Effectiveness and safety of Ivermectin in COVID-19 patients: A prospective study at a safety-net hospital

Ivermectin for treatment of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The effect of ivermectin (IVM) in treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still controversial, yet the drug has been widely used in the world. The aim of this review was to systematically evaluate the clinical outcomes of IVM in patients with COVID-19. From inception to June 22, 2023, the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science (WOS), and scopus databases were searched for relevant observational studies on the risk of RA in migraineurs. We searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and bioRxiv to collect all relevant publications from inception to June 22, 2023. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality rate, mechanical ventilation (MV) requirement, PCR negative conversion, and adverse events (AEs). Revman 5.4 was used to assess the risk of bias (RoB) and quality of evidence. Thirty-three RCTs (n = 10,489) were included. No significant difference in all-cause mortality rates or PCR negative conversion between IVM and controls. There were significant differences in MV requirement (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47-0.96) and AEs (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.95) between the two groups. Ivermectin could reduce the risk of MV requirement and AEs in patients with COVID-19, without increasing other risks. In the absence of a better alternative, clinicians could use it with caution.

Azvudine and mortality in patients with coronavirus disease 2019: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Several studies have found that azvudine (FNC) can inhibit severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) replication both in vivo and in vitro. However, the effect of FNC on the risk of death in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unclear. This study aims to investigate the effect of FNC on the risk of death in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

Charts of consecutive patients hospitalized at five hospitals in Chongqing with confirmed COVID-19. The primary outcome of the study was 28-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were: ICU admission rates, length of hospital and ICU stay, and also the range of mechanical ventilation days when admission. We compared primary outcome in patients who received FNC with those in patients who did not, using a multivariable model with inverse probability weighting according to the propensity score.

RESULTS

We included 1,110 patients in our study cohort. Of the 236 patients treated with FNC, 30 died within 28 days (12.7%), and of the 874 patients not treated with FNC, 206 died within 28 days (23.6%). In the crude, unadjusted analysis, a significant beneficial effect of FNC in terms of the 28-day mortality (OR 0.472, 95% CI 0.312-0.714; p < 0.001) in the overall population was detected. The adjusted odds ratio by multivariate analysis was (OR 0.498, 95% CI 0.287-0.864; p = 0.013). In the multivariate analysis with inverse probability weighting according to the propensity score, a significantly beneficial effect of FNC in terms of the 28-day mortality was further confirmed (OR 0.754, 95% CI 0.614-0.925; p = 0.007). Moreover, multivariable propensity-score analyses with matching also yielded similar results (OR 0.438, 95% CI 0.246-0.778; p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Our results reveal that in patients with COVID-19, FNC administration was associated with a significantly reduced 28-day mortality.

Efficacy and safety of single-dose ivermectin in mild-to-moderate COVID-19: the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled CORVETTE-01 trial

Background

To investigate whether ivermectin inhibits SARS-CoV-2 proliferation in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 using time to a negative COVID-19 reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test.

Methods

CORVETTE-01 was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study (August 2020-October 2021) conducted in Japan. Overall, 248 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 using RT-PCR were assessed for eligibility. A single oral dose of ivermectin (200  μg/kg) or placebo was administered under fasting. The primary outcome was time to a negative COVID-19 RT-PCR test result for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid, assessed using stratified log-rank test and Cox regression models.

Results

Overall, 112 and 109 patients were randomized to ivermectin and placebo, respectively; 106 patients from each group were included in the full analysis set (male [%], mean age: 68.9%, 47.9 years [ivermectin]; 62.3%, 47.5 years [placebo]). No significant difference was observed in the occurrence of negative RT-PCR tests between the groups (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-1.32; p = 0.785). Median (95% CI) time to a negative RT-PCR test was 14.0 (13.0-16.0) and 14.0 (12.0-16.0) days for ivermectin and placebo, respectively; 82.1% and 84% of patients achieved negative RT-PCR tests, respectively.

Conclusion

In patients with COVID-19, single-dose ivermectin was ineffective in decreasing the time to a negative RT-PCR test.

Clinical Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04703205.

Efficacy of Remdesivir and Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibodies in Monotherapy or Combination Therapy in Reducing the Risk of Disease Progression in Elderly or Immunocompromised Hosts Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Single Center Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION

Remdesivir (REM) and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) could alleviate severe COVID-19 in at-risk outpatients. However, data on their use in hospitalized patients, particularly in elderly or immunocompromised hosts, are lacking.

METHODS

All consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at our unit from 1 July 2021 to 15 March 2022 were retrospectively enrolled. The primary outcome was the progression to severe COVID-19 (P/F < 200). Descriptive statistics, a Cox univariate-multivariate model, and an inverse probability treatment-weighted (IPTW) analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 331 subjects were included; their median (q1-q3) age was 71 (51-80) years, and they were males in 52% of the cases. Of them, 78 (23%) developed severe COVID-19. All-cause in-hospital mortality was 14%; it was higher in those with disease progression (36% vs. 7%, p < 0.001). REM and mAbs resulted in a 7% (95%CI = 3-11%) and 14% (95%CI = 3-25%) reduction in the risk of severe COVID-19, respectively, after adjusting the analysis with the IPTW. In addition, by evaluating only immunocompromised hosts, the combination of REM and mAbs was associated with a significantly lower incidence of severe COVID-19 (aHR = 0.06, 95%CI = 0.02-0.77) when compared with monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

REM and mAbs may reduce the risk of COVID-19 progression in hospitalized patients. Importantly, in immunocompromised hosts, the combination of mAbs and REM may be beneficial.

Current pharmacotherapeutic strategies for Strongyloidiasis and the complications in its treatment

INTRODUCTION

Strongyloidiasis, an infection caused by the soil-transmitted helminth Strongyloides stercoralis, can lead immunocompromised people to a life-threatening syndrome. We highlight here current and emerging pharmacotherapeutic strategies for strongyloidiasis and discuss treatment protocols according to patient cohort. We searched PubMed and Embase for papers published on this topic between 1990 and May 2022.

AREAS COVERED

Ivermectin is the first-line drug, with an estimated efficacy of about 86% and excellent tolerability. Albendazole has a lower efficacy, with usage advised when ivermectin is not available or not recommended. Moxidectin might be a valid alternative to ivermectin, with the advantage of being a dose-independent formulation.

EXPERT OPINION

The standard dose of ivermectin is 200 µg/kg single dose orally, but multiple doses might be needed in immunosuppressed patients. In the case of hyperinfection, repeated doses are recommended up to 2 weeks after clearance of larvae from biological fluids, with close monitoring and further dosing based on review. Subcutaneous ivermectin is used where there is impaired intestinal absorption/paralytic ileus. In pregnant or lactating women, studies have not identified increased risk with ivermectin use. However, with limited available data, a risk-benefit assessment should be considered for each case.

Ivermectin Inhibits the Replication of Usutu Virus In Vitro

Usutu virus (USUV) is an emerging mosquito-borne arbovirus within the genus Flavivirus, family Flaviviridae. Similar to the closely related West Nile virus (WNV), USUV infections are capable of causing mass mortality in wild and captive birds, especially blackbirds. In the last few years, a massive spread of USUV was present in the avian population of Germany and other European countries. To date, no specific antiviral therapies are available. Nine different approved drugs were tested for their antiviral effects on the replication of USUV in vitro in a screening assay. Ivermectin was identified as a potent inhibitor of USUV replication in three cell types from different species, such as simian Vero CCL-81, human A549 and avian TME R. A 2- to 7-log10 reduction of the viral titer in the supernatant was detected at a non-cytotoxic concentration of 5 µM ivermectin dependent on the applied cell line. IC₅₀ values of ivermectin against USUV lineage Africa 3 was found to be 0.55 µM in Vero CCL-81, 1.94 µM in A549 and 1.38 µM in TME-R cells. The antiviral efficacy was comparable between the USUV lineages Africa 2, Africa 3 and Europe 3. These findings show that ivermectin may be a candidate for further experimental and clinical studies addressing the treatment of USUV disease, especially in captive birds.

Microbiome-Based Hypothesis on Ivermectin's Mechanism in COVID-19: Ivermectin Feeds Bifidobacteria to Boost Immunity

Ivermectin is an anti-parasitic agent that has gained attention as a potential COVID-19 therapeutic. It is a compound of the type Avermectin, which is a fermented by-product of Streptomyces avermitilis. Bifidobacterium is a member of the same phylum as Streptomyces spp., suggesting it may have a symbiotic relation with Streptomyces. Decreased Bifidobacterium levels are observed in COVID-19 susceptibility states, including old age, autoimmune disorder, and obesity. We hypothesize that Ivermectin, as a by-product of Streptomyces fermentation, is capable of feeding Bifidobacterium, thereby possibly preventing against COVID-19 susceptibilities. Moreover, Bifidobacterium may be capable of boosting natural immunity, offering more direct COVID-19 protection. These data concord with our study, as well as others, that show Ivermectin protects against COVID-19.

Antiparasitic Drugs against SARS-CoV-2: A Comprehensive Literature Survey

More than two years have passed since the viral outbreak that led to the novel infectious respiratory disease COVID-19, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. Since then, the urgency for effective treatments resulted in unprecedented efforts to develop new vaccines and to accelerate the drug discovery pipeline, mainly through the repurposing of well-known compounds with broad antiviral effects. In particular, antiparasitic drugs historically used against human infections due to protozoa or helminth parasites have entered the main stage as a miracle cure in the fight against SARS-CoV-2. Despite having demonstrated promising anti-SARS-CoV-2 activities in vitro, conflicting results have made their translation into clinical practice more difficult than expected. Since many studies involving antiparasitic drugs are currently under investigation, the window of opportunity might be not closed yet. Here, we will review the (controversial) journey of these old antiparasitic drugs to combat the human infection caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2.

Non-effectiveness of Ivermectin on Inpatients and Outpatients With COVID-19; Results of Two Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials

Background

Ivermectin which was widely considered as a potential treatment for COVID-19, showed uncertain clinical benefit in many clinical trials. Performing large-scale clinical trials to evaluate the effectiveness of this drug in the midst of the pandemic, while difficult, has been urgently needed.

Methods

We performed two large multicenter randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials evaluating the effectiveness of ivermectin in treating inpatients and outpatients with COVID-19 infection. The intervention group received ivermectin, 0.4mg/kg of body weight per day for 3 days. In the control group, placebo tablets were used for 3 days.

Results

Data for 609 inpatients and 549 outpatients were analyzed. In hospitalized patients, complete recovery was significantly higher in the ivermectin group (37%) compared to placebo group (28%; RR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.04–1.66]; p-value = 0.02). On the other hand, the length of hospital stay was significantly longer in the ivermectin group with a mean of 7.98 ± 4.4 days compared to the placebo receiving group with a mean of 7.16 ± 3.2 days (RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.15–1.45]; p-value = 0.02). In outpatients, the mean duration of fever was significantly shorter (2.02 ± 0.11 days) in the ivermectin group versus (2.41 ± 0.13 days) placebo group with p value = 0.020. On the day seventh of treatment, fever (p-value = 0.040), cough (p-value = 0.019), and weakness (p-value = 0.002) were significantly higher in the placebo group compared to the ivermectin group. Among all outpatients, 7% in ivermectin group and 5% in placebo group needed to be hospitalized (RR, 1.36 [95% CI, 0.65–2.84]; p-value = 0.41). Also, the result of RT-PCR on day five after treatment was negative for 26% of patients in the ivermectin group versus 32% in the placebo group (RR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.60–1.09]; p-value = 0.16).

Conclusion

Our data showed, ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not have a significant potential effect on clinical improvement, reduced admission in ICU, need for invasive ventilation, and death in hospitalized patients; likewise, no evidence was found to support the prescription of ivermectin on recovery, reduced hospitalization and increased negative RT-PCR assay for SARS-CoV-2 5 days after treatment in outpatients. Our findings do not support the use of ivermectin to treat mild to severe forms of COVID-19.

Clinical Trial Registration

www.irct.ir IRCT20111224008507N5 and IRCT20111224008507N4.

Antiviral Activity of Repurposing Ivermectin against a Panel of 30 Clinical SARS-CoV-2 Strains Belonging to 14 Variants

Over the past two years, several variants of SARS-CoV-2 have emerged and spread all over the world. However, infectivity, clinical severity, re-infection, virulence, transmissibility, vaccine responses and escape, and epidemiological aspects have differed between SARS-CoV-2 variants. Currently, very few treatments are recommended against SARS-CoV-2. Identification of effective drugs among repurposing FDA-approved drugs is a rapid, efficient and low-cost strategy against SARS-CoV-2. One of those drugs is ivermectin. Ivermectin is an antihelminthic agent that previously showed in vitro effects against a SARS-CoV-2 isolate (Australia/VI01/2020 isolate) with an IC50 of around 2 µM. We evaluated the in vitro activity of ivermectin on Vero E6 cells infected with 30 clinically isolated SARS-CoV-2 strains belonging to 14 different variants, and particularly 17 strains belonging to six variants of concern (VOC) (variants related to Wuhan, alpha, beta, gamma, delta and omicron). The in vitro activity of ivermectin was compared to those of chloroquine and remdesivir. Unlike chloroquine (EC50 from 4.3 ± 2.5 to 29.3 ± 5.2 µM) or remdesivir (EC50 from 0.4 ± 0.3 to 25.2 ± 9.4 µM), ivermectin showed a relatively homogeneous in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 regardless of the strains or variants (EC50 from 5.1 ± 0.5 to 6.7 ± 0.4 µM), except for one omicron strain (EC50 = 1.3 ± 0.5 µM). Ivermectin (No. EC50 = 219, mean EC50 = 5.7 ± 1.0 µM) was, overall, more potent in vitro than chloroquine (No. EC50 = 214, mean EC50 = 16.1 ± 9.0 µM) (p = 1.3 × 10-34) and remdesivir (No. EC50 = 201, mean EC50 = 11.9 ± 10.0 µM) (p = 1.6 × 10-13). These results should be interpreted with caution regarding the potential use of ivermectin in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients: it is difficult to translate in vitro study results into actual clinical treatment in patients.

Potential Role of the Antidepressants Fluoxetine and Fluvoxamine in the Treatment of COVID-19

Mapping non-canonical cellular pathways affected by approved medications can accelerate drug repurposing efforts, which are crucial in situations with a global impact such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Fluoxetine and fluvoxamine are well-established and widely-used antidepressive agents that act as serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI-s). Interestingly, these drugs have been reported earlier to act as lysosomotropic agents, inhibitors of acid sphingomyelinase in the lysosomes, and as ligands of sigma-1 receptors, mechanisms that might be used to fight severe outcomes of COVID-19. In certain cases, these drugs were administered for selected COVID-19 patients because of their antidepressive effects, while in other cases, clinical studies were performed to assess the effect of these drugs on treating COVID-19 patients. Clinical studies produced promising data that encourage the further investigation of fluoxetine and fluvoxamine regarding their use in COVID-19. In this review, we summarize experimental data and the results of the performed clinical studies. We also provide an overview of previous knowledge on the tissue distribution of these drugs and by integrating this information with the published experimental results, we highlight the real opportunity of using these drugs in our fight against COVID-19.