Promising effects of tocilizumab in COVID-19: A non-controlled, prospective clinical trial

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.

Does tocilizumab have an effect on the clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients? A meta-analysis of randomized control trials

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the impact of tocilizumab on clinical outcomes associated with COVID-19.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted across Scopus, PubMed (Medline), Cochrane Library, EMBASE (Elsevier), ClinicalTrials.gov, and Web of Sciences to identify pertinent studies published until May 2022. The primary search terms included "tocilizumab" and "COVID-19". Following the formulation of the search strategy, all identified studies were screened, and the data extraction process was initiated. Subsequently, the Cochrane risk of bias checklist was employed to evaluate the risk of bias. The effects of tocilizumab were assessed utilizing the pooled risk ratio (RR) and the fixed effect model in STATA (version 17).

RESULTS

In this meta-analysis, we analyzed 17 clinical trial studies to assess the impact of tocilizumab on mortality in patients with COVID-19. The pooled risk ratio (RR) for mortality was 0.93 (RR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.86, 1.00; I2: 72.39%; P value: 0.001). The findings indicated that tocilizumab use was associated with a 4% increase in ICU hospitalization (RR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.90, 1.20; I2: 0.00%; P value: 0.65). Additionally, tocilizumab administration was linked to a 2% reduction in the requirement for a ventilator (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.90, 1.08; I2: 26.87%; P value: 0.16).

CONCLUSION

The administration of tocilizumab during the COVID-19 pandemic, prescribed to patients with the virus, exerted a noteworthy impact on reducing outcomes associated with COVID-19.

The effects of combination-therapy of tocilizumab and baricitinib on the management of severe COVID-19 cases: a randomized open-label clinical trial

Background: Tocilizumab and baricitinib are considered standard treatments for hospitalized COVID-19 patients with an inflammatory status. However, the effects of co-administering these medications aiming for more rapid patient recovery are controversial among practitioners. The potential benefits include the rapid improvement of patients and regulation of the immune system, and the potential risks include the increased chance of serious adverse events, including infections. This study aimed to investigate the effects of co-administering these two medications on the 28-day mortality rate, other efficacy parameters, and safety issues. Methods: In this randomized open-label trial, 68 patients were recruited. The study was conducted at Dr. Masih Daneshvari Hospital during 6 months (from 21 March 2022 to 23 August 2022). Severely ill patients aged between 18 and 100 years old with confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled. The primary outcomes included the need for invasive mechanical ventilation and a 28-day mortality rate. Secondary outcomes included the need for non-invasive mechanical ventilation, the need for admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), the length of hospital stay, and the need for a second dose of tocilizumab. Safety assessments were also performed for 28 days. The data were collected from the patients' medical records, which included age, gender, and comorbidities. Results: The 28-day mortality rate or the need for mechanical ventilation was not statistically different among the two groups (p-value = 0.49 for both outcomes). The need for non-invasive mechanical ventilation, the need for admission to the ICU, or the need for a second dose of tocilizumab and the length of hospital stay was not affected either (p-value = 1; 0.1; 0.49 and 0.9, respectively). One patient developed thrombosis in the combination group. No adverse events related to infectious complications were recorded in any groups. Conclusion: This study showed no beneficial effects of combining tocilizumab and baricitinib in managing severe COVID-19 cases. However, the need for ICU admission was meaningfully lower in the combination group. Studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm these results. Clinical Trial Registration: Identifier: RCT20151227025726N30M.

Safety and immunogenicity of a recombinant receptor-binding domain-based protein subunit vaccine (Noora vaccine™) against COVID-19 in adults: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 1 trial

The development of a safe and effective vaccine is essential to protect populations against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). There are several vaccine candidates under investigation with different mechanisms of action. In the present study, we have evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of a recombinant receptor-binding domain (RBD)-based protein subunit vaccine (Noora vaccine) against COVID-19 in adults. This Phase 1 trial is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the recombinant RBD-based protein subunit vaccine (Noora vaccine) against COVID-19 in healthy adults volunteers. Eligible participants were included in this study after evaluating their health status and considering the exclusion criteria. They were then randomized into three groups and received three doses of vaccine (80 µg, 120 µg, and placebo) on Days 0, 21, and 35. Primary outcomes including solicited, unsolicited, and medically attended adverse events were recorded during this study. Secondary outcomes including the humoral and cellular immunity (including anti-RBD IgG antibody and neutralizing antibody) were measured on Days 0, 21, 28, 35, 42, and 49 by using the ELISA kit and the Virus Neutralization Test (VNT) was performed on day 49. Totally 70 cases were included in this Phase 1 trial and 60 of them completed the study. Safety assessments showed no severe adverse events. Local pain at the vaccine injection site occurred in 80% of the vaccinated volunteers. Induration and redness at the injection site were the other adverse reactions of this vaccine. There was no significant difference between the studied groups regarding adverse reactions. Anti-RBD IgG antibody and neutralizing antibody assessment showed significant seroconversion in comparison to the placebo group (80%, and 100% respectively, p < 0.001). The cellular immunity panel also showed mild to moderate induction of TH1 responses and the VNT showed 78% of seroprotection. The results of this Phase 1 trial showed acceptable safety without serious adverse events and significant seroconversions in the humoral and cellular immunity panel. The dose of 80 µg is an appropriate dose for injection in the next phases of the trial.

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.

The hormetic and hermetic role of IL-6

Interleukin-6 is a pleiotropic cytokine regulating different tissues and organs in diverse and sometimes discrepant ways. The dual and sometime hermetic nature of IL-6 action has been highlighted in several contexts and can be explained by the concept of hormesis, in which beneficial or toxic effects can be induced by the same molecule depending on the intensity, persistence, and nature of the stimulation. According with hormesis, a low and/or controlled IL-6 release is associated with anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and pro-myogenic actions, whereas increased systemic levels of IL-6 can induce pro-inflammatory, pro-oxidant and pro-fibrotic responses. However, many aspects regarding the multifaceted action of IL-6 and the complex nature of its signal transduction remains to be fully elucidated. In this review we collect mechanistic insight into the molecular networks contributing to normal or pathologic changes during advancing age and in chronic diseases. We point out the involvement of IL-6 deregulation in aging-related diseases, dissecting the hormetic action of this key mediator in different tissues, with a special focus on skeletal muscle. Since IL-6 can act as an enhancer of detrimental factor associated with both aging and pathologic conditions, such as chronic inflammation and oxidative stress, this cytokine could represent a "Gerokine", a determinant of the switch from physiologic aging to age-related diseases.

Biologics in COVID-19 So Far: Systematic Review

This systematic review aimed to reevaluate the available evidence of the use of biologics as treatment candidates for the treatment of severe and advanced COVID-19 disease; what are the rationale for their use, which are the most studied, and what kind of efficacy measures are described? A search through Cochrane, Embase, Pubmed, Medline, medrxiv.org, and Google scholar was performed on the use of biologic interventions in COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 infection, viral pneumonia, and sepsis, until 11 January 2022. Throughout the research, we identified 4821 records, of which 90 were selected for qualitative analysis. Amongst the results, we identified five popular targets of use: IL6 and IL1 inhibitors, interferons, mesenchymal stem cells treatment, and anti-spike antibodies. None of them offered conclusive evidence of their efficacy with consistency and statistical significance except for some studies with anti-spike antibodies; however, Il6 and IL1 inhibitors as well as interferons show encouraging data in terms of increased survival and favorable clinical course that require further studies with better methodology standardization.

Potential plants for inflammatory dysfunction in the SARS-CoV-2 infection

The inflammatory process is a biological response of the organism to remove injurious stimuli and initiate homeostasis. It has been recognized as a key player in the most severe forms of SARS-CoV-2, characterized by significantly increased pro-inflammatory cytokine levels, the so-called "cytokine storm" that appears to play a pivotal role in this disease. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to select clinical trials with anti-inflammatory plants and relate the activity of these plants to inflammatory markers of SARS-CoV-2 infection. PRISMA guidelines are followed, and studies of interest are indexed in PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. As a result, 32 clinical trials encompassing 22 plants were selected. The main anti-inflammatory mechanisms described in the studies are the inhibition of inflammatory cytokines, such as IL-6, TNF-a, IFN-γ, and IL-1; decreased CRP and oxidative marker levels; increased endogenous antioxidant levels; modulation of cardiovascular risk markers. The data found are not directly related to SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, they provide possibilities for new studies as plants have a wide array of phytochemicals, and detecting which ones are responsible for anti-inflammatory effects can provide invaluable contribution to studies aiming to evaluate efficacy in scenarios of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Therapeutic role of immunomodulators during the COVID-19 pandemic- a narrative review

The emergency state caused by COVID-19 saw the use of immunomodulators despite the absence of robust research. To date, the results of relatively few randomized controlled trials have been published, and methodological approaches are riddled with bias and heterogeneity. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, convalescent plasma and the JAK inhibitor baricitinib have gained Emergency Use Authorizations and tentative recommendations for their use in clinical practice alone or in combination with other therapies. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are predominating the management of non-hospitalized patients, while the inpatient setting is seeing the use of convalescent plasma, baricitinib, tofacitinib, tocilizumab, sarilumab, and corticosteroids, as applicable. Available clinical data also suggest the potential clinical benefit of the early administration of blood-derived products (e.g. convalescent plasma, non-SARS-CoV-2-specific immunoglobins) and the blockade of factors implicated in the hyperinflammatory state of severe COVID-19 (Interleukin 1 and 6; Janus Kinase). Immune therapies seem to have a protective effect and using immunomodulators alone or in combination with viral replication inhibitors and other treatment modalities might prevent progression into severe COVID-19 disease, cytokine storm and death. Future trials should address existing gaps and reshape the landscape of COVID-19 management.

The Impact of Tocilizumab on Radiological Changes Assessed by Quantitative Chest CT in Severe COVID-19 Patients

(1) Background: We aimed to analyze the characteristics associated with the in-hospital mortality, describe the early CT changes expressed quantitatively after tocilizumab (TOC), and assess TOC timing according to the oxygen demands. (2) Methods: We retrospectively studied 101 adult patients with severe COVID-19, who received TOC and dexamethasone. The lung involvement was assessed quantitatively using native CT examination before and 7−10 days after TOC administration. (3) Results: The in-hospital mortality was 17.8%. Logistic regression analysis found that interstitial lesions above 50% were associated with death (p = 0.01). The other variables assessed were age (p = 0.1), the presence of comorbidities (p = 0.9), the oxygen flow rate at TOC administration (p = 0.2), FiO2 (p = 0.4), lymphocyte count (p = 0.3), and D-dimers level (p = 0.2). Survivors had a statistically significant improvement at 7−10 days after TOC of interstitial (39.5 vs. 31.6%, p < 0.001), mixt (4.3 vs. 2.3%, p = 0.001) and consolidating (1.7 vs. 1.1%, p = 0.001) lesions. When TOC was administered at a FiO2 ≤ 57.5% (oxygen flow rate ≤ 13 L/min), the associated mortality was significantly lower (4.3% vs. 29.1%, p < 0.05). (4) Conclusions: Quantitative imaging provides valuable information regarding the extent of lung damage which can be used to anticipate the in-hospital mortality. The timing of TOC administration is important and FiO2 could be used as a clinical predictor.

Medical imaging of pulmonary disease in SARS-CoV-2-exposed non-human primates

Chest X-ray (CXR), computed tomography (CT), and positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) are noninvasive imaging techniques widely used in human and veterinary pulmonary research and medicine. These techniques have recently been applied in studies of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-exposed non-human primates (NHPs) to complement virological assessments with meaningful translational readouts of lung disease. Our review of the literature indicates that medical imaging of SARS-CoV-2-exposed NHPs enables high-resolution qualitative and quantitative characterization of disease otherwise clinically invisible and potentially provides user-independent and unbiased evaluation of medical countermeasures (MCMs). However, we also found high variability in image acquisition and analysis protocols among studies. These findings uncover an urgent need to improve standardization and ensure direct comparability across studies.

The Use of Corticosteroids or Tocilizumab in COVID-19 Based on Inflammatory Markers

BACKGROUND

The inflammatory cascade is the main cause of death in COVID-19 patients. Corticosteroids (CS) and tocilizumab (TCZ) are available to treat this escalation but which patients to administer it remains undefined.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of immunosuppressive/anti-inflammatory therapy in COVID-19, based on the degree of inflammation.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study with data on patients collected and followed up from March 1st, 2020, to May 1st, 2021, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. Patients under treatment with CS vs. those under CS plus TCZ were compared. Effectiveness was explored in 3 risk categories (low, intermediate, high) based on lymphocyte count, C-reactive protein (CRP), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), ferritin, and D-dimer values.

PATIENTS

A total of 21,962 patients were included in the Registry by May 2021. Of these, 5940 met the inclusion criteria for the present study (5332 were treated with CS and 608 with CS plus TCZ).

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome of the study was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were the composite variable of in-hospital mortality, requirement for high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV), invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), or intensive care unit (ICU) admission.

KEY RESULTS

A total of 5940 met the inclusion criteria for the present study (5332 were treated with CS and 608 with CS plus TCZ). No significant differences were observed in either the low/intermediate-risk category (1.5% vs. 7.4%, p=0.175) or the high-risk category (23.1% vs. 20%, p=0.223) after propensity score matching. A statistically significant lower mortality was observed in the very high-risk category (31.9% vs. 23.9%, p=0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

The prescription of CS alone or in combination with TCZ should be based on the degrees of inflammation and reserve the CS plus TCZ combination for patients at high and especially very high risk.

Longer Prehospitalization and Preintubation Periods in Intubated Non-survivors and ECMO Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose: There is no clear consensus on the clinical course of critical COVID-19 patients. We examined the clinical course among intubated survivors, non-survivors, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) patients to reveal the standard clinical course and the difference among critical COVID-19 patients.

Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for original studies published until December 11, 2020, including case accumulation and clinical course reporting. Pregnant patients and children were excluded. We followed PRISMA guidelines and registered them with PROSPERO (CRD42021235534).

Results: Of the 11,716 studies identified, 94 met the selection criteria, and 2,549 cases were included in this meta-analysis. The times from intubation to extubation and death were 12.07 days (95% confidence interval 9.80–14.33 days) and 10.14 days (8.18–12.10 days), respectively, and the ECMO duration was 14.72 days (10.57–18.87 days). The time from symptom onset to hospitalization (prehospitalization period) of intubated survivors, non-survivors, and ECMO patients was 6.15 (4.61–7.69 days), 6.45 (4.55–8.34 days), and 7.15 days (6.48–7.81 days), and that from symptom onset to intubation (preintubation period) was 8.58 (7.36–9.80 days), 9.14 (7.26–11.01 days), and 10.54 days (9.18–11.90 days), respectively. Sensitivity analysis showed that the time from intubation to extubation and death was longer in the US and Europe than in East Asia.

Conclusion: For COVID-19, we hypothesize that prehospitalization and preintubation periods are longer in intubated non-survivors and ECMO patients than in intubated survivors. These periods may serve as a predictor of disease severity or death and support therapeutic strategy determination.

Beneficial and harmful outcomes of tocilizumab in severe COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The results of studies of tocilizumab (TCZ) in COVID-19 are contradictory. Our study aims to update medical evidence from controlled observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on the use of TCZ in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We searched the following databases from January 1, 2020 to April 13, 2021 (date of the last search): MEDLINE database through the PubMed search engine and Scopus, using the terms ("COVID-19" [Supplementary Concept]) AND "tocilizumab" [Supplementary Concept]).

RESULTS

Sixty four studies were included in the present study: 54 were controlled observational studies (50 retrospective and 4 prospective) and 10 were RCTs. The overall results provided data from 20,616 hospitalized patients with COVID-19: 7668 patients received TCZ in addition to standard of care (SOC) (including 1915 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) with reported mortality) and 12,948 patients only receiving SOC (including 4410 patients admitted to the ICU with reported mortality). After applying the random-effects model, the hospital-wide (including ICU) pooled mortality odds ratio (OR) of patients with COVID-19 treated with TCZ was 0.73 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.56-0.93). The pooled hospital-wide mortality OR was 1.25 (95% CI = 0.74-2.18) in patients admitted at conventional wards versus 0.66 (95% CI = 0.59-0.76) in patients admitted to the ICU. The pooled OR of hospital-wide mortality (including ICU) of COVID-19 patients treated with TCZ plus corticosteroids (CS) was 0.67 (95% CI = 0.54-0.84). The pooled in-hospital mortality OR was 0.71 (95% CI = 0.35-1.42) when TCZ was early administered (≤10 days from symptom onset) versus 0.83 (95% CI 0.48-1.45) for late administration (>10 days from symptom onset). The meta-analysis did not find significantly higher risk for secondary infections in COVID-19 patients treated with TCZ.

CONCLUSIONS

TCZ prevented mortality in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. This benefit was seen to a greater extent in patients receiving concomitant CS and when TCZ administration occurred within the first 10 days after symptom onset.

Combined Therapy of Ciclosporin Plus Favipiravir in the Management of Patients with Severe COVID-19, not Responding to Dexamethasone: A non-Controlled Prospective Trial

BACKGROUND

Regarding the COVID-19 pandemic, potential therapeutic agents are being evaluated almost every day. Ciclosporin, a calcineurin inhibitor, is characterized by beneficial antiviral and immunomodulatory effects. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ciclosporin in managing COVID-19.

METHODS

This study was a prospective non-controlled clinical trial carried out on 20 patients. Confirmed COVID-19 patients received two doses of ciclosporin (10 mg/kg and 5 mg/kg injections) 24 h apart. Mortality rate and the lengths of intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stays were assessed for all 20 patients.

RESULTS

The mortality rate and the need for mechanical ventilation were calculated as 50%. The percentage of ICU admission was 70%. The lengths of ICU and hospital stays were 8.13 ± 6.81 and 14.25 ± 8.55 days, respectively. The levels of ferritin and white blood cells were significantly higher after injecting the second dose of ciclosporin. Seven patients (35%) had radiologically improved lungs after ciclosporin therapy.

CONCLUSION

It seems that the protocol of two doses of ciclosporin in combination with favipiravir does not have favorable effects among COVID-19 patients that do not respond to dexamethasone. Controlled trials are needed to confirm the results.

Neuropsychiatric manifestations of COVID-19, potential neurotropic mechanisms, and therapeutic interventions

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused large-scale economic and social losses and worldwide deaths. Although most COVID-19 patients have initially complained of respiratory insufficiency, the presence of neuropsychiatric manifestations is also reported frequently, ranging from headache, hyposmia/anosmia, and neuromuscular dysfunction to stroke, seizure, encephalopathy, altered mental status, and psychiatric disorders, both in the acute phase and in the long term. These neuropsychiatric complications have emerged as a potential indicator of worsened clinical outcomes and poor prognosis, thus contributing to mortality in COVID-19 patients. Their etiology remains largely unclear and probably involves multiple neuroinvasive pathways. Here, we summarize recent animal and human studies for neurotrophic properties of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and elucidate potential neuropathogenic mechanisms involved in the viral invasion of the central nervous system as a cause for brain damage and neurological impairments. We then discuss the potential therapeutic strategy for intervening and preventing neuropsychiatric complications associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Time-series monitoring of clinical-neurochemical-radiological progress of neuropsychiatric and neuroimmune complications need implementation in individuals exposed to SARS-CoV-2. The development of a screening, intervention, and therapeutic framework to prevent and reduce neuropsychiatric sequela is urgently needed and crucial for the short- and long-term recovery of COVID-19 patients.

Pharmacology and Adverse Events of Emergency-Use Authorized Medication in Moderate to Severe COVID-19

Some effective drugs have been approved or issued an Emergency Use Authorization for the treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients, but post-market surveillance is warranted to monitor adverse events. We reviewed clinical trials and case reports in patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 infection who received remdesivir, baricitinib, tocilizumab, or sarilumab. The drug-specific pharmacokinetics, toxicity, and drug interactions are summarized in this study. Remdesivir and baricitinib are small-molecule drugs that are mainly metabolized by the kidneys, while tocilizumab and sarilumab are monoclonal antibody drugs with metabolic pathways that are currently not fully understood. The most common adverse events of these drugs are alterations in liver function, but serious adverse events have rarely been attributed to them. Only a few studies have reported that remdesivir might be cardiotoxic and that baricitinib might cause thromboembolism. Biological agents such as baricitinib, tocilizumab, and sarilumab could inhibit the pathway of inflammatory processes, leading to immune dysregulation, so the risk of secondary infection should be assessed before prescribing. Further recognition of the pathogenic mechanism and risk factors of adverse events is essential for optimizing treatment strategies.

A comparative review of immunoassays for COVID-19 detection

Introduction: The gold standard for diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), which is expensive, time-consuming and may result in false-negative results. Serological tests can be employed for RT-PCR negative patients, contact tracing, determining the probability of protection against re-infection, and seroepidemiological studies.Areas covered: The main methodologies of serology-based tests for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), chemiluminescent immunoassays (CLIAs) and lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs) were reviewed and their diagnostic performances were compared. Herein, a literature review on the databases of PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar between January 1, 2020 and June 30, 2020 based on the main serological methods for COVID-19 detection with the focus on comparative experiments was performed. The review was updated on December 31, 2020.Expert opinion: Serology testing could be considered as a part of diagnostic panel two-week post symptom onset. Higher sensitivity for serology-based tests could be achieved by determining combined IgG/IgM titers. Furthermore, higher sensitive serological test detecting neutralization antibody could be developed by targeting spike (S) antigen. It was also demonstrated that the sensitivity of ELISA/CLIA-based methods are higher than LFIA devices.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of anakinra, sarilumab, siltuximab and tocilizumab for COVID-19

BACKGROUND

There is accumulating evidence for an overly activated immune response in severe COVID-19, with several studies exploring the therapeutic role of immunomodulation. Through systematic review and meta-analysis, we assess the effectiveness of specific interleukin inhibitors for the treatment of COVID-19.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched on 7 January 2021 to identify studies of immunomodulatory agents (anakinra, sarilumab, siltuximab and tocilizumab) for the treatment of COVID-19. The primary outcomes were severity on an Ordinal Scale measured at day 15 from intervention and days to hospital discharge. Key secondary endpoints included overall mortality.

RESULTS

71 studies totalling 22 058 patients were included, 6 were randomised trials. Most studies explored outcomes in patients who received tocilizumab (60/71). In prospective studies, tocilizumab was associated with improved unadjusted survival (risk ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96, I2=0.0%), but conclusive benefit was not demonstrated for other outcomes. In retrospective studies, tocilizumab was associated with less severe outcomes on an Ordinal Scale (generalised OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.64, I2=98%) and adjusted mortality risk (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.66, I2=76.6%). The mean difference in duration of hospitalisation was 0.36 days (95% CI -0.07 to 0.80, I2=93.8%). There was substantial heterogeneity in retrospective studies, and estimates should be interpreted cautiously. Other immunomodulatory agents showed similar effects to tocilizumab, but insufficient data precluded meta-analysis by agent.

CONCLUSION

Tocilizumab was associated with a lower relative risk of mortality in prospective studies, but effects were inconclusive for other outcomes. Current evidence for the efficacy of anakinra, siltuximab or sarilumab in COVID-19 is insufficient, with further studies urgently needed for conclusive findings.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020176375.

Clinical features and laboratory findings first case of B. 1.617.2 (delta) variant concern (VOC) in Iraq

Since the initial report of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS CoV-2) in Wuhan, China, in 2019, the virus has constantly mutated, resulting in the appearance of novel variants. In December 2020, the B.1.617.2 (delta) variant concern (VOC) was first reported in India, and rapidly spread around the globe, is now the main brand in the United Kingdom, and it has grown dramatically. Here we present the clinical features and laboratory findings of the first case of B. 1.617.2 (delta) variant concern (VOC) in Iraq. A 6-year-old female child presented with severe abdominal pain, headache, severe vomiting, and diarrhea, runny nose, alerted mental status, loss of appetite, and fever. The patient was diagnosed with COVID-19 delta variant B.1.617.2 by RT-PCR. The patient was treated by administration of glucose saline 4% for 3 days, ceftriaxone vial 1 mg every 12 h for 6 days, and an acetaminophen bottle on a need to prevent fever followed by a Flagyl bottle every 24 h for 3 days. Vaccination and prevention the spread of the virus and against it are important preventive approaches for delta variant. Sore throat, runny nose, headache, and vomiting, diarrhea are the major clinical features of the delta variant. This was followed by an elevation of the leukocyte WBC, and blood platelets. To reduce the impact of new delta variant B.1.617.2 infection; handwashing, wearing a double mask, avoiding crowded and closed settings, social distancing, lockdown, and ensuring good ventilation are major significant options against this variant.

Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic characteristics, and immunogenicity of MW33: a Phase 1 clinical study of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD-targeting monoclonal antibody

MW33 is a fully humanized IgG1κ monoclonal neutralizing antibody, and may be used for the prevention and treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-dose, dose-escalation Phase 1 study to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity of MW33. Healthy adults aged 18–45 years were sequentially enrolled into the 4, 10, 20, 40, and 60 mg/kg dose groups and infused with MW33 over 60 ± 15 min and followed for 85 days. All 42 enrolled participants completed the MW33 infusion, and 40 participants completed the 85-day follow-up period. 34 participants received a single infusion of 4 (n = 2), 10 (n = 8), 20 (n = 8), 40 (n = 8), and 60 mg/kg (n = 8) of MW33. 27 subjects in the test groups experienced 78 adverse events (AEs) post-dose, with an incidence of 79.4% (27/34). The most common AEs included abnormal laboratory test results, vascular and lymphatic disorders, and infectious diseases. The severity of AEs was mainly Grade 1 (92 AEs), and three Grade 2 and one Grade 4. The main PK parameters, maximum concentration (C_max), and area under the concentration-time curve (AUC_0–t, and AUC_0–∞) in 34 subjects showed a linear kinetic relationship in the range of 10–60 mg/kg. The plasma half-life was approximately 25 days. The positive rates of serum ADAs and antibody titres were low with no evidence of an impact on safety or PK. In conclusion, MW33 was well-tolerated, demonstrated linear PK, with a lower positive rate of serum ADAs and antibody titres in healthy subjects.

Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04427501.

Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04533048.

Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04627584.

COVID-19: potential therapeutics for pediatric patients

The global spread of COVID-19 has imparted significant economic, medical, and social burdens. Like adults, children are affected by this pandemic. However, milder clinical symptoms are often experienced by them. Only a minimal proportion of the affected patients may develop severe and complicated COVID-19. Supportive treatment is recommended in all patients. Antiviral and immunomodulatory medications are spared for hospitalized children with respiratory distress or severe to critical disease. Up till now, remdesivir is the only USFDA-approved anti-COVID-19 medication indicated in the majority of symptomatic patients with moderate to severe disease. Dexamethasone is solely recommended in patients with respiratory distress maintained on oxygen or ventilatory support. The use of these medications in pediatric patients is founded on evidence deriving from adult studies. No randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving pediatric COVID-19 patients have assessed these medications' efficacy and safety, among others. Similarly, three novel monoclonal anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies, bamlanivimab, casirivimab and imdevimab, have been recently authorized by the USFDA. Nonetheless, their efficacy has not been demonstrated by multiple RCTs. In this review, we aim to dissect the various potential therapeutics used in children with COVID-19. We aspire to provide a comprehensive review of the available evidence and display the mechanisms of action and the pharmacokinetic properties of the studied therapeutics. Our review offers an efficient and practical guide for treating children with COVID-19.

Evaluation of adalimumab effects in managing severe cases of COVID-19: A randomized controlled trial

Background

COVID-19, which is a disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has spread around the world since late 2019. Studies have found associations between the rising levels of TNF-α and severe COVID-19 cases. Hence, TNF-α blocking can possibly be a favorable intervention in modifying COVID-19. To this end, in order to manage pneumonia caused by COVID-19, adalimumab may potentially be considered as a potential therapeutic agent. The present study aimed to investigate the potential therapeutic role of adalimumab in treating COVID-19 cases in combination therapy with remdesivir and dexamethasone.

Methods

Among the 68 patients who were included in the current randomized controlled trial, 34 were assigned to the adalimumab group and the remaining 34 were assigned to the control group. Adalimumab at a dose of 40 mg, subcutaneous for once, was used for the intervention group. Both the intervention and control groups received remdesivir, dexamethasone, and supportive care. The data gathered to make comparisons of the groups included demographic information, the rate of mortality, mechanical ventilation requirement, length of stay in hospital and Intensive Care Unit (ICU), and imaging findings.

Results

There was no significant difference between the two groups in the terms of mortality rate (P-value = 1) and mechanical ventilation requirement (P-value = 1). The length of hospital and ICU stay as well as radiologic changes were not affected either (P-value = 1, 0.27, and 0.53, respectively).

Conclusions

Our findings did not support the use of adalimumab in combination with remdesivir and dexamethasone in the treatment of severe COVID-19 cases.

Kidney injury in COVID-19 patients, drug development and their renal complications: Review study

Since December 2019, the world was encountered a new disease called coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Although SARS-CoV-2 initially causes lung damage, it also affects many other organs, including the kidneys, and on average, 5–23% of people with COVID-19 develop the symptoms of acute kidney injury (AKI), including elevated blood creatinine and urea, hematuria, proteinuria, and histopathological damages. The exact mechanism is unknown, but the researchers believe that SARS-CoV-2 directly and indirectly affects the kidneys. The direct pathway is by binding the virus to ACE2 receptor in the kidney, damage to cells, the renin-angiotensin system disturbances, activating coagulation pathways, and damaging the renal vascular endothelium. The initial evidence from studying the kidney tissue in postmortem patients is more in favor of the direct pathway. The indirect pathway is created by increased cytokines and cytokine storm, sepsis, circulatory disturbances, hypoxemia, as well as using the nephrotoxic drugs. Using renal tissue biopsy and autopsy in the patients with COVID-19, recent studies found evidence for a predominant indirect pathway in AKI induction by SARS-CoV-2. Besides, some studies showed that the degree of acute tubular injury (ATI) in autopsies from COVID-19 victims is milder compared to AKI degree. We review the mechanism of AKI induction and the renal side effects of the most common drugs used to treat COVID-19 after the overview of the latest findings on SARS-CoV-2 pathogenicity.

Pharmacological interventions for COVID-19: a systematic review of observational studies and clinical trials

Introduction: Currently, there is no approved therapeutic entity for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and clinicians are primarily relying on drug repurposing. However, findings across studies are widely disparate, making it difficult to draw firm conclusions. Since clinicians need accurate evidence to treat COVID-19, this manuscript systematically analyzed the published and ongoing studies evaluating the pharmacological interventions for COVID-19.Areas Covered: A systematic search of observational studies and Clinical Trials on the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 was performed by using various databases from inception to 2 December 2020.Expert Opinion: A total of 460 studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 37 were research studies, 386 were ongoing trials, and 37 were completed trials. Anti-virals, steroids, anti-malarial, plasma exchange, and monoclonal antibodies were the most common treatment modalities used alone or in combination in these studies. However, tocilizumab, plasma exchange, and steroids have shown significant improvements in patient's clinical and radiological status. Tocilizumab reported minimum hospital stay of 2 days along with maximum recovery and patient's stability rate. Existing literature demonstrate promising results of tocilizumab, plasma exchange, and steroids among COVID-19 patients. Nevertheless, these studies are accompanied by several methodological disparities which should be considered while interpreting the results.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of tocilizumab in persons with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19)

We performed a meta-analysis to determine safety and efficacy of tocilizumab in persons with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Medline using Boolean operators for studies with the terms coronavirus OR COVID-19 OR 2019-nCoV OR SARS-CoV-2 AND tocilizumab. Review Manager 5.4 was used to analyze data and the modified Newcastle-Ottawa and Jadad scales for quality assessment. We identified 32 studies in 11,487 subjects including three randomized trials and 29 cohort studies with a comparator cohort, including historical controls (N = 5), a matched cohort (N = 12), or concurrent controls (N = 12). Overall, tocilizumab decreased risk of death (Relative Risk [RR] = 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59, 0.93; P = 0.008; I2 = 80%) but not of surrogate endpoints including ICU admission (RR = 1.40 [0.64,3.06]; P = 0.4; I2 = 88%), invasive mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.83 [0.57,1.22]; P = 0.34; I2 = 65%) or secondary infections (RR = 1.30 [0.97,1.74]; P = 0.08; I2 = 65%) and increased interval of hospitalization of subjects discharged alive(mean difference [MD] = 2 days [<1, 4 days]; P = 0.006; I2 = 0). RRs of death in studies with historical controls (RR = 0.28 [0.16,0.49; P < 0.001]; I2 = 62%) or a matched cohort (RR = 0.68 [0.53, 0.87]; P = 0.002; I2 = 42%) were decreased. In contrast, RRs of death in studies with a concurrent control (RR = 1.10 [0.77, 1.56]; P = 0.60; I2 = 85%) or randomized (RR = 1.18 [0.57,2.44]; P = 0.66; I2 = 0) were not decreased. A reduced risk of death was not confirmed in our analyses which questions safety and efficacy of tocilizumab in persons with COVID-19.

Clinical Management of COVID-19: A Review of Pharmacological Treatment Options

Since the outbreak and subsequent declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic in March 2020, concerted efforts have been applied by the scientific community to curtail the spread of the disease and find a cure. While vaccines constitute a vital part of the public health strategy to reduce the burden of COVID-19, the management of this disease will continue to rely heavily on pharmacotherapy. This study aims to provide an updated review of pharmacological agents that have been developed and/or repurposed for the treatment of COVID-19. To this end, a comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Google Scholar, and LitCovid databases. Relevant clinical studies on drugs used in the management of COVID-19 were identified and evaluated in terms of evidence of efficacy and safety. To date, the FDA has approved three therapies for the treatment of COVID-19 Emergency Use Authorization: convalescent plasma, remdesivir, and casirivimab/imdevimab (REGN-COV2). Drugs such as lopinavir/ritonavir, umifenovir, favipiravir, anakinra, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, tocilizumab, interferons, tissue plasminogen activator, intravenous immunoglobulins, and nafamosat have been used off-label with mixed therapeutic results. Adjunctive administration of corticosteroids is also very common. The clinical experience with these approved and repurposed drugs is limited, and data on efficacy for the new indication are not strong. Overall, the response of the global scientific community to the COVID-19 pandemic has been impressive, as evident from the volume of scientific literature elucidating the molecular biology and pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2 and the approval of three new drugs for clinical management. Reviewed studies have shown mixed data on efficacy and safety of the currently utilized drugs. The lack of standard treatment for COVID-19 has made it difficult to interpret results from most of the published studies due to the risk of attribution error. The long-term effects of drugs can only be assessed after several years of clinical experience; therefore, the efficacy and safety of current COVID-19 therapeutics should continue to be rigorously monitored as part of post-marketing studies.

Stroke in SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Pictorial Overview of the Pathoetiology

Since the early days of the pandemic, there have been several reports of cerebrovascular complications during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Numerous studies proposed a role for SARS-CoV-2 in igniting stroke. In this review, we focused on the pathoetiology of stroke among the infected patients. We pictured the results of the SARS-CoV-2 invasion to the central nervous system (CNS) via neuronal and hematogenous routes, in addition to viral infection in peripheral tissues with extensive crosstalk with the CNS. SARS-CoV-2 infection results in pro-inflammatory cytokine and chemokine release and activation of the immune system, COVID-19-associated coagulopathy, endotheliitis and vasculitis, hypoxia, imbalance in the renin-angiotensin system, and cardiovascular complications that all may lead to the incidence of stroke. Critically ill patients, those with pre-existing comorbidities and patients taking certain medications, such as drugs with elevated risk for arrhythmia or thrombophilia, are more susceptible to a stroke after SARS-CoV-2 infection. By providing a pictorial narrative review, we illustrated these associations in detail to broaden the scope of our understanding of stroke in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. We also discussed the role of antiplatelets and anticoagulants for stroke prevention and the need for a personalized approach among patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Antibody LY-CoV555 in Outpatients with Covid-19

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), which is most frequently mild yet can be severe and life-threatening. Virus-neutralizing monoclonal antibodies are predicted to reduce viral load, ameliorate symptoms, and prevent hospitalization.

METHODS

In this ongoing phase 2 trial involving outpatients with recently diagnosed mild or moderate Covid-19, we randomly assigned 452 patients to receive a single intravenous infusion of neutralizing antibody LY-CoV555 in one of three doses (700 mg, 2800 mg, or 7000 mg) or placebo and evaluated the quantitative virologic end points and clinical outcomes. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in the viral load at day 11. The results of a preplanned interim analysis as of September 5, 2020, are reported here.

RESULTS

At the time of the interim analysis, the observed mean decrease from baseline in the log viral load for the entire population was -3.81, for an elimination of more than 99.97% of viral RNA. For patients who received the 2800-mg dose of LY-CoV555, the difference from placebo in the decrease from baseline was -0.53 (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.98 to -0.08; P = 0.02), for a viral load that was lower by a factor of 3.4. Smaller differences from placebo in the change from baseline were observed among the patients who received the 700-mg dose (-0.20; 95% CI, -0.66 to 0.25; P = 0.38) or the 7000-mg dose (0.09; 95% CI, -0.37 to 0.55; P = 0.70). On days 2 to 6, the patients who received LY-CoV555 had a slightly lower severity of symptoms than those who received placebo. The percentage of patients who had a Covid-19-related hospitalization or visit to an emergency department was 1.6% in the LY-CoV555 group and 6.3% in the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

In this interim analysis of a phase 2 trial, one of three doses of neutralizing antibody LY-CoV555 appeared to accelerate the natural decline in viral load over time, whereas the other doses had not by day 11. (Funded by Eli Lilly; BLAZE-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04427501.).

COVID-19: Characteristics and Therapeutics

Novel coronavirus (COVID-19 or 2019-nCoV or SARS-CoV-2), which suddenly emerged in December 2019 is still haunting the entire human race and has affected not only the healthcare system but also the global socioeconomic balances. COVID-19 was quickly designated as a global pandemic by the World Health Organization as there have been about 98.0 million confirmed cases and about 2.0 million confirmed deaths, as of January 2021. Although, our understanding of COVID-19 has significantly increased since its outbreak, and multiple treatment approaches and pharmacological interventions have been tested or are currently under development to mitigate its risk-factors. Recently, some vaccine candidates showed around 95% clinical efficacy, and now receiving emergency use approvals in different countries. US FDA recently approved BNT162 and mRNA-1273 vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna Inc. for emergency use and vaccination in the USA. In this review, we present a succinct overview of the SARS-CoV-2 virus structure, molecular mechanisms of infection, COVID-19 epidemiology, diagnosis, and clinical manifestations. We also systematize different treatment strategies and clinical trials initiated after the pandemic outbreak, based on viral infection and replication mechanisms. Additionally, we reviewed the novel pharmacological intervention approaches and vaccine development strategies against COVID-19. We speculate that the current pandemic emergency will trigger detailed studies of coronaviruses, their mechanism of infection, development of systematic drug repurposing approaches, and novel drug discoveries for current and future pandemic outbreaks.

A Novel Report on the Compassionate Use of Baricitinib in Treating a Pediatric Patient With Severe Symptoms of COVID-19 Infection

Since the outbreak of the pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), there has been an increasing need for treatment to decrease morbidity and mortality of patients presenting with severe disease symptoms. There has been increasing evidence to suggest that the pathophysiological basis is a severe inflammatory response that resembles the cytokine release syndrome. Current strategies to counteract this involve modifiers of the immune response such as interleukin (IL)-6 receptor blockers and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. An example of a JAK inhibitor is baricitinib. In this case, we present a 17-year-old female admitted with severe COVID-19 symptoms, who was placed on high-flow nasal cannula and started on azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine, which were standard of care at the time. Due to the worsening of symptoms, she was given baricitinib for compassionate use. There was a rapid improvement in clinical and imaging findings, and the patient was discharged from the hospital within 8 days of admission. This study is fascinating because there are very limited studies published on the benefits of baricitinib in managing patients with severe symptoms of COVID-19 especially in the pediatric population, and the rapidity in recovery time was remarkable.

An Up-to-Date Overview of Therapeutic Agents for the Treatment of COVID-19 Disease

Acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has a great potential to overwhelm the world healthcare systems that may lead to high morbidity and mortality. It also affects world economic development in the future. Currently, no proven effective drugs or vaccines are available for the management of COVID-19 disease. The pace of normal drug development progression is unacceptable in the context of the current pandemic. Therefore, repurposing the existing drugs that were used for the treatment of malaria, Ebola, and influenza helps rapid drug development for COVID-19. Currently, several repurposing candidate drugs are in a clinical trial including, chloroquine monoclonal antibodies, convalescent plasma, interferon, and antiviral therapies. Antiviral drugs like arbidol, remdesiv and favirnavir are the most promising due to the similarities of the viruses regarding viral entry, fusion, uncoating, and replication. This review article provides an overview of the potential therapeutic agent, which displayed better clinical treatment outcomes. Moreover, with further understanding of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, new drugs targeting specific SARS-CoV-2 viral components arise, and investigations on these novels anti-SARSCoV- 2 agents are also reviewed.

COVID-19 Clinical Trials Registered Worldwide for Drug Intervention: An Overview and Characteristic Analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to comprehensively evaluate the characteristics of clinical drug trials to facilitate the collection of evidence for COVID-19 drug treatments.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 910 trials retrieved on August 7, 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 910 registered clinical trials with at least one drug intervention were evaluated. The number of registrations (32.4%, 295) from the United States accounted for nearly one-third of the total and far exceeded that of other countries individually. Furthermore, the peak number of trials were registered in April (34.3%, 312). Over half of the trials (51.2%, 466) are in the recruitment phase, and only 4.2% (38) of the trials have been completed. The median (interquartile range) estimated enrollment is 127 (59, 365). In 39% (355) of trials, the estimated enrollment is less than 100 participants. A total of 94.5% (790) of the trials use randomization in the allocation, 82.7% (753) use a parallel intervention mode, and 52.2% (475) use masking. A total of 287 drug names have been standardized and mapped. "Hydroxychloroquine" is the leading drug among the registered trials (7.47%, 68). Among the main countries contributing to investigations on "hydroxychloroquine", the United States ranks first with 36.76% (25) of the trials.

CONCLUSION

The designs of COVID-19 clinical drug trials have greatly improved in terms of the implementation of randomization and, particularly, blinding methods. In terms of drug reuse, the number of drug types has greatly increased, and hundreds of drugs have been used for efficacy screening. The emergence of large-sample registration trials is expected to address the uncertainty regarding the current clinical efficacy of some drugs.