Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine as pre-and post-exposure prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is an anti-malarial and immunomodulatory drug considered a potential candidate for drug repurposing in COVID-19 due to their in vitro antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2. Despite the potential antiviral effects and anti-inflammatory profile, the results based on clinical studies are contradictory. Therefore, the quality of the decision-making process from meta-analyses summarizing the available evidence selecting studies with different designs and unblinded trials is limited. The aim of this study was to synthesize the best evidence on the efficacy and safety of HCQ as pre-and post-exposure prophylaxis and treatment of non-hospitalized and hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Methods

Searches were performed in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Lilacs, the website ClinicalTrials.gov and the preprint server medRxiv from January 1, 2020 to May 17, 2021. The following elements were used to define eligibility criteria: (1) Population: individuals at high-risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 (pre-exposure), individuals who had close contact with a positive or probable case of COVID-19 (post-exposure), non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and hospitalized patients with COVID-19; (2) Intervention: HCQ; (3) Comparison: placebo; (4) Outcomes: incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, need for hospitalization, length of hospital stay, need for invasive mechanical ventilation (MV), death, and adverse events; and (5) Study type: blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Risk of bias was judged according to the Cochrane guidelines for RCTs. Treatment effects were reported as relative risk (RR) for dichotomous variables and mean difference (MD) for continuous variables with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used either a fixed or random-effects model to pool the results of individual studies depending on the presence of heterogeneity. The GRADE system was used to evaluate the strength of evidence between use of HCQ and the outcomes of interest.

Findings

Fourteen blinded, placebo-controlled RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. Four trials (1942 patients: HCQ = 1271; placebo = 671) used HCQ as a prophylactic medication pre-exposure to COVID-19, two (1650 patients: HCQ = 821; placebo = 829) as a prophylactic medication post-exposure to COVID-19, three (1018 patients: HCQ = 497; placebo = 521) as treatment for non-hospitalized patients, and five (1138 patients: HCQ = 572; placebo = 566) as treatment for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We found no decreased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among individuals receiving HCQ as pre-exposure (RR = 0.90; 95% CI 0.46 to 1.77) or post-exposure (RR = 0.96; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.29) prophylaxis to prevent COVID-19. There was no significant decreased risk of hospitalization for outpatients with SARS-CoV-2 infection (RR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.33 to 1.23) and no decreased risk of MV (RR = 0.81; 95% CI 0.49 to 1.34) and death (RR = 1.05; 95% CI 0.62 to 1.78) among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 receiving HCQ. The certainty of the results on the lack of clinical benefit for HCQ was rated as moderate. Moreover, our results demonstrated an increased risk for any adverse events and gastrointestinal symptoms among those using HCQ.

Interpretation

Available evidence based on the results of blinded, placebo-controlled RCTs showed no clinical benefits of HCQ as pre-and post-exposure prophylaxis and treatment of non-hospitalized and hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Funding

There was no funding source.

SUBMITTER: Martins-Filho PR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8403035 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceHealth care workers (HCWs) caring for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at risk of exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Currently, to our knowledge, there is no effective pharmacologic prophylaxis for individuals at risk.ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in hospital-based HCWs with exposure to patients with COVID-19 using a pre-exposure prophylaxis strategy.Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial (the Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 With Hydroxychloroquine Study) was conducted at 2 tertiary urban hospitals, with enrollment from April 9, 2020, to July 14, 2020; follow-up ended August 4, 2020. The trial randomized 132 full-time, hospital-based HCWs (physicians, nurses, certified nursing assistants, emergency technicians, and respiratory therapists), of whom 125 were initially asymptomatic and had negative results for SARS-CoV-2 by nasopharyngeal swab. The trial was terminated early for futility before reaching a planned enrollment of 200 participants.InterventionsHydroxychloroquine, 600 mg, daily, or size-matched placebo taken orally for 8 weeks.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection as determined by a nasopharyngeal swab during the 8 weeks of treatment. Secondary outcomes included adverse effects, treatment discontinuation, presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, frequency of QTc prolongation, and clinical outcomes for SARS-CoV-2-positive participants.ResultsOf the 132 randomized participants (median age, 33 years [range, 20-66 years]; 91 women [69%]), 125 (94.7%) were evaluable for the primary outcome. There was no significant difference in infection rates in participants randomized to receive hydroxychloroquine compared with placebo (4 of 64 [6.3%] vs 4 of 61 [6.6%]; P > .99). Mild adverse events were more common in participants taking hydroxychloroquine compared with placebo (45% vs 26%; P = .04); rates of treatment discontinuation were similar in both arms (19% vs 16%; P = .81). The median change in QTc (baseline to 4-week evaluation) did not differ between arms (hydroxychloroquine: 4 milliseconds; 95% CI, -9 to 17; vs placebo: 3 milliseconds; 95% CI, -5 to 11; P = .98). Of the 8 participants with positive results for SARS-CoV-2 (6.4%), 6 developed viral symptoms; none required hospitalization, and all clinically recovered.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial, although limited by early termination, there was no clinical benefit of hydroxychloroquine administered daily for 8 weeks as pre-exposure prophylaxis in hospital-based HCWs exposed to patients with COVID-19.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04329923.

Project description:BackgroundPre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a promising strategy to break COVID-19 transmission. Although hydroxychloroquine was evaluated for treatment and post-exposure prophylaxis, it is not evaluated for COVID-19 PrEP yet. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PrEP with hydroxychloroquine against placebo in healthcare workers at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection during an epidemic period.MethodsWe conducted a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial in three hospitals in Barcelona, Spain. From 350 adult healthcare workers screened, we included 269 participants with no active or past SARS-CoV-2 infection (determined by a negative nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 PCR and a negative serology against SARS-CoV-2). Participants allocated in the intervention arm (PrEP) received 400 mg of hydroxychloroquine daily for the first four consecutive days and subsequently, 400 mg weekly during the study period. Participants in the control group followed the same treatment schedule with placebo tablets.Results52.8% (142/269) of participants were in the hydroxychloroquine arm and 47.2% (127/269) in the placebo arm. Given the national epidemic incidence decay, only one participant in each group was diagnosed with COVID-19. The trial was stopped due to futility and our study design was deemed underpowered to evaluate any benefit regarding PrEP efficacy. Both groups showed a similar proportion of participants experiencing at least one adverse event (AE) (p=0.548). No serious AEs were reported. Almost all AEs (96.4%, 106/110) were mild. Only mild gastrointestinal symptoms were significantly higher in the hydroxychloroquine arm compared to the placebo arm (27.4% (39/142) vs 15.7% (20/127), p=0.041).ConclusionsAlthough the efficacy of PrEP with hydroxychloroquine for preventing COVID-19 could not be evaluated, our study showed that PrEP with hydroxychloroquine at low doses is safe.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04331834 . Registered on April 2, 2020.

Project description:IntroductionAdolescent girls and young women (AGYW) in Africa have high HIV incidence despite scale-up of HIV testing and HIV treatment. Placebo-controlled trials of tenofovir-based pre-exposure prophylaxi (PrEP) in diverse populations demonstrated that PrEP works with close to 100% effectiveness if taken with high, but not perfect, adherence. Divergent efficacy estimates among African AGYW led to demonstration and implementation projects to better understand motivations for HIV prevention, uptake, adherence and persistence to PrEP. To inform PrEP programmes, the design and initial findings from PrEP demonstration projects for AGYW are reviewed.DiscussionEarly lessons from PrEP implementation projects among young African women include: (1) awareness and demand creation with positive messaging about the benefits of PrEP are critical to motivate AGYW to consider this novel prevention technology and to foster awareness among peers, partners, parents and guardians to support AGYW's effective PrEP use; (2) PrEP initiation is high in projects that are integrating PrEP into youth-friendly clinics, family planning clinics and mobile clinics; (3) young African women at risk are initiating PrEP, based on behavioural characteristics, history of intimate partner violence, depression and 30% prevalence of chlamydia and/or gonorrhoea; (4) provision of youth-friendly PrEP delivery programmes that integrate reproductive health services, including contraception and the diagnosis and treatment of sexually transmitted infections, increase health impact; (5) messages that emphasize the necessity for high adherence while at potential risk of HIV exposure and support strategies that addresses AGYW's adherence challenges are essential; and, (6) a substantial proportion of AGYW do not persist with PrEP, and strategies are needed to help AGYW assess their ongoing need, motivation and challenges with persisting with PrEP.ConclusionsPrEP is feasible to implement in integrated reproductive health service delivery models to reach African AGYW. While PrEP demonstration projects indicate that women with behavioural risks and high rates of sexually transmitted diseases are initiating PrEP; effective strategies to support AGYW's adherence and persistence with PrEP are needed. Lessons learned from oral PrEP delivery, a novel first generation HIV prevention product, are relevant to longer-acting and less adherence-dependent strategies which are currently in clinical trials.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Daily oral pre- or post-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP or PEP) is highly effective in preventing HIV infection. However, many people find it challenging to adhere to a daily oral regimen. Chemoprophylaxis with single oral doses of antiretroviral drugs taken before or after sex may better adapt to changing or unanticipated sexual practices and be a desirable alternative to daily PrEP or PEP. We investigated willingness to use a single oral pill before or after sex among men who have sex with men (MSM) and assessed the biological efficacy of a potent antiretroviral combination containing elvitegravir (EVG), emtricitabine (FTC), and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF). METHODS:Data on willingness to use single-dose PrEP or PEP were obtained from the 2017 cycle of the American Men's Internet Survey (AMIS), an annual online behavioral surveillance survey of MSM in the United States. Antiretroviral drug levels were measured in humans and macaques to define drug distribution in rectal tissue and identify clinically relevant doses for macaque modeling studies. The biological efficacy of a single dose of FTC/TAF/EVG as PrEP or PEP was investigated using a repeat-challenge macaque model of rectal HIV infection. FINDINGS:Through pharmacokinetic assessment in humans and macaques we found that EVG penetrates and concentrates in rectal tissues supporting its addition to FTC/TAF to boost and extend chemoprophylactic activity. Efficacy estimates for a single oral dose given to macaques 4h before or 2h after SHIV exposure was 91•7%[35•7%-98•9%] and 100%, respectively, compared to 80•1%[13•9%-95•4%] and 64•6%[-19•4%-89•5%] when single doses were given 6 and 24h post challenge, respectively. A two-dose regimen at 24h and 48h after exposure was also protective [77•1%[1•7%-94•7%]. INTERPRETATION:Informed by user willingness, human and macaque pharmacokinetic data, and preclinical efficacy we show that single-dose prophylaxis before or after sex is a promising HIV prevention strategy. Carefully designed clinical trials are needed to determine if any of these strategies will be effective in humans. FUNDING:Funded by CDC intramural funds, CDC contract HCVJCG2-2016-03948 (to CFK), and a grant from the MAC AIDS Fund and by the National Institutes of Health [P30AI050409] - the Emory Center for AIDS Research (to MZ and TS).