The Anti-Coronavirus Therapy (ACT) trials: design, baseline characteristics, and challenges

Operational complexities in international clinical trials: a systematic review of challenges and proposed solutions

OBJECTIVE

International trials can be challenging to operationalise due to incompatibilities between country-specific policies and infrastructures. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the operational complexities of conducting international trials and identify potential solutions for overcoming them.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase and Health Management Information Consortium were searched from 2006 to 30 January 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

All studies reporting operational challenges (eg, site selection, trial management, intervention management, data management) of conducting international trials were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Search results were independently screened by at least two reviewers and data were extracted into a proforma.

RESULTS

38 studies (35 RCTs, 2 reports and 1 qualitative study) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The median sample size was 1202 (IQR 332-4056) and median number of sites was 40 (IQR 13-78). 88.6% of studies had an academic sponsor and 80% were funded through government sources. Operational complexities were particularly reported during trial set-up due to lack of harmonisation in regulatory approvals and in relation to sponsorship structure, with associated budgetary impacts. Additional challenges included site selection, staff training, lengthy contract negotiations, site monitoring, communication, trial oversight, recruitment, data management, drug procurement and distribution, pharmacy involvement and biospecimen processing and transport.

CONCLUSIONS

International collaborative trials are valuable in cases where recruitment may be difficult, diversifying participation and applicability. However, multiple operational and regulatory challenges are encountered when implementing a trial in multiple countries. Careful planning and communication between trials units and investigators, with an emphasis on establishing adequately resourced cross-border sponsorship structures and regulatory approvals, may help to overcome these barriers and realise the benefits of the approach. OPEN SCIENCE FRAMEWORK REGISTRATION NUMBER: osf-registrations-yvtjb-v1.

Proactive anti-inflammatory therapy in the advanced stages of a new coronavirus infection. Main results of the inpatient phase of the COLORIT study (Colchicin vs. Ruxolitinib and secukinumab in an open, prospective, randomized trial in patients with novel coronavirus infection COVID-19)

Aim      To evaluate clinical efficacy of the proactive anti-inflammatory therapy in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 with pneumonia and a risk of "cytokine storm".Material and methods  The COLORIT study was a comparative study with randomization into 4 groups: colchicine (n=21) 1 mg for the first 3 days followed by 0.5 mg/day through day 12 or discharge from the hospital; secukinumab 300 mg/day, s.c., as a single dose (n=20); ruxolitinib 5 mg, twice a day (n=10); and a control group with no anti-inflammatory therapy (n=22). The effect was evaluated after 12±2 days of inpatient treatment or upon discharge, what comes first. For ethical reasons, completely randomized recruitment to the control group was not possible. Thus, for data analysis, 17 patients who did not receive any anti-inflammatory therapy for various reasons not related with inclusion into the study were added to the control group of 5 randomized patients. Inclusion criteria: presence of coronavirus pneumonia (positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 RNA or specific clinical presentation of pneumonia; IDC-10 codes U07.1 and U07.2); C-reactive protein (CRP) concentration >60 mg/l or its threefold increase from baseline; at least 2 of 4 symptoms (fever >37.5 °C, persistent cough, shortness of breath with inspiratory rate >20 per min or blood saturation with oxygen <94 % by the 7th-9th day of disease. The study primary endpoint was changes in COVID Clinical Condition Scale (CCS-COVID) score. The secondary endpoints were the dynamics of CRP and changes in the area of lung lesion according to data of computed tomography (CT) of the lungs from the date of randomization to 12±2 days.Results All three drugs significantly reduced inflammation, improved the clinical course of the disease, and decreased the disease severity as evaluated by the CCS score: in the ruxolitinib group, by 5.5 (p=0.004); in the secukinumab group, by 4 (p=0.096); in the colchicine group, by 4 (p=0.017), and in the control group, by 2 (р=0.329). In all three groups, the CCS-COVID score was 2-3 by the end of observation period, which corresponded to a mild process, while in the control group, the score was 7 (р=0.005). Time-related changes in CRP were significant in all three anti-inflammatory treatment groups with no statistical difference between the groups. By the end of the study, changes in CT of the lungs were nonsignificant.Conclusion      In severe СOVID-19 with a risk of "cytokine storm", the proactive therapy with ruxolitinib, colchicine, and secukinumab significantly reduces the inflammation severity, prevents the disease progression, and results in clinical improvement.

Colchicine and the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 (ACT): an open-label, factorial, randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 disease is accompanied by a dysregulated immune response and hypercoagulability. The Anti-Coronavirus Therapies (ACT) inpatient trial aimed to evaluate anti-inflammatory therapy with colchicine and antithrombotic therapy with the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin for prevention of disease progression in patients hospitalised with COVID-19.

METHODS

The ACT inpatient, open-label, 2 × 2 factorial, randomised, controlled trial was done at 62 clinical centres in 11 countries. Patients aged at least 18 years with symptomatic, laboratory confirmed COVID-19 who were within 72 h of hospitalisation or worsening clinically if already hospitalised were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive colchicine 1·2 mg followed by 0·6 mg 2 h later and then 0·6 mg twice daily for 28 days versus usual care; and in a second (1:1) randomisation, to the combination of rivaroxaban 2·5 mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg once daily for 28 days versus usual care. Investigators and patients were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome, assessed at 45 days in the intention-to-treat population, for the colchicine randomisation was the composite of the need for high-flow oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or death; and for the rivaroxaban plus aspirin randomisation was the composite of major thrombosis (myocardial infarction, stroke, acute limb ischaemia, or pulmonary embolism), the need for high-flow oxygen, mechanical ventilation, or death. The trial is registered at www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, NCT04324463 and is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 2, 2020, and Feb 10, 2022, at 62 sites in 11 countries, 2749 patients were randomly assigned to colchicine or control and the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin or to the control. 2611 patients were included in the analysis of colchicine (n=1304) versus control (n=1307); 2119 patients were included in the analysis of rivaroxaban and aspirin (n=1063) versus control (n=1056). Follow-up was more than 98% complete. Overall, 368 (28·2%) of 1304 patients allocated to colchicine and 356 (27·2%) of 1307 allocated to control had a primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04, 95% CI 0·90-1·21, p=0·58); and 281 (26·4%) of 1063 patients allocated to the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin and 300 (28·4%) of 1056 allocated to control had a primary outcome (HR 0·92, 95% CI 0·78-1·09, p=0·32). Results were consistent in subgroups defined by vaccination status, disease severity at baseline, and timing of randomisation in relation to onset of symptoms. There was no increase in the number of patients who had at least one serious adverse event for colchicine versus control groups (87 [6·7%] of 1304 vs 90 [6·9%] of 1307) or with rivaroxaban and aspirin versus control groups (85 [8·0%] vs 91 [8·6%]). Among patients assigned to colchicine, 8 (0·61%) had adverse events that led to discontinuation of study drug, mostly gastrointestinal in nature. 17 (1·6%) patients assigned to the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin had bleeding compared with seven (0·66%) of those allocated to control (p=0·042); the number of serious bleeding events was two (0·19%) versus six (0·57%), respectively (p=0·18). No patients assigned to rivaroxaban and aspirin had serious adverse events that led to discontinuation of study drug.

INTERPRETATION

Among patients hospitalised with COVID-19, neither colchicine nor the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin prevent disease progression or death.

FUNDING

Canadian Institutes for Health Research, Bayer, Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton Health Sciences Research Institute, Thistledown Foundation.

TRANSLATIONS

For the Portuguese, Russian and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Colchicine and aspirin in community patients with COVID-19 (ACT): an open-label, factorial, randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The large number of patients worldwide infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus has overwhelmed health-care systems globally. The Anti-Coronavirus Therapies (ACT) outpatient trial aimed to evaluate anti-inflammatory therapy with colchicine and antithrombotic therapy with aspirin for prevention of disease progression in community patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

The ACT outpatient, open-label, 2 × 2 factorial, randomised, controlled trial, was done at 48 clinical sites in 11 countries. Patients in the community aged 30 years and older with symptomatic, laboratory confirmed COVID-19 who were within 7 days of diagnosis and at high risk of disease progression were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive colchicine 0·6 mg twice daily for 3 days and then 0·6 mg once daily for 25 days versus usual care, and in a second (1:1) randomisation to receive aspirin 100 mg once daily for 28 days versus usual care. Investigators and patients were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was assessed at 45 days in the intention-to-treat population; for the colchicine randomisation it was hospitalisation or death, and for the aspirin randomisation it was major thrombosis, hospitalisation, or death. The ACT outpatient trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324463 and is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between Aug 27, 2020, and Feb 10, 2022, 3917 patients were randomly assigned to colchicine or control and to aspirin or control; after excluding 36 patients due to administrative reasons 3881 individuals were included in the analysis (n=1939 colchicine vs n=1942 control; n=1945 aspirin vs 1936 control). Follow-up was more than 99% complete. Overall event rates were 5 (0·1%) of 3881 for major thrombosis, 123 (3·2%) of 3881 for hospitalisation, and 23 (0·6%) of 3881 for death; 66 (3·4%) of 1939 patients allocated to colchicine and 65 (3·3%) of 1942 patients allocated to control experienced hospitalisation or death (hazard ratio [HR] 1·02, 95% CI 0·72-1·43, p=0·93); and 59 (3·0%) of 1945 of patients allocated to aspirin and 73 (3·8%) of 1936 patients allocated to control experienced major thrombosis, hospitalisation, or death (HR 0·80, 95% CI 0·57-1·13, p=0·21). Results for the primary outcome were consistent in all prespecified subgroups, including according to baseline vaccination status, timing of randomisation in relation to onset of symptoms (post-hoc analysis), and timing of enrolment according to the phase of the pandemic (post-hoc analysis). There were more serious adverse events with colchicine than with control (34 patients [1·8%] of 1939 vs 27 [1·4%] of 1942) but none in either group that led to discontinuation of study interventions. There was no increase in serious adverse events with aspirin versus control (31 [1·6%] vs 31 [1·6%]) and none that led to discontinuation of study interventions.

INTERPRETATION

The results provide no support for the use of colchicine or aspirin to prevent disease progression or death in outpatients with COVID-19.

FUNDING

Canadian Institutes for Health Research, Bayer, Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton Health Sciences Research Institute, and Thistledown Foundation.

TRANSLATIONS

For the Portuguese, Russian and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.