Colchicine Is Safe Though Ineffective in the Treatment of Severe COVID-19: a Randomized Clinical Trial (COLCHIVID)

Oral Colchicine and Low-Dose Aspirin Combination Therapy for Non-elderly, Non-severe, Early Time From Onset, Adult Outpatients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) during "The Fifth Pandemic Wave" in Japan

BACKGROUND

Treatment with antiviral drugs for non-severe, early time from onset, adult outpatients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) had not been established in 2021. However, some new variants of SARS-CoV-2 had caused rapid exacerbation and hospitalization among non-elderly outpatients with COVID-19, contributing to widespread crises within healthcare systems.

METHODS

From July to October 2021, we urgently assessed a therapeutic program using oral colchicine (1.0 mg loading dose, followed approximately half a day later by 0.5 mg twice daily for 5 days, and then 0.5 mg once daily for 4 days) and low-dose aspirin (100 mg once daily for 10 days), for non-elderly, non-severe, early time from onset, adult outpatients with COVID-19. To verify its effectiveness, we set loxoprofen as a control arm, and com parison of these two arms was performed. The primary outcomes were hospitalization, criticality, and death rates.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients (23 receiving colchicine and low-dose aspirin [CA]; 15 receiving loxoprofen [LO]) were evaluated. Hospitalization rate was lower in the CA group (1/23; 4.3%) than in the LO group (2/15; 13.3%); however, no significant difference was found between the two groups (p=0.34). No critical cases, deaths, or severe adverse events were found in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our CA regimen did not show superiority over LO treatment. However, our clinical experience should be recorded as part of community health care activities carried out in Kurume City against the unprece dented COVID-19 pandemic.

Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Treatment and Management of Patients With COVID-19 (September 2022)

There are many pharmacologic therapies that are being used or considered for treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with rapidly changing efficacy and safety evidence from trials. The objective was to develop evidence-based, rapid, living guidelines intended to support patients, clinicians, and other healthcare professionals in their decisions about treatment and management of patients with COVID-19. In March 2020, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel of infectious disease clinicians, pharmacists, and methodologists with varied areas of expertise to regularly review the evidence and make recommendations about the treatment and management of persons with COVID-19. The process used a living guideline approach and followed a rapid recommendation development checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. A systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted at regular intervals. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. Based on the most recent search conducted on 31 May 2022, the IDSA guideline panel has made 32 recommendations for the treatment and management of the following groups/populations: pre- and postexposure prophylaxis, ambulatory with mild-to-moderate disease, and hospitalized with mild-to-moderate, severe but not critical, and critical disease. As these are living guidelines, the most recent recommendations can be found online at: https://idsociety.org/COVID19guidelines. At the inception of its work, the panel has expressed the overarching goal that patients be recruited into ongoing trials. Since then, many trials were conducted that provided much-needed evidence for COVID-19 therapies. There still remain many unanswered questions as the pandemic evolved, which we hope future trials can answer.

Colchicine for the treatment of patients with COVID-19: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

We conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of colchicine treatment on clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, medRxiv and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to January 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the efficacy of colchicine treatment in patients with COVID-19 as compared with placebo or standard of care were included. There were no language restrictions. Studies that used colchicine prophylactically were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We extracted all information relating to the study characteristics, such as author names, location, study population, details of intervention and comparator groups, and our outcomes of interest. We conducted our meta-analysis by using RevMan V.5.4 with risk ratio (RR) and mean difference as the effect measures.

RESULTS

We included 23 RCTs (28 249 participants) in this systematic review. Colchicine did not decrease the risk of mortality (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05; I2=0%; 20 RCTs, 25 824 participants), with the results being consistent among both hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients. There were no significant differences between the colchicine and control groups in other relevant clinical outcomes, including the incidence of mechanical ventilation (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.18; p=0.22; I2=40%; 8 RCTs, 13 262 participants), intensive care unit admission (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.49 to 1.22; p=0.27; I2=0%; 6 RCTs, 961 participants) and hospital admission (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.16; p=0.19; I2=70%; 3 RCTs, 8572 participants).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this meta-analysis do not support the use of colchicine as a treatment for reducing the risk of mortality or improving other relevant clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. However, RCTs investigating early treatment with colchicine (within 5 days of symptom onset or in patients with early-stage disease) are needed to fully elucidate the potential benefits of colchicine in this patient population.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022369850.

The Efficacy of Colchicine as an Adjunct Therapy in Non-hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The therapeutic potential of oral colchicine administration may help combat COVID-19 infection due to reduced disease severity and mortality risk.

OBJECTIVE

This randomized trial aimed to assess the effect of colchicine treatment on the inflammatory and hematologic markers as well as clinical features in non-hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 disease.

METHODS

In the present placebo-controlled randomized trial, 80 non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients were enrolled and followed for 14 days. Subjects randomly received oral colchicine or placebo tablets once a day for two weeks. The fever and cough clinical signs, as well as Creactive protein (CRP) and lymphopenia, were evaluated through the follow-up.

RESULTS

No significant between-group differences were observed in terms of the duration of clinical symptoms, CRP, and lymphopenia at 0, 7, and 14 days of intervention. Although the proportion of participants with fever, cough, positive CRP, and lymphopenia was higher reduced in the colchicine group than the placebo during treatment, no significant differences were found between groups. Due to no adverse effects detected in this trial, colchicine therapy was well-tolerated and safe.

CONCLUSION

Our findings revealed that colchicine adjuvant therapy had no beneficial effect on clinical and para-clinical parameters in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients during 14 days of intervention. The present trial does not support colchicine as a potential treatment against COVID-19 disease.

Drug repositioning in the COVID-19 pandemic: fundamentals, synthetic routes, and overview of clinical studies

INTRODUCTION

Drug repositioning is a strategy to identify a new therapeutic indication for molecules that have been approved for other conditions, aiming to speed up the traditional drug development process and reduce its costs. The high prevalence and incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) underline the importance of searching for a safe and effective treatment for the disease, and drug repositioning is the most rational strategy to achieve this goal in a short period of time. Another advantage of repositioning is the fact that these compounds already have established synthetic routes, which facilitates their production at the industrial level. However, the hope for treatment cannot allow the indiscriminate use of medicines without a scientific basis.

RESULTS

The main small molecules in clinical trials being studied to be potentially repositioned to treat COVID-19 are chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, favipiravir, colchicine, remdesivir, dexamethasone, nitazoxanide, azithromycin, camostat, methylprednisolone, and baricitinib. In the context of clinical tests, in general, they were carried out under the supervision of large consortiums with a methodology based on and recognized in the scientific community, factors that ensure the reliability of the data collected. From the synthetic perspective, compounds with less structural complexity have more simplified synthetic routes. Stereochemical complexity still represents the major challenge in the preparation of dexamethasone, ivermectin, and azithromycin, for instance.

CONCLUSION

Remdesivir and baricitinib were approved for the treatment of hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. Dexamethasone and methylprednisolone should be used with caution. Hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, ivermectin, and azithromycin are ineffective for the treatment of the disease, and the other compounds presented uncertain results. Preclinical and clinical studies should not be analyzed alone, and their methodology's accuracy should also be considered. Regulatory agencies are responsible for analyzing the efficacy and safety of a treatment and must be respected as the competent authorities for this decision, avoiding the indiscriminate use of medicines.

Oxygen Saturation in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients and Its Relation to Colchicine Treatment: A Retrospective Cohort Study with an Updated Systematic Review

Background: Colchicine has been proposed as a cytokine storm-blocking agent for COVID-19 due to its efficacy as an anti-inflammatory drug. The findings of the studies were contentious on the role of colchicine in preventing deterioration in COVID-19 patients. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of colchicine in COVID-19-hospitalized patients. Design: A retrospective observational cohort study was carried out at three major isolation hospitals in Alexandria (Egypt), covering multiple centers. In addition, a systematic review was conducted by searching six different databases for published studies on the utilization of colchicine in patients with COVID-19 until March 2023. The primary outcome measure was to determine whether colchicine could decrease the number of days that the patient needed supplemental oxygen. The secondary outcomes were to evaluate whether colchicine could reduce the number of hospitalization days and mortality rate in these patients. Results: Out of 515 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, 411 were included in the survival analysis. After adjusting for the patients' characteristics, patients not receiving colchicine had a shorter length of stay (median: 7.0 vs. 6.0 days) and fewer days of supplemental oxygen treatment (median: 6.0 vs. 5.0 days), p < 0.05, but there was no significant difference in mortality rate. In a subgroup analysis based on oxygen equipment at admission, patients admitted on nasal cannula/face masks who did not receive colchicine had a shorter duration on oxygen supply than those who did [Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.76 (CI 0.59-0.97)]. Using cox-regression analysis, clarithromycin compared to azithromycin in colchicine-treated patients was associated with a higher risk of longer duration on oxygen supply [HR = 1.77 (CI 1.04-2.99)]. Furthermore, we summarized 36 published colchicine studies, including 114,878 COVID-19 patients. Conclusions: COVID-19-hospitalized patients who were given colchicine had poorer outcomes in terms of the duration of supplemental oxygen use and the length of their hospital stay. Therefore, based on these findings, the use of colchicine is not recommended for COVID-19-hospitalized adults.

Efficacy and safety of Ixekizumab vs. low-dose IL-2 vs. Colchicine vs. standard of care in the treatment of patients hospitalized with moderate-to-critical COVID-19: A pilot randomized clinical trial (STRUCK: Survival Trial Using Cytokine Inhibitors)

BACKGROUND

Cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring hospitalization continue to appear in vulnerable populations, highlighting the importance of novel treatments. The hyperinflammatory response underlies the severity of the disease, and targeting this pathway may be useful. Herein, we tested whether immunomodulation focusing on interleukin (IL)-6, IL-17, and IL-2, could improve the clinical outcomes of patients admitted with COVID-19.

METHODS

This multicenter, open-label, prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted in Brazil. Sixty hospitalized patients with moderate-to-critical COVID-19 received in addition to standard of care (SOC): IL-17 inhibitor (ixekizumab 80 mg SC/week) 1 dose every 4 weeks; low-dose IL-2 (1.5 million IU per day) for 7 days or until discharge; or indirect IL-6 inhibitor (colchicine) orally (0.5 mg) every 8 hours for 3 days, followed by 4 weeks at 0.5 mg 2x/day; or SOC alone. The primary outcome was accessed in the "per protocol" population as the proportion of patients with clinical improvement, defined as a decrease greater or equal to two points on the World Health Organization's (WHO) seven-category ordinal scale by day 28.

RESULTS

All treatments were safe, and the efficacy outcomes did not differ significantly from those of SOC. Interestingly, in the colchicine group, all participants had an improvement of greater or equal to two points on the WHO seven-category ordinal scale and no deaths or patient deterioration were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Ixekizumab, colchicine, and IL-2 were demonstrated to be safe but ineffective for COVID-19 treatment. These results must be interpreted cautiously because of the limited sample size.

The evidence from clinical trials on colchicine and corticosteroids' effect on COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

With no clear end for the outbreak, identifying the drugs that are effective in COVID-19's management is of utmost importance to reduce the impact on the general population and the healthcare systems.

METHODS

This is a systematic review and a meta-analysis evaluating the evidence from clinical trials on the effect of colchicine and corticosteroids against COVID-19. In this review, we have systematically searched five databases [(PubMed, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, ICTRP, CINAHL (EBSCO)]. Cochrane's data extraction sheet was used to collect the required information, and RevMan-5.4.1 was used to conduct the meta-analysis and to assess the risk of bias. The review was registered in Prospero (CRD42022299718).

RESULTS

The total number of included studies was 17, with 18,956 participants; the majority were male 12,001. Out of which, 8772 participants were on colchicine, 569 took methylprednisolone, and 64 patients received prednisolone. The meta-analysis has shown that colchicine had no significant effect on reducing the mortality rate among COVID-19 patients [OR 0.98(95% CI 0.90-1.08), p = .70), I²:1%)], corticosteroids have significantly reduced the mortality rates [OR 0.55 (95% CI 0.33-0.91), p = .02, I²:40]. Colchicine did not reduce the incidence of ICU admissions [OR 0.74 (95% CI 0.39-1.40), p = .35, I²:0%], while steroidal drugs significantly reduced the ICU admissions [OR 0.42 (95% CI 0.23-0.78), p = .005, I²:0%]. Unlike steroidal drugs [OR 0.53 (95% CI 0.30-0.95), p = .03, I²:61%], colchicine failed to reduce the need for mechanical ventilation [OR 0.73 (95% CI 0.48-1.10), p = .13, I²:76%]. Steroidal drugs significantly reduced the duration of hospitalization among COVID-19 patients [OR -0.50 (95% CI -0.79-0.21), p = .0007, I²:36%].

CONCLUSIONS

The use of colchicine did not significantly reduce the mortality rate, ICU admissions, and mechanical ventilation among COVID-19 patients. Conversely, corticosteroids significantly reduced the mortality rate, ICU admissions, mechanical ventilation, and hospitalization duration among COVID-19 patients.

Effect of colchicine on the outcomes of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

AIM

This meta-analysis aimed to assess the usefulness of colchicine in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between database inception and November 12, 2021. Only RCTs that compared the clinical efficacy and safety of colchicine with other alternative treatments or placebos in patients with COVID-19 were included.

RESULTS

Overall, 7 RCTs involving 16,024 patients were included; 7,794 patients were in the study group receiving colchicine and 8,230 were in the control group receiving placebo or standard treatment. The study and control groups had similar risk of mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.91-1.09; I2 = 0%). No significant difference was observed between the study and control groups in terms of the need for non-invasive ventilation (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.83-1.03; I2 = 0%), the need for mechanical ventilation (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.32-1.32; I2 = 58%), and length of hospital stay (mean difference, -0.42 days; 95% CI, -1.95 to 1.11; I2 = 62%). In addition, colchicine was associated with significantly higher risks of gastrointestinal adverse events (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.56-2.11; I2 = 0%) and diarrhoea (OR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.75-2.56; I2 = 9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Colchicine does not improve clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19, so it did not support the additional use of colchicine in the treatment of patients with COVID-19.Key messageColchicine could not reduce the mortality of patients with COVID-19.No significant difference was observed between the colchicine and comparators in terms of the need for non-invasive ventilation, need for mechanical ventilation, and length of hospital stay.Colchicine was associated with a higher risk of gastrointestinal adverse events.

Comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for severe COVID-19 patients: An updated network meta-analysis of 48 randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To date, there has been little agreement on what drug is the "best" drug for treating severe COVID-19 patients. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of different medications available at present for severe COVID-19.

METHODS

We searched databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to February 28, 2022, with no language restrictions, of medications recommended for patients (aged 16 years or older) with severe COVID-19 infection. We extracted data on trials and patient characteristics, and the following primary outcomes: all-cause mortality (ACM), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).

RESULTS

We identified 4021 abstracts and of these included 48 RCTs comprising 9147 participants through database searches and other sources. For decrease in ACM, we found that ivermectin/doxycycline, C-IVIG (i.e., a hyperimmune anti-COVID-19 intravenous immunoglobulin), methylprednisolone, interferon-beta/standard-of-care (SOC), interferon-beta-1b, convalescent plasma, remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir, immunoglobulin gamma, high dosage sarilumab (HS), auxora, and imatinib were effective when compared with placebo or SOC group. We found that colchicine and interferon-beta/SOC were only associated with the TEAEs of severe COVID-19 patients.

CONCLUSION

This study suggested that ivermectin/doxycycline, C-IVIG, methylprednisolone, interferon-beta/SOC, interferon-beta-1b, convalescent plasma (CP), remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir, immunoglobulin gamma, HS, auxora, and imatinib were efficacious for treating severe COVID-19 patients. We found that most medications were safe in treating severe COVID-19. More large-scale RCTs are still needed to confirm the results of this study.

Care for adults with COVID-19: living guidelines from the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce

INTRODUCTION

The Australian National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce was established in March 2020 to maintain up-to-date recommendations for the treatment of people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The original guideline (April 2020) has been continuously updated and expanded from nine to 176 recommendations, facilitated by the rapid identification, appraisal, and analysis of clinical trial findings and subsequent review by expert panels.

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS

In this article, we describe the recommendations for treating non-pregnant adults with COVID-19, as current on 1 August 2022 (version 61.0). The Taskforce has made specific recommendations for adults with severe/critical or mild disease, including definitions of disease severity, recommendations for therapy, COVID-19 prophylaxis, respiratory support, and supportive care.

CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THE GUIDELINE

The Taskforce currently recommends eight drug treatments for people with COVID-19 who do not require supplemental oxygen (inhaled corticosteroids, casirivimab/imdevimab, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, regdanvimab, remdesivir, sotrovimab, tixagevimab/cilgavimab) and six for those who require supplemental oxygen (systemic corticosteroids, remdesivir, tocilizumab, sarilumab, baricitinib, casirivimab/imdevimab). Based on evidence of their achieving no or only limited benefit, ten drug treatments or treatment combinations are not recommended; an additional 42 drug treatments should only be used in the context of randomised trials. Additional recommendations include support for the use of continuous positive airway pressure, prone positioning, and endotracheal intubation in patients whose condition is deteriorating, and prophylactic anticoagulation for preventing venous thromboembolism. The latest updates and full recommendations are available at www.covid19evidence.net.au.

Coagulopathy in COVID-19 and anticoagulation clinical trials

Severe acute respiratory disease coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) first emerged in Wuhan, China, in December 2019 and has caused a global pandemic of a scale unprecedented in the modern era. People infected with SARS-CoV-2 can be asymptomatic, moderate symptomatic or develop severe COVID-19. Other than the typical acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), patients with moderate or severe COVID-19 also develop a distinctive systemic coagulopathy, known as COVID-19-associated coagulopathy (CAC), which is different from sepsis-related forms of disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC). Endotheliopathy or endotheliitis are other unique features of CAC. The endothelial cell perturbation can further increase the risk of thrombotic events in COVID-19 patients. In this review, we will summarize the current knowledge on COVID-19 coagulopathy and the possible mechanisms for the condition. We also discuss the results of clinical trials testing methods for mitigating thrombosis events in COVID-19 patients.

What Next? New Drugs, Old Drugs, and New Challenges in Choosing Treatments for Covid-19

Much has changed since March 2020, when the World Health Organization declared Covid-19 a pandemic and clinicians around the world began desperately searching for therapies that could help afflicted patients. Barely 2.5 years after SARS-CoV-2 was discovered, we have solid evidence for the efficacy and safety of repurposed and novel agents for pre- and postexposure prophylaxis and for mild and severe disease, not to mention highly effective vaccines.

Neutrophils in COVID-19: Not Innocent Bystanders

Unusually for a viral infection, the immunological phenotype of severe COVID-19 is characterised by a depleted lymphocyte and elevated neutrophil count, with the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio correlating with disease severity. Neutrophils are the most abundant immune cell in the bloodstream and comprise different subpopulations with pleiotropic actions that are vital for host immunity. Unique neutrophil subpopulations vary in their capacity to mount antimicrobial responses, including NETosis (the generation of neutrophil extracellular traps), degranulation and de novo production of cytokines and chemokines. These processes play a role in antiviral immunity, but may also contribute to the local and systemic tissue damage seen in acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. Neutrophils also contribute to complications of COVID-19 such as thrombosis, acute respiratory distress syndrome and multisystem inflammatory disease in children. In this Progress review, we discuss the anti-viral and pathological roles of neutrophils in SARS-CoV-2 infection, and potential therapeutic strategies for COVID-19 that target neutrophil-mediated inflammatory responses.

Efficacy of Colchicine in the Treatment of COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the efficacy of colchicine in COVID-19 patients through a systematic review.

METHODS

Six databases were searched until March 2022 for studies assessing colchicine versus control in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The primary outcome was mortality, and secondary outcome was length of hospitalization. Inverse variance and random effect meta-analyses were performed. The strength of evidence was assessed using GRADE.

RESULTS

Nine studies (five randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and four non-randomized studies of intervention (NRSI); n = 13,478). Colchicine did not reduce mortality in comparison with the standard of care in RCTs (RR 0.99; 95%CI 0.90 to 1.10; p = 0.90); however, it did reduce mortality in NRSI studies (RR 0.45; 95%CI 0.26 to 0.77; p = 0.02). In the analysis of RCTs, colchicine did not reduce the length of hospitalization in comparison with the standard of care (MD: -2.25 days; 95%CI: -9.34 to 4.84; p = 0.15). Most studies were scored as having a high risk of bias. Quality of evidence was very low for primary and secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Colchicine did not reduce the mortality and length of hospitalization in comparison with the standard of care in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The published evidence is insufficient and of very low quality to recommend treatment in patients with COVID-19.

FRAGILE-COLCOVID19: A Clinical Trial Based on Early Administration of an Oral Combination of Colchicine and Prednisone in Elderly Patients with COVID-19 in Geriatric Facilities

BACKGROUND

Unprotected and fragile elderly people in nursing homes experienced the highest mortality rates during the initial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to study the role of two oral anti-inflammatory drugs, colchicine and prednisone, in elderly patients with COVID-19 in geriatric centers.

METHODS

A phase II/III, randomized, controlled, multicenter clinical trial was performed in a geriatric population comparing the efficacy and safety of an oral combination of prednisone (60 mg/day for 3 days) and colchicine (at loading doses of 1-1.5 mg/day for 3 days, followed by 0.5 mg/day for 11 days) with the standard treatment, based on intravenous dexamethasone. Primary endpoints assessed the efficacy in reducing death or the modified endpoint death/therapeutic failure to the study drugs over a 28-day period, while secondary endpoints included safety, laboratory changes, and additional therapies used.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients (35 female/19 male) were enrolled, 25 (46.3%) of whom were allocated to the experimental arm and 29 (53.7%) to the control arm. At day 28, no differences in deaths were observed. The combination of mortality or therapeutic failure occurred in 12 (45.13%) patients receiving dexamethasone and 6 (28.13%) patients receiving colchicine/prednisone, resulting in a reduction of risk difference (RD) of - 17% (p = 0.17), with an average reduction of 39% (risk ratio [RR] 0.61) in patients receiving colchicine/prednisone (p = 0.25). Control patients received higher amounts of additional glucocorticoids (p = 0.0095) over a longer time frame (p = 0.0003). Colchicine/prednisone significantly reduced ferritin levels at day 14, as well as D-dimer and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels at day 28. Adverse events were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination colchicine/prednisone compared with intravenous dexamethasone has shown a remarkable trend to increase disease survival over a 28-day period in elderly patients requiring oxygen therapy in geriatric centers, without safety issues.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY

Clinical Trials Registration Number: NCT04492358.

Potential Role of Colchicine in Combating COVID-19 Cytokine Storm and Its Ability to Inhibit Protease Enzyme of SARS-CoV-2 as Conferred by Molecular Docking Analysis

Despite the advance in the management of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the global pandemic is still ongoing with a massive health crisis. COVID-19 manifestations may range from mild symptoms to severe life threatening ones. The hallmark of the disease severity is related to the overproduction of pro-inflammatory cytokines manifested as a cytokine storm. Based on its anti-inflammatory activity through interfering with several pro and anti-inflammatory pathways, colchicine had been proposed to reduce the cytokine storm and subsequently improve clinical outcomes. Molecular docking analysis of colchicine against RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) and protease enzymes of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) revealed that colchicine provided a grid-based molecular docking method, C-DOCKER interaction energy 64.26 and 47.53 (Kcal/mol) with protease and RdRp, respectively. This finding indicated higher binding stability for colchicine–protease complexes than the colchicine–RdRp complex with the involvement of seven hydrogen bonds, six hydrogen acceptors with Asn142, Gly143, Ser144, and Glu166 and one hydrogen-bond donors with Cys145 of the protease enzyme. This is in addition to three hydrophobic interactions with His172, Glu166, and Arg188. A good alignment with the reference compound, Boceprevir, indicated high probability of binding to the protease enzyme of SARS-CoV-2. In conclusion, colchicine can ameliorate the destructive effect of the COVID-19 cytokine storm with a strong evidence of antiviral activity by inhibiting the protease enzyme of SARS-CoV-2.