Higher-Dose Primaquine to Prevent Relapse of Plasmodium vivax Malaria.

BACKGROUND: In most of the Americas, the recommended treatment to prevent relapse of Plasmodium vivax malaria is primaquine at a total dose of 3.5 mg per kilogram of body weight, despite evidence of only moderate efficacy. METHODS: In this trial conducted in Brazil, we evaluated three primaquine regimens to prevent relapse of P. vivax malaria in children at least 5 years of age and in adults with microscopy-confirmed P. vivax monoinfection. All the patients received directly observed chloroquine for 3 days (total dose, 25 mg per kilogram). Group 1 received a total primaquine dose of 3.5 mg per kilogram (0.5 mg per kilogram per day) over 7 days with unobserved administration; group 2 received the same regimen as group 1 but with observed administration; and group 3 received a total primaquine dose of 7.0 mg per kilogram over 14 days (also 0.5 mg per kilogram per day) with observed administration. We monitored the patients for 168 days. RESULTS: We enrolled 63 patients in group 1, 96 in group 2, and 95 in group 3. The median age of the patients was 22.4 years (range, 5.4 to 79.8). By day 28, three P. vivax recurrences were observed: 2 in group 1 and 1 in group 2. By day 168, a total of 70 recurrences had occurred: 24 in group 1, 34 in group 2, and 12 in group 3. No serious adverse events were noted. On day 168, the percentage of patients without recurrence was 58% (95% confidence interval [CI], 44 to 70) in group 1, 59% (95% CI, 47 to 69) in group 2, and 86% (95% CI, 76 to 92) in group 3. Survival analysis showed a difference in the day 168 recurrence-free percentage of 27 percentage points (97.5% CI, 10 to 44; P<0.001) between group 1 and group 3 and a difference of 27 percentage points (97.5% CI, 12 to 42; P<0.001) between group 2 and group 3. CONCLUSIONS: The administration of primaquine at a total dose of 7.0 mg per kilogram had higher efficacy in preventing relapse of P. vivax malaria than a total dose of 3.5 mg per kilogram through day 168. (Supported by the U.S. Agency for International Development; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03610399.).

Chloroquine has shown high therapeutic efficacy against uncomplicated Plasmodium vivax malaria in southern Ethiopia: seven decades after its introduction.

BACKGROUND: Plasmodium vivax malaria is a leading cause of morbidity in Ethiopia. The first-line treatment for P. vivax is chloroquine (CQ) and primaquine (PQ), but there have been local reports of CQ resistance. A clinical study was conducted to determine the efficacy of CQ for the treatment of P. vivax malaria in southern Ethiopia. METHODS: In 2021, patients with P. vivax mono-infection and uncomplicated malaria were enrolled and treated with 25 mg/kg CQ for 3 consecutive days. Patients were followed for 28 days according to WHO guidelines. The data were analysed using per-protocol (PP) and Kaplan‒Meier (K‒M) analyses to estimate the risk of recurrent P. vivax parasitaemia on day 28. RESULTS: A total of 88 patients were enrolled, 78 (88.6%) of whom completed the 28 days of follow-up. Overall, 76 (97.4%) patients had adequate clinical and parasitological responses, and two patients had late parasitological failures. The initial therapeutic response was rapid, with 100% clearance of asexual parasitaemia within 48 h. CONCLUSION: Despite previous reports of declining chloroquine efficacy against P. vivax, CQ retains high therapeutic efficacy in southern Ethiopia, supporting the current national treatment guidelines. Ongoing clinical monitoring of CQ efficacy supported by advanced molecular methods is warranted to inform national surveillance and ensure optimal treatment guidelines.

Preliminary Study on Open Labelled Randomized Controlled Trial of the Safety and Efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine Phosphate for the Treatment of Persons Infected with 2019 Coronavirus Disease in Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a causative agent of COVID-19 is a leading cause of ill-health and deaths worldwide. Currently, COVID-19 has no known widely approved therapeutics. Thus, the need for effective treatment. OBJECTIVES: We investigated the safety and efficacy of two (2) therapeutic agents; chloroquine phosphate (CQ), 2- hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and a control (standard supportive therapy) among hospitalized adults with COVID-19. METHODS: The clinical trial was done in accordance to the World Health Organization master protocol for investigational therapeutics for COVID-19. Atotal of 40 participants with laboratory-confirmed positive COVID-19 were enrolled. Blood samples and oropharyngeal (OP) swabs were obtained on days 1,3,15 and 29 for safety and efficacy assessments. RESULTS: The baseline demographics showed that the median ages in years (range) were 45 (31-57) in CQ, 45 (36.5-60.5) in HCQ, 43 (39.5-67.0) and 44.5 (25.3-51.3) in the control (P<0.042).At randomization, seven (7) participants were asymptomatic, thirty-three (33) had mild symptoms, eight (8) had moderate symptoms while three (3) had severe symptoms. The average day of conversion to negative COVID-19 was 15.5 days for CQ, 16 days for HCQ and 18 days for the control(P=0.036). CONCLUSION: The safety assessment revealed no adverse effect of the drugs in COVID-19 patients after treatment. These findings proved that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are effective for the treatment of COVID-19 among hospitalized adults. It also confirmed that they are safe.

CONTEXTE: Le coronavirus du syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère 2 (SARS-CoV-2),agentcausaldelaCOVID-19, est l'unedes principales causes demaladie et de décès dans le monde. À l'heure actuelle, il n'existe aucun traitement largement approuvé pour la COVID-19. Ainsi, ilya un besoin de traitement efficace. OBJECTIFS: Nous avons étudié l'innocuité et l'efficacité de deux (2) agents thérapeutiques, le phosphate de chloroquine (CQ) et l'hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), ainsi qu'un groupe témoin (traitement de soutien standard) chez des adultes hospitalisés atteints de la COVID-19.MÉTHODES: L'essai clinique a été mené conformément au protocole maître de l'Organisation mondiale de la santé pour les thérapeutiques à l'étude de la COVID-19. Au total, 40 participants atteints de la COVID-19, confirmée en laboratoire, ont été in scrits. Des échantillons de sang et des prélèvements oropharyngés (PO) ont été effectuésauxjours1,3,15et29pourévaluerl'innocuitéetl'efficacité. RÉSULTATS: Les données démographiques initiales ont révélé que l'âge médian en années (plage) était de 45 (31-57) pour le groupe CQ, de 45 (36,5-60,5) pour le groupe HCQ, de 43 (39,5-67,0) et de 44,5 (25,3-51,3) pour le groupe témoin (P<0,042). À la randomisation, sept (7) participants étaient asymptomatiques, trente-trois (33) présentaient des symptômes bénins, huit(8) avaient des symptômes modérés, tandis que trois(3) avaient des symptômes graves. Le jour moyende conversionentest COVID-19 négatif était de 15,5 jours pour le groupe CQ, de 16 jours pour le groupe HCQ et de 18 jours pourle groupe témoin (P=0,036). CONCLUSION: L'évaluation de la sécurité n'a révélé aucun effet indésirable des médicaments chez les patients atteints de la COVID-19 après le traitement. Ces conclusions ont prouvé que la chloroquine et l'hydroxychloroquine sont efficaces pour le traitement de la COVID-19 chez les adultes hospitalisés. Cela a également confirmé qu' ilssont sûrs. Mots-clés: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, essai clinique, innocuité, efficacité, thérapeutiques.

A Novel Ex Vivo Drug Assay for Assessing the Transmission-Blocking Activity of Compounds on Field-Isolated Plasmodium falciparum Gametocytes.

The discovery and development of transmission-blocking therapies challenge malaria elimination and necessitate standard and reproducible bioassays to measure the blocking properties of antimalarial drugs and candidate compounds. Most of the current bioassays evaluating the transmission-blocking activity of compounds rely on laboratory-adapted Plasmodium strains. Transmission-blocking data from clinical gametocyte isolates could help select novel transmission-blocking candidates for further development. Using freshly collected Plasmodium falciparum gametocytes from asymptomatic individuals, we first optimized ex vivo culture conditions to improve gametocyte viability and infectiousness by testing several culture parameters. We next pre-exposed ex vivo field-isolated gametocytes to chloroquine, dihydroartemisinin, primaquine, KDU691, GNF179, and oryzalin for 48 h prior to direct membrane feeding. We measured the activity of the drug on the ability of gametocytes to resume the sexual life cycle in Anopheles after drug exposure. Using 57 blood samples collected from Malian volunteers aged 6 to 15 years, we demonstrate that the infectivity of freshly collected field gametocytes can be preserved and improved ex vivo in a culture medium supplemented with 10% horse serum at 4% hematocrit for 48 h. Moreover, our optimized drug assay displays the weak transmission-blocking activity of chloroquine and dihydroartemisinin, while primaquine and oryzalin exhibited a transmission-blocking activity of ~50% at 1 µM. KDU691 and GNF179 both interrupted Plasmodium transmission at 1 µM and 5 nM, respectively. This new approach, if implemented, has the potential to accelerate the screening of compounds with transmission-blocking activity.

Update on pathogenesis, management, and control of Plasmodium vivax.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This is a review of Plasmodium vivax epidemiology, pathogenesis, disease presentation, treatment and innovations in control and elimination. Here, we examine the recent literature and summarize new advances and ongoing challenges in the management of P. vivax . RECENT FINDINGS: P. vivax has a complex life cycle in the human host which impacts disease severity and treatment regimens. There is increasing data for the presence of cryptic reservoirs in the spleen and bone marrow which may contribute to chronic vivax infections and possibly disease severity. Methods to map the geospatial epidemiology of P. vivax chloroquine resistance are advancing, and they will inform local treatment guidelines. P. vivax treatment requires an 8-aminoquinoline to eradicate the dormant liver stage. Evidence suggests that higher doses of 8-aminoquinolines may be needed for radical cure of tropical frequent-relapsing strains. SUMMARY: P. vivax is a significant global health problem. There have been recent developments in understanding the complexity of P. vivax biology and optimization of antimalarial therapy. Studies toward the development of best practices for P. vivax control and elimination programs are ongoing.

Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the prophylaxis and therapy of COVID-19 infection.

At the end of last century a prominent biochemist once opened the discussion of a controversial issue in the field of Bioenergetics with the following statement: "This is a long story, that shouldn't be long, but it will take a long time to make it short". As it happens, such a statement would apply perfectly well to the story of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the COVID-19 infection: it has become a veritable saga, with conflicting views that have often gone beyond the normal scientific dialectic, and with conclusions that have frequently been polluted by non scientific opinions: thus, for instance, when National Agencies have taken positions against CQ and HCQ, the move has been seen as a pro-vaccine attempt to block low cost therapy means. And it is difficult to avoid the feeling that the opposition to CQ and HCQ has in large measure been shaped not by scientific arguments, but by the fact that their use has been strongly endorsed by National leaders whose popularity among Western intellectuals is extremely low. The role of the two drugs in the COVID-19 infection thus deserves an objective analysis solely based on scientific facts. This contribution will attempt to produce it.

Evaluation of the effect of supervised anti-malarial treatment on recurrences of Plasmodium vivax malaria.

BACKGROUND: Relapses in vivax malaria have posed great challenges for malaria control, and they also account for a great proportion of reported cases. Knowing the real effectiveness of a 7-day primaquine (PQ) scheme is crucial in order to evaluate not only the cost-effectiveness of implementing new anti-hypnozoite drugs, but also how health education strategies can guarantee better compliance and be reinforced. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of daily treatment with chloroquine and PQ supervised by health workers versus prescription without supervision. METHODS: The outcome was the passive detection of new positive thick blood smears up to 180 days, based on the official data records from the National Malaria Control Programme. The recurrences seen in the real life were, therefore, used as a surrogate for true relapses. RESULTS: Patients under supervised treatment had a lower risk of recurrence up to day 180 when compared to the unsupervised treatment (17.9% vs. 36.1%; p = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: The lack of supervision in the non-supervised group (which followed standard of care in the real life) enabled proper comparison, as consent itself would have lead to greater compliance in this group. Future studies should scale such an analysis to different settings in the Brazilian Amazon.

Drug treatment and prevention of malaria in pregnancy: a critical review of the guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Malaria caused by Plasmodium falciparum in pregnancy can result in adverse maternal and fetal sequelae. This review evaluated the adherence of the national guidelines drawn from World Health Organization (WHO) regions, Africa, Eastern Mediterranean, Southeast Asia, and Western Pacific, to the WHO recommendations on drug treatment and prevention of chloroquine-resistant falciparum malaria in pregnant women. METHODS: Thirty-five updated national guidelines and the President's Malaria Initiative (PMI), available in English language, were reviewed. The primary outcome measures were the first-line anti-malarial treatment protocols adopted by national guidelines for uncomplicated and complicated falciparum malaria infections in early (first) and late (second and third) trimesters of pregnancy. The strategy of intermittent preventive treatment of malaria in pregnancy (IPTp) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) was also addressed. RESULTS: This review evaluated the treatment and prevention of falciparum malaria in pregnancy in 35 national guidelines/PMI-Malaria Operational Plans (MOP) reports out of 95 malaria-endemic countries. Of the 35 national guidelines, 10 (28.6%) recommend oral quinine plus clindamycin as first-line treatment for uncomplicated malaria in the first trimester. As the first-line option, artemether-lumefantrine, an artemisinin-based combination therapy, is adopted by 26 (74.3%) of the guidelines for treating uncomplicated or complicated malaria in the second and third trimesters. Intravenous artesunate is approved by 18 (51.4%) and 31 (88.6%) guidelines for treating complicated malaria during early and late pregnancy, respectively. Of the 23 national guidelines that recommend IPTp-SP strategy, 8 (34.8%) are not explicit about directly observed therapy requirements, and three-quarters, 17 (73.9%), do not specify contra-indication of SP in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected pregnant women receiving cotrimoxazole prophylaxis. Most of the guidelines (18/23; 78.3%) state the recommended folic acid dose. CONCLUSION: Several national guidelines and PMI reports require update revisions to harmonize with international guidelines and emergent trends in managing falciparum malaria in pregnancy. National guidelines and those of donor agencies should comply with those of WHO guideline recommendations although local conditions and delayed guideline updates may call for deviations from WHO evidence-based guidelines.

Efficacy of favipiravir in COVID-19 treatment: a multi-center randomized study.

No specific antiviral drugs have been approved for the treatment of COVID-19. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of favipiravir in treatment of COVID-19. This was a multicenter randomized controlled study including 96 patients with COVID- 19 who were randomly assigned into a chloroquine (CQ) group and a favipiravir group. None of the patients in the favipiravir group needed mechanical ventilation (p = 0.129). One patient (2.3%) in the favipiravir group and two patients (4.2%) in the CQ group died (p = 1.00). Favipiravir is a promising drug for COVID-19 that decreases the hospital stay and the need for mechanical ventilation.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT04351295.

Efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine against SARS-CoV-2 infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)/Chloroquine (CQ) has been evaluated for treatment and prophylaxis against SARS-CoV-2 infection in various studies with conflicting results. We performed a systematic review to synthesize the currently available evidence over the efficacy and safety of HCQ/CQ therapy alone against SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: We searched Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane central for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies published until October 15, 2020 and assessing the efficacy of HCQ alone against SARS-CoV-2 infection. We included studies evaluating HCQ/CQ alone as intervention and placebo/standard care as a control group. Retrospective studies and studies using other drugs (namely azithromycin, corticosteroids, immunomodulators, etc.) we excluded. Thirteen RCTs and three prospective cohort studies were included in this review. We pooled data using a random-effect model. RESULTS: Pooled data from 12 studies (9917 participants) showed that HCQs increase mortality as compared to placebo/standard of care (RR 1.10; 95% CI:1.00-1.20). Hydroxychloroquine did not reduce the need for hospitalization in out-patients (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.31-1.02). HCQ group has a significantly higher rate of any adverse event (RR 2.68; 95% CI 1.55-4.64), as compared to the control group. Also, using HCQ for prophylaxis against SARS-CoV-2 infection did not reduce the risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.58-1.88). CONCLUSIONS: HCQ therapy for COVID-19 is associated with an increase in mortality and other adverse events. The negative effects are more pronounced in hospitalized patients. Therefore, with the available evidence, HCQ should not be used in prophylaxis or treatment of patients with COVID-19.

Chloroquine nasal drops in asymptomatic & mild COVID-19: An exploratory randomized clinical trial.

Background & objectives: Chloroquine (CQN) administered as nasal drops has the potential to achieve much greater local tissue levels than with oral/systemic administration. This trial was undertaken to study the efficacy and safety profile of topical nasal administration of CQN drops in reducing viral load and preventing clinical progression in early COVID-19 infection. Methods: This randomized clinical trial was done with a sample size of 60. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) confirmed asymptomatic patients or those with mild COVID-19 illness [National Early Warning Score (NEWS) ≤4] were included. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 manner. Control arm (standard supportive treatment, n=30) was compared with intervention arm (n=30) of standard treatment plus CQN eye drops (0.03%) repurposed as nasal drops administered six times daily (0.5 ml/dose) for 10 days. Outcome measures were adverse events and adherence; clinical progression and outcomes were measured by NEWS; sequential RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values were also noted on days 0, 3, 7 and 10. Results: Nasal CQN was associated with local irritation in seven and non-compliance in one of 30 patients. Eleven patients were excluded due to enrolment error (2 - recovered; 9 - false-positive referral), and 49 patients were analyzed as per modified intention-to-treat analysis. Clinical recovery was noted as similar with 100 per cent asymptomatic by day seven in both arms. Virological outcomes also indicated similarly improving Ct values in both arms, and similar proportion of patients transitioning to non-infectivity by day 10 (controls - 19/25; nasal CQN - 15/24). Nine false-positive patients with enrolment error and day 0 RT-PCR negative were initially uninfected but had continuing COVID-19 exposure and treatment as per randomization. Patients receiving nasal CQN (n=5) demonstrated stable Ct values from day 0 to 10, while patients with no nasal CQN (n=4) demonstrated significant dip in Ct value indicating to infection (Ct<35) and infectivity (Ct<33). Interpretation & conclusions: The present study suggests to the potential of topical nasal CQN in the prevention of COVID-19 infection if administered before the infection is established. No significant differences in clinical or virological outcome were however, demonstrated in patients with mild but established illness.

Effect of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine on Cytokine Release Syndrome in Patients with COVID-19.

Objective: To assess the effect of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine on cytokine release syndrome (CRS) in adult patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) having mild to moderate symptoms.Methods: This blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized study was conducted in the Department of Medicine, Pak Emirates Military Hospital Rawalpindi, from June 1-15, 2020. A total of 150 hospitalized patients were enrolled after diagnoses with COVID-19 through reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). They were divided into three groups: hydroxychloroquine plus general care (HGC, n=50), chloroquine plus general care (CGC, n=50); and only general care (OGC, n=50). The HGC group received treatment with hydroxychloroquine 400 mg every 12 hours for day one and 200 mg for the next 4 days. The CGC group received treatment with chloroquine 250 mg every 12 hours for 7 days. The OGC group was kept as a control with only general care. After 12 days, the patients were screened for development of CRS through detection of interleukin 6 (IL-6) in serum samples by using Roche cobas e411 electrochemiluminescence immunoassay analyzer.Results: The mean duration from onset of symptoms to randomization was 7.65 days (SD = 3.287 days; range, 2-15 days). The mean age of patients was 37.57 (range 19-63) years. Results showed that out of a total 150 patients, only 10 patients (6%, mean=1.93; CI=1.89-1.97, P=0.651) developed CRS in all study groups. Four patients (8%) developed CRS in the HGC group, 2 patients (4%) in the CGC group, and 4 patients (8%) in the OGC group. There was no significant difference in the mean level of CRS among study groups.Conclusion: Administration of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine has no effect in reducing the development of CRS in patients with COVID-19 having mild to moderate symptoms.

Antimalarial and cytotoxic drugs on COVID-19 and the cardiovascular burden: Literature review and lessons to be learned.

BACKGROUND: The world is witnessing an unprecedented crisis with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It is important to accurately analyze the available evidence to provide correct clinical guidance for optimal patient care. We aim to discuss current clinical evidence regarding chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, remdesivir, and the cardiovascular burden of COVID-19. METHODS: A literature review was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar. Additional clinical trials were identified through the "TrialsTracker" project. RESULTS: We found conflicting evidence of chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin, and remdesivir in COVID-19 despite promising early reports of in vitro antiviral activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Some of the current studies have demonstrated adverse drug reactions to chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin. Widespread systemic inflammation and procoagulant/hypercoagulable state, including thrombotic microangiopathy, endothelial dysfunction, bleeding disorder, and thrombosis are increasingly being witnessed in COVID-19. Evidence of cardiac injury and stroke is mostly reported in hospitalized patients; however, large specialized studies that focus on cardiac or neuropathology are lacking. DISCUSSION: There is no convincing clinical evidence of chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin, and remdesivir use in COVID-19. As evidence of systemic inflammation is rapidly unfolding, there is a dire need to maximize our resources to find the best possible solutions to the current crisis while conclusive evidence from clinical trials emerges.

COVID-19 prevention and treatment: A critical analysis of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine clinical pharmacology.

Nicholas White and coauthors discuss chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine pharmacology in the context of possible treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Severe COVID-19 in a renal transplant recipient: A focus on pharmacokinetics.

The current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic requires extra attention for immunocompromised patients, including solid organ transplant recipients. We report on a case of a 35-year-old renal transplant recipient who suffered from a severe COVID-19 pneumonia. The clinical course was complicated by extreme overexposure to the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus, following coadministration of chloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir therapy. The case is illustrative for dilemmas that transplant professionals may face in the absence of evidence-based COVID-19 therapy and concurrent pressure for exploration of experimental pharmacological treatment options. However, the risk-benefit balance of experimental or off-label therapy may be weighed differently in organ transplant recipients than in otherwise healthy COVID-19 patients, owing to their immunocompromised status and potential drug interactions with immunosuppressive therapy. With this case report, we aimed to achieve increased awareness and improved management of drug-drug interactions associated with the various treatment options for COVID-19 in renal transplant patients.

Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine Prescribing Patterns by Provider Specialty Following Initial Reports of Potential Benefit for COVID-19 Treatment - United States, January-June 2020.

Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, primarily used to treat autoimmune diseases and to prevent and treat malaria, received national attention in early March 2020, as potential treatment and prophylaxis for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1). On March 20, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an emergency use authorization (EUA) for chloroquine phosphate and hydroxychloroquine sulfate in the Strategic National Stockpile to be used by licensed health care providers to treat patients hospitalized with COVID-19 when the providers determine the potential benefit outweighs the potential risk to the patient.* Following reports of cardiac and other adverse events in patients receiving hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 (2), on April 24, 2020, FDA issued a caution against its use† and on June 15, rescinded its EUA for hydroxychloroquine from the Strategic National Stockpile.§ Following the FDA's issuance of caution and EUA rescindment, on May 12 and June 16, the federal COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel issued recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to treat COVID-19; the panel also noted that at that time no medication could be recommended for COVID-19 pre- or postexposure prophylaxis outside the setting of a clinical trial (3). However, public discussion concerning the effectiveness of these drugs on outcomes of COVID-19 (4,5), and clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis of COVID-19 continue.¶ In response to recent reports of notable increases in prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine (6), CDC analyzed outpatient retail pharmacy transaction data to identify potential differences in prescriptions dispensed by provider type during January-June 2020 compared with the same period in 2019. Before 2020, primary care providers and specialists who routinely prescribed hydroxychloroquine, such as rheumatologists and dermatologists, accounted for approximately 97% of new prescriptions. New prescriptions by specialists who did not typically prescribe these medications (defined as specialties accounting for ≤2% of new prescriptions before 2020) increased from 1,143 prescriptions in February 2020 to 75,569 in March 2020, an 80-fold increase from March 2019. Although dispensing trends are returning to prepandemic levels, continued adherence to current clinical guidelines for the indicated use of these medications will ensure their availability and benefit to patients for whom their use is indicated (3,4), because current data on treatment and pre- or postexposure prophylaxis for COVID-19 indicate that the potential benefits of these drugs do not appear to outweigh their risks.

Mass radical treatment of a group of foreign workers to mitigate the risk of re-establishment of malaria in Sri Lanka.

BACKGROUND: Following malaria elimination, Sri Lanka was free from indigenous transmission for six consecutive years, until the first introduced case was reported in December 2018. The source of transmission (index case) was a member of a group of 32 migrant workers from India and the location of transmission was their residence reporting a high prevalence of the primary vector for malaria. Despite extensive vector control the situation was highly susceptible to onward transmission if another of the group developed malaria. Therefore, Mass Radical Treatment (MRT) of the group of workers for Plasmodium vivax malaria was undertaken to mitigate this risk. METHOD: The workers were screened for malaria by microscopy and RDT, their haemoglobin level assessed, and tested for Glucose 6 phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency (G6PD) using the Care Start RDT and Brewers test prior to treatment with chloroquine (CQ) 25 mg/kg body weight (over three days) and primaquine (PQ) (0.25 mg/kg/day bodyweight for 14 days) following informed consent. All were monitored for adverse events. RESULTS: None of the foreign workers were parasitaemic at baseline screening and their haemoglobin levels ranged from 9.7-14.7 g/dl. All 31 individuals (excluding the index case treated previously) were treated with the recommended dose of CQ. The G6PD test results were inconclusive in 45% of the RDT results and were discrepant between the two tests in 31% of the remaining test events. Seven workers who tested G6PD deficient in either test were excluded from PQ and the rest, 24 workers, received PQ. No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Mass treatment may be an option in prevention of reintroduction settings for groups of migrants who are likely to be carrying latent malaria infections, and resident in areas of high receptivity. However, in the case of Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium ovale, a more reliable and affordable point-of-care test for G6PD activity would be required. Most countries which are eliminating malaria now are in the tropical zone and face considerable and similar risks of malaria re-introduction due to massive labour migration between them and neighbouring countries. Regional elimination of malaria should be the focus of global strategy if malaria elimination from countries is to be worthwhile and sustainable.

Impact of Trump's Promotion of Unproven COVID-19 Treatments and Subsequent Internet Trends: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with large followings can influence public opinions and behaviors, especially during a pandemic. In the early days of the pandemic, US president Donald J Trump has endorsed the use of unproven therapies. Subsequently, a death attributed to the wrongful ingestion of a chloroquine-containing compound occurred. OBJECTIVE: We investigated Donald J Trump's speeches and Twitter posts, as well as Google searches and Amazon purchases, and television airtime for mentions of hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, azithromycin, and remdesivir. METHODS: Twitter sourcing was catalogued with Factba.se, and analytics data, both past and present, were analyzed with Tweet Binder to assess average analytics data on key metrics. Donald J Trump's time spent discussing unverified treatments on the United States' 5 largest TV stations was catalogued with the Global Database of Events, Language, and Tone, and his speech transcripts were obtained from White House briefings. Google searches and shopping trends were analyzed with Google Trends. Amazon purchases were assessed using Helium 10 software. RESULTS: From March 1 to April 30, 2020, Donald J Trump made 11 tweets about unproven therapies and mentioned these therapies 65 times in White House briefings, especially touting hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine. These tweets had an impression reach of 300% above Donald J Trump's average. Following these tweets, at least 2% of airtime on conservative networks for treatment modalities like azithromycin and continuous mentions of such treatments were observed on stations like Fox News. Google searches and purchases increased following his first press conference on March 19, 2020, and increased again following his tweets on March 21, 2020. The same is true for medications on Amazon, with purchases for medicine substitutes, such as hydroxychloroquine, increasing by 200%. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals in positions of power can sway public purchasing, resulting in undesired effects when the individuals' claims are unverified. Public health officials must work to dissuade the use of unproven treatments for COVID-19.

Hydroxychloroquine Controversies: Clinical Trials, Epistemology, and the Democratization of Science.

The claim that anti-malaria drugs, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, can cure COVID-19 became a focus of fierce political battles that pitted promoters of these pharmaceuticals, Presidents Bolsonaro and Trump among them, against "medical elites." At the center of these battles are different meanings of effectiveness in medicine, the complex role of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in proving such effectiveness, the task of medical experts and the state in regulating pharmaceuticals, patients' activism, and the collective production of medical knowledge. This article follows the trajectory of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine as anti-COVID-19 drugs, focusing on the reception of views of their main scientific promoter, the French infectious disease specialist, Didier Raoult. The surprising career of these drugs, our text proposes, is fundamentally a political event, not in the narrow sense of engaging specific political fractions, but in the much broader sense of the politics of public participation in science.

Epidemiology and Treatment Options for COVID-19: A Review.

The Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is a highly transmittable and pathogenic viral infection caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which emerged in Wuhan, China and spread around the world. As of 19 June 2020 data from the World Health Organization (WHO) have shown that more than 8457305 confirmed cases have been identified in more than 200 countries, with the number of cases cutting across all continents. On 30th January 2020, the WHO declared COVID-19 as the sixth public health emergency of international concern. Genomic analysis revealed that SARS-CoV-2 is phylogenetically related to severe acute respiratory syndrome-like (SARS-like) bat viruses; therefore, bats could be the possible primary reservoir. The intermediate source of origin and transfer to humans is not known, however, the rapid human-to-human transfer has been confirmed widely via droplets or direct contact, and infection has been estimated to have mean incubation period of 6.4 days. Currently, controlling infection to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 is the primary intervention being used. However, public health authorities should keep monitoring the situation closely, as the more we can learn about this novel virus and its associated outbreak, the better we can respond.