RESUMO
BackgroundThe benefits of remdesivir in the treatment of hospitalized patients with Covid-19 remain debated with the National Institutes of Health and the World Health Organization providing contradictory recommendations for and against use. MethodsWe performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of remdesivir for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The primary outcome was mortality, stratified by oxygen use (none, supplemental oxygen without mechanical ventilation, and mechanical ventilation). We conducted a frequentist random effects meta-analysis on the risk ratio (RR) scale and, to better contextualize the probabilistic benefits, we also performed a bayesian random effects meta-analysis on the risk difference scale. ResultsWe identified 8 randomized trials, totaling 9157 participants. The RR for mortality comparing remdesivir versus control was 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-1.22; I2=0.0%) in the patients who did not require supplemental oxygen; 0.83 (95%CI 0.73-0.95; I2=0.0%) for nonventilated patients requiring oxygen; and 1.19 (95%CI 0.98-1.44 I2=0.0%) in the setting of mechanical ventilation. Using neutral priors, the probabilities that remdesivir reduces mortality were 74.7%, 96.9% and 8.9%, respectively. The probability that remdesivir reduced mortality by more than 1% was 88.1% for nonventilated patients requiring oxygen. ConclusionBased on this meta-analysis, there is a high probability that remdesivir reduces mortality for nonventilated patients with COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen therapy.
RESUMO
ImportanceWidely available and affordable options for the outpatient management of COVID-19 are needed, particularly therapies that prevent hospitalization. ObjectivePerform a meta-analysis of the available randomized clinical trial evidence for fluvoxamine in the outpatient management of COVID-19. Data SourcesWorld Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov. Study SelectionCompleted outpatient trials with available results which compared fluvoxamine to placebo. Data Extraction and SynthesisWe followed the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. We extracted study details in terms of inclusion criteria, trial demographics and the pre-specified outcome of all-cause hospitalization. Risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. We conducted a frequentist random effects meta-analysis, as well as two sensitivity analyses using a Bayesian random effects meta-analysis with different estimates of prior probability: a weakly neutral prior (50% chance of efficacy with 95% confidence interval for Risk Ratio [RR] between 0.5 and 2) and a moderately optimistic prior (85% chance of efficacy). We contextualized the results by estimating the probability of any effect (RR [≤]1) and moderate effect (RR [≤]0.9) on reducing hospitalization. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s)All cause hospitalization. Results2196 participants were included from 3 identified trials. The risk ratios for hospitalization were 0.75 (95%CI, 0.57-0.97) for the frequentist analysis, 0.78 (95%CI 0.58-1.08) for the Bayesian weakly neutral prior, and 0.73 (95%CI, 0.53-1.01) for the Bayesian moderately optimistic prior. Depending on the scenario, the probability of any effect on hospitalization ranged from 94.1% to 98.3% and a moderate effect from 81.6% to 91.1%. Conclusions and RelevanceUnder a variety of assumptions, fluvoxamine shows a high probability of preventing hospitalization in outpatients with COVID-19. While ongoing randomized trials are important to evaluate alternative doses, explore the effectiveness in vaccinated patients, and provide further refinement to these estimates, fluvoxamine could be recommended as a treatment option, particularly in resource-limited settings or persons without access to SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody therapy or direct antivirals. Key PointsO_ST_ABSQuestionC_ST_ABSDoes early administration of fluvoxamine prevent hospitalization in symptomatic adult outpatients with confirmed COVID-19? FindingsIn this meta-analysis with Bayesian sensitivity analyses that accounted for varying prior probabilities, there was a high probability (94.1% to 98.3%) that fluvoxamine reduces hospitalization with frequentist risk ratio of 0.75 (95%CI 0.57-0.97). MeaningFluvoxamine is a widely available and inexpensive option that prevents hospitalization in patients with early COVID-19 based on randomized controlled trial evidence to date.
RESUMO
BackgroundSeveral outpatient COVID-19 therapies have reduced hospitalization in randomized controlled trials. The choice of therapy may depend on drug efficacy, toxicity, pricing, availability, and access to administration infrastructure. To facilitate comparative decision making, we evaluated the efficacy of each treatment in clinical trials and then estimated the associated cost per hospitalization prevented. MethodsWherever possible, we obtained relative risk for hospitalization from published randomized controlled trials. Otherwise, we extracted data from press releases, conference abstracts, government submissions, or preprints. If more than one study was published, the results were meta-analyzed. Using relative risk, we estimated the number needed to treat (NNT), assuming a baseline hospitalization risk of 5%. Drug pricing was based on Canadian formularies, government purchases, or manufacturer estimates. Administrative and societal costs were not included. Results will be updated online as new studies emerge or final publication numbers become available. ResultsAt a 5% risk of hospitalization the estimated NNTs were: 87 for colchicine, 80 for fluvoxamine, 72 for inhaled corticosteroids, 24 for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, 25 for sotrovimab, 24 for remdesivir, 29 for casirivimab/imdevimab, 29 for bamlanivimab/etesevimab and 52 for molnupiravir. Colchicine, fluvoxamine, inhaled corticosteroids, and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir had cost per hospitalization prevented point estimates below the CIHI estimated cost of hospitalization ($23000). InterpretationCanada is fortunate to have access to several effective outpatient therapies to prevent COVID-19 hospitalization. Given differences in efficacy, toxicity, cost and administration complexities, this assessment serves as one tool to help guide policy makers and clinicians in their treatment selection.
RESUMO
The role of inhaled corticosteroids for outpatient COVID-19 is evolving. We meta-analyzed reported clinical trials and estimated probability of any effect and number needed to treat of 50 or 20 for symptom resolution by day 14 [100%, 99.8%, 93.1%] and hospitalization [89.3%, 72.9%, 26.7%] respectively.
RESUMO
Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a rapidly emerging virus causing the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic with no known effective prophylaxis. We investigated whether hydroxychloroquine could prevent SARS CoV-2 in healthcare workers at high-risk of exposure. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of healthcare workers with ongoing exposure to persons with Covid-19, including those working in emergency departments, intensive care units, Covid-19 hospital wards, and first responders. Participants across the United States and in the Canadian province of Manitoba were randomized to hydroxychloroquine 400mg once weekly or twice weekly for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was confirmed or probable Covid-19-compatible illness. We measured hydroxychloroquine whole blood concentrations. Results: We enrolled 1483 healthcare workers, of which 79% reported performing aerosol-generating procedures. The incidence of Covid-19 (laboratory-confirmed or symptomatic compatible illness) was 0.27 events per person-year with once-weekly and 0.28 events per person-year with twice-weekly hydroxychloroquine compared with 0.38 events per person-year with placebo. For once weekly hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis, the hazard ratio was 0.72 (95%CI 0.44 to 1.16; P=0.18) and for twice weekly was 0.74 (95%CI 0.46 to 1.19; P=0.22) as compared with placebo. Median hydroxychloroquine concentrations in whole blood were 98 ng/mL (IQR, 82-120) with once-weekly and 200 ng/mL (IQR, 159-258) with twice-weekly dosing. Hydroxychloroquine concentrations did not differ between participants who developed Covid-19 (154 ng/mL) versus participants without Covid-19 (133 ng/mL; P=0.08). Conclusions: Pre-exposure prophylaxis with hydroxychloroquine once or twice weekly did not significantly reduce laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 or Covid-19-compatible illness among healthcare workers.
RESUMO
IntroductionUse of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, especially in combination with azithromycin, has raised safety concerns. Here, we report safety data from three outpatient randomized clinical trials. MethodsWe conducted three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials investigating hydroxychloroquine as pre-exposure prophylaxis, post-exposure prophylaxis and early treatment for COVID-19. We excluded individuals with contraindications to hydroxychloroquine. We collected side effects and serious adverse events. We report descriptive analyses of our findings. ResultsWe enrolled 2,795 participants. The median age of research participants was 40 (IQR 34-49) years, and 59% (1633/2767) reported no chronic medical conditions. Overall 2,324 (84%) participants reported side effect data, and 638 (27%) reported at least one medication side effect. Side effects were reported in 29% with daily, 36% with twice weekly, 31% with once weekly hydroxychloroquine compared to 19% with placebo. The most common side effects were upset stomach or nausea (25% with daily, 18% with twice weekly, 16% with weekly, vs. 10% for placebo), followed by diarrhea, vomiting, or abdominal pain (23% for daily, 16% twice weekly, 12% weekly, vs. 6% for placebo). Two individuals were hospitalized for atrial arrhythmias, one on placebo and one on twice weekly hydroxychloroquine. No sudden deaths occurred. ConclusionData from three outpatient COVID-19 trials demonstrated that gastrointestinal side effects were common but mild with the use of hydroxychloroquine, while serious side effects were rare. No deaths occurred related to hydroxychloroquine. Randomized clinical trials can safely investigate whether hydroxychloroquine is efficacious for COVID-19. Short SummaryData from three randomized clinical trials using hydroxychloroquine for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 did not suggest significant safety concerns. Gastrointestinal side effects were common but arrhythmias were rare. There were no sudden deaths in any trial.
RESUMO
BackgroundThe severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in December 2019 causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Currently, there are a lack of evidence-based therapies to prevent COVID-19 following exposure, or to prevent worsening of symptoms following confirmed infection. We describe the design of a clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine for post-exposure prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy for COVID-19. MethodsWe will conduct two nested multicenter international double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine for: 1) post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) of asymptomatic household contacts or healthcare workers exposed to COVID-19 within the past four days, and 2) pre-emptive therapy (PET) for symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 with a total symptom duration of less than 4 days. We will recruit 1500 patients for each the PEP and PET trials. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive 5 days of hydroxychloroquine or placebo. The primary PEP trial outcome will be the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19 disease. The primary PET trial outcome will be an ordinal scale of disease severity (not hospitalized; hospitalized without intensive care, hospitalization with intensive care, or death). Participant screening, informed consent, and follow up will be exclusively internet-based with appropriate regulatory and research ethics board approvals in Canada and the United States. DiscussionThese complementary randomized control trials are innovatively designed and adequately powered to rapidly answer urgent questions regarding the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine to reduce transmission and disease severity of COVID-19 during a pandemic. In-person participant follow-up will not be conducted in order to facilitate social distancing strategies and reduce risks of exposure to study personnel. Innovative trial approaches are needed to urgently assess therapeutic options to mitigate the global impact of this pandemic. Trials Registrationclinicaltrials.gov (NCT04308668); 16 March 2020.
