Nitazoxanide superiority to placebo to treat moderate COVID-19 - A Pilot prove of concept randomized double-blind clinical trial

T cell-mediated Immune response and correlates of inflammation and their relationship with COVID-19 clinical severity: not an intuitive guess

BACKGROUND

Predictors of the outcome of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection remain to be fully determined. We evaluated selected viral characteristics and immunological responses that might predict and/or correlate to the clinical outcome of COVID-19.

METHODS

For individuals developing divergent clinical outcomes, the magnitude and breadth of T cell-mediated responses were measured within 36 h of symptom onset. Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells (PBMCs) were subjected to in vitro stimulation with SARS-CoV-2-based peptides. In addition, SARS-CoV-2 sequences were generated by metagenome, and HLA typing was performed using Luminex technology.

FINDINGS

CD4+ T cell activation was negatively correlated with SARS-CoV-2 basal viral load in patients with severe COVID-19 (p = 0·043). The overall cellular immune response, as inferred by the IFN-γ signal, was higher at baseline for patients who progressed to mild disease compared to patients who progressed to severe disease (p = 0·0044). Subjects with milder disease developed higher T cell responses for MHC class I and II-restricted peptides (p = 0·033).

INTERPRETATION

Mounting specific cellular immune responses in the first days after symptom onset, as inferred by IFN-γ magnitude in the ELISPOT assay, may efficiently favor a positive outcome. In contrast, progression to severe COVID-19 was accompanied by stronger cellular immune responses, higher CD4 + T cell activation, and a higher number of in silico predicted high-affinity class I HLA alleles.

Effect of drug therapies on self-reported chemosensory outcomes after COVID-19

Objective

The aim of this study was to assess the relative efficacy of medications used following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection on self-reported alterations in taste and/or smell function.

Methods

Seven hundred and fourteen persons with self-reported postcoronavirus disease 2019 (post-COVID-19) chemosensory disorders were personally interviewed regarding specific medications they were administered following the acute phase of the disease. The dependent measure-self-reported total recovery of chemosensory symptoms-was subjected to stepwise logistic regression. Independent predictors included demographic and clinical variables, in addition to specific medications used to mitigate disease symptoms (i.e., systemic corticosteroids, oseltamivir, vitamin C, ibuprofen, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, ivermectin, nitazoxanide, anticoagulants, and zinc).

Results

The median time between COVID-19 symptom onset and the interviews was 81 days (interquartile range: 60-104). Of the 714 subjects, 249 (34.9%) reported total recovery of their chemosensory function; 437 (61.2%) had at least one treatment since the beginning of the disease. Women and those with more comorbidities had undergone more treatments. The recovery rates of the treated and nontreated groups did not differ significantly. Nonetheless, respondents who had used nitazoxanide tended to have a higher rate of self-reported taste or smell recovery. Those who took oral zinc were less likely to improve.

Conclusions

No medication employed during the first months after SARS-CoV-2 infection had a clear positive effect on returning self-reported smell or taste function to normal, although nitrazoxide trended in a positive direction. Oral zinc had a negative effect on the reported recovery of these senses.

Why Certain Repurposed Drugs Are Unlikely to Be Effective Antivirals to Treat SARS-CoV-2 Infections

Most repurposed drugs have proved ineffective for treating COVID-19. We evaluated median effective and toxic concentrations (EC50, CC50) of 49 drugs, mostly from previous clinical trials, in Vero cells. Ratios of reported unbound peak plasma concentrations, (Cmax)/EC50, were used to predict the potential in vivo efficacy. The 20 drugs with the highest ratios were retested in human Calu-3 and Caco-2 cells, and their CC50 was determined in an expanded panel of cell lines. Many of the 20 drugs with the highest ratios were inactive in human Calu-3 and Caco-2 cells. Antivirals effective in controlled clinical trials had unbound Cmax/EC50 ≥ 6.8 in Calu-3 or Caco-2 cells. EC50 of nucleoside analogs were cell dependent. This approach and earlier availability of more relevant cultures could have reduced the number of unwarranted clinical trials.

Preclinical and Clinical Investigations of Potential Drugs and Vaccines for COVID-19 Therapy: A Comprehensive Review With Recent Update

The COVID-19 pandemic-led worldwide healthcare crisis necessitates prompt societal, ecological, and medical efforts to stop or reduce the rising number of fatalities. Numerous mRNA based vaccines and vaccines for viral vectors have been licensed for use in emergencies which showed 90% to 95% efficacy in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, safety issues, vaccine reluctance, and skepticism remain major concerns for making mass vaccination a successful approach to treat COVID-19. Hence, alternative therapeutics is needed for eradicating the global burden of COVID-19 from developed and low-resource countries. Repurposing current medications and drug candidates could be a more viable option for treating SARS-CoV-2 as these therapies have previously passed a number of significant checkpoints for drug development and patient care. Besides vaccines, this review focused on the potential usage of alternative therapeutic agents including antiviral, antiparasitic, and antibacterial drugs, protease inhibitors, neuraminidase inhibitors, and monoclonal antibodies that are currently undergoing preclinical and clinical investigations to assess their effectiveness and safety in the treatment of COVID-19. Among the repurposed drugs, remdesivir is considered as the most promising agent, while favipiravir, molnupiravir, paxlovid, and lopinavir/ritonavir exhibited improved therapeutic effects in terms of elimination of viruses. However, the outcomes of treatment with oseltamivir, umifenovir, disulfiram, teicoplanin, and ivermectin were not significant. It is noteworthy that combining multiple drugs as therapy showcases impressive effectiveness in managing individuals with COVID-19. Tocilizumab is presently employed for the treatment of patients who exhibit COVID-19-related pneumonia. Numerous antiviral drugs such as galidesivir, griffithsin, and thapsigargin are under clinical trials which could be promising for treating COVID-19 individuals with severe symptoms. Supportive treatment for patients of COVID-19 may involve the use of corticosteroids, convalescent plasma, stem cells, pooled antibodies, vitamins, and natural substances. This study provides an updated progress in SARS-CoV-2 medications and a crucial guide for inventing novel interventions against COVID-19.

An Update on SARS-CoV-2 Clinical Trial Results-What We Can Learn for the Next Pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has claimed over 7 million lives worldwide, providing a stark reminder of the importance of pandemic preparedness. Due to the lack of approved antiviral drugs effective against coronaviruses at the start of the pandemic, the world largely relied on repurposed efforts. Here, we summarise results from randomised controlled trials to date, as well as selected in vitro data of directly acting antivirals, host-targeting antivirals, and immunomodulatory drugs. Overall, repurposing efforts evaluating directly acting antivirals targeting other viral families were largely unsuccessful, whereas several immunomodulatory drugs led to clinical improvement in hospitalised patients with severe disease. In addition, accelerated drug discovery efforts during the pandemic progressed to multiple novel directly acting antivirals with clinical efficacy, including small molecule inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies. We argue that large-scale investment is required to prepare for future pandemics; both to develop an arsenal of broad-spectrum antivirals beyond coronaviruses and build worldwide clinical trial networks that can be rapidly utilised.

The African Kelleni's roadmap using nitazoxanide and broad-spectrum antimicrobials to abort returning to COVID-19 square one

For over 3.5 years, SARS CoV-2 is continuing to evolve threatening to return all and any improvement the world has made into square one. In this clinically oriented systematic review and perspective, the author explains how the best current medical evidence is strongly supporting the use of the low cost, widely available and very safe nitazoxanide in early management of COVID-19, debates the relevant theoretical studies that negated or doubted this benefit, and suggests an African roadmap to preempt the worst-case scenario if or when a new SARS CoV-2 (sub) variant or even a new respiratory virus causes a new global surge of morbidity and mortality. Kelleni's protocol, including nitazoxanide as an integral component, is continuing to perfectly save lives of patients infected with many viruses, including SARS CoV-2 and the author stresses that respiratory RNA viruses are best managed with early pharmacological treatment. Broad-spectrum antimicrobials as nitazoxanide and azithromycin together with other therapeutics as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and the antihistaminic loratadine should be considered first to personalize the clinical management of COVID-19 and selected other alarming viral infections.

Antiviral activity of nitazoxanide against Morbillivirus infections

The measles virus (MeV) and canine distemper virus (CDV) belong to the genus Morbillivirus of the Paramyxoviridae family. They are enveloped viruses harboring a non-segmented negative-sense RNA. Morbilliviruses are extremely contagious and transmitted through infectious aerosol droplets. Both MeV and CDV may cause respiratory infections and fatal encephalitis, although a high incidence of brain infections is unique to CDV. Despite the availability of a safe and effective vaccine against these viruses, in recent years we are witnessing a strong resurgence of Morbillivirus infection. Measles still kills more than 100,000 people each year, and CDV causes widespread outbreaks, especially among wild animals, including non-human primates. No drugs are currently approved for MeV and CDV. Therefore, the identification of effective antiviral agents represents an unmet medical need. Here, we have investigated the potential antiviral properties of nitazoxanide (NTZ) against MeV and CDV. Antiviral activity was explored with live virus and cell-based assays. NTZ is a thiazolide that is approved by the FDA as an antiprotozoal agent for the treatment of Giardia intestinalis and Cryptosporidium parvum. Further, nitazoxanide and its metabolite tizoxanide have recently emerged as broad-spectrum antiviral agents. We found that NTZ blocks the MeV and CDV replication, acting at the post-entry level. Moreover, we showed that NTZ affects the function of the viral fusion protein (F), impairing viral spread. Our results indicate that NTZ should be further explored as a therapeutic option in measles and canine distemper virus treatment.

Does haste make waste? Prevalence and types of errors reported after publication of studies of COVID-19 therapeutics

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic spurred publication of a rapid proliferation of studies on potential therapeutic agents. While important for the advancement of clinical care, pressure to collect, analyze, and report data in an expedited manner could potentially increase the rate of important errors, some of which would be captured in published errata. We hypothesized that COVID-19 therapeutic studies published in the early years of the pandemic would be associated with a high rate of published errata and that, within these errata, there would be a high prevalence of serious errors.

METHODS

We performed a review of published errata associated with empirical studies of COVID-19 treatments. Errata were identified via a MEDLINE and Embase search spanning January 2020 through September 2022. Errors located within each published erratum were characterized by location within publication, error type, and error seriousness.

RESULTS

Of 47 studies on COVID-19 treatments with published errata, 18 met inclusion criteria. Median time from publication of the original article to publication of the associated erratum was 76 days (range, 12-511 days). A majority of errata addressed issues with author attribution or conflict of interest disclosures (39.5%) or numerical results (25.6%). Only one erratum contained a serious error: a typographical error which could have misled readers into believing that the treatment in question had serious adverse effects when in fact it did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite accelerated publication times, we found among studies of COVID-19 treatments the majority of errata (17/18) reported minor errors that did not lead to misinterpretation of the study results. Retractions, an indicator of scientific misdirection even more concerning than errata, were beyond the scope of this review.

Can Nitazoxanide and/or other anti-viral medications be a solution to long COVID? Case report with a brief literature review

Key Clinical Message

Findings here imply lingering of virus, SARS-CoV-2, in the body for months. Thus, Nitazoxanide and/or other anti-viral medications might be potential options to combat long COVID. This could transform treatment for long COVID patients globally.

Abstract

Long COVID or post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) continues to affect many people even after a relatively mild acute illness. Underlying causes of PASC are poorly understood. There is no particular treatment or management program developed yet. Thus, the possibility of well-known, safe anti-viral medications use against PASC is proposed here.

What are the current anti-COVID-19 drugs? From traditional to smart molecular mechanisms

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, a highly infectious member of the coronavirus family, which emerged in December 2019 in "Wuhan, China". It induces respiratory illness ranging from mild symptoms to severe disease. It was declared a "pandemic" by the World Health Organization (WHO) in March 2020. Since then, a vast number of clinical and experimental studies have been conducted to identify effective approaches for its prevention and treatment.

MAIN BODY

The pathophysiology of COVID-19 represents an unprecedented challenge; it triggers a strong immune response, which may be exacerbated by "a cytokine storm syndrome". It also induces thrombogenesis and may trigger multi-organ injury. Therefore, different drug classes have been proposed for its treatment and prevention, such as antivirals, anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody agents (monoclonal antibodies, convalescent plasma, and immunoglobulins), anti-inflammatory drugs, immunomodulators, and anticoagulant drugs. To the best of our knowledge, this review is the first to present, discuss, and summarize the current knowledge about the different drug classes used for the treatment of COVID-19, with special emphasis on their targets, mechanisms of action, and important adverse effects and drug interactions. Additionally, we spotlight the latest "October 2023" important guidelines (NIH, IDSA, and NICE) and FDA approval or authorization regarding the use of these agents in the management of COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Despite the wide array of therapeutic strategies introduced for the treatment of COVID-19, one of the most prominent therapeutic challenges is SARS-CoV-2 mutations and emerging new variants and subvariants. Currently, the anti-COVID-19 drug pipeline is continuously affording novel treatments to face this growing challenge.

The FDA-approved drug nitazoxanide is a potent inhibitor of human seasonal coronaviruses acting at postentry level: effect on the viral spike glycoprotein

Coronaviridae is recognized as one of the most rapidly evolving virus family as a consequence of the high genomic nucleotide substitution rates and recombination. The family comprises a large number of enveloped, positive-sense single-stranded RNA viruses, causing an array of diseases of varying severity in animals and humans. To date, seven human coronaviruses (HCoV) have been identified, namely HCoV-229E, HCoV-NL63, HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1, which are globally circulating in the human population (seasonal HCoV, sHCoV), and the highly pathogenic SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. Seasonal HCoV are estimated to contribute to 15-30% of common cold cases in humans; although diseases are generally self-limiting, sHCoV can sometimes cause severe lower respiratory infections and life-threatening diseases in a subset of patients. No specific treatment is presently available for sHCoV infections. Herein we show that the anti-infective drug nitazoxanide has a potent antiviral activity against three human endemic coronaviruses, the Alpha-coronaviruses HCoV-229E and HCoV-NL63, and the Beta-coronavirus HCoV-OC43 in cell culture with IC50 ranging between 0.05 and 0.15 μg/mL and high selectivity indexes. We found that nitazoxanide does not affect HCoV adsorption, entry or uncoating, but acts at postentry level and interferes with the spike glycoprotein maturation, hampering its terminal glycosylation at an endoglycosidase H-sensitive stage. Altogether the results indicate that nitazoxanide, due to its broad-spectrum anti-coronavirus activity, may represent a readily available useful tool in the treatment of seasonal coronavirus infections.

Plant-Waste-Derived Sorbents for Nitazoxanide Adsorption

The increased application of drugs during the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in their increased concentration in wastewater. Conventional wastewater treatment plants do not remove such pollutants effectively. Adsorption is a cheap, effective, and environmentally friendly method that can accomplish this. On the other hand, maintaining organic waste is required. Thus, in this study, plant waste-derived pelletized biochar obtained from different feedstock and pyrolyzed at 600 °C was applied for the adsorption of nitazoxanide, an antiparasitic drug used for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2. The adsorption was fast and enables one to remove the drug in one hour. The highest adsorption capacity was noted for biochar obtained from biogas production (14 mg/g). The process of NTZ adsorption was governed by chemisorption (k2 = 0.2371 g/mg min). The presence of inorganic ions had a detrimental effect on adsorption (Cl-, NO3- in 20-30%) and carbonates were the most effective in hindering the process (60%). The environmentally relevant concentration of DOM (10 mg/L) did not affect the process. The model studies were supported by the results with a real wastewater effluent (15% reduction). Depending on the applied feedstock, various models described nitazoxanide adsorption onto tested biochars. In summary, the application of carbonaceous adsorbents in the pelletized form is effective in nitazoxanide adsorption.

Clinically Evaluated COVID-19 Drugs with Therapeutic Potential for Biological Warfare Agents

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak resulted in hundreds of millions of coronavirus cases, as well as millions of deaths worldwide. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), the disease resulting from exposure to this pathogen, is characterized, among other features, by a pulmonary pathology, which can progress to "cytokine storm", acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), respiratory failure and death. Vaccines are the unsurpassed strategy for prevention and protection against the SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, there is still an extremely high number of severely ill people from at-risk populations. This may be attributed to waning immune response, variant-induced breakthrough infections, unvaccinated population, etc. It is therefore of high importance to utilize pharmacological-based treatments, despite the progression of the global vaccination campaign. Until the approval of Paxlovid, an efficient and highly selective anti-SARS-CoV-2 drug, and the broad-spectrum antiviral agent Lagevrio, many pharmacological-based countermeasures were, and still are, being evaluated in clinical trials. Some of these are host-directed therapies (HDTs), which modulate the endogenic response against the virus, and therefore may confer efficient protection against a wide array of pathogens. These could potentially include Biological Warfare Agents (BWAs), exposure to which may lead to mass casualties due to disease severity and a possible lack of efficient treatment. In this review, we assessed the recent literature on drugs under advanced clinical evaluation for COVID-19 with broad spectrum activity, including antiviral agents and HDTs, which may be relevant for future coping with BWAs, as well as with other agents, in particular respiratory infections.

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.

Preparing for the next viral threat with broad-spectrum antivirals

There is a large global unmet need for the development of countermeasures to combat hundreds of viruses known to cause human disease and for the establishment of a therapeutic portfolio for future pandemic preparedness. Most approved antiviral therapeutics target proteins encoded by a single virus, providing a narrow spectrum of coverage. This, combined with the slow pace and high cost of drug development, limits the scalability of this direct-acting antiviral (DAA) approach. Here, we summarize progress and challenges in the development of broad-spectrum antivirals that target either viral elements (proteins, genome structures, and lipid envelopes) or cellular proviral factors co-opted by multiple viruses via newly discovered compounds or repurposing of approved drugs. These strategies offer new means for developing therapeutics against both existing and emerging viral threats that complement DAAs.

Protein structure-based in-silico approaches to drug discovery: Guide to COVID-19 therapeutics

With more than 5 million fatalities and close to 300 million reported cases, COVID-19 is the first documented pandemic due to a coronavirus that continues to be a major health challenge. Despite being rapid, uncontrollable, and highly infectious in its spread, it also created incentives for technology development and redefined public health needs and research agendas to fast-track innovations to be translated. Breakthroughs in computational biology peaked during the pandemic with renewed attention to making all cutting-edge technology deliver agents to combat the disease. The demand to develop effective treatments yielded surprising collaborations from previously segregated fields of science and technology. The long-standing pharmaceutical industry's aversion to repurposing existing drugs due to a lack of exponential financial gain was overrun by the health crisis and pressures created by front-line researchers and providers. Effective vaccine development even at an unprecedented pace took more than a year to develop and commence trials. Now the emergence of variants and waning protections during the booster shots is resulting in breakthrough infections that continue to strain health care systems. As of now, every protein of SARS-CoV-2 has been structurally characterized and related host pathways have been extensively mapped out. The research community has addressed the druggability of a multitude of possible targets. This has been made possible due to existing technology for virtual computer-assisted drug development as well as new tools and technologies such as artificial intelligence to deliver new leads. Here in this article, we are discussing advances in the drug discovery field related to target-based drug discovery and exploring the implications of known target-specific agents on COVID-19 therapeutic management. The current scenario calls for more personalized medicine efforts and stratifying patient populations early on for their need for different combinations of prognosis-specific therapeutics. We intend to highlight target hotspots and their potential agents, with the ultimate goal of using rational design of new therapeutics to not only end this pandemic but also uncover a generalizable platform for use in future pandemics.

Small molecules in the treatment of COVID-19

The outbreak of COVID-19 has become a global crisis, and brought severe disruptions to societies and economies. Until now, effective therapeutics against COVID-19 are in high demand. Along with our improved understanding of the structure, function, and pathogenic process of SARS-CoV-2, many small molecules with potential anti-COVID-19 effects have been developed. So far, several antiviral strategies were explored. Besides directly inhibition of viral proteins such as RdRp and M^pro, interference of host enzymes including ACE2 and proteases, and blocking relevant immunoregulatory pathways represented by JAK/STAT, BTK, NF-κB, and NLRP3 pathways, are regarded feasible in drug development. The development of small molecules to treat COVID-19 has been achieved by several strategies, including computer-aided lead compound design and screening, natural product discovery, drug repurposing, and combination therapy. Several small molecules representative by remdesivir and paxlovid have been proved or authorized emergency use in many countries. And many candidates have entered clinical-trial stage. Nevertheless, due to the epidemiological features and variability issues of SARS-CoV-2, it is necessary to continue exploring novel strategies against COVID-19. This review discusses the current findings in the development of small molecules for COVID-19 treatment. Moreover, their detailed mechanism of action, chemical structures, and preclinical and clinical efficacies are discussed.

The Effect of Nitazoxanide on the Clinical Outcomes in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Nitazoxanide, a US Food and Drug Administration-approved antiparasitic agent, was reported to be effective in treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The lack of effective and precise treatments for COVID-19 infection earlier in the pandemic forced us to depend on symptomatic, empirical, and supportive therapy, which overburdened intensive care units and exhausted hospital resources. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was  to assess the efficacy and safety of nitazoxanide for COVID-19 treatment.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing relevant randomized controlled trials from six databases (MedRxiv, WOS, SCOPUS, EMBASE, PubMed, and CENTRAL) until 17 May 2022 was conducted. Risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes was used and data with a 95% confidence interval (CI) are presented. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42022334658.

RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials with 1412 patients were included in the analysis. Nitazoxanide was effective in accelerating viral clearance compared with placebo (RR: 1.30 with 95% CI 1.08, 1.56, p = 0.006) and reducing oxygen requirements (RR: 0.48 with 95% CI 0.39, 0.59, p = 0.00001), but we found no difference between nitazoxanide and placebo in improving clinical resolution (RR: 1.01 with 95% CI 0.94, 1.08, p = 0.88), reducing the mortality rate (RR: 0.88 with 95% CI 0.4, 1.91, p = 0.74), and intensive care unit admission (RR: 0.69 with 95% CI 0.43, 1.13, p = 0.14). Moreover, nitazoxanide was as safe as placebo (RR: 0.9 with 95% CI 0.72, 1.12, p = 0.34).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebo, nitazoxanide was effective in expediting viral clearance and decreasing oxygen requirements. However, there was no difference between nitazoxanide and placebo regarding clinical response, all-cause mortality, and intensive care unit admission. Therefore, more large-scale studies are still needed to ascertain the clinical applicability of nitazoxanide in COVID-19.

Repurposing of Chemotherapeutics to Combat COVID-19

Severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel strain of SARS coronavirus. The COVID-19 disease caused by this virus was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). SARS-CoV-2 mainly spreads through droplets sprayed by coughs or sneezes of the infected to a healthy person within the vicinity of 6 feet. It also spreads through asymptomatic carriers and has negative impact on the global economy, security and lives of people since 2019. Numerous lives have been lost to this viral infection; hence there is an emergency to build up a potent measure to combat SARS-CoV-2. In view of the non-availability of any drugs or vaccines at the time of its eruption, the existing antivirals, antibacterials, antimalarials, mucolytic agents and antipyretic paracetamol were used to treat the COVID-19 patients. Still there are no specific small molecule chemotherapeutics available to combat COVID-19 except for a few vaccines approved for emergency use only. Thus, the repurposing of chemotherapeutics with the potential to treat COVID-19 infected people is being used. The antiviral activity for COVID-19 and biochemical mechanisms of the repurposed drugs are being explored by the biological assay screening and structure-based in silico docking simulations. The present study describes the various US-FDA approved chemotherapeutics repositioned to combat COVID-19 along with their screening for biological activity, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation.

Clinical outcomes, virological efficacy and safety of nitazoxanide in the treatment of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

This study investigated the clinical outcomes, virological efficacy and safety of nitazoxanide in the treatment of patients with COVID-19.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for relevant articles written before August 23, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the usefulness and safety of nitazoxanide in patients with COVID-19 were included.

RESULTS

Five RCTs were included. The overall mortality of COVID-19 patients receiving nitazoxanide (study group) was 1.3% (9/670), which was lower than the control group (1.8%, 12/681), but this difference did not reach statistical significance (risk difference [RD], 0.00; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.01; P =0.97). However, nitazoxanide was associated with a higher virological eradication rate than placebo or standard care (RD, 0.09; 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.17; P = 0.03). Compared with the placebo or standard care, nitazoxanide were associated with a similar risk of any adverse event (RD, -0.02; 95% CI: -0.07 to 0.03; P = 0.44).

CONCLUSIONS

Although nitazoxanide can help virological eradication and is also tolerable, it does not provide additional clinical benefits. Based on these evidences, the use of nitazoxanide in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 is not recommended.

Impact of COVID-19 on the liver and on the care of patients with chronic liver disease, hepatobiliary cancer, and liver transplantation: An updated EASL position paper

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented a serious challenge to the hepatology community, particularly healthcare professionals and patients. While the rapid development of safe and effective vaccines and treatments has improved the clinical landscape, the emergence of the omicron variant has presented new challenges. Thus, it is timely that the European Association for the Study of the Liver provides a summary of the latest data on the impact of COVID-19 on the liver and issues guidance on the care of patients with chronic liver disease, hepatobiliary cancer, and previous liver transplantation, as the world continues to deal with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Efficacy and safety of nitazoxanide in treating SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials

Purpose

Nitazoxanide is a broad-spectrum antiparasitic that has been tested for COVID-19 due to its anti-inflammatory effects and in vitro antiviral activity. This study synthesized the best evidence on the efficacy and safety of nitazoxanide in COVID-19.

Methods

Searches for studies were performed in peer-reviewed and grey-literature from January 1, 2020 to May 23, 2022. The following elements were used to define eligibility criteria: (1) Population: individuals with COVID-19; (2) Intervention: nitazoxanide; (3) Comparison: placebo; (4) Outcomes: primary outcome was death, and secondary outcomes were viral load, positive RT-PCR status, serum biomarkers of inflammation, composite measure of disease progression (ICU admission or invasive mechanical ventilation), and any adverse events; (5) Study type: blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Treatment effects were reported as relative risk (RR) for dichotomous variables and standardized mean difference (SMD) for continuous variables with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results

Five blinded, placebo-controlled RCTs were included and enrolled individuals with mild or moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection. We found no difference between nitazoxanide and placebo in reducing viral load (SMD =  − 0.16; 95% CI − 0.38 to 0.05) and the frequency of positive RTP-PCR results (RR = 0.92; 95% CI 0.81 to 1.06). In addition, there was no decreased risk for disease progression (RR = 0.63; 95% CI 0.38 to 1.04) and death (RR = 0.81; 95% CI 0.36 to 1.78) among patients receiving nitazoxanide. Patients with COVID-19 treated with nitazoxanide had decreased levels of white blood cells (SMD =  − 0.15; 95% − 0.29 to − 0.02), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (SMD − 0.32; 95% − 0.52 to − 0.13), and D-dimer (SMD − 0.49; 95% CI − 0.68 to − 0.31) compared to placebo, but the magnitude of effect was considered small to moderate.

Conclusion

This systematic review showed no evidence of clinical benefits of the use of nitazoxanide to treat patients with mild or moderate COVID-19. In addition, we found a reduction in WBC, LDH, and D-dimer levels among nitazoxanide-treated patients, but the effect size was considered small to moderate.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00228-022-03380-5.

Failed clinical trials on COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome in hospitalized patients: common oversights and streamlining the development of clinically effective therapeutics

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put a strain on global healthcare systems. Despite admirable efforts to develop rapidly new pharmacotherapies, supportive treatments remain the standard of care. Multiple clinical trials have failed due to design issues, biased patient enrollment, small sample sizes, inadequate control groups, and lack of long-term outcomes monitoring.

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review depicts the current situation around failed and success COVID-19 clinical trials and recommendations in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, oversights and streamlining of clinically effective therapeutics. PubMed, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, and WHO and NIH guidelines were searched for relevant literature up to 5 August 2022.

EXPERT OPINION

The WHO, NIH, and IDSA have issued recommendations to better clarify which drugs should be used during the different phases of the disease. Given the biases and high heterogeneity of published studies, interpretation of the current literature is difficult. Future clinical trials should be designed to standardize clinical approaches, with appropriate organization, patient selection, addition of control groups, and careful identification of disease phase to reduce heterogeneity and bias and should rely on the integration of scientific societies to promote a consensus on interpretation of the data and recommendations for optimal COVID-19 therapies.

Randomized clinical trial of nitazoxanide or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection

BACKGROUND

The COVER trial evaluated whether nitazoxanide or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir could lower the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nitazoxanide was selected given its favourable pharmacokinetics and in vitro antiviral effects against SARS-CoV-2. Sofosbuvir/daclatasvir had shown favourable results in early clinical trials.

METHODS

In this clinical trial in Johannesburg, South Africa, healthcare workers and others at high risk of infection were randomized to 24 weeks of either nitazoxanide or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir as prevention, or standard prevention advice only. Participants were evaluated every 4 weeks for COVID-19 symptoms and had antibody and PCR testing. The primary endpoint was positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR and/or serology ≥7 days after randomization, regardless of symptoms. A Poisson regression model was used to estimate the incidence rate ratios of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 between each experimental arm and control.

RESULTS

Between December 2020 and January 2022, 828 participants were enrolled. COVID-19 infections were confirmed in 100 participants on nitazoxanide (2234 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI 1837-2718), 87 on sofosbuvir/daclatasvir (2125 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI 1722-2622) and 111 in the control arm (1849 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI 1535-2227). There were no significant differences in the primary endpoint between the treatment arms, and the results met the criteria for futility. In the safety analysis, the frequency of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was low and similar across arms.

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomized trial, nitazoxanide and sofosbuvir/daclatasvir had no significant preventative effect on infection with SARS-CoV-2 among healthcare workers and others at high risk of infection.

Pre-clinical evaluation of antiviral activity of nitazoxanide against SARS-CoV-2

Background

To address the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, multiple clinical trials in humans were rapidly started, including those involving an oral treatment by nitazoxanide, despite no or limited pre-clinical evidence of antiviral efficacy.

Methods

In this work, we present a complete pre-clinical evaluation of the antiviral activity of nitazoxanide against SARS-CoV-2.

Findings

First, we confirmed the in vitro efficacy of nitazoxanide and tizoxanide (its active metabolite) against SARS-CoV-2. Then, we demonstrated nitazoxanide activity in a reconstructed bronchial human airway epithelium model. In a SARS-CoV-2 virus challenge model in hamsters, oral and intranasal treatment with nitazoxanide failed to impair viral replication in commonly affected organs. We hypothesized that this could be due to insufficient diffusion of the drug into organs of interest. Indeed, our pharmacokinetic study confirmed that concentrations of tizoxanide in organs of interest were always below the in vitro EC₅₀.

Interpretation

These preclinical results suggest, if directly applicable to humans, that the standard formulation and dosage of nitazoxanide is not effective in providing antiviral therapy for Covid-19.

Funding

This work was supported by the Fondation de France “call FLASH COVID-19”, project TAMAC, by “Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale” through the REACTing (REsearch and ACTion targeting emerging infectious diseases), by REACTING/ANRS MIE under the agreement No. 21180 (‘Activité des molécules antivirales dans le modèle hamster’), by European Virus Archive Global (EVA 213 GLOBAL) funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No. 871029 and DNDi under support by the Wellcome Trust Grant ref: 222489/Z/21/Z through the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator”.

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.

Nitazoxanide in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Multicentre, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Background

Nitazoxanide exerts antiviral activity in vitro and in vivo and anti-inflammatory effects, but its impact on patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia is uncertain.

Methods

A multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in 19 hospitals in Brazil. Hospitalized adult patients requiring supplemental oxygen, with COVID-19 symptoms and a chest computed tomography scan suggestive of viral pneumonia or positive RT-PCR test for COVID-19 were enrolled. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive nitazoxanide (500 mg) or placebo, 3 times daily, for 5 days, and were followed for 14 days. The primary outcome was intensive care unit admission due to the need for invasive mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes included clinical improvement, hospital discharge, oxygen requirements, death, and adverse events within 14 days.

Results

Of the 498 patients, 405 (202 in the nitazoxanide group and 203 in the placebo group) were included in the analyses. Admission to the intensive care unit did not differ between the groups (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval], 0.68 [0.38–1.20], p = 0.179); death rates also did not differ. Nitazoxanide improved the clinical outcome (2.75 [2.21–3.43], p < 0.0001), time to hospital discharge (1.37 [1.11–1.71], p = 0.005), and reduced oxygen requirements (0.77 [0.64–0.94], p = 0.011). C-reactive protein, D-dimer, and ferritin levels were lower in the nitazoxanide group than the placebo group on day 7. No serious adverse events were observed.

Conclusions

Nitazoxanide, compared with placebo, did not prevent admission to the intensive care unit for patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Clinical Trial Registration

Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (REBEC) RBR88bs9x; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04561219.

Impairment of SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein maturation and fusion activity by nitazoxanide: an effect independent of spike variants emergence

SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19, has caused an unprecedented global health crisis. The SARS-CoV-2 spike, a surface-anchored trimeric class-I fusion glycoprotein essential for viral entry, represents a key target for developing vaccines and therapeutics capable of blocking virus invasion. The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 spike variants that facilitate virus spread and may affect vaccine efficacy highlights the need to identify novel antiviral strategies for COVID-19 therapy. Here, we demonstrate that nitazoxanide, an antiprotozoal agent with recognized broad-spectrum antiviral activity, interferes with SARS-CoV-2 spike maturation, hampering its terminal glycosylation at an endoglycosidase H-sensitive stage. Engineering multiple SARS-CoV-2 variant-pseudoviruses and utilizing quantitative cell–cell fusion assays, we show that nitazoxanide-induced spike modifications hinder progeny virion infectivity as well as spike-driven pulmonary cell–cell fusion, a critical feature of COVID-19 pathology. Nitazoxanide, being equally effective against the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan-spike and different emerging variants, including the Delta variant of concern, may represent a useful tool in the fight against COVID-19 infections.

Can anti-parasitic drugs help control COVID-19?

Novel COVID-19 is a public health emergency that poses a serious threat to people worldwide. Given the virus spreading so quickly, novel antiviral medications are desperately needed. Repurposing existing drugs is the first strategy. Anti-parasitic drugs were among the first to be considered as a potential treatment option for this disease. Even though many papers have discussed the efficacy of various anti-parasitic drugs in treating COVID-19 separately, so far, no single study comprehensively discussed these drugs. This study reviews some anti-parasitic recommended drugs to treat COVID-19, in terms of function and in vitro as well as clinical results. Finally, we briefly review the advanced techniques, such as artificial intelligence, that have been used to find effective drugs for the treatment of COVID-19.

An Open Label, Adaptive, Phase 1 Trial of High-Dose Oral Nitazoxanide in Healthy Volunteers: An Antiviral Candidate for SARS-CoV-2

Repurposing approved drugs may rapidly establish effective interventions during a public health crisis. This has yielded immunomodulatory treatments for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but repurposed antivirals have not been successful to date because of redundancy of the target in vivo or suboptimal exposures at studied doses. Nitazoxanide is a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved antiparasitic medicine, that physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling has indicated may provide antiviral concentrations across the dosing interval, when repurposed at higher than approved doses. Within the AGILE trial platform (NCT04746183) an open label, adaptive, phase I trial in healthy adult participants was undertaken with high-dose nitazoxanide. Participants received 1,500 mg nitazoxanide orally twice-daily with food for 7 days. Primary outcomes were safety, tolerability, optimum dose, and schedule. Intensive pharmacokinetic (PK) sampling was undertaken day 1 and 5 with minimum concentration (Cmin ) sampling on days 3 and 7. Fourteen healthy participants were enrolled between February 18 and May 11, 2021. All 14 doses were completed by 10 of 14 participants. Nitazoxanide was safe and with no significant adverse events. Moderate gastrointestinal disturbance (loose stools or diarrhea) occurred in 8 participants (57.1%), with urine and sclera discoloration in 12 (85.7%) and 9 (64.3%) participants, respectively, without clinically significant bilirubin elevation. This was self-limiting and resolved upon drug discontinuation. PBPK predictions were confirmed on day 1 but with underprediction at day 5. Median Cmin was above the in vitro target concentration on the first dose and maintained throughout. Nitazoxanide administered at 1,500 mg b.i.d. with food was safe with acceptable tolerability a phase Ib/IIa study is now being initiated in patients with COVID-19.

A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial of nitazoxanide for treatment of mild or moderate COVID-19

BACKGROUND

There is an urgent need for treatments of mild or moderate COVID-19 in an outpatient setting.

METHODS

A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial in 36 centers in the U.S. between August 2020 and February 2021 investigated the safety and effectiveness of oral nitazoxanide 600 mg twice daily for five days in outpatients with symptoms of mild or moderate COVID-19 enrolled within 72 h of symptom onset (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04486313). Efficacy endpoints were time to sustained clinical recovery (TSR, a novel primary endpoint) and proportion of participants progressing to severe illness within 28 days (key secondary).

FINDINGS

1092 participants were enrolled. 379 with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were analyzed. In the primary analysis, median (IQR) TSR were 13·3 (6·3, >21) and 12·4 (7·2, >21) days for the nitazoxanide and placebo groups, respectively (p = 0·88). 1 of 184 (0·5%) treated with nitazoxanide progressed to severe illness compared to 7 of 195 (3·6%) treated with placebo (key secondary analysis, odds ratio 5·6 [95% CI 0·7 - 46·1], relative risk reduction 85%, p = 0·07). In the pre-defined stratum with mild illness at baseline, nitazoxanide-treated participants experienced reductions in median TSR (3·1 days, p = 0·09) and usual health (5·2 days, p < 0·01) compared to placebo. Nitazoxanide was safe and well tolerated.

INTERPRETATION

Further trials with larger numbers are warranted to evaluate efficacy of nitazoxanide therapy in preventing progression to severe illness in patients at high risk of severe illness and reducing TSR in patients with mild illness.

Significance of Immune Status of SARS-CoV-2 Infected Patients in Determining the Efficacy of Therapeutic Interventions

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is now being investigated for its distinctive patterns in the course of disease development which can be indicated with miscellaneous immune responses in infected individuals. Besides this series of investigations on the pathophysiology of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), significant fundamental immunological and physiological processes are indispensable to address clinical markers of COVID-19 disease and essential to identify or design effective therapeutics. Recent developments in the literature suggest that deficiency of type I interferon (IFN) in serum samples can be used to represent a severe progression of COVID-19 disease and can be used as the basis to develop combined immunotherapeutic strategies. Precise control over inflammatory response is a significant aspect of targeting viral infections. This account presents a brief review of the pathophysiological characteristics of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the understanding of the immune status of infected patients. We further discuss the immune system’s interaction with the SARS-CoV-2 virus and their subsequent involvement of dysfunctional immune responses during the progression of the disease. Finally, we highlight some of the implications of the different approaches applicable in developing promising therapeutic interventions that redirect immunoregulation and viral infection.

Mechanism of Action of Small-Molecule Agents in Ongoing Clinical Trials for SARS-CoV-2: A Review

Since the first reports from December 2019, COVID-19 caused an overwhelming global pandemic that has affected 223 countries, seriously endangering public health and creating an urgent need for effective drugs to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection. Currently, there is a lack of safe, effective, and specific therapeutic drugs for COVID-19, with mainly supportive and symptomatic treatments being administered to patients. The preferred option for responding to an outbreak of acute infectious disease is through drug repurposing, saving valuable time that would otherwise be lost in preclinical and clinical research, hastening clinical introduction, and lowering treatment costs. Alternatively, researchers seek to design and discover novel small-molecule candidate drugs targeting the key proteins in the life cycle of SARS-CoV-2 through an in-depth study of the infection mechanism, thus obtaining a number of candidate compounds with favorable antiviral effects in preclinical and clinical settings. There is an urgent need to further elucidate the efficacy and mechanism of action of potential anti-SARS-CoV-2 small-molecule drugs. Herein, we review the candidate small-molecule anti-SARS-CoV-2 drugs in ongoing clinical trials, with a major focus on their mechanisms of action in an attempt to provide useful insight for further research and development of small-molecule compounds against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The oral drug nitazoxanide restricts SARS-CoV-2 infection and attenuates disease pathogenesis in Syrian hamsters

A well-tolerated and cost-effective oral drug that blocks SARS-CoV-2 growth and dissemination would be a major advance in the global effort to reduce COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. Here, we show that the oral FDA-approved drug nitazoxanide (NTZ) significantly inhibits SARS-CoV-2 viral replication and infection in different primate and human cell models including stem cell-derived human alveolar epithelial type 2 cells. Furthermore, NTZ synergizes with remdesivir, and it broadly inhibits growth of SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.351 (beta), P.1 (gamma), and B.1617.2 (delta) and viral syncytia formation driven by their spike proteins. Strikingly, oral NTZ treatment of Syrian hamsters significantly inhibits SARS-CoV-2-driven weight loss, inflammation, and viral dissemination and syncytia formation in the lungs. These studies show that NTZ is a novel host-directed therapeutic that broadly inhibits SARS-CoV-2 dissemination and pathogenesis in human and hamster physiological models, which supports further testing and optimization of NTZ-based therapy for SARS-CoV-2 infection alone and in combination with antiviral drugs.

NSAIDs and Kelleni's protocol as potential early COVID-19 treatment game changer: could it be the final countdown?

We have previously published several papers illustrating numerous immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory potential benefits when we repurposed safe, generic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)/nitazoxanide/azithromycin (Kelleni's protocol), to early manage our COVID-19 pediatric, adult, and pregnant patients. In this manuscript, we discuss some recently published meta-analysis and clinical studies supporting our practice and discuss a molecular study that might be interpreted as an academic proof that our protocol might also prevent SARS-CoV-2 replication. Moreover, after aspirin has been suggested to be independently associated with reduced risk of mechanical ventilation, ICU admission and in-hospital mortality of COVID-19, we claim that the molecular interpretation of the results that led to this suggestion was not scientifically accurate, and we provide our academic interpretation confirming that low-dose aspirin is least likely to improve COVID-19 mortality through anticoagulation as was suggested. Furthermore, we describe other potential benefits related to aspirin-triggered lipoxins and resolvins while illustrating how NSAIDs interfere with COX-1, COX-2, SARS-CoV-2/ SARS-CoV-2 ORF protein-dependent activation of caspases and their subsequent mitochondrial dysfunction, endoplasmic reticulum stress, apoptosis and necroptosis which were associated with COVID-19 complications. Similarly, NSAIDs are known caspase inhibitors and thus they might independently inhibit other caspase-related COVID-19-associated downstream pathological signaling mechanisms. Finally, we postulated that CARD-14, a caspase recruitment domain-containing protein, polymorphisms might play a role in the development of severe and critical COVID-19 and confirmed our old call to early adopt NSAIDs, as an integral part of Kelleni's protocol, as of choice in its management aiming to end this pandemic.

Potential therapeutic options for COVID-19: an update on current evidence

SARS-CoV-2, a novel coronavirus, is the agent responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic and is a major public health concern nowadays. The rapid and global spread of this coronavirus leads to an increase in hospitalizations and thousands of deaths in many countries. To date, great efforts have been made worldwide for the efficient management of this crisis, but there is still no effective and specific treatment for COVID-19. The primary therapies to treat the disease are antivirals, anti-inflammatories and respiratory therapy. In addition, antibody therapies currently have been a many active and essential part of SARS-CoV-2 infection treatment. Ongoing trials are proposed different therapeutic options including various drugs, convalescent plasma therapy, monoclonal antibodies, immunoglobulin therapy, and cell therapy. The present study summarized current evidence of these therapeutic approaches to assess their efficacy and safety for COVID-19 treatment. We tried to provide comprehensive information about the available potential therapeutic approaches against COVID-19 to support researchers and physicians in any current and future progress in treating COVID-19 patients.

Broad-spectrum prodrugs with anti-SARS-CoV-2 activities: Strategies, benefits, and challenges

In this era, broad-spectrum prodrugs with anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) activities are gaining considerable attention owing to their potential clinical benefits and role in combating the fast-spreading coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The last 2 years have seen a surge of reports on various broad-spectrum prodrugs against SARS-CoV-2, and in in vitro studies, animal models, and clinical practice. Currently, only remdesivir (with many controversies and limitations) has been approved by the U.S. FDA for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and additional potent anti-SARS-CoV-2 drugs are urgently required to enrich the defense arsenals. The world has ubiquitously grappled with the COVID-19 pandemic, and the availability of broad-spectrum prodrugs provides great hope for us to subdue this global threat. This article reviews promising treatment strategies, antiviral mechanisms, potential benefits, and daunting clinical challenges of anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents to provide some important guidance for future clinical treatment.

Final Results of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Two-Arm, Parallel Clinical Trial of Proxalutamide for Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Multiregional, Joint Analysis of the Proxa-Rescue AndroCoV Trial

Background The role of androgens on COVID-19 is well established. Proxalutamide is a second-generation, non-steroidal antiandrogen (NSAA) with the highest antiandrogen potency among NSAAs and concurrent regulation of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) expression and inflammatory response. Proxalutamide has been demonstrated to be effective to prevent hospitalizations in early COVID-19 in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Conversely, in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, preliminary results from two different arms of an RCT (The Proxa-Rescue AndroCoV Trial) also demonstrated a reduction in all-cause mortality. This study aims to report the final, joint results of the two arms (North arm and South arm) of the Proxa-Rescue AndroCoV trial of the two arms (North and South arms) combined, and to evaluate whether COVID-19 response to proxalutamide was consistent across different regions (Northern Brazil and Southern Brazil). Materials and methods Upon randomization, hospitalized COVID-19 patients received either proxalutamide 300mg/day or placebo for 14 days, in addition to usual care, in a proxalutamide:placebo ratio of 1:1 in the North arm and 4:1 in the South arm (ratio was modified due to preliminary report of high drug efficacy). Datasets of the South and North arms were combined, and statistical analysis was performed for the overall study population. Proxalutamide was compared to placebo group for 14-day and 28-day recovery (discharge alive from the hospital) and mortality rates, and overall and post-randomization hospitalization stay. Results of proxalutamide and placebo groups were also compared between the North and South arms. Analysis was also performed stratified by sex and baseline WHO COVID Ordinary Score. Results A total of 778 subjects were included (645 from the North, 317 from the proxalutamide group and 328 from the placebo group; 133 from the South arm, 106 from the proxalutamide group and 27 from the placebo group). Recovery rate was 121% higher in proxalutamide than placebo group at day 14 [81.1% vs 36.6%; Recovery ratio (RecR) 2.21; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.92-2.56; p<0.0001], and 81% higher at day 28 (98.1% vs 47.6%; RecR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.61-2.03; p<0.0001). All-cause mortality rate was 80% lower in proxalutamide than placebo group at Day 14 [8.0% vs 39.2%; Risk ratio (RR), 0.20; 95% CI, 0.14-0.29; p<0.0001], and 78% lower at Day 28 (10.6% vs 48.2%; RR, 0.22; 95% CI 0.16-0.30). Post-randomization time-to-discharge was shorter in proxalutamide [median, 5 days; interquartile range (IQR), 3-8] than placebo group (median, 9 days; IQR, 6-14) (p<0.0001). Results were statistically similar between North and South arms for all measured outcomes. Males and females presented similar results in all outcomes. Patients that did not require oxygen use (scores 3 and 4) did not present statistically significant improvement in recovery and mortality rates, whereas scores 5 and 6 presented significant improvements in all outcomes (p<0.0001 for all). Conclusion Proxalutamide increased recovery rate, reduced mortality rate and shortened hospital stay in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Results were similar between the two different arms, providing further consistency for the efficacy of proxalutamide when used in late-stage COVID-19.

Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Control between Drug Repurposing and Vaccination: A Comprehensive Overview

Respiratory viruses represent a major public health concern, as they are highly mutated, resulting in new strains emerging with high pathogenicity. Currently, the world is suffering from the newly evolving severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This virus is the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a mild-to-severe respiratory tract infection with frequent ability to give rise to fatal pneumonia in humans. The overwhelming outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 continues to unfold all over the world, urging scientists to put an end to this global pandemic through biological and pharmaceutical interventions. Currently, there is no specific treatment option that is capable of COVID-19 pandemic eradication, so several repurposed drugs and newly conditionally approved vaccines are in use and heavily applied to control the COVID-19 pandemic. The emergence of new variants of the virus that partially or totally escape from the immune response elicited by the approved vaccines requires continuous monitoring of the emerging variants to update the content of the developed vaccines or modify them totally to match the new variants. Herein, we discuss the potential therapeutic and prophylactic interventions including repurposed drugs and the newly developed/approved vaccines, highlighting the impact of virus evolution on the immune evasion of the virus from currently licensed vaccines for COVID-19.

Drug Interactions for Patients with Respiratory Diseases Receiving COVID-19 Emerged Treatments

Pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is still pressing the healthcare systems worldwide. Thus far, the lack of available COVID-19-targeted treatments has led scientists to look through drug repositioning practices and exploitation of available scientific evidence for potential efficient drugs that may block biological pathways of SARS-CoV-2. Till today, several molecules have emerged as promising pharmacological agents, and more than a few medication protocols are applied during hospitalization. On the other hand, given the criticality of the disease, it is important for healthcare providers, especially those in COVID-19 clinics (i.e., nursing personnel and treating physicians), to recognize potential drug interactions that may lead to adverse drug reactions that may negatively impact the therapeutic outcome. In this review, focusing on patients with respiratory diseases (i.e., asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) that are treated also for COVID-19, we discuss possible drug interactions, their underlying pharmacological mechanisms, and possible clinical signs that healthcare providers in COVID-19 clinics may need to acknowledge as adverse drug reactions due to drug-drug interactions.

Drug repurposing against SARS-CoV-1, SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, large in silico screening studies and numerous in vitro studies have assessed the antiviral activity of various drugs on SARS-CoV-2. In the context of health emergency, drug repurposing represents the most relevant strategy because of the reduced time for approval by international medicines agencies, the low cost of development and the well-known toxicity profile of such drugs. Herein, we aim to review drugs with in vitro antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2, combined with molecular docking data and results from preliminary clinical studies. Finally, when considering all these previous findings, as well as the possibility of oral administration, 11 molecules consisting of nelfinavir, favipiravir, azithromycin, clofoctol, clofazimine, ivermectin, nitazoxanide, amodiaquine, heparin, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, show an interesting antiviral activity that could be exploited as possible drug candidates for COVID-19 treatment.

Efficacy of COVID-19 Treatments: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: We provided a comprehensive evaluation of efficacy of available treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Methods: We searched for candidate COVID-19 studies in WHO COVID-19 Global Research Database up to August 19, 2021. Randomized controlled trials for suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients published on peer-reviewed journals were included, regardless of demographic characteristics. Outcome measures included mortality, mechanical ventilation, hospital discharge and viral clearance. Bayesian network meta-analysis with fixed effects was conducted to estimate the effect sizes using posterior means and 95% equal-tailed credible intervals (CrIs). Odds ratio (OR) was used as the summary measure for treatment effect. Bayesian hierarchical models were used to estimate effect sizes of treatments grouped by the treatment classifications.

Results: We identified 222 eligible studies with a total of 102,950 patients. Compared with the standard of care, imatinib, intravenous immunoglobulin and tocilizumab led to lower risk of death; baricitinib plus remdesivir, colchicine, dexamethasone, recombinant human granulocyte colony stimulating factor and tocilizumab indicated lower occurrence of mechanical ventilation; tofacitinib, sarilumab, remdesivir, tocilizumab and baricitinib plus remdesivir increased the hospital discharge rate; convalescent plasma, ivermectin, ivermectin plus doxycycline, hydroxychloroquine, nitazoxanide and proxalutamide resulted in better viral clearance. From the treatment class level, we found that the use of antineoplastic agents was associated with fewer mortality cases, immunostimulants could reduce the risk of mechanical ventilation and immunosuppressants led to higher discharge rates.

Conclusions: This network meta-analysis identified superiority of several COVID-19 treatments over the standard of care in terms of mortality, mechanical ventilation, hospital discharge and viral clearance. Tocilizumab showed its superiority compared with SOC on preventing severe outcomes such as death and mechanical ventilation as well as increasing the discharge rate, which might be an appropriate treatment for patients with severe or mild/moderate illness. We also found the clinical efficacy of antineoplastic agents, immunostimulants and immunosuppressants with respect to the endpoints of mortality, mechanical ventilation and discharge, which provides valuable information for the discovery of potential COVID-19 treatments.

Lack of efficacy of mono-mode of action therapeutics in COVID-19 therapy - How the lack of predictive power of preclinical cell and animal studies leads developments astray

The diverse experiences regarding the failure of tested drugs in the fight against COVID‐19 made it clear that one should at least question the requirement to apply classical preclinical development strategies that demand cell and animal efficacy models to be tested before going into clinical trials. Most animals are not susceptible to infection with SARS‐CoV‐2, and so this led to one‐sided virus replication experiments in cells and the use of animal models that have little in common with the complex pathogenesis of COVID‐19 in humans. Therefore, non‐clinical development strategies were designed to meet regulatory requirements, but they did not truly reflect the situation in the clinic. This has led the search for effective agents astray in many cases. As proof of this statement, we now bring together the results of such required preclinical experiments and compare with the results in clinical trials. Two clear conclusions that can be drawn from the experience to date: The required preclinical models are unsuitable for the development of innovative treatments medical devices in the case of COVID‐19 and mono‐action strategies (e.g. direct antivirals) are of very little or no benefit to patients under randomized,blinded conditions. Our hypothesis is that the complex situation of COVID‐19 may benefit from multi‐mode drugs. Here, the molecular class of aptamers could be a solution.

Efficacy and safety of current medications for treating severe and non-severe COVID-19 patients: an updated network meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Many recent studies have investigated the role of drug interventions for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. However, an important question has been raised about how to select the effective and secure medications for COVID-19 patients. The aim of this analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of the various medications available for severe and non-severe COVID-19 patients based on randomized placebo-controlled trials (RPCTs).

METHODS

We did an updated network meta-analysis. We searched the databases from inception until July 31, 2021, with no language restrictions. We included RPCTs comparing 49 medications and placebo in the treatment of severe and non-severe patients (aged 18 years or older) with COVID-19 infection. We extracted data on the trial and patient characteristics, and the following primary outcomes: all-cause mortality, the ratios of virological cure, and treatment-emergent adverse events. Odds ratio (OR) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as effect estimates.

RESULTS

From 3,869 publications, we included 61 articles related to 73 RPCTs (57 in non-severe COVID-19 patients and 16 in severe COVID-19 patients), comprising 20,680 patients. The mean sample size was 160 (interquartile range 96-393) in this study. The median duration of follow-up drugs intervention was 28 days (interquartile range 21-30). For increase in virological cure, we only found that proxalutamide (OR 9.16, 95% CI 3.15-18.30), ivermectin (OR 6.33, 95% CI 1.22-32.86), and low dosage bamlanivimab (OR 5.29, 95% CI 1.12-24.99) seemed to be associated with non-severe COVID-19 patients when compared with placebo, in which proxalutamide seemed to be better than low dosage bamlanivimab (OR 5.69, 95% CI 2.43-17.65). For decrease in all-cause mortality, we found that proxalutamide (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.09-0.19), imatinib (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25-0.96), and baricitinib (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42-0.82) seemed to be associated with non-severe COVID-19 patients; however, we only found that immunoglobulin gamma (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.08-0.89) was related to severe COVID-19 patients when compared with placebo. For change in treatment-emergent adverse events, we only found that sotrovimab (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.13-0.34) was associated with non-severe COVID-19 patients; however, we did not find any medications that presented a statistical difference when compared with placebo among severe COVID-19 patients.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that marked variations exist in the efficacy and safety of medications between severe and non-severe patients with COVID-19. It seems that monoclonal antibodies (e.g., low dosage bamlanivimab, baricitinib, imatinib, and sotrovimab) are a better choice for treating severe or non-severe COVID-19 patients. Clinical decisions to use preferentially medications should carefully consider the risk-benefit profile based on efficacy and safety of all active interventions in patients with COVID-19 at different levels of infection.

Early COVID-19 therapy with azithromycin plus nitazoxanide, ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine in outpatient settings significantly improved COVID-19 outcomes compared to known outcomes in untreated patients

In a prospective observational study (pre-AndroCoV Trial), the use of nitazoxanide, ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine demonstrated unexpected improvements in COVID-19 outcomes when compared to untreated patients. The apparent yet likely positive results raised ethical concerns on the employment of further full placebo controlled studies in early-stage COVID-19. The present analysis aimed to elucidate, through a comparative analysis with two control groups, whether full placebo-control randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on early-stage COVID-19 are still ethically acceptable. The Active group (AG) consisted of patients enrolled in the Pre-AndroCoV-Trial (n = 585). Control Group 1 (CG1) consisted of a retrospectively obtained group of untreated patients of the same population (n = 137), and Control Group 2 (CG2) resulted from a precise prediction of clinical outcomes based on a thorough and structured review of indexed articles and official statements. Patients were matched for sex, age, comorbidities and disease severity at baseline. Compared to CG1 and CG2, AG showed reduction of 31.5-36.5% in viral shedding (p < 0.0001), 70-85% in disease duration (p < 0.0001), and 100% in respiratory complications, hospitalization, mechanical ventilation, deaths and post-COVID manifestations (p < 0.0001 for all). For every 1000 confirmed cases for COVID-19, at least 70 hospitalizations, 50 mechanical ventilations and five deaths were prevented. Benefits from the combination of early COVID-19 detection and early pharmacological approaches were consistent and overwhelming when compared to untreated groups, which, together with the well-established safety profile of the drug combinations tested in the Pre-AndroCoV Trial, precluded our study from continuing employing full placebo in early COVID-19.