Dataset Information

A phase 2 randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of raloxifene for patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Current available therapeutic options for Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) are primarily focused on treating hospitalized patients, and there is a lack of oral therapeutic options to treat mild to moderate outpatient COVID-19 and prevent clinical progression. Raloxifene was found as a promising molecule to treat COVID-19 due to its activity to modulate the replication of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and act as an immunomodulator to decrease proinflammatory cytokines.

Methods

This was a phase 2 multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of raloxifene in adult patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 between October 2020 to June 2021 in five centers located in Italy. This was a planned 2/3 adaptive study, but due to operational difficulties, the study was discontinued during the phase 2 study segment. Participants were randomized 1:1:1 to receive oral placebo, raloxifene 60 mg, or raloxifene 120 mg by self-administration for a maximum of two weeks. The primary outcomes were the proportion of patients with undetectable SARS-CoV-2 via nasopharyngeal swabs at day 7 and the proportion of patients who did not require supplemental oxygen therapy or mechanical ventilation on day 14. Safety was assessed. The trial is registered (EudraCT 2021-002,476-39, and ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05172050).

Findings

A total of 68 participants were enrolled and randomized to placebo (n = 21), raloxifene 60 mg (n = 24), and raloxifene 120 mg (n = 23). The proportion of participants with undetectable SARS-CoV-2 after seven days of treatment with raloxifene 60 mg [36.8%, 7/19 vs. 0.0%, 0/14] and 120 mg [22.2%, 4/18 vs. 0.0%, 0/14] was better compared to placebo, [risk difference (RD) = 0·37 (95% C.I.:0·09-0·59)] and [RD = 0·22 (95% C.I.: -0·03-0·45)], respectively. There was no evidence of effect for requirement of supplemental oxygen and/or mechanical ventilation with effects for raloxifene 60 mg and raloxifene 120 mg over placebo, [RD = 0·09 (95% C.I.: -0·22-0·37)], and [RD = 0·03 (95% C.I.: -0·28-0·33)], respectively. Raloxifene was well tolerated at both doses, and there was no evidence of any difference in the occurrence of serious adverse events.

Interpretation

Raloxifene showed evidence of effect in the primary virologic endpoint in the treatment of early mild to moderate COVID-19 patients shortening the time of viral shedding. The safety profile was consistent with that reported for other indications. Raloxifene may represent a promising pharmacological option to prevent or mitigate COVID-19 disease progression.

Funding

The study was funded by Dompé Farmaceutici SpA and supported by the funds from the European Commission - Health and Consumers Directorate General, for the Action under the Emergency Support Instrument- Grant to support clinical testing of repurposed medicines to treat SARS-COV-2 patients (PPPA-ESI-CTRM-2020-SI2.837140), and by the COVID-2020-12,371,675 Ricerca finalizzata and line 1 Ricerca Corrente COVID both funded by Italian Ministry of Health.

SUBMITTER: Nicastri E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9098200 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection may cause severe life-threatening diseases called acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) owing to cytokine storms. The mortality rate of COVID-19-related ARDS is as high as 40% to 50%. However, effective treatment for the extensive release of acute inflammatory mediators induced by hyperactive and inappropriate immune responses is very limited. Many anti-inflammatory drugs with variable efficacies have been investigated. Colchicine inhibits interleukin 1 beta (IL-1β) and its subsequent inflammatory cascade by primarily blocking pyrin and nucleotide-binding domain leucine-rich repeat and pyrin domain containing receptor 3 (NLRP3) activation. Therefore, this cheap, widely available, oral drug might provide an added benefit in combating the cytokine storm in COVID-19. Here, we sought to determine whether adding colchicine to other standards of care could be beneficial for moderate COVID-19 pneumonia in terms of the requirement for advanced respiratory support and mortality.Methods and findingsThis blinded placebo-controlled drug trial was conducted at the Dhaka Medical College Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh. A total of 300 patients with moderate COVID-19 based on a positive RT-PCR result were enrolled based on strict selection criteria from June 2020 to November 2020. Patients were randomly assigned to either treatment group in a 1:1 ratio. Patients were administered 1.2 mg of colchicine on day 1 followed by daily treatment with 0.6 mg of colchicine for 13 days or placebo along with the standard of care. The primary outcome was the time to clinical deterioration from randomization to two or more points on a seven-category ordinal scale within the 14 days post-randomization. Clinical outcomes were also recorded on day 28. The primary endpoint was met by 9 (6.2%) patients in the placebo group and 4 (2.7%) patients in the colchicine group (P = 0.171), which corresponds to a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 0.44 (0.13-1.43). Additional analysis of the outcomes on day 28 revealed significantly lower clinical deterioration (defined as a decrease by two or more points) in the colchicine group, with a hazard ratio [95%CI] of 0.29 [0.098-0.917], (P = 0.035). Despite a 56% reduction in the need for mechanical ventilation and death with colchicine treatment on day 14, the reduction was not statistically significant. On day 28, colchicine significantly reduced clinical deterioration measured as the need for mechanical ventilation and all-cause mortality.ConclusionColchicine was not found to have a significant beneficial effect on reducing mortality and the need for mechanical ventilation. However, a delayed beneficial effect was observed. Therefore, further studies should be conducted to evaluate the late benefits of colchicine.Clinical trial registrationClinical trial registration no: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04527562 https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=NCT04527562.

Project description:BackgroundPersons with diabetes are at high risk of developing diabetic kidney disease (DKD), which is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Current drug therapies for DKD, such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), are not entirely satisfactory. This study aimed to evaluate the additional benefit and safety of the Chinese herbal granule Tangshen Formula (TSF) in treating DKD.MethodsThe study was designed as a six-center randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. From April 2007 through December 2009, 180 patients with DKD were enrolled. In addition to conventional treatment with ACEIs or ARBs, 122 participants were randomly assigned to receive TSF and 58 participants to receive placebo for 24 weeks. Primary outcome was urinary protein level, measured by urinary albumin excretion rate (UAER) for participants with microalbuminuria, 24-hour urinary protein (24h UP) for participants with macroalbuminuria. Secondary outcomes included renal function, serum lipids, quality of life, symptoms, and adverse events.FindingsAfter 24 weeks of treatment, no statistically significant difference in UAER (TSF -19.53??g/min compared with placebo -7.01??g/min, with a mean difference of -12.52??g/min; 95%CI, -68.67 to 43.63, P?=?0.696) was found between TSF and placebo groups. However, TSF displayed a statistically significant decrease in 24h UP (TSF-0.21?g compared with placebo 0.36?g, with a mean difference of -0.57g; 95%CI, -1.05 to -0.09, P?=?0.024). Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was improved in both patients with microalbuminuria and macroalbuminuria, with a mean difference of 15.51?ml/min/1.73?m2 (95%CI, 3.71 to 27.31), 9.01?ml/min/1.73?m2 (95%CI, -0.10 to 18.13), respectively. Other secondary outcomes showed no statistically significant difference between groups or in the incidence of adverse events.ConclusionsBased on conventional treatments, TSF appears to provide additional benefits compared with placebo in decreasing proteinuria and improving eGFR in DKD patients with macroalbuminuria. Nevertheless, further study is needed to evaluate TSF treating patients with microalbuminuria.Trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-TRC-10000843.