Direct antivirals working against the novel coronavirus: azithromycin (DAWn-AZITHRO), a randomized, multicenter, open-label, adaptive, proof-of-concept clinical trial of new antivirals working against SARS-CoV-2-azithromycin trial

Hepatic Disorders and COVID-19: From Pathophysiology to Treatment Strategy

Following the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak and the subsequent development of the COVID-19 pandemic, organs such as the lungs, kidneys, liver, heart, and brain have been identified as priority organs. Liver diseases are considered a risk factor for high mortality from the COVID-19 pandemic. Besides, liver damage has been demonstrated in a substantial proportion of patients with COVID-19, especially those with severe clinical symptoms. Furthermore, antiviral medications, immunosuppressive drugs after liver transplantation, pre-existing hepatic diseases, and chronic liver diseases such as cirrhosis have also been implicated in SARS-CoV-2-induced liver injury. As a result, some precautions have been taken to prevent, monitor the virus, and avoid immunocompromised and susceptible individuals, such as liver and kidney transplant recipients, from being infected with SARS-CoV-2, thereby avoiding an increase in mortality. The purpose of this review was to examine the impairment caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection and the impact of drugs used during the pandemic on the mortality range and therefore the possibility of preventive measures in patients with liver disease.

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.

Azithromycin for Treatment of Hospitalised COVID-19 Patients: a randomised, multicentre, open-label clinical trial (DAWn-AZITHRO)

Background and objectives

Azithromycin was rapidly adopted as a repurposed drug to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) early in the pandemic. We aimed to evaluate its efficacy in patients hospitalised for COVID-19.

Methods

In a series of randomised, open-label, phase 2 proof-of-concept, multicentre clinical trials (Direct Antivirals Working against the novel coronavirus (DAWn)), several treatments were compared with standard of care. In 15 Belgian hospitals, patients hospitalised with moderate to severe COVID-19 were allocated 2:1 to receive standard of care plus azithromycin or standard of care alone. The primary outcome was time to live discharge or sustained clinical improvement, defined as a two-point improvement on the World Health Organization (WHO) ordinal scale sustained for at least 3 days.

Results

Patients were included between April 22 and December 17, 2020. When 15-day follow-up data were available for 160 patients (56% of preset cohort), an interim analysis was performed at request of the independent Data Safety and Monitoring Board. Subsequently, DAWn-AZITHRO was stopped for futility. In total, 121 patients were allocated to the treatment arm and 64 patients to the standard-of-care arm. We found no effect of azithromycin on the primary outcome with a hazard ratio of 1.044 (95% CI 0.772–1.413; p=0.7798). None of the predefined subgroups showed significant interaction as covariates in the Fine–Gray regression analysis. No benefit of azithromycin was found on any of the short- and longer-term secondary outcomes.

Conclusion

Time to clinical improvement is not influenced by azithromycin in patients hospitalised with moderate to severe COVID-19.

Previous randomised controlled studies with azithromycin in hospitalised COVID-19 patients assessed end-points at fixed timepoints. Complementary to this, DAWn-AZITHRO assessed time to sustained improvement. No benefit of azithromycin was shown.https://bit.ly/3FapyC7

Databases, DrugBank, and virtual screening platforms for therapeutic development

The upsurge of the severe acute respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has turned into a global health disaster. Many remodeled medications were suggested for treatment in the early stages of this pandemic, but these dosages afterward came across with distinct offshoots. Thus, these consequences compelled the scientists to develop new drugs using various antiviral, antiinflammatory, antibacterial, and phytochemical compounds. A handful of drugs have been scrutinized in silico, in vitro, plus through human trials such as anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents and made available as various databases by various scientific communities. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic databases are designed to allay difficulties associated with this scenario. Some of the popular databases are GESS (global evaluation of SARS-CoV-2/HCoV-19 sequences) which gives a thorough study of data based on tenfold of thousands of complete coverage and quality of SARS-CoV-2 genomes, CORona Drug InTERactions (CORDITE) database for SARS-CoV-2 which profoundly combines the understanding of potential drugs and make it available for scientists and medicos. SARSCOVIDB set one’s sights to merge all differential gene expression data, at mRNA and protein levels, helping to accelerate analysis and research on the molecular impact of covid-19. This chapter aims to provide a piece of complete information about the SARS-CoV-2 virus databases, potentially available drugs, and virtual screening methods. And also provides a different webserver to reach out for information related to the COVID-19 pandemic and its future.

Antibiotics for the treatment of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The effect of antibiotics with potential antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties are being investigated in clinical trials as treatment for COVID-19. The use of antibiotics follows the intention-to-treat the viral disease and not primarily to treat bacterial co-infections of individuals with COVID-19. A thorough understanding of the current evidence regarding effectiveness and safety of antibiotics as anti-viral treatments for COVID-19 based on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is required.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of antibiotics compared to each other, no treatment, standard of care alone, placebo, or any other active intervention with proven efficacy for treatment of COVID-19 outpatients and inpatients.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (including MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, medRxiv, CENTRAL), Web of Science and WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies to 14 June 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs were included that compared antibiotics with each other, no treatment, standard of care alone, placebo, or another proven intervention, for treatment of people with confirmed COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, treated in the in- or outpatient settings. Co-interventions had to be the same in both study arms. We excluded studies comparing antibiotics to other pharmacological interventions with unproven efficacy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed risk of bias of primary outcomes using the Cochrane risk of bias tool (ROB 2) for RCTs. We used GRADE to rate the certainty of evidence for the following primary outcomes: 1. to treat inpatients with moderate to severe COVID-19: mortality, clinical worsening defined as new need for intubation or death, clinical improvement defined as being discharged alive, quality of life, adverse and serious adverse events, and cardiac arrhythmias; 2. to treat outpatients with asymptomatic or mild COVID-19: mortality, clinical worsening defined as hospital admission or death, clinical improvement defined as symptom resolution, quality of life, adverse and serious adverse events, and cardiac arrhythmias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies with 11,281 participants with an average age of 54 years investigating antibiotics compared to placebo, standard of care alone or another antibiotic. No study was found comparing antibiotics to an intervention with proven efficacy. All studies investigated azithromycin, two studies investigated other antibiotics compared to azithromycin. Seven studies investigated inpatients with moderate to severe COVID-19 and four investigated mild COVID-19 cases in outpatient settings. Eight studies had an open-label design, two were blinded with a placebo control, and one did not report on blinding. We identified 19 ongoing and 15 studies awaiting classification pending publication of results or clarification of inconsistencies. Of the 30 study results contributing to primary outcomes by included studies, 17 were assessed as overall low risk and 13 as some concerns of bias. Only studies investigating azithromycin reported data eligible for the prioritised primary outcomes. Azithromycin doses and treatment duration varied among included studies.  Azithromycin for the treatment of COVID-19 compared to placebo or standard of care alone in inpatients We are very certain that azithromycin has little or no effect on all-cause mortality at day 28 compared to standard of care alone (risk ratio (RR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.06; 8600 participants; 4 studies; high-certainty evidence). Azithromycin probably has little or no effect on clinical worsening or death at day 28 (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.87 to 1.03; 7311 participants; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence), on clinical improvement at day 28 (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.84 to 1.11; 8172 participants; 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), on serious adverse events during the study period (RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.40; 794 participants; 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), and cardiac arrhythmias during the study period (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.15; 7865 participants; 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) compared to placebo or standard of care alone. Azithromycin may increase any adverse events slightly during the study period (RR 1.20; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.57; 355 participants; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence) compared to standard of care alone. No study reported quality of life up to 28 days. Azithromycin for the treatment of COVID-19 compared to placebo or standard of care alone in outpatients Azithromycin may have little or no effect compared to placebo or standard of care alone on all-cause mortality at day 28 (RR 1.00 ; 95% CI 0.06 to 15.69; 876 participants; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence), on admission to hospital or death within 28 days (RR 0.94 ; 95% CI 0.57 to 1.56; 876 participants; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence), and on symptom resolution at day 14 (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.12; 138 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether azithromycin increases or reduces serious adverse events compared to placebo or standard of care alone (0 participants experienced serious adverse events; 454 participants; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). No study reported on adverse events, cardiac arrhythmias during the study period or quality of life up to 28 days. Azithromycin for the treatment of COVID-19 compared to any other antibiotics in inpatients and outpatients One study compared azithromycin to lincomycin in inpatients, but did not report any primary outcome. Another study compared azithromycin to clarithromycin in outpatients, but did not report any relevant outcome for this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are certain that risk of death in hospitalised COVID-19 patients is not reduced by treatment with azithromycin after 28 days. Further, based on moderate-certainty evidence, patients in the inpatient setting with moderate and severe disease probably do not benefit from azithromycin used as potential antiviral and anti-inflammatory treatment for COVID-19 regarding clinical worsening or improvement. For the outpatient setting, there is currently low-certainty evidence that azithromycin may have no beneficial effect for COVID-19 individuals. There is no evidence from RCTs available for other antibiotics as antiviral and anti-inflammatory treatment of COVID-19. With accordance to the living approach of this review, we will continually update our search and include eligible trials to fill this evidence gap. However, in relation to the evidence for azithromycin and in the context of antimicrobial resistance, antibiotics should not be used for treatment of COVID-19 outside well-designed RCTs.

Effect of Oral Azithromycin vs Placebo on COVID-19 Symptoms in Outpatients With SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Azithromycin has been hypothesized to have activity against SARS-CoV-2.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether oral azithromycin in outpatients with SARS-CoV-2 infection leads to absence of self-reported COVID-19 symptoms at day 14.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomized clinical trial of azithromycin vs matching placebo conducted from May 2020 through March 2021. Outpatients from the US were enrolled remotely via internet-based surveys and followed up for 21 days. Eligible participants had a positive SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic test result (nucleic acid amplification or antigen) within 7 days prior to enrollment, were aged 18 years or older, and were not hospitalized at the time of enrollment. Among 604 individuals screened, 297 were ineligible, 44 refused participation, and 263 were enrolled. Participants, investigators, and study staff were masked to treatment randomization.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomized in a 2:1 fashion to a single oral 1.2-g dose of azithromycin (n = 171) or matching placebo (n = 92).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was absence of self-reported COVID-19 symptoms at day 14. There were 23 secondary clinical end points, including all-cause hospitalization at day 21.

RESULTS

Among 263 participants who were randomized (median age, 43 years; 174 [66%] women; 57% non-Hispanic White and 29% Latinx/Hispanic), 76% completed the trial. The trial was terminated by the data and safety monitoring committee for futility after the interim analysis. At day 14, there was no significant difference in proportion of participants who were symptom free (azithromycin: 50%; placebo: 50%; prevalence difference, 0%; 95% CI, -14% to 15%; P > .99). Of 23 prespecified secondary clinical end points, 18 showed no significant difference. By day 21, 5 participants in the azithromycin group had been hospitalized compared with 0 in the placebo group (prevalence difference, 4%; 95% CI, -1% to 9%; P = .16).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among outpatients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, treatment with a single dose of azithromycin compared with placebo did not result in greater likelihood of being symptom free at day 14. These findings do not support the routine use of azithromycin for outpatient SARS-CoV-2 infection.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04332107.

The Role of Dysbiosis in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19 and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

In late December 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) quickly spread worldwide, and the syndrome it causes, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has reached pandemic proportions. Around 30% of patients with COVID-19 experience severe respiratory distress and are admitted to the intensive care unit for comprehensive critical care. Patients with COVID-19 often present an enhanced immune response with a hyperinflammatory state characterized by a "cytokine storm," which may reflect changes in the microbiota composition. Moreover, the evolution to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) may increase the severity of COVID-19 and related dysbiosis. During critical illness, the multitude of therapies administered, including antibiotics, sedatives, analgesics, body position, invasive mechanical ventilation, and nutritional support, may enhance the inflammatory response and alter the balance of patients' microbiota. This status of dysbiosis may lead to hyper vulnerability in patients and an inappropriate response to critical circumstances. In this context, the aim of our narrative review is to provide an overview of possible interaction between patients' microbiota dysbiosis and clinical status of severe COVID-19 with ARDS, taking into consideration the characteristic hyperinflammatory state of this condition, respiratory distress, and provide an overview on possible nutritional strategies for critically ill patients with COVID-19-ARDS.

Itraconazole for COVID-19: preclinical studies and a proof-of-concept randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The antifungal drug itraconazole exerts in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 in Vero and human Caco-2 cells. Preclinical and clinical studies are required to investigate if itraconazole is effective for the treatment and/or prevention of COVID-19.

METHODS

Due to the initial absence of preclinical models, the effect of itraconazole was explored in a clinical, proof-of-concept, open-label, single-center study, in which hospitalized COVID-19 patients were randomly assigned to standard of care with or without itraconazole. Primary outcome was the cumulative score of the clinical status until day 15 based on the 7-point ordinal scale of the World Health Organization. In parallel, itraconazole was evaluated in a newly established hamster model of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission, as soon as the model was validated.

FINDINGS

In the hamster acute infection model, itraconazole did not reduce viral load in lungs, stools or ileum, despite adequate plasma and lung drug concentrations. In the transmission model, itraconazole failed to prevent viral transmission. The clinical trial was prematurely discontinued after evaluation of the preclinical studies and because an interim analysis showed no signal for a more favorable outcome with itraconazole: mean cumulative score of the clinical status 49 vs 47, ratio of geometric means 1.01 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.19) for itraconazole vs standard of care.

INTERPRETATION

Despite in vitro activity, itraconazole was not effective in a preclinical COVID-19 hamster model. This prompted the premature termination of the proof-of-concept clinical study.

FUNDING

KU Leuven, Research Foundation - Flanders (FWO), Horizon 2020, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.