Dataset Information

Outcomes of persons with coronavirus disease 2019 in hospitals with and without standard treatment with (hydroxy)chloroquine.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To compare survival of individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treated in hospitals that either did or did not routinely treat patients with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine.

Methods

We analysed data of COVID-19 patients treated in nine hospitals in the Netherlands. Inclusion dates ranged from 27 February to 15 May 2020, when the Dutch national guidelines no longer supported the use of (hydroxy)chloroquine. Seven hospitals routinely treated patients with (hydroxy)chloroquine, two hospitals did not. Primary outcome was 21-day all-cause mortality. We performed a survival analysis using log-rank test and Cox regression with adjustment for age, sex and covariates based on premorbid health, disease severity and the use of steroids for adult respiratory distress syndrome, including dexamethasone.

Results

Among 1949 individuals, 21-day mortality was 21.5% in 1596 patients treated in hospitals that routinely prescribed (hydroxy)chloroquine, and 15.0% in 353 patients treated in hospitals that did not. In the adjusted Cox regression models this difference disappeared, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.09 (95% CI 0.81-1.47). When stratified by treatment actually received in individual patients, the use of (hydroxy)chloroquine was associated with an increased 21-day mortality (HR 1.58; 95% CI 1.24-2.02) in the full model.

Conclusions

After adjustment for confounders, mortality was not significantly different in hospitals that routinely treated patients with (hydroxy)chloroquine compared with hospitals that did not. We compared outcomes of hospital strategies rather than outcomes of individual patients to reduce the chance of indication bias. This study adds evidence against the use of (hydroxy)chloroquine in hospitalised patients with COVID-19.

SUBMITTER: Peters EJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7554450 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Outcomes of persons with coronavirus disease 2019 in hospitals with and without standard treatment with (hydroxy)chloroquine.

Peters Edgar Jg EJ Collard Didier D Van Assen Sander S Beudel Martijn M Bomers Marije K MK Buijs Jacqueline J De Haan Lianne R LR De Ruijter Wouter W Douma Renée A RA Elbers Paul Wg PW Goorhuis Abraham A Gritters van den Oever Niels C NC Knarren Lieve Ghh LG Moeniralam Hazra S HS Mostard Remy Lm RL Quanjel Marian Jr MJ Reidinga Auke C AC Renckens Roos R Van Den Bergh Joop Pw JP Vlasveld Imro N IN Sikkens Jonne J JJ

Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 20201014 2

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare survival of individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treated in hospitals that either did or did not routinely treat patients with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine.<h4>Methods</h4>We analysed data of COVID-19 patients treated in nine hospitals in the Netherlands. Inclusion dates ranged from 27 February to 15 May 2020, when the Dutch national guidelines no longer supported the use of (hydroxy)chloroquine. Seven hospitals routinely treated patients with (h ...[more]

PMID: 33068758

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: In January, national guidelines were developed and recommended for use throughout China to fight coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) was also included as part of the treatment plans at various stages of COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a pilot randomized, controlled trial in patients with severe COVID-19 in Wuhan, China. Eligible adult patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either CHM plus standard care or standard care alone for 7 days. The primary outcome was the change in the disease severity category of COVID-19 after treatment. Results: Between Jan 31, 2020, and Feb 19, 2020, 42 out of 100 screened patients were included in the trial: 28 in the CHM plus standard care group and 14 in the standard care alone group. Among 42 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age 60.43 years [12.69 years]), 21 (21/42, 50%) were aged ≥65 years, 35 (35/42, 83%) were women, and 42 (42/42, 100%) had data available for the primary outcome. For the primary outcome, one patient from each group died during treatment; the odds of a shift toward death was lower in the CHM plus group than in the standard care alone group (common OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.148-2.352, P = 0.454). Three (two from the CHM plus group and one from the standard care alone group) patients progressed from severe to critical illness. After treatment, mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19 disease accounted for 17.86% (5/28) vs. 14.29% (2/28), 71.43% (20/28) vs. 64.29% (9/28), and 0% (0) vs. 7.14% (1/28) of the patients treated with CHM plus standard care vs. standard care alone. Conclusions: For the first time, the G-CHAMPS trial provided valuable information for the national guideline-based CHM treatment of hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. The effects of CHM in COVID-19 may be clinically important and warrant further consideration and studies. Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx. Uniqueidentifier: ChiCTR2000029418.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Medicines for the treatment of 2019-novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infections are urgently needed. However, drug screening using live 2019-nCoV requires high-level biosafety facilities, which imposes an obstacle for those institutions without such facilities or 2019-nCoV. This study aims to repurpose the clinically approved drugs for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a 2019-nCoV-related coronavirus model. METHODS:A 2019-nCoV-related pangolin coronavirus GX_P2V/pangolin/2017/Guangxi was described. Whether GX_P2V uses angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) as the cell receptor was investigated by using small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated silencing of ACE2. The pangolin coronavirus model was used to identify drug candidates for treating 2019-nCoV infection. Two libraries of 2406 clinically approved drugs were screened for their ability to inhibit cytopathic effects on Vero E6 cells by GX_P2V infection. The anti-viral activities and anti-viral mechanisms of potential drugs were further investigated. Viral yields of RNAs and infectious particles were quantified by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and plaque assay, respectively. RESULTS:The spike protein of coronavirus GX_P2V shares 92.2% amino acid identity with that of 2019-nCoV isolate Wuhan-hu-1, and uses ACE2 as the receptor for infection just like 2019-nCoV. Three drugs, including cepharanthine (CEP), selamectin, and mefloquine hydrochloride, exhibited complete inhibition of cytopathic effects in cell culture at 10 ?mol/L. CEP demonstrated the most potent inhibition of GX_P2V infection, with a concentration for 50% of maximal effect [EC50] of 0.98 ?mol/L. The viral RNA yield in cells treated with 10 ?mol/L CEP was 15,393-fold lower than in cells without CEP treatment ([6.48?±?0.02]?×?10vs. 1.00?±?0.12, t?=?150.38, P?<?0.001) at 72 h post-infection (p.i.). Plaque assays found no production of live viruses in media containing 10 ?mol/L CEP at 48 h p.i. Furthermore, we found CEP had potent anti-viral activities against both viral entry (0.46?±?0.12, vs.1.00?±?0.37, t?=?2.42, P?<?0.05) and viral replication ([6.18?±?0.95]?×?10vs. 1.00?±?0.43, t?=?3.98, P?<?0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Our pangolin coronavirus GX_P2V is a workable model for 2019-nCoV research. CEP, selamectin, and mefloquine hydrochloride are potential drugs for treating 2019-nCoV infection. Our results strongly suggest that CEP is a wide-spectrum inhibitor of pan-betacoronavirus, and further study of CEP for treatment of 2019-nCoV infection is warranted.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough much has been learned about the pathophysiology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections, pathology data from patients who have died of COVID-19 in low- and middle-income country settings remain sparse. We integrated minimally invasive tissue sampling (MITS) into an ongoing postmortem surveillance study of COVID-19 in deceased individuals of all ages in Lusaka, Zambia.MethodsWe enrolled deceased subjects from the University Teaching Hospital Morgue in Lusaka, Zambia within 48 hours of death. We collected clinical and demographic information, a nasopharyngeal swab, and core tissue biopsies from the lung, liver, and kidneys for pathologic analysis. Individuals were considered eligible for MITS if they had a respiratory syndrome prior to death or a COVID-19+ polymerase chain reaction (PCR) nasopharyngeal swab specimen. Samples were retested using quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR.ResultsFrom June to September 2020 we performed MITS on 29 deceased individuals. PCR results were available for 28/29 (96.5%) cases. Three had a COVID-19+ diagnosis antemortem, and 5 more were identified postmortem using the recommended cycle threshold cut-point <40. When expanding the PCR threshold to 40 ≤ cycle threshold (Ct) ≤ 45, we identified 1 additional case. Most cases were male and occurred in the community The median age at death was 47 years (range 40-64). Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/AIDS, tuberculosis, and diabetes were more common among the COVID-19+ cases. Diffuse alveolar damage and interstitial pneumonitis were common among COVID-19+ cases; nonspecific findings of hepatic steatosis and acute kidney injury were also prevalent in the COVID-19+ group. Vascular thrombi were rarely detected.ConclusionsLung abnormalities typical of viral pneumonias were common among deceased COVID-19+ individuals, as were nonspecific findings in the liver and kidneys. Pulmonary vascular thrombi were rarely detected, which could be a limitation of the MITS technique. Nonetheless, MITS offers a valuable alternative to open autopsy for understanding pathological changes due to COVID-19.

Project description:ImportanceThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed health care delivery worldwide. Although decreases in hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have been reported during the pandemic, the implication for in-hospital outcomes is not well understood.ObjectiveTo define changes in AMI case rates, patient demographics, cardiovascular comorbidities, treatment approaches, and in-hospital outcomes during the pandemic.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study retrospectively analyzed AMI hospitalizations that occurred between December 30, 2018, and May 16, 2020, in 1 of the 49 hospitals in the Providence St Joseph Health system located in 6 states (Alaska, Washington, Montana, Oregon, California, and Texas). The cohort included patients aged 18 years or older who had a principal discharge diagnosis of AMI (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI] or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [NSTEMI]). Segmented regression analysis was performed to assess changes in weekly case volumes. Cases were grouped into 1 of 3 periods: before COVID-19 (December 30, 2018, to February 22, 2020), early COVID-19 (February 23, 2020, to March 28, 2020), and later COVID-19 (March 29, 2020, to May 16, 2020). In-hospital mortality was risk-adjusted using an observed to expected (O/E) ratio and covariate-adjusted multivariable model.ExposureDate of hospitalization.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the weekly rate of AMI (STEMI or NSTEMI) hospitalizations. The secondary outcomes were patient characteristics, treatment approaches, and in-hospital outcomes of this patient population.ResultsThe cohort included 15 244 AMI hospitalizations (of which 4955 were for STEMI [33%] and 10 289 for NSTEMI [67%]) involving 14 724 patients (mean [SD] age of 68 [13] years and 10 019 men [66%]). Beginning February 23, 2020, AMI-associated hospitalizations decreased at a rate of -19.0 (95% CI, -29.0 to -9.0) cases per week for 5 weeks (early COVID-19 period). Thereafter, AMI-associated hospitalizations increased at a rate of +10.5 (95% CI, +4.6 to +16.5) cases per week (later COVID-19 period). No appreciable differences in patient demographics, cardiovascular comorbidities, and treatment approaches were observed across periods. The O/E mortality ratio for AMI increased during the early period (1.27; 95% CI, 1.07-1.48), which was disproportionately associated with patients with STEMI (1.96; 95% CI, 1.22-2.70). Although the O/E mortality ratio for AMI was not statistically different during the later period (1.23; 95% CI, 0.98-1.47), increases in the O/E mortality ratio were noted for patients with STEMI (2.40; 95% CI, 1.65-3.16) and after risk adjustment (odds ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.02-2.26).Conclusions and relevanceThis cross-sectional study found important changes in AMI hospitalization rates and worse outcomes during the early and later COVID-19 periods. Future studies are needed to identify contributors to the increased mortality rate among patients with STEMI.

Dataset Information

Outcomes of persons with coronavirus disease 2019 in hospitals with and without standard treatment with (hydroxy)chloroquine.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Outcomes of persons with coronavirus disease 2019 in hospitals with and without standard treatment with (hydroxy)chloroquine.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets