Worldwide rates of diagnosis and effective treatment for cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Time has seen management for Cystic Fibrosis (CF) advance drastically, most recently in the development of the disease-modifying triple combination therapy ivacaftor/tezacaftor/elexacaftor. There is currently limited evidence regarding both the global epidemiology of CF and access to this transformative therapy - and therefore where needs are not being met. Therefore, this study aims to define gaps in access to CF treatment. METHODS: Patient data were extracted from established CF registries. Where these were not available, literature searches were conducted alongside an international survey of 51 CF experts to determine the diagnosed patient population. National CF prevalence estimates were combined with registry data on estimated population coverage, to extrapolate the total estimated number of undiagnosed patients. Estimates of ivacaftor/tezacaftor/elexacaftor treatment coverage were extracted from publicly available sales summaries and pricing data. RESULTS: 162,428 [144,606-186,620] people are estimated to be living with CF across 94 countries. Of these, an estimated 105,352 (65%) are diagnosed, with 19,516 (12%) receiving triple combination therapy. We estimated 57,076 patients with undiagnosed CF. Owing to a paucity of high-quality data, estimates of undiagnosed CF in low- and middle-income countries are highly uncertain. Patient registries were available in 45 countries, and used to identify 90% of the estimated diagnosed population. CONCLUSIONS: A significant CF patient burden exists in countries where disease-modifying drugs are unavailable, and final figures are likely underestimates. This analysis shows the potential to improve rates of diagnosis and treatment for CF, so a higher percentage of patients receive the most effective triple combination treatment.

Retraction to: Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials of Ivermectin to Treat SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

[This retracts the article DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofab358.]

Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials of Ivermectin to Treat SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Ivermectin is an antiparasitic drug being investigated for repurposing against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Ivermectin showed in vitro activity against SARS-COV-2, but only at high concentrations. This meta-analysis investigated ivermectin in 23 randomized clinical trials (3349 patients) identified through systematic searches of PUBMED, EMBASE, MedRxiv, and trial registries. The primary meta-analysis was carried out by excluding studies at a high risk of bias. Ivermectin did not show a statistically significant effect on survival (risk ratio [RR], 0.90; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.42; P = .66) or hospitalizations (RR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.11; P = .11). Ivermectin displayed a borderline significant effect on duration of hospitalization in comparison with standard of care (mean difference, -1.14 days; 95% CI, -2.27 to -0.00; P = .05). There was no significant effect of ivermectin on time to clinical recovery (mean difference, -0.57 days; 95% CI, -1.31 to 0.17; P = .13) or binary clinical recovery (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.50; P = .15). Currently, the World Health Organization recommends the use of ivermectin only inside clinical trials. A network of large clinical trials is in progress to validate the results seen to date.

Evaluation of the efficacy of sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir in combination with ribavirin for hospitalized COVID-19 patients with moderate disease compared with standard care: a single-centre, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: New therapeutic options are urgently needed to tackle the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Repurposing existing pharmaceuticals provides an immediate treatment opportunity. We assessed the efficacy of sofosbuvir and daclatasvir with ribavirin for treating patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This was a single-centre, randomized controlled trial in adults with moderate COVID-19 admitted to the Ghaem Shahr Razi Hospital in Mazandaran Province, Iran. Patients were randomly assigned to 400 mg sofosbuvir, 60 mg daclatasvir and 1200 mg ribavirin (intervention group) or to standard care (control group). The primary endpoint of this study was length of hospital stay. This study is registered by IRCT.ir under the ID: IRCT20200328046886N1. RESULTS: Between 20 March 2020 and 8 April 2020, 48 patients were recruited; 24 patients were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 24 to the control group. The median duration of hospital stay was 6 days in both groups (P = 0.398). The number of ICU admissions in the sofosbuvir/daclatasvir/ribavirin group was not significantly lower than the control group (0 versus 4, P = 0.109). There was no difference in the number of deaths between the groups (0 versus 3, P = 0.234). The cumulative incidence of recovery was higher in the sofosbuvir/daclatasvir/ribavirin arm (Gray's P = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial was too small to make definitive conclusions. There were trends in favour of the sofosbuvir/daclatasvir/ribavirin arm for recovery and lower death rates. However, there was an imbalance in the baseline characteristics between the arms. Larger randomized trials should be conducted to investigate this treatment further.

Sofosbuvir and daclatasvir compared with standard of care in the treatment of patients admitted to hospital with moderate or severe coronavirus infection (COVID-19): a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Currently no effective antiviral therapy has been found to treat COVID-19. The aim of this trial was to assess if the addition of sofosbuvir and daclatasvir improved clinical outcomes in patients with moderate or severe COVID-19. METHODS: This was an open-label, multicentre, randomized controlled clinical trial in adults with moderate or severe COVID-19 admitted to four university hospitals in Iran. Patients were randomized into a treatment arm receiving sofosbuvir and daclatasvir plus standard care, or a control arm receiving standard care alone. The primary endpoint was clinical recovery within 14 days of treatment. The study is registered with IRCT.ir under registration number IRCT20200128046294N2. RESULTS: Between 26 March and 26 April 2020, 66 patients were recruited and allocated to either the treatment arm (n = 33) or the control arm (n = 33). Clinical recovery within 14 days was achieved by 29/33 (88%) in the treatment arm and 22/33 (67%) in the control arm (P = 0.076). The treatment arm had a significantly shorter median duration of hospitalization [6 days (IQR 4-8)] than the control group [8 days (IQR 5-13)]; P = 0.029. Cumulative incidence of hospital discharge was significantly higher in the treatment arm versus the control (Gray's P = 0.041). Three patients died in the treatment arm and five in the control arm. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of sofosbuvir and daclatasvir to standard care significantly reduced the duration of hospital stay compared with standard care alone. Although fewer deaths were observed in the treatment arm, this was not statistically significant. Conducting larger scale trials seems prudent.

Analysis of Pharmacovigilance Databases for Dolutegravir Safety in Pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: The Botswana Tsepamo study reported neural tube defects (NTDs) in 4 of 426 (0.94%) infants of women receiving preconception dolutegravir (DTG) antiretroviral therapy (ART) vs 14 of 11 300 (0.12%) receiving preconception non-DTG ART. Data are needed to investigate this potential safety signal. Clinicians, patients, and pharmaceutical companies can report adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to pharmacovigilance databases. Data from ADRs reported to various pharmacovigilance databases were searched for NTDs. METHODS: Four pharmacovigilance databases (World Health Organization [WHO] VigiAccess; United Kingdom Medicines Health Regulatory Authority [UK MHRA]; European Medicines Agency [EMA] EudraVigilance; US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System [FAERS]) with online data availability were analyzed for NTD reports for 4 integrase inhibitors (DTG, raltegravir, elvitegravir, bictegravir), 2 protease inhibitors (darunavir, atazanavir), and 2 nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (nevirapine, efavirenz). Reports in the system organ class "congenital or familial disorders" were searched for NTDs. RESULTS: NTDs have been reported among infants born from women taking a wide range of antiretrovirals in 4 pharmacovigilance databases (WHO VigiAccess, 116 reactions; UK MHRA, 8 cases; EMA EudraVigilance, 20 cases; FAERS, 44 cases). Six NTDs were identified for DTG across the pharmacovigilance databases. Cases were very hard to interpret, given the lack of clear denominators. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacovigilance databases have many limitations, most importantly lack of a clear denominator for patients exposed to the drug of interest and duplicate cases that are difficult to identify. Given widespread use of new antiretroviral drugs worldwide and anticipated use of new drugs, prospective follow-up of pregnant women and birth surveillance studies such as Tsepamo are critically needed.