Dataset Information

Itraconazole for COVID-19: preclinical studies and a proof-of-concept randomized clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The antifungal drug itraconazole exerts in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 in Vero and human Caco-2 cells. Preclinical and clinical studies are required to investigate if itraconazole is effective for the treatment and/or prevention of COVID-19.

Methods

Due to the initial absence of preclinical models, the effect of itraconazole was explored in a clinical, proof-of-concept, open-label, single-center study, in which hospitalized COVID-19 patients were randomly assigned to standard of care with or without itraconazole. Primary outcome was the cumulative score of the clinical status until day 15 based on the 7-point ordinal scale of the World Health Organization. In parallel, itraconazole was evaluated in a newly established hamster model of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission, as soon as the model was validated.

Findings

In the hamster acute infection model, itraconazole did not reduce viral load in lungs, stools or ileum, despite adequate plasma and lung drug concentrations. In the transmission model, itraconazole failed to prevent viral transmission. The clinical trial was prematurely discontinued after evaluation of the preclinical studies and because an interim analysis showed no signal for a more favorable outcome with itraconazole: mean cumulative score of the clinical status 49 vs 47, ratio of geometric means 1.01 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.19) for itraconazole vs standard of care.

Interpretation

Despite in vitro activity, itraconazole was not effective in a preclinical COVID-19 hamster model. This prompted the premature termination of the proof-of-concept clinical study.

Funding

KU Leuven, Research Foundation - Flanders (FWO), Horizon 2020, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

SUBMITTER: Liesenborghs L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7979145 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere are limited antiviral options for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. Ivermectin (IVM), a macrocyclic lactone with a wide anti-parasitary spectrum, has shown potent activity against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. This study aimed at assessing the antiviral effect of IVM on viral load of respiratory secretions and its relationship with drug concentrations in plasma.MethodsProof-of-concept, pilot, randomized, controlled, outcome-assessor blinded trial to evaluate antiviral activity of high-dose IVM in 45 COVID-19 hospitalized patients randomized in a 2:1 ratio to standard of care plus oral IVM at 0·6 mg/kg/day for 5 days versus standard of care in 4 hospitals in Argentina. Eligible patients were adults with RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 5 days of symptoms onset. The primary endpoint was the difference in viral load in respiratory secretions between baseline and day-5, by quantitative RT-PCR. Concentrations of IVM in plasma were measured. Study registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04381884.Findings45 participants were recruited (30 to IVM and 15 controls) between May 18 and September 9, 2020. There was no difference in viral load reduction between groups but a significant difference was found in patients with higher median plasma IVM levels (72% IQR 59-77) versus untreated controls (42% IQR 31-73) (p = 0·004). Mean ivermectin plasma concentration levels correlated with viral decay rate (r: 0·47, p = 0·02). Adverse events were similar between groups. No differences in clinical evolution at day-7 and day-30 between groups were observed.InterpretationA concentration dependent antiviral activity of oral high-dose IVM was identified at a dosing regimen that was well tolerated. Large trials with clinical endpoints are necessary to determine the clinical utility of IVM in COVID-19.FundingThis work was supported by grant IP-COVID-19-625, Agencia Nacional de Promoción de la Investigación, el Desarrollo Tecnológico y la Innovación, Argentina and Laboratorio ELEA/Phoenix, Argentina.

Project description:BackgroundThe peak of the global COVID-19 pandemic has not yet been reached, and many countries face the prospect of a second wave of infections before effective vaccinations will be available. After an initial phase of viral replication, some patients develop a second illness phase in which the host thrombotic and inflammatory responses seem to drive complications. Severe COVID-19 disease is linked to high mortality, hyperinflammation, and a remarkably high incidence of thrombotic events. We hypothesize a crucial pathophysiological role for the contact pathway of coagulation and the kallikrein-bradykinin pathway. Therefore, drugs that modulate this excessive thromboinflammatory response should be investigated in severe COVID-19.MethodsIn this adaptive, open-label multicenter randomized clinical trial, we compare low molecular weight heparins at 50 IU anti-Xa/kg twice daily-or 75 IU anti-Xa twice daily for intensive care (ICU) patients-in combination with aprotinin to standard thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. In the case of hyperinflammation, the interleukin-1 receptor antagonist anakinra will be added on top of the drugs in the interventional arm. In a pilot phase, the effect of the intervention on thrombotic markers (D-dimer) will be assessed. In the full trial, the primary outcome is defined as the effect of the interventional drugs on clinical status as defined by the WHO ordinal scale for clinical improvement.DiscussionIn this trial, we target the thromboinflammatory response at multiple levels. We intensify the dose of low molecular weight heparins to reduce thrombotic complications. Aprotinin is a potent kallikrein pathway inhibitor that reduces fibrinolysis, activation of the contact pathway of coagulation, and local inflammatory response. Additionally, aprotinin has shown in vitro inhibitory effects on SARS-CoV-2 cellular entry. Because the excessive thromboinflammatory response is one of the most adverse prognostic factors in COVID-19, we will add anakinra, a recombinant interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, to the regimen in case of severely increased inflammatory parameters. This way, we hope to modulate the systemic response to SARS-CoV-2 and avoid disease progressions with a potentially fatal outcome.Trial registrationThe EU Clinical Trials Register 2020-001739-28 . Registered on April 10, 2020.

Project description:BackgroundEndocannabinoid dysfunction in animal models of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and accumulating, albeit anecdotal, evidence for efficacy in humans motivated this placebo-controlled double-blind comparison of two oral cannabinoid solutions in 150 participants (age 5-21 years) with ASD.MethodsWe tested (1) BOL-DP-O-01-W, a whole-plant cannabis extract containing cannabidiol and ?9-tetrahydrocannabinol at a 20:1 ratio and (2) BOL-DP-O-01, purified cannabidiol and ?9-tetrahydrocannabinol at the same ratio. Participants (N?=?150) received either placebo or cannabinoids for 12-weeks (testing efficacy) followed by a 4-week washout and predetermined cross-over for another 12 weeks to further assess tolerability. Registered primary efficacy outcome measures were improvement in behavioral problems (differences between whole-plant extract and placebo) on the Home Situation Questionnaire-ASD (HSQ-ASD) and the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale with disruptive behavior anchor points (CGI-I). Secondary measures were Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS-2) and Autism Parenting Stress Index (APSI).ResultsChanges in Total Scores of HSQ-ASD (primary-outcome) and APSI (secondary-outcome) did not differ among groups. Disruptive behavior on the CGI-I (co-primary outcome) was either much or very much improved in 49% on whole-plant extract (n?=?45) versus 21% on placebo (n?=?47; p?=?0.005). Median SRS Total Score (secondary-outcome) improved by 14.9 on whole-plant extract (n?=?34) versus 3.6 points after placebo (n?=?36); p?=?0.009). There were no treatment-related serious adverse events. Common adverse events included somnolence and decreased appetite, reported for 28% and 25% on whole-plant extract, respectively (n?=?95); 23% and 21% on pure-cannabinoids (n?=?93), and 8% and 15% on placebo (n?=?94). Limitations Lack of pharmacokinetic data and a wide range of ages and functional levels among participants warrant caution when interpreting the results.ConclusionsThis interventional study provides evidence that BOL-DP-O-01-W and BOL-DP-O-01, administrated for 3 months, are well tolerated. Evidence for efficacy of these interventions are mixed and insufficient. Further testing of cannabinoids in ASD is recommended. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02956226. Registered 06 November 2016, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02956226.