Objective To compare the effects of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). Design Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources WHO covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature, up to 1 March 2021 and six additional Chinese databases up to 20 February 2021. Studies identified as of 12 February 2021 were included in the analysis. Study selection Randomised clinical trials in which people with suspected, probable, or confirmed covid-19 were randomised to drug treatment or to standard care or placebo. Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles. Methods After duplicate data abstraction, a bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool, and the certainty of the evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. For each outcome, interventions were classified in groups from the most to the least beneficial or harmful following GRADE guidance. Results 196 trials enrolling 76 767 patients were included; 111 (56.6%) trials and 35 098 (45.72%) patients are new from the previous iteration; 113 (57.7%) trials evaluating treatments with at least 100 patients or 20 events met the threshold for inclusion in the analyses. Compared with standard care, corticosteroids probably reduce death (risk difference 20 fewer per 1000 patients, 95% credible interval 36 fewer to 3 fewer, moderate certainty), mechanical ventilation (25 fewer per 1000, 44 fewer to 1 fewer, moderate certainty), and increase the number of days free from mechanical ventilation (2.6 more, 0.3 more to 5.0 more, moderate certainty). Interleukin-6 inhibitors probably reduce mechanical ventilation (30 fewer per 1000, 46 fewer to 10 fewer, moderate certainty) and may reduce length of hospital stay (4.3 days fewer, 8.1 fewer to 0.5 fewer, low certainty), but whether or not they reduce mortality is uncertain (15 fewer per 1000, 30 fewer to 6 more, low certainty). Janus kinase inhibitors may reduce mortality (50 fewer per 1000, 84 fewer to no difference, low certainty), mechanical ventilation (46 fewer per 1000, 74 fewer to 5 fewer, low certainty), and duration of mechanical ventilation (3.8 days fewer, 7.5 fewer to 0.1 fewer, moderate certainty). The impact of remdesivir on mortality and most other outcomes is uncertain. The effects of ivermectin were rated as very low certainty for all critical outcomes, including mortality. In patients with non-severe disease, colchicine may reduce mortality (78 fewer per 1000, 110 fewer to 9 fewer, low certainty) and mechanical ventilation (57 fewer per 1000, 90 fewer to 3 more, low certainty). Azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, and interferon-beta do not appear to reduce risk of death or have an effect on any other patient-important outcome. The certainty in effects for all other interventions was low or very low. Conclusion Corticosteroids and interleukin-6 inhibitors probably confer important benefits in patients with severe covid-19. Janus kinase inhibitors appear to have promising benefits, but certainty is low. Azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir-ritonavir, and interferon-beta do not appear to have any important benefits. Whether or not remdesivir, ivermectin, and other drugs confer any patient-important benefit remains uncertain. Systematic review registration This review was not registered. The protocol is publicly available in the supplementary material. Readers’ note This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This is the fourth version of the original article published on 30 July 2020 (BMJ 2020;370:m2980), and previous versions can be found as data supplements. When citing this paper please consider adding the version number and date of access for clarity.

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/370/bmj.m2980.full.pdf

Drug treatments for covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Since the initial reports of a cluster of pneumonia cases of unidentified origin in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, the novel coronavirus that causes this disease — severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) — has spread throughout the world, igniting the twenty-first century’s deadliest pandemic. Over the past 12 months, a dizzying array of information has emerged from numerous laboratories, covering everything from the putative origin of SARS-CoV-2 to the development of numerous candidate vaccines. Many immunologists quickly pivoted from their existing research to focus on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and, owing to this unprecedented convergence of efforts on one viral infection, a remarkable body of work has been produced and disseminated, through both preprint servers and peer-reviewed journals. Here, we take readers through the timeline of key discoveries during the first year of the pandemic, which showcases the extraordinary leaps in our understanding of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 and highlights gaps in our knowledge as well as areas for future investigations. A timeline of the major scientific discoveries during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic showcases the collaborative efforts that enabled the key aspects of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 to be reported at unprecedented speed.

/pdf/the-first-12-months-of-covid-19-a-timeline-of-immunological-2sdtnozheu.pdf

The first 12 months of COVID-19: a timeline of immunological insights.

Effect of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin on the mortality of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The coronavirus pandemic has significantly impacted solid organ transplantation (SOT). Early in the outbreak period, transplant societies recommended suspending living kidney transplant programs in communities with widespread transmission to avoid exposing recipients to increased risk of immunosuppression, while recommendations were made to reserve deceased-donor kidney transplantation for likely life-saving indications. SOT recipients may be at high risk from COVID-19 disease due to chronic immunosuppressive treatment and other medical comorbidities. Mortality rates reported between 13 to over 30% in SOT recipients. In addition to high rates of complications and mortality attributable to COVID-19 infections, the pandemic has also led to additional complexities in transplantation including new questions regarding screening of donors and recipients, decision making to accept a patient for kidney transplant or wait after pandemic. The clinical implications of COVID-19 infection may also differ depending on the type of the transplanted organ and recipient comorbidities which further impacts decisions on continuing transplantation during the pandemic. Transplant activity during a pandemic should be tailored with careful selection of both donors and recipients. Furthermore, while tremendous strides have been made in treatment strategies and vaccinations, the impact of these in transplant recipients may be attenuated in the setting of their immunosuppression. In this review, we aim to summarize several aspects of COVID-19 in transplantation, including the immune response to SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics, clinical outcomes in SOT recipients, and end-stage kidney disease patients, transplant activity during the pandemic, and treatment options for COVID-19 disease.

COVID-19 and Solid Organ Transplantation: A Review Article.

Azithromycin for community treatment of suspected COVID-19 in people at increased risk of an adverse clinical course in the UK (PRINCIPLE): a randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial.

BACKGROUND: No effective oral therapy exists for early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether hydroxychloroquine could reduce COVID-19 severity in adult outpatients. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from 22 March through 20 May 2020. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04308668). SETTING: Internet-based trial across the United States and Canada (40 states and 3 provinces). PARTICIPANTS: Symptomatic, nonhospitalized adults with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 or probable COVID-19 and high-risk exposure within 4 days of symptom onset. INTERVENTION: Oral hydroxychloroquine (800 mg once, followed by 600 mg in 6 to 8 hours, then 600 mg daily for 4 more days) or masked placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Symptoms and severity at baseline and then at days 3, 5, 10, and 14 using a 10-point visual analogue scale. The primary end point was change in overall symptom severity over 14 days. RESULTS: Of 491 patients randomly assigned to a group, 423 contributed primary end point data. Of these, 341 (81%) had laboratory-confirmed infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or epidemiologically linked exposure to a person with laboratory-confirmed infection; 56% (236 of 423) were enrolled within 1 day of symptoms starting. Change in symptom severity over 14 days did not differ between the hydroxychloroquine and placebo groups (difference in symptom severity: relative, 12%; absolute, -0.27 point [95% CI, -0.61 to 0.07 point]; P = 0.117). At 14 days, 24% (49 of 201) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine had ongoing symptoms compared with 30% (59 of 194) receiving placebo (P = 0.21). Medication adverse effects occurred in 43% (92 of 212) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine versus 22% (46 of 211) receiving placebo (P < 0.001). With placebo, 10 hospitalizations occurred (2 non-COVID-19-related), including 1 hospitalized death. With hydroxychloroquine, 4 hospitalizations occurred plus 1 nonhospitalized death (P = 0.29). LIMITATION: Only 58% of participants received SARS-CoV-2 testing because of severe U.S. testing shortages. CONCLUSION: Hydroxychloroquine did not substantially reduce symptom severity in outpatients with early, mild COVID-19. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Private donors.

/pdf/hydroxychloroquine-in-nonhospitalized-adults-with-early-29qp4nhwvy.pdf

Hydroxychloroquine in Nonhospitalized Adults With Early COVID-19 : A Randomized Trial.

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel pathogen causing the current worldwide coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Due to insufficient diagnostic testing in the United States, there is a need for clinical decision-making algorithms to guide testing prioritization. Methods We recruited participants nationwide for a randomized clinical trial. We categorized participants into 3 groups: (1) those with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, (2) those with probable SARS-CoV-2 infection (pending test or not tested but with a confirmed COVID-19 contact), and (3) those with possible SARS-CoV-2 infection (pending test or not tested and with a contact for whom testing was pending or not performed). We compared the frequency of self-reported symptoms in each group and categorized those reporting symptoms in early infection (0-2 days), midinfection (3-5 days), and late infection (>5 days). Results Among 1252 symptomatic persons screened, 316 had confirmed, 393 had probable, and 543 had possible SARS-CoV-2 infection. In early infection, those with confirmed and probable SARS-CoV-2 infection shared similar symptom profiles, with fever most likely in confirmed cases (P = .002). Confirmed cases did not show any statistically significant differences compared with unconfirmed cases in symptom frequency at any time point. The most commonly reported symptoms in those with confirmed infection were cough (82%), fever (67%), fatigue (62%), and headache (60%), with only 52% reporting both fever and cough. Conclusions Symptomatic persons with probable SARS-CoV-2 infection present similarly to those with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. There was no pattern of symptom frequency over time.

/pdf/symptoms-of-covid-19-outpatients-in-the-united-states-1388usp9cc.pdf

Symptoms of COVID-19 Outpatients in the United States

Trial monitoring protects participant safety and study integrity. While monitors commonly go on site to verify source data, there is little evidence that this practice is efficient or effective. An ongoing international HIV treatment trial (START) provides an opportunity to explore the usefulness of different monitoring approaches. All START sites are centrally monitored and required to follow a local monitoring plan requiring specific quality assurance activities. In addition, sites were randomized (1:1) to receive, or not receive, annual on-site monitoring. The study will determine if on-site monitoring increases the identification of major protocol deviations (eligibility or consent violations, improper study drug use, primary or serious event underreporting, data alteration or fraud). The START study completed enrollment in December 2013, with planned follow-up through December 2016. The monitoring study is ongoing at 196 sites in 34 countries. Results are expected when the START study concludes in December 2016.

Nicole S Engen

Papers

Hydroxychloroquine in Nonhospitalized Adults With Early COVID-19 : A Randomized Trial.

Symptoms of COVID-19 Outpatients in the United States

Investigating the Efficacy of Clinical Trial Monitoring Strategies Design and Implementation of the Cluster Randomized START Monitoring Substudy