Dataset Information

Comparing outcomes of hospitalized patients with moderate and severe COVID-19 following treatment with hydroxychloroquine plus atazanavir/ritonavir.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The role of the antiviral therapy in treatment of COVID-19 is still a matter to be investigated. Also efficacy and safety of antiviral regimens were not compared according severity of the disease. In this study the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine plus atazanavir/ritonavir was compared in patients with moderate and severe COVID-19. METHODS:We prospectively evaluated the clinical outcomes of 213 patients with COVID-19 during the hospitalization course and up to 56 days after the hospital discharge. The disease was categorized to moderate and severe based on the severity of pneumonia and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2). The patients received the national treatment protocol containing hydroxychloroquine (400 mg BD in first day and then 200 mg BD) plus atazanavir/ritonavir (300/100 mg daily) for 7 days. Main outcomes included discharge rates at day 7, 14 and 28, 28-day mortality, rate of intensive care unit (ICU) admission and intubation, length of hospital and ICU stay and incidence of adverse events. RESULTS:The mean (SD) age of patients was 60(14) years and 53% were male. According to WHO definition, 51.64% and 48.36% of the patients had moderate (SpO2???90%) and severe disease (SpO2?

SUBMITTER: Rahmani H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7453126 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparing outcomes of hospitalized patients with moderate and severe COVID-19 following treatment with hydroxychloroquine plus atazanavir/ritonavir.

Rahmani Hamid H Davoudi-Monfared Effat E Nourian Anahid A Nabiee Morteza M Sadeghi Setayesh S Khalili Hossein H Abbasian Ladan L Ghiasvand Fereshteh F Seifi Arash A Hasannezhad Malihe M Ghaderkhani Sara S Mohammadi Mostafa M Yekaninejad Mir Saeed MS

Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences 20200828 2

<h4>Background</h4>The role of the antiviral therapy in treatment of COVID-19 is still a matter to be investigated. Also efficacy and safety of antiviral regimens were not compared according severity of the disease. In this study the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine plus atazanavir/ritonavir was compared in patients with moderate and severe COVID-19.<h4>Methods</h4>We prospectively evaluated the clinical outcomes of 213 patients with COVID-19 during the hospitalization course and up to ...[more]

PMID: 32857301

Similar Datasets

Project description:The object of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetics of darunavir-ritonavir and atazanavir-ritonavir once-daily dosing over 72 h (h) following drug intake cessation. Volunteers received darunavir-ritonavir at 800 and 100 mg, respectively, once daily for 10 days, followed by a 7-day washout period, and atazanavir-ritonavir at 300 and 100 mg, respectively, once daily for 10 days. Full pharmacokinetic profiles were assessed for each phase for the 72 h following day 10. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined over 24 h and to the last measurable concentration by noncompartmental methods. Seventeen subjects completed the study. The geometric mean (GM) terminal elimination half-life to 72 h of darunavir was 6.48 h, which was lower than the 0- to 24-h half-life (10.70 h). The terminal elimination half-life of atazanavir was 6.74 h, which was lower than the 0- to 24-h half-life (13.72 h). All subjects but one had darunavir concentrations higher than the target of 550 ng/ml for protease-resistant HIV isolates (equivalent to 10 times the protein-binding-corrected 50% inhibitory concentration [IC(50)] for wild-type virus) at 24 h postdose, and 14 out of 17 had concentrations higher than the target at 30 h postdose (GM of 1,088 and 851 ng/ml). All subjects had atazanavir concentrations above the suggested minimum effective concentration of 150 ng/ml (equivalent to 10 times the protein-binding-corrected IC(50) for wild-type virus) at 24 and 30 h postdose (GM of 693 and 392 ng/ml). Two of 17 and 5 of 17 subjects were above target at 48 h postdose while on darunavir-ritonavir and atazanavir-ritonavir. Ritonavir half-life to 72 h was 6.84 h with darunavir and 6.07 with atazanavir. This study investigated the pharmacokinetic forgiveness of two boosted protease inhibitors. Although the rates of decline of darunavir and atazanavir slightly increased as ritonavir concentrations declined, most individuals had concentrations 6 h after the end of the ideal dosing interval of 24 h which were above the cutoff used to define therapeutic concentrations.

Project description:ObjectivesWe evaluated the clinical, virological and safety outcomes of lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir-interferon (IFN)-β-1a, hydroxychloroquine or remdesivir in comparison to standard of care (control) in coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) inpatients requiring oxygen and/or ventilatory support.MethodsWe conducted a phase III multicentre, open-label, randomized 1:1:1:1:1, adaptive, controlled trial (DisCoVeRy), an add-on to the Solidarity trial (NCT04315948, EudraCT2020-000936-23). The primary outcome was the clinical status at day 15, measured by the WHO seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes included quantification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in respiratory specimens and pharmacokinetic and safety analyses. We report the results for the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing arms and for the hydroxychloroquine arm, trials of which were stopped prematurely.ResultsThe intention-to-treat population included 583 participants-lopinavir/ritonavir (n = 145), lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-β-1a (n = 145), hydroxychloroquine (n = 145), control (n = 148)-among whom 418 (71.7%) were male, the median age was 63 years (IQR 54-71), and 211 (36.2%) had a severe disease. The day-15 clinical status was not improved with the investigational treatments: lopinavir/ritonavir versus control, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.83, (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.26, p 0.39), lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-β-1a versus control, aOR 0.69 (95%CI 0.45-1.04, p 0.08), and hydroxychloroquine versus control, aOR 0.93 (95%CI 0.62-1.41, p 0.75). No significant effect of investigational treatment was observed on SARS-CoV-2 clearance. Trough plasma concentrations of lopinavir and ritonavir were higher than those expected, while those of hydroxychloroquine were those expected with the dosing regimen. The occurrence of serious adverse events was significantly higher in participants allocated to the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing arms.ConclusionIn adults hospitalized for COVID-19, lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-β-1a and hydroxychloroquine improved neither the clinical status at day 15 nor SARS-CoV-2 clearance in respiratory tract specimens.

Project description:BackgroundLimited data compare once-daily options for initial therapy for HIV-1.ObjectiveTo compare time to virologic failure; first grade-3 or -4 sign, symptom, or laboratory abnormality (safety); and change or discontinuation of regimen (tolerability) for atazanavir plus ritonavir with efavirenz-containing initial therapy for HIV-1.DesignA randomized equivalence trial accrued from September 2005 to November 2007, with median follow-up of 138 weeks. Regimens were assigned by using a central computer, stratified by screening HIV-1 RNA level less than 100 000 copies/mL or 100 000 copies/mL or greater; blinding was known only to the site pharmacist. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00118898)Setting59 AIDS Clinical Trials Group sites in the United States and Puerto Rico.PatientsAntiretroviral-naive patients.InterventionOpen-label atazanavir plus ritonavir or efavirenz, each given with with placebo-controlled abacavir-lamivudine or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF)-emtricitabine.MeasurementsPrimary outcomes were time to virologic failure, safety, and tolerability events. Secondary end points included proportion of patients with HIV-1 RNA level less than 50 copies/mL, emergence of drug resistance, changes in CD4 cell counts, calculated creatinine clearance, and lipid levels.Results463 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive atazanavir plus ritonavir and 465 were assigned to receive efavirenz, both with abacavir-lamivudine; 322 (70%) and 324 (70%), respectively, completed follow-up. The respective numbers of participants in each group who received tenofovir DF-emtricitabine were 465 and 464; 342 (74%) and 343 (74%) completed follow-up. Primary efficacy was similar in the group that received atazanavir plus ritonavir and and the group that received efavirenz and did not differ according to whether abacavir-lamivudine or tenofovir DF-emtricitabine was also given. Hazard ratios for time to virologic failure were 1.13 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.56) and 1.01 (CI, 0.70 to 1.46), respectively, although CIs did not meet prespecified criteria for equivalence. The time to safety (P = 0.048) and tolerability (P < 0.001) events was longer in persons given atazanavir plus ritonavir than in those given efavirenz with abacavir-lamivudine but not with tenofovir DF-emtricitabine.LimitationsNeither HLA-B*5701 nor resistance testing was the standard of care when A5202 enrolled patients. The third drugs, atazanavir plus ritonavir and efavirenz, were open-label; the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors were prematurely unblinded in the high viral load stratum; and 32% of patients modified or discontinued treatment with their third drug.ConclusionAtazanavir plus ritonavir and efavirenz have similar antiviral activity when used with abacavir-lamivudine or tenofovir DF-emtricitabine.Primary funding sourceNational Institutes of Health.

Project description:BACKGROUND:No therapeutics have yet been proven effective for the treatment of severe illness caused by SARS-CoV-2. METHODS:We conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label trial involving hospitalized adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, which causes the respiratory illness Covid-19, and an oxygen saturation (Sao2) of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or a ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen (Pao2) to the fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio2) of less than 300 mm Hg. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either lopinavir-ritonavir (400 mg and 100 mg, respectively) twice a day for 14 days, in addition to standard care, or standard care alone. The primary end point was the time to clinical improvement, defined as the time from randomization to either an improvement of two points on a seven-category ordinal scale or discharge from the hospital, whichever came first. RESULTS:A total of 199 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent randomization; 99 were assigned to the lopinavir-ritonavir group, and 100 to the standard-care group. Treatment with lopinavir-ritonavir was not associated with a difference from standard care in the time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio for clinical improvement, 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 1.80). Mortality at 28 days was similar in the lopinavir-ritonavir group and the standard-care group (19.2% vs. 25.0%; difference, -5.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -17.3 to 5.7). The percentages of patients with detectable viral RNA at various time points were similar. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, lopinavir-ritonavir led to a median time to clinical improvement that was shorter by 1 day than that observed with standard care (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.91). Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common in the lopinavir-ritonavir group, but serious adverse events were more common in the standard-care group. Lopinavir-ritonavir treatment was stopped early in 13 patients (13.8%) because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS:In hospitalized adult patients with severe Covid-19, no benefit was observed with lopinavir-ritonavir treatment beyond standard care. Future trials in patients with severe illness may help to confirm or exclude the possibility of a treatment benefit. (Funded by Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development and others; Chinese Clinical Trial Register number, ChiCTR2000029308.).

Dataset Information

Comparing outcomes of hospitalized patients with moderate and severe COVID-19 following treatment with hydroxychloroquine plus atazanavir/ritonavir.

Publications

Comparing outcomes of hospitalized patients with moderate and severe COVID-19 following treatment with hydroxychloroquine plus atazanavir/ritonavir.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets