Dataset Information

Early use of nitazoxanide in mild COVID-19 disease: randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Nitazoxanide is widely available and exerts broad-spectrum antiviral activity in vitro. However, there is no evidence of its impact on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

Methods

In a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adult patients presenting up to 3 days after onset of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms (dry cough, fever and/or fatigue) were enrolled. After confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection using reverse transcriptase PCR on a nasopharyngeal swab, patients were randomised 1:1 to receive either nitazoxanide (500 mg) or placebo, three times daily, for 5 days. The primary outcome was complete resolution of symptoms. Secondary outcomes were viral load, laboratory tests, serum biomarkers of inflammation and hospitalisation rate. Adverse events were also assessed.

Results

From June 8 to August 20, 2020, 1575 patients were screened. Of these, 392 (198 placebo, 194 nitazoxanide) were analysed. Median (interquartile range) time from symptom onset to first dose of study drug was 5 (4-5) days. At the 5-day study visit, symptom resolution did not differ between the nitazoxanide and placebo arms. Swabs collected were negative for SARS-CoV-2 in 29.9% of patients in the nitazoxanide arm versus 18.2% in the placebo arm (p=0.009). Viral load was reduced after nitazoxanide compared to placebo (p=0.006). The percentage viral load reduction from onset to end of therapy was higher with nitazoxanide (55%) than placebo (45%) (p=0.013). Other secondary outcomes were not significantly different. No serious adverse events were observed.

Conclusions

In patients with mild COVID-19, symptom resolution did not differ between nitazoxanide and placebo groups after 5 days of therapy. However, early nitazoxanide therapy was safe and reduced viral load significantly.

SUBMITTER: Rocco PRM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7758778 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWell tolerated antivirals administered early in the course of COVID-19 infection when the viremia is highest could prevent progression to severe disease. Favipiravir inhibits SARS-CoV-2 viral replication in vitro with evidence of clinical benefit in open label trials. Placebo controlled studies of people with early symptomatic COVID-19 with regular assessments of SARS-CoV-2 viral load can determine if it has an antiviral effect and improves clinical outcomes.MethodsPeople with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 and 5 days or less of symptoms were randomised 1:1 to favipiravir 1800 mg on day 1, then 800 mg twice daily or matched placebo for 14 days. SARS-CoV-2 viral load was quantitated from second daily self-collected nose-throat swabs while receiving study drug. The primary endpoint was time to virological cure defined as 2 successive swabs negative for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR and secondary outcomes were progression of disease severity, symptom resolution and safety.FindingsBetween 31 July 2020 and 19 September 2021, 200 people were enrolled (199 in the community, 1 in hospital) with 190 receiving one or more doses of drug (modified intention to treat [mITT] population). There was no difference in time to virological cure (Log-rank p=0.6 comparing Kaplan Meier curves), progression to hospitalisation (14 favipiravir, 9 placebo; p=0.38), time to symptom resolution (cough, fever, sore throat) and there were no deaths. 51 people related an adverse event that was possibly drug related, but these were evenly distributed (n=24 favipiravir, n=27 placebo). Sensitivity analyses where the definition of virological cure was changed to: a single negative PCR, exclude datapoints based on the presence or absence of human DNA in the swab, a SARS-CoV-2 viral load < 300 copies/mL being considered negative all demonstrated no difference between arms.InterpretationFavipiravir does not improve the time to virological cure or clinical outcomes and shows no evidence of an antiviral effect when treating early symptomatic COVID-19 infection.FundingThe study was supported in part by grants from the Commonwealth Bank Australia, the Lord Mayor's Charitable Foundation, Melbourne Australia and the Orloff Family Charitable Trust, Melbourne, Australia. JHM is supported by the Medical Research Future Fund, AYP, JT are supported by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Project description:IntroductionA novel coronavirus, designated SARS-CoV-2, caused an international outbreak of a respiratory illness, termed COVID-19 in December 2019. There is a lack of specific therapeutic agents based on evidence for this novel coronavirus infection; however, several medications have been evaluated as a potential therapy. Therapy is required to treat symptomatic patients and decrease the virus carriage duration to limit the communitytransmission.Methods and analysisWe hypothesise that patients with mild COVID-19 treated with favipiravir will have a shorter duration of time to virus clearance than the control group. The primary outcome is to evaluate the effect of favipiravir on the timing of the PCR test conversion from positive to negative within 15 days after starting the medicine.Adults (>18 years, men or nonpregnant women, diagnosed with mild COVID-19 within 5 days of disease onset) are being recruited by physicians participating from the Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs and the Ministry of Health ethics committee approved primary healthcare centres. This double-blind, randomised trial comprises three significant parts: screening, treatment and a follow-up period. The treating physician and patients are blinded. Eligible participants are randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either the therapy group (favipiravir) or a control group (placebo) with 1800 mg by mouth two times per day for the first day, followed by 800 mg two times per day for 4-7 days. Serial nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swab samples are obtained on day 1 (5 days before therapy). On day5±1 day, 10±1 day, 15±2 days, extra nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal PCR COVID-19 samples are requested.The primary analysis population for evaluating both the efficacy and safety outcomes will be a modified intention to treat population. Anticipating a 10% dropout rate, we expect to recruit 288 subjects per arm. The results assume that the hazard ratio is constant throughout the study and that the Cox proportional hazard regression is used to analyse the data.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the King Abdullah International Medical Research Centre Institutional Review Board (28 April 2020) and the Ministry of Health Institutional Review Board (1 July 2020). Protocol details and any amendments will be reported to https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04464408. The results will be published in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNational Clinical Trial Registry (NCT04464408).

Project description:BackgroundNo specific antiviral drug has been proven effective for treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue prodrug, has inhibitory effects on pathogenic animal and human coronaviruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro, and inhibits Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, SARS-CoV-1, and SARS-CoV-2 replication in animal models.MethodsWe did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial at ten hospitals in Hubei, China. Eligible patients were adults (aged ?18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, with an interval from symptom onset to enrolment of 12 days or less, oxygen saturation of 94% or less on room air or a ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less, and radiologically confirmed pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg on days 2-10 in single daily infusions) or the same volume of placebo infusions for 10 days. Patients were permitted concomitant use of lopinavir-ritonavir, interferons, and corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement up to day 28, defined as the time (in days) from randomisation to the point of a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status (from 1=discharged to 6=death) or discharged alive from hospital, whichever came first. Primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety analysis was done in all patients who started their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04257656.FindingsBetween Feb 6, 2020, and March 12, 2020, 237 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (158 to remdesivir and 79 to placebo); one patient in the placebo group who withdrew after randomisation was not included in the ITT population. Remdesivir use was not associated with a difference in time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio 1·23 [95% CI 0·87-1·75]). Although not statistically significant, patients receiving remdesivir had a numerically faster time to clinical improvement than those receiving placebo among patients with symptom duration of 10 days or less (hazard ratio 1·52 [0·95-2·43]). Adverse events were reported in 102 (66%) of 155 remdesivir recipients versus 50 (64%) of 78 placebo recipients. Remdesivir was stopped early because of adverse events in 18 (12%) patients versus four (5%) patients who stopped placebo early.InterpretationIn this study of adult patients admitted to hospital for severe COVID-19, remdesivir was not associated with statistically significant clinical benefits. However, the numerical reduction in time to clinical improvement in those treated earlier requires confirmation in larger studies.FundingChinese Academy of Medical Sciences Emergency Project of COVID-19, National Key Research and Development Program of China, the Beijing Science and Technology Project.

Project description:ObjectivesTo study if early initiation of inhaled beclomethasone 1200 mcg in patients with asymptomatic, mild or moderate COVID-19 reduces disease progression to severe COVID-19.DesignDouble-blinded, parallel-groups, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.SettingA hospital-based study in Sri Lanka.ParticipantsAdults with asymptomatic, mild or moderate COVID-19, presenting within the first 7 days of symptom onset or laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19, admitted to a COVID-19 intermediate treatment centre in Sri Lanka between July and November 2021.InterventionsAll participants received inhaled beclomethasone 600 mcg or placebo two times per day, for 10 days from onset of symptoms/COVID-19 test becoming positive if asymptomatic or until reaching primary endpoint, whichever is earlier.Primary outcome measureProgression of asymptomatic, mild or moderate COVID-19 to severe COVID-19.Secondary outcome measuresThe number of days with a temperature of 38°C or more and the time to self-reported clinical recovery.ResultsA total of 385 participants were randomised to receive beclomethasone(n=193) or placebo(n=192) stratified by age (≤60 or >60 years) and sex. One participant from each arm withdrew from the study. All participants were included in final analysis. Primary outcome occurred in 24 participants in the beclomethasone group and 26 participants in the placebo group (RR 0.90 ; p=0.763). The median time for self-reported clinical recovery in all participants was 5 days (95% CI 3 to 7) in the beclomethasone group and 5 days (95% CI 3 to 8) in the placebo group (p=0.5). The median time for self-reported clinical recovery in patients with moderate COVID-19 was 5 days (95% CI 3 to 7) in the beclomethasone group and 6 days (95% CI 4 to 9) in the placebo group (p=0.05). There were no adverse events.ConclusionsEarly initiation of inhaled beclomethasone in patients with asymptomatic, mild or moderate COVID-19 did not reduce disease progression to severe COVID-19.Trial registration numberSri Lanka Clinical Trials Registry; SLCTR/2021/017.

Project description:BackgroundConvalescent plasma has been proposed as an early treatment to interrupt the progression of early COVID-19 to severe disease, but there is little definitive evidence. We aimed to assess whether early treatment with convalescent plasma reduces the risk of hospitalisation and reduces SARS-CoV-2 viral load among outpatients with COVID-19.MethodsWe did a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in four health-care centres in Catalonia, Spain. Adult outpatients aged 50 years or older with the onset of mild COVID-19 symptoms 7 days or less before randomisation were eligible for enrolment. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive one intravenous infusion of either 250-300 mL of ABO-compatible high anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG titres (EUROIMMUN ratio ≥6) methylene blue-treated convalescent plasma (experimental group) or 250 mL of sterile 0·9% saline solution (control). Randomisation was done with the use of a central web-based system with concealment of the trial group assignment and no stratification. To preserve masking, we used opaque tubular bags that covered the investigational product and the infusion catheter. The coprimary endpoints were the incidence of hospitalisation within 28 days from baseline and the mean change in viral load (in log10 copies per mL) in nasopharyngeal swabs from baseline to day 7. The trial was stopped early following a data safety monitoring board recommendation because more than 85% of the target population had received a COVID-19 vaccine. Primary efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population, safety was assessed in all patients who received the investigational product. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04621123.FindingsBetween Nov 10, 2020, and July 28, 2021, we assessed 909 patients with confirmed COVID-19 for inclusion in the trial, 376 of whom were eligible and were randomly assigned to treatment (convalescent plasma n=188 [serum antibody-negative n=160]; placebo n=188 [serum antibody-negative n=166]). Median age was 56 years (IQR 52-62) and the mean symptom duration was 4·4 days (SD 1·4) before random assignment. In the intention-to-treat population, hospitalisation within 28 days from baseline occurred in 22 (12%) participants who received convalescent plasma versus 21 (11%) who received placebo (relative risk 1·05 [95% CI 0·78 to 1·41]). The mean change in viral load from baseline to day 7 was -2·41 log10 copies per mL (SD 1·32) with convalescent plasma and -2·32 log10 copies per mL (1·43) with placebo (crude difference -0·10 log10 copies per mL [95% CI -0·35 to 0·15]). One participant with mild COVID-19 developed a thromboembolic event 7 days after convalescent plasma infusion, which was reported as a serious adverse event possibly related to COVID-19 or to the experimental intervention.InterpretationMethylene blue-treated convalescent plasma did not prevent progression from mild to severe illness and did not reduce viral load in outpatients with COVID-19. Therefore, formal recommendations to support the use of convalescent plasma in outpatients with COVID-19 cannot be concluded.FundingGrifols, Crowdfunding campaign YoMeCorono.