scholarly journals A Systematic Review on the Potency and How Safe Chloroquine is for the Treatment of COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aborode Abdullahi Tunde
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Severe Form ◽  
World Health ◽  
Health Concern ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Health Organization

Coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) is a global health emergency of serious health concern. However, there is no current medical treatment, although it is much needed for patient contracting the severe form of the disease. This systematic review was to explain the information regarding chloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 via the data obtain from PubMed and other three trial Registries which were searched for review and the use of chloroquine in patients with COVID-19. Four articles were included (one narrative letter, one in-vitro study, one commentary and one editorial) and review on other 14 ongoing clinical trials in China. Chloroquine seems to have great potential in reducing the replication of SARS-CoV-2 (virus causing COVID-19) in vitro. There is high chance, pre-clinical evidence of effectiveness and information of safety from long-time clinical use for other indications to describe the clinical research on Chloroquine in patients with COVID-19. However, clinical description should either adhere to the Monitored Emergency Use of Unregistered Interventions (MEURI) framework or be ethically approved as a trial as stated by the World Health Organization. Safety data and data from high-quality clinical trials are urgently needed.

scholarly journals THE THERAPEUTIC POTENTIAL OF IVERMECTIN FOR COVID-19: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF MECHANISMS AND EVIDENCE

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefanie Kalfas ◽  
Kumar Visvanathan ◽  
Kim Chan ◽  
John Drago
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Therapeutic Potential ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Clinical Severity ◽  
World Health ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Immunomodulatory Action ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Clinical Trials Registry

ABSTRACTIntroductionIvermectin is a commonly used antihelminthic agent with over 35 years of established safety data in humans. Recent data demonstrates antiviral activity in vitro against SARS-CoV-2, in addition to a range of viruses. In vitro and animal models also provide evidence of immunomodulatory action. These additional modes of action are supported by in silico modelling, which propose a number of viral and host targets that would mediate these effects.ObjectivesThe aim of this study is to systematically review the published and preprint clinical literature and study results that assessed the potential role of ivermectin as a COVID-19 therapeutic and prophylactic agent.MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive review of PubMed, medRxiv, ClinicalTrials.gov, Global Coronavirus COVID-19 Clinical Trial Tracker, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, EU Clinical Trials Register, ANZ clinical trials registry, and references from relevant articles.ResultsSearch keywords- “COVID-19 (and synonyms) AND ivermectin”- generated 86 articles on PubMed, 48 on medRvix and 37 on clinicaltrials.gov at the time of writing. Twelve of these were listed as completed clinical trials and of these, 8 were included as investigators had released results. Positive mortality benefit, reduced time to clinical recovery, reduced incidence of disease progression and decreased duration of hospital admission were reported in patients across all stages of clinical severity.LimitationsDue to the time-critical nature of the COVID-19 pandemic our review included preprint data, which must be interpreted with caution while it awaits peer review.

scholarly journals The efficacy and safety of interferons for the treatment of patients with COVID-19: protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Afsaneh Noormandi ◽  
Mohammad Fathalipour ◽  
Reza Daryabeygi-Khotbehsara ◽  
Soheil Hassanipour
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
World Health ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Global Pandemic ◽  
The World ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Time Of Administration

Background and objective: COVID-19 has since been declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO), infecting millions worldwide. The use of Interferon (INF) subtypes previously examined in the treatment of SARS and MERS is also being initiated in some clinical trials. Although different clinical trials were evaluated IFNs in the treatment of COVID-19, their efficacy and safety remain unknown. Therefore, this study aims to systematically assess IFNs efficacy and safety in treating patients with COVID-19. Methods: The protocol has been registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register (CRD42020200643) on 24 July 2020. This protocol has been arranged according to the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) 2015 checklist. Discussion: Due to lack of approved medication for the covid-19 treatment and also various mutations of this virus, evaluated the efficacy and safety of medications by various studies could help for finding treatments with high effectiveness. IFNs are one of the medications that have been administered in covid-19 infection.  Moreover, the best time of administration and dose of this medication was unknown. Although meta-analysis is a potent source for assessing the accuracy of subjects, heterogeneity of articles is a potent limitation of our work.

scholarly journals Therapeutic Effectiveness and Safety of Repurposing Drugs for the Treatment of COVID-19: Position Standing in 2021

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Safaet Alam ◽  
Taslima Binte Kamal ◽  
Md. Moklesur Rahman Sarker ◽  
Jin-Rong Zhou ◽  
S. M. Abdur Rahman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Basic Knowledge ◽  
World Health ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Drug Candidates ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Meta Analyses

COVID-19, transmitted by SARS-CoV-2, is one of the most serious pandemic situations in the history of mankind, and has already infected a huge population across the globe. This horrendously contagious viral outbreak was first identified in China and within a very short time it affected the world's health, transport, economic, and academic sectors. Despite the recent approval of a few anti-COVID-19 vaccines, their unavailability and insufficiency along with the lack of other potential therapeutic options are continuing to worsen the situation, with valuable lives continuing to be lost. In this situation, researchers across the globe are focusing on repurposing prospective drugs and prophylaxis such as favipiravir, remdesivir, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, lopinavir-ritonavir, azithromycin, doxycycline, ACEIs/ARBs, rivaroxaban, and protease inhibitors, which were preliminarily based on in vitro and in vivo pharmacological and toxicological study reports followed by clinical applications. Based on available preliminary data derived from limited clinical trials, the US National Institute of Health (NIH) and USFDA also recommended a few drugs to be repurposed i.e., hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, and favipiravir. However, World Health Organization later recommended against the use of chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, and lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of COVID-19 infections. Combining basic knowledge of viral pathogenesis and pharmacodynamics of drug molecules as well as in silico approaches, many drug candidates have been investigated in clinical trials, some of which have been proven to be partially effective against COVID-19, and many of the other drugs are currently under extensive screening. The repurposing of prospective drug candidates from different stages of evaluation can be a handy wellspring in COVID-19 management and treatment along with approved anti-COVID-19 vaccines. This review article combined the information from completed clinical trials, case series, cohort studies, meta-analyses, and retrospective studies to focus on the current status of repurposing drugs in 2021.

scholarly journals Should chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine be used to treat COVID-19? A rapid review

BJGP Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. bjgpopen20X101069 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kome Gbinigie ◽  
Kerstin Frie
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
World Health ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

BackgroundOn the 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that COVID-19 was a pandemic. To date, there are no medical treatments for COVID-19 with proven effectiveness. Novel treatments and/or vaccines will take time to be developed and distributed to patients. In light of this, there has been growing interest in the use of existing medications, such as chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), as potential treatments of this disease.AimTo establish the current evidence for the effectiveness of CQ and HCQ in treating COVID-19.Design & settingA rapid review of the literature was conducted.MethodElectronic searches in PubMed and Google Scholar were conducted on 21 March 2020. A further search was conducted in Google for relevant literature on 28 March 2020.ResultsThere is limited evidence of in vitro activity of CQ/HCQ against SARS-CoV-2. A number of in vivo clinical trials are underway. The empirical data available from two of these trials reveal conflicting results. Both trials are characterised by small numbers of participants (n = 30 and n = 36) and suffer methodological limitations. No medium or long-term follow-up data is available.ConclusionAt present, there is insufficient evidence to determine whether CQ/HCQ are safe and effective treatments for COVID-19. High quality, adequately powered randomised clinical trials in primary and secondary care settings are urgently required to guide policymakers and clinicians. These studies should report medium- and long-term follow-up results, and safety data.

Combination of Ceftriaxone and Ampicillin for the Treatment of Enterococcal Endocarditis: A Qualitative Systematic Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 51 (6) ◽  
pp. 496-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaylee C. Peterson ◽  
Tim T. Y. Lau ◽  
Mary H. H. Ensom
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
World Health ◽  
Current Standard ◽  
Health Organization

Objective: The aim of this systematic review is to review all human trials assessing the efficacy and safety of ampicillin and ceftriaxone for enterococcal endocarditis and to discuss the clinical implications of the findings. Data Sources: MEDLINE (1946-), EMBASE (1974-), CENTRAL, Google Scholar, and the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched through January 2017 using the search terms ampicillin, penicillin, ceftriaxone, cephalosporin, enterococ*, and endocarditis. Unpublished studies were eligible for inclusion. Additional references were identified from literature citations. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Clinical trials in humans that reported on clinical efficacy or adverse outcomes with ceftriaxone and ampicillin therapy in patients with enterococcal endocarditis were included. Case reports, nonhuman, and non-English studies were excluded. Data Synthesis: Four observational clinical studies were identified. One examined the effects of ceftriaxone and ampicillin alone, and 3 compared the therapy to the current standard of care, ampicillin and gentamicin. The studies had small sample sizes and were not adequately designed or powered to establish noninferiority or equivalence to the current standard of care. Rates of clinical cure with ampicillin 2 g every 4 hours and ceftriaxone 2 g every 12 hours were similar to those of ampicillin and gentamicin. Ampicillin and ceftriaxone therapy was well tolerated with low rates of renal failure (0%-33%). Conclusion: The evidence to support the use of ampicillin and ceftriaxone for enterococcal endocarditis is not definitive. In the absence of compelling evidence, clinicians may consider ampicillin and ceftriaxone in patients with Enterococcus faecalis infection at high risk for nephrotoxicity or those with aminoglycoside-resistant pathogens.

scholarly journals Advances in Bacteriophage Therapy against Relevant MultiDrug-Resistant Pathogens

Antibiotics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 672
Author(s):  
Antonio Broncano-Lavado ◽  
Guillermo Santamaría-Corral ◽  
Jaime Esteban ◽  
Meritxell García-Quintanilla
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Phage Therapy ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
World Health ◽  
Health Concern ◽  
Bacteriophage Therapy ◽  
Promising Alternative ◽  
Carbapenem Resistant

The increase of multiresistance in bacteria and the shortage of new antibiotics in the market is becoming a major public health concern. The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared critical priority to develop new antimicrobials against three types of bacteria: carbapenem-resistant A. baumannii, carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa and carbapenem-resistant and ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae. Phage therapy is a promising alternative therapy with renewed research in Western countries. This field includes studies in vitro, in vivo, clinical trials and clinical cases of patients receiving phages as the last resource after failure of standard treatments due to multidrug resistance. Importantly, this alternative treatment has been shown to be more effective when administered in combination with antibiotics, including infections with biofilm formation. This review summarizes the most recent studies of this strategy in animal models, case reports and clinical trials to deal with infections caused by resistant A. baumannii, K. pneumoniae, E. coli, and P. aeruginosa strains, as well as discusses the main limitations of phage therapy.

Off label medication to combat COVID-19: Review Results to Date.

Coronaviruses ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 01 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amita Verma ◽  
Anuj Kumar Singh ◽  
Aman K. Das ◽  
Netra P. Neupane
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Reliable Data ◽  
World Health ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Off Label ◽  
The People ◽  
Control And Prevention ◽  
Health Organization

Background: Severe viral pneumonia cases were seen in the people of Wuhan, China at the end of December 2019. It has already affected almost every country around the globe and was declared a pandemic by the World Health Or-ganization. We aim to evaluate the therapeutics and safety of various off label COVID-19 drugs Methods: PubMed, Research Gate, Science Direct, Google Scholar, Centre for Disease control and prevention (CDC) por-tal, Chinese Centre for Disease Control and prevention (CCDC) portal, World Health Organization (WHO) portal were searched for obtaining reliable data. Result: COVID-19 is creating a storm of deaths and active cases globally which is forcing the pharmaceutical companies and scientists to work day and night to find an effective and safer anti-COVID-19 medication. Various in-vitro and clinical trials had been performed as well as currently ongoing to analyze the mechanisms and therapeutics of off label medications like Chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine, Amodiaquine, Azithromycin, Remdesivir, Favipiravir, Ritonavir/Lopinavir, Umifenovir, Oseltamivir, Ribavirin, Nafamostat, Camostat, Tocilizumab, Ivermectin, Nitazoxanide, Famotidine, Vitamin D, Corticosteroids and Dexamethasone. In-vitro studies were performed by utilizing Vero E6 cells and hSLAM cells while open/closed, randomized/non-randomized, single-centered/multi-centered and retrospective clinical trials and cases study were organized to determined safety and efficacy Conclusion: Although these drugs have shown promising results against COVID-19 patients, it cannot be concluded that these drugs are truly safe and effective because there are no conclusive evidences to support the facts since only limited re-searches and studies had been investigated

Treating drug-resistant wound pathogens with non-medicated dressings: an in vitro study

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (9) ◽  
pp. 629-638 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark G. Rippon ◽  
Alan A. Rogers ◽  
Samantha Westgate
Keyword(s):  
Pseudomonas Aeruginosa ◽  
Acinetobacter Baumannii ◽  
Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus ◽  
Wound Care ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Petri Dish ◽  
World Health ◽  
Antimicrobial Performance ◽  
Health Organization

Objective: To assess the in vitro antimicrobial performance of a non-medicated hydro-responsive wound dressing (HRWD) on the sequestration and killing of wound relevant microorganisms found on the World Health Organization (WHO) priority pathogens list. Methods: Suspensions of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) were placed on petri dishes. Dressings were each placed on top, incubated for 30 minutes and then removed from the inoculated petri dish. The surface of the dressings previously in contact with the bacterial suspensions were placed directly onto a tryptone soy agar (TSA) plate and incubated for 24 hours. Dressings were then removed from the TSA plate and the level of bacterial growth on the plates was assessed. Sequestered microorganism viability was assessed using LIVE/DEAD viability kits and visualisation by epifluorescence. Results: Our results indicated that HRWDs sequester and retain Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii and MRSA within the dressing. Non-medicated HRWDs containing bound PHMB (polyhexamethylene biguanide, HRWD+PHMB) killed the microorganisms sequestered within the dressing matrix. Conclusion: These data suggest that non-medicated HRWD+PHMB is an effective against WHO priority pathogens and promoting goal of antimicrobial stewardship in wound care.

scholarly journals First description of Nodding Syndrome in the Central African Republic

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. e0009430
Author(s):  
Salvatore Metanmo ◽  
Farid Boumédiène ◽  
Pierre-Marie Preux ◽  
Robert Colebunders ◽  
Joseph N. Siewe Fodjo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Central African Republic ◽  
Age Of Onset ◽  
Severe Form ◽  
World Health ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Nodding Syndrome ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
First Time ◽  
Height For Age

Background The term Nodding Syndrome (NS) refers to an atypical and severe form of childhood epilepsy characterized by a repetitive head nodding (HN). The disease has been for a long time limited to East Africa, and the cause is still unknown. The objective of this study was to confirm the existence of NS cases in Central African Republic (CAR). Methodology/Principal findings This was a cross-sectional descriptive study in the general population. The identification of NS cases was conducted through a door-to-door survey in a village near Bangui along the Ubangui River. Based on Winkler’s 2008 and the World Health Organization (WHO)’s 2012 classifications, the confirmation of cases was done by a neurologist who also performed the electroencephalograms. No laboratory tests were done during this investigation. Treatment was offered to all patients. A total of 6,175 individuals was surveyed in 799 households. After reviewing the cases, we identified 5 NS cases in girls aged between 8 and 16. The age of onset of the seizures was between 5 and 12 years of age. Two cases were classified as "HN plus" according to Winkler’s 2008 classification. Four NS cases were classified as probable and one as confirmed according to the WHO’s 2012 classification. Three of them presented with developmental delay and cognitive decline, and one had an abnormally low height-for-age z-score. Electroencephalographic abnormalities were found in four patients. Conclusions/Significance Nodding Syndrome cases were described in CAR for the first time. Despite certain peculiarities, these cases are similar to those described elsewhere. Given that only a small part of the affected area was investigated, the study area along the Ubangui River needs to be expanded in order to investigate the association between Onchocerca volvulus and NS and also evaluate the real burden of NS in CAR.

Current Drug Trends for the Treatment of SARS-CoV-2

Coronaviruses ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 01 ◽  
Author(s):  
Márcio Robert Mattos da Silva ◽  
Melanie Tavares ◽  
Ralph Santos-Oliveira ◽  
Eduardo RicciJúnior
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
World Health Organization ◽  
Molecular Modelling ◽  
Current Trend ◽  
In Vitro Studies ◽  
World Health ◽  
The World ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Positive Results

Background: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2, initially first appeared in China and spread rapidly around the world, causing a pandemic. Due to the absence of an effective vaccine, many drugs have been extensively studied for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2. Objective: The aim of this work is to provide a current trend of potential drugs for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2, through literature research over drug repositioning. Methods: A literature review was performed on databases such as PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scielo, Lilacs, World Health Organization and Clinical Trials to identify relevant articles of drugs used for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 since 2003 up to 2020. Results and Discussion : Nelfinavir presented favorable results in molecular modelling and in vitro studies. Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine showed positive results, nevertheless, the World Health Organization discontinued the clinical trials because these drugs might increase the frequency of ventricular arrhythmias. Darunavir and Ribavirin presented one positive and negative result for molecular modelling and in vitro studies, respectively. The combination of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Umifenovir alone demonstrated negative results in the clinical trials performed. Remdesivir was the major drug tested which presented more positive results. Conclusion: The data do not support the use of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Umifenovir with the potential for treatment against SARS-CoV-2. Nelfinavir has potential to be explored against SARS-CoV-2. Due to the union of several positive results obtained from studies against SARS-CoV-2, the Remdesivir should be explored as the most effective drug for the potential treatment against this virus.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document