An evidence mapping and analysis of registered COVID-19 clinical trials in China

Drugs and convalescent plasma therapy for COVID-19: a survey of the interventional clinical studies in Italy after 1 year of pandemic

Background

The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has highlighted the importance of health research and fostered clinical research as never before. A huge number of clinical trials for potential COVID-19 interventions have been launched worldwide. Therefore, the effort of monitoring and characterizing the ongoing research portfolio of COVID-19 clinical trials has become crucial in order to fill evidence gaps that can arise, define research priorities and methodological issues, and eventually, formulate valuable recommendations for investigators and sponsors. The main purpose of the present work was to analyze the landscape of COVID-19 clinical research in Italy, by mapping and describing the characteristics of planned clinical trials investigating the role of drugs and convalescent plasma for treatment or prevention of COVID-19 disease.

Methods

During an 11-month period between May 2020 and April 2021, we performed a survey of the Italian COVID-19 clinical trials on therapeutic and prophylactic drugs and convalescent plasma. Clinical trials registered in the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) and ClinicalTrials.gov websites were regularly monitored. In the present paper, we report an analysis of study design characteristics and other trial features at 6 April 2021.

Results

Ninety-four clinical trials planned to be carried out in Italy were identified. Almost all of them (91%) had a therapeutic purpose; as for the study design, the majority of them adopted a parallel group (74%) and randomized (76%) design. Few of them were blinded (33%). Eight multiarm studies were identified, and two of them were multinational platform trials. Many therapeutic strategies were investigated, mostly following a drug repositioning therapeutic approach.

Conclusions

Our study describes the characteristics of COVID-19 clinical trials planned to be carried out in Italy over about 1 year of pandemic emergency.

High level quality clinical trials were identified, although some weaknesses in study design and replications of experimental interventions were observed, particularly in the early phase of the pandemic.

Our findings provide a critical view of the clinical research strategies adopted for COVID-19 in Italy during the early phase of the pandemic. Further actions could include monitoring and follow-up of trial results and publications and focus on non-pharmacological research areas.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06474-8.

Reporting and methodological quality of COVID-19 systematic reviews needs to be improved: an evidence mapping

OBJECTIVES

To assess the reporting and methodological quality of COVID-19 systematic reviews, and to analyze trends and gaps in the quality, clinical topics, author countries, and populations of the reviews using an evidence mapping approach.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A structured search for systematic reviews concerning COVID-19 was performed using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Campbell Library, Web of Science, CBM, WanFang Data, CNKI, and CQVIP from inception until June 2020. The quality of each review was assessed using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) checklist and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist.

RESULTS

In total, 243 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria, over 50% of which (128, 52.7%) were from 14 developing countries, with China contributing the most reviews (76, 31.3%). In terms of methodological quality of the studies, 30 (12.3%) were of moderate quality, 63 (25.9%) were of low quality, and 150 (61.7%) were of critically low quality. In terms of reporting quality, the median (interquartile range) PRISMA score was 14 (10-18). Regarding the topics of the reviews, 24 (9.9%) focused on the prevalence of COVID-19, 69 (28.4%) focused on the clinical manifestations, 30 (12.3%) focused on etiology, 43 (17.7%) focused on diagnosis, 65 (26.7%) focused on treatment, 104 (42.8%) focused on prognosis, and 25 (10.3%) focused on prevention. These studies mainly focused on general patients with COVID-19 (161, 66.3%), followed by children (22, 9.1%) and pregnant patients (18, 7.4%).

CONCLUSION

This study systematically evaluated the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews of COVID-19, summarizing and analyzing trends in their clinical topics, author countries, and study populations.

How the clinical research community responded to the COVID-19 pandemic: an analysis of the COVID-19 clinical studies in ClinicalTrials.gov

OBJECTIVE

In the past few months, a large number of clinical studies on the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) have been initiated worldwide to find effective therapeutics, vaccines, and preventive strategies for COVID-19. In this study, we aim to understand the landscape of COVID-19 clinical research and identify the issues that may cause recruitment difficulty or reduce study generalizability.

METHODS

We analyzed 3765 COVID-19 studies registered in the largest public registry-ClinicalTrials.gov, leveraging natural language processing (NLP) and using descriptive, association, and clustering analyses. We first characterized COVID-19 studies by study features such as phase and tested intervention. We then took a deep dive and analyzed their eligibility criteria to understand whether these studies: (1) considered the reported underlying health conditions that may lead to severe illnesses, and (2) excluded older adults, either explicitly or implicitly, which may reduce the generalizability of these studies to the older adults population.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 2295 interventional studies and 1470 observational studies. Most trials did not explicitly exclude older adults with common chronic conditions. However, known risk factors such as diabetes and hypertension were considered by less than 5% of trials based on their trial description. Pregnant women were excluded by 34.9% of the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Most COVID-19 clinical studies included both genders and older adults. However, risk factors such as diabetes, hypertension, and pregnancy were under-represented, likely skewing the population that was sampled. A careful examination of existing COVID-19 studies can inform future COVID-19 trial design towards balanced internal validity and generalizability.

Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19: Perspectives on their failure in repurposing

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Non-clinical studies suggest that chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have antiviral activities. Early clinical reports of successful HCQ-associated reduction in viral load from small studies in COVID-19 patients spurred a large number of national and international clinical trials to test their therapeutic potential. The objective of this review is to summarize the current evidence on the safety and efficacy of these two agents and to provide a perspective on why their repurposing has hitherto failed.

METHODS

Published studies and rapidly emerging data were reviewed to gather evidence on safety and efficacy of CQ and HCQ in patients with COVID-19 infection or as prophylaxis. The focus is on clinically relevant efficacy endpoints and their adverse effects on QT interval.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

At the doses used, the two agents, given alone or with azithromycin (AZM), are not effective in COVID-19 infection. The choice of (typically subtherapeutic) dosing regimens, influenced partly by "QT-phobia," varied widely and seems anecdotal without any pharmacologically reliable supporting clinical evidence. A substantial proportion of patients receiving CQ/HCQ/AZM regimen developed QTc interval prolongation, many with absolute QTc interval exceeding the potential proarrhythmic threshold, but very few developed proarrhythmia.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The strategy to repurpose CQ/HCQ to combat COVID-19 infection is overshadowed by concerns about their QT liability, resulting in choice of potentially subtherapeutic doses. Although the risk of QT-related proarrhythmia is real, it is low and manageable by careful monitoring. Recent discontinuation of HCQ from at least four large studies effectively marks the end of efforts at repurposing of CQ or HCQ for COVID-19 infection. This episode leaves behind important questions on dose selection and risk/benefit balance in repurposing drugs generally.

COVID-19-related medical research: a meta-research and critical appraisal

BACKGROUND

Since the start of the COVID-19 outbreak, a large number of COVID-19-related papers have been published. However, concerns about the risk of expedited science have been raised. We aimed at reviewing and categorizing COVID-19-related medical research and to critically appraise peer-reviewed original articles.

METHODS

The data sources were Pubmed, Cochrane COVID-19 register study, arXiv, medRxiv and bioRxiv, from 01/11/2019 to 01/05/2020. Peer-reviewed and preprints publications related to COVID-19 were included, written in English or Chinese. No limitations were placed on study design. Reviewers screened and categorized studies according to i) publication type, ii) country of publication, and iii) topics covered. Original articles were critically appraised using validated quality assessment tools.

RESULTS

Among the 11,452 publications identified, 10,516 met the inclusion criteria, among which 7468 (71.0%) were peer-reviewed articles. Among these, 4190 publications (56.1%) did not include any data or analytics (comprising expert opinion pieces). Overall, the most represented topics were infectious disease (n = 2326, 22.1%), epidemiology (n = 1802, 17.1%), and global health (n = 1602, 15.2%). The top five publishing countries were China (25.8%), United States (22.3%), United Kingdom (8.8%), Italy (8.1%) and India (3.4%). The dynamic of publication showed that the exponential growth of COVID-19 peer-reviewed articles was mainly driven by publications without original data (mean 261.5 articles ± 51.1 per week) as compared with original articles (mean of 69.3 ± 22.3 articles per week). Original articles including patient data accounted for 713 (9.5%) of peer-reviewed studies. A total of 576 original articles (80.8%) showed intermediate to high risk of bias. Last, except for simulation studies that mainly used large-scale open data, the median number of patients enrolled was of 102 (IQR = 37-337).

CONCLUSIONS

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the majority of research is composed by publications without original data. Peer-reviewed original articles with data showed a high risk of bias and included a limited number of patients. Together, these findings underscore the urgent need to strike a balance between the velocity and quality of research, and to cautiously consider medical information and clinical applicability in a pressing, pandemic context. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/5zjyx/.

Licorice: A Potential Herb in Overcoming SARS-CoV-2 Infections

The management of the global pandemic outbreak due to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been challenging with no exact dedicated treatment nor established vaccines at the beginning of the pandemic. Nonetheless, the situation seems to be better controlled with the recent COVID-19 vaccines roll-out globally as active immunisation to prevent COVID-19. The extensive usage and trials done in recent outbreak in China has shown the effectiveness of traditional Chinese Medicines (TCM) in improving the wellbeing of COVID-19 patients. Therefore, COVID-19 Prevention and Treatment guidelines has listed a number of recommended concoctions meant for COVID-19 patients. Licorice, more commonly known as Gancao in Chinese Pinyin, is known as one of the most frequently used ingredients in TCM prescriptions for treatment of epidemic diseases. Interestingly, it is deemed as food ingredient as well, where it is normally used in Western cuisines' desserts and sweets. The surprising fact that licorice appeared in the top 10 main ingredients used in TCM prescriptions in COVID-19 has drawn great attention from researchers in revealing its biological potential in overcoming this disease. To date, there are no comprehensive review on licorice and its benefits when used in COVID-19. Thus, in this current review, the possible benefits, mechanism of actions, safety and limitations of licorice were explored in hope to provide a quick reference guide for its preclinical and clinical experimental set-up in this very critical moment of pandemic.

Effects of Tanreqing Capsule on the negative conversion time of nucleic acid in patients with COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study

Objective

Traditional Chinese medicine plays a significant role in the treatment of the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Tanreqing Capsule (TRQC) was used in the treatment of COVID-19 patients in the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center. This study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy of TRQC in the treatment of COVID-19.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 82 patients who had laboratory-confirmed mild and moderate COVID-19; patients were treated with TRQC in one designated hospital. The treatment and control groups consisted of 25 and 57 cases, respectively. The treatment group was given TRQC orally three times a day, three pills each time, in addition to conventional Western medicine treatments which were also administered to the control group. The clinical efficacy indicators, such as the negative conversion time of pharyngeal swab nucleic acid, the negative conversion time of fecal nucleic acid, the duration of negative conversion of pharyngeal-fecal nucleic acid, and the improvement in the level of immune indicators such as T-cell subsets (CD3, CD4 and CD45) were monitored.

Results

COVID-19 patients in the treatment group, compared to the control group, had a shorter negative conversion time of fecal nucleic acid (4 vs. 9 days, P = 0.047) and a shorter interval of negative conversion of pharyngeal-fecal nucleic acid (0 vs. 2 days, P = 0.042). The level of CD3⁺ T cells increased in the treatment group compared to the control group ([317.09 ± 274.39] vs. [175.02 ± 239.95] counts/μL, P = 0.030). No statistically significant differences were detected in the median improvement in levels of CD4⁺ T cells (173 vs. 107 counts/μL, P = 0.208) and CD45⁺ T cells (366 vs. 141 counts/μL, P = 0.117) between the treatment and control groups.

Conclusion

Significant reductions in the negative conversion time of fecal nucleic acid and the duration of negative conversion of pharyngeal-fecal nucleic acid were identified in the treatment group as compared to the control group, illustrating the potential therapeutic benefits of using TRQC as a complement to conventional medicine in patients with mild and moderate COVID-19. The underlying mechanism may be related to the improved levels of the immune indicator CD3⁺ T cells.