Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 42
Filter
4.
Clin Ther ; 43(6): 1007-1019, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1245895

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Given the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there is a global urgency to discover an effective treatment for patients withthis disease. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of the widely used antiparasitic drug ivermectin on outcomes in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind clinical trial, patients with COVID-19 admitted to 2 referral tertiary hospitals in Mazandaran, Iran, were randomly divided into 2 groups: intervention and control. In addition to standard treatment for COVID-19, the intervention group received a single weight-based dose (0.2 mg/kg) of ivermectin; the control group received the standard of care. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, and imaging data from participants were recorded at baseline. Patients were assessed daily for symptoms and disease progression. The primary clinical outcome measures were the durations of hospital stay, fever, dyspnea, and cough; and overall clinical improvement. FINDINGS: Sixty-nine patients were enrolled (mean [SD] ages: ivermectin, 47.63 [22.20] years; control, 45.18 [23.11] years; P = 0.65). Eighteen patients (51.4%) in the ivermectin group and 18 (52.9%) in control group were male (P = 0.90). The mean durations of dyspnea were 2.6 (0.4) days in the ivermectin group and 3.8 (0.4) days in the control group (P = 0.048). Also, persistent cough lasted for 3.1 (0.4) days in the ivermectin group compared to 4.8 (0.4) days in control group (PP = 0.019). The mean durations of hospital stay were 7.1 (0.5) days versus 8.4 (0.6) days in the ivermectin and control groups, respectively (P = 0.016). Also, the frequency of lymphopenia decreased to 14.3% in the ivermectin group and did not change in the control group (P = 0.007). IMPLICATIONS: A single dose of ivermectin was well-tolerated in symptomatic patients with COVID-19, and important clinical features of COVID-19 were improved with ivermectin use, including dyspnea, cough, and lymphopenia. Further studies with larger sample sizes, different drug dosages, dosing intervals and durations, especially in different stages of the disease, may be useful in understanding the potential clinical benefits ivermectin. Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials identifier: IRCT20111224008507N3.

5.
Cureus ; 13(4): e14761, 2021 Apr 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1244351

ABSTRACT

Introduction Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global threat to public health. The current study investigates alterations in the biological estimates concerning the severity, recovery, mortality, and assessment of treatment-based outcomes. Methods A case series of 165 COVID-19 patients admitted to OMI Institute (a tertiary care hospital) was conducted between May and August 2020. The data regarding demographic characteristics, comorbid conditions, radiographic abnormalities, biological estimations, symptoms, treatment, disease progression, complications, and outcomes were recorded using a structured questionnaire. Laboratory estimations included complete blood count (CBC), renal and electrolyte profile, liver function tests (LFTs), hematological indices, and inflammatory markers. Chest X-ray, electrocardiogram (ECG), and a high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) scan were also performed, and data were extracted from the medical records. Analysis was done using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22.0. Results Out of the 165 COVID-19 patients, 79.4% recovered and were successfully discharged, while 20.6% of inpatient died. The patients' mean age was 56.03 ± 15.96 years, with a male majority (55.1%). The most common comorbid conditions were diabetes and hypertension; fever and dry cough were among the most frequently reported symptoms. The chest imaging findings among the severe/critical COVID-19 patients showed extensive bilateral patchy opacities. The median laboratory investigations, including neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (14.83), C-reactive protein (CRP) (7.4 mg/dl), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (786 IU/L), ferritin (1401.15 mcg/ml), and mean oxygen saturation (88.25%), were significantly altered among cases with increased disease severity and those who expired (p<0.05). The proportion of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and sepsis development was significantly high among severe/critical COVID-19 patients (p<0.05). Treatment with tocilizumab, remdesivir, doxycycline, ivermectin, enoxaparin sodium, and steroids was deemed to be potentially effective treatment options in terms of reducing COVID-19 severity and chances of recovery. Furthermore, age (OR 1.05; p=0.047), presence of comorbidity (OR 8.471; p=0.004), high NLR, LDH (final outcome) (OR 1.361 and 1.018; p<0.05), and CRP levels (midpoint) (OR 1.631; p=0.05) were identified as the strong predictors of death among COVID-19 patients. Conclusion The study identified several alterations in the clinical profile of the COVID-19 patients concerning severity during the hospital stay, affecting prognosis. Clinically, tocilizumab, remdesivir, doxycycline, ivermectin, enoxaparin sodium, and steroids were identified as potential therapeutic options for COVID-19 due to their ability to alter disease-associated severity and recovery rate.

6.
BMC Infect Dis ; 21(1): 411, 2021 May 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1216885

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: An effective treatment option is not yet available for SARS-CoV2, which causes the COVID-19 pandemic and whose effects are felt more and more every day. Ivermectin is among the drugs whose effectiveness in treatment has been investigated. In this study; it was aimed to investigate the presence of gene mutations that alter ivermectin metabolism and cause toxic effects in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia, and to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ivermectin use in the treatment of patients without mutation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with severe COVID19 pneumonia were included in the study, which was planned as a prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind phase 3 study. Two groups, the study group and the control group, took part in the study. Ivermectin 200 mcg/kg/day for 5 days in the form of a solution prepared for enteral use added to the reference treatment protocol -hydroxychloroquine + favipiravir + azithromycin- of patients included in the study group. Patients in the control group were given only reference treatment with 3 other drugs without ivermectin. The presence of mutations was investigated by performing sequence analysis in the mdr1/abcab1 gene with the Sanger method in patients included in the study group according to randomization. Patients with mutations were excluded from the study and ivermectin treatment was not continued. Patients were followed for 5 days after treatment. At the end of the treatment and follow-up period, clinical response and changes in laboratory parameters were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 66 patients, 36 in the study group and 30 in the control group were included in the study. Mutations affecting ivermectin metabolism was detected in genetic tests of six (16.7%) patients in the study group and they were excluded from the study. At the end of the 5-day follow-up period, the rate of clinical improvement was 73.3% (22/30) in the study group and was 53.3% (16/30) in the control group (p = 0.10). At the end of the study, mortality developed in 6 patients (20%) in the study group and in 9 (30%) patients in the control group (p = 0.37). At the end of the follow-up period, the average peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2) values of the study and control groups were found to be 93.5 and 93.0%, respectively. Partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2)/FiO2 ratios were determined as 236.3 ± 85.7 and 220.8 ± 127.3 in the study and control groups, respectively. While the blood lymphocyte count was higher in the study group compared to the control group (1698 ± 1438 and 1256 ± 710, respectively) at the end of the follow-up period (p = 0.24); reduction in serum C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin and D-dimer levels was more pronounced in the study group (p = 0.02, p = 0.005 and p = 0.03, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: According to the findings obtained, ivermectin can provide an increase in clinical recovery, improvement in prognostic laboratory parameters and a decrease in mortality rates even when used in patients with severe COVID-19. Consequently, ivermectin should be considered as an alternative drug that can be used in the treatment of COVID-19 disease or as an additional option to existing protocols.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Ivermectin/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , ATP Binding Cassette Transporter, Subfamily B/genetics , Aged , Amides/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/pharmacokinetics , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/mortality , Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A/genetics , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Ivermectin/pharmacokinetics , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Viral/blood , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Prospective Studies , Pyrazines/therapeutic use , Single-Blind Method , Treatment Outcome
7.
BMJ ; 373: n949, 2021 04 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1203960

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine and compare the effects of drug prophylaxis on SARS-CoV-2 infection and covid-19. DESIGN: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: World Health Organization covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature to 25 March 2021, and six additional Chinese databases to 20 February 2021. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised trials of people at risk of covid-19 who were assigned to receive prophylaxis or no prophylaxis (standard care or placebo). Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles. METHODS: Random effects bayesian network meta-analysis was performed after duplicate data abstraction. Included studies were assessed for risk of bias using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool, and certainty of evidence was assessed using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: The first iteration of this living network meta-analysis includes nine randomised trials-six of hydroxychloroquine (n=6059 participants), one of ivermectin combined with iota-carrageenan (n=234), and two of ivermectin alone (n=540), all compared with standard care or placebo. Two trials (one of ramipril and one of bromhexine hydrochloride) did not meet the sample size requirements for network meta-analysis. Hydroxychloroquine has trivial to no effect on admission to hospital (risk difference 1 fewer per 1000 participants, 95% credible interval 3 fewer to 4 more; high certainty evidence) or mortality (1 fewer per 1000, 2 fewer to 3 more; high certainty). Hydroxychloroquine probably does not reduce the risk of laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (2 more per 1000, 18 fewer to 28 more; moderate certainty), probably increases adverse effects leading to drug discontinuation (19 more per 1000, 1 fewer to 70 more; moderate certainty), and may have trivial to no effect on suspected, probable, or laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (15 fewer per 1000, 64 fewer to 41 more; low certainty). Owing to serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision, and thus very low certainty of evidence, the effects of ivermectin combined with iota-carrageenan on laboratory confirmed covid-19 (52 fewer per 1000, 58 fewer to 37 fewer), ivermectin alone on laboratory confirmed infection (50 fewer per 1000, 59 fewer to 16 fewer) and suspected, probable, or laboratory confirmed infection (159 fewer per 1000, 165 fewer to 144 fewer) remain very uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: Hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis has trivial to no effect on hospital admission and mortality, probably increases adverse effects, and probably does not reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Because of serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision, it is highly uncertain whether ivermectin combined with iota-carrageenan and ivermectin alone reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review was not registered. The protocol established a priori is included as a supplement. READERS' NOTE: This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Carrageenan/pharmacology , Global Health/statistics & numerical data , Hydroxychloroquine/pharmacology , Ivermectin/pharmacology , Anti-Infective Agents/pharmacology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Chemoprevention/methods , Chemoprevention/statistics & numerical data , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome , Uncertainty
8.
JAMA ; 325(14): 1426-1435, 2021 04 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1201461

ABSTRACT

Importance: Ivermectin is widely prescribed as a potential treatment for COVID-19 despite uncertainty about its clinical benefit. Objective: To determine whether ivermectin is an efficacious treatment for mild COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Double-blind, randomized trial conducted at a single site in Cali, Colombia. Potential study participants were identified by simple random sampling from the state's health department electronic database of patients with symptomatic, laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 during the study period. A total of 476 adult patients with mild disease and symptoms for 7 days or fewer (at home or hospitalized) were enrolled between July 15 and November 30, 2020, and followed up through December 21, 2020. Intervention: Patients were randomized to receive ivermectin, 300 µg/kg of body weight per day for 5 days (n = 200) or placebo (n = 200). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was time to resolution of symptoms within a 21-day follow-up period. Solicited adverse events and serious adverse events were also collected. Results: Among 400 patients who were randomized in the primary analysis population (median age, 37 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 29-48]; 231 women [58%]), 398 (99.5%) completed the trial. The median time to resolution of symptoms was 10 days (IQR, 9-13) in the ivermectin group compared with 12 days (IQR, 9-13) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for resolution of symptoms, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.87 to 1.32]; P = .53 by log-rank test). By day 21, 82% in the ivermectin group and 79% in the placebo group had resolved symptoms. The most common solicited adverse event was headache, reported by 104 patients (52%) given ivermectin and 111 (56%) who received placebo. The most common serious adverse event was multiorgan failure, occurring in 4 patients (2 in each group). Conclusion and Relevance: Among adults with mild COVID-19, a 5-day course of ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve the time to resolution of symptoms. The findings do not support the use of ivermectin for treatment of mild COVID-19, although larger trials may be needed to understand the effects of ivermectin on other clinically relevant outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04405843.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Ivermectin/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Anti-Infective Agents/adverse effects , Double-Blind Method , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Humans , Ivermectin/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Acuity , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Time Factors , Treatment Failure
9.
BMJ Evid Based Med ; 2021 Apr 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1199788
11.
Front Immunol ; 12: 663586, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1190318

ABSTRACT

As of January 2021, SARS-CoV-2 has killed over 2 million individuals across the world. As such, there is an urgent need for vaccines and therapeutics to reduce the burden of COVID-19. Several vaccines, including mRNA, vector-based vaccines, and inactivated vaccines, have been approved for emergency use in various countries. However, the slow roll-out of vaccines and insufficient global supply remains a challenge to turn the tide of the pandemic. Moreover, vaccines are important tools for preventing the disease but therapeutic tools to treat patients are also needed. As such, since the beginning of the pandemic, repurposed FDA-approved drugs have been sought as potential therapeutic options for COVID-19 due to their known safety profiles and potential anti-viral effects. One of these drugs is ivermectin (IVM), an antiparasitic drug created in the 1970s. IVM later exerted antiviral activity against various viruses including SARS-CoV-2. In this review, we delineate the story of how this antiparasitic drug was eventually identified as a potential treatment option for COVID-19. We review SARS-CoV-2 lifecycle, the role of the nucleocapsid protein, the turning points in past research that provided initial 'hints' for IVM's antiviral activity and its molecular mechanism of action- and finally, we culminate with the current clinical findings.


Subject(s)
Active Transport, Cell Nucleus/drug effects , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Ivermectin/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Animals , Cell Line , Chlorocebus aethiops , Coronavirus Nucleocapsid Proteins/antagonists & inhibitors , Coronavirus Nucleocapsid Proteins/metabolism , Drug Repositioning , Humans , Phosphoproteins/antagonists & inhibitors , Phosphoproteins/metabolism , Protein Transport/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/growth & development , Vero Cells , Virus Replication/drug effects , alpha Karyopherins/antagonists & inhibitors , beta Karyopherins/antagonists & inhibitors
12.
Drug Saf ; 44(6): 635-644, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1188213

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Ivermectin (IVM) and doxycycline (DOXY) have demonstrated in-vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, and have a reasonable safety profile. The objective of this systematic review was to explore the evidence in the literature on the safety and efficacy of their use as monotherapy and combination therapy in COVID-19 management. METHODS: After prospectively registering the study protocol with the Open Science Framework, we searched PubMed, Google Scholar, clinicaltrials.gov, various pre-print servers and reference lists for relevant records published until 16 February, 2021 using appropriate search strategies. Baseline features and data pertaining to efficacy and safety outcomes were extracted separately for IVM monotherapy, DOXY monotherapy, and IVM + DOXY combination therapy. Methodological quality was assessed based on the study design. RESULTS: Out of 200 articles screened, 19 studies (six retrospective cohort studies, seven randomised controlled trials, five non-randomised trials, one case series) with 8754 unique patients with multiple stages of COVID-19 were included; four were pre-prints and one was an unpublished clinicaltrials.gov document. The comparator was standard care and 'hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin' in seven and three studies respectively, and two studies were placebo controlled; six studies did not have a comparator. IVM monotherapy, DOXY monotherapy and IVM + DOXY were explored in eight, five and five studies, respectively; one study compared IVM monotherapy and IVM + DOXY with placebo. While all studies described efficacy, the safety profile was described in only six studies. Efficacy outcomes were mixed with some studies concluding in favour of the intervention and some studies displaying no significant benefit; barring one study that described 9/183 patients with erosive esophagitis and non-ulcer dyspepsia with IVM + DOXY (without causality assessment details), there were no new safety signals of concern with any of the three interventions considered. The quality of studies varied widely, with five studies having a 'good' methodological quality. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence is not sufficiently strong to either promote or refute the efficacy of IVM, DOXY, or their combination in COVID-19 management. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL REGISTRATION DETAILS: Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/n7r2j .


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , Doxycycline/pharmacology , Ivermectin/pharmacology , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Anti-Infective Agents/pharmacology , Drug Therapy, Combination/adverse effects , Drug Therapy, Combination/methods , Humans , Treatment Outcome
13.
14.
Trials ; 22(1): 262, 2021 Apr 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1175342

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective is to determine the effect of a daily dose of ivermectin administered in three consecutive days to non-severe COVID-19 patients with no more than 96 hours of symptoms, on the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by PCR from nasopharyngeal swabs at day seven post-treatment initiation. The secondary objectives are: 1. To assess the efficacy of ivermectin to reduce the SARS-CoV-2 viral load in the nasopharyngeal swab on days 4, 7, 14 and 21 post-treatment initiation 2. To assess the efficacy of ivermectin on the improvement of symptoms 3. To assess the proportion of seroconversions at day 21 4. To assess the safety of ivermectin at the proposed dose 5. To determine the magnitude of the immune response against SARS-CoV-2 6. To assess correlation of the presence of intestinal helminths on participants on baseline and day 14 with COVID-19 progression and treatment. TRIAL DESIGN: SAINT PERU is a triple-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial with two parallel arms to evaluate the efficacy of ivermectin in negativizing nasopharyngeal PCR in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. PARTICIPANTS: The trial is conducted in two national hospitals in Lima-Peru. The study population is patients with a positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 in a nasopharyngeal specimen, symptomatic for 96 hours or less, with non-severe COVID-19 disease at baseline, regardless of the presence of risk factors for progression to severity. The study will not include pregnant women or minors (17 years old or younger). Inclusion criteria 1. COVID-19 symptomatology (cough, fever, anosmia, etc.) lasting no more than 96 hours, with a positive nasopharyngeal swab PCR test for SARS-CoV-2. 2. 18 years or older. 3. No use of ivermectin in the month prior to the visit. 4. No known history of ivermectin allergy. 5. Capable to give informed consent. 6. Not current use of CYP 3A4 or P-gp inhibitor drugs such as quinidine, amiodarone, diltiazem, spironolactone, verapamil, clarithromycin, erythromycin, itraconazole, ketoconazole, cyclosporine, tacrolimus, indinavir, ritonavir, cobicistat or critical CYP3A4 substrate drugs such as warfarin. Exclusion criteria 1. COVID-19 pneumonia diagnosed by the attending physician (oxygen saturation < 95% or lung examination) 2. Positive pregnancy test for women at childbearing age. 3. Positive IgG against SARS-CoV-2 by rapid diagnostic test at screening. Participants will be recruited by the investigators at the emergency services of the study sites. They are expected to remain in the trial for a period of 21 days. Follow-up visits will be conducted by the trial medical staff at the participant's home or at a hospital in case of hospitalization. Follow-up visits will assess clinical and laboratory parameters of the patients. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Ivermectin (300 mcg/kg) or placebo will be administered in one daily dose for three consecutive days. Currently, there is no solid data on the efficacy of ivermectin against the virus in vivo; therefore the use of placebo in the control group is ethically justified. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary Proportion of patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR from a nasopharyngeal swab at day 7 post-treatment. Secondary 1. Mean viral load as determined by PCR cycle threshold (Ct) on days 4, 7, 14, and 21 2. Proportion of patients with fever and cough at days 4, 7, 14, and 21 as well as proportion of patients progressing to severe disease or death during the trial 2. Proportion of patients with a positive rapid diagnostic test at day 21 3. Proportion of drug-related adverse events during the trial 4. Median levels of IgG, IgM, IgA measured by Luminex RANDOMIZATION: Participants will be randomized to receive one dose of 300 mcg/kg ivermectin or placebo daily for three consecutive days. The epidemiologist will generate a list of correlative numbers, in randomized blocks of size 4, with the assignment to the treatment groups (a and b). The randomization list will be kept in an encrypted file accessible only to the trial statistician. This list will be handed directly to the pharmacist. Independently, the principal investigator will randomly assign the intervention (ivermectin) to one of the two groups (a or b) by tossing a coin, and will inform the pharmacist of the result of this process. The pharmacist will prepare and label the treatment vials according to the randomization list prepared by the epidemiologist and the treatment assignment given by the principal investigator. Eligible patients will be allocated in a 1:1 ratio using this randomization list. BLINDING (MASKING): The clinical trial team, the statistician, and the patients will be blinded as to arm allocation. The vials with placebo will be visibly identical to the ones with the active drug. Treatment will be administered by staff not involved in the clinical care or participant's follow up. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMIZED (SAMPLE SIZE): The planned sample size is 186 SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive patients: 93 patients to treatment and 93 to the placebo group. TRIAL STATUS: Current protocol version: 2.0 dated January 15th, 2021. Recruitment started on Aug 29th, 2020. Recruitment is expected to be completed April 30th 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: "Ensayo Clínico aleatorizado de Fase IIa para comparar la efectividad de la ivermectina versus placebo en la negativización del PCR en pacientes en fase temprana de COVID-19" Peru National Health Institute REPEC with number: PER-034-20 , registered July 17th 2020 (National Peruvian Registration before the first participant enrolled). "Randomized Phase IIA Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of Ivermectin to Obtain Negative PCR Results in Patients With Early Phase COVID-19" Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04635943 , retrospectively registered in November 19th 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/drug therapy , Ivermectin/therapeutic use , Humans , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Nasopharynx/virology , Peru , Polymerase Chain Reaction , RNA, Viral/isolation & purification , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome
15.
Pharmacol Rep ; 73(5): 1473-1479, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1155355

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The effect of ivermectin on mortality in patients with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been investigated in many studies. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to investigate the overall effect of ivermectin on the risk of mortality in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, and preprint repository databases (up to February 28, 2021). Random-effects and inverse variance heterogeneity meta-analysis were used to pool the odds ratio of individual trials. The risk of bias was appraised using Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. RESULTS: Six randomized controlled trials were included in this analysis with a total of 658 patients who were randomized to receive ivermectin and 597 patients randomized in the control group who did not receive ivermectin. Of six trials, four had an overall high risk of bias. The estimated effect of ivermectin indicated mortality benefits (pooled odds ratio = 0.21; 95% confidence interval 0.11-0.42, n = 1255), with some evidence against the hypothesis of 'no significant difference' at the current sample size. CONCLUSION: We observed a preliminary beneficial effect on mortality associated with ivermectin use in patients with COVID-19 that warrants further clinical evidence in appropriately designed large-scale randomized controlled trials.


Subject(s)
Antiparasitic Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/mortality , Ivermectin/adverse effects , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
16.
Toxicol Rep ; 8: 505-510, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1135576

ABSTRACT

Objectives: In this randomized open-label trial pilot study we assessed the antiviral effects and safety of various doses of ivermectin in patients with mild clinical symptoms of COVID-19. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to receive standard of care (SOC) treatment at hospital admission; SOC plus ivermectin 100 mcg/kg; SOC plus ivermectin 200 mcg/kg; or SOC plus ivermectin 400 mcg/kg. The primary assessed endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved two consecutive negative SARS-CoV-2 RT PCR tests within 7 days of the start of the dosing period. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04431466). Results: A total of 32 patients were enrolled and randomized to treatment. SOC treatment together with ivermectin did not result in any serious adverse events. All patients exhibited a reduction in SARS-CoV-2 viral load within 7 days; however, those who received ivermectin had a more consistent decrease as compared to the SOC alone group, characterized by a shorter time for obtaining two consecutive negative SARS-CoV-2 RT PCR tests. Conclusions: Ivermectin is safe in patients with SARS-CoV-2, reducing symptomatology and the SARS-CoV-2 viral load. This antiviral effect appears to depend on the dose used, and if confirmed in future studies, it suggests that ivermectin may be a useful adjuvant to the SOC treatment in patients with mild COVID-19 symptoms.

17.
Inflammopharmacology ; 29(2): 343-366, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1135175

ABSTRACT

Inflammation is an intrinsic defence mechanism triggered by the immune system against infection or injury. Chronic inflammation allows the host to recover or adapt through cellular and humoral responses, whereas acute inflammation leads to cytokine storms resulting in tissue damage. In this review, we present the overlapping outcomes of cancer inflammation with virus-induced inflammation. The study emphasises how anti-inflammatory drugs that work against cancer inflammation may work against the inflammation caused by the viral infection. It is established that the cytokine storm induced in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection contributes to disease-associated mortality. While cancer remains the second among the diseases associated with mortality worldwide, cancer patients' mortality rates are often observed upon extended periods after illness, usually ranging from months to years. However, the mortality rates associated with COVID-19 disease are robust. The cytokine storm induced by SARS-CoV-2 infection appeared to be responsible for the multi-organ failure and increased mortality rates. Since both cancer and COVID-19 disease share overlapping inflammatory mechanisms, repurposing some anticancer and anti-inflammatory drugs for COVID-19 may lower mortality rates. Here, we review some of these inflammatory mechanisms and propose some potential chemotherapeutic agents to intervene in them. We also discuss the repercussions of anti-inflammatory drugs such as glucocorticoids and hydroxychloroquine with zinc or antiviral drugs such as ivermectin and remdesivir against SARS-CoV-2 induced cytokine storm. In this review, we emphasise on various possibilities to reduce SARS-CoV-2 induced cytokine storm.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/pathology , Inflammation/drug therapy , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/pathology , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Inflammation/pathology , Inflammation/virology
18.
Viruses ; 12(9)2020 09 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1120792

ABSTRACT

Traditionally, drug discovery utilises a de novo design approach, which requires high cost and many years of drug development before it reaches the market. Novel drug development does not always account for orphan diseases, which have low demand and hence low-profit margins for drug developers. Recently, drug repositioning has gained recognition as an alternative approach that explores new avenues for pre-existing commercially approved or rejected drugs to treat diseases aside from the intended ones. Drug repositioning results in lower overall developmental expenses and risk assessments, as the efficacy and safety of the original drug have already been well accessed and approved by regulatory authorities. The greatest advantage of drug repositioning is that it breathes new life into the novel, rare, orphan, and resistant diseases, such as Cushing's syndrome, HIV infection, and pandemic outbreaks such as COVID-19. Repositioning existing drugs such as Hydroxychloroquine, Remdesivir, Ivermectin and Baricitinib shows good potential for COVID-19 treatment. This can crucially aid in resolving outbreaks in urgent times of need. This review discusses the past success in drug repositioning, the current technological advancement in the field, drug repositioning for personalised medicine and the ongoing research on newly emerging drugs under consideration for the COVID-19 treatment.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Drug Repositioning , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Drug Repositioning/economics , Drug Repositioning/trends , Humans , Pandemics , Pharmaceutical Research , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Precision Medicine , Rare Diseases/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2
19.
PLoS One ; 16(2): e0247163, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1117470

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Ivermectin is one among several potential drugs explored for its therapeutic and preventive role in SARS-CoV-2 infection. The study was aimed to explore the association between ivermectin prophylaxis and the development of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers. METHODS: A hospital-based matched case-control study was conducted among healthcare workers of AIIMS Bhubaneswar, India, from September to October 2020. Profession, gender, age and date of diagnosis were matched for 186 case-control pairs. Cases and controls were healthcare workers who tested positive and negative, respectively, for COVID-19 by RT-PCR. Exposure was defined as the intake of ivermectin and/or hydroxychloroquine and/or vitamin-C and/or other prophylaxis for COVID-19. Data collection and entry was done in Epicollect5, and analysis was performed using STATA version 13. Conditional logistic regression models were used to describe the associated factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: Ivermectin prophylaxis was taken by 76 controls and 41 cases. Two-dose ivermectin prophylaxis (AOR 0.27, 95% CI, 0.15-0.51) was associated with a 73% reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers for the following month. Those involved in physical activity (AOR 3.06 95% CI, 1.18-7.93) for more than an hour/day were more likely to contract SARS-CoV-2 infection. Type of household, COVID duty, single-dose ivermectin prophylaxis, vitamin-C prophylaxis and hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis were not associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSION: Two-dose ivermectin prophylaxis at a dose of 300 µg/kg with a gap of 72 hours was associated with a 73% reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers for the following month. Chemoprophylaxis has relevance in the containment of pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Ivermectin/therapeutic use , Adult , Ascorbic Acid/administration & dosage , Ascorbic Acid/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , Case-Control Studies , Chemoprevention/methods , Drug Combinations , Female , Humans , India , Ivermectin/administration & dosage , Male , Middle Aged
20.
QJM ; 2021 Feb 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1087809

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In vitro studies have shown the efficacy of Ivermectin (IV) to inhibit the SARS - CoV- 2 viral replication, but questions remained as to In-vivo applications. We set out to explore the efficacy and safety of Ivermectin in persons infected with COVID19. METHODS: We conducted a translational proof of concept (PoC) randomized, double blind placebo controlled, dose response, parallel group study of IV efficacy in RT - PCR proven COVID 19 positive patients. 62 patients were randomized to 3 treatment groups. (A) IV 6mg regime, (B)IV 12 mg regime (given Q84hrs for 2weeks) (C, control) Lopinavir/Ritonavir. All groups plus standard of Care. RESULTS: The Days to COVID negativity [DTN] was significantly and dose dependently reduced by IV (p = 0.0066). The DTN for Control were, = 9.1+/-5.2, for A 6.0 +/- 2.9, and for B 4.6 +/-3.2 . 2 Way repeated measures ANOVA of ranked COVID 19 +/- scores at 0, 84, 168, 232 hours showed a significant IV treatment effect (p = 0.035) and time effect (p < 0.0001). IV also tended to increase SPO2% compared to controls, p = 0.073, 95% CI - 0.39 to 2.59 and increased platelet count compared to C (p = 0.037) 95%CI 5.55 - 162.55 × 103/ml. The platelet count increase was inversely correlated to DTN (r = -0.52, p = 0.005). No SAE was reported. CONCLUSIONS: 12 mg IV regime may have superior efficacy. IV should be considered for use in clinical management of SARS-Cov-2, and may find applications in community prophylaxis in high-risk areas.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...