treatment with HCQ. We identified two clusters, one of 3,913 younger patients with lower circulating inflammation levels and better renal function, and one of 483 generally older and more comorbid subjects, more prevalently men and smokers. The latter group was at increased death risk adjusted by HCQ (HR[CI95%] = 3.80[3.08-4.67]), while HCQ showed an independent inverse association (0.51[0.43-0.61]), as well as a significant influence of cluster∗HCQ interaction (p < 0.001). This was driven by a differential association of HCQ with mortality between the high (0.89[0.65-1.22]) and the low risk cluster (0.46[0.39-0.54]). These effects survived adjustments for additional medications in use and were concordant with associations with disease severity and outcome. These findings suggest a particularly beneficial effect of HCQ within low risk Covid-19 patients and may contribute to clarifying the current controversy on HCQ efficacy in Covid-19 treatment.
| S-EPMC8238578 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Current formulations and dose regimens of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) put patients at risk of harm. An analysis of clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov revealed that this may continue as many studies combine HCQ with agents that prolong the QT interval. Further, almost all of the trials registered do not consider dosage adjustment in the elderly, a patient population most likely to require HCQ treatment. Here we describe an inhaled formulation of HCQ which has passed safety studies in clinical trials for the treatment of asthma and discuss how this approach may reduce side-effects and improve efficacy. As this simple formulation progressed to phase II studies, safety data can be used to immediately enable phase II trials in COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7361049 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionHydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is presently being used off-label or within a clinical trial.ObjectivesWe investigated a multinational database of patients with COVID-19 with real-world data containing outcomes and their relationship to HCQ use. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 30 days of follow-up.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of patients receiving HCQ within 48 hours of hospital admission. Medications, preexisting conditions, clinical measures on admission, and outcomes were recorded.ResultsAmong patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 in our propensity-matched cohort, the mean ages ± SD were 62.3 ± 15.9 years (53.7% male) and 61.9 ± 16.0 years (53.0% male) in the HCQ and no-HCQ groups, respectively. There was no difference in overall 30-day mortality between the HCQ and no-HCQ groups (HCQ 13.1%, n=367; no HCQ 13.6%, n=367; odds ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.62-1.46) after propensity matching. Although statistically insignificant, the HCQ-azithromycin (AZ) group had an overall mortality rate of 14.6% (n=199) compared with propensity-matched no-HCQ-AZ cohort's rate of 12.1% (n=199, OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.70-2.22). Importantly, however, there was no trend in this cohort's overall mortality/arrhythmogenesis outcome (HCQ-AZ 17.1%, no HCQ-no AZ 17.1%; OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6-1.7).ConclusionsWe report from a large retrospective multinational database analysis of COVID-19 outcomes with HCQ and overall mortality in hospitalized patients. There was no statistically significant increase in mortality and mortality-arrhythmia with HCQ or HCQ-AZ.
| S-EPMC7675747 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7717256 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceHydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, has been considered as a possible therapeutic agent for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, there are limited data on efficacy and associated adverse events.ObjectiveTo describe the association between use of hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, and clinical outcomes among hospital inpatients diagnosed with COVID-19.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective multicenter cohort study of patients from a random sample of all admitted patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in 25 hospitals, representing 88.2% of patients with COVID-19 in the New York metropolitan region. Eligible patients were admitted for at least 24 hours between March 15 and 28, 2020. Medications, preexisting conditions, clinical measures on admission, outcomes, and adverse events were abstracted from medical records. The date of final follow-up was April 24, 2020.ExposuresReceipt of both hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine alone, azithromycin alone, or neither.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were cardiac arrest and abnormal electrocardiogram findings (arrhythmia or QT prolongation).ResultsAmong 1438 hospitalized patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 (858 [59.7%] male, median age, 63 years), those receiving hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or both were more likely than those not receiving either drug to have diabetes, respiratory rate >22/min, abnormal chest imaging findings, O2 saturation lower than 90%, and aspartate aminotransferase greater than 40 U/L. Overall in-hospital mortality was 20.3% (95% CI, 18.2%-22.4%). The probability of death for patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin was 189/735 (25.7% [95% CI, 22.3%-28.9%]), hydroxychloroquine alone, 54/271 (19.9% [95% CI, 15.2%-24.7%]), azithromycin alone, 21/211 (10.0% [95% CI, 5.9%-14.0%]), and neither drug, 28/221 (12.7% [95% CI, 8.3%-17.1%]). In adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, compared with patients receiving neither drug, there were no significant differences in mortality for patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (HR, 1.35 [95% CI, 0.76-2.40]), hydroxychloroquine alone (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.63-1.85]), or azithromycin alone (HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.26-1.21]). In logistic models, compared with patients receiving neither drug cardiac arrest was significantly more likely in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (adjusted OR, 2.13 [95% CI, 1.12-4.05]), but not hydroxychloroquine alone (adjusted OR, 1.91 [95% CI, 0.96-3.81]) or azithromycin alone (adjusted OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.27-1.56]), . In adjusted logistic regression models, there were no significant differences in the relative likelihood of abnormal electrocardiogram findings.Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients hospitalized in metropolitan New York with COVID-19, treatment with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or both, compared with neither treatment, was not significantly associated with differences in in-hospital mortality. However, the interpretation of these findings may be limited by the observational design.
| S-EPMC7215635 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7995239 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7568487 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an unprecedented pandemic that has severely impacted global public health and the economy. Hydroxychloroquine administered orally to COVID-19 patients was ineffective, but its antiviral and anti-inflammatory actions were observed in vitro. The lack of efficacy in vivo could be due to the inefficiency of the oral route in attaining high drug concentration in the lungs. Delivering hydroxychloroquine by inhalation may be a promising alternative for direct targeting with minimal systemic exposure. This paper reports on the characterisation of isotonic, pH-neutral hydroxychloroquine sulphate (HCQS) solutions for nebulisation for COVID-19. They can be prepared, sterilised, and nebulised for testing as an investigational new drug for treating this infection. The 20, 50, and 100 mg/mL HCQS solutions were stable for at least 15 days without refrigeration when stored in darkness. They were atomised from Aerogen Solo Ultra vibrating mesh nebulisers (1 mL of each of the three concentrations and, in addition, 1.5 mL of 100 mg/mL) to form droplets having a median volumetric diameter of 4.3-5.2 µm, with about 50-60% of the aerosol by volume < 5 µm. The aerosol droplet size decreased (from 4.95 to 4.34 µm) with increasing drug concentration (from 20 to 100 mg/mL). As the drug concentration and liquid volume increased, the nebulisation duration increased from 3 to 11 min. The emitted doses ranged from 9.1 to 75.9 mg, depending on the concentration and volume nebulised. The HCQS solutions appear suitable for preclinical and clinical studies for potential COVID-19 treatment.
| S-EPMC8399722 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Abstract This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To evaluate the effects of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as: an antiviral treatment on death and time to clearance of the virus from clinical samples and recovery in people with COVID‐19; a prophylactic treatment on prevention of COVID‐19 in people at risk of SARS‐CoV‐2 exposure; a prophylactic treatment on prevention of COVID‐19 in people who have been exposed to SARS‐CoV‐2.
| S-EPMC7177204 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionGiven the current lack of an approved and effective treatment or vaccine for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), repositioning old drugs for use as an antiviral treatment is an interesting strategy because knowledge about these drugs' safety profile, posology, and drug interactions is already known. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, widely used as antimalarial and autoimmune disease drugs, have recently been reported as a potential broad-spectrum antiviral drug.BackgroundThe in vitro antiviral activity of chloroquine has been identified since the late 1960s. However, antiviral mechanisms of chloroquine remain speculative. Several clinical trials have been conducted to test the efficacy and safety of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19-associated pneumonia. The quality of the studies and the outcomes are evaluated in this systematic review and meta-analysis.Review resultsLiterature review revealed 23 clinical studies. Only 9 of 23 studies were randomized controlled trials. Of nine randomized controlled trials, only study by Skipper et al. was deemed to be at low risk of bias. All studies evaluated variedwith different outcomes. Mechanical ventilation and virological clearance were the only common outcomes evaluated in more than two studies. Virological clearance odds ratio (OR) was 1.25 (95% confidence interval [CI] of 0.57-2.73; Chi2 = 0.83; I2 = 0%). GRADE quality of evidence was downgraded by three levels to very low due to concerns about the risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision. For mechanical ventilation, OR was 1.09 (95% CI 0.80-1.50; Chi2 = 0; I2 = 0). GRADE quality of evidence was downgraded by two levels to low due to concerns about the risk of bias and imprecision. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups for these two outcomes.ConclusionAs per the available evidence, based on our review, we conclude that hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine has not shown to be beneficial when used for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.How to cite this articleShetty RM, Namachivayam A. Evidence for Chloroquine/Hydroxychloroquine in the Treatment of COVID-19. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(4):441-452.
| S-EPMC8138637 | biostudies-literature