RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Colchicine has been proposed as a potential therapy in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to their anti-inflammatory actions. METHODS: The COL-COVID study was a prospective, randomized, controlled and open-label clinical trial that compared colchicine added to standard treatment vs standard treatment in hospitalized COVID-19 patients that do not need mechanical ventilatory support. Colchicine was initiated within the first 48 hours of admission at a 1.5 mg loading dose, followed by 0.5 mg b.i.d. for one week and 0.5 mg per day for 28 days. The study endpoints were clinical status (7-points WHO ordinal scale) and inflammatory biomarkers (IL-6 and CRP). RESULTS: A total of 103 patients (51±12 years, 52% male) were randomly allocated to colchicine arm (n=52) and control arm (n=51). At day 28, all patients in the colchicine group were alive and discharged, whereas in the control group, two patients died in-hospital and one patient remained hospitalized. Clinical improvement in terms of changes on WHO scale at day 14 and 28 and time to 1-point clinical improvement did not differ between the two groups. Clinical deterioration (increase of at least 1-point in WHO scale) was observed in a higher proportion of cases in colchicine group (13.8%) vs control group (5.8%) (p=0.303); after adjustment by baseline risk factors and concomitant therapies, colchicine therapy was associated with a lower risk of clinical deterioration (p=0.030). Inflammatory biomarkers CRP and IL-6 concentrations course did not differ between the two arms. CONCLUSION: In hospitalized COVID-19 patients, colchicine treatment neither improved the clinical status, nor the inflammatory response, over the standard treatment. Nevertheless, a preventive effect for further clinical deterioration might be possible. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04350320.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Testosterone deficiency is associated with heart failure (HF) progression and poor prognosis. Testosterone therapy has been shown to improve exercise capacity in patients with chronic HF, but no trial has evaluated the impact of replacement in patients with demonstrated testosterone deficiency. METHODS: Prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, and parallel-group trial comparing testosterone replacement with placebo in males with chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and testosterone deficiency (NCT01813201). Long-acting undecanoate testosterone at a fixed dose of 1000 mg was supplied by intramuscular injection at inclusion and then every 3 months. The placebo group received isotonic saline serum. Patients were randomly allocated 1:1 to testosterone or placebo while receiving optimal medical therapy, and the study was conducted for 12 months. RESULTS: The final sample comprised 29 patients, 15 in the placebo group and 14 in the testosterone group (aged 65 ± 8, 62% with an ischemic etiology, left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] 30% ± 6%, 69% New York Heart Association functional [NYHA II]). After 12 months, testosterone replacement increased testosterone levels ( P = .002) but was not associated with benefit in terms of clinical symptoms and functional capacity including NYHA class, Framingham score, Minnesota Living Heart Failure Questionnaire, 6-minute walk test, or LVEF and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels. No significant side effects associated with testosterone treatment were observed. No effects were found in other hormonal, metabolic, and bone turnover biomarkers. CONCLUSION: In patients with HFrEF and testosterone deficiency, replacement therapy was not associated with any significant improvement.
