Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of single-dose ivermectin in mild-to-moderate COVID-19: the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled CORVETTE-01 trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To investigate whether ivermectin inhibits SARS-CoV-2 proliferation in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 using time to a negative COVID-19 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test.

Methods

CORVETTE-01 was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study (August 2020-October 2021) conducted in Japan. Overall, 248 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 using RT-PCR were assessed for eligibility. A single oral dose of ivermectin (200 μg/kg) or placebo was administered under fasting. The primary outcome was time to a negative COVID-19 RT-PCR test result for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid, assessed using stratified log-rank test and Cox regression models.

Results

Overall, 112 and 109 patients were randomized to ivermectin and placebo, respectively; 106 patients from each group were included in the full analysis set (male [%], mean age: 68.9%, 47.9 years [ivermectin]; 62.3%, 47.5 years [placebo]). No significant difference was observed in the occurrence of negative RT-PCR tests between the groups (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-1.32; p = 0.785). Median (95% CI) time to a negative RT-PCR test was 14.0 (13.0-16.0) and 14.0 (12.0-16.0) days for ivermectin and placebo, respectively; 82.1% and 84% of patients achieved negative RT-PCR tests, respectively.

Conclusion

In patients with COVID-19, single-dose ivermectin was ineffective in decreasing the time to a negative RT-PCR test.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04703205.

SUBMITTER: Wada T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10240959 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and safety of single-dose ivermectin in mild-to-moderate COVID-19: the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled CORVETTE-01 trial.

Wada Tatsuhiko T Hibino Makoto M Aono Hiromi H Kyoda Shunsuke S Iwadate Yosuke Y Shishido Eri E Ikeda Keisuke K Kinoshita Nana N Matsuda Yasuki Y Otani Sakiko S Kameda Ryo R Matoba Kenta K Nonaka Miwa M Maeda Mika M Kumagai Yuji Y Ako Junya J Shichiri Masayoshi M Naoki Katsuhiko K Katagiri Masato M Takaso Masashi M Iwamura Masatsugu M Katayama Kazuhiko K Miyatsuka Takeshi T Orihashi Yasushi Y Yamaoka Kunihiro K

Frontiers in medicine 20230522

<h4>Background</h4>To investigate whether ivermectin inhibits SARS-CoV-2 proliferation in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 using time to a negative COVID-19 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test.<h4>Methods</h4>CORVETTE-01 was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study (August 2020-October 2021) conducted in Japan. Overall, 248 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 using RT-PCR were assessed for eligibility. A single oral dose of ivermectin (200 μg/kg) or pla ...[more]

PMID: 37283627

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInnovative approaches are needed to complement existing tools for malaria elimination. Ivermectin is a broad spectrum antiparasitic endectocide clinically used for onchocerciasis and lymphatic filariasis control at single doses of 150 to 200 mcg/kg. It also shortens the lifespan of mosquitoes that feed on individuals recently treated with ivermectin. However, the effect after a 150 to 200 mcg/kg oral dose is short-lived (6 to 11 days). Modeling suggests higher doses, which prolong the mosquitocidal effects, are needed to make a significant contribution to malaria elimination. Ivermectin has a wide therapeutic index and previous studies have shown doses up to 2000 mcg/kg (ie, 10 times the US Food and Drug Administration approved dose) are well tolerated and safe; the highest dose used for onchocerciasis is a single dose of 800 mcg/kg.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to determine the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of ivermectin doses of 0, 300, and 600 mcg/kg/day for 3 days, when provided with a standard 3-day course of the antimalarial dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP), on mosquito survival.MethodsThis is a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 3-arm, dose-finding trial in adults with uncomplicated malaria. Monte Carlo simulations based on pharmacokinetic modeling were performed to determine the optimum dosing regimens to be tested. Modeling showed that a 3-day regimen of 600 mcg/kg/day achieved similar median (5 to 95 percentiles) maximum drug concentrations (Cmax) of ivermectin to a single of dose of 800 mcg/kg, while increasing the median time above the lethal concentration 50% (LC50, 16 ng/mL) from 1.9 days (1.0 to 5.7) to 6.8 (3.8 to 13.4) days. The 300 mcg/kg/day dose was chosen at 50% of the higher dose to allow evaluation of the dose response. Mosquito survival will be assessed daily up to 28 days in laboratory-reared Anopheles gambiae s.s. populations fed on patients' blood taken at days 0, 2 (Cmax), 7 (primary outcome), 10, 14, 21, and 28 after the start of treatment. Safety outcomes include QT-prolongation and mydriasis. The trial will be conducted in 6 health facilities in western Kenya and requires a sample size of 141 participants (47 per arm). Sub-studies include (1) rich pharmacokinetics and (2) direct skin versus membrane feeding assays.ResultsRecruitment started July 20, 2015. Data collection was completed July 2, 2016. Unblinding and analysis will commence once the database has been completed, cleaned, and locked.ConclusionsHigh-dose ivermectin, if found to be safe and well tolerated, might offer a promising new tool for malaria elimination.

Project description:BackgroundEvidence on ivermectin as a treatment for Covid-19 is controversial. A Cochrane review concluded that the efficacy and safety of ivermectin is uncertain (evidence up to April 2022) and WHO recommended its use only in the setting of clinical trials. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of oral ivermectin in hospitalized patients with mild to moderate Covid-19.Trial design and methodsA double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted among RT-PCR-confirmed, adults, hospitalised within the first four days of symptoms. Patients received oral ivermectin 24 mg or placebo daily for five days. RT-PCR was repeated on days five and ten. Clinical progression was monitored using the World Health Organization Clinical Progression Scale. Serum ivermectin levels were measured on days three, five, and seven. The primary outcome was the difference in the viral load between day zero and ten in the two groups.ResultsOut of 1699 patients screened, 249 underwent randomization and 127 received ivermectin, and 122 placebo. D10 median viral load for E gene (IQR) was 2,000 copies/mL (100 - 20,500) with ivermectin (n = 80) and 4,100 copies/mL (1,000-65,600) with placebo (n = 81, p = 0.028), per protocol analysis. The difference in Log viral load between day zero and ten between ivermectin and placebo was 3.72 and 2.97 respectively (p = 0.022). There was no significant difference in the WHO clinical progression scale or the adverse effects. Ivermectin blood levels taken before or with meals were not significantly different. Only 7 and 17 patients achieved blood levels above 160ng/ML and 100ng/ML respectively and they did not achieve a significantly lower viral load.ConclusionAlthough ivermectin resulted in statistically significant lower viral load in patients with mild to moderate Covid-19, it had no significant effect on clinical symptoms.Trial registration numberSLCTR/2021/020, Sri Lanka Clinical Trials Registry. 19/07/2021.

Project description:BackgroundTopical anti-inflammatory therapy is a cornerstone of treatment for atopic dermatitis (AD). However, many unmet needs remain with existing therapies. B244 is a live topical biotherapeutic being tested for the reduction of pruritus and improvement of eczema signs in patients with AD. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of B244, compared to vehicle, for patients with mild-to-moderate AD and moderate-to-severe pruritus.MethodsIn this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 2b trial, adults aged 18-65 years with mild-to-moderate AD and moderate-to-severe pruritus were enrolled across 56 sites in the USA. Patients were randomised 1:1:1 into a low-dose (optical density at 600 nm [OD] 5.0), high-dose (OD 20.0), or vehicle group for the 4-week treatment period and a 4 week follow-up period. Patients were instructed to apply the topical spray twice daily throughout the treatment period. Randomisation was centrally based (random alternating blocks of 6 and 3) and stratified by site. All participants, investigators, and those assessing outcomes were blinded to the treatment group assignments. The primary endpoint was the mean change in pruritus as measured by the Worst Itch Numeric Rating Scale (WI-NRS) at 4 weeks. Safety was tracked throughout the study. Primary efficacy analyses included the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population, encompassing those who received at least one dose of study drug and attended at least one post-baseline visit. The safety population included all participants who received at least one does of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04490109.FindingsBetween June 4, 2020 and October 22, 2021, 547 eligible patients were enrolled. All study endpoints were meaningfully improved with B244 compared to vehicle. The WI-NRS score was reduced by 34% (-2.8 B244 vs -2.1 placebo, p = 0.014 and p = 0.015 for OD 20.0 and OD 5.0), from a baseline score of >8. B244 was well tolerated with no serious adverse events (SAEs); treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and treatment related TEAEs were low in incidence, mild in severity, and transient. 33 (18%) of 180 patients given B244 OD 5.0, 29 (16%) of 180 patients given B244 OD 20.0, and 17 (9%) of 186 patients given placebo reported treatment-emergent adverse events; headache was the most frequent (3%, 2%, and 1%, respectively).InterpretationB244 was well tolerated and demonstrated improved efficacy compared to vehicle in all primary, secondary, and exploratory endpoints and should be further developed as a novel, natural, fast-acting topical spray treatment option for AD and associated pruritus.FundingAOBiome Therapeutics.

Project description:IntroductionWe evaluated the anti-interleukin-36 receptor antibody spesolimab in patients with moderate-to-severe palmoplantar pustulosis (PPP).MethodsThis phase IIb trial comprised a loading dose period to week (W) 4, then maintenance dosing to W52. Patients were randomised 2:1:1:1:2 to subcutaneous spesolimab 3000 mg to W4 then 600 mg every 4 weeks (q4w), spesolimab 3000 mg to W4 then 300 mg q4w, spesolimab 1500 mg to W4 then 600 mg q4w, spesolimab 1500 mg to W4, 300 mg q4w to W16 then 300 mg every 8 weeks (q8w), or placebo switching to spesolimab 600 mg q4w at W16. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage change from baseline in Palmoplantar Pustular Area and Severity Index (PPP ASI) at W16. Secondary endpoints included a Palmoplantar Pustular Physician's Global Assessment (PPP PGA) score of 0/1. Safety (including adverse events [AEs], local tolerability) was assessed.Results152 patients were treated. The primary endpoint was not met; mean differences for spesolimab versus placebo ranged from - 14.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: - 31.5%, 2.2%) to - 5.3% (95% CI: - 19.1%, 8.6%); none reached significance. At W16, 23 (21.1%) and two (4.7%) patients in the combined spesolimab and placebo groups, respectively, achieved PPP PGA 0/1 (mean difference 16.4%; 95% CI: 3.8%, 25.7%), increasing to 59 (54.1%; combined spesolimab) and 12 (27.9%; placebo switch to spesolimab) patients at W52. Non-Asian patients had significant improvements in the primary endpoint (mean difference - 17.7%; nominal P = 0.0394) and PPP PGA 0/1 at W16 with spesolimab versus placebo. Rates of AEs and AE-related discontinuations were similar for spesolimab and placebo. Local tolerability events and injection-site reactions were more frequent with spesolimab than placebo.ConclusionThe primary objective to demonstrate a non-flat dose-response relationship and proof-of-concept was not achieved; improvements with spesolimab occurred in secondary endpoints and in non-Asian patients, indicating potential modest benefits. Spesolimab was generally well tolerated (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04015518).

Project description:BackgroundGST-HG171 is a potent, broad-spectrum, orally bioavailable small-molecule 3C like protease inhibitor that has demonstrated greater potency and efficacy compared to Nirmatrelvir in pre-clinical studies. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of orally administered GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infected with emerging XBB and non-XBB variants.MethodsThis randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trial was conducted in 47 sites in China among adult patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 with symptoms onset ≤72 h. Eligible patients were randomised 1:1 to receive GST-HG171 (150 mg) plus Ritonavir (100 mg) or corresponding placebo tablets twice daily for 5 days, with stratification factors including the risk level of disease progression and vaccination status. The primary efficacy endpoint was time to sustained recovery of clinical symptoms within 28 days, defined as a score of 0 for 11 COVID-19-related target symptoms for 2 consecutive days, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05656443) and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200067088).FindingsBetween Dec 19, 2022, and May 4, 2023, 1525 patients were screened. Among 1246 patients who underwent randomisation, most completed basic (21.2%) or booster (74.9%) COVID-19 immunization, and most had a low risk of disease progression at baseline. 610 of 617 who received GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir and 603 of 610 who received placebo were included in the mITT population. Patients who received GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir showed shortened median time to sustained recovery of clinical symptoms compared to the placebo group (13.0 days [95.45% confidence interval 12.0-15.0] vs. 15.0 days [14.0-15.0], P = 0.031). Consistent results were observed in both SARS-CoV-2 XBB (45.7%, 481/1053 of mITT population) and non-XBB variants (54.3%, 572/1053 of mITT population) subgroups. Incidence of adverse events was similar in the GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir (320/617, 51.9%) and placebo group (298/610, 48.9%). The most common adverse events in both placebo and treatment groups were hypertriglyceridaemia (10.0% vs. 14.7%). No deaths occurred.InterpretationTreatment with GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir has demonstrated benefits in symptom recovery and viral clearance among low-risk vaccinated adult patients with COVID-19, without apparent safety concerns. As most patients were treated within 2 days after symptom onset in our study, confirming the potential benefits of symptom recovery for patients with a longer duration between symptom onset and treatment initiation will require real-world studies.FundingFujian Akeylink Biotechnology Co., Ltd.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of single-dose ivermectin in mild-to-moderate COVID-19: the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled CORVETTE-01 trial.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Clinical trial registration

Publications

Efficacy and safety of single-dose ivermectin in mild-to-moderate COVID-19: the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled CORVETTE-01 trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets