query: are there any clinical trials available for the coronavirus

positive: Cardiovascular Safety of Potential Drugs for the Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic. It is still uncontrolled in most countries and no therapies are currently available. Various drugs are under investigation for its treatment. The disease is known to have worse outcomes in patients who have underlying cardiovascular disease. Chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, remdesivir and lopinavir/ritonavir are currently being studied in trials and show some promise. Conduction disorders, heart failure and mortality have been reported with the use of these drugs. It is important to have a knowledge of potential cardiotoxic effects of these drugs before using them for COVID-19 patients for better allocation of healthcare resources and improvement in clinical outcomes.

positive: Chloroquine as prophylactic agent against COVID-19? • Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in COVID-19 treatment; • Use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine in COVID-19 prophylaxis.

positive: COVID-19: Review of Epidemiology and Potential Treatments Against 2019 Novel Coronavirus An epidemic of extreme respiratory deterrence, pneumonia and shortness of breath, the SARS-CoV-2 viral infection began in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China in December 2019, and rapidly spread across China and beyond, with human to human transmission. On February 12, 2020, World Health Organization officially named the new coronavirus disease as coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). Most COVID-19 patients were diagnosed with pneumonia and many were treated using Chinese medicines and other secondary therapies. As of April 22, 2020, the total figure of infected patients has crossed 2.6 million people worldwide with over 180,000 deaths and 700,000 patients that have recovered. Preliminary reports suggest that certain drugs, such as chloroquine and antiviral nucleotide analogues such as remdesivir, which inhibit viral replication, can target the new coronavirus, although their usefulness in the clinic is still under debate. An expert US committee developed the US NIH guidelines for COVID-19 treatment, which was just released and will be regularly updated. This manuscript reviews the epidemiology, etiology, mortality, COVID-19 clinical symptoms, and potential therapeutic drugs, while highlighting the seriousness and damage-induced by SARS-CoV-2.

positive: Boceprevir, GC-376, and calpain inhibitors II, XII inhibit SARS-CoV-2 viral replication by targeting the viral main protease A novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, also called novel coronavirus 2019 (nCoV-19), started to circulate among humans around December 2019, and it is now widespread as a global pandemic. The disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus is called COVID-19, which is highly contagious and has an overall mortality rate of 6.96% as of May 4, 2020. There is no vaccine or antiviral available for SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we report our discovery of inhibitors targeting the SARS-CoV-2 main protease (M(pro)). Using the FRET-based enzymatic assay, several inhibitors including boceprevir, GC-376, and calpain inhibitors II, and XII were identified to have potent activity with single-digit to submicromolar IC(50) values in the enzymatic assay. The mechanism of action of the hits was further characterized using enzyme kinetic studies, thermal shift binding assays, and native mass spectrometry. Significantly, four compounds (boceprevir, GC-376, calpain inhibitors II and XII) inhibit SARS-CoV-2 viral replication in cell culture with EC(50) values ranging from 0.49 to 3.37 μM. Notably, boceprevir, calpain inhibitors II and XII represent novel chemotypes that are distinct from known M(pro) inhibitors. A complex crystal structure of SARS-CoV-2 M(pro) with GC-376, determined at 2.15 Å resolution with three monomers per asymmetric unit, revealed two unique binding configurations, shedding light on the molecular interactions and protein conformational flexibility underlying substrate and inhibitor binding by M(pro). Overall, the compounds identified herein provide promising starting points for the further development of SARS-CoV-2 therapeutics.

positive: Azithromycin added to hydroxychloroquine for patients admitted to intensive care due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-protocol of randomised controlled trial AZIQUINE-ICU BACKGROUND: Novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is known to be susceptible in vitro to exposure to hydroxychloroquine and its effect has been found to be potentiated by azithromycin. We hypothesise that early administration of hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin can prevent respiratory deterioration in patients admitted to intensive care due to rapidly progressive COVID-19 infection. METHODS: Design: Prospective, multi-centre, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial (RCT). PARTICIPANTS: Adult (> 18 years) within 24 h of admission to the intensive care unit with proven or suspected COVID-19 infection, whether or not mechanically ventilated. Exclusion criteria include duration symptoms of febrile disease for ≥ 1 week, treatment limitations in place or moribund patients, allergy or intolerance of any study treatment, and pregnancy. INTERVENTIONS: Patients will be randomised in 1:1:1 ratio to receive Hydroxychloroquine 800 mg orally in two doses followed by 400 mg daily in two doses and azithromycin 500 mg orally in one dose followed by 250 mg in one dose for a total of 5 days (HC-A group) or hydroxychloroquine + placebo (HC group) or placebo + placebo (C-group) in addition to the best standard of care, which may evolve during the trial period but will not differ between groups. Primary outcome is the composite percentage of patients alive and not on end-of-life pathway who are free of mechanical ventilation at day 14. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: The percentage of patients who were prevented from needing intubation until day 14, ICU length of stay, and mortality (in hospital) at day 28 and 90. DISCUSSION: Although both investigational drugs are often administered off label to patients with severe COVID-19, at present, there is no data from RCTs on their safety and efficacy. In vitro and observational trial suggests their potential to limit viral replication and the damage to lungs as the most common reason for ICU admission. Therefore, patients most likely to benefit from the treatment are those with severe but early disease. This trial is designed and powered to investigate whether the treatment in this cohort of patients leads to improved clinical patient-centred outcomes, such as mechanical ventilation-free survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials.gov: NCT04339816 (Registered on 9 April 2020, amended on 22 June 2020); Eudra CT number: 2020-001456-18 (Registered on 29 March 2020).

positive: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Spread and Pharmacovigilance Implications: Expert Opinion The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is rapidly spreading throughout the world after emerging in China in December 2019. Currently, there are no approved treatments for COVID-19 based on large clinical trial data, and hence, management involves infection prevention and control measures and supportive care. With anecdotal reports and in vitro studies suggesting that certain medicines already in use for treatment of other conditions could be viable treatment options, there has been an increased demand for these therapies which could have adverse consequences on patients and healthcare systems. Toxicity from these medicines resulting from a mad rush for them at community pharmacies and pressure on physicians to prescribe for individuals who do not have the infection are worth noting. Furthermore, the indiscriminate use of these medicines could result in viral resistance as well as acute shortage such that patients who routinely take them for other conditions may not get them.

positive: Systematic and Statistical Review of Coronavirus Disease 19 Treatment Trials The following systematic review and meta-analysis compile the current data regarding human controlled COVID-19 treatment trials. An electronic search of the literature compiled studies pertaining to human controlled treatment trials with COVID-19. Medications assessed included lopinavir/ritonavir, arbidol, hydroxychloroquine, tocilizumab, favipiravir, heparin, and dexamethasone. Statistical analyses were performed for common viral clearance endpoints whenever possible. Lopinavir/ritonavir showed no significant effect on viral clearance for COVID-19 cases (OR 0.95 [95% CI 0.50–1.83]). Hydroxychloroquine also showed no significant effect on COVID-19 viral clearance rates (OR 2.16 [95% CI 0.80–5.84]). Arbidol showed no 7-day (OR 1.63 [95% CI 0.76–3.50]) or 14-day viral (OR 5.37 [95% CI 0.35–83.30]) clearance difference compared to lopinavir/ritonavir. Review of literature showed no significant clinical improvement with lopinavir/ritonavir, arbidol, hydroxychloroquine, or remdesivir. Tocilizumab showed mixed results regarding survival. Favipiravir showed quicker symptom improvement compared to lopinavir/ritonavir and arbidol. Heparin and dexamethasone showed improvement with severe COVID-19 cases requiring supplemental oxygenation. Current medications do not show significant effect on COVID-19 viral clearance rates. Tocilizumab showed mixed results regarding survival. Favipiravir shows favorable results compared to other tested medications. Heparin and dexamethasone show benefit especially for severe COVID-19 cases.

positive: Repurposing antimalarials and other drugs for COVID-19

positive: A Review of SARS-CoV-2 and the Ongoing Clinical Trials The sudden outbreak of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV, later named SARS-CoV-2) in Wuhan, China, which rapidly grew into a global pandemic, marked the third introduction of a virulent coronavirus into the human society, affecting not only the healthcare system, but also the global economy. Although our understanding of coronaviruses has undergone a huge leap after two precedents, the effective approaches to treatment and epidemiological control are still lacking. In this article, we present a succinct overview of the epidemiology, clinical features, and molecular characteristics of SARS-CoV-2. We summarize the current epidemiological and clinical data from the initial Wuhan studies, and emphasize several features of SARS-CoV-2, which differentiate it from SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), such as high variability of disease presentation. We systematize the current clinical trials that have been rapidly initiated after the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic. Whereas the trials on SARS-CoV-2 genome-based specific vaccines and therapeutic antibodies are currently being tested, this solution is more long-term, as they require thorough testing of their safety. On the other hand, the repurposing of the existing therapeutic agents previously designed for other virus infections and pathologies happens to be the only practical approach as a rapid response measure to the emergent pandemic, as most of these agents have already been tested for their safety. These agents can be divided into two broad categories, those that can directly target the virus replication cycle, and those based on immunotherapy approaches either aimed to boost innate antiviral immune responses or alleviate damage induced by dysregulated inflammatory responses. The initial clinical studies revealed the promising therapeutic potential of several of such drugs, including favipiravir, a broad-spectrum antiviral drug that interferes with the viral replication, and hydroxychloroquine, the repurposed antimalarial drug that interferes with the virus endosomal entry pathway. We speculate that the current pandemic emergency will be a trigger for more systematic drug repurposing design approaches based on big data analysis.

positive: Umbilical cord blood therapy to prevent progression of COVID-19 related pneumonia: a structured summary of a study protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: Objective: To undertake a pilot, feasibility RCT of umbilical cord blood derived cell therapy for treatment of adult patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 virus related moderate-to-severe pneumonia to prevent progression to severe ARDS. HYPOTHESIS: Expanded cord blood derived cell therapy will be feasible, well tolerated and show potential efficacy in the treatment of acute COVID-19 related moderate to severe pneumonia in adult patients because of their powerful anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties. TRIAL DESIGN: Pilot, parallel design randomised controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: The trial will recruit 24 hospitalised patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia from July to December 2020 at Monash Medical Centre in Melbourne, Australia. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention: Intravenous injection of expanded umbilical cord blood cells at a dose of 5 million cells/kg (maximum dose - 500 million cells). Cell infusion will occur over 30-60 minutes through a peripheral intravenous cannula. Standard supportive care will continue as needed. Comparator: Standard supportive care. MAIN OUTCOMES: Safety and tolerability of cell administration within first 24 hours of administration; clinical improvement on a seven-category clinical improvement ordinal scale. RANDOMISATION: Randomisation will be done using computer generated allocation to intervention/ control groups in a 1:1 ratio (in blocks of 6) using sealed opaque envelopes. BLINDING (MASKING): This will be an unblinded study, given that it is the first study using expanded cord blood cells in COVID-19 patients. There will be no placebo infusion. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): Twelve participants in each group. Total n=24. TRIAL STATUS: CBC-19 protocol v2, dated 23rd April 2020. Recruitment has not started yet. Estimated recruitment timeline is between 1st July - 31st December 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12620000478910, registered 16th April 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Current Status of Treatment Options, Clinical Trials, and Vaccine Development for SARS-CoV-2 Infection The severe acute respiratory syndrome virus (SARS-CoV-2), a novel coronavirus first discovered in Wuhan, China in December 2019 causes the Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19), which presents with a wide range of clinical symptoms from mild or moderate to severe and critical illnesses With the continuing transmission of the virus worldwide and the rapidly evolving situation globally, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic in March Currently, there is no proven specific treatment for this potentially deadly disease beyond supportive care However, a massive effort has been put globally into the investigation of medications and other interventional measures to fight COVID-19 Convalescent plasma therapy from recovered patients has recently drawn considerable interest Several alternative medical treatments, although evidence of their efficacy still lacking, have also gained popularity, especially in countries with such traditions such as India and China Rapid repurposing of drugs for COVID-19 has revealed a few promising candidate antiviral agents, but further research, especially high quality randomized controlled trials, will be needed to prove their efficacy and safety in the clinical use to treat COVID-19 Vaccine development has been the imperative task in the battle against SARS-CoV-2 While clinical trials have been launched for several candidate vaccines, research on COVID-19 vaccines is still at an early stage So far, optimized supportive care remains the best practice against COVID-19

positive: Antiviral Drugs Specific for Coronaviruses in Preclinical Development Coronaviruses are positive stranded RNA viruses that cause respiratory, enteric and central nervous system diseases in many species, including humans. Until recently, the relatively low burden of disease in humans caused by few of these viruses impeded the development of coronavirus specific therapeutics. However, the emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), and more recently, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), has impelled the development of such drugs. This review focuses on some newly identified SARS-CoV inhibitors, with known mechanisms of action and their potential to inhibit the novel MERS-CoV. The clinical development of optimized versions of such compounds could be beneficial for the treatment and control of SARS-CoV, the current MERS-CoV and other future SARS-like epidemics.

positive: Antiviral therapy in management of COVID-19: a systematic review on current evidence Background: The purpose of the current systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy of antiviral therapies in treatment of COVID-19 In addition, clinical trials on the efficacy of antiviral therapies in the management of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (SARS-Cov) or Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) have also been reviewed, in order to identify potential treatment options for COVID-19 Method: An extensive search was performed in Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and CENTRAL databases until the end of March 15, 2020 Two independent researchers performed the screening, and finally the related studies were included Results: Only one clinical trial on the efficacy of antiviral therapy in management of COVID-19 was found The results depicted that adding Lopinavir-Ritonavir to the standard treatment regimen of patients with severe COVID-19 has no benefits Moreover, 21 case-series and case-report studies reported the prescription of antiviral agents in COVID-19, none of which can be used to determine the efficacy of antiviral therapies in confronting COVID-19 In addition, no clinical trials were found to be performed on the efficacy of antiviral agents in the management of SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV Conclusion: The current evidence impede researchers from proposing an appropriate antiviral therapy against COVID-19, making the current situation a serious concern for international organizations such as World Health Organization (WHO) In the time of the current pandemic and future epidemics, organizations such as WHO should pursue more proactive actions and plan well-designed clinical trials so that their results can be used in managing future epidemics

positive: Remdesivir for COVID-19: challenges of underpowered studies

positive: Role of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine in the Treatment of COVID-19 Infection- A Systematic Literature Review Background: Coronavirus pandemic is currently a global public health emergency. At present, no pharmacological treatment is known to treat this condition, and there is a need to review the available treatments. Objective: While there have been studies to describe the role of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in various viral conditions, there is limited information about the use of them in COVID-19. This systematic review aims to summarize the available evidence regarding the role of chloroquine in treating coronavirus infection. Methods: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used for this review. A literature search was performed using PUBMED & Google Scholar to find articles about the role of CQ in COVID-19 patients. Results: We included 19 publications (Five published articles, three letters/correspondence, one commentary, five pre-proofs of accepted articles, one abstract of yet to be published article, and four were pre-prints (not yet peer-reviewed) articles) in this systematic review. All the articles mentioned about the role of chloroquine and /or hydroxychloroquine in limiting the infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus causing COVID-19). Conclusions: There is theoretical, experimental, preclinical and clinical evidence of the effectiveness of chloroquine in patients affected with COVID-19. There is adequate evidence of drug safety from the long-time clinical use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in other indications. More data from ongoing and future trials will add more insight into the role of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 infection.

positive: Targeting the catecholamine-cytokine axis to prevent SARS-CoV-2 cytokine storm syndrome The mortality of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) appears to be driven by acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and a dysregulated immune response to SARS-CoV-2. Emerging evidence suggests that a subset of COVID-19 is characterized by the development of a cytokine storm syndrome (CSS), and interleukin (IL)-6 levels are predictors of COVID-19 severity and in-hospital mortality. Targeting hyper-inflammation in COVID-19 may be critical for reducing mortality. Catecholamines enhance inflammatory injury by augmenting the production of IL-6 and other cytokines through a self-amplifying feed-forward loop in immune cells that requires alpha-1 adrenergic receptor (α1-AR) signaling. Prophylactic inhibition of catecholamine synthesis with the α1-AR antagonist prazosin reduced catecholamines and cytokine responses in mice, and resulted in markedly increased survival following various hyper-inflammatory stimuli. These findings offer a rationale for studying α1-AR antagonists in the prophylaxis of patients with COVID-19-CSS and ARDS. As high infection rates threaten to overwhelm hospital capacity during this pandemic, preventative approaches that ameliorate COVID-19 severity and reduce excessive mortality are desperately needed. We hypothesize that treatment with prazosin of individuals who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 could reduce catecholamine surges, secondary cytokine dysregulation, and mortality. To investigate a potential role for α1-AR antagonists in preventing poor outcomes in ARDS, we conducted a retrospective analysis of hospitalized patients diagnosed with ARDS. Using data from the Truven Health MarketScan Research Database (2010-2017), we identified 13,125 men (age 45-64) with ARDS, of whom 655 patients (5.0%) were prescribed α1-AR antagonists in the previous year. Applying logistic regression models, we found that patients with prior use of α1-AR antagonists had lower odds of invasive mechanical ventilation compared to non-users (adjusted OR=0.75, 95% CI 0.59-0.95, p=0.019). Perhaps more importantly, those patients had a ~36% lower incidence of both being ventilated and dying in the hospital (adjusted OR=0.59, 95% CI 0.34-0.95, p=0.042). By contrast, prior use of beta-adrenergic receptor (β-AR) antagonists was not correlated with either outcome. We extended these analyses to patients admitted with pneumonia. Of 108,956 subjects in this cohort, 5,498 patients (5.0%) were taking α1-AR antagonist. Similar to ARDS, patients with pneumonia on α1-AR antagonists (but no β-AR antagonists) had a lower odds of mechanical ventilation (adjusted OR=0.83, 95% CI 0.75-0.92, p<0.001) and of both being ventilated and dying in the hospital (adjusted OR=0.77, 95% CI 0.62-0.94, p=0.014) compared to non-users. Mirroring findings from pre-clinical models, these data support a clinical rationale to study α1-AR antagonists in the prevention of severe complications of pneumonia, ARDS, and COVID-19. Prospective, randomized clinical trials of alpha-1 receptor antagonists (e.g. prazosin) administered prior to the onset of severe symptoms are needed to assess their efficacy in preventing CSS and reducing mortality in COVID-19.

positive: Key points of serious adverse event and protection of patients in ophthalmic clinical trials during novel coronavirus pneumonia outbreak/ 新型冠状病毒肺炎防控期间眼科临床试验流程管理及受试者随访防护要点 The prevention and control of novel coronavirus pneumonia is the most priority recently, and various measures during the prevention and control period will have varying degrees of impact on the implement of clinical trials.However, various examinations in ophthalmological clinical trials need close contact between operators and patients, which put us at risk of cross-infection.This paper indicated some suggestions based on the criteria of clinical trials under major public health emergencies, the management of clinical trials during epidemic period, including the follow-up of subjects, the treatment of epidemic serious adverse event (SAE) and the management requirements of co-sponsors, as well as the requirements and management principles for environment, subjects, examiners and inspection equipment in the process of ophthalmic clinical trials.It may be helpful to the ophthalmic clinical trial researchers and subjects during the period of novel coronavirus infection.

positive: Mapping the Global Research and Clinical Trials in COVID-19 COVID-19 has created an unprecedented level of research and innovation activity globally to bring out drug to control or cure the disease, and develop vaccine for long time prevention. A 'new/better normal' is emerging that is trying to push this time period for drug development and vaccine within a year and earlier than that from typical 8 to 10 years for drugs and 10 to 15 years for vaccine. This is happening due to multiple factors: strong policy push by different government that includes dedicated investment, speeding up regulation process, multiple agencies involvement, and multilateral bodies led by WHO trying to create a global platform, huge grants from private funding bodies, strategic linkages across the whole research and innovation value chain between firms, academic, research organisations and start-ups. The paper maps the research papers and ongoing clinical trials to provide an informed view of the current status of the research and drug development activity as seen through the lens of research papers and clinical trials. The intended goal of this study is to help the research community and policy makers to keep track of highly relevant research and drug development in COVID-19.

positive: Anti-IL6R role in treatment of COVID-19-related ARDS

positive: Review of trials currently testing treatment and prevention of COVID-19 BACKGROUND: As COVID-19 cases continue to rise globally, evidence from large randomized controlled trials is still lacking. Currently, numerous trials testing potential treatment and preventative options are being undertaken all over the world. OBJECTIVES: We summarized all registered clinical trials examining treatment and prevention options for COVID-19. Additionally, we evaluated the quality of the retrieved studies. DATA SOURCES: Clinicaltrials.gov, the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry and the European Union Clinical Trials Register were systematically searched. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Registered clinical trials examining treatment and/or prevention options for COVID-19 were included. No language, country or study design restrictions were applied. We excluded withdrawn or cancelled studies and trials not reporting therapeutic or preventative strategies for COVID-19. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: No restrictions in terms of participants' age and medical background or type of intervention were enforced. METHODS: The registries were searched using the term 'coronavirus' or 'COVID-19' from their inception until 26 March 2020. Additional manual search of the registries was also performed. Eligible studies were summarized and tabulated. Interventional trials were methodologically analysed, excluding expanded access studies and trials testing traditional Chinese medicine. RESULTS: In total, 309 trials evaluating therapeutic management options, 23 studies assessing preventive strategies and three studies examining both were retrieved. Finally, 214 studies were methodologically reviewed. Interventional treatment studies were mostly randomized (n = 150/198, 76%) and open label (n = 73/198, 37%) with a median number of planned inclusions of 90 (interquartile range 40-200). Major categories of interventions that are currently being investigated are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Numerous clinical trials have been registered since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Summarized data on these trials will assist physicians and researchers to promote patient care and guide future research efforts for COVID-19 pandemic containment.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine for the management of COVID-19: Hope or Hype? A Systematic review of the current evidence Purpose: The COVID-19 Pandemic has literally left the world breathless in the chase for Pharmacotherapy. With the vaccine approval likely more than a year away and novel drugs in early clinical trials, repurposing of existing drugs takes the center stage. A potential drug discussed both in geopolitical and global scientific community is hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). We intend to systematically weigh and analyze the existing evidence of HCQ in the light of published and pre-print data available so far. Methods: PubMed Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google scholar databases and official clinical trial Registries of the United States, China, WHO ICTRP were electronically searched for studies for the use of HCQ in patients with COVID-19. Pre-proof article repositories like MedRxiv, BioRxiv, and ChemRxiv were also included in the search. The literature was critically appraised. Results: Total 71 articles were available as of 15 th April of which articles of relevance (three invitro studies, two open label non-randomized trials, two open label randomized control trials, one follow-up study, three reviews, ten short communications) and 88 clinical trials registered in three clinical trial registries were analyzed. HCQ seems to be efficient in inhibiting of SARS CoV-2 in in-vitro cell lines; there is lack of strong evidence from human studies. Conclusions: The in-vitro cell culture based data of viral inhibition does not suffice for the use of hydroxychloroquine in the patients with COVID-19. Currently literature shows inadequate, low level evidence in human studies. Scarcity of safety and efficacy data warrants medical communities, health care agencies and governments across the world against the widespread use of HCQ in COVID-19 prophylaxis and treatment, until robust evidence becomes available. Keywords: Hydroxychloroquine, SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, Corona virus, nCov2, systematic review

positive: Clinical and CT imaging features of 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19)

positive: The Role of Chest Imaging in Patient Management during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multinational Consensus Statement from the Fleischner Society Abstract With more than 900,000 confirmed cases worldwide and nearly 50,000 deaths during the first three months of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has emerged as an unprecedented healthcare crisis. The spread of COVID-19 has been heterogeneous, resulting in some regions having sporadic transmission and relatively few hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and others having community transmission that has led to overwhelming numbers of severe cases. For these regions, healthcare delivery has been disrupted and compromised by critical resource constraints in diagnostic testing, hospital beds, ventilators, and healthcare workers who have fallen ill to the virus exacerbated by shortages of personal protective equipment. While mild cases mimic common upper respiratory viral infections, respiratory dysfunction becomes the principal source of morbidity and mortality as the disease advances. Thoracic imaging with chest radiography (CXR) and computed tomography (CT) are key tools for pulmonary disease diagnosis and management, but their role in the management of COVID-19 has not been considered within the multivariable context of the severity of respiratory disease, pre-test probability, risk factors for disease progression, and critical resource constraints. To address this deficit, a multidisciplinary panel comprised principally of radiologists and pulmonologists from 10 countries with experience managing COVID-19 patients across a spectrum of healthcare environments evaluated the utility of imaging within three scenarios representing varying risk factors, community conditions, and resource constraints. Fourteen key questions, corresponding to 11 decision points within the three scenarios and three additional clinical situations, were rated by the panel based upon the anticipated value of the information that thoracic imaging would be expected to provide. The results were aggregated, resulting in five main and three additional recommendations intended to guide medical practitioners in the use of CXR and CT in the management of COVID-19.

positive: Favipiravir versus Arbidol for COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial Background No clinically proven effective antiviral strategy exists for the epidemic Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label multicenter trial involving adult patients with COVID-19. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive conventional therapy plus Umifenovir (Arbidol) (200mg*3/day) or Favipiravir (1600mg*2/first day followed by 600mg*2/day) for 10 days. The primary outcome was clinical recovery rate of Day 7. Latency to relief for pyrexia and cough, the rate of auxiliary oxygen therapy (AOT) or noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NMV) were the secondary outcomes. Safety data were collected for 17 days. Results 240 enrolled COVID-19 patients underwent randomization; 120 patients were assigned to receive Favipiravir (116 assessed), and 120 to receive Arbidol (120 assessed). Clinical recovery rate of Day 7 does not significantly differ between Favipiravir group (71/116) and Arbidol group (62/120) (P=0.1396, difference of recovery rate: 0.0954; 95% CI: -0.0305 to 0.2213). Favipiravir led to shorter latencies to relief for both pyrexia (difference: 1.70 days, P<0.0001) and cough (difference: 1.75 days, P<0.0001). No difference was observed of AOT or NMV rate (both P>0.05). The most frequently observed Favipiravir-associated adverse event was raised serum uric acid (16/116, OR: 5.52, P=0.0014). Conclusions Among patients with COVID-19, Favipiravir, compared to Arbidol, did not significantly improve the clinically recovery rate at Day 7. Favipiravir significantly improved the latency to relief for pyrexia and cough. Adverse effects caused Favipiravir are mild and manageable. This trial is registered with Chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2000030254).

positive: Covid-19 treatment update: follow the scientific evidence

positive: Characteristics, treatment, outcomes and cause of death of invasively ventilated patients with COVID-19 ARDS in Milan, Italy Objective: Describe characteristics, daily care and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Design: Case series of 73 patients. Setting: Large tertiary hospital in Milan. Participants: Mechanically ventilated patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) between 20 February and 2 April 2020. Main outcome measures: Demographic and daily clinical data were collected to identify predictors of early mortality. Results: Of the 73 patients included in the study, most were male (83.6%), the median age was 61 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-69 years), and hypertension affected 52.9% of patients. Lymphocytopenia (median, 0.77 x 103 per mm3 ; IQR, 0.58-1.00 x 103 per mm3), hyperinflammation with C-reactive protein (median, 184.5 mg/dL; IQR, 108.2-269.1 mg/dL) and pro-coagulant status with D-dimer (median, 10.1 µg/m; IQR, 5.0-23.8 µg/m) were present. Median tidal volume was 6.7 mL/kg (IQR, 6.0-7.5 mL/kg), and median positive end-expiratory pressure was 12 cmH2O (IQR, 10-14 cmH2O). In the first 3 days, prone positioning (12-16 h) was used in 63.8% of patients and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in five patients (6.8%). After a median follow-up of 19.0 days (IQR, 15.0-27.0 days), 17 patients (23.3%) had died, 23 (31.5%) had been discharged from the ICU, and 33 (45.2%) were receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the ICU. Older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.12; 95% CI, 1.04-1.22; P = 0.004) and hypertension (OR, 6.15; 95% CI, 1.75-29.11; P = 0.009) were associated with mortality, while early improvement in arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) to fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) ratio was associated with being discharged alive from the ICU (P = 0.002 for interaction). Conclusions: Despite multiple advanced critical care interventions, COVID-19 ARDS was associated with prolonged ventilation and high short term mortality. Older age and pre-admission hypertension were key mortality risk factors. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04318366.

positive: Baricitinib therapy in COVID-19: A pilot study on safety and clinical impact • Baricitinib at 4 mg/day/orally was given to 12 patients with moderate COVID-19. • In baricitinib-treated patients no adverse events were recorded, after 2 weeks. • Clinical and respiratory parameters significantly improved at 2 weeks. • None of the baricitinib-treated patients required admission to ICU. • Proper control group was missing; this is required to demonstrate the efficacy.

positive: Remdesivir as a possible therapeutic option for the COVID-19

positive: Overview of therapeutic drug research for COVID-19 in China Since the outbreak of novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19) in December 2019, more than 2,500,000 people worldwide have been diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 as of April 22. In response to this epidemic, China has issued seven trial versions of diagnosis and treatment protocol for COVID-19. According to the information that we have collected so far, this article provides an overview of potential therapeutic drugs and compounds with much attention, including favipiravir and hydroxychloroquine, as well as traditional Chinese medicine, which have been reported with good clinical treatment effects. Moreover, with further understanding of SARS-CoV-2 virus, new drugs targeting specific SARS-CoV-2 viral components arise and investigations on these novel anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents are also reviewed.

positive: Clinical Trial Endpoints in Severe COVID-19

positive: Lack of supporting data make the risks of a clinical trial of radiation therapy as a treatment for COVID-19 pneumonia unacceptable

positive: Post-exposure Prophylaxis or Preemptive Therapy for SARS-Coronavirus-2: Study Protocol for a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial Background: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in December 2019 causing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Currently, there are a lack of evidence-based therapies to prevent COVID-19 following exposure, or to prevent worsening of symptoms following confirmed infection. We describe the design of a clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine for post-exposure prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy for COVID-19. Methods: We will conduct two nested multicenter international double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine for: 1) post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) of asymptomatic household contacts or healthcare workers exposed to COVID-19 within the past four days, and 2) pre-emptive therapy (PET) for symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 with a total symptom duration of less than 4 days. We will recruit 1500 patients for each the PEP and PET trials. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive 5 days of hydroxychloroquine or placebo. The primary PEP trial outcome will be the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19 disease. The primary PET trial outcome will be an ordinal scale of disease severity (not hospitalized; hospitalized without intensive care, hospitalization with intensive care, or death). Participant screening, informed consent, and follow up will be exclusively internet-based with appropriate regulatory and research ethics board approvals in Canada and the United States. Discussion: These complementary randomized control trials are innovatively designed and adequately powered to rapidly answer urgent questions regarding the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine to reduce transmission and disease severity of COVID-19 during a pandemic. In-person participant follow-up will not be conducted in order to facilitate social distancing strategies and reduce risks of exposure to study personnel. Innovative trial approaches are needed to urgently assess therapeutic options to mitigate the global impact of this pandemic. Trials Registration: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04308668); 16 March 2020.

positive: Advance of promising targets and agents against COVID-19 in China

positive: Targeting the Endocytic Pathway and Autophagy Process as a Novel Therapeutic Strategy in COVID-19 Coronaviruses (CoVs) are a group of enveloped, single-stranded positive genomic RNA viruses and some of them are known to cause severe respiratory diseases in human, including Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the ongoing coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). One key element in viral infection is the process of viral entry into the host cells. In the last two decades, there is increasing understanding on the importance of the endocytic pathway and the autophagy process in viral entry and replication. As a result, the endocytic pathway including endosome and lysosome has become important targets for development of therapeutic strategies in combating diseases caused by CoVs. In this mini-review, we will focus on the importance of the endocytic pathway as well as the autophagy process in viral infection of several pathogenic CoVs inclusive of SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and the new CoV named as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and discuss the development of therapeutic agents by targeting these processes. Such knowledge will provide important clues for control of the ongoing epidemic of SARS-CoV-2 infection and treatment of COVID-19.

positive: Hunting coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (2019 novel coronavirus): From laboratory testing back to basic research The rapid spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in many countries causes citizens of daily inconvenience and even life-threat for elderly population. The invasion of the main pathogen, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2; 2019 novel coronavirus [2019-nCoV]), into human body causes different levels of impact to various patients. One of the most important issues for COVID-19 is how to defend this virus with the ability to foresee the infected targets. Thus, we maintain the quarantined essentially as for as others saved from COVID-19. So far, the routine laboratory test to confirm whether infected by SARS-CoV-2/2019-nCoV or not is through real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR; quantitative polymerase chain reaction [qPCR]) with certain sequence regions that recognize SARS-CoV-2/2019-nCoV RNA genome. The heavy loading of rRT-PCR (qPCR) machine and handling labor have tight-packed the instruments as well as the manpower almost in every country. Therefore, the alternative approaches are eagerly waiting to be developed. In this review article, we sort out some state-of-the-art novel approaches that might be applied for a fast, sensitive, and precise detection of SARS-CoV-2/2019-nCoV not only to help the routine laboratory testing but also to improve effective quarantine.

positive: Review of safety and minimum pricing of nitazoxanide for potential treatment of COVID-19 BACKGROUND: Many treatments are being assessed for repurposing to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). One drug that has shown promising results in vitro is nitazoxanide. Unlike other postulated drugs, nitazoxanide shows a high ratio of maximum plasma concentration (C(max)), after 1 day of 500 mg twice daily (BD), to the concentration required to inhibit 50% replication (EC(50)) of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (C(max): EC(50)roughly equal to 14:1). As such, it is important to investigate the safety of nitazoxanide for further trials. Furthermore, treatments for COVID-19 should be cheap to promote global access, but prices of many drugs are far higher than the costs of production. We aimed to conduct a review of the safety of nitazoxanide for any prior indication and calculate its minimum costs of production. METHODS: A review of nitazoxanide clinical research was conducted using EMBASE and MEDLINE databases, supplemented by ClinicalTrials.gov. We searched for phase 2 or 3 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing nitazoxanide with placebo or active control for 5–14 days in participants experiencing acute infections of any kind. Data extracted were grade 1–4 and serious adverse events (AEs). Data were also extracted on gastrointestinal (GI) AEs, as well as hepatorenal and cardiovascular effects. Active pharmaceutical ingredient cost data from 2016 to 2019 were extracted from the Panjiva database and adjusted for 5% loss during production, costs of excipients, formulation, a 10% profit margin and tax. Two dosages, at 500 mg BD and a higher dose of 1100 mg three times daily (TDS), were considered. Our estimated costs were compared with publicly available list prices from a selection of countries. RESULTS: Nine RCTs of nitazoxanide were identified for inclusion. These RCTs accounted for 1514 participants and an estimated 95.3 person-years-of-follow-up. No significant differences were found in any of the AE endpoints assessed, across all trials or on subgroup analyses of active- or placebo-controlled trials. Mild GI AEs increased with dose. No hepatorenal or cardiovascular concerns were raised, but few appropriate metrics were reported. There were no teratogenic concerns, but the evidence base was very limited. Based on a weighted-mean cost of US $61/kg, a 14-day course of treatment with nitazoxanide 500 mg BD would cost $1.41. The daily cost would therefore be $0.10. The same 14-day course could cost $3944 in US commercial pharmacies, and $3 per course in Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. At a higher dose of 1100 mg TDS, our estimated cost was $4.08 per 14-day course, equivalent to $0.29 per day. CONCLUSION: Nitazoxanide demonstrates a good safety profile at approved doses. However, further evidence is required regarding hepatorenal and cardiovascular effects, as well as teratogenicity. We estimate that it would be possible to manufacture nitazoxanide as generic for $1.41 for a 14-day treatment course at 500 mg BD, up to $4.08 at 1100 mg TDS. Further trials in COVID-19 patients should be initiated. If efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 is demonstrated in clinical studies, nitazoxanide may represent a safe and affordable treatment in the ongoing pandemic.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine use in the COVID-19 patient Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has multiple potential antiviral mechanisms of action that differ according to the pathogen studied (eg, Chikungunya, Dengue virus, human immunodeficiency virus, poliovirus, Zika virus). Data on HCQ for treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are rapidly evolving. To date, there is no evidence from randomized controlled trials that HCQ, or any single therapy, improves outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. There are also no clinical trial data supporting prophylactic HCQ therapy in COVID-19. Use of HCQ in patients with COVID-19 is being investigated for prophylaxis, postexposure prophylaxis, and treatment.

positive: The vaccine journey for COVID-19: a comprehensive systematic review of current clinical trials in humans. INTRODUCTION Since December 2019, there has been an outbreak of a novel beta-coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in Wuhan, China. On March the 11th the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 as a pandemic, with over 118,000 cases in more than 110 countries around the world. In response to the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emergency, clinical trial research assessing the efficacy and safety of experimental vaccines to prevent COVID-19 are emerging at an unprecedented rate. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the preliminary experiences and ongoing clinical trials of the major candidates and challenges of the vaccine strategies in humans. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION After a priori protocol registration with PROSPERO (181483), a systematic research of the published literature was conducted on 24 April 2020 using Medline (via PubMed), Embase (via Ovid), and WHO databases. Moreover, to explore the more recent literature we also searched the preprint server medRxiv. Finally, we scrutinized the Cochrane COVID-19 study register and the COVID-19 section of ClinicalTrials.gov database for identifying relevant ongoing clinical trials. Thereafter we selected the articles according to the PRISMA guidelines. Animal or in-vitro experimental studies were excluded. Moreover editorials, commentaries, abstracts, reviews, book chapters, and articles not in English were not included. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Our search identified 1359 published papers, 478 pre-print articles and 367 ongoing clinical trials. Finally, only ten ongoing clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. Specifically, seven developed vaccines for the S protein of SARS-CoV-2 and three clinical trials assessed the protective role of BCG vaccine against COVID-19. The first group included phase I/II trials with different types of molecules (DNA or mRNA vaccine, bacterial plasmid or viral vectors), the latter were phase III/IV trials designed on the basis of a heterologous lymphocyte activation by the BCG vaccine. CONCLUSIONS This new disease is pushing the scientific community to develop swiftly a safe and effective vaccine. Notwithstanding the limitations of our analysis, given by the absence of available results, we try to provide a comprehensive view of the ongoing clinical trials in humans. Our analysis reveals a worldwide effort of both scientists and enterprises to achieve one of the most challenging goals of our century.

positive: Is there any supportive evidence for low dose radiotherapy for COVID-19 pneumonia? Since early April 2020, there has been intense debate over proposed clinical use of ionizing radiation to treat life-threatening pneumonia in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. At least twelve relevant papers appeared by 20 May 2020. The radiation dose proposed for clinical trials are a single dose (0.1-1 Gy) or two doses (a few mGy followed by 0.1-0.25 Gy involving a putative adaptive response, or 1-1.5 Gy in two fractions 2-3 days apart). The scientific rationale for such proposed so-called low dose radiotherapy (LDRT) is twofold (note that only doses below 0.1 Gy are considered as low doses in the field of radiation protection, but here we follow the term as conventionally used in the field of radiation oncology). Firstly, the potentially positive observations in human case series and biological studies in rodent models on viral or bacterial pneumonia that were conducted in the pre-antibiotic era. Secondly, the potential anti-inflammatory properties of LDRT, which have been seen when LDRT is applied locally to subacute degenerative joint diseases, mainly in Germany. However, the human and animal studies cited as supportive evidence have significant limitations, and whether LDRT produces anti-inflammatory effects in the inflamed lung or exacerbates ongoing COVID-19 damage remains unclear. Therefore, we conclude that the available scientific evidence does not justify clinical trials of LDRT for COVID-19 pneumonia, with unknown benefit and known mortality risks from radiogenic cancer and circulatory disease. Despite the significant uncertainties in these proposals, some clinical trials are ongoing and planned. This paper gives an overview of current situations surrounding LDRT for COVID-19 pneumonia.

positive: Bayesian Adaptive Clinical Trials for Anti-Infective Therapeutics during Epidemic Outbreaks In the midst of epidemics such as COVID-19, therapeutic candidates are unlikely to be able to complete the usual multi-year clinical trial and regulatory approval process within the course of an outbreak. We apply a Bayesian adaptive patient-centered model---which minimizes the expected harm of false positives and false negatives---to optimize the clinical trial development path during such outbreaks. When the epidemic is more infectious and fatal, the Bayesian-optimal sample size in the clinical trial is lower and the optimal statistical significance level is higher. For COVID-19 (assuming a static R0=2 and initial infection percentage of 0.1%), the optimal significance level is 7.1% for a clinical trial of a non-vaccine anti-infective therapeutic clinical trial and 13.6% for that of a vaccine. For a dynamic R0 ranging from 2 to 4, the corresponding values are 14.4% and 26.4%, respectively. Our results illustrate the importance of adapting the clinical trial design and the regulatory approval process to the specific parameters and stage of the epidemic.

positive: Lopinavir/ritonavir use in Covid-19 infection: is it completely non-beneficial? Covid-19 infection caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-COV-2 continues to be a major global health challenge. Till date, no drug has been approved for the treatment of this infection. A number of medications have been proposed and there are ongoing clinical trials around the world to find a suitable treatment. A recent randomised control trial compared lopinavir/ritonavir with standard care among 199 patients with severe Covid-19 infection and concluded that there was no significant reduction in mortality rate with lopinavir/ritonavir. However, there are a few important lessons which may be learnt from the study apart from the statistical reduction in mortality rate. There was a numerical reduction in mortality rate, less intensive care unit stay and less complications in the lopinavir-ritonavir group. This article points out some of those important lessons with some suggestions for future clinical trials.

positive: Towards treatment planning of COVID-19: Rationale and hypothesis for the use of multiple immunosuppressive agents: anti-antibodies, immunoglobulins, and corticosteroids Abstract The novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV2, can cause a potentially fatal disease, COVID-19, in humans. Here, we will provide an overview of therapeutic options for COVID-19. Plasma from patients recovered from COVID-19 that contains antibodies against SARS-CoV2 has shown promising results in patients with severe COVID-19. Also, IVIG, combined with moderate-dose of corticosteroids, might improve patient outcomes. Evidence links COVID-19 to variable degrees of inflammation. Studies show that the use of corticosteroids might accelerate recovery from COVID-19. There are, however, no controlled clinical trials that show whether the use of corticosteroids can reduce COVID-19-related death. Also, the pro-inflammatory cytokine IL6 is the best-documented cytokine in COVID-19 correlated with severity, criticality, viral load, and prognosis of patients with COVID-19. Tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody against IL6, could confer clinical benefit in patients with high IL6 levels. Essential elements that process SARS-CoV2 cell entry and specific characteristics that allow SARS-CoV2 to escape the immune system have the potential as targets for COVID-19 therapy.

positive: Potential therapeutic agents against COVID-19: What we know so far The emerging outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 continues to spread all over the world. Agents or vaccines of proven efficacy to treat or prevent human coronavirus infection are in urgent need and are being investigated vigorously worldwide. This review summarizes the current evidence of potential therapeutic agents, such as lopinavir/ritonavir, remdesivir, favipiravir, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, interferon, ribavirin, tocilizumab, and sarilumab. More clinical trials are being conducted for further confirmation of the efficacy and safety of these agents in treating COVID-19.

positive: Clinical trials during COVID-19 As this ever-evolving pandemic lays itself, more of its impact is being understood. Until recently, most guidelines were reported to aid in managing and treating suspected or confirmed cases. Research institutions around the world are responding with a sense of confusion. Some are continuing routinely, especially those who are overseeing clinical trials that could offer life-saving therapies, particularly against the novel coronavirus. Since research must continue even in the face of a shutdown, we aim to collate the currently available recommendations from various organizations and provide guidance to head and neck researchers across the world during these trying times.

positive: Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine for post-exposure prophylaxis to prevent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among adults exposed to coronavirus disease (COVID-19): a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: Primary Objective â¢ To test the efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) (400 mg orally daily for 3 days then 200 mg orally daily for an additional 11 days, to complete 14 days) to prevent incident SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared to ascorbic acid among contacts of persons with SARS-CoV-2 infection Secondary objectives â¢ To determine the safety and tolerability of HCQ as SARS-CoV-2 Post-exposure Prophylaxis (PEP) in adults â¢ To test the efficacy of HCQ (400 mg orally daily for 3 days then 200 mg orally daily for an additional 11 days, to complete 14 days) to prevent incident SARS-CoV-2 infection 2 weeks after completing therapy, compared to ascorbic acid among contacts of persons with SARS-CoV-2 infection â¢ To test the efficacy of HCQ to shorten the duration of SARS-CoV-2 shedding among those with SARS-CoV-2 infection in the HCQ PEP group â¢ To test the efficacy of HCQ to prevent incident COVID-19 TRIAL DESIGN: This is a randomized, multi-center, placebo-equivalent (ascorbic acid) controlled, blinded study of HCQ PEP for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection in adults exposed to the virus. PARTICIPANTS: This study will enroll up to 2000 asymptomatic adults 18 to 80 years of age (inclusive) at baseline who are close contacts of persons with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 or clinically suspected COVID-19 and a pending SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. This multisite trial will be conducted at seven sites in Seattle (UW), Los Angeles (UCLA), New Orleans (Tulane), Baltimore (UMB), New York City (NYU), Syracuse (SUNY-Upstate), and Boston (BMC). Inclusion criteria Participants are eligible to be included in the study only if all of the following criteria apply: 1.Men or women 18 to 80 years of age inclusive, at the time of signing the informed consent2.Willing and able to provide informed consent3.Had a close contact of a person (index) with known PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection or index who is currently being assessed for COVID-19 Close contact is defined as: a.Household contact (i.e., residing with the index case in the 14 days prior to index diagnosis or prolonged exposure within a residence/vehicle/enclosed space without maintaining social distance)b.Medical staff, first responders, or other care persons who cared for the index case without personal protection (mask and gloves)4.Less than 4 days since last exposure (close contact with a person with SARS-CoV-2 infection) to the index case5.Access to device and internet for Telehealth visits6.Not planning to take HCQ in addition to the study medication Exclusion criteria Participants are excluded from the study if any of the following criteria apply: 1.Known hypersensitivity to HCQ or other 4-aminoquinoline compounds2.Currently hospitalized3.Symptomatic with subjective fever, cough, or shortness of breath4.Current medications exclude concomitant use of HCQ5.Concomitant use of other anti-malarial treatment or chemoprophylaxis, including chloroquine, mefloquine, artemether, or lumefantrine.6.History of retinopathy of any etiology7.Psoriasis8.Porphyria9.Known bone marrow disorders with significant neutropenia (polymorphonuclear leukocytes <1500) or thrombocytopenia (<100 K)10.Concomitant use of digoxin, cyclosporin, cimetidine, amiodarone, or tamoxifen11.Known moderate or severe liver disease12.Known long QT syndrome13.Severe renal impairment14.Use of any investigational or non-registered drug or vaccine within 30 days preceding the first dose of the study drugs or planned use during the study period INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Households will be randomized 1:1 (at the level of household), with close contact participants receiving one of the following therapies: â¢HCQ 400 mg orally daily for 3 days then 200 mg orally daily for an additional 11 days â¢Placebo-like control (ascorbic acid) 500 mg orally daily for 3 days then 250 mg orally daily for 11 days MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome of the study is the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection through day 14 among participants who are SARS-CoV-2 negative at baseline by randomization group. RANDOMISATION: Participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to HCQ or ascorbic acid at the level of the household (all eligible participants in 1 household will receive the same intervention). The randomization code and resulting allocation list will be generated and maintained by the Study Statistician. The list will be blocked and stratified by site and contact type (household versus healthcare worker). BLINDING (MASKING): This is a blinded study. HCQ and ascorbic acid will appear similar, and taste will be partially masked as HCQ can be bitter and ascorbic acid will be sour. The participants will be blinded to their randomization group once assigned. Study team members, apart from the Study Pharmacist and the unblinded statistical staff, will be blinded. Laboratory staff are blinded to the group allocation. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The sample size for the study is N=2 000 participants randomized 1:1 to either HCZ (n=1 000) and ascorbic acid (n=1 000). TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version: 1.2 05 April 2020 Recruitment is ongoing, started March 31 and anticipated end date is September 30, 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, Protocol Registry Number: NCT04328961 Date of registration: April 1, 2020, retrospectively registered FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19. Backgrounds. Since COVID-19 outbreak, various agents have been tested but no proven effective therapies have been identified. This has led to a lot of controversies among associated researches. Hence, in order to address the issue of using hydroxychloroquine in treating COVID-19 patients, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods. A thorough search was carried out to find relevant studies in MEDLINE, medRxiv, PubMed, Cochrane Database, China Academic Journals Full-text Database and Web of Science. Two investigators independently reviewed 274 abstracts and 23 articles. The trials which evaluated hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19 were included for this systematic review. Two investigators assessed quality of the studies and data extraction was done by one reviewer and cross checked by the other. Results. Five trials involving 677 patients were included while conducting the meta-analysis. Compared with the control group, hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin showed benefits in positive-to-negative conversion of SARS-CoV-2 (odds ratio [OR], 1.95 [95% CI,0.19 to 19.73] and a reduction in progression rate (OR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.58 to 1.37]), but without demonstrating any statistical significance. This systematic review has also suggested a possible synergistic effect of the combination therapy which included hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin. However, the use of hydroxychloroquine alone was associated with increased mortality in COVID-19 patients. Conclusion. The use of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin for treatment of COVID-19 patients, seems to be effective. The combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin has shown synergic effects. However, mortality rate was increased when the treatment was conducted with hydroxychloroquine.

positive: Biggest COVID-19 trial tests repurposed drugs first.

positive: Evaluating the efficacy and safety of human anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma in severely ill adults with COVID-19: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of human anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma in hospitalized adults with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a prospective, single-center, phase 2, randomized, controlled trial that is blinded to participants and clinical outcome assessor. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible participants include adults (≥ 18 years) with evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by PCR test of nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab within 14 days of randomization, evidence of infiltrates on chest radiography, peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2) ≤ 94% on room air, and/or need for supplemental oxygen, non-invasive mechanical ventilation, or invasive mechanical ventilation, who are willing and able to provide written informed consent prior to performing study procedures or who have a legally authorized representative available to do so. Exclusion criteria include participation in another clinical trial of anti-viral agent(s)* for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), receipt of any anti-viral agent(s)* with possible activity against SARS-CoV-2 <24 hours prior to plasma infusion, mechanical ventilation (including extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [ECMO]) for ≥ 5 days, severe multi-organ failure, history of allergic reactions to transfused blood products per NHSN/CDC criteria, known IgA deficiency, and pregnancy. Included participants will be hospitalized at the time of randomization and plasma infusion. *Use of remdesivir as treatment for COVID-19 is permitted. The study will be undertaken at Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York, USA. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: The investigational treatment is anti-SARS-CoV-2 human convalescent plasma. To procure the investigational treatment, volunteers who recovered from COVID-19 will undergo testing to confirm the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody to the spike trimer at a 1:400 dilution. Donors will also be screened for transfusion-transmitted infections (e.g. HIV, HBV, HCV, WNV, HTLV-I/II, T. cruzi, ZIKV). If donors have experienced COVID-19 symptoms within 28 days, they will be screened with a nasopharyngeal swab to confirm they are SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative. Plasma will be collected using standard apheresis technology by the New York Blood Center. Study participants will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive one unit (200 - 250 mL) of anti-SARS-CoV-2 plasma versus one unit (200 - 250 mL) of the earliest available control plasma. The control plasma cannot be tested for presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody prior to the transfusion, but will be tested for anti- SARS-CoV-2 antibody after the transfusion to allow for a retrospective per-protocol analysis. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary endpoint is time to clinical improvement. This is defined as time from randomization to either discharge from the hospital or improvement by one point on the following seven-point ordinal scale, whichever occurs first. 1. Not hospitalized with resumption of normal activities 2. Not hospitalized, but unable to resume normal activities 3. Hospitalized, not requiring supplemental oxygen 4. Hospitalized, requiring supplemental oxygen 5. Hospitalized, requiring high-flow oxygen therapy or non-invasive mechanical ventilation 6. Hospitalized, requiring ECMO, invasive mechanical ventilation, or both 7. Death This scale, designed to assess clinical status over time, was based on that recommended by the World Health Organization for use in determining efficacy end-points in clinical trials in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. A recent clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of lopinavir- ritonavir for patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 used a similar ordinal scale, as have recent clinical trials of novel therapeutics for severe influenza, including a post-hoc analysis of a trial evaluating immune plasma. The primary safety endpoints are cumulative incidence of grade 3 and 4 adverse events and cumulative incidence of serious adverse events during the study period. RANDOMIZATION: Study participants will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive anti-SARS-CoV-2 plasma versus control plasma using a web-based randomization platform. Treatment assignments will be generated using randomly permuted blocks of different sizes to minimize imbalance while also minimizing predictability. BLINDING (MASKING): The study participants and the clinicians who will evaluate post-treatment outcomes will be blinded to group assignment. The blood bank and the clinical research team will not be blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMIZED (SAMPLE SIZE): We plan to enroll 129 participants, with 86 in the anti-SARS-CoV-2 arm, and 43 in the control arm. Among the participants, we expect ~70% or n = 72 will achieve clinical improvement. This will yield an 80% power for a one-sided Wald test at 0.15 level of significance under the proportional hazards model with a hazard ratio of 1.5. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol AAAS9924, Version 17APR2020, 4/17/2020 Start of recruitment: April 20, 2020 Recruitment is ongoing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04359810 Date of trial registration: April 24, 2020 Retrospectively registered FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Multicenter initial guidance on use of antivirals for children with COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 BACKGROUND: Although Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is mild in nearly all children, a small proportion of pediatric patients develops severe or critical illness. Guidance is therefore needed regarding use of agents with potential activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in pediatrics. METHODS: A panel of pediatric infectious diseases physicians and pharmacists from 18 geographically diverse North American institutions was convened. Through a series of teleconferences and web-based surveys, a set of guidance statements was developed and refined based on review of best available evidence and expert opinion. RESULTS: Given the typically mild course of pediatric COVID-19, supportive care alone is suggested for the overwhelming majority of cases. The panel suggests a decision-making framework for antiviral therapy that weighs risks and benefits based on disease severity as indicated by respiratory support needs, with consideration on a case-by-case basis of potential pediatric risk factors for disease progression. If an antiviral is used, the panel suggests remdesivir as the preferred agent. Hydroxychloroquine could be considered for patients who are not candidates for remdesivir or when remdesivir is not available. Antivirals should preferably be used as part of a clinical trial if available. CONCLUSIONS: Antiviral therapy for COVID-19 is not necessary for the great majority of pediatric patients. For those rare children who develop severe or critical disease, this guidance offer an approach for decision-making regarding antivirals, informed by available data. As evidence continues to evolve rapidly, the need for updates to the guidance is anticipated.

positive: A randomized multicenter clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of melatonin in the prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in high-risk contacts (MeCOVID Trial): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: Primary objective: to evaluate the efficacy of melatonin as a prophylactic treatment on prevention of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Secondary objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of melatonin as a prophylactic treatment on prevention of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.To evaluate the efficacy of melatonin to prevent the development of severe COVID-19 in the participants enrolled in this study who develop SARS-CoV-2 infection along the trial.To evaluate the duration of COVID-19 symptoms in participants receiving melatonin before the infection.To evaluate seroconversion timing post-symptom onset. Exploratory objectives:To compare severity of COVID-19 between men and women.To evaluate the influence of sleep and diet on prevention from SARS-CoV-2 infection.To evaluate the effect of melatonin on the incidence and characteristics of lymphopenia and increase of inflammatory cytokines related to COVID-19. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a two-arm parallel randomised double-blind controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of melatonin versus placebo in the prophylaxis of coronavirus disease 2019 among healthcare workers. PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion Criteria: Male or female participants ≥ 18 and ≤ 80 years of age.Healthcare workers from the public and private Spanish hospital network at risk of SARS-CoV 2 infection.Not having a previous COVID19 diagnosis.Understanding the purpose of the trial and not having taken any pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) including HIV PrEP from March 1st 2020 until study enrolment.Having a negative SARS-CoV 2 reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR) result or a negative serologic rapid test (IgM/IgG) result before randomization.Premenopausal women must have a negative urinary pregnancy test in the 7 days before starting the trial treatment.Premenopausal women and males with premenopausal couples must commit to using a high efficiency anticonceptive method. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: HIV infection.Active hepatitis B infection.Renal failure (CrCl < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) or need for hemodialysis.Osteoporosis.Myasthenia gravis.Pre-existent maculopathy.Retinitis pigmentosa.Bradycardia (less than 50 bpm).Weight less than 40 Kg.Participant with any immunosuppressive condition or hematological disease.Treatment with drugs that may prolong QT in the last month before randomization for more than 7 days including: azithromycin, chlorpromazine, cisapride, clarithromycin, domperidone, droperidol, erythromycin, halofantrine, haloperidol, lumefantrine, mefloquine, methadone, pentamidine, procainamide, quinidine, quinine, sotalol, sparfloxacin, thioridazine, amiodarone.Hereditary intolerance to galactose, Lapp lactase deficiency or glucose or galactose malabsorption.Treatment with fluvoxamine.Treatment with benzodiazepines or benzodiazepine analogues such as zolpidem, zopiclone or zaleplon.Pregnancy.Breastfeeding.History of potentially immune derived diseases such as: lupus, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, vasculitis or rheumatoid arthritis.Insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.Known history of hypersensitivity to the study drug or any of its components.Patients that should not be included in the study at the judgment of the research team. Participants will be recruited from the following eight hospitals in Madrid, Spain: Hospital Universitario La Paz, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Hospital Infanta Sofía, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Hospital Central de la defensa Gómez Ulla,Hospital de La Princesa and Hospital Infanta Leonor. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Experimental: Melatonin (Circadin®, Exeltis Healthcare, Spain): 2 mg of melatonin orally before bedtime for 12 weeks. Comparator: Identical looking placebo (Laboratorios Liconsa, Spain) orally before bedtime for 12 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES: Number of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) symptomatic infections confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test or serologic test or according to each centre diagnosis protocol. Primary outcome will be measured until the end of treatment for each participant (until the date of the last dose taken by each patient). RANDOMISATION: Patients who meet all inclusion and no exclusion criteria will be randomised, stratified by centres, sex and age (<50 and ≥ 50 years old). The randomisation sequence was created using SAS version 9.4 statistical software (procedure 'PROC PLAN') with a 1:1 allocation. No randomisation seed was specified. The randomisation seed was generated taking the hour of the computer where the program was executed. Randomization will be done centrally through the electronic system RedCAP® in order to conceal the sequence until interventions are assigned BLINDING (MASKING): Participants, caregivers, and those assessing the outcomes are blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A total of 450 participants are planned to be enrolled in this clinical trial, 225 in the experimental arm and 225 in the placebo arm. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 3.0, 17th of April 2020. Recruitment ongoing. First participant was recruited on the 21st of April 2020. The final participant is anticipated to be recruited on the 31st of May 2020. As of May 18th, 2020, a total of 312 participants have been enrolled (154 at Hospital La Paz, 85 at Hospital Infanta Sofía and 73 at Hospital 12 de Octubre). TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU Clinical Trials Register: 2020-001530-35; Date of trial registration: 13th of April 2020; https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2020-001530-35/ES FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Covid-19 and drug therapy, what we learned COVID-19, the disease associated in December 2019 with the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, was observed for the first time in China and then spread worldwide becoming pandemic. Currently, there is still no licensed specific antiviral treatment for the human coronavirus disease and a vaccine will not be ready soon. However, based on experience from the use of other antiviral agents to treat similar virusses, some treatment options have been tried with some efficacy. Clinical trials for future therapies are still ongoing. In the meantime, prevention, control, active communication and investment in research are the only ways to overcome this challenge.

positive: Efficacy and Safety of Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine for COVID-19: A systematic review BACKGROUND: Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine are widely used to treat hospitalized COVID-19 patients primarily based on antiviral activity in in vitro studies. Our objective was to systematically evaluate their efficacy and safety in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We systematically reviewed PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Medrxviv for studies of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in COVID-19 hospitalized patients on April 26, 2020. We evaluated the quality of trials and observational studies using the Jadad criteria and Newcastle Ottawa Scale, respectively. RESULTS: After a review of 175 citations, we included 5 clinical trials (total of 345 patients), 9 observational studies (n = 2529), and 6 additional studies (n = 775) reporting on the QT interval. Three studies reported treatment benefits including two studies reporting benefit on virologic outcomes, which was statistically significant in one study, and another reported significant improvement on cough symptoms. Three studies reported that treatment was potentially harmful, including an significantly increased risk of mortality in two studies and increased need for respiratory support in another. Eight studies were unable to detect improvements on virologic outcomes (n = 3) or pneumonia or transfer to ICU/death (n = 5). The proportion of participants with critical QTc intervals of [≥] 500 ms or an increase of [≥] 60 ms from baseline ranged from 8.3% to 36% (n = 8). One clinical trial and six observational studies were of good quality. The remaining studies were of poor quality. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review of reported clinical studies did not identify substantial evidence to support the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine in hospitalized COVID-19 patients and raises questions about potential harm from QT prolongation and increased mortality.

positive: ChemoPROphyLaxIs with hydroxychloroquine For covId-19 infeCtious disease (PROLIFIC) to prevent covid-19 infection in frontline healthcare workers: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether chemoprophylaxis with hydroxychloroquine versus placebo increases time to contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in frontline healthcare workers. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: 1) To determine whether chemoprophylaxis with daily versus weekly dosing of hydroxychloroquine increases time to contracting COVID-19 disease in frontline healthcare workers. 2) To compare the number of COVID-19 cases between each trial arm on the basis of positive tests (as per current clinical testing methods and/or serology) 3) To compare the percentage of COVID-19 positive individuals with current testing methods versus serologically-proven COVID-19 in each trial arm 4) To compare COVID-19 disease severity in each trial arm 5) To compare recovery time from COVID-19 infection in each trial arm EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVES: 1) To determine compliance (as measured by trough pharmacokinetic hydroxychloroquine levels) on COVID-19 positive tests 2) To determine if genetic factors determine susceptibility to COVID-19 disease or response to treatment 3) To determine if blood group determines susceptibility to COVID-19 disease 4) To compare serum biomarkers of COVID-19 disease in each arm TRIAL DESIGN: Double-blind, multi-centre, 2-arm (3:3:2 ratio) randomised placebo-controlled trial PARTICIPANTS: National Health Service (NHS) workers who have direct patient contact delivering care to patients with COVID-19. Participants in the trial will be recruited from a number of NHS hospitals directly caring for patients with COVID-19. INCLUSION CRITERIA: To be included in the trial the participant MUST: 1) Have given written informed consent to participate 2) Be aged 18 years to 70 years 3) Not previously have been diagnosed with COVID-19 4) Work in a high-risk secondary or tertiary healthcare setting (hospitals accepting COVID-19 patients) with direct patient-facing care EXCLUSION CRITERIA: The presence of any of the following will mean participants are ineligible: 1) Known COVID-19 positive test at baseline (if available) 2) Symptomatic for possible COVID-19 at baseline 3) Known hypersensitivity reaction to hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine or 4-aminoquinolines 4) Known retinal disease 5) Known porphyria 6) Known chronic kidney disease (CKD; eGFR<30ml/min) 7) Known epilepsy 8) Known heart failure or conduction problems 9) Known significant liver disease (Gilbert's syndrome is permitted) 10) Known glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency 11) Currently taking any of the following contraindicated medications: Digoxin, Chloroquine, Halofantrine, Amiodarone, Moxifloxacin, Cyclosporin, Mefloquine, Praziquantel, Ciprofloxacin, Clarithromycin, Prochlorperazine, Fluconazole 12) Currently taking hydroxychloroquine or having a clinical indication for taking hydroxychloroquine 13) Currently breastfeeding 14) Unable to be followed-up during the trial 15) Current or future involvement in the active treatment phase of other interventional research studies (excluding observational/non-interventional studies) before study follow-up visit 16) Not able to use or have access to a modern phone device/web-based technology 17) Any other clinical reason which may preclude entry in the opinion of the investigator INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Interventions being evaluated are: A) Daily hydroxychloroquine or B) Weekly hydroxychloroquine or C) Placebo The maximum treatment period is approximately 13 weeks per participant. Hydroxychloroquine-identical matched placebo tablets will ensure that all participants are taking the same number and dosing regimen of tablets across the three trial arms. There is no variation in the dose of hydroxychloroquine by weight. The dosing regimen for the three arms of the study (A, B, C) are described in further detail below. Arm A: Active Hydroxychloroquine (- daily dosing and placebo-matched hydroxychloroquine - weekly dosing). Form: Tablets Route: Oral. Dose and Frequency: Active hydroxychloroquine: Days 1-2: Loading phase - 400mg (2 x 200mg tablets) taken twice a day for 2 days Days 3 onwards: Maintenance Phase - 200mg (1 x 200mg tablet) taken once daily, every day for 90 days (~3 months) Matched Placebo hydroxychloroquine: Days 3 onwards: Maintenance Phase - 2 tablets taken once a week on the same day each week (every 7th day) for 90 days (~3 months) Arm B: Active Hydroxychloroquine (- weekly dosing and placebo matched hydroxychloroquine - daily dosing.) Form: Tablets Route: Oral. Dose and Frequency: Active hydroxychloroquine: Days 1-2: Loading Phase - 400mg (2 x 200mg tablets) taken twice daily for 2 days Days 3 onwards: Maintenance Phase - 400mg (2 x 200mg tablets) taken once a week on the same day each week (every 7th day) for 90 days (~3 months) Matched Placebo hydroxychloroquine: Days 3 onwards: Maintenance Phase - 1 tablet taken once daily for 90 days (~3 months) Arm C: Matched placebo Hydroxychloroquine (- daily dosing and matched placebo hydroxychloroquine - weekly dosing.) Form: Table. Route: Oral. Frequency: Matched placebo hydroxychloroquine - daily dosing: Days 1-2: Loading Phase - 2 tablets taken twice daily for 2 days Days 3 onwards: Maintenance Phase - 1 tablet taken once daily for 90 days (~3 months) Matched placebo hydroxychloroquine - weekly dosing: Days 3 onwards: Maintenance Phase - 2 tablets taken once a week on the same day each week (every 7th day) for 90 days (~3 months) A schematic of the dosing schedule can be found in the full study protocol (Additional File 1). MAIN OUTCOMES: Time to diagnosis of positive COVID-19 disease (defined by record of date of symptoms onset and confirmed by laboratory test) RANDOMISATION: Participants will be randomised to either hydroxychloroquine dosed daily with weekly placebo, HCQ dosed weekly with daily placebo, or placebo dosed daily and weekly. Randomisation will be in a 3:3:2 ratio [hydroxychloroquine-(daily), hydroxychloroquine-(weekly), placebo], using stratified block randomisation. Random block sizes will be used, and stratification will be by study site. BLINDING (MASKING): Participants and trial investigators consenting participants, delivering trial assessments and procedures will be blinded to intervention. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A sufficient number of participants will be enrolled so that approximately 1000 participants in total will have data suitable for the primary statistical analysis. It is anticipated that approximately 1,200 participants will need to be enrolled in total, to allow for a 20% dropout over the period of the trial. This would result in approximately 450:450:300 participants randomised to hydroxychloroquine daily, hydroxychloroquine weekly+daily matched placebo or matched-placebo daily and weekly. TRIAL STATUS: V 1.0, 7th April 2020 EU Clinical Trials Register EudraCT Number: 2020-001331-26 Date of registration: 14th April 2020 Trial registered before first participant enrolment. Trial site is Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. Recruitment started on 11th May 2020. It is anticipated that the trial will run for 12 months. The recruitment end date cannot yet be accurately predicted. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).

positive: Combined point of care nucleic acid and antibody testing for SARS-CoV-2: a prospective cohort study in suspected moderate to severe COVID-19 disease. Abstract Background Rapid COVID-19 diagnosis in hospital is essential for patient management and identification of infectious patients to limit the potential for nosocomial transmission. The diagnosis is complicated by 30-50% of COVID-19 hospital admissions with negative nose/throat swabs negative for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid, frequently after the first week of illness when SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses become detectable. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of combined rapid antibody point of care (POC) and nucleic acid assays for suspected COVID-19 disease in the emergency department. Methods We developed (i) an in vitro neutralization assay using a lentivirus expressing a genome encoding luciferase and pseudotyped with spike protein and (ii) an ELISA test to detect IgG antibodies to nucleocapsid (N) and spike (S) proteins from SARS-CoV-2. We tested two promising candidate lateral flow rapid fingerprick test with bands for IgG and IgM. We then prospectively recruited participants with suspected moderate to severe COVID-19 and tested for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid in a combined nasal/throat swab using the standard laboratory RT-PCR and a validated rapid nucleic acid test. Additionally, serum collected at admission was retrospectively tested by in vitro neutralization, ELISA and the candidate POC antibody tests. We determined the sensitivity and specificity of the individual and combined rapid POC diagnostic tests against a composite gold standard of neutralisation and the standard laboratory RT-PCR. Results 45 participants had specimens tested for nucleic acid in nose/throat swabs as well as stored sera for antibodies. Serum neutralisation assay, SARS-CoV-2 Spike IgG ELISA and the POC antibody test results were concordant. Using the composite gold standard, prevalence of COVID-19 disease was 53.3% (24/45). Median age was 73.5 (IQR 54.0-86.5) years in those with COVID-19 disease by our gold standard and 63.0 (IQR 41.0-72.0) years in those without disease. Median duration of symptoms was 7 days (IQR 1-8) in those with infection. The overall sensitivity of rapid NAAT diagnosis was 79.2% (95CI 57.8-92.9%) and 50.0% (11.8-88.2) at days 8-28. Sensitivity and specificity of the combined rapid POC diagnostic tests reached 100% (95CI 85.8-100) and 94.7% (95CI 74.0-99.0) overall. Conclusions Dual point of care SARS-CoV-2 testing can significantly improve diagnostic sensitivity, whilst maintaining high specificity. Rapid combined tests have the potential to transform our management of COVID-19, including inflammatory manifestations where nucleic acid test results are negative. A rapid combined approach will also aid recruitment into clinical trials and in prescribing therapeutics, particularly where potentially harmful immune modulators (including steroids) are used.

positive: Anti-cancer therapy and clinical trial considerations for gynecologic oncology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis Abstract Objectives The COVID-19 pandemic has consumed considerable resources and has impacted the delivery of cancer care. Patients with cancer may have factors which place them at high risk for COVID 19 morbidity or mortality. Highly immunosuppressive chemotherapy regimens and possible exposure to COVID-19 during treatment may put patients at additional risk. The Society of Gynecologic Oncology convened an expert panel to address recommendations for best practices during this crisis to minimize risk to patients from deviations in cancer care and from COVID-19 morbidity. Methods An expert panel convened to develop initial consensus guidelines regarding anti-neoplastic therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic with respect to gynecologic cancer care and clinical trials. Results COVID-19 poses special risks to patients who are older, have medical co-morbidities, and cancer. In addition, this pandemic will likely strain resources, making delivery of cancer care or conduct of clinical trials unpredictable. Recommendations are to limit visits and contact with health care facilities by using telemedicine when appropriate, and choosing regimens which require less frequent visits and which are less immunosuppressive. Deviations will occur in clinical trials as a result of limited resources, and it is important to understand regulatory obligations to trial sponsors as well as to the IRB to ensure that clinical trial and patient safety oversight are maintained. Conclusions The ongoing crisis will strain resources needed to deliver cancer care. When alterations to the delivery of care are mandated, efforts should be taken to minimize risks and maximize safety while approximating standard practice.

positive: Will the coronavirus help mRNA and DNA vaccines prove their worth? Biotech companies, pharma firms, universities, and government agencies are all rushing to start clinical trials of newly created gene-based vaccines for COVID-19 Developer;Technology;Phase I clinical trial Moderna and National Institutes of Health;mRNA vaccine;Began in March 2020 CanSino Biologics;Adenoviral vector vaccine;Began in March 2020 BioNTech, Shanghai Fosun Pharmaceutical, and Pfizer;mRNA vaccine;April 2020 Inovio Pharmaceuticals and Wistar Institute;DNA vaccine;April 2020 University of Oxford;Adenoviral vector vaccine;April 2020 CureVac;mRNA vaccine;By early summer Imperial College London;mRNA vaccine;Early summer Arcturus Therapeutics and Duke-NUS Medical School;mRNA vaccine;Second half of 2020 Johnson & Johnson and Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority;Adenoviral vector vaccine;By September Altimmune;Adenoviral vector vaccine;Q3 2020 Translate Bio and Sanofi Pasteur;mRNA vaccine;By end of 2020 eTheRNA Immunotherapies;mRNA vaccine;2021 Karolinska Institute;DNA vaccine;2021 University of Pennsylvania and Duke Human Vaccine Institute;mRNA vaccine;Unknown

positive: Compassionate remdesivir treatment of severe Covid-19 pneumonia in intensive care unit (ICU) and Non-ICU patients: Clinical outcome and differences in post-treatment hospitalisation status SARS-CoV-2 is causing an increasing number of deaths worldwide because no effective treatment is currently available. Remdesivir has shown in vitro activity against coronaviruses and is a possible antiviral treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection. This prospective (compassionate), open-label study of remdesivir, which was conducted at Luigi Sacco Hospital, Milan, Italy, between February 23 and March 20, 2020, involved patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia aged ≥18 years undergoing mechanical ventilation or with an oxygen saturation level of ≤94 % in air or a National Early Warning Score 2 of ≥4. The primary outcome was the change in clinical status based on a 7-category ordinal scale (1 = not hospitalised, resuming normal daily activities; 7 = deceased). The 35 patients enrolled from February 23 to March 20, 2020, included 18 in intensive care unit (ICU), and 17 in our infectious diseases ward (IDW). The 10-day course of remdesivir was completed by 22 patients (63 %) and discontinued by 13, of whom eight (22.8 %) discontinued because of adverse events. The median follow-up was 39 days (IQR 25-44). At day 28, 14 (82.3 %) patients from IDW were discharged, two were still hospitalized and one died (5.9 %), whereas in ICU 6 (33.3 %) were discharged, 8 (44.4 %) patients died, three (16.7 %) were still mechanically ventilated and one (5.6 %) was improved but still hospitalized. Hypertransaminasemia and acute kidney injury were the most frequent severe adverse events observed (42.8 % and 22.8 % of the cases, respectively). Our data suggest that remdesivir can benefit patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia hospitalised outside ICU where clinical outcome was better and adverse events are less frequently observed. Ongoing randomised controlled trials will clarify its real efficacy and safety, who to treat, and when.

positive: High risk of infection caused posttraumatic stress symptoms in individuals with poor sleep quality: A study on influence of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in China The influence of the outbreak of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) on mental health was poorly understood. The present study aimed to exam sleep problems and posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) in Chinese immediately after the massive outbreak of COVID-19. A total of 2027 Chinese participated in the present study. Wuhan-expose history, sleep quality and PTSS were measured with self-rating scales. Results showed that there were significant differences of PCL-5 and of sleep quality scores in different data-collection dates (ps<0.05). There were significant differences of PCL-5 scores (p<0.05) and latency onset of sleep (p<0.05) between participants with and without Wuhan-expose history. The interaction effect of Wuhan exposure history × sleep quality significantly influenced PCL-5 (ps<0.05). These results indicate that keeping good sleep quality in individuals with high infectious risk is a way to prevent PTSS.

positive: SARS-CoV-2 infection does not significantly cause acute renal injury: an analysis of 116 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in a single hospital, Wuhan, China Summary Background Whether the patients with COVID-19 infected by SARS-CoV-2 would commonly develop acute renal function damage is a problem worthy of clinical attention. This study aimed to explore the effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection on renal function through analyzing the clinical data of 116 hospitalized COVID-19-confirmed patients. Methods 116 hospitalized COVID-19-confirmed patients enrolled in this study were hospitalized in the Department of Infectious Diseases, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University from January 14 to February 13, 2020. The recorded information includes demographic data, medical history, contact history, potential comorbidities, symptoms, signs, laboratory test results, chest computer tomography (CT) scans, and treatment measures. SARS-CoV-2 RNA in 53 urine sediments of enrolled patients was examined by real-time RT-PCR. Findings 12 (10.8%) and 8 (7.2%) patients showed mild elevation of blood urea nitrogen or creatinine, and trace or 1+ albuminuria respectively in 111 COVID-19-confirmed patients without basic kidney disease. In addition, 5 patients with chronic renal failure (CRF) were undergone regular continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) were confirmed infection of SARS-CoV-2, and diagnosed as COVID-19. Beside the treatment of COVID-19, CRRT was also applied three times weekly. The course of treatment, the renal function indicators showed stable, without exacerbation of CRF, and pulmonary inflammation was gradually absorbed. All 5 patients with CRF were survived. Moreover, SARS-CoV-2 RNA in urine sediments was positive only in 3 patients from 48 cases without renal illness before, and one patient had a positive for SARS-CoV-2 ORF 1ab from 5 cases with CRF. Interpretation Acute renal impairment was uncommon in COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 infection does not significantly cause obvious acute renal injury, or aggravate CRF in the COVID-19 patients.

positive: COVID-19 Treatment: Close to a Cure? – A Rapid Review of Pharmacotherapies for the Novel Coronavirus Currently, there is no approved therapy for COVID-19. The World Health Organization therefore endorse supportive care only. However, frontline clinicians and researchers have been experimenting with several virus-based and host-based therapeutics since the outbreak in China. China's National Health Commission has issued the first COVID-19 Treatment Guideline with therapy suggestions (7(th) edition attached) which inspired following clinical studies worldwide. Major therapeutics are evaluated in this review. Key evidence from in vitro researches, animal models and clinical researches in emerging coronaviruses are examined. Antiviral therapies remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir and umifenovir, if considered, could be initiated before the peak of viral replication for optimal outcomes. Ribavirin may be beneficial as an add-on therapy and is ineffective as a monotherapy. Corticosteroids use should be limited to indicating comorbidities. IVIG is not recommended due to lack of data in COVID-19. Xuebijing may benefit patients with complications of bacterial pneumonia or sepsis. The efficacy of interferon is unclear due to conflicting outcomes in coronavirus studies. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have shown in vitro inhibition of SARS-CoV-2, and the studies on clinical efficacy and whether the benefits outweigh the risk of dysrhythmias remain inconclusive. For patients who developed cytokine release syndrome, interleukin-6 inhibitors may be beneficial.

positive: Effect of Hydroxychloroquine in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: Preliminary results from a multi-centre, randomized, controlled trial. Background: Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have been proposed as treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the basis of in vitro activity, uncontrolled data, and small randomized studies. Methods: The Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 therapy (RECOVERY) trial is a randomized, controlled, open-label, platform trial comparing a range of possible treatments with usual care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We report the preliminary results for the comparison of hydroxychloroquine vs. usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Results: 1561 patients randomly allocated to receive hydroxychloroquine were compared with 3155 patients concurrently allocated to usual care. Overall, 418 (26.8%) patients allocated hydroxychloroquine and 788 (25.0%) patients allocated usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.96 to 1.23; P=0.18). Consistent results were seen in all pre-specified subgroups of patients. Patients allocated to hydroxychloroquine were less likely to be discharged from hospital alive within 28 days (60.3% vs. 62.8%; rate ratio 0.92; 95% CI 0.85-0.99) and those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline were more likely to reach the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (29.8% vs. 26.5%; risk ratio 1.12; 95% CI 1.01-1.25). There was no excess of new major cardiac arrhythmia. Conclusions: In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, hydroxychloroquine was not associated with reductions in 28-day mortality but was associated with an increased length of hospital stay and increased risk of progressing to invasive mechanical ventilation or death.

positive: A Trial of Lopinavir-Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Severe Covid-19 BACKGROUND: No therapeutics have yet been proven effective for the treatment of severe illness caused by SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label trial involving hospitalized adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, which causes the respiratory illness Covid-19, and an oxygen saturation (Sao2) of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or a ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen (Pao2) to the fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio2) of less than 300 mm Hg. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either lopinavir-ritonavir (400 mg and 100 mg, respectively) twice a day for 14 days, in addition to standard care, or standard care alone. The primary end point was the time to clinical improvement, defined as the time from randomization to either an improvement of two points on a seven-category ordinal scale or discharge from the hospital, whichever came first. RESULTS: A total of 199 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent randomization; 99 were assigned to the lopinavir-ritonavir group, and 100 to the standard-care group. Treatment with lopinavir-ritonavir was not associated with a difference from standard care in the time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio for clinical improvement, 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 1.80). Mortality at 28 days was similar in the lopinavir-ritonavir group and the standard-care group (19.2% vs. 25.0%; difference, -5.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -17.3 to 5.7). The percentages of patients with detectable viral RNA at various time points were similar. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, lopinavir-ritonavir led to a median time to clinical improvement that was shorter by 1 day than that observed with standard care (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.91). Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common in the lopinavir-ritonavir group, but serious adverse events were more common in the standard-care group. Lopinavir-ritonavir treatment was stopped early in 13 patients (13.8%) because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized adult patients with severe Covid-19, no benefit was observed with lopinavir-ritonavir treatment beyond standard care. Future trials in patients with severe illness may help to confirm or exclude the possibility of a treatment benefit. (Funded by Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development and others; Chinese Clinical Trial Register number, ChiCTR2000029308.).

positive: Debate on Bacille Calmette-Guérin vaccination against COVID-19: Is it worth performing clinical trials? The non-specific beneficial effects of Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination suggest that this vaccine might play a role in protecting individuals against severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19).Several studies propose that BCG vaccination may increase the body's immunity, thereby preventing respiratory infections caused by other respiratory pathogens. As the number of deaths due to COVID-19 is increasing rapidly and there is no specific treatment available to date, scientists are evaluating the effectiveness of already approved drugs as therapies against COVID-19, and the results were found to vary widely: from no significant effect being observed to a reduction in the time taken for clinical improvement. This study thus aims to evaluate whether it is worth performing clinical trials to examine the effects of the BCG vaccine on COVID-19. We herein emphasize the need to conduct phase III randomized controlled trials with an adequate sample size and quality to investigate the effects of the BCG vaccine on COVID-19. In the event that BCG vaccination provides non-specific protection against COVID-19, administering it could be helpful in controlling the transmission of COVID-19 and other infectious diseases during future pandemics.

positive: A SARS-CoV-2-Human Protein-Protein Interaction Map Reveals Drug Targets and Potential Drug-Repurposing An outbreak of the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19 respiratory disease, has infected over 290,000 people since the end of 2019, killed over 12,000, and caused worldwide social and economic disruption(1,2). There are currently no antiviral drugs with proven efficacy nor are there vaccines for its prevention. Unfortunately, the scientific community has little knowledge of the molecular details of SARS-CoV-2 infection. To illuminate this, we cloned, tagged and expressed 26 of the 29 viral proteins in human cells and identified the human proteins physically associated with each using affinity- purification mass spectrometry (AP-MS), which identified 332 high confidence SARS-CoV-2-human protein-protein interactions (PPIs). Among these, we identify 66 druggable human proteins or host factors targeted by 69 existing FDA-approved drugs, drugs in clinical trials and/or preclinical compounds, that we are currently evaluating for efficacy in live SARS-CoV-2 infection assays. The identification of host dependency factors mediating virus infection may provide key insights into effective molecular targets for developing broadly acting antiviral therapeutics against SARS-CoV-2 and other deadly coronavirus strains.

positive: Novel Coronavirus COVID-19: Current Evidence and Evolving Strategies COVID-19 is a global pandemic that has currently infected >300,000 globally. Fever and cough are the most common symptoms of the disease, and it is important to remember that the virus can even be transmitted by individuals who test positive for the disease but do not have any symptoms. Currently reported mortality rates vary because of the rapid spread of the disease and different approaches to calculating this estimate, but it is clear that the risk of death is associated with age and the presence of underlying conditions. Risk mitigation techniques (i.e., hand washing, social distancing, and self-isolation) have already been emphasized across major news outlets. It is essential that we continue these practices, as the outbreak is currently expected to last for many more months and we must be mindful of the lessons learned from past pandemics to prevent a second wave from occurring.

positive: Current State of Research About Chinese Herbal Medicines (CHM) for the Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Scoping Review. Background: There is currently no effective treatment against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The optimal selection of interventions targeting the virus is unknown. Therefore, evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to support specific treatment against COVID-19 is urgently needed. The use of Chinese herbal medicines (CHMs) might have a role in the treatment and symptomatic management of patients with COVID-19. It was aimed at providing an overview of the available evidence and ongoing trials concerning the effects of CHMs for the treatment of COVID-19. Methods: This is a narrative review of relevant studies. Searches were conducted to identify documents published till April 22, 2020. Electronic databases, evidence-based collections, websites of relevant organizations, and trial registries were consulted. Results: A total of 25 guidelines on the treatment of patients with COVID-19 were identified. Four guidelines provided recommendations on the use of CHMs; these guidelines were developed in China and South Korea and were based on the consensus of experts exclusively. The remaining 21 guidelines provided no guidance on CHMs. No finished RCTs of CHMs for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 was found. According to the evidence evaluated in this review, a Cochrane review of CHMs for severe acute respiratory syndrome and five uncontrolled observational studies of the effects of CHMs in patients with COVID-19, the effects of CHMs for COVID-19 are unknown. A total of 52 ongoing clinical trials of CHM interventions for the treatment of COVID-19 were found. These trials will be carried out mostly in China (n = 51). Forty (77%) of the ongoing trials will be randomized, whereas 12 (23%) have an unclear sequence generation procedure. Forty-seven trials (90%) will have a sample size <400 participants. Conclusions: To the authors' knowledge, only the Chinese and the South Korean guidelines recommend CHMs as a treatment option for patients with COVID-19. These guidelines base their recommendations on the consensus of experts. Clinical guidelines or health authorities from other countries do not provide advice on CHMs. Due to the absence of RCT, there is currently no reliable evidence on the effects of any specific CHM intervention for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. A high number of clinical trials of different herbal products are being currently conducted in China.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine in patients with mainly mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019: open label, randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care compared with standard of care alone in adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 16 government designated covid-19 treatment centres in China, 11 to 29 February 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 150 patients admitted to hospital with laboratory confirmed covid-19 were included in the intention to treat analysis (75 patients assigned to hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care, 75 to standard of care alone). INTERVENTIONS: Hydroxychloroquine administrated at a loading dose of 1200 mg daily for three days followed by a maintenance dose of 800 mg daily (total treatment duration: two or three weeks for patients with mild to moderate or severe disease, respectively). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Negative conversion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by 28 days, analysed according to the intention to treat principle. Adverse events were analysed in the safety population in which hydroxychloroquine recipients were participants who received at least one dose of hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine non-recipients were those managed with standard of care alone. RESULTS: Of 150 patients, 148 had mild to moderate disease and two had severe disease. The mean duration from symptom onset to randomisation was 16.6 (SD 10.5; range 3-41) days. A total of 109 (73%) patients (56 standard of care; 53 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) had negative conversion well before 28 days, and the remaining 41 (27%) patients (19 standard of care; 22 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) were censored as they did not reach negative conversion of virus. The probability of negative conversion by 28 days in the standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine group was 85.4% (95% confidence interval 73.8% to 93.8%), similar to that in the standard of care group (81.3%, 71.2% to 89.6%). The difference between groups was 4.1% (95% confidence interval –10.3% to 18.5%). In the safety population, adverse events were recorded in 7/80 (9%) hydroxychloroquine non-recipients and in 21/70 (30%) hydroxychloroquine recipients. The most common adverse event in the hydroxychloroquine recipients was diarrhoea, reported in 7/70 (10%) patients. Two hydroxychloroquine recipients reported serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of hydroxychloroquine did not result in a significantly higher probability of negative conversion than standard of care alone in patients admitted to hospital with mainly persistent mild to moderate covid-19. Adverse events were higher in hydroxychloroquine recipients than in non-recipients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR2000029868.

positive: Emergence of novel coronavirus and progress toward treatment and vaccine In late December 2019, a group of patients was observed with pneumonia‐like symptoms that were linked with a wet market in Wuhan, China. The patients were found to have a novel coronavirus genetically related to a bat coronavirus that was termed SARS‐CoV‐2. The virus gradually spread worldwide and was declared a pandemic by WHO. Scientists have started trials on potential preventive and treatment options. Currently, there is no specific approved treatment for SARS‐CoV‐2, and various clinical trials are underway to explore better treatments. Some previously approved antiviral and other drugs have shown some in vitro activity. Here we summarize the fight against this novel coronavirus with particular focus on the different treatment options and clinical trials exploring treatment as well as work done toward development of vaccines.

positive: Minimum costs to manufacture new treatments for COVID-19 INTRODUCTION: ‘Repurposing’ existing drugs to treat COVID-19 is vital to reducing mortality and controlling the pandemic. Several promising drugs have been identified and are in various stages of clinical trials globally. If efficacy of these drugs is demonstrated, rapid, mass availability at an affordable cost would be essential to ensuring equity and access especially amongst low- and middle-income economies. METHODS: Minimum costs of production were estimated from the costs of active pharmaceutical ingredients using established methodology, which had good predictive accuracy for medicines for hepatitis C and HIV amongst others. Data were extracted from global export shipment records or analysis of the route of chemical synthesis. The estimated costs were compared with list prices from a range of countries where pricing data were available. RESULTS: Minimum estimated costs of production were US $0.93/day for remdesivir, $1.45/day for favipiravir, $0.08/day for hydroxychloroquine, $0.02/day for chloroquine, $0.10/day for azithromycin, $0.28/day for lopinavir/ritonavir, $0.39/day for sofosbuvir/daclatasvir and $1.09/day for pirfenidone. Costs of production ranged between $0.30 and $31 per treatment course (10–28 days). Current prices of these drugs were far higher than the costs of production, particularly in the US. CONCLUSIONS: Should repurposed drugs demonstrate efficacy against COVID-19, they could be manufactured profitably at very low costs, for much less than current list prices. Estimations for the minimum production costs can strengthen price negotiations and help ensure affordable access to vital treatment for COVID-19 at low prices globally.

positive: Core Outcome Set for Clinical Trials on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COS-COVID) Since its outbreak in December 2019, a series of clinical trials on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been registered or carried out. However, the significant heterogeneity and less critical outcomes of such trials may be leading to a waste of research resources. This study aimed to develop a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials on COVID-19 in order to tackle the outcome issues. The study was conducted according to the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) handbook (version 1.0), a guideline for COS development. A research group was set up that included experts in respiratory and critical medicine, traditional Chinese medicine, evidence-based medicine, clinical pharmacology, and statistics, in addition to medical journal editors. Clinical trial registry websites (chictr.org.cn and clinicaltrials.gov) were searched to retrieve clinical trial protocols and outcomes in order to form an outcome pool. A total of 78 clinical trial protocols on COVID-19 were included and 259 outcomes were collected. After standardization, 132 outcomes were identified within seven different categories, of which 58 were selected to develop a preliminary outcome list for further consensus. After two rounds of Delphi survey and one consensus meeting, the most important outcomes for the different clinical classifications of COVID-19 were identified and determined to constitute the COS for clinical trials on COVID-19 (COS-COVID). The COS-COVID includes one outcome for the mild type (time to 2019-nCoV reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) negativity), four outcomes for the ordinary type (length of hospital stay, composite events, score of clinical symptoms, and time to 2019-nCoV RT-PCR negativity), five outcomes for the severe type (composite events, length of hospital stay, arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), duration of mechanical ventilation, and time to 2019-nCoV RT-PCR negativity), one outcome for critical type (all-cause mortality), and one outcome for rehabilitation period (pulmonary function). The COS-COVID is currently the most valuable and practical clinical outcome set for the evaluation of intervention effect, and is useful for evidence assessment and decision-making. With a deepening understanding of COVID-19 and application feedback, the COS-COVID should be continuously updated.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine efficacy and safety in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease severity during pregnancy (COVID-Preg): a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised placebo controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives of the study are: 1. To assess the effect of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in reducing SARS-CoV-2 viral shedding by PCR in infected pregnant women with mild symptoms. 2. To assess the efficacy of HCQ to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant women in contact with an infected or suspected case. 3. To evaluate the effect of HCQ in preventing the development of the COVID-19 disease in asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2-infected pregnant women. The secondary objectives are: 1. To determine the effect of HCQ on the clinical course and duration of the COVID-19 disease in SARS-CoV-2-infected pregnant women. 2. To determine the impact of HCQ on the risk of hospitalization and mortality of SARS-CoV-2-infected pregnant women. 3. To assess the safety and tolerability of HCQ in pregnant women. 4. To describe the clinical presentation of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. 5. To describe the effects of maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection on pregnancy and perinatal outcomes by treatment group. 6. To determine the risk of vertical transmission (intra-utero and intra-partum) of SARS-CoV-2. TRIAL DESIGN: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled two-arm multicentre clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of HCQ to prevent and/or minimize SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. Participants will be randomized to receive a 14-day oral treatment course of HCQ or placebo, ratio 1:1. PARTICIPANTS: Study population: pregnant women undergoing routine prenatal follow up or attending emergency units at the participating hospitals who report either symptoms/signs suggestive of COVID-19 disease or close contact with a suspected or confirmed COVID-19 case. Inclusion criteria Women will be invited to participate in the trial and sign an informed consent if they meet the following inclusion criteria. • Presenting with fever (≥37.5°C) and/or one mild symptom suggestive of COVID-19 disease (cough, dyspnoea, chills, odynophagia, diarrhoea, muscle pain, anosmia, dysgeusia, headache) OR being contact* of a SARS-CoV-2 confirmed or suspected case in the past 14 days • More than 12 weeks of gestation (dated by ultrasonography) • Agreement to deliver in the study hospitals Exclusion criteria • Known hypersensitivity to HCQ or other 4-amonoquinoline compounds • History of retinopathy of any aetiology • Concomitant use of digoxin, cyclosporine, cimetidine • Known liver disease • Clinical history of cardiac pathology including known long QT syndrome • Unable to cooperate with the requirements of the study • Participating in other intervention studies • Delivery onset (characterized by painful uterine contractions and variable changes of the cervix, including some degree of effacement and slower progression of dilatation up to 5 cm for first and subsequent labours) The study participants will be stratified by clinical presentation and SARS-CoV-2 PCR results. Assignment of participants to study groups will be as follows: • SARS-CoV-2-PCR confirmed, infected pregnant women: a. symptomatic (n=100) b. asymptomatic (n=100) • SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative pregnant women in contact* with a SARS-CoV-2-infected confirmed or suspected case (n=514). *The ECDC definition of close contact will be followed. The trial will be conducted in five hospitals in Spain: Hospital Clínic of Barcelona, Hospital Sant Joan de Déu and Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, in Barcelona, and HM Puerta del Sur and Hospital Universitario de Torrejón, in Madrid. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Participants will be randomized to HCQ (400 mg/day for three days, followed by 200 mg/day for 11 days) or placebo (2 tablets for three days, followed by one tablet for 11 days). MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is the number of PCR-confirmed infected pregnant women assessed from collected nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs at day 21 after treatment start (one week after treatment is completed). RANDOMISATION: Allocation of participants to study arms will be done centrally by the trial’s Sponsor (the Barcelona Institute for Global Health, ISGlobal) by block randomization. This method will ensure balanced allocation to both arms. The electronic CRF will automatically assign a study number to each participant, depending on her study group and recruitment site. Each number will be related to a treatment number, which assigns them to one of the study arms. BLINDING (MASKING): Participants, caregivers, investigators and those assessing the outcomes will be blinded to group assignment. Study tablets (HCQ and placebo) will be identically packaged in small opaque bottles. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): This study requires 200 SARS-CoV-2 infected and 514 contact pregnant women, randomised 1:1 with 100 and 227 respectively in each study arm. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 1.0, from May 8(th), 2020. Recruitment is ongoing (first patient recruited the 19(th) May 2020 and recruitment end anticipated by December 2020). TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number: 2020-001587-29, registered 2 April 2020. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04410562, retrospectively registered 1 June 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: A survey of 434 clinical trials about coronavirus disease 2019 in China

positive: The current understanding and potential therapeutic options to combat COVID-19 Abstract The ongoing wreaking global outbreak of the novel human beta coronavirus (CoV) pathogen was presumed to be from a seafood wholesale market in Wuhan, China, belongs to the Coronaviridae family in the Nidovirales order. The virus is highly contagious with potential human-human transmission which was named as the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), has spread across six continents and emerged as a global pandemic in short span with alarming levels of spread and severity. This virus associated symptoms and infectious respiratory illness is designated as coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). The SARS-CoV-2 possesses enveloped club-like spike protein projections with positive-sense large RNA genome and has a unique replication strategy. This virus was believed to have zoonotic origin with genetical identity to bat and pangolin CoV. In the current review, we introduce a general overview about the human CoVs and the associated diseases, the origin, structure, replication and key clinical events that occur in the COVID-19 pathogenicity. Furthermore, we focused on possible therapeutic options such as repurposing drugs including antimalarials, antivirals, antiparasitic drugs, and anti-HIV drugs, as well as monoclonal antibodies, vaccines as potential treatment options. Also we have summarized the latest research progress on the usage of stem cell therapy, human convalescent serum, interferon's, in the treatment of COVID-19.

positive: Ethics and practical mitigations for ongoing clinical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic

positive: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 with or without diabetes: A systematic search and a narrative review with a special reference to India and other developing countries Abstract Background and aims No drugs are currently approved for Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19), although some have been tried. In view of recent studies and discussion on chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), we aimed to review existing literature and relevant websites regarding these drugs and COVID-19, adverse effects related to drugs, and related guidelines. Aims and methods We systematically searched the PubMed database up till March 21, 2020 and retrieved all the articles published on chloroquine and HCQ and COVID-19. Results Two small human studies have been conducted with both these drugs in COVID-19, and have shown significant improvement in some parameters in patients with COVID-19. Conclusion Considering minimal risk upon use, a long experience of use in other diseases, cost-effectiveness and easy availability across India, we propose that both these drugs are worthy of fast track clinical trial for treatment, and may be carefully considered for clinical use as experimental drugs. Since HCQ has been approved for treatment of diabetes in India, it should be further researched in diabetes and COVID-19, a subgroup where significant mortality has been shown.

positive: Analysis on herbal medicines utilized for treatment of COVID-19 As coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses a substantial global public health threat, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) was used in 91.50% of the COVID-19 cases in China, showing encouraging results in improving symptom management and reducing the deterioration, mortality, and recurrence rates. A total of 166 modified herbal formulae consisting of 179 single herbal medicines were collected for treating COVID-19 in China. Glycyrrhizae Radix et Rhizome, Scutellariae Radix, and Armeniacae Semen Amarum are the most frequently utilized in clinics, most of which are antipyretic (47, 26.26%), expectorant and cough-suppressing (22, 12.29%), and dampness-resolving (21, 11.73%) from traditional descriptions. A total of 1212 chemical components containing β-sitosterol, stigmasterol, and quercetin were primarily selected. Additionally, using complex system entropy and unsupervised hierarchical clustering, 8 core herbal combinations and 10 new formulae emerged as potentially useful candidates for COVID-19. Finally, following scaffold analysis, self-organizing mapping (SOM) and cluster analysis, 12 clusters of molecules yielded 8 pharmacophore families of structures that were further screened as pharmacological targets in human metabolic pathways for inhibiting coronavirus. This article aims to make more easily accessible and share historical herbal knowledge used in contemporary treatments in a modern manner to assist researchers contain the global spread of COVID-19.

positive: Waste in COVID-19 clinical trials conducted in western Europe

positive: Two Randomized Controlled Trials of Bacillus Calmette-Guérin Vaccination to reduce absenteeism among health care workers and hospital admission by elderly persons during the COVID-19 pandemic: A structured summary of the study protocols for two randomised controlled trials OBJECTIVES: The objectives of these two separate trials are: (1) to reduce health care workers (HCWs) absenteeism; and (2) to reduce hospital admission among the elderly during the COVID-19 pandemic through BCG vaccination. TRIAL DESIGN: Two separate multi-centre placebo-controlled parallel group randomized trials PARTICIPANTS: (1) Health care personnel working in the hospital or ambulance service where they will take care of patients with the COVID-19 infection and (2) elderly ≥60 years. The HCW trial is being undertaken in 9 hospitals. The elderly trial is being undertaken in locations in the community in Nijmegen, Utrecht, and Veghel, in the Netherlands, using senior citizen organisations to facilitate recruitment. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: For both trials the intervention group will be randomized to vaccination with 0.1 ml of the licensed BCG vaccine (Danish strain 1331, SSI, Denmark, equivalent to 0.075 mg attenuated M. bovis). The placebo group consists of 0.1 ml 0.9% NaCl, which is the same amount, and has the same colour and appearance as the suspended BCG vaccine. MAIN OUTCOMES: (1) Number of days of unplanned work absenteeism in HCWs for any reason which can be continuously measured on a bi-weekly basis, and (2) the cumulative incidence of hospital admission due to documented COVID-19. RANDOMISATION: Participants will be randomized to BCG vaccine or placebo (1;1) centrally using a computer- based system, stratified by study centre. BLINDING (MASKING): Subjects, investigators, physicians and outcome assessors are blinded for the intervention. Only the pharmacist assistant that prepares- and research personnel that administers- study medicines are unblinded. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): (1) The sample size for the first trial is N=1500 HCWs randomised 1:1 to either BCG vaccine (n=750) and placebo (n=750) and (2) The sample size for the second trial is N=1600 elderly persons randomised to BCG vaccine (n=800) and the placebo group (n=800). TRIAL STATUS: HCW: version 4.0, 24-04-2020. Recruitment began 25-03-2020 and was completed on the 23-04-2020. Elderly: version 3.0, 04-04-2020. Recruitment began 16-04- 2020 and is ongoing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The HCWs trial was registered 31-03-2020 at clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT04328441) and registered 20-03-2020 at the Dutch Trial Registry (trialregister.nl, identifier Trial NL8477). The elderly trial was registered 22-04-2020 at the Dutch trial registry with number NL8547. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocols will be attached as additional files, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Guideline-based Chinese herbal medicine treatment plus standard care for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (G-CHAMPS): evidence from China Abstract Objectives: To assess outcomes in patients who have severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and were treated with either China guideline based Chinese herbal medicines (CHMs) plus standard care or standard care alone. Design: A pilot randomized controlled trial. Setting Hubei Provincial Hospital of Integrated Chinese and Western Medicine, Wuhan, China Patients: A total of 42 adults with severe COVID-19. Interventions: Participants in the CHM plus standard care group received CHM and standard care, and the control group received standard care alone. Measurements and Main Results: The primary outcome was the change in the disease severity category of COVID-19 after treatment at 7 days. Among 42 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age 60.43 years [12.69 years]; 21 [50%] were aged [≥] 65 years; and 35 [83%] women, 42 (100%) had data available for the primary outcome. For the primary outcome, one patient from each group died during treatment; the odds of a shift towards death was lower in the CHM plus group than the standard care alone group (common OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.148 to 2.352 P=.454). Three (2 from the CHM plus group and 1 from the standard care alone group) patients progressed from severe to critical illness. After treatment, mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19 disease accounted for 18% (5) vs 14% (2), 71% (20) vs 64% (9), and 0% (0) vs 7% (1) of the patients treated with CHM plus standard care vs. standard care alone. Conclusions: For the first time, the G-CHAMPS trial provided valuable information for the national guideline-based CHM treatment for hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. CHM effects in COVID-19 may be clinically important and warrant further consideration and studies.

positive: Therapeutic strategies in an outbreak scenario to treat the novel coronavirus originating in Wuhan, China [version 1;peer review: awaiting peer review] A novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating in Wuhan, China presents a potential respiratory viral pandemic to the world population Current efforts are focused on containment and quarantine of infected individuals Ultimately, the outbreak could be controlled with a protective vaccine to prevent 2019-nCoV infection While vaccine research should be pursued intensely, there exists today no therapy to treat 2019-nCoV upon infection, despite an urgent need to find options to help these patients and preclude potential death Herein, I review the potential options to treat 2019-nCoV in patients, with an emphasis on the necessity for speed and timeliness in developing new and effective therapies in this outbreak I consider the options of drug repurposing, developing neutralizing monoclonal antibody therapy, and an oligonucleotide strategy targeting the viral RNA genome, emphasizing the promise and pitfalls of these approaches Finally, I advocate for the fastest strategy to develop a treatment now, which could be resistant to any mutations the virus may have in the future The proposal is a biologic that blocks 2019-nCoV entry using a soluble version of the viral receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), fused to an immunoglobulin Fc domain, providing a neutralizing antibody with maximal breath to avoid any viral escape, while also helping to recruit the immune system to build lasting immunity The sequence of the ACE2-Fc protein is provided to investigators, allowing its possible use in recombinant protein expression systems to start producing drug today to treat patients under compassionate use, while formal clinical trials are later undertaken Such a treatment could help infected patients before a protective vaccine is developed and widely available in the coming months to year(s)

positive: Preliminary Estimates of the Prevalence of Selected Underlying Health Conditions Among Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 — United States, February 12–March 28, 2020 On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) a pandemic (1). As of March 28, 2020, a total of 571,678 confirmed COVID-19 cases and 26,494 deaths have been reported worldwide (2). Reports from China and Italy suggest that risk factors for severe disease include older age and the presence of at least one of several underlying health conditions (3,4). U.S. older adults, including those aged ≥65 years and particularly those aged ≥85 years, also appear to be at higher risk for severe COVID-19-associated outcomes; however, data describing underlying health conditions among U.S. COVID-19 patients have not yet been reported (5). As of March 28, 2020, U.S. states and territories have reported 122,653 U.S. COVID-19 cases to CDC, including 7,162 (5.8%) for whom data on underlying health conditions and other known risk factors for severe outcomes from respiratory infections were reported. Among these 7,162 cases, 2,692 (37.6%) patients had one or more underlying health condition or risk factor, and 4,470 (62.4%) had none of these conditions reported. The percentage of COVID-19 patients with at least one underlying health condition or risk factor was higher among those requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission (358 of 457, 78%) and those requiring hospitalization without ICU admission (732 of 1,037, 71%) than that among those who were not hospitalized (1,388 of 5,143, 27%). The most commonly reported conditions were diabetes mellitus, chronic lung disease, and cardiovascular disease. These preliminary findings suggest that in the United States, persons with underlying health conditions or other recognized risk factors for severe outcomes from respiratory infections appear to be at a higher risk for severe disease from COVID-19 than are persons without these conditions.

positive: Rapid review for the anti-coronavirus effect of remdesivir. The outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 rapidly spread across China and worldwide. Remdesivir had been proposed as a promising option for treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We provided a rapid review to critically assess the potential anti-coronavirus effect of remdesivir on COVID-19 and other coronaviruses based on the most up-to-date evidence. Even though remdesivir was proposed as a promising option for treating COVID-19 based on laboratory experiments and reports from compassionate use, its safety and effect in humans requires high-quality evidence from well-designed and adequately-powered clinical trials for further clarification.

positive: Could nitric oxide help to prevent or treat COVID-19? Abstract The nasal cavity and turbinates play important physiological functions by filtering, warming and humidifying inhaled air. Paranasal sinuses continually produce nitric oxide (NO), a reactive oxygen species that diffuses to the bronchi and lungs to produce bronchodilatory and vasodilatory effects. Studies indicate that NO may also help to reduce respiratory tract infection by inactivating viruses and inhibiting their replication in epithelial cells cultured in vitro. In view of the pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), clinical trials have been designed to examine the effects of inhaled nitric oxide in COVID-19 subjects. We discuss here additional lifestyle factors such as mouth breathing which may affect the antiviral response against SARS-CoV-2 by bypassing the filtering effect of the nose and by decreasing NO levels in the airways. Simple devices that promote nasal breathing during sleep may help prevent the common cold, suggesting potential benefits against coronavirus infection. In the absence of effective treatments against COVID-19, the alternative strategies proposed here should be considered and studied in more detail.

positive: Favipiravir: Pharmacokinetics and Concerns About Clinical Trials for 2019-nCoV Infection An outbreak of 2019-nCoV infection has spread across the world. No specific antiviral drugs have been approved for the treatment of COVID-2019. In addition to the recommended antiviral drugs, such as interferon-É, lopinavir/ritonavir, ribavirin, and chloroquine phosphate, some clinical trials focusing on virus RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) inhibitors have been registered and initiated. Favipiravir, a purine nucleic acid analog and potent RdRp inhibitor approved for use in influenza, is also considered in several clinical trials. Herein, we summarized the pharmacokinetic characteristics of favipiravir and possible drug-drug interactions from the view of drug metabolism. We hope this will be helpful for the design of clinical trials for favipiravir in COVID-2019, as data regarding in vitro virus inhibition and efficacy in preclinical animal studies are still not available.

positive: Appealing for efficient, well organized clinical trials on COVID-19. Background The rapid emergence of clinical trials on COVID-19 stimulated a wave of discussion in scientific community. It is important to understand the characteristics of the ongoing or pending interventional clinical trials on COVID-19. Methods We reviewed the characteristics of interventional trials from Chinese Clinical Trial Registration (ChiCTR) and ClinicalTrials.gov. A total of 171 COVID-19-related interventional trials were identified on Feb 22, 2020. These trials are classified into 4 categories based on treatment modalities, including chemical drugs (CDs), biological therapies (BTs), traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) treatments and other therapies. Results Our analysis focused on the issues of stage, design, randomization, blinding, primary endpoints (PEs) definition and sample size of these trials. Although most trials use parallel-arm design (88.3%) and randomization (77.2%), blinding is applied in only 25 trials (14.6%). More than half of the trials planned to recruit ≤100 patients, indicating a possibility of insufficient statistical power. About one third of trials will recruit severe and critically ill patients. More trials on traditional Chinese medical treatment use 2 or more PEs than those on CDs or biological treatments (57.6%, 39.4% and 40.5%, respectively). Conclusions We found some studies with potential defects including unreasonable design, inappropriate PE and small sample size. Clinical trials on COVID-19 should be designed based on scientific rules, ethics and benefits for patients.

positive: Cardiovascular Disease Novel Coronavirus and the Search for Investigational Therapies PURPOSE: The primary purpose of the current study was to investigate and summarize the registered trials that listed COVID-19 as the primary condition. METHODS: We performed a search on ClinicalTrials.gov using the independent search terms COVID-19, SARS, and SARS COV2, and then downloaded the data file on March 23, 2020. All trials were downloaded to a csv file and searched for appropriateness. RESULTS: Fifty-six of 124 (45.2%) registered trials were listed as recruiting. The majority (85, 68.5%) classified their study as interventional, 37 (29.8%) classified as observational and one (0.8%) each classified their study as either expanded access:individual patients | treatment IND/Protocol or expanded access:intermediate-size population | treatment IND/Protocol. There were 67 (54.0%) of the trials that listed drug as the type of study. Immunological and antiviral trials were the greatest, representing approximately 30% and 21%, respectively. When immunological and antiviral drugs were used alone or in combination, they represented 41.9% and 34.4%, respectively. Anti-malarial agents are represented in 7.5% of trials. Approximately 14% of trials involved Traditional Chinese Medicine. The aforementioned study agents used solely or in combination represented approximately 80% of therapeutic approaches to COVID19. CONCLUSION: There was a large and quick response on ClinicalTrials.gov to the COVID-19 outbreak. Many of the registered trials are currently recruiting new patients, while some will begin in the near future. Specific potential experimental therapies, including dosing and monitoring, might be found by reviewing content. Within clinicaltrials.gov, patients, family members, health care professionals and researchers can search and find ongoing and future trials for COVID-19.

positive: Systematic review of the efficacy and safety of antiretroviral drugs against SARS, MERS or COVID‐19: initial assessment INTRODUCTION: Several antiretroviral drugs are being considered for the treatment of COVID‐19, the disease caused by a newly identified coronavirus, (SARS‐CoV‐2). We systematically reviewed the clinical outcomes of using antiretroviral drugs for the prevention and treatment of coronaviruses and planned clinical trials. METHODS: Three databases were screened from inception to 30 March 2020 for studies reporting clinical outcomes of patients with SARS, MERS or COVID‐19 treated with antiretrovirals. RESULTS: From an initial screen of 433 titles, two randomized trials and 24 observational studies provided clinical outcome data on the use of antiretroviral drugs; most studies reported outcomes using LPV/r as treatment. Of the 21 observational studies reporting treatment outcomes, there were three studies among patients with SARS, six studies among patients with MERS and 12 studies among patients with COVID‐19. In one randomized trial 99 patients with severe COVID‐19 illness were randomized to receive LPV/r (400/100 mg twice a day) and 100 patients to standard of care for 14 days: LPV/r was not associated with a statistically significant difference in time to clinical improvement, although LPV/r given within 12 days of symptoms was associated with shorter time to clinical improvement; 28 day mortality was numerically lower in the LPV/r group (14/99) compared to the control group (25/100), but this difference was not statistically significant. The second trial found no benefit. The certainty of the evidence for the randomized trials was low. In the observational studies 3 out of 361 patients who received LPV/r died; the certainty of evidence was very low. Three studies reported a possible protective effect of LPV/r as post‐exposure prophylaxis. Again, the certainty of the evidence was very low due to uncertainty due to limited sample size. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the available evidence it is uncertain whether LPV/r and other antiretrovirals improve clinical outcomes or prevent infection among patients at high risk of acquiring COVID‐19.

positive: Treatment with convalescent plasma for critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection Abstract As of March 24, 2020, novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been responsible for 379,661 infection cases with 16,428 deaths globally and the number is still increasing rapidly. Herein, we presented four critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection who received supportive care and convalescent plasma. Although all the four patients (including a pregnant woman) recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection eventually, randomized trials are needed to eliminate the effect of other treatments and investigate the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy.

positive: A review on possible modes of action of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine: repurposing against SAR-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic Chloroquine (CQ) and its analogue hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have long been used worldwide as frontline drugs for the treatment and prophylaxis of human malaria. Since the first reported cases in Wuhan, China, in late December 2019, humans have been under threat from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (previously known as 2019-nCoV), subsequently declared a pandemic. While the world is searching for expedited approval for a vaccine, which may be only preventative and not a cure, physicians and country leaders are considering several concerted clinical trials suggesting that the age-old antimalarial drugs CQ/HCQ could be a potent therapeutic against COVID-19. Based on accumulating scientific reports, here we highlight the possible modes of action of CQ/HCQ that could justify its use against viral infections. Considering the global health crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic, the option of repurposing old drugs, e.g. CQ/HCQ, particularly HCQ, for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection could be a good choice. CQ/HCQ has diverse modes of action, including alteration of the acidic environment inside lysosomes and late endosomes, preventing endocytosis, exosome release and phagolysosomal fusion, and inhibition of the host cytokine storm. One or more diverse mechanisms might work against viral infections and reduce mortality. As there is no cure for COVID-19, clinical testing of HCQ is urgently required to determine its potency against SARS-CoV-2, as this is the currently available treatment option. There remains a need to find other innovative drug candidates as possible candidates to enter clinical evaluation and testing.

positive: Cathepsin L-selective inhibitors: A potentially promising treatment for COVID-19 patients The widespread coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has already infected over 4 million people worldwide, with a death toll over 280,000. Current treatment of COVID-19 patients relies mainly on antiviral drugs lopinavir/ritonavir, arbidol, and remdesivir, the anti-malarial drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, and traditional Chinese medicine. There are over 2118 on-going clinical trials underway, but to date none of these drugs have consistently proven effective. Cathepsin L (CatL) is an endosomal cysteine protease. It mediates the cleavage of the S1 subunit of the coronavirus surface spike glycoprotein. This cleavage is necessary for coronavirus entry into human host cells, virus and host cell endosome membrane fusion, and viral RNA release for next round of replication. Here we summarize data regarding seven CatL-selective inhibitors that block coronavirus entry into cultured host cells and provide a mechanism to block SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans. Given the rapid growth of the SARS-CoV-2-positive population worldwide, ready-to-use CatL inhibitors should be explored as a treatment option. We identify ten US FDA-approved drugs that have CatL inhibitory activity. We provide evidence that supports the combined use of serine protease and CatL inhibitors as a possibly safer and more effective therapy than other available therapeutics to block coronavirus host cell entry and intracellular replication, without compromising the immune system.

positive: A Collaborative Multidisciplinary Approach to the Management of Coronavirus Disease-19 in the Hospital Setting • Supportive care is the standard approach to the management of coronavirus disease-19, with particular attention to respiratory support, and early detection of potential complications such as cytokine storm and organ dysfunction. • Therapeutic management of coronavirus disease-19 using antivirals and immunomodulators remain investigational, and should be implemented using clinical trial protocols. • 3. A multidisciplinary collaborative approach to management of coronavirus disease-19 is an essential component of providing optimal care to patients.

positive: A Rapid Systematic Review of Clinical Trials Utilizing Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine as a Treatment for COVID‐19 OBJECTIVES: The emergence of SARS‐CoV‐2 has presented clinicians with a difficult therapeutic dilemma. With supportive care as the current mainstay of treatment, the fatality rate of COVID‐19 is 6.9%. There are currently several trials assessing the efficacy of different antivirals as treatment. Of these, chloroquine (CQ) and its derivative hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have garnered the most attention. METHODS: In this study, the literature currently available on CQ and HCQ as treatment of COVID‐19 was surveyed using EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, MedRxiv, and one clinical trial registry. Upon gathering published and preprint trials, risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. RESULTS: There are currently seven completed clinical trials and 29 registered clinical trials focusing on HCQ or CQ as a therapeutic avenue for COVID‐19. Of these, five of seven trials have shown favorable outcomes for patients using CQ or HCQ and two of seven have shown no change compared to control. However, all seven trials carried varying degrees of bias and poor study design. CONCLUSION: There are currently not enough data available to support the routine use of HCQ and CQ as therapies for COVID‐19. Pending further results from more extensive studies with more stringent study parameters, clinicians should defer from routine use of HCQ and CQ. There are several clinical trials currently under way with results expected soon.

positive: Network-based drug repurposing for novel coronavirus 2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2 Human coronaviruses (HCoVs), including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV, also known as SARS-CoV-2), lead global epidemics with high morbidity and mortality. However, there are currently no effective drugs targeting 2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2. Drug repurposing, representing as an effective drug discovery strategy from existing drugs, could shorten the time and reduce the cost compared to de novo drug discovery. In this study, we present an integrative, antiviral drug repurposing methodology implementing a systems pharmacology-based network medicine platform, quantifying the interplay between the HCoV–host interactome and drug targets in the human protein–protein interaction network. Phylogenetic analyses of 15 HCoV whole genomes reveal that 2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2 shares the highest nucleotide sequence identity with SARS-CoV (79.7%). Specifically, the envelope and nucleocapsid proteins of 2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2 are two evolutionarily conserved regions, having the sequence identities of 96% and 89.6%, respectively, compared to SARS-CoV. Using network proximity analyses of drug targets and HCoV–host interactions in the human interactome, we prioritize 16 potential anti-HCoV repurposable drugs (e.g., melatonin, mercaptopurine, and sirolimus) that are further validated by enrichment analyses of drug-gene signatures and HCoV-induced transcriptomics data in human cell lines. We further identify three potential drug combinations (e.g., sirolimus plus dactinomycin, mercaptopurine plus melatonin, and toremifene plus emodin) captured by the “Complementary Exposure” pattern: the targets of the drugs both hit the HCoV–host subnetwork, but target separate neighborhoods in the human interactome network. In summary, this study offers powerful network-based methodologies for rapid identification of candidate repurposable drugs and potential drug combinations targeting 2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2.

positive: Clinical Laboratory Parameters Associated with Severe or Critical Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Background: To date, several clinical laboratory parameters associated with COVID-19 severity have been reported. However, these parameters have not been observed consistently across studies. The aim of this review was to assess clinical laboratory parameters which may serve as markers or predictors of severe or critical COVID-19 disease Methods: We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and Google Scholar databases from 2019 through April 18, 2020, and reviewed bibliographies of eligible studies, relevant systematic reviews, and the medRxiv pre-print server. We included hospital-based observational studies reporting clinical laboratory parameters of confirmed cases of COVID-19 and excluded studies having large proportions (>10%) of children and pregnant women. Two authors independently carried out screening of articles, data extraction and quality assessment. Meta-analyses were done using random effects model. Meta-median difference (MMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for each laboratory parameter. Results: Forty-five studies in 6 countries were included. Compared to non-severe COVID-19 cases, severe or critical COVID-19 disease was characterised by higher neutrophil count (MMD: 1.23 [95% CI: 0.58 to 1.88] x109 cells/L), and lower lymphocyte and CD4 counts with MMD (95% CI) of -0.39 (-0.47, -0.31) x109 cells/L and -204.9 (-302.6, -107.1) cells/l, respectively. Other notable results were observed for C-reactive protein (MMD: 36.97 [95% CI: 27.58, 46.35] mg/L), interleukin-6 (MMD: 17.37 [95% CI: 4.74, 30.00] pg/ml,), Troponin I (MMD: 0.01 [0.00, 0.02] ng/ml), and D-dimer (MMD: 0.65 [0.45, 0.85] mg/ml). Conclusions and Relevance: Relative to non-severe COVID-19, severe or critical COVID-19 is characterised by increased markers of innate immune response, decreased markers of adaptive immune response, and increased markers of tissue damage and major organ failure. These markers could be used to recognise severe or critical disease and to monitor clinical course of COVID-19.

positive: Ongoing Clinical Trials for the Management of the COVID-19 Pandemic COVID-19 has rapidly developed into a worldwide pandemic with a significant health and economic burden. There are currently no approved treatments or preventative therapeutic strategies. Hundreds of clinical studies have been registered with the intention of discovering effective treatments. Here, we review currently registered interventional clinical trials for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 to provide an overall summary and insight into the global response.

positive: Long-Term Care Facilities: A Cornucopia of Viral Pathogens OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency and types of respiratory viruses circulating in Boston long-term care facilities (LTCFs) during a 3-year period. DESIGN: Observational. SETTING: Thirty-three Boston-area LTCFs over a 3-year period. PARTICIPANTS: Residents of long-term care who had previously participated in a trial of vitamin E supplementation and had paired serum samples available for viral analysis. MEASUREMENTS: Viral antibody titers to eight respiratory viruses (influenza A and B, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), parainfluenza virus serotype three (PIV-3), PIV-2, human metapneumovirus (hMPV), and coronaviruses 229E and OC43) were measured using enzyme immunoassay at baseline and 53 weeks. Infection was defined as a more than quadrupling of viral titers. Clinical data on respiratory illnesses were collected throughout the study period. RESULTS: A total of 617 persons were enrolled in the trial. Of these, 382 (62%) had sera available for viral analysis. A total of 204 viral infections were documented in 157 subjects. Serological responses to all eight viruses were documented, with hMPV (12.8%) and coronavirus 229E (10.5%) being the most common and PIV-2 (2.4%) the least common. The occurrence of bronchitis (P = .007), pneumonia (P = .02), and any lower respiratory tract infection (P = .002) was significantly associated with having a viral diagnosis. CONCLUSION: A wide range of respiratory viruses cocirculates in LTCFs and contributes to respiratory illness morbidity in these populations.

positive: Benefits and Risks of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine in The Treatment of Viral Diseases: A Meta-Analysis of Placebo Randomized Controlled Trials Background and Objective: Recently, in the scramble to find drugs to treat COVID-19, chloroquine (CQ) and its derivative hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have rapidly gained the public attention. In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CQ and HCQ in the treatment of viral diseases. Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, Clinical Trials Registries, CNKI, Wanfang Data, CQVIP, and Preprint Servers through April 4, 2020, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the efficacy and safety of CQ and HCQ against viral infection. We analyzed pooled data on the overall efficacy, the relative risks over the placebo, and the prevalence of adverse events. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was also performed to evaluate the random errors in the meta-analysis. Potential moderators of drug-placebo efficacy differences were analyzed by meta-regression. Results: The analysis included 11 RCTs with 2613 adult patients. Both the plasma viral load (standard mean difference: 0.29, 95% CI: -1.19 - 1.76, P = 0.70) and the improvement of clinical symptoms (odds ratio: 2.36, 95% CI: 0.81 - 6.92, P = 0.11) were not different between the intervention and placebo arm. There was significant heterogeneity for the efficacy assessment, which was primarily explained by the age of patients and the sample size. Compared to the placebo, CQ and HCQ had increased risk of mild adverse events (risk ratio: 1.51, 95% CI: 1.35 - 1.70, P < 0.05, TSA adjusted 95% CI: 1.31 - 2.19), which were statistically significant in nervous, integumentary, and gastrointestinal systems. The most common adverse events were observed in the nervous system, with the pooled prevalence of 31.4% (95% CI: 10.5% - 56.7%). Conclusions: Insufficient data were available to support the antiviral efficacy of CQ and HCQ due to the high heterogeneity caused by the age of patients. Mild side effects are expected for the current antiviral dose regimens of CQ and HCQ. Treatment outcomes may be enhanced by better-selected patients based on age and well-controlled adverse events.

positive: Thoughts on COVID-19 and autoimmune diseases Over the 2 months since coronavirus first appeared in China, cases have emerged on every continent, and it is clear that patients with autoimmune diseases might also be affected. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly contagious viral illness with a mortality rate approaching 2%. Here we discuss the challenges that patients with autoimmune diseases might face and the information on using immunomodulatory therapies like chloroquine, tocilizumab and baricitinib to quench the cytokine storm in patients with very severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

positive: Identification of antiviral drug candidates against SARS-CoV-2 from FDA-approved drugs COVID-19 is an emerging infectious disease and was recently declared as a pandemic by WHO. Currently, there is no vaccine or therapeutic available for this disease. Drug repositioning represents the only feasible option to address this global challenge and a panel of 48 FDA-approved drugs that have been pre-selected by an assay of SARS-CoV was screened to identify potential antiviral drug candidates against SARS-CoV-2 infection. We found a total of 24 drugs which exhibited antiviral efficacy (0.1 μM < IC50 < 10 μM) against SARS-CoV-2. In particular, two FDA-approved drugs - niclosamide and ciclesonide – were notable in some respects. These drugs will be tested in an appropriate animal model for their antiviral activities. In near future, these already FDA-approved drugs could be further developed following clinical trials in order to provide additional therapeutic options for patients with COVID-19.

positive: Effect of Colchicine vs Standard Care on Cardiac and Inflammatory Biomarkers and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized With Coronavirus Disease 2019: The GRECCO-19 Randomized Clinical Trial IMPORTANCE: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection has evolved into a global pandemic. Low-dose colchicine combines anti-inflammatory action with a favorable safety profile. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of treatment with colchicine on cardiac and inflammatory biomarkers and clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this prospective, open-label, randomized clinical trial (the Greek Study in the Effects of Colchicine in COVID-19 Complications Prevention), 105 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were randomized in a 1:1 allocation from April 3 to April 27, 2020, to either standard medical treatment or colchicine with standard medical treatment. The study took place in 16 tertiary hospitals in Greece. INTERVENTION: Colchicine administration (1.5-mg loading dose followed by 0.5 mg after 60 min and maintenance doses of 0.5 mg twice daily) with standard medical treatment for as long as 3 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary end points were (1) maximum high-sensitivity cardiac troponin level; (2) time for C-reactive protein to reach more than 3 times the upper reference limit; and (3) time to deterioration by 2 points on a 7-grade clinical status scale, ranging from able to resume normal activities to death. Secondary end points were (1) the percentage of participants requiring mechanical ventilation, (2) all-cause mortality, and (3) number, type, severity, and seriousness of adverse events. The primary efficacy analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients were evaluated (61 [58.1%] men; median [interquartile range] age, 64 [54-76] years) with 50 (47.6%) randomized to the control group and 55 (52.4%) to the colchicine group. Median (interquartile range) peak high-sensitivity cardiac troponin values were 0.0112 (0.0043-0.0093) ng/mL in the control group and 0.008 (0.004-0.0135) ng/mL in the colchicine group (P = .34). Median (interquartile range) maximum C-reactive protein levels were 4.5 (1.4-8.9) mg/dL vs 3.1 (0.8-9.8) mg/dL (P = .73), respectively. The clinical primary end point rate was 14.0% in the control group (7 of 50 patients) and 1.8% in the colchicine group (1 of 55 patients) (odds ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.01-0.96; P = .02). Mean (SD) event-free survival time was 18.6 (0.83) days the in the control group vs 20.7 (0.31) in the colchicine group (log rank P = .03). Adverse events were similar in the 2 groups, except for diarrhea, which was more frequent with colchicine group than the control group (25 patients [45.5%] vs 9 patients [18.0%]; P = .003). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial, participants who received colchicine had statistically significantly improved time to clinical deterioration. There were no significant differences in high-sensitivity cardiac troponin or C-reactive protein levels. These findings should be interpreted with caution. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04326790

positive: Exploring COVID-19 Therapies: An Extraordinary Global Challenge

positive: Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial Abstract Background Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have been found to be efficient on SARS-CoV-2, and reported to be efficient in Chinese COV-19 patients. We evaluate the role of hydroxychloroquine on respiratory viral loads. Patients and methods French Confirmed COVID-19 patients were included in a single arm protocol from early March to March 16th, to receive 600mg of hydroxychloroquine daily and their viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs was tested daily in a hospital setting. Depending on their clinical presentation, azithromycin was added to the treatment. Untreated patients from another center and cases refusing the protocol were included as negative controls. Presence and absence of virus at Day6-post inclusion was considered the end point. Results Six patients were asymptomatic, 22 had upper respiratory tract infection symptoms and eight had lower respiratory tract infection symptoms. Twenty cases were treated in this study and showed a significant reduction of the viral carriage at D6-post inclusion compared to controls, and much lower average carrying duration than reported of untreated patients in the literature. Azithromycin added to hydroxychloroquine was significantly more efficient for virus elimination. Conclusion Despite its small sample size our survey shows that hydroxychloroquine treatment is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients and its effect is reinforced by azithromycin.

positive: Clinical trials of repurposed antivirals for SARS-CoV-2. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has prompted the repurposing of drugs on the basis of promising in vitro and therapeutic results with other human coronavirus diseases such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). These repurposed drugs have mainly included remdesivir, favipiravir, lopinavir/ritonavir, ribavirin, interferons, and hydroxychloroquine. Unfortunately, the first open-label, randomized controlled trials are showing the poor efficacy of these repurposed drugs. These results highlight the necessity of identifying and characterizing specific and potent SARS-CoV-2 antivirals.

positive: A systematic review of lopinavir therapy for SARS coronavirus and MERS coronavirus—A possible reference for coronavirus disease‐19 treatment option In the past few decades, coronaviruses have risen as a global threat to public health. Currently, the outbreak of coronavirus disease‐19 (COVID‐19) from Wuhan caused a worldwide panic. There are no specific antiviral therapies for COVID‐19. However, there are agents that were used during the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) epidemics. We could learn from SARS and MERS. Lopinavir (LPV) is an effective agent that inhibits the protease activity of coronavirus. In this review, we discuss the literature on the efficacy of LPV in vitro and in vivo, especially in patients with SARS and MERS, so that we might clarify the potential for the use of LPV in patients with COVID‐19.

positive: COVID‐19Clinical trials: quality matters more than quantity Despite the ferment aroused in the scientific community by the COVID‐19 outbreak and the over 11,000 papers listed in PubMed, published evidence on safe and effective drugs has not progressed yet at the same speed of the pandemic. However, clinical research is rapidly progressing, as shown by the hundreds of registered clinical trials on candidate drugs for COVID‐19. Unfortunately, information on protocols of individual studies differs from registry to registry. Furthermore, study designs, criteria for stratification of patients and choice of outcomes are quite heterogeneous. All this makes data sharing and secondary analysis difficult.At last, small single centre studies and the use of drugs on a compassionate basis should be replaced by highly powered, multi‐centre, multi‐arm clinical trials, in orderto provide the required evidence of safety and efficacy of novel or repurposed candidate drugs. Hopefully, the efforts of clinical researchers in the fight against the SARS Cov‐2 will result into the identification of effective treatments. To make this possible, clinical research should be oriented by guidelines for more harmonized high‐quality studies and by a united commitment of the scientific community to share personal knowledge and data. Allergists and clinical immunologists should have a leading role in this unprecedent challenge.

positive: Therapeutic use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 and other viral infections: A narrative review Abstract The rapidly spreading Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), represents an unprecedented serious challenge to the global public health community. The extremely rapid international spread of the disease with significant morbidity and mortality made finding possible therapeutic interventions a global priority. While approved specific antiviral drugs against SARS-CoV-2 are still lacking, a large number of existing drugs are being explored as a possible treatment for COVID-19 infected patients. Recent publications have re-examined the use of Chloroquine (CQ) and/or Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a potential therapeutic option for these patients. In an attempt to explore the evidence that supports their use in COVID-19 patients, we comprehensively reviewed the previous studies which used CQ or HCQ as an antiviral treatment. Both CQ and HCQ demonstrated promising in vitro results, however, such data have not yet been translated into meaningful in vivo studies. While few clinical trials have suggested some beneficial effects of CQ and HCQ in COVID-19 patients, most of the reported data are still preliminary. Given the current uncertainty, it is worth being mindful of the potential risks and strictly rational the use of these drugs in COVID-19 patients until further high quality randomized clinical trials are available to clarify their role in the treatment or prevention of COVID-19.

positive: Post-exposure prophylaxis or pre-emptive therapy for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2): study protocol for a pragmatic randomized-controlled trial BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in December 2019 causing the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Currently, there is a lack of evidence-based therapies to prevent COVID-19 following exposure to the virus, or to prevent worsening of symptoms following confirmed infection. We describe the design of a clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine for post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) and pre-emptive therapy (PET) for COVID-19. METHODS: We will conduct two nested multicentre international double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine for: 1) PEP of asymptomatic household contacts or healthcare workers exposed to COVID-19 within the past four days, and 2) PET for symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 showing symptoms for less than four days. We will recruit 1,500 patients each for the PEP and PET trials. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive five days of hydroxychloroquine or placebo. The primary PEP trial outcome will be the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19. The primary PET trial outcome will be an ordinal scale of disease severity (not hospitalized, hospitalized without intensive care, hospitalization with intensive care, or death). Participant screening, informed consent, and follow-up will be exclusively internet-based with appropriate regulatory and research ethics board approvals in Canada and the United States. DISCUSSION: These complementary randomized-controlled trials are innovatively designed and adequately powered to rapidly answer urgent questions regarding the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine to reduce virus transmission and disease severity of COVID-19 during a pandemic. In-person participant follow-up will not be conducted to facilitate social distancing strategies and reduce risks of exposure to study personnel. Innovative trial approaches are needed to urgently assess therapeutic options to mitigate the global impact of this pandemic. TRIALS REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04308668); registered 16 March, 2020.

positive: Key points of serious adverse eventand protection of patients in ophthalmic clinical trials during novel coronavirus pneumonia outbreak/ 中华实验眼科杂志 The prevention and control of novel coronavirus pneumonia is the most priority recently, and various measures during the prevention and control period will have varying degrees of impact on the implement of clinical trials. However, various examinations in ophthalmological clinical trials need close contact between operators and patients, which put us at risk of cross-infection. This paper indicated some suggestions based on the criteria of clinical trials under major public health emergencies, the management of clinical trials during epidemic period including the follow-up of subjects, the treatment of epidemic serious adverse event (SAE) and the management requirements of co-sponsors, as well as the requirements and management principles for environment, subjects, examiners and inspection equipment in the process of ophthalmic clinical trials. It may be helpful to the ophthalmic clinical trial researchers and subjects during the period of novel coronavirus infection.

positive: Supportive Treatment with Tocilizumab for COVID-19: A Systematic Review

positive: Transmission and clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 in 104 outside-Wuhan patients, China Cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emigrating from Wuhan escalated the risk of spreading the disease in other cities. This report focused on outside-Wuhan patients to assess the transmission and clinical characteristics of this illness. Contact investigation was conducted on each patient who was admitted to the assigned hospitals in Hunan Province (geographically adjacent to Wuhan) from 22 January to 23 February 2020. Cases were confirmed by the polymerase chain reaction test. Demographic, clinical, and outcomes were collected and analyzed. Of the 104 patients, 48 (46.15%) were cases who immigrated from Wuhan; 93 (89.42%) had a definite contact history with infection. Family clusters were the major body of patients. Transmission along the chain of three "generations" was observed. Five asymptomatic infected cases were found and two of them infected their relatives. Mean age was 43 (range, 8-84) years, and 49 (47.12%) were male. The median incubation period was 6 (range, 1-32) days, which of 8 patients ranged from 18 to 32 days, 96 (92.31%) were discharged, and 1 (0.96%) died. The average hospital stay was 10 (range, 8-14) days. Family but not community transmission became the main body of infections in the two centers, suggesting the timely control measures after the Wuhan shutdown worked well. Asymptomatic transmission demonstrated here warned us that it may lead to the widespread of COVID-19. A 14-day quarantine may need to be prolonged.

positive: Clinical Trials during the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic

positive: Lack of Antiviral Activity of Darunavir against SARS-CoV-2 Given the high need and the absence of specific antivirals for treatment of COVID-19 (the disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus-2 [SARS-CoV-2]), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) protease inhibitors are being considered as therapeutic alternatives. Prezcobix/Rezolsta is a fixed-dose combination of 800 mg of the HIV protease inhibitor darunavir (DRV) and 150 mg cobicistat, a CYP3A4 inhibitor, which is indicated in combination with other antiretroviral agents for the treatment of HIV infection. There are currently no definitive data on the safety and efficacy of DRV/cobicistat for treatment of COVID-19. The in vitro antiviral activity of darunavir against a clinical isolate from a patient infected with SARS-CoV-2 was assessed. DRV showed no activity against SARS-CoV-2 at clinically relevant concentrations (EC50 >100 μM). Remdesivir, used as a positive control, showed potent antiviral activity (EC50 = 0.38 μM). Overall, the data do not support the use of DRV for treatment of COVID-19.

positive: COVID-19, an emerging coronavirus infection: advances and prospects in designing and developing vaccines, immunotherapeutics, and therapeutics The novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19 or Coronavirus disease 2019) that emerged from Wuhan, Hubei province of China has spread to many countries worldwide. Efforts have been made to develop vaccines against human coronavirus (CoV) infections such as MERS and SARS in the past decades. However, to date, no licensed antiviral treatment or vaccine exists for MERS and SARS. Most of the efforts for developing CoV vaccines and drugs target the spike glycoprotein or S protein, the major inducer of neutralizing antibodies. Although a few candidates have shown efficacy in in vitro studies, not many have progressed to randomized animal or human trials, hence may have limited use to counter COVID-19 infection. This article highlights ongoing advances in designing vaccines and therapeutics to counter COVID-19 while also focusing on such experiences and advances as made with earlier SARS- and MERS-CoVs, which together could enable efforts to halt this emerging virus infection.

positive: Emerging Treatment and Prevention Strategies against COVID-19: A Brief Update Patients with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at significantly increased risk for mortality and morbidity. Current management remains supportive care, ranging from symptomatic outpatient management to full–intensive care support, including intravenous fluids, invasive, and non-invasive oxygen supplementation. In patients with septic shock, treatment with antibiotics and vasopressors are recommended to keep mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥ 65 mm Hg and lactate < 2 mmol/L. Because of the lack of effectiveness and possible adverse effects, routine corticosteroids should be avoided unless they are indicated for another reason (exacerbation of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], and septic shock in whom fluids and vasopressors do not restore hemodynamic stability). There is currently no sufficient evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, remdesivir, and other antivirals in the treatment or prevention of COVID-19. Limited evidence shows that COVID-19 convalescent plasma can be used as a treatment of COVID-19 without the occurrence of severe adverse events. Drug regulatory agencies granted an emergency-use authorization of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine and remdesivir to treat patients when a clinical trial is not available or participation is not feasible. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are associated with QT interval prolongation and life-threatening cardiac arrhythmia in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease. Guidelines are issued for use of convalescent plasma in patients with serious or immediately life-threatening COVID-19. Data from several ongoing randomized controlled trials will provide further evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19.

positive: Potential pharmacological agents for COVID-19. A novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov-2) first emerged in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, has become a global pandemic. Currently, the management of COVID-19 infection is mainly supportive. Several clinical trials worldwide are evaluating several drugs approved for other indications, as well as multiple investigational agents for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19. Here, we give a brief overview of pharmacological agents and other therapies which are under investigation as treatment options or adjunctive agents for patients infected with COVID-19 and for chemoprophylaxis for the prevention of COVID-19 infection. At the time of writing this commentary, there is no peer-reviewed published evidence from randomized clinical trials of any pharmacological agents improving outcomes in COVID-19 patients. However, it was reported that remdesivir an investigational antiviral agent hastens clinical recovery, but a study is yet to be published in peer-reviewed medical journal.

positive: Recent progress and challenges in drug development against COVID-19 coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) - an update on the status Abstract Coronaviruses are a large group of viruses known to cause illnesses that vary between the common cold and more severe diseases to include severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). A novel coronavirus was identified in December 2019 in Wuhan city, Hubei province, China. This virus represents a new strain that has not been previously identified in humans. The virus is now known as the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the resulting disease is called coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the novel coronavirus outbreak a global pandemic in March 2020. Despite rigorous global containment and quarantine efforts, the incidence of COVID-19 continues to rise, with more than 1,948,617 laboratory-confirmed cases and over 121,846 deaths worldwide. Currently, no specific medication is recommended to treat COVID-19 patients. However, governments and pharmaceutical companies are struggling to quickly find an effective drug to defeat the coronavirus. In the current review, we summarize the existing state of knowledge about COVID-19, available medications, and treatment options. Favilavir is an antiviral drug that is approved in Japan for common influenza treatment and is now approved to treat symptoms of COVID-19 in China. Moreover, Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, drugs used to treat malaria and arthritis, respectively, were recommended by the National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China for treatment of COVID-19. Presently, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are under investigation by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a treatment for COVID-19. The first COVID-19 vaccine is not expected to be ready for clinical trials before the end of the year.

positive: Multiplex PCR system for the rapid diagnosis of respiratory virus infection: systematic review and meta-analysis Abstract Objectives To provide a summary of evidence for the diagnostic accuracies of three multiplex PCR systems (mPCRs)—BioFire FilmArray RP (FilmArray), Nanosphere Verigene RV+ test (Verigene RV+) and Hologic Gen-Probe Prodesse assays—on the detection of viral respiratory infections. Methods A comprehensive search up to 1 July 2017 was conducted on Medline and Embase for studies that utilized FilmArray, Verigene RV+ and Prodesse for diagnosis of viral respiratory infections. A summary of diagnostic accuracies for the following five viruses were calculated: influenza A virus (FluA), influenza B virus, respiratory syncytial virus, human metapneumovirus and adenovirus. Hierarchical summary receiver operating curves were used for estimating the viral detection performance per assay. Results Twenty studies of 5510 patient samples were eligible for analysis. Multiplex PCRs demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy, with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) equal to or more than 0.98 for all the above viruses except for adenovirus (AUROC 0.89). FilmArray, Verigene RV+ and ProFlu+ (the only Prodesse assay with enough data) demonstrated a summary sensitivity for FluA of 0.911 (95% confidence interval, 0.848–0.949), 0.949 (95% confidence interval, 0.882–0.979) and 0.954 (95% confidence interval, 0.871–0.985), respectively. The three mPCRs were comparable in terms of detection of FluA. Conclusions Point estimates calculated from eligible studies showed that the three mPCRs (FilmArray, Verigene RV+ and ProFlu+) are highly accurate and may provide important diagnostic information for early identification of respiratory virus infections. In patients with low pretest probability for FluA, these three mPCRs can predict a low possibility of infection and may justify withholding empirical antiviral treatments.

positive: Review of safety and minimum pricing of nitazoxanide for potential treatment of COVID-19. Background Many treatments are being assessed for repurposing to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). One drug that has shown promising results in vitro is nitazoxanide. Unlike other postulated drugs, nitazoxanide shows a high ratio of maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), after 1 day of 500 mg twice daily (BD), to the concentration required to inhibit 50% replication (EC50) of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (Cmax : EC50 roughly equal to 14:1). As such, it is important to investigate the safety of nitazoxanide for further trials. Furthermore, treatments for COVID-19 should be cheap to promote global access, but prices of many drugs are far higher than the costs of production. We aimed to conduct a review of the safety of nitazoxanide for any prior indication and calculate its minimum costs of production. Methods A review of nitazoxanide clinical research was conducted using EMBASE and MEDLINE databases, supplemented by ClinicalTrials.gov. We searched for phase 2 or 3 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing nitazoxanide with placebo or active control for 5-14 days in participants experiencing acute infections of any kind. Data extracted were grade 1-4 and serious adverse events (AEs). Data were also extracted on gastrointestinal (GI) AEs, as well as hepatorenal and cardiovascular effects.Active pharmaceutical ingredient cost data from 2016 to 2019 were extracted from the Panjiva database and adjusted for 5% loss during production, costs of excipients, formulation, a 10% profit margin and tax. Two dosages, at 500 mg BD and a higher dose of 1100 mg three times daily (TDS), were considered. Our estimated costs were compared with publicly available list prices from a selection of countries. Results Nine RCTs of nitazoxanide were identified for inclusion. These RCTs accounted for 1514 participants and an estimated 95.3 person-years-of-follow-up. No significant differences were found in any of the AE endpoints assessed, across all trials or on subgroup analyses of active- or placebo-controlled trials. Mild GI AEs increased with dose. No hepatorenal or cardiovascular concerns were raised, but few appropriate metrics were reported. There were no teratogenic concerns, but the evidence base was very limited.Based on a weighted-mean cost of US $61/kg, a 14-day course of treatment with nitazoxanide 500 mg BD would cost $1.41. The daily cost would therefore be $0.10. The same 14-day course could cost $3944 in US commercial pharmacies, and $3 per course in Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. At a higher dose of 1100 mg TDS, our estimated cost was $4.08 per 14-day course, equivalent to $0.29 per day. Conclusion Nitazoxanide demonstrates a good safety profile at approved doses. However, further evidence is required regarding hepatorenal and cardiovascular effects, as well as teratogenicity. We estimate that it would be possible to manufacture nitazoxanide as generic for $1.41 for a 14-day treatment course at 500 mg BD, up to $4.08 at 1100 mg TDS. Further trials in COVID-19 patients should be initiated. If efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 is demonstrated in clinical studies, nitazoxanide may represent a safe and affordable treatment in the ongoing pandemic.

positive: Meplazumab treats COVID-19 pneumonia: an open-labelled, concurrent controlled add-on clinical trial Background: SARS-CoV-2 is a novel human coronavirus, there is no specific antiviral drugs. It has been proved that host-cell-expressed CD147 could bind spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 and involve in host cell invasion. Antibody against CD147 could block the infection of SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of meplazumab, a humanized anti-CD147 antibody, as add-on therapy in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: All patients received recommended strategy from Diagnosis and Treatment for 2019 Novel Coronavirus Diseases released by National Health Commission of China. Eligible patients were add-on administered 10 mg meplazumab intravenously at days 1, 2, and 5. Patients hospitalized in the same period were observed as concurrent control. The endpoints include virological clearance rate, case severity, chest radiographic, and laboratory test. This trial was approved by the Ethics Committee of Institution at the Tangdu hospital, and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT 04275245. Findings:17 patients were enrolled and assigned to meplazumab group between Feb 3, 2020 and Feb 10, 2020. 11 hospitalized patients served as concurrent control. Baseline characteristics were generally balanced across two groups. Compared to control group, meplazumab treatment significantly improved the discharged (p=0.006) and case severity (p=0.021) in critical and severe patients. The time to virus negative in meplazumab group was reduced than that in control group (median 3, 95%CI[1.5-4.5] vs. 13, [6.5-19.5]; p=0.014, HR=0.37, 95%CI[0.155-0.833]). The percentages of patients recovered to the normal lymphocyte count and CRP concentration were also increased remarkably and rapidly in meplazumab group. No adverse effect was found in meplazumab-treated patients. Interpretation:Meplazumab efficiently improved the recovery of patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia with a favorable safety profile. Our results support to carry out a large-scale investigation of meplazumab as a treatment for COVID-19 pneumonia. Funding:National Science and Technology Major Project.

positive: Imaging features and mechanisms of novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19): Study Protocol Clinical Trial (SPIRIT Compliant) INTRODUCTION: A novel coronavirus, tentatively designated as 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV), now called severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, emerged in Wuhan, China, at the end of 2019 and which continues to expand. On February 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) named the disease coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). On February 28, WHO increased our assessment of the risk of spread and the risk of impact of COVID-19 to very high at a global level. The COVID-19 poses significant threats to international health. Computed tomography (CT) has been an important imaging modality in assisting in the diagnosis and management of patients withCOVID-19. Some retrospective imaging studies have reported chest CT findings of COVID-19 in the past 2 months, suggesting that several CT findings may be characteristic. To our knowledge, there has been no prospective multicentre imaging study of COVID-19 to date. We proposed a hypothesis: There are some specific CT features on Chest CT of COVID-19 patients. And the mechanism of these CT features is explicable based on pathological findings. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the specific CT features of COVID-19 and the formation mechanism of these CT features. METHOD: This study is a prospective multicenter observational study. We will recruit 100 patients with COVID-19 at 55 hospitals. All patients undergo chest CT examination with the same scan protocol. The distribution and morphology of lesions on chest CT, clinical data will be recorded. A number of patients will be pathologically examined after permission is granted. The data of these three aspects will be analyzed synthetically. DISCUSSION: This study will help us to identify the chest CT features of COVID-19 and its mechanism. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This retrospective study was approved by the Biomedical Research Ethics Committee of West China Hospital of Sichuan University (No. 2020–140). Written informed consent will be obtained from all study participants prior to enrollment in the study. To protect privacy of participants, all private information were kept anonymous. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be disseminated electronically and in print regardless of results.

positive: [Analysis on clinical study protocols of traditional Chinese medicine for coronavirus disease 2019] To analyze the registered clinical trial protocols of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) for the prevention and treatment of coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19), in order to provide information for improving the quality of research design. The website of the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry(www.chictr.org.cn) and the American Clinical Trial Registry(clinicaltrials.gov) were searched to collect protocols of TCM for COVID-19. Documents were screened following the inclusion criteria, and data were extracted in regard to registration date, study objective, type of design, sponsor, patient, sample size, intervention, and evaluation index. Descriptive analysis was conducted. A total of 49 clinical trial protocols of TCM for COVID-19 were included. Primary sponsors were mainly hospitals or universities in places like Hubei, Beijing, Zhejiang and other regions. The implementation units are mainly in Hubei, Guangdong, Zhejiang, Henan and other regional hospitals. The types of study design were mainly experimental studies(40), including 30 randomized parallel controlled trials, 7 non-randomized controlled trials, 2 single arm trials and 1 consecutively recruited trial; besides, there were also 6 observational studies, 2 health service studies and 1 preventive study. The sample size reached a total of 30 562 cases, with a maximum of 20 000 for a single study and a minimum of 30. The 49 trials subjects included healthy people(3), isolation and observation cases(1), suspected cases(10),confirmed COVID-19 patients(31) and COVID-19 recovery patients(4). Of the 31 trials planned to include confirmed COVID-19 patients, 16 protocols no definite disease classification, 3 with a clear exclusion of severe subjects, 4 with common subjects, 2 with light, common or severe subjects, 1 with light and common subjects, 1 with common or severe subjects, 3 with severe subjects, and 1 with severe or critical subjects. The experimental interventions included Chinese patent medicine(Lianhua Qingwen Capsules/Granules, Huoxiang Zhengqi Dropping Pills/Oral Liquid, Babao Dan, Gubiao Jiedu Ling, Jinhao Jiere Granules, Compound Yu-xingcao Mixture, Jinye Baidu Granules, Shufeng Jiedu Capsuless, Shuanghuanglian Oral Liquid, Tanreqing Injection, Xuebijing Injection, Reduning Injection, Xiyanping Injection), Chinese medicinal decoction and taichi. The primary evaluation outcomes mainly included antipyretic time, clinical symptom relief, novel coronavirus nucleic acid turning to negative, conversion rate of severe cases and chest CT. There was a quick response of clinical research on the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 with TCM, with the current registered protocols covers the whole process of disease prevention, treatment and rehabilitation. However, issues need to be concerned, including unclear definition of patient's condition, unclear research objectives, unclear intervention process and inappropriate outcomes, etc. In addition, researchers should consider the actual difficulties and workload of doctors in epidemic response environment, and make effort to optimize the process and improve the operability of research protocols under the principle of medical ethics.

positive: Controlled, double-blind, randomized trial to assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine chemoprophylaxis in SARS CoV2 infection in healthcare personnel in the hospital setting: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infection presents a high transmission in the group of health professionals in Spain (12-15% infected). Currently there is no accepted chemoprophylaxis but hydroxychloroquine (HDQ) is known to inhibit the coronavirus in vitro. Our hypothesis is that oral administration of hydroxychloroquine to healthcare professionals can reduce the incidence and prevalence of infection as well as its severity in this group. METHODS: Design: Prospective, single center, double blind, randomised, controlled trial (RCT). Participants: Adult health-care professionals (18-65 years) working in areas of high exposure and high risk of transmission of SARS-COV-2 (COVID areas, Intensive Care Unit –ICUs-, Emergency, Anesthesia and all those performing aerosol-generating procedures) will be included. Exclusion criteria include previous infection with SARS CoV2 (positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR or IgG serology), pregnancy or lactation, any contraindication to hydroxychloroquine or evidence of unstable or clinically significant systemic disease. INTERVENTIONS: Patients will be randomized (1:1) to receive once-daily oral Hydroxychloroquine 200mg for two months (HC group) or placebo (P group) in addition to the protective measures appropriate to the level of exposure established by the hospital. A serological evaluation will be carried out every 15 days with PCR in case of seroconversion, symptoms or risk exposure. Primary outcome is the percentage of subjects presenting infection (seroconversion and/or PCR +ve) by the SARS-Cov-2 virus during the observation period. Additionally, both the percentage of subjects in each group presenting Pneumonia with severity criteria (Curb 65 ≥2) and that of subjects requiring admission to ICU will be determined. DISCUSSION: While awaiting a vaccine, hygiene measures, social distancing and personal protective equipment are the only primary prophylaxis measures against SARS-CoV-2, but they have not been sufficient to protect our healthcare professionals. Some evidence of the in vitro efficacy of hydroxychloroquine against this virus is known, along with some clinical data that would support the study of this drug in the chemoprophylaxis of infection. However, there are still no data from controlled clinical trials in this regard. If our hypothesis is confirmed, hydroxychloroquine can help professionals fight this infection with more guarantees. PARTICIPANTS: This is a single-center study that will be carried out at the Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital. 450 health professionals working at the Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla in areas of high exposure and high risk of transmission of SARS COV2 (COVID hospital areas, Intensive Care Unit, Emergency, Anesthesia and all those performing aerosol-generating procedures) will be included. Inclusion criteria: 1) Health professionals aged between 18 and 65 years (inclusive) at the time of the first screening visit; 2) They must provide signed written informed consent and agree to comply with the study protocol; 3) Active work in high exposure areas during the last two weeks and during the following weeks. Exclusion criteria: 1) Previous infection with SARS CoV2 (positive coronavirus PCR or positive serology with SARS Cov2 negative PCR and absence of symptoms); 2) Current treatment with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine; 3) Hypersensitivity, allergy or any contraindication for taking hydroxychloroquine, in the technical sheet; 4) Previous or current treatment with tamoxifen or raloxifene; 5) Previous eye disease, especially maculopathy; 6) Known heart failure (Grade III to IV of the New York Heart Association classification) or prolonged QTc; 7) Any type of cancer (except basal cell) in the last 5 years; 6) Refusal to give informed consent; 8) Evidence of any other unstable or clinically significant untreated immune, endocrine, hematological, gastrointestinal, neurological, neoplastic or psychiatric illness; 9) Antibodies positive for the human immunodeficiency virus; 10) Significant kidney or liver disease; 11) Pregnancy or lactation. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: 1. Intervention: (n = 225): One 200 mg hydroxychloroquine sulfate coated tablet once daily for two months. 2. Comparator (control group) (n = 225): One hydroxychloroquine placebo tablet (identical to that of the drug) once daily for two months. MAIN OUTCOMES: number and percentage of healthcare personnel presenting symptomatic and asymptomatic infection (see “Diagnosis of SARS CoV2 infection” below) by the SARS-Cov2 virus during the study observation period (8 weeks) in both treatment arms; number and percentage of healthcare personnel in each group presenting with Pneumonia with severity criteria (Curb 65 ≥2) and number and percentage of healthcare personnel requiring admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in both treatment arms. DIAGNOSIS OF SARS COV2 INFECTION: Determination of IgA, IgM and IgG type antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 using the Anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA kit (EUROIMMUN Medizinische Labordiagnostika AG, Germany) every two weeks. In cases of seroconversion, a SARS-CoV-2 PCR will be performed to rule out / confirm an active infection (RT-PCR in One Step: RT performed with mastermix (Takara) and IDT probes, following protocol published and validated by the CDC Evaluation of COVID-19 in case of SARS-CoV-2 infection RANDOMISATION: Participants will be allocated to intervention and comparator groups according to a balanced randomization scheme (1: 1). The assignment will be made through a computer-generated numeric sequence for all participants BLINDING (MASKING): Both participants and investigators responsible for recruiting and monitoring participants will be blind to the assigned arm. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): Taking into account the current high prevalence of infection in healthcare personnel in Spain (up to 15%), to detect a difference equal to or greater than 8% in the percentage estimates through a two-tailed 95% CI, with a statistical power of 80% and a dropout rate of 5%, a total of 450 participants will need to be included (250 in each arm). TRIAL STATUS: The protocol approved by the health authorities in Spain (Spanish Agency for Medicines and Health Products “AEMPS”) and the Ethics and Research Committee of Cantabria (CEIm Cantabria) corresponds to version 1.1 of April 2, 2020. Currently, recruitment has not yet started, with the start scheduled for the second week of May 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Eudra CT number: 2020-001704-42 (Registered on 29 March 2020) FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).

positive: A systematic review of the prophylactic role of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) OBJECTIVE: The pandemic coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) has pushed the global healthcare system to a crisis and amounted to a huge economic burden. Different drugs for prophylaxis against COVID-19 including chloroquine (CQ) or hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have been tried. This study was performed to systematically review the role of CQ and HCQ in preventing the spread of COVID-19. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies that evaluated the prophylactic role of CQ or HCQ on SARS-CoV-2 (pre-clinical studies) or COVID-19 (clinical studies) until 30 March 2020. The available literature was critically appraised. RESULTS: A total of 45 articles were screened and 5 (3 in vitro pre-clinical studies and 2 clinical opinions) were included. The pre-clinical studies showed the prophylactic effects of CQ and HCQ against SARS-CoV-2. On the other hand, the clinical opinions advocated the prophylactic use of CQ and HCQ against COVID-19. However, no original clinical studies on the prophylactic role of CQ or HCQ on COVID-19 were available. CONCLUSION: Although pre-clinical results are promising, to date there is a dearth of evidence to support the efficacy of CQ or HCQ in preventing COVID-19. Considering potential safety issues and the likelihood of imparting a false sense of security, prophylaxis with CQ or HCQ against COVID-19 needs to be thoroughly evaluated in observational studies or high-quality randomized controlled studies.

positive: COVID-19: Why SOLIDARITY and DisCoVeRy trials may fail to bring informative and timely results Objective: The SOLIDARITY and DisCoVeRy trials were launched to facilitate the rapid worldwide comparison of the efficacy and safety of treatments against COVID-19. This study aimed to review the trial designs of SOLIDARITY and DisCoVeRy and their feasibility to generate high-quality evidence. Method: A systematic search of the European Clinical trial registry, the U.S. National Library of Medicine ClinicalTrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) created by the World Health Organization (WHO) was conducted on May 10th, 2020 to identify the study details of the SOLIDARITY and DisCoVeRy trials. A supplementary search of PubMed, the websites of the WHO and French authorities, and Google search engine was conducted. A critical review was performed on the findings. Results: The DisCoVeRy trial design was detailed consistently in both the European and the US clinical rial registries. SOLIDARITY was registered on ICTRP, with country-specific information reported on country-level registry platforms. The design of DisCoVeRy trial appears to be ideal from the methodological perspective. Both trials appear difficult to implement, impractical, and disconnected from the pandemic reality. This is consistent with the apparent failure of the trials to deliver conclusions before the end of the pandemic. Conclusion: Both trials constitute an interesting initiative yet may lack the resources to support a high-quality implementation. The authors call for a pandemic task force, with various experts on the front-line of COVID-19, to inform policy-makers to make effective decisions that may not be based on traditional, methodological state-of-the-art evidence, but rather pragmatic and revisable decisions reflecting emerging evidence for the benefit of patients and society.

positive: Potential therapeutic targets for combating SARS-CoV-2: Drug repurposing, clinical trials and recent advancements The present pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 has been a tough task for the whole world to deal with. With the absence of specific drugs or vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, the situation is very difficult to control. Apart from the absence of specific therapies, the lack of knowledge about potential therapeutic targets and individual perception is adding to the complications. The present review describes the novel SARS-CoV-2 structure, surface proteins, asymptomatic and symptomatic transmission in addition to the genotype and phenotype of SARS-CoV-2 along with genetic strains and similarity between SARS, MERS and SARS-CoV-2. Therapeutic strategies such as inhibition of the endocytic pathway and suppressing RNA polymerase activity by metal ions, which could be quite beneficial for controlling COVID-19, are outlined. The drug repurposing for SARS-CoV-2 is discussed in detail along with therapeutic classes such as antivirals, antibiotics, and amino quinolones and their probable role in suppressing SARS-CoV-2 with reference to case studies. The ongoing clinical trials both with respect to drug repurposing and vaccines are summarized along with a brief description. The recent advancements and future perspective of ongoing research for therapy and detection of SARS-CoV-2 are provided. The review, in brief, summarizes epidemiology, therapy and the current scenario for combating SARS-CoV-2.

positive: Controlled, double-blind, randomized trial to assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine chemoprophylaxis in SARS CoV2 infection in healthcare personnel in the hospital setting: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infection presents a high transmission in the group of health professionals in Spain (12-15% infected). Currently there is no accepted chemoprophylaxis but hydroxychloroquine (HDQ) is known to inhibit the coronavirus in vitro. Our hypothesis is that oral administration of hydroxychloroquine to healthcare professionals can reduce the incidence and prevalence of infection as well as its severity in this group. METHODS: Design: Prospective, single center, double blind, randomised, controlled trial (RCT). PARTICIPANTS: Adult health-care professionals (18-65 years) working in areas of high exposure and high risk of transmission of SARS-COV-2 (COVID areas, Intensive Care Unit -ICUs-, Emergency, Anesthesia and all those performing aerosol-generating procedures) will be included. Exclusion criteria include previous infection with SARS CoV2 (positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR or IgG serology), pregnancy or lactation, any contraindication to hydroxychloroquine or evidence of unstable or clinically significant systemic disease. INTERVENTIONS: Patients will be randomized (1:1) to receive once-daily oral Hydroxychloroquine 200mg for two months (HC group) or placebo (P group) in addition to the protective measures appropriate to the level of exposure established by the hospital. A serological evaluation will be carried out every 15 days with PCR in case of seroconversion, symptoms or risk exposure. Primary outcome is the percentage of subjects presenting infection (seroconversion and/or PCR +ve) by the SARS-Cov-2 virus during the observation period. Additionally, both the percentage of subjects in each group presenting Pneumonia with severity criteria (Curb 65 ≥2) and that of subjects requiring admission to ICU will be determined. DISCUSSION: While awaiting a vaccine, hygiene measures, social distancing and personal protective equipment are the only primary prophylaxis measures against SARS-CoV-2, but they have not been sufficient to protect our healthcare professionals. Some evidence of the in vitro efficacy of hydroxychloroquine against this virus is known, along with some clinical data that would support the study of this drug in the chemoprophylaxis of infection. However, there are still no data from controlled clinical trials in this regard. If our hypothesis is confirmed, hydroxychloroquine can help professionals fight this infection with more guarantees. PARTICIPANTS: This is a single-center study that will be carried out at the Marqués de Valdecilla University Hospital. 450 health professionals working at the Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla in areas of high exposure and high risk of transmission of SARS COV2 (COVID hospital areas, Intensive Care Unit, Emergency, Anesthesia and all those performing aerosol-generating procedures) will be included. INCLUSION CRITERIA: 1) Health professionals aged between 18 and 65 years (inclusive) at the time of the first screening visit; 2) They must provide signed written informed consent and agree to comply with the study protocol; 3) Active work in high exposure areas during the last two weeks and during the following weeks. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: 1) Previous infection with SARS CoV2 (positive coronavirus PCR or positive serology with SARS Cov2 negative PCR and absence of symptoms); 2) Current treatment with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine; 3) Hypersensitivity, allergy or any contraindication for taking hydroxychloroquine, in the technical sheet; 4) Previous or current treatment with tamoxifen or raloxifene; 5) Previous eye disease, especially maculopathy; 6) Known heart failure (Grade III to IV of the New York Heart Association classification) or prolonged QTc; 7) Any type of cancer (except basal cell) in the last 5 years; 6) Refusal to give informed consent; 8) Evidence of any other unstable or clinically significant untreated immune, endocrine, hematological, gastrointestinal, neurological, neoplastic or psychiatric illness; 9) Antibodies positive for the human immunodeficiency virus; 10) Significant kidney or liver disease; 11) Pregnancy or lactation. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Two groups will be analyzed with a 1: 1 randomization rate. 1)Intervention: (n = 225): One 200 mg hydroxychloroquine sulfate coated tablet once daily for two months.2)Comparator (control group) (n = 225): One hydroxychloroquine placebo tablet (identical to that of the drug) once daily for two months MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome of this study will be to evaluate: number and percentage of healthcare personnel presenting symptomatic and asymptomatic infection (see "Diagnosis of SARS CoV2 infection" below) by the SARS-Cov2 virus during the study observation period (8 weeks) in both treatment arms;number and percentage of healthcare personnel in each group presenting with Pneumonia with severity criteria (Curb 65 ≥2) and number and percentage of healthcare personnel requiring admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in both treatment arms. DIAGNOSIS OF SARS COV2 INFECTION: Determination of IgA, IgM and IgG type antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 using the Anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA kit (EUROIMMUN Medizinische Labordiagnostika AG, Germany) every two weeks. In cases of seroconversion, a SARS-CoV-2 PCR will be performed to rule out / confirm an active infection (RT-PCR in One Step: RT performed with mastermix (Takara) and IDT probes, following protocol published and validated by the CDC Evaluation of COVID-19 in case of SARS-CoV-2 infection RANDOMISATION: Participants will be allocated to intervention and comparator groups according to a balanced randomization scheme (1: 1). The assignment will be made through a computer-generated numeric sequence for all participants BLINDING (MASKING): Both participants and investigators responsible for recruiting and monitoring participants will be blind to the assigned arm. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): Taking into account the current high prevalence of infection in healthcare personnel in Spain (up to 15%), to detect a difference equal to or greater than 8% in the percentage estimates through a two-tailed 95% CI, with a statistical power of 80% and a dropout rate of 5%, a total of 450 participants will need to be included (250 in each arm). TRIAL STATUS: The protocol approved by the health authorities in Spain (Spanish Agency for Medicines and Health Products "AEMPS") and the Ethics and Research Committee of Cantabria (CEIm Cantabria) corresponds to version 1.1 of April 2, 2020. Currently, recruitment has not yet started, with the start scheduled for the second week of May 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Eudra CT number: 2020-001704-42 (Registered on 29 March 2020) FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).

positive: Challenges in Drug Development Posed by the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Opportunity for Clinical Pharmacology The unprecedented challenges posed by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlight the urgency for applying clinical pharmacology and model-informed drug development in (i) dosage optimization for COVID-19 therapies, (ii) approaching therapeutic dilemmas in clinical trial settings, and (iii) maximizing value of information from impacted non-COVID-19 trials. More than ever, we have a responsibility for adaptive evidence synthesis with a Totality of Evidence mindset in this race against time across biomedical research, clinical practice, drug development, and regulation.

positive: Clinical trials for the prevention and treatment of COVID‐19: current state of play Since coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) emerged in Wuhan, China in December 2019 and spread around the world, over 1100 clinical studies have been registered globally on clinical trials registries, including over 500 randomised controlled trials. Such rapid development and launch of clinical trials is impressive but presents challenges, including the potential for duplication and competition. There is currently no known effective treatment for COVID‐19. In order to focus on those studies most likely to influence clinical practice, we summarise the 31 currently registered randomised trials with a target sample size of at least 1000 participants. We have grouped these trials into four categories: prophylaxis; treatment of outpatients with mild COVID‐19; treatment of hospitalised patients with moderate COVID‐19; and treatment of hospitalised patients with moderate or severe disease. The most common therapeutic agent being trialled currently is hydroxychloroquine (24 trials with potential sample size of over 25 000 participants), followed by lopinavir–ritonavir (seven trials) and remdesevir (five trials). There are many candidate drugs in pre‐clinical and early phase development, and these form a pipeline for future large clinical trials if current candidate therapies prove ineffective or unsafe.

positive: Complementary and alternative medicine for the treatment of bronchiolitis in infants: A systematic review BACKGROUND: Bronchiolitis is a common cause of hospitalization among infants. The limited effectiveness of conventional medication has prompted the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) as alternative or adjunctive therapy for the management of bronchiolitis. AIMS: To determine the effectiveness and safety of CAM for the treatment of bronchiolitis in infants aged less than 2 years. METHODS: A systematic electronic search was performed in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from their respective inception to June 30, 2016 for studies evaluating CAM as an intervention to treat bronchiolitis in infants (1 month to 2 years of age). The CAM could be any form of treatment defined by the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) and was utilized either as a single agent or adjunctive therapy. The predefined primary outcome was length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes were time to resolution of bronchiolitis symptoms, adverse events, and all other clinical outcomes reported by the included studies. RESULTS: The review identified 11 studies (8 randomized controlled trials and 3 cohort studies) examining four herbal preparations and four supplements used either as adjunctive or alternative therapy for bronchiolitis in 904 infants. Most studies were of moderate quality. Among six studies reporting on length of stay, a significant benefit was found for Chinese herbal medicine compared to ribavirin in one cohort study (n = 66) and vitamin D compared to placebo in one randomized controlled trial (n = 89). Studies of Chinese herbal medicine (4 studies, n = 365), vitamin D (1 study, n = 89), N-acetylcysteine (1 study, n = 100), and magnesium (2 studies, n = 176) showed some benefits with respect to clinical severity scores, oxygen saturation, and other symptoms, although data were sparse for any single intervention and the outcomes assessed and reported varied across studies. Only five studies reported on adverse events; no serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Among 11 studies examining the effect of CAM on inpatients with bronchiolitis, six reported on the review’s primary outcome of length of hospital stay. In general, findings did not show a significant benefit associated with the primary outcome. Preliminary evidence indicated that Chinese herbal medicine mixtures, vitamin D, N-acetylcysteine, and magnesium might be useful in managing the symptoms of bronchiolitis. However, the evidence was not sufficient or rigorous enough to formulate recommendations for the use of any CAM. Among studies that reported adverse events, no serious harms were noted.

positive: Atazanavir inhibits SARS-CoV-2 replication and pro-inflammatory cytokine production Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is already responsible for far more deaths than previous pathogenic coronaviruses (CoVs) from 2002 and 2012. The identification of clinically approved drugs to be repurposed to combat 2019 CoV disease (COVID-19) would allow the rapid implementation of potentially life-saving procedures. The major protease (Mpro) of SARS-CoV-2 is considered a promising target, based on previous results from related CoVs with lopinavir (LPV), an HIV protease inhibitor. However, limited evidence exists for other clinically approved antiretroviral protease inhibitors, such as atazanavir (ATV). ATV is of high interest because of its bioavailability within the respiratory tract. Our results show that ATV could dock in the active site of SARS-CoV-2 Mpro, with greater strength than LPV. ATV blocked Mpro activity. We confirmed that ATV inhibits SARS-CoV-2 replication, alone or in combination with ritonavir (RTV) in Vero cells, human pulmonary epithelial cell line and primary monocytes, impairing virus-induced enhancement of IL-6 and TNF-α levels. Together, our data strongly suggest that ATV and ATV/RTV should be considered among the candidate repurposed drugs undergoing clinical trials in the fight against COVID-19.

positive: Vitamin D: A simpler alternative to tocilizumab for trial in COVID-19? There is anecdotal evidence that tocilizumab, an immunosuppressant drug, may be a potential therapeutic option for patients with severe manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Like tocilizumab, Vitamin D appears to modulate the activity of an interleukin (IL-6), which may explain the seasonal variation in prevalence of influenza. While most cases of COVID-19 have, thus far, occurred in the Northern Hemisphere winter, limiting the ability to assess seasonal variation, there remains substantial variation in the severity of this condition that has yet to be explained. A retrospective comparison of Vitamin D levels in previously obtained blood samples between survivors and confirmed fatalities could establish a rationale for implementation of widespread Vitamin D supplementation. This would be far cheaper and simpler than tocilizumab as a therapeutic option to trial.

positive: RECOVERY trial: the UK covid-19 study resetting expectations for clinical trials

positive: Remdesivir, lopinavir, emetine, and homoharringtonine inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro An escalating pandemic by the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus is impacting global health and effective therapeutic options are urgently needed. We evaluated the in vitro antiviral effect of compounds that were previously reported to inhibit coronavirus replication and compounds that are currently under evaluation in clinical trials for SARS-CoV-2 patients. We report the antiviral effect of remdesivir, lopinavir, homorringtonine, and emetine against SARS-CoV-2 virus in Vero E6 cells with the estimated 50% effective concentration at 23.15 μM, 26.63 μM, 2.55 μM and 0.46 μM, respectively. Ribavirin or favipiravir that are currently evaluated under clinical trials showed no inhibition at 100 μM. Synergy between remdesivir and emetine was observed, and remdesivir at 6.25 μM in combination with emetine at 0.195 μM may achieve 64.9% inhibition in viral yield. Combinational therapy may help to reduce the effective concentration of compounds below the therapeutic plasma concentrations and provide better clinical benefits.

positive: An Update on Current Therapeutic Drugs Treating COVID-19 The current pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has presented unprecedented challenges to the healthcare systems in almost every country around the world. Currently, there are no proven effective vaccines or therapeutic agents against the virus. Current clinical management includes infection prevention and control measures and supportive care including supplemental oxygen and mechanical ventilatory support. Evolving research and clinical data regarding the virologic SARS-CoV-2 suggest a potential list of repurposed drugs with appropriate pharmacological effects and therapeutic efficacies in treating COVID-19 patients. In this review, we will update and summarize the most common and plausible drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. These drugs and therapeutic agents include antiviral agents (remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, lopinavir, umifenovir, favipiravir, and oseltamivir), and supporting agents (Ascorbic acid, Azithromycin, Corticosteroids, Nitric oxide, IL-6 antagonists), among others. We hope that this review will provide useful and most updated therapeutic drugs to prevent, control, and treat COVID-19 patients until the approval of vaccines and specific drugs targeting SARS-CoV-2.

positive: Identification of Repurposal Drugs and Adverse Drug Reactions for Various Courses of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Based on Single-cell RNA Sequencing Data With more than 3.8 million people infected Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), poses a critical threat to human health. There is no proven vaccine or specific drug to date, which highlights the urgent need for rapid development of therapeutics for COVID-19. To identify potentially repurposable drugs, we employed a systematic approach to mine candidates from U.S. FDA approved drugs and pre-clinical small-molecule compounds by integrating the gene expression perturbation data by chemicals from the Library of Integrated Network-Based Cellular Signatures (LINCS) project with publically available single-cell RNA sequencing dataset from mild and severe COVID-19 patients. We identified 281 FDA approved drugs that have the potential to be effective against SARS-CoV-2 infection, 10 of which are currently undergoing clinical trials to evaluate their efficacy against COVID-19. In conclusion, we have identified a list of repurposable anti-SARS- CoV-2 drugs using a systems biology approach.

positive: Therapeutic use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 and other viral infections: A narrative review The rapidly spreading Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), represents an unprecedented serious challenge to the global public health community. The extremely rapid international spread of the disease with significant morbidity and mortality made finding possible therapeutic interventions a global priority. While approved specific antiviral drugs against SARS-CoV-2 are still lacking, a large number of existing drugs are being explored as a possible treatment for COVID-19 infected patients. Recent publications have re-examined the use of Chloroquine (CQ) and/or Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a potential therapeutic option for these patients. In an attempt to explore the evidence that supports their use in COVID-19 patients, we comprehensively reviewed the previous studies which used CQ or HCQ as an antiviral treatment. Both CQ and HCQ demonstrated promising in vitro results, however, such data have not yet been translated into meaningful in vivo studies. While few clinical trials have suggested some beneficial effects of CQ and HCQ in COVID-19 patients, most of the reported data are still preliminary. Given the current uncertainty, it is worth being mindful of the potential risks and strictly rationalise the use of these drugs in COVID-19 patients until further high quality randomized clinical trials are available to clarify their role in the treatment or prevention of COVID-19.

positive: Feasibility of a randomized controlled trial to assess treatment of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection in Saudi Arabia: a survey of physicians BACKGROUND: The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) is an emerging respiratory pathogen with a high mortality rate and no specific treatments available to date. The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of convalescent plasma therapy for MERS-CoV-infected patients by using MERS-CoV-specific convalescent plasma obtained from previously recovered patients. METHODS: A survey was adapted from validated questionnaire originally aimed to measure network capacities and capabilities within the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC). The questionnaire was modified for this study to include 26 items that were divided into three main domains of interest: (1) the ability to care for critically ill MERS-CoV patients; (2) laboratory capacity to diagnose MERS-CoV and blood bank ability to prepare convalescent plasma; and (3), research capacity to conduct randomized controlled trials. The questionnaire was emailed to physicians. RESULTS: Of 582 physicians who were invited to the survey, 327 responded (56.2 %). The professional focus of the majority of respondents was critical care (106/249 (43 %)), pediatrics (59/249, (24 %)) or internal medicine (52/249 (21 %)) but none was blood banking. Nearly all respondents (251/263 (95 %)) reported to have access to ICU facilities within their institutions. Most respondents (219/270 (81 %)) reported that intensivists were the most physician group responsible for treatment decisions about critically ill SARI patients. While 125/165 respondents (76 %) reported that they conduct research in ICUs, and 80/161 (49.7 %) had been involved in the conduct of RCTs, including using a placebo comparison (60/161 (37 %)), only 49/226 (21 %) of respondents regularly participated in research networks. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey indicated that in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), ICUs are the most likely clinical locations for conducting a clinical trial of convalescent plasma therapy for MERS-CoV, and that most ICUs have experience with such research designs. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12871-016-0198-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

positive: Characteristics of COVID-19 Clinical Trials in China Based on the Registration Data on ChiCTR and ClinicalTrials.gov Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the fundamental characteristics of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) clinical trials registered in China. Methods: COVID-19 clinical trials registered in China were analyzed from databases on ChiCTR and ClinicalTrials.gov. The study designs, samples, primary end points, and intervention measures were evaluated. Results: In total, 262 intervention clinical trials were retrieved on March 10, 2020. Overall, 181 (69.1%) trials involved two groups, 200 (76.3%) trials were randomized parallel trials, 24 (9.2%) trials were double blind, and 60.3% of trials included ≤100 participants. Sixty (22.9%) trials considered symptom improvement as the primary endpoint and 43 (16.4%) trials considered the rate or time at which the subjects became virus-free as the primary endpoint. Of 262 intervention studies, chemical drugs and biological products were studied in 105 (40.1%) intervention studies, of which antiviral drugs accounted for 15.3% and malaria drugs accounted for 8.4% of the studies. Among all trials, 27.9% of the studies used traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), 10.3% used cell therapy, and 5.0% used plasma therapy. Conclusion: This study is the first snapshot of the landscape of COVID-19 clinical trials registered in China and provided the basic features of clinical trial designs for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 to offer useful information to guide future clinical trials on COVID-19 in other countries.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine in Patients with Rheumatic Disease Complicated by COVID-19: Clarifying Target Exposures and the Need for Clinical Trials OBJECTIVE: To characterize hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) exposure in patients with rheumatic disease receiving longterm HCQ compared to target concentrations with reported antiviral activity against the coronavirus disease 2019 caused by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). METHODS: We evaluated total HCQ concentrations in serum and plasma from published literature values, frozen serum samples from a pediatric systemic lupus erythematosus trial, and simulated concentrations using a published pharmacokinetic model during pregnancy. For each source, we compared observed or predicted HCQ concentrations to target concentrations with reported antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: The average total serum/plasma HCQ concentrations were below the lowest SARS-CoV-2 target of 0.48 mg/l in all studies. Assuming the highest antiviral target exposure (total plasma concentration of 4.1 mg/l), all studies had about one-tenth the necessary concentration for in vitro viral inhibition. Pharmacokinetic model simulations confirmed that pregnant adults receiving common dosing for rheumatic diseases did not achieve target exposures; however, the models predict that a dosage of 600 mg once a day during pregnancy would obtain the lowest median target exposure for most patients after the first dose. CONCLUSION: We found that the average patient receiving treatment with HCQ for rheumatic diseases, including children and non-pregnant/pregnant adults, are unlikely to achieve total serum or plasma concentrations shown to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. Nevertheless, patients receiving HCQ long term may have tissue concentrations far exceeding that of serum/plasma. Because the therapeutic window for HCQ in the setting of SARS-CoV-2 is unknown, well-designed clinical trials that include patients with rheumatic disease are urgently needed to characterize the efficacy, safety, and target exposures for HCQ.

positive: Could Chloroquine /Hydroxychloroquine Be Harmful in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Treatment?

positive: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE ONGOING CLINICAL TRIALS EVALUATING THE DIAGNOSTIC AND THERAPEUTIC INTERVENTIONS TO MANAGE THE RESPIRATORY INFECTION CAUSED BY 2019 NOVEL CORONAVIRUS (2019-NCOV) TYPE: Abstract Publication TOPIC: Respiratory Care PURPOSE: 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) is attributed for outbreak with first human infection detected in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, which has caused clusters of severe respiratory illness like severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus. The latest mortality was 2.07%. Currently, the standard care is supportive care, and no treatment is proven to be effective METHODS: We systematically analysed the contemporary protocols of the seven ongoing trials through the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (4 trials) and the trials registry (3 trials) database. The latest evaluation was on January 29, 2020 with key word ‘2019-nCoV’, for the trials evaluating the diagnostic and the therapeutic interventions to manage the respiratory infection caused by 2019-nCoV RESULTS: Therapeutic interventions include, lopinavir-ritonavir with aerosolized interferon-alpha compared with the adjunctive IV methylprednisolone, umifenovir (broad-spectrum antiviral), SARI-nCoV trial for role of glucocorticoid, three comparative antiviral therapies utilising ribavirin, interferon alpha-1b, lopinavir -ritonavir, Xue-Bi-Jing injection (only Chinese medicine injection approved for sepsis) and novel isothermal nucleic acid amplification technique is under trial for simple, fast and portable diagnosis. The mean number of patients being enrolled is 193 (SD ± 183, maximum 500, minimum 40, range 460, 95% CI 24 to 362). Cumulatively, 1350 patients are targeted across 7 trials. CONCLUSIONS: Varied novel approaches based on the current scientific understanding of the disease are being evaluated for quick and effective management CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: As the 2019-nCoV becomes a global threat, the rapidity of the Chinese trials for an evidence-based approach are in direction to provide rational, efficacious and potential solutions to effectively manage the disease DISCLOSURE: No significant relationships. KEYWORDS: Ongoing Trials, Systematic Review, 2019-nCoV

positive: Hydroxychloroquine use in the COVID-19 patient. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has multiple potential antiviral mechanisms of action that differ according to the pathogen studied (eg, Chikungunya, Dengue virus, human immunodeficiency virus, poliovirus, Zika virus). Data on HCQ for treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are rapidly evolving. To date there is no evidence from randomized controlled trials that any single therapy improves outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. There are also no clinical trial data supporting prophylactic HCQ therapy in COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) use in patients with COVID-19 is being investigated examining prophylaxis, postexposure prophylaxis, and treatment regimens.

positive: Novel coronavirus (COVID-19) infection: What a doctor on the frontline needs to know Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a zoonotic respiratory infection originating from Wuhan, China. Rapidly spreading from Wuhan to all inhabited continents of the world, the World Health Organisation declared COVID-19 a pandemic on March 11, 2019. Infected patients present with fever and cough; radiological features include bilateral infiltrates on chest x-ray and computed tomography scanning. Management is supportive with oxygen supplementation, broad-spectrum antibiotics as well as careful fluid balancing. A number of drugs, both new and old, are currently in clinical trials and being used on an experimental basis in clinical practice. The COVID-19 pandemic is the greatest worldwide public health crisis of a generation, and has led to seismic political, economic and social changes. This review provides an overview of COVID-19 for junior doctors who find themselves on a new frontline of healthcare.

positive: Medical treatment options for COVID-19 Therapeutic options for coronavirus disease 2019 are desperately needed to respond to the ongoing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic. Both antiviral drugs and immunomodulators might have their place in the management of coronavirus disease 2019. Unfortunately, no drugs have been approved yet to treat infections with human coronaviruses. As it will take years to develop new therapies for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the current focus is on the repurposing of drugs that have been approved or are in development for other conditions. Several clinical trials have already been conducted or are currently ongoing to evaluate the efficacy of such drugs. Here, we discuss the potential of these therapies for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019.

positive: A large number of COVID-19 interventional clinical trials were registered soon after the pandemic onset: a descriptive analysis BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There is a pressing need for evidence-based interventions to address the devastating clinical and public health effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The number of registered trials related to COVID-19 is increasing by the day. The objective of this study was to describe the characteristics of the currently registered interventional clinical trials related to COVID-19. METHODS: We searched the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on May 15th, 2020. We included any entry that is related to COVID-19. We abstracted and then descriptively analyzed the following characteristics of the registered trials: study design, status, phase, primary endpoints, experimental interventions, and geographic location among other qualifiers. RESULTS: We identified 1,308 eligible registered trials. Most trials were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (n = 703; 53.7%) and the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (n = 291; 22.2%). The number of participants to be enrolled across these trials was 734,657, with a median of 110 participants per trial. The most commonly studied intervention category was pharmacologic (n = 763; 58.3%), with antiparasitic medications being the most common subcategory. Although over half of the trials were already recruiting, we identified published peer-reviewed results for only 8 of those trials. CONCLUSION: There is a relatively large number of registered trials but with very few results published so far. Although our findings suggest an appropriate initial response by the research community, the real challenge will be to get these trials completed, published, and translated into practice and policy.

positive: Covering coronavirus—emerging tools for the fight against the common enemy

positive: Should chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine be used to treat COVID-19? A rapid review BACKGROUND: On the 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that COVID-19 was a pandemic. To date, there are no medical treatments for COVID-19 with proven effectiveness. Novel treatments and/or vaccines will take time to be developed and distributed to patients. In light of this, there has been growing interest in the use of existing medications, such as chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), as potential treatments of this disease. AIM: To establish the current evidence for the effectiveness of CQ and HCQ in treating COVID-19. DESIGN & SETTING: A rapid review of the literature was conducted. METHOD: Electronic searches in PubMed and Google Scholar were conducted on 21 March 2020. A further search was conducted in Google for relevant literature on 28 March 2020. RESULTS: There is limited evidence of in vitro activity of CQ/HCQ against SARS-CoV-2. A number of in vivo clinical trials are underway. The empirical data available from two of these trials reveal conflicting results. Both trials are characterised by small numbers of participants (n = 30 and n = 36) and suffer methodological limitations. No medium or long-term follow-up data is available. CONCLUSION: At present, there is insufficient evidence to determine whether CQ/HCQ are safe and effective treatments for COVID-19. High quality, adequately powered randomised clinical trials in primary and secondary care settings are urgently required to guide policymakers and clinicians. These studies should report medium- and long-term follow-up results, and safety data.

positive: Clinical and historical features associated with severe COVID-19 infection: a systematic review Background: There is an urgent need for rapid assessment methods to guide pathways of care for COVID-19 patients, as frontline providers need to make challenging decisions surrounding rationing of resources. This study aimed to evaluate existing literature for factors associated with COVID-19 illness severity. Methods: A systematic review identified all studies published between 1/12/19 and 19/4/20 that used primary data and inferential statistics to assess associations between the outcome of interest - disease severity - and historical or clinical variables. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the WHO Database of Publications on Coronavirus Disease were searched. Data were independently extracted and cross-checked independently by two reviewers using PRISMA guidelines, after which they were descriptively analysed. Quality and risk of bias in available evidence were assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. This review was registered with PROSPERO, registration number CRD42020178098. Results: Of the 6202 relevant articles found, 63 were eligible for inclusion; these studies analysed data from 17648 COVID-19 patients. The majority (n=57, 90.5%) were from China and nearly all (n=51, 90.5%) focussed on admitted adult patients. Patients had a median age of 52.5 years and 52.8% were male. The predictors most frequently associated with COVID-19 disease severity were age, absolute lymphocyte count, hypertension, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), C-reactive protein (CRP), and history of any pre-existing medical condition. Conclusion: This study identified multiple variables likely to be predictive of severe COVID-19 illness. Due to the novelty of SARS-CoV-2 infection, there is currently no severity prediction tool designed to, or validated for, COVID-19 illness severity. Findings may inform such a tool that can offer guidance on clinical treatment and disposition, and ultimately reduce morbidity and mortality due to the pandemic.

positive: Effectiveness of glucocorticoid therapy in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019: protocol of a randomized controlled trial BACKGROUND: At the end of 2019, a novel coronavirus outbreak causative organism has been subsequently designated the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). The effectiveness of adjunctive glucocorticoid therapy in the management of 2019-nCoV-infected patients with severe lower respiratory tract infections is not clear, and warrants further investigation. METHODS: The present study will be conducted as an open-labeled, randomized, controlled trial. We will enrol 48 subjects from Chongqing Public Health Medical Center. Each eligible subject will be assigned to an intervention group (methylprednisolone via intravenous injection at a dose of 1-2 mg/kg/day for 3 days) or a control group (no glucocorticoid use) randomly, at a 1:1 ratio. Subjects in both groups will be invited for 28 days of follow-up which will be scheduled at four consecutive visit points. We will use the clinical improvement rate as our primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints include the timing of clinical improvement after intervention, duration of mechanical ventilation, duration of hospitalization, overall incidence of adverse events, as well as rate of adverse events at each visit, and mortality at 2 and 4 weeks. DISCUSSION: The present coronavirus outbreak is the third serious global coronavirus outbreak in the past two decades. Oral and parenteral glucocorticoids have been used in the management of severe respiratory symptoms in coronavirus-infected patients in the past. However, there remains no definitive evidence in the literature for or against the utilization of systemic glucocorticoids in seriously ill patients with coronavirus-related severe respiratory disease, or indeed in other types of severe respiratory disease. In this study, we hope to discover evidence either supporting or opposing the systemic therapeutic administration of glucocorticoids in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ChiCTR2000029386, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=48777.

positive: Experimental Treatment with Favipiravir for COVID-19: An Open-Label Control Study Abstract An outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and its caused coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been reported in China since December 2019. More than 16% of patients developed acute respiratory distress syndrome, and the fatality ratio was about 1%–2%. No specific treatment has been reported. Herein, we examine the effects of Favipiravir (FPV) versus Lopinavir (LPV)/ritonavir (RTV) for the treatment of COVID-19. Patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 who received oral FPV (Day 1: 1600 mg twice daily; Days 2–14: 600 mg twice daily) plus interferon (IFN)-α by aerosol inhalation (5 million U twice daily) were included in the FPV arm of this study, whereas patients who were treated with LPV/RTV (Days 1–14: 400 mg/100 mg twice daily) plus IFN-α by aerosol inhalation (5 million U twice daily) were included in the control arm. Changes in chest computed tomography (CT), viral clearance, and drug safety were compared between the two groups. For the 35 patients enrolled in the FPV arm and the 45 patients in the control arm, all baseline characteristics were comparable between the two arms. A shorter viral clearance time was found for the FPV arm versus the control arm (median (interquartile range, IQR), 4 (2.5–9) d versus 11 (8–13) d, P < 0.001). The FPV arm also showed significant improvement in chest imaging compared with the control arm, with an improvement rate of 91.43% versus 62.22% (P = 0.004). After adjustment for potential confounders, the FPV arm also showed a significantly higher improvement rate in chest imaging. Multivariable Cox regression showed that FPV was independently associated with faster viral clearance. In addition, fewer adverse reactions were found in the FPV arm than in the control arm. In this open-label nonrandomized control study, FPV showed significantly better treatment effects on COVID-19 in terms of disease progression and viral clearance; if causal, these results should be important information for establishing standard treatment guidelines to combat the SARS-CoV-2 infection.

positive: Pharmacologic Treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Review. Importance The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) presents an unprecedented challenge to identify effective drugs for prevention and treatment. Given the rapid pace of scientific discovery and clinical data generated by the large number of people rapidly infected by SARS-CoV-2, clinicians need accurate evidence regarding effective medical treatments for this infection. Observations No proven effective therapies for this virus currently exist. The rapidly expanding knowledge regarding SARS-CoV-2 virology provides a significant number of potential drug targets. The most promising therapy is remdesivir. Remdesivir has potent in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, but it is not US Food and Drug Administration approved and currently is being tested in ongoing randomized trials. Oseltamivir has not been shown to have efficacy, and corticosteroids are currently not recommended. Current clinical evidence does not support stopping angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with COVID-19. Conclusions and Relevance The COVID-19 pandemic represents the greatest global public health crisis of this generation and, potentially, since the pandemic influenza outbreak of 1918. The speed and volume of clinical trials launched to investigate potential therapies for COVID-19 highlight both the need and capability to produce high-quality evidence even in the middle of a pandemic. No therapies have been shown effective to date.

positive: Potential Rapid Diagnostics, Vaccine and Therapeutics for 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV): A Systematic Review Rapid diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics are important interventions for the management of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. It is timely to systematically review the potential of these interventions, including those for Middle East respiratory syndrome-Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, to guide policymakers globally on their prioritization of resources for research and development. A systematic search was carried out in three major electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) to identify published studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Supplementary strategies through Google Search and personal communications were used. A total of 27 studies fulfilled the criteria for review. Several laboratory protocols for confirmation of suspected 2019-nCoV cases using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been published. A commercial RT-PCR kit developed by the Beijing Genomic Institute is currently widely used in China and likely in Asia. However, serological assays as well as point-of-care testing kits have not been developed but are likely in the near future. Several vaccine candidates are in the pipeline. The likely earliest Phase 1 vaccine trial is a synthetic DNA-based candidate. A number of novel compounds as well as therapeutics licensed for other conditions appear to have in vitro efficacy against the 2019-nCoV. Some are being tested in clinical trials against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, while others have been listed for clinical trials against 2019-nCoV. However, there are currently no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations supported by high-level evidence.

positive: Adding Colchicine to the Antiretroviral Medication - Lopinavir/Ritonavir (Kaletra) in Hospitalized Patients with Non-Severe Covid-19 Pneumonia: A Structured Summary of a Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial OBJECTIVES: Colchicine is a well-known drug, which has been used for years to treat a wide range of rheumatic and inflammatory disorders. It helps break the cycle of inflammation through diverse mechanisms including reducing Intereukin-6, Interleukin-8, Tumour Necrosis Factor-alpha besides controlling oxidative stress pathways which all are important and pathologic components in the clinical course and outcome of patients infected with COVID-19. This study aims to assess the anti-inflammatory effects of colchicine in non-severe hospitalized COVID-19 patients. TRIAL DESIGN: Prospective, randomized (1:1 ratio), double blind study with parallel group design. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized patients with positive nasopharyngeal swab for COVID-19 infection (RT -PCR) and lung Computed tomography scan involvement compatible with COVID-19 pneumonia. The patients are not severely hypoxic, do not need intubation or invasive oxygenation. Exclusion criteria: known hypersensitivity to colchicine; known hepatic failure; estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)<30 ml/min/1.73m(2) (by the CKD-EPI Creatinine Equation for Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) which estimates GFR based on serum creatinine. ; kidney transplant recipients, using Digoxin, QTc >450 msec. Participants will be recruited from inpatients at Labbafinejad Meidcal Center , Tehran, Iran. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Eligible enrolled patients will be randomized into two groups. Group A will receive the antiretroviral Lopinavir/Ritonavir (Kaletra) while group B will receive Lopinavir/Ritonavir (Kaletra) + Colchicine 1.5 mg loading then 0.5 mg twice daily orally. All patients in both groups will receive the same amounts of essential minerals, vitamins as antioxidants, and antibiotics. Patients of both groups will be treated under optimal treatment based on the CDC and WHO guidelines and national consensus proposed in Iran including the same dosages of Lopinavir/Ritonavir, antibiotics, trace elements and antioxidants while only in group-B patients Colchicine will be added on top of this protocol. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary: Time for clinical improvement and lung CT score changes 14 days after treatment. Secondary: 14 days after treatment – C-Reactive Protein test x Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio , Interleukin-6, malondialdehyde (MDA) levels reduction – Percentage of patients who require supplemental Oxygen – Mean hospital stay length RANDOMISATION: Patients will be allocated to each group (ratio 1:1) by using an online randomization tool: http://www.graphpad.com/quickcalcs/index.cfm BLINDING (MASKING): This will be a double-blind study in which participants and those assessing the final outcomes will be blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): Regarding the pandemic crisis and our center capacity to hospitalize confirmed COVID-19 patients, a total of 80 patients was found to be logical to be randomized into two groups of 40- patients. TRIAL STATUS: Recruitment is ongoing. Recruitment began on 20/03/2020 and the date by which the recruitment is anticipated to be completed is 30/05/2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04360980, registered 24/04/2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Triple combination of interferon beta-1b, lopinavir–ritonavir, and ribavirin in the treatment of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19: an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial BACKGROUND: Effective antiviral therapy is important for tackling the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We assessed the efficacy and safety of combined interferon beta-1b, lopinavir–ritonavir, and ribavirin for treating patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This was a multicentre, prospective, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial in adults with COVID-19 who were admitted to six hospitals in Hong Kong. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to a 14-day combination of lopinavir 400 mg and ritonavir 100 mg every 12 h, ribavirin 400 mg every 12 h, and three doses of 8 million international units of interferon beta-1b on alternate days (combination group) or to 14 days of lopinavir 400 mg and ritonavir 100 mg every 12 h (control group). The primary endpoint was the time to providing a nasopharyngeal swab negative for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 RT-PCR, and was done in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04276688. FINDINGS: Between Feb 10 and March 20, 2020, 127 patients were recruited; 86 were randomly assigned to the combination group and 41 were assigned to the control group. The median number of days from symptom onset to start of study treatment was 5 days (IQR 3–7). The combination group had a significantly shorter median time from start of study treatment to negative nasopharyngeal swab (7 days [IQR 5–11]) than the control group (12 days [8–15]; hazard ratio 4·37 [95% CI 1·86–10·24], p=0·0010). Adverse events included self-limited nausea and diarrhoea with no difference between the two groups. One patient in the control group discontinued lopinavir–ritonavir because of biochemical hepatitis. No patients died during the study. INTERPRETATION: Early triple antiviral therapy was safe and superior to lopinavir–ritonavir alone in alleviating symptoms and shortening the duration of viral shedding and hospital stay in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Future clinical study of a double antiviral therapy with interferon beta-1b as a backbone is warranted. FUNDING: The Shaw-Foundation, Richard and Carol Yu, May Tam Mak Mei Yin, and Sanming Project of Medicine.

positive: Enabling emergency mass vaccination: Innovations in manufacturing and administration during a pandemic

positive: Novel 2019 coronavirus: Genome structure, clinical trials, and outstanding questions Novel 2019 coronavirus has created havoc across the globe since its emergence in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, and fast spreading potential. While we were able to identify the causative agent within a few days of the disease outbreak, several questions still remain unanswered. In this review, we discuss the extent of virus spread, current statistics, SARS-CoV-2 genome organization, comparison between the novel coronavirus and causative agents involved in previous outbreaks, ongoing clinical trials and myths associated with the virus. Lastly, we provide insights into the future perspectives which could prove useful for the scientific community as they work on finding the cure against the disease. IMPACT STATEMENT: Early availability of the sequence, the genetic material of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19), has prompted efforts towards identifying a safe and effective vaccine in the current public health emergency. To that end, understanding the pathophysiology of disease is crucial for scientists around the world. Since conventional vaccine development and manufacturing may take several years, it is important to think about alternative strategies that we could use to mitigate imminent catastrophe. We hope that this article will open up new avenues and provide insights that could potentially save hundreds of lives affected by COVID-19.

positive: Discovering drugs to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The SARS-CoV-2 virus emerged in December 2019 and then spread rapidly worldwide, particularly to China, Japan, and South Korea. Scientists are endeavoring to find antivirals specific to the virus. Several drugs such as chloroquine, arbidol, remdesivir, and favipiravir are currently undergoing clinical studies to test their efficacy and safety in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China; some promising results have been achieved thus far. This article summarizes agents with potential efficacy against SARS-CoV-2.

positive: Imaging features and mechanisms of novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19): Study Protocol Clinical Trial (SPIRIT Compliant) INTRODUCTION: A novel coronavirus, tentatively designated as 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV), now called severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, emerged in Wuhan, China, at the end of 2019 and which continues to expand. On February 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) named the disease coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). On February 28, WHO increased our assessment of the risk of spread and the risk of impact of COVID-19 to very high at a global level. The COVID-19 poses significant threats to international health.Computed tomography (CT) has been an important imaging modality in assisting in the diagnosis and management of patients withCOVID-19. Some retrospective imaging studies have reported chest CT findings of COVID-19 in the past 2 months, suggesting that several CT findings may be characteristic. To our knowledge, there has been no prospective multicentre imaging study of COVID-19 to date.We proposed a hypothesis: There are some specific CT features on Chest CT of COVID-19 patients. And the mechanism of these CT features is explicable based on pathological findings. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the specific CT features of COVID-19 and the formation mechanism of these CT features. METHOD: This study is a prospective multicenter observational study. We will recruit 100 patients with COVID-19 at 55 hospitals. All patients undergo chest CT examination with the same scan protocol. The distribution and morphology of lesions on chest CT, clinical data will be recorded. A number of patients will be pathologically examined after permission is granted. The data of these three aspects will be analyzed synthetically. DISCUSSION: This study will help us to identify the chest CT features of COVID-19 and its mechanism. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This retrospective study was approved by the Biomedical Research Ethics Committee of West China Hospital of Sichuan University (No. 2020-140). Written informed consent will be obtained from all study participants prior to enrollment in the study. To protect privacy of participants, all private information were kept anonymous. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be disseminated electronically and in print regardless of results.

positive: The feasibility of convalescent plasma therapy in severe COVID-19 patients: a pilot study Currently, there are no approved specific antiviral agents for 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). In this study, ten severe patients confirmed by real-time viral RNA test were enrolled prospectively. One dose of 200 mL convalescent plasma (CP) derived from recently recovered donors with the neutralizing antibody titers above 1:640 was transfused to the patients as an addition to maximal supportive care and antiviral agents. The primary endpoint was the safety of CP transfusion. The second endpoints were the improvement of clinical symptoms and laboratory parameters within 3 days after CP transfusion. The median time from onset of illness to CP transfusion was 16.5 days. After CP transfusion, the level of neutralizing antibody increased rapidly up to 1:640 in five cases, while that of the other four cases maintained at a high level (1:640). The clinical symptoms were significantly improved along with increase of oxyhemoglobin saturation within 3 days. Several parameters tended to improve as compared to pre-transfusion, including increased lymphocyte counts (0.65*109/L vs. 0.76*109/L) and decreased C-reactive protein (55.98 mg/L vs. 18.13 mg/L). Radiological examinations showed varying degrees of absorption of lung lesionswithin 7 days. The viral load was undetectable after transfusion in seven patients who had previous viremia. No severe adverse effects were observed. This study showed CP therapy was welltolerated and could potentially improve the clinical outcomes through neutralizing viremia in severe COVID-19 cases. The optimal dose and time point, as well as the clinical benefit of CP therapy, needs further investigation in larger well-controlled trials.

positive: Effectiveness and Safety of Glucocorticoids to Treat COVID-19: A Rapid Review and Meta-Analysis Background: Glucocorticoids are widely used in the treatment of various pulmonary inflammatory diseases, but they are also often accompanied by significant adverse reactions. Published guidelines point out that low dose and short duration systemic glucocorticoid therapy may be considered for patients with rapidly progressing COVID-19 while the evidence is still limited. Methods: We comprehensively searched electronic databases and supplemented the screening by conducting a manual search. We included RCTs and cohort studies evaluating the effectiveness and safety of glucocorticoids in children and adults with COVID-19, SARS and MERS, and conducted meta-analyses of the main indicators that were identified in the studies. Results: Our search retrieved 23 studies, including one RCT and 22 cohort studies, with a total of 13,815 patients. In adults with COVID-19, the use of systemic glucocorticoid did not reduce mortality (RR=2.00, 95% CI: 0.69 to 5.75, I 2=90.9%) or the duration of lung inflammation (WMD=-1 days, 95% CI: -2.91 to 0.91), while a significant reduction was found in the duration of fever (WMD=-3.23 days, 95% CI: -3.56 to -2.90). In patients with SARS, glucocorticoids also did not reduce the mortality (RR=1.52, 95% CI: 0.89 to 2.60, I2=84.6%), duration of fever (WMD=0.82 days, 95% CI: -2.88 to 4.52, I2=97.9%) or duration of lung inflammation absorption (WMD=0.95 days, 95% CI: -7.57 to 9.48, I2=94.6%). The use of systemic glucocorticoid therapy prolonged the duration of hospital stay in all patients (COVID-19, SARS and MERS). Conclusions: Glucocorticoid therapy was found to reduce the duration of fever, but not mortality, duration of hospitalization or lung inflammation absorption. Long-term use of high-dose glucocorticoids increased the risk of adverse reactions such as coinfections, so routine use of systemic glucocorticoids for patients with COVID-19 cannot be recommend. Keywords: COVID-19; glucocorticoids; meta-analysis; rapid review

positive: Global coalition to accelerate COVID-19 clinical research in resource-limited settings

positive: “Hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and meta-analysis.” BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS: The role of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the treatment of COVID-19 is not fully known. We studied the efficacy of HCQ compared to the control in COVID-19 subjects on a. viral clearance measured by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and, b. death due to all cause. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane and MedRxiv database were searched using the specific keywords up to April 30, 2020. Studies that met our objectives were assessed for the risk of bias applying various tools as indicated. Three studies each that reported the outcome of viral clearance by RT-PCR and death due to all cause, were meta-analyzed by applying inverse variance-weighted averages of logarithmic risk ratio (RR) using a random effects model. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed using the I(2) statistic and funnel plots, respectively. RESULTS: Meta-analysis of 3 studies (n = 210) on viral clearance assessed by RT-PCR showed no benefit (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.38; p = 0.74), although with a moderate heterogeneity (I(2) = 61.7%, p = 0.07). While meta-analysis of 3 studies (n = 474) showed a significant increase in death with HCQ, compared to the control (RR, 2.17; 95% 1.32 to 3.57; p = 0.002), without any heterogeneity (I(2) = 0.0%, p = 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: No benefit on viral clearance but a significant increase in mortality was observed with HCQ compared to control in patients with COVID-19.

positive: Vitamin C for the treatment of COVID-19: A living systematic review Objective This living systematic review aims to provide a timely, rigorous and continuously updated summary of the evidence available on the role of vitamin C in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. Data sources We will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature and in a centralised repository in L OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methods We adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question. We will include randomised trials evaluating the effect of vitamin C, as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs, versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Randomised trials evaluating vitamin C in infections caused by other coronaviruses, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19 will be searched in case no direct evidence from randomised trials is found, or if the direct evidence provides low- or very low-certainty for critical outcomes. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the GRADE system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it every time the conclusions change or whenever there are substantial updates. Ethics and dissemination No ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media. PROSPERO Registration Submitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation). Keywords COVID-19, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, Coronavirus Infections, Systematic review, vitamin c, ascorbic acid.

positive: A prospective, randomised, double blind placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia (TOC-COVID): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: SARS-CoV2 infection leads to a concomitant pulmonary inflammation. This inflammation is supposed to be the main driver in the pathogenesis of lung failure (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome) in COVID-19. Objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single dose treatment with Tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19. We hypothesize that Tocilizumab slows down the progression of SARS-CoV-2 induced pneumonia and inflammation. We expect an improvement in pulmonary function compared to placebo-treated patients. Desirable outcomes would be that tocilizumab reduces the number of days that patients are dependent on mechanical ventilation and reduces the invasiveness of breathing assistance. Furthermore, this treatment might result in fewer admissions to intensive care units. Next to these efficacy parameters, safety of a therapy with Tocilizumab in COVID-19 patients has to be monitored closely, since immunosuppression could lead to an increased rate of bacterial infections, which could negatively influence the patient’s outcome. TRIAL DESIGN: Multicentre, prospective, 2-arm randomised (ratio 1:1), double blind, placebo-controlled trial with parallel group design. PARTICIPANTS: : 1. Proof of SARS-CoV2 (Symptoms and positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR)). 2. a. Ambient air SpO(2) ≤ 92% or b. Need of ≥ 6l O2/min or c. NIV (non-invasive ventilation) or d. IMV (invasive mechanical ventilation). 3. Age ≥ 18 years. : 1. Non-invasive or invasive mechanical ventilation ≥ 48 hours. 2. Pregnancy or breast feeding. 3. Liver injury or failure (AST/ALT ≥ 5x ULN). 4. Leukocytes < 2 × 10(3)/μl. 5. Thrombocytes < 50 × 10(3)/μl. 6. Severe bacterial infection (PCT > 3ng/ml). 7. Acute or chronic diverticulitis. 8. Immunosuppressive therapy (e.g. mycophenolate, azathioprine, methotrexate, biologicals, prednisolone >10mg/d; exceptions are: prednisolone ≤ 10mg/d, sulfasalazine or hydroxychloroquine). 9. Known active or chronic tuberculosis. 10. Known active or chronic viral hepatitis. 11. Known allergic reactions to tocilizumab or its ingredients. 12. Life expectation of less than 1 year (independent of COVID-19). 13. Participation in any other interventional clinical trial within the last 30 days before the start of this trial. 14. Simultaneous participation in other interventional trials (except for participation in COVID-19 trials) which could interfere with this trial; simultaneous participation in registry and diagnostic trials is allowed. 15. Failure to use one of the following safe methods of contraception: female condoms, diaphragm or coil, each used in combination with spermicides; intra-uterine device; hormonal contraception in combination with a mechanical method of contraception. The data collection of the primary follow up (28 days after randomisation) takes place during the hospital stay. Subsequently, a telephone interview on the quality of life is conducted after 6 and 12 months. Participants will be recruited from inpatients at ten medical centres in Germany. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention arm: Application of 8mg/kg body weight (BW) Tocilizumab i.v. once immediately after randomisation (12 mg/kg for patients with <30kg BW; total dose should not exceed 800 mg) AND conventional treatment. Control arm: Placebo (NaCl) i.v. once immediately after randomisation AND conventional treatment. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary endpoint is the number of ventilator free days (d) (VFD) in the first 28 days after randomisation. Non-invasive ventilation (NIV), Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) are defined as ventilator days. VFD’s are counted as zero if the patient dies within the first 28 days. RANDOMISATION: The randomisation code will be generated by the CTU (Clinical Trials Unit, ZKS Freiburg) using the following procedure to ensure that treatment assignment is unbiased and concealed from patients and investigator staff. Randomisation will be stratified by centre and will be performed in blocks of variable length in a ratio of 1:1 within each centre. The block lengths will be documented separately and will not be disclosed to the investigators. The randomisation code will be produced by validated programs based on the Statistical Analysis System (SAS). BLINDING (MASKING): Participants, caregivers, and the study team assessing the outcomes are blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): 100 participants will be randomised to each group (thus 200 participants in total). TRIAL STATUS: Protocol Version: V 1.2, 16.04.2020. Recruitment began 27th April 2020 and is anticipated to be completed by December 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered before trial start in trial registries (EudraCT: No. 2020-001408-41, registered 21st April 2020, and DRKS: No. DRKS00021238, registered 22nd April 2020). FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: The ICMR bulletin on targeted hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis for Covid-19: Need to interpret with caution The National Task Force for Covid-19 of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) in a bulletin dated March 21, 2020 recommended the use of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis in asymptomatic health care workers caring for suspected or confirmed patients and household contacts of confirmed patients. This is cause for concern with regard to bioethics and good clinical practice. The evidence for the efficacy of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine is currently derived from open label trials and cell culture studies with no conclusive evidence available from randomised clinical trials. Hydroxychloroquine also carries contraindications in the case of conditions such as maculopathy, retinopathy and QTc prolongation and should be used with caution in vulnerable populations such as children, pregnancy, lactation and the elderly. Despite this, there has been a rush to procure and self-medicate with hydroxychloroquine, which has been addressed by the National Task Force. The WHO and the FDA have not found adequate evidence to recommend any specific medication for the treatment of Covid-19. While further evidence is awaited, including from trials registered with the FDA and the ICMR, it is recommended that the administration of hydroxychloroquine for chemo-prophylaxis be considered on a case by case basis with monitoring by a registered medical practitioner including electrocardiography (ECG). The potential for retinal and cardiac toxicity must also be borne in mind. It is further recommended that a public advisory regarding the need for caution in chemo-prophylaxis be made available in the public domain. Keywords: Coronavirus, Covid-19, SARS-CoV-2, hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, chemoprophylaxis, bioethics, evidence- based medicine.

positive: Outbreak of SARS-CoV2: Pathogenesis of infection and cardiovascular involvement Since the new coronavirus SARS (SARS-CoV2) has emerged from china, the infection (COVID-19) has affected many countries and led to many deaths worldwide. Like SARS-CoV, ACE2 as a functional receptor for SARS-CoV2 is essential for virus to entry to the cell. ACE2 is a part of RAS which is expressed in several organs that opposes the AngII functions by converting Ang II to Ang (1-7), the one with vasodilation effects. The death rate of COVID-19 is estimated about 3.4%, however, some comorbid conditions like underlying cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and diabetes increase the risk of mortality. In addition, cardiovascular involvement by SARS-CoV2 could be direct through either ACE2 receptors which are expressed tremendously in heart, or by the surge of different cytokines or by ARDS-induced hypoxia. Traditional risk factors could aggravate the process of COVID-19 infection that urges the triage of these high risk patients for SARS-CoV2. Currently, there is no effective, proven treatment or vaccination for COVID-19, but many investigators are struggling to find a treatment strategy as soon as possible. Some potential medications like chloroquine by itself or in combination with azithromycin, and some protease inhibitors used for the treatment of COVID-19 have cardiovascular adverse effects that should be kept in mind in order to close monitor of the patients receiving these medications.

positive: An evidence mapping and analysis of registered COVID-19 clinical trials in China BACKGROUND: This article aims to summarize the key characteristics of registered trials of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), in terms of their spatial and temporal distributions, types of design and interventions, and patient characteristics among others. METHODS: A comprehensive search of the registered COVID-19 trials has been performed on platforms including ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), Chinese Clinical Trials Registry (CHiCTR), Australian Clinical Trials Registry, Britain's National Research Register (BNRR), Current Control Trials (CCT), and Glaxo Smith Kline Register. Trials registered at the first 8 weeks of the COVID-19 outbreak are included, without language restrictions. For each study, the registration information, study design, and administrator information are collected and summarized. RESULTS: A total of 220 registered trials were evaluated as of February 27, 2020. Hospital-initiated trials were the majority and account for 80% of the sample. Among the trials, pilot studies and phase 4 trials are more common and represent 35% and 19.1% of the sample, respectively. The median sample size of the registered trials is 100, with interquartile range 60-240. Further, 45.9% of the trials mentioned information on a data monitoring committee. 54.5% of the trials did not specify the disease severity among patients they intend to recruit. Four types of interventions are most common in the experimental groups across the registered studies: antiviral drugs, Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), biological agents, and hormone drugs. Among them, the TCM and biological agents are frequently used in pilot study and correspond to a variety of primary endpoints. In contrast, trials with antiviral drugs have more targeted primary outcomes such as "COVID-19 nucleic acid test" and "28-day mortality." CONCLUSIONS: We provide an evidence mapping and analysis of registered COVID-19 clinical trials in China. In particular, it is critical for ongoing and future studies to refine their research hypothesis and better identify their intervention therapies and the corresponding primary outcomes. It is also imperative for multiple public health divisions and research institutions to work together for integrative clinical data capture and sharing, with a common objective of improving future studies that evaluate COVID-19 interventions.

positive: Improving the efficacy of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine against SARS-CoV-2 may require Zinc additives - A better synergy for future COVID-19 clinical trials. The recent outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is now officially declared as a pandemic by the World Health Organization. As of now, there is no known effective pharmaceutical agent against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. However, several precautionary measures have been prescribed to prevent further spread of the virus, which include avoidance of social gatherings, proper handwashing, frequently disinfecting of used items and surfaces and so on. More recent studies have highlighted the possibility of treating patients infected with the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus with chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, of which mechanism of action is not completely understood. We seek to draw the attention of the scientific community to the possibility of drastically reducing the effects of the virus on the affected patients and improving clinical trials outcome through the synergistic action of zinc and chloroquine in patients suffering from the coronavirus disease.

positive: An exploratory randomized controlled study on the efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir or arbidol treating adult patients hospitalized with mild/moderate COVID-19 (ELACOI) Background: Antiviral therapies against the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, which has caused a global pandemic of respiratory illness called COVID-19, are still lacking. Methods: Our study (NCT04252885, named ELACOI), was an exploratory randomized (2:2:1) controlled trial assessing the efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) or arbidol monotherapy for treating patients with mild/moderate COVID-19. Findings: This study successfully enrolled 86 patients with mild/moderate COVID-19 with 34 randomly assigned to receive LPV/r, 35 to arbidol and 17 with no antiviral medication as control. Baseline characteristics of the three groups were comparable. The primary endpoints, the average time of positive-to-negative conversion of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid and conversion rates at days 7 and 14, were similar between groups (all P>0.05). There were no differences between groups in the secondary endpoints, the rates of antipyresis, cough alleviation, or improvement of chest CT at days 7 or 14 (all P>0.05). At day 7, eight (23.5%) patients in the LPV/r group, 3 (8.6%) in the arbidol group and 2(11.8%) in the control group showed a deterioration in clinical status from moderate to severe/critical(P =0.206). Overall, 12 (35.3%) patients in the LPV/r group and 5 (14.3%) in the arbidol group experienced adverse events during the follow-up period. No apparent adverse event occurred in the control group. Conclusions: LPV/r or arbidol monotherapy present little benefit for improving the clinical outcome of patients hospitalized with mild/moderate COVID-19 over supportive care.

positive: Associations of clinical characteristics and antiviral drugs with viral RNA clearance in patients with COVID-19 in Guangzhou, China: a retrospective cohort study Background: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) characterized by respiratory symptoms has become a global pandemic although factors influencing viral RNA clearance remained unclear to inform optimal isolation period and treatment strategies. Methods: In this retrospective study, we included patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to Guangzhou Eighth People's Hospital from 20th January 2020 to 15th March 2020. The associations of clinical characteristics and treatment regimens on time to viral RNA clearance were analyzed. Results: We examined 284 consecutive COVID-19 cases, accounting for 82% of confirmed cases in Guangzhou during this period. At the time of reporting (20th March 2020), 276 (97.2%) had recovered and were discharged from hospital with a median hospital stay of 18 days (interquartile range [IQR]:13-24). Overall, 280 patients achieved viral RNA clearance with a median length of 12 days (IQR: 8-16) after onset of illness. Amongst them, 66.1% had viral RNA cleared within 14 days, and 89.3% within 21 days. Older age, severity of disease, time lag from illness onset to hospital admission, high body temperature, and corticosteroid use were associated with delayed clearance of viral RNA. None of the antiviral regimens (chloroquine, oseltamivir, arbidol, and lopinavir/ritonavir) improved viral RNA clearance. The use of lopinavir/ritonavir was associated with delayed clearance of viral RNA even after adjusting for confounders. Conclusion: In patients with COVID-19, isolation for a minimum of 21 days after onset of illness may be warranted, while the use of antiviral drugs does not enhance viral RNA clearance.

positive: A real-time dashboard of clinical trials for COVID-19

positive: Urgent Guidance for Navigating and Circumventing the QTc-Prolonging and Torsadogenic Potential of Possible Pharmacotherapies for Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) Abstract As the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) global pandemic rages across the globe, the race to prevent and treat this deadly disease has led to the “off-label” repurposing of drugs such as hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir, which has the potential for unwanted QT-interval prolongation and a risk of drug-induced sudden cardiac death. With the possibility that a considerable proportion of the world’s population soon could receive COVID-19 pharmacotherapies with torsadogenic potential for therapy or postexposure prophylaxis, this document serves to help health care professionals mitigate the risk of drug-induced ventricular arrhythmias while minimizing risk of COVID-19 exposure to personnel and conserving the limited supply of personal protective equipment.

positive: A living systematic review protocol for COVID-19 clinical trial registrations Since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak was identified in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, a strong response from the research community has been observed with the proliferation of independent clinical trials assessing diagnostic methods, therapeutic and prophylactic strategies. While there is no intervention for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 with proven clinical efficacy to date, tools to distil the current research landscape by intervention, level of evidence and those studies likely powered to address future research questions is essential. This living systematic review aims to provide an open, accessible and frequently updated resource summarising the characteristics of COVID-19 clinical trial registrations. Weekly search updates of the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and source registries will be conducted. Data extraction by two independent reviewers of trial characteristic variables including categorisation of trial design, geographic location, intervention type and targets, level of evidence and intervention adaptability to low resource settings will be completed. Descriptive and thematic synthesis will be conducted. A searchable and interactive visualisation of the results database will be created, and made openly available online. Weekly results from the continued search updates will be published and made available on the Infectious Diseases Data Observatory (IDDO) website ( COVID-19 website). This living systematic review will provide a useful resource of COVID-19 clinical trial registrations for researchers in a rapidly evolving context. In the future, this sustained review will allow prioritisation of research targets for individual patient data meta-analysis.

positive: The Australasian COVID-19 Trial (ASCOT) to assess clinical outcomes in hospitalised patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19) treated with lopinavir/ritonavir and/or hydroxychloroquine compared to standard of care: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: To determine if lopinavir/ritonavir +/- hydroxychloroquine will reduce the proportion of participants who survive without requiring ventilatory support, 15 days after enrolment, in adult participants with non-critically ill SARS-CoV-2 infection. TRIAL DESIGN: ASCOT is an investigator-initiated, multi-centre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Participants will have been hospitalised with confirmed COVID-19, and will be randomised 1:1:1:1 to receive lopinavir /ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, both or neither drug in addition to standard of care management. PARTICIPANTS: Participants will be recruited from >80 hospitals across Australia and New Zealand, representing metropolitan and regional centres in both public and private sectors. Admitted patients will be eligible if aged ≥ 18 years, have confirmed SARS-CoV-2 by nucleic acid testing in the past 12 days and are expected to remain an inpatient for at least 48 hours from the time of randomisation. Potentially eligible participants will be excluded if admitted to intensive care or requiring high level respiratory support, are currently receiving study drugs or their use is contraindicated due to allergy, drug interaction or comorbidities (including baseline QTc prolongation of 470ms for women or 480ms for men), or death is anticipated imminently. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Participants will be randomised 1:1:1:1 to: Group 1: standard of care; Group 2: lopinavir (400mg) / ritonavir (100mg) twice daily for 10 days in tablet form; Group 3: hydroxychloroquine (800mg) 4x200mg administered 12 hours apart on Day 1, followed by 400mg twice a day for 6 days; Group 4: lopinavir /ritonavir plus hydroxychloroquine. MAIN OUTCOMES: Proportion of participants alive and not having required intensive respiratory support (invasive or non-invasive ventilation) at 15 days after enrolment. A range of clinical and virological secondary outcomes will also be evaluated. RANDOMISATION: The randomisation schedule will be generated by an independent statistician. Randomisation will be stratified by site and will be in permuted blocks of variable block size. The randomised sequence allocation will only be accessible to the data management group, and site investigators will have individual participant allocation provided through a web-based trial enrolment platform. BLINDING (MASKING): This is an open-label study, with researchers assessing the laboratory outcomes blinded to treatment allocation. No unblinding procedures relating to potential adverse effects are therefore required. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): We assumed that 5% of participants receiving standard of care would meet the primary outcome, aimed to evaluate whether interventions could lead to a relative risk of 0.5, assuming no interaction between intervention arms. This corresponds to a required sample size of 610 per arm, with a 5% two-sided significance level (alpha) and 80% power. The total sample size therefore is planned to be 2440. TRIAL STATUS: ASCOT protocol version 3, May 5, 2020. Recruitment opened April 4, 2020 and is ongoing, with planned completion of enrolment July 31, 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12620000445976). Prospectively registered April 6, 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Data sharing for novel coronavirus (COVID-19)

positive: Covid-19 Pandemic and Current Medical Interventions Abstract First humanoid coronavirus was discovered in the middle of 1960s, the class of viruses are considered to be a huge threat. The first onset of human coronavirus, SARS (SARS-CoV) appeared in 2003 which spanned five continents having lethal effects on human population accompanied by The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus in 2012 with a death rate of 35%. The viruses remain a threat till date and are of serious concern since no vaccine or specified drug therapy has been approbated for treating human coronaviruses. The viruses became a pandemic worldwide with the emergence of Wuhan coronavirus (2019-nCoV). SARS-CoV2 viral manifestation poses a serious human life risk by causing acute lung injury and various respiratory outcomes and has become a global concern. High pathogenicity and transmission rate of the viral strain has become the spotlight of research community throughout the world. With the ongoing studies on viral structure and host interactions, the intricacy of the viral proteome structure and replication cycle proposes a need to explore our understanding of host factors playing role in viral multiplication cycle. This review provides insight into our prevalent perception of coronavirus-host interactions, structure of SARS-CoV2, receptor mediated entry of virus inside the human cells, ongoing clinical trials and drug therapies and treatments that are being used to combat COVID-19 targeting viral fusion, replication and its multiplication.

positive: A Multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of hydroxychloroquine and a retrospective study in adult patients with mild to moderate Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Objective In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) via a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and a retrospective study. Methods Subjects admitted to 11 designated public hospitals in Taiwan between April 1 and May 31, 2020, with COVID-19 diagnosis confirmed by pharyngeal real-time RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2, were randomized at a 2:1 ratio and stratified by mild or moderate illness. HCQ 400 mg twice for 1 d and HCQ 200 mg twice daily for 6 days were administered. Both study group and controlled group received standard of care (SOC). Pharyngeal swabs and sputum were collected every other day. The proportion and time to negative viral PCR were assessed on day 14. In the retrospective study, medical records were reviewed for patients admitted before March 31, 2020. Results There were 33 and 37 cases in the RCT and retrospective study, respectively. In the RCT, the median times to negative rRT-PCR from randomization to hospital day 14 were 5 days (95% CI; 1-9 days) and 10 days (95% CI; 2-12 days) for the HCQ and SOC groups, respectively (p = 0.40). On day 14, 81.0% (17/21) and 75.0% (9/12) of the subjects in the HCQ and SOC groups, respectively, had undetected virus (p = 0.36). In the retrospective study, 12 (42.9%) in the HCQ group and 5 (55.6%) in the control group had negative rRT-PCR results on hospital day 14 (p = 0.70). Conclusions Neither study demonstrated that HCQ shortened viral shedding in mild to moderate COVID-19 subjects.

positive: Type 1 interferons as a potential treatment against COVID-19 Abstract Type 1 interferons have a broad antiviral activity in vitro and are currently evaluated in a clinical trial to treat MERS-CoV. In this review, we discuss preliminary data concerning the potential activity of type 1 interferons on SARS-CoV-2, and the relevance of evaluating these molecules in clinical trials for the treatment of COVID-19.

positive: Fighting against COVID-19: Innovative strategies for clinical pharmacists Abstract Background Clinical pharmacists’ routine task is carrying out pharmaceutical care to ensure patients' safe and reasonable medication use. However, under public health emergencies, such as the outbreak of COVID-19, the work strategies of clinical pharmacists need to be modified according to the rapid spread of the disease, where information and resources are usually lack to guide them. Objective To retrieve and investigate the prevention and control measures of clinical pharmacists during the outbreak of novel coronavirus, summarize the roles and responsibilities of clinical pharmacists, and to propose innovative strategies for developing pharmacy services under the epidemic. Methods The Chinese and English databases, self-media network, website of professional society or medical institution, and clinical trial center platforms were searched, and clinical pharmacists involved in the work against COVID-19 were surveyed and interviewed. Investigate the challenges and needs of frontline medical staffs for treating patients, and formulate strategies based on the actual medical environment. Results Clinical pharmacists play a vital role in leading the industry to formulate work instructions, provide frontline medical staff with drug information, and develop innovative pharmacy services to promote the rational use of medicines with collaborative teamwork and close communication according to the epidemic situation of COVID-19. Anti-epidemic work indeed has driven the development of remote pharmacy services. Conclusion Facing public health emergencies, clinical pharmacists can give full play to their professional expertise, analyze the current situation rationally, formulate telehealth strategies swiftly, and work in a united and efficient manner to provide innovative pharmacy services to ensure medication safety and rational use of medicine.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine as an aerosol might markedly reduce and even prevent severe clinical symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 infection Abstract Covid-19 is a new coronavirus disease first described in December 2019. This respiratory illness is severe and potentially fatal. Severe cases make up to 15%, lethality ranges between 1.5 and more than 10 %. What is urgently needed is an efficient pharmacological treatment for the treatment of severe cases. During the infection of alveolar epithelial cells of the lung, the ACE2 receptor has a central function. The antimalarial drugs chloroquine phosphate (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) impair in vitro the terminal glycosylation of ACE2 without significant change of cell-surface ACE2 and, therefore, might be potent inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Starting inhibition at 0.1 µM, CQ completely prevented in vitro infections at 10 µM, suggesting a prophylactic effect and preventing the virus spread 5 hours after infection. In a first clinical trial, CQ was effective in inhibiting exacerbation of pneumonia, improving lung imaging findings, promotion of virus-negative conversion, and shortening the disease. In addition, HCQ, which is three times more potent than CQ in SARS-CoV-2 infected cells (EC50 0.72 µM), was significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients compared to controls. Theoretically, CQ and HCQ could thus be effectively used in the treatment of SARS-CoV pneumonia. From a pharmacological standpoint, however, the major problems of oral treatment with these drugs are possible severe side effects and toxicity. Concretely, this relates to (a) the inconsistent individual bioavailability of these drugs at the alveolar target cells, depending on intestinal resorption, hepatic first-pass metabolism and accumulation in liver, spleen and lung, and (b) the need for a relatively high concentration of 1-5 µM at the alveolar surface. Therefore, we propose in a first dose estimation the use of HCQ as an aerosol in a dosage of 2-4 mg per inhalation in order to reach sufficient therapeutic levels at the alveolar epithelial cells. By using a low-dose non-systemic aerosol, adverse drug reactions will markedly be reduced compared with oral application. This increase in tolerability enables a broader use for prevention and after contact with an infected person, which would be an advantage especially for the high-risk, often multi-morbid and elderly patients. Empirical data on self-medication with a one-week aerosol application by two of the authors is presented. Inhalation was well tolerated without relevant side effects.

positive: The COVID-19 pandemic: is our medicine still evidence-based? There is no randomized controlled trial that demonstrated the efficacy of antiviral therapy against COVID-19 yet. However, physicians are prescribing different drugs to a large part of COVID-19 population in the hope they will cure them. This does not reflect the evidence-based medicine approach. What we need is more evidence-based knowledge about what routine care practices we should to apply to ameliorate symptoms of patients and fight COVID-19 pathology.

positive: Trials of anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy for COVID-19 are urgently needed

positive: Recent progress and challenges in drug development against COVID-19 coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) - an update on the status Coronaviruses are a large group of viruses known to cause illnesses that vary between the common cold and more severe diseases to include severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). A novel coronavirus was identified in December 2019 in Wuhan city, Hubei province, China. This virus represents a new strain that has not been previously identified in humans. The virus is now known as the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the resulting disease is called coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the novel coronavirus outbreak a global pandemic in March 2020. Despite rigorous global containment and quarantine efforts, the incidence of COVID-19 continues to rise, with more than 1,948,617 laboratory-confirmed cases and over 121,846 deaths worldwide. Currently, no specific medication is recommended to treat COVID-19 patients. However, governments and pharmaceutical companies are struggling to quickly find an effective drug to defeat the coronavirus. In the current review, we summarize the existing state of knowledge about COVID-19, available medications, and treatment options. Favilavir is an antiviral drug that is approved in Japan for common influenza treatment and is now approved to treat symptoms of COVID-19 in China. Moreover, Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, drugs used to treat malaria and arthritis, respectively, were recommended by the National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China for treatment of COVID-19. Presently, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are under investigation by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a treatment for COVID-19. The first COVID-19 vaccine is not expected to be ready for clinical trials before the end of the year.

positive: Current targeted therapeutics against COVID-19: based on first-line experience in china Abstract SARS-CoV-2 is a novel strain, causing a global pandemic since the end of 2019. The majority of patients showed nonspecific symptoms such as fever, dry cough, and fatigue. Most patients have a good prognosis while some with severe conditions could rapidly progress to acute respiratory distress syndrome, septic shock, metabolic acidosis, coagulation dysfunction, and even die. The exacerbation of the patient's condition may be due to a cytokine storm in the body. Effective targeted therapies including antiviral and immunization are urgently needed. Although many clinical trials are already underway and the majority of patients have received antiviral therapy based on medication experience with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and preliminary results from some clinical trials, there are no antiviral drugs proven to be effective currently. We summarize the current therapeutic medicines used in the clinic, hope to be able to provide some implications for clinical medication.

positive: Evaluation of 19 antiviral drugs against SARS-CoV-2 Infection The global pandemic of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2 or 2019-nCoV) has prompted multiple clinical trials to jumpstart search for anti-SARS-CoV-2 therapies from existing drugs, including those with reported in vitro efficacies as well as those ones that are not known to inhibit SARS-CoV-2, such as ritonavir/lopinavir and favilavir. Here we report that after screening 19 antiviral drugs that are either in clinical trials or with proposed activity against SARS-CoV-2, remdesivir was the most effective. Chloroquine only effectively protected virus-induced cytopathic effect at around 30 µM with a therapeutic index of 1.5. Our findings also suggest that velpatasvir, ledipasvir, ritonavir, litonavir, lopinavir, favilavir, sofosbuvir, danoprevir, and pocapavir do not have direct antiviral effect.

positive: The journey of remdesivir: from Ebola to COVID-19 Countries around the world are currently fighting the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). SARS-CoV-2 is a betacoronavirus, belonging to the same genus as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)-CoV. Currently, there are no proven antiviral therapies for COVID-19. Numerous clinical trials have been initiated to identify an effective treatment. One leading candidate is remdesivir (GS-5734), a broad-spectrum antiviral that was initially developed for the treatment of Ebola virus (EBOV). Although remdesivir performed well in preclinical studies, it did not meet efficacy endpoints in a randomized trial conducted during an Ebola outbreak. Remdesivir holds promise for treating COVID-19 based on in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, uncontrolled clinical reports, and limited data from randomized trials. Overall, current data are insufficient to judge the efficacy of remdesivir for COVID-19, and the results of additional randomized studies are eagerly anticipated. In this narrative review, we provide an overview of Ebola and coronavirus outbreaks. We then summarize preclinical and clinical studies of remdesivir for Ebola and COVID-19.

positive: Novel Stem Cells and Nucleic Acid-Based Vaccine Trials Against Viral Outbreak: A Systematic Evaluation During COVID-2019 Pandemic The current Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak, the cause of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), has influenced health globally. So far, there are no established management options and prophylaxis for those who have been exposed to SARS-CoV-2, and those who develop COVID-19. Documented scientific evidences in similar viral outbreaks in past suggested few therapy regimens. These rather have not shown promising results in management of current pandemic. So, in the current review, we are exploring novel treatment strategies and therapies that are being explored and are in clinical and preclinical stages of research. To explore more about the same, we directed our search towards stem cell based, DNA based, or RNA based vaccines against COVID-19 under development by various universities, institutes or pharmaceutical companies. The current scientific literature and database search were performed by exploring various Trials registry (NIH: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ and https://www.coronavirus.gov) and Chinese clinical trial registry http://www.chictr.org.cn/) and for preclinical trials various University, Institutions, Pharmaceutical companies websites and news bulletins along with google search were checked routinely from 3rd March 2020 to 16 May 2020. The term “Stem Cell therapy and COVID-19”, “Mesenchymal stem cell and corona 2019 virus”, “DNA Vaccines and COVID-19, RNA Vaccines and COVID-19” and “Cell-based therapy with SARS-CoV-2, University/Institutions and COVID-19 research” were used. The vaccine trials (Stem Cells/DNA/RNA) which were cancelled were not included in this review. Similarly, few others like repurposing of drugs, Nano Vaccines, other miscellaneous trials of Herbs, Music therapy etc., were also excluded. In the present review, we have included the various novel therapies like stem cell therapy, DNA or RNA vaccines which are under development and if proven successful may have a lasting impact on the health industry.

positive: Should Clinicians Use Chloroquine or Hydroxychloroquine Alone or in Combination With Azithromycin for the Prophylaxis or Treatment of COVID-19? Living Practice Points From the American College of Physicians (Version 1)

positive: Efficacy and safety of current therapeutic options for COVID-19 - lessons to be learnt from SARS and MERS epidemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis The rapidly progressing of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become a global concern. This meta-analysis aimed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of current option of therapies for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS) besides COVID-19, in an attempt to identify promising therapy for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infected patients. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), and WANFANG DATA for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective cohort, and retrospective cohort studies that evaluated therapies (hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir-based therapy, and ribavirin-based therapy, etc.) for SARS, MERS, and COVID-19. The primary outcomes were mortality, virological eradication and clinical improvement, and secondary outcomes were improvement of symptoms and chest radiography results, incidence of acute respiratory disease syndrome (ARDS), utilization of mechanical ventilation, and adverse events (AEs). Summary relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models, and the quality of evidence was appraised using GRADEpro. Eighteen articles (5 RCTs, 2 prospective cohort studies, and 11 retrospective cohort studies) involving 4,941 patients were included. Compared with control treatment, anti-coronary virus interventions significantly reduced mortality (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44-0.96; I2 = 81.3%), remarkably ameliorate clinical improvement (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.05-2.19) and radiographical improvement (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.11-2.36, I2 = 11.0 %), without manifesting clear effect on virological eradication, incidence of ARDS, intubation, and AEs. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that the combination of ribavirin and corticosteroids remarkably decreased mortality (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.27-0.68). The lopinavir/ritonavir-based combination showed superior virological eradication and radiographical improvement with reduced rate of ARDS. Likewise, hydroxychloroquine improved radiographical result. For safety, ribavirin could induce more bradycardia, anemia and transaminitis. Meanwhile, hydroxychloroquine could increase AEs rate especially diarrhea. Overall, the quality of evidence on most outcomes were very low. In conclusion, although we could not draw a clear conclusion for the recommendation of potential therapies for COVID-19 considering the very low quality of evidence and wide heterogeneity of interventions and indications, our results may help clinicians to comprehensively understand the advantages and drawbacks of each anti-coronavirus agents on efficacy and safety profiles. Lopinavir/ritonavir combinations might observe better virological eradication capability than other anti-coronavirus agents. Conversely, ribavirin might cause more safety concerns especially bradycardia. Thus, large RCTs objectively assessing the efficacy of antiviral therapies for SARS-CoV-2 infections should be conducted with high priority.

positive: Efficacy of remdesivir versus placebo for the treatment of COVID-19: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Background: In spite of the global containment on prevention efforts, the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is continuing to rise, with 1.1 million confirmed cases and 60,124 deaths recorded worldwide since 04 April 2020. The outbreak has a significant threat to international health and economy. At present, there is no approved vaccine or treatment for the disease, while efforts are underway. Remdesivir, a nucleotide-analogue antiviral drug developed for Ebola, is determined to prevent and stop infections with COVID-19, while results are yet controversial. Here, we aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare the effectiveness of remdesivir and placebo in patients with COVID-19. Method and analysis: We will search MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google scholar databases without restriction in year of publication. We will include randomized controlled trials that assessed the effectiveness of remdesivir versus placebo for patients confirmed with COVID-19. We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA 2015) guidelines for the design and reporting of the results. The primary endpoint will be time to clinical recovery. The secondary endpoints will be all cause mortality, discharged date, frequency of respiratory progression, and treatment-emergent adverse events. Two independent authors will perform study selection, data extraction, and methodology quality assessment. RevMan 5.3 software will be used for statistical analysis. Random/fixed effect model will be carried out to calculate mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratio for dichotomous outcomes between remdesivir and placebo. Ethics and dissemination: This study does not require ethical approval, because no participants data will be involved in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The findings of this study will be published in reputable and peer-reviewed journal. Registration: This review protocol is submitted in PROSPERO database for registration and we will include the registration number in the revised version of the manuscript. Keywords: 2019 novel coronavirus, 2019-nCoV, Coronavirus diseases 2019, COVID-19, SARS-cov-2, Remdesivir, Randomized Controlled Trials. Systematic review, Meta-analysis, protocol

positive: Repurposed prophylaxis strategies for COVID-19: a systematic review Introduction Efficient therapeutic strategies are needed to counter the COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS- CoV-2 virus. In a context where specific vaccines are not yet available, the containment of the pandemic would be facilitated with efficient prophylaxis. Methods We screened several clinical trials repositories and platforms in search of the prophylactic strategies that are investigated against COVID-19 in late April 2020. Results Up to April 27, 2020, we found 68 clinical trials targeting medical workers (n=43, 63%), patients relatives (n=16, 24%) or individuals at risk of severe COVID-19 (n=5, 7%). (Hydroxy)chloroquine was the most frequently evaluated treatment (n=46, 68%), before BCG vaccine (n=5, 7%). Sixty-one (90%) clinical trials were randomized with a median of planned inclusions of 600 (IQR 255-1515). Conclusion The investigated prophylaxis strategies cover both pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis and study numerous immune enhancers and antivirals, although most research efforts are focused on (hydroxy)chloroquine.

positive: Quantifying treatment effects of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin for COVID-19: a secondary analysis of an open label non-randomized clinical trial (Gautret et al, 2020) Human infections with a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) were first identified via syndromic surveillance in December of 2019 in Wuhan China. Since identification, infections (coronavirus disease-2019; COVID-19) caused by this novel pathogen have spread globally, with more than 250,000 confirmed cases as of March 21, 2020. An open-label clinical trial has just concluded, suggesting improved resolution of viremia with use of two existing therapies: hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as monotherapy, and in combination with azithromycin (HCQ-AZ). The results of this important trial have major implications for global policy in the rapid scale-up and response to this pandemic. The authors present results with p-values for differences in proportions between the study arms, but their analysis is not able to provide effect size estimates. To address this gap, more modern analytical methods including survival models, have been applied to these data, and show modest to no impact of HCQ treatment, with more significant effects from the HCQ-AZ combination, potentially suggesting a role for co-infections in COVID-19 pathogenesis. The trial of Gautret and colleagues, with consideration of the effect sizes, and p-values from multiple models, does not provide sufficient evidence to support wide-scale rollout of HCQ monotherapy for the treatment of COVID-19; larger randomized studies should be considered. The trial of Gautret and colleagues, with consideration of the effect sizes, and p-values from multiple models, does not provide sufficient evidence to support wide-scale rollout of HCQ monotherapy for the treatment of COVID-19; larger randomized studies should be considered. These data also suggest further randomized-controlled studies of HCQ-AZ combination therapy should be undertaken.

positive: COVID-19 pandemic: an overview of epidemiology, parthenogenesis, diagnostics and potential vaccines and therapeutics At the time of writing this review, severe acute respiratory coronavirus syndrome-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has infected more than 2,355,853 patients and resulted in more than 164,656 deaths worldwide (as of 20 April 2020). This review highlights the preventive measures, available clinical therapies and the potential of vaccine development against SARS-CoV-2 by taking into consideration the strong genetic similarities of the 2003 epidemic SARS-CoV. Recent studies are investigating the repurposing of US FDA-approved drugs as there is no available vaccine yet with many attempts under clinical evaluation. Several antivirals, antimalarials and immunomodulators that have shown activity against SARS-CoV and Middle East coronavirus respiratory syndromes are being evaluated. In particular, hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, favipiravir, arbidol, tocilizumab and bevacizumab have shown promising results. The main aim of this review is to provide an overview of this pandemic and where we currently stand.

positive: Analysis of therapeutic targets for SARS-CoV-2 and discovery of potential drugs by computational methods SARS-CoV-2 has caused tens of thousands of infections and more than one thousand deaths. There are currently no registered therapies for treating coronavirus infections. Because of time consuming process of new drug development, drug repositioning may be the only solution to the epidemic of sudden infectious diseases. We systematically analyzed all the proteins encoded by SARS-CoV-2 genes, compared them with proteins from other coronaviruses, predicted their structures, and built 19 structures that could be done by homology modeling. By performing target-based virtual ligand screening, a total of 21 targets (including two human targets) were screened against compound libraries including ZINC drug database and our own database of natural products. Structure and screening results of important targets such as 3-chymotrypsin-like protease (3CLpro), Spike, RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp), and papain like protease (PLpro) were discussed in detail. In addition, a database of 78 commonly used anti-viral drugs including those currently on the market and undergoing clinical trials for SARS-CoV-2 was constructed. Possible targets of these compounds and potential drugs acting on a certain target were predicted. This study will provide new lead compounds and targets for further in vitro and in vivo studies of SARS-CoV-2, new insights for those drugs currently ongoing clinical studies, and also possible new strategies for drug repositioning to treat SARS-CoV-2 infections.

positive: COVID-19: Melatonin as a potential adjuvant treatment Abstract This article summarizes the likely benefits of melatonin in the attenuation of COVID-19 based on its putative pathogenesis. The recent outbreak of COVID-19 has become a pandemic with tens of thousands of infected patients. Based on clinical features, pathology, the pathogenesis of acute respiratory disorder induced by either highly homogenous coronaviruses or other pathogens, the evidence suggests that excessive inflammation, oxidation, and an exaggerated immune response very likely contribute to COVID-19 pathology. This leads to a cytokine storm and subsequent progression to acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and often death. Melatonin, a well-known anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidative molecule, is protective against ALI/ARDS caused by viral and other pathogens. Melatonin is effective in critical care patients by reducing vessel permeability, anxiety, sedation use, and improving sleeping quality, which might also be beneficial for better clinical outcomes for COVID-19 patients. Notably, melatonin has a high safety profile. There is significant data showing that melatonin limits virus-related diseases and would also likely be beneficial in COVID-19 patients. Additional experiments and clinical studies are required to confirm this speculation.

positive: COVID-19: towards controlling of a pandemic

positive: Remdesivir for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 causing COVID-19: An evaluation of the evidence Abstract The novel coronavirus infection that initially found at the end of 2019 has attracted great attention. So far, the number of infectious cases has increased globally to more than 100 thousand and the outbreak has been defined as a pandemic situation, but there are still no “specific drug” available. Relevant reports have pointed out the novel coronavirus has 80% homology with SARS. In the difficulty where new synthesized drug cannot be applied immediately to patients, “conventional drug in new use” becomes a feasible solution. The first medication experience of the recovered patients in the US has led remdesivir to be the “specific drug”. China has also taken immediate action to put remdesivir into clinical trials with the purpose of applying it into clinical therapeutics for Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). We started from the structure, immunogenicity, and pathogenesis of coronavirus infections of the novel coronavirus. Further, we analyzed the pharmacological actions and previous trials of remdesivir to identify the feasibility of conducting experiments on COVID-19.

positive: Perspectives on monoclonal antibody therapy as potential therapeutic intervention for Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). Last decade witnessed the outbreak of many life-threatening human pathogens including Nipah, Ebola, Chikungunya, Zika, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), Severe Acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and more recently novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV or SARS-CoV-2). The disease condition associated with novel coronavirus, referred to as Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The emergence of novel coronavirus in 2019 in Wuhan, China marked the third highly pathogenic coronavirus infecting humans in the 21st century. The continuing emergence of coronaviruses at regular intervals poses a significant threat to human health and economy. Ironically, even after a decade of research on coronavirus, still there are no licensed vaccines or therapeutic agents to treat coronavirus infection which highlights an urgent need to develop effective vaccines or post-exposure prophylaxis to prevent future epidemics. Several clinical, genetic and epidemiological features of COVID-19 resemble SARS-CoV infection. Hence, the research advancements on SARS-CoV treatment might help scientific community in quick understanding of this virus pathogenesis and develop effective therapeutic/prophylactic agents to treat and prevent this infection. Monoclonal antibodies represent the major class of biotherapeutics for passive immunotherapy to fight against viral infection. The therapeutic potential of monoclonal antibodies has been well recognized in the treatment of many diseases. Here, we summarize the potential monoclonal antibody based therapeutic intervention for COVID-19 by considering the existing knowledge on the neutralizing monoclonal antibodies against similar coronaviruses SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. Further research on COVID-19 pathogenesis could identify appropriate therapeutic targets to develop specific anti-virals against this newly emerging pathogen.

positive: Studying the pathophysiology of coronavirus disease 2019 - a protocol for the Berlin prospective COVID-19 patient cohort (Pa- COVID-19) Purpose Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread worldwide causing a global health emergency. Pa-COVID-19 aims to provide comprehensive data on clinical course, pathophysiology, immunology and outcome of COVID-19, in order to identify prognostic biomarkers, clinical scores, and therapeutic targets for improved clinical management and preventive interventions. Methods Pa-COVID-19 is a prospective observational cohort study of patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection treated at Charite - Universitaetsmedizin Berlin. We collect data on epidemiology, demography, medical history, symptoms, clinical course, pathogen testing and treatment. Systematic, serial blood sampling will allow deep molecular and immunological phenotyping, transcriptomic profiling, and comprehensive biobanking. Longitudinal data and sample collection during hospitalization will be supplemented by long-term follow-up. Results Outcome measures include the WHO clinical ordinal scale on day 15 and clinical, functional and health-related quality of life assessments at discharge and during follow-up. We developed a scalable dataset to (i) suit national standards of care (ii) facilitate comprehensive data collection in medical care facilities with varying resources and (iii) allow for rapid implementation of interventional trials based on the standardized study design and data collection. We propose this scalable protocol as blueprint for harmonized data collection and deep phenotyping in COVID-19 in Germany. Conclusion We established a basic platform for harmonized, scalable data collection, pathophysiological analysis, and deep phenotyping of COVID-19, which enables rapid generation of evidence for improved medical care and identification of candidate therapeutic and preventive strategies. The electronic database accredited for interventional trials allows fast trial implementation for candidate therapeutic agents.

positive: A Call for Pediatric COVID-19 Clinical Trials.

positive: Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine for post-exposure prophylaxis to prevent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among adults exposed to coronavirus disease (COVID-19): a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: Primary Objective • To test the efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) (400 mg orally daily for 3 days then 200 mg orally daily for an additional 11 days, to complete 14 days) to prevent incident SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared to ascorbic acid among contacts of persons with SARS-CoV-2 infection Secondary objectives • To determine the safety and tolerability of HCQ as SARS-CoV-2 Post-exposure Prophylaxis (PEP) in adults • To test the efficacy of HCQ (400 mg orally daily for 3 days then 200 mg orally daily for an additional 11 days, to complete 14 days) to prevent incident SARS-CoV-2 infection 2 weeks after completing therapy, compared to ascorbic acid among contacts of persons with SARS-CoV-2 infection • To test the efficacy of HCQ to shorten the duration of SARS-CoV-2 shedding among those with SARS-CoV-2 infection in the HCQ PEP group • To test the efficacy of HCQ to prevent incident COVID-19 TRIAL DESIGN: This is a randomized, multi-center, placebo-equivalent (ascorbic acid) controlled, blinded study of HCQ PEP for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection in adults exposed to the virus. PARTICIPANTS: This study will enroll up to 2000 asymptomatic adults 18 to 80 years of age (inclusive) at baseline who are close contacts of persons with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 or clinically suspected COVID-19 and a pending SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. This multisite trial will be conducted at seven sites in Seattle (UW), Los Angeles (UCLA), New Orleans (Tulane), Baltimore (UMB), New York City (NYU), Syracuse (SUNY-Upstate), and Boston (BMC). Inclusion criteria 1. Men or women 18 to 80 years of age inclusive, at the time of signing the informed consent. 2. Willing and able to provide informed consent. 3. Had a close contact of a person (index) with known PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection or index who is currently being assessed for COVID-19. a. Household contact (i.e., residing with the index case in the 14 days prior to index diagnosis or prolonged exposure within a residence/vehicle/enclosed space without maintaining social distance). b. Medical staff, first responders, or other care persons who cared for the index case without personal protection (mask and gloves): 4. Less than 4 days since last exposure (close contact with a person with SARS-CoV-2 infection) to the index case; 5. Access to device and internet for Telehealth visits; 6. Not planning to take HCQ in addition to the study medication. Exclusion criteria 1. Known hypersensitivity to HCQ or other 4-aminoquinoline compounds. 2. Currently hospitalized. 3. Symptomatic with subjective fever, cough, or shortness of breath. 4. Current medications exclude concomitant use of HCQ. 5. Concomitant use of other anti-malarial treatment or chemoprophylaxis, including chloroquine, mefloquine, artemether, or lumefantrine. 6. History of retinopathy of any etiology. 7. Psoriasis. 8. Porphyria. 9. Known bone marrow disorders with significant neutropenia (polymorphonuclear leukocytes <1500) or thrombocytopenia (<100 K). 10. Concomitant use of digoxin, cyclosporin, cimetidine, amiodarone, or tamoxifen. 11. Known moderate or severe liver disease. 12. Known long QT syndrome. 13. Severe renal impairment. 14. Use of any investigational or non-registered drug or vaccine within 30 days preceding the first dose of the study drugs or planned use during the study period. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Households will be randomized 1:1 (at the level of household), with close contact participants receiving one of the following therapies: •HCQ 400 mg orally daily for 3 days then 200 mg orally daily for an additional 11 days •Placebo-like control (ascorbic acid) 500 mg orally daily for 3 days then 250 mg orally daily for 11 days MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome of the study is the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection through day 14 among participants who are SARS-CoV-2 negative at baseline by randomization group. RANDOMISATION: Participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to HCQ or ascorbic acid at the level of the household (all eligible participants in 1 household will receive the same intervention). The randomization code and resulting allocation list will be generated and maintained by the Study Statistician. The list will be blocked and stratified by site and contact type (household versus healthcare worker). BLINDING (MASKING): This is a blinded study. HCQ and ascorbic acid will appear similar, and taste will be partially masked as HCQ can be bitter and ascorbic acid will be sour. The participants will be blinded to their randomization group once assigned. Study team members, apart from the Study Pharmacist and the unblinded statistical staff, will be blinded. Laboratory staff are blinded to the group allocation. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The sample size for the study is N=2 000 participants randomized 1:1 to either HCZ (n=1 000) and ascorbic acid (n=1 000). TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version: 1.2 05 April 2020 Recruitment is ongoing, started March 31 and anticipated end date is September 30, 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, Protocol Registry Number: NCT04328961 Date of registration: April 1, 2020, retrospectively registered FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Recent Advances in the Vaccine Development Against Middle East Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) is a deadly viral respiratory disease caused by MERS-coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection. To date, there is no specific treatment proven effective against this viral disease. In addition, no vaccine has been licensed to prevent MERS-CoV infection thus far. Therefore, our current review focuses on the most recent studies in search of an effective MERS vaccine. Overall, vaccine candidates against MERS-CoV are mainly based upon the viral spike (S) protein, due to its vital role in the viral infectivity, although several studies focused on other viral proteins such as the nucleocapsid (N) protein, envelope (E) protein, and non-structural protein 16 (NSP16) have also been reported. In general, the potential vaccine candidates can be classified into six types: viral vector-based vaccine, DNA vaccine, subunit vaccine, nanoparticle-based vaccine, inactivated-whole virus vaccine and live-attenuated vaccine, which are discussed in detail. Besides, the immune responses and potential antibody dependent enhancement of MERS-CoV infection are extensively reviewed. In addition, animal models used to study MERS-CoV and evaluate the vaccine candidates are discussed intensively.

positive: Statistical Issues and Lessons Learned From COVID-19 Clinical Trials With Lopinavir-Ritonavir and Remdesivir BACKGROUND: Recently, three randomized clinical trials on coronavirus disease (COVID-19) treatments were completed: one for lopinavir-ritonavir and two for remdesivir. One trial reported that remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery, while the other two showed no benefit of the treatment under investigation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to, from a statistical perspective, identify several key issues in the design and analysis of three COVID-19 trials and reanalyze the data from the cumulative incidence curves in the three trials using more appropriate statistical methods. METHODS: The lopinavir-ritonavir trial enrolled 39 additional patients due to insignificant results after the sample size reached the planned number, which led to inflation of the type I error rate. The remdesivir trial of Wang et al failed to reach the planned sample size due to a lack of eligible patients, and the bootstrap method was used to predict the quantity of clinical interest conditionally and unconditionally if the trial had continued to reach the originally planned sample size. Moreover, we used a terminal (or cure) rate model and a model-free metric known as the restricted mean survival time or the restricted mean time to improvement (RMTI) to analyze the reconstructed data. The remdesivir trial of Beigel et al reported the median recovery time of the remdesivir and placebo groups, and the rate ratio for recovery, while both quantities depend on a particular time point representing local information. We use the restricted mean time to recovery (RMTR) as a global and robust measure for efficacy. RESULTS: For the lopinavir-ritonavir trial, with the increase of sample size from 160 to 199, the type I error rate was inflated from 0.05 to 0.071. The difference of RMTIs between the two groups evaluated at day 28 was –1.67 days (95% CI –3.62 to 0.28; P=.09) in favor of lopinavir-ritonavir but not statistically significant. For the remdesivir trial of Wang et al, the difference of RMTIs at day 28 was –0.89 days (95% CI –2.84 to 1.06; P=.37). The planned sample size was 453, yet only 236 patients were enrolled. The conditional prediction shows that the hazard ratio estimates would reach statistical significance if the target sample size had been maintained. For the remdesivir trial of Beigel et al, the difference of RMTRs between the remdesivir and placebo groups at day 30 was –2.7 days (95% CI –4.0 to –1.2; P<.001), confirming the superiority of remdesivir. The difference in the recovery time at the 25th percentile (95% CI –3 to 0; P=.65) was insignificant, while the differences became more statistically significant at larger percentiles. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the statistical issues and lessons learned from the recent three clinical trials on COVID-19 treatments, we suggest more appropriate approaches for the design and analysis of ongoing and future COVID-19 trials.

positive: Deubiquitinating Enzymes in Coronaviruses and Possible Therapeutic Opportunities for COVID-19 Following the outbreak of novel severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-coronavirus (CoV)2, the majority of nations are struggling with countermeasures to fight infection, prevent spread and improve patient survival. Considering that the pandemic is a recent event, no large clinical trials have been possible and since coronavirus specific drug are not yet available, there is no strong consensus on how to treat the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated viral pneumonia. Coronaviruses code for an important multifunctional enzyme named papain-like protease (PLP), that has many roles in pathogenesis. First, PLP is one of the two viral cysteine proteases, along with 3-chymotripsin-like protease, that is responsible for the production of the replicase proteins required for viral replication. Second, its intrinsic deubiquitinating and deISGylating activities serve to antagonize the host’s immune response that would otherwise hinder infection. Both deubiquitinating and deISGylating functions involve the removal of the small regulatory polypeptides, ubiquitin and ISG15, respectively, from target proteins. Ubiquitin modifications can regulate the innate immune response by affecting regulatory proteins, either by altering their stability via the ubiquitin proteasome pathway or by directly regulating their activity. ISG15 is a ubiquitin-like modifier with pleiotropic effects, typically expressed during the host cell immune response. PLP inhibitors have been evaluated during past coronavirus epidemics, and have showed promising results as an antiviral therapy in vitro. In this review, we recapitulate the roles of PLPs in coronavirus infections, report a list of PLP inhibitors and suggest possible therapeutic strategies for COVID-19 treatment, using both clinical and preclinical drugs.

positive: Traditional Chinese herbal medicine for treating novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis BACKGROUND: A new type of coronavirus, novel coronavirus (COVID-19), is causing an increasing number of cases of pneumonia and was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization on 30 January 2020. The virus first appeared in Wuhan, China, in late December 2019, and traditional Chinese herbal medicine is being used for its treatment. This systematic review and meta-analysis will assess studies of the effects of traditional Chinese herbal medicine in COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: We will search electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), and Wanfang database using keywords related to COVID-19 and traditional Chinese herbal medicine. Reference lists of relevant trials and reviews will be searched. We will manually search gray literature, such as conference proceedings and academic degree dissertations, and trial registries. Two independent reviewers will screen studies (XL and DZ), extract data (YL and LG), and evaluate risk of bias (YL and DZ). Data analysis will be conducted using the Review Manager software (version 5.3.5) and R software (version 3.6.1). Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed using a standard chi-square test with a significance level of P < 0.10. Biases associated with study size (e.g., publication bias) will be investigated using funnel plots, Egger’s test and Begg’s test, and Trim and Fill analysis. DISCUSSION: This study will provide a high-quality synthesis of the effects of traditional Chinese herbal medicine for COVID-19. The use of traditional Chinese herbal medicine for treatment or prevention of these novel viral infections affecting the pneumonia will be investigated. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020168004

positive: Antiviral therapy in management of COVID-19: a systematic review on current evidence. Background The purpose of the current systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy of antiviral therapies in treatment of COVID-19. In addition, clinical trials on the efficacy of antiviral therapies in the management of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (SARS-Cov) or Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) have also been reviewed, in order to identify potential treatment options for COVID-19. Method An extensive search was performed in Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and CENTRAL databases until the end of March 15, 2020. Two independent researchers performed the screening, and finally the related studies were included. Results Only one clinical trial on the efficacy of antiviral therapy in management of COVID-19 was found. The results depicted that adding Lopinavir-Ritonavir to the standard treatment regimen of patients with severe COVID-19 has no benefits. Moreover, 21 case-series and case-report studies reported the prescription of antiviral agents in COVID-19, none of which can be used to determine the efficacy of antiviral therapies in confronting COVID-19. In addition, no clinical trials were found to be performed on the efficacy of antiviral agents in the management of SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. Conclusion The current evidence impede researchers from proposing an appropriate antiviral therapy against COVID-19, making the current situation a serious concern for international organizations such as World Health Organization (WHO). In the time of the current pandemic and future epidemics, organizations such as WHO should pursue more proactive actions and plan well-designed clinical trials so that their results can be used in managing future epidemics.

positive: A Rapid Systematic Review of Clinical Trials Utilizing Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine as a Treatment for COVID-19 OBJECTIVES: The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 has presented clinicians with a difficult therapeutic dilemma. With supportive care as the current mainstay of treatment, the fatality rate of COVID-19 is 6.9%. There are currently several trials assessing the efficacy of different antivirals as treatment. Of these, chloroquine (CQ) and its derivative hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have garnered the most attention. METHODS: In this study, the literature currently available on CQ and HCQ as treatment of COVID-19 was surveyed using EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, MedRxiv, and one clinical trial registry. Upon gathering published and preprint trials, risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. RESULTS: There are currently seven completed clinical trials and 29 registered clinical trials focusing on HCQ or CQ as a therapeutic avenue for COVID-19. Of these, five of seven trials have shown favorable outcomes for patients using CQ or HCQ and two of seven have shown no change compared to control. However, all seven trials carried varying degrees of bias and poor study design. CONCLUSION: There are currently not enough data available to support the routine use of HCQ and CQ as therapies for COVID-19. Pending further results from more extensive studies with more stringent study parameters, clinicians should defer from routine use of HCQ and CQ. There are several clinical trials currently under way with results expected soon.

positive: Comprehensive overview of COVID-19 clinical trials Here, we present an overview of the clinical trials that are currently being conducted or have concluded to date on COVID-19 globally. A comprehensive search was conducted to present 16 trial registries from around the world. Collectively, there are 1,528 trials reported for COVID-19 to date. Out of them, 50 studies included paediatric age group from day 0 to less than or equal to 18 years of age. A few 18 studies involve only females and 20 only males. There are 2 trials currently underway in Bangladesh, 4 in Pakistan and 13 in India. Overall, 940 trials are related to medicines and/or interventions. They include standard of care for any viral illness, antivirals, anti-inflammatory and immune altering medications. Two out of 10 vaccine trials are novel vaccines. It is knowledgeable and resourceful to reach out to the concerned sponsor if a physician thinks his patient can benefit from the trials in the region.

positive: Umbilical cord blood therapy to prevent progression of COVID-19 related pneumonia: a structured summary of a study protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: Objective: To undertake a pilot, feasibility RCT of umbilical cord blood derived cell therapy for treatment of adult patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 virus related moderate-to-severe pneumonia to prevent progression to severe ARDS. Hypothesis: Expanded cord blood derived cell therapy will be feasible, well tolerated and show potential efficacy in the treatment of acute COVID-19 related moderate to severe pneumonia in adult patients because of their powerful anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties. TRIAL DESIGN: Pilot, parallel design randomised controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: The trial will recruit 24 hospitalised patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and pneumonia from July to December 2020 at Monash Medical Centre in Melbourne, Australia. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention: Intravenous injection of expanded umbilical cord blood cells at a dose of 5 million cells/kg (maximum dose - 500 million cells). Cell infusion will occur over 30-60 minutes through a peripheral intravenous cannula. Standard supportive care will continue as needed. Comparator: Standard supportive care. MAIN OUTCOMES: Safety and tolerability of cell administration within first 24 hours of administration; clinical improvement on a seven-category clinical improvement ordinal scale. RANDOMISATION: Randomisation will be done using computer generated allocation to intervention/ control groups in a 1:1 ratio (in blocks of 6) using sealed opaque envelopes. BLINDING (MASKING): This will be an unblinded study, given that it is the first study using expanded cord blood cells in COVID-19 patients. There will be no placebo infusion. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): Twelve participants in each group. Total n=24. TRIAL STATUS: CBC-19 protocol v2, dated 23(rd) April 2020. Recruitment has not started yet. Estimated recruitment timeline is between 1st July – 31st December 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12620000478910, registered 16th April 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Medication for COVID-19-an Overview of Approaches Currently Under Study BACKGROUND: With the worldwide spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection, it is becoming increasingly urgent to develop a vaccine to prevent COVID-19, as well as effective drugs to treat it. METHODS: This article is based on a selective literature search in PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov, followed by an assessment of the ongoing clinical trials that were revealed by the search. RESULTS: A number of substances have been found to prevent the reproduction of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. These include virustatic agents that have already been approved for the treatment of other types of viral infection, as well as drugs that are currently used for entirely different purposes. High in vitro activity has been found for the nucleotide analogue remdesivir, for the antimalarial drug chloroquine, and for nitazoxanide, a drug used to treat protozoan infections. Because the virus enters human cells by way of the membrane-associated angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), keeping the virus from docking to this receptor is a conceivable treatment approach. Transmembrane protease serine 2 (TMPRSS2) plays a role in the fusion of the virus with cells; inhibitors of this enzyme are known as well. The potential therapeutic efficacy and tolerability of these and other active substances remain to be investigated in clinical trials. At present, more than 80 trials on COVID-10 have already been registered with Clinical- Trials.gov. Some initial findings should already be available in late April 2020. CONCLUSION: Clinical trials are now indispensable in order to determine the true clinical benefits and risks of the substances that have been found to be active against SARSCoV- 2 in vitro. There is not yet any recommendation for the therapeutic use of any particular agent beyond standard supportive treatment.

positive: A minimal common outcome measure set for COVID-19 clinical research Clinical research is necessary for an effective response to an emerging infectious disease outbreak. However, research efforts are often hastily organised and done using various research tools, with the result that pooling data across studies is challenging. In response to the needs of the rapidly evolving COVID-19 outbreak, the Clinical Characterisation and Management Working Group of the WHO Research and Development Blueprint programme, the International Forum for Acute Care Trialists, and the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium have developed a minimum set of common outcome measures for studies of COVID-19. This set includes three elements: a measure of viral burden (quantitative PCR or cycle threshold), a measure of patient survival (mortality at hospital discharge or at 60 days), and a measure of patient progression through the health-care system by use of the WHO Clinical Progression Scale, which reflects patient trajectory and resource use over the course of clinical illness. We urge investigators to include these key data elements in ongoing and future studies to expedite the pooling of data during this immediate threat, and to hone a tool for future needs.

positive: A Comprehensive Analysis of Clinical Trials in the COVID-19 Pandemic Era. Background and objective: Despite medical advances, we are facing the unprecedented disaster of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic without available treatments and effective vaccines. As the COVID-19 pandemic has approached its culmination, desperate efforts have been made to seek proper treatments and response strategies, and the number of clinical trials has been rapidly increasing. In this time of the pandemic, it is believed that learning lessons from it would be meaningful in preparing for future pandemics. Thus, this study aims at providing a comprehensive landscape of COVID-19 related clinical trials based on the ClinicalTrials.gov database. Materials and methods: Up to 30 March 2020, we identified a total of 147 eligible clinical trials and reviewed the overview of the studies. Results: Until then, the most clinical trials were set up in China. Treatment approaches are the most frequent purpose of the registered studies. Chloroquine, interferon, and antiviral agents such as remdesivir, lopinavir, and ritonavir are agents under investigation in these trials. Conclusions: In this study, we introduced the promising therapeutic options that many researchers and clinicians are interested in, and to address the hidden issues behind clinical trials in this COVID-19 pandemic.

positive: Harmonizing heterogeneous endpoints in COVID-19 trials without loss of information - an essential step to facilitate decision making Background: Many trials are now underway to inform decision-makers on potential effects of treatments for COVID-19. To provide sufficient information for all involved decision-makers (clinicians, public health authorities, drug regulatory agencies) a multiplicity of endpoints must be considered. It is a challenge to generate detailed high quality evidence from data while ensuring fast availability and evaluation of the results. Methods: We reviewed all interventional COVID-19 trials on Remdesivir, Lopinavir/ritonavir and Hydroxychloroquine registered in the National Library of Medicine (NLM) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and summarized the endpoints used to assess treatment effects. We propose a multistate model that harmonizes heterogeneous endpoints and differing lengths of follow-up within and between trials. Results: There are currently, March 27, 2020, 23 registered interventional trials investigating the potential benefits of Remdesivir, Lopinavir/ritonavir and Hydroxychloroquine. The endpoints are highly heterogeneous. Follow-up for the primary endpoints ranges from four to 168 days. A detailed precisely defined endpoint has been proposed by the global network REMAP-CAP, which is specialized on community-acquired pneumonia. Their seven-category endpoint accounts for major clinical events informative for all decision-makers. Moreover, the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative is currently working on a core outcome set. We propose a multistate model that accommodates analysis of these recommended endpoints. The model allows for a detailed investigation of treatment effects for various endpoints over the course of time thereby harmonizing differing endpoints and lengths of follow-up. Conclusion: Multistate model analysis is a powerful tool to study clinically heterogeneous endpoints (mortality, discharge) as well as endpoints influencing hospital capacities (duration of hospitalization and ventilation) simultaneously over time. Our proposed model extracts all information available in the data and is - by harmonizing endpoints within and between trials - a step towards faster decision making. All ongoing clinical trials, especially those with severe cases, should accommodate primary analysis with a stacked probability plot of the major events mechanical ventilation, discharge alive and death.

positive: [Analysis on clinical study protocols of traditional Chinese medicine for coronavirus disease 2019]. To analyze the registered clinical trial protocols of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) for the prevention and treatment of coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19), in order to provide information for improving the quality of research design. The website of the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry(www.chictr.org.cn) and the American Clinical Trial Registry(clinicaltrials.gov) were searched to collect protocols of TCM for COVID-19. Documents were screened following the inclusion criteria, and data were extracted in regard to registration date, study objective, type of design, sponsor, patient, sample size, intervention, and evaluation index. Descriptive analysis was conducted. A total of 49 clinical trial protocols of TCM for COVID-19 were included. Primary sponsors were mainly hospitals or universities in places like Hubei, Beijing, Zhejiang and other regions. The implementation units are mainly in Hubei, Guangdong, Zhejiang, Henan and other regional hospitals. The types of study design were mainly experimental studies(40), including 30 randomized parallel controlled trials, 7 non-randomized controlled trials, 2 single arm trials and 1 consecutively recruited trial; besides, there were also 6 observational studies, 2 health service studies and 1 preventive study. The sample size reached a total of 30 562 cases, with a maximum of 20 000 for a single study and a minimum of 30. The 49 trials subjects included healthy people(3), isolation and observation cases(1), suspected cases(10),confirmed COVID-19 patients(31) and COVID-19 recovery patients(4). Of the 31 trials planned to include confirmed COVID-19 patients, 16 protocols no definite disease classification, 3 with a clear exclusion of severe subjects, 4 with common subjects, 2 with light, common or severe subjects, 1 with light and common subjects, 1 with common or severe subjects, 3 with severe subjects, and 1 with severe or critical subjects. The experimental interventions included Chinese patent medicine(Lianhua Qingwen Capsules/Granules, Huoxiang Zhengqi Dropping Pills/Oral Liquid, Babao Dan, Gubiao Jiedu Ling, Jinhao Jiere Granules, Compound Yu-xingcao Mixture, Jinye Baidu Granules, Shufeng Jiedu Capsuless, Shuanghuanglian Oral Liquid, Tanreqing Injection, Xuebijing Injection, Reduning Injection, Xiyanping Injection), Chinese medicinal decoction and taichi. The primary evaluation outcomes mainly included antipyretic time, clinical symptom relief, novel coronavirus nucleic acid turning to negative, conversion rate of severe cases and chest CT. There was a quick response of clinical research on the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 with TCM, with the current registered protocols covers the whole process of disease prevention, treatment and rehabilitation. However, issues need to be concerned, including unclear definition of patient's condition, unclear research objectives, unclear intervention process and inappropriate outcomes, etc. In addition, researchers should consider the actual difficulties and workload of doctors in epidemic response environment, and make effort to optimize the process and improve the operability of research protocols under the principle of medical ethics.

positive: Improving the efficacy of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine against SARS-CoV-2 may require Zinc additives - A better synergy for future COVID-19 clinical trials The recent outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is now officially declared as a pandemic by the World Health Organization. As of now, there is no known effective pharmaceutical agent against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. However, several precautionary measures have been prescribed to prevent further spread of the virus, which include avoidance of social gatherings, proper handwashing, frequently disinfecting of used items and surfaces and so on. More recent studies have highlighted the possibility of treating patients infected with the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus with chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, of which mechanism of action is not completely understood. We seek to draw the attention of the scientific community to the possibility of drastically reducing the effects of the virus on the affected patients and improving clinical trials outcome through the synergistic action of zinc and chloroquine in patients suffering from the coronavirus disease.

positive: Connecting BCG Vaccination and COVID-19: Additional Data The reasons for a wide variation in severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) across the affected countries of the world are not known. Two recent studies have suggested a link between the BCG vaccination policy and the morbidity and mortality due to COVID-19. In the present study we compared the impact of COVID-19 in terms of case fatality rates (CFR) between countries with high disease burden and those with BCG revaccination policies presuming that revaccination practices would have provided added protection to the population against severe COVID-19. We found a significant difference in the CFR between the two groups of countries. Our data further supports the view that universal BCG vaccination has a protective effect on the course of COVID-19 probably preventing progression to severe disease and death. Clinical trials of BCG vaccine are urgently needed to establish its beneficial role in COVID-19 as suggested by the epidemiological data, especially in countries without a universal BCG vaccination policy. Keywords: COVID-19, BCG vaccination, case fatality ratio, mortality, low resource countries

positive: Pharmacological Therapeutics Targeting RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase, Proteinase and Spike Protein: From Mechanistic Studies to Clinical Trials for COVID-19 An outbreak of novel coronavirus-related pneumonia COVID-19, that was identified in December 2019, has expanded rapidly, with cases now confirmed in more than 211 countries or areas. This constant transmission of a novel coronavirus and its ability to spread from human to human have prompted scientists to develop new approaches for treatment of COVID-19. A recent study has shown that remdesivir and chloroquine effectively inhibit the replication and infection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2, 2019-nCov) in vitro. In the United States, one case of COVID-19 was successfully treated with compassionate use of remdesivir in January of 2020. In addition, a clinically proven protease inhibitor, camostat mesylate, has been demonstrated to inhibit Calu-3 infection with SARS-CoV-2 and prevent SARS-2-spike protein (S protein)-mediated entry into primary human lung cells. Here, we systemically discuss the pharmacological therapeutics targeting RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp), proteinase and S protein for treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This review should shed light on the fundamental rationale behind inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 enzymes RdRp as new therapeutic approaches for management of patients with COVID-19. In addition, we will discuss the viability and challenges in targeting RdRp and proteinase, and application of natural product quinoline and its analog chloroquine for treatment of coronavirus infection. Finally, determining the structural-functional relationships of the S protein of SARS-CoV-2 will provide new insights into inhibition of interactions between S protein and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and enable us to develop novel therapeutic approaches for novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2.

positive: A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fit‐tested and non‐fit‐tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health care workers Please cite this paper as: MacIntyre et al. (2011) A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fit‐tested and non‐fit‐tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health care workers. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses DOI: 10.1111/j.1750‐2659.2010.00198.x. Background We compared the efficacy of medical masks, N95 respirators (fit tested and non fit tested), in health care workers (HCWs). Methods A cluster randomized clinical trial (RCT) of 1441 HCWs in 15 Beijing hospitals was performed during the 2008/2009 winter. Participants wore masks or respirators during the entire work shift for 4 weeks. Outcomes included clinical respiratory illness (CRI), influenza‐like illness (ILI), laboratory‐confirmed respiratory virus infection and influenza. A convenience no‐mask/respirator group of 481 health workers from nine hospitals was compared. Findings The rates of CRI (3·9% versus 6·7%), ILI (0·3% versus 0·6%), laboratory‐confirmed respiratory virus (1·4% versus 2·6%) and influenza (0·3% versus 1%) infection were consistently lower for the N95 group compared to medical masks. By intention‐to‐treat analysis, when P values were adjusted for clustering, non‐fit‐tested N95 respirators were significantly more protective than medical masks against CRI, but no other outcomes were significant. The rates of all outcomes were higher in the convenience no‐mask group compared to the intervention arms. There was no significant difference in outcomes between the N95 arms with and without fit testing. Rates of fit test failure were low. In a post hoc analysis adjusted for potential confounders, N95 masks and hospital level were significant, but medical masks, vaccination, handwashing and high‐risk procedures were not. Interpretation Rates of infection in the medical mask group were double that in the N95 group. A benefit of respirators is suggested but would need to be confirmed by a larger trial, as this study may have been underpowered. The finding on fit testing is specific to the type of respirator used in the study and cannot be generalized to other respirators. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ACTRN: ACTRN12609000257268 (http://www.anzctr.org.au).

positive: Data Monitoring for the Chinese Clinical Trials of Remdesivir in Treating Patients with COVID-19 During the Pandemic Crisis Two phase-III, double-blind, randomized clinical trials of remdesivir plus SOC (standard of care) versus placebo plus SOC have been conducted in Wuhan hospitals by Chinese investigators during the urgent COVID-19 epidemic [ClincalTrials.gov NCT04257656 and NCT04252664]. These trials have been highly anticipated worldwide. We expect investigators of the trials will soon report the clinical and laboratory findings from the medical perspective. This manuscript provides documentary style information on the process of monitoring key data and making recommendations to the sponsor and investigators based on analytical insights when dealing with the emergent situation from the statistical viewpoint. Having monitored data sequentially from 237 patients, we comment on the strength and weakness of the study design and suggest the treatment effect of remdesivir on severe COVID-19 cases. Our experience with using the Dynamic Data Monitoring (DDM) tool has demonstrated its efficiency and reliability in supporting DSMB’s instantaneous review of essential data during the emergent situation. DDM, when used properly by disciplined statisticians, has shown its capability of exploring the trial data flexibly and, in the meantime, protecting the trial’s scientific integrity.

positive: [A pilot study of hydroxychloroquine in treatment of patients with moderate COVID-19] OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the treatment of patients with moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 30 treatment-naïve patients with confirmed COVID-19 after informed consent at Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center. The patients were randomized 1ï¼1 to HCQ group and the control group. Patients in HCQ group were given HCQ 400 mg per day for 5 days plus conventional treatments, while those in the control group were given conventional treatment only. The primary endpoint was negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid in respiratory pharyngeal swab on days 7 after randomization. This study has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center and registered online (NCT04261517). RESULTS: One patient in HCQ group developed to severe during the treatment. On day 7, nucleic acid of throat swabs was negative in 13 (86.7%) cases in the HCQ group and 14 (93.3%) cases in the control group (P>0.05). The median duration from hospitalization to virus nucleic acid negative conservation was 4 (1,9) days in HCQ group, which is comparable to that in the control group [2 (1,4) days, Z=1.27, P>0.05]. The median time for body temperature normalization in HCQ group was 1 (0,2) day after hospitalization, which was also comparable to that in the control group [1 (0,3) day]. Radiological progression was shown on CT images in 5 cases (33.3%) of the HCQ group and 7 cases (46.7%) of the control group, and all patients showed improvement in follow-up examinations. Four cases (26.7%) of the HCQ group and 3 cases (20%) of the control group had transient diarrhea and abnormal liver function (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The prognosis of COVID-19 moderate patients is good. Larger sample size study are needed to investigate the effects of HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19. Subsequent research should determine better endpoint and fully consider the feasibility of experiments such as sample size.

positive: Remdesivir in adults with severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial Summary Background No specific antiviral drug has been proven effective for treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue prodrug, has inhibitory effects on pathogenic animal and human coronaviruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro, and inhibits Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, SARS-CoV-1, and SARS-CoV-2 replication in animal models. Methods We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial at ten hospitals in Hubei, China. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, with an interval from symptom onset to enrolment of 12 days or less, oxygen saturation of 94% or less on room air or a ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less, and radiologically confirmed pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg on days 2–10 in single daily infusions) or the same volume of placebo infusions for 10 days. Patients were permitted concomitant use of lopinavir–ritonavir, interferons, and corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement up to day 28, defined as the time (in days) from randomisation to the point of a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status (from 1=discharged to 6=death) or discharged alive from hospital, whichever came first. Primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety analysis was done in all patients who started their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04257656. Findings Between Feb 6, 2020, and March 12, 2020, 237 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (158 to remdesivir and 79 to placebo); one patient in the placebo group who withdrew after randomisation was not included in the ITT population. Remdesivir use was not associated with a difference in time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio 1·23 [95% CI 0·87–1·75]). Although not statistically significant, patients receiving remdesivir had a numerically faster time to clinical improvement than those receiving placebo among patients with symptom duration of 10 days or less (hazard ratio 1·52 [0·95–2·43]). Adverse events were reported in 102 (66%) of 155 remdesivir recipients versus 50 (64%) of 78 placebo recipients. Remdesivir was stopped early because of adverse events in 18 (12%) patients versus four (5%) patients who stopped placebo early. Interpretation In this study of adult patients admitted to hospital for severe COVID-19, remdesivir was not associated with statistically significant clinical benefits. However, the numerical reduction in time to clinical improvement in those treated earlier requires confirmation in larger studies. Funding Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Emergency Project of COVID-19, National Key Research and Development Program of China, the Beijing Science and Technology Project.

positive: Lectin-like Intestinal Defensin Inhibits 2019-nCoV Spike binding to ACE2 The burgeoning epidemic caused by novel coronavirus 2019 (2019-nCoV) is currently a global concern. Angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE2) is a receptor of 2019-nCoV spike 1 protein (S1) and mediates viral entry into host cells. Despite the abundance of ACE2 in small intestine, few digestive symptoms are observed in patients infected by 2019-nCoV. Herein, we investigated the interactions between ACE2 and human defensins (HDs) specifically secreted by intestinal Paneth cells. The lectin-like HD5, rather than HD6, bound ACE2 with a high affinity of 39.3 nM and weakened the subsequent recruitment of 2019-nCoV S1. The cloak of HD5 on the ligand-binding domain of ACE2 was confirmed by molecular dynamic simulation. A remarkable dose-dependent preventive effect of HD5 on 2019-nCoV S1 binding to intestinal epithelial cells was further evidenced by in vitro experiments. Our findings unmasked the innate defense function of lectin-like intestinal defensin against 2019-nCoV, which may provide new insights into the prevention and treatment of 2019-nCoV infection.

positive: In Silico Investigations on the Potential Inhibitors for COVID-19 Protease A novel strain of coronavirus, namely, COVID-19 has been identified in Wuhan city of China in December 2019. There are no specific therapies available and investigations regarding the treatment of the COVID-19 are still lacking. This prompted us to perform a preliminary in silico study on the COVID-19 protease with anti-malarial compounds in the search of potential inhibitor. We have calculated log P and log S values in addition to molecular docking and PASS predictions. Among the seven studied compounds, mepacrine appears as the potential inhibitor of the COVID-19 followed by chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine and phomarin. Therefore, these anti-malarial drugs may be potential drug candidate for the treatment of this novel coronavirus. A detailed analysis on these inhibitors is currently in progress and clinical studies are invited to investigate their potential medicinal use for the COVID-19.

positive: Mechanistic inferences from clinical reports of SARS-CoV-2 SARS-CoV-2 was identified as the causative pathogen in an outbreak of viral pneumonia cases originating in Wuhan, China, with an ensuing rapid global spread that led it to be declared a pandemic by the WHO on March 11, 2020. Given the threat to public health posed by sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the literature surrounding patient presentation in severe and non-severe cases, transmission rates and routes, management strategies, and initial clinical trial results have become available at an unprecedented pace. In this review we collate current clinical and immunologic reports, comparing these to reports of previous coronaviruses to identify mechanisms driving progression to severe disease in some patients. In brief, we propose a model wherein dysregulated type I interferon signalling leads to aberrant recruitment and accumulation of innate immune lineages in the lung, impairing establishment of productive adaptive responses, and permitting a pathologic pro-inflammatory state. Finally, we extend these findings to suggest possible treatment options that may merit investigation in randomized clinical trials.

positive: Guideline-Based Chinese Herbal Medicine Treatment Plus Standard Care for Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (G-CHAMPS): Evidence From China Background: In January, national guidelines were developed and recommended for use throughout China to fight coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) was also included as part of the treatment plans at various stages of COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a pilot randomized, controlled trial in patients with severe COVID-19 in Wuhan, China. Eligible adult patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either CHM plus standard care or standard care alone for 7 days. The primary outcome was the change in the disease severity category of COVID-19 after treatment. Results: Between Jan 31, 2020, and Feb 19, 2020, 42 out of 100 screened patients were included in the trial: 28 in the CHM plus standard care group and 14 in the standard care alone group. Among 42 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age 60.43 years [12.69 years]), 21 (21/42, 50%) were aged ≥65 years, 35 (35/42, 83%) were women, and 42 (42/42, 100%) had data available for the primary outcome. For the primary outcome, one patient from each group died during treatment; the odds of a shift toward death was lower in the CHM plus group than in the standard care alone group (common OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.148–2.352, P = 0.454). Three (two from the CHM plus group and one from the standard care alone group) patients progressed from severe to critical illness. After treatment, mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19 disease accounted for 17.86% (5/28) vs. 14.29% (2/28), 71.43% (20/28) vs. 64.29% (9/28), and 0% (0) vs. 7.14% (1/28) of the patients treated with CHM plus standard care vs. standard care alone. Conclusions: For the first time, the G-CHAMPS trial provided valuable information for the national guideline-based CHM treatment of hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. The effects of CHM in COVID-19 may be clinically important and warrant further consideration and studies. Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx. Uniqueidentifier: ChiCTR2000029418.

positive: Traditional Chinese Medicine in the Treatment of Patients Infected with 2019-New Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2): A Review and Perspective Currently, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2, formerly known as 2019-nCoV, the causative pathogen of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)) has rapidly spread across China and around the world, causing an outbreak of acute infectious pneumonia. No specific anti-virus drugs or vaccines are available for the treatment of this sudden and lethal disease. The supportive care and non-specific treatment to ameliorate the symptoms of the patient are the only options currently. At the top of these conventional therapies, greater than 85% of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients in China are receiving Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) treatment. In this article, relevant published literatures are thoroughly reviewed and current applications of TCM in the treatment of COVID-19 patients are analyzed. Due to the homology in epidemiology, genomics, and pathogenesis of the SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV, and the widely use of TCM in the treatment of SARS-CoV, the clinical evidence showing the beneficial effect of TCM in the treatment of patients with SARS coronaviral infections are discussed. Current experiment studies that provide an insight into the mechanism underlying the therapeutic effect of TCM, and those studies identified novel naturally occurring compounds with anti-coronaviral activity are also introduced.

positive: Trials and tribulations: so many potential treatments, so few answers PURPOSE: The purpose of this review is to quantify the landscape of current clinical trials ongoing for therapies in the treatment of COVID-19. A secondary purpose is to examine the relationship between public and scientific interests in potential therapies for COVID-19. METHODS: A systematic search of clinicaltrials.gov was undertaken on April 22, 2020, to identify all currently registered clinical trials investigating potential therapies for patients with COVID-19. Public interest in the various therapies was quantified utilizing Google Trends. Public interest in hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine was plotted against the cumulative number of active clinical trials evaluating antimalarials as potential COVID-19 therapies over time. RESULTS: There were 341 interventional studies and 208 different therapies actively registered on clinicaltrials.gov whose primary aim is the treatment of COVID-19. The median sample size was 120 patients (range 4–6000) with 154 (45%) trials reporting a planned sample size of 100 patients or less. There was a strong positive correlation (r = 0.76, p = 0.01) between the number of registered clinical trials and the public interest in the top ten proposed therapies. Following the spike in public interest, the average number of new trials increased tenfold with respect to antimalarial therapies. CONCLUSIONS: The relatively small sample sizes and the number of independent trials investigating similar therapies are concerning. Resources may not be being allocated based on scientific merit and may be driven by public consciousness and speculation. Moving forward, a concerted effort focused on implementing large, well-coordinated and carefully designed multi-armed clinical trials will help to ensure that the most promising therapeutic options are rigorously studied and clinically meaningful results produced.

positive: Remdesivir in adults with severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial BACKGROUND: No specific antiviral drug has been proven effective for treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue prodrug, has inhibitory effects on pathogenic animal and human coronaviruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro, and inhibits Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, SARS-CoV-1, and SARS-CoV-2 replication in animal models. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial at ten hospitals in Hubei, China. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, with an interval from symptom onset to enrolment of 12 days or less, oxygen saturation of 94% or less on room air or a ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less, and radiologically confirmed pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg on days 2-10 in single daily infusions) or the same volume of placebo infusions for 10 days. Patients were permitted concomitant use of lopinavir-ritonavir, interferons, and corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement up to day 28, defined as the time (in days) from randomisation to the point of a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status (from 1=discharged to 6=death) or discharged alive from hospital, whichever came first. Primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety analysis was done in all patients who started their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04257656. FINDINGS: Between Feb 6, 2020, and March 12, 2020, 237 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (158 to remdesivir and 79 to placebo); one patient in the placebo group who withdrew after randomisation was not included in the ITT population. Remdesivir use was not associated with a difference in time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio 1·23 [95% CI 0·87-1·75]). Although not statistically significant, patients receiving remdesivir had a numerically faster time to clinical improvement than those receiving placebo among patients with symptom duration of 10 days or less (hazard ratio 1·52 [0·95-2·43]). Adverse events were reported in 102 (66%) of 155 remdesivir recipients versus 50 (64%) of 78 placebo recipients. Remdesivir was stopped early because of adverse events in 18 (12%) patients versus four (5%) patients who stopped placebo early. INTERPRETATION: In this study of adult patients admitted to hospital for severe COVID-19, remdesivir was not associated with statistically significant clinical benefits. However, the numerical reduction in time to clinical improvement in those treated earlier requires confirmation in larger studies. FUNDING: Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Emergency Project of COVID-19, National Key Research and Development Program of China, the Beijing Science and Technology Project.

positive: COVID-19 clinical trials: see it big and keep it simple

positive: Treatment of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome with a combination of lopinavir-ritonavir and interferon-β1b (MIRACLE trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial BACKGROUND: It had been more than 5 years since the first case of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus infection (MERS-CoV) was recorded, but no specific treatment has been investigated in randomized clinical trials. Results from in vitro and animal studies suggest that a combination of lopinavir/ritonavir and interferon-β1b (IFN-β1b) may be effective against MERS-CoV. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy of treatment with a combination of lopinavir/ritonavir and recombinant IFN-β1b provided with standard supportive care, compared to treatment with placebo provided with standard supportive care in patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS requiring hospital admission. METHODS: The protocol is prepared in accordance with the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) guidelines. Hospitalized adult patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS will be enrolled in this recursive, two-stage, group sequential, multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind randomized controlled trial. The trial is initially designed to include 2 two-stage components. The first two-stage component is designed to adjust sample size and determine futility stopping, but not efficacy stopping. The second two-stage component is designed to determine efficacy stopping and possibly readjustment of sample size. The primary outcome is 90-day mortality. DISCUSSION: This will be the first randomized controlled trial of a potential treatment for MERS. The study is sponsored by King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Enrollment for this study began in November 2016, and has enrolled thirteen patients as of Jan 24-2018. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02845843. Registered on 27 July 2016. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2427-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

positive: Favipiravir: pharmacokinetics and concerns about clinical trials for 2019-nCoV infection. An outbreak of 2019-nCoV infection in China has spread across the world. No specific antiviral drugs have been approved for the treatment of COVID-2019. In addition to the recommended antiviral drugs such as interferon-ɑ, lopinavir/ritonavir, ribavirin, and chloroquine phosphate, some clinical trials focusing on virus RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) inhibitors have been registered and initiated. Favipiravir, a purine nucleic acid analog and potent RdRp inhibitor approved for use in influenza, is also considered in several clinical trials. Herein, we summarized the pharmacokinetic characteristics of favipiravir and possible drug-drug interactions from the view of drug metabolism. We hope this will be helpful for the design of clinical trials for favipiravir in COVID-2019, as data regarding in vitro virus inhibition and efficacy in preclinical animal studies are still not available.

positive: The hunt for covid-19 drugs Many drugs and vaccines are now being developed and tested

positive: Severe COVID-19 and aging: are monocytes the key? The ongoing pandemic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes a disproportionate number of severe cases and deaths in older adults. Severe SARS-CoV-2-associated disease (coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)) was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization in March 2020 and is characterized by cytokine storm, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and in some cases by systemic inflammation–related pathology. Currently, our knowledge of the determinants of severe COVID-19 is primarily observational. Here, I review emerging evidence to argue that monocytes, a circulating innate immune cell, are principal players in cytokine storm and associated pathologies in COVID-19. I also describe changes in monocyte function and phenotype that are characteristic of both aging and severe COVID-19, which suggests a potential mechanism underlying increased morbidity and mortality due to SARS-CoV-2 infection in older adults. The innate immune system is therefore a potentially important target for therapeutic treatment of COVID-19, but experimental studies are needed, and SARS-CoV-2 presents unique challenges for pre-clinical and mechanistic studies in vivo. The immediate establishment of colonies of SARS-CoV-2-susceptible animal models for aging studies, as well as strong collaborative efforts in the geroscience community, will be required in order to develop the therapies needed to combat severe COVID-19 in older adult populations.

positive: Clinical trials for Covid‐19: can we better use the short window of opportunity? The scientific community has risen to the Covid‐19 challenge, coming up with an impressive list of candidate drugs and vaccines targeting an array of pharmacological and immunological mechanisms. Yet, generating clinical evidence of efficacy and safety of these candidate treatments may be frustrated by the absence of comprehensive trial coordination mechanisms. Many small stand‐alone trials and observational studies of single‐agent interventions are currently running or in planning; many of these will likely not deliver robust results that could support regulatory and patient‐level treatment decisions. We here discuss actions that all stakeholders in the clinical trial ecosystem need to take to ensure that the window of opportunity during this pandemic will not shut, both for patients in need of treatment and for researchers to conduct decision‐relevant clinical trials.

positive: The CREST-2 experience with the evolving challenges of COVID-19: A clinical trial in a pandemic The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has disrupted the lives of whole communities and nations. The multinational multicenter National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Carotid Revascularization and Medical Management for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Trial stroke prevention trial rapidly experienced the effects of the pandemic and had to temporarily suspend new enrollments and shift patient follow-up activities from in-person clinic visits to telephone contacts. There is an ethical obligation to the patients to protect their health while taking every feasible step to ensure that the goals of the trial are successfully met. Here, we describe the effects of the pandemic on the trial and steps that are being taken to mitigate the effects of the pandemic so that trial objectives can be met.

positive: Difference of coagulation features between severe pneumonia induced by SARS-CoV2 and non-SARS-CoV2 Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is commonly complicated with coagulopathy, the difference of coagulation features between severe pneumonia induced by SARS-CoV2 and non-SARS-CoV2 has not been analyzed. Coagulation results and clinical features of consecutive patients with severe pneumonia induced by SARS-CoV2 (COVID group) and non-SARS-CoV2 (non-COVID group) in Tongji hospital were retrospectively analyzed and compared. Whether patients with elevated D-dimer could benefit from anticoagulant treatment was evaluated. There were 449 COVID patients and 104 non-COVID patients enrolled into the study. The 28-day mortality in COVID group was approximately twofold of mortality in non-COVID group (29.8% vs. 15.4%, P = 0.003), COVID group were older (65.1 ± 12.0 vs. 58.4 ± 18.0, years, P < 0.001) and with higher platelet count (215 ± 100 vs. 188 ± 98, ×10(9)/L, P = 0.015), comparing to non-COVID group. The 28-day mortality of heparin users were lower than nonusers In COVID group with D-dimer > 3.0 μg/mL (32.8% vs. 52.4%, P = 0.017). Patients with severe pneumonia induced by SARS-CoV2 had higher platelet count than those induced by non-SARS-CoV2, and only the former with markedly elevated D-dimer may benefit from anticoagulant treatment.

positive: Aminoquinolines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine

positive: Norwegian Coronavirus Disease 2019 (NO COVID-19) Pragmatic Open label Study to assess early use of hydroxychloroquine sulphate in moderately severe hospitalised patients with coronavirus disease 2019: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The hypothesis of the study is that treatment with hydroxychloroquine sulphate in hospitalised patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is safe and will accelerate the virological clearance rate for patients with moderately severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) when compared to standard care. Furthermore, we hypothesize that early treatment with hydroxychloroquine sulphate is associated with more rapid resolve of clinical symptoms as assessed by the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2), decreased admission rate to intensive care units and mortality, and improvement in protein biomarker profiles (C-reactive protein, markers of renal and hepatic injury, and established cardiac biomarkers like cardiac troponin and B-type natriuretic peptide). TRIAL DESIGN: The study is a two-arm, open label, pragmatic randomised controlled group sequential adaptive trial designed to assess the effect on viral loads and clinical outcome of hydroxychloroquine sulphate therapy in addition to standard care compared to standard care alone in patients with established Covid-19. By utilizing resources already paid for by the hospitals (physicians and nurses in daily clinical practice), this pragmatic trial can include a larger number of patients over a short period of time and at a lower cost than studies utilizing traditional randomized controlled trial designs with an external study organization. The pragmatic approach will enable swift initiation of randomisation and allocation to treatment. PARTICIPANTS: Patients will be recruited from all inpatients at Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. Electronic real-time surveillance of laboratory reports from the Department of Microbiology will be examined regularly for SARS-CoV-2 positive subjects. All of the following conditions must apply to the prospective patient at screening prior to inclusion: (1) Hospitalisation; (2) Adults 18 years or older; (3) Moderately severe Covid-19 disease (NEWS2 of 6 or less); (4) SARS-CoV-2 positive nasopharyngeal swab; (5) Expected time of hospitalisation > 48 hours; and (6) Signed informed consent must be obtained and documented according to Good Clinical Practice guidelines of the International Conference on Harmonization, and national/local regulations. Patients will be excluded from participation in the study if they meet any of the following criteria: (1) Requiring intensive care unit admission at screening; (2) History of psoriasis; (3) Known adverse reaction to hydroxychloroquine sulphate; (4) Pregnancy; or (5) Prolonged corrected QT interval (>450 ms). Clinical data, including standard hospital biochemistry, medical therapy, vital signs, NEWS2, and microbiology results (including blood culture results and reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction [RT-PCR] for other upper airway viruses), will be automatically extracted from the hospital electronic records and merged with the study specific database. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Included patients will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to (1) standard care with the addition of 400 mg hydroxychloroquine sulphate (PlaquenilTM) twice daily for seven days or (2) standard care alone. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary endpoint of the study is the rate of decline in SARS-CoV-2 viral load in oropharyngeal samples as assessed by RT-PCR in samples collected at baseline, 48 and 96 hours after randomization and administration of drug for the intervention arm. Secondary endpoints include change in NEWS2 at 96 hours after randomisation, admission to intensive care unit, mortality (in-hospital, and at 30 and 90 days), duration of hospital admission, clinical status on a 7-point ordinal scale 14 days after randomization ([1] Death [2] Hospitalised, on invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [3] Hospitalised, on non-invasive ventilation or high flow oxygen devices [4] Hospitalized, requiring supplemental oxygen [5] Hospitalised, not requiring supplemental oxygen [6] Not hospitalized, but unable to resume normal activities [7] Not hospitalised, with resumption of normal activities), and improvement in protein biomarker profiles (C-reactive protein, markers of renal and hepatic injury, and established cardiac biomarkers like cardiac troponin and B-type natriuretic peptide) at 96 hours after randomization. RANDOMISATION: Eligible patients will be allocated in a 1:1 ratio, using a computer randomisation procedure. The allocation sequence has been prepared by an independent statistician. BLINDING (MASKING): Open label randomised controlled pragmatic trial without blinding, no active or placebo control. The virologist assessing viral load in the oropharyngeal samples and the statistician responsible for analysis of the data will be blinded to the treatment allocation for the statistical analyses. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMIZED (SAMPLE SIZE): This is a group sequential adaptive trial where analyses are planned after 51, 101, 151 and 202 completed patients, with a maximum sample size of 202 patients (101 patients allocated to intervention and standard care and 101 patients allocated to standard care alone). TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 1.3 (March 26, 2020). Recruitment of first patient on March 26, 2020, and 51 patients were included as per April 28, 2020. Study recruitment is anticipated to be completed by July 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04316377. Trial registered March 20, 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Updated Approaches against SARS-CoV-2 Novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) lies behind the ongoing outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). There is a growing understanding of SARS-CoV-2 in virology, epidemiology, and clinical management strategies. However, no anti-SARS-CoV-2 drug or vaccine has been officially approved due to the absence of adequate evidence. Scientists are racing to develop a treatment for COVID-19. Recent studies have revealed many attractive therapeutic options, even if some of them remain to be further confirmed in rigorous preclinical models and clinical trials. In this minireview, we aim to summarize the updated potential approaches against SARS-CoV-2. We emphasize that further efforts are warranted to develop the safest and most effective approach.

positive: Coronavirus Infection Among Children and Adolescents Coronavirus infection is a global emergency. Over the past few months, there is a rapid increase in the number of cases and deaths due to coronavirus infection. It has been observed that elderly individuals and those with medical co-morbidities are maximally affected. In children and adolescents, coronavirus infection has low mortality as well as the severity of symptoms are less. Children and adolescents with immunocompromised state, malnutrition, medical co-morbidities and poor hygiene are at higher risk of contracting coronavirus infection. Minimizing this risk factors and adopting appropriate prevention measures will be helpful in limiting the spread of infection as there is no specific treatment and immunization available to date to address this serious issue. This chapter highlights the issues and challenges of coronavirus infection in children and adolescents.

positive: New insights on the antiviral effects of chloroquine against coronavirus: what to expect for COVID-19? ABSTRACT Recently, a novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), officially known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), emerged in China. Despite drastic containment measures, the spread of this virus is ongoing. SARS-CoV-2 is the aetiological agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) characterised by pulmonary infection in humans. The efforts of international health authorities have since focused on rapid diagnosis and isolation of patients as well as the search for therapies able to counter the most severe effects of the disease. In the absence of a known efficient therapy and because of the situation of a public-health emergency, it made sense to investigate the possible effect of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine against SARS-CoV-2 since this molecule was previously described as a potent inhibitor of most coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-1. Preliminary trials of chloroquine repurposing in the treatment of COVID-19 in China have been encouraging, leading to several new trials. Here we discuss the possible mechanisms of chloroquine interference with the SARS-CoV-2 replication cycle.

positive: Quest for a COVID-19 Cure by Repurposing Small-Molecule Drugs: Mechanism of Action, Clinical Development, Synthesis at Scale, and Outlook for Supply [Image: see text] The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has spurred an intense global effort to repurpose existing approved drugs for its treatment. In this review, we highlight the development of seven small-molecule drugs that are currently being assessed in clinical trials for the treatment of COVID-19. Three sections are presented for each drug: (1) history, mechanism of action, and status of clinical trials; (2) scalable synthetic routes and final forms; and (3) outlook for supply should clinical trials show treatment efficacy. A brief overview of diagnostic testing and vaccine development is also presented.

positive: The Ethics of COVID-19 Clinical Trials: New Considerations in a Controversial Area

positive: Conducting phase 1 cancer clinical trials during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–related disease pandemic

positive: Comprehensive analysis of drugs to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection: Mechanistic insights into current COVID-19 therapies (Review) The major impact produced by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) focused many researchers attention to find treatments that can suppress transmission or ameliorate the disease. Despite the very fast and large flow of scientific data on possible treatment solutions, none have yet demonstrated unequivocal clinical utility against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This work represents an exhaustive and critical review of all available data on potential treatments for COVID-19, highlighting their mechanistic characteristics and the strategy development rationale. Drug repurposing, also known as drug repositioning, and target based methods are the most used strategies to advance therapeutic solutions into clinical practice. Current in silico, in vitro and in vivo evidence regarding proposed treatments are summarized providing strong support for future research efforts.

positive: Effect of hydroxychloroquine on COVID-19 prevention in cancer patients undergoing treatment: a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: In this study, we investigate the effect of hydroxychloroquine on the prevention of Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) in cancer patients being treated. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a multi-centre, two-arm, parallel-group, triple-blind, phase 2-3 randomised controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: All patients over the age of 15 from 5 types of cancer are included in the study. Patients with acute lymphoid and myeloid leukemias in the first line treated with curative intent, patients with high-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma treated with leukemia protocols and patients with non-metastatic breast and colon cancer in the first line of treatment will enter the study. The exclusion criteria will include known sensitivity to Hydroxychloroquine, weight below 35 kilograms, history of retinopathy, history of any cardiac disease, acute respiratory tract infection in the last 2 months, having COVID-19 in the first two weeks of entering the trial, having Diabetes Mellitus, having an immuno-suppressive disease other than cancer, having chronic pulmonary disease and taking immuno-suppressant drug other than chemotherapeutic agents for current cancer. This study is performed in five academic centres affiliated to Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Patients are randomly assigned to two groups; one being given hydroxychloroquine and the other is given placebo. During two months of treatment, the two groups are treated with either hydroxychloroquine (Amin® Pharmaceutical Company, Isfahan, Iran) or placebo (identical in terms of shape, colour, smell) as a single 200 mg tablet every other day. Patients will be monitored for COVID-19 symptoms during the follow-up period. If signs or symptoms occur (fever, cough, shortness of breath), they will be examined and investigated with a high-resolution computed tomography (CT) scan of the lungs, COVID-19 specific IgM, IgG antibody assay and a nucleic acid amplification test (NAT) for the SARS-CoV-2 virus. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary end point of this study is to investigate the incidence of COVID-19 in patients being treated for their cancer over a 2-month period. RANDOMISATION: Randomisation will be performed using randomly permuted blocks. By using an online website (www.randomization.com) the randomization sequence will be produced by quadruple blocks. The allocation ratio in intervention and control groups is 1:1. BLINDING (MASKING): Participants and caregivers do not know whether the patient is in the intervention or the control group. The outcome assessor and the data analyst are also blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The calculated total sample size is 60 patients, with 30 patients in each group. TRIAL STATUS: The trial began on April 14, 2020 and recruitment is ongoing. Recruitment is anticipated to be completed by June 14, 2020 There has been no change in study protocol since approval, protocol version 1 was approved April 12, 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial has been registered by the title of "Effect of Hydroxychloroquine on Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) prevention in cancer patients under treatment" in Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT) with code "IRCT20200405046958N1", https://www.irct.ir/trial/46946. Registration date is April 14, 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Merit of an ursodeoxycholic acid clinical trial in COVID-19 patients Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected over 8 million people worldwide. We underscore the potential benefits of conducting a randomized open-label unblinded clinical trial to evaluate the role of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) in the treatment of COVID-19. Some COVID-19 patients are characterized with cytokine storm syndrome that can cause severe and irreversible damage to organs leading to multi-organ failure and death. Therefore, it is critical to control both programmed cell death (apoptosis) and the hyper-immune inflammatory response in COVID-19 patients to reduce the rising morbidity and mortality. UDCA is an existing drug with proven safety profiles that can reduce inflammation and prevent cell death. National Geographic reported that, “China Promotes Bear Bile as Coronavirus Treatment”. Bear bile is rich in UDCA, comprising up to 40–50% of the total bile acid. UDCA is a logical and attainable replacement for bear bile that is available in pill form and merits clinical trial consideration.

positive: The potential for antibody-dependent enhancement of SARS-CoV-2 infection: Translational implications for vaccine development There is an urgent need for vaccines to the 2019 coronavirus (COVID19; SARS-CoV-2). Vaccine development may not be straightforward, due to antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). Antibodies against viral surface proteins can, in some cases, increase infection severity by ADE. This phenomenon occurs in SARS-CoV-1, MERS, HIV, Zika, and dengue virus infection and vaccination. Lack of high-affinity anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG in children may explain the decreased severity of infection in these groups. Here, we discuss the evidence for ADE in the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection and how to address this potential translational barrier to vaccine development, convalescent plasma, and targeted monoclonal antibody therapies.

positive: Review and methodological analysis of trials currently testing treatment and prevention options for the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) globally. Background: As novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) cases continue to steeply rise globally within an unprecedented short period of time, solid evidence from large randomised controlled trials is still lacking. Currently, numerous trials testing potential treatment and preventative options are undertaken globally. Objectives: We summarised all currently registered clinical trials examining treatment and prevention options for COVID-19 pneumonia. Additionally, we evaluated the quality of the retrieved interventional studies. Data sources: The ClinicalTrials.gov, the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry and the European Union Clinical Trials Register were systematically searched. Study eligibility criteria: Registered clinical trials examining treatment and/or prevention options for COVID-19 were included. No language, country or study design restrictions were applied. Withdrawn, cancelled studies and trials not reporting therapeutic or preventative strategies for COVID-19 were excluded. Participants and interventions: No restrictions in terms of participants' age and medical background or type of intervention were enforced. Methods: The registries were searched using the term "coronavirus" or "COVID-19" from their inception until 26th March 2020. Additional manual search of the registries was also performed. Eligible studies were summarised and tabulated. Interventional trials were methodologically analysed, excluding expanded access studies and trials testing Traditional Chinese Medicine. Results: In total, 309 trials evaluating therapeutic management options, 23 studies assessing preventive strategies and 3 studies examining both were retrieved. Interventional treatment studies were mostly randomised (n=150, 76%) and open-label (n=73, 37%) with a median number of planned inclusions of 90 (IQR 40-200). Major categories of interventions that are currently being investigated are discussed. Conclusion: Numerous clinical trials have been registered since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Summarised data on these trials will assist physicians and researchers to promote patient care and guide future research efforts for COVID-19 pandemic containment. However, up to the end of March, 2020, significant information concerning reported trials was lacking.

positive: Remdesivir in treatment of COVID-19: A systematic benefit-risk assessment Background: There is a need to identify effective, safe treatments for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease) rapidly, given the current, ongoing pandemic. A systematic benefit-risk assessment was designed and conducted to strengthen the ongoing understanding of the benefit-risk balance for remdesivir in COVID-19 treatment by using a structured method which uses all available data. Methods: The Benefit-Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework was used to assess the overall benefit-risk of the use of remdesivir as a treatment for COVID-19 compared to standard of care, placebo or other treatments. We searched PubMed,Google Scholar and government agency websites to identify literature reporting clinical outcomes in patients taking remdesivir for COVID-19. A value tree was constructed and key benefits and risks were ranked by two clinicians in order of considered importance. Results: Several key benefits and risks for use of remdesivir in COVID-19 compared to placebo have been identified. In one trial, the benefit of time to clinical improvement was not statistically significant (21 vs 23 days, HR=1.23, 95% CI: 0.87, 1.75), although the study was underpowered. In another trial, a shorter time to recovery in patients treated with remdesivir was observed (11 vs 15 days), with non-significant reduced mortality risk (8% vs 12%). Risk data were only available from one trial. This trial reported fewer serious adverse events in patients taking remdesivir (18%) comparted to the placebo group (26%), however more patients in the remdesivir group discontinued treatment as a result of an adverse event compared to those patients receiving placebo (12% vs 5%). Conclusions: Preliminary clinical trial results suggest a favourable benefit-risk profile for remdesivir compared to placebo, however there is limited safety data available at the current time. The current framework summarises the key anticipated benefits and risks for which further data are needed. Ongoing clinical trial data can be incorporated into the framework when available to provide an updated benefit-risk assessment.

positive: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in management of COVID-19; A systematic review on current evidence BACKGROUND: Since there is still no definitive conclusion regarding which non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are most effective and safe in viral respiratory infections, we decided to evaluate the efficacy and safety of various NSAIDs in viral respiratory infections so that we can reach a conclusion on which NSAID is best choice for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: A search was performed in Medline (via PubMed), Embase and CENTRAL databases until 23 March 2020. Clinical trials on application of NSAIDs in viral respiratory infections were included. RESULTS: Six clinical trials were included. No clinical trial has been performed on COVID-19, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome infections. Studies show that ibuprofen and naproxen not only have positive effects in controlling cold symptoms, but also do not cause serious side effects in rhinovirus infections. In addition, it was found that clarithromycin, naproxen and oseltamivir combination leads to decrease in mortality rate and duration of hospitalisation in patients with pneumonia caused by influenza. CONCLUSION: Although based on existing evidence, NSAIDs have been effective in treating respiratory infections caused by influenza and rhinovirus, since there is no clinical trial on COVID-19 and case-reports and clinical experiences are indicative of elongation of treatment duration and exacerbation of the clinical course of patients with COVID-19, it is recommended to use substitutes such as acetaminophen for controlling fever and inflammation and be cautious about using NSAIDs in management of COVID-19 patients until there are enough evidence. Naproxen may be a good choice for future clinical trials.

positive: Protection by Exclusion: Another Missed Opportunity to Include Pregnant Women in Research During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a novel infectious disease that started in Wuhan, China, and has rapidly spread all across the world. With limited ability to contain the virus and relatively high transmissibility and case fatality rates, governmental institutions and pharmaceutical companies are racing to find therapeutics and vaccines that target this novel coronavirus. However, once again, pregnant and breastfeeding women are excluded from participating in clinical trials during this pandemic. This “protection by exclusion” of pregnant women from drug development and clinical therapeutic trials, even during epidemics and pandemics, is not unprecedented. Moreover, it is both misguided and not justifiable and may have excluded them from potentially beneficial interventions. This is another missed opportunity to obtain pregnancy-specific safety and efficacy data, because therapeutics developed for men and nonpregnant women may not be generalizable to pregnant women. Therefore, we recommend and urge the scientific community and professional societies that, without clear justification for exclusion, pregnant women should be given the opportunity to be included in clinical trials for COVID-19 based on the concepts of justice, equity, autonomy, and informed consent.

positive: Combination of western medicine and Chinese traditional patent medicine in treating a family case of COVID-19 in Wuhan In December 2019, an outbreak of novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) occurred in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. By February 14, 2020, it has led to 66 492 confirmed patients in China and high mortality up to ∼2.96% (1123/37 914) in Wuhan. Here we report the first family case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) confirmed in Wuhan and treated using the combination of western medicine and Chinese traditional patent medicine Shuanghuanglian oral liquid (SHL). This report describes the identification, diagnosis, clinical course, and management of three cases from a family, suggests the expected therapeutic effects of SHL on COVID-19, and warrants further clinical trials.

positive: Azithromycin and COVID‐19Prompt Early Use at First Signs of this Infection in Adults and Children An Approach Worthy of Consideration The devastating effects of the coronavirus designated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐Cov‐2) has led to urgent attempts to find effective therapeutic agents for inpatient and outpatient treatment of COVID‐19. Initial enthusiasm for the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin has abated. However, as a result of positive clinical experience with azithromycin used alone during the first few days of the flu‐like illness caused by this coronavirus, we recommend formal clinical trials using azithromycin early in the course of a COVID‐19 infection. There is one clinical trial initiated, the individually‐randomized, telemedicine‐based, “Azithromycin for COVID‐19 Treatment in Outpatients Nationwide (ACTION)” based at the University of California San Francisco. This placebo‐controlled trial is designed to determine the efficacy of a single 1.2 g dose of oral azithromycin to prevent COVID‐19 patient progression to hospitalization. We recommend formal clinical trials of azithromycin in its prepackaged form at the first sign of COVID‐19 infection in adults and children, using an initial adult dose of 500 mg followed by 250 mg per day for four days, a total cumulative dose of 1.5 g, and for children 5 to 18 years of age, 10 mg/kg on the first day followed by 5 mg/kg for four days. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

positive: A COVID-19 pandemic guideline in evidence-based medicine Data sources This review article scrutinised 16 clinical studies (clinical trials and observational studies) concerning coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19). Additionally, 18 guidelines about the COVID-19 were reviewed and the key points were represented in this study. Study selection The review included human trials, in-vitro studies, review articles, and credible news reports about severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and COVID-19 complications, treatment guidelines, management strategies, and epidemiological features. There were no exclusion criteria reported in this review and the included information was in English and Chinese languages. Data extraction and synthesis A descriptive review of the literature was conducted, taking a comprehensive approach. The paper consisted of three main parts: introduction, presentation, and management. The introduction part presented basic information about the SARS-CoV-2, its evolution and transmission, and the course of disease. The presentation section introduced the signs and symptoms, diagnosis, high risk groups, and complications of COVID-19. Eventually, some evidence was presented about the prevention, medical management, and measuring responses to the treatments in the management section. Results Based on the results of this study, non-pharmaceutical interventions, including strict social isolation and distancing measures, might reduce the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 by nearly 99.3 percent (reproduction number mitigating from 406 to 2.5 in 30 days). In the supportive management section, monitoring vital signs and neonatal feeding were stated as the most important factors to consider. For symptomatic neonates, medical management and intervention were mentioned as essential. It was claimed that for adults with mild infection, the best option would be home quarantine with further medical monitoring or hospitalisation if required. The following sequence was also suggested as early supportive therapy and monitoring: intravenous fluid administration, oxygen therapy, and application of corticosteroids. Management of critical patients with critical COVID-19 included admission to intensive care unit, use of continuous positive airway pressure and bi-level positive airway pressure in certain circumstances, endotracheal intubation, invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and fluid resuscitation and vasopressors. Additionally, this study suggested oseltamivir, iopinavir, remdesivir, chloroquine, baricitinib, ruxolitinib, and fedratinib as possible drugs to help manage COVID-19. A soaring c-reactive protein level and decreased albumin content in the blood were reported to be associated with a deteriorating status in COVID-19 patients. To keep the number of exposures to a minimum, two separate viral clearance tests taken at least 24 hours apart, were stated as necessary laboratory results before the discharge of patients with COVID-19. Conclusions The study warns about possible exponential spread of COVID-19 and proposes to adhering to tighter restrictions of social distancing. Besides the clinical guidelines presented within the study, it also encourages further up-to-date and evidence-based management guidelines for patients with COVID-19.

positive: An evidence mapping and analysis of registered COVID-19 clinical trials in China BACKGROUND: This article aims to summarize the key characteristics of registered trials of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), in terms of their spatial and temporal distributions, types of design and interventions, and patient characteristics among others. METHODS: A comprehensive search of the registered COVID-19 trials has been performed on platforms including ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), Chinese Clinical Trials Registry (CHiCTR), Australian Clinical Trials Registry, Britain’s National Research Register (BNRR), Current Control Trials (CCT), and Glaxo Smith Kline Register. Trials registered at the first 8 weeks of the COVID-19 outbreak are included, without language restrictions. For each study, the registration information, study design, and administrator information are collected and summarized. RESULTS: A total of 220 registered trials were evaluated as of February 27, 2020. Hospital-initiated trials were the majority and account for 80% of the sample. Among the trials, pilot studies and phase 4 trials are more common and represent 35% and 19.1% of the sample, respectively. The median sample size of the registered trials is 100, with interquartile range 60–240. Further, 45.9% of the trials mentioned information on a data monitoring committee. 54.5% of the trials did not specify the disease severity among patients they intend to recruit. Four types of interventions are most common in the experimental groups across the registered studies: antiviral drugs, Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), biological agents, and hormone drugs. Among them, the TCM and biological agents are frequently used in pilot study and correspond to a variety of primary endpoints. In contrast, trials with antiviral drugs have more targeted primary outcomes such as “COVID-19 nucleic acid test” and “28-day mortality.” CONCLUSIONS: We provide an evidence mapping and analysis of registered COVID-19 clinical trials in China. In particular, it is critical for ongoing and future studies to refine their research hypothesis and better identify their intervention therapies and the corresponding primary outcomes. It is also imperative for multiple public health divisions and research institutions to work together for integrative clinical data capture and sharing, with a common objective of improving future studies that evaluate COVID-19 interventions.

positive: The Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib in COVID-19 with severe systemic hyperinflammation A subgroup of patients with severe COVID-19 suffers from progression to acute respiratory distress syndrome and multiorgan failure. These patients present with progressive hyperinflammation governed by proinflammatory cytokines. An interdisciplinary COVID-19 work flow was established to detect patients with imminent or full blown hyperinflammation. Using a newly developed COVID-19 Inflammation Score (CIS), patients were prospectively stratified for targeted inhibition of cytokine signalling by the Janus Kinase 1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib (Rux). Patients were treated with efficacy/toxicity guided step up dosing up to 14 days. Retrospective analysis of CIS reduction and clinical outcome was performed. Out of 105 patients treated between March 30th and April 15th(,) 2020, 14 patients with a CIS ≥ 10 out of 16 points received Rux over a median of 9 days with a median cumulative dose of 135 mg. A total of 12/14 patients achieved significant reduction of CIS by ≥25% on day 7 with sustained clinical improvement in 11/14 patients without short term red flag warnings of Rux-induced toxicity. Rux treatment for COVID-19 in patients with hyperinflammation is shown to be safe with signals of efficacy in this pilot case series for CRS-intervention to prevent or overcome multiorgan failure. A multicenter phase-II clinical trial has been initiated (NCT04338958).

positive: Review of trials currently testing treatment and prevention of COVID-19 BACKGROUND: As COVID-19 cases continue to rise globally, evidence from large randomised controlled trials is still lacking. Currently, numerous trials testing potential treatment and preventative options are undertaken all over the world. OBJECTIVES: We summarised all registered clinical trials examining treatment and prevention options for COVID-19. Additionally, we evaluated the quality of the retrieved studies. DATA SOURCES: Clinicaltrials.gov, the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry and the European Union Clinical Trials Register were systematically searched. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Registered clinical trials examining treatment and/or prevention options for COVID-19 were included. No language, country or study design restrictions were applied. We excluded withdrawn or cancelled studies and trials not reporting therapeutic or preventative strategies for COVID-19. PARTICIPANTS: and interventions: No restrictions in terms of participants’ age and medical background or type of intervention were enforced. METHODS: The registries were searched using the term “coronavirus” or “COVID-19” from their inception until 26(th) March 2020.Additional manual search of the registries was also performed. Eligible studies were summarised and tabulated. Interventional trials were methodologically analysed, excluding expanded access studies and trials testing Traditional Chinese Medicine. RESULTS: In total, 309 trials evaluating therapeutic management options, 23 studies assessing preventive strategies and 3 studies examining both were retrieved. Finally, 214 studies were methodologically reviewed. Interventional treatment studies were mostly randomised (n=150, 76%) and open-label (n=73, 37%) with a median number of planned inclusions of 90 (IQR 40-200). Major categories of interventions that are currently being investigated are discussed. CONCLUSION: Numerous clinical trials have been registered since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Summarised data on these trials will assist physicians and researchers to promote patient care and guide future research efforts for COVID-19 pandemic containment.

positive: Safety and efficacy assessment of allogeneic human dental pulp stem cells to treat patients with severe COVID-19: structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (Phase I / II) OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and therapeutic effects of allogeneic human dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) in treating severe pneumonia caused by COVID-19. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a single centre, two arm ratio 1:1, triple blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel group, clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: 1. Adults aged 18-65 years; 2. Voluntarily participate in this clinical trial and sign the “informed consent form” or have consent from a legal representative. 3. Diagnosed with severe pneumonia of COVID-19: nucleic acid test SARS-CoV-2 positive; respiratory distress (respiratory rate > 30 times / min); hypoxia (resting oxygen saturation < 93% or arterial partial pressure of oxygen / oxygen concentration < 300 mmHg). 4. COVID-19 featured lung lesions in chest X-ray image. 1. Patients have received other experimental treatment for COVID-19 within the last 30 days; 2. Patients have severe liver condition (e.g., Child Pugh score >=C or AST> 5 times of the upper limit); 3. Patients with severe renal insufficiency (estimated glomerular filtration rate <=30mL / min/1.73 m(2)) or patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy, hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis; 4. Patients who are co-infected with HIV, hepatitis B, tuberculosis, influenza virus, adenovirus or other respiratory infection viruses; 5. Female patients who have no sexual protection in the last 30 days prior to the screening assessment; 6. Pregnant or lactating women or women using estrogen contraception; 7. Patients who are planning to become pregnant during the study period or within 6 months after the end of the study period; 8. Other conditions that the researchers consider not suitable for participating in this clinical trial. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: There will be two study groups: experimental and control. Both will receive all necessary routine treatment for COVID-19. The experimental group will receive an intravenous injection of dental pulp stem cells suspension (3.0x10(7) human DPSCs in 30ml saline solution) on day 1, 4 and 7; The control group will receive an equal amount of saline (placebo) on the same days. Clinical and laboratory observations will be performed for analysis during a period of 28 days for each case since the commencement of the study. MAIN OUTCOMES: 1. Primary outcome The primary outcome is Time To Clinical Improvement (TTCI). By definition, TTCI is the time (days) it takes to downgrade two levels from the following six ordered grades [(grade 1) discharge to (grade 6) death] in the clinical state of admission to the start of study treatments (hDPSCs or placebo). Six grades of ordered variables: 2. Secondary outcomes 2.1 vital signs: heart rate, blood pressure (systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure). During the screening period, hospitalization every day (additional time points of D1, D4, D7 30min before injection, 2h ± 30min, 24h ± 30min after the injection) and follow-up period D90 ± 3 days. 2.2 Laboratory examinations: during the screening period, 30 minutes before D1, D4, D7 infusion, 2h ± 30min, 24h ± 30min after the end of infusion, D10, D14, D28 during hospitalization or discharge day and follow-up period D90 ± 3 days. 2.3 Blood routine: white blood cells, neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils, basophils, neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils Acidic granulocyte count, basophil count, red blood cell, hemoglobin, hematocrit, average volume of red blood cells, average red blood cell Hb content, average red blood cell Hb concentration, RDW standard deviation, RDW coefficient of variation, platelet count, platelet specific platelet average Volume, platelet distribution width,% of large platelets; 2.4 Liver and kidney function tests: alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, γ-glutamyl transferase, prealbumin, total protein, albumin, globulin, white / globule ratio , Total bilirubin, direct bilirubin, cholinesterase, urea, creatinine, total carbon dioxide, uric acid glucose, potassium, sodium, chlorine, calcium, corrected calcium, magnesium, phosphorus, calcium and phosphorus product, anion gap, penetration Pressure, total cholesterol, triacylglycerol, high density lipoprotein cholesterol, Low density lipoprotein cholesterol, lipoprotein a, creatine kinase, lactate dehydrogenase, estimated glomerular filtration rate. 2.5 Inflammation indicators: hypersensitive C-reactive protein, serum amyloid (SAA); 2.6 Infectious disease testing: Hepatitis B (HBsAg, HBsAb, HBeAg, HBeAb, HBcAb), Hepatitis C (Anti-HCV), AIDS (HIVcombin), syphilis (Anti-TP), cytomegalovirus CMV-IgM, cytomegalovirus CMV-IgG; only during the screening period and follow-up period D90 ± 3. 2.7 Immunological testing: Collect peripheral blood to detect the phenotype of T lymphocyte, B lymphocyte, natural killer cell, Macrophage and neutrophil by using flow cytometry. Collect peripheral blood to detect the gene profile of mononuclear cells by using single-cell analyses. Collect peripheral blood serum to detect various immunoglobulin changes: IgA, IgG, IgM, total IgE; Collect peripheral blood serum to explore the changes of cytokines, Th1 cytokines (IL-1 β, IL-2, TNF-a, ITN-γ), Th2 cytokines (IL-4, IL-6, IL -10). 2.8 Pregnancy test: blood β-HCG, female subjects before menopause are examined during the screening period and follow-up period D90 ± 3. 2.9 Urine routine: color, clarity, urine sugar, bilirubin, ketone bodies, specific gravity, pH, urobilinogen, nitrite, protein, occult blood, leukocyte enzymes, red blood cells, white blood cells, epithelial cells, non-squamous epithelial cells , Transparent cast, pathological cast, crystal, fungus; 2.10 Stool Routine: color, traits, white blood cells, red blood cells, fat globules, eggs of parasites, fungi, occult blood (chemical method), occult blood (immune method), transferrin (2h ± 30min after the injection and not detected after discharge). RANDOMIZATION: Block randomization method will be applied by computer to allocate the participants into experimental and control groups. The random ratio is 1:1. BLINDING (MASKING): Participants, outcomes assessors and investigators (including personnel in laboratory and imaging department who issue the sample report or image observations) will be blinded. Injections of cell suspension and saline will be coded in accordance with the patient’s randomisation group. The blind strategy is kept by an investigator who does not deliver the medical care or assess primary outcome results. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMIZED (SAMPLE SIZE): Twenty participants will be randomized to the experimental and control groups (10 per group). TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version number, hDPSC-CoVID-2019-02-2020 Version 2.0, March 13, 2020. Patients screening commenced on 16(th) April and an estimated date of the recruitment of the final participants will be around end of July. . TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration: World Health Organization Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000031319; March 27,2020. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04336254; April 7, 2020 Other Study ID Numbers: hDPSC-CoVID-2019-02-2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: More than 80 clinical trials launch to test coronavirus treatments

positive: The Mechanism and Clinical Outcome of patients with Corona Virus Disease 2019 Whose Nucleic Acid Test has changed from negative to positive, and the therapeutic efficacy of Favipiravir: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: A variety of possible mechanisms can make the nucleic acid test of patients who meet the discharge conditions positive again, including reinfection, reactivation of the original virus, lack of strict discharge criteria, new infection, and so on. Different reasons will correspond to different prevention and control measures. We will enroll patients who are discharged after treatment, whose nucleic acid test has changed from negative to positive during the screening visit, regardless of the severity of the symptoms, to investigate the mechanism, clinical outcome and therapeutic efficacy with Favipiravir patients with Corona virus Disease 2019. Favipiravir is an anti-viral agent that selectively and potently inhibits the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, it has been used for treatment of some life-threatening infections such as Ebola virus, Lassa virus and rabies. Its therapeutic efficacy has been proven in these diseases. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a multi-center, two arm, open label, parallel group, randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Eligibility criteria: Inclusion criteria: 1.Adults 18 to 80 years, male or female.2.After the first diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19, the nucleic acid test of respiratory specimens such as sputum or nasopharyngeal swabs, has been negative for two consecutive times (sampling time interval of at least 24 hours), in accordance with the COVID-19's diagnosis and treatment Plan (7th Edition), discharged.3.During screening visit (follow-up after discharge), The nucleic acid test of COVID-19 is positive in any one of the following samples: sputum, throat swabs, blood, feces or other specimens. Regardless of whether or not they had symptoms and the severity of symptoms.4.Volunteer to participate in the research and sign the Informed Consent Form. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: 1.Allergic to Favipiravjr;2.Pregnant or lactating women3.Uncontrolled diseases of the blood and cardiovascular system, liver or kidney.4.History of mental disorders, drug abuse or dependence;5.Researchers consider it inappropriate for adults to participate;6.Participating in other clinical studies. Loss to Follow up: Cases that do not complete the clinical trial program will be regarded as lost to follow up. Including the withdrawal of patients by themselves (such as poor compliance, etc.), or the withdrawal of patients ordered by the researcher (those who need other drugs which affect the judgment of the curative effect, and those who need to stop taking drugs for severe adverse events) Study setting: The participating hospitals are some of the designated hospitals that have been or may be admitting patients who meet the eligibility criteria, mainly in Hubei, Shenzhen, Anhui and Beijing. Participants will be recruited from these 15 hospitals: Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital, Hubei; Jinyintan Hospital of Wuhan, Hubei; Ezhou Central Hospital, Hubei; The Second People's Hospital of Fuyang, Anhui; The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC, Anhui; Beijing Youan Hospital, Beijing; Capital Medical University Beijing Institute of Hepatology, Beijing; Ezhou Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Hubei; Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Hubei; The Fifth Hospital of ShiJiazhuang, Hebei; Jinan Infectious Diseases Hospital, Shandong; Public Health Clinical Center of Chengdu, Sichuan; Wuxi No.5 People's Hospital, Jiangsu; The Third People's Hospital of Shenzhen, Guangdong; The First Affiliated Hospital of Bengfu Medical College, AnHui. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Favipiravir group (experimental): Favipiravir 1600mg each dose, twice a day on the 1st day; 600mg each dose, twice a day from the 2nd to the 7th day, Oral administration, the maximum number of days taken will be no more than 14 days plus routine treatment for COVID-19. Regular treatment group (control): Treatments other than Antiviral drugs can be given. Routine treatment for patients with the corona virus will be administered, this includes oxygen therapy, drugs that reduced phlegm and relieve cough, including thymosin, proprietary Chinese medicine, etc. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary Outcome Measures: Viral nucleic acid test negative [Time Frame: 5 months]: Subjects who tested negative for nucleic acid from sputum or nasopharyngeal swabs for two consecutive times (sampling time interval of at least 24 hours). SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical cure [Time Frame: 5 months]: 1.Body temperature returned to normal for more than 3 days;2.Lung image improved.3.Clinical manifestation improved;4.The viral nucleic acid test of respiratory specimens was negative for two consecutive times (sampling time interval of at least 24 hours). RANDOMIZATION: The central randomization system (Interactive Web Response Management System), will be used to randomly divide the subjects into the experimental group and the control group according to the ratio of 2:1. In this study, block randomization will be used, in blocks of 6. BLINDING (MASKING): This is an open label trial. Trial participants, investigators, care givers, outcome assessors, and date analysts are not blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED: 210 patients are expected to be enrolled and allocated according to the ratio of 2 (Favipiravir group, n=140): 1(regular treatment group, n=70). TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version number 3.0, 10th April 2020 First Patient, first visit 17th March 2020; recruitment end date anticipated June 1, 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04333589, April 3, 2020. Registered April 3, 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Pandemic: An Overview of Systematic Reviews Background: Navigating the rapidly growing body of scientific literature on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is challenging and ongoing critical appraisal of this output is essential. We aimed to collate and summarize all published systematic reviews on the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Methods: Nine databases (Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Sciences, PDQ-Evidence, WHO's Global Research, LILACS and Epistemonikos) were searched from December 1, 2019 to March 24, 2020. Systematic reviews analyzing primary studies of COVID-19 were included. Two authors independently undertook screening, selection, extraction (data on clinical symptoms, prevalence, pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, diagnostic test assessment, laboratory and radiological findings) and quality assessment (AMSTAR 2). Meta-analysis on prevalence of clinical outcomes was performed. Results: Eighteen systematic reviews were included; one was empty. Using AMSTAR 2, confidence in the results of 13 reviews was rated as "critically low", one as "low", one as "moderate" and two as "high". Symptoms of COVID-19 were (range values of point estimates): fever (82-95%), cough with or without sputum (58-72%), dyspnea (26-59%), myalgia or muscle fatigue (29-51%), sore throat (10-13%), headache (8-12%) and gastrointestinal complaints (5-9%). Severe symptoms were more common in men. Elevated C-reactive protein (associated with lymphocytopenia) and lactate dehydrogenase, and slightly elevated aspartate and alanine aminotransferase, were commonly described. Thrombocytopenia and elevated levels of procalcitonin and cardiac troponin I were associated with severe disease. Chest imaging described a frequent pattern of uni- or bilateral multilobar ground-glass opacity. Only one review investigated the impact of medication (chloroquine) but found no verifiable clinical data. All-cause mortality ranged from 0.3% to 14%. Conclusions: Confidence in the results of most reviews was "critically low". Future studies and systematic reviews should adhere to established methodologies. The majority of included systematic reviews were hampered by imprecise search strategy and no previous protocol submission. Protocol registration: This is an extension of a PROSPERO protocol (CRD42020170623); protocol available on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/6xtyw).

positive: Protocol of a randomized controlled trial testing inhaled Nitric Oxide in mechanically ventilated patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome in COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2). INTRODUCTION. Severe acute respiratory syndrome due to novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) related infection (COVID-19) is characterized by severe ventilation perfusion mismatch leading to refractory hypoxemia. To date, there is no specific treatment available for COVID-19. Nitric oxide is a selective pulmonary vasodilator gas used as a rescue therapy in refractory hypoxemia due to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). In has also shown invitro and clinical evidence that inhaled nitric oxide gas (iNO) has antiviral activity against other strains of coronavirus. The primary aim of this study is to determine whether inhaled NO improves oxygenation in patients with hypoxic COVID-19. This is a multicenter randomized controlled trial with 1:1 individual allocation. Patients will be blinded to the treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS. Intubated patients admitted to the intensive care unit with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe hypoxemia will be randomized to receive inhalation of NO (treatment group) or not (control group). Treatment will be stopped when patients are free from hypoxemia for more than 24 hours. The primary outcome evaluates levels of oxygenation between the two groups at 48 hours. Secondary outcomes include rate of survival rate at 28 and 90 days in the two groups, time to resolution of severe hypoxemia, time to achieve negativity of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION. The study protocol has been approved by the Investigational Review Board of Xijing Hospital (Xi’an, China) and by the Partners Human Research Committee (Boston, USA). Recruitment will start after approval of both IRBs and local IRBs at other enrolling centers. Results of this study will be published in scientific journals, presented at scientific meetings, reported through flyers and posters, and published on related website or media in combating against this widespread contagious disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION. Clinicaltrials.gov. NCT04306393

positive: ChemoPROphyLaxIs with hydroxychloroquine For covId-19 infeCtious disease (PROLIFIC) to prevent covid-19 infection in frontline healthcare workers: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether chemoprophylaxis with hydroxychloroquine versus placebo increases time to contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in frontline healthcare workers. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: 1. To determine whether chemoprophylaxis with daily versus weekly dosing of hydroxychloroquine increases time to contracting COVID-19 disease in frontline healthcare workers. 2. To compare the number of COVID-19 cases between each trial arm on the basis of positive tests (as per current clinical testing methods and/or serology). 3. To compare the percentage of COVID-19 positive individuals with current testing methods versus serologically-proven COVID-19 in each trial arm. 4. To compare COVID-19 disease severity in each trial arm. 5. To compare recovery time from COVID-19 infection in each trial arm. EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVES: 1. To determine compliance (as measured by trough pharmacokinetic hydroxychloroquine levels) on COVID-19 positive tests. 2. To determine if genetic factors determine susceptibility to COVID-19 disease or response to treatment. 3. To determine if blood group determines susceptibility to COVID-19 disease. 4. To compare serum biomarkers of COVID-19 disease in each arm. TRIAL DESIGN: Double-blind, multi-centre, 2-arm (3:3:2 ratio) randomised placebo-controlled trial PARTICIPANTS: National Health Service (NHS) workers who have direct patient contact delivering care to patients with COVID-19. Participants in the trial will be recruited from a number of NHS hospitals directly caring for patients with COVID-19. INCLUSION CRITERIA: 1. Have given written informed consent to participate. 2. Be aged 18 years to 70 years. 3. Not previously have been diagnosed with COVID-19. 4. Work in a high-risk secondary or tertiary healthcare setting (hospitals accepting COVID-19 patients) with direct patient-facing care. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: 1. Known COVID-19 positive test at baseline (if available). 2. Symptomatic for possible COVID-19 at baseline. 3. Known hypersensitivity reaction to hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine or 4-aminoquinolines. 4. Known retinal disease. 5. Known porphyria. 6. Known chronic kidney disease (CKD; eGFR<30ml/min). 7. Known epilepsy. 8. Known heart failure or conduction problems. 9. Known significant liver disease (Gilbert’s syndrome is permitted). 10. Known glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency. 11. Currently taking any of the following contraindicated medications: Digoxin, Chloroquine, Halofantrine, Amiodarone, Moxifloxacin, Cyclosporin, Mefloquine, Praziquantel, Ciprofloxacin, Clarithromycin, Prochlorperazine, Fluconazole. 12. Currently taking hydroxychloroquine or having a clinical indication for taking hydroxychloroquine. 13. Currently breastfeeding. 14. Unable to be followed-up during the trial. 15. Current or future involvement in the active treatment phase of other interventional research studies (excluding observational/non-interventional studies) before study follow-up visit. 16. Not able to use or have access to a modern phone device/web-based technology. 17. Any other clinical reason which may preclude entry in the opinion of the investigator. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: A).. Daily hydroxychloroquine or B).. Weekly hydroxychloroquine or C).. Placebo. The maximum treatment period is approximately 13 weeks per participant. Hydroxychloroquine-identical matched placebo tablets will ensure that all participants are taking the same number and dosing regimen of tablets across the three trial arms. There is no variation in the dose of hydroxychloroquine by weight. The dosing regimen for the three arms of the study (A, B, C) are described in further detail below. Arm A: Active Hydroxychloroquine (– daily dosing and placebo-matched hydroxychloroquine - weekly dosing). Form: Tablets Route: Oral. Dose and Frequency: Active hydroxychloroquine: Days 1-2: Loading phase - 400mg (2 x 200mg tablets) taken twice a day for 2 days. Days 3 onwards: Maintenance Phase - 200mg (1 x 200mg tablet) taken once daily, every day for 90 days (~3 months). Days 3 onwards: Maintenance Phase - 2 tablets taken once a week on the same day each week (every 7(th) day) for 90 days (~3 months). Arm B: Active Hydroxychloroquine (- weekly dosing and placebo matched hydroxychloroquine – daily dosing.) Form: Tablets Route: Oral. Dose and Frequency: Days 1-2: Loading Phase - 400mg (2 x 200mg tablets) taken twice daily for 2 days. Days 3 onwards: Maintenance Phase - 400mg (2 x 200mg tablets) taken once a week on the same day each week (every 7(th) day) for 90 days (~3 months). Days 3 onwards: Maintenance Phase - 1 tablet taken once daily for 90 days (~3 months). Arm C: Matched placebo Hydroxychloroquine (- daily dosing and matched placebo hydroxychloroquine - weekly dosing.) Form: Table. Route: Oral. Frequency: Days 1-2: Loading Phase - 2 tablets taken twice daily for 2 days. Days 3 onwards: Maintenance Phase - 1 tablet taken once daily for 90 days (~3 months). Days 3 onwards: Maintenance Phase - 2 tablets taken once a week on the same day each week (every 7th day) for 90 days (~3 months). A schematic of the dosing schedule can be found in the full study protocol (Additional File 1). MAIN OUTCOMES: Time to diagnosis of positive COVID-19 disease (defined by record of date of symptoms onset and confirmed by laboratory test) RANDOMISATION: Participants will be randomised to either hydroxychloroquine dosed daily with weekly placebo, HCQ dosed weekly with daily placebo, or placebo dosed daily and weekly. Randomisation will be in a 3:3:2 ratio [hydroxychloroquine-(daily), hydroxychloroquine-(weekly), placebo], using stratified block randomisation. Random block sizes will be used, and stratification will be by study site. BLINDING (MASKING): Participants and trial investigators consenting participants, delivering trial assessments and procedures will be blinded to intervention. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A sufficient number of participants will be enrolled so that approximately 1000 participants in total will have data suitable for the primary statistical analysis. It is anticipated that approximately 1,200 participants will need to be enrolled in total, to allow for a 20% dropout over the period of the trial. This would result in approximately 450:450:300 participants randomised to hydroxychloroquine daily, hydroxychloroquine weekly+daily matched placebo or matched-placebo daily and weekly. TRIAL STATUS: V 1.0, 7(th) April 2020 EU Clinical Trials Register EudraCT Number: 2020-001331-26 Date of registration: 14(th) April 2020 Trial registered before first participant enrolment. Trial site is Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. Recruitment started on 11(th) May 2020. It is anticipated that the trial will run for 12 months. The recruitment end date cannot yet be accurately predicted. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).

positive: Deficiencies in the designs and interventions of COVID-19 clinical trials

positive: Field trial evaluation of a reo-coronavirus calf diarrhea vaccine. Field trials were conducted using an experimental, modified live virus, oral vaccine for prevention of reo- and coronavirus calf diarrhea. Prior to the trials, one or both of the specific causative agents were identified from affected calves in each participating herd. In 21 herds, sequential trials were conducted in which results of uninterrupted vaccination were compared with disease rates during a preceding or subsequent control period. In these herds there was a statistically significant reduction in the morbidity and mortality from disease in 1,598 vaccinates compared with the rates in 829 prevaccination control calves. Morbidity and mortality in 206 post-vaccination control calves rose marginally above the rates in the same vaccinates. In 26 other herds, where double blind trials were conducted, rates of morbidity and mortality from disease were virtually the same for 1,080 vaccinated calves and 355 placebo calves. Vaccinates in the sequential trials had the lowest morbidity and mortality rates of any test group in either field trial format. In a selected dairy herd, both field trial formats were implemented and the results compared. In the double blind trial, vaccinates and placebo calves had comparable rates of morbidity and mortality from disease. When a sequential trial was later implemented, a statistically significant reduction in morbidity and mortality occurred in vaccinates compared with rates in control calves.

positive: Repositioned chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine as antiviral prophylaxis for COVID-19: A protocol for rapid systematic review of randomized controlled trials Since the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak rapidly evolved into a pandemic, there is an urgent need for rapid development, identification and confirmation of efficacious antiviral prophylaxis. In this setting, the existing drugs chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) which has suggestive evidence of efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease has become prime candidates to be repositioned as therapeutic and preventative agents, and a growing number of clinical trials have been registered to study their preventative potential for at-risk populations using a range of dosing schemes and outcome measures. This rapid systematic review protocol aims to provide streamlined and timely synthesis on methodologies and results of randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of CQ and HCQ in hopes that this will constructively inform further research as well as public health policy.

positive: Effect of hydroxychloroquine on COVID-19 prevention in cancer patients undergoing treatment: a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: In this study, we investigate the effect of hydroxychloroquine on the prevention of Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) in cancer patients being treated. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a multi-centre, two-arm, parallel-group, triple-blind, phase 2-3 randomised controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: All patients over the age of 15 from 5 types of cancer are included in the study. Patients with acute lymphoid and myeloid leukemias in the first line treated with curative intent, patients with high-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma treated with leukemia protocols and patients with non-metastatic breast and colon cancer in the first line of treatment will enter the study. The exclusion criteria will include known sensitivity to Hydroxychloroquine, weight below 35 kilograms, history of retinopathy, history of any cardiac disease, acute respiratory tract infection in the last 2 months, having COVID-19 in the first two weeks of entering the trial, having Diabetes Mellitus, having an immuno-suppressive disease other than cancer, having chronic pulmonary disease and taking immuno-suppressant drug other than chemotherapeutic agents for current cancer. This study is performed in five academic centres affiliated to Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Patients are randomly assigned to two groups; one being given hydroxychloroquine and the other is given placebo. During two months of treatment, the two groups are treated with either hydroxychloroquine (Amin® Pharmaceutical Company, Isfahan, Iran) or placebo (identical in terms of shape, colour, smell) as a single 200 mg tablet every other day. Patients will be monitored for COVID-19 symptoms during the follow-up period. If signs or symptoms occur (fever, cough, shortness of breath), they will be examined and investigated with a high-resolution computed tomography (CT) scan of the lungs, COVID-19 specific IgM, IgG antibody assay and a nucleic acid amplification test (NAT) for the SARS-CoV-2 virus. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary end point of this study is to investigate the incidence of COVID-19 in patients being treated for their cancer over a 2-month period. RANDOMISATION: Randomisation will be performed using randomly permuted blocks. By using an online website (www.randomization.com) the randomization sequence will be produced by quadruple blocks. The allocation ratio in intervention and control groups is 1:1. BLINDING (MASKING): Participants and caregivers do not know whether the patient is in the intervention or the control group. The outcome assessor and the data analyst are also blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The calculated total sample size is 60 patients, with 30 patients in each group. TRIAL STATUS: The trial began on April 14, 2020 and recruitment is ongoing. Recruitment is anticipated to be completed by June 14, 2020 There has been no change in study protocol since approval, protocol version 1 was approved April 12, 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial has been registered by the title of “Effect of Hydroxychloroquine on Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) prevention in cancer patients under treatment” in Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT) with code “IRCT20200405046958N1”, https://www.irct.ir/trial/46946. Registration date is April 14, 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: A new clinical trial to test high-dose vitamin C in patients with COVID-19

positive: Randomization amid a pandemic - a critical appraisal regarding convalescent plasma therapy clinical trials for COVID-19 patients Abstract The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is spreading rapidly, a pandemic that has already affected millions of people across the world Currently there are no vaccines or drugs approved for COVID-19 Initial data which are coming from large clinical trials using Hydroxychloroquine, Lopinavir/Ritonavir, Remdesevir, and Favipiravir are not satisfactory against COVID-19 till now and we are in the midst of a worldwide public health threat In this context human convalescent plasma is considered as an option for treatment of COVID-19 disease Convalescent plasma therapy is a classic adaptive immunotherapy which involves the administration of antibodies against COVID-19 to a COVID-19 patient for the purpose of treating the viral disease Over the last two decades, convalescent plasma therapy was used for the treatment of 2003 SARS-CoV-1 epidemic, 2009-2010 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, the 2012 Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS)-CoV epidemic and 2014-2016 Ebola epidemic

positive: Assessment of Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine Safety Profiles: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Background: Recently, chloroquine (CQ) and its derivative hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have emerged as potential antiviral and immunomodulatory options for the treatment of 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19). To examine the safety profiles of these medications, we systematically evaluated the adverse events (AEs) of these medications from published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, and the ClinicalTrials.gov for all the RCTs comparing CQ or HCQ with placebo or other active agents, published before March 31, 2020. The random-effects or fixed-effects models were used to pool the risk estimates relative ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for the outcomes. Results: The literature search yielded 23 and 17 studies for CQ and HCQ, respectively, that satisfied our inclusion criteria. Of these studies, we performed meta-analysis on the ones that were placebo-controlled, which included 6 studies for CQ and 14 studies for HCQ. We did not limit our analysis to published reports involving viral treatment alone; data also included the usage of either CQ or HCQ for the treatment of other diseases. The trials for the CQ consisted of a total of 2,137 participants (n=1,077 CQ, n=1,060 placebo), while the trials for HCQ involved 1,096 participants (n=558 HCQ and n=538 placebo). The overall mild or total AEs were statistically higher comparing CQ or HCQ to placebo. The AEs were further categorized into four groups and analyses revealed that neurologic, gastrointestinal, dermatologic, and ophthalmic AEs were higher in participants taking CQ compared to placebo. Although this was not evident in HCQ treated groups, further analyses suggested that there were more AEs attributed to other organ system that were not included in the categorized meta-analyses. Additionally, meta-regression analyses revealed that total AEs was affected by dosage for the CQ group. Conclusions: Taken together, we found that participants taking either CQ or HCQ have more AEs than participants taking placebo. Precautionary measures should be taken when using these drugs to treat COVID-19.

positive: Coalition: Advocacy for prospective clinical trials to test the post-exposure potential of hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19 Our coalition of public health experts, doctors, and scientists worldwide want to draw attention to the need for high-quality evaluation protocols of the potential beneficial effect of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a post-exposure drug for exposed people, meaning people with close contact with positive tested patients, including home and medical caregivers. We have reviewed the mechanisms of antiviral effect of HCQ, the risk-benefit ratio taking into consideration the PK/PD of HCQ and the thresholds of efficacy. We have studied its use as an antimalarial, an antiviral, and an immunomodulating drug and concluded that the use of HCQ at does matching that of the standard treatment of Systemic Lupus erythematous, which has proven safety and efficacy in terms of HCQ blood and tissue concentration adapted to bodyweight (2,3), at 6â¯mg/kg/day 1 (loading dose) followed by 5â¯mg/kg/day, with a maximum limit of 600â¯mg/day in all cases should swiftly be clinically evaluated as a post-exposure drug for exposed people.

positive: Current Clinical Trials and Vaccine Development Strategies for Corona Virus Disease (COVID-19) Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has reached global epidemic status claiming more than 319K lives and affecting more than 4 81M people and counting worldwide Considering the severity of the situation and low recovery rate many research institutions and pharmaceutical industries are rushing to learn more about this new virus and the morbid physiology of this disease with effective diagnostic methods, therapeutic agents and vaccines Various approaches are highlighted for comparing the possible treatment methods available for COVID-19 some of which are BCG vaccination on COVID-19 and Non-pharmaceutical interventions, drug based clinical trials of Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromycin, chloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, Remdesivir, Stem Cell therapy and mesenchymal stromal cell therapy, etc

positive: COVID-19 and therapeutic drugs repurposing in hand: the need for collaborative efforts Abstract The novel pandemic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is responsible to cause coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). It is a global pandemic disease and has reached a new dimension with a higher death ratio. On 2 June 2020, World Health Organization (WHO) data showed more than 6,194,500 confirmed and 376,300 deaths globally due to the COVID-19. There are currently no approved medications or vaccines which have been claimed to be effective in COVID-19 prevention or treatment. Drug repurposing of available drugs and research studies for the search of new therapeutic agents are underway in various countries to try different combinations to treat their patients. It is too early to be sure of them as safe treatments because some reports seem to suggest some alarming side effects. However, a lot of work needs to be done to achieve a successful treatment result and the full safety and efficacy of the trial drugs will take some time to be developed. In this narrative perspective review, we addressed evidence-based literature on various possible antiviral medications, plant-derived antivirals drugs, and other valuable treatment options for COVID-19 management.

positive: What the oncologist needs to know about COVID-19 infection in cancer patients

positive: Current evidence for directed and supportive investigational therapies against COVID-19 Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global health crisis. There is currently a great need for effective and safe therapies directed at the disease, but no drugs are presently registered for use in COVID-19. Several directed therapies have been proposed, and most are still in clinical trials. Currently available published, peer-reviewed results mostly involve small sample sizes with study limitations restricting the interpretation of the findings. Many trials currently published also do not have a control group, limiting the interpretation of the effect of the intervention. Investigational directed therapies as well as investigational supportive therapies against COVID-19 are reviewed here. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine show promise as directed therapies, but current trial results are conflicting. Lopinavir/ritonavir also shows potential, but was started late in the disease course in most trials. No randomised controlled evidence is currently available for remdesivir and favipiravir. Corticosteroid use is not recommended for directed therapy against COVID-19, and the role of tocilizumab is currently unclear, based on limited evidence. Early initiation of investigational directed therapies may provide benefit in selected patients. The results from larger randomised controlled trials will clarify the place of these therapies in COVID-19 treatment.

positive: Rheumotologitsts' view on the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 The current pandemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) calls urgently for effective therapies. Anti-malarial medicine chloroquine (CQ) and particularly its chemical analogue hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have been recommended as promising candidate therapeutics that are now under either compassionate off-label use or clinical trials for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. However, there are public concerns and disputes about both the safety and efficacy of CQ and HCQ for this new application. Given the fact that for decades HCQ has been approved as an immunomodulatory drug for the long term treatment of chronic rheumatic diseases, as experienced rheumatologists, we would like to share our thoughts in this regard and trigger a brainstorm among clinical care providers for exchanging their diverse opinions on this urgent topic.

positive: Off‐Label Therapies for COVID‐19—Are We All In This Together? SARS-CoV-2 continues to spread rapidly outside of mainland China. As of April 6, there are over 300,000 cases and 10,000 deaths in the US. Effective therapies for the novel Coronavirus are urgently needed and over 200 clinical trials are now underway across the globe. Recognizing the need for robust randomized control trials, the World Health Organization (WHO) recently organized a multinational randomized trial-the SOLIDARITY trial-to study the effect of drugs that have been identified as promising based on in-vitro data and the early clinical experience with COVID-19: Remdesivir, lopinavir and ritonavir; lopinavir and ritonavir + interferon; and chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine or Chloroquine for Treatment or Prophylaxis of COVID-19: A Living Systematic Review. BACKGROUND Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have antiviral effects in vitro against severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). PURPOSE To summarize evidence about the benefits and harms of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for the treatment or prophylaxis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). DATA SOURCES PubMed (via MEDLINE), EMBASE (via Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, bioRxiv, Preprints, ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry from 1 December 2019 until 8 May 2020. STUDY SELECTION Studies in any language reporting efficacy or safety outcomes from hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine use in any setting in adults or children with suspected COVID-19 or at risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection. DATA EXTRACTION Independent, dually performed data extraction and quality assessments. DATA SYNTHESIS Four randomized controlled trials, 10 cohort studies, and 9 case series assessed treatment effects of the medications, but no studies evaluated prophylaxis. Evidence was conflicting and insufficient regarding the effect of hydroxychloroquine on such outcomes as all-cause mortality, progression to severe disease, clinical symptoms, and upper respiratory virologic clearance with antigen testing. Several studies found that patients receiving hydroxychloroquine developed a QTc interval of 500 ms or greater, but the proportion of patients with this finding varied among the studies. Two studies assessed the efficacy of chloroquine; 1 trial, which compared higher-dose (600 mg twice daily for 10 days) with lower-dose (450 mg twice daily on day 1 and once daily for 4 days) therapy, was stopped owing to concern that the higher dose therapy increased lethality and QTc interval prolongation. An observational study that compared adults with COVID-19 receiving chloroquine phosphate 500 mg once or twice daily with patients not receiving chloroquine found minor fever resolution and virologic clearance benefits with chloroquine. LIMITATION There were few controlled studies, and control for confounding was inadequate in observational studies. CONCLUSION Evidence on the benefits and harms of using hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to treat COVID-19 is very weak and conflicting. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

positive: Azithromycin and COVID-19: Prompt early use at first signs of this infection in adults and children, an approach worthy of consideration The devastating effects of the coronavirus designated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have led to urgent attempts to find effective therapeutic agents for inpatient and outpatient treatment of COVID-19. Initial enthusiasm for the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin has abated. However, as a result of positive clinical experience with azithromycin used alone during the first few days of the flu-like illness caused by this coronavirus, we recommend formal clinical trials using azithromycin early in the course of a COVID-19 infection. There is one clinical trial initiated, the individually randomized, telemedicine-based, "Azithromycin for COVID-19 Treatment in Outpatients Nationwide" based at the University of California San Francisco. This placebo-controlled trial is designed to determine the efficacy of a single 1.2-g dose of oral azithromycin to prevent COVID-19 patient progression to hospitalization. We recommend formal clinical trials of azithromycin in its prepackaged form at the first sign of COVID-19 infection in adults and children, using an initial adult dose of 500 mg followed by 250 mg per day for 4 days, a total cumulative dose of 1.5 g, and for children 5 to 18 years of age, 10 mg/kg on the first day followed by 5 mg/kg for 4 days.

positive: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative impact of the use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine on outcomes important to patients with COVID 19. DESIGN: This is the protocol of a living systematic review. DATA SOURCES: We will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), trial registries, grey literature and in a centralised repository in L-OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L-OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L-OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES AND METHODS: We will follow a common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews, already published and submitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation). We will include randomised controlled trials evaluating the effect of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine - as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs - versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Randomised trials evaluating chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in infections caused by other coronaviruses, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19 will be searched in case no direct evidence from randomised trials is found, or if the direct evidence provides low- or very low-certainty for critical outcomes. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will perform random-effects meta-analyses and use GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it if the conclusions change or there are substantial updates. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.

positive: First Clinical Use of Lenzilumab to Neutralize GM-CSF in Patients with Severe and Critical COVID-19 Pneumonia Background: In COVID-19, high levels of granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) and inflammatory myeloid cells correlate with disease severity, cytokine storm, and respiratory failure. With this rationale, we used lenzilumab, an anti-human GM-CSF monoclonal antibody, to treat patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and risk factors for poor outcomes were treated with lenzilumab 600 mg intravenously for three doses through an emergency single-use IND application. Patient characteristics, clinical and laboratory outcomes, and adverse events were recorded. All patients receiving lenzilumab through May 1, 2020 were included in this report. Results: Twelve patients were treated with lenzilumab. Clinical improvement was observed in 11 out of 12 (92%), with a median time to discharge of 5 days. There was a significant improvement in oxygenation: The proportion of patients with SpO2/FiO2 < 315 at the end of observation was 8% vs. compared to 67% at baseline (p=0.00015). A significant improvement in mean CRP and IL-6 values on day 3 following lenzilumab administration was also observed (137.3 mg/L vs 51.2 mg/L, p = 0.040; 26.8 pg/mL vs 16.1 pg/mL, p = 0.035; respectively). Cytokine analysis showed a reduction in inflammatory myeloid cells two days after lenzilumab treatment. There were no treatment-emergent adverse events attributable to lenzilumab, and no mortality in this cohort of patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Conclusions: In high-risk COVID-19 patients with severe pneumonia, GM-CSF neutralization with lenzilumab was safe and associated with improved clinical outcomes, oxygen requirement, and cytokine storm.

positive: Mechanistic rationale of drugs, Primary endpoints, Geographical distribution of clinical trials against Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-2: A Systematic Review Objective To do a systematic review and critical appraisal of the ongoing clinical trials that are assessing various therapeutic interventions against SARS-CoV-2 with an aim to provide insight into the various interventions tested, clinical rationale, geographical distribution of the trials as well as the endpoints assessed in the studies. Design Rapid systematic review and critical appraisal of the ongoing clinical trials against SARS-CoV-2. Data sources ClinicalTrials.gov, World health organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and Cochrane COVID registry were assessed till May 11th 2020. Study selection Studies on any intervention based randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective clinical studies on SARS-CoV-2 in patients [≥]18 years of age. Studies on autopsy series, preclinical studies, diagnostic methods, mathematical modelling, epidemiology and health services research, pediatric populations were excluded. Data extraction The data was extracted by two authors independently into pre-defined forms based on the SPIRIT 2013 checklist. The data was extracted on various domains such as trial number, study title, abstract of the study, interventions assessed, sample size, phase of the study, study sponsor, primary endpoint assessed and country of study. Results The search resulted in 3242 ongoing studies of which 829 studies were included. There are 134 different drug-based interventions being assessed in 463 clinical trials as treatment options. Seventy-two studies assessed preventive options of which 53 are drug-based prophylaxis and 19 assessed vaccines. Herbal medicines are being assessed in 79 studies; convalescent plasma therapy in 56 studies; stem cell based interventions in 42 studies; anesthesia-based interventions in 31 studies, machine-based interventions in 24 studies, mental health- based interventions in18 studies, rehabilitation based interventions in 12 studies and miscellaneous interventions in 32 studies. China accounts for 35% of all ongoing clinical studies followed by USA 23%, France 7%, Spain 3.3%,Canada 2%, multi-country studies account only for 1.5% (13) and other countries together account for 28%.Amongst the 463 studies assessing drug-based treatment options, studies that are funded by federal and academic institutions are 79.6%, pharmaceutical company funded studies are 15.11% and no funding information is available in 5.10%. The definitive outcomes like mortality are being assessed as primary outcome in 22.8% of the studies only and need for ventilator in 6.2% of the studies. Rest of the studies has primary outcomes such as clinical recovery (15.9%), viral clearance(17.4%), time to recovery (10.1%), oxygen improvement (5.6%), ICU admission (1.9%), lab and imaging(6.4%), adverse effects (5.3%) and symptom reduction(1.5%),no outcome reported(6.2%) which account for 71% of the studies. Amongst the pharmaceutical company funded drug-based studies, only 20% of the studies had mortality as the primary outcome. Only 5.5% of the ongoing clinical trials are specifically designed to assess the most vulnerable population like elderly, patients with comorbidities and cancer. The most common intervention being tested against COVID-19 are antimalarial medications with 105 clinical studies. Hydroxychloroquine is the most common drug being tested with 83 ongoing studies. Conclusion Multiple intervention based clinical studies against SARS-CoV-2 are being performed throughout the world with a high concentration of clinical trials in the developed world. There is a high concern that most of the studies maybe repetitive; elderly and patients with comorbidities are being underrepresented; definite endpoints like mortality are being assessed in only one-fifth of the studies.

positive: Two Randomized Controlled Trials of Bacillus Calmette-Guérin Vaccination to reduce absenteeism among health care workers and hospital admission by elderly persons during the COVID-19 pandemic: A structured summary of the study protocols for two randomised controlled trials OBJECTIVES: The objectives of these two separate trials are: (1) to reduce health care workers (HCWs) absenteeism; and (2) to reduce hospital admission among the elderly during the COVID-19 pandemic through BCG vaccination. TRIAL DESIGN: Two separate multi-centre placebo-controlled parallel group randomized trials PARTICIPANTS: (1) Health care personnel working in the hospital or ambulance service where they will take care of patients with the COVID-19 infection and (2) elderly ≥60 years. The HCW trial is being undertaken in 9 hospitals. The elderly trial is being undertaken in locations in the community in Nijmegen, Utrecht, and Veghel, in the Netherlands, using senior citizen organisations to facilitate recruitment. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: For both trials the intervention group will be randomized to vaccination with 0.1 ml of the licensed BCG vaccine (Danish strain 1331, SSI, Denmark, equivalent to 0.075 mg attenuated M. bovis). The placebo group consists of 0.1 ml 0.9% NaCl, which is the same amount, and has the same colour and appearance as the suspended BCG vaccine. MAIN OUTCOMES: (1) Number of days of unplanned work absenteeism in HCWs for any reason which can be continuously measured on a bi-weekly basis, and (2) the cumulative incidence of hospital admission due to documented COVID-19. RANDOMISATION: Participants will be randomized to BCG vaccine or placebo (1;1) centrally using a computer- based system, stratified by study centre. BLINDING (MASKING): Subjects, investigators, physicians and outcome assessors are blinded for the intervention. Only the pharmacist assistant that prepares- and research personnel that administers- study medicines are unblinded. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): (1) The sample size for the first trial is N=1500 HCWs randomised 1:1 to either BCG vaccine (n=750) and placebo (n=750) and (2) The sample size for the second trial is N=1600 elderly persons randomised to BCG vaccine (n=800) and the placebo group (n=800). TRIAL STATUS: HCW: version 4.0, 24-04-2020. Recruitment began 25-03-2020 and was completed on the 23-04-2020. Elderly: version 3.0, 04-04-2020. Recruitment began 16-04- 2020 and is ongoing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The HCWs trial was registered 31-03-2020 at clinicaltrials.gov (identifier: NCT04328441) and registered 20-03-2020 at the Dutch Trial Registry (trialregister.nl, identifier Trial NL8477). The elderly trial was registered 22-04-2020 at the Dutch trial registry with number NL8547. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocols will be attached as additional files, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Efficacy of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19. OBJECTIVE The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), also called COVID-19, has caused a pandemic which has swiftly involved the entire world and raised great public health concerns. The scientific community is actively exploring treatments that would potentially be effective in combating COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine has been demonstrated to limit the replication of SARS-CoV-2 virus in vitro. In malarial pandemic countries, chloroquine is widely used to treat malaria. In malarial non-pandemic nations, chloroquine is not widely used. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine share similar chemical structures and mechanisms of action. The aim of this study was to indirectly investigate the efficacy of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 by determining the prevalence of COVID-19 in malaria pandemic and non-pandemic nations. We sought evidence to support or refute the hypothesis that these drugs could show efficacy in the treatment of COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS We reviewed in vitro studies, in vivo studies, original studies, clinical trials, and consensus reports, that were conducted to evaluate the antiviral activities of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine. The studies on "COVID-19 and its allied treatment were found from World Health Organization (WHO), ISI-Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Google Scholar, and clinical trial registries. The search was based on keywords: antiviral drugs, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, COVID-19, COVID-19 treatment modalities, and coronavirus. In addition, we analyzed the prevalence of COVID-19 in malaria pandemic and non-pandemic countries. The review and analyses were performed on March 28, 2020. RESULTS For this study, we identified a total of 09 published articles: 03 clinical trials with sample size 150; 03 in vitro studies and 03 expert consensus reports. These studies were all suggestive that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine can successfully treat COVID-19 infections. We found that COVID-19 infections are highly pandemic in countries where malaria is least pandemic and are least pandemic in nations where malaria is highly pandemic. CONCLUSIONS Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have antiviral characteristics in vitro. The findings support the hypothesis that these drugs have efficacy in the treatment of COVID-19. People are currently using these drugs for malaria. It is reasonable, given the hypothetical benefit of these two drugs, that they are now being tested in clinical trials to assess their effectiveness to combat this global health crisis.

positive: Heart Failure Collaboratory Statement on Clinical Trials in the Landscape of COVID-19

positive: Advance of Novel Coronavirus Registration Clinical Trial Background.This research aims to analyze the clinical characteristics of a novel Corona Virus Disease (COVID-19) registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR), and to provide an information-based data foundation and information reference for curbing the spread of the COVID-19 epidemic. Methods.The ChiCTR database was comprehensively searched, and the COVID-19 research registration information as of February 24, 2020 was counted. Descriptive analysis of registration time trends and geographical distribution. Chi-square test was used to compare the statistical differences between different study types, intervention methods, research phases and major sponsors. Frequency studies were used to analyze the characteristics of CMT and BI therapy. Results.232 COVID-19 studies registered at the ChiCTR Center were collected. The overall number of COVID-19 registrations was increased. Hubei Province, China has the largest number of registrations, followed by Guangdong, Zhejiang and Sichuan. There were significant differences between the number of participants (P=0.000), study duration (P=0.008), study assignment (P=0.000), and blind method (P=0.000) for different study types. Significant differences could be seen in the dimensions of multicenter study(P=0.022), of participants numbe(P=0.000), study duration(P=0.000) and study assignment(P=0.001) for the four intervention methods. There were significant differences in study assignment (P=0.043) between the early and late studies. CMT drugs with high research frequency are chloroquine, lopinavir / ritonavir, and I-IFN, which are all in phase 4; BI was Cell therapy, plasma therapy, Thymosin, and M/P-AB, which are all in early stages. Conclusion.There were problems of unclear classification of research types and irregular registration behavior. Also, within the studies researched, heterogeneity exists for various dimensions. Different research types, intervention methods, and research stages lead to significant differences in some dimensions of the COVID-19 study. Finally, statistical high-frequency research drugs can provide more treatment options and evidence-based evidence for the clinical practice.

positive: Rapid Multiplex Testing for Upper Respiratory Pathogens in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Controlled Trial BACKGROUND: Acute upper respiratory tract infections are a common cause of emergency department (ED) visits and often result in unnecessary antibiotic treatment. METHODS: We conducted a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the impact of a rapid, multipathogen respiratory panel (RP) test vs usual care (control). Patients were eligible if they were ≥12 months old, had symptoms of upper respiratory infection or influenza-like illness, and were not on antibiotics. The primary outcome was antibiotic prescription; secondary outcomes included antiviral prescription, disposition, and length of stay (ClinicalTrials.gov# NCT02957136). RESULTS: Of 191 patients enrolled, 93 (49%) received RP testing; 98 (51%) received usual care. Fifty-three (57%) RP and 7 (7%) control patients had a virus detected and reported during the ED visit (P = .0001). Twenty (22%) RP patients and 33 (34%) usual care patients received antibiotics during the ED visit (–12%; 95% confidence interval, –25% to 0.4%; P = .06/0.08); 9 RP patients received antibiotics despite having a virus detected. The magnitude of antibiotic reduction was greater in children (–19%) vs adults (–9%, post hoc analysis). There was no difference in antiviral use, length of stay, or disposition. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid RP testing was associated with a trend toward decreased antibiotic use, suggesting a potential benefit from more rapid viral tests in the ED. Future studies should determine if specific groups are more likely to benefit from testing and evaluate the relative cost and effectiveness of broad testing, focused testing, and a combined diagnostic and antimicrobial stewardship approach.

positive: Current development of COVID-19 diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics Abstract A novel coronavirus, designated as SARS-CoV-2, first emerged in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China, in late December 2019. The rapidly increasing number of cases has caused worldwide panic. In this review, we describe some currently applied diagnostic approaches, as well as therapeutics and vaccines, to prevent, treat and control further outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

positive: Challenges in Drug Development Posed by the COVID‐19 Pandemic: An Opportunity for Clinical Pharmacology The unprecedented challenges posed by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic highlight the urgency for applying clinical pharmacology and model‐informed drug development in (i) dosage optimization for COVID‐19 therapies, (ii) approaching therapeutic dilemmas in clinical trial settings, and (iii) maximizing value of information from impacted non–COVID‐19 trials. More than ever, we have a responsibility for adaptive evidence synthesis with a Totality of Evidence mindset in this race against time across biomedical research, clinical practice, drug development, and regulation.

positive: Reducing mortality and morbidity in patients with severe COVID-19 disease by advancing ongoing trials of Mesenchymal Stromal (stem) Cell (MSC) therapy - Achieving global consensus and visibility for cellular host-directed therapies As of May 17th 2020, the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused 307,395 deaths worldwide, out of 3,917,366 cases reported to the World Health Organization. No specific treatments for reducing mortality or morbidity are yet available. Deaths from COVID-19 will continue to rise globally until effective and appropriate treatments and/or vaccines are found. In search of effective treatments, the global medical, scientific, pharma and funding communities have rapidly initiated over 500 COVID-19 clinical trials on a range of antiviral drug regimens and repurposed drugs in various combinations. A paradigm shift is underway from the current focus of drug development targeting the pathogen, to advancing cellular Host-Directed Therapies (HDTs) for tackling the aberrant host immune and inflammatory responses which underlie the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 and high COVID-19 mortality rates. We focus this editorial specifically on the background to, and the rationale for, the use and evaluation of mesenchymal stromal (Stem) cells (MSCs) in treatment trials of patients with severe COVID-19 disease. Currently, the ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) report a combined 28 trials exploring the potential of MSCs or their products for treatment of COVID-19. MSCs should also be trialed for treatment of other circulating WHO priority Blueprint pathogens such as MERS-CoV which causes upto 34% mortality rates. It's about time funding agencies invested more into development MSCs per se, and also for a range of other HDTs, in combination with other therapeutic interventions. MSC therapy could turn out to be an important contribution to bringing an end to the high COVID-19 death rates and preventing long-term functional disability in those who survive disease.

positive: RECOVERY trial: the UK covid-19 study resetting expectations for clinical trials.

positive: Testing COVID-19 therapies to prevent progression of mild disease

positive: Effect of hydroxychloroquine on prevention of COVID-19 virus infection among healthcare professionals: a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: Comparison of the effect of hydroxychloroquine with placebo to prevent infection from the COVID -19 virus among healthcare professionals TRIAL DESIGN: Single centre, 2-arm, double-blind randomised (ratio 1:1) placebo-controlled trial PARTICIPANTS: Treatment staff who are in contact with patients and have at least 3 shifts a week in Arash hospital affiliated with Tehran University of Medical Sciences, in Iran and who consent to participate in the study. Exclusion criteria include: History of COVID -19 virus infection, clinical symptoms such as fever, nausea, dyspnea and myalgia in the past two months, history of underlying diseases hypersensitivity to hydroxychloroquine and G6PD enzyme deficiency. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention group: Hydroxychloroquine 200 mg tablet of Amin Pharmaceutical. CONTROL GROUP: placebo which is completely similar in form and taste to 200 mg hydroxychloroquine tablet and is manufactured by the same factory (Amin Pharmacy). The dosage is two tablets daily, once a week for one to three months (based on the duration of the Coronavirus epidemic in Tehran). MAIN OUTCOMES: Confirmed COVID-19 virus infection using Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test is the primary outcome. The time period for measuring the primary outcome is any infection within the trial period up to one month after taking the last dose. RANDOMISATION: The randomized block allocation method was developed using Stata version 15 software by an independent researcher, using a block size of six. Allocation to the two treatment groups will be conducted by this researcher using paper labels (random 10-digit codes) in a 1:1 ratio t The labels will be attached to the drug packages in order of randomization. Drug packages will be arranged in a box according to the randomization list. BLINDING (MASKING): Participants and caregivers are blinded to group assignment and the data will be analyzed by an independent statistical expert who is unaware of the treatment allocation. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A total of 282 participants will be randomised with 141 participants the Hydroxychloroquineeach intervention group and 141 participants to the placebo control group TRIAL STATUS: The protocol version number is 99-1-101-47091 and the approval ID is IR.TUMS.VCR.REC.1399.001 and recruitment began April 7, 2020, and is anticipated to be complete by August 7, 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The name of the trial register is Iranian registry of clinical trial (IRCT), registration number is IRCT20120826010664N6, date of trial registration is April 7, 2020, FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine or Chloroquine for Treatment or Prophylaxis of COVID-19: A Living Systematic Review BACKGROUND: Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have antiviral effects in vitro against severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). PURPOSE: To summarize evidence about the benefits and harms of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for the treatment or prophylaxis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). DATA SOURCES: PubMed (via MEDLINE), EMBASE (via Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, bioRxiv, Preprints, ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry from 1 December 2019 until 8 May 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Studies in any language reporting efficacy or safety outcomes from hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine use in any setting in adults or children with suspected COVID-19 or at risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection. DATA EXTRACTION: Independent, dually performed data extraction and quality assessments. DATA SYNTHESIS: Four randomized controlled trials, 10 cohort studies, and 9 case series assessed treatment effects of the medications, but no studies evaluated prophylaxis. Evidence was conflicting and insufficient regarding the effect of hydroxychloroquine on such outcomes as all-cause mortality, progression to severe disease, clinical symptoms, and upper respiratory virologic clearance with antigen testing. Several studies found that patients receiving hydroxychloroquine developed a QTc interval of 500 ms or greater, but the proportion of patients with this finding varied among the studies. Two studies assessed the efficacy of chloroquine; 1 trial, which compared higher-dose (600 mg twice daily for 10 days) with lower-dose (450 mg twice daily on day 1 and once daily for 4 days) therapy, was stopped owing to concern that the higher dose therapy increased lethality and QTc interval prolongation. An observational study that compared adults with COVID-19 receiving chloroquine phosphate 500 mg once or twice daily with patients not receiving chloroquine found minor fever resolution and virologic clearance benefits with chloroquine. LIMITATION: There were few controlled studies, and control for confounding was inadequate in observational studies. CONCLUSION: Evidence on the benefits and harms of using hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to treat COVID-19 is very weak and conflicting. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

positive: Knowledge-based repositioning of the anti-HCV direct antiviral agent Sofosbuvir as SARS-CoV-2 treatment The new human coronavirus named SARS-CoV-2 is a positive-sense RNA virus for which no specific drugs are currently available. A knowledge-based analysis strongly suggests a possible repositioning of the anti-HCV direct antiviral agent (DAA) Sofosbuvir as treatment for SARS-CoV-2. Indeed, the RNA-dependent RNA-polymerases (RdRp) of the two viruses show high sequence and structural homology, supporting the likelihood of binding the Sofosbuvir molecule with similar efficiency. Such a repositioning would allow the containment of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and limit the progression of disease to potentially deadly COVID19.

positive: The race to find a SARS-CoV-2 drug can only be won by a few chosen drugs: a systematic review of registers of clinical trials of drugs aimed at preventing or treating COVID-19 Considering the massive amount of clinical trial registers aimed to find effective drugs for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19, it is challenging to have a comprehensive view of which drugs are being studied more extensively and when is expected that we will have consistent results regarding their effectiveness. This systematic review included all clinical trials on pharmacological therapy related to COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 registered at the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO-ICTRP) up to April 22, 2020. Clinical trials characteristics (country, design, sample size, main outcomes, expected completion data, type of participants, length of the interventions, main outcomes). How many trials and he accumulated sample size by drug or combination of drugs, and by month in 2020 was depicted. We identified 412 clinical trials registers addressing the effect of pharmacological treatments on COVID-19, predominantly from Asia and Europe (42.2% and 31.1% of clinical trials registers, respectively). The most main outcomes studied were clinical recovery (54.4% of the clinical trials registers, respiratory recovery (28.2%) mortality (27.4%), viral load/negativity (20.4%). During 2020, a huge amount of clinical trials are expected to be completed: 41 trials (60,366 participants) using hydroxychloroquine, 20 trials (1,588 participants) using plasma, 18 trials (6,830 participants) using chloroquine, 12 trials (9,938 participants using lopinavir/ritonavir, 11 trials (1,250 participants) using favipiravir, 10 trials ( 2,175 participants) using tocilizumab and 6 trials (13,540 participants) using Remdesivir. The distribution of the number of registered clinical trials among the different therapeutic options leads to an excess of sample size for some and a lack for others. Our data allow us to conclude that by the end of June we will have results of almost 20 trials involving 40000 patients for hydroxychloroquine and 5 trials with 4500 patients for remdesivir; however, low statistical power is expected from the 9 clinical trials testing the efficacy of favipiravir or the 5 testing tocilizumab, since they will recruit less than 1000 patients each one.

positive: Comprehensive overview of COVID-19 clinical trials. Here, we present an overview of the clinical trials that are currently being conducted or have concluded to date on COVID-19 globally. A comprehensive search was conducted to present 16 trial registries from around the world. Collectively, there are 1,528 trials reported for COVID-19 to date. Out of them, 50 studies included paediatric age group from day 0 to less than or equal to 18 years of age. A few 18 studies involve only females and 20 only males. There are 2 trials currently underway in Bangladesh, 4 in Pakistan and 13 in India. Overall, 940 trials are related to medicines and/or interventions. They include standard of care for any viral illness, antivirals, anti-inflammatory and immune altering medications. Two out of 10 vaccine trials are novel vaccines. It is knowledgeable and resourceful to reach out to the concerned sponsor if a physician thinks his patient can benefit from the trials in the region.

positive: [Potential antiviral therapeutics for 2019 Novel Coronavirus]. The recent outbreak of respiratory illness in Wuhan, China is caused by a novel coronavirus, named 2019-nCoV, which is genetically close to a bat-derived coronavirus. 2019-nCoV is categorized as beta genus coronavirus, same as the two other strains - severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV). Antiviral drugs commonly used in clinical practice, including neuraminidase inhibitors (oseltamivir, paramivir, zanamivir, etc.), ganciclovir, acyclovir and ribavirin, are invalid for 2019-nCoV and not recommended. Drugs are possibly effective for 2019-nCoV include: remdesivir, lopinavir / ritonavir, lopinavir / ritonavir combined with interferon-β, convalescent plasma, and monoclonal antibodies. But the efficacy and safety of these drugs for 2019-nCoV pneumonia patients need to be assessed by further clinical trials.

positive: Toward understanding the 2019 Coronavirus and its impact on the heart

positive: 3CLpro inhibitors as a potential therapeutic option for COVID-19: Available evidence and ongoing clinical trials

positive: Testing the repatriated for SARS-Cov2: Should laboratory-based quarantine replace traditional quarantine? Abstract Background An ongoing epidemic of respiratory diseases caused by a novel coronavirus (COVID 2019, SARS-CoV2) started in Wuhan, Hubei, in China at the end of December 2019. The French government decided to repatriate the 337 French nationals living in Wuhan and place them in quarantine in their home country. We decided to test them all for SARS-Cov2 twice in order to reduce anxiety among the population and decision-makers. Methods We investigated the presence of SARS-CoV-19 in asymptomatic carriers by testing all repatriated patients within the first 24 h of their arrival in France and at day 5. Viral RNA was extracted from pooled nasal and oropharyngeal swab fluids or sputum in the absence of nasal/oropharyngeal swabs. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA was then carried out using several real-time reverse transcription (RT)-PCR assays. Results We tested 337 passengers at day 0 and day 5. All the tests for SARS-CoV2 were negative. By optimising the sampling process, sending samples sequentially and reducing the time-scale for biological analysis, we were able to test the samples within 5 h (including sampling, shipment and biological tests). Conclusion Optimising our procedures reduces anxiety and reassures the population and decision makers.

positive: Clinical Trials for COVID-19: Can we Better Use the Short Window of Opportunity? The scientific community has risen to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) challenge, coming up with an impressive list of candidate drugs and vaccines targeting an array of pharmacological and immunological mechanisms. Yet, generating clinical evidence of efficacy and safety of these candidate treatments may be frustrated by the absence of comprehensive trial coordination mechanisms. Many small stand-alone trials and observational studies of single-agent interventions are currently running or in planning; many of these will likely not deliver robust results that could support regulatory and patient-level treatment decisions. In this paper, we discuss actions that all stakeholders in the clinical trial ecosystem need to take to ensure that the window of opportunity during this pandemic will not shut, both for patients in need of treatment and for researchers to conduct decision-relevant clinical trials.

positive: Clinical Trials and Novel Pathogens: Lessons Learned from SARS During the recent global outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), thousands of patients received treatments of uncertain efficacy and known toxicity such as ribavirin and corticosteroids. Despite this, no controlled clinical trials assessing the efficacy of these agents were conducted. If a second global SARS outbreak occurred, clinicians would not have controlled data on which to base therapeutic decisions. We discuss the unique methodologic and logistical challenges faced by researchers who attempt to conduct controlled trials of therapeutic agents during an outbreak of a novel or unknown infectious pathogen. We draw upon our own experience in attempting to conduct a randomized controlled trial (trial) of ribavirin therapy for SARS and discuss the lessons learned. Strategies to facilitate future clinical trials during outbreaks of unknown or novel pathogens are also presented.

positive: Shenhuang granule in the treatment of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): study protocol for an open-label randomized controlled clinical trial BACKGROUND: Currently, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is continuously and rapidly circulating, causing heavy damage on public health. No effective antiviral treatment has been proved thus far. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been widely applied in the treatment of a variety of infection diseases in China, hoping to produce clinical effects and reduce the use of antibiotics and glucocorticoid. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Shenhuang granule in treatment of severe COVID-19. METHODS/DESIGN: This multicenter, open-label randomized controlled trial is conducted in 160 participants with severe COVID-19. The participants will be randomly (1:1) divided into treatment group or control group. All participants are given standard therapy at the same time. The experiment will receive Shenhuang granule treatment twice a day for 14 days. The clinical indicators of patients will be assessed at baseline and at 3, 5, 7, and 14 days after treatment initiation. The primary outcome is 14-day clinical outcome. Adverse events will be monitored throughout the trial. DISCUSSION: This will be the first randomized controlled trial, which evaluate the effect of Shenhuang granule in patients with severe COVID-19 in China. The results of this trial may not only provide evidence-based recommendations to clinicians to treat severe COVID-19, but also enrich the theory and practice of TCM in treating infectious diseases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2000029777. Registered on 13 February 2020.

positive: Lopinavir-ritonavir alone or combined with arbidol in the treatment of 73 hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a pilot retrospective study Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the antiviral efficacy of lopinavir/ritonavir alone or combined with arbidol in the treatment of hospitalized patients with common coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). Methods: In this retrospective observational study, COVID-19 hospitalized patients were identified and divided into two groups based on the antiviral agents used during their hospitalization. Group-LR patients were treated with single antiviral drug of lopinavir-ritonavir. Group-LR+Ar patients were treated with lopinavir-ritonavir combined with arbidol for antiviral therapy at least 3 days. Patients were assessed for different clinical outcomes. Results: A total of 34 and 39 patients were identified for Group-LR and Group-LR+Ar, respectively. Treatment with lopinavir-ritonavir alone was not difference from lopinavir-ritonavir combined with arbidol in overall cure rate of COVID-19 hospitalized patients (92.3% and 97.1%, respectively). In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, lopinavir-ritonavir combined with abidol led to a median time of hospital stay that was shorter by 1.5 days than group-LR (12.5 days vs. 14 days). The percentages of COVID-19 RNA clearance was 92.3 in group-LR and 97.1 in group-LR+Ar. The mean time of virus turning negative was 11.5 plus-or-minus sign 9.0 days in group-LR+Ar that were longer than group-LR. Treatment of lopinavir-ritonavir combined with arbidol did not significantly accelerate main symptoms improvement and promote the image absorption of pulmonary inflammation. Conclusion: No benefit was observed in the anti-virus effect of lopinavir-ritonavir combined with arbidol compared with lopinavir-ritonavir alone in the hospitalized patients with COVID-19. More clinical observations in COVID-19 patients may help to confirm or exclude the effect of antiviral agents.

positive: Clinical trial analysis of 2019-nCoV therapy registered in China So far, there is a lack of effective drugs for the new coronavirus pneumonia. With more and more patients diagnosed, China has carried out more than 100 clinical studies of new coronavirus infection, including antiviral drugs, antimalarial drugs, glucocorticoids, plasma therapy, virus vaccine, and other Western drugs, while Chinese medicine research accounted for half of the studies. Most of the trials were initiated by investigators and the study period would last for 1 to 11 months. The primary endpoints included symptom improvement and virus nucleic acid turning negative, but the optimal endpoint has not been determined. Although the final results of studies will take a long time to complete, the interim research data may provide some help for the current urgent demand for drug treatment. Compared with that of during SARS period in 2003, China has the stronger capability to carry out clinical trials of new drugs in emergency period.

positive: [Comment] Treatment strategies to fight the new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2: A challenge for a Rubik's Cube solver SARS-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), the etiologic agent of the new lung disease COVID-19 is closely related to SARS-CoV, and together with MERS-CoV are three new human coronaviruses that emerged in the last 20 years. The COVID-19 outbreak is a rapidly evolving situation with higher transmissibility and infectivity compared with SARS and MERS. Clinical presentations range from asymptomatic or mild symptoms to severe illness. The prevalent cause of mortality is pneumonia that progresses to ARDS. The ongoing pandemic has already resulted in more than 135,000 deaths and an unprecedented burden on national health systems worldwide. Pending the availability of a vaccine, there is a critical need to identify effective treatments and a number of clinical trials have been implemented worldwide. Trials are based on repurposed drugs that are already approved for other infections, have acceptable safety profiles or have performed well in animal studies against the other two deadly coronaviruses. Supportive care remains the mainstay of therapy at present, as it is still unclear how well these data can be extrapolated to SARS-CoV-2. Most of those emerging re-introduced drugs are administered to patients in the context of clinical trials. In this review, we summarize the strategies currently employed in the treatment of COVID-19.

positive: Pressure-controlled versus volume-controlled ventilation for acute respiratory failure due to acute lung injury (ALI) or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). BACKGROUND Acute lung injury (ALI) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) account for one-quarter of cases of acute respiratory failure in intensive care units (ICUs). A third to half of patients will die in the ICU, in hospital or during follow-up. Mechanical ventilation of people with ALI/ARDS allows time for the lungs to heal, but ventilation is invasive and can result in lung injury. It is uncertain whether ventilator-related injury would be reduced if pressure delivered by the ventilator with each breath is controlled, or whether the volume of air delivered by each breath is limited. OBJECTIVES To compare pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) versus volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) in adults with ALI/ARDS to determine whether PCV reduces in-hospital mortality and morbidity in intubated and ventilated adults. SEARCH METHODS In October 2014, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2014, Isssue 9), MEDLINE (1950 to 1 October 2014), EMBASE (1980 to 1 October 2014), the Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) (1994 to 1 October 2014) and Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) at the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Web of Science (1990 to 1 October 2014), as well as regional databases, clinical trials registries, conference proceedings and reference lists. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs (irrespective of language or publication status) of adults with a diagnosis of acute respiratory failure or acute on chronic respiratory failure and fulfilling the criteria for ALI/ARDS as defined by the American-European Consensus Conference who were admitted to an ICU for invasive mechanical ventilation, comparing pressure-controlled or pressure-controlled inverse-ratio ventilation, or an equivalent pressure-controlled mode (PCV), versus volume-controlled ventilation, or an equivalent volume-controlled mode (VCV). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently screened and selected trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We sought clarification from trial authors when needed. We pooled risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) for continuous data with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model. We assessed overall evidence quality using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. MAIN RESULTS We included three RCTs that randomly assigned a total of 1089 participants recruited from 43 ICUs in Australia, Canada, Saudi Arabia, Spain and the USA. Risk of bias of the included studies was low. Only data for mortality and barotrauma could be combined in the meta-analysis. We downgraded the quality of evidence for the three mortality outcomes on the basis of serious imprecision around the effect estimates. For mortality in hospital, the RR with PCV compared with VCV was 0.83 (95% CI 0.67 to 1.02; three trials, 1089 participants; moderate-quality evidence), and for mortality in the ICU, the RR with PCV compared with VCV was 0.84 (95% CI 0.71 to 0.99; two trials, 1062 participants; moderate-quality evidence). One study provided no evidence of clear benefit with the ventilatory mode for mortality at 28 days (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.06; 983 participants; moderate-quality evidence). The difference in effect on barotrauma between PCV and VCV was uncertain as the result of imprecision and different co-interventions used in the studies (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.77; two trials, 1062 participants; low-quality evidence). Data from one trial with 983 participants for the mean duration of ventilation, and from another trial with 78 participants for the mean number of extrapulmonary organ failures that developed with PCV or VCV, were skewed. None of the trials reported on infection during ventilation or quality of life after discharge. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Currently available data from RCTs are insufficient to confirm or refute whether pressure-controlled or volume-controlled ventilation offers any advantage for people with acute respiratory failure due to acute lung injury or acute respiratory distress syndrome. More studies including a larger number of people given PCV and VCV may provide reliable evidence on which more firm conclusions can be based.

positive: Human Coronavirus Data from Four Clinical Trials of Masks and Respirators There are few published data on the protection of masks or respirators against coronavirus infections. This is an important research question to inform the response to the COVID-19 epidemic. The transmission modes of human coronaviruses are similar, thought to be by droplet, contact and sometimes airborne routes. There are several randomised clinical trials of masks and respirators, but most used clinical endpoints or tested only for influenza. In four trials which we conducted, we tested for human coronaviruses, but only composite viral endpoints were reported in the trials. We reviewed and analysed the coronavirus data from four of our trials. Laboratory-confirmed coronavirus infections were identified in our community household trial (1 case), health worker trials (8 cases) and trial of mask use by sick patients (19 cases). No coronavirus infections were transmitted in households to parents who wore P2 or surgical masks, but one child with coronavirus infection transmitted infection to a parent in the control arm. No transmissions to close contacts occurred when worn by sick patients with coronavirus infections. There was a higher risk of coronavirus infection in HCWs who wore a mask compared to a respirator, but the difference was not statistically significant. These are the only available data on coronavirus infections associated with mask or respirator use. More clinical trials are needed to assess the efficacy of respiratory protection against coronavirus infections.

positive: Commentary on “Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open label non-randomized clinical trial” by Gautret et al The results of a clinical trial comparing hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin to the standard of care for the treatment of COVID-19 were recently published by Philippe Gautret et al. This study provides outstanding results for the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin over the standard of care, but the evidence was deemed insufficiently robust to warrant a public health decision to widen the use of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19. We provide a scientific critical review of the Gautret et al. publication, put the results in the context of the current knowledge, provide an evaluation of the validity of the results (from a methodologic perspective), and discuss public health implications. The study has a number of limitations, including small sample size, lack of comparability between patients in active treatment and control arms, lack of blinding, use of interim analyses without controlling for the risk of type 1 error, use of analysis in the per-protocol population instead of the intention-to-treat population, and inconsistencies between the study protocol and article. However, none of these observations is of a nature to reverse the conclusions. The study brings useful knowledge consistent with available evidence and clinical practice from China and South Korea, which could have prompted quicker policy decision-making.

positive: Multicenter point-prevalence evaluation of the utilization and safety of drug therapies for COVID-19 Background: There are currently no FDA-approved medications for the treatment of COVID-19. At the onset of the pandemic, off-label medication use was supported by limited or no clinical data. We sought to characterize experimental COVID-19 therapies and identify safety signals during this period. Methods: We conducted a non-interventional, multicenter, point prevalence study of patients hospitalized with suspected/confirmed COVID-19. Clinical and treatment characteristics within a 24-hour window were evaluated in a random sample of up to 30 patients per site. The primary objective was to describe COVID-19 targeted therapies. The secondary objective was to describe adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Results: A total of 352 patients from 15 US hospitals were included. Most patients were treated at academic medical centers (53.4%) or community hospitals (42.6%). Sixty-seven patients (19%) were receiving drug therapy in addition to supportive care. Drug therapies included hydroxychloroquine (69%), remdesivir (10%), and interleukin-6 inhibitors (9%). Five patients (7.5%) were receiving combination therapy. Patients with a history of asthma (14.9% vs. 7%, p=0.037) and those enrolled in clinical trials (26.9% vs. 3.2%, p<0.001) were more likely to receive therapy. Among those receiving COVID-19 therapy, eight patients (12%) experienced an ADR, and ADRs were more commonly recognized in patients enrolled in clinical trials (62.5% vs 22%, OR=5.9, p=0.028). Conclusions: While we observed high rates of supportive care for patients with COVID-19, we also found that ADRs were common among patients receiving drug therapy including in clinical trials. Comprehensive systems are needed to identify and mitigate ADRs associated with experimental COVID-19 therapies.

positive: Remdesivir: Review of Pharmacology, Pre-clinical Data, and Emerging Clinical Experience for COVID-19 The global pandemic of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has created an urgent need for effective antivirals. Remdesivir (formerly GS-5734) is a nucleoside analogue pro-drug currently being evaluated in COVID-19 clinical trials. Its unique structural features allow high concentrations of the active triphosphate metabolite to be delivered intracellularly and it evades proofreading to successfully inhibit viral RNA synthesis. In pre-clinical models, remdesivir has demonstrated potent antiviral activity against diverse human and zoonotic ß-coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-2. In this article, we critically review available data on remdesivir with an emphasis on biochemistry, pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and in vitro activity against coronaviruses as well as clinical experience and current progress in COVID-19 clinical trials.

positive: A review on Promising vaccine development progress for COVID-19 disease Abstract The emergence of the strain of coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) that causes corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its impact on in the world have made imperative progress to develop an effective and safe vaccine. Despite several measures undertaken, the spread of this virus is ongoing. So far, more than 1,560,000 cases and 1000,000 deaths occurred in the world. Efforts have been made to develop vaccines against human coronavirus (CoV) infections such as MERS and SARS. However, currently, no approved vaccine exists for these coronavirus strains. Such Previous research efforts to develop a coronavirus vaccine in the years following the 2003 pandemic have opened the door for the scientist to design a new vaccine for the COVID-19. Both SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 has a high degree of genetic similarity and bind to the same host cell ACE2 receptor. By using different vaccine development platforms including whole virus vaccines, recombinant protein subunit vaccines, and nucleic acid vaccines several candidates displayed efficacy in vitro studies but few progressed to clinical trials. This review provides a brief introduction of the general features of SARS-CoV-2 and discusses the current progress of ongoing advances in designing vaccine development efforts to counter COVID-19.

positive: A systematic review of the prophylactic role of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in coronavirus disease‐19 (COVID‐19) OBJECTIVE: The pandemic coronavirus disease‐19 (COVID‐19) has pushed the global healthcare system to a crisis and amounted to a huge economic burden. Different drugs for prophylaxis against COVID‐19 including chloroquine (CQ) or hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have been tried. This study was performed to systematically review the role of CQ and HCQ in preventing the spread of COVID‐19. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies that evaluated the prophylactic role of CQ or HCQ on SARS‐CoV‐2 (pre‐clinical studies) or COVID‐19 (clinical studies) until 30 March 2020. The available literature was critically appraised. RESULTS: A total of 45 articles were screened and 5 (3 in vitro pre‐clinical studies and 2 clinical opinions) were included. The pre‐clinical studies showed the prophylactic effects of CQ and HCQ against SARS‐CoV‐2. On the other hand, the clinical opinions advocated the prophylactic use of CQ and HCQ against COVID‐19. However, no original clinical studies on the prophylactic role of CQ or HCQ on COVID‐19 were available. CONCLUSION: Although pre‐clinical results are promising, to date there is a dearth of evidence to support the efficacy of CQ or HCQ in preventing COVID‐19. Considering potential safety issues and the likelihood of imparting a false sense of security, prophylaxis with CQ or HCQ against COVID‐19 needs to be thoroughly evaluated in observational studies or high‐quality randomized controlled studies.

positive: Remdesivir in COVID-19: A critical review of pharmacology, pre-clinical and clinical studies BACKGROUND & AIMS: Remdesivir is a broad spectrum anti-viral drug that has shown to inhibit SARS-CoV-2, in vitro and in vivo. In absence of any effective treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19), remdesivir has been tried for a compassionate use in severe COVID-19. Newer randomized controlled studies that have recently become available, showed a mixed result. We aimed to systematically search the literature to understand the pharmacology and clinical effects of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed, ClinicalTrial.Org and MedRxiv database up till May 5, 2020 using specific key words such as “Remdesivir” or ‘GS-5734″ AND “COVID-19” or “SARS-CoV-2” and retrieved all the article published in English language, that have reported the pharmacology and the clinical outcomes of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: Initial compassionate use of remdesivir has shown a fairly good result, but difficult to quantify, in the absence of control arm. While the very first double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial conducted in Wuhan, did not find any significant benefit compared to the control, the preliminary result of another similar multi-country trial has shown a significant faster time to recovery but without any difference in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir has shown a mixed result in patients with COVID-19 with an acceptable side effect. However, jury is still out while awaiting the results from the forthcoming trials.

positive: Current pharmacological treatments for COVID‐19: What's next? Since December 2019 SARS‐Cov‐2 was found responsible for the disease COVID‐19, which has spread worldwide. No specific therapies/vaccines are yet available for the treatment of COVID‐19. Drug repositioning may offer a strategy and a number of drugs have been repurposed, including lopinavir/ritonavir, remdesivir, favipiravir and tocilizumab. This paper describes the main pharmacological properties of such drugs administered to patients with COVID‐19, focusing on their antiviral, immune‐modulatory and/or anti‐inflammatory actions. Where available, data from clinical trials involving patients with COVID‐19 are reported. Preliminary clinical trials seem to support their benefit. However, such drugs in COVID‐19 patients have peculiar safety profiles. Thus, adequate clinical trials are necessary for these compounds. Nevertheless, while waiting for effective preventive measures i.e. vaccines, many clinical trials on drugs belonging to different therapeutic classes are currently underway. Their results will help us in defining the best way to treat COVID‐19 and reducing its symptoms and complications.

positive: Driving forces for COVID-19 clinical trials using chloroquine: the need to choose the right research questions and outcomes

positive: Potential effect of blood purification therapy in reducing cytokine storm as a late complication of critically ill COVID-19

positive: More than 80 clinical trials launch to test coronavirus treatments.

positive: A systematic review on the efficacy and safety of chloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 PURPOSE: COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) is a public health emergency of international concern. As of this time, there is no known effective pharmaceutical treatment, although it is much needed for patient contracting the severe form of the disease. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the evidence regarding chloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and three trial Registries were searched for studies on the use of chloroquine in patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: We included six articles (one narrative letter, one in-vitro study, one editorial, expert consensus paper, two national guideline documents) and 23 ongoing clinical trials in China. Chloroquine seems to be effective in limiting the replication of SARS-CoV-2 (virus causing COVID-19) in vitro. CONCLUSIONS: There is rationale, pre-clinical evidence of effectiveness and evidence of safety from long-time clinical use for other indications to justify clinical research on chloroquine in patients with COVID-19. However, clinical use should either adhere to the Monitored Emergency Use of Unregistered Interventions (MEURI) framework or be ethically approved as a trial as stated by the World Health Organization. Safety data and data from high-quality clinical trials are urgently needed.

positive: A Trial of Lopinavir–Ritonavir in Adults Hospitalized with Severe Covid-19 BACKGROUND: No therapeutics have yet been proven effective for the treatment of severe illness caused by SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label trial involving hospitalized adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, which causes the respiratory illness Covid-19, and an oxygen saturation (Sao(2)) of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or a ratio of the partial pressure of oxygen (Pao(2)) to the fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio(2)) of less than 300 mm Hg. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either lopinavir–ritonavir (400 mg and 100 mg, respectively) twice a day for 14 days, in addition to standard care, or standard care alone. The primary end point was the time to clinical improvement, defined as the time from randomization to either an improvement of two points on a seven-category ordinal scale or discharge from the hospital, whichever came first. RESULTS: A total of 199 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection underwent randomization; 99 were assigned to the lopinavir–ritonavir group, and 100 to the standard-care group. Treatment with lopinavir–ritonavir was not associated with a difference from standard care in the time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio for clinical improvement, 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.72). Mortality at 28 days was similar in the lopinavir–ritonavir group and the standard-care group (19.2% vs. 25.0%; difference, −5.8 percentage points; 95% CI, −17.3 to 5.7). The percentages of patients with detectable viral RNA at various time points were similar. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, lopinavir–ritonavir led to a median time to clinical improvement that was shorter by 1 day than that observed with standard care (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.91). Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common in the lopinavir–ritonavir group, but serious adverse events were more common in the standard-care group. Lopinavir–ritonavir treatment was stopped early in 13 patients (13.8%) because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized adult patients with severe Covid-19, no benefit was observed with lopinavir–ritonavir treatment beyond standard care. Future trials in patients with severe illness may help to confirm or exclude the possibility of a treatment benefit. (Funded by Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development and others; Chinese Clinical Trial Register number, ChiCTR2000029308.)

positive: A RAPID SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE EFFICACY OF FACE MASKS AND RESPIRATORS AGAINST CORONAVIRUSES AND OTHER RESPIRATORY TRANSMISSIBLE VIRUSES FOR THE COMMUNITY, HEALTHCARE WORKERS AND SICK PATIENTS ABSTRACT Background The pandemic of COVID-19 is growing, and a shortage of masks and respirators has been reported globally. Policies of health organizations for healthcare workers are inconsistent, with a change in policy in the US for universal face mask use. The aim of this study was to review the evidence around the efficacy of masks and respirators for healthcare workers, sick patients and the general public. Methods A systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials on use of respiratory protection by healthcare workers, sick patients and community members was conducted. Articles were searched on Medline and Embase using key search terms. Results A total of 19 randomised controlled trials were included in this study – 8 in community settings, 6 in healthcare settings and 5 as source control. Most of these randomised controlled trials used different interventions and outcome measures. In the community, masks appeared to be more effective than hand hygiene alone, and both together are more protective. Randomised controlled trials in health care workers showed that respirators, if worn continually during a shift, were effective but not if worn intermittently. Medical masks were not effective, and cloth masks even less effective. When used by sick patients randomised controlled trials suggested protection of well contacts. Conclusion The study suggests that community mask use by well people could be beneficial, particularly for COVID-19, where transmission may be pre-symptomatic. The studies of masks as source control also suggest a benefit, and may be important during the COVID-19 pandemic in universal community face mask use as well as in health care settings. Trials in healthcare workers support the use of respirators continuously during a shift. This may prevent health worker infections and deaths from COVID-19, as aerosolisation in the hospital setting has been documented.

positive: Creating a Framework for Conducting Randomized Clinical Trials during Disease Outbreaks

positive: A comprehensive review on drug repositioning against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID19) Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) is the reason for this ongoing pandemic infection diseases termed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that has emerged since early December 2019 in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China. In this century, it is the worst threat to international health and the economy. After 4 months of COVID-19 outbreak, there is no certain and approved medicine against it. In this public health emergency, it makes sense to investigate the possible effects of old drugs and find drug repositioning that is efficient, economical, and riskless process. Old drugs that may be effective are from different pharmacological categories, antimalarials, anthelmintics, anti-protozoal, anti-HIVs, anti-influenza, anti-hepacivirus, antineoplastics, neutralizing antibodies, immunoglobulins, and interferons. In vitro, in vivo, or preliminary trials of these drugs in the treatment of COVID-19 have been encouraging, leading to new research projects and trials to find the best drug/s. In this review, we discuss the possible mechanisms of these drugs against COVID-19. Also, it should be mentioned that in this manuscript, we discuss preliminary rationales; however, clinical trial evidence is needed to prove them. COVID-19 therapy must be based on expert clinical experience and published literature and guidelines from major health organizations. Moreover, herein, we describe current evidence that may be changed in the future.

positive: COVID-19 for the Cardiologist: A Current Review of the Virology, Clinical Epidemiology, Cardiac and Other Clinical Manifestations and Potential Therapeutic Strategies Summary The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), a contagious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV2), has reached pandemic status. As it spreads across the world, it has overwhelmed healthcare systems, strangled the global economy and led to a devastating loss of life. Widespread efforts from regulators, clinicians and scientists are driving a rapid expansion of knowledge of the SARS-CoV2 virus and the COVID-19 disease. We review the most current data with a focus on our basic understanding of the mechanism(s) of disease and translation to the clinical syndrome and potential therapeutics. We discuss the basic virology, epidemiology, clinical manifestation, multi-organ consequences, and outcomes. With a focus on cardiovascular complications, we propose several mechanisms of injury. The virology and potential mechanism of injury form the basis for a discussion of potential disease-modifying therapies.

positive: Profiles of COVID-19 clinical trials in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. The COVID-19 pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is a global public health crisis since its initial reports in China. Since no effective vaccine or drug has been developed to treat and combat the COVID-19, the current approaches for clinical management focus on supportive care. There is a pressing need for evidence-based interventions to address the devastating clinical and public health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Chinese scientists supported by private and government resources have adopted extensive efforts to identify effective drugs against the virus. To date, a large number of clinical trials addressing various aspects of COVID-19 have been registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR), including more than 200 interventional studies. Under such an urgent circumstance, the scope and quality of these clinical studies vary significantly. Hence, this review aims to make a comprehensive analysis on the profiles of COVID-19 clinical trials registered in the ChiCTR, including a wide range of characteristics. Our findings will provide a useful summary on these clinical studies, since most of these studies will encounter major challenges from the design to completion. It will be a long road for the outcomes of these studies to be published and international collaboration will help the ultimate goals of developing new vaccines and antiviral drugs. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04252664.. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04257656..

positive: COVID-19: An Update on the Epidemiological, Clinical, Preventive and Therapeutic Evidence and Guidelines of Integrative Chinese-Western Medicine for the Management of 2019 Novel Coronavirus Disease As of 22 February 2020, more than 77662 cases of confirmed COVID-19 have been documented globally with over 2360 deaths. Common presentations of confirmed cases include fever, fatigue, dry cough, upper airway congestion, sputum production, shortness of breath, myalgia/arthralgia with lymphopenia, prolonged prothrombin time, elevated C-reactive protein, and elevated lactate dehydrogenase. The reported severe/critical case ratio is approximately 7-10% and median time to intensive care admission is 9.5-10.5 days with mortality of around 1-2% varied geographically. Similar to outbreaks of other newly identified virus, there is no proven regimen from conventional medicine and most reports managed the patients with lopinavir/ritonavir, ribavirin, beta-interferon, glucocorticoid and supportive treatment with remdesivir undergoing clinical trial. In China, Chinese medicine is proposed as a treatment option by national and provincial guidelines with substantial utilization. We reviewed the latest national and provincial clinical guidelines, retrospective cohort studies, and case series regarding the treatment of COVID-19 by add-on Chinese medicine. We have also reviewed the clinical evidence generated from SARS and H1N1 management with hypothesized mechanisms and latest in silico findings to identify candidate Chinese medicines for the consideration of possible trials and management. Given the paucity of strongly evidence-based regimens, the available data suggest that Chinese medicine could be considered as an adjunctive therapeutic option in the management of COVID-19.

positive: Coronavirus Disease 2019 and the Pediatric Gastroenterologist

positive: Safety and efficacy assessment of allogeneic human dental pulp stem cells to treat patients with severe COVID-19: structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (Phase I / II) OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and therapeutic effects of allogeneic human dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) in treating severe pneumonia caused by COVID-19. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a single centre, two arm ratio 1:1, triple blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel group, clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty serious COVID-19 cases will be enrolled in the trial from April 6th to December 31st 2020. INCLUSION CRITERIA: hospitalised patients at Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University satisfy all criteria as below: 1)Adults aged 18-65 years;2)Voluntarily participate in this clinical trial and sign the "informed consent form" or have consent from a legal representative.3)Diagnosed with severe pneumonia of COVID-19: nucleic acid test SARS-CoV-2 positive; respiratory distress (respiratory rate > 30 times / min); hypoxia (resting oxygen saturation < 93% or arterial partial pressure of oxygen / oxygen concentration < 300 mmHg).4)COVID-19 featured lung lesions in chest X-ray image. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Patients will be excluded from the study if they meet any of the following criteria. 1.Patients have received other experimental treatment for COVID-19 within the last 30 days;2.Patients have severe liver condition (e.g., Child Pugh score >=C or AST> 5 times of the upper limit);3.Patients with severe renal insufficiency (estimated glomerular filtration rate <=30mL / min/1.73 m2) or patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy, hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis;4.Patients who are co-infected with HIV, hepatitis B, tuberculosis, influenza virus, adenovirus or other respiratory infection viruses;5.Female patients who have no sexual protection in the last 30 days prior to the screening assessment;6.Pregnant or lactating women or women using estrogen contraception;7.Patients who are planning to become pregnant during the study period or within 6 months after the end of the study period;8.Other conditions that the researchers consider not suitable for participating in this clinical trial. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: There will be two study groups: experimental and control. Both will receive all necessary routine treatment for COVID-19. The experimental group will receive an intravenous injection of dental pulp stem cells suspension (3.0x107 human DPSCs in 30ml saline solution) on day 1, 4 and 7; The control group will receive an equal amount of saline (placebo) on the same days. Clinical and laboratory observations will be performed for analysis during a period of 28 days for each case since the commencement of the study. MAIN OUTCOMES: 1. Primary outcome The primary outcome is Time To Clinical Improvement (TTCI). By definition, TTCI is the time (days) it takes to downgrade two levels from the following six ordered grades [(grade 1) discharge to (grade 6) death] in the clinical state of admission to the start of study treatments (hDPSCs or placebo). Six grades of ordered variables: GradeDescriptionGrade 1:Discharged of patient;Grade 2:Hospitalized without oxygen supplement;Grade 3:Hospitalized, oxygen supplement is required, but NIV / HFNC is not required;Grade 4:Hospitalized in intensive care unit, and NIV / HFNC treatment is required;Grade 5:Hospitalized in intensive care unit, requiring ECMO and/or IMV;Grade 6:Death. ABBREVIATIONS: NIV, non-invasive mechanical ventilation; HFNC, high-flow nasal catheter; IMV, invasive mechanical ventilation. 2. Secondary outcomes 2.1 vital signs: heart rate, blood pressure (systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure). During the screening period, hospitalization every day (additional time points of D1, D4, D7 30min before injection, 2h ± 30min, 24h ± 30min after the injection) and follow-up period D90 ± 3 days. 2.2 Laboratory examinations: during the screening period, 30 minutes before D1, D4, D7 infusion, 2h ± 30min, 24h ± 30min after the end of infusion, D10, D14, D28 during hospitalization or discharge day and follow-up period D90 ± 3 days. 2.3 Blood routine: white blood cells, neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils, basophils, neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils Acidic granulocyte count, basophil count, red blood cell, hemoglobin, hematocrit, average volume of red blood cells, average red blood cell Hb content, average red blood cell Hb concentration, RDW standard deviation, RDW coefficient of variation, platelet count, platelet specific platelet average Volume, platelet distribution width,% of large platelets; 2.4 Liver and kidney function tests: alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, Î³-glutamyl transferase, prealbumin, total protein, albumin, globulin, white / globule ratio , Total bilirubin, direct bilirubin, cholinesterase, urea, creatinine, total carbon dioxide, uric acid glucose, potassium, sodium, chlorine, calcium, corrected calcium, magnesium, phosphorus, calcium and phosphorus product, anion gap, penetration Pressure, total cholesterol, triacylglycerol, high density lipoprotein cholesterol, Low density lipoprotein cholesterol, lipoprotein a, creatine kinase, lactate dehydrogenase, estimated glomerular filtration rate. 2.5 Inflammation indicators: hypersensitive C-reactive protein, serum amyloid (SAA); 2.6 Infectious disease testing: Hepatitis B (HBsAg, HBsAb, HBeAg, HBeAb, HBcAb), Hepatitis C (Anti-HCV), AIDS (HIVcombin), syphilis (Anti-TP), cytomegalovirus CMV-IgM, cytomegalovirus CMV-IgG; only during the screening period and follow-up period D90 ± 3. 2.7 Immunological testing: Collect peripheral blood to detect the phenotype of T lymphocyte, B lymphocyte, natural killer cell, Macrophage and neutrophil by using flow cytometry. Collect peripheral blood to detect the gene profile of mononuclear cells by using single-cell analyses. Collect peripheral blood serum to detect various immunoglobulin changes: IgA, IgG, IgM, total IgE; Collect peripheral blood serum to explore the changes of cytokines, Th1 cytokines (IL-1 ß, IL-2, TNF-a, ITN-Î³), Th2 cytokines (IL-4, IL-6, IL -10). 2.8 Pregnancy test: blood ß-HCG, female subjects before menopause are examined during the screening period and follow-up period D90 ± 3. 2.9 Urine routine: color, clarity, urine sugar, bilirubin, ketone bodies, specific gravity, pH, urobilinogen, nitrite, protein, occult blood, leukocyte enzymes, red blood cells, white blood cells, epithelial cells, non-squamous epithelial cells , Transparent cast, pathological cast, crystal, fungus; 2.10 Stool Routine: color, traits, white blood cells, red blood cells, fat globules, eggs of parasites, fungi, occult blood (chemical method), occult blood (immune method), transferrin (2h ± 30min after the injection and not detected after discharge). RANDOMIZATION: Block randomization method will be applied by computer to allocate the participants into experimental and control groups. The random ratio is 1:1. BLINDING (MASKING): Participants, outcomes assessors and investigators (including personnel in laboratory and imaging department who issue the sample report or image observations) will be blinded. Injections of cell suspension and saline will be coded in accordance with the patient's randomisation group. The blind strategy is kept by an investigator who does not deliver the medical care or assess primary outcome results. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMIZED (SAMPLE SIZE): Twenty participants will be randomized to the experimental and control groups (10 per group). TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version number, hDPSC-CoVID-2019-02-2020 Version 2.0, March 13, 2020. Patients screening commenced on 16th April and an estimated date of the recruitment of the final participants will be around end of July. . TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration: World Health Organization Trial Registry: ChiCTR2000031319; March 27,2020. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04336254; April 7, 2020 Other Study ID Numbers: hDPSC-CoVID-2019-02-2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Improving Precision and Power in Randomized Trials for COVID-19 Treatments Using Covariate Adjustment, for Ordinal or Time to Event Outcomes We aim to help inform the choice of estimand (i.e., target of inference) and analysis method to be used in future COVID-19 treatment trials. To this end, we describe estimands for outcome types of particular interest in these trials (ordinal and time-to-event). When the outcome is ordinal, the estimands that we consider are the difference between study arms in the mean outcome, the Mann-Whitney (rank--based) estimand, and the average of the cumulative log odds ratios over the levels of the outcome. For time-to-event outcomes, we consider the difference between arms in the restricted mean survival time, the difference between arms in the cumulative incidence, and the relative risk. Advantageously, the interpretability of these estimands does not rely on a proportional odds or proportional hazards assumptions. For each estimand, we evaluate the potential value added by using estimators that leverage information in baseline variables to improve precision and reduce the required sample size to achieve a desired power. These are called covariate adjusted estimators. To evaluate the performance of the covariate adjusted and unadjusted estimators that we present, we simulate two-arm, randomized trials comparing a hypothetical COVID-19 treatment versus standard of care, where the primary outcome is ordinal or time-to-event. Our simulated distributions are derived from two sources: longitudinal data on over 500 patients hospitalized at Weill Cornell Medicine New York Presbyterian Hospital prior to March 28, 2020, and a CDC preliminary description of 2449 cases reported to the CDC from February 12 to March 16, 2020. We focus on hospitalized, COVID-19 positive patients and consider the following outcomes: intubation, ventilator use, and death. We conduct simulations using all three estimands when the outcome is ordinal, but only evaluate the restricted mean survival time when the outcome is time to event. Our simulations showed that, in trials with at least 200 participants, the precision gains due to covariate adjustment are equivalent to requiring 10-20% fewer participants to achieve the same power as a trial that uses the unadjusted estimator; this was the case for each outcome and estimand that we considered.

positive: Old and re-purposed drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has developed since December 2019. It has caused a global pandemic with more than three hundred thousand case fatalities. However, apart from supportive care by respirators, no standard medical therapy is validated. AREAS COVERED: This paper presents old drugs with potential in vitro efficacy against SARS-CoV-2. The in vitro database, adverse effects, and potential toxicities of these drugs are reviewed regarding their feasibility of clinical prescription for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. To obtain convincing recommendations, we referred to opinions from the US National Institute of Health regarding drugs repurposed for COVID-19 therapy. EXPERT OPINION: Although strong evidence of well-designed randomized controlled studies regarding COVID-19 therapy is presently lacking, remdesivir, teicoplanin, hydroxychloroquine (not in combination with azithromycin), and ivermectin might be effective antiviral drugs and are deemed promising candidates for controlling SARS-CoV-2. In addition, tocilizumab might be considered as the supplementary treatment for COVID-19 patients with cytokine release syndrome. In future, clinical trials regarding a combination of potentially effective drugs against SARS-CoV-2 need to be conducted to establish the optimal regimen for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19.

positive: Boosting the arsenal against COVID-19 through computational drug repurposing

positive: An overview of the safety, clinical application and antiviral research of the COVID-19 therapeutics Since a novel coronavirus pneumonia outbreak in late December 2019, coronavirus disease -19 (COVID-19) epidemic has gradually spread worldwide, becoming a major public health event. No specific antivirals are currently available for COVID-19 caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The treatments for COVID-19 are mainly based on the experiences of similar virus such SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, HIV and influenza viruses. Scientists have taken great efforts to investigate the effective methods for the treatment of COVID-19. Up to now, there are over 1000 clinical studies for COVID-19 all over the world. In this article, we reviewed the current options for COVID-19 therapy including small molecules such as Remdesivir, Favipiravir, Lopinavir/Ritonavir etc, peptide inhibitors of ACE2, Traditional Chinese Medicines and Biologics such as SARS-CoV-2-specific neutralizing antibodies, mesenchymal stem cells and vaccines etc. Meanwhile, we systematically reviewed their clinical safety, clinical applications and progress of antiviral researches. The therapeutic effect of these antiviral drugs is summarized and compared, hoping to provide some ideas for clinical options of COVID-19 treatment and also provide experiences for the life-threatening virus diseases in the future.

positive: Plasma from donors recovered from the new Coronavirus 2019 as therapy for critical patients with COVID-19 (COVID-19 plasma study): a multicentre study protocol. Since the end of 2019, a new coronavirus strain has been reported in the Chinese province of Wuhan, indicated as 2019-nCoV or SARS-CoV-2. In February 2020, the first case of transmission on Italian soil was reported. On March 09, 2020, at the time of protocol design, the Italian Ministry of Health reported 10,149 people who had contracted the virus; of these, 8514 were positive, of which 5038 were hospitalized with symptoms (59.2%) and 877 in intensive care (10.3%), while the remaining 2599 were in home isolation; 631 were deceased (6.2%) and 1004 healed (9.9%). To date there are no studies in the literature that demonstrate its feasibility and efficacy in the context of the worldwide SARS-CoV-2 epidemic. Based upon the little existing evidence, we planned to assess the efficacy of the infusion of hyperimmune plasma in COVID-19 patients in a one-arm proof-of-concept clinical trial. The primary objective of our study is to evaluate the efficacy of the administration of plasma taken from convalescent donors of COVID-19 to critically ill patients with COVID-19 in terms of their survival. Death from any cause will be considered. The main limit of this study is its one-arm proof-of-concept design with only 43 patients enrolled. However, in the absence of previous evidence, larger and/or randomized trials did not appear to be ethically acceptable. Moreover, the results from this study, if encouraging, will allow us to plan further informed large clinical trials. Trial registration: NCT04321421 March 23, 2020.

positive: Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Treatment and Management of Patients with COVID-19 BACKGROUND: There are many pharmacologic therapies that are being used or considered for treatment of COVID-19. There is a need for frequently updated practice guidelines on their use, based on critical evaluation of rapidly emerging literature. OBJECTIVE: Develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support patients, clinicians and other health-care professionals in their decisions about treatment and management of patients with COVID-19. METHODS: IDSA formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel of infectious disease clinicians, pharmacists, and methodologists with varied areas of expertise. Process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations. RESULTS: The IDSA guideline panel agreed on 7 treatment recommendations and provided narrative summaries of other treatments undergoing evaluations. CONCLUSIONS: The panel expressed the overarching goal that patients be recruited into ongoing trials, which would provide much needed evidence on the efficacy and safety of various therapies for COVID-19, given that we could not make a determination whether the benefits outweigh harms for most treatments.

positive: Potential inhibitors against 2019-nCoV coronavirus M protease from clinically approved medicines

positive: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): latest developments in potential treatments Many viral respiratory infections can cause severe acute respiratory symptoms leading to mortality and morbidity. In the spring of 2003, the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak caused by SARS-CoV spread globally. In the summer of 2012, the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) outbreak caused by MERS-CoV occurred in Saudi Arabia. In the winter of 2019, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak caused by a novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 occurred in China which rapidly spread worldwide causing a global pandemic. Up until 27 May 2020, there are 5.5 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 and 347,587 COVID-19 related deaths worldwide, and there has also been an unprecedented increase in socioeconomic and psychosocial issues related to COVID-19. This overview aims to review the current developments in preventive treatments and therapies for COVID-19. The development of vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 is ongoing and various clinical trials are currently underway around the world. It is hoped that existing antivirals including remdesivir and lopinavir-ritonavir might have roles in the treatment of COVID-19, but results from trials thus far have not been promising. COVID-19 causes a mild respiratory disease in the majority of cases, but in some cases, cytokine activation causes sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome, leading to morbidity and mortality. Immunomodulatory treatments and biologics are also being actively explored as therapeutics for COVID-19. On the other hand, the use of steroidal and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) has been discouraged based on concerns about their adverse effects. Over the past two decades, coronaviruses have caused major epidemics and outbreaks worldwide, whilst modern medicine has been playing catch-up all along.

positive: Is it Ethically Appropriate to Continue Surgical Clinical Trials During the COVID-19 Pandemic? EDITED BY DR SARR COVID-19 has greatly impacted surgical care and decision-making. The status of surgical clinical trials during this pandemic has not been addressed. We provide a framework and recommendations for the management of patients involved in surgical clinical trials.

positive: Major ongoing clinical trials for COVID-19 treatment and studies currently being conducted or scheduled in Japan The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) poses a serious threat to global public health and economies Currently, hundreds of clinical trials on a wide variety of treatments against COVID-19 are being conducted around the world Here, we conducted a search for ongoing clinical trials for the treatment of COVID-19 at the clinicaltrials gov database on April 2, 2020 In total, 48 clinical trials were identified, and of these, 41 trials adopted drug intervention and the other 7 trials utilized biological intervention The number of trials stratified by a chief country conducting the investigation were 18 in China, 5 in the United States, 4 in Canada, 3 in Italy, 2 in France and Brazil, and 4 trials are being performed multinationally The drugs utilized in more than one trials were remdesivir (6 trials), lopinavir/ritonavir (6 trials), hydroxychloroquine (6 trials), interferon (5 trials), methylprednisolone (3 trials), nitric oxide gas (3 trials), oseltamivir (2 trials), arbidol (2 trials), and vitamin C (2 trials) We also described the Japanese trials which are now being conducted or scheduled, utilizing lopinavir/ritonavir, remdesivir, favipiravir, ciclesonide and nafamostat

positive: The COVIRL-001 Trial: A multicentre, prospective, randomised trial comparing standard of care (SOC) alone, SOC plus hydroxychloroquine monotherapy or SOC plus a combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in the treatment of non- critical, SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive population not requiring immediate resuscitation or ventilation but who have evidence of clinical decline: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

positive: Achieving Effective Informed Oversight by DMCs in COVID Clinical Trials Abstract Best practices of Data Monitoring Committees (DMCs) in randomized clinical trials are well established. Independent oversight provided by DMCs is particularly important in trials conducted in public health emergencies, such as in HIV/AIDS or coronavirus epidemics. Special considerations are needed to enable DMCs to effectively address novel circumstances they face in such settings. In the COVID-19 pandemic, these include the remarkable speed in which data regarding benefits and risks of interventions are accumulated. DMCs must hold frequent virtual meetings, using state-of-the-art communication software that protects against risk for security breaches. Data capture and DMC reports should be focused on the most informative measures about benefits and risks. Since numerous clinical trials are being concurrently conducted in the COVID-19 setting, often addressing closely related scientific questions, structures for DMC oversight should be efficient and adequately informative. When these concurrently conducted trials are evaluating related regimens in related clinical settings, often individually underpowered for safety and having separate DMCs, processes should be implemented enabling these DMCs to share with each other emerging confidential evidence to better assess risks and benefits. Ideally a single DMC would monitor a portfolio of clinical trials or a trial with multiple arms, such as a platform trial.

positive: A Randomized Trial of Hydroxychloroquine as Postexposure Prophylaxis for Covid-19 BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) occurs after exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). For persons who are exposed, the standard of care is observation and quarantine. Whether hydroxychloroquine can prevent symptomatic infection after SARS-CoV-2 exposure is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial across the United States and parts of Canada testing hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis. We enrolled adults who had household or occupational exposure to someone with confirmed Covid-19 at a distance of less than 6 ft for more than 10 minutes while wearing neither a face mask nor an eye shield (high-risk exposure) or while wearing a face mask but no eye shield (moderate-risk exposure). Within 4 days after exposure, we randomly assigned participants to receive either placebo or hydroxychloroquine (800 mg once, followed by 600 mg in 6 to 8 hours, then 600 mg daily for 4 additional days). The primary outcome was the incidence of either laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 or illness compatible with Covid-19 within 14 days. RESULTS: We enrolled 821 asymptomatic participants. Overall, 87.6% of the participants (719 of 821) reported a high-risk exposure to a confirmed Covid-19 contact. The incidence of new illness compatible with Covid-19 did not differ significantly between participants receiving hydroxychloroquine (49 of 414 [11.8%]) and those receiving placebo (58 of 407 [14.3%]); the absolute difference was -2.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval, -7.0 to 2.2; P = 0.35). Side effects were more common with hydroxychloroquine than with placebo (40.1% vs. 16.8%), but no serious adverse reactions were reported. CONCLUSIONS: After high-risk or moderate-risk exposure to Covid-19, hydroxychloroquine did not prevent illness compatible with Covid-19 or confirmed infection when used as postexposure prophylaxis within 4 days after exposure. (Funded by David Baszucki and Jan Ellison Baszucki and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04308668.).

positive: Coronavirus: Hotspot on coronavirus disease 2019 in India The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) or also known as the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been recognized as the cause of respiratory infection in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, in late December 2019. As of April 5, 2020, this epidemic had spread to worldwide with 12,03,485 confirmed cases, including 62,000 deaths. The World Health Organization has declared it a Global Public Health Crisis. Coronavirus causes respiratory illness coughing, sneezing, breathlessness, and fever including pneumonia. The disease is transmitted person to person through infected droplets. At present, the research on novel coronavirus is still in the primary stage. Based on the published study, we thoroughly summarize the history and origin, microbiology and taxonomy, mode of transmissions, target receptor, clinical features, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment about COVID-19. This short report writes in hope for providing platform to community and researcher dealings against with the novel coronavirus and providing a reference for further studies.

positive: Chloroquine diphosphate in two different dosages as adjunctive therapy of hospitalized patients with severe respiratory syndrome in the context of coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) infection: Preliminary safety results of a randomized, double-blinded, phase IIb clinical trial (CloroCovid-19 Study) Background There is no specific antiviral therapy recommended for the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). Recent publications have drawn attention to the possible benefit of chloroquine (CQ). Our study aimed to comprehensively evaluate the safety and efficacy of two different CQ dosages in patients with established severe COVID-19. Methods We performed a parallel, double-blinded, randomized, phase IIb clinical trial, aiming to assess safety and efficacy of two different CQ dosages as adjunctive therapy of hospitalized patients with SARS in Manaus, Brazilian Amazon. Eligible participants were allocated to receive orally or via nasogastric tube high dose CQ (600mg CQ twice daily for 10 days or total dose 12g); or low dose CQ (450mg for 5 days, twice daily only on the first day, or total dose 2.7g). In addition, all patients received ceftriaxone and azithromycin. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04323527. Findings Out of a pre-defined 440 patients sample size, 81 patients were enrolled. The high dose CQ arm presented more QTc>500ms (25%), and a trend toward higher lethality (17%) than the lower dosage. Fatality rate was 13.5% (95%CI=6.9-23.0%), overlapping with the CI of historical data from similar patients not using CQ (95%CI=14.5-19.2%). In 14 patients with paired samples, respiratory secretion at day 4 was negative in only one patient. Interpretation Preliminary findings suggest that the higher CQ dosage (10-day regimen) should not be recommended for COVID-19 treatment because of its potential safety hazards. Such results forced us to prematurely halt patient recruitment to this arm. Given the enormous global push for the use of CQ for COVID-19, results such as the ones found in this trial can provide robust evidence for updated COVID-19 patient management recommendations.

positive: Cell-based therapies for COVID-19: A living systematic review OBJECTIVE: This living systematic review aims to provide a timely, rigorous and continuously updated summary of the available evidence on the role of cell-based therapies in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. DATA SOURCES: We conducted searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature and in a centralised repository in L-OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L-OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L-OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. All the searches covered the period until April 23, 2020 (one day before submission). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES AND METHODS: We adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question. We searched for randomised trials evaluating the effect of cell-based therapies versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Anticipating the lack of randomised trials directly addressing this question, we also searched for trials evaluating other coronavirus infections, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19. Two reviewers independently screened each study for eligibility. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it every time the conclusions change or whenever there are substantial updates. RESULTS: We screened 1,043 records but no study was considered eligible. We identified 61 ongoing studies, including 39 randomised trials evaluating different types of cell-based therapies in COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any studies that met our inclusion criteria and hence there is no evidence to support or refute the use of cell-based therapies in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. A substantial number of ongoing studies should provide valuable evidence to inform researchers and decision makers in the near future. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020179711

positive: Towards Optimization of Hydroxychloroquine Dosing in Intensive Care Unit COVID-19 Patients Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) appears to be a promising treatment for COVID-19. However, all ongoing clinical trials with HCQ use different dosing regimens, resulting on various concentrations PK studies are therefore needed to define the optimal dosing regimen.

positive: A randomized multicenter clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of melatonin in the prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2 infection in high-risk contacts (MeCOVID Trial): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: Primary objective: to evaluate the efficacy of melatonin as a prophylactic treatment on prevention of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. To evaluate the efficacy of melatonin as a prophylactic treatment on prevention of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. To evaluate the efficacy of melatonin to prevent the development of severe COVID-19 in the participants enrolled in this study who develop SARS-CoV-2 infection along the trial. To evaluate the duration of COVID-19 symptoms in participants receiving melatonin before the infection. To evaluate seroconversion timing post-symptom onset. Exploratory objectives: To compare severity of COVID-19 between men and women. To evaluate the influence of sleep and diet on prevention from SARS-CoV-2 infection. To evaluate the effect of melatonin on the incidence and characteristics of lymphopenia and increase of inflammatory cytokines related to COVID-19. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a two-arm parallel randomised double-blind controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of melatonin versus placebo in the prophylaxis of coronavirus disease 2019 among healthcare workers. PARTICIPANTS: Male or female participants ≥ 18 and ≤ 80 years of age. Healthcare workers from the public and private Spanish hospital network at risk of SARS-CoV 2 infection. Not having a previous COVID19 diagnosis. Understanding the purpose of the trial and not having taken any pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) including HIV PrEP from March 1(st) 2020 until study enrolment. Having a negative SARS-CoV 2 reverse-transcription PCR (RT-PCR) result or a negative serologic rapid test (IgM/IgG) result before randomization. Premenopausal women must have a negative urinary pregnancy test in the 7 days before starting the trial treatment. Premenopausal women and males with premenopausal couples must commit to using a high efficiency anticonceptive method. HIV infection. Active hepatitis B infection. Renal failure (CrCl < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) or need for hemodialysis. Osteoporosis. Myasthenia gravis. Pre-existent maculopathy. Retinitis pigmentosa. Bradycardia (less than 50 bpm). Weight less than 40 Kg. Participant with any immunosuppressive condition or hematological disease. Treatment with drugs that may prolong QT in the last month before randomization for more than 7 days including: azithromycin, chlorpromazine, cisapride, clarithromycin, domperidone, droperidol, erythromycin, halofantrine, haloperidol, lumefantrine, mefloquine, methadone, pentamidine, procainamide, quinidine, quinine, sotalol, sparfloxacin, thioridazine, amiodarone. Hereditary intolerance to galactose, Lapp lactase deficiency or glucose or galactose malabsorption. Treatment with fluvoxamine. Treatment with benzodiazepines or benzodiazepine analogues such as zolpidem, zopiclone or zaleplon. Pregnancy. Breastfeeding. History of potentially immune derived diseases such as: lupus, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, vasculitis or rheumatoid arthritis. Insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Known history of hypersensitivity to the study drug or any of its components. Patients that should not be included in the study at the judgment of the research team. Participants will be recruited from the following eight hospitals in Madrid, Spain: Hospital Universitario La Paz, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Hospital Infanta Sofía, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Hospital Central de la defensa Gómez Ulla,Hospital de La Princesa and Hospital Infanta Leonor. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Experimental: Melatonin (Circadin®, Exeltis Healthcare, Spain): 2 mg of melatonin orally before bedtime for 12 weeks. Comparator: Identical looking placebo (Laboratorios Liconsa, Spain) orally before bedtime for 12 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES: Number of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) symptomatic infections confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test or serologic test or according to each centre diagnosis protocol. Primary outcome will be measured until the end of treatment for each participant (until the date of the last dose taken by each patient). RANDOMISATION: Patients who meet all inclusion and no exclusion criteria will be randomised, stratified by centres, sex and age (<50 and ≥ 50 years old). The randomisation sequence was created using SAS version 9.4 statistical software (procedure ‘PROC PLAN’) with a 1:1 allocation. No randomisation seed was specified. The randomisation seed was generated taking the hour of the computer where the program was executed. Randomization will be done centrally through the electronic system RedCAP® in order to conceal the sequence until interventions are assigned BLINDING (MASKING): Participants, caregivers, and those assessing the outcomes are blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A total of 450 participants are planned to be enrolled in this clinical trial, 225 in the experimental arm and 225 in the placebo arm. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 3.0, 17th of April 2020. Recruitment ongoing. First participant was recruited on the 21st of April 2020. The final participant is anticipated to be recruited on the 31st of May 2020. As of May 18th, 2020, a total of 312 participants have been enrolled (154 at Hospital La Paz, 85 at Hospital Infanta Sofía and 73 at Hospital 12 de Octubre). TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU Clinical Trials Register: 2020-001530-35; Date of trial registration: 13th of April 2020; https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2020-001530-35/ES FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Randomized Clinical Trials and COVID-19: Managing Expectations.

positive: The quality of the reported sample size calculation in clinical trials on COVID-19 patients indexed in PubMed

positive: Efficacy of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials BACKGROUND: Despite global containment measures to fight the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the pandemic continued to rise, rapidly spread across the world, and resulting in 2.6 million confirmed cases and 185 061 deaths worldwide as of 23 April 2020. Yet, there are no approved vaccines or drugs to make the disease less deadly, while efforts are underway. Remdesivir, a nucleotide-analogue antiviral drug developed for Ebola, is determined to prevent and stop infections with COVID-19, while results are yet controversial. Here, we aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: We will search MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google scholar databases for articles published as of 30 June 2020 and we will complete the study on 30 August 2020. We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 guidelines for the design and reporting of the results. We will include RCTs that assessed the efficacy of remdesivir versus placebo or standard of care. The primary endpoint will be time to clinical recovery. The secondary endpoints will be proportion of participants relieved from clinical symptoms defined at the time (in hours) from initiation of the study treatment, all-cause mortality, discharged date, frequency of respiratory progression and treatment-emergent adverse events. RevMan V.5.3 software will be used for statistical analysis. Random effects model will be carried out to calculate mean differences for continuous outcome data and risk ratio for dichotomous outcome data between remdesivir and placebo or standard of care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: There are no ethical considerations associated with this study as we will use publicly available data from previously published studies. We plan to publish results in open-access peer-reviewed journals and present at international and national conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020177953.

positive: Clinical Testing For Covid-19 Abstract As the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 caused COVID-19 cases in the United States the initial test was developed and performed at the Center for Disease Control (CDC). As the number of cases increased the demand for tests multiplied, leading the CDC to utilize the Emergency Utilization Authorization to allow clinical and commercial laboratories to develop tests to detect the presence of the virus. Many nucleic acid tests based on reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) were developed, each with different techniques, specifications and turnaround time. As the illnesses turned into a pandemic, testing became more crucial. The test supply became inadequate to meet the need that it had to be prioritized according to guidance. For surveillance, the need for serologic tests emerged. Here we review the timeline of test development, the turn-around times, the various approved tests and compare them as regards the genes they detect. We concentrate on the point-of-care tests and discuss the basis for new serologic tests. We discuss the testing guidance for prioritization and their application in a hospital setting. As SARS-CoV-2 virus arrived in the USA causing the COVID-19 illness, one of the most talked about issues in the management of the disease and the resulting pandemic has been clinical testing. A unique situation arose of a communicable and highly contagious disease necessitating the rapid diagnosis of patients and the identification of non-symptomatic infected persons. Unfortunately, the USA did not have a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved laboratory test for the illness. The FDA ultimately utilized its Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA) on February 4, 2020 to allow for more rapid and widespread development and implementation of in-vitro testing.1 Indeed, companies and organizations utilized the EUA to file applications for new tests based on different methodologies, amounting to 48 applications in the span of 3 months from the beginning of February to the end of April 2020. In addition, multiple other tests were put in place under a separate authorization by a Presidential memorandum in early March allowing laboratories that carry Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment (CLIA) certification to put tests in place without an EUA from the FDA. This created an unprecedented situation where the medical community and the public may not be familiar with the various new tests for COVID-19 that are offered to patients and hospitals. The purpose of this review is to provide information, up-to-date as of the date of submission of the manuscript to the journal, on the various tests that have been developed, their scientific basis and their interpretation. We give a real-world example demonstrating the time lag in the return of test results and review testing prioritization guidance since the supply of tests remains below the perceived need.

positive: Public Engagement and Government Responsiveness in the Communications About COVID-19 During the Early Epidemic Stage in China: Infodemiology Study on Social Media Data BACKGROUND: Effective risk communication about the outbreak of a newly emerging infectious disease in the early stage is critical for managing public anxiety and promoting behavioral compliance. China has experienced the unprecedented epidemic of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in an era when social media has fundamentally transformed information production and consumption patterns. OBJECTIVE: This study examined public engagement and government responsiveness in the communications about COVID-19 during the early epidemic stage based on an analysis of data from Sina Weibo, a major social media platform in China. METHODS: Weibo data relevant to COVID-19 from December 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020, were retrieved. Engagement data (likes, comments, shares, and followers) of posts from government agency accounts were extracted to evaluate public engagement with government posts online. Content analyses were conducted for a random subset of 644 posts from personal accounts of individuals, and 273 posts from 10 relatively more active government agency accounts and the National Health Commission of China to identify major thematic contents in online discussions. Latent class analysis further explored main content patterns, and chi-square for trend examined how proportions of main content patterns changed by time within the study time frame. RESULTS: The public response to COVID-19 seemed to follow the spread of the disease and government actions but was earlier for Weibo than the government. Online users generally had low engagement with posts relevant to COVID-19 from government agency accounts. The common content patterns identified in personal and government posts included sharing epidemic situations; general knowledge of the new disease; and policies, guidelines, and official actions. However, personal posts were more likely to show empathy to affected people (χ(2)(1)=13.3, P<.001), attribute blame to other individuals or government (χ(2)(1)=28.9, P<.001), and express worry about the epidemic (χ(2)(1)=32.1, P<.001), while government posts were more likely to share instrumental support (χ(2)(1)=32.5, P<.001) and praise people or organizations (χ(2)(1)=8.7, P=.003). As the epidemic evolved, sharing situation updates (for trend, χ(2)(1)=19.7, P<.001) and policies, guidelines, and official actions (for trend, χ(2)(1)=15.3, P<.001) became less frequent in personal posts but remained stable or increased significantly in government posts. Moreover, as the epidemic evolved, showing empathy and attributing blame (for trend, χ(2)(1)=25.3, P<.001) became more frequent in personal posts, corresponding to a slight increase in sharing instrumental support, praising, and empathizing in government posts (for trend, χ(2)(1)=9.0, P=.003). CONCLUSIONS: The government should closely monitor social media data to improve the timing of communications about an epidemic. As the epidemic evolves, merely sharing situation updates and policies may be insufficient to capture public interest in the messages. The government may adopt a more empathic communication style as more people are affected by the disease to address public concerns.

positive: Implications of the lack of a unified research project framework: an investigation into the registration of clinical trials of COVID-19 Objective: The aim of this study was to provide recommendations for improving the design of subsequent studies through analysis of the registered coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) clinical trials.Methods: A retrospective analysis of 189 trial retrievals achieved on 20 February 2020.Results: A total of 189 trials are included in the study. There were 69.3% interventional studies, 21.7% observational studies, 5.3% diagnostic tests and 3.7% other studies. The following statistics are provided only for the interventional studies. Severity of disease: 5.3% light and common type, 17.6% severe and critically ill and 59.6% with no restricted classification. Medication use: 51.1% Western medicine, 32.1% Chinese medicine, 10.7% blood related product and 6.1% non-drug therapy. The median and inner quantile range of the sample sizes included in these studies: 104 (IQR: 60, 200). Primary outcome type most used: 45.8% with clinical characteristics and 21.4% with virological. Study design characteristics: 71% of all studies were randomized, 5% of all studies were blinded, 18% of all studies were multicenter and 76% of all studies were single center.Conclusion: Although many COVID-19 studies include randomization in their design, the lack of additional double-blind and placebo-controlled elements in their designs result in a less robust evaluation of intervention safety and efficacy. Furthermore, similar or repeated research and small sample studies that have less promise in gains of new information have possibly led to a shortage of recruitable patients and become a barrier to the completion of large multicenter clinical trial studies.

positive: Systematic Review of the Registered Clinical Trials of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Background: Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many researchers in China have immediately carried out clinical research scheme of the COVID-19. But, there is still a lack of systematic review of registered clinical trials. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of the clinical trials of COVID-19 to summarize the characteristics of the COVID-19 registered clinical trials. Methods: This study is based on the recommendations of the PRISMA in the Cochrane handbook. The databases from the Chinese Clinical Registration Center and the ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to collect the registered clinical trials of COVID-19. The retrieval inception date is February 9, 2020. Two researchers independently selected the literature based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data and evaluated the risk of bias. Results: A total of 75 registered clinical trials (63 interventional studies and 12 observational studies) of COVID-19 were obtained. A majority of clinical trials were sponsored by Chinese hospitals. Only 11 trials have begun to recruit patients, and none of the registered clinical trials had been completed; 34 trials were early clinical exploratory trials or in a pre-experiment stage, 15 trials belonged to phrase Ⅲ and 4 trials were phrase Ⅳ. The methods of intervention included traditional Chinese medicine involving 26 trials, Western medicine involving 30 trials, and integrated traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine involving 19 trials. The subjects were mainly non-critical adult patients (≥ 18 years old). The median sample size of the trials was 100 (IQR: 60 - 200), and the median execute time of the trials was 179 d (IQR: 94 - 366 d). The main outcomes were clinical observation and examinations. Overall, both the methodology quality of interventional trials and observational studies were low. Conclusions: Disorderly and intensive clinical trials of COVID-19 using traditional Chinese medicine and western medicine are ongoing or will being carried out in China. However, based on the low methodology quality and small sample size and long studies execute time, we will not be able to obtain reliable, high-quality clinical evidence about COVID-19 treatment in the near future. Improving the quality of study design, prioritizing promising drugs, and using different designs and statistical methods are worth advocating and recommending for the clinical trials of COVID-19 in China.

positive: A large number of COVID-19 interventional clinical trials were registered soon after the pandemic onset: a descriptive analysis Abstract Background There is a pressing need for evidence-based interventions to address the devastating clinical and public health effects of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The number of registered trials related to COVID-19 is increasing by the day. Objectives To describe the characteristics of the currently registered clinical trials related to COVID-19. Methods We searched the World Health Organization (WHO)’s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on May 15, 2020. We included any entry that is related to COVID-19. We abstracted then descriptively analyzed the following characteristics of the registered trials: study design, status, phase, primary endpoints, experimental interventions, and geographic location among other qualifiers. Results We identified 1,308 eligible registered trials. The majority of trials were initially registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (n= 703; 53.7%) and the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) (n= 291; 22.2%). The number of participants to be enrolled across these trials was 734,657, with a median of 110 participants per trial. The most-commonly studied intervention category was pharmacologic (n=763; 58.3%), with antiparasitic medications being the most common subcategory. While over half of trials were already recruiting, we identified published peer-reviewed results for only 8 of those trials. Conclusion There is a relatively large number of registered trials but very few results published so far. While our findings suggest an appropriate initial response by the research community, the real challenge will be to get these trials completed, published, and translated into practice and policy.

positive: Medical masks vs N95 respirators for preventing COVID-19 in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials BACKGROUND: Respiratory protective devices are critical in protecting against infection in healthcare workers at high risk of novel 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19); however, recommendations are conflicting and epidemiological data on their relative effectiveness against COVID-19 are limited. PURPOSE: To compare medical masks to N95 respirators in preventing laboratory-confirmed viral infection and respiratory illness including coronavirus specifically in healthcare workers. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL from January 1, 2014, to March 9, 2020. Update of published search conducted from January 1, 1990, to December 9, 2014. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the protective effect of medical masks to N95 respirators in healthcare workers. DATA EXTRACTION: Reviewer pair independently screened, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Four RCTs were meta-analyzed adjusting for clustering. Compared with N95 respirators; the use of medical masks did not increase laboratory-confirmed viral (including coronaviruses) respiratory infection (OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.90-1.25; I2 = 0%; low certainty in the evidence) or clinical respiratory illness (OR 1.49; 95% CI: 0.98-2.28; I2 = 78%; very low certainty in the evidence). Only one trial evaluated coronaviruses separately and found no difference between the two groups (P = .49). LIMITATIONS: Indirectness and imprecision of available evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Low certainty evidence suggests that medical masks and N95 respirators offer similar protection against viral respiratory infection including coronavirus in healthcare workers during non-aerosol-generating care. Preservation of N95 respirators for high-risk, aerosol-generating procedures in this pandemic should be considered when in short supply.

positive: Treatment Considerations for COVID-19: A Critical Review of the Evidence (or Lack Thereof) Abstract The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is causing a worldwide pandemic that may lead to a highly morbid and potentially fatal coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). There is currently no drug that has been proven as an effective therapy for COVID-19. Several candidate drugs are being considered and evaluated for treatment. This includes clinically-available drugs, such as chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and lopinavir/ritonavir, which are being repurposed for the treatment of COVID-19. Novel experimental therapies, such as remdesivir and favipiravir, are also actively being investigated for antiviral efficacy. Clinically-available and investigational immunomodulators, such as the IL-6 inhibitors tocilizumab and sarilumab and the anti-GMCSF lenzilumab, are being tested for their anticipated effect in counteracting the pro-inflammatory cytokine environment that characterizes severe and critical COVID-19. This review article examines the evidence behind the potential use of these leading drug candidates for the treatment of COVID-19. The authors conclude, based on this review, that there is still no high-quality evidence to support any of these proposed drug therapies. The authors, therefore, encourage the enrollment of eligible patients to multiple ongoing clinical trials that assess the efficacy and safety of these candidate therapies. Until the results of controlled trials are available, none of the suggested therapeutics is clinically proven as an effective therapy for COVID-19.

positive: An overview of coronaviruses including the SARS-2 coronavirus – Molecular biology, epidemiology and clinical implications Abstract Coronavirus infections have emerged as epidemic and pandemic threats in last two decades. After the H1N1 influenza pandemic in 2009, recently diagnosed novel betacoronavirus or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2 has spread across 203 countries and territories in all 5 major continents. World Health Organization (WHO) declared this as a public health emergency of international concern on January 30, 2020. Subsequently on February 11, 2020 a new name was given to this disease i.e. COVID-19 by an expert group from WHO. As of April 12, 2020, 10:00 CET, GMT+2:00, 1,696,588 confirmed cases and 105,952 confirmed deaths have been reported to the WHO. (Coronavirus disease 2019, situation report 83). It possibly originated from a small animal market in Wuhan, China. A cluster of patients were admitted with unusual pneumonia not responding to treatment in various hospitals. Epidemiological, genomic analysis and correlation with other coronaviruses led to the isolation of new coronavirus, closely resembling the bat coronaviruses, from such patients in Wuhan. They were identified as the SARS-CoV-2. This virus infection presents as influenza like illness in the affected people. Fever, cough, respiratory distress with fatigue, diarrhea, nausea and vomiting are common symptoms seen in adults. This may progress on to respiratory distress, hypoxia, need for oxygen supplementation and ventilator support as seen in patients in the SARS-CoV-1 epidemic (2003) in Guangdong, China. The transmissibility of SARS-CoV-1 was less as compared to SARS-CoV-2 infection, and it was well controlled with good public health efforts. The present COVID-19 epidemic is still in the acceleration phase of 3 and 4 in various countries. Without any effective antiviral agents available at present, the need of the hour is early case detection, isolation of cases, use of good preventive care measures by the household contacts and in the hospital set up. The results of ongoing clinical trials on hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin alone or in combination and a new antiviral agent remdesivir may help to treat some of the infections. A need for effective vaccine is being seen an as good preventive strategy in this pandemic. However the results of clinical trials and incorporation of vaccines in public health programs is a long way to go.

positive: Coronavirus Disease 2019 Treatment: A Review of Early and Emerging Options Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has spread across the globe resulting in a pandemic. At the time of this review, COVID-19 has been diagnosed in more than 200 000 patients and associated with over 8000 deaths (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, World Health Organization). On behalf of the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists, we herein summarize the current evidence as of March 18, 2020 to provide guidance on potential COVID-19 treatment options. It is important to caution readers that new data emerges daily regarding clinical characteristics, treatment options, and outcomes for COVID-19. Optimized supportive care remains the mainstay of therapy, and the clinical efficacy for the subsequent agents is still under investigation. Antimicrobial stewardship programs, including infectious diseases pharmacists and physicians, are at the forefront of COVID-19 emergency preparedness. We encourage all readers to continue to assess clinical data as it emerges and share their experience within our community in a well-controlled, adequately powered fashion.

positive: A Compressed Sensing Approach to Group-testing for COVID-19 Detection We propose Tapestry, a novel approach to pooled testing with application to COVID-19 testing with quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) that can result in shorter testing time and conservation of reagents and testing kits. Tapestry combines ideas from compressed sensing and combinatorial group testing with a novel noise model for PCR. Unlike Boolean group testing algorithms, the input is a quantitative readout from each test, and the output is a list of viral loads for each sample. While other pooling techniques require a second confirmatory assay, Tapestry obtains individual sample-level results in a single round of testing. When testing $n$ samples with $t$ tests, as many as $k= O(t / \log n)$ infected samples can be identified at clinically-acceptable false positive and false negative rates. This makes Tapestry viable even at prevalence rates as high as 10\%. Tapestry has been validated in simulations as well as in wet lab experiments with oligomers. Clinical trials with Covid-19 samples are underway. An accompanying Android application Byom Smart Testing which makes the Tapestry protocol straightforward to implement in testing centres is available for free download.

positive: AGILE-ACCORD: A Randomized, Multicentre, Seamless, Adaptive Phase I/II Platform Study to Determine the Optimal Dose, Safety and Efficacy of Multiple Candidate Agents for the Treatment of COVID-19: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised platform trial OBJECTIVES: Phase I - To determine the optimal dose of each candidate (or combination of candidates) entered into the platform. Phase II - To determine the efficacy and safety of each candidate entered into the platform, compared to the current Standard of Care (SoC), and recommend whether it should be evaluated further in a later phase II & III platforms. TRIAL DESIGN: AGILE-ACCORD is a Bayesian multicentre, multi-arm, multi-dose, multi-stage open-label, adaptive, seamless phase I/II randomised platform trial to determine the optimal dose, activity and safety of multiple candidate agents for the treatment of COVID-19. Designed as a master protocol with each candidate being evaluated within its own sub-protocol (Candidate Specific Trial (CST) protocol), randomising between candidate and SoC with 2:1 allocation in favour of the candidate (N.B the first candidate has gone through regulatory approval and is expected to open to recruitment early summer 2020). Each dose will be assessed for safety sequentially in cohorts of 6 patients. Once a phase II dose has been identified we will assess efficacy by seamlessly expanding into a larger cohort. PARTICIPANTS: Patient populations can vary between CSTs, but the main eligibility criteria include adult patients (≥18 years) who have laboratory-confirmed infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We will include both severe and mild-moderate patients defined as follows: Group A (severe disease) - patients with WHO Working Group on the Clinical Characteristics of COVID-19 infection 9-point ordinal scale of Grades 4 (hospitalised, oxygen by mask or nasal prongs), 5 (hospitalised, non-invasive ventilation or high flow oxygen), 6 (hospitalised, intubation and mechanical ventilation) or 7 (hospitalised, ventilation and additional organ support); Group B (mild-moderate disease) - ambulant or hospitalised patients with peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO(2)) >94% RA. If any CSTs are included in the community setting, the CST protocol will clarify whether patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection are also eligible. Participants will be recruited from England, North Ireland, Wales and Scotland. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Comparator is the current standard of care (SoC), in some CSTs plus placebo. Candidates that prevent uncontrolled cytokine release, prevention of viral replication, and other anti-viral treatment strategies are at various stages of development for inclusion into AGILE-ACCORD. Other CSTs will be added over time. There is not a set limit on the number of CSTs we can include within the AGILE-ACCORD Master protocol and we will upload each CST into this publication as each opens to recruitment. MAIN OUTCOMES: Phase I: Dose limiting toxicities using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5 Grade ≥3 adverse events. Phase II: Agreed on a CST basis depending on mechanism of action of the candidate and patient population. But may include; time to clinical improvement of at least 2 points on the WHO 9-point category ordinal scale [measured up to 29 days from randomisation], progression of disease (oxygen saturation (SaO(2)) <92%) or hospitalization or death, or change in time-weighted viral load [measured up to 29 days from randomisation]. RANDOMISATION: Varies with CST, but default is 2:1 allocation in favour of the candidate to maximise early safety data. BLINDING (MASKING): For the safety phase open-label although for some CSTs may include placebo or SoC for the efficacy phase. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): Varies between CSTs. However simulations have shown that around 16 participants are necessary to determine futility or promise of a candidate at a given dose (in efficacy evaluation alone) and between 32 and 40 participants are required across the dose-finding and efficacy evaluation when capping the maximum number of participants contributing to the evaluation of a treatment at 40. TRIAL STATUS: Master protocol version number v5 07 May 2020, trial is in setup with full regulatory approval and utilises several digital technology solutions, including Medidata’s Rave EDC [electronic data capture], RTSM for randomisation and patient eConsent on iPads via Rave Patient Cloud. The recruitment dates will vary between CSTs but at the time of writing no CSTs are yet open for recruitment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT 2020-001860-27 14(th) March 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: COVID-19 in Children: Clinical Approach and Management COVID-19 pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a major public health crisis threatening humanity at this point in time. Transmission of the infection occurs by inhalation of infected droplets or direct contact with soiled surfaces and fomites. It should be suspected in all symptomatic children who have undertaken international travel in the last 14 d, all hospitalized children with severe acute respiratory illness, and asymptomatic direct and high-risk contacts of a confirmed case. Clinical symptoms are similar to any acute respiratory viral infection with less pronounced nasal symptoms. Disease seems to be milder in children, but situation appears to be changing. Infants and young children had relatively more severe illness than older children. The case fatality rate is low in children. Diagnosis can be confirmed by Reverse transcriptase - Polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) on respiratory specimen (commonly nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swab). Rapid progress is being made to develop rapid diagnostic tests, which will help ramp up the capacity to test and also reduce the time to getting test results. Management is mainly supportive care. In severe pneumonia and critically ill children, trial of hydroxychloroquine or lopinavir/ritonavir should be considered. As per current policy, children with mild disease also need to be hospitalized; if this is not feasible, these children may be managed on ambulatory basis with strict home isolation. Pneumonia, severe disease and critical illness require admission and aggressive management for acute lung injury and shock and/or multiorgan dysfunction, if present. An early intubation is preferred over non-invasive ventilation or heated, humidified, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, as these may generate aerosols increasing the risk of infection in health care personnel. To prevent post discharge dissemination of infection, home isolation for 1-2 wk may be advised. As of now, no vaccine or specific chemotherapeutic agents are approved for children.

positive: SARS: Systematic Review of Treatment Effects BACKGROUND: The SARS outbreak of 2002–2003 presented clinicians with a new, life-threatening disease for which they had no experience in treating and no research on the effectiveness of treatment options. The World Health Organization (WHO) expert panel on SARS treatment requested a systematic review and comprehensive summary of treatments used for SARS-infected patients in order to guide future treatment and identify priorities for research. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In response to the WHO request we conducted a systematic review of the published literature on ribavirin, corticosteroids, lopinavir and ritonavir (LPV/r), type I interferon (IFN), intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and SARS convalescent plasma from both in vitro studies and in SARS patients. We also searched for clinical trial evidence of treatment for acute respiratory distress syndrome. Sources of data were the literature databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to February 2005. Data from publications were extracted and evidence within studies was classified using predefined criteria. In total, 54 SARS treatment studies, 15 in vitro studies, and three acute respiratory distress syndrome studies met our inclusion criteria. Within in vitro studies, ribavirin, lopinavir, and type I IFN showed inhibition of SARS-CoV in tissue culture. In SARS-infected patient reports on ribavirin, 26 studies were classified as inconclusive, and four showed possible harm. Seven studies of convalescent plasma or IVIG, three of IFN type I, and two of LPV/r were inconclusive. In 29 studies of steroid use, 25 were inconclusive and four were classified as causing possible harm. CONCLUSIONS: Despite an extensive literature reporting on SARS treatments, it was not possible to determine whether treatments benefited patients during the SARS outbreak. Some may have been harmful. Clinical trials should be designed to validate a standard protocol for dosage and timing, and to accrue data in real time during future outbreaks to monitor specific adverse effects and help inform treatment.

positive: Azithromycin added to hydroxychloroquine for patients admitted to intensive care due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)—protocol of randomised controlled trial AZIQUINE-ICU BACKGROUND: Novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is known to be susceptible in vitro to exposure to hydroxychloroquine and its effect has been found to be potentiated by azithromycin. We hypothesise that early administration of hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin can prevent respiratory deterioration in patients admitted to intensive care due to rapidly progressive COVID-19 infection. METHODS: Design: Prospective, multi-centre, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial (RCT). Participants: Adult (> 18 years) within 24 h of admission to the intensive care unit with proven or suspected COVID-19 infection, whether or not mechanically ventilated. Exclusion criteria include duration symptoms of febrile disease for ≥ 1 week, treatment limitations in place or moribund patients, allergy or intolerance of any study treatment, and pregnancy. Interventions: Patients will be randomised in 1:1:1 ratio to receive Hydroxychloroquine 800 mg orally in two doses followed by 400 mg daily in two doses and azithromycin 500 mg orally in one dose followed by 250 mg in one dose for a total of 5 days (HC-A group) or hydroxychloroquine + placebo (HC group) or placebo + placebo (C-group) in addition to the best standard of care, which may evolve during the trial period but will not differ between groups. Primary outcome is the composite percentage of patients alive and not on end-of-life pathway who are free of mechanical ventilation at day 14. Secondary outcomes: The percentage of patients who were prevented from needing intubation until day 14, ICU length of stay, and mortality (in hospital) at day 28 and 90. DISCUSSION: Although both investigational drugs are often administered off label to patients with severe COVID-19, at present, there is no data from RCTs on their safety and efficacy. In vitro and observational trial suggests their potential to limit viral replication and the damage to lungs as the most common reason for ICU admission. Therefore, patients most likely to benefit from the treatment are those with severe but early disease. This trial is designed and powered to investigate whether the treatment in this cohort of patients leads to improved clinical patient-centred outcomes, such as mechanical ventilation-free survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials.gov: NCT04339816 (Registered on 9 April 2020, amended on 22 June 2020); Eudra CT number: 2020-001456-18 (Registered on 29 March 2020).

positive: COVID-19: a case for inhibiting IL-17? IL-17 and IL-17 receptor inhibitors boast an impressive safety history and are widely available. Here, we argue that targeting IL-17 is immunologically plausible as a strategy to prevent acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and discuss why we think that a clinical trial of a drug in this class could be a logical addition to the effort to find effective therapies.

positive: Treatment options for COVID-19: the reality and challenges Abstract An outbreak related to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was first reported in Wuhan, China in December 2019. An extremely high potential for dissemination resulted in the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in 2020. Despite the worsening trends of COVID-19, no drugs are validated to have significant efficacy in clinical treatment of COVID-19 patients in large-scale studies. Remdesivir is considered the most promising antiviral agent; it works by inhibiting the activity of RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp). A large-scale study investigating the clinical efficacy of remdesivir (200 mg on day 1, followed by 100 mg once daily) is on-going. The other excellent anti-influenza RdRp inhibitor favipiravir is also being clinically evaluated for its efficacy in COVID-19 patients. The protease inhibitor lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/RTV) alone is not shown to provide better antiviral efficacy than standard care. However, the regimen of LPV/RTV plus ribavirin was shown to be effective against SARS-CoV in vitro. Another promising alternative is hydroxychloroquine (200 mg thrice daily) plus azithromycin (500 mg on day 1, followed by 250 mg once daily on day 2-5), which showed excellent clinical efficacy on Chinese COVID-19 patients and anti-SARS-CoV-2 potency in vitro. The roles of teicoplanin (which inhibits the viral genome exposure in cytoplasm) and monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 are under investigation. Avoiding the prescription of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, or angiotensin II type I receptor blockers is advised for COVID-19 patients.

positive: Therapeutic Application of Chloroquine in Clinical Trials for COVID-19 The novel corona virus disease -2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused a massive global public health havoc. Recent clinical trials carried out in China has found a promising therapeutic application of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19. This study meticulously evaluated the various dosages of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine utilized in clinical trials registered in Chinese and US clinical trial registries for the treatment of pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2.

positive: Proactive Prophylaxis With Azithromycin and HydroxyChloroquine in Hospitalised Patients With COVID-19 (ProPAC-COVID): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The aim of this randomised GCP-controlled trial is to clarify whether combination therapy with the antibiotic azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine via anti-inflammation/immune modulation, antiviral efficacy and pre-emptive treatment of supra-infections can shorten hospitalisation duration for patients with COVID-19 (measured as "days alive and out of hospital" as the primary outcome), reduce the risk of non- invasive ventilation, treatment in the intensive care unit and death. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a multi-centre, randomised, Placebo-controlled, 2-arm ratio 1:1, parallel group double-blind study. PARTICIPANTS: 226 participants are recruited at the trial sites/hospitals, where the study will take place in Denmark: Aalborg, Bispebjerg, Gentofte, Herlev, Hillerød, Hvidovre, Odense and Slagelse hospitals. Inclusion criteria: • Patient admitted to Danish emergency departments, respiratory medicine departments or internal medicine departments • Age≥ 18 years • Hospitalized ≤48 hours • Positive COVID-19 test / diagnosis during the hospitalization (confirmed). • Men or non-fertile women. Fertile women* must not be pregnant, i.e. negative pregnancy test must be available at inclusion • Informed consent signed by the patient *Defined as after menarche and until postmenopausal (no menstruation for 12 months) Exclusion criteria: • At the time of recruitment, the patient uses >5 LO2/min (equivalent to 40% FiO2 if measured) • Known intolerance/allergy to azithromycin or hydroxychloroquine or hypersensitivity to quinine or 4-aminoquinoline derivatives • Neurogenic hearing loss • Psoriasis • Retinopathy • Maculopathy • Visual field changes • Breastfeeding • Severe liver diseases other than amoebiasis (INR> 1.5 spontaneously) • Severe gastrointestinal, neurological and hematological disorders (investigator-assessed) • eGFR <45 ml/min/1.73 m2 • Clinically significant cardiac conduction disorders/arrhythmias or prolonged QTc interval (QTc (f) of> 480/470 ms). • Myasthenia gravis • Treatment with digoxin* • Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency • Porphyria • Hypoglycaemia (Blood glucose at any time since hospitalization of <3.0 mmol/L) • Severe mental illness which significantly impedes cooperation • Severe linguistic problems that significantly hinder cooperation • Treatment with ergot alkaloids *The patient must not be treated with digoxin for the duration of the intervention. For atrial fibrillation/flutter, select according to the Cardiovascular National Treatment Guide (NBV): Calcium antagonist, Beta blocker, direct current (DC) conversion or amiodarone. In case of urgent need for digoxin treatment (contraindication for the aforementioned equal alternatives), the test drug should be paused, and ECG should be taken daily. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Control group: The control group will receive the standard treatment + placebo for both types of intervention medication at all times. If part or all the intervention therapy being investigated becomes standard treatment during the study, this may also be offered to the control group. Intervention group: The patients in the intervention group will also receive standard care. Immediately after randomisation to the intervention group, the patient will begin treatment with: Azithromycin: Day 1-3: 500 mg x 1 Day 4-15: 250 mg x 1 If the patient is unable to take the medication orally by themselves, the medication will, if possible, be administered by either stomach-feeding tube, or alternatively, temporary be changed to clarithromycin 500 mg x 2 (this only in agreement with either study coordinator Pradeesh Sivapalan or principal investigator Jens-Ulrik Stæhr Jensen). This will also be done in the control group if necessary. The patient will switch back to azithromycin when possible. Hydroxychloroquine: Furthermore, the patient will be treated with hydroxychloroquine as follows: Day 1-15: 200 mg x 2 MAIN OUTCOMES: • Number of days alive and discharged from hospital within 14 days (summarises both whether the patient is alive and discharged from hospital) ("Days alive and out of hospital") RANDOMISATION: The sponsor (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Trial Network, COP:TRIN) generates a randomisation sequence. Randomisation will be in blocks of unknown size and the final allocation will be via an encrypted website (REDCap). There will be stratification for age (>70 years vs. <=70 years), site of recruitment and whether the patient has any of the following chronic lung diseases: COPD, asthma, bronchiectasis, interstitial lung disease (Yes vs. No). BLINDING (MASKING): Participants and study personnel will both be blinded, i.e. neither will know which group the participant is allocated to. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): This study requires 226 patients randomised 1:1 with 113 in each group. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 1.8, from April 16, 2020. Recruitment is ongoing (first patient recruited April 6, 2020; final patient expected to be recruited October 31, 2020). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04322396 (registered March 26, 2020) FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).

positive: Potential pharmacological agents for COVID-19 A novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov-2) first emerged in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, has become a global pandemic. Currently, the management of COVID-19 infection is mainly supportive. Several clinical trials worldwide are evaluating several drugs approved for other indications, as well as multiple investigational agents for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19. Here, we give a brief overview of pharmacological agents and other therapies which are under investigation as treatment options or adjunctive agents for patients infected with COVID-19 and for chemoprophylaxis for the prevention of COVID-19 infection. At the time of writing this commentary, there is no peer-reviewed published evidence from randomized clinical trials of any pharmacological agents improving outcomes in COVID-19 patients. However, it was reported that remdesivir an investigational antiviral agent hastens clinical recovery, but a study is yet to be published in peer-reviewed medical journal.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis BACKGROUND: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, often in combination with a second-generation macrolide, are being widely used for treatment of COVID-19, despite no conclusive evidence of their benefit. Although generally safe when used for approved indications such as autoimmune disease or malaria, the safety and benefit of these treatment regimens are poorly evaluated in COVID-19. METHODS: We did a multinational registry analysis of the use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19. The registry comprised data from 671 hospitals in six continents. We included patients hospitalised between Dec 20, 2019, and April 14, 2020, with a positive laboratory finding for SARS-CoV-2. Patients who received one of the treatments of interest within 48 h of diagnosis were included in one of four treatment groups (chloroquine alone, chloroquine with a macrolide, hydroxychloroquine alone, or hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide), and patients who received none of these treatments formed the control group. Patients for whom one of the treatments of interest was initiated more than 48 h after diagnosis or while they were on mechanical ventilation, as well as patients who received remdesivir, were excluded. The main outcomes of interest were in-hospital mortality and the occurrence of de-novo ventricular arrhythmias (non-sustained or sustained ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation). FINDINGS: 96 032 patients (mean age 53·8 years, 46·3% women) with COVID-19 were hospitalised during the study period and met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 14 888 patients were in the treatment groups (1868 received chloroquine, 3783 received chloroquine with a macrolide, 3016 received hydroxychloroquine, and 6221 received hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide) and 81 144 patients were in the control group. 10 698 (11·1%) patients died in hospital. After controlling for multiple confounding factors (age, sex, race or ethnicity, body-mass index, underlying cardiovascular disease and its risk factors, diabetes, underlying lung disease, smoking, immunosuppressed condition, and baseline disease severity), when compared with mortality in the control group (9·3%), hydroxychloroquine (18·0%; hazard ratio 1·335, 95% CI 1·223–1·457), hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide (23·8%; 1·447, 1·368–1·531), chloroquine (16·4%; 1·365, 1·218–1·531), and chloroquine with a macrolide (22·2%; 1·368, 1·273–1·469) were each independently associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality. Compared with the control group (0·3%), hydroxychloroquine (6·1%; 2·369, 1·935–2·900), hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide (8·1%; 5·106, 4·106–5·983), chloroquine (4·3%; 3·561, 2·760–4·596), and chloroquine with a macrolide (6·5%; 4·011, 3·344–4·812) were independently associated with an increased risk of de-novo ventricular arrhythmia during hospitalisation. INTERPRETATION: We were unable to confirm a benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, when used alone or with a macrolide, on in-hospital outcomes for COVID-19. Each of these drug regimens was associated with decreased in-hospital survival and an increased frequency of ventricular arrhythmias when used for treatment of COVID-19. FUNDING: William Harvey Distinguished Chair in Advanced Cardiovascular Medicine at Brigham and Women's Hospital.

positive: Antiviral therapy in management of COVID-19: a systematic review on current evidence BACKGROUND: The purpose of the current systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy of antiviral therapies in treatment of COVID-19. In addition, clinical trials on the efficacy of antiviral therapies in the management of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (SARS-Cov) or Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) have also been reviewed, in order to identify potential treatment options for COVID-19. METHOD: An extensive search was performed in Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and CENTRAL databases until the end of March 15, 2020. Two independent researchers performed the screening, and finally the related studies were included. RESULTS: Only one clinical trial on the efficacy of antiviral therapy in management of COVID-19 was found. The results depicted that adding Lopinavir-Ritonavir to the standard treatment regimen of patients with severe COVID-19 has no benefits. Moreover, 21 case-series and case-report studies reported the prescription of antiviral agents in COVID-19, none of which can be used to determine the efficacy of antiviral therapies in confronting COVID-19. In addition, no clinical trials were found to be performed on the efficacy of antiviral agents in the management of SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. CONCLUSION: The current evidence impede researchers from proposing an appropriate antiviral therapy against COVID-19, making the current situation a serious concern for international organizations such as World Health Organization (WHO). In the time of the current pandemic and future epidemics, organizations such as WHO should pursue more proactive actions and plan well-designed clinical trials so that their results can be used in managing future epidemics.

positive: Repair of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome by Stromal Cell Administration in COVID-19 (REALIST-COVID-19): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised, controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of the study is to assess the safety of a single intravenous infusion of Mesenchymal Stromal Cells (MSCs) in patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19. Secondary objectives are to determine the effects of MSCs on important clinical outcomes, as described below. TRIAL DESIGN: REALIST COVID 19 is a randomised, placebo-controlled, triple blinded trial. PARTICIPANTS: The study will be conducted in Intensive Care Units in hospitals across the United Kingdom. Patients with moderate to severe ARDS as defined by the Berlin definition, receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and with a diagnosis of COVID-19 based on clinical diagnosis or PCR test will be eligible. Patients will be excluded for the following reasons: more than 72 hours from the onset of ARDS; age < 16 years; patient known to be pregnant; major trauma in previous 5 days; presence of any active malignancy (other than non-melanoma skin cancer); WHO Class III or IV pulmonary hypertension; venous thromboembolism currently receiving anti-coagulation or within the past 3 months; patient receiving extracorporeal life support; severe chronic liver disease (Child-Pugh > 12); Do Not Attempt Resuscitation order in place; treatment withdrawal imminent within 24 hours; prisoners; declined consent; non-English speaking patients or those who do not adequately understand verbal or written information unless an interpreter is available; previously enrolled in the REALIST trial. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention: Allogeneic donor CD362 enriched human umbilical cord derived mesenchymal stromal cells (REALIST ORBCEL-C) supplied as sterile, single-use cryopreserved cell suspension of a fixed dose of 400 x106 cells in 40ml volume, to be diluted in Plasma-Lyte 148 to a total volume of 200mls for administration. Comparator (placebo): Plasma-Lyte 148 Solution for Infusion (200mls). The cellular product (REALIST ORBCEL-C) was developed and patented by Orbsen Therapeutics. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary safety outcome is the incidence of serious adverse events. The primary efficacy outcome is Oxygenation Index (OI) at day 7. Secondary outcomes include: OI at days 4 and 14; respiratory compliance, driving pressure and PaO2/FiO2 ratio (PF ratio) at days 4, 7 and 14; Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score at days 4, 7 and 14; extubation and reintubation; ventilation free days at day 28; duration of mechanical ventilation; length of ICU and hospital stay; 28-day and 90-day mortality. RANDOMISATION: After obtaining informed consent, patients will be randomised via a centralised automated 24-hour telephone or web-based randomisation system (CHaRT, Centre for Healthcare Randomised Trials, University of Aberdeen). Randomisation will be stratified by recruitment centre and by vasopressor use and patients will be allocated to REALIST ORBCEL-C or placebo control in a 1:1 ratio. BLINDING (MASKING): The investigator, treating physician, other members of the site research team and participants will be blinded. The cell therapy facility and clinical trials pharmacist will be unblinded to facilitate intervention and placebo preparation. The unblinded individuals will keep the treatment information confidential. The infusion bag will be masked at the time of preparation and will be administered via a masked infusion set. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A sample size of 60 patients with 30 patients randomised to the intervention and 30 to the control group. If possible, recruitment will continue beyond 60 patients to provide more accurate and definitive trial results. The total number of patients recruited will depend on the pandemic and be guided by the data monitoring and ethics committee (DMEC). TRIAL STATUS: REALIST Phase 1 completed in January 2020 prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. This was an open label dose escalation study of REALIST ORBCEL-C in patients with ARDS. The COVID-19 pandemic emerged as REALIST Phase 2 was planned to commence and the investigator team decided to repurpose the Phase 2 trial as a COVID-19 specific trial. This decision was discussed and approved by the Trial Steering Committee (TSC) and DMEC. Submissions were made to the Research Ethics Committee (REC) and MHRA to amend the protocol to a COVID-19 specific patient population and the protocol amendment was accepted by the REC on 27th March 2020 and MHRA on 30th March 2020 respectively. Other protocol changes in this amendment included an increase in the time of onset of ARDS from 48 to 72 hours, inclusion of clinical outcomes as secondary outcomes, the provision of an option for telephone consent, an indicative sample size and provision to continue recruitment beyond this indicative sample size. The current protocol in use is version 4.0 23.03.2020 (Additional file 1). Urgent Public Health status was awarded by the NIHR on 2 April 2020 and the trial opened to recruitment and recruited the first participant the same day. At the time of publication the trial was open to recruitment at 5 sites across the UK (Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, King's College London, Guys and St Thomas' Hospital London, Birmingham Heartlands Hospital and the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham) and 12 patients have been recruited across these sites. Additional sites are planned to open and appropriate approvals for these are being obtained. It is estimated recruitment will continue for 6 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03042143 (Registered 3 Feb 2017). EudraCT 2017-000585-33 (Registered 28 Nov 2017). FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol (version 4.0 23.03.2020) is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).

positive: Update on treatment of COVID-19: ongoing studies between promising and disappointing results The COVID-19 pandemic represents the greatest global public health crisis since the pandemic influenza outbreak of 1918. We are facing a new virus, so several antiviral agents previously used to treat other coronavirus infections such as SARS and MERS are being considered as the first potential candidates to treat COVID-19. Thus, several agents have been used by the beginning of the current outbreak in China first and all over the word successively, as reported in several different guidelines and therapeutic recommendations. At the same time, a great number of clinical trials have been launched to investigate the potential efficacy therapies for COVID-19 highlighting the urgent need to get as quickly as possible high-quality evidence. Through PubMed, we explored the relevant articles published on treatment of COVID-19 and on trials ongoing up to April 15, 2020.

positive: Broad Spectrum Antiviral Agent Niclosamide and Its Therapeutic Potential [Image: see text] The recent outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) highlights an urgent need for therapeutics. Through a series of drug repurposing screening campaigns, niclosamide, an FDA-approved anthelminthic drug, was found to be effective against various viral infections with nanomolar to micromolar potency such as SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, ZIKV, HCV, and human adenovirus, indicating its potential as an antiviral agent. In this brief review, we summarize the broad antiviral activity of niclosamide and highlight its potential clinical use in the treatment of COVID-19.

positive: Dose prediction for repurposing nitazoxanide in SARS-CoV-2 treatment or chemoprophylaxis Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organisation and urgent treatment and prevention strategies are needed. Many clinical trials have been initiated with existing medications, but assessments of the expected plasma and lung exposures at the selected doses have not featured in the prioritisation process. Although no antiviral data is currently available for the major phenolic circulating metabolite of nitazoxanide (known as tizoxanide), the parent ester drug has been shown to exhibit in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2. Nitazoxanide is an anthelmintic drug and its metabolite tizoxanide has been described to have broad antiviral activity against influenza and other coronaviruses. The present study used physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modelling to inform optimal doses of nitazoxanide capable of maintaining plasma and lung tizoxanide exposures above the reported nitazoxanide 90% effective concentration (EC90) against SARS-CoV-2. Methods: A whole-body PBPK model was constructed for oral administration of nitazoxanide and validated against available tizoxanide pharmacokinetic data for healthy individuals receiving single doses between 500 mg SARS-CoV-2 4000 mg with and without food. Additional validation against multiple-dose pharmacokinetic data when given with food was conducted. The validated model was then used to predict alternative doses expected to maintain tizoxanide plasma and lung concentrations over the reported nitazoxanide EC90 in >90% of the simulated population. Optimal design software PopDes was used to estimate an optimal sparse sampling strategy for future clinical trials. Results: The PBPK model was validated with AAFE values between 1.01 SARS-CoV-2 1.58 and a difference less than 2-fold between observed and simulated values for all the reported clinical doses. The model predicted optimal doses of 1200 mg QID, 1600 mg TID, 2900 mg BID in the fasted state and 700 mg QID, 900 mg TID and 1400 mg BID when given with food, to provide tizoxanide plasma and lung concentrations over the reported in vitro EC90 of nitazoxanide against SARS-CoV-2. For BID regimens an optimal sparse sampling strategy of 0.25, 1, 3 and 12h post dose was estimated. Conclusion: The PBPK model predicted that it was possible to achieve plasma and lung tizoxanide concentrations, using proven safe doses of nitazoxanide, that exceed the EC90 for SARS-CoV-2. The PBPK model describing tizoxanide plasma pharmacokinetics after oral administration of nitazoxanide was successfully validated against clinical data. This dose prediction assumes that the tizoxanide metabolite has activity against SARS-CoV-2 similar to that reported for nitazoxanide, as has been reported for other viruses. The model and the reported dosing strategies provide a rational basis for the design (optimising plasma and lung exposures) of future clinical trials of nitazoxanide in the treatment or prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

positive: Clinical trials for coronavirus disease 2019: What is being evaluated and what is not Since the report of the first case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China in late December 2019, there have been 204 610 cases worldwide as of 18 March, 2020. As part of the response to this outbreak, there has been an impressive amount of research undertaken to better characterize the disease and to evaluate therapeutic options. By March 12, 2020, there are more than 382 studies registered in the clinical trials databases addressing COVID-19 including more than 80 randomized controlled trials.

positive: How Should Clinicians Interpret Imprecise Trials Assessing Drugs for COVID-19 Patients? As the COVID-19 pandemic progresses, researchers are reporting findings of randomized trials comparing standard care with care augmented by experimental drugs. The trials have small sample sizes, so estimates of treatment effects are imprecise. Seeing imprecision, clinicians reading research articles may find it difficult to decide when to treat patients with experimental drugs. Whatever decision criterion one uses, there is always some probability that random variation in trial outcomes will lead to prescribing sub-optimal treatments. A conventional practice when comparing standard care and an innovation is to choose the innovation only if the estimated treatment effect is positive and statistically significant. This practice defers to standard care as the status quo. We argue that clinicians should ignore conventional measures of statistical significance. They should choose treatments that work best in trials, taking side effects into account and recognizing that treatment effects may vary with patient risk factors. To evaluate treatments, we use the concept of near optimality, which jointly considers the probability and magnitude of decision errors. An appealing decision criterion from this perspective is the empirical success rule, which chooses the treatment with the highest observed average patient outcome in the trial. Considering the design of COVID-19 trials, we show that the empirical success rule yields treatment results that are much closer to optimal than those generated by prevailing decision criteria based on hypothesis tests.

positive: Ruxolitinib in treatment of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A multicenter, single-blind, randomized controlled trial Abstract Background Accumulating evidence proposed JAK inhibitors as therapeutic targets warranting rapid investigation. Objective This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib, a Janus-associated kinase (JAK1/2) inhibitor, for COVID-19. Methods We conducted a prospective, multicenter, single-blind, randomized controlled phase II trial involving patients with severe COVID-19. Results Forty-three patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ruxolitinib plus SoC treatment (22 patients) or placebo based on SoC treatment (21 patients). After exclusion of 2 patients (1 ineligible, 1 consent withdrawn) from the ruxolitinib group, 20 patients in intervention group and 21 patients in control group were included in the study. Treatment with ruxolitinib plus SoC was not associated with significantly accelerated clinical improvement in severe patients with COVID-19, although ruxolitinib recipients had a numerically faster clinical improvement. Eighteen (90%) patients from the ruxolitinib group showed CT improvement at D14 compared with 13 (61.9%) patients from the control group (P = 0.0495). Three patients in the control group died of respiratory failure, with 14.3% overall mortality at D28; no patients died in the ruxolitinib group. Ruxolitinib was well tolerated with low toxicities and no new safety signals. Levels of 7 cytokines were significantly decreased in the ruxolitinib group in comparison to the control group. Conclusions Although no statistical difference was observed, ruxolitinib recipients had a numerically faster clinical improvement. Significant chest CT improvement, a faster recovery from lymphopenia and favorable side-effect profile in ruxolitinib group were encouraging and informative to future trials to test efficacy of ruxolitinib in a larger population. This trial is registered at www.chictr.org.cn as ChiCTR-OPN-2000029580.

positive: The Current and Future State of Vaccines, Antivirals and Gene Therapies Against Emerging Coronaviruses Emerging coronaviruses (CoV) are constant global public health threats to society. Multiple ongoing clinical trials for vaccines and antivirals against CoVs showcase the availability of medical interventions to both prevent and treat the future emergence of highly pathogenic CoVs in human. However, given the diverse nature of CoVs and our close interactions with wild, domestic and companion animals, the next epidemic zoonotic CoV could resist the existing vaccines and antivirals developed, which are primarily focused on Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS CoV). In late 2019, the novel CoV (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in Wuhan, China, causing global public health concern. In this review, we will summarize the key advancements of current vaccines and antivirals against SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV as well as discuss the challenge and opportunity in the current SARS-CoV-2 crisis. At the end, we advocate the development of a “plug-and-play” platform technologies that could allow quick manufacturing and administration of broad-spectrum countermeasures in an outbreak setting. We will discuss the potential of AAV-based gene therapy technology for in vivo therapeutic antibody delivery to combat SARS-CoV-2 outbreak and the future emergence of severe CoVs.

positive: Characteristics of registered clinical trials assessing treatments for COVID-19: a cross-sectional analysis OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has prompted many initiatives to identify safe and efficacious treatments, yet little is known regarding where early efforts have focused. We aimed to characterise registered clinical trials assessing drugs or plasma treatments for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional analysis of clinical trials for the treatment of COVID-19 that were registered in the USA or in countries contributing to the WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Relevant trial entries of drugs or plasma were downloaded on 26 March 2020, deduplicated, verified with reviews of major medical journals and WHO websites and independently analysed by two reviewers. MAIN OUTCOMES: Trial intervention, sponsorship, critical design elements and specified outcomes RESULTS: Overall, 201 clinical trials were registered for testing the therapeutic benefits of 92 drugs or plasma, including 64 in monotherapy and 28 different combinations. Only eight (8.7%) products or combinations involved new molecular entities. The other test therapies had a wide range of prior medical uses, including as antivirals, antimalarials, immunosuppressants and oncology treatments. In 152 trials (75.7%), patients were randomised to treatment or comparator, including 55 trials with some form of blinding and 97 open-label studies. The 49 (24.4%) of trials without a randomised design included 29 single armed studies and 20 trials with some comparison group. Most trial designs featured multiple endpoints. Clinical endpoints were identified in 134 (66.7%) of trials and included COVID-19 symptoms, death, recovery, required intensive care and hospital discharge. Clinical scales were being used in 33 (16.4%) trials, most often measures of oxygenation and critical illness. Surrogate endpoints or biomarkers were studied in 88 (42.3%) of trials, primarily assays of viral load. Although the trials were initiated in more than 17 countries or regions, 100 (49.8%) were registered in China and 78 (37.8%) in the USA. Registered trials increased rapidly, with the number of registered trials doubling from 1 March to 26 March 2020. CONCLUSIONS: While accelerating morbidity and mortality from the COVID-19 pandemic has been paralleled by early and rapid clinical investigation, many trials lack features to optimise their scientific value. Global coordination and increased funding of high-quality research may help to maximise scientific progress in rapidly discovering safe and effective treatments.

positive: Glecaprevir and Maraviroc are high-affinity inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 main protease: possible implication in COVID-19 therapy Due to the lack of efficient therapeutic options and clinical trial limitations, the FDA-approved drugs can be a good choice to handle Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Many reports have enough evidence for the use of FDA-approved drugs which have inhibitory potential against target proteins of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Here, we utilized a structure-based drug design approach to find possible drug candidates from the existing pool of FDA-approved drugs and checked their effectiveness against the SARS-CoV-2. We performed virtual screening of the FDA-approved drugs against the main protease (Mpro) of SARS-CoV-2, an essential enzyme, and a potential drug target. Using well-defined computational methods, we identified Glecaprevir and Maraviroc (MVC) as the best inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 Mpro. Both drugs bind to the substrate-binding pocket of SARS-CoV-2 Mpro and form a significant number of non-covalent interactions. Glecaprevir and MVC bind to the conserved residues of substrate-binding pocket of SARS-CoV-2 Mpro. This work provides sufficient evidence for the use of Glecaprevir and MVC for the therapeutic management of COVID-19 after experimental validation and clinical manifestations.

positive: Potential therapeutic effects of dipyridamole in the severely ill patients with COVID-19 Abstract Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection can cause acute respiratory distress syndrome, hypercoagulability, hypertension, and multiorgan dysfunction. Effective antivirals with safe clinical profile are urgently needed to improve the overall prognosis. In an analysis of a randomly collected cohort of 124 patients with Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), we found that hypercoagulability as indicated by elevated concentrations of D-dimers was associated with disease severity. By virtual screening of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drug library, we identified an anticoagulation agent dipyridamole (DIP) in silico, which suppressed SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro. In a proof-of-concept trial involving 31 patients with COVID-19, DIP supplementation was associated with significantly decreased concentrations of D-dimers (P<0.05), increased lymphocyte and platelet recovery in the circulation, and markedly improved clinical outcomes in comparison to the control patients. In particular, all 8 of the DIP-treated severely ill patients showed remarkable improvement: 7 patients (87.5%) achieved clinical cure and were discharged from the hospitals while the remaining 1 patient (12.5%) was in clinical remission.

positive: Fatalism in the context of COVID-19: Perceiving coronavirus as a death sentence predicts reluctance to perform recommended preventative behaviors() To manage the spread of coronavirus, health entities have urged the public to take preventative measures such as social distancing and handwashing. Yet, many appear reluctant to take these measures. Research is needed to understand factors underlying such reluctance, with the aim of developing targeted health interventions. We identify associating coronavirus with death as one such factor. 590 participants completed surveys in mid-March 2020, which included attitudes toward coronavirus, preventative behavioral intentions, and sociodemographic factors. Associating coronavirus with death negatively predicted intentions to perform preventative behaviors. Further, associating coronavirus with death was not evenly distributed throughout the sample and was related with a number of sociodemographic factors including age, race, and availability of sick leave. Following recommended preventative measures to slow the spread of coronavirus appears to relate to the degree to which people associate coronavirus with death. These findings can be used by public health researchers and practitioners to identify those for whom targeted health communication and interventions would be most beneficial, as well as to frame health messaging in ways that combat fatalism.

positive: COVID-19 Outbreak: the gold rush and the Responsibilities of the scientific community

positive: Rapid and accurate identification of COVID-19 infection through machine learning based on clinical available blood test results Since the sudden outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), it has rapidly evolved into a momentous global health concern. Due to the lack of constructive information on the pathogenesis of COVID-19 and specific treatment, it highlights the importance of early diagnosis and timely treatment. In this study, 11 key blood indices were extracted through random forest algorithm to build the final assistant discrimination tool from 49 clinical available blood test data which were derived by commercial blood test equipments. The method presented robust outcome to accurately identify COVID-19 from a variety of suspected patients with similar CT information or similar symptoms, with accuracy of 0.9795 and 0.9697 for the cross-validation set and test set, respectively. The tool also demonstrated its outstanding performance on an external validation set that was completely independent of the modeling process, with sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy of 0.9512, 0.9697, and 0.9595, respectively. Besides, 24 samples from overseas infected patients with COVID-19 were used to make an in-depth clinical assessment with accuracy of 0.9167. After multiple verification, the reliability and repeatability of the tool has been fully evaluated, and it has the potential to develop into an emerging technology to identify COVID-19 and lower the burden of global public health. The proposed tool is well-suited to carry out preliminary assessment of suspected patients and help them to get timely treatment and quarantine suggestion. The assistant tool is now available online at http://lishuyan.lzu.edu.cn/COVID2019_2/.

positive: Effect of hydroxychloroquine on prevention of COVID-19 virus infection among healthcare professionals: a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: Comparison of the effect of hydroxychloroquine with placebo to prevent infection from the COVID -19 virus among healthcare professionals TRIAL DESIGN: Single centre, 2-arm, double-blind randomised (ratio 1:1) placebo-controlled trial PARTICIPANTS: Treatment staff who are in contact with patients and have at least 3 shifts a week in Arash hospital affiliated with Tehran University of Medical Sciences, in Iran and who consent to participate in the study. Exclusion criteria include: History of COVID -19 virus infection, clinical symptoms such as fever, nausea, dyspnea and myalgia in the past two months, history of underlying diseases hypersensitivity to hydroxychloroquine and G6PD enzyme deficiency. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention group: Hydroxychloroquine 200 mg tablet of Amin Pharmaceutical. Control group: placebo which is completely similar in form and taste to 200 mg hydroxychloroquine tablet and is manufactured by the same factory (Amin Pharmacy). The dosage is two tablets daily, once a week for one to three months (based on the duration of the Coronavirus epidemic in Tehran). MAIN OUTCOMES: Confirmed COVID-19 virus infection using Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test is the primary outcome. The time period for measuring the primary outcome is any infection within the trial period up to one month after taking the last dose. RANDOMISATION: The randomized block allocation method was developed using Stata version 15 software by an independent researcher, using a block size of six. Allocation to the two treatment groups will be conducted by this researcher using paper labels (random 10-digit codes) in a 1:1 ratio t The labels will be attached to the drug packages in order of randomization. Drug packages will be arranged in a box according to the randomization list. BLINDING (MASKING): Participants and caregivers are blinded to group assignment and the data will be analyzed by an independent statistical expert who is unaware of the treatment allocation. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A total of 282 participants will be randomised with 141 participants the Hydroxychloroquineeach intervention group and 141 participants to the placebo control group TRIAL STATUS: The protocol version number is 99-1-101-47091 and the approval ID is IR.TUMS.VCR.REC.1399.001 and recruitment began April 7, 2020, and is anticipated to be complete by August 7, 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The name of the trial register is Iranian registry of clinical trial (IRCT), registration number is IRCT20120826010664N6, date of trial registration is April 7, 2020, FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Mesenchymal stem cells as a potential therapy for COVID-19 The outbreak of 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) worldwide is becoming rapidly a major concern. The number of severe cases has increased dramatically worldwide, while specific treatment options are scarce. The main pathologic features of severe or critical COVID-19 were consistent with acute lung injure (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), characterized by cellular fibromyxoid exudates, extensive pulmonary inflammation, pulmonary edema, and hyaline membrane formation. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) can balance the inflammatory response and has been mentioned to be effective on ALI/ARDS from both infectious and noninfectious causes previously, presenting an important opportunity to be applied to COVID-19. In this commentary, we summarize the clinical trials of MSCs treatments on ALI/ARDS and raise MSCs as a hopefully alternative therapy for severe or critical COVID-19.

positive: The continuing 2019-nCoV epidemic threat of novel coronaviruses to global health — The latest 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, China

positive: Use of antiviral drugs to reduce COVID-19 transmission

positive: The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cancer Patients In December 2019, a novel coronavirus called severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) caused an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Severe complications have been reported to occur in 33% of patients with COVID-19 and include acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute renal failure, acute respiratory injury, septic shock, and severe pneumonia. Currently, there is no specific treatment or approved vaccine against COVID-19 and many clinical trials are currently investigating potential medications to treat COVID-19. The immunosuppressed status of some cancer patients (whether caused by the disease itself or the treatment) increases their risk of infection compared with the general population. This short review aims to focus on the impact of COVID-19 on a cancer patient and discuss management options and recommendation in addition to highlighting the currently available clinical guidelines and resources.

positive: Effect of High vs Low Doses of Chloroquine Diphosphate as Adjunctive Therapy for Patients Hospitalized With Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection: A Randomized Clinical Trial Importance: There is no specific antiviral therapy recommended for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In vitro studies indicate that the antiviral effect of chloroquine diphosphate (CQ) requires a high concentration of the drug. Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 2 CQ dosages in patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel, double-masked, randomized, phase IIb clinical trial with 81 adult patients who were hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was conducted from March 23 to April 5, 2020, at a tertiary care facility in Manaus, Brazilian Amazon. Interventions: Patients were allocated to receive high-dosage CQ (ie, 600 mg CQ twice daily for 10 days) or low-dosage CQ (ie, 450 mg twice daily on day 1 and once daily for 4 days). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was reduction in lethality by at least 50% in the high-dosage group compared with the low-dosage group. Data presented here refer primarily to safety and lethality outcomes during treatment on day 13. Secondary end points included participant clinical status, laboratory examinations, and electrocardiogram results. Outcomes will be presented to day 28. Viral respiratory secretion RNA detection was performed on days 0 and 4. Results: Out of a predefined sample size of 440 patients, 81 were enrolled (41 [50.6%] to high-dosage group and 40 [49.4%] to low-dosage group). Enrolled patients had a mean (SD) age of 51.1 (13.9) years, and most (60 [75.3%]) were men. Older age (mean [SD] age, 54.7 [13.7] years vs 47.4 [13.3] years) and more heart disease (5 of 28 [17.9%] vs 0) were seen in the high-dose group. Viral RNA was detected in 31 of 40 (77.5%) and 31 of 41 (75.6%) patients in the low-dosage and high-dosage groups, respectively. Lethality until day 13 was 39.0% in the high-dosage group (16 of 41) and 15.0% in the low-dosage group (6 of 40). The high-dosage group presented more instance of QTc interval greater than 500 milliseconds (7 of 37 [18.9%]) compared with the low-dosage group (4 of 36 [11.1%]). Respiratory secretion at day 4 was negative in only 6 of 27 patients (22.2%). Conclusions and Relevance: The preliminary findings of this study suggest that the higher CQ dosage should not be recommended for critically ill patients with COVID-19 because of its potential safety hazards, especially when taken concurrently with azithromycin and oseltamivir. These findings cannot be extrapolated to patients with nonsevere COVID-19. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04323527.

positive: The possible mechanisms of action of 4-aminoquinolines (chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine) against Sars-Cov-2 infection (COVID-19): A role for iron homeostasis? The anti-malarial drugs chloroquine (CQ) and primarily the less toxic hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) are currently used to treat autoimmune diseases for their immunomodulatory and anti-thrombotic properties. They have also been proposed for the treatment of several viral infections, due to their anti-viral effects in cell cultures and animal models, and, currently, for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the pandemic severe acute respiratory syndrome caused by coronavirus 2 (Sars-Cov-2) infection that is spreading all over the world. Although in some recent studies a clinical improvement in COVID-19 patients has been observed, the clinical efficacy of CQ and HCQ in COVID-19 has yet to be proven with randomized controlled studies, many of which are currently ongoing, also considering pharmacokinetics, optimal dosing regimen, therapeutic level and duration of treatment and taking into account patients with different severity degrees of disease. Here we review what is currently known on the mechanisms of action of CQ and HCQ as anti-viral, anti-inflammatory and anti-thrombotic drugs and discuss the up-to-date experimental evidence on the potential mechanisms of action of CQ/HCQ in Sars-Cov2 infection and the current clinical knowledge on their efficacy in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Given the role of iron in several human viral infections, we also propose a different insight into a number of CQ and HCQ pharmacological effects, suggesting a potential involvement of iron homeostasis in Sars-Cov-2 infection and COVID-19 clinical course.

positive: Cardiovascular disease due to novel coronavirus and the search for investigational therapies OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of the study was to investigate and to summarize the registered trials that listed COVID-19 as the primary condition. METHODS: We performed a search on ClinicalTrials.gov using the independent search terms COVID-19, SARS, and SARS-CoV-2 and then downloaded the data file on March 23, 2020. All trials were downloaded to a csv file and searched for appropriateness. RESULTS: Of 124 registered trials, 56 (45.2%) were listed as recruiting. The majority (85 [68.5%]) were classified as interventional, 37 (29.8%) as observational, and one (0.8%) each as either expanded access: individual patients|treatment investigational new drug/protocol or expanded access: intermediate-size population|treatment investigational new drug/protocol. There were 67 (54.0%) trials that listed drug as the type of study. Immunologic and antiviral trials were the most common, representing approximately 30% and 21%, respectively. When immunologic and antiviral drugs were used alone or in combination, they represented 41.9% and 34.4%, respectively. Antimalarial agents are represented in 7.5% of trials. Approximately 14% of trials involved traditional Chinese medicine. The study agents used solely or in combination represented approximately 80% of therapeutic approaches to COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: There was a large and quick response on ClinicalTrials.gov to the COVID-19 outbreak. Many of the registered trials are currently recruiting new patients, whereas some will begin in the near future. Specific potential experimental therapies, including dosing and monitoring, might be found by reviewing content. Within ClinicalTrials.gov, patients, family members, health care professionals, and researchers can search and find ongoing and future trials for COVID-19.

positive: Evaluating the efficacy and safety of human anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma in severely ill adults with COVID-19: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of human anti-SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma in hospitalized adults with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a prospective, single-center, phase 2, randomized, controlled trial that is blinded to participants and clinical outcome assessor. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible participants include adults (≥ 18 years) with evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by PCR test of nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab within 14 days of randomization, evidence of infiltrates on chest radiography, peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2) ≤ 94% on room air, and/or need for supplemental oxygen, non-invasive mechanical ventilation, or invasive mechanical ventilation, who are willing and able to provide written informed consent prior to performing study procedures or who have a legally authorized representative available to do so. Exclusion criteria include participation in another clinical trial of anti-viral agent(s)* for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), receipt of any anti-viral agent(s)* with possible activity against SARS-CoV-2 <24 hours prior to plasma infusion, mechanical ventilation (including extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [ECMO]) for ≥ 5 days, severe multi-organ failure, history of allergic reactions to transfused blood products per NHSN/CDC criteria, known IgA deficiency, and pregnancy. Included participants will be hospitalized at the time of randomization and plasma infusion. *Use of remdesivir as treatment for COVID-19 is permitted. The study will be undertaken at Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York, USA. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: The investigational treatment is anti-SARS-CoV-2 human convalescent plasma. To procure the investigational treatment, volunteers who recovered from COVID-19 will undergo testing to confirm the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody to the spike trimer at a 1:400 dilution. Donors will also be screened for transfusion-transmitted infections (e.g. HIV, HBV, HCV, WNV, HTLV-I/II, T. cruzi, ZIKV). If donors have experienced COVID-19 symptoms within 28 days, they will be screened with a nasopharyngeal swab to confirm they are SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative. Plasma will be collected using standard apheresis technology by the New York Blood Center. Study participants will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive one unit (200 – 250 mL) of anti-SARS-CoV-2 plasma versus one unit (200 – 250 mL) of the earliest available control plasma. The control plasma cannot be tested for presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody prior to the transfusion, but will be tested for anti- SARS-CoV-2 antibody after the transfusion to allow for a retrospective per-protocol analysis. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary endpoint is time to clinical improvement. This is defined as time from randomization to either discharge from the hospital or improvement by one point on the following seven-point ordinal scale, whichever occurs first. 1. Not hospitalized with resumption of normal activities 2. Not hospitalized, but unable to resume normal activities 3. Hospitalized, not requiring supplemental oxygen 4. Hospitalized, requiring supplemental oxygen 5. Hospitalized, requiring high-flow oxygen therapy or non-invasive mechanical ventilation 6. Hospitalized, requiring ECMO, invasive mechanical ventilation, or both 7. Death This scale, designed to assess clinical status over time, was based on that recommended by the World Health Organization for use in determining efficacy end-points in clinical trials in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. A recent clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of lopinavir- ritonavir for patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 used a similar ordinal scale, as have recent clinical trials of novel therapeutics for severe influenza, including a post-hoc analysis of a trial evaluating immune plasma. The primary safety endpoints are cumulative incidence of grade 3 and 4 adverse events and cumulative incidence of serious adverse events during the study period. RANDOMIZATION: Study participants will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive anti-SARS-CoV-2 plasma versus control plasma using a web-based randomization platform. Treatment assignments will be generated using randomly permuted blocks of different sizes to minimize imbalance while also minimizing predictability. BLINDING (MASKING): The study participants and the clinicians who will evaluate post-treatment outcomes will be blinded to group assignment. The blood bank and the clinical research team will not be blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMIZED (SAMPLE SIZE): We plan to enroll 129 participants, with 86 in the anti-SARS-CoV-2 arm, and 43 in the control arm. Among the participants, we expect ~70% or n = 72 will achieve clinical improvement. This will yield an 80% power for a one-sided Wald test at 0.15 level of significance under the proportional hazards model with a hazard ratio of 1.5. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol AAAS9924, Version 17APR2020, 4/17/2020 Start of recruitment: April 20, 2020 Recruitment is ongoing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04359810 Date of trial registration: April 24, 2020 Retrospectively registered FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: SARS-CoV-2 Testing: Trials and Tribulations

positive: Gilead and Moderna lead on coronavirus treatments wo US biotech firms have positioned themselves as front-runners fighting the novel coronavirus, called SARS-CoV-2 On Feb 25, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) said it had begun a Phase II clinical trial of remdesivir, an experimental small-molecule drug made by Gilead Sciences, for treatment of those infected with SARS-CoV-2 On the same day, Moderna said it had shipped its experimental coronavirus vaccine to the NIH, which will conduct a Phase I trial to assess its safety The entire process—from vaccine design, to manufacturing, to shipment—took only 7 weeks The news came just as the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned that US communities should brace for “disruption to everyday life ” Gilead was able to move quickly because it had previously developed remdesivir to treat the Ebola virus The firm is now launching two of its own Phase III clinical trials of remdesivir, in addition to the [truncated]

positive: Hydroxychloroquine efficacy and safety in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease severity during pregnancy (COVID-Preg): a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised placebo controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives of the study are: 1. To assess the effect of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in reducing SARS-CoV-2 viral shedding by PCR in infected pregnant women with mild symptoms. 2. To assess the efficacy of HCQ to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant women in contact with an infected or suspected case. 3. To evaluate the effect of HCQ in preventing the development of the COVID-19 disease in asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2-infected pregnant women. The secondary objectives are: 1. To determine the effect of HCQ on the clinical course and duration of the COVID-19 disease in SARS-CoV-2-infected pregnant women. 2. To determine the impact of HCQ on the risk of hospitalization and mortality of SARS-CoV-2-infected pregnant women. 3. To assess the safety and tolerability of HCQ in pregnant women. 4. To describe the clinical presentation of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. 5. To describe the effects of maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection on pregnancy and perinatal outcomes by treatment group. 6. To determine the risk of vertical transmission (intra-utero and intra-partum) of SARS-CoV-2. TRIAL DESIGN: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled two-arm multicentre clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of HCQ to prevent and/or minimize SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy. Participants will be randomized to receive a 14-day oral treatment course of HCQ or placebo, ratio 1:1. PARTICIPANTS: Study population: pregnant women undergoing routine prenatal follow up or attending emergency units at the participating hospitals who report either symptoms/signs suggestive of COVID-19 disease or close contact with a suspected or confirmed COVID-19 case. Inclusion criteria Women will be invited to participate in the trial and sign an informed consent if they meet the following inclusion criteria. â¢ Presenting with fever (≥37.5°C) and/or one mild symptom suggestive of COVID-19 disease (cough, dyspnoea, chills, odynophagia, diarrhoea, muscle pain, anosmia, dysgeusia, headache) OR being contact* of a SARS-CoV-2 confirmed or suspected case in the past 14 days â¢ More than 12 weeks of gestation (dated by ultrasonography) â¢ Agreement to deliver in the study hospitals Exclusion criteria â¢ Known hypersensitivity to HCQ or other 4-amonoquinoline compounds â¢ History of retinopathy of any aetiology â¢ Concomitant use of digoxin, cyclosporine, cimetidine â¢ Known liver disease â¢ Clinical history of cardiac pathology including known long QT syndrome â¢ Unable to cooperate with the requirements of the study â¢ Participating in other intervention studies â¢ Delivery onset (characterized by painful uterine contractions and variable changes of the cervix, including some degree of effacement and slower progression of dilatation up to 5 cm for first and subsequent labours) The study participants will be stratified by clinical presentation and SARS-CoV-2 PCR results. Assignment of participants to study groups will be as follows: â¢ SARS-CoV-2-PCR confirmed, infected pregnant women: a. symptomatic (n=100) b. asymptomatic (n=100) â¢ SARS-CoV-2 PCR negative pregnant women in contact* with a SARS-CoV-2-infected confirmed or suspected case (n=514). *The ECDC definition of close contact will be followed. The trial will be conducted in five hospitals in Spain: Hospital Clínic of Barcelona, Hospital Sant Joan de Déu and Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, in Barcelona, and HM Puerta del Sur and Hospital Universitario de Torrejón, in Madrid. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Participants will be randomized to HCQ (400 mg/day for three days, followed by 200 mg/day for 11 days) or placebo (2 tablets for three days, followed by one tablet for 11 days). MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is the number of PCR-confirmed infected pregnant women assessed from collected nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs at day 21 after treatment start (one week after treatment is completed). RANDOMISATION: Allocation of participants to study arms will be done centrally by the trial's Sponsor (the Barcelona Institute for Global Health, ISGlobal) by block randomization. This method will ensure balanced allocation to both arms. The electronic CRF will automatically assign a study number to each participant, depending on her study group and recruitment site. Each number will be related to a treatment number, which assigns them to one of the study arms. BLINDING (MASKING): Participants, caregivers, investigators and those assessing the outcomes will be blinded to group assignment. Study tablets (HCQ and placebo) will be identically packaged in small opaque bottles. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): This study requires 200 SARS-CoV-2 infected and 514 contact pregnant women, randomised 1:1 with 100 and 227 respectively in each study arm. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 1.0, from May 8th, 2020. Recruitment is ongoing (first patient recruited the 19th May 2020 and recruitment end anticipated by December 2020). TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number: 2020-001587-29, registered 2 April 2020. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04410562 , retrospectively registered 1 June 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of intravenous remdesivir in adult patients with severe COVID-19: study protocol for a phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by a novel corinavirus (later named SARS-CoV-2 virus), was fistly reported in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China towards the end of 2019. Large-scale spread within China and internationally led the World Health Organization to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on 30th January 2020. The clinical manifestations of COVID-19 virus infection include asymptomatic infection, mild upper respiratory symptoms, severe viral pneumonia with respiratory failure, and even death. There are no antivirals of proven clinical efficacy in coronavirus infections. Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue, has inhibitory effects on animal and human highly pathogenic coronaviruses, including MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, in in vitro and in vivo experiments. It is also inhibitory against the COVID-19 virus in vitro. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of remdesivir in adult patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS: The protocol is prepared in accordance with the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) guidelines. This is a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Adults (≥ 18 years) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 virus infection, severe pneumonia signs or symptoms, and radiologically confirmed severe pneumonia are randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenously administered remdesivir or placebo for 10 days. The primary endpoint is time to clinical improvement (censored at day 28), defined as the time (in days) from randomization of study treatment (remdesivir or placebo) until a decline of two categories on a six-category ordinal scale of clinical status (1 = discharged; 6 = death) or live discharge from hospital. One interim analysis for efficacy and futility will be conducted once half of the total number of events required has been observed. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized, placebo-controlled trial in COVID-19. Enrolment began in sites in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China on 6th February 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04257656. Registered on 6 February 2020.

positive: Sacubitril/valsartan in COVID-19 patients: the need for trials

positive: Hydroxychloroquine as Prophylaxis for Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 Infection: Review ff the Ongoing Clinical Trials

positive: Covid-19: A Comprehensive Review of a Formidable Foe and the Road Ahead. INTRODUCTION The Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) caused by the novel beta coronavirus named Severe Acute Respiratory Syndromecoronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) started in late December 2019 in Wuhan, China. Within a short span, COVID-19 was declared a global public health emergency affecting 214 countries with 5,939,234 confirmed cases and 3,67,255 deaths as of 30 May, 2020. With limited knowledge about SARS-CoV-2, no approved treatment or vaccine is available till date. AREAS COVERED We performed a review of literature on PubMed on the SARS-CoV-2 virus and COVID-19 illness including trials of preventive and therapeutic measures. This review presents the basic biology of coronaviruses, epidemiology of COVID-19, clinical presentations, investigational therapies and vaccines, infection prevention and control measures and the lessons from the present pandemic. EXPERT OPINION The scale of the outbreak has brought the governments, healthcare professionals and scientists around the world under tremendous pressure to devise control strategies and develop novel prevention measures. While availability of vaccine for COVID-19 may take time, the disease may be contained through hand hygiene, physical distancing, travel restriction and aggressive steps such as 'lockdown'. Clinical trials at different phases are ongoing across different countries to expedite development of effective drugs and vaccine to overcome the pandemic.

positive: COVID-19 Clinical Research INTRODUCTION: While the global COVID-19 pandemic has challenged the entire humanity and health systems, it also triggered researchers to urgently perform clinical trials to assess the safety and efficacy of many agents and modalities to combat COVID-19. As of April 22, over 650 clinical studies have been registered both in USA and internationally. Results from these studies are also coming at a brisk pace in this unprecedented emergency. AREAS COVERED: We searched the NCI website and Medline and summarize various national and international clinical trials and summarize few of the pivotal ones in this paper, including those specific to oncology population. Two hundred and eighty four studies are actively recruiting adults and children with confirmed COVID-19, including 25 are early-phase I/phase I, 72 phase II, 58 phase III, 12 phase IV, and 31 other trials. They can be categorized into four groups: drugs that combat SARS-CoV-2, immunomodulatory agents to counteract cytokine storm, convalescence plasma therapies and vaccines trials. EXPERT OPINION: It is hoped that these efforts will results in a successful treatment to COVID-19, especially in a timely fashion before the second pandemic expected in fall. It is essential to acknowledge the devotion and hard work of the clinical research team and clinical research volunteers.

positive: Vitamin D(3) and gargling for the prevention of upper respiratory tract infections: a randomized controlled trial BACKGROUND: We undertook a 2X2 factorial, randomized controlled trial (RCT) to assess whether vitamin D(3) supplementation (10,000 international units per week) versus placebo and gargling versus no gargling could prevent viral, clinical upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) in university students. METHODS: We randomized 600 students into 4 treatment arms: 1) vitamin D(3) and gargling, 2) placebo and gargling, 3) vitamin D(3) and no gargling, and 4) placebo and no gargling. Students completed weekly electronic surveys and submitted self-collected mid-turbinate nasal flocked swabs during September and October in 2010 or 2011. Symptomatic students also completed an electronic symptom diary. The primary and secondary outcomes were the occurrence of symptomatic clinical URTI and laboratory confirmed URTI respectively. RESULTS: Of 600 participants, 471 (78.5%) completed all surveys while 43 (7.2%) completed none; 150 (25.0%) reported clinical URTI. Seventy participants (23.3%) randomized to vitamin D(3) reported clinical URTI compared to 80 (26.7%) randomized to placebo (RR:0.79, CI(95):0.61-1.03, p = 0.09). Eighty-five participants (28.3%) randomized to gargling reported clinical URTI compared to 65 participants (21.7%) randomized to the no gargling arm (RR:1.3, CI(95):0.92-1.57, p = 0.19). Laboratory testing identified 70 infections (46.7 per 100 URTIs). Vitamin D(3) treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk for laboratory confirmed URTI (RR: 0.54, CI(95):0.34-0.84, p = 0.007) and with a significantly lower mean viral load measured as log(10) viral copies/mL (mean difference: -0.89, CI(95:) -1.7, -0.06, p = 0.04). Fewer students assigned to gargling experienced laboratory confirmed URTI, however this was not statistically significant (RR:0.82, CI(95):0.53-1.26, p = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that vitamin D(3) is a promising intervention for the prevention of URTI. Vitamin D(3) significantly reduced the risk of laboratory confirmed URTI and may reduce the risk of clinical infections. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Registration: NCT01158560.

positive: Potential drugs for the treatment of the novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19) in China The fight against the novel coronavirus pneumonia (namely COVID-19) that seriously harms human health is a common task for all mankind. Currently, development of drugs against the novel coronavirus (namely SARS-CoV-2) is quite urgent. Chinese medical workers and scientific researchers have found some drugs to play potential therapeutic effects on COVID-19 at the cellular level or in preliminary clinical trials. However, more fundamental studies and large sample clinical trials need to be done to ensure the efficacy and safety of these drugs. The adoption of these drugs without further testing must be careful. The relevant articles, news, and government reports published on the official and Preprint websites, PubMed and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases from December 2019 to April 2020 were searched and manually filtered. The general pharmacological characteristics, indications, adverse reactions, general usage, and especially current status of the treatment of COVID-19 of those potentially effective drugs, including chemical drugs, traditional Chinese medicines (TCMs), and biological products in China were summarized in this review to guide reasonable medication and the development of specific drugs for the treatment of COVID-19.

positive: Why We (Probably) Must Deliberately Infect In the grip of a pandemic of proportions that have not been seen for generations, some have proposed conducting “human challenge” vaccine trials in which healthy volunteers are deliberately infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19. Such trials might substantially speed up the search for a safe and effective vaccine and save many thousands of lives. I argue that such trials are not only permissible, but given reasonable assumptions, they are morally required, subject to some important caveats.

positive: ACMT Position Statement: Off-Label Prescribing during COVID-19 Pandemic

positive: A Real-World Evidence Framework for Optimizing Dosing in All Patients with COVID-19 Potential treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are being investigated at unprecedented speed, and successful treatments will rapidly be used in tens or hundreds of thousands of patients. To ensure safe and effective use in all those patents it is essential also to develop, at unprecedented speed, a means to provide frequently updated, optimal dosing information for all patient subgroups. Success will require immediate collaboration between drug developers, academics, and regulators.

positive: Repurposing Therapeutics for COVID-19: Rapid Prediction of Commercially available drugs through Machine Learning and Docking Background The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease COVID 19, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus has spread rapidly around the globe during the past 3 months. As the virus infected cases and mortality rate of this disease is increasing exponentially, scientists and researchers all over the world are relentlessly working to understand this new virus along with possible treatment regimens by discovering active therapeutic agents and vaccines. So, there is an urgent requirement of new and effective medications that can treat the disease caused by SARS CoV 2. Methods and findings We perform the study of drugs that are already available in the market and being used for other diseases to accelerate clinical recovery, in other words repurposing of existing drugs. The vast complexity in drug design and protocols regarding clinical trials often prohibit developing various new drug combinations for this epidemic disease in a limited time. Recently, remarkable improvements in computational power coupled with advancements in Machine Learning (ML) technology have been utilized to revolutionize the drug development process. Consequently, a detailed study using ML for the repurposing of therapeutic agents is urgently required. Here, we report the ML model based on the Naive Bayes algorithm, which has an accuracy of around 73% to predict the drugs that could be used for the treatment of COVID-19. Our study predicts around ten FDA approved commercial drugs that can be used for repurposing. Among all, we suggest that the antiretroviral drug Atazanavir (DrugBank ID DB01072) would probably be one of the most effective drugs based on the selected criterions. Conclusions Our study can help clinical scientists in being more selective in identifying and testing the therapeutic agents for COVID 19 treatment. The ML based approach for drug discovery as reported here can be a futuristic smart drug designing strategy for community applications.

positive: Enhancing immunity in viral infections, with special emphasis on COVID-19: A review BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Balanced nutrition which can help in maintaining immunity is essential for prevention and management of viral infections. While data regarding nutrition in coronavirus infection (COVID-19) are not available, in this review, we aimed to evaluate evidence from previous clinical trials that studied nutrition-based interventions for viral diseases (with special emphasis on respiratory infections), and summarise our observations. METHODS: A systematic search strategy was employed using keywords to search the literature in 3 key medical databases: PubMed®, Web of Science® and SciVerse Scopus®. Studies were considered eligible if they were controlled trials in humans, measuring immunological parameters, on viral and respiratory infections. Clinical trials on vitamins, minerals, nutraceuticals and probiotics were included. RESULTS: A total of 640 records were identified initially and 22 studies were included from other sources. After excluding duplicates and articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria, 43 studies were obtained (vitamins: 13; minerals: 8; nutraceuticals: 18 and probiotics: 4). Among vitamins, A and D showed a potential benefit, especially in deficient populations. Among trace elements, selenium and zinc have also shown favourable immune-modulatory effects in viral respiratory infections. Several nutraceuticals and probiotics may also have some role in enhancing immune functions. Micronutrients may be beneficial in nutritionally depleted elderly population. CONCLUSIONS: We summaries possible benefits of some vitamins, trace elements, nutraceuticals and probiotics in viral infections. Nutrition principles based on these data could be useful in possible prevention and management of COVID-19.

positive: Studying the pathophysiology of coronavirus disease 2019: a protocol for the Berlin prospective COVID-19 patient cohort (Pa-COVID-19) PURPOSE: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread worldwide causing a global health emergency. Pa-COVID-19 aims to provide comprehensive data on clinical course, pathophysiology, immunology and outcome of COVID-19, to identify prognostic biomarkers, clinical scores, and therapeutic targets for improved clinical management and preventive interventions. METHODS: Pa-COVID-19 is a prospective observational cohort study of patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection treated at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin. We collect data on epidemiology, demography, medical history, symptoms, clinical course, and pathogen testing and treatment. Systematic, serial blood sampling will allow deep molecular and immunological phenotyping, transcriptomic profiling, and comprehensive biobanking. Longitudinal data and sample collection during hospitalization will be supplemented by long-term follow-up. RESULTS: Outcome measures include the WHO clinical ordinal scale on day 15 and clinical, functional, and health-related quality-of-life assessments at discharge and during follow-up. We developed a scalable dataset to (i) suit national standards of care, (ii) facilitate comprehensive data collection in medical care facilities with varying resources, and (iii) allow for rapid implementation of interventional trials based on the standardized study design and data collection. We propose this scalable protocol as blueprint for harmonized data collection and deep phenotyping in COVID-19 in Germany. CONCLUSION: We established a basic platform for harmonized, scalable data collection, pathophysiological analysis, and deep phenotyping of COVID-19, which enables rapid generation of evidence for improved medical care and identification of candidate therapeutic and preventive strategies. The electronic database accredited for interventional trials allows fast trial implementation for candidate therapeutic agents. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered at the German registry for clinical studies (DRKS00021688) ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s15010-020-01464-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

positive: Missing clinical trial data: the knowledge gap in the safety of potential COVID-19 drugs Abstract (290/300 words) Objectives: Several drugs are being repurposed for the treatment of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic based on in vitro or early clinical findings. As these drugs are being used in varied regimens and dosages, it is important to enable synthesis of existing safety data from clinical trials. However, availability of safety information is limited by a lack of timely reporting of clinical trial results on public registries or through academic publication. We aimed to analyse the knowledge gap in safety data by quantifying the number of missing clinical trial results for drugs potentially being repurposed for COVID-19. Design: ClinicalTrials.gov was searched for 19 drugs that have been identified as potential treatments for COVID-19. Relevant clinical trials for any prior indication were listed by identifier (NCT number) and checked for timely result reporting (within 395 days of the primary completion date). Additionally, PubMed and Google Scholar were searched using the NCT number to identify publications of results not listed on the registry. A second, blinded search of 10% of trials was conducted to assess reviewer concordance. Results: Of 3754 completed trials, 1516 (40.4%) did not post results on ClinicalTrials.gov or in the academic literature. 1172 (31.2%) completed trials had tabular results on ClinicalTrials.gov. A further 1066 (28.4%) completed trials had results from the literature search, but did not report results on ClinicalTrials.gov. Key drugs missing clinical trial results include hydroxychloroquine (37.0% completed trials unreported), favipiravir (77.8%) and lopinavir (40.5%). Conclusion: There is an important evidence gap for the safety of drugs being repurposed for COVID-19. This uncertainty could cause a large burden of additional morbidity and mortality during the pandemic. We recommend caution in experimental drug use for non-severe disease and urge clinical trial sponsors to report missing results retrospectively.

positive: COVID-19 Clinical Trial Oversight at a Major Academic Medical Center: Approach of the Michigan Medicine COVID-19 Clinical Trial Committees Clinicians – eager to offer the best care in the absence of guiding data – have provided patients with COVID-19 diverse clinical interventions. This usage has led to perceptions of efficacy of some interventions that, while receiving media coverage, lack robust evidence. Moving forward, randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) are necessary to ensure that clinicians can treat patients effectively during this outbreak and the next. To do so, academic medical centers must address two key research issues: (1) how to effectively and efficiently determine which trials have the best chance of benefiting current and future patients, and (2) how to establish a transparent and ethical process for subject recruitment while maintaining research integrity and without overburdening patients or staff. We share here the current methods used by the University of Michigan to address these issues.

positive: COVID-19 randomised trial protocols: rapid publication without barriers

positive: Old and re-purposed drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has developed since December 2019. It has caused a global pandemic with more than three hundred thousand case fatalities. However, apart from supportive care by respirators, no standard medical therapy is validated.Areas covered: This paper presents old drugs with potential in vitro efficacy against SARS-CoV-2. The in vitro database, adverse effects, and potential toxicities of these drugs are reviewed regarding their feasibility of clinical prescription for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. To obtain convincing recommendations, we referred to opinions from the US National Institute of Health regarding drugs repurposed for COVID-19 therapy.Expert opinion: Although strong evidence of well-designed randomized controlled studies regarding COVID-19 therapy is presently lacking, remdesivir, teicoplanin, hydroxychloroquine (not in combination with azithromycin), and ivermectin might be effective antiviral drugs and are deemed promising candidates for controlling SARS-CoV-2. In addition, tocilizumab might be considered as the supplementary treatment for COVID-19 patients with cytokine release syndrome. In future, clinical trials regarding a combination of potentially effective drugs against SARS-CoV-2 need to be conducted to establish the optimal regimen for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19.

positive: Sofosbuvir as Repurposed Antiviral Drug Against COVID-19: Why Were we Convinced to Evaluate the Drug in a Registered/Approved Clinical Trial? COVID-19 is a devastating global pandemic around the world. While the majority of infected cases appear mild, in some cases individuals present respiratory complications with possible serious lung damage. There are no specific treatments for COVID-19 as yet, though a number are under evaluation, including experimental antivirals. Sofosbuvir, the clinically approved anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) drug, is also capable of suppressing other families of positive-strand RNA viruses; Flaviviridae and Togaviridae. Coronaviruses are a family of positive-strand RNA viruses with conserved polymerase, so SARS-CoV-2 RdRp is very likely to be effectively inhibited by sofosbuvir. More importantly, sofosbuvir is safe and well tolerated at 400 mg daily in a 24 week therapeutic regimen. Sofosbuvir active metabolite, however, shows an extremely high intracellular stability So, it is hypothesized that SARS-CoV-2 infection could also be susceptible to sofosbuvir and we were convinced to design and run a clinical trial to evaluate the effect of sofosbuvir 400 mg (in combination with velpatasvir 100 mg, as add-on treatment, in addition to standard of care) on the COVID-19. However, we believe that this manuscript/correspondence should be made available to the international scientific community as soon as possible, with the help of this esteemed journal.

positive: Lopinavir/ritonavir for the treatment of COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. Design This is the protocol of a living systematic review. Data sources We will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature and in a centralised repository in L-OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L-OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L-OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methods We adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question. We will include randomised trials evaluating the effect of lopinavir/ritonavir - as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs - versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Randomised trials evaluating lopinavir/ritonavir in infections caused by other coronaviruses, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19 will be searched in case no direct evidence from randomised trials is found, or if the direct evidence provides low- or very low-certainty for critical outcomes. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will perform random-effects meta-analyses and use GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it if the conclusions change or there are substantial updates. Ethics and dissemination No ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.

positive: COVID-19 Clinical Trials: A Primer for the Cardiovascular and Cardio-Oncology Communities Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a proliferation of clinical trials that are designed to slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. The overwhelming majority of cardiovascular and cancer patients are at increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection; accordingly, the cardiovascular and cardio-oncology communities are playing a major role in caring for COVID-19 patients. Many of the therapeutic agents that are being used to treat patients with COVID-19 are repurposed treatments for influenza, drugs that were not effective in Ebola patients, or treatments for malaria that were developed decades ago, and are unlikely to be familiar to the cardiovascular and cardio-oncology communities. Here we have provided a foundation for cardiovascular and cardio-oncology physicians who are on the frontline providing care to COVID-19 patients, so that they can better understand the emerging cardiovascular epidemiology of COVID-19, as well as the biological rationale for the clinical trials that are ongoing for the treatment of COVID-19 patients.

positive: Determinants of cardiac adverse events of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in 20 years of drug safety surveillance reports Chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) are on the World Health Organization's List of Essential Medications for treating non-resistant malaria, rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). In addition, both drugs are currently used off-label in hospitals worldwide and in numerous clinical trials for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, CQ and HCQ use has been associated with cardiac side effects, which is of concern due to the higher risk of COVID-19 complications in patients with heart related disorders, and increased mortality associated with COVID-19 cardiac complications. In this study we analyzed over thirteen million adverse event reports form the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System to confirm and quantify the association of cardiac side effects of CQ and HCQ. Additionally, we identified several confounding factors, including male sex, NSAID coadministration, advanced age, and prior diagnoses contributing to the risk of drug related cardiotoxicity. These findings may help guide therapeutic decision making and ethical trial design for COVID-19 treatment.

positive: Adipose-derived stromal stem cells (ASCs) as a new regenerative immediate therapy combating coronavirus (COVID-19)-induced pneumonia

positive: The UK COVID-19 Response: A Behavioural Irony?

positive: Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of intravenous remdesivir in adult patients with severe COVID-19: study protocol for a phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by a novel corinavirus (later named SARS-CoV-2 virus), was fistly reported in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China towards the end of 2019. Large-scale spread within China and internationally led the World Health Organization to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on 30(th) January 2020. The clinical manifestations of COVID-19 virus infection include asymptomatic infection, mild upper respiratory symptoms, severe viral pneumonia with respiratory failure, and even death. There are no antivirals of proven clinical efficacy in coronavirus infections. Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue, has inhibitory effects on animal and human highly pathogenic coronaviruses, including MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, in in vitro and in vivo experiments. It is also inhibitory against the COVID-19 virus in vitro. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of remdesivir in adult patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS: The protocol is prepared in accordance with the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) guidelines. This is a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Adults (≥ 18 years) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 virus infection, severe pneumonia signs or symptoms, and radiologically confirmed severe pneumonia are randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenously administered remdesivir or placebo for 10 days. The primary endpoint is time to clinical improvement (censored at day 28), defined as the time (in days) from randomization of study treatment (remdesivir or placebo) until a decline of two categories on a six-category ordinal scale of clinical status (1 = discharged; 6 = death) or live discharge from hospital. One interim analysis for efficacy and futility will be conducted once half of the total number of events required has been observed. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized, placebo-controlled trial in COVID-19. Enrolment began in sites in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China on 6(th) February 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04257656. Registered on 6 February 2020.

positive: Rethinking cancer clinical trials for COVID-19 and beyond The risks posed to patients with cancer by the current COVID-19 pandemic demand rapid structural changes in healthcare delivery, with many positive changes likely to continue long term. An immediate critical reassessment of trial methodology based on clinical and scientific priorities is essential to ensure the resilience of clinical cancer research and optimize patient-centered care.

positive: Déjà vu: Stimulating open drug discovery for SARS-CoV-2 In the past decade we have seen two major Ebola virus outbreaks in Africa, the Zika virus in Brazil and the Americas and the current pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). There is a strong sense of déjà vu because there are still no effective treatments. In the COVID-19 pandemic, despite being a new virus, there are already drugs suggested as active in in vitro assays that are being repurposed in clinical trials. Promising SARS-CoV-2 viral targets and computational approaches are described and discussed. Here, we propose, based on open antiviral drug discovery approaches for previous outbreaks, that there could still be gaps in our approach to drug discovery.

positive: Covid19db -- An online database of trials of medicinal products to prevent or treat COVID-19, with a specific focus on drug repurposing Background: The global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 virus has prompted an unprecedented international effort to seek medicines for prevention and treatment of infection. Drug repurposing has played a key part in this response. The rapid increase in trial activity has raised questions about efficiency and lack of coordination. Our objective was to develop a user-friendly, open access, online database of interventional trials of medicinal products to monitor and rapidly identify trials of medicinal products. Methods and Findings: Using the US clinicaltrials.gov (NCT) registry, the EU Clinical Trials Register (EUCTR) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), we identified all COVID-19 trials of medicinal products and combined data from the 3 sources into a single data table. Trials that were out of scope and duplicates were excluded. A manual encoding was performed to ascertain key information (e.g. trial aim, type of intervention etc). The database, Covid19db, was published online at: http://www.redo-project.org/covid19db/. Descriptive statistics of the database from April 4th 2020 through to May 19th show an increase from 186 to 955 trials, or an average of 17 new trials registered per day. Over this period, the proportion of trials including a repurposing arm decreased slightly over time (from a maximum of 75% to 68% at the end of the covered period) as did the proportion of trials aiming to prevent infection (from a maximum of 16% to 12% at the end of the covered period). The most popular intervention is hydroxychloroquine (180 trials), followed by azithromycin (57 trials), chloroquine, tocilizumab and lopinavir/ritonavir (36 trials). Total planned enrolment is 468,559 participants as of 19th May 2020. Conclusions: we have developed an open access, online and regularly updated tool to monitor clinical trials of medicinal products to prevent or treat infection by SARS-CoV-2 globally. Our analysis shows a high number of 'me-too' trials, in particular for some repurposed drugs, such as hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and tocilizumab, substantiating calls for better coordination and better use of trial resources.

positive: Candidate drugs against SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Abstract Outbreak and pandemic of coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 in 2019/2020 will challenge global health for the future. Because a vaccine against the virus will not be available in the near future, we herein try to offer a pharmacological strategy to combat the virus. There exists a number of candidate drugs that may inhibit infection with and replication of SARS-CoV-2. Such drugs comprise inhibitors of TMPRSS2 serine protease and inhibitors of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). Blockade of ACE2, the host cell receptor for the S protein of SARS-CoV-2 and inhibition of TMPRSS2, which is required for S protein priming may prevent cell entry of SARS-CoV-2. Further, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, and off-label antiviral drugs, such as the nucleotide analogue remdesivir, HIV protease inhibitors lopinavir and ritonavir, broad-spectrum antiviral drugs arbidol and favipiravir as well as antiviral phytochemicals available to date may prevent spread of SARS-CoV-2 and morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 pandemic.

positive: Augmented Curation of Unstructured Clinical Notes from a Massive EHR System Reveals Specific Phenotypic Signature of Impending COVID-19 Diagnosis Understanding the temporal dynamics of COVID-19 patient phenotypes is necessary to derive fine-grained resolution of pathophysiology. Here we use state-of-the-art deep neural networks over an institution-wide machine intelligence platform for the augmented curation of 15.8 million clinical notes from 30,494 patients subjected to COVID-19 PCR diagnostic testing. By contrasting the Electronic Health Record (EHR)-derived clinical phenotypes of COVID-19-positive (COVIDpos, n=635) versus COVID-19-negative (COVIDneg, n=29,859) patients over each day of the week preceding the PCR testing date, we identify anosmia/dysgeusia (37.4-fold), myalgia/arthralgia (2.6-fold), diarrhea (2.2-fold), fever/chills (2.1-fold), respiratory difficulty (1.9-fold), and cough (1.8-fold) as significantly amplified in COVIDpos over COVIDneg patients. The specific combination of cough and diarrhea has a 3.2-fold amplification in COVIDpos patients during the week prior to PCR testing, and along with anosmia/dysgeusia, constitutes the earliest EHR-derived signature of COVID-19 (4-7 days prior to typical PCR testing date). This study introduces an Augmented Intelligence platform for the real-time synthesis of institutional knowledge captured in EHRs. The platform holds tremendous potential for scaling up curation throughput, with minimal need for retraining underlying neural networks, thus promising EHR-powered early diagnosis for a broad spectrum of diseases.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine plus standard care compared with the standard care alone in COVID-19: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Background & Objective: The efficacy and safety of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in treating coronavirus disease COVID-19 pandemic is disputed. This study aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of HCQ plus standard of care in COVID-19 patients. Methods: PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Embase, and web of sciences were searched up to June 1, 2020. The references list of the key studies was reviewed for additional relevant resources. Clinical studies registry databases were searched for identifying potential clinical trials. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaborations tool. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan software (version 5.3). Results: Three randomized controlled trials with total number of 242 patients were identified eligible for meta-analysis. No significant differences were observed between HCQ and standard care in terms of viral clearance (Risk ratio [RR] = 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.91, 1.16; P= 0.68), disease progression (RR=0.92; 95% CI= 0.10, 0.81; P=0.94), Chest CT (RR=1.40; 95% CI= 1.03, 1.91; P=0.03). There is a significant difference between HCQ and standard care for adverse events (RR=2.88; 95% CI= 1.50, 5.54; P=0.002). Conclusion: Although the current meta-analysis failed to confirm the efficacy and safety of HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, further rigorous randomized clinical trials are necessary to evaluate conclusively the efficacy and safety of HCQ against COVID-19. Keyword: Coronavirus Disease; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2; Hydroxychloroquine; Efficacy; Safety

positive: Pharmacological interventions for COVID-19: Protocol for a Rapid Living Systematic Review with network meta-analysis CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged in China in December 2019 and rapidly spread. Although extraordinary efforts have been made on research regarding pharmacological interventions, none have proven effective. This is the protocol for a rapid living systematic review that aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of different pharmacological interventions for the treatment of COVID-19. METHODS: rapid living systematic review methodology with Network Meta-Analysis following the recommendations of Cochrane Handbook. We will include randomized controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-RCTs that evaluate single and/or combined pharmacological interventions at any dose for the treatment of COVID-19. We will search PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), LILACS, Scopus and SciELO to identify potentially eligible studies. No language restrictions will be used in the selection. We will perform the critical appraisal of included studies with the Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

positive: Interleukin-6 in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Purpose: Coronaviruses may activate dysregulated host immune responses. As exploratory studies have suggested that interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels are elevated in cases of complicated COVID-19 and that the anti-IL-6 biologic tocilizumab may be beneficial, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the evidence in this field. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies investigating the immunological response in COVID-19 or its treatment with tocilizumab; additional grey literature searches were undertaken. Meta-analysis was undertaken using random effects models. Results: Eight published studies, three pre-prints, and five registered trials were eligible. Meta-analysis of mean IL-6 concentrations demonstrated 2.9-fold higher levels in patients with complicated COVID-19 compared with patients with non-complicated disease (six studies; n=1302; 95%CI, 1.17-7.19; I2=100%). A single non-randomized, single-arm study assessed tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19, demonstrating decreased oxygen requirements, resolution of radiographic abnormalities, and clinical improvement. No adverse events or deaths were observed. Conclusions: In patients with COVID-19, IL-6 levels are significantly elevated and associated with adverse clinical outcomes. While inhibition of IL-6 with tocilizumab appears to be efficacious and safe in preliminary investigation, the results of several ongoing clinical trials should be awaited to better define the role of tocilizumab in COVID-19 prior to routine clinical application.

positive: The clinical manifestations and management of COVID-19-related liver injury

positive: Drug repurposing strategies for COVID-19 COVID-19 has now been declared a pandemic and new treatments are urgently needed as we enter a phase beyond containment. Developing new drugs from scratch is a lengthy process, thus impractical to face the immediate global challenge. Drug repurposing is an emerging strategy where existing medicines, having already been tested safe in humans, are redeployed to combat difficult-to-treat diseases. While using such repurposed drugs individually may ultimately not yield a significant clinical benefit, carefully combined cocktails could be very effective, as was for HIV in the 1990s; the urgent question now being which combination.

positive: Effect of integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine on SARS: a review of clinical evidence. AIM To assess the possible effect of integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine on severe acute respiratory syndromes. METHODS The current available randomized controlled trials of integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine on SARS were identified through systematically searching literature in any languages or any types of publications. Additional studies of gray literature were also collected. The quality of studies was evaluated by two investigators independently based largely on the quality criteria specified CONSORT. Statistical analysis of the results was performed using RevMan 4.2.0 software developed by the Cochrane Collaboration. RESULTS Six studies (n = 366) fulfilling the inclusion criteria were found, of which the quality of one study was graded as B, the remaining five were graded as C. Two studies were performed with meta-analysis, the other four studies existed some heterogeneity for which meta-analysis could not be performed, a significant effect on lung infiltrate absorption was found in the treatment groups of these two studies (RR 6.68, 95% CI (2.93, 15.24), P<0.01), there was no significant differences between the mortality (RR 0.86, 95% CI (0.22, 3.29), P = 0.82) and the average dosage of corticosteroid (WMD -39.65, 95% CI (-116.84, 37.54), P = 0.31). The other three studies also showed significant differences in infiltrate absorption, including national drug No. 2. 3. 4 in combination with Western medicine (RR 5.45, 95% CI (1.54, 19.26)), compound formulas NO. 1 combined with Western medicine (WMD 0.24, 95% CI (0.02, 0.46)), compound formulas combined with Western medicine (RR 8.06, 95% CI (0.40, 163.21)). Kangfeidian No.4 in combination with Western medicine had no significant effect on symptom improvement such as loss of dyspnea and cough (RR 1.50, 95%CI (0.41, 5.43)) and (RR 1.29, 95%CI (0.30, 5.43)). CONCLUSION Integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicines has some positive effects on lung infiltrate absorption in SARS patients, and is recommended as an adjunct treatment for SARS. However, its effect on SARS requires further careful study due to limited available randomized control trials.

positive: Current Understanding of COVID-19 Clinical Course and Investigational Treatments Importance: Currently, there is no unified framework linking disease progression to established viral levels, clinical tests, inflammatory markers, and investigational treatment options. Objective: It may take many weeks or months to establish a standard treatment approach. Given the growing morbidity and mortality with respect to COVID-19, we present a treatment approach based on a thorough review of scholarly articles and clinical reports. Our focus is on staged progression, clinical algorithms, and individualized treatment. Evidence Review: We followed the protocol for a quality review article proposed by Heyn et. al.1 A literature search was conducted to find all relevant studies related to COVID-19. The search was conducted between April 1, 2020 and April 13, 2020 using the following electronic databases: PubMed (1809 to present), Google Scholar (1900 to present), MEDLINE (1946 to present), CINAHL (1937 to present), and Embase (1980 to present). Keywords used included COVID-19, 2019-nCov, SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV, with terms such as efficacy, seroconversion, microbiology, pathophysiology, viral levels, inflammation, survivability, and treatment and pharmacology. No language restriction was placed on the search. Reference lists were manually scanned for additional studies. Findings: Of the articles found in the literature search, 70 were selected for inclusion in this study (67 cited in the body of the manuscript and 3 additional unique references in the Figures). The articles represent work from China, Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, Rwanda, Israel, France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Canada, and the United States. Most of the articles were cohort or case studies, but we also drew upon information found in guidelines from hospitals and clinics instructing their staff on procedures to follow. In addition, we based some decisions on data collected by agencies such as the CDC, FDA, IHME, ISDA, and Worldometer. None of the case studies or cohort studies used a large number of participants. The largest group of participants numbered less than 500 and some case studies had fewer than 30 patients. However, the review of the literature revealed the need for individualized treatment protocols due to the variability of patient clinical presentation and survivability. A number of factors appear to influence mortality: the stage at which the patient first presented for care, pre-existing health conditions, age, and the viral load the patient carried. Conclusion and Relevance: COVID-19 can be divided into three distinct Stages, beginning at the time of infection (Stage I), sometimes progressing to pulmonary involvement (Stage II, with or without hypoxemia) and less frequently to systemic inflammation (Stage III). In addition to modeling the stages of disease progression, we have also created a treatment algorithm which considers age, comorbidities, clinical presentation, and disease progression to suggest drug classes or treatment modalities. This paper presents the first evidence-based recommendations for individualized treatment for COVID-19.

positive: An Updated Systematic Review of the Therapeutic Role of Hydroxychloroquine in Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The world is currently experiencing the Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. There is no approved drug for the definitive treatment of the disease. Various drugs are being tried for the treatment of COVID-19, including hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). This study was performed to systematically review the therapeutic role of HCQ in COVID-19 from the available literature. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, ICTRP (WHO), Cochrane Library databases, and two pre-print servers (medRxiv.org and Research Square) were searched for clinical studies that evaluated the therapeutic role of HCQ on COVID-19 until 10 May 2020. The available studies were critically analyzed and the data were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 663 articles were screened and 12 clinical studies (seven peer-reviewed and published studies and five non-peer-reviewed studies from pre-print servers) with a total sample size of 3543 patients were included. Some of the clinical studies demonstrated good virological and clinical outcomes with HCQ alone or in combination with azithromycin in COVID-19 patients, although the studies had major methodological limitations. Some of the other studies showed negative results with HCQ therapy along with the risk of adverse reactions. CONCLUSION: The results of efficacy and safety of HCQ in COVID-19, as obtained from the clinical studies, are not satisfactory, although many of these studies had major methodological limitations. Stronger evidence from well-designed robust randomized clinical trials is required before conclusively determining the role of HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19. Clinical prudence is required in advocating HCQ as a therapeutic armamentarium in COVID-19. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40261-020-00927-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

positive: Anti COVID-19 Drugs: Need for More Clinical Evidence and Global Action The World Health Organization (WHO) called the outbreak of coronavirus infectious disease-2019 (COVID-19) a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern” (PHEIC). According to the WHO, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), currently there are no medicines or vaccines that have been claimed to be useful in the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. Several existing antiviral drugs, previously developed or used as treatments for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and malaria, are being investigated as COVID-19 treatments and some of them are being used in clinical trials. According to the CDC and Chinese treatment guidelines for COVID-19, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, and one of the investigational agents (remdesivir) are recommended in critically ill older patients. The use of other potential drugs reported in different studies may be considered if treatment with first-line drugs is ineffective. There are currently no complete data available from large randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to provide clinical guidance on the use, dosing, or duration to validate the effective role, safety profile, and adverse effects of all of the trial drugs for prophylaxis or treatment of COVID-19. Until now, it is still unclear which drug can successfully fight against the disease. Therefore, for the better safety of patients with COVID-19, further clinical trials and large randomized controlled studies are needed to validate the effective role, safety profile, and adverse effects of all the potential drugs. Such a measure requires action at the global level.

positive: Clinical trials during COVID‐19 As this ever‐evolving pandemic lays itself, more of its impact is being understood. Until recently, most guidelines were reported to aid in managing and treating suspected or confirmed cases. Research institutions around the world are responding with a sense of confusion. Some are continuing routinely, especially those who are overseeing clinical trials that could offer life‐saving therapies, particularly against the novel coronavirus. Since research must continue even in the face of a shutdown, we aim to collate the currently available recommendations from various organizations and provide guidance to head and neck researchers across the world during these trying times.

positive: Statistical Issues and Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Clinical Trials with Lopinavir-Ritonavir and Remdesivir Background: Since the outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in December 2019, it has rapidly spread in more than 200 countries or territories with over 8 million confirmed cases and 440,000 deaths by June 17, 2020. Recently, three randomized clinical trials on COVID-19 treatments were completed, one for lopinavir-ritonavir and two for remdesivir. One trial reported that remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery, while the other two showed no benefit of the treatment under investigation. However, several statistical issues in the original design and analysis of the three trials are identified, which might shed doubts on their findings and the conclusions should be evaluated with cautions. Objective: From statistical perspectives, we identify several issues in the design and analysis of three COVID-19 trials and reanalyze the data from the cumulative incidence curves in the three trials using more appropriate statistical methods. Methods: The lopinavir-ritonavir trial enrolled 39 additional patients due to insignificant results after the sample size reached the planned number, which led to inflation of the type I error rate. The remdesivir trial of Wang et al. failed to reach the planned sample size due to a lack of eligible patients, while the bootstrap method was used to predict the quantity of clinical interest conditionally and unconditionally if the trial had continued to reach the originally planned sample size. Moreover, we used a terminal (or cure) rate model and a model-free metric known as the restricted mean survival time or the restricted mean time to improvement (RMTI) in this context to analyze the reconstructed data due to the existence of death as competing risk and a terminal event. The remdesivir trial of Beigel et al. reported the median recovery time of the remdesivir and placebo groups and the rate ratio for recovery, while both quantities depend on a particular time point representing local information. We reanalyzed the data to report other percentiles of the time to recovery and adopted the bootstrap method and permutation test to construct the confidence intervals as well as the P values. The restricted mean time to recovery (RMTR) was also computed as a global and robust measure for efficacy. Results: For the lopinavir-ritonavir trial, with the increase of sample size from 160 to 199, the type I error rate was inflated from 0.05 to 0.071. The difference of terminal rates was -8.74% (95% CI [-21.04, 3.55]; P=.16) and the hazards ratio (HR) adjusted for terminal rates was 1.05 (95% CI [0.78, 1.42]; P=.74), indicating no significant difference. The difference of RMTIs between the two groups evaluated at day 28 was -1.67 days (95% CI [-3.62, 0.28]; P=.09) in favor of lopinavir-ritonavir but not statistically significant. For the remdesivir trial of Wang et al., the difference of terminal rates was -0.89% (95% CI [-2.84, 1.06]; P=.19) and the HR adjusted for terminal rates was 0.92 (95% CI [0.63, 1.35]; P=.67). The difference of RMTIs at day 28 was -0.89 day (95% CI [-2.84, 1.06]; P=.37). The planned sample size was 453, yet only 236 patients were enrolled. The conditional prediction shows that the HR estimates would reach statistical significance if the target sample size had been maintained, and both conditional and unconditional prediction delivered significant HR results if the trial had continued to double the target sample size. For the remdesivir trial of Beigel et al., the difference of RMTRs between the remdesivir and placebo groups up to day 30 was -2.7 days (95% CI [-4.0, -1.2]; P<.001), confirming the superiority of remdesivir. The difference in recovery time at the 25th percentile (95% CI [-3, 0]; P=.65) was insignificant, while the differences manifested to be statistically significant at larger percentiles. Conclusions: Based on the statistical issues and lessons learned from the recent three clinical trials on COVID-19 treatments, we suggest more appropriate approaches for the design and analysis for ongoing and future COVID-19 trials.

positive: The Efficacy and Safety of Triazavirin for COVID-19: A Trial Protocol The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a pneumonia caused by a novel coronavirus, was reported in December 2019. COVID-19 is highly contagious and has rapidly developed from a regional epidemic into a global pandemic. As yet, no effective drugs have been found to treat this virus. This study, an ongoing multicenter and blind randomized controlled trial (RCT), is being conducted at ten study sites in Heilongjiang Province, China, to investigate the efficacy and safety of Triazavirin (TZV) versus its placebo in COVID-19 patients. A total of 240 participants with COVID-19 are scheduled to be enrolled in this trial. Participants with positive tests of throat swab virus nucleic acid are randomized (1:1) into two groups: standard therapy plus TZV or standard therapy plus placebo for a 7-day treatment with a 21-day follow-up. The primary outcome is the time to clinical improvement of the subjects. Secondary outcomes include clinical improvement rate, time to alleviation of fever, mean time and proportion of obvious inflammatory absorption in the lung, conversion rate of repeated negative virus nucleic acid tests, mortality rate, and conversion rate to severe and critically severe patients. Adverse events, serious adverse events, liver function, kidney function and concurrent treatments will be monitored and recorded throughout the trial. The results of this trial should provide evidence-based recommendations to clinicians for the treatment of COVID-19.

positive: Rheumatologists’ perspective on coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) and potential therapeutic targets The ongoing pandemic coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a matter of global concern. Environmental factors such as air pollution and smoking and comorbid conditions (hypertension, diabetes mellitus and underlying cardio-respiratory illness) likely increase the severity of COVID-19. Rheumatic manifestations such as arthralgias and arthritis may be prevalent in about a seventh of individuals. COVID-19 can result in acute interstitial pneumonia, myocarditis, leucopenia (with lymphopenia) and thrombocytopenia, also seen in rheumatic diseases like lupus and Sjogren’s syndrome. Severe disease in a subset of patients may be driven by cytokine storm, possibly due to secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH), akin to that in systemic onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis or adult-onset Still’s disease. In the absence of high-quality evidence in this emerging disease, understanding of pathogenesis may help postulate potential therapies. Angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) appears important for viral entry into pneumocytes; dysbalance in ACE2 as caused by ACE inhibitors or ibuprofen may predispose to severe disease. Preliminary evidence suggests potential benefit with chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine. Antiviral drugs like lopinavir/ritonavir, favipiravir and remdesivir are also being explored. Cytokine storm and secondary HLH might require heightened immunosuppressive regimens. Current international society recommendations suggest that patients with rheumatic diseases on immunosuppressive therapy should not stop glucocorticoids during COVID-19 infection, although minimum possible doses may be used. Disease-modifying drugs should be continued; cessation may be considered during infection episodes as per standard practices. Development of a vaccine may be the only effective long-term protection against this disease.

positive: Update on treatment of COVID-19: ongoing studies between promising and disappointing results. The COVID-19 pandemic represents the greatest global public health crisis since the pandemic influenza outbreak of 1918. We are facing a new virus, so several antiviral agents previously used to treat other coronavirus infections such as SARS and MERS are being considered as the first potential candidates to treat COVID-19. Thus, several agents have been used by the beginning of the current outbreak in China first and all over the word successively, as reported in several different guidelines and therapeutic recommendations. At the same time, a great number of clinical trials have been launched to investigate the potential efficacy therapies for COVID-19 highlighting the urgent need to get as quickly as possible high-quality evidence. Through PubMed, we explored the relevant articles published on treatment of COVID-19 and on trials ongoing up to April 15, 2020.

positive: Limiting factors for wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) in a health care environment evaluated in a randomised study Pandemics and re-emerging diseases put pressure on the health care system to prepare for patient care and sample logistics requiring enhanced personnel protective equipment (PPE) for health care workers. We generated quantifiable data on ergonomics of PPE applicable in a health care setting by defining error rates and physically limiting factors due to PPE-induced restrictions. Nineteen study volunteers tested randomly allocated head- or full body-ventilated PPE suits equipped with powered-air-purifying-respirators and performed four different tasks (two laboratory tutorials, a timed test of selective attention and a test investigating reaction time, mobility, speed and physical exercise) during 6 working hours at 22°C on one day and 4 working hours at 28°C on another day. Error rates and physical parameters (fluid loss, body temperature, heart rate) were determined and ergonomic-related parameters were assessed hourly using assessment sheets. Depending on the PPE system the most restrictive factors, which however had no negative impact on performance (speed and error rate), were: reduced dexterity due to multiple glove layers, impaired visibility by flexible face shields and back pain related to the respirator of the fully ventilated suit. Heat stress and liquid loss were perceived as restrictive at a working temperature of 28°C but not 22°C.

positive: GOST: A generic ordinal sequential trial design for a treatment trial in an emerging pandemic BACKGROUND: Conducting clinical trials to assess experimental treatments for potentially pandemic infectious diseases is challenging. Since many outbreaks of infectious diseases last only six to eight weeks, there is a need for trial designs that can be implemented rapidly in the face of uncertainty. Outbreaks are sudden and unpredictable and so it is essential that as much planning as possible takes place in advance. Statistical aspects of such trial designs should be evaluated and discussed in readiness for implementation. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: This paper proposes a generic ordinal sequential trial design (GOST) for a randomised clinical trial comparing an experimental treatment for an emerging infectious disease with standard care. The design is intended as an off-the-shelf, ready-to-use robust and flexible option. The primary endpoint is a categorisation of patient outcome according to an ordinal scale. A sequential approach is adopted, stopping as soon as it is clear that the experimental treatment has an advantage or that sufficient advantage is unlikely to be detected. The properties of the design are evaluated using large-sample theory and verified for moderate sized samples using simulation. The trial is powered to detect a generic clinically relevant difference: namely an odds ratio of 2 for better rather than worse outcomes. Total sample sizes (across both treatments) of between 150 and 300 patients prove to be adequate in many cases, but the precise value depends on both the magnitude of the treatment advantage and the nature of the ordinal scale. An advantage of the approach is that any erroneous assumptions made at the design stage about the proportion of patients falling into each outcome category have little effect on the error probabilities of the study, although they can lead to inaccurate forecasts of sample size. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: It is important and feasible to pre-determine many of the statistical aspects of an efficient trial design in advance of a disease outbreak. The design can then be tailored to the specific disease under study once its nature is better understood.

positive: Searching an Effective Therapy for the Coronavirus Pandemic: Do We See Light at the End of the Tunnel? Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an emerging infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). First reported at the end of December 2019 as a cause for clusters of pneumonia cases in Wuhan city in China, the rapid spread of this condition was declared a pandemic on March 11, 2020, by the World Health Organization (WHO). Apart from the mortality and morbidity associated with COVID-19, the massive social and financial havoc inflicted by this pandemic has left the entire world pondering if medical science can innovate and curtail the ongoing damage due to SARS-CoV-2. Recent findings of an open-label study that investigated the use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in COVID-19 patients in Marseille, France, has garnered some optimism in scientific quarters and the general public alike in terms of finding a treatment regimen to control the rampant rise of COVID-19. We will discuss the potential off-label therapy and studies as it pertains to COVID-19.

positive: Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine vs Hydroxychloroquine + Nitazoxanide in COVID-19 patients with risk factors for poor prognosis: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine vs. Hydroxychloroquine + Nitazoxanide in reducing the need for invasive mechanical ventilatory support for patients with COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine is currently being used in multiple trials with varying doses in an attempt to treat COVID-19. Nitazoxanide has powerful antiviral effects and proven efficacy against a range of viruses including SARS and MERS. Dual therapy by combining appropriate doses of these two medications with diverse activities against COVID-19 is expected to be better than monotherapy with hydroxychloroquine. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a single centre, randomized, controlled, single blinded, 2 arm (ratio 1:1) parallel group trial. PARTICIPANTS: 86 COVID-19 positive patients that are being treated at the Health Institute of the State of Mexico (ISEM) in Toluca, State of Mexico will be recruited from May 14 to December 31, 2020. INCLUSION CRITERIA: 1)Age older than 18 years.2)Hospitalised COVID-19 PCR test positive patients.3)Within the first 72 hours after performing the PCR test.4)Presence of risk factors for complications (at least one): over 60 years, history of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and morbid obesity. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: 1)Patients with corrected QT interval (QTc) greater than 500ms at hospital admission.2)Patients who have inherent contraindications to each drug.3)Patients who are unable to consent.4)Patients who have previously received chloroquine.5)Patients already intubated. Elimination criteria: 1)Patients whose clinical follow-up is lost or who decide not to continue in the study INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: The two management alternatives will be: Control - Hydroxychloroquine 200 mg taken orally every 12 hours for 7 days. Dual therapy - Hydroxychloroquine 400 mg taken orally every 12 hours for two days and then 200 mg taken orally every 12 hours for four days + Nitazoxanide 500 mg orally every 6 hours taken with food, for seven days. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary: Mechanical ventilation requirement assessed at one week. Percentage of COVID-19 positive patients who require mechanical ventilation . All patients will be monitored till hospital discharge or death. RANDOMISATION: Patients will be randomly allocated using allocation papers and opaque sealed envelopes to either receive the placebo or the dual therapy intervention treatment in a 1:1 ratio until we have recruited the required number of patients for each group. BLINDING (MASKING): Trial participants will be blinded. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): 86 participants will be randomized to each group, with 43 in the control group and 43 in the dual therapy group. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version: 2, recruitment will begin on May 14 until sample size is reached , with the analysis deadline of December 31st 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04341493. Date of trial registration: April 10, 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Mismatched Double-Stranded RNA: PolyI:PolyC12U Ampligen® [polyI:polyC12U] is a mismatched double-stranded RNA that acts by inducing interferon production (immunomodulator) and by activating an intracellular enzyme (RNase-L) against viral RNA transcripts (antiviral). Ampligen®, currently under development by Hemispherx Biopharma in the US, acts on the immunological system through T-lymphocyte stimulation and is indicated for the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome and acquired immunodeficiency deficiency syndrome (AIDS), as part of the combined therapy. Ampligen® is available for licensing worldwide. In February 2004, Fujisawa Deutschland GmbH, a subsidiary of Fujisawa Pharmaceutical Co., entered into an option agreement with Hemispherx Biopharma with the intent of becoming a distributor for Ampligen® for the potential treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome in Germany, Switzerland and Austria. An option fee of €400 000 was paid pursuant to the terms of the option agreement and upon execution of the Distribution Agreement, Fujisawa will pay Hemispherx fees and milestone payments with a potential worth of several millions of dollars.[1] In September 2003, Hemispherx Biopharma Inc. entered into an agreement with Guangdong Medicine Group Corporation to organise clinical trials, marketing, sales and distribution for both of its lead compounds, Ampligen® and Alferon N® in the People’s Republic of China. The agreement stipulates that the Guangdong Medicine Group Corporation (GMC) will conduct clinical trials with Ampligen® for the treatment of HIV. All costs related to the trials are to be covered by GMC. Additionally, GMC has to develop and implement marketing and promotional programmes.[2] In May 2003, Hemispherx Biopharma and the Center for Cell and Gene Therapy entered into a research project agreement that will see Ampligen® implemented in a protocol used in patients with relapsed EBV-positive Hodgkin’s Lymphoma.[3] In March 2002, Esteve and Hemispherx Biopharma entered into a collaborative agreement under which Esteve will be the sole distributor of Ampligen® in Spain, Portugal and Andorra for the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome. Under this agreement, in addition to other terms, Esteve will also collaborate in the drug product development by conducting clinical studies in Spain in patients coinfected with HIV/HCV. In July 2001 Hemispherx Biopharma announced that it had formed a strategic alliance with Empire Health Resources for clinical trials of Ampligen® in the treatment of HIV and hepatitis C virus infections. Empire Health Resources, a healthcare management firm, will be responsible for accrual and retention of patients for HIV trials, and protocols for trials in patients with hepatitis C or both HIV and hepatitis C infections. Hemispherx has entered into a collaboration with RED Laboratories, and RED Laboratories NV expects that this will facilitate the continued development of Ampligen®. Hemispherx has also entered into an agreement with Schering Plough to use a Schering facility as its principal manufacturing platform in the US. This agreement may be expanded to include other territories. Hemispherx and AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals have signed a marketing agreement for Ampligen® for the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome for Austria, the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary. In an arrangement between Hemispherx and Bioclones, Bioclones has certain marketing rights for Ampligen® in the Southern Hemisphere, UK and Ireland. In the US, Ampligen® has been granted orphan drug status for the treatment of AIDS, renal cell carcinoma (phase II, completed), chronic fatigue syndrome (phase III) and invasive/metastatic malignant melanoma (phase II). In August 2004, Hemispherx announced that it intends to use the proceeds from the private placement of company stock to complete the clinical work for its immunotherapeutics/ antivirals Ampligen® and Oragens™. Previously, Hemispherx submitted an application to the EMEA for the approval of Ampligen® for the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome; the first stage of the regulatory review has been cleared. In 2000, Hemispherx Europe (Hemispherx) obtained orphan drug status for Ampligen® for the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome in the EU, providing Hemispherx with 10 years of marketing exclusivity following the launch of the drug, as well as potential financial research benefits for the agent. In February 2000, Crystaal Corporation (now Biovail Pharmaceuticals Canada) acquired exclusive marketing rights to Ampligen® in Canada, where it submitted an NDA for the agent for the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome. In the meantime, Ampligen® has been available since May 1996 under the Canadian Emergency Drug Release Programme for the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome and immune dysfunction syndrome by Rivex Pharma (Helix BioPharma). Bioclones has initiated clinical studies with Ampligen® for the treatment of chronic fatigue syndrome in Australia. The active substance for Ampligen® is manufactured by F.H. Faulding Ltd. Clinical treatment programmes for chronic fatigue syndrome in other Pacific Rim countries are planned. Ampligen® is available for severe chronic fatigue syndrome on a named patient, cost-recovery basis in South Africa. Hemispherx has developed a ‘ready-to-use’ liquid formulation of the drug and has begun treating patients with chronic fatigue syndrome in ongoing clinical trials. Hemispherx has also developed an oral version of the drug (Oragen®), which is undergoing preclinical evaluation. In February 2001, Hemispherx Biopharma announced that it was initiating phase II/III trials of Ampligen® in the treatment of late-stage, multidrug-resistant strains of HIV in the European Union. Patients treated in these studies will have exhausted all other treatment options. In July 2001, Hemispherx stated that Ampligen® was being evaluated in a phase IIb trial in patients with HIV in the US. The trial, comprising two studies, REARMI and REARMII (Research/Evaluation of Ampligen® for Retroviral Mutations I and II), will evaluate the ability of Ampligen® to prevent the emergence of mutated, drug-resistant strains of the virus. ‘Several hundred’ patients currently on antiretroviral therapy and at risk of viral relapse will be enrolled at centres in Connecticut, New York, Florida and California. A second phase IIb study evaluating the effect of Ampligen® on structured treatment interruptions (STI) is also underway. Final results from this study were reported in December 2002. NIH sponsored studies of potential therapies for SARS have identified Ampligen® as having unusually high and consistent antiviral activity against human coronavirus, the pathogen implicated as the causative agent of the disease. Ampligen® demonstrated very high potency at very low concentrations (0.4 μg/mL) and had a favourable safety profile.[4] In October 2003, Hemispherx announced that, based on these promsing new results, the company will stockpile injectible and/or oral formats of Ampligen® and Alferon N®.[5] Independent researchers have demonstrated the antiviral activity of Ampligen® against flaviviruses (West Nile virus, Equine Encephalitis virus, Dengue fever virus and Japanese Encephalitis virus) as well as virus classes associated with bioterrorism. In an animal study, Ampligen® was shown to prevent destruction of nerve cells, reduce virus concentrations in the brain and blood stream and increase survival rates.[6] Researchers at the Rega Institute in Belgium have published results from an animal study demonstrating that Ampligen® was superior at protecting mice against coxsackie B3 virus-induced myocarditis compared with pegylated interferon.[7] In May 2004 Hemispherx announced that it had filed an expanded US patent application covering the use of Ampligen® for the potential treatment and prevention of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and dreaded emerging viruses.

positive: Rational Use of Tocilizumab in the Treatment of Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia Since December 2019, a novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19) has broken out in Wuhan, China and spread rapidly. Recent studies have found that ⁓ 15.7% of patients develop severe pneumonia, and cytokine storm is an important factor leading to rapid disease progression. Currently, there are no specific drugs for COVID-19 and the cytokine storm it causes. IL-6 is one of the key cytokines involved in infection-induced cytokine storm. Tocilizumab, which is the IL-6 receptor antagonist, has been approved by the US FDA for the treatment of cytokine release syndrome (CRS), is expected to treat cytokine storm caused by COVID-19 and is now in clinical trials. In this paper, we will elaborate the role of cytokine storm in COVID-19, the mechanism of tocilizumab on cytokine storm and the key points of pharmaceutical care based on the actual clinical application for COVID-19 in our hospital, the latest research reports, clinical trial progress of tocilizumab, drug instruction from the US FDA, and “Diagnosis and Treatment Plan of Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia (seventh trial edition)” in China, so as to provide reference for the treatment of COVID-19.

positive: Appealing for Efficient, Well Organized Clinical Trials on COVID-19 The rapid emergence of clinical trials on COVID-19 stimulated a wave of discussion in scientific community. We reviewed the characteristics of interventional trials from Chinese Clinical Trial Registration (ChiCTR) and ClinicalTrials.gov. A total of 171 COVID-19-related interventional trials were identified on Feb 22nd, 2020. These trials are classified into 4 categories based on treatment modalities, including chemical drugs, biological therapies, traditional Chinese medicine treatments and other therapies. Our analysis focused on the issues of stage, design, randomization, blinding, primary endpoints definition and sample size of these trials. We found some studies with potential defects including unreasonable design, inappropriate primary endpoint definition, insufficient sample size and ethical issue. Clinical trials on COVID-19 should be designed based on scientific rules, ethics and benefits for patients.

positive: Rigorous Randomized Controlled Trial Implementation in the Era of COVID-19 Rigorous Randomized Controlled Trial Implementation in the Era of Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19).

positive: Compounds with Therapeutic Potential against Novel Respiratory 2019 Coronavirus Currently, the expansion of the novel human respiratory coronavirus (known as SARS-CoV-2 [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2], COVID-2019 [coronavirus disease 2019], or 2019-nCoV [2019 novel coronavirus]) has stressed the need for therapeutic alternatives to alleviate and stop this new epidemic. The previous epidemics of infections by high-morbidity human coronaviruses, such as SARS-CoV in 2003 and the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in 2012, prompted the characterization of compounds that could be potentially active against the currently emerging novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. The most promising compound is remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleotide analog prodrug currently in clinical trials for treating Ebola virus infections. Remdesivir inhibited the replication of SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV in tissue cultures, and it displayed efficacy in nonhuman animal models. In addition, a combination of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) protease inhibitors lopinavir/ritonavir and interferon beta (LPV/RTV–IFN-β) was shown to be effective in patients infected with SARS-CoV. LPV/RTV–IFN-β also improved clinical parameters in marmosets and mice infected with MERS-CoV. Remarkably, the therapeutic efficacy of remdesivir appeared to be superior to that of LPV/RTV–IFN-β against MERS-CoV in a transgenic humanized mouse model. The relatively high mortality rates associated with these three novel human coronavirus infections, SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2, have suggested that proinflammatory responses might play a role in the pathogenesis. It remains unknown whether the generated inflammatory state should be targeted. Therapeutics that target the coronavirus alone might not be able to reverse highly pathogenic infections. This minireview aims to provide a summary of therapeutic compounds that have shown potential in fighting SARS-CoV-2 infections.

positive: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): a scoping review BACKGROUND: In December 2019, a pneumonia caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in Wuhan, China and has rapidly spread around the world since then. AIM: This study aims to understand the research gaps related to COVID-19 and propose recommendations for future research. METHODS: We undertook a scoping review of COVID-19, comprehensively searching databases and other sources to identify literature on COVID-19 between 1 December 2019 and 6 February 2020. We analysed the sources, publication date, type and topic of the retrieved articles/studies. RESULTS: We included 249 articles in this scoping review. More than half (59.0%) were conducted in China. Guidance/guidelines and consensuses statements (n = 56; 22.5%) were the most common. Most (n = 192; 77.1%) articles were published in peer-reviewed journals, 35 (14.1%) on preprint servers and 22 (8.8%) posted online. Ten genetic studies (4.0%) focused on the origin of SARS-CoV-2 while the topics of molecular studies varied. Nine of 22 epidemiological studies focused on estimating the basic reproduction number of COVID-19 infection (R(0)). Of all identified guidance/guidelines (n = 35), only ten fulfilled the strict principles of evidence-based practice. The number of articles published per day increased rapidly until the end of January. CONCLUSION: The number of articles on COVID-19 steadily increased before 6 February 2020. However, they lack diversity and are almost non-existent in some study fields, such as clinical research. The findings suggest that evidence for the development of clinical practice guidelines and public health policies will be improved when more results from clinical research becomes available.

positive: Compassionate remdesivir treatment of severe Covid-19 pneumonia in intensive care unit (ICU) and Non-ICU patients: Clinical outcome and differences in post_treatment hospitalisation status SARS-CoV-2 is causing an increasing number of deaths worldwide because no effective treatment is currently available. Remdesivir has shown in vitro activity against coronaviruses and is a possible antiviral treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection. This prospective (compassionate), open-label study of remdesivir, which was conducted at Luigi Sacco Hospital, Milan, Italy, between February 23 and March 20, 2020, involved patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia aged ≥18 years undergoing mechanical ventilation or with an oxygen saturation level of ≤94% in air or a National Early Warning Score 2 of ≥4. The primary outcome was the change in clinical status based on a 7-category ordinal scale (1 = not hospitalised, resuming normal daily activities; 7 = deceased). The 35 patients enrolled from February 23 to March 20, 2020, included 18 in intensive care unit (ICU), and 17 in our infectious diseases ward (IDW). The 10-day course of remdesivir was completed by 22 patients (63%) and discontinued by 13, of whom eight (22.8%) discontinued because of adverse events. The median follow-up was 39 days (IQR 25-44). At day 28, 14 (82.3%) patients from IDW were discharged, two were still hospitalized and one died (5.9%), whereas in ICU 6 (33.3%) were discharged, 8 (44.4%) patients died, three (16.7%) were still mechanically ventilated and one (5.6%) was improved but still hospitalized. Hypertransaminasemia and acute kidney injury were the most frequent severe adverse events observed (42.8% and 22.8% of the cases, respectively). Our data suggest that remdesivir can benefit patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia hospitalised outside ICU where clinical outcome was better and adverse events are less frequently observed. Ongoing randomised controlled trials will clarify its real efficacy and safety, who to treat, and when.

positive: Current State of Research About Chinese Herbal Medicines (CHM) for the Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Scoping Review Background: There is currently no effective treatment against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The optimal selection of interventions targeting the virus is unknown. Therefore, evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to support specific treatment against COVID-19 is urgently needed. The use of Chinese herbal medicines (CHMs) might have a role in the treatment and symptomatic management of patients with COVID-19. It was aimed at providing an overview of the available evidence and ongoing trials concerning the effects of CHMs for the treatment of COVID-19. Methods: This is a narrative review of relevant studies. Searches were conducted to identify documents published till April 22, 2020. Electronic databases, evidence-based collections, websites of relevant organizations, and trial registries were consulted. Results: A total of 25 guidelines on the treatment of patients with COVID-19 were identified. Four guidelines provided recommendations on the use of CHMs; these guidelines were developed in China and South Korea and were based on the consensus of experts exclusively. The remaining 21 guidelines provided no guidance on CHMs. No finished RCTs of CHMs for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 was found. According to the evidence evaluated in this review, a Cochrane review of CHMs for severe acute respiratory syndrome and five uncontrolled observational studies of the effects of CHMs in patients with COVID-19, the effects of CHMs for COVID-19 are unknown. A total of 52 ongoing clinical trials of CHM interventions for the treatment of COVID-19 were found. These trials will be carried out mostly in China (n = 51). Forty (77%) of the ongoing trials will be randomized, whereas 12 (23%) have an unclear sequence generation procedure. Forty-seven trials (90%) will have a sample size <400 participants. Conclusions: To the authors' knowledge, only the Chinese and the South Korean guidelines recommend CHMs as a treatment option for patients with COVID-19. These guidelines base their recommendations on the consensus of experts. Clinical guidelines or health authorities from other countries do not provide advice on CHMs. Due to the absence of RCT, there is currently no reliable evidence on the effects of any specific CHM intervention for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. A high number of clinical trials of different herbal products are being currently conducted in China.

positive: Advances in COVID-19: the virus, the pathogenesis, and evidence-based control and therapeutic strategies Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in early December 2019, 81 174 confirmed cases and 3242 deaths have been reported in China as of March 19, 2020. The Chinese people and government have contributed huge efforts to combat this disease, resulting in significant improvement of the situation, with 58 new cases (34 were imported cases) and 11 new deaths reported on March 19, 2020. However, as of March 19, 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic continues to develop in 167 countries/territories outside of China, and 128 665 confirmed cases and 5536 deaths have been reported, with 16 498 new cases and 817 new deaths occurring in last 24 hours. Therefore, the world should work together to fight against this pandemic. Here, we review the recent advances in COVID-19, including the insights in the virus, the responses of the host cells, the cytokine release syndrome, and the therapeutic approaches to inhibit the virus and alleviate the cytokine storm. By sharing knowledge and deepening our understanding of the virus and the disease pathogenesis, we believe that the community can efficiently develop effective vaccines and drugs, and the mankind will eventually win this battle against this pandemic.

positive: Rational Use of Tocilizumab in the Treatment of Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia Since December 2019, a novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19) has broken out in Wuhan, China and spread rapidly. Recent studies have found that â 15.7% of patients develop severe pneumonia, and cytokine storm is an important factor leading to rapid disease progression. Currently, there are no specific drugs for COVID-19 and the cytokine storm it causes. IL-6 is one of the key cytokines involved in infection-induced cytokine storm. Tocilizumab, which is the IL-6 receptor antagonist, has been approved by the US FDA for the treatment of cytokine release syndrome (CRS), is expected to treat cytokine storm caused by COVID-19 and is now in clinical trials. In this paper, we will elaborate the role of cytokine storm in COVID-19, the mechanism of tocilizumab on cytokine storm and the key points of pharmaceutical care based on the actual clinical application for COVID-19 in our hospital, the latest research reports, clinical trial progress of tocilizumab, drug instruction from the US FDA, and "Diagnosis and Treatment Plan of Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia (seventh trial edition)" in China, so as to provide reference for the treatment of COVID-19.

positive: Effect of facemasks on empathy and relational continuity: a randomised controlled trial in primary care BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence to support the use of facemasks in preventing infection for primary care professionals. Negative effects on communication has been suggested when the physician wears a facemask. As communication skills and doctor patient relationship are essential to primary care consultations, the effects of doctor’s facemask wearing were explored. METHOD: A randomised controlled study was conducted in primary care to explore the effects of doctors wearing facemasks on patients’ perception of doctors’ empathy, patient enablement and patient satisfaction. Primary care doctors were randomized to mask wearing and non mask wearing clinical consultations in public primary care clinics in Hong Kong. Patients’ views were gathered using the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure, Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) and an overall satisfaction rating scale. The effects of face mask wearing were investigated using multilevel (hierarchical) modelling. RESULTS: 1,030 patients were randomised to doctor-mask wearing consultations (n = 514) and non mask wearing consultations (n = 516). A significant and negative effect was found in the patients’ perception of the doctors’ empathy (CARE score reduction -0.98, p-value = 0.04). In the more established doctor-patient relationship, the effect of doctors’ mask wearing was more pronounced (CARE score reduction -5.67, p-value = 0.03). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that when doctors wearing a facemask during consultations, this has a significant negative impact on the patient’s perceived empathy and diminish the positive effects of relational continuity. Consideration should be taken in planning appropriate use of facemasks in infectious disease policy for primary care and other healthcare professionals at a national, local or practice level. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered on Chinese Clinical Trial Register (ChiCTR). Registration no.: ChiCTR-TTRCC-12002519. URL: http://www.chictr.org/en/proj/show.aspx?proj=3486. Due to administrative error, registration of trial did not take place until after the trial started on 1(st) August 2011 and registration number was released on 21(st) September 2012.

positive: Clinical trial analysis of 2019‐nCoV therapy registered in China So far, there is a lack of effective drugs for the new coronavirus pneumonia. With more and more patients diagnosed, China has carried out more than 100 clinical studies of new coronavirus infection, including antiviral drugs, antimalarial drugs, glucocorticoids, plasma therapy, virus vaccine, and other Western drugs, while Chinese medicine research accounted for half of the studies. Most of the trials were initiated by investigators and the study period would last for 1 to 11 months. The primary endpoints included symptom improvement and virus nucleic acid turning negative, but the optimal endpoint has not been determined. Although the final results of studies will take a long time to complete, the interim research data may provide some help for the current urgent demand for drug treatment. Compared with that of during SARS period in 2003, China has the stronger capability to carry out clinical trials of new drugs in emergency period.

positive: Effect of Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: Preliminary Report Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with diffuse lung damage. Corticosteroids may modulate immune-mediated lung injury and reducing progression to respiratory failure and death. Methods: The Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 therapy (RECOVERY) trial is a randomized, controlled, open-label, adaptive, platform trial comparing a range of possible treatments with usual care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We report the preliminary results for the comparison of dexamethasone 6 mg given once daily for up to ten days vs. usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Results: 2104 patients randomly allocated to receive dexamethasone were compared with 4321 patients concurrently allocated to usual care. Overall, 454 (21.6%) patients allocated dexamethasone and 1065 (24.6%) patients allocated usual care died within 28 days (age-adjusted rate ratio [RR] 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74 to 0.92; P<0.001). The proportional and absolute mortality rate reductions varied significantly depending on level of respiratory support at randomization (test for trend p<0.001): Dexamethasone reduced deaths by one-third in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (29.0% vs. 40.7%, RR 0.65 [95% CI 0.51 to 0.82]; p<0.001), by one-fifth in patients receiving oxygen without invasive mechanical ventilation (21.5% vs. 25.0%, RR 0.80 [95% CI 0.70 to 0.92]; p=0.002), but did not reduce mortality in patients not receiving respiratory support at randomization (17.0% vs. 13.2%, RR 1.22 [95% CI 0.93 to 1.61]; p=0.14). Conclusions: In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, dexamethasone reduced 28-day mortality among those receiving invasive mechanical ventilation or oxygen at randomization, but not among patients not receiving respiratory support.

positive: Convalescent plasma transfusion a promising therapy for coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19): current updates While there is no proven treatment available for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), convalescent plasma (CP) may provide therapeutic relief as the number of cases escalate steeply world-wide. At the time of writing this review, vaccines, monoclonal antibodies or drugs are still lacking for the recent large COVID-19 outbreak, which restores the interest in CP as an empirical life-saving treatment. However, formal proof of efficacy is needed. The purpose of this review is to summarize all historical clinical trials on COVID-19 infected patients treated with CP to provide precise evidence for the efficacy and effectiveness of CP therapy in severe COVID-19 patients. Although there are many clinical trials in progress, high-quality clinical evidence is still lacking to analyze the existing problems. Meanwhile, based on the previous successful outcomes, we recommend healthcare systems to use CP therapy cautiously in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

positive: Importance of Pediatric Inclusion in COVID-19 Therapeutic Trials Pediatric patients are excluded from most coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) therapeutic trials. We outline a rationale for the inclusion of children in COVID-19 therapeutic trials, which enabled us to include children of all ages in a therapeutic COVID-19 trial at our institution.

positive: Human Challenge Studies to Accelerate Coronavirus Vaccine Licensure Controlled human challenge trials of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates could accelerate the testing and potential rollout of efficacious vaccines. By replacing conventional phase 3 testing of vaccine candidates, such trials may subtract many months from the licensure process, making efficacious vaccines available more quickly. Obviously, challenging volunteers with this live virus risks inducing severe disease and possibly even death. However, we argue that such studies, by accelerating vaccine evaluation, could reduce the global burden of coronavirus-related mortality and morbidity. Volunteers in such studies could autonomously authorize the risks to themselves, and their net risk could be acceptable if participants comprise healthy young adults, who are at relatively low risk of serious disease following natural infection, if they have a high baseline risk of natural infection, and if during the trial they receive frequent monitoring and, following any infection, the best available care.

positive: No evidence of clinical efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 infection with oxygen requirement: results of a study using routinely collected data to emulate a target trial Background Treatments are urgently needed to prevent respiratory failure and deaths from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has received worldwide attention because of positive results from small studies. Methods We used data collected from routine care of all adults in 4 French hospitals with documented SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and requiring oxygen ≥ 2 L/min to emulate a target trial aimed at assessing the effectiveness of HCQ at 600 mg/day. The composite primary endpoint was transfer to intensive care unit (ICU) within 7 days from inclusion and/or death from any cause. Analyses were adjusted for confounding factors by inverse probability of treatment weighting. Results This study included 181 patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia; 84 received HCQ within 48 hours of admission (HCQ group) and 97 did not (no-HCQ group). Initial severity was well balanced between the groups. In the weighted analysis, 20.2% patients in the HCQ group were transferred to the ICU or died within 7 days vs 22.1% in the no-HCQ group (16 vs 21 events, relative risk [RR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.47-1.80). In the HCQ group, 2.8% of the patients died within 7 days vs 4.6% in the no-HCQ group (3 vs 4 events, RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.13-2.89), and 27.4% and 24.1%, respectively, developed acute respiratory distress syndrome within 7 days (24 vs 23 events, RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.65-2.00). Eight patients receiving HCQ (9.5%) experienced electrocardiogram modifications requiring HCQ discontinuation. Interpretation These results do not support the use of HCQ in patients hospitalised for documented SARS-CoV-2-positive hypoxic pneumonia.

positive: Therapeutic effects of dipyridamole on COVID-19 patients with coagulation dysfunction The human coronavirus HCoV-19 infection can cause acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), hypercoagulability, hypertension, extrapulmonary multiorgan dysfunction. Effective antiviral and anti-coagulation agents with safe clinical profiles are urgently needed to improve the overall prognosis. We screened an FDA approved drug library and found that an anticoagulant agent dipyridamole (DIP) suppressed HCoV-19 replication at an EC50 of 100 nM in vitro. It also elicited potent type I interferon responses and ameliorated lung pathology in a viral pneumonia model. In analysis of twelve HCoV-19 infected patients with prophylactic anti-coagulation therapy, we found that DIP supplementation was associated with significantly increased platelet and lymphocyte counts and decreased D-dimer levels in comparison to control patients. Two weeks after initiation of DIP treatment, 3 of the 6 severe cases (60%) and all 4 of the mild cases (100%) were discharged from the hospital. One critically ill patient with extremely high levels of D-dimer and lymphopenia at the time of receiving DIP passed away. All other patients were in clinical remission. In summary, HCoV-19 infected patients could potentially benefit from DIP adjunctive therapy by reducing viral replication, suppressing hypercoagulability and enhancing immune recovery. Larger scale clinical trials of DIP are needed to validate these therapeutic effects.

positive: Effect of High vs Low Doses of Chloroquine Diphosphate as Adjunctive Therapy for Patients Hospitalized With Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infection: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Importance There is no specific antiviral therapy recommended for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In vitro studies indicate that the antiviral effect of chloroquine diphosphate (CQ) requires a high concentration of the drug. Objective To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 2 CQ dosages in patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants This parallel, double-masked, randomized, phase IIb clinical trial with 81 adult patients who were hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was conducted from March 23 to April 5, 2020, at a tertiary care facility in Manaus, Brazilian Amazon. Interventions Patients were allocated to receive high-dosage CQ (ie, 600 mg CQ twice daily for 10 days) or low-dosage CQ (ie, 450 mg twice daily on day 1 and once daily for 4 days). Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcome was reduction in lethality by at least 50% in the high-dosage group compared with the low-dosage group. Data presented here refer primarily to safety and lethality outcomes during treatment on day 13. Secondary end points included participant clinical status, laboratory examinations, and electrocardiogram results. Outcomes will be presented to day 28. Viral respiratory secretion RNA detection was performed on days 0 and 4. Results Out of a predefined sample size of 440 patients, 81 were enrolled (41 [50.6%] to high-dosage group and 40 [49.4%] to low-dosage group). Enrolled patients had a mean (SD) age of 51.1 (13.9) years, and most (60 [75.3%]) were men. Older age (mean [SD] age, 54.7 [13.7] years vs 47.4 [13.3] years) and more heart disease (5 of 28 [17.9%] vs 0) were seen in the high-dose group. Viral RNA was detected in 31 of 40 (77.5%) and 31 of 41 (75.6%) patients in the low-dosage and high-dosage groups, respectively. Lethality until day 13 was 39.0% in the high-dosage group (16 of 41) and 15.0% in the low-dosage group (6 of 40). The high-dosage group presented more instance of QTc interval greater than 500 milliseconds (7 of 37 [18.9%]) compared with the low-dosage group (4 of 36 [11.1%]). Respiratory secretion at day 4 was negative in only 6 of 27 patients (22.2%). Conclusions and Relevance The preliminary findings of this study suggest that the higher CQ dosage should not be recommended for critically ill patients with COVID-19 because of its potential safety hazards, especially when taken concurrently with azithromycin and oseltamivir. These findings cannot be extrapolated to patients with nonsevere COVID-19. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04323527.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19: an open-label, randomized, controlled trial Abstract Objectives To assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) plus standard-of-care (SOC) compared with SOC alone in adult patients with COVID-19. Design Multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial. Setting 16 government-designated COVID-19 treatment centers in China through 11 to 29 in February 2020. Participants 150 patients hospitalized with COVID-19. 75 patients were assigned to HCQ plus SOC and 75 were assigned to SOC alone (control group). Interventions HCQ was administrated with a loading dose of 1, 200 mg daily for three days followed by a maintained dose of 800 mg daily for the remaining days (total treatment duration: 2 or 3 weeks for mild/moderate or severe patients, respectively). Main outcome measures The primary endpoint was the 28-day negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2. The assessed secondary endpoints were negative conversion rate at day 4, 7, 10, 14 or 21, the improvement rate of clinical symptoms within 28-day, normalization of C-reactive protein and blood lymphocyte count within 28-day. Primary and secondary analysis was by intention to treat. Adverse events were assessed in the safety population. Results The overall 28-day negative conversion rate was not different between SOC plus HCQ and SOC group (Kaplan-Meier estimates 85.4% versus 81.3%, P=0.341). Negative conversion rate at day 4, 7, 10, 14 or 21 was also similar between the two groups. No different 28-day symptoms alleviation rate was observed between the two groups. A significant efficacy of HCQ on alleviating symptoms was observed when the confounding effects of anti-viral agents were removed in the post-hoc analysis (Hazard ratio, 8.83, 95%CI, 1.09 to 71.3). This was further supported by a significantly greater reduction of CRP (6.986 in SOC plus HCQ versus 2.723 in SOC, milligram/liter, P=0.045) conferred by the addition of HCQ, which also led to more rapid recovery of lymphopenia, albeit no statistical significance. Adverse events were found in 8.8% of SOC and 30% of HCQ recipients with two serious adverse events. The most common adverse event in the HCQ recipients was diarrhea (10%). Conclusions The administration of HCQ did not result in a higher negative conversion rate but more alleviation of clinical symptoms than SOC alone in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 without receiving antiviral treatment, possibly through anti-inflammatory effects. Adverse events were significantly increased in HCQ recipients but no apparently increase of serious adverse events. Trial registration ChiCTR2000029868.

positive: Vaccines and Drug Therapeutics to Lock Down Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials The ongoing novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been responsible for millions of infections and hundreds of thousands of deaths. To date, there is no approved targeted treatment, and many investigational therapeutic agents and vaccine candidates are being considered for the treatment of COVID-19. To extract and summarize information on potential vaccines and therapeutic agents against COVID-19 at different stages of clinical trials from January to March 2020, we reviewed major clinical trial databases such as ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and other primary registries between January and March 15, 2020. Interventional studies at different phases under the COVID-19 pipeline were included. A total of 249 clinical trials were identified between January to March 15, 2020. After filtering observational studies (194 studies), a total of 56 interventional trials were considered. The majority of clinical trials have been conducted on chloroquine (n=10) and traditional Chinese medications (TCMs; n=10), followed by antivirals (n=8), anti-inflammatory/immunosuppressants (n=9), cellular therapies (n=4), combinations of different antivirals therapies (n=3), antibacterial (n=1), and other therapies (n=5). Five vaccines are under phase I, and there are a couple of phase III trials on the Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine under investigation among healthcare workers. Many novel compounds and vaccines against COVID-19 are currently under investigation. Some candidates have been tested for other viral infections and are listed for clinical trials against the COVID-19 pipeline. Currently, there are no effective specific antivirals or drug combinations available for the treatment of COVID-19.

positive: Does zinc supplementation enhance the clinical efficacy of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine to win todays battle against COVID-19? Abstract Currently, drug repurposing is an alternative to novel drug development for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. The antimalarial drug chloroquine (CQ) and its metabolite hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) are currently being tested in several clinical studies as potential candidates to limit SARS-CoV-2-mediated morbidity and mortality. CQ and HCQ (CQ/HCQ) inhibit pH-dependent steps of SARS-CoV-2 replication by increasing pH in intracellular vesicles and interfere with virus particle delivery into host cells. Besides direct antiviral effects, CQ/HCQ specifically target extracellular zinc to intracellular lysosomes where it interferes with RNA-dependent RNA polymerase activity and coronavirus replication. As zinc deficiency frequently occurs in elderly patients and in those with cardiovascular disease, chronic pulmonary disease, or diabetes, we hypothesize that CQ/HCQ plus zinc supplementation may be more effective in reducing COVID-19 morbidity and mortality than CQ or HCQ in monotherapy. Therefore, CQ/HCQ in combination with zinc should be considered as additional study arm for COVID-19 clinical trials.

positive: Systematic review of the registered clinical trials for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) BACKGROUND: Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many researchers in China have performed related clinical research. However, systematic reviews of the registered clinical trials are still lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of clinical trials for COVID-19 to summarize their characteristics. METHODS: This study is based on the PRISMA recommendations in the Cochrane handbook. The Chinese Clinical Registration Center and the ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched to identify registered clinical trials related to COVID-19. The retrieval inception date was February 9, 2020. Two researchers independently selected the literature based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias. RESULTS: A total of 75 registered clinical trials (63 interventional studies and 12 observational studies) for COVID-19 were identified. The majority of clinical trials were sponsored by Chinese hospitals. Only 11 trials have begun to recruit patients, and none of the registered clinical trials have been completed; 34 trials were early clinical exploratory trials or in the pre-experiment stage, 13 trials were phase III, and four trials were phase IV. The intervention methods included traditional Chinese medicine in 26 trials, Western medicine in 30 trials, and integrated traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine in 19 trials. The subjects were primarily non-critical adult patients (≥ 18 years old). The median sample size of the trials was 100 (IQR: 60–200), and the median length of the trial periods was 179 d (IQR: 94–366 d). The main outcomes were clinical observation and examinations. Overall, the methodological quality of both the interventional trials and observational studies was low. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive clinical trials on the treatment of COVID-19 using traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine are ongoing or will be performed in China. However, based on the uncertain methodological quality, small sample size, and long trial duration, we will not be able to obtain reliable, high-quality clinical evidence regarding the treatment of COVID-19 in the near future. Improving the quality of study design, prioritizing promising drugs, and using different designs and statistical methods are worth advocating and recommending for clinical trials of COVID-19 in the future.

positive: Efficient adaptive designs for clinical trials of interventions for COVID-19 The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented response in terms of clinical research activity. An important part of this research has been focused on randomized controlled clinical trials to evaluate potential therapies for COVID-19. The results from this research need to be obtained as rapidly as possible. This presents a number of challenges associated with considerable uncertainty over the natural history of the disease and the number and characteristics of patients affected, and the emergence of new potential therapies. These challenges make adaptive designs for clinical trials a particularly attractive option. Such designs allow a trial to be modified on the basis of interim analysis data or stopped as soon as sufficiently strong evidence has been observed to answer the research question, without compromising the trial's scientific validity or integrity. In this paper we describe some of the adaptive design approaches that are available and discuss particular issues and challenges associated with their use in the pandemic setting. Our discussion is illustrated by details of four ongoing COVID-19 trials that have used adaptive designs.

positive: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the management of COVID-19: much kerfuffle but little evidence Summary Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are drugs that have shown in vitro activity on the replication of certain coronaviruses. In the context of the SARS-Cov-2 epidemic, the virus responsible for the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), these two drugs have been proposed as possible treatments. The results of the first clinical studies evaluating the effect of hydroxychloroquine do not support any efficacy of this drug in patients with COVID-19, due to major methodological weaknesses. Yet, these preliminary studies have aroused considerable media interest, raising fears of massive and uncontrolled use. In the absence of evidence of clinical benefits, the main risk is of exposing patients unnecessarily to the well-known adverse effects of hydroxychloroquine, with a possibly increased risk in the specific setting of COVID-19. In addition, widespread use outside of any recommendation risks compromising the completion of good quality clinical trials. The chloroquine hype, fueled by low-quality studies and media announcements, has yielded to the implementation of more than 150 studies worldwide. This represents a waste of resources and a loss of opportunity for other drugs to be properly evaluated. In the context of emergency, rigorous trials are more than ever needed in order to have, as soon as possible, reliable data on drugs that are possibly effective against the disease. Meanwhile, serious adverse drug reactions have been reported in patients with COVID-19 receiving hydroxychloroquine, justifying to limit its prescription, and to perform suitable cardiac and therapeutic drug monitoring.

positive: Clinical trials for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19: current state of play Since coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged in Wuhan, China in December 2019 and spread around the world, over 1100 clinical studies have been registered globally on clinical trials registries, including over 500 randomised controlled trials. Such rapid development and launch of clinical trials is impressive but presents challenges, including the potential for duplication and competition. There is currently no known effective treatment for COVID-19. In order to focus on those studies most likely to influence clinical practice, we summarise the 31 currently registered randomised trials with a target sample size of at least 1000 participants. We have grouped these trials into four categories: prophylaxis; treatment of outpatients with mild COVID-19; treatment of hospitalised patients with moderate COVID-19; and treatment of hospitalised patients with moderate or severe disease. The most common therapeutic agent being trialled currently is hydroxychloroquine (24 trials with potential sample size of over 25 000 participants), followed by lopinavir-ritonavir (seven trials) and remdesevir (five trials) There are many candidate drugs in pre-clinical and early phase development, and these form a pipeline for future large clinical trials if current candidate therapies prove ineffective or unsafe.

positive: Research and Development on Therapeutic Agents and Vaccines for COVID-19 and Related Human Coronavirus Diseases Since the outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease COVID-19, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, this disease has spread rapidly around the globe. Considering the potential threat of a pandemic, scientists and physicians have been racing to understand this new virus and the pathophysiology of this disease to uncover possible treatment regimens and discover effective therapeutic agents and vaccines. To support the current research and development, CAS has produced a special report to provide an overview of published scientific information with an emphasis on patents in the CAS content collection. It highlights antiviral strategies involving small molecules and biologics targeting complex molecular interactions involved in coronavirus infection and replication. The drug-repurposing effort documented herein focuses primarily on agents known to be effective against other RNA viruses including SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. The patent analysis of coronavirusrelated biologics includes therapeutic antibodies, cytokines, and nucleic acid-based therapies targeting virus gene expression as well as various types of vaccines. More than 500 patents disclose methodologies of these four biologics with the potential for treating and preventing coronavirus infections, which may be applicable to COVID-19. The information included in this report provides a strong intellectual groundwork for the ongoing development of therapeutic agents and vaccines.

positive: Does zinc supplementation enhance the clinical efficacy of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine to win today's battle against COVID-19? Currently, drug repurposing is an alternative to novel drug development for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. The antimalarial drug chloroquine (CQ) and its metabolite hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) are currently being tested in several clinical studies as potential candidates to limit SARS-CoV-2-mediated morbidity and mortality. CQ and HCQ (CQ/HCQ) inhibit pH-dependent steps of SARS-CoV-2 replication by increasing pH in intracellular vesicles and interfere with virus particle delivery into host cells. Besides direct antiviral effects, CQ/HCQ specifically target extracellular zinc to intracellular lysosomes where it interferes with RNA-dependent RNA polymerase activity and coronavirus replication. As zinc deficiency frequently occurs in elderly patients and in those with cardiovascular disease, chronic pulmonary disease, or diabetes, we hypothesize that CQ/HCQ plus zinc supplementation may be more effective in reducing COVID-19 morbidity and mortality than CQ or HCQ in monotherapy. Therefore, CQ/HCQ in combination with zinc should be considered as additional study arm for COVID-19 clinical trials.

positive: Remdesivir investigational trials in COVID-19: a critical reappraisal Abstract During outbreak of emerging disease, the most important aim is to discover an effective drug to save life. Consequently, a lot of effort are generally made by the industry to promote clinical trials with new drugs. Here we review evidence of the 8 most recent reports including 3 randomized controlled trials on the clinical efficacy of remdesivir in treating COVID-19 patient. We conclude that it is far too premature to identify remdesivir as a curative or life-saving intervention.

positive: Effectiveness and safety of antiviral or antibody treatments for coronavirus: A rapid review Background: To identify safe and effective medical countermeasures (e.g., antivirals/antibodies) to address the current outbreak of a novel coronavirus (COVID-19) Methods: Comprehensive literature searches were developed by an experienced librarian for MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and biorxiv.org/medrxiv.org; additional searches for ongoing trials and unpublished studies were conducted in clinicaltrials.gov and the Global Infectious Diseases and Epidemiology Network (GIDEON). Title/abstract and full-text screening, data abstraction, and risk of bias appraisal were carried out by single reviewers. Results: 54 studies were included in the review: three controlled trials, 10 cohort studies, seven retrospective medical record/database studies, and 34 case reports or series. These studies included patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARs, n=33), middle east respiratory syndrome (MERS, n=16), COVID-19 (n=3), and unspecified coronavirus (n=2). The most common treatment was ribavirin (n=41), followed by oseltamivir (n=10) and the combination of lopinavir/ritonavir (n=7). Additional therapies included broad spectrum antibiotics (n=30), steroids (n=39) or various interferons (n=12). No eligible studies examining monoclonal antibodies for COVID-19 were identified. One trial found that ribavirin prophylactic treatment statistically significantly reduced risk of MERS infection in people who had been exposed to the virus. Of the 21 studies reporting rates of ICU admission in hospitalized SARS or MERS patients, none reported statistically significant results in favour of or against antiviral therapies. Of the 40 studies reporting mortality rates in hospitalized SARS or MERS patients, one cohort study (MERS) and one retrospective study (SARS) found a statistically significant increase in the mortality rate for patients treated with ribavirin. Eighteen studies reported potential drug-related adverse effects including gastrointestinal symptoms, anemia, and altered liver function in patients receiving ribavirin. Conclusion: The current evidence for the effectiveness and safety of antiviral therapies for coronavirus is inconclusive and suffers from a lack of well-designed prospective trials or observational studies, preventing any treatment recommendations from being made. However, it is clear that the existing body of evidence is weighted heavily towards ribavirin (41/54 studies), which has not shown conclusive evidence of effectiveness and may cause harmful adverse events so future investigations may consider focusing on other candidates for antiviral therapy.

positive: Molecular mechanism of action of repurposed drugs and traditional Chinese medicine used for the treatment of patients infected with COVID-19: A systematic review The emergence of COVID-19 as a pandemic has resulted in the need for urgent development of vaccines and drugs and the conduction of clinical trials to fight the outbreak. Because of the time constraints associated with the development of vaccines and effective drugs, drug repurposing and other alternative treatment methods have been used to treat patients that have been infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus and have acquired COVID-19. In this systematic review, we provide an overview of the molecular mechanism of action of repurposed drugs or alternative treatment medicines used to attenuate COVID-19 disease. The research articles or grey literature, including theses, government reports, and official news online, were identified from 4 databases and 1 search engine. The full content of a total of 160 articles that fulfilled our inclusion criteria was analyzed and information about 6 drugs (ritonavir, lopinavir, oseltamivir, remdesivir, favipiravir, and chloroquine) and 4 traditional Chinese medicines (Shuang Huang Lian Kou Fu Ye, TCM combination of Bu Huan Jin Zheng Qi San and Da Yuan Yin, Xue Bi Jing Injection and Qing Fei Pai Du Tang) were extracted. All of the drug treatment options depend on the ability of the drug to inhibit the proliferation of the SARS-CoV-2 virus by binding to enzyme active sites, viral chain termination, or triggering of the molecular pathway, whereas traditional Chinese medicine has a pivotal role in triggering the inflammation pathway, such as the neuraminidase blocker, to fight the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This review provides an insight to experimental validation of drugs and alternative medicine used for the treatment and control of COVID-19.

positive: Repurposed immunomodulatory drugs for Covid-19 in pre-ICu patients - mulTi-Arm Therapeutic study in pre-ICu patients admitted with Covid-19 – Repurposed Drugs (TACTIC-R): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: To determine if a specific immunomodulatory intervention reduces progression of COVID-19-related disease to organ failure or death, compared to standard of care (SoC). TRIAL DESIGN: Randomised, parallel 3-arm (1:1:1 ratio), open-label, Phase IV platform trial of immunomodulatory therapies in patients with late stage 1 or stage 2 COVID-19-related disease, with a diagnosis based either on a positive assay or high suspicion of COVID-19 infection by clinical and/or radiological assessment. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 18 and over, with a clinical picture strongly suggestive of COVID-19-related disease (with/without a positive COVID-19 test) AND a Risk count (as defined below) >3 OR ≥3 if risk count includes “Radiographic severity score >3”. A risk count is calculated by the following features on admission (1 point for each): radiographic severity score >3, male gender, non-white ethnicity, diabetes, hypertension, neutrophils >8.0 x10(9)/L, age >40 years and CRP >40 mg/L. Patients should be considered an appropriate subject for intervention with immunomodulatory therapies in the opinion of the investigator and be able to be maintained on venous thromboembolism prophylaxis during the inpatient dosing period, according to local guidelines. The complete inclusion and exclusion criteria as detailed in the additional file 1 should be fulfilled. Patients will be enrolled prior to the need for invasive mechanical ventilation, cardiac or renal support. Participants will be recruited across multiple centres including initially at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, University Hospital of Wales, Gloucestershire Royal Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Each active comparator arm will be compared against standard of care (SoC). The immunomodulatory drugs were selected from a panel of licenced candidates by a drug evaluation committee, which considered potential efficacy, potential toxicity, scalability and novelty of each strategy. The initial active arms comprise baricitinib and ravulizumab. Baricitinib will be given 4 mg orally (once daily (OD)) on days 1-14 or until day of discharge. The dose will be reduced to 2 mg OD for patients aged > 75 years and those with an estimated Cockcroft Gault creatinine clearance of 30-60 ml/min. Ravulizumab will be administered intravenously once according to the licensed weight-based dosing regimen (see Additional file 1). Each active arm will be compared with standard of care alone. No comparisons will be made between active arms in this platform trial. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome is the incidence (from baseline up to Day 14) of any one of the events (whichever comes first): death, invasive mechanical ventilation, extra corporeal membrane oxygenation, cardiovascular organ support (inotropes or balloon pump), or renal failure (estimated Cockcroft Gault creatinine clearance <15ml/min). RANDOMISATION: Eligible patients will be randomised using a central web-based randomisation service (Sealed Envelope) in a 1:1:1 ratio, stratified by site to one of the treatment arms or SoC. BLINDING (MASKING): This is an open-label trial. Data analysis will not be blinded. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): There is no fixed sample size for this study. Serial interim analyses will be triggered by an Independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC), including analysis after 125 patients are recruited to each arm, 375 in total assuming 3 arms. Additional interim analyses are projected after 229 patients per arm, and potentially then after 469 per arm, but additional analyses may be triggered by the IDMC. TRIAL STATUS: TACTIC-R Protocol version number 2.0 date May 20, 2020, recruitment began May 7, 2020 and the end trial will be the date 18 months after the last patient’s last visit. The recruitment end date cannot yet be accurately predicted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered on EU Clinical Trials Register EudraCT Number: 2020-001354-22 Registered: 6 May 2020 It was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04390464) and on ISRCTN (ISRCTN11188345) FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Profiles of COVID-19 clinical trials in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry The COVID-19 pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is a global public health crisis since its initial reports in China. Since no effective vaccine or drug has been developed to treat and combat the COVID-19, the current approaches for clinical management focus on supportive care. There is a pressing need for evidence-based interventions to address the devastating clinical and public health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Chinese scientists supported by private and government resources have adopted extensive efforts to identify effective drugs against the virus. To date, a large number of clinical trials addressing various aspects of COVID-19 have been registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR), including more than 200 interventional studies. Under such an urgent circumstance, the scope and quality of these clinical studies vary significantly. Hence, this review aims to make a comprehensive analysis on the profiles of COVID-19 clinical trials registered in the ChiCTR, including a wide range of characteristics. Our findings will provide a useful summary on these clinical studies, since most of these studies will encounter major challenges from the design to completion. It will be a long road for the outcomes of these studies to be published and international collaboration will help the ultimate goals of developing new vaccines and antiviral drugs. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04252664.. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04257656..

positive: Reducing mortality and morbidity in patients with severe COVID-19 disease by advancing ongoing trials of Mesenchymal Stromal (stem) Cell (MSC) therapy - achieving global consensus and visibility for cellular host-directed therapies Abstract As of May 11th 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the novel, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused 274,361 deaths out of 3,917,366 (7% case fatality rate). As with the two other novel coronavirus zoonotic diseases of humans, SARS and MERS, no specific treatments for reducing mortality or morbidity are yet available. Deaths from COVID-19 will continue to rise globally until effective and appropriate treatments and vaccines are found. With no specific treatments being available for treating COVID-19 patients, the global medical, scientific, pharma and funding communities have rapidly initiated over 500 COVID-19 clinical on a range of antiviral drug regimens, biologics, repurposed drugs in various combinations. We focus this editorial specifically on the background to, and the rationale for, the use and evaluation of mesenchymal stromal (Stem) cells (MSCs) in treatment trials of patients with severe COVID-19 disease. This is an area which has been eclipsed by the current emphasis the huge number of trials evaluating new anti-viral drugs, repurposed drugs and combinations thereof. MSCs should also be trialed for treatment of severe cases of MERS where mortality rates are upto 34% and MERS-CoV remains a WHO priority Blueprint pathogen. It’s about time funding agencies now invest more into development MSCs per se and other host-directed therapies in combination with other therapeutic interventions. MSC therapy could turn out to be an important contribution to bringing an end to the high COVID-19 and MERS death rates.

positive: Current pharmacological treatments for COVID-19: What's next? Since December 2019 SARS-Cov-2 was found responsible for the disease COVID-19, which has spread worldwide. No specific therapies/vaccines are yet available for the treatment of COVID-19. Drug repositioning may offer a strategy and a number of drugs have been repurposed, including lopinavir/ritonavir, remdesivir, favipiravir and tocilizumab. This paper describes the main pharmacological properties of such drugs administered to patients with COVID-19, focusing on their antiviral, immune-modulatory and/or anti-inflammatory actions. Where available, data from clinical trials involving patients with COVID-19 are reported. Preliminary clinical trials seem to support their benefit. However, such drugs in COVID-19 patients have peculiar safety profiles. Thus, adequate clinical trials are necessary for these compounds. Nevertheless, while waiting for effective preventive measures i.e. vaccines, many clinical trials on drugs belonging to different therapeutic classes are currently underway. Their results will help us in defining the best way to treat COVID-19 and reducing its symptoms and complications.

positive: Emerging pharmacotherapies for COVID-19 Novel Corona-virus Disease 2019 (nCOVID 19) is caused by a novel virulent corona virus and leads to potentially fatal virulent pneumonia and severe respiratory distress syndrome. It was initially declared as public health emergency if international concern by WHO followed by Pandemic on 12(th) March 2020. As of 10(th) April 2020, more than 1.5 million people are affected globally with around 95000 deaths. Vaccines for this deadly virus are currently under development and many drugs used for other indications have been repurposed and investigated for prophylaxis and treatment of COVID 19. As per SOLIDARITY trial by WHO, some of the most promising candidates include chloroquine phosphate and hydroxychloroquine which are anti-malarial medications, Remdesivir, Lopinavir-Ritonavir combination with or without interferon which are anti-HIV drugs and convalescent plasma therapy. The current evidence of efficacy and ongoing research has been elaborated in the article. Besides, there has been evidence regarding inflammatory pathogenesis of this virus leading to cytokine storm in susceptible individuals. Thus, anti-proinflammatory cytokine drugs like Anakinra and Tocilizumab are undergoing multiple trials and some results are encouraging. Similarly, use of anti-inflammatory cytokines like IL-37 and IL-38 is hypothesised to be useful and is under research. The situation is still evolving and hence there is yet no definitive therapy but to conclude the use of repurposed medications can be a boon till a definitive therapy and vaccines are developed.

positive: An evidence-based framework for priority clinical research questions for COVID-19 Background: On 31 December, 2019, the World Health Organization China Country Office was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown aetiology. Since then, there have been over 75 000 cases globally of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), 2000 deaths, and over 14 000 cases recovered. Outbreaks of novel agents represent opportunities for clinical research to inform real-time public health action. In 2018, we conducted a systematic review to identify priority research questions for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-related coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome-related coronavirus (MERS-CoV). Here, we review information available on COVID-19 and provide an evidenced-based framework for priority clinical research in the current outbreak. Methods: Three bibliographic databases were searched to identify clinical studies published on SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV in the outbreak setting. Studies were grouped thematically according to clinical research questions addressed. In February 2020, available information on COVID19 was reviewed and compared to the results of the SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV systematic review. Results: From the research objectives for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, ten themes in the literature were identified: Clinical characterisation, prognosis, diagnosis, clinical management, viral pathogenesis, epidemiological characterisation, infection prevention and control/transmission, susceptibility, psychosocial, and aetiology. For COVID19, some information on clinical presentation, diagnostic testing, and aetiology is available but many clinical research gaps have yet to be filled. Conclusions: Based on a systematic review of other severe coronaviruses, we summarise the state of clinical research for COVID-19, highlight the research gaps, and provide recommendations for the implementation of standardised protocols. Data based on internationally standardised protocols will inform clinical practice real-time.

positive: Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19: results of a randomized clinical trial Aims: Studies have indicated that chloroquine (CQ) shows antagonism against COVID-19 in vitro. However, evidence regarding its effects in patients is limited. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. Main methods: From February 4 to February 28, 2020, 62 patients suffering from COVID-19 were diagnosed and admitted to Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University. All participants were randomized in a parallel-group trial, 31 patients were assigned to receive an additional 5-day HCQ (400 mg/d) treatment, Time to clinical recovery (TTCR), clinical characteristics, and radiological results were assessed at baseline and 5 days after treatment to evaluate the effect of HCQ. Key findings: For the 62 COVID-19 patients, 46.8% (29 of 62) were male and 53.2% (33 of 62) were female, the mean age was 44.7 (15.3) years. No difference in the age and sex distribution between the control group and the HCQ group. But for TTCR, the body temperature recovery time and the cough remission time were significantly shortened in the HCQ treatment group. Besides, a larger proportion of patients with improved pneumonia in the HCQ treatment group (80.6%, 25 of 31) compared with the control group (54.8%, 17 of 31). Notably, all 4 patients progressed to severe illness that occurred in the control group. However, there were 2 patients with mild adverse reactions in the HCQ treatment group. Significance: Among patients with COVID-19, the use of HCQ could significantly shorten TTCR and promote the absorption of pneumonia.

positive: Overwhelming COVID-19 Clinical Trials: Call for Prospective Meta-analysis Abstract In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, an overwhelming number of clinical trials have been registered to test a variety of preventive and therapeutic strategies, as comprehensively summarized by Lythgoe and Middleton [1]. Under such an urgent circumstance, the quality of these clinical studies is inevitably of serious concerns. Here, we propose applying prospective meta-analysis approaches to maximize their values, and to minimize research waste and bias of the ongoing and future COVID-19 trials.

positive: The potential of drug repositioning as a short-term strategy for the control and treatment of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2): a systematic review The novel human coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of COVID-19, has quickly become a threat to the public health and economy worldwide. Despite the severity of some cases, there are no current pathogen-specific antivirals available to treat the disease. Therefore, many studies have focused on the evaluation of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity of clinically available drugs. Here, we conducted a systematic review to describe the drug repositioning strategy against SARS-CoV-2 and to discuss the clinical impact of this approach in the current pandemic context. The systematic review was performed on March 23, 2020, using PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Biblioteca Virtual de Saúde (BVS). The data were summarized in tables and critically analyzed. After the database search, 12 relevant studies were identified as eligible for the review. Among the drugs reported in these studies, 57 showed some evidence of antiviral activity. Antivirals, especially antiretrovirals, are the main class of therapeutic agents evaluated against COVID-19. Moreover, studies have reported the anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity of antitumor (16%; 9/57), antimalarial (7%, 4/57), and antibacterial (5%; 3/57) agents. Additionally, seven pharmacological agents (chloroquine, tetrandrine, umifenovir (arbidol), carrimycin, damageprevir, lopinavir/ritonavir) are in phase IV of clinical trials. Due to the evidence of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity of various clinically available agents, drug repositioning stands out as a promising strategy for a short-term response in the fight against the novel coronavirus. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00705-020-04693-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

positive: A systematic review on use of aminoquinolines for the therapeutic management of COVID-19: Efficacy, safety and clinical trials Recent global outbreak of the pandemic caused by coronavirus (COVID-19) emphasizes the urgent need for novel antiviral therapeutics. It can be supplemented by utilization of efficient and validated drug discovery approaches such as drug repurposing/repositioning. The well reported and clinically used anti-malarial aminoquinoline drugs (chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine) have shown potential to be repurposed to control the present pandemic by inhibition of COVID-19. The review elaborates the mechanism of action, safety (side effects, adverse effects, toxicity) and worldwide clinical trials for chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine to benefit the clinicians, medicinal chemist, pharmacologist actively involved in the management of COVID-19 infection.

positive: A data-driven drug repositioning framework discovered a potential therapeutic agent targeting COVID-19 The global spread of SARS-CoV-2 requires an urgent need to find effective therapeutics for the treatment of COVID-19. We developed a data-driven drug repositioning framework, which applies both machine learning and statistical analysis approaches to systematically integrate and mine large-scale knowledge graph, literature and transcriptome data to discover the potential drug candidates against SARS-CoV-2. The retrospective study using the past SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV data demonstrated that our machine learning based method can successfully predict effective drug candidates against a specific coronavirus. Our in silico screening followed by wet-lab validation indicated that a poly-ADP-ribose polymerase 1 (PARP1) inhibitor, CVL218, currently in Phase I clinical trial, may be repurposed to treat COVID-19. Our in vitro assays revealed that CVL218 can exhibit effective inhibitory activity against SARS-CoV-2 replication without obvious cytopathic effect. In addition, we showed that CVL218 is able to suppress the CpG-induced IL-6 production in peripheral blood mononuclear cells, suggesting that it may also have anti-inflammatory effect that is highly relevant to the prevention immunopathology induced by SARS-CoV-2 infection. Further pharmacokinetic and toxicokinetic evaluation in rats and monkeys showed a high concentration of CVL218 in lung and observed no apparent signs of toxicity, indicating the appealing potential of this drug for the treatment of the pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection. Moreover, molecular docking simulation suggested that CVL218 may bind to the N-terminal domain of nucleocapsid (N) protein of SARS-CoV-2, providing a possible model to explain its antiviral action. We also proposed several possible mechanisms to explain the antiviral activities of PARP1 inhibitors against SARS-CoV-2, based on the data present in this study and previous evidences reported in the literature. In summary, the PARP1 inhibitor CVL218 discovered by our data-driven drug repositioning framework can serve as a potential therapeutic agent for the treatment of COVID-19.

positive: Safety and immunogenicity of an anti-Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus DNA vaccine: a phase 1, open-label, single-arm, dose-escalation trial BACKGROUND: Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) coronavirus causes a highly fatal lower-respiratory tract infection. There are as yet no licensed MERS vaccines or therapeutics. This study (WRAIR-2274) assessed the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of the GLS-5300 MERS coronavirus DNA vaccine in healthy adults. METHODS: This study was a phase 1, open-label, single-arm, dose-escalation study of GLS-5300 done at the Walter Reed Army Institute for Research Clinical Trials Center (Silver Spring, MD, USA). We enrolled healthy adults aged 18–50 years; exclusion criteria included previous infection or treatment of MERS. Eligible participants were enrolled sequentially using a dose-escalation protocol to receive 0·67 mg, 2 mg, or 6 mg GLS-5300 administered by trained clinical site staff via a single intramuscular 1 mL injection at each vaccination at baseline, week 4, and week 12 followed immediately by co-localised intramuscular electroporation. Enrolment into the higher dose groups occurred after a safety monitoring committee reviewed the data following vaccination of the first five participants at the previous lower dose in each group. The primary outcome of the study was safety, assessed in all participants who received at least one study treatment and for whom post-dose study data were available, during the vaccination period with follow-up through to 48 weeks after dose 3. Safety was measured by the incidence of adverse events; administration site reactions and pain; and changes in safety laboratory parameters. The secondary outcome was immunogenicity. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT02670187) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Feb 17 and July 22, 2016, we enrolled 75 individuals and allocated 25 each to 0·67 mg, 2 mg, or 6 mg GLS-5300. No vaccine-associated serious adverse events were reported. The most common adverse events were injection-site reactions, reported in 70 participants (93%) of 75. Overall, 73 participants (97%) of 75 reported at least one solicited adverse event; the most common systemic symptoms were headache (five [20%] with 0·67 mg, 11 [44%] with 2 mg, and seven [28%] with 6 mg), and malaise or fatigue (five [20%] with 0·67 mg, seven [28%] with 2 mg, and two [8%] with 6 mg). The most common local solicited symptoms were administration site pain (23 [92%] with all three doses) and tenderness (21 [84%] with all three doses). Most solicited symptoms were reported as mild (19 [76%] with 0·67 mg, 20 [80%] with 2 mg, and 17 [68%] with 6 mg) and were self-limiting. Unsolicited symptoms were reported for 56 participants (75%) of 75 and were deemed treatment-related for 26 (35%). The most common unsolicited adverse events were infections, occurring in 27 participants (36%); six (8%) were deemed possibly related to study treatment. There were no laboratory abnormalities of grade 3 or higher that were related to study treatment; laboratory abnormalities were uncommon, except for 15 increases in creatine phosphokinase in 14 participants (three participants in the 0·67 mg group, three in the 2 mg group, and seven in the 6 mg group). Of these 15 increases, five (33%) were deemed possibly related to study treatment (one in the 2 mg group and four in the 6 mg group). Seroconversion measured by S1-ELISA occurred in 59 (86%) of 69 participants and 61 (94%) of 65 participants after two and three vaccinations, respectively. Neutralising antibodies were detected in 34 (50%) of 68 participants. T-cell responses were detected in 47 (71%) of 66 participants after two vaccinations and in 44 (76%) of 58 participants after three vaccinations. There were no differences in immune responses between dose groups after 6 weeks. At week 60, vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses were detected in 51 (77%) of 66 participants and 42 (64%) of 66, respectively. INTERPRETATION: The GLS-5300 MERS coronavirus vaccine was well tolerated with no vaccine-associated serious adverse events. Immune responses were dose-independent, detected in more than 85% of participants after two vaccinations, and durable through 1 year of follow-up. The data support further development of the GLS-5300 vaccine, including additional studies to test the efficacy of GLS-5300 in a region endemic for MERS coronavirus. FUNDING: US Department of the Army and GeneOne Life Science.

positive: Ethical rationale for better coordination of clinical research on COVID-19 Hundreds of clinical trials of potential treatments and vaccines for the “coronavirus 19 disease” (COVID-19) have been set up in record time. This is a remarkable reaction to the global pandemic, but the absence of a global coordination of clinical research efforts raises serious ethical concerns. Some COVID-19 patients might carry the burden of clinical trial involvement even though their trial cannot be completed as researchers are competing for patients. A shortage of medicines can occur when existing drugs are diverted for clinical trials. Research ethics committees are overburdened with multiple applications. A multitude of trials can also overstretch medical staff and risk neglecting non-COVID-19 patients. And finally, conflicting conclusions from a multitude of heterogeneous trials might lead to delays in public health decisions about life-saving issues. These challenges are made worse by the unpredictable evolution of epidemics, the active involvement of political decision-makers in scientific issues and the pressure of social media globally. While freedom to conduct research must be safeguarded, global health emergency situations would greatly benefit from effective international coordination mechanisms for clinical research.

positive: Convalescent Plasma for COVID-19. A randomized clinical trial Background After recovery from COVID-19, most patients have anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies. Their convalescent plasma could be an inexpensive and widely available treatment for COVID-19. Methods The Convalescent-plasma-for-COVID (ConCOVID) study was a randomized trial comparing convalescent plasma with standard of care therapy in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in the Netherlands. Patients were randomized 1:1 and received 300ml of plasma with anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody titers of at least 1:80. The primary endpoint was day-60 mortality and key secondary endpoints were hospital stay and WHO 8-point disease severity scale improvement on day 15. Results The trial was halted prematurely after 86 patients were enrolled. Although symptomatic for only 10 days (IQR 6-15) at the time of inclusion, 53 of 66 patients tested had anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at baseline. A SARS-CoV-2 plaque reduction neutralization test showed neutralizing antibodies in 44 of the 56 (79%) patients tested with median titers comparable to the 115 donors (1:160 vs 1:160, p=0.40). These observations caused concerns about the potential benefit of convalescent plasma in the study population and after discussion with the data safety monitoring board, the study was discontinued. No difference in mortality (p=0.95), hospital stay (p=0.68) or day-15 disease severity (p=0.58) was observed between plasma treated patients and patients on standard of care. Conclusion Most COVID-19 patients already have high neutralizing antibody titers at hospital admission. Screening for antibodies and prioritizing convalescent plasma to risk groups with recent symptom onset will be key to identify patients that may benefit from convalescent plasma. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04342182

positive: Research methodology and characteristics of journal articles with original data, preprint articles and registered clinical trial protocols about COVID-19 BACKGROUND: The research community reacted rapidly to the emergence of COVID-19. We aimed to assess characteristics of journal articles, preprint articles, and registered trial protocols about COVID-19 and its causal agent SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We analyzed characteristics of journal articles with original data indexed by March 19, 2020, in World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 collection, articles published on preprint servers medRxiv and bioRxiv by April 3, 2010. Additionally, we assessed characteristics of clinical trials indexed in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) by April 7, 2020. RESULTS: Among the first 2118 articles on COVID-19 published in scholarly journals, 533 (25%) contained original data. The majority was published by authors from China (75%) and funded by Chinese sponsors (75%); a quarter was published in the Chinese language. Among 312 articles that self-reported study design, the most frequent were retrospective studies (N = 88; 28%) and case reports (N = 86; 28%), analyzing patients’ characteristics (38%). Median Journal Impact Factor of journals where articles were published was 5.099. Among 1088 analyzed preprint articles, the majority came from authors affiliated in China (51%) and were funded by sources in China (46%). Less than half reported study design; the majority were modeling studies (62%), and analyzed transmission/risk/prevalence (43%). Of the 927 analyzed registered trials, the majority were interventional (58%). Half were already recruiting participants. The location for the conduct of the trial in the majority was China (N = 522; 63%). The median number of planned participants was 140 (range: 1 to 15,000,000). Registered intervention trials used highly heterogeneous primary outcomes and tested highly heterogeneous interventions; the most frequently studied interventions were hydroxychloroquine (N = 39; 7.2%) and chloroquine (N = 16; 3%). CONCLUSIONS: Early articles on COVID-19 were predominantly retrospective case reports and modeling studies. The diversity of outcomes used in intervention trial protocols indicates the urgent need for defining a core outcome set for COVID-19 research. Chinese scholars had a head start in reporting about the new disease, but publishing articles in Chinese may limit their global reach. Mapping publications with original data can help finding gaps that will help us respond better to the new public health emergency.

positive: Clinical Performance of SARS-CoV-2 Molecular Testing Molecular testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the gold standard for diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the test clinical performance is poorly understood. From 3/10/2020-5/1/2020 NewYork-Presbyterian laboratories performed 27,377 SARS-CoV-2 molecular assays from 22,338 patients. Repeat testing was performed in 3,432 patients, of which 2,413 had negative and 1,019 had positive first day results. Repeat-tested patients were more likely to be older, male, African-American or Hispanic, and to have severe disease. Among the patients with initially negative results, 18.6% became positive upon repeat-testing. Only 58.1% of any-time positive patients had a result of "detected" on the first test. The clinical sensitivity of COVID-19 molecular assays is estimated between 66.2% and 95.6%, depending on the unknown number of false negative results in single-tested patients. Conversion to a negative result is unlikely to occur before 15 to 20 days after initial testing or 20-30 days after the onset of symptoms, with 50% conversion occurring at 28 days after initial testing. Forty-nine initially-positive patients converted to negative and then back to positive in subsequent days. Conversion from first day negative to positive results increased linearly with each day of testing, reaching 25% probability in 20 days. In summary, our study provides estimates of the clinical performance of SARS-CoV-2 molecular assays and suggests time frames for appropriate repeat testing, namely 15 to 20 days after a positive test and the same or next 2 days after a negative test in a patient with high suspicion for COVID-19.

positive: Should we stimulate or suppress immune responses in COVID-19? Cytokine and anti-cytokine interventions Abstract The coronavirus disease-19 pandemic (COVID-19), which appeared in China in December 2019 and rapidly spread throughout the world, has forced clinicians and scientists to take up extraordinary challenges. This unprecedented situation led to the inception of numerous fundamental research protocols and many clinical trials. It quickly became apparent that although COVID-19, in the vast majority of cases, was a benign disease, it could also develop a severe form with sometimes fatal outcomes. Cytokines are central to the pathophysiology of COVID-19; while some of them are beneficial (type-I interferon, interleukin-7), others appear detrimental (interleukin-1β, -6, and TNF-α) particularly in the context of the so-called cytokine storm. Yet another characteristic of the disease has emerged: concomitant immunodeficiency, notably involving impaired type-I interferon response, and lymphopenia. This review provides an overview of current knowledge on COVID-19 immunopathology. We discuss the defective type-I IFN response, the theoretical role of IL-7 to restore lymphocyte repertoire, as well as we mention the two patterns observed in severe COVID-19 (i.e. interleukin-1β-driven macrophage activation syndrome vs. interleukin-6-driven immune dysregulation). Next, reviewing current evidence drawn from clinical trials, we examine a number of cytokine and anti-cytokine therapies, including interleukin-1, -6, and TNF inhibitors, as well as less targeted therapies, such as corticosteroids, chloroquine, or JAK inhibitors.

positive: Combating devastating COVID-19 by drug repurposing Despite advances in drug discovery, viral infections remain a major challenge for scientists across the globe. The recent pandemic of COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019), caused by a viral infection with SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2), has created a disastrous situation all over the world. As no drugs are available to treat this life-threatening disease and the mortality rate due to COVID-19 is high, there is an utmost need to attempt to treat the infection using drug repurposing. Some countries are against the use of these drugs because of adverse effects associated with drug repurposing and lack of statistically significant clinical data, but they have been found to be effective in some countries to treat COVID-19 patients (off-label/investigational). This article emphasises possible drug candidates in the treatment of COVID-19. Most of these drugs were found to be effective in in vitro studies. There is a need to re-assess in vitro data and to carry out randomised clinical trials. Further investigations of these drugs are recommended on a priority basis.

positive: A snapshot of the ongoing clinical research on COVID-19 The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presents an unprecedented challenge to rapidly develop new diagnostic, preventive and therapeutic strategies. Currently, thousands of new COVID-19 patients are quickly enrolled in clinical studies. We aimed to investigate the characteristics of the COVID-19 studies registered in ClinicalTrials.gov and report the extent to which they have incorporated features that are desirable for generating high-quality evidence. On April 28, 2020, a total of 945 studies on COVID-19 have been registered in ClinicalTrials.gov; 586 studies are interventional (62.0%), the most frequent allocation scheme is the parallel group assignment (437; 74.6%), they are open-label and the most common primary purpose is the research on treatment. Too many of the ongoing interventional studies have a small expected sample size and may not generate credible evidence at completion. This might lead to a delayed recognition of effective therapies that are urgently needed, and a waste of time and resources. In the COVID-19 pandemic era, it is crucial that the adoption of new diagnostic, preventive and therapeutic strategies is based upon evidence coming from well-designed, adequately powered and carefully conducted clinical trials.

positive: Antiviral treatment of COVID-19 Currently, there is not any specific effective antiviral treatment for COVID-19. Although most of the COVID-19 patients have mild or moderate courses, up to 5%–10% can have severe, potentially life threatening course, there is an urgent need for effective drugs. Optimized supportive care remains the mainstay of therapy. There have been more than 300 clinical trials going on, various antiviral and immunomodulating agents are in various stages of evaluation for COVID-19 in those trials and some of them will be published in the next couple of months. Despite the urgent need to find an effective antiviral treatment for COVID-19 through randomized controlled studies, certain agents are being used all over the world based on either in-vitro or extrapolated evidence or observational studies. The most frequently used agents both in Turkey and all over the world including chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, favipiravir and remdesivir will be reviewed here .Nitazoxanide and ivermectin were also included in this review as they have recently been reported to have an activity against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro and are licensed for the treatment of some other human infections.

positive: Norwegian Coronavirus Disease 2019 (NO COVID-19) Pragmatic Open label Study to assess early use of hydroxychloroquine sulphate in moderately severe hospitalised patients with coronavirus disease 2019: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The hypothesis of the study is that treatment with hydroxychloroquine sulphate in hospitalised patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is safe and will accelerate the virological clearance rate for patients with moderately severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) when compared to standard care. Furthermore, we hypothesize that early treatment with hydroxychloroquine sulphate is associated with more rapid resolve of clinical symptoms as assessed by the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2), decreased admission rate to intensive care units and mortality, and improvement in protein biomarker profiles (C-reactive protein, markers of renal and hepatic injury, and established cardiac biomarkers like cardiac troponin and B-type natriuretic peptide). TRIAL DESIGN: The study is a two-arm, open label, pragmatic randomised controlled group sequential adaptive trial designed to assess the effect on viral loads and clinical outcome of hydroxychloroquine sulphate therapy in addition to standard care compared to standard care alone in patients with established Covid-19. By utilizing resources already paid for by the hospitals (physicians and nurses in daily clinical practice), this pragmatic trial can include a larger number of patients over a short period of time and at a lower cost than studies utilizing traditional randomized controlled trial designs with an external study organization. The pragmatic approach will enable swift initiation of randomisation and allocation to treatment. PARTICIPANTS: Patients will be recruited from all inpatients at Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. Electronic real-time surveillance of laboratory reports from the Department of Microbiology will be examined regularly for SARS-CoV-2 positive subjects. All of the following conditions must apply to the prospective patient at screening prior to inclusion: (1) Hospitalisation; (2) Adults 18 years or older; (3) Moderately severe Covid-19 disease (NEWS2 of 6 or less); (4) SARS-CoV-2 positive nasopharyngeal swab; (5) Expected time of hospitalisation > 48 hours; and (6) Signed informed consent must be obtained and documented according to Good Clinical Practice guidelines of the International Conference on Harmonization, and national/local regulations. Patients will be excluded from participation in the study if they meet any of the following criteria: (1) Requiring intensive care unit admission at screening; (2) History of psoriasis; (3) Known adverse reaction to hydroxychloroquine sulphate; (4) Pregnancy; or (5) Prolonged corrected QT interval (>450 ms). Clinical data, including standard hospital biochemistry, medical therapy, vital signs, NEWS2, and microbiology results (including blood culture results and reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction [RT-PCR] for other upper airway viruses), will be automatically extracted from the hospital electronic records and merged with the study specific database. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Included patients will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to (1) standard care with the addition of 400 mg hydroxychloroquine sulphate (Plaquenil(TM)) twice daily for seven days or (2) standard care alone. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary endpoint of the study is the rate of decline in SARS-CoV-2 viral load in oropharyngeal samples as assessed by RT-PCR in samples collected at baseline, 48 and 96 hours after randomization and administration of drug for the intervention arm. Secondary endpoints include change in NEWS2 at 96 hours after randomisation, admission to intensive care unit, mortality (in-hospital, and at 30 and 90 days), duration of hospital admission, clinical status on a 7-point ordinal scale 14 days after randomization ([1] Death [2] Hospitalised, on invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [3] Hospitalised, on non-invasive ventilation or high flow oxygen devices [4] Hospitalized, requiring supplemental oxygen [5] Hospitalised, not requiring supplemental oxygen [6] Not hospitalized, but unable to resume normal activities [7] Not hospitalised, with resumption of normal activities), and improvement in protein biomarker profiles (C-reactive protein, markers of renal and hepatic injury, and established cardiac biomarkers like cardiac troponin and B-type natriuretic peptide) at 96 hours after randomization. RANDOMISATION: Eligible patients will be allocated in a 1:1 ratio, using a computer randomisation procedure. The allocation sequence has been prepared by an independent statistician. BLINDING (MASKING): Open label randomised controlled pragmatic trial without blinding, no active or placebo control. The virologist assessing viral load in the oropharyngeal samples and the statistician responsible for analysis of the data will be blinded to the treatment allocation for the statistical analyses. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMIZED (SAMPLE SIZE): This is a group sequential adaptive trial where analyses are planned after 51, 101, 151 and 202 completed patients, with a maximum sample size of 202 patients (101 patients allocated to intervention and standard care and 101 patients allocated to standard care alone). TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 1.3 (March 26, 2020). Recruitment of first patient on March 26, 2020, and 51 patients were included as per April 28, 2020. Study recruitment is anticipated to be completed by July 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04316377. Trial registered March 20, 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Off-Label Therapies for COVID-19-Are We All In This Together?

positive: Favipiravir for treating novel coronavirus (COVID-19) patients: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials Introduction An outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) was reported in Wuhan, China in mid-December 2019, and declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11, 2020. Due to the unknown nature of the disease and the lack of specific drugs, several potential treatments were used for patients. This systematic review and meta-analysis will evaluate studies of the effects of Favipiravir in COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods and analysis We will search electronic databases including LitCovid hub, PubMed, Scopus, ISI web of Sciences, Cochrane, and Embase using keywords related to COVID-19 and Favipiravir. We will search the reference lists of all included studies and reviews. We will also search for clinical trial registries, such as clinicaltrial.gov for the ongoing clinical trials. Two investigators (MAZ and SH) will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full-text of included studies based on eligibility criteria. These investigators will also independently extract data and appraise the quality of studies. All potential discrepancies will be resolved through consultation with the third reviewer. Data synthesis will be conducted using the Review Manager software (version 5.3) or CMA (version 2). Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed using a standard I2 test. A funnel plot, Egger test, and Begg test will be used for asymmetry to explore possible publication bias. Ethics and dissemination The findings of this systematic review with proportional meta-analysis will help to identify the safety and efficacy of Favipiravir for COVID-19 patients. Knowledge gained from this research will also assist physicians in selecting better treatment options and developing a guideline in this field.

positive: Vaccines for SARS-CoV-2: Lessons from Other Coronavirus Strains. The emergence of the strain of coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) and its impact on global health have made imperative the development of effective and safe vaccines for this lethal strain. SARS-CoV-2 now adds to the list of coronavirus diseases that have threatened global health, along with the SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) and MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome) coronaviruses that emerged in 2002/2003 and 2012, respectively. As of April 2020, no vaccine is commercially available for these coronavirus strains. Nevertheless, the knowledge obtained from the vaccine development efforts for MERS and SARS can be of high value for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019). Here, we review the past and ongoing vaccine development efforts for clinically relevant coronavirus strains with the intention that this information helps in the development of effective and safe vaccines for COVID-19. In addition, information from naturally exposed individuals and animal models to coronavirus strains is described for the same purpose of helping into the development of effective vaccines against COVID-19.

positive: Impact of corticosteroid therapy on outcomes of persons with SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, or MERS-CoV infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis We performed a meta-analysis to determine safety and efficacy of corticosteroids in SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV infections. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, WanFang Chinese database, and ZhiWang Chinese database using Boolean operators and search terms covering SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, OR MERS-CoV AND corticosteroids to find appropriate studies. Review Manager 5.3 was used to analyze results of meta-analysis. Observational studies were analyzed for quality using the modified Newcastle–Ottawa scale and randomized clinical trials, using the Jadad scale. Subjects were divided into those with severe-only and other (severe and not severe) cohorts based on published criteria. Efficacy endpoints studied included mortality, hospitalization duration, rates of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, use of mechanical ventilation, and a composite endpoint (death, ICU admission, or mechanical ventilation). We included 11 reports including 10 cohort studies and 1 randomized clinical trial involving 5249 subjects (2003–2020). Two discussed the association of corticosteroids and virus clearing and 10 explored how corticosteroids impacted mortality, hospitalization duration, use of mechanical ventilation, and a composite endpoint. Corticosteroid use was associated with delayed virus clearing with a mean difference (MD) = 3.78 days (95% confidence Interval [CI] = 1.16, 6.41 days; I(2) = 0%). There was no significant reduction in deaths with relative Risk Ratio (RR) = 1.07 (90% CI = 0.81; 1.42; I(2) = 80%). Hospitalization duration was prolonged and use of mechanical ventilation increased. In conclusion, corticosteroid use in subjects with SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV infections delayed virus clearing and did not convincingly improve survival, reduce hospitalization duration or ICU admission rate and/or use of mechanical ventilation. There were several adverse effects. Because of a preponderance of observational studies in the dataset and selection and publication biases our conclusions, especially regarding SARS-CoV-2, need confirmation in a randomized clinical trial. In the interim we suggest caution using corticosteroids in persons with COVID-19.

positive: Clinical Outcomes and Plasma Concentrations of Baloxavir Marboxil and Favipiravir in COVID-19 Patients: an Exploratory Randomized, Controlled Trial Background: Effective antiviral drugs for COVID-19 are still lacking. This study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes and plasma concentrations of baloxavir marboxil and favipiravir in COVID-19 patients. Methods: Favipiravir and baloxavir acid were evaluated for their antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro before the trial initiation. We conducted an exploratory trial with 3 arms involving hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19. Patients were randomized assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio into baloxavir marboxil group, favipiravir group, and control group. The primary outcome was the percentage of subjects with viral negative by Day 14 and the time from randomization to clinical improvement. Virus load reduction, blood drug concentration and clinical presentation were also observed. The trial was registered with Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR 2000029544). Results: Baloxavir showed antiviral activity in vitro with the half-maximal effective concentration (EC50) of 5.48 M comparable to arbidol and lopinavir, but favipiravir did not demonstrate significant antiviral activity up to 100 M. Thirty patients were enrolled. The percentage of patients who turned viral negative after 14-day treatment was 70%, 77%, and 100% in the baloxavir, favipiravir, and control group respectively, with the medians of time from randomization to clinical improvement was 14, 14 and 15 days, respectively. One reason for the lack of virological effect and clinical benefits may be due to insufficient concentrations of these drugs relative to their antiviral activities. Conclusions: Our findings do not support that adding either baloxavir or favipiravir under the trial dosages to the existing standard treatment.

positive: Review of safety and minimum pricing of nitazoxanide for potential treatment of COVID-19 BACKGROUND: Many treatments are being assessed for repurposing to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). One drug that has shown promising results in vitro is nitazoxanide. Unlike other postulated drugs, nitazoxanide shows a high ratio of maximum plasma concentration (C(max)), after 1 day of 500 mg twice daily (BD), to the concentration required to inhibit 50% replication (EC(50)) of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (C(max ): EC(50 )roughly equal to 14:1). As such, it is important to investigate the safety of nitazoxanide for further trials. Furthermore, treatments for COVID-19 should be cheap to promote global access, but prices of many drugs are far higher than the costs of production. We aimed to conduct a review of the safety of nitazoxanide for any prior indication and calculate its minimum costs of production. METHODS: A review of nitazoxanide clinical research was conducted using EMBASE and MEDLINE databases, supplemented by ClinicalTrials.gov. We searched for phase 2 or 3 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing nitazoxanide with placebo or active control for 5–14 days in participants experiencing acute infections of any kind. Data extracted were grade 1–4 and serious adverse events (AEs). Data were also extracted on gastrointestinal (GI) AEs, as well as hepatorenal and cardiovascular effects. Active pharmaceutical ingredient cost data from 2016 to 2019 were extracted from the Panjiva database and adjusted for 5% loss during production, costs of excipients, formulation, a 10% profit margin and tax. Two dosages, at 500 mg BD and a higher dose of 1100 mg three times daily (TDS), were considered. Our estimated costs were compared with publicly available list prices from a selection of countries. RESULTS: Nine RCTs of nitazoxanide were identified for inclusion. These RCTs accounted for 1514 participants and an estimated 95.3 person-years-of-follow-up. No significant differences were found in any of the AE endpoints assessed, across all trials or on subgroup analyses of active- or placebo-controlled trials. Mild GI AEs increased with dose. No hepatorenal or cardiovascular concerns were raised, but few appropriate metrics were reported. There were no teratogenic concerns, but the evidence base was very limited. Based on a weighted-mean cost of US $61/kg, a 14-day course of treatment with nitazoxanide 500 mg BD would cost $1.41. The daily cost would therefore be $0.10. The same 14-day course could cost $3944 in US commercial pharmacies, and $3 per course in Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. At a higher dose of 1100 mg TDS, our estimated cost was $4.08 per 14-day course, equivalent to $0.29 per day. CONCLUSION: Nitazoxanide demonstrates a good safety profile at approved doses. However, further evidence is required regarding hepatorenal and cardiovascular effects, as well as teratogenicity. We estimate that it would be possible to manufacture nitazoxanide as generic for $1.41 for a 14-day treatment course at 500 mg BD, up to $4.08 at 1100 mg TDS. Further trials in COVID-19 patients should be initiated. If efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 is demonstrated in clinical studies, nitazoxanide may represent a safe and affordable treatment in the ongoing pandemic.

positive: A Scoping Review of Registered Clinical Trials of Cellular Therapy for COVID-19 and a Framework for Accelerated Synthesis of Trial Evidence – FAST Evidence Abstract The urgent need for safe and effective treatments for COVID-19 has fueled the launch of many parallel complex studies of cellular therapies with small to modest enrolment projections. By pooling data from multiple studies that are similar, we can increase the ability to achieve sufficient power to determine effectiveness more quickly through metanalysis. A scoping review of registered clinical trials using cell-based interventions for COVID-19 was conducted to identify candidate studies for metanalysis that could support an accelerated regulatory review. ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched April 23, 2020. Trials were included if they utilized cell or cell-derived products to treat or prevent COVID-19. Fifty-four registered cellular therapy trials were identified and included for analysis. Studies of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs; 41 studies; 1129 subjects projected to receive cells) and natural killer (NK) cells (5 studies; 135 projected to received cells) were observed most commonly. A subset of studies are controlled (34 studies, or 63%), including 27 studies of MSCs and 3 of NK cells. While heterogeneity in study design exists, the cumulative projected enrolment of patients from similar studies appears sufficient to allow the detection of meaningful differences in clinically important outcomes such as mortality, admission to intensive care and need for mechanical ventilation by September 2020 – sooner than any individual study could determine effectiveness. MSCs are the predominant cell type in registered trials for severe or critical COVID-19 and represent the most promising candidates for future metanalysis. Sufficient pooled sample size to detect clinically important reductions in multiple outcomes, including mortality, is anticipated by September 2020, but may require accessing supplementary data to align outcome reporting. Regulatory approval, funding and implementation by cell manufacturing partners will be accelerated by our framework for rapid metanalysis.

positive: Efficacy and Safety of Remdesivir for COVID-19 Treatment: An Analysis of Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trials BACKGROUND Remdesivir, an inhibitor of viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerases, has been identified as a candidate for COVID-19 treatment. However, the therapeutic effect of remdesivir is controversial. METHODS We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception to June 11, 2020 for randomized controlled trials on the clinical efficacy of remdesivir. The main outcomes were discharge rate, mortality, and adverse events. This study is registered at INPLASY (INPLASY202060046). RESULTS Data of 1075 subjects showed that remdesivir significantly increased the discharge rate of patients with COVID-19 compared with the placebo (50.4% vs. 45.29%; relative risk [RR] 1.19 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.34], I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.754). It also significantly decreased mortality (8.18% vs. 12.70%; RR 0.64 [95% CI, 0.44-0.92], I2 = 45.7%, P = 0.175) compared to the placebo. Data of 1296 subjects showed that remdesivir significantly decreased the occurrence of serious adverse events (RR 0.77 [95% CI, 0.63-0.94], I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.716). CONCLUSION Remdesivir is efficacious and safe for the treatment of COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER This study is registered at the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY202060046).

positive: Prevalence and severity of corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A systematic review and meta-analysis Abstract Background Since being first reported in Wuhan, China, in December 8, 2019, the outbreak of the novel coronavirus, now known as COVID-19, has spread globally. Some case studies regarding the characteristics and outcome of patients with COVID-19 have been published recently. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the risk factors of COVID-19. Methods Medline, SinoMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for clinical and epidemiological studies on confirmed cases of COVID-19. Results The incidence of fever, cough, fatigue, and dyspnea symptoms were 85.6 % (95CI 81.3–89.9 %), 65.7 % (95CI 60.1–71.4 %), 42.4 % (95CI 32.2–52.6 %) and 21.4 % (95CI 15.3–27.5 %). The prevalence of diabetes was 7.7 % (95CI 6.1–9.3 %), hypertension was 15.6 % (95CI 12.6–18.6 %), cardiovascular disease was 4.7 % (95CI 3.1–6.2 %), and malignancy was 1.2 % (95CI 0.5–1.8 %). The complications, including ARDS risk, ranged from 5.6–13.2 %, with the pooled estimate of ARDS risk at 9.4 %, ACI at 5.8 % (95CI 0.7–10.8 %), AKI at 2.1 % (95CI 0.6–3.7 %), and shock at 4.7 % (95CI 0.9–8.6 %). The risks of severity and mortality ranged from 12.6 to 23.5% and from 2.0 to 4.4 %, with pooled estimates at 18.0 and 3.2 %, respectively. The percentage of critical cases in diabetes and hypertension was 44.5 % (95CI 27.0–61.9 %) and 41.7 % (95CI 26.4–56.9 %), respectively. Conclusion Fever is the most common symptom in patients with COVID-19. The most prevalent comorbidities are hypertension and diabetes which are associated with the severity of COVID-19. ARDS and ACI may be the main obstacles for patients to treatment recovery. The case severe rate and mortality is lower than that of SARS and MERS.

positive: Take precautions beforehand: calling for clinical trials of pediatric drugs for treating coronavirus disease 2019

positive: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to assess the safety and effectiveness of a novel dual-action oral topical formulation against upper respiratory infections BACKGROUND: Current prevention options for upper respiratory infections (URIs) are not optimal. We conducted a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled pilot clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ARMS-I™ (currently marketed as Halo™) in the prevention of URIs. METHODS: ARMS-I is patented novel formulation for the prevention and treatment of influenza, comprising a broad-spectrum antimicrobial agent (cetylpyridinium chloride, CPC) and components (glycerin and xanthan gum) that form a barrier on the host mucosa, thus preventing viral contact and invasion. Healthy adults (18–45 years of age) were randomized into ARMS-I or placebo group (50 subjects each). The drug was sprayed intra-orally (3× daily) for 75 days. The primary objectives were to establish whether ARMS-I decreased the frequency, severity or duration of URIs. Secondary objectives were to evaluate safety, tolerability, rate of virus detection, acceptability and adherence; effect on URI-associated absenteeism and medical visits; and effect of prior influenza vaccination on study outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 94 individuals who completed the study (placebo: n = 44, ARMS-I: n = 50), six presented with confirmed URI (placebo: 4, ARMS-I: 2), representing a 55% relative reduction, albeit this was statistically not significant). Influenza, coronavirus or rhinovirus were detected in three participants; all in the placebo group. Moreover, frequency of post-treatment exit visits was reduced by 55% in ARMS-I compared to the placebo group (N = 4 and 2, respectively). Fever was reported only in the placebo group. ARMS-I significantly reduced the frequency and severity of cough and sore throat, and duration of cough (P ≤ .019 for all comparisons). ARMS-I was safe, well tolerated, had high acceptability and high adherence to medication use. Medical visits occurred only in the placebo group while absenteeism did not differ between the two arms. Prior influenza vaccination had no effect on study outcome. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized proof-of-concept clinical trial demonstrated that ARMS-I tended to provide protection against URIs in the enrolled study participants, while reducing severity and duration of cough and sore throat. A clinical trial with a larger number of study participants is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02644135 (retrospectively registered). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12879-016-2177-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

positive: Ethical issues related to the hydroxychloroquine treatment prescription for Covid-19 Abstract The 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19), has led to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). To date, no drugs have demonstrated safety and efficacy in randomized controlled trials for patients with COVID-19. Although the association between Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin efficacy lack of solid evidence-base, several governments have adopted it for all virology confirmed Covid-19 cases even for those who are asymptomatic. In the following, we aim to discuss some of the ethical issues associated with the use of this treatment association. We mainly tried to discuss the following controversial questions: Is it ethical not to treat a patient while a treatment exists and is used for other indications than Covid-19 for which it’s not proven yet? If yes, is a randomized controlled trial to prove the hydroxychloroquine for the Covid-19 treatment, necessary, in the context of covid-19 pandemic? If No, is it the government’s right to decide the hydroxychloroquine treatment for all covid-19 patients? and what should be the physicians’ attitudes? Finally, what are the government, physicians, and patient’s rights and responsibilities? The paper conclude that, since health authorities in some countries recommended this off-label use treatment, physicians are challenged by the requirement of veracity while providing care to their patients and the implications of such a requirement; they are facing the challenge of balancing this guideline and their own conviction. Furthermore, the fundamental principles of beneficence and non-maleficence, and respect for persons should underlie any reflection process to address this dilemma. In addition, in a pandemic context, the limits between the government’s, practitioner’s and patient’s rights and obligations are not clear which could significantly endanger the universal ethical principles in clinical practice. It could also undermine any attempt to develop serious clinical trials to prove the considered off-label drug.

positive: Triple combination of interferon beta-1b, lopinavir-ritonavir, and ribavirin in the treatment of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19: an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial BACKGROUND: Effective antiviral therapy is important for tackling the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We assessed the efficacy and safety of combined interferon beta-1b, lopinavir-ritonavir, and ribavirin for treating patients with COVID-19. METHODS: This was a multicentre, prospective, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial in adults with COVID-19 who were admitted to six hospitals in Hong Kong. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to a 14-day combination of lopinavir 400 mg and ritonavir 100 mg every 12 h, ribavirin 400 mg every 12 h, and three doses of 8 million international units of interferon beta-1b on alternate days (combination group) or to 14 days of lopinavir 400 mg and ritonavir 100 mg every 12 h (control group). The primary endpoint was the time to providing a nasopharyngeal swab negative for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 RT-PCR, and was done in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04276688. FINDINGS: Between Feb 10 and March 20, 2020, 127 patients were recruited; 86 were randomly assigned to the combination group and 41 were assigned to the control group. The median number of days from symptom onset to start of study treatment was 5 days (IQR 3-7). The combination group had a significantly shorter median time from start of study treatment to negative nasopharyngeal swab (7 days [IQR 5-11]) than the control group (12 days [8-15]; hazard ratio 4·37 [95% CI 1·86-10·24], p=0·0010). Adverse events included self-limited nausea and diarrhoea with no difference between the two groups. One patient in the control group discontinued lopinavir-ritonavir because of biochemical hepatitis. No patients died during the study. INTERPRETATION: Early triple antiviral therapy was safe and superior to lopinavir-ritonavir alone in alleviating symptoms and shortening the duration of viral shedding and hospital stay in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Future clinical study of a double antiviral therapy with interferon beta-1b as a backbone is warranted. FUNDING: The Shaw-Foundation, Richard and Carol Yu, May Tam Mak Mei Yin, and Sanming Project of Medicine.

positive: Emerging Therapeutic Strategies for COVID-19 patients Over 100,000 cases of COVID-19 patients infected with the novel coronavirus SARS-COV-2 have been reported worldwide in approximately 2 months, resulting in over 3000 deaths. Potential therapeutic strategies, including remdesivir, chloroquine phosphate, abidol, lopinavir/ritonavir, plasma, antibody, vaccine and stem cells are discussed in this review. With the number of patients increasing daily, there is an urgent need for effective therapeutic intervention.

positive: Vitamin C may reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation in critically ill patients: a meta-regression analysis BACKGROUND: Our recent meta-analysis indicated that vitamin C may shorten the length of ICU stay and the duration of mechanical ventilation. Here we analyze modification of the vitamin C effect on ventilation time, by the control group ventilation time (which we used as a proxy for severity of disease in the patients of each trial). METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and reference lists of relevant publications. We included controlled trials in which the administration of vitamin C was the only difference between the study groups. We did not limit our search to randomized trials and did not require placebo control. We included all doses and all durations of vitamin C administration. One author extracted study characteristics and outcomes from the trial reports and entered the data in a spreadsheet. Both authors checked the data entered against the original reports. We used meta-regression to examine whether the vitamin C effect on ventilation time depends on the duration of ventilation in the control group. RESULTS: We identified nine potentially eligible trials, eight of which were included in the meta-analysis. We pooled the results of the eight trials, including 685 patients in total, and found that vitamin C shortened the length of mechanical ventilation on average by 14% (P = 0.00001). However, there was significant heterogeneity in the effect of vitamin C between the trials. Heterogeneity was fully explained by the ventilation time in the untreated control group. Vitamin C was most beneficial for patients with the longest ventilation, corresponding to the most severely ill patients. In five trials including 471 patients requiring ventilation for over 10 h, a dosage of 1–6 g/day of vitamin C shortened ventilation time on average by 25% (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: We found strong evidence that vitamin C shortens the duration of mechanical ventilation, but the magnitude of the effect seems to depend on the duration of ventilation in the untreated control group. The level of baseline illness severity should be considered in further research. Different doses should be compared directly in future trials.

positive: Comments on Zhang et al: Clinical trial analysis of 2019‐nCoV therapy registered in China We have read the article by Zhang et al. published in the recent issue of the Journal of Medical Virology1 . Zhang and his colleagues have made a cross-sectional survey of currently registered clinical trials concerning 2019-nCoV, including the published literature. As such, they have given a preliminary assessment on the prospects of therapy for 2019-nCoV. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

positive: Nitazoxanide/Azithromycin combination for COVID-19: A suggested new protocol for COVID-19 early management Abstract Azithromycin has been shown to have a clinical efficacy against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; ivermectin has also demonstrated a remarkable experimental efficacy with a potential to be used for Coronavirus disease 2019. Further, BCG vaccination is being considered for clinical trials aiming to test its potential for lowering COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. This article illustrates some structural and functional relationships that may gather these drugs and the author, basing on a combined pathophysiological and pharmacological approach, recommends the FDA-approved antidiarrhea drug; nitazoxanide, which has been previously suggested but unfortunately ignored, to be tested in combination with azithromycin for their potential activity against SARS CoV-2, soonest. The author also recommends testing their combined administration as early during the clinical course of COVID-19 as possible. Further, basing on the same represented concept, the author suggests more trials for interferons to be tested against SARS CoV-2, especially in severe and critical cases.

positive: A Novel Protein Drug, Novaferon, as the Potential Antiviral Drug for COVID-19 Abstract Background Novaferon, a novel protein drug approved for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B in China, exhibits potent antiviral activities. We aimed to determine the anti-SARS-CoV-2 effects of Novaferon in vitro, and conducted a randomized, open-label, parallel group study to explore the antiviral effects of Novaferon for COVID-19. Methods In laboratory, the inhibition of Novaferon on viral replication in cells infected with SARS-CoV-2, and on SARS-CoV-2 entry into healthy cells was determined. Antiviral effects of Novaferon were evaluated in COVID-19 patients with treatment of Novaferon, Novaferon plus Lopinavir/Ritonavir, or Lopinavir/Ritonavir. The primary endpoint was the SARS-CoV-2 clearance rates on day 6 of treatment, and the secondary endpoint was the time to the SARS-CoV-2 clearance in COVID-19 patients Results Novaferon inhibited the viral replication in infected cells (EC50=1.02 ng/ml), and protected healthy cells from SARS-CoV-2 infection (EC50=0.1 ng/ml). Results from the 89 enrolled COVID-19 patients showed that both Novaferon and Novaferon plus Lopinavir/Ritonavir groups had significantly higher SARS-CoV-2 clearance rates on day 6 than the Lopinavir/Ritonavir group (50.0% vs.24.1%, p = 0.0400, and 60.0% vs.24.1%, p = 0.0053). Median time to SARS-CoV-2 clearance were 6 days, 6 days, and 9 days for three groups respectively, suggesting a 3-dayreduction of time to SARS-CoV-2 clearance in both Novaferon and Novaferon plus Lopinavir/Ritonavir groups compared with Lopinavir/Ritonavir group. Conclusions Novaferon exhibited anti-SARS-CoV-2 effects in vitro and in COVID-19 patients. These data justified the further evaluation of Novaferon. Key words: COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Novaferon, Antiviral drug, Lopinavir/Ritonavir

positive: Systematic review of the efficacy and safety of antiretroviral drugs against SARS, MERS or COVID-19: initial assessment INTRODUCTION: Several antiretroviral drugs are being considered for the treatment of COVID-19, the disease caused by a newly identified coronavirus, (SARS-CoV-2). We systematically reviewed the clinical outcomes of using antiretroviral drugs for the prevention and treatment of coronaviruses and planned clinical trials. METHODS: Three databases were screened from inception to 30 March 2020 for studies reporting clinical outcomes of patients with SARS, MERS or COVID-19 treated with antiretrovirals. RESULTS: From an initial screen of 433 titles, two randomized trials and 24 observational studies provided clinical outcome data on the use of antiretroviral drugs; most studies reported outcomes using LPV/r as treatment. Of the 21 observational studies reporting treatment outcomes, there were three studies among patients with SARS, six studies among patients with MERS and 12 studies among patients with COVID-19. In one randomized trial 99 patients with severe COVID-19 illness were randomized to receive LPV/r (400/100 mg twice a day) and 100 patients to standard of care for 14 days: LPV/r was not associated with a statistically significant difference in time to clinical improvement, although LPV/r given within 12 days of symptoms was associated with shorter time to clinical improvement; 28 day mortality was numerically lower in the LPV/r group (14/99) compared to the control group (25/100), but this difference was not statistically significant. The second trial found no benefit. The certainty of the evidence for the randomized trials was low. In the observational studies 3 out of 361 patients who received LPV/r died; the certainty of evidence was very low. Three studies reported a possible protective effect of LPV/r as post-exposure prophylaxis. Again, the certainty of the evidence was very low due to uncertainty due to limited sample size. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the available evidence it is uncertain whether LPV/r and other antiretrovirals improve clinical outcomes or prevent infection among patients at high risk of acquiring COVID-19.

positive: COVID-19 Clinical Trials: A Teachable Moment for Improving Our Research Infrastructure and Relevance The authors posit the need for rapid evaluation of therapies for COVID-19 as an inflection point spurring a much-needed rethinking of our research enterprise.

positive: The management of coronavirus infections with particular reference to SARS The human coronaviruses (HCoV) OC43 and 229E are common causes of upper respiratory tract infections. Severe diseases were rare, however, until the emergence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV in 2003. Since then, other novel CoV (NL63 and HKU1) have been described, and they have caused respiratory infections worldwide. Potentially exposed laboratory workers or animal handlers with rapidly progressive pneumonia not responding to standard antibacterial coverage must be isolated with contact and droplet, and for specific situations, airborne precautions, till rapid tests of respiratory and faecal samples are negative for SARS-CoV. Generally, the viral loads collected at different anatomical sites correlate with the severity of symptoms and mortality. Shedding of SARS-CoV peaks at day 10 after the onset of symptoms, which theoretically allows ample time for antiviral treatment. The disease is characterized by uncontrolled replication of the virus and a prominent pro-inflammatory response. No randomized controlled trials with a specific anti-coronavirus agent have been conducted with respect to therapy or prophylaxis. Reports using historical matched controls have suggested that treatment with interferon alfacon-1 (a synthetic interferon) combined with steroid, protease inhibitors together with ribavirin, or convalescent plasma containing neutralizing antibody, could be useful. Prophylaxis with interferon or hyperimmune globulin may be considered for unprotected exposure. The role of immunomodulators to decrease excessive inflammation remains elusive. Other non-SARS-CoV infections are generally milder in immunocompetent hosts, and scientific data on antiviral treatment of these viruses are scarce.

positive: Response to "Comments on 'Zhang et al: Clinical trial analysis of 2019-nCoV therapy registered in China'"

positive: The COVID-19 & Cancer Consortium (CCC19): a collaborative effort to understand the effects of COVID-19 on patients with cancer Summary National and international consortia will play a key role in understanding the effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on cancer patients. The COVID-19 & Cancer Consortium (CCC19) aims to collect and analyze observational data at scale to inform clinical practice in real-time.

positive: IL-6 Inhibitors in the Treatment of Serious COVID-19: A Promising Therapy? At present, there are no proven agents for treatment of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The available evidence has not allowed guidelines to clearly recommend any drugs outside the context of clinical trials. The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 that causes COVID-19 invokes a hyperinflammatory state driven by multiple cells and mediators like interleukin (IL)-1, IL-6, IL-12, and IL-18, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), etc. Considering the proven role of cytokine dysregulation in causing this hyperinflammation in the lungs with IL-6 being a key driver, particularly in seriously ill COVID-19 patients, it is crucial to further explore selective cytokine blockade with drugs like the IL-6 inhibitors tocilizumab, sarilumab, and siltuximab. These targeted monoclonal antibodies can dampen the downstream IL-6 signaling pathways, which can lead to decreased cell proliferation, differentiation, oxidative stress, exudation, and improve clinical outcomes in patients with evident features of cytokine-driven inflammation like persistent fever, dyspnea and elevated markers. Preliminary evidence has come for tocilizumab from some small studies, and interim analysis of a randomized controlled trial; the latter also being available for sarilumab. International guidelines do include IL-6 inhibitors as one of the options available for severe or critically ill patients. There has been increased interest in evaluating these drugs with a series of clinical trials being registered and conducted in different countries. The level of investigation though perhaps needs to be further intensified as there is a need to focus on therapeutic options that can prove to be ‘life-saving’ as the number of COVID-19 fatalities worldwide keeps increasing alarmingly. IL-6 inhibitors could be one such treatment option, with generation of more evidence and completion of a larger number of systematic studies.

positive: Clinical trials impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic: Adaptive designs to the rescue? Very recently the new pathogen severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. The pandemic has a number of consequences for the ongoing clinical trials in non-COVID-19 conditions. Motivated by four currently ongoing clinical trials in a variety of disease areas we illustrate the challenges faced by the pandemic and sketch out possible solutions including adaptive designs. Guidance is provided on (i) where blinded adaptations can help; (ii) how to achieve type I error rate control, if required; (iii) how to deal with potential treatment effect heterogeneity; (iv) how to utilize early readouts; and (v) how to utilize Bayesian techniques. In more detail approaches to resizing a trial affected by the pandemic are developed including considerations to stop a trial early, the use of group-sequential designs or sample size adjustment. All methods considered are implemented in a freely available R shiny app. Furthermore, regulatory and operational issues including the role of data monitoring committees are discussed.

positive: Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine for the Prevention or Treatment of COVID-19 in Africa: Caution for Inappropriate Off-label Use in Healthcare Settings The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 pandemic has spread to Africa, where nearly all countries have reported laboratory-confirmed cases of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Although there are ongoing clinical trials of repurposed and investigational antiviral and immune-based therapies, there are as yet no scientifically proven, clinically effective pharmacological treatments for COVID-19. Among the repurposed drugs, the commonly used antimalarials chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have become the focus of global scientific, media, and political attention despite a lack of randomized clinical trials supporting their efficacy. Chloroquine has been used worldwide for about 75 years and is listed by the WHO as an essential medicine to treat malaria. Hydroxychloroquine is mainly used as a therapy for autoimmune diseases. However, the efficacy and safety of CQ/HCQ for the treatment of COVID-19 remains to be defined. Indiscriminate promotion and widespread use of CQ/HCQ have led to extensive shortages, self-treatment, and fatal overdoses. Shortages and increased market prices leave all countries vulnerable to substandard and falsified medical products, and safety issues are especially concerning for Africa because of its healthcare system limitations. Much needed in Africa is a cross-continental collaborative network for coordinated production, distribution, and post-marketing surveillance aligned to low-cost distribution of any approved COVID-19 drug; this would ideally be piggybacked on existing global aid efforts. Meanwhile, African countries should strongly consider implementing prescription monitoring schemes to ensure that any off-label CQ/HCQ use is appropriate and beneficial during this pandemic.

positive: The effect of uncontrolled travelers and social distancing on the spread of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in Colombia

positive: A Chinese Case of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Did Not Show Infectivity During the Incubation Period: Based on an Epidemiological Survey Controversy remains over whether the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) virus may have infectivity during the incubation period before the onset of symptoms. The author had the opportunity to examine the infectivity of COVID-19 during the incubation period by conducting an epidemiological survey on a confirmed patient who had visited Jeju Island during the incubation period. The epidemiological findings support the claim that the COVID-19 virus does not have infectivity during the incubation period.

positive: COVID-19: An Update about the Discovery Clinical Trial Finding efficacious and safe treatments for COVID-19 emerges as a crucial need in order to control the spread of the pandemic. Whereas plasma therapy attracts much interest, the European project Discovery focuses on the potentialities of small molecules like remdesivir, the combination of lopinavir/ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine, and chloroquine. Results recently published on the clinical evaluation of those drugs are compiled in this brief report, although complete data are still impatiently awaited.

positive: Intention to participate in a COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial and to get vaccinated against COVID-19 in France during the pandemic Background: The world is facing the COVID-19 pandemic. Development of vaccine is challenging. Aim: To determine the proportion of people who intend to get vaccinated against COVID-19 in France or to participate in a vaccine clinical trial. Methods: We conducted an anonymous on-line survey from the 26th of March to the 20th of April 2020. Primary endpoints were the intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19 if a vaccine was available or participate in a vaccine clinical trial. Results: Three thousand two hundred and fifty nine individuals answered the survey; women accounted for 67.4 % of the responders, 670 (20.6 %) were under 30 years of age, 1,502 (46.1 %) between 30-49 years, 803 (24.6 %) between 50-64 years, 271 (8.3%) between 65-80 years, 13 (0.4%) over 80 years of age. According to their statements, 2.512 participants (77.6%, 95 % CI 76.2-79 %) will certainly or probably agree to get vaccinated against COVID-19. Older age, male gender, fear about COVID-19, being healthcare workers and individual perceived risk were associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance Vaccine hesitancy was associated with a decrease in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. One thousand and five hundred and fifty responders (47.6 % 95 % CI 45.9-49.3 %) will certainly or probably agree to participate in a COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial. Conclusions and Relevance: Nearly 75 % and 48 % of the survey responders were likely to accept vaccination or participation in a clinical trial against COVID-19. Vaccine hesitancy will be the major barrier to COVID-19 vaccine uptake.

positive: Chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and COVID-19: systematic review and narrative synthesis of efficacy and safety Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has required clinicians to urgently identify new treatment options or the repurposing of existing drugs. Several drugs are now being repurposed with the aim of identifying if these drugs provide some level of disease resolution. Of particular interest are chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), first developed as an antimalarial therapy. There is increasing concern with regards to the efficacy and safety of these agents. The aims of this review are to systematically identify and collate studies describing the use of CQ and HCQ in human clinical trials and provide a detailed synthesis of evidence of its efficacy and safety. Methods and Findings: Searches for (COVID AND chloroquine [title/abstract] AND outcomes[full text]) and two (COVID AND hydroxychloroquine[title/abstract] AND outcomes[full text]) yielded 272 unique articles. Unique articles were manually checked for inclusion and exclusion criteria and also subjected to a quality appraisal assessment. A total of 19 articles were included in the systematic review. Seventy-five percent of observational studies employing an endpoint specific to efficacy recorded no significant difference in the attainment of outcomes, between COVID-19 patients given a range of CQ and/or HCQ doses, and the control groups. All clinical trials and 82% of observational studies examining an indicator unique to drug safety discovered a higher probability of adverse events in those treated patients suspected of, and diagnosed with, COVID-19. Seventy-five percent of the total papers focusing on cardiac side-effects found a greater incidence among patients administered a wide range of CQ and/or HCQ doses, with QTc prolongation the most common finding, in addition to its consequences of VT and cardiac arrest. Of the total studies using mortality rate as an end-point, 60% reported no significant change in the risk of death, while 30% showed an elevation, and 10% a depression, in treated relative to control patients. Conclusion: The strongest available evidence suggests that, relative to standard in-hospital management of symptoms, the use of CQ and HCQ to treat hospitalised COVID-19 patients has likely been unsafe. At the very least, the poor quality of data failing to find any significant changes in the risk of VT should preclude definitive judgment on drug safety until the completion of high-quality randomised clinical trials.

positive: Systematic and Statistical Review of COVID19 Treatment Trials Objective: The following systematic review and meta-analysis compiles the current data regarding human controlled COVID-19 treatment trials. Methods: An electronic search of the literature compiled studies pertaining to human controlled treatment trials with COVID-19. Medications assessed included lopinavir/ritonavir, arbidol, hydroxychloroquine, favipiravir, and heparin. Statistical analyzes were performed for common viral clearance endpoints whenever possible. Results: Lopinavir/ritonavir showed no significant effect on viral clearance for COVID-19 cases (OR 0.95 [95% CI 0.50-1.83]). Hydroxychloroquine also showed no significant effect on COVID-19 viral clearance rates (OR 2.16 [95% CI 0.80-5.84]). Arbidol showed no seven-day (OR 1.63 [95% CI 0.76-3.50]) or 14-day viral (OR 5.37 [95% CI 0.35-83.30]) clearance difference compared to lopinavir/ritonavir. Review of literature showed no significant clinical improvement with lopinavir/ritonavir, arbidol, hydroxychloroquine, or remdesivir. Favipiravir showed quicker symptom improvement compared to lopinavir/ritonavir and arbidol. Heparin showed improvement with severe COVID-19 cases. Conclusion: Current medications do not show significant effect on COVID-19 viral clearance rates. Favipiravir shows favorable results compared to other tested medications. Heparin shows benefit for severe cases of COVID-19.

positive: Case of the Index Patient Who Caused Tertiary Transmission of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Korea: the Application of Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the Treatment of COVID-19 Pneumonia Monitored by Quantitative RT-PCR Since mid-December of 2019, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been spreading from Wuhan, China. The confirmed COVID-19 patients in South Korea are those who came from or visited China. As secondary transmissions have occurred and the speed of transmission is accelerating, there are rising concerns about community infections. The 54-year old male is the third patient diagnosed with COVID-19 in Korea. He is a worker for a clothing business and had mild respiratory symptoms and intermittent fever in the beginning of hospitalization, and pneumonia symptoms on chest computerized tomography scan on day 6 of admission. This patient caused one case of secondary transmission and three cases of tertiary transmission. Hereby, we report the clinical findings of the index patient who was the first to cause tertiary transmission outside China. Interestingly, after lopinavir/ritonavir (Kaletra, AbbVie) was administered, β-coronavirus viral loads significantly decreased and no or little coronavirus titers were observed.

positive: Efficacy and safety of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine in moderate type of COVID-19: a prospective open-label randomized controlled study The outbreak of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a pandemic. Drug repurposing may represent a rapid way to fill the urgent need for effective treatment. We evaluated the clinical utility of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in treating COVID-19. Forty-eight patients with moderate COVID-19 were randomized to oral treatment with chloroquine (1000 mg QD on Day 1, then 500 mg QD for 9 days; n=18), hydroxychloroquine (200 mg BID for 10 days; n=18), or control treatment (n=12). Adverse events were mild, except for one case of Grade 2 ALT elevation. Adverse events were more commonly observed in the chloroquine group (44.44%) and the hydroxychloroquine group (50.00%) than in the control group (16.67%). The chloroquine group achieved shorter time to clinical recovery (TTCR) than the control group (P=0.019). There was a trend toward reduced TTCR in the hydroxychloroquine group (P=0.049). The time to reach viral RNA negativity was significantly faster in the chloroquine group and the hydroxychloroquine group than in the control group (P=0.006 and P=0.010, respectively). The median numbers of days to reach RNA negativity in the chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and control groups was 2.5 (IQR: 2.0-3.8) days, 2.0 (IQR: 2.0-3.5) days, and 7.0 (IQR: 3.0-10.0) days, respectively. The chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine groups also showed trends toward improvement in the duration of hospitalization and findings on lung computerized tomography (CT). This study provides evidence that (hydroxy)chloroquine may be used effectively in treating moderate COVID-19 and supports larger trials.

positive: A brief review of antiviral drugs evaluated in registered clinical trials for COVID-19 Background: Although a number of antiviral agents have been evaluated for coronaviruses there are no approved drugs available. To provide an overview of the landscape of therapeutic research for COVID-19, we conducted a review of registered clinical trials. Methods: A review of currently registered clinical trials was performed on registries, including the Chinese (chictr.org.cn) and US (clinicaltrials.gov) databases to identify relevant studies up to March, 7th 2020. The search was conducted using the search terms “2019-nCoV”, “COVID-19”, “SARS-CoV-2”, “Hcov-19”, “new coronavirus”, “novel coronavirus”. We included interventional clinical trials focusing on patients with COVID-19 and assessing antiviral drugs or agents. Findings: Out of the 353 studies identified, 115 clinical trials were selected for data extraction. Phase IV trials were the most commonly reported study type (n=27, 23%). However, 62 trials (54%) did not describe the phase of the study. Eighty percent (n=92) of the trials were randomized with parallel assignment and the median number of planned inclusions was 63 (IQR, 36-120). Open-label studies were the most frequent (46%) followed by double-blind (13%) and single blind studies (10%). The most frequently assessed therapies were: stem cells therapy (n=23 trials), lopinavir/ritonavir (n=15), chloroquine (n=11), umifenovir (n=9), hydroxychloroquine (n=7), plasma treatment (n=7), favipiravir (n=7), methylprednisolone (n=5), and remdesivir (n=5). Remdesivir was tested in 5 trials with a median of 400 (IQR, 394-453) planned inclusions per trial, while stem cells therapy was tested in 23 trials, but had a median of 40 (IQR, 23-60) planned inclusions per trial. Lopinavir/ritonavir was associated with the highest total number of planned inclusions (2606) followed by remdesivir (2155). Only 52% of the clinical trials reported the treatment dose (n=60) and only 34% (n=39) the duration. The primary outcome was clinical in 76 studies (66%), virological in 27 (23%); radiological in 9 (8%) or immunological in three studies (3%). Interpretation: Numerous clinical trials have been registered since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, however, a number of information regarding drugs or trial design were lacking. Funding: None

positive: The efficacy and safety of Jinhua Qinggan granule (JHQG) in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis BACKGROUND: Currently, the global number of infected novel coronavirus has exceeded 2.6 million and the death toll has exceeded 170,000, but the specific drug for the treatment of COVID-19 has been not appears. In the process of fighting COVID-19 in China, JHQG has been promoted by the Chinese government and widely used in the treatment of COVID-19. The purpose of this study is to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of JHQG for COVID-19. METHODS: We are going to search the electronic databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Web of Science (WOS), Google scholar, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical literature Database (CBM), Chinese Scientific and Journal Database (VIP), Wan Fang database (Wanfang) for published clinical trails and search clinical trials register platforms of Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) and ClinicalTrials.gov (www.ClinicalTrials.gov/) for ongoing trials of Jinhua Qinggan granule for COVID-19. The primary outcomes of the included studies contain Clinical symptom disappearance rate and the secondary outcomes obtain: TCM syndrome scale score, Hamilton anxiety scale score, and adverse events. We will use RevMan V5.3 software to perform the calculations. PRISMA-P checklist was used in writing this report. RESULTS: The study results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. CONCLUSION: This study will provide a high-quality evidence of the efficacy and safety of Jinhua Qinggan granule on patients with COVID-19. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020181919.

positive: A systematic review of Anakinra, Tocilizumab, Sarilumab and Siltuximab for coronavirus-related infections Background There is accumulating evidence for an overly activated immune response characterised by the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines in severe Covid-19. Suppression of the inflammatory response with immunomodulatory therapies may be a potential therapeutic strategy. We systematically review and assess the effectiveness of specific interleukin-1 and -6 inhibitors for the treatment of coronavirus-related infections. Methods Electronic databases, pre-print servers and clinical trial registries were searched to identify current and ongoing studies of immunomodulatory agents (anakinra, sarilumab, siltuximab and tocilizumab) for the treatment of Covid-19 and other coronavirus related super infections. The co-primary outcome was time to hospital discharge (days) and severity on an ordinal scale measured at day 15. Results Five retrospective studies (tocilizumab, two case series and two case reports; siltuximab, one case series) were shortlisted for inclusion, totalling 59 patients. All studies had a moderate or high risk of bias, with multiple limitations. Insufficient data and inter-study heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis. Primary outcomes were inconsistently reported but suggest many patients experienced an improvement in status seven days following therapy. The case fatality ratio (CFR) of patients with severe Covid-19 included in our review was 6.8%, a figure substantially lower than that estimated in non-interventional case series. Of the studies measuring IL-6, all reported elevated baseline levels. Twenty-five ongoing registered clinical trials exploring immunomodulatory agents in Covid-19 were identified, although inconsistency in participants and endpoints are noted. Conclusion Inhibition of IL-6 with tocilizumab and siltuximab requires further evaluation in managing the assumed hyperinflammatory response associated with severe Covid-19. These early data are considered hypothesis generating and justify the need for well-designed randomised clinical studies.

positive: Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy for COVID-19: Present or Future “COVID-19” is the word that certainly isn’t forgotten by everybody who lives in the first half of the twenty-first century. COVID-19, as a pandemic, has led many researchers from different biomedical fields to find solutions or treatments to manage the pandemic. However, no standard treatment for this disease has been discovered to date. Probably, preventing the severe acute respiratory infection form of COVID-19 as the most dangerous phase of this disease can be helpful for the treatment and reduction of the death rate. In this regard, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs)-based immunomodulation treatment has been proposed as a suitable therapeutic approach and several clinical trials have begun. Recently, MSCs according to their immunomodulatory and regenerative properties attract attention in clinical trials. After the intravenous transplantation of MSCs, a significant population of cells accumulates in the lung, which they alongside immunomodulatory effect could protect alveolar epithelial cells, reclaim the pulmonary microenvironment, prevent pulmonary fibrosis, and cure lung dysfunction. Given the uncertainties in this area, we reviewed reported clinical trials and hypotheses to provide useful information to researchers and those interested in stem cell therapy. In this study, we considered this new approach to improve patient’s immunological responses to COVID-19 using MSCs and discussed the aspects of this proposed treatment. However, currently, there are no approved MSC-based approaches for the prevention and/or treatment of COVID-19 patients but clinical trials ongoing.

positive: Available Evidence and Ongoing Clinical Trials of Remdesivir: Could It Be a Promising Therapeutic Option for COVID-19? The novel coronavirus strain, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2, the causative agent of COVID-19 emerged in Wuhan, China, in December 2019 and is skyrocketing throughout the globe and become a global public health emergency. Despite promising preventive measures being taken, there is no vaccine or drug therapy officially approved to prevent or treat the infection. Everybody is waiting the findings of ongoing clinical trials in various chemical and biological products. This review is specifically aimed to summarize the available evidence and ongoing clinical trials of remdesivir as a potential therapeutic option for COVID-19. Remdesivir is an investigational drug having broad spectrum antiviral activity with its target RNA dependent RNA polymerase. It has not yet been officially approved for Ebola and Coronaviruses. Several studies showed that remdesivir had promising in vitro and in vivo antiviral activities against SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV strains. On the top of this, it exhibited a promising in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 strains though there are no published studies that substantiate its activity in vivo until the time of this review. There are few phase 3 randomized double-blind placebo controlled trials on the way to investigate the safety and efficacy of remdesivir. Of which, one completed double blind, placebo controlled trial showed that remdesivir showed faster time to clinical improvement in severe COVID-19 patients compared to placebo though not found statistically significant. In addition, two phase 3 randomized open label clinical trials coordinated by Gilead Sciences are being conducted. In addition, WHO Solidarity trial and INSERM DisCoVeRy trials (randomized open labels) were launched recently.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: preliminary results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial Background Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine have been found to be efficient on COV-19, and reported to be efficient in Chinese patients infected by this virus. We evaluate the role of Hydroxychloroquine on respiratory viral loads. Patients and methods Patients were included in a single arm protocol to receive 600mg of hydroxychloroquine daily and their viral load in nasal swabs was tested daily. Depending on their clinical presentation azithromycin was added to the treatment. Untreated patients from another center and cases refusing the protocol were included as negative control. Presence and absence of virus at Day-6 was considered the end point. Results Twenty cases were treated in this study and showed a significant reduction of the viral carriage at D-6 compared to controls, and much lower than reported average carrying duration of untreated patients in the literature. Azithromycin added to Hydroxychloroquine was significantly more efficient for virus elimination. Conclusion : Hydroxychloroquine is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in patients with COVID-19 and its effect is reinforced by Azithromycin.

positive: Pharmacologic Treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Review Importance: The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) presents an unprecedented challenge to identify effective drugs for prevention and treatment. Given the rapid pace of scientific discovery and clinical data generated by the large number of people rapidly infected by SARS-CoV-2, clinicians need accurate evidence regarding effective medical treatments for this infection. Observations: No proven effective therapies for this virus currently exist. The rapidly expanding knowledge regarding SARS-CoV-2 virology provides a significant number of potential drug targets. The most promising therapy is remdesivir. Remdesivir has potent in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, but it is not US Food and Drug Administration approved and currently is being tested in ongoing randomized trials. Oseltamivir has not been shown to have efficacy, and corticosteroids are currently not recommended. Current clinical evidence does not support stopping angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with COVID-19. Conclusions and Relevance: The COVID-19 pandemic represents the greatest global public health crisis of this generation and, potentially, since the pandemic influenza outbreak of 1918. The speed and volume of clinical trials launched to investigate potential therapies for COVID-19 highlight both the need and capability to produce high-quality evidence even in the middle of a pandemic. No therapies have been shown effective to date.

positive: Coalition: Advocacy for prospective clinical trials to test the post-exposure potential of hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19 Abstract Our coalition of public health experts, doctors, and scientists worldwide want to draw attention to the need for high-quality evaluation protocols of the potential beneficial effect of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a post-exposure drug for exposed people, meaning people with close contact with positive tested patients, including home and medical caregivers. We have reviewed the mechanisms of antiviral effect of HCQ, the risk-benefit ratio taking into consideration the PK/PD of HCQ and the thresholds of efficacy. We have studied its use as an antimalarial, an antiviral, and an immunomodulating drug and concluded that the use of HCQ at does matching that of the standard treatment of Systemic Lupus erythematous, which has proven safety and efficacy in terms of HCQ blood and tissue concentration adapted to bodyweight (2,3), at 6 mg/kg/day 1 (loading dose) followed by 5 mg/kg/day, with a maximum limit of 600 mg/day in all cases should swiftly be clinically evaluated as a post-exposure drug for exposed people.

positive: Response to "Comments on 'Zhang et al.: Clinical trial analysis of 2019-nCoV therapy registered in China '". We thank Dr. Yang and colleagues for their attention to our article1,2 . And we appreciate their meaningful suggestions, which we highly agree with. With the purpose of letting the public know the overall situation of the clinical trials of new coronary pneumonia in China as soon as possible, we completed the data collection and brief analysis in a very short time. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

positive: The Lung, the Heart, the Novel Coronavirus, and the Renin-Angiotensin System; The Need for Clinical Trials Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is the receptor for COVID-19 (SARs-CoV-2). ACE2 protects the lung and heart from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and acute myocarditis and arrhythmias, because it breaks down Angiotensin II, which has inflammatory effects in the lung and heart as well as in the kidney. When SARS-CoV-2 binds to ACE2, it suppresses it, so this protective action of ACE2 is lost. Death from COVID-19 is due to ARDS and also heart failure and acute cardiac injury. Drugs that prevent the inflammatory actions of Angiotensin II (i.e., Angiotensin receptor blockers, ARBs) prevent acute lung injury caused by SARS-CoV. Clinical trials are underway to test the risks and benefits of ARBs and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) in COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization. Other potential treatments are also discussed.

positive: Current status of clinical trial registration regarding coronavirus disease 2019 Objective: To summarize the main characteristics of clinical studies regarding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) registered on the Chinese and US NIH Official Clinical Trial Registration Websites. Methods: To search all the clinical studies about COVID-19 which were registered on the Chinese and U.S. NIH official clinical trial registration websites until March 9, 2020. The search terms were "new coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19), 2019-nCoV, novel coronavirus pneumonia". Results: Overall, 360 studies with a total sample size of 268, 773 participants are registered on Chinese clinical trial registration website, and 74 studies with a total sample size of 73, 723 participants in the U.S. NIH clinical trial registration website. According to the information provided by the Chinese Clinical Trial Registration Website, there are 237 interventional studies, 108 observational studies, and 15 diagnostic test studies; and the most commonly studied interventions were Traditional Chinese Medicine in 80 studies, antiviral therapy in 58 studies, stem cells in 19 studies, plasma of recovered patients in 13 studies, glucocorticoid in 7 studies, molecular targeted therapy in 4 studies, and vaccine in 2 studies. According to the information provided by the U.S. NIH Clinical Trial Registration Website, there were 54 interventional studies, 17 observational studies, and 3 diagnostic test studies; and the most commonly studied interventions were antiviral therapy in 16 studies, stem cells in 7 studies, Traditional Chinese Medicine in 6 studies, molecular targeted therapy in 3 studies, and vaccine in 3 studies. Conclusions Numerous clinical studies related to COVID-19 have been registered during a very short period. Among them, Traditional Chinese Medicine is the most commonly studied intervention, which suggests the Chinese characteristics in medical care. However, considering such a large sample size needed for these clinical studies, it is very important to ensure the enrollment of participants effectively and orderly in future.

positive: 5-Fluorouracil in combination with deoxyribonucleosides and deoxyribose as possible therapeutic options for the Coronavirus, COVID-19 infection Abstract The recent global pandemic created by the Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, started in Wuhan, China in December 2019, has generated panic, both in term of human death (4-5% of infected patients identified through testing) and the global economy. Human sufferings seem to be continuing, and it is not clear how long this will continue and how much more destruction it is going to cause until complete control is achieved. One of the most disturbing issues is Covid-19 treatment; although a large number of medications, previously used successfully with other viruses (including Chinese herbal medicines and anti-malaria drugs), are under consideration, there remain questions as to whether they can play a satisfactory role for this disease. Global attempts are ongoing to find the drugs for the treatment of this virus but none of the antiviral drugs used for treatment of other human viral infection is working and hence attempts to find new drugs are continuing. Here the author is proposing that 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) which when used on its own is failing as an antiviral agent due to the removal of this compound by proof reading ability exceptionally found in Coronaviruses. The author here is proposing to test 5-FU in combination with a number of deoxynucleosides on animal models infected with this Covid-19. Should encouraging results ensue, therapies could then be tried on patients.

positive: Convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID-19: a rapid review. BACKGROUND Convalescent plasma and hyperimmune immunoglobulin may reduce mortality in patients with respiratory virus diseases, and are currently being investigated in trials as a potential therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A thorough understanding of the current body of evidence regarding the benefits and risks is required. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin transfusion is effective and safe in the treatment of people with COVID-19. SEARCH METHODS The protocol was pre-published with the Center for Open Science and can be accessed here: osf.io/dwf53 We searched the World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 Global Research Database, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COVID-19 Research Article Database and trials registries to identify ongoing studies and results of completed studies on 23 April 2020 for case-series, cohort, prospectively planned, and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). SELECTION CRITERIA We followed standard Cochrane methodology and performed all steps regarding study selection in duplicate by two independent review authors (in contrast to the recommendations of the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group). We included studies evaluating convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, age, gender or ethnicity. We excluded studies including populations with other coronavirus diseases (severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)) and studies evaluating standard immunoglobulins. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We followed recommendations of the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group regarding data extraction and assessment. To assess bias in included studies, we used the assessment criteria tool for observational studies, provided by Cochrane Childhood Cancer. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the following outcomes: all-cause mortality at hospital discharge, improvement of clinical symptoms (7, 15, and 30 days after transfusion), grade 3 and 4 adverse events, and serious adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: We included eight studies (seven case-series, one prospectively planned, single-arm intervention study) with 32 participants, and identified a further 48 ongoing studies evaluating convalescent plasma (47 studies) or hyperimmune immunoglobulin (one study), of which 22 are randomised. Overall risk of bias of the eight included studies was high, due to: study design; small number of participants; poor reporting within studies; and varied type of participants with different severities of disease, comorbidities, and types of previous or concurrent treatments, including antivirals, antifungals or antibiotics, corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine and respiratory support. We rated all outcomes as very low certainty, and we were unable to summarise numerical data in any meaningful way. As we identified case-series studies only, we reported results narratively. Effectiveness of convalescent plasma for people with COVID-19 The following reported outcomes could all be related to the underlying natural history of the disease or other concomitant treatment, rather than convalescent plasma. All-cause mortality at hospital discharge All studies reported mortality. All participants were alive at the end of the reporting period, but not all participants had been discharged from hospital by the end of the study (15 participants discharged, 6 still hospitalised, 11 unclear). Follow-up ranged from 3 days to 37 days post-transfusion. We do not know whether convalescent plasma therapy affects mortality (very low-certainty evidence). Improvement of clinical symptoms (assessed by respiratory support) Six studies, including 28 participants, reported the level of respiratory support required; most participants required respiratory support at baseline. All studies reported improvement in clinical symptoms in at least some participants. We do not know whether convalescent plasma improves clinical symptoms (very low-certainty evidence). Time to discharge from hospital Six studies reported time to discharge from hospital for at least some participants, which ranged from four to 35 days after convalescent plasma therapy. Admission on the intensive care unit (ICU) Six studies included patients who were critically ill. At final follow-up the majority of these patients were no longer on the ICU or no longer required mechanical ventilation. Length of stay on the ICU Only one study (1 participant) reported length of stay on the ICU. The individual was discharged from the ICU 11 days after plasma transfusion. Safety of convalescent plasma for people with COVID-19 Grade 3 or 4 adverse events The studies did not report the grade of adverse events after convalescent plasma transfusion. Two studies reported data relating to participants who had experienced adverse events, that were presumably grade 3 or 4. One case study reported a participant who had moderate fever (38.9 °C). Another study (3 participants) reported a case of severe anaphylactic shock. Four studies reported the absence of moderate or severe adverse events (19 participants). We are very uncertain whether or not convalescent plasma therapy affects the risk of moderate to severe adverse events (very low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events One study (3 participants) reported one serious adverse event. As described above, this individual had severe anaphylactic shock after receiving convalescent plasma. Six studies reported that no serious adverse events occurred. We are very uncertain whether or not convalescent plasma therapy affects the risk of serious adverse events (very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We identified eight studies (seven case-series and one prospectively planned single-arm intervention study) with a total of 32 participants (range 1 to 10). Most studies assessed the risks of the intervention; reporting two adverse events (potentially grade 3 or 4), one of which was a serious adverse event. We are very uncertain whether convalescent plasma is effective for people admitted to hospital with COVID-19 as studies reported results inconsistently, making it difficult to compare results and to draw conclusions. We identified very low-certainty evidence on the effectiveness and safety of convalescent plasma therapy for people with COVID-19; all studies were at high risk of bias and reporting quality was low. No RCTs or controlled non-randomised studies evaluating benefits and harms of convalescent plasma have been completed. There are 47 ongoing studies evaluating convalescent plasma, of which 22 are RCTs, and one trial evaluating hyperimmune immunoglobulin. We will update this review as a living systematic review, based on monthly searches in the above mentioned databases and registries. These updates are likely to show different results to those reported here.

positive: COVID-19 clinical trials: see it big and keep it simple.

positive: Potential use of hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin and azithromycin drugs in fighting COVID-19: trends, scope and relevance Abstract Alarming situation has been caused due to the emergence of COVID-19 infection around the world. There is an urgency of developing a therapeutic strategy in order to control the spread of COVID-19. Towards that initiative, potential drugs like hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin and azithromycin have been tested by diverse group of researchers worldwide for their potential against novel coronavirus. The present report presents together the comprehensive knowledge derived from the major researches about the above drugs altogether in context of the current health emergency around the world. Hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin were known to act by creating the acidic environment and inhibiting the importin (IMPα/β1) mediated viral import. Azithromycin was found to act similar to the hydroxychloroquine as an acidotropic lipophilic weak base. All the three categories of drugs seemed to potentially act against novel coronavirus infection. However, their efficacies need to be studied in detail individually and in combination in-vivo in order to combat COVID-19 infection.

positive: Anti COVID-19 Drugs: Need for More Clinical Evidence and Global Action The World Health Organization (WHO) called the outbreak of coronavirus infectious disease-2019 (COVID-19) a "Public Health Emergency of International Concern" (PHEIC). According to the WHO, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), currently there are no medicines or vaccines that have been claimed to be useful in the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. Several existing antiviral drugs, previously developed or used as treatments for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and malaria, are being investigated as COVID-19 treatments and some of them are being used in clinical trials. According to the CDC and Chinese treatment guidelines for COVID-19, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, and one of the investigational agents (remdesivir) are recommended in critically ill older patients. The use of other potential drugs reported in different studies may be considered if treatment with first-line drugs is ineffective. There are currently no complete data available from large randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to provide clinical guidance on the use, dosing, or duration to validate the effective role, safety profile, and adverse effects of all of the trial drugs for prophylaxis or treatment of COVID-19. Until now, it is still unclear which drug can successfully fight against the disease. Therefore, for the better safety of patients with COVID-19, further clinical trials and large randomized controlled studies are needed to validate the effective role, safety profile, and adverse effects of all the potential drugs. Such a measure requires action at the global level.

positive: The possibility of using Lopinave/Litonawe (LPV/r) as treatment for novel coronavirus 2019-nCov pneumonia: a quick systematic review based on earlier coronavirus clinical studies/ 中华急诊医学杂志 Objective@#To explore the possibility of using Lopinave/Litonawe (LPV/r) as treatment for novel coronavirus 2019-nCov pneumonia by systematically review earlier coronavirus studies.@*Methods@#Systematically retrieve relevant clinical studies from Chinese and English databases such as CNKI,VIP, Wangfang Data,CBM,PubMed, Web of Science,EMBASE. In addition, information from Chinese bio-medical journals, WHO, US CDC, Chinese CDC websites and the references from published relevant articles were retrieved. The inclusion period is from January 2003 to January 24, 2020. The criteria for inclusion are: (1) studies that aim to compare LPV/r and placebo/standard for SARS, MERS; (2) studies that include at least one clinical outcome; (3) studies with diagnosis criteria meeting WHO requirement on SARS or MERS; (4) data from multiple reports but originated from one study, where we extract information from all reports; (5) guidelines, includes: national or academic guidelines/experts 'consensus. The exclude criteria are: 1) only have abstracts but no full information; 2) in vitro studies. Two reviewers independently review articles and extract data on study design, patients, diagnosis criteria, regimen, and clinical outcomes (mortality, morbidity, quality of life, steroids dosage, chest image and adverse responses).@*Results@#Two hundred and thirty potential article were found by screening, and narrow down to forty-four articles for evaluation and finally four studies were included. The results of included studies indicate the early use of LPV/r regimen can reduce the mortality of SARS and MERS, and reduce steroids dosing.@*Conclusions@#ILPV/r can be used as a component of experimental regimen for treat 2019-nCoV pneumonia. It strongly suggests that initiating real world studies to explore the true clinical effects of LPV/r on 2019-nCoV patients.

positive: Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine vs Hydroxychloroquine + Nitazoxanide in COVID-19 patients with risk factors for poor prognosis: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine vs. Hydroxychloroquine + Nitazoxanide in reducing the need for invasive mechanical ventilatory support for patients with COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine is currently being used in multiple trials with varying doses in an attempt to treat COVID-19. Nitazoxanide has powerful antiviral effects and proven efficacy against a range of viruses including SARS and MERS. Dual therapy by combining appropriate doses of these two medications with diverse activities against COVID-19 is expected to be better than monotherapy with hydroxychloroquine. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a single centre, randomized, controlled, single blinded, 2 arm (ratio 1:1) parallel group trial. PARTICIPANTS: 86 COVID-19 positive patients that are being treated at the Health Institute of the State of Mexico (ISEM) in Toluca, State of Mexico will be recruited from May 14 to December 31, 2020. 1. Age older than 18 years. 2. Hospitalised COVID-19 PCR test positive patients. 3. Within the first 72 hours after performing the PCR test. 4. Presence of risk factors for complications (at least one): over 60 years, history of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and morbid obesity. 1. Patients with corrected QT interval (QTc) greater than 500ms at hospital admission. 2. Patients who have inherent contraindications to each drug. 3. Patients who are unable to consent. 4. Patients who have previously received chloroquine. 5. Patients already intubated. 1. Patients whose clinical follow-up is lost or who decide not to continue in the study. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: The two management alternatives will be: Control - Hydroxychloroquine 200 mg taken orally every 12 hours for 7 days. Dual therapy - Hydroxychloroquine 400 mg taken orally every 12 hours for two days and then 200 mg taken orally every 12 hours for four days + Nitazoxanide 500 mg orally every 6 hours taken with food, for seven days. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary: Mechanical ventilation requirement assessed at one week. Percentage of COVID-19 positive patients who require mechanical ventilation . All patients will be monitored till hospital discharge or death. RANDOMISATION: Patients will be randomly allocated using allocation papers and opaque sealed envelopes to either receive the placebo or the dual therapy intervention treatment in a 1:1 ratio until we have recruited the required number of patients for each group. BLINDING (MASKING): Trial participants will be blinded. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): 86 participants will be randomized to each group, with 43 in the control group and 43 in the dual therapy group. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version: 2, recruitment will begin on May 14 until sample size is reached , with the analysis deadline of December 31st 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04341493. Date of trial registration: April 10, 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol

positive: What is the best drug to treat COVID-19? The need for randomized controlled trials The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is currently the biggest public health challenge to the biomedical community of the last century Despite multiple public health measures, 1-3 there remains an urgent need for pharmacologic therapies to treat infected patients and minimize mortality, decrease pressures on intensive care units and health systems and optimally they should decrease subsequent transmission At the time of writing, there are no licensed drugs to treat COVID-19 and a search on clinicaltrials gov using ‘COVID-19’ as the input term, yielded 657 studies Drug-based interventions currently fall into categories including off label use which includes repurposed drugs, 4,5 and newer entities but both categories should be given in the context of clinical trials In Wuhan, China, then the epicentre of the pandemic, Cao et al under heroic circumstances, conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label trial involving 199 hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection including as an entry criteria oxygen saturation (SaO2) of 94% or less on air (ChiCTR2000029308) Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either lopinavir–ritonavir (400 mg and 100 mg, respectively) twice daily for 14 days, or standard care alone The primary end point was the time to clinical improvement, defined as the time from randomization to either an improvement of two points on a seven-category ordinal scale or discharge from the hospital, whichever came first 6 Even though their study showed no benefits with lopinavir–ritonavir treatment beyond standard care, this is exactly the sort of study that best informs our treatment options Following this, we were surprised to see the New England Journal of Medicine publishing a single arm study on 61 patients who received at least one dose of remdesevir, again with similar entry criteria of SaO2 <94% on air 7 Unlike the randomised trial by Cao et al , there was no accompanying editorial, but there was a subsequent an open letter discussing remdesevir studies from the CEO and Chairman of Gilead (https://www gilead com/stories/articles/an-open-letter-from-our-chairman-and-ceo) One presumes that the patients in the remdesevir single arm study, and several included in an earlier Lancet paper, 8 were recruited in perhaps easier conditions than those in Wuhan earlier this year Randomised trials are designed to precisely answer questions regarding toxicity and efficacy beyond standard of care and in the absence of an effective therapy it remains entirely reasonable and ethical at this point to perform a trial versus placebo They are much more informative than single arm studies which result in claims, perhaps borne from hope and/or desperation, that drugs work, 9 and such claims include those from physicians stating very high cure rates Clearly, recruiting patients recently diagnosed will have ‘cure rates’ usually in the high 90s%, unless one focuses on recruiting hospitalised patients and/or the elderly, frail, those with co-morbidities or a high body mass index, to name a few examples A well-known French microbiologist on social media has promoted the use of chloroquine to treat or prevent COVID-19 The FDA has approved it, although at the time of writing they haven’t explained the rationale behind the approval, and as a consequence patients, institutions and the worried public have demanded immediate chloroquine for all The resulting rush on chloroquine has led to severe shortages of the drug, and patients taking regular chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine for lupus or other systemic diseases had to stop their treatment due to a lack of supply This drug has well known often serious toxicities;10 we note one small study was stopped due to potential cardiac complications (https://www nytimes com/2020/04/12/health/chloroquine-coronavirus-trump html) and we suggest it should only be taken in the context of a randomised or other clinical study This is not to suggest single arm studies are not helpful: they inform subsequent trials includi g dosage, duration and appropriate endpoints For example, we have observed11 that use of baricitinib for 10 days is associated with viral rebound in nasopharyngeal swabs in rapidly recovered and discharged patients, and thus have recommended longer use in the large randomised studies in which it is included, and we suggest again that comparisons between different therapies or placebo are likely to yield more informative results than randomised studies comparing 10 days of intravenous remdesevir with 5 days (https://benevolent ai/news/potential-treatment-for-covid-19-identified-by-benevolentai-usingartificial-intelligence-enters-clinical-testing And https://investor lilly com/news-releases/news-release-details/lilly-begins-clinical-testingtherapies-covid-19) With this in mind, we thoroughly congratulate the authors from Guangzhou, China, who successfully randomised 86 individuals with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in a 2:2:1 design, to either lopinavir/ritonavir, arbidol (a broad spectrum viral infusion inhibitor12) or placebo (NCT04252885) Because they included only mild-to-moderate patients, the pre-defined primary endpoint was the conversion at day 21 of positive-to-negative PCR tests for SARSCoV-2 from nasopharyngeal swabs The real time reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) method used was indeed appropriate as it was performed simultaneously on two target genes, ORF1ab and N genes, and positive and negative controls were used at each batch Negative conversion required 2 separate real time RT-PCR tests separated by 24 hours, and the entry criteria for the definition of mild-to-moderate including the absence of pneumonia are entirely appropriate Baseline criteria between the 3 groups were well-matched (a criticism of one of the hydroxychloroquine randomised studies is this was not the case13) and follow up was appropriate Their data helpfully shows there was no difference between any of the groups in the primary endpoint In the continuing search for safe and effective new therapies to treat patients with COVID-19, we require well-conducted ethical studies including prospective, randomised, placebocontrolled clinical studies such as this Although many drugs have predicted in vitro activity against the virus, the proposal that such drugs might provide more benefit than harm is not appropriate with no evidence base supporting efficacy in any patients infected with SARSCoV-2 A preprint reporting results from a randomised trial of the anti-viral favipravir versus arbidol in 240 adults has shown no difference in clinical recovery at 7 days, but cough and pyrexia were improved on favipravir 14 These authors and Li et al should be applauded for their efforts to add a useful randomised trial to the literature, albeit one that is negative It is critical to publish such studies International multicentre trials, such as Discovery (NCT04315948) and Solidarity (EudraCT Number 2020-000982-18), will randomise patients with COVID-19 to receive different drugs in adaptive study designs Such initiatives will provide the best and most relevant data to guide management of patients with COVID-19 Whether antiviral, immunomodulatory or antimalarial drugs could be effective in changing the disease course in patients with either mild or severe COVID-19 remains unknown When patients take these off-label and recover it is not known whether the drug was helpful in the disease course without randomisation Similarly, when patients deteriorate, we do not know if they should be continued or considered clinically ineffective and stopped Assessing viral loads by PCR on nasopharyngeal swabs as performed in the trial here, will help clarify the roles of these medicines going forwards

positive: Current Evidence of the Pharmacological Treatments for Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) A Scoping Review Background: As of May 2 2020, 3,267,184 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and 229,971 COVID-19-caused deaths have been reported worldwide. Currently, there is limited clarity on the pharmacological treatments available for the novel coronavirus. We systematically identified the current evidence and ongoing research on the pharmacological treatments for COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a scoping review using PRISMA-ScR. Observational studies, including cohort studies and case series, as well as experimental studies, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs were searched electronically on April 7, 2020 and by hand on May 1, 2020. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases were searched along with seven trial registries. The inclusion criteria were patients with confirmed COVID-19 who received pharmacological therapies, including hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, remdesivir, tocilizumab, and favipiravir. Results: We identified 222 studies on pharmacological treatment of the novel coronavirus. We included 11 of these studies in this review, including the ones on hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine (one cohort), lopinavir/ritonavir (one RCT, three cohorts, and two case series), remdesivir (one RCT and one case series), tocilizumab (one case series), and favipiravir (one RCT). In the three RCTs carried out in China, both lopinavir/ritonavir and remdesivir did not show any significant earlier clinical improvement in case of severe infection [Hazard ratio (HR): 1.31, p=0.09 and HR: 1.24, p=0.24, respectively], The clinical recovery rate on day seven was not significantly different between the favipiravir and arbidol groups (p=0.14) for moderate patients, although the duration of pyrexia and cough in the favipiravir group was significantly shorter as compared to the arbidol group (p<0.01). There are 135 ongoing RCTs, including 72 for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, 29 for lopinavir/ritonavir, 14 for remdesivir, 16 for tocilizumab, and 4 for favipiravir. Conclusion: The clinical effectiveness and safety of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 remains unclear owing to the lack of large, high-quality RCTs. However, in the event of emerging infectious diseases, we need to repeatedly and systematically update the best available evidence to avoid misleading information.

positive: Baricitinib for COVID-19: a suitable treatment? – Authors' reply

positive: Randomized Clinical Trials and COVID-19: Managing Expectations

positive: [A pilot study of hydroxychloroquine in treatment of patients with moderate COVID-19]. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the treatment of patients with moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS We prospectively enrolled 30 treatment-naïve patients with confirmed COVID-19 after informed consent at Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center. The patients were randomized 1：1 to HCQ group and the control group. Patients in HCQ group were given HCQ 400 mg per day for 5 days plus conventional treatments, while those in the control group were given conventional treatment only. The primary endpoint was negative conversion rate of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid in respiratory pharyngeal swab on days 7 after randomization. This study has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center and registered online (NCT04261517). RESULTS One patient in HCQ group developed to severe during the treatment. On day 7, nucleic acid of throat swabs was negative in 13 (86.7%) cases in the HCQ group and 14 (93.3%) cases in the control group (P>0.05). The median duration from hospitalization to virus nucleic acid negative conservation was 4 (1,9) days in HCQ group, which is comparable to that in the control group [2 (1,4) days, Z=1.27, P>0.05]. The median time for body temperature normalization in HCQ group was 1 (0,2) day after hospitalization, which was also comparable to that in the control group [1 (0,3) day]. Radiological progression was shown on CT images in 5 cases (33.3%) of the HCQ group and 7 cases (46.7%) of the control group, and all patients showed improvement in follow-up examinations. Four cases (26.7%) of the HCQ group and 3 cases (20%) of the control group had transient diarrhea and abnormal liver function (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS The prognosis of COVID-19 moderate patients is good. Larger sample size study are needed to investigate the effects of HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19. Subsequent research should determine better endpoint and fully consider the feasibility of experiments such as sample size.

positive: Role of adjunctive treatment strategies in COVID-19 and a review of international and national clinical guidelines The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a global struggle to cope with the sheer numbers of infected persons, many of whom require intensive care support or eventually succumb to the illness. The outbreak is managed by a combination of disease containment via public health measures and supportive care for those who are affected. To date, there is no specific anti-COVID-19 treatment. However, the urgency to identify treatments that could turn the tide has led to the emergence of several investigational drugs as potential candidates to improve outcome, especially in the severe to critically ill. While many of these adjunctive drugs are being investigated in clinical trials, professional bodies have attempted to clarify the setting where the use of these drugs may be considered as off-label or compassionate use. This review summarizes the clinical evidence of investigational adjunctive treatments used in COVID-19 patients as well as the recommendations of their use from guidelines issued by international and national organizations in healthcare.

positive: Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Background: There is no effective therapy for COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) have been used for its treatment but their safety and efficacy remain uncertain. Objective: We performed a systematic review to synthesize the available data on the efficacy and safety of CQ and HCQ for the treatment of COVID-19. Methods: Two reviewers searched for published and pre-published relevant articles between December 2019 to 8th June 2020. The data from the selected studies were abstracted and analyzed for efficacy and safety outcomes. Critical appraisal of the evidence was done by Cochrane risk of bias tool and Newcastle Ottawa scale. The quality of evidence was graded as per the GRADE approach. Results: We reviewed 12 observational and 3 randomized trials which included 10659 patients of whom 5713 received CQ/HCQ and 4966 received only standard of care. The efficacy of CQ/HCQ for COVID-19 was inconsistent across the studies. Meta-analysis of included studies revealed no significant reduction in mortality with HCQ use [RR 0.98 95% CI 0.66-1.46] , time to fever resolution [mean difference -0.54 days (-1.19-011)] or clinical deterioration/development of ARDS with HCQ [RR 0.90 95% CI 0.47-1.71]. There was a higher risk of ECG abnormalities/arrhythmia with HCQ/CQ [RR 1.46 95% CI 1.04 to 2.06]. The quality of evidence was graded as very low for these outcomes. Conclusions: The available evidence suggests that CQ or HCQ does not improve clinical outcomes in COVID-19. Well-designed randomized trials are required for assessing the efficacy and safety of HCQ and CQ for COVID-19.

positive: Outcome reporting from protocols of clinical trials of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): a review Objectives: To examine heterogeneity of outcomes in protocols of clinical trials of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to identify outcomes for prioritization in developing a core outcome set (COS) in this field. Design: This study is a review. Data sources: Databases of ICMJE-accepted clinical trial registry platform were searched on February 14, 2020. Eligibility Criteria: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs of COVID-19 were considered.Conditions of patients include common type, severe type or critical type. Interventions include traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) and Western medicine. We excluded trials that for discharged patients, psychological intervention and complications of COVID-19. Data extraction and synthesis: The general information and outcomes, outcome measurement instruments and measurement times were extracted. The results were analysed by descriptive analysis. Results: 19 registry platforms were searched. A total of 97 protocols were included from 160 protocols. For protocols of TCM clinical trials, 76 outcomes from 16 outcome domains were reported, and almost half (34/76, 44.74%) of outcomes were reported only once; the most frequently reported outcome was time of SARS-CoV-2 RNA turns to negative. 27 (27/76, 35.53%) outcomes were provided one or more outcome measurement instruments. 10 outcomes were provided one or more measurement time frame. For protocols of western medicine clinical trials, 126 outcomes from 17 outcome domains were reported; almost half (62/126, 49.21%) of outcomes were reported only once; the most frequently reported outcome was proportion of patients with negative SARS-CoV-2. 27 outcomes were provided one or more outcome measurement instruments. 40 (40/126, 31.75%) outcomes were provided one or more measurement time frame. Conclusion: Outcome reporting in protocols of clinical trials of COVID-19 is inconsistent. Thus, developing a core outcome set is necessary. Keywords: Outcomes; clinical trials, COVID-19; review.

positive: Core Outcome Set for Clinical Trials of COVID-19 Based on Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine BACKGROUND: Development of a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials for COVID-19 is urgent because of the pandemic wreaking havoc worldwide and the heterogeneity of outcomes in clinical trials. METHODS: A preliminary list of outcomes was developed after a systematic review of protocols of clinical trials for COVID-19. Then, two rounds of the Delphi survey were conducted. Stakeholders were traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) experts, Western medicine (WM) experts, nurses, and the public. Patients with confirmed COVID-19 were also invited to participate in a questionnaire written in understandable language. Then different stakeholders participated in a consensus meeting by video conference to vote. RESULTS: Ninety-seven eligible study protocols were identified from 160 clinical trials. Seventy-six outcomes were identified from TCM clinical trials and 126 outcomes were identified from WM clinical trials. Finally, 145 outcomes were included in the first round of the Delphi survey. Then, a COS for clinical trials of TCM and WM was developed. The COS included clinical outcomes (recovery/improvement/progression/death), etiology (SARS-CoV-2 nucleic-acid tests, viral load), inflammatory factor (C-reactive protein), vital signs (temperature, respiration), blood and lymphatic-system parameters (lymphocytes, virus antibody), respiratory outcomes (pulmonary imaging, blood oxygen saturation, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, arterial blood gas analysis, mechanical ventilation, oxygen intake, pneumonia severity index), clinical efficacy (prevalence of preventing patients with mild-to-moderate disease progressing to severe disease), and symptoms (clinical symptom score). Outcomes were recommended according to different types of disease. Outcome measurement instruments/definitions were also recommended. CONCLUSION: Though there are some limitations for the research, such as insufficient patients and the public involvement, and the unbalanced stakeholders' region, the COS for COVID-19 may improve consistency of outcome reporting in clinical trials. It also should be updated with research progression.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine Versus COVID-19: A Rapid Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Background: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a major global issue with rising the number of infected individuals and mortality in recent months. Among all therapeutic approaches, arguments have raised about hydroxychloroquine efficacy in treatment of COVID-19. We aimed to overcome the controversies regarding effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine in treatment of COVID-19, using a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar and medRxiv pre-print database using all available MeSH terms for COVID-19 and hydroxychloroquine. Two authors selected and assessed the quality of studies independently using related checklists. Data have been extracted from included studies and analyzed using CMA v. 2.2.064. heterogeneity was also assessed using I-squared test. Results: Seven studies including four clinical trials and three observational studies have entered into the study. The results of meta-analysis of clinical trials showed that there were no significant differences between patients who received the standard treatment with HCQ regimen and the patients that received the standard treatment without HCQ (RR: 1.44, 95% CI, 0.80-2.59). CT-Scan findings improved in 59% (95% CI 0.15-0.92) and nasopharyngeal culture following RT-PCR resulted negative in 76% (95% CI 0.56-0.89) of patients received hydroxychloroquine. Meta-analysis of observational studies showed 75% (95% CI, 0.54-0.88) of patients were discharged from the hospital, 34% (95% CI, 0.07-0.14) admitted to intensive care unit and 1.5% (95% CI, 0.03-0.83) have expired. Conclusion: This study indicated no clinical benefits regarding HCQ for treatment of COVID-19 patients. However, further large clinical trials should be taken into account in order to achieve more reliable findings.

positive: Prioritisation of potential anti-SARS-CoV-2 drug repurposing opportunities based on ability to achieve adequate target site concentrations derived from their established human pharmacokinetics Many papers are emerging that describe the in vitro antiviral activity of drugs that may be repurposed for therapy or chemoprophylaxis against SARS-CoV-2. However, no comprehensive evaluation of these molecules in the context of the achievable plasma pharmacokinetics after administration of approved doses and schedules to humans has been conducted. Moreover, most publications have focussed on 50% maximum effective concentrations (EC50), which may be an insufficiently robust indicator of antiviral activity because of marked differences in the slope of the concentration-response curve between drugs. Accordingly, in vitro anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity data was digitised from all available publications up to 13th April 2020 and used to recalculate an EC90 value for each drug. EC90 values were then expressed as a ratio to the achievable maximum plasma concentrations (Cmax) reported for each drug after administration of the approved dose to humans (Cmax/EC90 ratio). Only 14 of the analysed drugs achieved a Cmax/EC90 ratio above 1 meaning that plasma Cmax concentrations exceeded those necessary to inhibit 90% of SARS-CoV-2 replication. A more in-depth assessment of these drugs demonstrated that only nitazoxanide, nelfinavir, tipranavir (boosted with ritonavir) and sulfadoxine achieved plasma concentrations above their anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity across their entire approved dosing interval at their approved human dose. For all drugs reported, the unbound lung to plasma tissue partition coefficient (KpUlung) was also simulated and used along with reported Cmax and fraction unbound in plasma to derive a lung Cmax/EC50 as a better indicator of potential human efficacy (lung Cmax/EC90 ratio was also calculable for a limited number of drugs). Using this parameter hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, mefloquine, atazanavir (boosted with ritonavir), tipranavir (boosted with ritonavir), ivermectin, azithromycin and lopinavir (boosted with ritonavir) were all predicted to achieve lung concentrations over 10-fold higher than their reported EC50. This analysis was not possible for nelfinavir because insufficient data were available to calculate KpUlung but nitozoxanide and sulfadoxine were also predicted to exceed their reported EC50 by 3.1- and 1.5-fold in lung, respectively. The antiviral activity data reported to date is of variable quality and conducted under different conditions by different investigators. However, this analysis has prioritised candidates with the best chance for success in therapy or chemoprevention of Covid-19 based upon the currently available in vitro activity and human plasma pharmacokinetic data. Future studies should focus on EC90 values and discuss findings in the context of achievable exposures in humans, especially within target compartments such as the lung, in order to maximise the potential for success of proposed human clinical trials.

positive: Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report BACKGROUND: Although several therapeutic agents have been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), none have yet been shown to be efficacious. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous remdesivir in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 with evidence of lower respiratory tract involvement. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remdesivir (200 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for up to 9 additional days) or placebo for up to 10 days. The primary outcome was the time to recovery, defined by either discharge from the hospital or hospitalization for infection-control purposes only. RESULTS: A total of 1063 patients underwent randomization. The data and safety monitoring board recommended early unblinding of the results on the basis of findings from an analysis that showed shortened time to recovery in the remdesivir group. Preliminary results from the 1059 patients (538 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo) with data available after randomization indicated that those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 11 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 12), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 19) in those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.55; P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality by 14 days were 7.1% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.04). Serious adverse events were reported for 114 of the 541 patients in the remdesivir group who underwent randomization (21.1%) and 141 of the 522 patients in the placebo group who underwent randomization (27.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 and evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ACTT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04280705.)

positive: Effectiveness of Interferon Beta 1a, compared to Interferon Beta 1b and the usual therapeutic regimen to treat adults with moderate to severe COVID-19: structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial OBJECTIVES: We will investigate the effectiveness of Interferon Beta 1a, compared to Interferon Beta 1b and the usual therapeutic regimen in COVID-19 in patients that have tested positive and are moderately to severely ill. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a single center, open label, randomized, controlled, parallel group, clinical trial that will be conducted at Loghman Hakim Medical Education Center in conjunction with Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty COVID-19 confirmed cases (using the RT-PCR test) will be enrolled in the trial between April 9(th) to April 14(th) 2020. Patients will be randomly assigned to the intervention groups or the control group with the following eligibility criteria: ≥ 18 years of age AND (oxygen saturation (SPO2) ≤ 93% OR respiratory rate ≥ 24) AND at least one of the following: Contactless infrared forehead thermometer temperature of ≥37.8, cough, sputum production, nasal discharge, myalgia, headache or fatigue on admission, and time of onset of the symptoms should be acute (Days ≤ 14). Although Hydroxychloroquine will be administered in a single dose, patients with heart problems (prolonged QT or PR intervals, second- or third-degree heart block, and arrhythmias including torsade de pointes) will be excluded. Other exclusion criteria include using drugs with potential interaction with Hydroxychloroquine + Lopinavir/Ritonavir, Interferon-β 1a, Interferon-β 1b, pregnant or lactating women, history of alcohol or drug addiction in the past 5 years, blood ALT/AST levels > 5 times the upper limit of normal on laboratory results and refusal to participate. This study will be undertaken at the Loghman Hakim Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences and Health Services. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: COVID-19 confirmed patients will be randomly assigned to one of three groups, with 20 patients in each. The first group (Arm 1) will receive Hydroxychloroquine + Lopinavir / Ritonavir (Kaletra) + Interferon-β 1a (Recigen), the second group (Arm 2) will be administered Hydroxychloroquine + Lopinavir / Ritonavir (Kaletra) + Interferon-β 1b (Ziferon), and the control group (Arm 3) will be treated by Hydroxychloroquine + Lopinavir / Ritonavir (Kaletra). MAIN OUTCOMES: Time to clinical improvement is our primary outcome measure. This is an improvement of two points on a seven-category ordinal scale (recommended by the World Health Organization: Coronavirus disease (COVID-2019) R&D. Geneva: World Health Organization) or discharge from the hospital, whichever comes first. Secondary outcomes include mortality from the date of randomization until the last day of the study which will be the day all of the patients have had at least one of the following outcomes: 1) Improvement of two points on a seven-category ordinal scale. 2) Discharge from the hospital 3) Death. If any patient dies, we have reached an important secondary outcome. SpO2 Improvement between the last and first day of hospitalization, using pulse-oximetry. Duration of hospitalization from date of randomization until the date of hospital discharge or date of death from any cause, whichever comes first. Incidence of new mechanical ventilation uses from date of randomization until the last day of the study. Please note that we are trying to add further secondary outcomes and this section of the protocol is still evolving. Statistical analysis will be performed by R version 3.6.1 software. We will use Kaplan–Meier to analyze the time to clinical improvement (compared with a log-rank test). Hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals will be calculated using the Cox proportional-hazards model in crude and adjusted analysis. RANDOMIZATION: Eligible patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive either Interferon Beta 1a, Interferon Beta 1b or standard care only. Patients will be randomly allocated to three therapeutic arms using permuted, block-randomization to balance the number of patients allocated to each group. The permuted block (three or six patients per block) randomization sequence will be generated, using Package ‘randomizeR’ in R software version 3.6.1. and placed in individual sealed and opaque envelopes by the statistician. The investigator will enroll the patients and only then open envelopes to assign patients to the different treatment groups. This method of allocation concealment will result in minimum selection and confounding biases. BLINDING (MASKING): The present research is open-label (no masking) of patients and health care professionals who are undertaking outcome assessment of the primary outcome - time to clinical improvement. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMIZED (SAMPLE SIZE): Of the 60 patients who underwent randomization, 20 patients were assigned to receive Interferon beta-1a, 20 patients were assigned to receive Interferon beta 1b plus standard care and the rest of patients were assigned to receive the standard care alone. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 1.2.1. Recruitment is finished, the start date of recruitment was on 9(th) April 2020 and the end date was on 14(th) April 2020. Last point of data collection will be the last day on which all of the 60 participants have had an outcome of clinical improvement or death, completing the study’s follow-up time window. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with National Institutes of Health Clinical trials (www.clinicaltrials.gov; identification number NCT04343768, registered April 8, 2020 and first available online April 13, 2020). FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: BCG versus COVID-19: impact on urology PURPOSE: To search for evidence base for using BCG in the fight against COVID-19 and the possible impact of these clinical trials on urology practice. METHODS: A literature review about the basis of the ongoing clinical trials using BCG against COVID-19, as well as the use of BCG in urology and if there are any implications of these trials on our practice. RESULTS: Based on data from some epidemiological studies, there are some current clinical trials on the use BCG as a possible prophylactic vaccine against SARS CoV-2 which can affect urology practice. Urologists are already struggling with the global shortage of BCG which can be even more aggravated by such trials. In addition, if the ongoing trials proved the efficacy of BCG as a prophylaxis against COVID-19, this may open the door to more urological research opportunities to question the possibility that intra-vesical BCG, given its systemic immunologic effect, may have been protective to this subgroup of urological patients. CONCLUSION: The ongoing clinical trials using BCG against COVID-19 can affect our urology practice. We need to stay vigilant to such impacts: BCG shortage and possible new chances for urology research work.

positive: Characteristics of registered clinical trials assessing treatments for COVID-19: a cross-sectional analysis OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has prompted many initiatives to identify safe and efficacious treatments, yet little is known regarding where early efforts have focused. We aimed to characterise registered clinical trials assessing drugs or plasma treatments for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional analysis of clinical trials for the treatment of COVID-19 that were registered in the USA or in countries contributing to the WHO’s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Relevant trial entries of drugs or plasma were downloaded on 26 March 2020, deduplicated, verified with reviews of major medical journals and WHO websites and independently analysed by two reviewers. MAIN OUTCOME(S): Trial intervention, sponsorship, critical design elements and specified outcomes RESULTS: Overall, 201 clinical trials were registered for testing the therapeutic benefits of 92 drugs or plasma, including 64 in monotherapy and 28 different combinations. Only eight (8.7%) products or combinations involved new molecular entities. The other test therapies had a wide range of prior medical uses, including as antivirals, antimalarials, immunosuppressants and oncology treatments. In 152 trials (75.7%), patients were randomised to treatment or comparator, including 55 trials with some form of blinding and 97 open-label studies. The 49 (24.4%) of trials without a randomised design included 29 single armed studies and 20 trials with some comparison group. Most trial designs featured multiple endpoints. Clinical endpoints were identified in 134 (66.7%) of trials and included COVID-19 symptoms, death, recovery, required intensive care and hospital discharge. Clinical scales were being used in 33 (16.4%) trials, most often measures of oxygenation and critical illness. Surrogate endpoints or biomarkers were studied in 88 (42.3%) of trials, primarily assays of viral load. Although the trials were initiated in more than 17 countries or regions, 100 (49.8%) were registered in China and 78 (37.8%) in the USA. Registered trials increased rapidly, with the number of registered trials doubling from 1 March to 26 March 2020. CONCLUSIONS: While accelerating morbidity and mortality from the COVID-19 pandemic has been paralleled by early and rapid clinical investigation, many trials lack features to optimise their scientific value. Global coordination and increased funding of high-quality research may help to maximise scientific progress in rapidly discovering safe and effective treatments.

positive: Clinical Characteristics of 20,662 Patients with COVID-19 in mainland China: A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic and has been widely reported; however, a comprehensive systemic review and meta-analysis has not been conducted. We systematically investigated the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in mainland China to guide diagnosis and treatment. We searched the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, bioRxiv, medRxiv, and SSRN databases for studies related to COVID-19 published or preprinted in English or Chinese from January 1 to March 15, 2020. Clinical studies on COVID-19 performed in mainland China were included. We collected primary outcomes including signs and symptoms, chest CT imaging, laboratory tests, and treatments. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. Qualitative and quantitative synthesis was conducted, and random-effects models were applied to pooled estimates. This study is registered with PROSPERO (number CRD42020171606). Of the 3624 records identified, 147 studies (20,662 patients) were analyzed. The mean age of patients with COVID-19 was 49.40 years, 53.45% were male, and 38.52% had at least one comorbidity. Fever and cough were the most common symptoms, followed by fatigue, expectoration, and shortness of breath. Most patients with COVID-19 had abnormal chest CT findings with ground glass opacity (70.70%) or consolidation (29.91%). Laboratory findings shown lymphopenia, increased lactate dehydrogenase, increased infection-related indicators, and fibrinolytic hyperactivity. Antiviral therapy, antibiotic therapy, and corticosteroids were administered to 89.75%, 79.13%, and 35.64% of patients, respectively. Most clinical characteristics of COVID-19 are non-specific. Patients with suspected should be evaluated by virological assays and clinically treated.

positive: Early experience with convalescent plasma as immunotherapy for COVID‐19 in China: Knowns and unknowns BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In the absence of a vaccine or specific drug treatment options for coronavirus disease (COVID‐19), attention has been shifted in China to the possible therapeutic use of convalescent plasma. COVID‐19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is currently under investigation. We summarized clinical studies and other research data available as of May 5, 2020, on CCP therapy according to the Clinical Treatment Guideline of COVID‐19 Convalescent Plasma in China, as well as clinical experience at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University, as part of a comprehensive anti‐epidemic strategy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As of May 5, 2020, when the epidemic was well‐controlled in China, healthcare databases and sources of English literature relating to convalescent plasma were searched and reviewed. Sources of clinical and methodological heterogeneity were identified. RESULTS: As of May 5, 2020, up to 2,000 samples of CCP had been collected across China and administered to 700 COVID‐19 patients. From donors, 200–400 mL of plasma were collected at each donation, with antibody titers >1:160. We identified three clinical studies for COVID‐19 in China. Analyses showed a statistically significant improvement in clinical outcomes compared with untreated cases (P<0.001). No adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSION: From initial studies, convalescent plasma therapy appears effective and safe for COVID‐19. However, there is clearly a need for well‐designed RCTs (randomized controlled trials) or other formal studies to further evaluate the efficacy and any potential adverse effects of CCP.

positive: COVID-19: a novel coronavirus and a novel challenge for critical care

positive: Repair of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome by Stromal Cell Administration in COVID-19 (REALIST-COVID-19): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised, controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of the study is to assess the safety of a single intravenous infusion of Mesenchymal Stromal Cells (MSCs) in patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19. Secondary objectives are to determine the effects of MSCs on important clinical outcomes, as described below. TRIAL DESIGN: REALIST COVID 19 is a randomised, placebo-controlled, triple blinded trial. PARTICIPANTS: The study will be conducted in Intensive Care Units in hospitals across the United Kingdom. Patients with moderate to severe ARDS as defined by the Berlin definition, receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and with a diagnosis of COVID-19 based on clinical diagnosis or PCR test will be eligible. Patients will be excluded for the following reasons: more than 72 hours from the onset of ARDS; age < 16 years; patient known to be pregnant; major trauma in previous 5 days; presence of any active malignancy (other than non-melanoma skin cancer); WHO Class III or IV pulmonary hypertension; venous thromboembolism currently receiving anti-coagulation or within the past 3 months; patient receiving extracorporeal life support; severe chronic liver disease (Child-Pugh > 12); Do Not Attempt Resuscitation order in place; treatment withdrawal imminent within 24 hours; prisoners; declined consent; non-English speaking patients or those who do not adequately understand verbal or written information unless an interpreter is available; previously enrolled in the REALIST trial. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention: Allogeneic donor CD362 enriched human umbilical cord derived mesenchymal stromal cells (REALIST ORBCEL-C) supplied as sterile, single-use cryopreserved cell suspension of a fixed dose of 400 x10(6) cells in 40ml volume, to be diluted in Plasma-Lyte 148 to a total volume of 200mls for administration. Comparator (placebo): Plasma-Lyte 148 Solution for Infusion (200mls). The cellular product (REALIST ORBCEL-C) was developed and patented by Orbsen Therapeutics. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary safety outcome is the incidence of serious adverse events. The primary efficacy outcome is Oxygenation Index (OI) at day 7. Secondary outcomes include: OI at days 4 and 14; respiratory compliance, driving pressure and PaO(2)/FiO(2) ratio (PF ratio) at days 4, 7 and 14; Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score at days 4, 7 and 14; extubation and reintubation; ventilation free days at day 28; duration of mechanical ventilation; length of ICU and hospital stay; 28-day and 90-day mortality. RANDOMISATION: After obtaining informed consent, patients will be randomised via a centralised automated 24-hour telephone or web-based randomisation system (CHaRT, Centre for Healthcare Randomised Trials, University of Aberdeen). Randomisation will be stratified by recruitment centre and by vasopressor use and patients will be allocated to REALIST ORBCEL-C or placebo control in a 1:1 ratio. BLINDING (MASKING): The investigator, treating physician, other members of the site research team and participants will be blinded. The cell therapy facility and clinical trials pharmacist will be unblinded to facilitate intervention and placebo preparation. The unblinded individuals will keep the treatment information confidential. The infusion bag will be masked at the time of preparation and will be administered via a masked infusion set. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A sample size of 60 patients with 30 patients randomised to the intervention and 30 to the control group. If possible, recruitment will continue beyond 60 patients to provide more accurate and definitive trial results. The total number of patients recruited will depend on the pandemic and be guided by the data monitoring and ethics committee (DMEC). TRIAL STATUS: REALIST Phase 1 completed in January 2020 prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. This was an open label dose escalation study of REALIST ORBCEL-C in patients with ARDS. The COVID-19 pandemic emerged as REALIST Phase 2 was planned to commence and the investigator team decided to repurpose the Phase 2 trial as a COVID-19 specific trial. This decision was discussed and approved by the Trial Steering Committee (TSC) and DMEC. Submissions were made to the Research Ethics Committee (REC) and MHRA to amend the protocol to a COVID-19 specific patient population and the protocol amendment was accepted by the REC on 27(th) March 2020 and MHRA on 30(th) March 2020 respectively. Other protocol changes in this amendment included an increase in the time of onset of ARDS from 48 to 72 hours, inclusion of clinical outcomes as secondary outcomes, the provision of an option for telephone consent, an indicative sample size and provision to continue recruitment beyond this indicative sample size. The current protocol in use is version 4.0 23.03.2020 (Additional file 1). Urgent Public Health status was awarded by the NIHR on 2 April 2020 and the trial opened to recruitment and recruited the first participant the same day. At the time of publication the trial was open to recruitment at 5 sites across the UK (Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, King’s College London, Guys and St Thomas’ Hospital London, Birmingham Heartlands Hospital and the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham) and 12 patients have been recruited across these sites. Additional sites are planned to open and appropriate approvals for these are being obtained. It is estimated recruitment will continue for 6 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT 03042143 (Registered 3 Feb 2017). EudraCT 2017-000585-33 (Registered 28 Nov 2017). FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol (version 4.0 23.03.2020) is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).

positive: COVID-19: A Brief Overview of the Discovery Clinical Trial. The outbreak of COVID-19 is leading to a tremendous search for curative treatments. The urgency of the situation favors a repurposing of active drugs but not only antivirals. This short communication focuses on four treatments recommended by WHO and included in the first clinical trial of the European Discovery project.

positive: How robust are the results of one of the first positive trials exploring hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19? An outbreak of a novel human coronavirus infection emerged in Wuhan, China in December 2019. Two months later, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced SARS-CoV-2 as the name for the new virus and COVID-19 for the associated illness. On March 12, 2020, the WHO officially declared COVID-19 as a pandemic. The scientific community has raced to find effective therapeutic agents against the virus. Gautret et al 2020 is among one of the first purportedly positive trials of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19. However, it is imperative that a thorough analysis and understanding of trial data be undertaken prior to making claims about safety and efficacy. Our group assessed the statistical robustness of the trial using the Fragility Index (FI). The FI provides a numerical quantification of a clinical trial's conclusions. The index is based on iterative statistical calculations to determine the minimum number of events within a trial that would theoretically need to change from positive to negative in order for the trial's endpoint to convert from significant to non-significant; the higher the index, the more statistically robust the study results. For the Gautret et al trial, one endpoint had an FI of 1, two had indices of 2, and another had an index of 4. The primary endpoint of viral clearance on day 6 had an FI of 4. This indicates that if 4 events were to change from positive to negative, the conclusion of the trial would become mathematically non-significant. This index is comparable to many other published trials of established agents; the median FI across the reported literature appears to be 2. In conclusion, the trial results reported by Gautret et al are statistically robust, assuming that data quality is not compromised; however, the study was an open-label trial with non-homogenous groups, with analysis conducted per-protocol. Additionally, SARS-CoV-2 Reverse Transcriptase-PCR (RT-PCR) testing was not conducted in a systematic way amongst the two groups. Further analyses of this trial and future trials of antiviral agents with potential activity against SARS-CoV-2 should be performed with complementary epidemiologic and statistical techniques to determine whether the trial's results are clinically important and/or should be explored in depth. Given the statistically robust results reported by Gautret et al, despite the study's inherent methodological and analytical flaws, hydroxychloroquine should be studied as a potential agent against COVID-19 in larger clinical trials.

positive: Emergence of novel coronavirus and progress toward treatment and vaccine In late December 2019, a group of patients was observed with pneumonia-like symptoms that were linked with a wet market in Wuhan, China. The patients were found to have a novel coronavirus genetically related to a bat coronavirus that was termed SARS-CoV-2. The virus gradually spread worldwide and was declared a pandemic by WHO. Scientists have started trials on potential preventive and treatment options. Currently, there is no specific approved treatment for SARS-CoV-2, and various clinical trials are underway to explore better treatments. Some previously approved antiviral and other drugs have shown some in vitro activity. Here we summarize the fight against this novel coronavirus with particular focus on the different treatment options and clinical trials exploring treatment as well as work done toward development of vaccines.

positive: Therapeutic Management of COVID-19 Patients: A systematic review Abstract Background SARS-CoV-2 is the causative agent of COVID-19; that has been declared a global pandemic by the WHO in 2020. The COVID-19 treatment guidelines vary in each country, and yet there is no approved therapeutic for COVID-19. Aims of the study this review aimed to report any evidence of therapeutics used for the management of COVID-19 patients in clinical practice since the emergence of the virus. Methods A systematic review protocol was developed based on PRISMA Statement. Articles for review were selected from electronic databases (Embase, Medline and Google Scholar). Readily accessible peer-reviewed, full articles in English published from December 1st , 2019 to March 26th , 2020 were included. The search terms included combinations of: COVID, SARS-COV-2, glucocorticoids, convalescent plasma, antiviral and antibacterial. There were no restrictions on the type of study design eligible for inclusion. Results As of March 26th, 2020, of the initial manuscripts identified (n=449); forty-one studies were included. These consisted of clinical trials (n=3), case reports (n=7), case series (n=10), retrospective (n=11) and prospective (n=10) observational studies. Thirty-six studies were conducted in China (88%). The most commonly reported medicine in this systematic review was corticosteroids (n=25), followed by Lopinavir (n=21) and Oseltamivir (n=16). Conclusions This is the first systematic review to date related to the therapeutics used in COVID-19 patients. Only 41 research articles on COVID-19 and therapeutics were found eligible to be included, most conducted in China. Corticosteroid therapy was found to be the most studied medicine in the literature.

positive: Ramipril in High Risk Patients with COVID-19 Abstract Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by SARS-CoV2 that interfaces with the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) through angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE-2). This interaction has been proposed as a potential risk factor in patients treated with RAAS-inhibitors. Objectives To analyze if RAAS-inhibitors modify the risk for COVID-19. Methods RASTAVI (NCT03201185) is an ongoing randomized clinical trial randomly allocating Ramipril or control after successful transcatheter aortic valve replacement at 14 centers is Spain. We performed a non-pre-specified interim analysis to evaluate its impact on COVID-19 risk in this vulnerable population. Results As in April 1st 2020, 102 patients (50 Ramipril and 52 controls) were included in the trial. Mean age was 82.3±6.1 years, 56.9% males. Median time of Ramipril treatment was 6 months [IQR:2.9-11.4]. Eleven patients (10.8%) have been diagnosed with COVID-19 (6 in control group and 5 receiving Ramipril, HR=1.150 [95%CI: 0.351-3.768]). The risk of COVID-19 was increased in older patients (p=0.019), those with atrial fibrillation (p=0.066), lower hematocrit (p=0.084), and more comorbidities according to Society of thoracic surgeons score (p=0.065). Admission and oxygen supply was required in 4.9% (2 patients in the Ramipril and 3 in control), and 4 of them died (two in each randomized group). A higher body mass index was the only factor increasing the mortality rate (p=0.039). Conclusions In a high risk population of old patients with cardiovascular disease, randomization to Ramipril had no impact in the incidence or severity of COVID-19. This analysis supports the maintenance of RAAS-inhibitor treatment during COVID-19 crisis.

positive: Endpoints for randomized controlled clinical trials for COVID-19 treatments Introduction: Endpoint choice for randomized controlled trials of treatments for COVID-19 is complex. A new disease brings many uncertainties, but trials must start rapidly. COVID-19 is heterogeneous, ranging from mild disease that improves within days to critical disease that can last weeks and can end in death. While improvement in mortality would provide unquestionable evidence about clinical significance of a treatment, sample sizes for a study evaluating mortality are large and may be impractical. Furthermore, patient states in between"cure"and"death"represent meaningful distinctions. Clinical severity scores have been proposed as an alternative. However, the appropriate summary measure for severity scores has been the subject of debate, particularly in relating to the uncertainty about the time-course of COVID-19. Outcomes measured at fixed time-points may risk missing the time of clinical benefit. An endpoint such as time-to-improvement (or recovery), avoids the timing problem. However, some have argued that power losses will result from reducing the ordinal scale to a binary state of"recovered"vs"not recovered."Methods: We evaluate statistical power for possible trial endpoints for COVID-19 treatment trials using simulation models and data from two recent COVID-19 treatment trials. Results: Power for fixed-time point methods depends heavily on the time selected for evaluation. Time-to-improvement (or recovery) analyses do not specify a time-point. Time-to-event approaches have reasonable statistical power, even when compared to a fixed time-point method evaluated at the optimal time. Discussion: Time-to-event analyses methods have advantages in the COVID-19 setting, unless the optimal time for evaluating treatment effect is known in advance. Even when the optimal time is known, a time-to-event approach may increase power for interim analyses.

positive: A prospective, randomised, double blind placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia (TOC-COVID): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: SARS-CoV2 infection leads to a concomitant pulmonary inflammation. This inflammation is supposed to be the main driver in the pathogenesis of lung failure (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome) in COVID-19. Objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single dose treatment with Tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19. We hypothesize that Tocilizumab slows down the progression of SARS-CoV-2 induced pneumonia and inflammation. We expect an improvement in pulmonary function compared to placebo-treated patients. Desirable outcomes would be that tocilizumab reduces the number of days that patients are dependent on mechanical ventilation and reduces the invasiveness of breathing assistance. Furthermore, this treatment might result in fewer admissions to intensive care units. Next to these efficacy parameters, safety of a therapy with Tocilizumab in COVID-19 patients has to be monitored closely, since immunosuppression could lead to an increased rate of bacterial infections, which could negatively influence the patient's outcome. TRIAL DESIGN: Multicentre, prospective, 2-arm randomised (ratio 1:1), double blind, placebo-controlled trial with parallel group design. PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion criteria 1.Proof of SARS-CoV2 (Symptoms and positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR))2.Severe respiratory failure: a.Ambient air SpO2 ≤ 92% orb.Need of ≥ 6l O2/min orc.NIV (non-invasive ventilation) ord.IMV (invasive mechanical ventilation)3.Age ≥ 18 years Exclusion criteria 1.Non-invasive or invasive mechanical ventilation ≥ 48 hours2.Pregnancy or breast feeding3.Liver injury or failure (AST/ALT ≥ 5x ULN)4.Leukocytes < 2 × 103/µl5.Thrombocytes < 50 × 103/µl6.Severe bacterial infection (PCT > 3ng/ml)7.Acute or chronic diverticulitis8.Immunosuppressive therapy (e.g. mycophenolate, azathioprine, methotrexate, biologicals, prednisolone >10mg/d; exceptions are: prednisolone ≤ 10mg/d, sulfasalazine or hydroxychloroquine)9.Known active or chronic tuberculosis10.Known active or chronic viral hepatitis11.Known allergic reactions to tocilizumab or its ingredients12.Life expectation of less than 1 year (independent of COVID-19)13.Participation in any other interventional clinical trial within the last 30 days before the start of this trial14.Simultaneous participation in other interventional trials (except for participation in COVID-19 trials) which could interfere with this trial; simultaneous participation in registry and diagnostic trials is allowed15.Failure to use one of the following safe methods of contraception: female condoms, diaphragm or coil, each used in combination with spermicides; intra-uterine device; hormonal contraception in combination with a mechanical method of contraception. The data collection of the primary follow up (28 days after randomisation) takes place during the hospital stay. Subsequently, a telephone interview on the quality of life is conducted after 6 and 12 months. Participants will be recruited from inpatients at ten medical centres in Germany. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Intervention arm: Application of 8mg/kg body weight (BW) Tocilizumab i.v. once immediately after randomisation (12 mg/kg for patients with <30kg BW; total dose should not exceed 800 mg) AND conventional treatment. Control arm: Placebo (NaCl) i.v. once immediately after randomisation AND conventional treatment. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary endpoint is the number of ventilator free days (d) (VFD) in the first 28 days after randomisation. Non-invasive ventilation (NIV), Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) are defined as ventilator days. VFD's are counted as zero if the patient dies within the first 28 days. RANDOMISATION: The randomisation code will be generated by the CTU (Clinical Trials Unit, ZKS Freiburg) using the following procedure to ensure that treatment assignment is unbiased and concealed from patients and investigator staff. Randomisation will be stratified by centre and will be performed in blocks of variable length in a ratio of 1:1 within each centre. The block lengths will be documented separately and will not be disclosed to the investigators. The randomisation code will be produced by validated programs based on the Statistical Analysis System (SAS). BLINDING (MASKING): Participants, caregivers, and the study team assessing the outcomes are blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): 100 participants will be randomised to each group (thus 200 participants in total). TRIAL STATUS: Protocol Version: V 1.2, 16.04.2020. Recruitment began 27th April 2020 and is anticipated to be completed by December 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered before trial start in trial registries (EudraCT: No. 2020-001408-41, registered 21st April 2020, and DRKS: No. DRKS00021238, registered 22nd April 2020). FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: COVID-19 gone bad: A new character in the spectrum of the hyperferritinemic syndrome? Abstract The severe form of COVID-19 share several clinical and laboratory features with four entities gathered under the term “hyperferritinemic syndrome” and including macrophage activation syndrome (MAS), adult-onset Still's disease (AOSD), catastrophic anti-phospholipid syndrome (CAPS) and septic shock. COVID-19 systemic inflammatory reaction and “hyperferritinemic syndromes” are all characterized by high serum ferritin and a life-threatening hyper-inflammation sustained by a cytokines storm which eventually leads to multi-organ failure. In this review, we analyze the possible epidemiological and molecular mechanisms responsible for hyper-inflammation in patients with severe COVID-19 and we underline the similarities between this condition and “hyperferritinemic syndromes” which would allow considering this entity as the fifth member of the spectrum of inflammatory conditions.

positive: PROGNOSTIC FACTORS FOR CLINICAL COURSE OF PATIENTS WITH COVID-19: PROTOCOL FOR A RAPID LIVING SYSTEMATIC REVIEW CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Determining prognostic factors in a context of health crises such as the COVID-19 scenario may provide the best possible care for patients and optimize the management and the resource utilization of the health system. Thus, we aim to systematically review the prognostic factors for different outcomes of patients with COVID-19. DESIGN AND SETTING: Protocol for a rapid living systematic review methodology following the recommendations proposed by the Cochrane Handbook. METHODS: We will include prospective and retrospective longitudinal cohorts. In view of the limited amount of information, we will also include case-control studies. We will search PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), LILACS, Scopus and SciELO to identify published, ongoing, and unpublished studies. No language restrictions will be applied. We will perform the critical appraisal of included studies with the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool and the certainty of evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

positive: The Oxford Royal College of General Practitioners Clinical Informatics Digital Hub: Protocol to Develop Extended COVID-19 Surveillance and Trial Platforms BACKGROUND: Routinely recorded primary care data have been used for many years by sentinel networks for surveillance. More recently, real world data have been used for a wider range of research projects to support rapid, inexpensive clinical trials. Because the partial national lockdown in the United Kingdom due to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in decreasing community disease incidence, much larger numbers of general practices are needed to deliver effective COVID-19 surveillance and contribute to in-pandemic clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this protocol is to describe the rapid design and development of the Oxford Royal College of General Practitioners Clinical Informatics Digital Hub (ORCHID) and its first two platforms. The Surveillance Platform will provide extended primary care surveillance, while the Trials Platform is a streamlined clinical trials platform that will be integrated into routine primary care practice. METHODS: We will apply the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) metadata principles to a new, integrated digital health hub that will extract routinely collected general practice electronic health data for use in clinical trials and provide enhanced communicable disease surveillance. The hub will be findable through membership in Health Data Research UK and European metadata repositories. Accessibility through an online application system will provide access to study-ready data sets or developed custom data sets. Interoperability will be facilitated by fixed linkage to other key sources such as Hospital Episodes Statistics and the Office of National Statistics using pseudonymized data. All semantic descriptors (ie, ontologies) and code used for analysis will be made available to accelerate analyses. We will also make data available using common data models, starting with the US Food and Drug Administration Sentinel and Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership approaches, to facilitate international studies. The Surveillance Platform will provide access to data for health protection and promotion work as authorized through agreements between Oxford, the Royal College of General Practitioners, and Public Health England. All studies using the Trials Platform will go through appropriate ethical and other regulatory approval processes. RESULTS: The hub will be a bottom-up, professionally led network that will provide benefits for member practices, our health service, and the population served. Data will only be used for SQUIRE (surveillance, quality improvement, research, and education) purposes. We have already received positive responses from practices, and the number of practices in the network has doubled to over 1150 since February 2020. COVID-19 surveillance has resulted in tripling of the number of virology sites to 293 (target 300), which has aided the collection of the largest ever weekly total of surveillance swabs in the United Kingdom as well as over 3000 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) serology samples. Practices are recruiting to the PRINCIPLE (Platform Randomised trial of INterventions against COVID-19 In older PeopLE) trial, and these participants will be followed up through ORCHID. These initial outputs demonstrate the feasibility of ORCHID to provide an extended national digital health hub. CONCLUSIONS: ORCHID will provide equitable and innovative use of big data through a professionally led national primary care network and the application of FAIR principles. The secure data hub will host routinely collected general practice data linked to other key health care repositories for clinical trials and support enhanced in situ surveillance without always requiring large volume data extracts. ORCHID will support rapid data extraction, analysis, and dissemination with the aim of improving future research and development in general practice to positively impact patient care. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/19773.

positive: COVID-19 pharmacologic treatments for children: research priorities and approach to pediatric studies Clinical trials of pharmacologic treatments of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are being rapidly designed and implemented in adults. Children are often not considered during development of novel treatments for infectious diseases until very late. Although children appear to have a lower risk compared to adults of severe COVID-19 disease, a substantial number of children globally will benefit from pharmacologic treatments. It will be reasonable to extrapolate efficacy of most treatments from adult trials to children. Pediatric trials should focus on characterizing a treatment’s pharmacokinetics, optimal dose and safety, across the age spectrum. These trials should use an adaptive design to efficiently add or remove arms in what will be a rapidly evolving treatment landscape, and should involve a large number of sites across the globe in a collaborative effort to facilitate efficient implementation. All stakeholders must commit to equitable access to any effective, safe treatment for children everywhere.

positive: Respiratory Conditions in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Important Considerations Regarding Novel Treatment Strategies to Reduce Mortality Abstract A novel virus named 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2) causes symptoms that are classified as coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Respiratory conditions are extensively described among more serious cases of COVID-19, and the onset of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is one of the hallmark features of critical COVID-19 cases. ARDS can be directly life-threatening because it is associated with low blood oxygenation levels and can result in organ failure. There are no generally recognized effective treatments for COVID-19, but treatments are urgently needed. Anti-viral medications and vaccines are in the early developmental stages and may take many months or even years to fully develop. At present, management of COVID-19 with respiratory and ventilator support are standard therapeutic treatments, but unfortunately such treatments are associated with high mortality rates. Therefore, it is imperative to consider novel new therapeutic interventions to treat/ameliorate respiratory conditions associated with COVID-19. Alternate treatment strategies utilizing clinically available treatments such as hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT), packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfusions, or erthropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) therapy were hypothesized to increase oxygenation of tissues by alternative means than standard respiratory and ventilator treatments. It was also revealed that alternative treatments currently being considered for COVID-19 such as chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine by increasing hemoglobin production and increasing hemoglobin availability for oxygen binding and acetazolamine (for the treatment of altitude sickness) by causing hyperventilation with associated increasing levels of oxygen and decreasing levels of carbon dioxide in the blood may significantly ameliorate COVID-19 respiratory symptoms. In conclusion, is recommend, given HBOT, pRBC, and ESA therapies are currently available and routinely utilized in the treatment of other conditions, that such therapies be tried among COVID-19 patients with serious respiratory conditions and that future controlled-clinical trials explore the potential usefulness of such treatments among COVID-19 patients with respiratory conditions.

positive: Paying Participants in COVID-19 Trials Trials are in development and underway to examine potential interventions for treatment and prophylaxis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). How should we think about offering payment to participants in these trials? Payment for research participation is ethically contentious even under ideal circumstances. Here, we review 3 functions of research payment—reimbursement, compensation, and incentive—and identify heightened and novel ethical concerns in the context of a global pandemic. We argue that COVID-19 trial participants should usually be offered reimbursement for research-related expenses, and compensation for their time and effort, as for other types of research under usual circumstances. Given increased risk of undue influence against pandemic background conditions, incentive payment should be avoided unless essential to recruitment and retention in important trials whose social value outweighs this risk. Where essential, however, incentives can be ethically permissible, so long as reasonable efforts are made to minimize the possibility of undue influence.

positive: Characteristics of registered studies for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A systematic review Abstract Background The World Health Organization characterized the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic on March 11th. Many clinical trials on COVID-19 have been registered, and we aim to review the study characteristics and provide guidance for future trials to avoid duplicated effort. Methods Studies on COVID-19 registered before March 3rd, 2020 on eight registry platforms worldwide were searched and the data of design, participants, interventions, and outcomes were extracted and analyzed. Results Three hundred and ninety-three studies were identified and 380 (96.7%) were from mainland China, while 3 in Japan, 3 in France, 2 in the US, and 3 were international collaborative studies. Two hundred and sixty-six (67.7%) aimed at therapeutic effect, others were for prevention, diagnosis, prognosis, etc. Two hundred and two studies (51.4%) were randomized controlled trials. Two third of therapeutic studies tested Western medicines including antiviral drugs (17.7%), stem cell and cord blood therapy (10.2%), chloroquine and derivatives (8.3%), 16 (6.0%) on Chinese medicines, and 73 (27.4%) on integrated therapy of Western and Chinese medicines. Thirty-one studies among 266 therapeutic studies (11.7%) used mortality as primary outcome, while the most designed secondary outcomes were symptoms and signs (47.0%). Half of the studies (45.5%) had not started recruiting till March 3rd. Conclusions Inappropriate outcome setting, delayed recruitment and insufficient numbers of new cases in China implied many studies may fail to complete. Strategies and protocols of the studies with robust and rapid data sharing are warranted for emergency public health events, helping the timely evidence-based decision-making.

positive: HUMAN CORONAVIRUS DATA FROM FOUR CLINICAL TRIALS OF MASKS AND RESPIRATORS There are few published data on the protection of masks or respirators against coronavirus infections. This is an important research question to inform the response to the COVID-19 epidemic. The transmission modes of human coronaviruses are similar, thought to be by droplet, contact and sometimes airborne routes. There are several randomised clinical trials of masks and respirators, but most used clinical endpoints or tested only for influenza. In four trials which we conducted, we tested for human coronaviruses, but only composite viral endpoints were reported in the trials. We reviewed and analysed the coronavirus data from four of our trials. Laboratory-confirmed coronavirus infections were identified in our community household trial (1 case), health worker trials (8 cases) and trial of mask use by sick patients (19 cases). No coronavirus infections were transmitted in households to parents who wore P2 or surgical masks, but one child with coronavirus infection transmitted infection to a parent in the control arm. No transmissions to close contacts occurred when worn by sick patients with coronavirus infections. There was a higher risk of coronavirus infection in HCWs who wore a mask compared to a respirator, but the difference was not statistically significant. These are the only available data on coronavirus infections associated with mask or respirator use. More clinical trials are needed to assess the efficacy of respiratory protection against coronavirus infections.

positive: Molecular docking and binding mode analysis of selected FDA approved drugs against COVID-19 selected key protein targets: An effort towards drug repurposing to identify the combination therapy to combat COVID-19 The emergence of COVID-19 has severely compromised the arsenal of antiviral and antibiotic drugs. Drug discovery is a multistep process with a high failure rate, high cost and it takes approximately 10-12 years for the development of new molecules into the clinical candidate. On the other side, drug repurposing also called old drugs for new uses, is an attractive alternative approach for a new application of marketed FDA approved or investigational drugs. In the current pandemic situation raised due to COVID-19, repurposing of existing FDA approved drugs are emerging as the first line of the treatment. The causative viral agent of this highly contagious disease and acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) shares high nucleotide similarity. Therefore, many existing viral targets are structurally expected to be similar to SARS-CoV and likely to be inhibited by the same compounds. Here, we selected three viral key proteins based on their vital role in viral life cycle: ACE2 (helps in entry into the human host), viral nonstructural proteins RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) NSP12, and NSP16 which helps in replication, and viral latency (invasion from immunity). The FDA approved drugs chloroquine (CQ), hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), remdesivir (RDV) and arbidol (ABD) are emerging as promising agents to combat COVID-19. Our hypothesis behind the docking studies is to determine the binding affinities of these drugs and identify the key amino acid residues playing a key role in their mechanism of action. The docking studies were carried out through Autodock and online COVID-19 docking server. Further studies on a broad range of FDA approved drugs including few more protein targets, molecular dynamics studies, in-vitro and in-vivo biological evaluation are required to identify the combination therapy targeting various stages of the viral life cycle.

positive: A Comprehensive Literature Review on the Clinical Presentation, and Management of the Pandemic Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a declared global pandemic. There are multiple parameters of the clinical course and management of the COVID-19 that need optimization. A hindrance to this development is the vast amount of misinformation present due to scarcely sourced manuscript preprints and social media. This literature review aims to presents accredited and the most current studies pertaining to the basic sciences of SARS-CoV-2, clinical presentation and disease course of COVID-19, public health interventions, and current epidemiological developments. The review on basic sciences aims to clarify the jargon in virology, describe the virion structure of SARS-CoV-2 and present pertinent details relevant to clinical practice. Another component discussed is the brief history on the series of experiments used to explore the origins and evolution of the phylogeny of the viral genome of SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, the clinical and epidemiological differences between COVID-19 and other infections causing outbreaks (SARS, MERS, H1N1) are elucidated. Emphasis is placed on evidence-based medicine to evaluate the frequency of presentation of various symptoms to create a stratification system of the most important epidemiological risk factors for COVID-19. These can be used to triage and expedite risk assessment. Furthermore, the limitations and statistical strength of the diagnostic tools currently in clinical practice are evaluated. Criteria on rapid screening, discharge from hospital and discontinuation of self-quarantine are clarified. Epidemiological factors influencing the rapid rate of spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus are described. Accurate information pertinent to improving prevention strategies is also discussed. The penultimate portion of the review aims to explain the involvement of micronutrients such as vitamin C and vitamin D in COVID19 treatment and prophylaxis. Furthermore, the biochemistry of the major candidates for novel therapies is briefly reviewed and a summary of their current status in the clinical trials is presented. Lastly, the current scientific data and status of governing bodies such as the Center of Disease Control (CDC) and the WHO on the usage of controversial therapies such as angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (Ibuprofen), and corticosteroids usage in COVID-19 are discussed. The composite collection of accredited studies on each of these subtopics of COVID-19 within this review will enable clarification and focus on the current status and direction in the planning of the management of this global pandemic.

positive: Coronavirus Epidemic and Extracorporeal Therapies in Intensive Care: si vis pacem para bellum

positive: Clinical characteristics and predictors of survival in adults with coronavirus disease 2019 receiving tocilizumab Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can progress to cytokine storm that is associated with organ dysfunction and death. The purpose of the present study is to determine clinical characteristics associated with 28 day in-hospital survival in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that received tocilizumab. This was a retrospective observational cohort study conducted at a five hospital health system in Michigan, United States. Adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 that were admitted to the hospital and received tocilizumab for cytokine storm from March 1, 2020 through April 3, 2020 were included. Patients were grouped into survivors and non-survivors based on 28 day in-hospital mortality. Study day 0 was defined as the day tocilizumab was administered. Factors independently associated with in-hospital survival at 28 days after tocilizumab administration were assessed. Epidemiologic, demographic, laboratory, prognostic scores, treatment, and outcome data were collected and analyzed. Clinical response was collected and defined as a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status or discharged alive from the hospital. Of the 81 patients included, the median age was 64 (58–71) years and 56 (69.1%) were male. The 28 day in-hospital mortality was 43.2%. There were 46 (56.8%) patients in the survivors and 35 (43.2%) in the non-survivors group. On study day 0 no differences were noted in demographics, clinical characteristics, severity of illness scores, or treatments received between survivors and non-survivors. C-reactive protein was significantly higher in the non-survivors compared to survivors. Compared to non-survivors, recipients of tocilizumab within 12 days of symptom onset was independently associated with survival (adjusted OR: 0.296, 95% CI: 0.098–0.889). SOFA score ≥8 on day 0 was independently associated with mortality (adjusted OR: 2.842, 95% CI: 1.042–7.753). Clinical response occurred more commonly in survivors than non-survivors (80.4% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001). Improvements in the six-point ordinal scale and SOFA score were observed in survivors after tocilizumab. Early receipt of tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19 was an independent predictor for in-hospital survival at 28 days.

positive: Clinical trials on drug repositioning for COVID-19 treatment The World Health Organization (WHO) was informed on December 2019 about a coronavirus pneumonia outbreak in Wuhan, Hubei province (China). Subsequently, on March 12, 2020, 125,048 cases and 4,614 deaths were reported. Coronavirus is an enveloped RNA virus, from the genus Betacoronavirus, that is distributed in birds, humans, and other mammals. WHO has named the novel coronavirus disease as COVID-19. More than 80 clinical trials have been launched to test coronavirus treatment, including some drug repurposing or repositioning for COVID-19. Hence, we performed a search in March 2020 of the clinicaltrials.gov database. The eligibility criteria for the retrieved studies were: contain a clinicaltrials.gov base identifier number; describe the number of participants and the period for the study; describe the participants’ clinical conditions; and utilize interventions with medicines already studied or approved for any other disease in patients infected with the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (2019-nCoV). It is essential to emphasize that this article only captured trials listed in the clinicaltrials.gov database. We identified 24 clinical trials, involving more than 20 medicines, such as human immunoglobulin, interferons, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, arbidol, remdesivir, favipiravir, lopinavir, ritonavir, oseltamivir, methylprednisolone, bevacizumab, and traditional Chinese medicines (TCM). Although drug repurposing has some limitations, repositioning clinical trials may represent an attractive strategy because they facilitate the discovery of new classes of medicines; they have lower costs and take less time to reach the market; and there are existing pharmaceutical supply chains for formulation and distribution.

positive: Effectiveness of glucocorticoid therapy in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019: protocol of a randomized controlled trial BACKGROUND: At the end of 2019, a novel coronavirus outbreak emerged in Wuhan, China, and its causative organism has been subsequently designated the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). The effectiveness of adjunctive glucocorticoid therapy in the management of 2019-nCoV-infected patients with severe lower respiratory tract infections is not clear, and warrants further investigation. METHODS: The present study will be conducted as an open-labeled, randomized, controlled trial. We will enrol 48 subjects from Chongqing Public Health Medical Center. Each eligible subject will be assigned to an intervention group (methylprednisolone via intravenous injection at a dose of 1–2 mg/kg/day for 3 days) or a control group (no glucocorticoid use) randomly, at a 1:1 ratio. Subjects in both groups will be invited for 28 days of follow-up which will be scheduled at four consecutive visit points. We will use the clinical improvement rate as our primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints include the timing of clinical improvement after intervention, duration of mechanical ventilation, duration of hospitalization, overall incidence of adverse events, as well as rate of adverse events at each visit, and mortality at 2 and 4 weeks. DISCUSSION: The present coronavirus outbreak is the third serious global coronavirus outbreak in the past two decades. Oral and parenteral glucocorticoids have been used in the management of severe respiratory symptoms in coronavirus-infected patients in the past. However, there remains no definitive evidence in the literature for or against the utilization of systemic glucocorticoids in seriously ill patients with coronavirus-related severe respiratory disease, or indeed in other types of severe respiratory disease. In this study, we hope to discover evidence either supporting or opposing the systemic therapeutic administration of glucocorticoids in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ChiCTR2000029386, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=48777.

positive: Medication for COVID-19—an Overview of Approaches Currently Under Study BACKGROUND: With the worldwide spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection, it is becoming increasingly urgent to develop a vaccine to prevent COVID-19, as well as effective drugs to treat it. METHODS: This article is based on a selective literature search in PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov, followed by an assessment of the ongoing clinical trials that were revealed by the search. RESULTS: A number of substances have been found to prevent the reproduction of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. These include virustatic agents that have already been approved for the treatment of other types of viral infection, as well as drugs that are currently used for entirely different purposes. High in vitro activity has been found for the nucleotide analogue remdesivir, for the antimalarial drug chloroquine, and for nitazoxanide, a drug used to treat protozoan infections. Because the virus enters human cells by way of the membrane-associated angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), keeping the virus from docking to this receptor is a conceivable treatment approach. Transmembrane protease serine 2 (TMPRSS2) plays a role in the fusion of the virus with cells; inhibitors of this enzyme are known as well. The potential therapeutic efficacy and tolerability of these and other active substances remain to be investigated in clinical trials. At present, more than 80 trials on COVID-10 have already been registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. Some initial findings should already be available in late April 2020. CONCLUSION: Clinical trials are now indispensable in order to determine the true clinical benefits and risks of the substances that have been found to be active against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. There is not yet any recommendation for the therapeutic use of any particular agent beyond standard supportive treatment.

positive: Therapeutic Management of COVID-19 Patients: A systematic review Background: SARS-CoV-2 is the cause of the COVID-19 that has been declared a global pandemic by the WHO in 2020. The COVID-19 treatment guidelines vary in each country, and yet there is no approved therapeutic for COVID-19. Aims of the study: this review aimed to report any evidence of therapeutics used for the management of COVID-19 patients in clinical practice since the emergence of the virus. Methods: A systematic review protocol was developed based on PRISMA Statement. Articles for review were selected from electronic databases (Embase, Medline and Google Scholar). Readily accessible peer-reviewed full articles in English published from December 1 st , 2019 to March 26 th , 2020 were included. The search terms included combinations of: COVID, SARS-COV-2, glucocorticoids, convalescent plasma, antiviral, antibacterial. There were no restrictions on the type of study design eligible for inclusion. Results: As of March 26, 2020, of the initial manuscripts identified (n=449) articles. Forty-one studies were included, of which clinical trials (n=3), (case reports n=7), case series (n=10), retrospective (n=11) and prospective (n=10) observational studies. Thirty-six studies were conducted in China (88%). The most common mentioned and reported medicine in this systematic review was corticosteroids (n=25), followed by Lopinavir (n=21) and oseltamivir (n=16). Conclusions: This is the first systematic review up to date related to the therapeutics used in COVID-19 patients. Only forty-one research articles on COVID-19 and therapeutics were found eligible to be included, most conducted in China, corticosteroid therapy was found to be the most used medicine in these studies.

positive: Update I. A systematic review on the efficacy and safety of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 PURPOSE: To assess efficacy and safety of chloroquine (CQ)/hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for treatment or prophylaxis of COVID-19 in adult humans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE and two pre-print repositories (bioRxiv, medRxiv) were searched from inception to 8th June 2020 for RCTs and nonrandomized studies (retrospective and prospective, including single-arm, studies) addressing the use of CQ/HCQ in any dose or combination for COVID-19. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were included (6 RCTs, 26 nonrandomized, 29,192 participants). Two RCTs had high risk, two ‘some concerns’ and two low risk of bias (Rob2). Among nonrandomized studies with comparators, nine had high risk and five moderate risk of bias (ROBINS-I). Data synthesis was not possible. Low and moderate risk of bias studies suggest that treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 with CQ/HCQ may not reduce risk of death, compared to standard care. High dose regimens or combination with macrolides may be associated with harm. Postexposure prophylaxis may not reduce the rate of infection but the quality of the evidence is low. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with COVID-19 should be treated with CQ/HCQ only if monitored and within the context of high quality RCTs. High quality data about efficacy/safety are urgently needed.

positive: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine effectiveness in human subjects during coronavirus: a systematic review In a search to find effective treatments for COVID-19, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have gained attention. We aim to provide evidence to support clinical decision-making regarding medication for the treatment of COVID-19 by carrying out a systematic review of the literature. The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, and HMIC were searched up to April 2020. Eligible study outcomes included: extubation or patient recovery. Relevant data were extracted and analysed by narrative synthesis. Our results included six studies in the review of which four studies were of good or fair quality. All eligible studies included were for coronavirus involving the use of either chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine to treat common symptoms such as fever, cough, shortness of breath and fatigue. Outcomes most commonly reported were improved lung function, viral clearance, and hospital discharge. Strong evidence to support the use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 is lacking. Fast track trials are riddled with bias and may not conform to rigorous guidelines which may lead to inadequate data being reported. The use of these drugs in combination with other medications may be useful but without knowing which groups they are suited for and when they may cause more harm than good.

positive: Rigorous Randomized Controlled Trial Implementation in the Era of COVID-19

positive: Is GSK3ß a molecular target of chloroquine treatment against COVID-19? The recent clinical trial reports pertaining to the efficacy of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine against COVID-19 albeit yet to be validated with larger clinical trials, have sparked much interest globally to evaluate whether this anti-malarial drug can be repurposed for the treatment of COVID-19. In addition to its anti-viral activity, the anti-inflammatory activity of chloroquine may also contribute to its efficacy. Based on our data obtained from an animal infection model of melioidosis (a disease caused by the bacteria Burkholderia pseudomallei), treatment with chloroquine can result in the phosphorylation and consequent inhibition of glycogen synthase kinase-3ß (GSK3ß). This serine/threonine protein kinase is now recognised as a point of convergence for host inflammatory response. In view of this, it is plausible that the mechanism for the anti-inflammatory effect of chloroquine against COVID-19 involves inhibition of host GSK3ß.

positive: COVID-19; Systematic and literature review of transmission, case definitions, clinical management and clinical trials. Background: SARS-CoV-2, the viral agent responsible for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was identified in Wuhan, China at the end of December 2019. It rapidly spread to the rest of the world, and was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on the 30th of January 2020. Our understanding of the virus, it is clinical manifestations and treatment options continues to evolve at an unparalleled pace. Objective: This review sought to summarise the key literature regarding transmission, case definitions, clinical management and trials, and performed a systematic review of reported clinical data on COVID-19. Synthesis methods: Two reviewers selected all the literature independently, and extracted information according to pre-defined topics. Results: COVID-19 is pandemic with ~4 million cases and 270,000 deaths in 210 countries as of 8 May 2020. Our review of reports showed that SARS-CoV-2 was mainly transmitted via inhalation of respiratory droplets containing the virus and had an incubation period of four to six days. The commonly reported symptoms were fever (80%) and cough (60%) across the spectrum of clinical disease - mild, moderate, severe and critical. Categorization of these cases for home care or hospital management need to be well defined considering the age of the patient and the presence of underlying co-morbidities. The case definitions we reviewed varied among affected countries, which could have contributed to the differences observed in the mean case fatality rates among continents: Oceania (1%), Asia (3%), Africa (4%), South America (5%), North America (6%) and Europe (10%). Asymptomatic cases, which constituted an estimated 80% of COVID-19 cases are a huge threat to control efforts. Conclusion: The presence of fever and cough may be sufficient to warrant a COVID-19 testing but using these symptoms in isolation will miss a proportion of cases. A clear definition of a COVID-19 case is important for managing, treating and tracking clinical illness. While several treatments are in development or in clinical trials for COVID-19, home care of mild/moderate cases and hospital care for severe and critical cases remain the recommended management for the disease. Quarantine measures and social distancing can help control the spread of SARS-CoV-2.

positive: A Randomized Trial of Hydroxychloroquine as Postexposure Prophylaxis for Covid-19 BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) occurs after exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). For persons who are exposed, the standard of care is observation and quarantine. Whether hydroxychloroquine can prevent symptomatic infection after SARS-CoV-2 exposure is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial across the United States and parts of Canada testing hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis. We enrolled adults who had household or occupational exposure to someone with confirmed Covid-19 at a distance of less than 6 ft for more than 10 minutes while wearing neither a face mask nor an eye shield (high-risk exposure) or while wearing a face mask but no eye shield (moderate-risk exposure). Within 4 days after exposure, we randomly assigned participants to receive either placebo or hydroxychloroquine (800 mg once, followed by 600 mg in 6 to 8 hours, then 600 mg daily for 4 additional days). The primary outcome was the incidence of either laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 or illness compatible with Covid-19 within 14 days. RESULTS: We enrolled 821 asymptomatic participants. Overall, 87.6% of the participants (719 of 821) reported a high-risk exposure to a confirmed Covid-19 contact. The incidence of new illness compatible with Covid-19 did not differ significantly between participants receiving hydroxychloroquine (49 of 414 [11.8%]) and those receiving placebo (58 of 407 [14.3%]); the absolute difference was −2.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval, −7.0 to 2.2; P=0.35). Side effects were more common with hydroxychloroquine than with placebo (40.1% vs. 16.8%), but no serious adverse reactions were reported. CONCLUSIONS: After high-risk or moderate-risk exposure to Covid-19, hydroxychloroquine did not prevent illness compatible with Covid-19 or confirmed infection when used as postexposure prophylaxis within 4 days after exposure. (Funded by David Baszucki and Jan Ellison Baszucki and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04308668.)

positive: Clinical trials for the treatment of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A rapid response to urgent need

positive: Protocol for a randomized controlled trial testing inhaled nitric oxide therapy in spontaneously breathing patients with COVID-19 INTRODUCTION: the current worldwide outbreak of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is seriously threatening the public health. The number of infected patients is continuously increasing and the need for Intensive Care Unit admission ranges from 5 to 26%. The mortality is reported to be around 3.4% with higher values for the elderly and in patients with comorbidities. Moreover, this condition is challenging the healthcare system where the outbreak reached its highest value. To date there is still no available treatment for SARS-CoV-2. Clinical and preclinical evidence suggests that nitric oxide (NO) has a beneficial effect on the coronavirus-mediated acute respiratory syndrome, and this can be related to its viricidal effect. The time from the symptoms’ onset to the development of severe respiratory distress is relatively long. We hypothesize that high concentrations of inhaled NO administered during early phases of COVID-19 infection can prevent the progression of the disease. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Spontaneous breathing patients admitted to the hospital for symptomatic COVID-19 infection will be eligible to enter the study. Patients in the treatment group will receive inhaled NO at high doses (140-180 parts per million) for 30 minutes, 2 sessions every day for 14 days in addition to the hospital care. Patient in the control group will receive only hospital care. The primary outcome is the percentage of patients requiring endotracheal intubation due to the progression of the disease in the first 28 days from enrollment in the study. Secondary outcomes include mortality at 28 days, proportion of negative test for SARS-CoV-2 at 7 days and time to clinical recovery. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial protocol has been approved at the Investigation Review Boards of Xijing Hospital (Xi’an, China) and The Partners Human Research Committee of Massachusetts General Hospital (Boston, USA) is pending. Recruitment is expected to start in March 2020. Results of this study will be published in scientific journals, presented at scientific meetings, and on related website or media in fighting this widespread contagious disease.

positive: Review: Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine for Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a rapidly emerging viral infection causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have garnered unprecedented attention as potential therapeutic agents against COVID-19 following several small clinical trials, uncontrolled case series, and public figure endorsements. While there is a growing body of scientific data, there is also concern for harm, particularly QTc prolongation and cardiac arrhythmias. Here, we perform a rapid narrative review and discuss the strengths and limitations of existing in vitro and clinical studies. We call for additional randomized controlled trial evidence prior to the widespread incorporation of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine into national and international treatment guidelines.

positive: Pharmacotherapy for hospitalized patients with COVID-19: Waiting or doing?

positive: Weak Induction of Interferon Expression by SARS-CoV-2 Supports Clinical Trials of Interferon Lambda to Treat Early COVID-19

positive: Efficacy and safety of interferon β-1a in treatment of severe COVID-19: A randomized clinical trial. OBJECTIVES To the best of our knowledge, there is no published study regarding use of IFN β-1a in the treatment of severe COVID-19. In this randomized clinical trial efficacy and safety of IFN β-1a has been evaluated in patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS Forty-two patients in the interferon group received IFN β-1a in addition to the national protocol medications (hydroxychloroquine plus lopinavir/ritonavir or atazanavir/ritonavir). Each 44 micrograms/ml (12 million IU/ml) of interferon β-1a was subcutaneously injected three times weekly for two consecutive weeks. The control group consisted 39 patients that received only the national protocol medications. Primary outcome of study was time to reach clinical response. Secondary outcomes were duration of hospital stay, length of ICU stay, 28-day mortality, effect of early or late administration of IFN on mortality, adverse effects and complications during the hospitalization. RESULTS Between 29th February to 3rd April 2020, 92 patients were recruited that finally 42 patients in the IFN group and 39 patients in the control group completed the study. As primary outcome, time to the clinical response was not significantly different between the IFN and the control groups (9.7 ± 5.8 vs. 8.3 ± 4.9 days respectively, P=0.95). On day 14, 66.7% vs. 43.6% of patients in the IFN group and the control group were discharged, respectively (OR= 2.5; 95% CI: 1.05- 6.37). The 28-day overall mortality was significantly lower in the IFN than the control group (19% vs. 43.6% respectively, p= 0.015). Early administration significantly reduced mortality (OR=13.5; 95% CI: 1.5-118). CONCLUSION Although IFN did not change time to reach the clinical response, adding it to the national protocol significantly increased discharge rate on day 14 and decreased 28-day mortality.

positive: Interventions for treatment of COVID-19: a protocol for a living systematic review with network meta-analysis including individual patient data (The LIVING Project) BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a rapidly spreading virus infection that has quickly caused extensive burden to individual, families, countries, and the globe. No intervention has yet been proven effective for the treatment of COVID-19. Some randomized clinical trials assessing the effects of different drugs have been published, and more are currently underway. There is an urgent need for a living, dynamic systematic review that continuously evaluates the beneficial and harmful effects of all available interventions for COVID-19. METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a living systematic review based on searches of major medical databases (e.g., MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL) and clinical trial registries from their inception onwards to identify relevant randomized clinical trials. We will update the literature search once a week to continuously assess if new evidence is available. Two review authors will independently extract data and perform risk of bias assessment. We will include randomized clinical trials comparing any intervention for the treatment of COVID-19 (e.g., pharmacological interventions, fluid therapy, invasive or noninvasive ventilation, or similar interventions) with any comparator (e.g., an "active" comparator, standard care, placebo, no intervention, or "active placebo") for participants in all age groups with a diagnosis of COVID-19. Primary outcomes will be all-cause mortality and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes will be admission to intensive care, mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, quality of life, and non-serious adverse events. The living systematic review will include aggregate data meta-analyses, Trial Sequential Analyses, network meta-analysis, and individual patient data meta-analyses. Risk of bias will be assessed with domains, an eight-step procedure will be used to assess if the thresholds for clinical significance are crossed, and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE). DISCUSSION: COVID-19 has become a pandemic with substantial mortality. A living systematic review evaluating the beneficial and harmful effects of pharmacological and other interventions is urgently needed. This review will continuously inform best practice in treatment and clinical research of this highly prevalent disease. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020178787.

positive: Prevention and Control Strategies for SARS-CoV-2 Infection The population of 168 countries all over the world is struggling with the outbreak of COVID-19. The outbreak is declared as pandemic and public health emergency of international concern declared by WHO. SARS-CoV-2 responsible for the present health emergency exhibited close resemblance with SARS-CoV. Both the viruses are zoonotic and belong to a large family of viruses Coronaviridae. The complete virus particle is made up of four major structural proteins, namely spikes (S), nucleocapsid (N), membrane (M), and envelope (E) encoded by virus genome. The S protein of virus shows similarity to S protein of SARS-CoV. COVID-19 spreads from person to person, and this makes it more vulnerable for causing infection. Several efforts are taken to find prevention strategies for COVID-19. Researchers across the globe are working to find effective vaccination for SARS-CoV-2. There is no vaccine or medication available till date for COVID-19. Preventive measures such as social distancing, awareness, maintenance of hygiene, isolation, and movement restrictions can help in control of COVID-19 spread. Proper sanitization and cleaned and sanitized public transport can be effective in inhibiting the spread of the virus. In the present situation of medical emergency, cooperation and support by following advices from the WHO and government only facilitate everyone to come over.

positive: A Call for Randomized Controlled Trials to Test the Efficacy of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine as Therapeutics against Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) The American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.

positive: Prophylactic and therapeutic remdesivir (GS-5734) treatment in the rhesus macaque model of MERS-CoV infection The continued emergence of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) cases with a high case fatality rate stresses the need for the availability of effective antiviral treatments. Remdesivir (GS-5734) effectively inhibited MERS coronavirus (MERS-CoV) replication in vitro, and showed efficacy against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)-CoV in a mouse model. Here, we tested the efficacy of prophylactic and therapeutic remdesivir treatment in a nonhuman primate model of MERS-CoV infection, the rhesus macaque. Prophylactic remdesivir treatment initiated 24 h prior to inoculation completely prevented MERS-CoV−induced clinical disease, strongly inhibited MERS-CoV replication in respiratory tissues, and prevented the formation of lung lesions. Therapeutic remdesivir treatment initiated 12 h postinoculation also provided a clear clinical benefit, with a reduction in clinical signs, reduced virus replication in the lungs, and decreased presence and severity of lung lesions. The data presented here support testing of the efficacy of remdesivir treatment in the context of a MERS clinical trial. It may also be considered for a wider range of coronaviruses, including the currently emerging novel coronavirus 2019-nCoV.

positive: Treatment of severely ill COVID-19 patients with anti-interleukin drugs (COV-AID): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to test the safety and effectiveness of individually or simultaneously blocking IL-6, IL-6 receptor and IL-1 versus standard of care on blood oxygenation and systemic cytokine release syndrome in patients with COVID-19 coronavirus infection and acute hypoxic respiratory failure and systemic cytokine release syndrome. TRIAL DESIGN: A phase 3 prospective, multi-center, interventional, open label, 6-arm 2x2 factorial design study. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects will be recruited at the specialized COVID-19 wards and/or ICUs at 16 Belgian participating hospitals. Only adult (≥18y old) patients will be recruited with recent (≤16 days) COVID-19 infection and acute hypoxia (defined as PaO2/FiO2 below 350mmHg or PaO2/FiO2 below 280 on supplemental oxygen and immediately requiring high flow oxygen device or mechanical ventilation) and signs of systemic cytokine release syndrome characterized by high serum ferritin, or high D-dimers, or high LDH or deep lymphopenia or a combination of those, who have not been on mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours before randomisation. Patients should have had a chest X-ray and/or CT scan showing bilateral infiltrates within the last 2 days before randomisation. Patients with active bacterial or fungal infection will be excluded. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Patients will be randomized to 1 of 5 experimental arms versus usual care. The experimental arms consist of Anakinra alone (anti-IL-1 binding the IL-1 receptor), Siltuximab alone (anti-IL-6 chimeric antibody), a combination of Siltuximab and Anakinra, Tocilizumab alone (humanised anti-IL-6 receptor antibody) or a combination of Anakinra with Tocilizumab in addition to standard care. Patients treated with Anakinra will receive a daily subcutaneous injection of 100mg for a maximum of 28 days or until hospital discharge, whichever comes first. Siltuximab (11mg/kg) or Tocilizumab (8mg/kg, with a maximum dose of 800mg) are administered as a single intravenous injection immediately after randomization. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary end point is the time to clinical improvement defined as the time from randomization to either an improvement of two points on a six-category ordinal scale measured daily till day 28 or discharge from the hospital or death. This ordinal scale is composed of (1) Death; (2) Hospitalized, on invasive mechanical ventilation or ECMO; (3) Hospitalized, on non-invasive ventilation or high flow oxygen devices; (4) Hospitalized, requiring supplemental oxygen; (5) Hospitalized, not requiring supplemental oxygen; (6) Not hospitalized. RANDOMISATION: Patients will be randomized using an Interactive Web Response System (REDCap). A 2x2 factorial design was selected with a 2:1 randomization regarding the IL-1 blockade (Anakinra) and a 1:2 randomization regarding the IL-6 blockade (Siltuximab and Tocilizumab). BLINDING (MASKING): In this open-label trial neither participants, caregivers, nor those assessing the outcomes are blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A total of 342 participants will be enrolled: 76 patients will receive usual care, 76 patients will receive Siltuximab alone, 76 patients will receive Tocilizumab alone, 38 will receive Anakinra alone, 38 patients will receive Anakinra and Siltuximab and 38 patients will receive Anakinra and Tocilizumab. TRIAL STATUS: COV-AID protocol version 3.0 (15 Apr 2020). Participant recruitment is ongoing and started on April 4(th) 2020. Given the current decline of the COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium, it is difficult to anticipate the rate of participant recruitment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on Clinical Trials.gov on April 1st, 2020 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04330638) and on EudraCT on April 3rd 2020 (Identifier: 2020-001500-41). FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Effectiveness of Intravenous Immunoglobulin for Children with Severe COVID-19: A Rapid Review Background: Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is usually used as supportive therapy, but the treatment of COVID-19 by IVIG is controversial. This rapid review aims to explore the clinical effectiveness and safety of IVIG in the treatment of children with severe COVID-19. Methods: We systematically searched the literature on the use of IVIG in patients with COVID-19, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) or Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), including both adults and children. We assessed the risk of bias and quality of evidence and reported the main findings descriptively. Results: A total of 1519 articles were identified by initial literature search, and finally six studies, included one randomized controlled trial (RCT), four case series and one case report involving 198 patients. One case series showed the survival of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was not improved by IVIG. One case report showed high-dose IVIG could improve the outcome of COVID-19 adults. Three observational studies showed inconsistent results of the effect of IVIG on SARS patients. One RCT showed that IVIG did not reduce mortality or the incidence of nosocomial infection in adults with severe SARS. The quality of evidence was between low and very low. Conclusions: The existing evidence is insufficient to support the efficacy or safety of IVIG in the treatment of COVID-19. Keywords: COVID-19; children; intravenous immunoglobulin; rapid review.

positive: Targeting JAK-STAT Signaling to Control Cytokine Release Syndrome in COVID-19 Recent advances in the pathophysiologic understanding of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has indicated that patients with severe COVID-19 might experience cytokine release syndrome (CRS), characterized by increased interleukin (IL)-6, IL-2, IL-7, IL-10, etc. Therefore, the treatment of cytokine storm has been proposed as a critical part of rescuing severe COVID-19. Several of the cytokines involved in COVID-19 employ a distinct intracellular signaling pathway mediated by Janus kinases (JAKs). JAK inhibition, therefore, presents an attractive therapeutic strategy for CRS, which is a common cause of adverse clinical outcomes in COVID-19. Below, we review the possibilities and challenges of targeting the pathway in COVID-19.

positive: Interventions for treatment of COVID-19: a protocol for a living systematic review with network meta-analysis including individual patient data (The LIVING Project) BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a rapidly spreading virus infection that has quickly caused extensive burden to individual, families, countries, and the globe. No intervention has yet been proven effective for the treatment of COVID-19. Some randomized clinical trials assessing the effects of different drugs have been published, and more are currently underway. There is an urgent need for a living, dynamic systematic review that continuously evaluates the beneficial and harmful effects of all available interventions for COVID-19. METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a living systematic review based on searches of major medical databases (e.g., MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL) and clinical trial registries from their inception onwards to identify relevant randomized clinical trials. We will update the literature search once a week to continuously assess if new evidence is available. Two review authors will independently extract data and perform risk of bias assessment. We will include randomized clinical trials comparing any intervention for the treatment of COVID-19 (e.g., pharmacological interventions, fluid therapy, invasive or noninvasive ventilation, or similar interventions) with any comparator (e.g., an “active” comparator, standard care, placebo, no intervention, or “active placebo”) for participants in all age groups with a diagnosis of COVID-19. Primary outcomes will be all-cause mortality and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes will be admission to intensive care, mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, quality of life, and non-serious adverse events. The living systematic review will include aggregate data meta-analyses, Trial Sequential Analyses, network meta-analysis, and individual patient data meta-analyses. Risk of bias will be assessed with domains, an eight-step procedure will be used to assess if the thresholds for clinical significance are crossed, and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE). DISCUSSION: COVID-19 has become a pandemic with substantial mortality. A living systematic review evaluating the beneficial and harmful effects of pharmacological and other interventions is urgently needed. This review will continuously inform best practice in treatment and clinical research of this highly prevalent disease. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020178787

positive: Convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID-19: a living systematic review. BACKGROUND Convalescent plasma and hyperimmune immunoglobulin may reduce mortality in patients with viral respiratory diseases, and are currently being investigated in trials as potential therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A thorough understanding of the current body of evidence regarding the benefits and risks is required. OBJECTIVES: To continually assess, as more evidence becomes available, whether convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin transfusion is effective and safe in treatment of people with COVID-19. SEARCH METHODS We searched the World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 Global Research Database, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COVID-19 Research Article Database and trial registries to identify completed and ongoing studies on 4 June 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We included studies evaluating convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin for people with COVID-19, irrespective of study design, disease severity, age, gender or ethnicity. We excluded studies including populations with other coronavirus diseases (severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) or Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)) and studies evaluating standard immunoglobulin. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), the Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for controlled non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs), and the assessment criteria for observational studies, provided by Cochrane Childhood Cancer for non-controlled NRSIs. MAIN RESULTS: This is the first living update of our review. We included 20 studies (1 RCT, 3 controlled NRSIs, 16 non-controlled NRSIs) with 5443 participants, of whom 5211 received convalescent plasma, and identified a further 98 ongoing studies evaluating convalescent plasma or hyperimmune immunoglobulin, of which 50 are randomised. We did not identify any completed studies evaluating hyperimmune immunoglobulin. Overall risk of bias of included studies was high, due to study design, type of participants, and other previous or concurrent treatments. Effectiveness of convalescent plasma for people with COVID-19 We included results from four controlled studies (1 RCT (stopped early) with 103 participants, of whom 52 received convalescent plasma; and 3 controlled NRSIs with 236 participants, of whom 55 received convalescent plasma) to assess effectiveness of convalescent plasma. Control groups received standard care at time of treatment without convalescent plasma. All-cause mortality at hospital discharge (1 controlled NRSI, 21 participants) We are very uncertain whether convalescent plasma has any effect on all-cause mortality at hospital discharge (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.31; very low-certainty evidence). Time to death (1 RCT, 103 participants; 1 controlled NRSI, 195 participants) We are very uncertain whether convalescent plasma prolongs time to death (RCT: hazard ratio (HR) 0.74, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.82; controlled NRSI: HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.96; very low-certainty evidence). Improvement of clinical symptoms, assessed by need for respiratory support (1 RCT, 103 participants; 1 controlled NRSI, 195 participants) We are very uncertain whether convalescent plasma has any effect on improvement of clinical symptoms at seven days (RCT: RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.30 to 3.19), 14 days (RCT: RR 1.85, 95% CI 0.91 to 3.77; controlled NRSI: RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.29), and 28 days (RCT: RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.81; very low-certainty evidence). Quality of life No studies reported this outcome. Safety of convalescent plasma for people with COVID-19 We included results from 1 RCT, 3 controlled NRSIs and 10 non-controlled NRSIs assessing safety of convalescent plasma. Reporting of adverse events and serious adverse events was variable. The controlled studies reported on adverse events and serious adverse events only in participants receiving convalescent plasma. The duration of follow-up varied. Some, but not all, studies included death as a serious adverse event. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events (13 studies, 201 participants) The studies did not report the grade of adverse events. Thirteen studies (201 participants) reported on adverse events of possible grade 3 or 4 severity. The majority of these adverse events were allergic or respiratory events. We are very uncertain whether or not convalescent plasma therapy affects the risk of moderate to severe adverse events (very low-certainty evidence). Serious adverse events (14 studies, 5201 participants) Fourteen studies (5201 participants) reported on serious adverse events. The majority of participants were from one non-controlled NRSI (5000 participants), which reported only on serious adverse events limited to the first four hours after convalescent plasma transfusion. This study included death as a serious adverse event; they reported 15 deaths, four of which they classified as potentially, probably or definitely related to transfusion. Other serious adverse events reported in all studies were predominantly allergic or respiratory in nature, including anaphylaxis, transfusion-associated dyspnoea, and transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI). We are very uncertain whether or not convalescent plasma affects the number of serious adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We are very uncertain whether convalescent plasma is beneficial for people admitted to hospital with COVID-19. For safety outcomes we also included non-controlled NRSIs. There was limited information regarding adverse events. Of the controlled studies, none reported on this outcome in the control group. There is only very low-certainty evidence for safety of convalescent plasma for COVID-19. While major efforts to conduct research on COVID-19 are being made, problems with recruiting the anticipated number of participants into these studies are conceivable. The early termination of the first RCT investigating convalescent plasma, and the multitude of studies registered in the past months illustrate this. It is therefore necessary to critically assess the design of these registered studies, and well-designed studies should be prioritised. Other considerations for these studies are the need to report outcomes for all study arms in the same way, and the importance of maintaining comparability in terms of co-interventions administered in all study arms. There are 98 ongoing studies evaluating convalescent plasma and hyperimmune immunoglobulin, of which 50 are RCTs. This is the first living update of the review, and we will continue to update this review periodically. These updates may show different results to those reported here.

positive: Revisiting potential druggable targets against SARS‐CoV‐2 and repurposing therapeutics under preclinical study and clinical trials: A comprehensive review Coronavirus disease‐19 (COVID‐19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), is one of the most contagious diseases in human history that has already affected millions of lives worldwide. To date, no vaccines or effective therapeutics have been discovered yet that may successfully treat COVID‐19 patients or contain the transmission of the virus. Scientific communities across the globe responded rapidly and have been working relentlessly to develop drugs and vaccines, which may require considerable time. In this uncertainty, repurposing the existing antiviral drugs could be the best strategy to speed up the discovery of effective therapeutics against SARS‐CoV‐2. Moreover, drug repurposing may leave some vital information on druggable targets that could be capitalized in target‐based drug discovery. Information on possible drug targets and the progress on therapeutic and vaccine development also needs to be updated. In this review, we revisited the druggable targets that may hold promise in the development of the anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 agent. Progresses on the development of potential therapeutics and vaccines that are under the preclinical studies and clinical trials have been highlighted. We anticipate that this review will provide valuable information that would help to accelerate the development of therapeutics and vaccines against SARS‐CoV‐2 infection.

positive: Remdesivir in Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Benefit–Risk Assessment INTRODUCTION: There is a need to identify effective, safe treatments for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease) rapidly, given the current, ongoing pandemic. A systematic benefit–risk assessment was designed and conducted to examine the benefit–risk profile of remdesivir in COVID-19 patients compared with standard of care, placebo or other treatments. A key objective of this study was to provide a platform for a dynamic systematic benefit–risk evaluation, which starts with inevitably limited information (to meet the urgent unmet public health need worldwide), then update the benefit–risk evaluation as more data become available. METHODS: The Benefit–Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework was used to assess the overall benefit–risk of the use of remdesivir as a treatment for COVID-19 compared with standard of care, placebo or other treatments. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar and government agency websites to identify literature reporting clinical outcomes in patients taking remdesivir for COVID-19. A value tree was constructed and key benefits and risks were ranked by two clinicians in order of considered importance. RESULTS: Using the BRAT method, several key benefits and risks for use of remdesivir in COVID-19 compared with placebo have been identified. In one trial, the benefit of time to clinical improvement was not statistically significant (21 vs 23 days, HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.87–1.75), although the study was underpowered. In another trial, a shorter time to recovery in patients treated with remdesivir was observed (11 vs 15 days), with non-significant reduced mortality risk (8% vs 12%). Risk data were only available from one trial. This trial reported fewer serious adverse events in patients taking remdesivir (18%) compared with the placebo group (26%); however, more patients in the remdesivir group discontinued treatment as a result of an adverse event compared with those patients receiving placebo (12% vs 5%). CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary clinical trial results suggest that there may be a favourable benefit–risk profile for remdesivir compared with placebo in severe COVID-19 infection and further data on benefits would strengthen this evaluation. There is limited safety data for remdesivir, which should be obtained in further studies. The current framework summarises the key anticipated benefits and risks for which further data are needed. Ongoing clinical trial data can be incorporated into the framework when available to provide an updated benefit–risk assessment.

positive: The vaccine journey for COVID-19: a comprehensive systematic review of current clinical trials in humans INTRODUCTION: Since December 2019, there has been an outbreak of a novel beta-coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in Wuhan, China. On March the 11th the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 as a pandemic, with over 118,000 cases in more than 110 countries around the world. In response to the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emergency, clinical trial research assessing the efficacy and safety of experimental vaccines to prevent COVID-19 are emerging at an unprecedented rate. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the preliminary experiences and ongoing clinical trials of the major candidates and challenges of the vaccine strategies in humans. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: After a priori protocol registration with PROSPERO (181483), a systematic research of the published literature was conducted on 24 April 2020 using Medline (via PubMed), Embase (via Ovid), and WHO databases. Moreover, to explore the more recent literature we also searched the preprint server medRxiv. Finally, we scrutinized the Cochrane COVID-19 study register and the COVID-19 section of ClinicalTrials.gov database for identifying relevant ongoing clinical trials. Thereafter we selected the articles according to the PRISMA guidelines. Animal or in-vitro experimental studies were excluded. Moreover editorials, commentaries, abstracts, reviews, book chapters, and articles not in English were not included. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Our search identified 1359 published papers, 478 pre-print articles and 367 ongoing clinical trials. Finally, only ten ongoing clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. Specifically, seven developed vaccines for the S protein of SARS-CoV-2 and three clinical trials assessed the protective role of BCG vaccine against COVID-19. The first group included phase I/II trials with different types of molecules (DNA or mRNA vaccine, bacterial plasmid or viral vectors), the latter were phase III/IV trials designed on the basis of a heterologous lymphocyte activation by the BCG vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: This new disease is pushing the scientific community to develop swiftly a safe and effective vaccine. Notwithstanding the limitations of our analysis, given by the absence of available results, we try to provide a comprehensive view of the ongoing clinical trials in humans. Our analysis reveals a worldwide effort of both scientists and enterprises to achieve one of the most challenging goals of our century.

positive: From SARS-CoV to SARS-CoV-2: safety and broad-spectrum are important for coronavirus vaccine development The global pandemic of COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2 (also known as 2019-nCoV and HCoV-19) has posed serious threats to public health and economic stability worldwide, thus calling for development of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 and other emerging and reemerging coronaviruses. Since SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV have high similarity of their genomic sequences and share the same cellular receptor (ACE2), it is essential to learn the lessons and experiences from the development of SARS-CoV vaccines for the development of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. In this review, we summarized the current knowledge on the advantages and disadvantages of the SARS-CoV vaccine candidates and prospected the strategies for the development of safe, effective and broad-spectrum coronavirus vaccines for prevention of infection by currently circulating SARS-CoV-2 and other emerging and reemerging coronaviruses that may cause future epidemics or pandemics.

positive: Potential Effectiveness and Safety of Antiviral Agents in Children with Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Rapid Review and Meta-Analysis Background: The COVID-19 outbreak presents a new, life-threatening disease. Our aim was to assess the potential effectiveness and safety of antiviral agents for COVID-19 in children. Methods: Electronic databases from their inception to March, 31 2020 were searched for randomized controlled trials, clinical controlled trials and cohort studies of interventions with antiviral agents for children (less than 18 years of age) with COVID-19. Results: A total of 23 studies of indirect evidence with 6008 patients were included. The risks of bias in all studies were moderate to high in general. The effectiveness and safety of antiviral agents for children with COVID-19 is uncertain: For adults with COVID-19, lopinavir/ritonavir had no effect on mortality (risk ratio [RR]= 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45 to 1.30) and probability of negative PCR test (RR=0.98, 95 CI% 0.82 to 1.18). Arbidol had no benefit on probability of negative PCR test (RR=1.27, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.73). Hydroxychloroquine was not associated with increasing the probability of negative PCR result (RR=0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.18). For adults with SARS, interferon was associated with reduced corticosteroid dose (weighted mean difference [WMD]=-0.14 g, 95% CI -0.21 to -0.07) but had no effect on mortality (RR=0.72, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.88); ribavirin did not reduce mortality (RR=0.68, 95% CI % 0.43 to 1.06) and was associated with high risk of severe adverse reactions; and oseltamivir had no effect on mortality (RR=0.87, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.38). Ribavirin combined with interferon was also not effective in adults with MERS and associated with adverse reactions. Conclusions: There is no evidence showing the effectiveness of antiviral agents for children with COVID-19, and the clinical efficacy of existing antiviral agents is still uncertain. We do not suggest clinical routine use of antivirals for COVID-19 in children, with the exception of clinical trials. Keywords: Antiviral agents; children; COVID-19; meta-analysis; rapid review.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin to prevent major clinical events in hospitalised patients with coronavirus infection (COVID-19): rationale and design of a randomised, controlled clinical trial Introduction: Hydroxychloroquine and its combination with azithromycin have been suggested to improve viral clearance in patients with COVID-19, but its effect on clinical outcomes remains uncertain. Methods and analysis: We describe the rationale and design of an open-label pragmatic multicentre randomised (concealed) clinical trial of 7 days of hydroxychloroquine (400 mg BID) plus azithromycin (500 mg once daily), hydroxychloroquine 400 mg BID, or standard of care for moderately severe hospitalised patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 (in-patients with up to 4L/minute oxygen supply through nasal catheter). Patients are randomised in around 50 recruiting sites and we plan to enrol 630 patients with COVID-19. The primary endpoint is a 7-level ordinal scale measured at 15-days: 1)not hospitalised, without limitations on activities; 2)not hospitalised, with limitations on activities; 3)hospitalised, not using supplementary oxygen; 4)hospitalised, using supplementary oxygen; 5)hospitalised, using high-flow nasal cannula or non-invasive ventilation; 6)hospitalised, on mechanical ventilation; 7)death. Secondary endpoints are the ordinal scale at 7 days, need for mechanical ventilation and rescue therapies during 15 days, need of high-flow nasal cannula or non-invasive ventilation during 15 days, length of hospital stay, in-hospital mortality, thromboembolic events, occurrence of acute kidney injury, and number of days free of respiratory support at 15 days. Secondary safety outcomes include prolongation of QT interval on electrocardiogram, ventricular arrhythmias, and liver toxicity. The main analysis will consider all patients with confirmed COVID-19 in the groups they were randomly assigned. Ethics and dissemination: This study has been approved by Brazil's National Ethic Committee (CONEP) and National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA). An independent data monitoring committee will perform interim analyses and evaluate adverse events throughout the trial. Results will be submitted for publication after enrolment and follow-up are complete, as well as presented and reported to local health agencies. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04322123

positive: Clinical Perspective on 2019 Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia: A Systematic Review of Published Case Reports The ongoing pandemic of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), which originated from Wuhan, China, has led to 68,279 deaths due to 2019-nCoV pneumonia as of May 5, 2020. We conducted a systematic review and included 16 case reports to summarize the transmission and pathology of 2019-nCoV, and clinical presentation, laboratory and imaging findings, and treatment in 2019-nCoV pneumonia. The disease is mild in most people; in some, it may progress to severe pneumonia with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Patients with mild illness usually recover at home, with supportive care and isolation in accordance with guidelines. Patients who have moderate to severe pneumonia are usually monitored in the hospital. Although there is no definitive treatment for 2019-nCoV pneumonia so far, some antiviral drugs have shown promising results. The use of lopinavir/ritonavir and remdesivir was associated with significant clinical improvement in severe pneumonia. Nonetheless, we need more randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and treatment guidelines for developing effective management of the 2019-nCoV and improve patient outcomes by reducing mortality in high-risk patients. We also need more clinical trials and management guidelines for the effective management of 2019-nCoV pneumonia.

positive: IDentif.AI: Artificial Intelligence Pinpoints Remdesivir in Combination with Ritonavir and Lopinavir as an Optimal Regimen Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to the rapid initiation of urgently needed clinical trials of repurposed drug combinations and monotherapies. These regimens were primarily relying on mechanism-of-action based selection of drugs, many of which have yielded positive in vitro but largely negative clinical outcomes. To overcome this challenge, we report the use of IDentif.AI, a platform that rapidly optimizes infectious disease (ID) combination therapy design using artificial intelligence (AI). In this study, IDentif.AI was implemented on a 12-drug candidate therapy search set representing over 530,000 possible drug combinations. IDentif.AI demonstrated that the optimal combination therapy against SARS-CoV-2 was comprised of remdesivir, ritonavir, and lopinavir, which mediated a 6.5-fold improvement in efficacy over remdesivir alone. Additionally, IDentif.AI showed hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin to be relatively ineffective. The identification of a clinically actionable optimal drug combination was completed within two weeks, with a 3-order of magnitude reduction in the number of tests typically needed. IDentif.AI analysis was also able to independently confirm clinical trial outcomes to date without requiring any data from these trials. The robustness of the IDentif.AI platform suggests that it may be applicable towards rapid development of optimal drug regimens to address current and future outbreaks.

positive: Investigational Therapies for the Treatment of COVID-19: Updates from Ongoing Clinical Trials

positive: Potential Treatments for COVID-19; a Narrative Literature Review SARS-CoV-2 is a newly emerging human infectious coronavirus that causes COVID-19, which has been recognized as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) on March 11(th). There is still no vaccine or definitive treatment for this virus because its pathogenesis and proliferation pathways are still unknown. Therefore, in this article, new potential COVID-19 therapies are briefly reviewed.

positive: Hydroxychloroquine in patients with mainly mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019: open label, randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care compared with standard of care alone in adults with coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 16 government designated covid-19 treatment centres in China, 11 to 29 February 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 150 patients admitted to hospital with laboratory confirmed covid-19 were included in the intention to treat analysis (75 patients assigned to hydroxychloroquine plus standard of care, 75 to standard of care alone). INTERVENTIONS: Hydroxychloroquine administrated at a loading dose of 1200 mg daily for three days followed by a maintenance dose of 800 mg daily (total treatment duration: two or three weeks for patients with mild to moderate or severe disease, respectively). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Negative conversion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 by 28 days, analysed according to the intention to treat principle. Adverse events were analysed in the safety population in which hydroxychloroquine recipients were participants who received at least one dose of hydroxychloroquine and hydroxychloroquine non-recipients were those managed with standard of care alone. RESULTS: Of 150 patients, 148 had mild to moderate disease and two had severe disease. The mean duration from symptom onset to randomisation was 16.6 (SD 10.5; range 3-41) days. A total of 109 (73%) patients (56 standard of care; 53 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) had negative conversion well before 28 days, and the remaining 41 (27%) patients (19 standard of care; 22 standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine) were censored as they did not reach negative conversion of virus. The probability of negative conversion by 28 days in the standard of care plus hydroxychloroquine group was 85.4% (95% confidence interval 73.8% to 93.8%), similar to that in the standard of care group (81.3%, 71.2% to 89.6%). The difference between groups was 4.1% (95% confidence interval -10.3% to 18.5%). In the safety population, adverse events were recorded in 7/80 (9%) hydroxychloroquine non-recipients and in 21/70 (30%) hydroxychloroquine recipients. The most common adverse event in the hydroxychloroquine recipients was diarrhoea, reported in 7/70 (10%) patients. Two hydroxychloroquine recipients reported serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of hydroxychloroquine did not result in a significantly higher probability of negative conversion than standard of care alone in patients admitted to hospital with mainly persistent mild to moderate covid-19. Adverse events were higher in hydroxychloroquine recipients than in non-recipients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR2000029868.

positive: Statistical Evaluation of Clinical Trials Under COVID-19 Pandemic When conducting clinical trials under COVID-19 pandemic, protocol deviations and/or protocol violations are inevitably encountered due to possible environment change which may have an impact on the accuracy and reliability of clinical evaluation of the test treatment under investigation. Protocol deviations and/or violations include, but are not limited to, eligibility criteria, testing procedure, dose and dose regiment, treatment duration and clinical operation of the intended trial. FDA published guidance in March 2020 to assist investigators and institutional boards (IRBs) in assuring the safety of trial participants, maintaining compliance with good clinical practice, and minimizing risks to trial integrity during the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this article is to proposal methods for statistical evaluation in terms of (i) possible shift in target patient population and (ii) assessment of reproducibility of clinical studies conduct under COVID-19 pandemic environment. The proposed methods can be used to determine whether the clinical results of the intended trials are acceptable from both statistical and regulatory perspectives.

positive: Efficacy of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 OBJECTIVE: The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), also called COVID-19, has caused a pandemic which has swiftly involved the entire world and raised great public health concerns. The scientific community is actively exploring treatments that would potentially be effective in combating COVID-19. Hydroxychloroquine has been demonstrated to limit the replication of SARS-CoV-2 virus in vitro. In malarial pandemic countries, chloroquine is widely used to treat malaria. In malarial non-pandemic nations, chloroquine is not widely used. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine share similar chemical structures and mechanisms of action. The aim of this study was to indirectly investigate the efficacy of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 by determining the prevalence of COVID-19 in malaria pandemic and non-pandemic nations. We sought evidence to support or refute the hypothesis that these drugs could show efficacy in the treatment of COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed in vitro studies, in vivo studies, original studies, clinical trials, and consensus reports, that were conducted to evaluate the antiviral activities of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine. The studies on "COVID-19 and its allied treatment were found from World Health Organization (WHO), ISI-Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Google Scholar, and clinical trial registries. The search was based on keywords: antiviral drugs, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, COVID-19, COVID-19 treatment modalities, and coronavirus. In addition, we analyzed the prevalence of COVID-19 in malaria pandemic and non-pandemic countries. The review and analyses were performed on March 28, 2020. RESULTS: For this study, we identified a total of 09 published articles: 03 clinical trials with sample size 150; 03 in vitro studies and 03 expert consensus reports. These studies were all suggestive that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine can successfully treat COVID-19 infections. We found that COVID-19 infections are highly pandemic in countries where malaria is least pandemic and are least pandemic in nations where malaria is highly pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have antiviral characteristics in vitro. The findings support the hypothesis that these drugs have efficacy in the treatment of COVID-19. People are currently using these drugs for malaria. It is reasonable, given the hypothetical benefit of these two drugs, that they are now being tested in clinical trials to assess their effectiveness to combat this global health crisis.

positive: Of chloroquine and COVID-19 Abstract Recent publications have brought attention to the possible benefit of chloroquine, a broadly used antimalarial drug, in the treatment of patients infected by the novel emerged coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). The scientific community should consider this information in light of previous experiments with chloroquine in the field of antiviral research.

positive: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a clinical update Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has posed a significant threat to global health. It caused a total of 80 868 confirmed cases and 3101 deaths in Chinese mainland until March 8, 2020. This novel virus spread mainly through respiratory droplets and close contact. As disease progressed, a series of complications tend to develop, especially in critically ill patients. Pathological findings showed representative features of acute respiratory distress syndrome and involvement of multiple organs. Apart from supportive care, no specific treatment has been established for COVID-19. The efficacy of some promising antivirals, convalescent plasma transfusion, and tocilizumab needs to be investigated by ongoing clinical trials.

positive: A SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS OF THE TIME COURSE TO DEVELOP TREATMENTS FOR COVID-19 ABSTRACT Background. The spread of COVID-19 from Wuhan in China throughout the world has been alamingly rapid. Epidemiologic techniques succeeded in containing the disease in China, but efforts were not as successful in the rest of the world, particularly the United States where there have been 1,592, 599 cases with 95,863 deaths as of May 25, 2020. Projections are for continued new infections and deaths if no effective treatments can be activated over the next six months.. We performed a systematic review to determine the potential time course of development of treatments and vaccines focusing on availability in the last half of 2020. Methods. Our search was performed during the week of May 17, 2020. Publications: We reviewed up to date information from several sources to identify potential treatments for COVID-19: We used the Reagan-Udall Expanded Access Navigator COVID-19 Treatment Hub to track the efforts of companies to develop treatments. We then used the results to search for publications on pubmed.gov and on MedRxiv, the preprint server. We further used a targeted Google search to find announcements of trial results. Clinical Trials: We searched for all investigational trials involving potential treatments using several different sources: (A) covid-trials.org, then validated results on (B) clinicaltrials.gov and the (C) World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP). We focused on trials which were completed or currently recruiting for patients, reasoning that the timeline to arrive at treatments by the end of the year would require completion within the next 6 months. We excluded studies which were clearly observational, with no randomization, control or comparison group. We furtherset a cutoff of 100 for numbers of subjects since smaller trial size could lack statistical power to establish superiority of the intervention over the control condition. Results. Published Data: We found 19 publications reporting findings on 6 classes of agents. There were 9 publications related to hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), three on lopanovir/ritonavir (LPV/R) (one of which was combined with interferon beta-1),three on remdesivir, two on favipiravir, one on mepaluzamab, and one on tocilizumab. Ten publications reported randomized controlled trials, the rest were retrospective observational. Only one publication touched on outpatient management, the rest on hospitalized patients. Clinical Trials: We found 409 trials meeting our minimum requirement of 100 subjects which were recruiting or completed. The WHO has launched the Solidarity megatrial performed in over 100 countries actively comparing HCQ, lopanovir/ritonavir (LPV/R) alone and in combination with interferon beta-1, and remdesivir. That trial is scheduled to complete enrollment in the first quarter of 2021. In addition, we found 46 trials of HCQ, 11 trials of LPV/R and 8 trials of interferons. There were 18 ongoing trials of antiviral agents, 24 immune modulator trials, 9 vaccine trials, and 62 trials of other agents.We excluded a large number of trials of Chinese traditional medications, reasoning that there was insufficient clinical experience with these agents outside China to offer these treatments to the rest of the world. Forty four trials were hoping to complete enrollment by the end of the second quarter of 2020. Of these, only 9 were conducted on outpatients. A few vaccine trials are hoping to complete Phase 3 enrollment by the end of the third quarter, but a prolonged follow-up of patients will likely be required. Conclusion. Several treatments for severe disease in hospitalized patients have now been granted emergency authorization. However, the disease is propagated primarily by infected ambulatory individuals. There are only a few randomized controlled studies in outpatients which can be expected to yield results in time to impact on the continuing spread of the epidemic in 2020. It will be necessary for public health authorities to make hard decisions with limited data. The choices will be hardest in dealing with potential early release of vaccines. Keywords: Coronavirus, COVID-19, SARS-Cov-2, remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine

positive: Rapid systematic review on clinical evidence of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19: critical assessment and recommendation for future clinical trials Purpose: This study aims to critically assess the published studies of Chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for the treatment of COVID-19 and provide recommendations for future clinical trials for the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: A rapid systematic review was conducted by searching the PubMed, Embase, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases on April 13, 2020. Three clinical trial registry platforms, including ClinicalTrials.gov, the EU Clinical Trials Register, and the Chinese Clinical Trial Register were also complementarily searched. Results: A total of 10 clinical studies were identified, including 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 1 comparative nonrandomized trial, 5 single-arm trials, and 1 interim analysis. The heterogeneity among studies of the baseline disease severity and reported endpoints made a pooled analysis impossible. CQ and HCQ (with or without azithromycin) showed significant therapeutic benefit in terms of virologic clearance rate, improvement in symptoms and imaging findings, time to clinical recovery, and length of hospital stay in 1 RCT, 4 single-arm trials, and the interim analysis, whereas no treatment benefit of CQ or HCQ was observed in the remaining 4 studies. Limitations of the included studies ranged from small sample size, to insufficient information concerning baseline patient characteristics, to potential for selection bias without detailing the rationale for exclusion, and presence of confounding factors. Conclusion: Based on the studies evaluated, there still lacked solid evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of HCQ and CQ as a treatment for COVID-19 with or without azithromycin. This emphasized the importance of robust RCTs investing HCQ/CQ to address the evidence uncertainties. Keywords: COVID-19, Systematic review, Clinical trial, Chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine

positive: Microneedle array delivered recombinant coronavirus vaccines: Immunogenicity and rapid translational development Abstract Background Coronaviruses pose a serious threat to global health as evidenced by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), and COVID-19. SARS Coronavirus (SARS-CoV), MERS Coronavirus (MERS-CoV), and the novel coronavirus, previously dubbed 2019-nCoV, and now officially named SARS-CoV-2, are the causative agents of the SARS, MERS, and COVID-19 disease outbreaks, respectively. Safe vaccines that rapidly induce potent and long-lasting virus-specific immune responses against these infectious agents are urgently needed. The coronavirus spike (S) protein, a characteristic structural component of the viral envelope, is considered a key target for vaccines for the prevention of coronavirus infection. Methods We first generated codon optimized MERS-S1 subunit vaccines fused with a foldon trimerization domain to mimic the native viral structure. In variant constructs, we engineered immune stimulants (RS09 or flagellin, as TLR4 or TLR5 agonists, respectively) into this trimeric design. We comprehensively tested the pre-clinical immunogenicity of MERS-CoV vaccines in mice when delivered subcutaneously by traditional needle injection, or intracutaneously by dissolving microneedle arrays (MNAs) by evaluating virus specific IgG antibodies in the serum of vaccinated mice by ELISA and using virus neutralization assays. Driven by the urgent need for COVID-19 vaccines, we utilized this strategy to rapidly develop MNA SARS-CoV-2 subunit vaccines and tested their pre-clinical immunogenicity in vivo by exploiting our substantial experience with MNA MERS-CoV vaccines. Findings Here we describe the development of MNA delivered MERS-CoV vaccines and their pre-clinical immunogenicity. Specifically, MNA delivered MERS-S1 subunit vaccines elicited strong and long-lasting antigen-specific antibody responses. Building on our ongoing efforts to develop MERS-CoV vaccines, promising immunogenicity of MNA-delivered MERS-CoV vaccines, and our experience with MNA fabrication and delivery, including clinical trials, we rapidly designed and produced clinically-translatable MNA SARS-CoV-2 subunit vaccines within 4 weeks of the identification of the SARS-CoV-2 S1 sequence. Most importantly, these MNA delivered SARS-CoV-2 S1 subunit vaccines elicited potent antigen-specific antibody responses that were evident beginning 2 weeks after immunization. Interpretation MNA delivery of coronaviruses-S1 subunit vaccines is a promising immunization strategy against coronavirus infection. Progressive scientific and technological efforts enable quicker responses to emerging pandemics. Our ongoing efforts to develop MNA-MERS-S1 subunit vaccines enabled us to rapidly design and produce MNA SARS-CoV-2 subunit vaccines capable of inducing potent virus-specific antibody responses. Collectively, our results support the clinical development of MNA delivered recombinant protein subunit vaccines against SARS, MERS, COVID-19, and other emerging infectious diseases.

positive: Potential inhibitors for 2019-nCoV coronavirus M protease from clinically approved medicines Starting from December 2019, a novel coronavirus, named 2019-nCoV, was found to cause Severe Acute Respiratory (SARI) symptoms and rapid pandemic in China. With the hope to identify candidate drugs for 2019-nCoV, we adopted a computational approach to screen for available commercial medicines which may function as inhibitors for the Mpro of 2019-nCoV. Up to 10 commercial medicines that may form hydrogen bounds to key residues within the binding pocket of 2019-nCoV Mpro were identified, which may have higher mutation tolerance than lopinavir/ritonavir and may also function as inhibitors for other coronaviruses with similar Mpro binding sites and pocket structures.

positive: Convalescent plasma to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19): considerations for clinical trial design Case series studying convalescent plasma use in the treatment of COVID‐19 have been promising, but additional, high‐quality studies are needed to determine the efficacy of the treatment when applied for prophylaxis, for early phases of illness, and for severe illness. Previous studies of convalescent plasma in treating other viral diseases have identified factors to consider when designing treatment protocols, including timing of administration relative to onset of illness, timing of donation relative to resolution of symptoms, severity of illness of the donor, pretransfusion serology of the recipient, and antibody titers of the donor. There are many clinical trials studying treatment of, and prophylaxis against, COVID‐19 using convalescent plasma. In addition to clinical trials, the FDA also allows treatment through two other pathways: the “Expanded Access to Convalescent Plasma for the Treatment of Patients with COVID‐19” protocol, and emergency investigational new drug applications. The FDA also provides criteria for donation of convalescent plasma.

positive: Trials and tribulations: so many potential treatments, so few answers PURPOSE: The purpose of this review is to quantify the landscape of current clinical trials ongoing for therapies in the treatment of COVID-19. A secondary purpose is to examine the relationship between public and scientific interests in potential therapies for COVID-19. METHODS: A systematic search of clinicaltrials.gov was undertaken on April 22, 2020, to identify all currently registered clinical trials investigating potential therapies for patients with COVID-19. Public interest in the various therapies was quantified utilizing Google Trends. Public interest in hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine was plotted against the cumulative number of active clinical trials evaluating antimalarials as potential COVID-19 therapies over time. RESULTS: There were 341 interventional studies and 208 different therapies actively registered on clinicaltrials.gov whose primary aim is the treatment of COVID-19. The median sample size was 120 patients (range 4-6000) with 154 (45%) trials reporting a planned sample size of 100 patients or less. There was a strong positive correlation (r = 0.76, p = 0.01) between the number of registered clinical trials and the public interest in the top ten proposed therapies. Following the spike in public interest, the average number of new trials increased tenfold with respect to antimalarial therapies. CONCLUSIONS: The relatively small sample sizes and the number of independent trials investigating similar therapies are concerning. Resources may not be being allocated based on scientific merit and may be driven by public consciousness and speculation. Moving forward, a concerted effort focused on implementing large, well-coordinated and carefully designed multi-armed clinical trials will help to ensure that the most promising therapeutic options are rigorously studied and clinically meaningful results produced.

positive: Implications of the lack of a unified research project framework: an investigation into the registration of clinical trials of COVID-19. Objective: The aim of this study was to provide recommendations for improving the design of subsequent studies through analysis of the registered coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) clinical trials.Methods: A retrospective analysis of 189 trials retrievals achieved on February 20, 2020.Results: A total of 189 trials are included in the study. There were 69.3% interventional studies, 21.7% observational studies, 5.3% diagnostic tests, and 3.7% other studies. The following statistics are provided only for the interventional studies. Severity of disease: 5.3% light and common type, 17.6% severe and critically ill, and 59.6% with no restricted classification. Medication use: 51.1% Western medicine, 32.1% Chinese medicine, 10.7% blood related product, and 6.1% non-drug therapy. The median and inner quantile range of the sample sizes included in these studies: 104 (IQR: 60, 200). Primary outcome type most used: 45.8% with clinical characteristics and 21.4% with virological. Study design characteristics: 71% of all studies were randomized, 5% of all studies were blinded, 18% of all studies were multicenter, and 76% of all studies were single-center.Conclusion: Although many COVID-19 studies include randomization in their design, the lack of additional double-blind and placebo-controlled elements in their designs result in a less robust evaluation of intervention safety and efficacy. Furthermore, similar or repeated research and small sample studies that have less promise in gains of new information have possibly led to a shortage of recruitable patients and become a barrier to the completion of large multicenter clinical trial studies.

positive: A Comprehensive Analysis of Clinical Trials in the COVID-19 Pandemic Era Background and objective: Despite medical advances, we are facing the unprecedented disaster of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic without available treatments and effective vaccines. As the COVID-19 pandemic has approached its culmination, desperate efforts have been made to seek proper treatments and response strategies, and the number of clinical trials has been rapidly increasing. In this time of the pandemic, it is believed that learning lessons from it would be meaningful in preparing for future pandemics. Thus, this study aims at providing a comprehensive landscape of COVID-19 related clinical trials based on the ClinicalTrials.gov database. Materials and methods: Up to 30 March 2020, we identified a total of 147 eligible clinical trials and reviewed the overview of the studies. Results: Until then, the most clinical trials were set up in China. Treatment approaches are the most frequent purpose of the registered studies. Chloroquine, interferon, and antiviral agents such as remdesivir, lopinavir, and ritonavir are agents under investigation in these trials. Conclusions: In this study, we introduced the promising therapeutic options that many researchers and clinicians are interested in, and to address the hidden issues behind clinical trials in this COVID-19 pandemic.

positive: Transcatheter drug delivery through bronchial artery for COVID-19: is it fiction or could it come true? More than 1,200 active or recruiting clinical trials for novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatments and vaccines are registered. Many drugs have shown promise for treatment of COVID-19. Nevertheless, up to date, no drugs have been confirmed as a definitive treatment for COVID-19. Trials such as the SOLIDARITY and RECOVERY are ongoing, and first results were announced in favour of therapy with dexamethasone with a significant trend showing greatest benefit among those patients requiring ventilation. The drawbacks of these trials include exposing the patients to drugs with well-documented systemic adverse effects or unknown complications of novel therapies without proof of clinical benefit. We present here the hypothesis that bronchial artery infusion could be an alternative for systemic drug infusion in COVID-19 trials with superadded benefits of high drug concentration and low systemic adverse effects. The concept of this idea has many uncertainties and no current clinical data to support. Perhaps, the technique should be first applied in animal models to determine its safety and calculate the effective dose of the drugs. Guidelines and reviews of pharmacotherapy for COVID-19 should be implemented for this fiction to come true.

positive: Randomised controlled trial comparing efficacy and safety of high versus low Low-Molecular Weight Heparin dosages in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and coagulopathy not requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (COVID-19 HD): a structured summary of a study protocol OBJECTIVES: a. 1. Death. 2. Acute Myocardial Infarction [AMI]. 3. Objectively confirmed, symptomatic arterial or venous thromboembolism [TE]. 4. a. Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (Cpap) or Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) or b. IMV in patients who at randomisation were receiving standard oxygen therapy. 5. IMV in patients who at randomisation were receiving non-invasive mechanical ventilation. b. Similar in terms of major bleeding risk. TRIAL DESIGN: Multicentre, randomised controlled, superiority, open label, parallel group, two arms (1:1 ratio), in-hospital study. PARTICIPANTS: Inpatients will be recruited from 7 Italian Academic and non-Academic Internal Medicine Units, 2 Infectious Disease Units and 1 Respiratory Disease Unit. INCLUSION CRITERIA (ALL REQUIRED): 1. Age > 18 and < 80 years. 2. Positive SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic (on pharyngeal swab of deep airways material). 3. a. Respiratory Rate ≥25 breaths /min. b. Arterial oxygen saturation≤93% at rest on ambient air. c. PaO2/FiO2 ≤300 mmHg. 4. a. D-dimer >4 times the upper level of normal reference range. b. Sepsis-Induced Coagulopathy (SIC) score >4. 5. No need of IMV. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: 1. Age <18 and >80 years. 2. IMV. 3. Thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 80.000 mm3). 4. Coagulopathy: INR >1.5, aPTT ratio > 1.4. 5. Impaired renal function (eGFR calculated by CKD-EPI Creatinine equation < 30 ml/min). 6. Known hypersensitivity to enoxaparin. 7. History of heparin induced thrombocytopenia. 8. Presence of an active bleeding or a pathology susceptible of bleeding in presence of anticoagulation (e.g. recent haemorrhagic stroke, peptic ulcer, malignant cancer at high risk of haemorrhage, recent neurosurgery or ophthalmic surgery, vascular aneurysms, arteriovenous malformations). 9. Concomitant anticoagulant treatment for other indications (e.g. atrial fibrillation, venous thromboembolism, prosthetic heart valves). 10. Concomitant double antiplatelet therapy. 11. Administration of therapeutic doses of LMWH, fondaparinux, or unfractionated heparin (UFH) for more than 72 hours before randomization; prophylactic doses are allowed. 12. Pregnancy or breastfeeding or positive pregnancy test. 13. Presence of other severe diseases impairing life expectancy (e.g. patients are not expected to survive 28 days given their pre-existing medical condition). 14. Lack or withdrawal of informed consent. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Control Group (Low-Dose LMWH): patients in this group will be administered Enoxaparin (Inhixa®) at standard prophylactic dose (i.e., 4000 UI subcutaneously once day). Intervention Group (High-Dose LMWH): patients in this group will be administered Enoxaparin (Inhixa®) at dose of 70 IU/kg every 12 hours, as reported in the following table. This dose is commonly used in Italy when a bridging strategy is required for the management of surgery or invasive procedures in patients taking anti-vitamin K oral anticoagulants The treatment with Enoxaparin will be initiated soon after randomization (maximum allowed starting time 12h after randomization). The treatment will be administered every 12 hours in the intervention group and every 24 hours in the control group. Treatments will be administered in the two arms until hospital discharge or the primary outcomes detailed below occur. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary Efficacy Endpoint: 1. Death. 2. Acute Myocardial Infarction [AMI]. 3. Objectively confirmed, symptomatic arterial or venous thromboembolism [TE]. 4. a. Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (Cpap) or Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) or b. IMV in patients who at randomisation were in standard oxygen therapy by delivery interfaces. 5. Need for IMV, in patients who at randomisation were in Cpap or NIV. Time to the occurrence of each of these events will be recorded. Clinical worsening will be analysed as a binary outcome as well as a time-to-event one. Secondary Efficacy Endpoints: : 1. Death. 2. Acute Myocardial Infarction [AMI]. 3. Objectively confirmed, symptomatic arterial or venous thromboembolism [TE]. 4. a. Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (Cpap) or Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) or b. IMV in patients who at randomisation were in standard oxygen therapy by delivery interfaces. 5. Need for IMV in patients who at randomisation were in Cpap or NIV. 6. o D-dimer level; o Plasma fibrinogen levels; o Mean Platelet Volume; o Lymphocyte/Neutrophil ratio; o IL-6 plasma levels. MORTALITY AT 30 DAYS: Information about patients’ status will be sought in those who are discharged before 30 days on Day 30 from randomisation. Time to the occurrence of each of these events will be recorded. Each of these events will be analysed as a binary outcome and as a time-to-event one. Primary safety endpoint: Decrease in haemoglobin of 2 g/dl or more; Transfusion of 2 or more units of packed red blood cells; Bleeding that occurs in at least one of the following critical sites [intracranial, intraspinal, intraocular (within the corpus of the eye; thus, a conjunctival bleed is not an intraocular bleed), pericardial, intra-articular, intramuscular with compartment syndrome, or retroperitoneal]; Bleeding that is fatal (defined as a bleeding event that was the primary cause of death or contributed directly to death); Bleeding that necessitates surgical intervention. Time to the occurrence of each of these events will be recorded. Each of these events will be analysed as a binary outcome and as a time-to-event one. Secondary safety endpoint: 1. Any bleeding compromising hemodynamic. 2. Spontaneous hematoma larger than 25 cm2, or 100 cm2 if there was a traumatic cause. 3. Intramuscular hematoma documented by ultrasonography. 4. Epistaxis or gingival bleeding requiring tamponade or other medical intervention. 5. Bleeding from venipuncture for >5 minutes. 6. Haematuria that was macroscopic and was spontaneous or lasted for more than 24 hours after invasive procedures. 7. Haemoptysis, hematemesis or spontaneous rectal bleeding requiring endoscopy or other medical intervention. 8. Any other bleeding requiring temporary cessation of a study drug. Time to the occurrence of each of these events will be recorded. Each of these events will be analysed as a binary outcome and as a time-to-event one. RANDOMISATION: Randomisation (with a 1:1 randomisation ratio) will be centrally performed by using a secure, web-based system, which will be developed by the Methodological and Statistical Unit at the Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria of Modena. Randomisation stratified by 4 factors: 1) Gender (M/F); 2) Age (<75/≥75 years); 3) BMI (<30/≥30); 4) Comorbidities (0-1/>2) with random variable block sizes will be generated by STATA software. The web-based system will guarantee the allocation concealment. Blinding (masking) The study is conceived as open-label: patients and all health-care personnel involved in the study will be aware of the assigned group. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The target sample size is based on the hypothesis that LMWH administered at high doses versus low doses will significantly reduce the risk of clinical worsening. The overall sample size in this study is expected to be 300 with 150 in the Low-Dose LMWH control group and 150 in the High-Dose LMWH intervention group, recruited over 10-11 months. Assuming an alpha of 5% (two tailed) and a percentage of patients who experience clinical worsening in the control group being between 25% and 30%, the study will have 80% power to detect at least 50% relative reduction in the risk of death between low and high doses of heparin. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 1.2 of 11/05/2020. Recruitment start (expected): 08/06/2020 Recruitment finish (expected): 30/04/2021 Trial registration EudraCT 2020-001972-13, registered on April 17th, 2020 Full protocol The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Core Outcome Set for Clinical Trials of COVID-19 based on Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine Background: Development of a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials for COVID-19 is urgent because of the pandemic wreaking havoc worldwide and the heterogeneity of outcomes in clinical trials. Methods: A preliminary list of outcomes were developed after a systematic review of protocols of clinical trials for COVID-19. Then, two rounds of the Delphi survey were conducted. Stakeholders were traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) experts, Western medicine (WM) experts, nurses and the public. Patients with confirmed COVID-19 were also invited to participate in a questionnaire written in understandable language. Frontline clinicians, as well as nurse, methodologist, evidence based-medicine researcher, and staff from the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry participated by video conference to vote. Results: Ninety-seven eligible study protocols were identified from 160 clinical trials. Seventy-six outcomes were identified from TCM clinical trials and 126 outcomes were identified from WM clinical trials. Finally, 145 outcomes were included in the first round of the Delphi survey. Then, a COS for clinical trials of TCM and WM was developed. The COS include clinical outcomes (recovery/improvement/progression/death), etiology (SARS-CoV-2 nucleic-acid tests, viral load), inflammatory factor (C-reactive protein), vital signs (temperature, respiration), blood and lymphatic-system parameters (lymphocytes, virus antibody), respiratory outcomes (Pulmonary imaging, blood oxygen saturation, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, arterial blood gas analysis, mechanical ventilation, oxygen intake, pneumonia severity index), clinical efficacy (prevalence of preventing patients with mild-to-moderate disease progressing to severe disease), symptoms (clinical symptom score). Outcomes were recommended according to different types of disease. Outcome measurement instrument/definition were also recommended. Conclusion: A COS for COVID-19 may improve consistency of outcome reporting in clinical trials.

positive: Efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir or arbidol in adult patients with mild/moderate COVID-19: an exploratory randomized controlled trial Abstract Background Antiviral therapies against the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, which has caused a global pandemic of respiratory illness called COVID-19, are still lacking. Methods Our study (NCT04252885, named ELACOI), was an exploratory randomized (2:2:1) controlled trial assessing the efficacy and safety of lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) or arbidol monotherapy for treating patients with mild/moderate COVID-19. Findings This study successfully enrolled 86 patients with mild/moderate COVID-19 with 34 randomly assigned to receive LPV/r, 35 to arbidol and 17 with no antiviral medication as control. Baseline characteristics of the three groups were comparable. The primary endpoint, the rate of positive-to-negative conversion of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid, was similar between groups (all P>0.05). There were no differences between groups in the secondary endpoints, the rates of antipyresis, cough alleviation, or improvement of chest CT at days 7 or 14 (all P>0.05). At day 7, eight (23.5%) patients in the LPV/r group, 3 (8.6%) in the arbidol group and 2(11.8%) in the control group showed a deterioration in clinical status from moderate to severe/critical (P =0.206). Overall, 12 (35.3%) patients in the LPV/r group and 5 (14.3%) in the arbidol group experienced adverse events during the follow-up period. No apparent adverse event occurred in the control group. Conclusions LPV/r or arbidol monotherapy present little benefit for improving the clinical outcome of patients hospitalized with mild/moderate COVID-19 over supportive care. Funding This study was supported by project 2018ZX10302103-002, 2017ZX10202102-003-004 and Infectious Disease Specialty of Guangzhou High-level Clinical Key Specialty (2019-2021).

positive: An online solution focused brief therapy for adolescent anxiety during the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic: a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: This study aims to assess the effectiveness of delivering Solution Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) through telecommunication with a group of adolescents who present anxiety symptoms during the COVID-19 outbreak. We hypothesize that participants who are randomly assigned to receive 2–4 sessions of Solution Focused Brief Therapy would have better clinical outcomes than participants who are in the waitlist group. We additionally hypothesized that using SFBT can also change participants’ depression levels and their coping strategies in dealing with distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. TRIAL DESIGN: This study employs a randomized delayed crossover open label controlled trial in adolescents who are presenting anxiety symptoms during the COVID-19 outbreak. Participants who meet the enrollment criteria stated below will be invited to participate in this study through telecommunication. Those accepting will be randomly allocated to the intervention group or waitlist group.

positive: Clinical trials of repurposed antivirals for SARS-CoV-2 The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has prompted the repurposing of drugs on the basis of promising in vitro and therapeutic results with other human coronavirus diseases such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). These repurposed drugs have mainly included remdesivir, favipiravir, lopinavir/ritonavir, ribavirin, interferons, and hydroxychloroquine. Unfortunately, the first open-label, randomized controlled trials are showing the poor efficacy of these repurposed drugs. These results highlight the necessity of identifying and characterizing specific and potent SARS-CoV-2 antivirals.

positive: Clinical Efficacy of Intravenous Immunoglobulin Therapy in Critical Patients with COVID-19: A multicenter retrospective cohort study Summary Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread all over the world, causing more than 1.5 million infections and over ten thousands of deaths in a short period of time. However, little is known about its pathological mechanism, and there are still no clinical study reports on specific treatment. The purpose of this study is to determine the clinical efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) therapy on COVID-19. Methods In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, adult critical COVID-19 patients (including severe type and critical type, according to the clinical classification defined by National Health Commission of China) in 8 government designated treatment center in China from Dec 23, 2019 to Mar 31, 2020 were enrolled. Demographic, clinical, treatment, and laboratory data, prognosis were extracted from electronic medical records, and IVIG was exposure factor. Primary outcomes were the 28 days and 60 days mortality, and secondary outcomes were the total length of in-hospital and the total duration of the disease. Meanwhile, the parameters of inflammation response and organ function were detected. The risk factors were determined by COX proportional hazards model. The subgroup analysis was carried out according to clinical classification of COVID-19, IVIG dosage and timing. Findings 325patients were included in this study, of whom 222 (68%) were severe type, 103 (32%) were critical type. 42 (13%) died in 28 days within hospitalization, total 54 (17%) died in 60 days, and 6 (3%) died in severe type, 48 (47%) died in critical type. 174 cases were used IVIG, and 151 cases were not. Compared with the baseline characteristics between two groups, the results showed that the patients in IVIG group had higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHII) score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, IL-6 and lactate level, lower lymphocyte count and oxygenation index (all P<0.05). The 28 day and 60 day mortality did not improve with IVIG in overall patients. The in-hospital stay and the total duration of disease were longer in IVIG group (p<0.001). Risk factors were clinical classification (hazards ratio 0.126, 95% confidence interval 0.039-0.413, P=0.001), and using IVIG (hazards ratio 0.252, 95% confidence interval 0.107-0.591, P=0.002) with COX regression. Subgroup analysis showed that only in patients with critical type, IVIG could significantly reduce the 28 day mortality, decrease the inflammatory response and improve some organ functions (all p<0.05), and 60-day mortality reduced significantly by using IVIG in the early stage (admission[≤]7 days) and with high dose (>15 g/d). Interpretation Early and high dose of IVIG therapy may improve the prognosis of COVID-19 patients only in critical type, which provides the clinical basis for the choice of treatment population and method of IVIG therapy for the SARS-CoV-2 infection. Keywords: SARS-COV-2, COVID-19, IVIG, clinical efficacy, mortality

positive: Search for SARS-CoV-2 inhibitors in currently approved drugs to tackle COVID-19 pandemia Different treatments are currently used for clinical management of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but little is known about their efficacy yet. Here we present ongoing results to compare currently available drugs for a variety of diseases to find out if they counteract SARS-CoV-2-induced cytopathic effect in vitro. Our goal is to prioritize antiviral activity to provide a solid evidence-driven rationale for forthcoming clinical trials. Since the most effective antiviral approaches are usually based on combined therapies that tackle the viral life cycle at different stages, we are also testing combinations of drugs that may be critical to reduce the emergence of resistant viruses. We will provide results as soon as they become available, so data should be interpreted with caution, clearly understanding the limitations of the in vitro model, that may not always reflect what could happen in vivo. Thus, our goal is to test the most active antivirals identified in adequate animal models infected with SARS-CoV-2, to add more information about possible in vivo efficacy. In turn, successful antivirals could be tested in clinical trials as treatments for infected patients, but also as pre-exposure prophylaxis to avoid novel infections until an effective and safe vaccine is developed.

positive: The Mechanism and Clinical Outcome of patients with Corona Virus Disease 2019 Whose Nucleic Acid Test has changed from negative to positive, and the therapeutic efficacy of Favipiravir: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: A variety of possible mechanisms can make the nucleic acid test of patients who meet the discharge conditions positive again, including reinfection, reactivation of the original virus, lack of strict discharge criteria, new infection, and so on. Different reasons will correspond to different prevention and control measures. We will enroll patients who are discharged after treatment, whose nucleic acid test has changed from negative to positive during the screening visit, regardless of the severity of the symptoms, to investigate the mechanism, clinical outcome and therapeutic efficacy with Favipiravir patients with Corona virus Disease 2019. Favipiravir is an anti-viral agent that selectively and potently inhibits the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, it has been used for treatment of some life-threatening infections such as Ebola virus, Lassa virus and rabies. Its therapeutic efficacy has been proven in these diseases. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a multi-center, two arm, open label, parallel group, randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Eligibility criteria: 1. Adults 18 to 80 years, male or female. 2. After the first diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19, the nucleic acid test of respiratory specimens such as sputum or nasopharyngeal swabs, has been negative for two consecutive times (sampling time interval of at least 24 hours), in accordance with the COVID-19’s diagnosis and treatment Plan (7th Edition), discharged. 3. During screening visit (follow-up after discharge), The nucleic acid test of COVID-19 is positive in any one of the following samples: sputum, throat swabs, blood, feces or other specimens. Regardless of whether or not they had symptoms and the severity of symptoms. 4. Volunteer to participate in the research and sign the Informed Consent Form. 1. Allergic to Favipiravjr; 2. Pregnant or lactating women. 3. Uncontrolled diseases of the blood and cardiovascular system, liver or kidney. 4. History of mental disorders, drug abuse or dependence; 5. Researchers consider it inappropriate for adults to participate; 6. Participating in other clinical studies. Loss to Follow up: Cases that do not complete the clinical trial program will be regarded as lost to follow up. Including the withdrawal of patients by themselves (such as poor compliance, etc.), or the withdrawal of patients ordered by the researcher (those who need other drugs which affect the judgment of the curative effect, and those who need to stop taking drugs for severe adverse events) Study setting: The participating hospitals are some of the designated hospitals that have been or may be admitting patients who meet the eligibility criteria, mainly in Hubei, Shenzhen, Anhui and Beijing. Participants will be recruited from these 15 hospitals: Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital, Hubei; Jinyintan Hospital of Wuhan, Hubei; Ezhou Central Hospital, Hubei; The Second People's Hospital of Fuyang, Anhui; The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC, Anhui; Beijing Youan Hospital, Beijing; Capital Medical University Beijing Institute of Hepatology, Beijing; Ezhou Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Hubei; Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Hubei; The Fifth Hospital of ShiJiazhuang, Hebei; Jinan Infectious Diseases Hospital, Shandong; Public Health Clinical Center of Chengdu, Sichuan; Wuxi No.5 People’s Hospital, Jiangsu; The Third People’s Hospital of Shenzhen, Guangdong; The First Affiliated Hospital of Bengfu Medical College, AnHui. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Favipiravir group (experimental): Favipiravir 1600mg each dose, twice a day on the 1st day; 600mg each dose, twice a day from the 2nd to the 7th day, Oral administration, the maximum number of days taken will be no more than 14 days plus routine treatment for COVID-19. Regular treatment group (control): Treatments other than Antiviral drugs can be given. Routine treatment for patients with the corona virus will be administered, this includes oxygen therapy, drugs that reduced phlegm and relieve cough, including thymosin, proprietary Chinese medicine, etc. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary Outcome Measures: Viral nucleic acid test negative [Time Frame: 5 months]: Subjects who tested negative for nucleic acid from sputum or nasopharyngeal swabs for two consecutive times (sampling time interval of at least 24 hours). 1. Body temperature returned to normal for more than 3 days; 2. Lung image improved. 3. Clinical manifestation improved; 4. The viral nucleic acid test of respiratory specimens was negative for two consecutive times (sampling time interval of at least 24 hours). RANDOMIZATION: The central randomization system (Interactive Web Response Management System), will be used to randomly divide the subjects into the experimental group and the control group according to the ratio of 2:1. In this study, block randomization will be used, in blocks of 6. BLINDING (MASKING): This is an open label trial. Trial participants, investigators, care givers, outcome assessors, and date analysts are not blinded to group assignment. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED: 210 patients are expected to be enrolled and allocated according to the ratio of 2 (Favipiravir group, n=140): 1(regular treatment group, n=70). TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version number 3.0, 10(th) April 2020 First Patient, first visit 17(th) March 2020; recruitment end date anticipated June 1, 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04333589, April 3, 2020. Registered April 3, 2020. FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

positive: Repurposing of drugs for Covid-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis Objective: The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the data currently available regarding the repurposing of different drugs for Covid-19 treatment. Participants with suspected or diagnosed Covid-19 will be included. The interventions being considered are drugs being repurposed, and comparators will include standard of care treatment or placebo. Methods: We searched Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, clinical trial registration site in the UK(NIHR), Europe (clinicaltrialsregister.eu), US (ClinicalTrials.gov) and internationally (isrctn.com), and reviewed the reference lists of articles for eligible articles published up to April 22, 2020. All studies in English that evaluated the efficacy of the listed drugs were included. Cochrane RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tool were used to assess study quality. This systematic review adheres to the PRISMA guidelines. The protocol is available at PROSPERO (CRD42020180915). Results: From 708 identified studies or clinical trials, 16 studies and 16 case reports met our eligibility criteria. Of these, 6 were randomized controlled trials (763 patients), 7 cohort studies (321 patients) and 3 case series (191 patients). Chloroquine (CQ) had a 100% discharge rate compared to 50% with lopinavir-ritonavir at day 14, however a trial has recommended against a high dosage due to cardiotoxic events. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has shown no significant improvement in negative seroconversion rate which is also seen in our meta-analysis (p=0.68). Adverse events with HCQ have a significant difference compared to the control group (p=0.001). Lopinavir-ritonavir has shown no improvement in time to clinical improvement which is seen in our meta-analyses (p=0.1). Remdesivir has shown no significant improvement in time to clinical improvement but this trial had insufficient power. Discussion: Due to the paucity in evidence, it is difficult to establish the efficacy of these drugs in the treatment of Covid-19 as currently there is no significant clinical effectiveness of the repurposed drugs. Further large clinical trials are required to achieve more reliable findings. A risk-benefit analysis is required on an individual basis to weigh out the potential improvement in clinical outcome and viral load reduction compared to the risks of the adverse events. (1-16)

positive: Drug Repurposing to find Inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 Main Protease Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the strain of coronavirus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the respiratory illness responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic. Currently there is no known vaccine or specific antiviral treatment for COVID-19 and so, there is an urgent need for expedite discovery of new therapeutics to combat the disease until a vaccine will be available worldwide. Drug repurposing is a strategy for identifying new uses for approved drugs that has the advantage (over conventional approaches that attempt to develop a drug from scratch) that time frame of the overall process can be significantly reduced because of the few number of clinical trial required. In this work, a virtual screening of FDA-approved drugs was performed for repositioning as potential inhibitors of the main protease Mpro of SARS-CoV-2. As a result of this study, 12 drugs are proposed as candidates for inhibitors of the Mpro enzyme. Some of the selected compounds are antiviral drugs that are already being tested in COVID-19 clinical trials (i.e. ribavirin) or are used to alleviate symptoms of the disease (i.e. codeine). Surprisingly, the most promising candidate is the naturally occurring broad spectrum antibiotic oxytetracycline. This compound has largely outperformed the remaining selected candidates along all filtering steps of our virtual screening protocol. If the activity of any of these drugs is experimentally corroborated, they could be used directly in clinical trials without the need for pre-clinical testing or safety evaluation since they are already used as drugs for other diseases.

positive: Chest CT Scan of Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: A Case-Control Study Introduction: This paper sought to investigate the clinical characteristic differences between suspected and confirmed patients with COVID-19 from CT scan to prevent and treat this infectious disease, since the coronavirus outbreak in the world has seriously affected the quality of life. Methods: We proposed to use a retrospective case-control study to give a comparison between suspected patients and confirmed patients in the clinical characteristics. Results: (56%) patients were confirmed for COVID-19 from suspected 167 patients. We find that elder people were more likely to be infected by COVID-19. Among the confirmed 94 patients, 2 (2%) patients were admitted to an intensive care unit, and 0 (0%) patients died during the study period. We find that images of CT scan of patients with a COVID-19 are significantly different from patients without a COVID-19. Conclusions: To our best knowledge, it is the first time to use the case-control design to study the coronavirus disease, since it is particularly appropriate for investigating infectious disease outbreaks. The clinical treatment experience in this study can supply a guideline for treating COVID-19 as the number of the infected patients is increasing in the world. Compared with other studies, we find that the mortality rate and the intensive care unit rate can be reduced if patients can be treated timely in the right identification and detection with nucleic acid testing and chest CT scan. Therefore, we recommend nucleic acid testing and chest CT scan for the clinical treatment practice from this successful clinical treatment study.

positive: Does Hydroxychloroquine Combat COVID-19? A Timeline of Evidence

positive: An experimental trial of recombinant human interferon alpha nasal drops to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 in medical staff in an epidemic area Objective To investigate the efficacy and safety of recombinant human interferon alpha1b (rhIFN-α) nasal drops in healthy medical staff to prevent 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Methods A prospective, open-label study was conducted. Starting January 21, 2020, at Taihe Hospital in Shiyan City, Hubei Province, 2944 medical staff members were recruited and allocated into a low-risk group or a high-risk group according to whether they were directly exposed to the coronavirus. Participants in the low-risk group received rhIFN-α nasal drops (2-3 drops/nostril/time, 4 times/day) for 28 days; those in the high-risk group received rhIFN-α nasal drops combined with thymosin-α1 (1.6 mg, hypodermic injection, once a week). The primary outcome was new-onset COVID-19 over 28 days. The secondary outcome was new-onset fever or respiratory symptoms but with negative pulmonary images. The results were compared with the number of new cases in medical staff in the same areas of Hubei Province (including Wuhan) during the same period. Adverse reactions to interferon nasal drops were also observed. Results Among the 2944 subjects in our study, 2415 were included in the low-risk group, including 997 doctors and 1418 nurses with average ages of 37.38 and 33.56 years, respectively; 529 were included in the high-risk group, including 122 doctors and 407 nurses with average ages of 35.24 and 32.16 years, respectively. The 28-day incidence of COVID-19 was zero in both the high- and low-risk groups. The 28-day incidence of new-onset clinical symptoms with negative images for pneumonia was also zero in both the high- and low-risk groups. As controls, a total of 2035 medical personnel with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia from the same area (Hubei Province) was observed between January 21 to February 23, 2020. There were no serious adverse effects in the 2944 subjects treated during the intervention period. Conclusion In this investigator-initiated open-label study, we observed that rhIFN-α nasal drops can effectively prevent COVID-19 in treated medical personnel. Our results also indicate that rhIFN-α nasal drops have potential promise for protecting susceptible healthy people during the coronavirus pandemic.

positive: COVID‐19 and toxicity from potential treatments: Panacea or poison Since December 2019, coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) has been increasingly spreading from its origin in Wuhan, China to many countries around the world eventuating in morbidity and mortality affecting millions of people. This pandemic has proven to be a challenge given that there is no immediate cure, no vaccine is currently available and medications or treatments being used are still undergoing clinical trials. There have already been examples of self‐medication and overdose. Clearly, there is a need to further define the efficacy of treatments used in the management of COVID‐19. This evidence needs to be backed by large randomised‐controlled clinical trials. In the meantime, there will no doubt be further off‐label use of these medications by patients and practitioners and possibly related toxicity.

positive: Type 1 interferons as a potential treatment against COVID-19 Type 1 interferons have a broad antiviral activity in vitro and are currently evaluated in a clinical trial to treat MERS-CoV. In this review, we discuss preliminary data concerning the potential activity of type 1 interferons on SARS-CoV-2, and the relevance of evaluating these molecules in clinical trials for the treatment of COVID-19.

positive: IL-6 Inhibitors in the Treatment of Serious COVID-19: A Promising Therapy? At present, there are no proven agents for treatment of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The available evidence has not allowed guidelines to clearly recommend any drugs outside the context of clinical trials. The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 that causes COVID-19 invokes a hyperinflammatory state driven by multiple cells and mediators like interleukin (IL)-1, IL-6, IL-12, and IL-18, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), etc. Considering the proven role of cytokine dysregulation in causing this hyperinflammation in the lungs with IL-6 being a key driver, particularly in seriously ill COVID-19 patients, it is crucial to further explore selective cytokine blockade with drugs like the IL-6 inhibitors tocilizumab, sarilumab, and siltuximab. These targeted monoclonal antibodies can dampen the downstream IL-6 signaling pathways, which can lead to decreased cell proliferation, differentiation, oxidative stress, exudation, and improve clinical outcomes in patients with evident features of cytokine-driven inflammation like persistent fever, dyspnea and elevated markers. Preliminary evidence has come for tocilizumab from some small studies, and interim analysis of a randomized controlled trial; the latter also being available for sarilumab. International guidelines do include IL-6 inhibitors as one of the options available for severe or critically ill patients. There has been increased interest in evaluating these drugs with a series of clinical trials being registered and conducted in different countries. The level of investigation though perhaps needs to be further intensified as there is a need to focus on therapeutic options that can prove to be 'life-saving' as the number of COVID-19 fatalities worldwide keeps increasing alarmingly. IL-6 inhibitors could be one such treatment option, with generation of more evidence and completion of a larger number of systematic studies.

positive: Associations between immune-suppressive and stimulating drugs and novel COVID-19—a systematic review of current evidence BACKGROUND: Cancer and transplant patients with COVID-19 have a higher risk of developing severe and even fatal respiratory diseases, especially as they may be treated with immune-suppressive or immune-stimulating drugs. This review focuses on the effects of these drugs on host immunity against COVID-19. METHODS: Using Ovid MEDLINE, we reviewed current evidence for immune-suppressing or -stimulating drugs: cytotoxic chemotherapy, low-dose steroids, tumour necrosis factorα (TNFα) blockers, interlukin-6 (IL-6) blockade, Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, IL-1 blockade, mycophenolate, tacrolimus, anti-CD20 and CTLA4-Ig. RESULTS: 89 studies were included. Cytotoxic chemotherapy has been shown to be a specific inhibitor for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus in in vitro studies, but no specific studies exist as of yet for COVID-19. No conclusive evidence for or against the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the treatment of COVID-19 patients is available, nor is there evidence indicating that TNFα blockade is harmful to patients in the context of COVID-19. COVID-19 has been observed to induce a pro-inflammatory cytokine generation and secretion of cytokines, such as IL-6, but there is no evidence of the beneficial impact of IL-6 inhibitors on the modulation of COVID-19. Although there are potential targets in the JAK-STAT pathway that can be manipulated in treatment for coronaviruses and it is evident that IL-1 is elevated in patients with a coronavirus, there is currently no evidence for a role of these drugs in treatment of COVID-19. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to challenging decision-making about treatment of critically unwell patients. Low-dose prednisolone and tacrolimus may have beneficial impacts on COVID-19. The mycophenolate mofetil picture is less clear, with conflicting data from pre-clinical studies. There is no definitive evidence that specific cytotoxic drugs, low-dose methotrexate for auto-immune disease, NSAIDs, JAK kinase inhibitors or anti-TNFα agents are contraindicated. There is clear evidence that IL-6 peak levels are associated with severity of pulmonary complications.

positive: Predicting commercially available antiviral drugs that may act on the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) through a drug-target interaction deep learning model Abstract The infection of a novel coronavirus found in Wuhan of China (SARS-CoV-2) is rapidly spreading, and the incidence rate is increasing worldwide. Due to the lack of effective treatment options for SARS-CoV-2, various strategies are being tested in China, including drug repurposing. In this study, we used our pre-trained deep learning-based drug-target interaction model called Molecule Transformer-Drug Target Interaction (MT-DTI) to identify commercially available drugs that could act on viral proteins of SARS-CoV-2. The result showed that atazanavir, an antiretroviral medication used to treat and prevent the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), is the best chemical compound, showing an inhibitory potency with Kd of 94.94 nM against the SARS-CoV-2 3C-like proteinase, followed by remdesivir (113.13 nM), efavirenz (199.17 nM), ritonavir (204.05 nM), and dolutegravir (336.91 nM). Interestingly, lopinavir, ritonavir, and darunavir are all designed to target viral proteinases. However, in our prediction, they may also bind to the replication complex components of SARS-CoV-2 with an inhibitory potency with Kd < 1,000 nM. In addition, we also found that several antiviral agents, such as Kaletra (lopinavir/ritonavir), could be used for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2. Overall, we suggest that the list of antiviral drugs identified by the MT-DTI model should be considered, when establishing effective treatment strategies for SARS-CoV-2.

positive: Remdesivir: A Review of Its Discovery and Development Leading to Emergency Use Authorization for Treatment of COVID-19 [Image: see text] The global pandemic of SARS-CoV-2, the causative viral pathogen of COVID-19, has driven the biomedical community to action—to uncover and develop antiviral interventions. One potential therapeutic approach currently being evaluated in numerous clinical trials is the agent remdesivir, which has endured a long and winding developmental path. Remdesivir is a nucleotide analogue prodrug that perturbs viral replication, originally evaluated in clinical trials to thwart the Ebola outbreak in 2014. Subsequent evaluation by numerous virology laboratories demonstrated the ability of remdesivir to inhibit coronavirus replication, including SARS-CoV-2. Here, we provide an overview of remdesivir’s discovery, mechanism of action, and the current studies exploring its clinical effectiveness.

positive: Mortality reduction in 46 severe Covid-19 patients treated with hyperimmune plasma. A proof of concept single arm multicenter interventional trial BACKGROUND Hyperimmune plasma from Covid-19 convalescent is a potential treatment for severe Covid-19. METHODS We conducted a multicenter one arm proof of concept interventional study. Patients with Covid-19 disease with moderate-to-severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, elevated C-reactive Protein and need for mechanical ventilation and/or CPAP were enrolled. One to three 250-300 ml unit of hyperimmune plasma (neutralizing antibodies titer [≥]1:160) were administered. Primary outcome was 7-days hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were PaO2/FiO2, laboratory and radiologic changes, as well as weaning from mechanical ventilation and safety. RESULTS The study observed 46 patients from March, 25 to April, 21 2020. Patients were aged 63, 61% male, 30 on CPAP and 7 intubated. PaO2/FiO2 was 128 (SD 47). Symptoms and ARDS duration were 14 (SD 7) and 6 days (SD 3). Three patients (6.5%) died within 7 days. The upper one-sided 90%CI was 13.9%, allowing to reject the null hypothesis of a 15% mortality. PaO2/FiO2 increased by 112 units (95%CI 82 to142) in survivors, the chest radiogram severity decreased in 23% (95%CI 5% to 42%); CRP, Ferritin and LDH decreased by 60, 36 and 20% respectively. Weaning from CPAP was obtained in 26/30 patients and 3/7 were extubated. Five serious adverse events occurred in 4 patients (2 likely, 2 possible treatment related). CONCLUSIONS Hyperimmune plasma in Covid-19 shows promising benefits, to be confirmed in a randomized controlled trial. This proof of concept study could open to future developments including hyperimmune plasma banking, development of standardized pharmaceutical products and monoclonal antibodies.

positive: Characteristics of COVID-19 Clinical Trials in China Based on the Registration Data on ChiCTR and ClinicalTrials.gov OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the fundamental characteristics of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) clinical trials registered in China. METHODS: COVID-19 clinical trials registered in China were analyzed from databases on ChiCTR and ClinicalTrials.gov. The study designs, samples, primary end points, and intervention measures were evaluated. RESULTS: In total, 262 intervention clinical trials were retrieved on March 10, 2020. Overall, 181 (69.1%) trials involved two groups, 200 (76.3%) trials were randomized parallel trials, 24 (9.2%) trials were double blind, and 60.3% of trials included ≤100 participants. Sixty (22.9%) trials considered symptom improvement as the primary endpoint and 43 (16.4%) trials considered the rate or time at which the subjects became virus-free as the primary endpoint. Of 262 intervention studies, chemical drugs and biological products were studied in 105 (40.1%) intervention studies, of which antiviral drugs accounted for 15.3% and malaria drugs accounted for 8.4% of the studies. Among all trials, 27.9% of the studies used traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), 10.3% used cell therapy, and 5.0% used plasma therapy. CONCLUSION: This study is the first snapshot of the landscape of COVID-19 clinical trials registered in China and provided the basic features of clinical trial designs for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19 to offer useful information to guide future clinical trials on COVID-19 in other countries.

positive: Genomic variance of the 2019‐nCoV coronavirus There is a rising global concern for the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019‐nCoV). Full genomic sequences have been released by the worldwide scientific community in the last few weeks to understand the evolutionary origin and molecular characteristics of this virus. Taking advantage of all the genomic information currently available, we constructed a phylogenetic tree including also representatives of other coronaviridae, such as Bat coronavirus (BCoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome. We confirm high sequence similarity (>99%) between all sequenced 2019‐nCoVs genomes available, with the closest BCoV sequence sharing 96.2% sequence identity, confirming the notion of a zoonotic origin of 2019‐nCoV. Despite the low heterogeneity of the 2019‐nCoV genomes, we could identify at least two hypervariable genomic hotspots, one of which is responsible for a Serine/Leucine variation in the viral ORF8‐encoded protein. Finally, we perform a full proteomic comparison with other coronaviridae, identifying key aminoacidic differences to be considered for antiviral strategies deriving from previous anti‐coronavirus approaches.

positive: Systematic benefit-risk assessment for the use of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19: Establishing a framework for rapid decision-making Objectives: Given the current pandemic, there is an urgent need to identify effective, safe treatments for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease). A systematic benefit-risk assessment was designed and conducted to strengthen the ongoing monitoring of the benefit-risk balance for chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 treatment. Methods: The overall benefit-risk of the use of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19 compared to standard of care, placebo or other treatments was assessed using the Benefit-Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework. We searched PubMed and Google Scholar to identify literature reporting clinical outcomes in patients taking chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19. A value tree was constructed and key benefits and risks were ranked by two clinicians in order of considered importance. Results: Several potential key benefits and risks were identified for use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine in COVID-19 treatment. For the benefit of virological clearance, three studies were identified. A significant risk difference (RD) between hydroxychloroquine and the comparator group (standard of care) was found for only one study (RD=0.58, 95% CI: 0.17, 0.98). The risk difference was not significant for the other two studies (RD=-0.07, 95% CI:-0.75, 0.61 and RD=0.08, 95% CI:-0.74, 0.91). In addition, no significant risk difference between hydroxychloroquine and the comparator group (standard of care) was identified for the risk of abnormal liver function tests (LFTs) (RD=0.07, 95% CI: -0.28, 0.41). Conclusions: Overall, no conclusion can be made on the benefit-risk profile of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 compared to standard of care, placebo or other treatments at this time. Whilst the availability of comparative data are limited, the current framework summarises the key anticipated benefits and risks. As further data from clinical trials and real world use on these benefits and risks becomes available, this can be incorporated into the framework for an ongoing benefit-risk assessment.

positive: A Real‐World Evidence Framework for Optimising Dosing in All Patients with COVID‐19 The SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic and associated COVID‐19 disease are straining healthcare systems around the world with large numbers of patients becoming ill in a very short period of time, overwhelming healthcare systems in many countries. Several drugs are being repurposed into clinical trials in COVID‐19 patients, ranging from drugs already well established in other diseases, such as chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir+ ritonavir, azithromycin and tocilizumab/sarilumab, to those such as remdesivir still in development for their initial indication (1). The opportunities for clinical pharmacology to contribute to the development of new treatments have already been described by others in Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (2).

positive: Safety and tolerability of a novel, polyclonal human anti-MERS coronavirus antibody produced from transchromosomic cattle: a phase 1 randomised, double-blind, single-dose-escalation study Summary Background Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) is a severe respiratory illness with an overall mortality of 35%. There is no licensed or proven treatment. Passive immunotherapy approaches are being developed to prevent and treat several human medical conditions where alternative therapeutic options are absent. We report the safety of a fully human polyclonal IgG antibody (SAB-301) produced from the hyperimmune plasma of transchromosomic cattle immunised with a MERS coronavirus vaccine. Methods We did a phase 1 double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-dose escalation trial at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center. We recruited healthy participants aged 18–60 years who had normal laboratory parameters at enrolment, a body-mass index of 19–32 kg/m2, and a creatinine clearance of 70 mL/min or more, and who did not have any chronic medical problems that required daily oral medications, a positive rheumatoid factor (≥15 IU/mL), IgA deficiency (<7 mg/dL), or history of allergy to intravenous immunoglobulin or human blood products. Participants were randomly assigned by a computer-generated table, made by a masked pharmacist, to one of six cohorts (containing between three and ten participants each). Cohorts 1 and 2 had three participants, randomly assigned 2:1 to receive active drug SAB-301 versus normal saline placebo; cohorts 3 and 4 had six participants randomised 2:1; and cohorts 5 and 6 had ten participants, randomised 4:1. Participants received 1 mg/kg, 2·5 mg/kg, 5 mg/kg, 10 mg/kg, 20 mg/kg, or 50 mg/kg of SAB-301, or equivalent volume placebo (saline control), on day 0, and were followed up by clinical, laboratory, and pharmacokinetic assessments on days 1, 3, 7, 21, 42, and 90. The primary outcome was safety, and immunogenicity was a secondary outcome. We analysed the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02788188. Findings Between June 2, 2016, and Jan 4, 2017, we screened 43 participants, of whom 38 were eligible and randomly assigned to receive SAB-301 (n=28) or placebo (n=10). 97 adverse events were reported: 64 adverse events occurred in 23 (82%) of 28 participants receiving SAB-301 (mean 2·3 adverse events per participant). 33 adverse events occurred in all ten participants receiving placebo (mean 3·3 adverse events per participant). The most common adverse events were headache (n=6 [21%] in participants who received SAB-301 and n=2 [20%] in those receiving placebo), albuminuria (n=5 [18%] vs n=2 [20%]), myalgia (n=3 [11%] vs n=1 [10%]), increased creatine kinase (n=3 [11%] vs 1 [10%]), and common cold (n=3 [11%] vs n=2 [20%]). There was one serious adverse event (hospital admission for suicide attempt) in one participant who received 50 mg/kg of SAB-301. The area under the concentration–time curve (AUC) in the 50 mg/kg dose (27 498 μg × days per mL) is comparable to the AUC that was associated with efficacy in a preclinical model. Interpretation Single infusions of SAB-301 up to 50 mg/kg appear to be safe and well tolerated in healthy participants. Human immunoglobulin derived from transchromosomic cattle could offer a new platform technology to produce fully human polyclonal IgG antibodies for other medical conditions. Funding National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, and Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority.

positive: Current pharmacological treatments for SARS-COV-2: A narrative review The novel coronavirus, later identified as SARS-CoV-2, originating from Wuhan in China in November 2019, quickly spread around the world becoming a pandemic. Despite the knowledge of previous coronaviruses, such as those responsible for the SARS and MERS-CoV epidemic, there is no drug or prophylaxis treatment to this day. The rapid succession of scientific findings on SARS-CoV-2 provides a significant number of potential drug targets. Nevertheless, at the same time, the high quantity of clinical data, generated by a large number of rapidly infected people, require accurate tests regarding effective medical treatments. Several in vitro and in vivo studies were rapidly initiated after the outbreak of the pandemic COVID-19. Initial clinical studies revealed the promising potential of remdesivir that demonstrated a powerful and specific in vitro antiviral activity for COVID-19. Promising effects appear to be attributable to hydroxychloroquine. Remdesivir and hydroxychloroquine are being tested in ongoing randomized trials. In contrast, oseltamivir was not effective and corticosteroids are not currently recommended. However, few data from ongoing clinical trials are identifying low molecular weight heparins, innate immune system stimulating agents, and inflammatory modulating agents as potential effective agents. The authors assume that the current pandemic will determine the need for a systematic approach based on big data analysis for identifying effective drugs to defeat SARS-Cov-2. This work is aimed to be a general reference point and to provide an overview as comprehensive as possible regarding the main clinical trials in progress at the moment.

positive: Inclusion of Children in Clinical Trials of Treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).

negative: Exclusion of Pregnant Women from Clinical Trials during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Review of International Registries Objective Pregnant women have been historically excluded from clinical trials for nonobstetric conditions, even during prior epidemics. The objective of this review is to describe the current state of research for pregnant women during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Study Design We conducted a search of international trial registries for trials relating to the novel coronavirus. The eligibility criteria for each trial were reviewed for inclusion/exclusion of pregnant women. Relevant data were extracted and descriptive statistics were calculated for individual and combined data. The total number of trials from each registry were compared, as well as the proportions of pregnancy-related trials within each. Results Among 621,370 trials in the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, 927 (0.15%) were COVID-19 related. Of those, the majority (52%) explicitly excluded pregnancy or failed to address pregnancy at all (46%) and only 16 (1.7%) were pregnancy specific. When categorized by region, 688 (74.2%) of COVID-19 trials were in Asia, followed by 128 (13.8%) in Europe, and 66 (7.2%) in North America. Of the COVID-19 trials which included pregnant women, only three were randomized-controlled drug trials. Conclusion Approximately 1.7% of current COVID-19 research is pregnancy related and the majority of trials either explicitly exclude or fail to address pregnancy. Only three interventional trials worldwide involved pregnant women. The knowledge gap concerning the safety and efficacy of interventions for COVID-19 created by the exclusion of pregnant women may ultimately harm them. While “ethical” concerns about fetal exposure are often cited, it is in fact unethical to habitually exclude pregnant women from research. Key Points: Pregnancy was excluded from past pandemic research. Pregnancy is being excluded from COVID-19 research. Exclusion of pregnant women is potentially harmful.

negative: Full spectrum of COVID-19 severity still being depicted

negative: Covid-19 — The Search for Effective Therapy

negative: Modelling SARS-CoV-2 Dynamics: Implications for Therapy The scientific community is focussed on developing antiviral therapies to mitigate the impacts of the ongoing novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak. This will be facilitated by improved understanding of viral dynamics within infected hosts. Here, using a mathematical model in combination with published viral load data collected from the same specimen (throat / nasal swabs or nasopharyngeal / sputum / tracheal aspirate), we compare within-host dynamics for patients infected in the current outbreak with analogous dynamics for MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV infections. Our quantitative analyses revealed that SARS-CoV-2 infection dynamics are more severe than those for mild cases of MERS-CoV, but are similar to severe cases, and that the viral dynamics of SARS-CoV infection are similar to those of MERS-CoV in mild cases but not in severe case. Consequently, SARS-CoV-2 generates infection dynamics that are more severe than SARS-CoV. Furthermore, we used our viral dynamics model to predict the effectiveness of unlicensed drugs that have different methods of action. The effectiveness was measured by AUC of viral load. Our results indicated that therapies that block de novo infections or virus production are most likely to be effective if initiated before the peak viral load (which occurs around three days after symptom onset on average), but therapies that promote cytotoxicity are likely to have only limited effects. Our unique mathematical approach provides insights into the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 in humans, which are useful for development of antiviral therapies.

negative: Treatment of Middle East respiratory syndrome with a combination of lopinavir/ritonavir and interferon-β1b (MIRACLE trial): statistical analysis plan for a recursive two-stage group sequential randomized controlled trial ABSTRACT: The MIRACLE trial (MERS-CoV Infection tReated with A Combination of Lopinavir/ritonavir and intErferon-β1b) investigates the efficacy of a combination therapy of lopinavir/ritonavir and recombinant interferon-β1b provided with standard supportive care, compared to placebo provided with standard supportive care, in hospitalized patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS. The MIRACLE trial is designed as a recursive, two-stage, group sequential, multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind randomized controlled trial. The aim of this article is to describe the statistical analysis plan for the MIRACLE trial. The primary outcome is 90-day mortality. The primary analysis will follow the intention-to-treat principle. The MIRACLE trial is the first randomized controlled trial for MERS treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02845843. Registered on 27 July 2016.

negative: Commentary on: The SARS, MERS and novel coronavirus (COVID-19) epidemics, the newest and biggest global health threats: what lessons have we learned? A One Health approach to coronaviruses

negative: Systematic review of statistical methods for safety data in malaria chemoprevention in pregnancy trials BACKGROUND: Drug safety assessments in clinical trials present unique analytical challenges. Some of these include adjusting for individual follow-up time, repeated measurements of multiple outcomes and missing data among others. Furthermore, pre-specifying appropriate analysis becomes difficult as some safety endpoints are unexpected. Although existing guidelines such as CONSORT encourage thorough reporting of adverse events (AEs) in clinical trials, they provide limited details for safety data analysis. The limited guidelines may influence suboptimal analysis by failing to account for some analysis challenges above. A typical example where such challenges exist are trials of anti-malarial drugs for malaria prevention during pregnancy. Lack of proper standardized evaluation of the safety of antimalarial drugs has limited the ability to draw conclusions about safety. Therefore, a systematic review was conducted to establish the current practice in statistical analysis for preventive antimalarial drug safety in pregnancy. METHODS: The search included five databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Malaria in Pregnancy Library and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) to identify original English articles reporting Phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on anti-malarial drugs for malaria prevention in pregnancy published from January 2010 to July 2019. RESULTS: Eighteen trials were included in this review that collected multiple longitudinal safety outcomes including AEs. Statistical analysis and reporting of the safety outcomes in all the trials used descriptive statistics; proportions/counts (n = 18, 100%) and mean/median (n = 2, 11.1%). Results presentation included tabular (n = 16, 88.9%) and text description (n = 2, 11.1%). Univariate inferential methods were reported in most trials (n = 16, 88.9%); including Chi square/Fisher’s exact test (n = 12, 66.7%), t test (n = 2, 11.1%) and Mann–Whitney/Wilcoxon test (n = 1, 5.6%). Multivariable methods, including Poisson and negative binomial were reported in few trials (n = 3, 16.7%). Assessment of a potential link between missing efficacy data and safety outcomes was not reported in any of the trials that reported efficacy missing data (n = 7, 38.9%). CONCLUSION: The review demonstrated that statistical analysis of safety data in anti-malarial drugs for malarial chemoprevention in pregnancy RCTs is inadequate. The analyses insufficiently account for multiple safety outcomes potential dependence, follow-up time and informative missing data which can compromise anti-malarial drug safety evidence development, based on the available data.

negative: Precautions are Needed for COVID-19 Patients with Coinfection of Common Respiratory Pathogens Background: With the ongoing outbreak of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), infected patients within and beyond the epidemic area, Wuhan, China, showed different epidemiological and clinical characteristics. There is a paucity of data concerning coinfection with other common respiratory pathogens in COVID-19 patients outside of Wuhan. Methods: We conducted a double-centre study recruiting 68 patients with severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection confirmed by nucleic acid testing in Qingdao and Wuhan from January 17 to February 16, 2020. Indirect immunofluorescence was performed to detect the specific IgM antibody against common respiratory pathogens in collected acute phase serum. Results: Of the 68 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 30 (44.12%) were from Qingdao. The median age of Qingdao and Wuhan patients were 50 (IQR: 37-59) and 31 (IQR: 28-38) years, respectively, and the majority of patients were female in Qingdao (60.00%) and Wuhan (55.26%). Among COVID-19 patients in Qingdao, 24 (80.00%) of them had IgM antibodies against at least one respiratory pathogen, whereas only one (2.63%) of the patients in Wuhan had positive results for serum IgM antibody detection (P<0.0001). The most common respiratory pathogens detected in Qingdao COVID-19 patients were influenza virus A (60.00%) and influenza virus B (53.33%), followed by mycoplasma pneumoniae (23.33%) and legionella pneumophila (20.00%). While the pattern for coinfection in patients with community-acquired pneumonia in Qingdao was quite different, with a positive rate of only 20.90%. Interpretation: We reported a large proportion of COVID-19 patients with coinfection of seasonal respiratory pathogens in Qingdao, northeast China, which differed greatly from the patients in Wuhan, central China. Precautions are needed when dealing with COVID-19 patients beyond the epidemic centre who have coinfection with other respiratory pathogens. We highly recommend adding SARS-CoV-2 to routine diagnostic testing in capable hospitals to prevent misdetection of the virus.

negative: Angiotensin receptor blockers as tentative SARS‐CoV‐2 therapeutics At the time of writing this commentary (February 2020), the coronavirus COVID‐19 epidemic has already resulted in more fatalities compared with the SARS and MERS coronavirus epidemics combined. Therapeutics that may assist to contain its rapid spread and reduce its high mortality rates are urgently needed. Developing vaccines against the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus may take many months. Moreover, vaccines based on viral‐encoded peptides may not be effective against future coronavirus epidemics, as virus mutations could make them futile. Indeed, new Influenza virus strains emerge every year, requiring new immunizations. A tentative suggestion based on existing therapeutics, which would likely be resistant to new coronavirus mutations, is to use available angiotensin receptor 1 (AT1R) blockers, such as losartan, as therapeutics for reducing the aggressiveness and mortality from SARS‐CoV‐2 virus infections. This idea is based on observations that the angiotensin‐converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) very likely serves as the binding site for SARS‐CoV‐2, the strain implicated in the current COVID‐19 epidemic, similarly to strain SARS‐CoV implicated in the 2002–2003 SARS epidemic. This commentary elaborates on the idea of considering AT1R blockers as tentative treatment for SARS‐CoV‐2 infections, and proposes a research direction based on datamining of clinical patient records for assessing its feasibility.

negative: Power of Artificial Intelligence to Diagnose and Prevent Further COVID-19 Outbreak: A Short Communication Novel coronavirus-19 (2019-nCoV or COVID-19) is by far the most dangerous coronavirus ever identified for the third time in the three decades capable of infecting not only the animals but also the humans across the globe. Nearly 6000 deaths have been recorded due mainly to COVID-19 outbreak worldwide and more than 50% of these deaths appeared to have evolved from China where the virus was thought to originate. The endemicity of COVID-19 dramatically surpassed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) that were so far discovered in 2003 and 2012 respectively. Thus, the World Health Organization (WHO) has declared the 2019-nCoV outbreak not only a public health emergency but also pandemic in nature. Currently, over 120 countries including Nigeria were reported to have more than 157,844 confirmed cases and 5,846 deaths due mainly to COVID-19 outbreak as of March 15, 2020, 10:55 GMT. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is widely used to aid in the prediction, detection, response, recovery of disease and making clinical diagnosis. In this study, we highlighted the power of AI in the containment and mitigation of the spread of COVID-19 outbreak in African countries such as Nigeria where human to human contact is apparently inevitable.

negative: Genetic diversity and evolution of SARS-CoV-2 Abstract COVID-19 is a viral respiratory illness caused by a new coronavirus called SARS-CoV-2. The World Health Organization declared the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak a global public health emergency. We performed genetic analyses of eighty-six complete or near-complete genomes of SARS-CoV-2 and revealed many mutations and deletions on coding and non-coding regions. These observations provided evidence of the genetic diversity and rapid evolution of this novel coronavirus.

negative: Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China BACKGROUND: A recent cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan, China, was caused by a novel betacoronavirus, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). We report the epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics and treatment and clinical outcomes of these patients. METHODS: All patients with suspected 2019-nCoV were admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan. We prospectively collected and analysed data on patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection by real-time RT-PCR and next-generation sequencing. Data were obtained with standardised data collection forms shared by WHO and the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium from electronic medical records. Researchers also directly communicated with patients or their families to ascertain epidemiological and symptom data. Outcomes were also compared between patients who had been admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and those who had not. FINDINGS: By Jan 2, 2020, 41 admitted hospital patients had been identified as having laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection. Most of the infected patients were men (30 [73%] of 41); less than half had underlying diseases (13 [32%]), including diabetes (eight [20%]), hypertension (six [15%]), and cardiovascular disease (six [15%]). Median age was 49·0 years (IQR 41·0–58·0). 27 (66%) of 41 patients had been exposed to Huanan seafood market. One family cluster was found. Common symptoms at onset of illness were fever (40 [98%] of 41 patients), cough (31 [76%]), and myalgia or fatigue (18 [44%]); less common symptoms were sputum production (11 [28%] of 39), headache (three [8%] of 38), haemoptysis (two [5%] of 39), and diarrhoea (one [3%] of 38). Dyspnoea developed in 22 (55%) of 40 patients (median time from illness onset to dyspnoea 8·0 days [IQR 5·0–13·0]). 26 (63%) of 41 patients had lymphopenia. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest CT. Complications included acute respiratory distress syndrome (12 [29%]), RNAaemia (six [15%]), acute cardiac injury (five [12%]) and secondary infection (four [10%]). 13 (32%) patients were admitted to an ICU and six (15%) died. Compared with non-ICU patients, ICU patients had higher plasma levels of IL2, IL7, IL10, GSCF, IP10, MCP1, MIP1A, and TNFα. INTERPRETATION: The 2019-nCoV infection caused clusters of severe respiratory illness similar to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus and was associated with ICU admission and high mortality. Major gaps in our knowledge of the origin, epidemiology, duration of human transmission, and clinical spectrum of disease need fulfilment by future studies. FUNDING: Ministry of Science and Technology, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, National Natural Science Foundation of China, and Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission.

negative: N-Desmethylclozapine, Fluoxetine, and Salmeterol Inhibit Postentry Stages of the Dengue Virus Life Cycle Around 10,000 people die each year due to severe dengue disease, and two-thirds of the world population lives in a region where dengue disease is endemic. There has been remarkable progress in dengue virus vaccine development; however, there are no licensed antivirals for dengue disease, and none appear to be in clinical trials. We took the approach of repositioning approved drugs for anti-dengue virus activity by screening a library of pharmacologically active compounds. We identified N-desmethylclozapine, fluoxetine hydrochloride, and salmeterol xinafoate as dengue virus inhibitors based on reductions in the numbers of infected cells and viral titers. Dengue virus RNA levels were diminished in inhibitor-treated cells, and this effect was specific to dengue virus, as other flaviviruses, such as Japanese encephalitis virus and West Nile virus, or other RNA viruses, such as respiratory syncytial virus and rotavirus, were not affected by these inhibitors. All three inhibitors specifically inhibited dengue virus replication with 50% inhibitory concentrations (IC(50)s) in the high-nanomolar range. Estimation of negative-strand RNA intermediates and time-of-addition experiments indicated that inhibition was occurring at a postentry stage, most probably at the initiation of viral RNA replication. Finally, we show that inhibition is most likely due to the modulation of the endolysosomal pathway and induction of autophagy.

negative: Structural elucidation of SARS-CoV-2 vital proteins: Computational methods reveal potential drug candidates against main protease, Nsp12 polymerase and Nsp13 helicase Abstract The recently emerged SARS-CoV-2 caused a major outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and instigated a widespread fear, threatening global health security. To date, no licensed antiviral drugs or vaccines are available against COVID-19 although several clinical trials are underway to test possible therapies. During this urgency situation, computational drug discovery methods provide an alternative to tiresome high-throughput screening, particularly in the hit-to-lead-optimization stage. Identification of small molecules that specifically target viral replication apparatus has indicated highest potential towards antiviral drug discovery. In this work, we present potential compounds that specifically target SARS-CoV-2 vital proteins, including the main protease, Nsp12 RNA polymerase and Nsp13 helicase. An integrative virtual screening and molecular dynamics simulations approach led to the identification of potential binding modes and favourable molecular interaction profile of corresponding compounds. Moreover, the identification of structurally important binding site residues in conserved motifs located inside the active site highlights relative importance of ligand binding based on residual energy decomposition analysis. Although the current study lacks experimental validation, the structural information obtained from this computational study has paved way for the design of targeted inhibitors to combat COVID-19 outbreak.

negative: Innovative highlights of clinical drug trial design Clinical trials serve as the gold standard to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tested drugs prior to marketing authorization. Nevertheless, there have been a few challenging issues well noted in traditional clinical trials such as tedious processing duration and escalating high costs among others. To improve the efficiency of clinical studies, a spectrum of expedited clinical trial modes has been designed, and selectively implemented in contemporary drug developing landscape. Herein this article presents an update on the innovated human trial designs that are corroborated through coming up with approval of notable therapeutic compounds for clinical utilization including delivery of several blockbuster products. It is intended to inspire clinical investigators and pharmaceutical development not only timely communicating with the regulatory agencies, but also insightful translating from cutting-edge scientific discoveries.

negative: COVID-19 in patients with HIV: clinical case series

negative: Remote Methods for Conducting Tobacco-Focused Clinical Trials. Most tobacco-focused clinical trials are based on locally-conducted studies that face significant challenges to implementation and successful execution. These challenges include the need for large, diverse, yet still representative study samples. This often means a protracted, costly, and inefficient recruitment process. Multi-site clinical trials can overcome some of these hurdles but incur their own unique challenges. With recent advances in mobile health (mHealth) and digital technologies, there is now a promising alternative: Remote Trials. These trials are led and coordinated by a local investigative team, but are based remotely, within a given community, state, or even nation. The remote approach affords many of the benefits of multi-site trials (more efficient recruitment of larger study samples) without the same barriers (cost, multi-site management, regulatory hurdles). The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) global health pandemic has resulted in rapid requirements to shift ongoing clinical trials to remote delivery and assessment platforms, making methods for the conduct of remote trials even more timely. The purpose of the present manuscript it to provide an overview of available methods for the conduct of remote tobacco-focused clinical trials as well as illustrative examples of how these methods have been implemented across recently completed and ongoing tobacco studies. We focus on key aspects of the clinical trial pipeline including remote: 1) study recruitment and screening, 2) informed consent, 3) assessment, 4) biomarker collection, and 5) medication adherence monitoring.

negative: Diseases of the Liver and Hepatobiliary System

negative: Bovine whey proteins – Overview on their main biological properties Abstract Whey, a liquid by-product, is widely accepted to contain many valuable constituents. These include especially proteins that possess important nutritional and biological properties – particularly with regard to promotion of health, as well as prevention of diseases and health conditions. Antimicrobial and antiviral actions, immune system stimulation, anticarcinogenic activity and other metabolic features have indeed been associated with such whey proteins, as α-lactalbumin, β-lactoglobulin, lactoferrin, lactoperoxidase, and bovine serum albumin. The most important advances reported to date pertaining to biological properties of whey proteins are reviewed in this communication.

negative: Impact of viral epidemic outbreaks on mental health of healthcare workers: a rapid systematic review Objectives: To examine the impact of providing healthcare during or after health emergencies caused by viral epidemic outbreaks on healthcare workers (HCWs) mental health, and to assess the available evidence base regarding interventions to reduce such impact. Design: Systematic rapid review and meta-analysis. Data sources: MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO, searched up to 23 March 2020. Method: We selected observational and experimental studies examining the impact on mental health of epidemic outbreaks on HCWs. Titles and abstracts were screened by one reviewer, and full texts were evaluated by two reviewers independently. We extracted study characteristics, symptoms, prevalence of mental health problems, risk factors, mental health interventions, and its impact. We assessed risk of bias for each individual study. We conducted a narrative and tabulated synthesis of the results. We pooled data using random-effects meta-analyses to estimate the prevalence of specific mental health problems. We followed the GRADE approach to assess the certainty in the evidence. Results: We included 61 studies (56 examining impact on mental health and five about interventions to reduce such impact). Most were conducted in Asia (59%), examined the impact of the SARS epidemic (69%), and took place in the hospital setting (79%). The pooled prevalence was higher for anxiety (45%, 95% CI 21 to 69%; 6 studies, 3,373 participants), followed by depression (38%, 95% CI 15 to 60%; 7 studies, 3,636 participants), acute stress disorder (31%, 95% CI 0 to 82%, 3 studies , 2,587 participants), burnout (29%, 95% CI 25 to 32%; 3 studies; 1,168 participants) and post-traumatic stress disorder (19%, 95% CI 11 to 26%, 10 studies, 3,121 participants). Based on 37 studies, we identified a broad number of risk factors for these conditions, including sociodemographic: younger age and female gender; social factors: lack of social support, social rejection or isolation, stigmatization; and occupational: working in a high risk environment (frontline staff), specific occupational roles (e.g., nurse), and lower levels of specialized training, preparedness and job experience. Two out of five interventions identified were educational aimed to prevent mental health problems by increasing HCWs resilience. These interventions showed positive effects in confidence in support and training, pandemic self-efficacy and interpersonal problems solving (very low certainty). One multifaceted intervention (based on training and organisational changes) targeted at hospital nurses during the SARS epidemic produced statistically significant improvements in anxiety, depression, and sleep quality (very low certainty). The impact of the two remaining interventions (multifaceted and based on psychotherapy provision) was unreported. Conclusion: The prevalence of anxiety, depression, acute and post-traumatic stress disorder, and burnout, was high both during and after the outbreaks. These problems not only have a long-lasting effect on the mental health of HCWs, but also hinder the urgent response to the current COVID-19 pandemic, by jeopardising attention and decision-making. Governments and healthcare authorities should take urgent actions to protect the mental health of HCWs. In light of the limited evidence regarding the impact of interventions to tackle mental health problems in HCWs, the risk factors identified in this study represent important targets for future interventions.

negative: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19): The epidemic and the challenges The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2; previously provisionally named 2019 novel coronavirus or 2019-nCoV) disease (COVID-19) in China at the end of 2019 has caused a large global outbreak and is a major public health issue. As of 11 February 2020, data from the World Health Organization (WHO) have shown that more than 43 000 confirmed cases have been identified in 28 countries/regions, with >99% of cases being detected in China. On 30 January 2020, the WHO declared COVID-19 as the sixth public health emergency of international concern. SARS-CoV-2 is closely related to two bat-derived severe acute respiratory syndrome-like coronaviruses, bat-SL-CoVZC45 and bat-SL-CoVZXC21. It is spread by human-to-human transmission via droplets or direct contact, and infection has been estimated to have mean incubation period of 6.4 days and a basic reproduction number of 2.24–3.58. Among patients with pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2 (novel coronavirus pneumonia or Wuhan pneumonia), fever was the most common symptom, followed by cough. Bilateral lung involvement with ground-glass opacity was the most common finding from computed tomography images of the chest. The one case of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia in the USA is responding well to remdesivir, which is now undergoing a clinical trial in China. Currently, controlling infection to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 is the primary intervention being used. However, public health authorities should keep monitoring the situation closely, as the more we can learn about this novel virus and its associated outbreak, the better we can respond.

negative: Read all about it: The Lancet's Paper of the Year, 2003

negative: Analysis of the scientific literature in the first 30 Days of the novel coronavirus outbreak. Introduction: Recent events highlight how emerging and re-emerging pathogens are becoming global challenges for public health. In December 2019, a novel coronavirus has emerged. This has suddenly turned out into global health concern. Objectives: Aim of this research is to focus on the bibliometric aspects in order to measure what is published in the first 30-days of a global epidemic outbreak Methods: We searched PubMed database in order to find all relevant studies in the first 30-days from the first publication. Results: From the initial 442 identified articles, 234 were read in-extenso. The majority of papers come from China, UK and USA. 63.7% of the papers were commentaries, editorials and reported data and only 17.5% of the sources used data directly collected on the field. Topics mainly addressed were epidemiology, preparedness and generic discussion. NNR showed a reduction for both the objectives assessed from January to February. Conclusions: Diagnosis and effective preventive and therapeutic measures were the fields in which more research is still needed. The vast majority of scientific literature in the first 30-days of an epidemic outbreak is based on reported data rather than primary data. Nevertheless, the scientific statements and public health decisions rely on these data.

negative: Cross-Species Genome-Wide Analysis Reveals Molecular and Functional Diversity of the Unconventional Interferon-ω Subtype Innate immune interferons (IFNs), particularly type I IFNs, are primary mediators regulating animal antiviral, antitumor, and cell-proliferative activity. These antiviral cytokines have evolved remarkable molecular and functional diversity to confront ever-evolving viral threats and physiological regulation. We have annotated IFN gene families across 110 animal genomes, and showed that IFN genes, after originating in jawed fishes, had several significant evolutionary surges in vertebrate species of amphibians, bats and ungulates, particularly pigs and cattle. For example, pigs have the largest but still expanding type I IFN family consisting of nearly 60 IFN-coding genes that encode seven IFN subtypes including multigene subtypes of IFN-α, -δ, and -ω. Whereas, subtypes such as IFN-α and -β have been widely studied in many species, the unconventional subtypes such as IFN-ω have barely been investigated. We have cross-species defined the IFN evolution, and shown that unconventional IFN subtypes particularly the IFN-ω subtype have evolved several novel features including: (1) being a signature multi-gene subtype expanding primarily in mammals such as bats and ungulates, (2) emerging isoforms that have superior antiviral potency than typical IFN-α, (3) highly cross-species antiviral (but little anti-proliferative) activity exerted in cells of humans and other mammalian species, and (4) demonstrating potential novel molecular and functional properties. This study focused on IFN-ω to investigate the immunogenetic evolution and functional diversity of unconventional IFN subtypes, which may further IFN-based novel antiviral design pertinent to their cross-species high antiviral and novel activities.

negative: Nitazoxanide, a new drug candidate for the treatment of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus Summary Nitazoxanide is a broad-spectrum antiviral agent undergoing clinical development for treatment of influenza and other viral respiratory infections. Nitazoxanide exhibits in vitro activity against Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and other coronaviruses, inhibiting expression of the viral N protein. Nitazoxanide also suppresses production of pro-inflammatory cytokines in peripheral blood mononuclear cells and suppresses interleukin 6 production in mice. Having been used extensively in clinical trials and in post-marketing experience, nitazoxanide is an attractive drug candidate for treatment of Middle East respiratory syndrome. Future research should include in vitro mechanism studies, animal models of MERS-CoV infection, clinical trials, including dose-ranging trials, and evaluation of combination therapy with other potential MERS-CoV antivirals.

negative: A review of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) based on current evidence Abstract The pneumonia caused by novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in Wuhan, China in December 2019 is a highly contagious disease. The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared the ongoing outbreak as a global public health emergency. Currently, the research on novel coronavirus is still in the primary stage. Based on the current published evidence, we systematically summarizes the epidemiology, clinical characteristics, diagnosis, treatment and prevention of knowledge surrounding COVID-19. This review in the hope of helping the public effectively recognize and deal with the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), and providing a reference for future studies.

negative: Intrinsic resistance of feline peritoneal macrophages to coronavirus infection correlates with in vivo virulence. Cats infected with virulent feline coronavirus strains develop feline infectious peritonitis, an invariably fatal, immunologically mediated disease; avirulent strains cause either clinically inapparent infection or mild enteritis. Four virulent coronavirus isolates and five avirulent isolates were assessed by immunofluorescence and virus titration for their ability to infect and replicate in feline peritoneal macrophages in vitro. The avirulent coronaviruses infected fewer macrophages, produced lower virus titers, were less able to sustain viral replication, and spread less efficiently to other susceptible macrophages than the virulent coronaviruses. Thus, the intrinsic resistance of feline macrophages may play a pivotal role in the outcome of coronavirus infection in vivo.

negative: COVID-19 infection: Origin, transmission, and characteristics of human coronaviruses The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is a highly transmittable and pathogenic viral infection caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which emerged in Wuhan, China and spread around the world. Genomic analysis revealed that SARS-CoV-2 is phylogenetically related to severe acute respiratory syndrome-like (SARS-like) bat viruses, therefore bats could be the possible primary reservoir. The intermediate source of origin and transfer to humans is not known, however, the rapid human to human transfer has been confirmed widely. There is no clinically approved antiviral drug or vaccine available to be used against COVID-19. However, few broad-spectrum antiviral drugs have been evaluated against COVID-19 in clinical trials, resulted in clinical recovery. In the current review, we summarize and comparatively analyze the emergence and pathogenicity of COVID-19 infection and previous human coronaviruses severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and middle east respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV). We also discuss the approaches for developing effective vaccines and therapeutic combinations to cope with this viral outbreak.

negative: Conducting Clinical Research During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Investigator and Participant Perspectives As the medical landscape changes daily with the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, clinical researchers are caught off-guard and are forced to make decisions on research visits in their ongoing clinical trials. Although there is some guidance from local and national organizations, the principal investigator (PI) is ultimately responsible for determining the risk-benefit ratio of conducting, rescheduling, or cancelling each research visit. The PI should take into consideration the ethical principles of research, local/national guidance, the community risk of the pandemic in their locale, staffing strain, and the risk involved to each participant, to ultimately decide on the course of action. While balancing the rights and protection of the human subject, we seldom examine patients' views and opinions about their scheduled research visit(s). This article discusses the ethical principles of beneficence and autonomy in helping the decision-making process. We discuss ways to weigh-in local and national guidance, staffing strain, and institutional support into the decision-making process and outline potential changes needed for regulatory bodies depending on the decision. Further, we discuss the need to weigh-in the individual risk-benefit ratio for each participant and present a decision tree to navigate this complex process. Finally, we examine participant and caregiver perspectives on their fears, sense of preparedness, and factors that they consider before deciding whether to keep or postpone the research appointments. This entry also provides PIs ways to support their research participants in both scenarios, including provision of psychological support.

negative: Coronavirus neurovirulence correlates with the ability of the virus to induce proinflammatory cytokine signals from astrocytes and microglia. The molecular and cellular basis of coronavirus neurovirulence is poorly understood. Since neurovirulence may be determined at the early stages of infection of the central nervous system (CNS), we hypothesize that it may depend on the ability of the virus to induce proinflammatory signals from brain cells for the recruitment of blood-derived inflammatory cells. To test this hypothesis, we studied the interaction between coronaviruses (mouse hepatitis virus) of different neurovirulences with primary cell cultures of brain immune cells (astrocytes and microglia) and mouse tissues. We found that the level of neurovirulence of the virus correlates with its differential ability to induce proinflammatory cytokines (interleukin 12 [IL-12] p40, tumor necrosis factor alpha, IL-6, IL-15, and IL-1beta) in astrocytes and microglia and in mouse brains and spinal cords. These findings suggest that coronavirus neurovirulence may depend on a novel discriminatory ability of astrocytes and microglia to induce a proinflammatory response in the CNS.

negative: Clinical trials and Haemophilia during the COVID‐19’ pandemic: Madrid’s Experience In times of crisis, continuous adaptation is necessary. Communication between all members of a research team is key to adapting the development of clinical trials to the context of the epidemiological crisis of coronavirus. We are accustomed to performing day‐to‐day tasks to fulfil protocol requirements with precision. To this end, we typically have had protocol‐guided face‐to‐face visits and we have followed a detailed sequenced procedure during each visit.

negative: Animal models of Multiple Sclerosis Abstract Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory demyelinating disease of the central nervous system (CNS) which involves a complex interaction between immune system and neural cells. Animal modeling has been critical for addressing MS pathogenesis. The three most characterized animal models of MS are (1) the experimental autoimmune/allergic encephalomyelitis (EAE); (2) the virally-induced chronic demyelinating disease, known as Theiler׳s murine encephalomyelitis virus (TMEV) infection and (3) the toxin-induced demyelination. All these models, in a complementary way, have allowed to reach a good knowledge of the pathogenesis of MS. Specifically, EAE is the model which better reflects the autoimmune pathogenesis of MS and is extremely useful to study potential experimental treatments. Furthermore, both TMEV and toxin-induced demyelination models are suitable for characterizing the role of the axonal injury/repair and the remyelination process in MS. In conclusion, animal models, despite their limitations, remain the most useful instrument for implementing the study of MS.

negative: The need of health policy perspective to protect Healthcare Workers during COVID-19 pandemic. A GRADE rapid review on the N95 respirators effectiveness. Background Protecting Health Care Workers (HCWs) during routine care of suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients is of paramount importance to halt the SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2) pandemic. The WHO, ECDC and CDC have issued conflicting guidelines on the use of respiratory filters (N95) by HCWs. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase and The Cochrane Library from the inception to March 21, 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing N95 respirators versus surgical masks for prevention of COVID-19 or any other respiratory infection among HCWs. The grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. Findings Four RCTs involving 8736 HCWs were included. We did not find any trial specifically on prevention of COVID-19. However, wearing N95 respirators can prevent 73 more (95% CI 46-91) clinical respiratory infections per 1000 HCWs compared to surgical masks (2 RCTs; 2594 patients; low quality of evidence). A protective effect of N95 respirators in laboratory-confirmed bacterial colonization (RR= 0.41; 95%CI 0.28-0.61) was also found. A trend in favour of N95 respirators was observed in preventing laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infections, laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, and influenza like illness. Interpretation We found no direct high quality evidence on whether N95 respirators are better than surgical masks for HCWs protection from SARS-CoV-2. However, low quality evidence suggests that N95 respirators protect HCWs from clinical respiratory infections. This finding should be contemplated to decide the best strategy to support the resilience of healthcare systems facing the potentially catastrophic SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

negative: Specialty Grand Challenge for NeuroRehabilitation Research

negative: Machine intelligence design of 2019-nCoV drugs Wuhan coronavirus, called 2019-nCoV, is a newly emerged virus that infected more than 9692 people and leads to more than 213 fatalities by January 30, 2020. Currently, there is no effective treatment for this epidemic. However, the viral protease of a coronavirus is well-known to be essential for its replication and thus is an effective drug target. Fortunately, the sequence identity of the 2019-nCoV protease and that of severe-acute respiratory syndrome virus (SARS-CoV) is as high as 96.1%. We show that the protease inhibitor binding sites of 2019-nCoV and SARS-CoV are almost identical, which means all potential anti-SARS-CoV chemotherapies are also potential 2019-nCoV drugs. Here, we report a family of potential 2019-nCoV drugs generated by a machine intelligence-based generative network complex (GNC). The potential effectiveness of treating 2019-nCoV by using some existing HIV drugs is also analyzed.

negative: Focus on Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) Abstract Since the first case of human infection by the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in Saudi Arabia in June 2012, more than 2260 cases of confirmed MERS-CoV infection and 803 related deaths have been reported since the 16th of October 2018. The vast majority of these cases (71%) were reported in Saudi Arabia but the epidemic has now spread to 27 countries and has not ceased 6 years later, unlike SARS-CoV that disappeared a little less than 2 years after emerging. Due to the high fatality rate observed in MERS-CoV infected patients (36%), much effort has been put into understanding the origin and pathophysiology of this novel coronavirus to prevent it from becoming endemic in humans. This review focuses in particular on the origin, epidemiology and clinical manifestations of MERS-CoV, as well as the diagnosis and treatment of infected patients. The experience gained over recent years on how to manage the different risks related to this kind of epidemic will be key to being prepared for future outbreaks of communicable disease.

negative: The use of anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of people with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): The Perspectives of clinical immunologists from China Abstract The pandemic outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is rapidly spreading all over the world. Reports from China showed that about 20% of patients developed severe disease, resulting in a fatality of 4%. In the past two months, we clinical immunologists participated in multi-rounds of MDT (multidiscipline team) discussion on the anti-inflammation management of critical COVID-19 patients, with our colleagues dispatched from Chinese leading PUMC Hospital to Wuhan to admit and treat the most severe patients. Here, from the perspective of clinical immunologists, we will discuss the clinical and immunological characteristics of severe patients, and summarize the current evidence and share our experience in anti-inflammation treatment, including glucocorticoids, IL-6 antagonist, JAK inhibitors and choloroquine/hydrocholoroquine, of patients with severe COVID-19 that may have an impaired immune system.

negative: Challenges in early phase clinical trials for childhood cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: a report from the new agents group of the Spanish Society of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology (SEHOP) PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced healthcare stakeholders towards challenging decisions. We analyse the impact of the pandemic on the conduct of phase I–II trials for paediatric cancer during the first month of state of alarm in Spain. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all five ITCC-accredited Spanish Paediatric Oncology Early Phase Clinical Trial Units, including questions about impact on staff activities, recruitment, patient care, supply of investigational products, and legal aspects. RESULTS: All units suffered personnel shortages and difficulties in enrolling patients, treatment continuity, or performing trial assessments. Monitoring activity was frequently postponed (73%), and 49% of on-going trials interrupted recruitment. Only two patients could be recruited during this period (75% reduction in the expected rate). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 crisis has significantly impacted clinical research practice and access to innovation for children with cancer. Structural and functional changes are under way to better cope with the expected future restrictions.

negative: Respiratory viruses and influenza-like illness: Epidemiology and outcomes in children aged 6 months to 10 years in a multi-country population sample Summary Background Better population data on respiratory viruses in children in tropical and southern hemisphere countries is needed. Methods The epidemiology of respiratory viruses among healthy children (6 months to <10 years) with influenza-like illness (ILI) was determined in a population sample derived from an influenza vaccine trial (NCT01051661) in 17 centers in eight countries (Australia, South East Asia and Latin America). Active surveillance for ILI was conducted for approximately 1 year (between February 2010 and August 2011), with PCR analysis of nasal and throat swabs. Results 6266 children were included, of whom 2421 experienced 3717 ILI episodes. Rhinovirus/enterovirus had the highest prevalence (41.5%), followed by influenza (15.8%), adenovirus (9.8%), parainfluenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) (both 9.7%), coronavirus (5.6%), human metapneumovirus (5.5%) and human bocavirus (HBov) (2.0%). Corresponding incidence per 100 person-years was 29.78, 11.34, 7.03, 6.96, 6.94, 4.00, 3.98 and 1.41. Except for influenza, respiratory virus prevalence declined with age. The incidence of medically-attended ILI associated with viral infection ranged from 1.03 (HBov) to 23.69 (rhinovirus/enterovirus). The percentage of children missing school or daycare ranged from 21.4% (HBov) to 52.1% (influenza). Conclusions Active surveillance of healthy children provided evidence of respiratory illness burden associated with several viruses, with a substantial burden in older children.

negative: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2): Emergence, History, Basic and Clinical Aspects Abstract In late December 2019, the world woke to a reality of a pandemic of Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), elicited by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which belongs to a group of β-coronavirus. The potential to cause life-threatening respiratory failure and rapid transmission puts COVID-19 in the list of Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). In the last two decades, this is the 3rd deadliest Coronavirus pandemic, following SARS which lasted between 2002 and 2003 and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) from 2012 till date. Globally and as of April 1st 2020, COVID-19 has affected 924,688 individuals in over 200 countries, causing 46,368 fatalities. While the SARS-CoV-2 originated in China with over 82,724 confirmed cases and more than 3000 deaths as at the time of writing this review, the rapid transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has resulted in exponential increase in the number of cases outside of China to about 10 times the report case and death in mainland China. SARS-CoV-2 is suspected to be zoonotic in nature as genetic studies have shown sequence similarity to viruses originating from bats. Extreme precautionary measures, such as curfew, shutting of borders and quarantining of individuals suspected to be infected have been instituted with immediate effect; however, due to individuals that are asymptomatic, uncontrolled human-to-human transmission has resulted in exponential infection rate and numerous loss of lives even with this lockdown measures. This review article summarizes the developing situation surrounding the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic with respect to its epidemiology, unique genomic structure, possible origins, transmission, pathogenesis, comparison with other deadly species of Coronaviruses (CoV) and emerging treatment strategies built on informed literature.

negative: Integration of patient-reported outcomes in multiregional confirmatory clinical trials Abstract Introduction The increasing complexities of conducting multiregional trials and an evolving regulatory environment contribute to unprecedented new challenges for use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) 1 1 Patient-reported outcome measures. within clinical trials. This paper presents these challenges and potential solutions. Methods Real-world examples and situations are reviewed from an industry and patient-reported outcome (PRO) 2 2 Patient-reported outcome. expert position. Conclusions An increase in the pursuit of new therapeutic targets, changes to the regulatory environment, and business pressures to expand clinical trials to more countries have significantly increased the complexity of confirmatory clinical studies that incorporate PROMs. Decisions to participate in collaborative efforts for endpoint development or proceed independently are made in the context of competing priorities of drug development timelines, drug differentiation strategies, the need for patient-related value messages, and the depth of a sponsor pipeline within specific disease areas. Study logistics are critically important; factors such as concept cultural relevancy, respondent literacy level, and quality of cross-cultural adaptation of PROMs must be evaluated when integrating into confirmatory clinical trials. Awareness of the issues relating to PROs in multiregional studies will enable companies to better plan studies and interpret results.

negative: Ethical considerations for epidemic vaccine trials Vaccines are a powerful measure to protect the health of individuals and to combat outbreaks such as the COVID-19 pandemic. An ethical dilemma arises when one effective vaccine has been successfully developed against an epidemic disease and researchers seek to test the efficacy of another vaccine for the same pathogen in clinical trials involving human subjects. On the one hand, there are compelling reasons why it would be unethical to trial a novel vaccine when an effective product exists already. First, it is a firm principle of medical ethics that an effective treatment or vaccine should not be withheld from patients if their life may depend on it. Second, since epidemic outbreaks often emerge in settings with less-resourced health systems, there is a pronounced risk that any trial withholding an effective vaccine would disproportionately affect the vulnerable populations that historically have been exploited for biomedical research. Third, clinical trials for novel vaccines may be at odds with efforts to control active outbreaks. On the other hand, it may be justified to conduct a trial for a candidate vaccine if it is expected to have certain advantages compared with the existing product. This essay discusses key factors for comparing vaccines against epidemic pathogens, including immunological, logistical and economic considerations. Alongside a case study of the development of vaccines for Ebola, the essay seeks to establish a general framework that should be expanded and populated by immunologists, epidemiologists, economists and bioethicists, and ultimately could be applied to the case of COVID-19 vaccines.

negative: Optimizing Telemedicine to Facilitate ALS Clinical Trials. ALS has the largest drug pipeline among neuromuscular diseases, with over 160 companies actively involved in ALS research. There is a growing need to recruit trial participants, but ALS patients often have limited mobility and most ALS trials are conducted in a small number of major centers. These factors effectively limit patient participation, particularly for those in rural areas. The current COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated the more widespread use of telemedicine technology for clinical care, and has prompted consideration of its increased use for clinical trials. In this opinion piece, we describe the current state of telemedicine for recruitment, consenting and screening of participants for clinical trials. We also summarize the available data on remote administration of outcome measures. Current challenges include validation of outcome measures for remote assessment, as well as technological, regulatory and licensure barriers. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

negative: Does the traditional Chinese medicine theory of five circuits and six qi improve treatment effectiveness? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials Abstract Objective To evaluate whether the traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) theory of five circuits and six qi (FCSQ) is beneficial in terms of improving clinical effectiveness. Methods Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the clinical value of FCSQ theory were reviewed. Multiple databases (China Network Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Scientific Journals Database, Wanfang Data, SinoMed, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase) were systematically searched from inception to June 12, 2018. Two authors independently extracted the data and performed a methodological quality assessment of the RCTs. RevMan 5.3 software was used for the data analysis. The effect sizes for the primary outcome measures were expressed as relative risks or mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. Results A total of 13 RCTs were selected, involving 12 types of diseases and 4695 patients. The methodological quality of the RCTs was generally low. Five studies compared the effectiveness of TCM treatments guided by FCSQ theory with conventional TCM therapies, and the remaining eight studies compared the effectiveness of TCM treatments guided by FCSQ theory with biomedical treatments. All of the RCTs reported that the effectiveness of the treatment intervention was better than that of the intervention in the control group. Conclusion Because of many methodological problems in existing clinical studies, it remains impossible to definitively conclude that FCSQ theory can improve clinical effectiveness. It is difficult to unify the clinical application of FCSQ theory. The feasibility and repeatability of FCSQ as an intervention should be given more attention in future clinical research. Future work should also follow international norms for clinical research implementation and reporting to provide high-quality evidence for evaluating the clinical value of FCSQ theory.

negative: Host-directed therapies for improving poor treatment outcomes associated with the middle east respiratory syndrome coronavirus infections Summary Three years after its first discovery in Jeddah Saudi Arabia, the novel zoonotic pathogen of humans, the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) continues to be a major threat to global health security. 1 Sporadic community acquired cases of MERS continue to be reported from the Middle East. The recent nosocomial outbreaks in hospitals in Seoul, Korea and at the National Guard Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia indicate the epidemic potential of MERS-CoV. Currently there are no effective anti-MERS-CoV anti-viral agents or therapeutics and MERS is associated with a high mortality rate (40%) in hospitalised patients. A large proportion of MERS patients who die have a range of pulmonary pathology ranging from pneumonia to adult respiratory distress syndrome with multi-organ failure, compounded by co-morbidities, reflecting a precarious balance of interactions between the host-immune system and MERS-CoV. Whilst we wait for new MERS-CoV specific drugs, therapeutics and vaccines to be developed, there is a need to advance a range of Host-Directed Therapies. A range of HDTs are available, including commonly used drugs with good safety profiles, which could augment host innate and adaptive immune mechanisms to MERS-CoV, modulate excessive inflammation and reduce lung tissue destruction. We discuss the rationale and potential of using Host-Directed Therapies for improving the poor treatment outcomes associated with MERS. Carefully designed randomized controlled trials will be needed to determine whether HDTs could benefit patients with MERS. The recurrent outbreaks of MERS-CoV infections at hospitals in the Middle East present unique opportunities to conduct randomized clinical trials. The time has come for a more coordinated global response to MERS and a multidisciplinary global MERS-CoV response group is required to take forward priority research agendas.

negative: Statistical Issues and Recommendations for Clinical Trials Conducted During the COVID-19 Pandemic The COVID-19 pandemic has had and continues to have major impacts on planned and ongoing clinical trials. Its effects on trial data create multiple potential statistical issues. The scale of impact is unprecedented, but when viewed individually, many of the issues are well defined and feasible to address. A number of strategies and recommendations are put forward to assess and address issues related to estimands, missing data, validity and modifications of statistical analysis methods, need for additional analyses, ability to meet objectives and overall trial interpretability.

negative: The anti-viral facet of anti-rheumatic drugs: Lessons from COVID-19 Abstract The outbreak of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has posed the world at a pandemic risk. Coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, which causes pneumonia, requires intensive care unit hospitalization in about 10% of cases and can lead to a fatal outcome. Several efforts are currently made to find a treatment for COVID-19 patients. So far, several anti-viral and immunosuppressive or immunomodulating drugs have demonstrated some efficacy on COVID-19 both in vitro and in animal models as well as in cases series. In COVID-19 patients a pro-inflammatory status with high levels of interleukin (IL)-1B, IL-1 receptor (R)A and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α has been demonstrated. Moreover, high levels of IL-6 and TNF-α have been observed in patients requiring intensive-care-unit hospitalization. This provided rationale for the use of anti-rheumatic drugs as potential treatments for this severe viral infection. Other agents, such as hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine might have a direct anti-viral effect. The anti-viral aspect of immunosuppressants towards a variety of viruses has been known since long time and it is herein discussed in the view of searching for a potential treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

negative: Chloroquine for the 2019 novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2

negative: A call for long-term data in clinical studies of infrainguinal peripheral arterial revascularization: The DURABILITY II Study delivers. The DURABILITY II study provides outcomes in 220 patients treated with nitinol self-expanding stent placement for femoro-popliteal disease out to three years. In this core lab adjudicated study, the EverFlex™ (Covidien, Plymouth, MN) self-expanding stents had a low stent fracture rate (0.9%). The study demonstrated a freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) of nearly 70% at 3 years. Based on this study, primary angioplasty and stenting of these lesions is a reasonable strategy though results are better with lesions less than 8 cm compared to those greater than 8 cm. Further research is need comparing this strategy to use of drug-coated stents and that of atherectomy with drug eluting balloons and with longer term follow-up.

negative: Therapeutic strategies in an outbreak scenario to treat the novel coronavirus originating in Wuhan, China A novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) originating in Wuhan, China presents a potential respiratory viral pandemic to the world population. Current efforts are focused on containment and quarantine of infected individuals. Ultimately, the outbreak could be controlled with a protective vaccine to prevent 2019-nCoV infection. While vaccine research should be pursued intensely, there exists today no therapy to treat 2019-nCoV upon infection, despite an urgent need to find options to help these patients and preclude potential death. Herein, I review the potential options to treat 2019-nCoV in patients, with an emphasis on the necessity for speed and timeliness in developing new and effective therapies in this outbreak. I consider the options of drug repurposing, developing neutralizing monoclonal antibody therapy, and an oligonucleotide strategy targeting the viral RNA genome, emphasizing the promise and pitfalls of these approaches. Finally, I advocate for the fastest strategy to develop a treatment now, which could be resistant to any mutations the virus may have in the future. The proposal is a biologic that blocks 2019-nCoV entry using a soluble version of the viral receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), fused to an immunoglobulin Fc domain (ACE2-Fc), providing a neutralizing antibody with maximal breath to avoid any viral escape, while also helping to recruit the immune system to build lasting immunity. The ACE2-Fc therapy would also supplement decreased ACE2 levels in the lungs during infection, thereby directly treating acute respiratory distress pathophysiology as a third mechanism of action. The sequence of the ACE2-Fc protein is provided to investigators, allowing its possible use in recombinant protein expression systems to start producing drug today to treat patients under compassionate use, while formal clinical trials are later undertaken. Such a treatment could help infected patients before a protective vaccine is developed and widely available in the coming months to year(s).

negative: Clinical features and the maternal and neonatal outcomes of pregnant women with coronavirus disease 2019 BACKGROUND There is little information about the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) during pregnancy. This study aimed to determine the clinical features and the maternal and neonatal outcomes of pregnant women with Covid-19. METHODS In this retrospective analysis from five hospitals, we included pregnant women with Covid-19 from January 1 to February 20, 2020. The primary composite endpoints were admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), the use of mechanical ventilation, or death. Secondary endpoints included the clinical severity of Covid-19, neonatal mortality, admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and the incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) of pregnant women and newborns. RESULTS Thirty-three pregnant women with Covid-19 and 28 newborns were identified. One (3%) pregnant woman needed the use of mechanical ventilation. No pregnant women admitted to the ICU. There were no moralities among pregnant women or newborns. The percentages of pregnant women with mild, moderate, and severe symptoms were 13 (39.4%),19(57.6%), and 1(3%). One (3.6%) newborn developed ARDS and was admitted to the NICU. The rate of perinatal transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was 3.6%. CONCLUSIONS This report suggests that pregnant women are not at increased risk for severe illness or mortality with Covid-19 compared with the general population. The SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy might not be associated with as adverse obstetrical and neonatal outcomes that are seen with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection during pregnancy. (Funded by the National Key Research and Development Program.)

negative: Searching for MERS and Novel Flu with Limited Resources

negative: Optimizing telemedicine to facilitate amyotrophic lateral sclerosis clinical trials Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) has the largest drug pipeline among neuromuscular diseases, with over 160 companies actively involved in ALS research. There is a growing need to recruit trial participants, but ALS patients often have limited mobility and most ALS trials are conducted in a small number of major centers. These factors effectively limit patient participation, particularly for those in rural areas. The current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has necessitated the more widespread use of telemedicine technology for clinical care, and has prompted consideration of its increased use for clinical trials. In this opinion piece, we describe the current state of telemedicine for recruitment, consenting, and screening of participants for clinical trials. We also summarize the available data on remote administration of outcome measures. Current challenges include validation of outcome measures for remote assessment, as well as technological, regulatory, and licensure barriers.

negative: Severe acute respiratory syndrome Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) was caused by a previously unrecognized animal coronavirus that exploited opportunities provided by 'wet markets' in southern China to adapt to become a virus readily transmissible between humans. Hospitals and international travel proved to be 'amplifiers' that permitted a local outbreak to achieve global dimensions. In this review we will discuss the substantial scientific progress that has been made towards understanding the virus—SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV)—and the disease. We will also highlight the progress that has been made towards developing vaccines and therapies The concerted and coordinated response that contained SARS is a triumph for global public health and provides a new paradigm for the detection and control of future emerging infectious disease threats.

negative: Bacterial resistance: A sensitive issue Complexity of the challenge and containment strategy in Europe Abstract The development of antimicrobial agents has been a key achievement of modern medicine. However, their overuse has led to an increasing incidence of infections due to antibiotic-resistant microorganisms. Quantitative figures on the current economic and health impact of antimicrobial resistance are scant, but it is clearly a growing challenge that requires timely action. That action should be at the educational, ethical, economic and political level. An important first step would be to increase public awareness and willingness to take the necessary measures to curb resistance. Hence, studies are needed that would provide solid, quantitative data on the societal impact of antibiotic resistance. This review discusses the complexity of resistance, identifies its main drivers and proposes measures to contain it on a European scale.

negative: Highlights of traditional Chinese medicine frontline expert advice in the China national guideline for COVID-19 Abstract Introduction The World Health Organization has declared the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) as a pandemic on 11 March 2020, after the number of confirmed cases outside China increased 13-fold. As the epicentre of the initial outbreak, China has been updating the National COVID-19 Diagnostic and Treatment Guideline with up-to-date information about the disease. To facilitate the implementation of integrative Chinese–Western Medicine in COVID-19 management, Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been recommended in recent editions of the national guideline. Methods The national guideline summarised the opinions and frontline experience of medical experts across the country to provide by far the best management for COVID-19. We extracted the case definition and clinical classifications of COVID-19 in China along with relevant TCM treatments cited in the seventh edition of the guideline, with an intend to disseminate practical information to TCM practitioners and researchers around the world. Results We presented the most recent case definition, clinical classifications, and relevant TCM treatments of COVID-19 in accordance to recommendations of the Chinese guideline. TCM treatments are stratified into two groups based on patients’ disease status. Four types of Chinese patent medicines are recommended for suspected COVID-19 cases. Several herbal formulae are recommended for confirmed COVID-19 cases according to their clinical classification and TCM pattern diagnoses. Two herbal formulae are also recommended for rehabilitation of recovering cases. Conclusion To control the waves of COVID-19 outbreak, countries must ensure the adherence of their citizens to local public health measures. Medical professionals should diagnose and treat patients according to up-to-date guidelines. Future evaluation of the outcomes of implementing TCM recommendations will strengthen the evidence base for COVID-19 management for the sake of public health and the internationalisation of TCM.

negative: Clinical Characteristics of Two Human to Human Transmitted Coronaviruses: Corona Virus Disease 2019 versus Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus. After the outbreak of the middle east respiratory syndrome (MERS) worldwide in 2012. Currently, a novel human coronavirus has caused a major disease outbreak, and named corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The emergency of MRES-COV and COVID-19 has caused global panic and threatened health security. Unfortunately, the similarities and differences between the two coronavirus diseases remain to be unknown. The aim of this study, therefore, is to perform a systematic review to compare epidemiological, clinical and laboratory features of COVID-19 and MERS-COV population. We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials database to identify potential studies reported COVID-19 or MERS-COV. Epidemiological, clinical and laboratory outcomes, the admission rate of intensive cure unit (ICU), discharge rate and fatality rate were evaluated using GraphPad Prism software. Thirty-two studies involving 3770 patients (COVID-19 = 1062, MERS-COV = 2708) were included in this study. The present study revealed that compared with COVID-19 population, MERS-COV population had a higher rate of ICU admission, discharge and fatality and longer incubation time. It pointed out that fever, cough and generalised weakness and myalgia were main clinical manifestations of both COVID-19 and MERS-COV, whereas ARDS was main complication. The most effective drug for MERS-COV is ribavirin and interferon.

negative: Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) and Biologic Therapy in Psoriasis: Infection Risk and Patient Counseling in Uncertain Times With the emergence of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) viral pandemic, there is uncertainty whether biologic agents for psoriasis may place patients at a higher risk for infection or more severe disease course. This commentary offers patient counseling recommendations based on the current available evidence. While there are currently no specific data for psoriasis biologics and COVID-19, data are presented here from phase III clinical trials of psoriasis biologics on rates of upper respiratory infection, influenza, and serious infection. Overall these data reveal that on the whole, psoriasis biologics do not show major increases in infection risk compared to placebo during the course of these trials. However, as the COVID-19 virus is a novel pathogen that is associated with mortality in a subset of patients, a cautious approach is warranted. We discuss factors that may alter the benefit–risk ratio of biologic use during this time of COVID-19 outbreak. Ultimately, treatment decisions should be made on the basis of dialogue between patient and provider, considering each patient’s individualized situation. Once this pandemic has passed, it is only a matter of time before a new viral disease reignites the same issues discussed here.

negative: Recomendaciones de consenso respecto al soporte respiratorio no invasivo en el paciente adulto con insuficiencia respiratoria aguda secundaria a infección por SARS-CoV-2() Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a respiratory tract infection caused by a newly emergent coronavirus, that was first recognized in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. Currently, the World Health Organization (WHO) has defined the infection as a global pandemic and there is a health and social emergency for the management of this new infection. While most people with COVID-19 develop only mild or uncomplicated illness, approximately 14% develop severe disease that requires hospitalization and oxygen support, and 5% require admission to an intensive care unit. In severe cases, COVID-19 can be complicated by the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), sepsis and septic shock, and multiorgan failure. This consensus document has been prepared on evidence-informed guidelines developed by a multidisciplinary panel of health care providers from four Spanish scientific societies (Spanish Society of Intensive Care Medicine [SEMICYUC], Spanish Society of Pulmonologists [SEPAR], Spanish Society of Emergency [SEMES], Spanish Society of Anesthesiology, Reanimation, and Pain [SEDAR]) with experience in the clinical management of patients with COVID-19 and other viral infections, including SARS, as well as sepsis and ARDS. The document provides clinical recommendations for the noninvasive respiratory support (noninvasive ventilation, high flow oxygen therapy with nasal cannula) in any patient with suspected or confirmed presentation of COVID-19 with acute respiratory failure. This consensus guidance should serve as a foundation for optimized supportive care to ensure the best possible chance for survival and to allow for reliable comparison of investigational therapeutic interventions as part of randomized controlled trials.

negative: Automatic Detection of Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Using X-ray Images and Deep Convolutional Neural Networks The 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), with a starting point in China, has spread rapidly among people living in other countries, and is approaching approximately 12,245,417 cases worldwide according to the statistics of European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. There are a limited number of COVID-19 test kits available in hospitals due to the increasing cases daily. Therefore, it is necessary to implement an automatic detection system as a quick alternative diagnosis option to prevent COVID-19 spreading among people. In this study, three different convolutional neural network based models (ResNet50, InceptionV3 and Inception-ResNetV2) have been proposed for the detection of coronavirus pneumonia infected patient using chest X-ray radiographs. ROC analyses and confusion matrices by these three models are given and analyzed using 5-fold cross validation. Considering the performance results obtained, it is seen that the pre-trained ResNet50 model provides the highest classification performance with 98% accuracy among other two proposed models (97% accuracy for InceptionV3 and 87% accuracy for Inception-ResNetV2).

negative: Strategies for the development of drugs targeting novel coronavirus 2019-nCoV/ 药学学报 @# There is no specific drug that has been approved for 2019-nCoV. There are a number of factors that pose major challenges in their development. Approaches to the development of anti-2019-nCoV include screening existing broad-spectrum antiviral drugs, repositioning of readily available clinical compounds, and <italic>de novo</italic> development of novel and specific agents for 2019-nCoV. Candidate compounds can be developed either to inhibit virus-based targets, such as RNA proteases, polymerase, spike glycoproteins, and viral envelop and membrane proteins, or to inhibit host-based targets, such as receptors and proteases that are utilized by virus for viral entry and endocytosis. Recently, the RNA polymerase remdesivir had demonstrated clinical efficacy in one patient with severe novel coronavirus pneumonia (NCP). The broad-spectrum viral protease inhibitor Kaletra<sup>®</sup> is also recommended in the current NCP clinical practice. Both drugs had lately been proceeded into multiple controlled phase III clinical trials to test their safety and efficacy in NCP. Combinational therapies consisting of multiple drugs provide other viable options against 2019-nCoV, based on scientific and clinical rationales. Using bioinformatics and database analysis, we have identified 75 clinically compounds, including 20 marketed compounds, that are efficacious in inhibiting key targets in virus- and host-based approaches, which may facilitate the development of new therapeutic options for 2019-nCoV.

negative: Comparative therapeutic efficacy of remdesivir and combination lopinavir, ritonavir, and interferon beta against MERS-CoV Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) is the causative agent of a severe respiratory disease associated with more than 2468 human infections and over 851 deaths in 27 countries since 2012. There are no approved treatments for MERS-CoV infection although a combination of lopinavir, ritonavir and interferon beta (LPV/RTV-IFNb) is currently being evaluated in humans in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Here, we show that remdesivir (RDV) and IFNb have superior antiviral activity to LPV and RTV in vitro. In mice, both prophylactic and therapeutic RDV improve pulmonary function and reduce lung viral loads and severe lung pathology. In contrast, prophylactic LPV/RTV-IFNb slightly reduces viral loads without impacting other disease parameters. Therapeutic LPV/RTV-IFNb improves pulmonary function but does not reduce virus replication or severe lung pathology. Thus, we provide in vivo evidence of the potential for RDV to treat MERS-CoV infections.

negative: Taking the bull by the horns: Ethical considerations in the design and implementation of an Ebola virus therapy trial Abstract Ebola virus is categorized as one of the most dangerous pathogens in the world. Although there is no known cure for Ebola virus, there is some evidence that the severity of the disease can be curtailed using plasma from survivors. Although there is a general consensus on the importance of research, methodological and ethical challenges for conducting research in an emergency situation have been identified. Performing clinical trials is important, especially for health conditions that are of public health significance (including rare epidemics) to develop new therapies as well as to test the efficacy and effectiveness of new interventions. However, routine clinical trial procedures can be difficult to apply in emergency public health crises hence require a consideration of alternative approaches on how therapies in these situations are tested and brought to the market. This paper examines some of the ethical issues that arise when conducting clinical trials during a highly dangerous pathogen outbreak, with a special focus on the Ebola virus outbreak in West Africa. The issues presented here come from a review of a protocol that was submitted to the Global Emerging Pathogens Treatment Consortium (GET). In reviewing the proposal, which was about conducting a clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of using convalescent plasma in the management of Ebola virus disease, the authors deliberated on various issues, which were documented as minutes and later used as a basis for this paper. The experiences and reflections shared by the authors, who came from different regions and disciplines across Africa, present wide-ranging perspectives on the conduct of clinical trials during a dangerous disease outbreak in a resource-poor setting.

negative: Screening for Active COVID-19 Infection and Immunization Status Prior to Biologic Therapy in IBD Patients at the Time of the Pandemic Outbreak Abstract Coronavirus disease 2019 has been recently classified as pandemic infection by the World Health Organization. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are invited to follow the national recommendations as any other person. It is unclear whether a more aggressive clinical course might develop in asymptomatic COVID-19 infected subjects during biological therapy and current evidence does not support treatment suspension. However, during pandemic, the start of treatment with immunosuppressive drugs and biologics should be postponed whenever possible and based on an individual risk assessment. When clinical conditions and the disease activity do not allow a treatment delay, before starting a biological therapy, screening of IBD patients for COVID-19 active infection by RT-PCR should be advisable, even in absence of clinical suspicion. Serum antibody testing, when available, could provide evidence of infection as well as identify patients already immune to the disease.

negative: A systematic scorecard-based approach to site assessment in preparation for Lassa fever vaccine clinical trials in affected countries BACKGROUND: We sought to develop and test an objective scorecard-based system for assessing and categorizing available research sites in Lassa fever-affected countries based on their preparedness and capability to host Lassa fever vaccine clinical trials. METHODS: We mapped available clinical research sites through interrogation of online clinical trial registries and relevant disease-based consortia. A structured online questionnaire was used to assess the capability of clinical trial sites to conduct Lassa fever vaccine clinical trials. We developed a new scoring template by allocating scores to questionnaire parameters based on perceived importance to the conduct of clinical trials as described in the WHO/TDR Global Competency Framework for Clinical Research. Cutoff points of 75% and 50% were used to categorize sites into categories A, B, or C. RESULTS: This study identified 44 clinical trial sites in 8 Lassa fever-affected countries. Out of these, 35 sites were characterized based on their capacity to hold Lassa fever vaccine clinical trials. A total of 14 sites in 4 countries were identified as ready to host Lassa fever vaccine trials immediately or with little support. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to hold Lassa fever vaccine trials in affected countries based on the outcome of the survey. However, the findings are to be validated through sites’ visits. This experience with a standardized and objective method of the site assessment is encouraging, and the site selection method used can serve as an orientation to sponsors and researchers planning clinical trials in the region.

negative: Development of CRISPR as an Antiviral Strategy to Combat SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza Summary The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has highlighted the need for antiviral approaches that can target emerging viruses with no effective vaccines or pharmaceuticals. Here, we demonstrate a CRISPR-Cas13-based strategy, PAC-MAN (prophylactic antiviral CRISPR in human cells), for viral inhibition that can effectively degrade RNA from SARS-CoV-2 sequences and live influenza A virus (IAV) in human lung epithelial cells. We designed and screened CRISPR RNAs (crRNAs) targeting conserved viral regions and identified functional crRNAs targeting SARS-CoV-2. This approach effectively reduced H1N1 IAV load in respiratory epithelial cells. Our bioinformatic analysis showed that a group of only six crRNAs can target more than 90% of all coronaviruses. With the development of a safe and effective system for respiratory tract delivery, PAC-MAN has the potential to become an important pan-coronavirus inhibition strategy.

negative: Contentious issues and evolving concepts in the clinical presentation and management of patients with COVID-19 infectionwith reference to use of therapeutic and other drugs used in Co-morbid diseases (Hypertension, diabetes etc) Abstract Background and aims Multiple issues in management of COVID have emerged, but confusion persists regarding rational interpretation. Aim of this brief review is to review these issues based on current literature. Methods This is a narrative review with Pubmed and Google Scholar search till 23 March 2020. Search terms were, COVID-19, treatment of coronavirus, COVID 19 and following terms; chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, ibuprofen, ACE-inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, cardiovascular disease, diarrhoea, liver, testis and gastrointestinal disease. Results We discuss evidence regarding role of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in treatment and prophylaxis, use of inhibitors of the renin angiotensin system, safety of ibuprofen, unusual clinical features like gastrointestinal symptoms and interpretation of tests for cardiac enzymes and biomarkers. Conclusions While our conclusions on management of COVID-19 patients with co-morbidities are based on current evidence, however, data is limited and there is immediate need for fast track research.

negative: 新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情期间肺癌患者临床管理 In December 2019, China diagnosed the first patient with 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), and the following development of the epidemic had a huge impact on China and the whole world. For patients with lung occupying lesions, the whole process of diagnosis and treatment can not be carried out as usual due to the epidemic. For thoracic surgeons, the timing of surgical intervention should be very carefully considered. All thoracic surgeons in China should work together to develop the proper procedures for the diagnosis and treatment in this special situation, and continuously update the recommendations based on epidemic changes and further understanding of COVID-19. Here, we only offer some preliminary suggestions based on our own knowledge for further reference and discussion.

negative: Retinal pathology in multiple sclerosis: insight into the mechanisms of neuronal pathology

negative: Therapeutic strategies for critically ill patients with COVID-19 Since the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak originated from Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, at the end of 2019, it has become a clinical threat to the general population worldwide. Among people infected with the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), the intensive management of the critically ill patients in intensive care unit (ICU) needs substantial medical resource. In the present article, we have summarized the promising drugs, adjunctive agents, respiratory supportive strategies, as well as circulation management, multiple organ function monitoring and appropriate nutritional strategies for the treatment of COVID-19 in the ICU based on the previous experience of treating other viral infections and influenza. These treatments are referable before the vaccine and specific drugs are available for COVID-19.

negative: Recent Advances in Dipeptidyl-Peptidase-4 Inhibition Therapy: Lessons from the Bench and Clinical Trials DPP4 inhibitors (DPP4i) are a class of newly developed antidiabetic drugs which preserve incretin hormones and promote postprandial insulin secretion. Although the cardiovascular effect of DPP4 inhibition has been substantially studied, the exact role of DPP4 in cardiovascular disease especially in humans remains elusive. Previous small studies and meta-analyses have suggested a benefit in both surrogate outcomes and cardiovascular events for these agents. However, there was growing evidence in recent years questioning the cardioprotective effect of DPP4i. Further, a signal of heart failure hospitalization in a recent large scale clinical trial SAVOR-TIMI 53 has called into question the safety of these agents and their utility in the treatment of cardiovascular disease. In this review, we will revisit the physiologic function of DPP4 and discuss its role in cardiometabolic disease based on recent experimental and clinical studies.

negative: A Tale of Two Communities: Characterizing Reddit Response to COVID-19 through /r/China_Flu and /r/Coronavirus The COVID-19 pandemic has deeply impacted people's lives around the globe. During the extended lockdowns caused by the pandemic, online communities are crucial for people to access information and share experiences. In particular, two"new"communities have emerged on Reddit: /r/China_flu and /r/Coronavirus. By studying activities and users in these two communities, we provide a characterization of people's responses to COVID-19 on Reddit. First, we find that user activity peaks around March 17, when the World Health Organization (WHO) announced COVID-19 as a pandemic. Shortly after that, the activity levels of both communities have been declining week by week. We further illustrate the central role of these two communities in the emergence of COVID-related communities. Second, we study the differences between these two communities. /r/Coronavirus is recommended as the official community for COVID-19 on Reddit, while /r/China_flu adopts a loose moderation practice. As a result, we observe that these two communities are gradually growing apart and more extremism is being found in /r/China_flu. Finally, we examine the spillover effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on user activity across the entire Reddit platform. Our results show significant changes in user activities outside COVID-related communities. In subreddits related to finance, food, and countries/cities, user activity is recovering to the pre-pandemic level in late April and May as countries reopen, but subreddits related to travel and sports remain highly impacted and show lower activity levels than the pre-pandemic period. Our work highlights the strength of Reddit as a source for understanding public reactions to COVID-19 and the importance of content moderation on the Internet during a pandemic.

negative: Curation of viral genomes: challenges, applications and the way forward BACKGROUND: Whole genome sequence data is a step towards generating the 'parts list' of life to understand the underlying principles of Biocomplexity. Genome sequencing initiatives of human and model organisms are targeted efforts towards understanding principles of evolution with an application envisaged to improve human health. These efforts culminated in the development of dedicated resources. Whereas a large number of viral genomes have been sequenced by groups or individuals with an interest to study antigenic variation amongst strains and species. These independent efforts enabled viruses to attain the status of 'best-represented taxa' with the highest number of genomes. However, due to lack of concerted efforts, viral genomic sequences merely remained as entries in the public repositories until recently. RESULTS: VirGen is a curated resource of viral genomes and their analyses. Since its first release, it has grown both in terms of coverage of viral families and development of new modules for annotation and analysis. The current release (2.0) includes data for twenty-five families with broad host range as against eight in the first release. The taxonomic description of viruses in VirGen is in accordance with the ICTV nomenclature. A well-characterised strain is identified as a 'representative entry' for every viral species. This non-redundant dataset is used for subsequent annotation and analyses using sequenced-based Bioinformatics approaches. VirGen archives precomputed data on genome and proteome comparisons. A new data module that provides structures of viral proteins available in PDB has been incorporated recently. One of the unique features of VirGen is predicted conformational and sequential epitopes of known antigenic proteins using in-house developed algorithms, a step towards reverse vaccinology. CONCLUSION: Structured organization of genomic data facilitates use of data mining tools, which provides opportunities for knowledge discovery. One of the approaches to achieve this goal is to carry out functional annotations using comparative genomics. VirGen, a comprehensive viral genome resource that serves as an annotation and analysis pipeline has been developed for the curation of public domain viral genome data . Various steps in the curation and annotation of the genomic data and applications of the value-added derived data are substantiated with case studies.

negative: The 45th Annual Meeting of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation: Physicians – Poster Session

negative: The establishment of reference sequence for SARS‐CoV‐2 and variation analysis Starting around December 2019, an epidemic of pneumonia, which was named COVID‐19 by the World Health Organization, broke out in Wuhan, China, and is spreading throughout the world. A new coronavirus, named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) by the Coronavirus Study Group of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses was soon found to be the cause. At present, the sensitivity of clinical nucleic acid detection is limited, and it is still unclear whether it is related to genetic variation. In this study, we retrieved 95 full‐length genomic sequences of SARAS‐CoV‐2 strains from the National Center for Biotechnology Information and GISAID databases, established the reference sequence by conducting multiple sequence alignment and phylogenetic analyses, and analyzed sequence variations along the SARS‐CoV‐2 genome. The homology among all viral strains was generally high, among them, 99.99% (99.91%‐100%) at the nucleotide level and 99.99% (99.79%‐100%) at the amino acid level. Although overall variation in open‐reading frame (ORF) regions is low, 13 variation sites in 1a, 1b, S, 3a, M, 8, and N regions were identified, among which positions nt28144 in ORF 8 and nt8782 in ORF 1a showed mutation rate of 30.53% (29/95) and 29.47% (28/95), respectively. These findings suggested that there may be selective mutations in SARS‐COV‐2, and it is necessary to avoid certain regions when designing primers and probes. Establishment of the reference sequence for SARS‐CoV‐2 could benefit not only biological study of this virus but also diagnosis, clinical monitoring and intervention of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection in the future.

negative: Evaluating the effect of public health intervention on the global-wide spread trajectory of Covid-19 As COVID-19 evolves rapidly, the issues the governments of affected countries facing are whether and when to take public health interventions and what levels of strictness of these interventions should be, as well as when the COVID-19 spread reaches the stopping point after interventions are taken. To help governments with policy-making, we developed modified auto-encoders (MAE) method to forecast spread trajectory of Covid-19 of countries affected, under different levels and timing of intervention strategies. Our analysis showed public health interventions should be executed as soon as possible. Delaying intervention 4 weeks after March 8, 2020 would cause the maximum number of cumulative cases of death increase from 7,174 to 133,608 and the ending points of the epidemic postponed from Jun 25 to Aug 22.

negative: Abstracts of the EPSM-ABEC 2008 conference

negative: Structure of replicating SARS-CoV-2 polymerase The coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 uses an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) for the replication of its genome and the transcription of its genes. Here we present the cryo-electron microscopic structure of the SARS-CoV-2 RdRp in its replicating form. The structure comprises the viral proteins nsp12, nsp8, and nsp7, and over two turns of RNA template-product duplex. The active site cleft of nsp12 binds the first turn of RNA and mediates RdRp activity with conserved residues. Two copies of nsp8 bind to opposite sides of the cleft and position the RNA duplex as it exits. Long helical extensions in nsp8 protrude along exiting RNA, forming positively charged ‘sliding poles’ that may enable processive replication of the long coronavirus genome. Our results will allow for a detailed analysis of the inhibitory mechanisms used by antivirals such as remdesivir, which is currently in clinical trials for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

negative: A new transmission route for the propagation of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus We explore here how variation in the SARS-CoV-2 virus tropism could influence epidemic spread. We use a compartmental model fit to the existing data. The model indicates that Wuhan quarantine measures were effective but that alternative virus forms (gut tropism) and a second propagation route (through environment) was present. For Singapore and Shenzhen region the secondary route does not seem to be active yet. Adequate prevention measures taking into account both routes should be implemented.

negative: Do antimicrobial mass medications work? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials investigating antimicrobial prophylaxis or metaphylaxis against naturally occurring bovine respiratory disease A distinct difference between veterinary and human medicine is the routine use of antimicrobial mass medications (prophylaxis, metaphylaxis) to healthy individuals. The need for antimicrobial mass medications is based on beliefs that group/s of animals will contract a bacterial disease (i.e. morbidity) and/or die (i.e. mortality). Bovine respiratory disease (BRD) represents the major indication for cattle antimicrobials worldwide. The objectives were to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) for naturally occurring BRD investigating antimicrobial prophylaxis/metaphylaxis to prevent morbidity/mortality. In total, 58 publications met the inclusion criteria summarizing 169 individual RCTs, spanning 50 years (1966–2016). Antimicrobial prophylaxis and metaphylaxis demonstrated moderate, yet highly variable relative risk reductions in BRD morbidity. These were dependent on the antimicrobial classes used, dependent on metaphylaxis definition, BRD attack rates and duration of the RCTs. Best relative risk reductions were from broad-spectrum critically important antimicrobials, or combinations. BRD prophylaxis/metaphylaxis represents major antimicrobial consumption for highly variable short-term gains in absolute risk reduction of morbidity/mortality. Despite widespread use of prevention products, the need for antimicrobial mass medications should be re-evaluated since the underlying problem is more likely the segmented infrastructure of the feedlot and veal calf industries compared to the disease itself.

negative: Comparison of academic and nonacademic sites in multi-center clinical trials. The selection of appropriate subjects is a critical element of successful clinical trials. Failure to properly identify, select, and retain subjects in clinical trials of antidepressant medications may affect the ability to show separation from placebo. Little is known about which type of site, academic or nonacademic, is superior in selecting and retaining appropriate subjects. In the present investigation, the authors conducted a retrospective analysis comparing the performance of academic and nonacademic sites in selecting and retaining appropriate subjects in a recently completed multi-site clinical study of aripiprazole augmentation. The authors used a set of operationalized criteria called the SAFER to identify appropriate study subjects. No significant differences were found in rates of SAFER interview passing, study completion, and clinical outcomes between academic and nonacademic sites. Our findings suggest that academic and nonacademic sites are equally effective in their ability to identify and retain appropriate study participants.

negative: Genetic deletion of Sphk2 confers protection against Pseudomonas aeruginosa mediated differential expression of genes related to virulent infection and inflammation in mouse lung BACKGROUND: Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) is an opportunistic Gram-negative bacterium that causes serious life threatening and nosocomial infections including pneumonia. PA has the ability to alter host genome to facilitate its invasion, thus increasing the virulence of the organism. Sphingosine-1- phosphate (S1P), a bioactive lipid, is known to play a key role in facilitating infection. Sphingosine kinases (SPHK) 1&2 phosphorylate sphingosine to generate S1P in mammalian cells. We reported earlier that Sphk2(−/−) mice offered significant protection against lung inflammation, compared to wild type (WT) animals. Therefore, we profiled the differential expression of genes between the protected group of Sphk2(−/−) and the wild type controls to better understand the underlying protective mechanisms related to the Sphk2 deletion in lung inflammatory injury. Whole transcriptome shotgun sequencing (RNA-Seq) was performed on mouse lung tissue using NextSeq 500 sequencing system. RESULTS: Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) analysis was performed and differentially expressed genes following PA infection were identified using whole transcriptome of Sphk2(−/−) mice and their WT counterparts. Pathway (PW) enrichment analyses of the RNA seq data identified several signaling pathways that are likely to play a crucial role in pneumonia caused by PA such as those involved in: 1. Immune response to PA infection and NF-κB signal transduction; 2. PKC signal transduction; 3. Impact on epigenetic regulation; 4. Epithelial sodium channel pathway; 5. Mucin expression; and 6. Bacterial infection related pathways. Our genomic data suggests a potential role for SPHK2 in PA-induced pneumonia through elevated expression of inflammatory genes in lung tissue. Further, validation by RT-PCR on 10 differentially expressed genes showed 100% concordance in terms of vectoral changes as well as significant fold change. CONCLUSION: Using Sphk2(−/−) mice and differential gene expression analysis, we have shown here that S1P/SPHK2 signaling could play a key role in promoting PA pneumonia. The identified genes promote inflammation and suppress others that naturally inhibit inflammation and host defense. Thus, targeting SPHK2/S1P signaling in PA-induced lung inflammation could serve as a potential therapy to combat PA-induced pneumonia.

negative: Cluster randomised controlled trial to examine medical mask use as source control for people with respiratory illness RATIONALE: Medical masks are commonly used by sick individuals with influenza-like illness (ILI) to prevent spread of infections to others, but clinical efficacy data are absent. OBJECTIVE: Determine whether medical mask use by sick individuals with ILI protects well contacts from related respiratory infections. SETTING: 6 major hospitals in 2 districts of Beijing, China. DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: 245 index cases with ILI. INTERVENTION: Index cases with ILI were randomly allocated to medical mask (n=123) and control arms (n=122). Since 43 index cases in the control arm also used a mask during the study period, an as-treated post hoc analysis was performed by comparing outcomes among household members of index cases who used a mask (mask group) with household members of index cases who did not use a mask (no-mask group). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Primary outcomes measured in household members were clinical respiratory illness, ILI and laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infection. RESULTS: In an intention-to-treat analysis, rates of clinical respiratory illness (relative risk (RR) 0.61, 95% CI 0.18 to 2.13), ILI (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.03 to 3.13) and laboratory-confirmed viral infections (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.54) were consistently lower in the mask arm compared with control, although not statistically significant. A post hoc comparison between the mask versus no-mask groups showed a protective effect against clinical respiratory illness, but not against ILI and laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections. CONCLUSIONS: The study indicates a potential benefit of medical masks for source control, but is limited by small sample size and low secondary attack rates. Larger trials are needed to confirm efficacy of medical masks as source control. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12613000852752; Results.

negative: Conducting clinical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly impacted dermatology clinical trial operations due to mandated governmental and institutional shut-downs and newly implemented restrictions. During this unprecedented time, measures should be taken to maintain research conduct compliance while also ensuring the safety of trial staff and participants. Herein, we underscore the challenges facing dermatology trials during the COVID-19 pandemic, and offer strategies to maintain compliant and safe conduct.

negative: Upper airway symptoms in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

negative: Coronaviruses — drug discovery and therapeutic options In humans, infections with the human coronavirus (HCoV) strains HCoV-229E, HCoV-OC43, HCoV-NL63 and HCoV-HKU1 usually result in mild, self-limiting upper respiratory tract infections, such as the common cold. By contrast, the CoVs responsible for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), which were discovered in Hong Kong, China, in 2003, and in Saudi Arabia in 2012, respectively, have received global attention over the past 12 years owing to their ability to cause community and health-care-associated outbreaks of severe infections in human populations. These two viruses pose major challenges to clinical management because there are no specific antiviral drugs available. In this Review, we summarize the epidemiology, virology, clinical features and current treatment strategies of SARS and MERS, and discuss the discovery and development of new virus-based and host-based therapeutic options for CoV infections. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version of this article (doi:10.1038/nrd.2015.37) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

negative: MERS-CoV: Understanding the Latest Human Coronavirus Threat Human coronaviruses cause both upper and lower respiratory tract infections in humans. In 2012, a sixth human coronavirus (hCoV) was isolated from a patient presenting with severe respiratory illness. The 60-year-old man died as a result of renal and respiratory failure after admission to a hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The aetiological agent was eventually identified as a coronavirus and designated Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV). MERS-CoV has now been reported in more than 27 countries across the Middle East, Europe, North Africa and Asia. As of July 2017, 2040 MERS-CoV laboratory confirmed cases, resulting in 712 deaths, were reported globally, with a majority of these cases from the Arabian Peninsula. This review summarises the current understanding of MERS-CoV, with special reference to the (i) genome structure; (ii) clinical features; (iii) diagnosis of infection; and (iv) treatment and vaccine development.

negative: Informational needs assessment of non‐Hodgkin lymphoma survivors and their physicians

negative: The efficacy of convalescent plasma for the treatment of severe influenza Background. Administration of convalescent plasma may be of clinical benefit for treatment of severe acute viral respiratory infections. However, no clear evidence exists to support or oppose convalescent plasma use in clinical practice. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the evidence of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the convalescent plasma for the treatment of severe influenza. Methods. Healthcare databases were searched in February 2020. All records were screened against the eligibility criteria. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were undertaken. The primary outcome was case fatality rates by influenza. Results. We identified 5 RCTs of severe influenza. The pooled analyses showed no evidence for a reduction in mortality (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.06; p = 0.87; I2 = 35%). We also found non significant reductions in days in ICU and hospital, and days on mechanical ventilation. There seemed to have a biological benefit of increasing HAI titer levels and decreasing influenza B virus loads and cytokines after convalescent plasma treatment. No serious adverse events was reported between two groups. Studies were commonly of low risk of bias with high quality. Conclusions. Convalescent plasma appears safe but may not reduce mortality in severe influenza. This therapy should be studied within the context of a well designed clinical trial for treatment of SARS Cov 2 infection.

negative: National Institute for the Infectious Diseases “L. Spallanzani”, IRCCS. Recommendations for COVID-19 clinical management On January 9 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the identification, by Chinese Health authorities, of a novel coronavirus, further classified as SARS-CoV-2 responsible of a disease (COVID-19) ranging from asymptomatic cases to severe respiratory involvement. On March 9 2020, WHO declared COVID-19 a global pandemic. Italy is the second most affected country by COVID-19 infection after China. The “L. Spallanzani” National Institute for the Infectious Diseases, IRCCS, Rome, Italy, has been the first Italian hospital to admit and manage patients affected by COVID-19. Hereby, we show our recommendations for the management of COVID-19 patients, based on very limited clinical evidences; they should be considered as expert opinions, which may be modified according to newly produced literature data.

negative: The consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on non-COVID-19 clinical trials

negative: The RNA Virus Database http://virus.zoo.ox.ac.uk/rnavirusdb; http://hivweb.sanbi.ac.za/rnavirusdb; http://bioinf.cs.auckland.ac.nz/rnavirusdb; http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/rnavirusdb.

negative: Patients with cancer in the COVID-19 era: the clinical trial issue Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospital reorganization may result in reduced ability for the hospital to fully use its armamentarium for battling cancer. Thus different therapeutic modalities have been recommended. During the pandemic, despite regulatory agencies' recommendations, several considerations and doubts remain for oncologic clinical trials. Considering patients who had been enrolled before the pandemic, and who plan to take the study medication, the situation becomes complicated. These patients should undergo monitoring visits, blood sampling, questionnaire, physical examination, and drug and radiation administration. To avoid deviations from the protocol and trial discontinuation, follow-up should be performed regularly, in concordance with safety guidelines. Here we report several considerations.

negative: International Electronic Health Record-Derived COVID-19 Clinical Course Profiles: The 4CE Consortium We leveraged the largely untapped resource of electronic health record data to address critical clinical and epidemiological questions about Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). To do this, we formed an international consortium (4CE) of 96 hospitals across 5 countries (www.covidclinical.net). Contributors utilized the Informatics for Integrating Biology and the Bedside (i2b2) or Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) platforms to map to a common data model. The group focused on comorbidities and temporal changes in key laboratory test values. Harmonized data were analyzed locally and converted to a shared aggregate form for rapid analysis and visualization of regional differences and global commonalities. Data covered 27,584 COVID-19 cases with 187,802 laboratory tests. Case counts and laboratory trajectories were concordant with existing literature. Laboratory tests at the time of diagnosis showed hospital-level differences equivalent to country-level variation across the consortium partners. Despite the limitations of decentralized data generation, we established a framework to capture the trajectory of COVID-19 disease in patients and their response to interventions.

negative: Current status of potential therapeutic candidates for the COVID-19 crisis Abstract As of April 15, 2020, the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) pandemic has swept through 213 countries and infected more than 1,870,000 individuals, posing an unprecedented threat to international health and the economy. There is currently no specific treatment available for patients with COVID-19 infection. The lessons learned from past management of respiratory viral infections have provided insights into treating COVID-19. Numerous potential therapies, including supportive intervention, immunomodulatory agents, antiviral therapy, and convalescent plasma transfusion, have been tentatively applied in clinical settings. A number of these therapies have provided substantially curative benefits in treating patients with COVID-19 infection. Furthermore, intensive research and clinical trials are underway to assess the efficacy of existing drugs and identify potential therapeutic targets to develop new drugs for treating COVID-19. Herein, we summarize the current potential therapeutic approaches for diseases related to COVID-19 infection and introduce their mechanisms of action, safety, and effectiveness.

negative: Remote Methods for Conducting Tobacco-Focused Clinical Trials Most tobacco-focused clinical trials are based on locally-conducted studies that face significant challenges to implementation and successful execution. These challenges include the need for large, diverse, yet still representative study samples. This often means a protracted, costly, and inefficient recruitment process. Multi-site clinical trials can overcome some of these hurdles but incur their own unique challenges. With recent advances in mobile health (mHealth) and digital technologies, there is now a promising alternative: Remote Trials. These trials are led and coordinated by a local investigative team, but are based remotely, within a given community, state, or even nation. The remote approach affords many of the benefits of multi-site trials (more efficient recruitment of larger study samples) without the same barriers (cost, multi-site management, regulatory hurdles). The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) global health pandemic has resulted in rapid requirements to shift ongoing clinical trials to remote delivery and assessment platforms, making methods for the conduct of remote trials even more timely. The purpose of the present manuscript it to provide an overview of available methods for the conduct of remote tobacco-focused clinical trials as well as illustrative examples of how these methods have been implemented across recently completed and ongoing tobacco studies. We focus on key aspects of the clinical trial pipeline including remote: 1) study recruitment and screening, 2) informed consent, 3) assessment, 4) biomarker collection, and 5) medication adherence monitoring.

negative: Preliminary Findings of a Randomized Trial of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions to Prevent Influenza Transmission in Households BACKGROUND: There are sparse data on whether non-pharmaceutical interventions can reduce the spread of influenza. We implemented a study of the feasibility and efficacy of face masks and hand hygiene to reduce influenza transmission among Hong Kong household members. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial of households (composed of at least 3 members) where an index subject presented with influenza-like-illness of <48 hours duration. After influenza was confirmed in an index case by the QuickVue Influenza A+B rapid test, the household of the index subject was randomized to 1) control or 2) surgical face masks or 3) hand hygiene. Households were visited within 36 hours, and 3, 6 and 9 days later. Nose and throat swabs were collected from index subjects and all household contacts at each home visit and tested by viral culture. The primary outcome measure was laboratory culture confirmed influenza in a household contact; the secondary outcome was clinically diagnosed influenza (by self-reported symptoms). We randomized 198 households and completed follow up home visits in 128; the index cases in 122 of those households had laboratory-confirmed influenza. There were 21 household contacts with laboratory confirmed influenza corresponding to a secondary attack ratio of 6%. Clinical secondary attack ratios varied from 5% to 18% depending on case definitions. The laboratory-based or clinical secondary attack ratios did not significantly differ across the intervention arms. Adherence to interventions was variable. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The secondary attack ratios were lower than anticipated, and lower than reported in other countries, perhaps due to differing patterns of susceptibility, lack of significant antigenic drift in circulating influenza virus strains recently, and/or issues related to the symptomatic recruitment design. Lessons learnt from this pilot have informed changes for the main study in 2008. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00425893 HKClinicalTrials.com HKCTR-365

negative: Abstracts from the 37th Annual Meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine

negative: Conducting phase 1 cancer clinical trials during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-related disease pandemic

negative: Cytokine storm intervention in the early stages of COVID-19 pneumonia Abstract Clinical intervention in patients with corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has demonstrated a strong upregulation of cytokine production in patients who are critically ill with SARS-CoV2-induced pneumonia. In a retrospective study of 41 patients with COVID-19, most patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection developed mild symptoms, whereas some patients later developed aggravated disease symptoms, and eventually passed away because of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS), as a consequence of a severe cytokine storm. Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infected pneumonia were first published January 30th, 2020; these guidelines recommended for the first time that cytokine monitoring should be applied in severely ill patients to reduce pneumonia related mortality. The cytokine storm observed in COVID-19 illness is also an important component of mortality in other viral diseases, including SARS, MERS and influenza. In view of the severe morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 pneumonia, we review the current understanding of treatment of human coronavirus infections from the perspective of a dysregulated cytokine and immune response.

negative: Two Middle East respiratory syndrome vaccines: first step for other coronavirus vaccines?

negative: Traditional Chinese medicine is a resource for drug discovery against 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2)

negative: The phenotypic changes of Î³Î´ T cells in COVID-19 patients A novel pneumonia-associated respiratory syndrome named coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), which caused by SARS-CoV-2 and broken in Wuhan, China in the end of 2019. Unfortunately, there is no specific antiviral agent or vaccine available to treat SARS-CoV-2 infections. Also, information regarding the immunological characteristics in COVID-19 patients remains limited. Here we collected the blood samples from 18 healthy donors (HD) and 38 COVID-19 patients to analyze changes in {gamma}{delta} T cells. In comparison to HD, the {gamma}{delta} T cells percentage was decreased. {gamma}{delta} T cells are able to immediately respond to SARS-CoV-2 infection and upregulate the activation marker CD25. In addition, the increased expression of CD4 in {gamma}{delta} T cells may serve as a biomarker for the assessment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

negative: Translation from the 5' untranslated region (UTR) of mRNA 1 is repressed, but that from the 5' UTR of mRNA 7 is stimulated in coronavirus-infected cells. Viral gene products are generally required in widely differing amounts for successful virus growth and assembly. For coronaviruses, regulation of transcription is a major contributor to these differences, but regulation of translation may also be important. Here, we examine the possibility that the 5' untranslated regions (UTRs), unique for each of the nine species of mRNA in the bovine coronavirus and ranging in length from 70 nucleotides (nt) to 210 nt (inclusive of the common 5'-terminal 65-nt leader), can differentially affect the rate of protein accumulation. When the natural 77-nt 5' UTR on synthetic transcripts of mRNA 7 (mRNA for N and I proteins) was replaced with the 210-nt 5' UTR from mRNA 1 (genomic RNA, mRNA for viral polymerase), approximately twofold-less N, or (N) CAT fusion reporter protein, was made in vitro. Twofold less was also made in vivo in uninfected cells when a T7 RNA polymerase-driven transient-transfection system was used. In coronavirus-infected cells, this difference surprisingly became 12-fold as the result of both a stimulated translation from the 77-nt 5' UTR and a repression of translation from the 210-nt 5' UTR. These results reveal that a differential 5' UTR-directed regulation of translation can occur in coronavirus-infected cells and lead us to postulate that the direction and degree of regulation is carried out by viral or virally induced cellular factors acting in trans on cis-acting elements within the 5' UTR.

negative: The SARS-CoV-2 outbreak: What we know Abstract There is a current worldwide outbreak of the novel coronavirus Covid-19 (coronavirus disease 2019; the pathogen called SARS-CoV-2; previously 2019-nCoV), which originated from Wuhan in China and has now spread to 6 continents including 66 countries, as of 24:00 on March 2, 2020. Governments are under increased pressure to stop the outbreak from spiraling into a global health emergency. At this stage, preparedness, transparency, and sharing of information are crucial to risk assessments and beginning outbreak control activities. This information should include reports from outbreak site and from laboratories supporting the investigation. This paper aggregates and consolidates the epidemiology, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, treatments and preventions of this new type of coronavirus.

negative: SARS, MERS and COVID-19—new threats; old lessons

negative: CNS penetration of potential anti-COVID-19 drugs

negative: Are pangolins the intermediate host of the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) ? The outbreak of 2019-nCoV pneumonia (COVID-19) in the city of Wuhan, China has resulted in more than 70,000 laboratory confirmed cases, and recent studies showed that 2019-nCoV (SARS-CoV-2) could be of bat origin but involve other potential intermediate hosts. In this study, we assembled the genomes of coronaviruses identified in sick pangolins. The molecular and phylogenetic analyses showed that pangolin Coronaviruses (pangolin-CoV) are genetically related to both the 2019-nCoV and bat Coronaviruses but do not support the 2019-nCoV arose directly from the pangolin-CoV. Our study also suggested that pangolin be natural host of Betacoronavirus, with a potential to infect humans. Large surveillance of coronaviruses in pangolins could improve our understanding of the spectrum of coronaviruses in pangolins. Conservation of wildlife and limits of the exposures of humans to wildlife will be important to minimize the spillover risks of coronaviruses from wild animals to humans.

negative: Clinical Characteristics of Hospitalized Patients with SARS-CoV-2 and Hepatitis B virus Co-infection Background & Aims The coronavirus disease 2019 (COIVD-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 has been characterized as a pandemic, which causes a serious public health challenge in the world. A very large group of patients infected by HBV has been reported worldwide, especially in China. In order to answer whether specific treatment strategy on the patients coinfected with HBV and SARS-CoV-2, it requires profound understanding of the clinical characteristics on those patients. However, the impacts of SARS-CoV-2 infection on HBV patients remain largely unknown. Approach & Results In this retrospective investigation, we included 123 COVID-19 patients admitted to Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China, from January 5 to March 7, 2020. All enrolled patients are the laboratory confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia cases according to the criteria reported previously. A total of 123 patients were analyzed for their Clinical records, laboratory results including the diagnosis of HBV infection and liver function. Among 123 confirmed COVID-19 patients, the mean age was 51 years old and 59.3% were females (73/123). Fifteen were previously HBV infected patients, 66.7% of them were males (10/15), patients with HBV infection appeared to have a higher incidence of liver cirrhosis and an increased level of total bilirubin. Seven (46.7%) patients with HBV infection were defined as severe cases, while the severity rate was 24.1% for the patients without HBV infection (26/108). The mortality of patients with HBV infection was 13.3% (2/15) compared to 2.8% (3/108) for the patients without HBV infection. Conclusions SARS-CoV-2 infection may cause liver function damage in COVID-19 cases and the patients with HBV infection are likely to have more severe disease outcome.

negative: A phase 1 trial of nebulised heparin in acute lung injury INTRODUCTION: Animal studies of acute lung injury (ALI) suggest nebulised heparin may limit damage from fibrin deposition in the alveolar space and microcirculation. No human studies have been undertaken to date. We assessed the feasibility, safety and potential anticoagulant effects of administration of nebulised heparin to patients with ALI. METHODS: An open label phase 1 trial of four escalating doses of nebulised heparin was performed. A total of 16 ventilated patients with ALI were studied. The first group was administered a total of 50,000 U/day, the second group 100,000 U/day, the third group 200,000 U/day and the fourth group 400,000 U/day. Assessments of lung function included the PaO(2)/FiO(2 )ratio, lung compliance and the alveolar dead space fraction. Monitoring of anticoagulation included the activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and the thrombin clotting time. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid was collected and the prothrombin fragment and tissue plasminogen activator levels were assessed. Analysis of variance was used to compare the effects of dose. RESULTS: No serious adverse events occurred for any dose. The changes over time for the PaO(2)/FiO(2 )ratio, lung compliance and the alveolar dead space fraction levels were similar for all doses. A trend to increased APTT and thrombin clotting time levels was present with higher doses (P = 0.09 and P = 0.1, respectively). For the highest dose, the APTT reached 64 seconds; following cessation of nebulised heparin, the APTT fell to 39 seconds (P = 0.06). In bronchoalveolar lavage samples a trend to reduced prothrombin fragment levels was present with higher doses (P = 0.1), while tissue plasminogen activator levels were similar for all doses. CONCLUSION: Administration of nebulised heparin to mechanically ventilated patients with ALI is feasible. Nebulised heparin was not associated with any serious adverse events, and at higher doses it increased APTT levels. Larger trials are required to further investigate the safety and efficacy of nebulised heparin. In these trials due consideration must be given to systemic anticoagulant effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian Clinical trials registry ACTRN12606000388516.

negative: Immunosuppression during the COVID-19 pandemic in neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders patients: A new challenge

negative: Management of patients with multiple myeloma during the COVID-19 pandemic

negative: Nelfinavir inhibits replication of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in vitro In December 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. No specific treatment has been established against coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) so far. Therefore, it is urgently needed to identify effective antiviral agents for the treatment of this disease, and several approved drugs such as lopinavir have been evaluated. Here, we report that nelfinavir, an HIV-1 protease inhibitor, potently inhibits replication of SARS-CoV-2. The effective concentrations for 50% and 90% inhibition (EC50 and EC90) of nelfinavir were 1.13 µM and 1.76 µM respectively, the lowest of the nine HIV-1 protease inhibitors including lopinavir. The trough and peak serum concentrations of nelfinavir were three to six times higher than EC50 of this drug. These results suggest that nelfinavir is a potential candidate drug for the treatment of COVID-19 and should be assessed in patients with COVID-19.

negative: Limitations of Animal Studies for Predicting Toxicity in Clinical Trials: Part 2: Potential Alternatives to the Use of Animals in Preclinical Trials Dramatically rising costs in drug development are in large part because of the high failure rates in clinical phase trials. The poor correlation of animal studies to human toxicity and efficacy have led many developers to question the value of requiring animal studies in determining which drugs should enter in-human trials. Part 1 of this 2-part series examined some of the data regarding the lack of concordance between animal toxicity studies and human trials, as well as some of the potential reasons behind it. This second part of the series focuses on some alternatives to animal trials (hereafter referred to as animal research) as well as current regulatory discussions and developments regarding such alternatives.

negative: The World of Clinical Trial Development Post-Covid-19: Lessons Learned from a Global Pandemic The novel coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), is a global health threat.1 Cancer patients are one of the most vulnerable populations. During this pandemic clinical trial accrual to NCI studies has fallen dramatically. Investigators quickly turned to regulatory bodies to simplify treatment schedules, facilitate telemedicine and to decrease required data collection Going forward the oncology research community must use the lessons learned to focus on redesigning studies to ensure that the critical scientific questions are answered safely while expanding access and increasing partnerships with community physicians. These changes will accelerate clinical progress while protecting our patients.

negative: Adapting to a Pandemic — Conducting Oncology Trials during the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has necessitated changes in cancer care delivery as resources are reallocated. Clinical trials and other research activities are inevitably impacted. Start-up activities for new trials may be deferred and recruitment suspended. For patients already enrolled however, there are challenges in continuing treatment on trial. Regulatory bodies have issued guidance on managing clinical trials during the pandemic, including contingency measures for remote study visits, delivery of investigational product, and site monitoring visits. New cancer clinical trial practices during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic include new risk assessment strategies, decentralized and remote trial coordination, data collection, and delegation of specific therapeutic activities. This experience could provide evidence of more feasible and cost-effective methods for future clinical trial conduct.

negative: Can we use interleukin-6 (IL-6) blockade for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-induced cytokine release syndrome (CRS)? Abstract The emergent outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a global pandemic. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and multiorgan dysfunction are among the leading causes of death in critically ill patients with COVID-19. The elevated inflammatory cytokines suggest that a cytokine storm, also known as cytokine release syndrome (CRS), may play a major role in the pathology of COVID-19. However, the efficacy of corticosteroids, commonly utilized antiinflammatory agents, to treat COVID-19-induced CRS is controversial. There is an urgent need for novel therapies to treat COVID-19-induced CRS. Here, we discuss the pathogenesis of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-induced CRS, compare the CRS in COVID-19 with that in SARS and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and summarize the existing therapies for CRS. We propose to utilize interleukin-6 (IL-6) blockade to manage COVID-19-induced CRS and discuss several factors that should be taken into consideration for its clinical application.

negative: Mesenchymal stem cells and management of COVID-19 pneumonia Abstract Human coronavirus, hCoV-19, is highly pathogenic with severe pneumonia associated with rapid virus replication. Arising in Wuhan China December 2019, the current COVID-19 epidemic has rapidly grown with person-to-person infection expanding to become a global health emergency now on pandemic scale. Governments will not be able to minimise both deaths from COVID-19 and the economic impact of viral spread in mitigation of this current COVID-19 pandemic, according to Anderson et al. 2020 [1], Keeping mortality as low as possible will be the highest priority for individuals; hence governments must put in place measures to ameliorate the inevitable economic downturn. The current global picture shows small chains of transmission in many countries and large chains resulting in extensive spread in a few countries, such as Italy, Iran, South Korea, and Japan. Most countries are likely to have spread of COVID-19, at least in the early stages, before any mitigation measures have an impact. The scale of the problem is massive. Here I consider new approaches to improve patient's biological resistance to COVID-19 using stem cells, and how benefit might be scaled and simplified using synthetic stem cells to meet logistical needs within a short time frame.

negative: Evaluations of serological test in the diagnosis of 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) infections during the COVID-19 outbreak The ongoing SARS-CoV-2 outbreak has killed over twenty-one thousand and sickened over four hundred thousand people worldwide, posing a great challenge to global public health. A sensitive and accurate diagnosis method will substantially help to control disease expansion. Here, we developed a chemiluminescence-immunoassay method based on the recombinant nucleocapsid antigen and the magnetic beads for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infections and surveillance of antibody changing pattern. Serums from 29 healthy individuals, 51 tuberculosis patients, and 79 SARS-CoV-2 confirmed patients were employed to evaluate the performance of this approach. Compared to the IgM testing, the IgG testing was more reliable in which it identified 65 SARS-CoV-2 infections from the 79 confirmed patients and only two false-positive cases from the 80 control group with a sensitivity and specificity reaching 82.28% and 97.5%, respectively. However, only a slight difference (not statistically significant) in the detected cases of SARS-CoV-2 infections was observed between the IgM and IgG testing manner in patients at a different time of onset of disease. A performance comparison between an ELISA kit using the same nucleocapsid antigen and our chemiluminescence method was undertaken. The same false-positive cases were seen in both methods from the paired control group, while ELISA kit can only detect half of the SARS-CoV-2 infections from paired SARS-CoV-2 confirmed patients group than that of the chemiluminescence method, indicating a higher performance for the chemiluminescence-immunoassay approach. Together, our studies provide a useful and valuable serological testing tool for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the community.

negative: Conducting clinical trials in heart failure during (and after) the COVID-19 pandemic: an Expert Consensus Position Paper from the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has important implications for the safety of participants in clinical trials and the research staff caring for them and, consequently, for the trials themselves. Patients with heart failure may be at greater risk of infection with COVID-19 and the consequences might also be more serious, but they are also at risk of adverse outcomes if their clinical care is compromised. As physicians and clinical trialists, it is our responsibility to ensure safe and effective care is delivered to trial participants without affecting the integrity of the trial. The social contract with our patients demands no less. Many regulatory authorities from different world regions have issued guidance statements regarding the conduct of clinical trials during this COVID-19 crisis. However, international trials may benefit from expert guidance from a global panel of experts to supplement local advice and regulations, thereby enhancing the safety of participants and the integrity of the trial. Accordingly, the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology on 21 and 22 March 2020 conducted web-based meetings with expert clinical trialists in Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and Asia. The main objectives of this Expert Position Paper are to highlight the challenges that this pandemic poses for the conduct of clinical trials in heart failure and to offer advice on how they might be overcome, with some practical examples. While this panel of experts are focused on heart failure clinical trials, these discussions and recommendations may apply to clinical trials in other therapeutic areas.

negative: Safety and immunogenicity of a candidate Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus viral-vectored vaccine: a dose-escalation, open-label, non-randomised, uncontrolled, phase 1 trial BACKGROUND: Cases of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection continue to rise in the Arabian Peninsula 7 years after it was first described in Saudi Arabia. MERS-CoV poses a significant risk to public health security because of an absence of currently available effective countermeasures. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of the candidate simian adenovirus-vectored vaccine expressing the full-length spike surface glycoprotein, ChAdOx1 MERS, in humans. METHODS: This dose-escalation, open-label, non-randomised, uncontrolled, phase 1 trial was done at the Centre for Clinical Vaccinology and Tropical Medicine (Oxford, UK) and included healthy people aged 18–50 years with negative pre-vaccination tests for HIV antibodies, hepatitis B surface antigen, and hepatitis C antibodies (and a negative urinary pregnancy test for women). Participants received a single intramuscular injection of ChAdOx1 MERS at three different doses: the low-dose group received 5 × 10(9) viral particles, the intermediate-dose group received 2·5 × 10(10) viral particles, and the high-dose group received 5 × 10(10) viral particles. The primary objective was to assess safety and tolerability of ChAdOx1 MERS, measured by the occurrence of solicited, unsolicited, and serious adverse events after vaccination. The secondary objective was to assess the cellular and humoral immunogenicity of ChAdOx1 MERS, measured by interferon-γ-linked enzyme-linked immunospot, ELISA, and virus neutralising assays after vaccination. Participants were followed up for up to 12 months. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03399578. FINDINGS: Between March 14 and Aug 15, 2018, 24 participants were enrolled: six were assigned to the low-dose group, nine to the intermediate-dose group, and nine to the high-dose group. All participants were available for follow-up at 6 months, but five (one in the low-dose group, one in the intermediate-dose group, and three in the high-dose group) were lost to follow-up at 12 months. A single dose of ChAdOx1 MERS was safe at doses up to 5 × 10(10) viral particles with no vaccine-related serious adverse events reported by 12 months. One serious adverse event reported was deemed to be not related to ChAdOx1 MERS. 92 (74% [95% CI 66–81]) of 124 solicited adverse events were mild, 31 (25% [18–33]) were moderate, and all were self-limiting. Unsolicited adverse events in the 28 days following vaccination considered to be possibly, probably, or definitely related to ChAdOx1 MERS were predominantly mild in nature and resolved within the follow-up period of 12 months. The proportion of moderate and severe adverse events was significantly higher in the high-dose group than in the intermediate-dose group (relative risk 5·83 [95% CI 2·11–17·42], p<0·0001) Laboratory adverse events considered to be at least possibly related to the study intervention were self-limiting and predominantly mild in severity. A significant increase from baseline in T-cell (p<0·003) and IgG (p<0·0001) responses to the MERS-CoV spike antigen was observed at all doses. Neutralising antibodies against live MERS-CoV were observed in four (44% [95% CI 19–73]) of nine participants in the high-dose group 28 days after vaccination, and 19 (79% [58–93]) of 24 participants had antibodies capable of neutralisation in a pseudotyped virus neutralisation assay. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 MERS was safe and well tolerated at all tested doses. A single dose was able to elicit both humoral and cellular responses against MERS-CoV. The results of this first-in-human clinical trial support clinical development progression into field phase 1b and 2 trials. FUNDING: UK Department of Health and Social Care, using UK Aid funding, managed by the UK National Institute for Health Research.

negative: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Classification using CT Images by Machine Learning Methods This study presents early phase detection of Coronavirus (COVID-19), which is named by World Health Organization (WHO), by machine learning methods. The detection process was implemented on abdominal Computed Tomography (CT) images. The expert radiologists detected from CT images that COVID-19 shows different behaviours from other viral pneumonia. Therefore, the clinical experts specify that COV\.ID-19 virus needs to be diagnosed in early phase. For detection of the COVID-19, four different datasets were formed by taking patches sized as 16x16, 32x32, 48x48, 64x64 from 150 CT images. The feature extraction process was applied to patches to increase the classification performance. Grey Level Co-occurrence Matrix (GLCM), Local Directional Pattern (LDP), Grey Level Run Length Matrix (GLRLM), Grey-Level Size Zone Matrix (GLSZM), and Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT) algorithms were used as feature extraction methods. Support Vector Machines (SVM) classified the extracted features. 2-fold, 5-fold and 10-fold cross-validations were implemented during the classification process. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, precision, and F-score metrics were used to evaluate the classification performance. The best classification accuracy was obtained as 99.68% with 10-fold cross-validation and GLSZM feature extraction method.

negative: Clinical Implications of SARS-Cov2 Interaction with Renin Angiotensin System Abstract SARS-CoV2 host cell infection is mediated by the binding to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). Systemic dysregulation observed in SARS-CoV was previously postulated to be due to ACE2/Ang1-7/Mas axis downregulation, increased ACE2 activity was shown to mediate disease protection. Since angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), ACE inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) increase ACE2 receptor expression, it has been tacitly believed that the use of these agents may facilitate viral disease, thus they should not be used in high-risk patients with cardiovascular disease. Based on the anti-inflammatory benefits of the upregulation of the ACE2/Ang1-7/Mas axis and previously demonstrated benefits of lung function improvement in SARS-CoV infections, we hypothesize that the benefits of treatment with renin-angiotensin system inhibitors in SARS-COV2 may outweigh the risks and at the very least should not be withheld.

negative: A rate equation approach to model the denaturation or replication behavior of the SARS coronavirus As a newly emerging virus, little is known about the SARS coronavirus, whose outbreak has brought away several hundred people’s lives over the world in the year of 2003 and is seriously imperiling the human health. Revealing the denaturation and replication mechanisms of SARS coronavirus has great importance for successfully fighting SARS. However, experiments related to SARS coronavirus are extremely dangerous and therefore restricted only to certain specific labs with high safety standard. Clearly, predicting the behaviors of SARS coronavirus in a wide variety of environmental conditions, which are not easily accessible, are thus critically necessary. In this study, we proposed to quantify the survival time of SARS coronavirus either in vitro or in vivo, through introducing thermal rate process models established from the well-known Arrhenius law. The complex physical and chemical behaviors of the SARS coronavirus can then be attributed to its activation energy, frequency factor, damage function as well as the surrounding environmental conditions. Based on the first data on stability and resistance of SARS coronavirus measured by members of WHO laboratory network, the rate coefficients involved in the above equations were estimated for the first time. Predictions on the survival time of SARS coronavirus in different temperature scale were then performed. It was found theoretically that, such survival time falls in an extremely wide range, say from several seconds in high temperature to an almost infinitely long time in a low temperature environment, which has already or is being supported by the currently available tests data. Applications of the present theory to interpret several existing phenomena were presented and their implementations in developing new technical ways for SARS prevention and clinical therapy were discussed. Uncertainties involved in the theoretical models were also analyzed and predicted. Parametric studies were performed to test the effects of the rate coefficients to the survival time of SARS coronavirus. Some important factors, which can significantly vary the denaturation or replication process of SARS coronavirus were pointed out. Through regulating the parameters involved in the equation, certain potential therapies either through drug delivery or engineering approach to treat the SARS disease can possibly be established. Extension of the present model for further studies was also suggested. This study opens a new theoretical way for probing into the complex behaviors of SARS coronavirus. Modellierung der Denaturierung oder Repliziryng von SARS-Korona-Viren Zusammenfassung Der Kenntnisstand über die Eigenschaften des in 2003 neu aufgetretenen SARS Korona Virus, der einige Hundert Menschenleben gekostet hat, ist relativ gering. Die Ermittlung des Denaturierungs- und Replizierungsmechanismuses des SARS Virus ist für seine Bekämpfung von hoher Bedeutung. Experimentelle Untersuchungen an diesem extrem gefährlichen Virus dürfen nur durch Laboratorien mit einem hohen Sicherheitsstandard erfolgen. Die Vorhersage des Verhaltens des SARS Virus in unterschiedlichen Umgebungsbedingungen ist dabei erforderlich. In der vorliegenden Studie wird die überlebensdauer des Virus unter Labor- und realen Bedingungen durch Anwendung der bekannten Arrhenius-Beziehung für temperaturabhängige Vorgänge ermittelt. Das physikalische und chemische Verhalten des SARS Virus wird anhand der zugrundeliegenden Modell- Parameter beschrieben. Basierend auf den ersten Messungen von Mitgliedern des WHO-laboratory-network über die Stabilität und Widerstandsfähigkeit des Virus wurden erstmalig die Geschwindigkeitskoeffizienten des Berechnungsmodells bestimmt. Vorhersagen der Überlebensdauer des SARS-Virus unter unterschiedlichen Temperaturbedingungen wurden ausgeführt. Das sich hieraus ergebende, sehr unterschiedliche Ausmaß der Überlebensfähigkeit in Abhängigkeit der Umgebungstemperatur ist durch den Vergleich mit verfügbaren experimentellen Ergebnissen bestätigt worden. Die Anwendung der vorgestellten Modellierung zur Interpretation realer Phänomene und zur Entwicklung technischer Maßnahmen zur Vorbeugung und klinischen Therapierung von SARS wird diskutiert. Der Einfluß von Unsicherheiten des Modells wird analysiert und abgeschätzt. Parametrische Studien sind durchgeführt worden, um den Einfluß der Geschwindigkeitskoeffizienten auf die Überlebensdauer des SARS Virus darzustellen. Einige wichtige Einflußgrößen auf die Denaturierung und Replikationsfähigkeit des SARS Virus werden aufgezeigt. Durch eine Variation der Modellparameter kann die potentielle Wirksamkeit medikamentöser oder physikalischer Therapien abgeschätzt werden. Erweiterungsmöglichkeiten des vorgestellten Modells werden vorgeschlagen. Die vorliegende Studie ermöglicht neue, theoretische Vorgehensweisen zur Untersuchung des komplexen Verhaltensmusters des SARS Virus.

negative: Compassionate drug (mis)use during pandemics: lessons for COVID-19 from 2009. Background: New emerging infections have no known treatment. Assessing potential drugs for safety and efficacy enables clinicians to make evidence-based treatment decisions, and contributes to overall outbreak control. However, it is difficult to launch clinical trials in the unpredictable environment of an outbreak. We conducted a bibliometric systematic review for the 2009 influenza pandemic to determine the speed, and quality of evidence generation for treatments. This informs approaches to high-quality evidence generation in this and future pandemics. Methods: We searched PubMed for all clinical data (including clinical trial, observational and case series) describing treatment for patients with influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and ClinicalTrials.gov for research that aimed to enrol patients with the disease. Results: 33869 treatment courses for patients hospitalised with A(H1N1)pdm09 were detailed in 160 publications. Most were retrospective observational studies or case series. 592 patients received treatment (or placebo) as participants in a registered interventional clinical trial with results publicly available. None of these registered trial results were available during the timeframe of the pandemic, and the median date of publication was 213 days after the Public Health Emergency of International Concern ended. Conclusion: Patients were frequently treated for pandemic influenza with drugs not registered for this indication, but rarely under circumstances of high-quality data capture. The result was a reliance on use under compassionate circumstances, resulting in continued uncertainty regarding the potential benefits and harms of anti-viral treatment. Rapid scaling of clinical trials is critical for generating a quality evidence base during pandemics.

negative: Virus detection and its association with symptoms during influenza‐like illness in a sample of healthy adults enrolled in a randomised controlled vaccine trial Background Viral respiratory infections are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Many new aetiological agents have been described recently. Objectives We looked for respiratory viruses in a population‐based sample of healthy adults with influenza‐like illness (ILI). We investigated host and spatio‐temporal associations with virus isolation and host, spatio‐temporal and virus associations with self‐reported symptoms. Patients/Methods We recruited 586 participants experiencing 651 illness episodes from a population of healthy adults enrolled in an influenza vaccine effectiveness trial. At ILI assessment visits, a respiratory swab was collected and tested for viruses using a combination of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays. Participants also completed a questionnaire detailing their clinical course in 336 episodes. Results Of 643 samples analysed, a virus was identified in 44%. Half were picornaviruses, with influenza and coronaviruses the next most common. Individuals with influenza were significantly less likely to have been immunised than the reference (virus negative) population (OR = 0·52 (0·31, 0·87) P = 0·01). The mean symptom score (95% CI) reported by individuals with influenza was significantly higher than in all other episodes [Influenza: 10·2 (9·4, 10·9); Other: 7·4 (7·2, 7·7); Difference (95% CI): 2·5 (1·5, 3·5); P < 0·001]. In an analysis restricted to influenza‐positive cases, the symptom score was not attenuated by vaccination. Conclusions Our findings indicate that a greater number of symptoms are displayed by individuals presenting with influenza confirmed ILI compared with other agents that cause ILI. While influenza vaccination reduced the probability of influenza virus detection, symptom score for influenza‐positive ILI was not attenuated.

negative: Clinical trials and the COVID-19 pandemic. "...but why think? Why not try the experiment?..." John Hunter (1728-1793), in a letter to Edward Jenner. August 2nd, 1775. When Galen of Pergamum (2nd c. A.D.), physician, philosopher and experimentalist, sought to ascertain the therapeutic properties of Theriac, an antidote of repute against poisons, he resorted to an experiment. Theriac or Theriaca was a compound drug, containing in some versions used in antiquity numerous components; Galen's own composition included over 70 ingredients! One of its uses was as an antidote against snakebites, a frequent peril for the Roman armies marching on in sandals. Galen spent most of his life in Rome and was elevated to Imperial Physician at the court of Marcus Aurelius, who apparently took daily doses of Theriac, which among other components included opium. Describing the experiment to his friend Pison, Galen wrote, "as I could not possibly conduct a trial on humans, I experimented on roosters" For his experiment, Galen, studied two groups of roosters, but he doesn't tell us how many animals he included in each category. Both groups were exposed to poisonous snakebites. All roosters who were fed with theriac prior to exposure to viper bites survived, whereas in the second group that had not received prophylactic Theriac, all roosters died. Not only is Galen's methodology remarkable, preceding the modern randomised trial by eighteen centuries, but more importantly, it is notable for his ethical stance at a time when sensitivities about human rights, prevalent in our times, were largely absent in societies of widespread slavery. For example, Mithridates VI (132-63 BC), the King of Pontus who is credited with the first use of Theriac, tested its efficacy on criminals and slaves. For his experiment Galen used the random allocation of treatment, today's prospective randomised clinical trial, implemented in the evaluation of novel therapies, widely used internationally, particularly in cancer research! This experimental method used for ascertaining the efficacy of new drugs became established after the second half of the 20th century and is now firmly entrenched as a research tool. On the other hand, the retrieval of information from observational studies or non-randomised series is considered scientifically inferior and is often dismissed or ignored as irrelevant or anecdotal. Such is the compulsion for the randomised study that in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, respected physicians and scientists appeared in the media hesitant to recommend the use of protective facial masks, as there was no evidence of benefit for their use from prospective randomised studies in the general population! Logic had no place in the argument! COVID-19, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 new corona virus, brought to the fore the randomised trial, as well as, the ethical dilemmas that surround the allocation of treatment at random, in the face of a devastating pandemic. Anthony Fauci, distinguished infectious diseases expert and an adviser to the President of the USA, at a recent briefing from the Situation Room of the White House, endorsed categorically and unreservedly the randomised trial for the evaluation of drugs potentially effective against SARS-CoV-2, in patients afflicted with COVID-19. A few days later on April 8th, 2020, Professor Sotiris Tsiodras, scientific advisor to the Greek Government for COVID-19 and an expert on infectious diseases, when asked by a journalist about chloroquine, he responded, "Antony Fauci is correct. Nevertheless, we give the drug to everyone, that is, not half of the patients will receive it, and the other half will not". If we accept that the randomised trial represents the unique, impregnable method of evaluating new treatments-several clinicians dispute this dogma. -the question arises how will treatments be allocated to patients? According to the Declaration of Helsinki participation of a subject in a clinical trial requires their explicit written consent. Will, a potentially hypoxic patient rapidly deteriorating, be able to understand what is being asked of them, and will that patient be in a position to provide consent? And if that patient refuses to be randomised, what are the options? Is it his/her right to request the active treatment that a fellow patient is receiving in the next bed? Although the Declaration of Helsinki allows the option of no treatment or even placebo, where no known treatment is available for a certain condition, such as COVID-19, it also emphasizes that "while the primary purpose of medical research is to generate new knowledge, this goal can never take precedence over the rights and interests of individual research subjects". Consider now the physicians and nurses on the first line of the battle against the pandemic; to the enormous pressures and risks that they experience daily, they may have to endure the added psychological burden of the randomised trial, knowing that half of their patients are receiving the promising drug, whilst the other half are denied the chance of potential benefit. When during the Medical Research Council's randomized trial of streptomycin, one senior physician contracted tuberculosis, the Medical Research Council obtained supplies for him outside the trial. In this brief instance of medical history, the equipoise, the scientific imperative, all arguments and other justifications for providing treatment at random, were thrown out of the window in favour of the human factor! Why is randomization necessary? Because-it is presumed-the process of randomising subjects, protects the study from the selective inclusion of patients with favourable characteristics, thus inadvertently allowing or facilitating a falsely favourable result for the drug or treatment under investigation. However, the process of randomising patients does not necessarily result in the randomisation of the characteristics of their disease. Exactly because of this, at the end of a randomised study, even if the prognostic variables are evenly represented and balanced in the strata, further confirmation of the result is sought with a statistical multifactorial analysis. Such multifactorial analyses can also be applied to a non-randomised group of patients engaged in the trial of a new drug. Since the middle of the 20th century a generation of physicians have been trained to dismiss, or are incapable of evaluating the validity of a treatment beyond the established etiquette of the randomised study. This, some have argued, constitutes intellectual indolence, it is not scientific robustness. Pandits foresee that the world will be different after the end of this pandemic. Perhaps human ingenuity will seek new investigative methods that will render the randomised clinical trial obsolete, both, on methodological and ethical grounds. Until then and even if we have to accept the scientific supremacy of the randomised study in the evaluation of novel therapies, the ethical considerations in the unprecedented circumstances of a relentless pandemic demand a more humane approach, befitting the beneficent precepts of the Hippocratic tradition.

negative: Ecosystem approaches to the risk for schizophrenia

negative: Early Impact of COVID-19 on the Conduct of Oncology Clinical Trials and Long-Term Opportunities for Transformation: Findings From an American Society of Clinical Oncology Survey. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted all aspects of clinical care, including cancer clinical trials. In March 2020, ASCO launched a survey of clinical programs represented on its Cancer Research Committee and Research Community Forum Steering Group and taskforces to learn about the types of changes and challenges that clinical trial programs were experiencing early in the pandemic. There were 32 survey respondents; 14 represented academic programs, and 18 represented community-based programs. Respondents indicated that COVID-19 is leading programs to halt or prioritize screening and/or enrollment for certain clinical trials and cease research-only visits. Most reported conducting remote patient care where possible and remote visits and monitoring with sponsors and/or contract research organizations (CROs); respondents viewed this shift positively. Numerous challenges with conducting clinical trials were reported, including enrollment and protocol adherence difficulties with decreased patient visits, staffing constraints, and limited availability of ancillary services. Interactions with sponsors and CROs about modifying trial procedures were also challenging. The changes in clinical trial procedures identified by the survey could serve as strategies for other programs attempting to maintain their clinical trial portfolios during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, many of the adaptations to trials made during the pandemic provide a long-term opportunity to improve and transform the clinical trial system. Specific improvements could be expanded use of more pragmatic or streamlined trial designs, fewer clinical trial-related patient visits, and minimized sponsor and CRO visits to trial programs.

negative: Artificial intelligence for rapid identification of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak that originated in Wuhan, China has rapidly propagated due to widespread person-to-person transmission and has resulted in over 1,133,758 cases in 197 countries with a total of 62,784 deaths as of April 5, 2020. Laboratory confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 is performed with a virus-specific reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. This test can take up to two days to complete, and, due to the possibility of false negatives, serial testing may be required to reliably exclude infection. A current supply shortage of RT-PCR test kits compounds the shortcomings of entrusting diagnosis to the PCR test alone and underscores the urgent need to provide alternative methods for the rapid and accurate diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 patients. Chest computed tomography (CT) is a valuable component in the evaluation of patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nevertheless, CT alone may have limited negative predictive value to fully exclude infection, because of the normal radiologic findings in some early disease patients. In this study, we use artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms to integrate chest CT findings with clinical symptoms, exposure history, and/or laboratory testing to more accurately and rapidly diagnose SARS-CoV-2 (+) patients. We included 905 RT-PCR confirmed patients. 419 (46.2%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by laboratory-confirmed real-time RT-PCR assay and next-generation sequencing, while 486 patients (53.8%) tested negative (confirmed by at least two additional negative RT-PCR tests and clinical observation). The proposed AI system achieved an AUC of 0.92 and performed equally well in sensitivity compared to a senior thoracic radiologist on a testing set of 279 cases. The AI system also improved the detection of RT-PCR positive SARS-CoV-2 patients who presented with normal CTs, correctly identifying 17/25 (68%) patients, whereas all 25 RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2-positive CT-normal patients were classified as SARS-CoV-2 negative by radiologists.

negative: A screen of the NIH Clinical Collection small molecule library identifies potential anti-coronavirus drugs Abstract With the recent emergence of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus in humans and the outbreak of devastating porcine epidemic diarrhea coronavirus in swine, therapeutic intervention is urgently needed. However, anti-coronavirus drugs currently are not available. In an effort to assist rapid development of anti-coronavirus drugs, here we screened the NIH Clinical Collection in cell culture using a luciferase reporter-expressing recombinant murine coronavirus. Of the 727 compounds screened, 84 were found to have a significant anti-coronavirus effect. Further experiments revealed that 51 compounds blocked virus entry while 19 others inhibited viral replication. Additional validation studies with the top 3 inhibitors (hexachlorophene, nitazoxanide and homoharringtonine) demonstrated robust anti-coronavirus activities (a reduction of 6 to 8log10 in virus titer) with an IC50 ranging from 11nM to 1.2μM. Furthermore, homoharringtonine and hexachlorophene exhibited broad antiviral activity against diverse species of human and animal coronaviruses. Since the NIH Clinical Collection consists of compounds that have already been through clinical trials, these small molecule inhibitors have a great potential for rapid development as anti-coronavirus drugs.

negative: Exploring the SARS-CoV-2 virus-host-drug interactome for drug repurposing Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. It was first identified in Wuhan, China, and has since spread causing a global pandemic. Various studies have been performed to understand the molecular mechanisms of viral infection for predicting drug repurposing candidates. However, such information is spread across many publications and it is very time-consuming to access, integrate, explore, and exploit. We developed CoVex, the first interactive online platform for SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-1 host interactome exploration and drug (target) identification. CoVex integrates 1) experimentally validated virus-human protein interactions, 2) human protein-protein interactions and 3) drug-target interactions. The web interface allows user-friendly visual exploration of the virus-host interactome and implements systems medicine algorithms for network-based prediction of drugs. Thus, CoVex is an important resource, not only to understand the molecular mechanisms involved in SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-1 pathogenicity, but also in clinical research for the identification and prioritization of candidate therapeutics. We apply CoVex to investigate recent hypotheses on a systems biology level and to systematically explore the molecular mechanisms driving the virus life cycle. Furthermore, we extract and discuss drug repurposing candidates involved in these mechanisms. CoVex renders COVID-19 drug research systems-medicine-ready by giving the scientific community direct access to network medicine algorithms integrating virus-host-drug interactions. It is available at https://exbio.wzw.tum.de/covex/.

negative: Managing Oncology Services During a Major Coronavirus Outbreak: Lessons From the Saudi Arabia Experience Outbreaks of infectious etiology, particularly those caused by a novel virus that has no known treatment or vaccine, may result in the interruption of medical care provided to patients with cancer and put them at risk for undertreatment in addition to the risk of being exposed to infection, a life-threatening event among patients with cancer. This article describes the approach used to manage patients with cancer during a large-scale Middle East respiratory syndrome–coronavirus hospital outbreak in Saudi Arabia to ensure continuity of care and minimize harm from treatment interruption or acquiring infection. The approach taken toward managing this high-risk situation (COVID-19) could be easily adopted by health care organizations and would be helpful to ensure readiness for the occurrence of future outbreaks of different infectious etiologies like those recent episodes of new coronavirus.

negative: Why Are Lopinavir and Ritonavir Effective against the Newly Emerged Coronavirus 2019? Atomistic Insights into the Inhibitory Mechanisms [Image: see text] Since the emergence of a novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was first reported from Wuhan, China, neither a specific vaccine nor an antiviral drug against SARS-CoV-2 has become available. However, a combination of two HIV-1 protease inhibitors, lopinavir and ritonavir, has been found to be effective against SARS-CoV, and both drugs could bind well to the SARS-CoV 3C-like protease (SARS-CoV 3CL(pro)). In this work, molecular complexation between each inhibitor and SARS-CoV-2 3CL(pro) was studied using all-atom molecular dynamics simulations, free energy calculations, and pair interaction energy analyses based on MM/PB(GB)SA and FMO-MP2/PCM/6-31G* methods. Both anti-HIV drugs interacted well with the residues at the active site of SARS-CoV-2 3CL(pro). Ritonavir showed a somewhat higher number atomic contacts, a somewhat higher binding efficiency, and a somewhat higher number of key binding residues compared to lopinavir, which correspond with the slightly lower water accessibility at the 3CL(pro) active site. In addition, only ritonavir could interact with the oxyanion hole residues N142 and G143 via the formation of two hydrogen bonds. The interactions in terms of electrostatics, dispersion, and charge transfer played an important role in the drug binding. The obtained results demonstrated how repurposed anti-HIV drugs could be used to combat COVID-19.

negative: Therapeutic Options for Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) – possible lessons from a systematic review of SARS-CoV therapy Abstract The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) has been detected in a number of countries in the Middle East and Europe with an apparently high mortality rate. It is phylogenetically related to the SARS coronavirus and has also been associated with severe respiratory illness as well as nosocomial transmission in healthcare settings. Current international recommendations do not support any specific therapies; however, there are a number of agents, which were used during the SARS epidemic of 2003. It is possible that these might be active against the related MERS coronavirus. We have reviewed the literature on the safety and efficacy of therapies used in patients with SARS with a view to their potential use in patients with MERS-CoV infections.

negative: Clinical characteristics of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in newborns, infants and children

negative: Nasal Airway Obstruction Study (NAIROS): a phase III, open-label, mixed-methods, multicentre randomised controlled trial of septoplasty versus medical management of a septal deviation with nasal obstruction BACKGROUND: Septoplasty (surgery to straighten a deviation in the nasal septum) is a frequently performed operation worldwide, with approximately 250,000 performed annually in the US and 22,000 in the UK. Most septoplasties aim to improve diurnal and nocturnal nasal obstruction. The evidence base for septoplasty clinical effectiveness is hitherto very limited. AIMS: To establish, and inform guidance for, the best management strategy for individuals with nasal obstruction associated with a deviated septum. METHODS/DESIGN: A multicentre, mixed-methods, open label, randomised controlled trial of septoplasty versus medical management for adults with a deviated septum and a reduced nasal airway. Eligible patients will have septal deflection visible at nasendoscopy and a nasal symptom score ≥ 30 on the NOSE questionnaire. Surgical treatment comprises septoplasty with or without reduction of the inferior nasal turbinate on the anatomically wider side of the nose. Medical management comprises a nasal saline spray followed by a fluorinated steroid spray daily for six months. The recruitment target is 378 patients, recruited from up to 17 sites across Scotland, England and Wales. Randomisation will be on a 1:1 basis, stratified by gender and severity (NOSE score). Participants will be followed up for 12 months post randomisation. The primary outcome measure is the total SNOT-22 score at 6 months. Clinical and economic outcomes will be modelled against baseline severity (NOSE scale) to inform clinical decision-making. The study includes a recruitment enhancement process, and an economic evaluation. DISCUSSION: The NAIROS trial will evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of septoplasty versus medical management for adults with a deviated septum and symptoms of nasal blockage. Identifying those individuals most likely to benefit from surgery should enable more efficient and effective clinical decision-making, and avoid unnecessary operations where there is low likelihood of patient benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT: 2017–000893-12, ISRCTN: 16168569. Registered on 24 March 2017.

negative: Adapting to a Pandemic - Conducting Oncology Trials during the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has necessitated changes in cancer care delivery as resources are reallocated. Clinical trials and other research activities are inevitably impacted. Start-up activities for new trials may be deferred and recruitment suspended. For patients already enrolled however, there are challenges in continuing treatment on trial. Regulatory bodies have issued guidance on managing clinical trials during the pandemic, including contingency measures for remote study visits, delivery of investigational product, and site monitoring visits. New cancer clinical trial practices during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic include new risk assessment strategies, decentralized and remote trial coordination, data collection, and delegation of specific therapeutic activities. This experience could provide evidence of more feasible and cost-effective methods for future clinical trial conduct.

negative: Vaccines for emerging pathogens: prospects for licensure Globally, there are a number of emerging pathogens. For most, there are no licensed vaccines available for human use, although there is ongoing research and development. However, given the extensive and increasing list of emerging pathogens and the investment required to bring vaccines into clinical use, the task is huge. Overlaid on this task is the risk of anti‐microbial resistance (AMR) acquisition by micro‐organisms which can endow a relatively harmless organism with pathogenic potential. Furthermore, climate change also introduces a challenge by causing some of the insect vectors and environmental conditions prevalent in tropical regions to begin to spread out from these traditional areas, thus increasing the risk of migration of zoonotic disease. Vaccination provides a defence against these emerging pathogens. However, vaccines for pathogens which cause severe, but occasional, disease outbreaks in endemic pockets have suffered from a lack of commercial incentive for development to a clinical standard, encompassing Phase III clinical trials for efficacy. An alternative is to develop such vaccines to request US Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), or equivalent status in the United States, Canada and the European Union, making use of a considerable number of regulatory mechanisms that are available prior to licensing. This review covers the status of vaccine development for some of the emerging pathogens, the hurdles that need to be overcome to achieve EUA or an equivalent regional or national status and how these considerations may impact vaccine development for the future, such that a more comprehensive stockpile of promising vaccines can be achieved.

negative: Treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome The best treatment strategy for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is still unknown. Ribavirin and corticosteroids were used extensively during the SARS outbreak. Ribavirin has been criticized for its lack of efficacy. Corticosteroids are effective in lowering the fever and reversing changes in the chest radiograph but have the caveat of encouraging viral replication. The effectiveness of corticosteroids has only been suggested by uncontrolled observations, and the role of these agents in therapy remains to be established by randomized controlled studies. Both ribavirin and corticosteroids have very significant side effects. The lopinavir/ritonavir combination has been shown to reduce the intubation rate and the incidence of adverse clinical outcomes when used with ribavirin. When patients deteriorate clinically despite treatment with ribavirin and corticosteroids, rescue treatment with convalescent plasma and immunoglobulin may be beneficial. Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation is a sound treatment for SARS patients with respiratory failure if administered with due precaution in the correct environment. Interferons and other novel agents may hold promise as useful anti-SARS therapies in the future. The experience with traditional Chinese medicine is encouraging, and its use as an adjuvant should be further investigated.

negative: Drug treatment options for the 2019-new coronavirus (2019-nCoV). As of January 22, 2020, a total of 571 cases of the 2019-new coronavirus (2019-nCoV) have been reported in 25 provinces (districts and cities) in China. At present, there is no vaccine or antiviral treatment for human and animal coronavirus, so that identifying the drug treatment options as soon as possible is critical for the response to the 2019-nCoV outbreak. Three general methods, which include existing broad-spectrum antiviral drugs using standard assays, screening of a chemical library containing many existing compounds or databases, and the redevelopment of new specific drugs based on the genome and biophysical understanding of individual coronaviruses, are used to discover the potential antiviral treatment of human pathogen coronavirus. Lopinavir /Ritonavir, Nucleoside analogues, Neuraminidase inhibitors, Remdesivir, peptide (EK1), abidol, RNA synthesis inhibitors (such as TDF, 3TC), anti-inflammatory drugs (such as hormones and other molecules), Chinese traditional medicine, such ShuFengJieDu Capsules and Lianhuaqingwen Capsule, could be the drug treatment options for 2019-nCoV. However, the efficacy and safety of these drugs for 2019- nCoV still need to be further confirmed by clinical experiments.

negative: The global challenge of infectious diseases: the evolving role of the National Institutes of Health in basic and clinical research The US has entered a new period of fiscal restraint. What does this mean for basic research? Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, discusses the way forward for research scientists in the US.

negative: Chapter 36 SARS Abstract Five years after the first severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak, several candidate SARS-coronavirus (CoV) vaccines are at various stages of preclinical and clinical development. Based on the observation that SARSCoV infection is efficiently controlled upon passive transfer of antibodies directed against the spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV, vaccines containing the S protein have been formulated. Animals immunized with inactivated whole virus vaccines or live-recombinant vaccines expressing the SARS-CoV S protein (e.g., using rabies virus, vesicular stomatitis virus, bovine parainfluenza virus type 3, adenovirus, or attenuated vaccinia virus MVA as a vector), as well as mice immunized with DNA vaccines expressing the S protein gene all developed neutralizing antibodies to SARS-CoV and were protected against SARS-CoV challenge. Although much effort has been focused on developing a SARS vaccine, the commercial viability of such a vaccine for SARS-CoV will ultimately depend on whether the virus re-emerges in the near future. This vaccine should induce highly cross-reactive neutralizing antibodies to protect against newly emerging viruses related to SARS-CoV and protect both the gastrointestinal and respiratory tract in the absence of significant side effects. Given the fact that in the previous outbreak mainly the elderly succumbed to the infection, special attention should be given to vaccines that are able to efficiently protect aged individuals.

negative: COVID-19 and pets: When pandemic meets panic Abstract As the novel coronavirus outbreak spreads globally with devastating effects on human health, pets are also becoming unnecessary victims amidst the pandemic panic. Many have been reluctantly left home alone by owners who have been forced to temporarily evacuate their homes. And, although no evidence exists to indicate that they can either transmit the virus or develop its associated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), fear among the public that pets might play a role in spreading COVID-19 has resulted in pets being abandoned or even killed. This article outlines some of the ways in which the current pandemic has negatively impacted the welfare of pets. It also highlights the relationships between animal, human, and environmental health, as well as the importance of taking a collaborative transdisciplinary One Health approach to help prevent future COVID-19 outbreaks.

negative: Repurposed Therapeutic Agents Targeting the Ebola Virus: A Systematic Review BACKGROUND: The Ebola virus has been responsible for numerous outbreaks since the 1970s, with the most recent outbreak taking place between 2014 and 2016 and causing an international public health emergency. Ebola virus disease (EVD) has a high mortality rate and no approved targeted treatment exists to date. A number of established drugs are being considered as potential therapeutic agents for the treatment of EVD. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify potential drug repositioning candidates and to assess the scientific evidence available on their efficacy. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, and other relevant trial registry platforms for studies published between January 1976 and January 2017. We included drug screening, preclinical studies, and clinical studies on repurposed drugs for the treatment of EVD. The risk of bias for animal studies and nonrandomized clinical studies was assessed. The quality of reporting for case series and case reports was evaluated. Finally, we selected drugs approved by established regulatory authorities, which have positive in vitro study outcomes and at least one additional animal or clinical trial. RESULTS: We identified 3301 publications, of which 37 studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Studies were highly heterogeneous in terms of study type, methodology, and intervention. The risk of bias was high for 13 out of 14 animal studies. We selected 11 drugs with potential anti-EVD therapeutic effects and summarized their evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Several established drugs may have therapeutic effects on EVD, but the quality and quantity of current scientific evidence is lacking. This review highlights the need for well-designed and conducted preclinical and clinical research to establish the efficacy of potential repurposed drugs against EVD.

negative: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus protein 6 mediates ubiquitin-dependent proteosomal degradation of N-Myc (and STAT) interactor Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) encodes eight accessory proteins, the functions of which are not yet fully understood. SARS-CoV protein 6 (P6) is one of the previously studied accessory proteins that have been documented to enhance viral replication and suppress host interferon (IFN) signaling pathways. Through yeast two-hybrid screening, we identified eight potential cellular P6-interacting proteins from a human spleen cDNA library. For further investigation, we targeted the IFN signaling pathway-mediating protein, N-Myc (and STAT) interactor (Nmi). Its interaction with P6 was confirmed within cells. The results showed that P6 can promote the ubiquitin-dependent proteosomal degradation of Nmi. This study revealed a new mechanism of SARS-CoV P6 in limiting the IFN signaling to promote SARS-CoV survival in host cells.

negative: Occurrence and phylogenetic analysis of bovine respiratory syncytial virus in outbreaks of respiratory disease in Norway BACKGROUND: Bovine respiratory syncytial virus (BRSV) is one of the major pathogens involved in the bovine respiratory disease (BRD) complex. The seroprevalence to BRSV in Norwegian cattle herds is high, but its role in epidemics of respiratory disease is unclear. The aims of the study were to investigate the etiological role of BRSV and other respiratory viruses in epidemics of BRD and to perform phylogenetic analysis of Norwegian BRSV strains. RESULTS: BRSV infection was detected either serologically and/or virologically in 18 (86%) of 21 outbreaks and in most cases as a single viral agent. When serology indicated that bovine coronavirus and/or bovine parainfluenza virus 3 were present, the number of BRSV positive animals in the herd was always higher, supporting the view of BRSV as the main pathogen. Sequencing of the G gene of BRSV positive samples showed that the current circulating Norwegian BRSVs belong to genetic subgroup II, along with other North European isolates. One isolate from an outbreak in Norway in 1976 was also investigated. This strain formed a separate branch in subgroup II, clearly different from the current Scandinavian sequences. The currently circulating BRSV could be divided into two different strains that were present in the same geographical area at the same time. The sequence variations between the two strains were in an antigenic important part of the G protein. CONCLUSION: The results demonstrated that BRSV is the most important etiological agent of epidemics of BRD in Norway and that it often acts as the only viral agent. The phylogenetic analysis of the Norwegian strains of BRSV and several previously published isolates supported the theory of geographical and temporal clustering of BRSV.

negative: Epidemiologic and Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus and Bocavirus Respiratory Infections after Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Prospective Single-Center Study Abstract Epidemiologic data about coronaviruses (CoVs) and human bocavirus (HBoV) in the setting of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) are scarce. We conducted a prospective longitudinal study on respiratory viral infections (RVIs) in allo-HSCT recipients with respiratory symptoms from December 2013 until June 2016. Respiratory virus in upper and/or lower respiratory tract (URT and LRT) specimens were tested using Luminex xTAG RVP Fast v1 assay. Seventy-nine consecutive allo-HSCT recipients developed a total of 192 virologically documented RVI episodes over 30 months. The median follow-up after RVI was 388 days (range, 5 to 923). CoV or HBoV was detected in 27 of 192 episodes (14%); 18 of 79 recipients (23%) developed a total of 21 CoV RVI episodes, whereas 6 recipients (8%) had 1 HBoV RVI episode each. Fourteen CoV RVI episodes were limited to the URT, whereas 7 affected the LRT. Co-pathogens were detected in 8 (38%) CoV cases. Type OC43 CoV was the dominant type (48%) followed by NL63 (24%), KHU1 (19%), and 229E (9%); the CoV hospitalization rate was 19%, whereas mortality was 5% (1 patient without any other microbiologic documentation). Among the 6 recipients with HBoV (3%), only 1 had LRT involvement and no one died from respiratory failure. In 5 cases (83%) HBoV was detected along with other viral co-pathogens. CoV RVIs are common after allo-HSCT, and in a significant proportion of cases CoV progressed to LRT and showed moderate to severe clinical features. In contrast, HBoV RVIs were rare and mostly presented in the context of co-infections.

negative: A comprehensive microbiological safety approach for agarose encapsulated porcine islets intended for clinical trials BACKGROUND: The use of porcine islets to replace insulin‐producing islet β‐cells, destroyed during the diabetogenic disease process, presents distinct challenges if this option is to become a therapeutic reality for the treatment of type 1 diabetes. These challenges include a thorough evaluation of the microbiological safety of the islets. In this study, we describe a robust porcine islet‐screening program that provides a high level of confidence in the microbiological safety of porcine islets suitable for clinical trials. METHODS: A four‐checkpoint program systematically screens the donor herd (Large White – Yorkshire × Landrace F1 hybrid animals), individual sentinel and pancreas donor animals and, critically, the islet macrobeads themselves. Molecular assays screen for more than 30 known viruses, while electron microscopy and in vitro studies are employed to screen for potential new or divergent (emergent) viruses. RESULTS: Of 1207 monthly samples taken from random animals over a 2‐year period, only a single positive result for Transmissible gastroenteritis virus was observed, demonstrating the high level of biosecurity maintained in the source herd. Given the lack of clinical signs, positive antibody titers for Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus, Porcine parvovirus, and Influenza A confirm the efficacy of the herd vaccination program. Porcine respiratory coronavirus was found to be present in the herd, as expected for domestic swine. Tissue homogenate samples from six sentinel and 11 donor animals, over the same 2‐year period, were negative for the presence of viruses when co‐cultured with six different cell lines from four species. The absence of adventitious viruses in separate islet macrobead preparations produced from 12 individual pancreas donor animals was confirmed using validated molecular (n = 32 viruses), in vitro culture (cells from four species), and transmission electron microscopy assays (200 cell profiles per donor animal) over the same 2‐year period. There has been no evidence of viral transmission following the implantation of these same encapsulated and functional porcine islets into non‐immunosuppressed diabetic cynomolgus macaques for up to 4 years. Isolated peripheral blood mononuclear cells from all time points were negative for PCV (Type 2), PLHV, PRRSV, PCMV, and PERV‐A, PERV‐B, and PERV‐C by PCR analysis in all six recipient animals. CONCLUSION: The four‐checkpoint program is a robust and reliable method for characterization of the microbiological safety of encapsulated porcine islets intended for clinical trials.

negative: Ribavirin and interferon alfa-2a for severe Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection: a retrospective cohort study Summary Background Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection is associated with high mortality and has no approved antiviral therapy. We aimed to compare ribavirin and interferon alfa-2a treatment for patients with severe MERS-CoV infection with a supportive therapy only. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, we included adults (aged ≥16 years) with laboratory-confirmed MERS-CoV infection and pneumonia needing ventilation support, diagnosed between Oct 23, 2012, and May 1, 2014, at the Prince Sultan Military Medical City (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia). All patients received appropriate supportive care and regular clinical and laboratory monitoring, but patients diagnosed after Sept 16, 2013, were also given oral ribavirin (dose based on calculated creatinine clearance, for 8–10 days) and subcutaneous pegylated interferon alfa-2a (180 μg per week for 2 weeks). The primary endpoint was 14-day and 28-day survival from the date of MERS-CoV infection diagnosis. We used χ2 and Fischer's exact test to analyse categorical variables and the t test to analyse continuous variables. Findings We analysed 20 patients who received ribavirin and interferon (treatment group; initiated a median of 3 days [range 0–8] after diagnosis) and 24 who did not (comparator group). Baseline clinical and laboratory characteristics were similar between groups, apart from baseline absolute neutrophil count, which was significantly lower in the comparator group (5·88 × 109/L [SD 3·95] vs 9·88 × 109/L [6·63]; p=0·023). 14 (70%) of 20 patients in the treatment group had survived after 14 days, compared with seven (29%) of 24 in the comparator group (p=0·004). After 28 days, six (30%) of 20 and four (17%) of 24, respectively, had survived (p=0·054). Adverse effects were similar between groups, apart from reduction in haemoglobin, which was significantly greater in the treatment group than in the comparator group (4·32 g/L [SD 2·47] vs 2·14 g/L [1·90]; p=0·002). Interpretation In patients with severe MERS-CoV infection, ribavirin and interferon alfa-2a therapy is associated with significantly improved survival at 14 days, but not at 28 days. Further assessment in appropriately designed randomised trials is recommended. Funding None.

negative: Exclusion of Pregnant Women from Clinical Trials during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Review of International Registries OBJECTIVE: Pregnant women have been historically excluded from clinical trials for nonobstetric conditions, even during prior epidemics. The objective of this review is to describe the current state of research for pregnant women during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a search of international trial registries for trials relating to the novel coronavirus. The eligibility criteria for each trial were reviewed for inclusion/exclusion of pregnant women. Relevant data were extracted and descriptive statistics were calculated for individual and combined data. The total number of trials from each registry were compared, as well as the proportions of pregnancy-related trials within each. RESULTS: Among 621,370 trials in the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, 927 (0.15%) were COVID-19 related. Of those, the majority (52%) explicitly excluded pregnancy or failed to address pregnancy at all (46%) and only 16 (1.7%) were pregnancy specific. When categorized by region, 688 (74.2%) of COVID-19 trials were in Asia, followed by 128 (13.8%) in Europe, and 66 (7.2%) in North America. Of the COVID-19 trials which included pregnant women, only three were randomized-controlled drug trials. CONCLUSION: Approximately 1.7% of current COVID-19 research is pregnancy related and the majority of trials either explicitly exclude or fail to address pregnancy. Only three interventional trials worldwide involved pregnant women. The knowledge gap concerning the safety and efficacy of interventions for COVID-19 created by the exclusion of pregnant women may ultimately harm them. While "ethical" concerns about fetal exposure are often cited, it is in fact unethical to habitually exclude pregnant women from research. KEY POINTS: · Pregnancy was excluded from past pandemic research.. · Pregnancy is being excluded from COVID-19 research.. · Exclusion of pregnant women is potentially harmful..

negative: Hajj-associated infections Abstract Background The Hajj is the largest annual mass gathering event in the world, thus favoring the transmission of various infections: 183 different nationalities, high temperatures, coincidence with the start of the flu season in the Northern hemisphere, a long barefoot walk, tent-type accommodation, communal toilet facilities, absence of food control, and sharing of razors. Infections are the first cause of hospital admission, which often occurs in the home country of pilgrims. Methods Literature review on PubMed from 1952 to November 2015 on the epidemiology and prevention of infections contracted during the Hajj, using the keywords “Hajj” and “infections”. Results Respiratory tract infections, ENT infections, influenza, pyogenic pneumonia, whooping cough, and tuberculosis are most frequently observed during the Hajj. Outbreaks of meningococcal meningitis have been reported in pilgrims and their contacts. Waterborne infections such as gastroenteritis and hepatitis A are common, despite the improvement of health conditions. Pyoderma and furuncles are also frequently observed. Recently, dengue fever, Alkhumra hemorrhagic fever, and Rift Valley fever have emerged but no case of MERS-coronavirus, appeared in Saudi Arabia in 2012, have yet been observed during the 2012–2014 Hajj. Conclusion Prevention is based on compulsory meningococcal vaccination, vaccination against seasonal influenza and pneumococcal infections for pilgrims at high risk of contracting the infection, and on vaccination against hepatitis A. Updating immunization for diphtheria/tetanus/poliomyelitis/pertussis and measles/mumps is also crucial and pilgrims must comply with hygiene precautions.

negative: Novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19): a pandemic (epidemiology, pathogenesis and potential therapeutics) The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is highly pathogenic viral infection caused by SARS-CoV-2. Currently, COVID-19 has caused global health concern. It is assumed that COVID-19 has zoonotic origin based on the large number of infected people who were exposed to the wet market in Wuhan City, China. The phylogenetic analysis has revealed that SARS-CoV-2 has significant sequence similarity with severe acute respiratory syndrome-like (SARS-like) bat viruses, thus bats could be primary possible reservoir. The intermediate host and there subsequent transfer is not known yet, although human to human transfer is widely confirmed. The transmission of COVID-19 infection from one person to another resulted in the isolation of patients who were subsequently given a variety of treatments. To monitor the current outbreak, robust steps have been taken around the globe to reduce the transmission of COVID-19 infection particularly banning international and domestic flights, inducting lockdowns in vulnerable areas, social distancing etc. No clinically approved antiviral drug or vaccine against COVID-19 is reported yet. However, in clinical trials, few broad-spectrum antiviral drugs were evaluated against COVID-19 infection which resulted in clinical recovery. In this article emergence and pathogenicity of COVID-19 infection along with potential therapeutic strategies are analyzed to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.

negative: Current knowledge about the antivirals remdesivir (GS-5734) and GS-441524 as therapeutic options for coronaviruses Abstract Recent international epidemics of coronavirus-associated illnesses underscore the urgent medical and public health need for vaccine development and regulatory body approved therapies. In particular, the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has quickly intensified interest in developing treatment options to mitigate impact on human life. Remdesivir (GS-5734™) is a broad-spectrum antiviral drug that is now being tested as a potential treatment for COVID-19 in international, multi-site clinical trials. Currently available evidence about the antiviral effects of remdesivir against coronaviruses is primarily based on in vitro and in vivo studies (including some on a chemically related compound, GS-441524™), which have demonstrated largely favorable findings. As the pandemic progresses, information from human compassionate use cases will continue to accumulate before the clinical trials are concluded. It is imperative for public health practitioners and the One Health community to stay up to date on the most promising potential therapeutic options that are under investigation. Thus, the purpose of this review is to synthesize the knowledge to date about remdesivir as a therapeutic option for coronaviruses, with a special focus on information relevant to the One Health community.

negative: Oncology clinical trials during the COVID-19 outbreak: Lessons learnt during the crisis and future opportunities The COVID-19 pandemic affected many activities in the healthcare system including oncology drug development. Clinical trial recruitment was temporary halted in many centres to reduce patients and healthcare workers' potential exposure to the virus. Conversely, to continue offering treatments for patients already on effective therapies, multiple actions were timely put in place, resulting in simplification of trial-related procedures for patients and clinicians' best interest, reduction of the operational burden and effective communication. Here, we suggest maintaining effective measures for future trial simplification and to expedite drug development.

negative: Systematic review of reporting benefits and harms of surgical interventions in randomized clinical trials. BACKGROUND Standardized reporting methods facilitate comparisons between studies. Reporting of data on benefits and harms of treatments in surgical RCTs should support clinical decision-making. Correct and complete reporting of the outcomes of clinical trials is mandatory to appreciate available evidence and to inform patients properly before asking informed consent. METHODS RCTs published between January 2005 and January 2017 in 15 leading journals comparing a surgical treatment with any other treatment were reviewed systematically. The CONSORT checklist, including the extension for harms, was used to appraise the publications. Beneficial and harmful treatment outcomes, their definitions and their precision measures were extracted. RESULTS Of 1200 RCTs screened, 88 trials were included. For the differences in effect size of beneficial outcomes, 68 per cent of the trials reported a P value only but not a 95 per cent confidence interval. For harmful effects, this was 67 per cent. Only five of the 88 trials (6 per cent) reported a number needed to treat, and no study a number needed to harm. Only 61 per cent of the trials reported on both the beneficial and harmful outcomes of the intervention studied in the same paper. CONCLUSION Despite CONSORT guidelines, current reporting of benefits and harms in surgical trials does not facilitate clear communication of treatment outcomes with patients. Researchers, reviewers and journal editors should ensure proper reporting of treatment benefits and harms in trials.

negative: Infection with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus.

negative: Related Elsevier virology titles contents alert

negative: Individual risk management strategy and potential therapeutic options for the COVID-19 pandemic Abstract It is an ugly fact that a significant amount of the world's population will contract SARS-CoV infection with the current spreading. While specific treatment is not yet coming soon, individual risk assessment and management strategies are crucial. The individual preventive and protective measures drive the personal risk of getting the disease. Among the virus-contracted hosts, their different metabolic status, as determined by their diet, nutrition, age, sex, medical conditions, lifestyle, and environmental factors, govern the personal fate toward different clinical severity of COVID-19, from asymptomatic, mild, moderate, to death. The careful individual assessment for the possible dietary, nutritional, medical, lifestyle, and environmental risks, together with the proper relevant risk management strategies, is the sensible way to deal with the pandemic of SARS-CoV-II.

negative: Salvaging CNS Clinical Trials halted due to COVID‐19 The COVID‐19 pandemic has halted many ongoing CNS clinical trials, especially in Alzheimer’s disease. These long‐duration trials involve many stakeholders, especially the patients and their family members, who have demonstrated their commitment to developing new therapeutic interventions for this devastating disease. We certainly do not want to lose all the knowledge we have gained from these ongoing trials because of the pandemic. While some of these trials will need to restart, others can re‐start at different points along the trial protocol with substantial protocol amendments. However, there is an urgent need to combine useful information from the completers with those subjects undergoing complex protocols deviations and amendments after re‐start. We propose the concept of mechanistic modeling‐based virtual twin patients as a possible solution to harmonize the readouts from these complex and fragmented clinical datasets in a biologically relevant way.

negative: The Ebola clinical trials: a precedent for research ethics in disasters The West African Ebola epidemic has set in motion a collective endeavour to conduct accelerated clinical trials, testing unproven but potentially lifesaving interventions in the course of a major public health crisis. This unprecedented effort was supported by the recommendations of an ad hoc ethics panel convened in August 2014 by the WHO. By considering why and on what conditions the exceptional circumstances of the Ebola epidemic justified the use of unproven interventions, the panel's recommendations have challenged conventional thinking about therapeutic development and clinical research ethics. At the same time, unanswered ethical questions have emerged, in particular: (i) the specification of exceptional circumstances, (ii) the specification of unproven interventions, (iii) the goals of interventional research in terms of individual versus collective interests, (iv) the place of adaptive trial designs and (v) the exact meaning of compassionate use with unapproved interventions. Examination of these questions, in parallel with empirical data from research sites, will help build pragmatic foundations for disaster research ethics. Furthermore, the Ebola clinical trials signal an evolution in the current paradigms of therapeutic research, beyond the case of epidemic emergencies.

negative: Pharmacotherapy in COVID-19; A narrative review for emergency providers INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has been particularly challenging due to a lack of established therapies and treatment guidelines. With the rapid transmission of disease, even the off-label use of available therapies has been impeded by limited availability. Several antivirals, antimalarials, and biologics are being considered for treatment at this time. The purpose of this literature review is to synthesize the available information regarding treatment options for COVID-19 and serve as a resource for health care professionals. OBJECTIVES: This narrative review was conducted to summarize the effectiveness of current therapy options for COVID-19 and address the controversial use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). PubMed and SCOPUS were queried using a combination of the keywords “COVID 19,” “SARS-CoV-2,” and “treatment.” All types of studies were evaluated including systematic reviews, case-studies, and clinical guidelines. DISCUSSION: There are currently no therapeutic drugs available that are directly active against SARS-CoV-2; however, several antivirals (remdesivir, favipiravir) and antimalarials (chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine) have emerged as potential therapies. Current guidelines recommend combination treatment with hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin or chloroquine, if hydroxychloroquine is unavailable, in patients with moderate disease, although these recommendations are based on limited evidence. Remdesivir and convalescent plasma may be considered in critical patients with respiratory failure; however, access to these therapies may be limited. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) antagonists may be used in patients who develop evidence of cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Glucocorticoids should be avoided unless there is evidence of refractory septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), or another compelling indication for their use. ACE inhibitors and ARBs should not be discontinued at this time and ibuprofen may be used for fever. CONCLUSION: There are several ongoing clinical trials that are testing the efficacy of single and combination treatments with the drugs mentioned in this review and new agents are under development. Until the results of these trials become available, we must use the best available evidence for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. Additionally, we can learn from the experiences of healthcare providers around the world to combat this pandemic.

negative: Challenges in early phase clinical trials for childhood cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: a report from the new agents group of the Spanish Society of Paediatric Haematology and Oncology (SEHOP) PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced healthcare stakeholders towards challenging decisions. We analyse the impact of the pandemic on the conduct of phase I-II trials for paediatric cancer during the first month of state of alarm in Spain. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all five ITCC-accredited Spanish Paediatric Oncology Early Phase Clinical Trial Units, including questions about impact on staff activities, recruitment, patient care, supply of investigational products, and legal aspects. RESULTS: All units suffered personnel shortages and difficulties in enrolling patients, treatment continuity, or performing trial assessments. Monitoring activity was frequently postponed (73%), and 49% of on-going trials interrupted recruitment. Only two patients could be recruited during this period (75% reduction in the expected rate). CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 crisis has significantly impacted clinical research practice and access to innovation for children with cancer. Structural and functional changes are under way to better cope with the expected future restrictions.

negative: Chapter 3 Chemical and Biological Aspects of Narcissus Alkaloids Publisher Summary This chapter discusses the chemical and biological aspects of Narcissus alkaloids. Numerous alkaloids have been isolated from Narcissus speciesasaresult of the continuing search for novel alkaloids with pharmacological activity in the Amaryllidaceae family. The alkaloids isolated from this genus, classified in relation to the different skeleton types. The different Narcissus wild species and intersectional hybrids, grouped into subgenera and sections, with their corresponding alkaloids, arranged according to their ring system are listed. The biosynthetic pathways of Narcissus alkaloids includes: (1) enzymatic preparation of the precursors, (2) primary cyclization mechanisms, (3) enzymatic preparation of intermediates, (4) secondary cyclization, diversification, and restructuring. The chapter discusses proton nuclear magnetic resonance (1H NMR), carbon nuclear magnetic resonance (13C NMR), and mass spectrometry (MS) for Narcissus alkaloids. A list of the different Narcissus alkaloids, their spectroscopic properties, and literature with the most recent spectroscopic data is given. Several Narcissus extracts shows the following activities: antiviral, prophage induction, antibacterial, antifungal, antimalarial, insecticidal, cytotoxic, antitumor, antimitotic, antiplatelet, hypotensive, emetic, acetylcholine esterase inhibitory, antifertility, antinociceptive, chronotropic, pheromone, plant growth inhibitor, and allelopathic.

negative: The IGNITE Trial: Participant Recruitment Lessons Prior to SARS-CoV-2 Full and diverse participant enrollment is critical to the success and generalizability of all large-scale Phase III trials. Recruitment of sufficient participants is among the most significant challenges for many studies. The novel SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic has further changed and challenged the landscape for clinical trial execution, including screening and randomization. The Investigating Gains in Neurocognition in an Intervention Trial of Exercise (IGNITE) study has been designed as the most comprehensive test of aerobic exercise effects on cognition and brain health. Here we assess recruitment into IGNITE prior to the increased infection rates in the United States, and examine new challenges and opportunities for recruitment with a goal of informing the remaining required recruitment as infection containment procedures are lifted. The results may assist the design and implementation of recruitment for future exercise studies, and outline opportunities for study design that are flexible in the face of emerging threats.

negative: Meeting report: 29th International Conference on Antiviral Research in La Jolla, CA, USA Abstract The 29th International Conference on Antiviral Research (ICAR) was held in La Jolla, CA, USA from April 17 to 21, 2016. This report opens with a tribute to the late Chris McGuigan, a Past-President of ISAR, then continues with summaries of the principal invited lectures. Doug Richman (Elion Award) investigated HIV resistance, Bob Vince (Holý Award) showed how carbocyclic nucleoside analogs led to abacavir and Jerome Deval (Prusoff Award) explained how his group chose to seek a nucleoside analog to treat RSV. ALS-8176 was active in a human RSV-challenge study and is being evaluated in children. The first keynote address, by Richard H. Scheuermann, reported on the remarkable progress made in viral genomics. The second keynote address, by Heinz Feldmann, gave an overview of Ebola virus disease. There were four mini-symposia, Structural Biology, Diagnostic Technologies, DNA viruses and Zika virus. Diagnostic assays are approaching an ideal aim, a compact instrument, simple to use with any type of sample, no sample preparation and a result within an hour. The diversity of HCMV is far greater than for other herpesviruses, typically, an individual having >20,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). During antiviral treatment, there is rapid CMV evolution which is presumed to be due to preferential selection of already present variants rather than by the creation of new variants. A selection of contributor presentations includes oral prodrugs for nucleoside triphosphate analogs, a new method for the synthesis of phosphoramidate prodrugs and the clinical evaluation of brincidofovir for treating transplant recipients with adenovirus infections.

negative: A protocol for adding knowledge to Wikidata, a case report Pandemics, even more than other medical problems, require swift integration of knowledge. When caused by a new virus, understanding the underlying biology may help finding solutions. In a setting where there are a large number of loosely related projects and initiatives, we need common ground, also known as a “commons”. Wikidata, a public knowledge graph aligned with Wikipedia, is such a commons and uses unique identifiers to link knowledge in other knowledge bases However, Wikidata may not always have the right schema for the urgent questions. In this paper, we address this problem by showing how a data schema required for the integration can be modelled with entity schemas represented by Shape Expressions. As a telling example, we describe the process of aligning resources on the genomes and proteomes of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and related viruses as well as how Shape Expressions can be defined for Wikidata to model the knowledge, helping others studying the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. How this model can be used to make data between various resources interoperable, is demonstrated by integrating data from NCBI Taxonomy, NCBI Genes, UniProt, and WikiPathways. Based on that model, a set of automated applications or bots were written for regular updates of these sources in Wikidata and added to a platform for automatically running these updates. Although this workflow is developed and applied in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, to demonstrate its broader applicability it was also applied to other human coronaviruses (MERS, SARS, Human Coronavirus NL63, Human coronavirus 229E, Human coronavirus HKU1, Human coronavirus OC4).

negative: Overview of Current Therapeutics and Novel Candidates Against Influenza, Respiratory Syncytial Virus, and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Infections Emergence and re-emergence of respiratory virus infections represent a significant threat to global public health, as they occur seasonally and less frequently (such as in the case of influenza virus) as pandemic infections. Some of these viruses have been in the human population for centuries and others had recently emerged as a public health problem. Influenza viruses have been affecting the human population for a long time now; however, their ability to rapidly evolve through antigenic drift and antigenic shift causes the emergence of new strains. A recent example of these events is the avian-origin H7N9 influenza virus outbreak currently undergoing in China. Human H7N9 influenza viruses are resistant to amantadines and some strains are also resistant to neuraminidase inhibitors greatly limiting the options for treatment. Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) may cause a lower respiratory tract infection characterized by bronchiolitis and pneumonia mainly in children and the elderly. Infection with RSV can cause severe disease and even death, imposing a severe burden for pediatric and geriatric health systems worldwide. Treatment for RSV is mainly supportive since the only approved therapy, a monoclonal antibody, is recommended for prophylactic use in high-risk patients. The Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) is a newly emerging respiratory virus. The virus was first recognized in 2012 and it is associated with a lower respiratory tract disease that is more severe in patients with comorbidities. No licensed vaccines or antivirals have been yet approved for the treatment of MERS-CoV in humans. It is clear that the discovery and development of novel antivirals that can be used alone or in combination with existing therapies to treat these important respiratory viral infections are critical. In this review, we will describe some of the novel therapeutics currently under development for the treatment of these infections.

negative: PCR sequencing of the spike genes of geographically and chronologically distinct human coronaviruses 229E Abstract A reverse transcription nested PCR (RT-PCR) sequencing methodology was developed and used to generate sequence data from the spike genes of three geographically and chronologically distinct human coronaviruses 229E. These three coronaviruses were isolated originally from the USA in the 1960s (human coronavirus 229E strain ATCC VR-74), the UK in the 1990s (human coronavirus 229E LRI 281) and Ghana (human coronavirus 229E A162). Upon translation and alignment with the published spike protein sequence of human coronavirus 229E ‘LP’ (isolated in the UK in the 1970s), it was found that variation within the translated protein sequences was rather limited. In particular, minimal variation was observed between the translated spike protein sequence of human coronaviruses 229E LP and ATCC VR-74 (1/1012 amino acid differences), whilst most variation was observed between the translated spike protein sequence of human coronaviruses 229E LP and A162 (47/1012 amino acid changes). Further, the translated spike protein sequence of human coronavirus 229E A162 showed three clusters of amino acid changes, situated within the 5′ half of the translated spike protein sequence.

negative: Nucleotide sequence of the gene encoding the membrane protein of human coronavirus 229 E The sequence of the gene encoding the membrane protein of human coronavirus 229 E (HCV 229 E) has been determined. The primary translation product, deduced from the DNA sequence, is a polypeptide of 225 amino acids with a predicted molecular weight of 26,000. The polypeptide has 3 potential N-glycosylation sites. Many structural similarities with the membrane proteins of other coronaviruses can be recognized.

negative: Assessing the Impact of COVID-19 on the Objective and Analysis of Oncology Clinical Trials -- Application of the Estimand Framework COVID-19 outbreak has rapidly evolved into a global pandemic. The impact of COVID-19 on patient journeys in oncology represents a new risk to interpretation of trial results and its broad applicability for future clinical practice. We identify key intercurrent events that may occur due to COVID-19 in oncology clinical trials with a focus on time-to-event endpoints and discuss considerations pertaining to the other estimand attributes introduced in the ICH E9 addendum. We propose strategies to handle COVID-19 related intercurrent events, depending on their relationship with malignancy and treatment and the interpretability of data after them. We argue that the clinical trial objective from a world without COVID-19 pandemic remains valid. The estimand framework provides a common language to discuss the impact of COVID-19 in a structured and transparent manner. This demonstrates that the applicability of the framework may even go beyond what it was initially intended for.

negative: Genetic evolution analysis of 2019 novel coronavirus and coronavirus from other species The Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. However, so far, there are still controversies about the source of the virus and its intermediate host. Here, we found the novel coronavirus was closely related to coronaviruses derived from five wild animals, including Paguma larvata, Paradoxurus hermaphroditus, Civet, Aselliscus stoliczkanus and Rhinolophus sinicus, and was in the same branch of the phylogenetic tree. However, genome and ORF1a homology show that the virus is not the same coronavirus as the coronavirus derived from these five animals, whereas the virus has the highest homology with Bat coronavirus isolate RaTG13.

negative: British Society of Gastroenterology guidance for management of inflammatory bowel disease during the COVID-19 pandemic The COVID-19 pandemic is putting unprecedented pressures on healthcare systems globally. Early insights have been made possible by rapid sharing of data from China and Italy. In the UK, we have rapidly mobilised inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) centres in order that preparations can be made to protect our patients and the clinical services they rely on. This is a novel coronavirus; much is unknown as to how it will affect people with IBD. We also lack information about the impact of different immunosuppressive medications. To address this uncertainty, the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) COVID-19 IBD Working Group has used the best available data and expert opinion to generate a risk grid that groups patients into highest, moderate and lowest risk categories. This grid allows patients to be instructed to follow the UK government’s advice for shielding, stringent and standard advice regarding social distancing, respectively. Further considerations are given to service provision, medical and surgical therapy, endoscopy, imaging and clinical trials.

negative: Enhanced virulence mediated by the murine coronavirus, mouse hepatitis virus strain JHM, is associated with a glycine at residue 310 of the spike glycoprotein. The coronavirus, mouse hepatitis virus strain JHM, causes acute and chronic neurological diseases in rodents. Here we demonstrate that two closely related virus variants, both of which cause acute encephalitis in susceptible strains of mice, cause markedly different diseases if mice are protected with a suboptimal amount of an anti-JHM neutralizing antibody. One strain, JHM.SD, caused acute encephalitis, while infection with JHM.IA resulted in no acute disease. Using recombinant virus technology, we found that the differences between the two viruses mapped to the spike (S) glycoprotein and that the two S proteins differed at four amino acids. By engineering viruses that differed by only one amino acid, we identified a serine-to-glycine change at position 310 of the S protein (S310G) that recapitulated the more neurovirulent phenotype. The increased neurovirulence mediated by the virus encoding glycine at position S310 was not associated with a different tropism within the central nervous system (CNS) but was associated with increased lateral spread in the CNS, leading to significantly higher brain viral titers. In vitro studies revealed that S310G was associated with decreased S1-S2 stability and with enhanced ability to mediate infection of cells lacking the primary receptor for JHM ("receptor-independent spread"). These enhanced fusogenic properties of viruses encoding a glycine at position 310 of the S protein may contribute to spread within the CNS, a tissue in which expression of conventional JHM receptors is low.

negative: Chapter 3 Immunobiological aspects of vaccines in pregnancy: Maternal perspective Abstract Immunization during pregnancy is an efficient strategy to protect both the mother and the newborn infant against infectious pathogens. Pregnant women have an increased susceptibility to severe infections caused by some pathogens, but the mechanisms involved remain poorly understood. Pregnancy is associated with dynamic changes in maternal immune system that are critical for tolerance of the fetus. These changes could also play an important role in shaping maternal immune components that are transferred to the newborn infant following natural infection or vaccination to prevent infectious diseases in early life. As the momentum for maternal immunization is growing, there is a need to increase our understanding of the immunobiology of maternal immunization in order to better prevent infectious diseases in the pregnant women and the young infant.

negative: Neurally adjusted ventilatory assist vs. pressure support to deliver protective mechanical ventilation in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a randomized crossover trial BACKGROUND: Protective mechanical ventilation is recommended for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but it usually requires controlled ventilation and sedation. Using neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) or pressure support ventilation (PSV) could have additional benefits, including the use of lower sedative doses, improved patient–ventilator interaction and shortened duration of mechanical ventilation. We designed a pilot study to assess the feasibility of keeping tidal volume (V(T)) at protective levels with NAVA and PSV in patients with ARDS. METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized crossover trial in five ICUs from a university hospital in Brazil and included patients with ARDS transitioning from controlled ventilation to partial ventilatory support. NAVA and PSV were applied in random order, for 15 min each, followed by 3 h in NAVA. Flow, peak airway pressure (Paw) and electrical activity of the diaphragm (EAdi) were captured from the ventilator, and a software (Matlab, Mathworks, USA), automatically detected inspiratory efforts and calculated respiratory rate (RR) and V(T). Asynchrony events detection was based on waveform analysis. RESULTS: We randomized 20 patients, but the protocol was interrupted for five (25%) patients for whom we were unable to maintain V(T) below 6.5 mL/kg in PSV due to strong inspiratory efforts and for one patient for whom we could not detect EAdi signal. For the 14 patients who completed the protocol, V(T) was 5.8 ± 1.1 mL/kg for NAVA and 5.6 ± 1.0 mL/kg for PSV (p = 0.455) and there were no differences in RR (24 ± 7 for NAVA and 23 ± 7 for PSV, p = 0.661). Paw was greater in NAVA (21 ± 3 cmH(2)O) than in PSV (19 ± 3 cmH(2)O, p = 0.001). Most patients were under continuous sedation during the study. NAVA reduced triggering delay compared to PSV (p = 0.020) and the median asynchrony Index was 0.7% (0–2.7) in PSV and 0% (0–2.2) in NAVA (p = 0.6835). CONCLUSIONS: It was feasible to keep V(T) in protective levels with NAVA and PSV for 75% of the patients. NAVA resulted in similar V(T), RR and Paw compared to PSV. Our findings suggest that partial ventilatory assistance with NAVA and PSV is feasible as a protective ventilation strategy in selected ARDS patients under continuous sedation. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01519258). Registered 26 January 2012, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01519258

negative: The Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System in Coronavirus Infection – current considerations during the pandemic

negative: Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses. BACKGROUND Viral epidemics or pandemics of acute respiratory infections like influenza or severe acute respiratory syndrome pose a global threat. Antiviral drugs and vaccinations may be insufficient to prevent their spread. OBJECTIVES To review the effectiveness of physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses. SEARCH STRATEGY We searched The Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2010, Issue 3), which includes the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1966 to October 2010), OLDMEDLINE (1950 to 1965), EMBASE (1990 to October 2010), CINAHL (1982 to October 2010), LILACS (2008 to October 2010), Indian MEDLARS (2008 to October 2010) and IMSEAR (2008 to October 2010). SELECTION CRITERIA In this update, two review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria to all identified and retrieved articles and extracted data. We scanned 3775 titles, excluded 3560 and retrieved full papers of 215 studies, to include 66 papers of 67 studies. We included physical interventions (screening at entry ports, isolation, quarantine, social distancing, barriers, personal protection, hand hygiene) to prevent respiratory virus transmission. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohorts, case-controls, before-after and time series studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used a standardised form to assess trial eligibility. We assessed RCTs by randomisation method, allocation generation, concealment, blinding and follow up. We assessed non-RCTs for potential confounders and classified them as low, medium and high risk of bias. MAIN RESULTS We included 67 studies including randomised controlled trials and observational studies with a mixed risk of bias. A total number of participants is not included as the total would be made up of a heterogenous set of observations (participant people, observations on participants and countries (object of some studies)). The risk of bias for five RCTs and most cluster-RCTs was high. Observational studies were of mixed quality. Only case-control data were sufficiently homogeneous to allow meta-analysis. The highest quality cluster-RCTs suggest respiratory virus spread can be prevented by hygienic measures, such as handwashing, especially around younger children. Benefit from reduced transmission from children to household members is broadly supported also in other study designs where the potential for confounding is greater. Nine case-control studies suggested implementing transmission barriers, isolation and hygienic measures are effective at containing respiratory virus epidemics. Surgical masks or N95 respirators were the most consistent and comprehensive supportive measures. N95 respirators were non-inferior to simple surgical masks but more expensive, uncomfortable and irritating to skin. Adding virucidals or antiseptics to normal handwashing to decrease respiratory disease transmission remains uncertain. Global measures, such as screening at entry ports, led to a non-significant marginal delay in spread. There was limited evidence that social distancing was effective, especially if related to the risk of exposure. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Simple and low-cost interventions would be useful for reducing transmission of epidemic respiratory viruses. Routine long-term implementation of some measures assessed might be difficult without the threat of an epidemic.

negative: Global Distribution of Novel Rhinovirus Genotype Global surveillance for a novel rhinovirus genotype indicated its association with community outbreaks and pediatric respiratory disease in Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America. Molecular dating indicates that these viruses have been circulating for at least 250 years.

negative: COVID-19 (Novel Coronavirus 2019) - recent trends. The World Health Organization (WHO) has issued a warning that, although the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) from Wuhan City (China), is not pandemic, it should be contained to prevent the global spread. The COVID-19 virus was known earlier as 2019-nCoV. As of 12 February 2020, WHO reported 45,171 cases and 1115 deaths related to COVID-19. COVID-19 is similar to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) virus in its pathogenicity, clinical spectrum, and epidemiology. Comparison of the genome sequences of COVID-19, SARS-CoV, and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) showed that COVID-19 has a better sequence identity with SARS-CoV compared to MERS CoV. However, the amino acid sequence of COVID-19 differs from other coronaviruses specifically in the regions of 1ab polyprotein and surface glycoprotein or S-protein. Although several animals have been speculated to be a reservoir for COVID-19, no animal reservoir has been already confirmed. COVID-19 causes COVID-19 disease that has similar symptoms as SARS-CoV. Studies suggest that the human receptor for COVID-19 may be angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor similar to that of SARS-CoV. The nucleocapsid (N) protein of COVID-19 has nearly 90% amino acid sequence identity with SARS-CoV. The N protein antibodies of SARS-CoV may cross react with COVID-19 but may not provide cross-immunity. In a similar fashion to SARS-CoV, the N protein of COVID-19 may play an important role in suppressing the RNA interference (RNAi) to overcome the host defense. This mini-review aims at investigating the most recent trend of COVID-19.

negative: Chapter 2 Advanced Manufacturing Processes and Technologies Abstract A general framework of the emerging risks linked with advanced manufacturing processes and technologies is showed. For this, the systemic and occupational nature of said risks is considered. To achieve this general objective, the chapter is organized in two parts. In the first part, a theoretical basis is developed. This theoretical basis is configured by an explanation of the emerging risk concept, as well as by the development of an overview of advanced manufacturing processes and technologies. In the second part, contents and tools of practical application are exposed. To do this, the main emerging risks are shown first. Among the fields of application of these risks, some of the most important cross-cutting manufacturing technologies have been selected. One of the main risk governance frameworks is shown. Subsequently, this framework is deployed with two of its main applications on emerging risks: the management and characterization of the risk.

negative: Broad-spectrum antivirals for the emerging Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus Summary Objectives Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) has emerged to cause fatal infections in patients in the Middle East and traveler-associated secondary cases in Europe and Africa. Person-to-person transmission is evident in outbreaks involving household and hospital contacts. Effective antivirals are urgently needed. Methods We used small compound-based forward chemical genetics to screen a chemical library of 1280 known drugs against influenza A virus in Biosafety Level-2 laboratory. We then assessed the anti-MERS-CoV activities of the identified compounds and of interferons, nelfinavir, and lopinavir because of their reported anti-coronavirus activities in terms of cytopathic effect inhibition, viral yield reduction, and plaque reduction assays in Biosafety Level-3 laboratory. Results Ten compounds were identified as primary hits in high-throughput screening. Only mycophenolic acid exhibited low EC50 and high selectivity index. Additionally, ribavirin and interferons also exhibited in-vitro anti-MERS-CoV activity. The serum concentrations achievable at therapeutic doses of mycophenolic acid and interferon-β1b were 60–300 and 3–4 times higher than the concentrations at which in-vitro anti-MERS-CoV activities were demonstrated, whereas that of ribavirin was ∼2 times lower. Combination of mycophenolic acid and interferon-β1b lowered the EC50 of each drug by 1–3 times. Conclusions Interferon-β1b with mycophenolic acid should be considered in treatment trials of MERS.

negative: Impact of the COVID-19 Epidemic on a Pan-Asian Academic Oncology Clinical Trial

negative: Epidemic spreading in metapopulation networks with heterogeneous infection rates Abstract In this paper, we study epidemic spreading in metapopulation networks wherein each node represents a subpopulation symbolizing a city or an urban area and links connecting nodes correspond to the human traveling routes among cities. Differently from previous studies, we introduce a heterogeneous infection rate to characterize the effect of nodes’ local properties, such as population density, individual health habits, and social conditions, on epidemic infectivity. By means of a mean-field approach and Monte Carlo simulations, we explore how the heterogeneity of the infection rate affects the epidemic dynamics, and find that large fluctuations of the infection rate have a profound impact on the epidemic threshold as well as the temporal behavior of the prevalence above the epidemic threshold. This work can refine our understanding of epidemic spreading in metapopulation networks with the effect of nodes’ local properties.

negative: Current status and progress of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia/ 中华危重病急救医学 Recently, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) pneumonia outbroke in Wuhan and rapidly spread to all over China and even the world. Because of the strong infectivity and various clinical symptoms, it has brought certain difficulties to the epidemic prevention and control. Currently there is no specific drug for 2019-nCoV. Previous drugs used to treat other coronaviruses may be effective, but further clinical trials remain needed. We reviewed literature on the epidemiology, etiology, clinical manifestations, imaging manifestations, laboratory examination, diagnosis, complications, treatment and outcome of 2019-nCoV pneumonia.

negative: Clinical trials: management of investigational products during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic Disclaimer: In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

negative: Developing vaccines against epidemic-prone emerging infectious diseases Today’s world is characterized by increasing population density, human mobility, urbanization, and climate and ecological change. This global dynamic has various effects, including the increased appearance of emerging infectious diseases (EIDs), which pose a growing threat to global health security. Outbreaks of EIDs, like the 2013–2016 Ebola outbreak in West Africa or the current Ebola outbreak in Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), have not only put populations in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) at risk in terms of morbidity and mortality, but they also have had a significant impact on economic growth in affected regions and beyond. The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation (CEPI) is an innovative global partnership between public, private, philanthropic, and civil society organizations that was launched as the result of a consensus that a coordinated, international, and intergovernmental plan was needed to develop and deploy new vaccines to prevent future epidemics. CEPI is focusing on supporting candidate vaccines against the World Health Organization (WHO) Blueprint priority pathogens MERS-CoV, Nipah virus, Lassa fever virus, and Rift Valley fever virus, as well as Chikungunya virus, which is on the WHO watch list. The current vaccine portfolio contains a wide variety of technologies, ranging across recombinant viral vectors, nucleic acids, and recombinant proteins. To support and accelerate vaccine development, CEPI will also support science projects related to the development of biological standards and assays, animal models, epidemiological studies, and diagnostics, as well as build capacities for future clinical trials in risk-prone contexts.

negative: Estimation of the Final Size of the COVID-19 Epidemic in Pakistan The COVID-19 infections in Pakistan are spreading at an exponential rate and a point may soon be reached where rigorous prevention measures would need to be adopted. Mathematical models can help define the scale of an epidemic and the rate at which an infection can spread in a community. We used an SIR model to predict the magnitude of the COVID-19 epidemic in Pakistan and compared the numbers with the reported cases on the national database. Our results indicate that Pakistan could hit peak number of infectious cases on May 26th, 2020 and by June 24th, 2020, 90% of the population will have become infected with the virus if policy interventions seeking to curb this infection are not adopted aggressively.

negative: Report from the World Health Organization’s third Product Development for Vaccines Advisory Committee (PDVAC) meeting, Geneva, 8–10th June 2016 The third meeting of WHO’s Product Development for Vaccines Advisory Committee (PDVAC) was held in June 2016, with a remit to revisit the pathogen areas for which significant progress has occurred since recommendations from the 2015 meeting, as well as to consider new advances in the development of vaccines against other pathogens. Since the previous meeting, significant progress has been made with regulatory approvals of the first malaria and dengue vaccines, and the first phase III trials of a respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine candidate has started in the elderly and pregnant women. In addition, PDVAC has also supported vaccine development efforts against important emerging pathogens, including Middle Eastern Coronavirus (MERS CoV) and Zika virus. Trials of HIV and tuberculosis vaccine candidates are steadily progressing towards pivotal data points, and the leading norovirus vaccine candidate has entered a phase IIb efficacy study. WHO’s Immunization, Vaccine and Biologicals (IVB) department is actively working in several pathogen areas on the recommendation of PDVAC, as well as continuing horizon scanning for advances in the development of vaccines that may benefit low and middle income countries (LMICs), such as the recent licensure of the enterovirus 71 (EV71) vaccine in China. Following on from discussions with WHO’s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on Immunization, PDVAC will also look beyond licensure and consider data needs for vaccine recommendation and implementation to reduce the delay between vaccine approval and vaccine impact.

negative: Dynamic change process of target genes by RT-PCR testing of SARS-Cov-2 during the course of a Coronavirus Disease 2019 patient Abstract We report the dynamic change process of target genes by RT-PCR testing of SARS-Cov-2 during the course of a COVID-19 patient: from successive negative results to successive single positive nucleocapsid gene, to two positive target genes (orf1ab and nucleocapsid) by RT-PCR testing of SARS-Cov-2, and describe the diagnosis, clinical course, and management of the case. In this case, negative results of RT-PCR testing was not excluded to diagnose a suspected COVID-19 patient, clinical signs and symptoms, other laboratory findings, and chest CT images should be taken into account for the absence of enough positive evidence. This case highlights the importance of successive sampling and testing SARS-Cov-2 by RT-PCR as well as the increased value of single positive target gene from pending to positive in two specimens to diagnose laboratory-confirmed COVID-19.

negative: Overexpression of 7a, a protein specifically encoded by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus, induces apoptosis via a caspase-dependent pathway. Besides genes that are homologous to proteins found in other coronaviruses, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus genome also contains nine other potential open reading frames. Previously, we have characterized the expression and cellular localization of two of these "accessory" viral proteins, 3a (previously termed U274) and 7a (previously termed U122). In this study, we further examined whether they can induce apoptosis, which has been observed clinically. We showed that the overexpression of 7a, but not of 3a or the viral structural proteins, nucleocapsid, membrane, and envelope, induces apoptosis. 7a induces apoptosis via a caspase-dependent pathway and in cell lines derived from different organs, including lung, kidney, and liver.

negative: A Pilot Randomized Trial Comparing Weaning From Mechanical Ventilation on Pressure Support Versus Proportional Assist Ventilation. OBJECTIVES Despite protocols incorporating spontaneous breathing trials, 31% of ICU patients experience difficult or prolonged weaning from mechanical ventilation. Nonfatiguing modes such as pressure support ventilation are recommended. Proportional assist ventilation provides assistance in proportion to patient effort, which may optimize weaning. However, it is not known how proportional assist ventilation performs relative to pressure support ventilation over a prolonged period in the complex ICU setting. The purpose of this study was to compare the physiologic and clinical performance (failure rate), safety, and feasibility of protocols using daily spontaneous breathing trial plus pressure support ventilation versus proportional assist ventilation until ventilation discontinuation. DESIGN Single-center, unblinded pilot randomized controlled trial. SETTING Medical-surgical ICU of a tertiary-care hospital. PATIENTS Adult patients intubated greater than 36 hours were randomized if they met eligibility criteria for partial ventilatory support, tolerated pressure support ventilation greater than or equal to 30 minutes, and either failed or did not meet criteria for a spontaneous breathing trial. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to the pressure support ventilation or proportional assist ventilation protocol (PAV+, Puritan Bennett 840; Covidien, Boulder, CO). Both protocols used progressive decreases in level of assistance as tolerated, coupled with daily assessment for spontaneous breathing trials. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Of 54 patients randomized, outcome data are available for 50 patients; 27 were randomized to receive proportional assist ventilation and 23 to receive pressure support ventilation. There were no adverse events linked to the study interventions, and protocol violations were infrequent. Recruitment was slower than projected (1.3 patients per month). The median (interquartile range) time from randomization to successful extubation was 3.9 days (2.8-8.4 d) on proportional assist ventilation versus 4.9 days (2.9-26.3 d) on pressure support ventilation (p = 0.39). Time to live ICU discharge was 7.3 days (5.2-11.4 d) on proportional assist ventilation versus 12.4 days (7.5-30.8 d) on pressure support ventilation (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION This pilot study demonstrates the utility, safety, and feasibility of the weaning protocols and provides important information to guide the design of a future randomized controlled trial comparing weaning from mechanical ventilation on pressure support ventilation versus proportional assist ventilation.

negative: Non-invasive bioluminescence imaging of HCoV-OC43 infection and therapy in the central nervous system of live mice Abstract Human coronaviruses (HCoVs) are important pathogens that cause upper respiratory tract infections and have neuroinvasive abilities; however, little is known about the dynamic infection process of CoVs in vivo, and there are currently no specific antiviral drugs to prevent or treat HCoV infection. Here, we verified the replication ability and pathogenicity of a reporter HCoV-OC43 strain expressing Renilla luciferase (Rluc; rOC43-ns2DelRluc) in mice with different genetic backgrounds (C57BL/6 and BALB/c). Additionally, we monitored the spatial and temporal progression of HCoV-OC43 through the central nervous system (CNS) of live BALB/c mice after intranasal or intracerebral inoculation with rOC43-ns2DelRluc. We found that rOC43-ns2DelRluc was fatal to suckling mice after intranasal inoculation, and that viral titers and Rluc expression were detected in the brains and spinal cords of mice infected with rOC43-ns2DelRluc. Moreover, viral replication was initially observed in the brain by non-invasive bioluminescence imaging before the infection spread to the spinal cord of BALB/c mice, consistent with its tropism in the CNS. Furthermore, the Rluc readout correlated with the HCoV replication ability and protein expression, which allowed quantification of antiviral activity in live mice. Additionally, we validated that chloroquine strongly inhibited rOC43-ns2DelRluc replication in vivo. These results provide new insights into the temporal and spatial dissemination of HCoV-OC43 in the CNS, and our methods provide an extremely sensitive platform for evaluating the efficacy of antiviral therapies to treat neuroinvasive HCoVs in live mice.

negative: The evolving world of protein-G-quadruplex recognition: A medicinal chemist’s perspective Abstract The physiological and pharmacological role of nucleic acids structures folded into the non canonical G-quadruplex conformation have recently emerged. Their activities are targeted at vital cellular processes including telomere maintenance, regulation of transcription and processing of the pre-messenger or telomeric RNA. In addition, severe conditions like cancer, fragile X syndrome, Bloom syndrome, Werner syndrome and Fanconi anemia J are related to genomic defects that involve G-quadruplex forming sequences. In this connection G-quadruplex recognition and processing by nucleic acid directed proteins and enzymes represents a key event to activate or deactivate physiological or pathological pathways. In this review we examine protein-G-quadruplex recognition in physiologically significant conditions and discuss how to possibly exploit the interactions’ selectivity for targeted therapeutic intervention.

negative: Defining the interval for monitoring potential adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) after receipt of live viral vectored vaccines Abstract Live viral vectors that express heterologous antigens of the target pathogen are being investigated in the development of novel vaccines against serious infectious agents like HIV and Ebola. As some live recombinant vectored vaccines may be replication-competent, a key challenge is defining the length of time for monitoring potential adverse events following immunization (AEFI) in clinical trials and epidemiologic studies. This time period must be chosen with care and based on considerations of pre-clinical and clinical trials data, biological plausibility and practical feasibility. The available options include: (1) adapting from the current relevant regulatory guidelines; (2) convening a panel of experts to review the evidence from a systematic literature search to narrow down a list of likely potential or known AEFI and establish the optimal risk window(s); and (3) conducting “near real-time“ prospective monitoring for unknown clustering’s of AEFI in validated large linked vaccine safety databases using Rapid Cycle Analysis for pre-specified adverse events of special interest (AESI) and Treescan to identify previously unsuspected outcomes. The risk window established by any of these options could be used along with (4) establishing a registry of clinically validated pre-specified AESI to include in case-control studies. Depending on the infrastructure, human resources and databases available in different countries, the appropriate option or combination of options can be determined by regulatory agencies and investigators.

negative: LONG-TERM CLINICAL OUTCOMES IN SURVIVORS OF CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAKS AFTER HOSPITALISATION OR ICU ADMISSION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF FOLLOW-UP STUDIES Objective: To determine the long-term clinical problems in adult survivors of coronavirus (CoV) infection [Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS)] after hospitalisation or Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Data sources: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus and PsycINFO were searched using the strategy: (Coronavirus OR Coronavirus Infections OR COVID OR SARS virus OR Severe acute respiratory syndrome OR MERS OR Middle east respiratory syndrome) AND (Follow-up OR Follow-up studies OR Prevalence). Original studies reporting the clinical outcomes of adult survivors of coronavirus outbreaks two months after discharge or three months after admission were included. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) 2009 Level of Evidence Tool. Meta-analysis was conducted to derive pooled estimates of prevalence and severity for different outcomes at time points up to 6 months follow-up and beyond 6 months follow-up. Results: The search yielded 1169 studies of which 28 were included in this review. There were 15 Level 1b, 8 Level 2b, 2 Level 3b and 3 Level 4 studies by OCEBM grading. Pooled analysis of studies revealed that complications commonly observed were impaired diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) [prevalence of 27.26%, 95% CI 14.87 to 44.57] and reduced exercise capacity [(6-minute walking distance (6MWD) mean 461m, 95% CI 449.66 to 472.71] at 6 months with limited improvement beyond 6 months. Coronavirus survivors had considerable prevalence of psychological disorders such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) [38.80%, CI 30.93 to 47.31], depression [33.20%, CI 19.80 to 50.02] and anxiety [30.04%, CI 10.44 to 61.26) beyond 6 months. These complications were accompanied by low Short Form 36 (SF-36) scores at 6 months and beyond indicating reduced quality of life which is present long-term. Conclusions: The long term clinical problems in survivors of CoV infections (SARS and MERS) after hospitalisation or Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission include respiratory dysfunction, reduced exercise capacity, psychological problems such as PTSD, depression and anxiety, and reduced quality of life. Critical care, rehabilitation and mental health services should anticipate a high prevalence of these problems following COVID-19 and ensure their adequate and timely management with the aim of restoring premorbid quality of life.

negative: SARS-CoV-2 outbreak: How can pharmacists help? Coronaviruses (CoVs) are a large family of viruses that cause disorders ranging from a mild cold to severe disease. Some of the CoVs are zoonotic, meaning they can be transmitted from animals to humans. In December 2019, the world awoke to a new zoonotic strain of CoV that was named SARS-CoV-2 (standing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2), which has been classified as a high-consequence infectious disease. In addition, serious complications related to COVID-19 have been reported in some patients. These include acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute renal failure, septic shock and ventilator-associated pneumonia. The pharmacist, as a healthcare practitioner, can play an important role in hindering the spread of COVID-19, and can be an active participant in national and community efforts to fight and contain this outbreak.

negative: The outbreak of COVID-19: An overview In late December 2019, a previous unidentified coronavirus, currently named as the 2019 novel coronavirus#, emerged from Wuhan, China, and resulted in a formidable outbreak in many cities in China and expanded globally, including Thailand, Republic of Korea, Japan, United States, Philippines, Viet Nam, and our country (as of 2/6/2020 at least 25 countries). The disease is officially named as Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19, by WHO on February 11, 2020). It is also named as Severe Pneumonia with Novel Pathogens on January 15, 2019 by the Taiwan CDC, the Ministry of Health and is a notifiable communicable disease of the fifth category. COVID-19 is a potential zoonotic disease with low to moderate (estimated 2%–5%) mortality rate. Person-to-person transmission may occur through droplet or contact transmission and if there is a lack of stringent infection control or if no proper personal protective equipment available, it may jeopardize the first-line healthcare workers. Currently, there is no definite treatment for COVID-19 although some drugs are under investigation. To promptly identify patients and prevent further spreading, physicians should be aware of the travel or contact history of the patient with compatible symptoms.

negative: Predicting the receptor-binding domain usage of the coronavirus based on kmer frequency on spike protein

negative: Awareness of MERS-CoV among Staff Members of Prince Sultan Military Medical City in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Background The Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) developed infections that caused serious epidemics. Special priority of awareness and prompt initiative involvement of health workers (HW) during such intensified health situation necessitated an assessment of their preparedness, appropriate attitudes and protective strategies for better efficiency modes and acceleration during emergency. Methods HW of Prince Sultan Military Medical city in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia were reviewed through specifically designed questionnaires to acquire the demanded data. It included clinical and demographic information about the viral diseases, associated signs and symptoms, transmission and protection, and attitudes about the MERS-CoV disease. Results The study was accomplished between August and November, 2017 and 477 participants of the medical city, successfully completed the study questionnaire (Appendix I). Females represented a majority and there was an indirectly proportional decrease with the increasing age. Gradual educational increase levels reflected dominance of the university degree holders. Jobs were dominated by nurses and non-Saudis were a majority whilst, the highly experienced, (>10 years) were a minority. A majority recognized the viral transmission methods, popular information sources of MERS-CoV and associated medical terms. Highest scores were observed in dealing with protective aids and recognizing symptoms of disease. High adherence to hand hygiene protocols and correct washing steps were recorded. Correct and high levels were observed in taking preventive measures and avoiding infection. Participants responded correctly to negative and wrong actions that patients should refrain from. High scores were observed in taking appreciable attitudes towards oneself and towards others. Conclusions Expatriates were majority and nurses were dominant which, necessitates Saudization of this sector. Ministry of health pamphlets and seminars were of less impact in invigilating HW, hence, more attention and efforts are demanded. HW were quite aware of the basic and emergent health policies during epidemic episodes of MERS-CoV.

negative: Diagnosis of Feline Infectious Peritonitis: A Review of the Current Literature Feline infectious peritonitis (FIP) is a fatal disease that poses several challenges for veterinarians: clinical signs and laboratory changes are non-specific, and there are two pathotypes of the etiologic agent feline coronavirus (FCoV), sometimes referred to as feline enteric coronavirus (FECV) and feline infectious peritonitis virus (FIPV) that vary fundamentally in their virulence, but are indistinguishable by a number of diagnostic methods. This review focuses on all important steps every veterinary practitioner has to deal with and new diagnostic tests that can be considered when encountering a cat with suspected FIP with the aim to establish a definitive diagnosis. It gives an overview on all available direct and indirect diagnostic tests and their sensitivity and specificity reported in the literature in different sample material. By providing summarized data for sensitivity and specificity of each diagnostic test and each sample material, which can easily be accessed in tables, this review can help to facilitate the interpretation of different diagnostic tests and raise awareness of their advantages and limitations. Additionally, diagnostic trees depict recommended diagnostic steps that should be performed in cats suspected of having FIP based on their clinical signs or clinicopathologic abnormalities. These steps can easily be followed in clinical practice.

negative: Core Outcome Set for Clinical Trials on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COS-COVID) Abstract Since its outbreak in December 2019, a series of clinical trials on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been registered or carried out. However, the significant heterogeneity and less critical outcomes of such trials may be leading to a waste of research resources. This study aimed to develop a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials on COVID-19 in order to tackle the outcome issues. The study was conducted according to the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) handbook (version 1.0), a guideline for COS development. A research group was set up that included experts in respiratory and critical medicine, traditional Chinese medicine, evidence-based medicine, clinical pharmacology, and statistics, in addition to medical journal editors. Clinical trial registry websites (chictr.org.cn and clinicaltrials.gov) were searched to retrieve clinical trial protocols and outcomes in order to form an outcome pool. A total of 78 clinical trial protocols on COVID-19 were included and 259 outcomes were collected. After standardization, 132 outcomes were identified within seven different categories, of which 58 were selected to develop a preliminary outcome list for further consensus. After two rounds of Delphi survey and one consensus meeting, the most important outcomes for the different clinical classifications of COVID-19 were identified and determined to constitute the COS for clinical trials on COVID-19 (COS-COVID). The COS-COVID includes one outcome for the mild type (time to 2019-nCoV reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) negativity), four outcomes for the ordinary type (length of hospital stay, composite events, score of clinical symptoms, and time to 2019-nCoV RT-PCR negativity), five outcomes for the severe type (composite events, length of hospital stay, arterial oxygen partial pressure (PaO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), duration of mechanical ventilation, and time to 2019-nCoV RT-PCR negativity), one outcome for critical type (all-cause mortality), and one outcome for rehabilitation period (pulmonary function). The COS-COVID is currently the most valuable and practical clinical outcome set for the evaluation of intervention effect, and is useful for evidence assessment and decision-making. With a deepening understanding of COVID-19 and application feedback, the COS-COVID should be continuously updated.

negative: Oncology clinical trials during the COVID-19 outbreak: lessons learnt during the crisis and future opportunities The COVID-19 pandemic affected many activities in the healthcare system including oncology drug development. Clinical trial recruitment was temporary halted in many centres to reduce patients and healthcare workers’ potential exposure to the virus. Conversely, to continue offering treatments for patients already on effective therapies, multiple actions were timely put in place, resulting in simplification of trial-related procedures for patients and clinicians’ best interest, reduction of the operational burden and effective communication. Here, we suggest maintaining effective measures for future trial simplification and to expedite drug development.

negative: Evaluation of potential anti-toxoplasmosis efficiency of combined traditional herbs in a mouse model Toxoplasma gondii is a worldwide spread protozoan and is able to infect almost all warm-blood animals. No effective drugs are available clinically on toxoplasmosis. Chinese traditional herbal medicines have provided remedies for many health problems. There exists a possibility that Chinese herbs may provide protection against T. gondii. This work aims to assess the protective efficacy of combined Chinese herbs against T. gondii. We screened five herbal medicines that have different pharmacological effects and combined them into a prescription according to the traditional Chinese medicine compatibility principle. The drug potential and protective efficacy were evaluated through a mouse model by determining the survival time, the parasite load in blood and tissues, the change of cell proportions in blood and histological detection. The results showed that the survival time of mice in the 500 mg Chinese herbs group and sulfadiazine group was significantly longer than that of the PBS control group. Also the parasite load in blood and tissues of 500 mg Chinese herbs and sulfadiazine groups was significantly lower than that of PBS group at 7 days post infection (dpi), which was in accordance with the result of histological detection. Monocyte and neutrophil of infected mice were remarkably increased while lymphocyte was dramatically decreased compared to that of blank group at 7 dpi. The results demonstrated that the 500 mg dosage of our Chinese herbs could slow down the replication of T. gondii and prolong the survival time of mice and could be considered as possible candidate drug against toxoplasmosis.

negative: Proceedings of a Consensus Conference: Pathogen Inactivation—Making Decisions About New Technologies Significant progress has been made in reducing the risk of pathogen transmission to transfusion recipients. Nonetheless, there remains a continuing risk of transmission of viruses, bacteria, protozoa, and prions to recipients. These include many of the viruses for which specific screening tests exist as well as pathogens for which testing is currently not being done, including various species of bacteria, babesiosis, variant Creutzfeld-Jacob disease, hepatitis A virus, human herpes virus 8, chikungunya virus, Chagas disease, and malaria. Pathogen inactivation (PI) technologies potentially provide an additional way to protect the blood supply from emerging agents and also provide additional protection against both known and as-yet-unidentified agents. However, the impact of PI on product quality and recipient safety remains to be determined. The purpose of this consensus conference was to bring together international experts in an effort to consider the following issues with respect to PI: implementation criteria; licensing requirements; blood service and clinical issues; risk management issues; cost-benefit impact; and research requirements. These proceedings are provided to make available to the transfusion medicine community the considerable amount of important information presented at this consensus conference.

negative: MATHEMATICAL PREDICTIONS FOR COVID-19 AS A GLOBAL PANDEMIC This study shows that the disease free equilibrium (E_0 ) for COVID-19 coronavirus does not satisfy the criteria for a locally or globally asymptotic stability. This implies that as a pandemic as declared by WHO (2020) the COVID-19 coronavirus does not have a curative vaccine yet and precautionary measures are advised through quarantine and observatory procedures. Also, the Basic Reproductive number (R_0<1) by Equation (33) shows that there is a chance of decline of secondary infections when the ratio between the incidence rate in the population and the total number of infected population quarantined with observatory procedure. The effort to evaluate the disease equilibrium shows that unless there is a dedicated effort from government, decision makers and stakeholders, the world would hardly be reed of the COVID-19 coronavirus and further spread is eminent and the rate of infection will continue to increase despite the increased rate of recovery because of the absence of vaccine at the moment.

negative: Comparison of risk factors for viral and nonviral asthma exacerbations

negative: Vector-based genetically modified vaccines: Exploiting Jenner’s legacy Abstract The global vaccine market is diverse while facing a plethora of novel developments. Genetic modification (GM) techniques facilitate the design of ’smarter’ vaccines. For many of the major infectious diseases of humans, like AIDS and malaria, but also for most human neoplastic disorders, still no vaccines are available. It may be speculated that novel GM technologies will significantly contribute to their development. While a promising number of studies is conducted on GM vaccines and GM vaccine technologies, the contribution of GM technology to newly introduced vaccines on the market is disappointingly limited. In this study, the field of vector-based GM vaccines is explored. Data on currently available, actually applied, and newly developed vectors is retrieved from various sources, synthesised and analysed, in order to provide an overview on the use of vector-based technology in the field of GM vaccine development. While still there are only two vector-based vaccines on the human vaccine market, there is ample activity in the fields of patenting, preclinical research, and different stages of clinical research. Results of this study revealed that vector-based vaccines comprise a significant part of all GM vaccines in the pipeline. This study further highlights that poxviruses and adenoviruses are among the most prominent vectors in GM vaccine development. After the approval of the first vectored human vaccine, based on a flavivirus vector, vaccine vector technology, especially based on poxviruses and adenoviruses, holds great promise for future vaccine development. It may lead to cheaper methods for the production of safe vaccines against diseases for which no or less perfect vaccines exist today, thus catering for an unmet medical need. After the introduction of Jenner’s vaccinia virus as the first vaccine more than two centuries ago, which eventually led to the recent eradication of smallpox, this and other viruses may now be the basis for constructing vectors that may help us control other major scourges of mankind.

negative: Estimating the generation interval for COVID-19 based on symptom onset data Background: Estimating key infectious disease parameters from the COVID-19 outbreak is quintessential for modelling studies and guiding intervention strategies. Whereas different estimates for the incubation period distribution and the serial interval distribution have been reported, estimates of the generation interval for COVID-19 have not been provided. Methods: We used outbreak data from clusters in Singapore and Tianjin, China to estimate the generation interval from symptom onset data while acknowledging uncertainty about the incubation period distribution and the underlying transmission network. From those estimates we obtained the proportions pre-symptomatic transmission and reproduction numbers. Results: The mean generation interval was 5.20 (95%CI 3.78-6.78) days for Singapore and 3.95 (95%CI 3.01-4.91) days for Tianjin, China when relying on a previously reported incubation period with mean 5.2 and SD 2.8 days. The proportion of pre-symptomatic transmission was 48% (95%CI 32-67%) for Singapore and 62% (95%CI 50-76%) for Tianjin, China. Estimates of the reproduction number based on the generation interval distribution were slightly higher than those based on the serial interval distribution. Conclusions: Estimating generation and serial interval distributions from outbreak data requires careful investigation of the underlying transmission network. Detailed contact tracing information is essential for correctly estimating these quantities.

negative: Critical care management of adults with community-acquired severe respiratory viral infection With the expanding use of molecular assays, viral pathogens are increasingly recognized among critically ill adult patients with community-acquired severe respiratory illness; studies have detected respiratory viral infections (RVIs) in 17–53% of such patients. In addition, novel pathogens including zoonotic coronaviruses like the agents causing Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019 nCoV) are still being identified. Patients with severe RVIs requiring ICU care present typically with hypoxemic respiratory failure. Oseltamivir is the most widely used neuraminidase inhibitor for treatment of influenza; data suggest that early use is associated with reduced mortality in critically ill patients with influenza. At present, there are no antiviral therapies of proven efficacy for other severe RVIs. Several adjunctive pharmacologic interventions have been studied for their immunomodulatory effects, including macrolides, corticosteroids, cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, sirolimus, statins, anti-influenza immune plasma, and vitamin C, but none is recommended at present in severe RVIs. Evidence-based supportive care is the mainstay for management of severe respiratory viral infection. Non-invasive ventilation in patients with severe RVI causing acute hypoxemic respiratory failure and pneumonia is associated with a high likelihood of transition to invasive ventilation. Limited existing knowledge highlights the need for data regarding supportive care and adjunctive pharmacologic therapy that is specific for critically ill patients with severe RVI. There is a need for more pragmatic and efficient designs to test different therapeutics both individually and in combination. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00134-020-05943-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

negative: Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Vaccine Candidates: Cautious Optimism Efforts towards developing a vaccine for Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) have yielded promising results. Utilizing a variety of platforms, several vaccine approaches have shown efficacy in animal models and begun to enter clinical trials. In this review, we summarize the current progress towards a MERS-CoV vaccine and highlight potential roadblocks identified from previous attempts to generate coronavirus vaccines.

negative: The specification, acceptability and effectiveness of respite care and short breaks for young adults with complex healthcare needs: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review. INTRODUCTION The number of young adults with complex healthcare needs due to life-limiting conditions/complex physical disability has risen significantly as children with complex conditions survive into adulthood. Respite care and short breaks are an essential service, however, needs often go unmet after the transition to adult services, leading to a significant impact on the life expectancy and quality of life for this population. We aim to identify, appraise and synthesise relevant evidence to explore respite care and short breaks provision for this population, and to develop a conceptual framework for understanding service models. METHODS AND ANALYSIS A mixed-methods systematic review conducted in two stages: (1) knowledge map and (2) evidence review. We will comprehensively search multiple electronic databases; use the Citations, Lead authors, Unpublished materials, Google Scholar, Theories, Early examples, and Related projects (CLUSTER) approach, search relevant websites and circulate a 'call for evidence'. Using the setting, perspective, intervention/phenomenon of interest, comparison and evaluation framework, two reviewers will independently select evidence for inclusion into a knowledge map and subsequent evidence review, extract data relating to study and population characteristics, methods and outcomes; and assess the quality of evidence. A third reviewer will arbitrate where necessary.Evidence will be synthesised using the following approaches: quantitative (narratively/conducting meta-analyses where appropriate); qualitative (framework approach); policy and guidelines (documentary analysis informed approach). An overall, integrated synthesis will be created using a modified framework approach. We will use Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)/GRADE-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research to assess the strength and confidence of the synthesised evidence. Throughout, we will develop a conceptual framework to articulate how service models work in relation to context and setting. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Ethical approval is not required as this is a systematic review. We will present our work in academic journals, at appropriate conferences; we will disseminate findings across networks using a range of media. Steering and advisory groups were established to ensure findings are shared widely and in accessible formats. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42018088780.

negative: Old drugs as lead compounds for a new disease? Binding analysis of SARS coronavirus main proteinase with HIV, psychotic and parasite drugs Abstract The SARS-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV) main proteinase is a key enzyme in viral polyprotein processing. To allow structure-based design of drugs directed at SARS-CoV main proteinase, we predicted its binding pockets and affinities with existing HIV, psychotic and parasite drugs (lopinavir, ritonavir, niclosamide and promazine), which show signs of inhibiting the replication of SARS-CoV. Our results suggest that these drugs and another two HIV inhibitors (PNU and UC2) could be used as templates for designing SARS-CoV proteinase inhibitors.

negative: Randomized placebo-controlled trial on azithromycin to reduce the morbidity of bronchiolitis in Indigenous Australian infants: rationale and protocol BACKGROUND: Acute lower respiratory infections are the commonest cause of morbidity and potentially preventable mortality in Indigenous infants. Infancy is also a critical time for post-natal lung growth and development. Severe or repeated lower airway injury in very young children likely increases the likelihood of chronic pulmonary disorders later in life. Globally, bronchiolitis is the most common form of acute lower respiratory infections during infancy. Compared with non-Indigenous Australian infants, Indigenous infants have greater bacterial density in their upper airways and more severe bronchiolitis episodes. Our study tests the hypothesis that the anti-microbial and anti-inflammatory properties of azithromycin, improve the clinical outcomes of Indigenous Australian infants hospitalised with bronchiolitis. METHODS: We are conducting a dual centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group trial in northern Australia. Indigenous infants (aged ≤ 24-months, expected number = 200) admitted to one of two regional hospitals (Darwin, Northern Territory and Townsville, Queensland) with a clinical diagnosis of bronchiolitis and fulfilling inclusion criteria are randomised (allocation concealed) to either azithromycin (30 mg/kg/dose) or placebo administered once weekly for three doses. Clinical data are recorded twice daily and nasopharyngeal swab are collected at enrolment and at the time of discharge from hospital. Primary outcomes are 'length of oxygen requirement' and 'duration of stay,' the latter based upon being judged as 'ready for respiratory discharge'. The main secondary outcome is readmission for a respiratory illness within 6-months of leaving hospital. Descriptive virological and bacteriological (including development of antibiotic resistance) data from nasopharyngeal samples will also be reported. DISCUSSION: Two published studies, both involving different patient populations and settings, as well as different macrolide antibiotics and treatment duration, have produced conflicting results. Our randomised, placebo-controlled trial of azithromycin in Indigenous infants hospitalised with bronchiolitis is designed to determine whether it can reduce short-term (and potentially long-term) morbidity from respiratory illness in Australian Indigenous infants who are at high risk of developing chronic respiratory illness. If azithromycin is efficacious in reducing the morbidly of Indigenous infants hospitalised with bronchiolitis, the intervention would lead to improved short term (and possibly long term) health benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR): ACTRN12610000326099

negative: Emergence of a Novel Coronavirus, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2: Biology and Therapeutic Options The new decade of the 21(st) century (2020) started with the emergence of a novel coronavirus known as SARS-CoV-2 that caused an epidemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China. It is the third highly pathogenic and transmissible coronavirus after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) emerged in humans. The source of origin, transmission to humans, and mechanisms associated with the pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 are not yet clear, however, its resemblance to SARS-CoV and several other bat coronaviruses was recently confirmed through genome sequencing-related studies. The development of therapeutic strategies is necessary in order to prevent further epidemics and cure infections. In this review, we summarize current information about the emergence, origin, diversity, and epidemiology of three pathogenic coronaviruses with a specific focus on the current outbreak in Wuhan, China. Furthermore, we discuss the clinical features and potential therapeutic options that may be effective against SARS-CoV-2.

negative: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Related Coronavirus Is Inhibited by Interferon-α Current treatment schemes for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) include broad-spectrum antibiotics, glucocorticoids, and ribavirin. We evaluated the susceptibility of the SARS-related coronavirus (SARS CoV) to ribavirin and interferon (IFN)-α in vitro by use of cytopathic effect, plaque assay, and immunoblot analysis. Ribavirin did not inhibit viral growth at concentrations attainable in human serum. In contrast, IFN-α showed an in vitro inhibitory effect starting at concentrations of 1000 IU/mL. In conclusion, ribavirin alone is unlikely to be beneficial in the prophylaxis or treatment of SARS CoV infections. Clinical trials with IFN-α might be justified to determine a beneficial effect on the outcome of SARS.

negative: Therapeutic iloprost for the treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (the ThIlo trial): a prospective, randomized, multicenter phase II study BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is caused by rapid-onset (within hours) acute inflammatory processes in lung tissue, and it is a life-threatening condition with high mortality. The treatment of ARDS to date is focused on the prevention of further iatrogenic damage of the lung rather than the treatment of the initial inflammatory process. Several preclinical studies have revealed a beneficial effect of iloprost on the control of pulmonary inflammation, and in a small number of patients with ARDS, iloprost treatment resulted in improved oxygenation. Therefore, we plan to conduct a large multicenter trial to evaluate the effect of iloprost on ARDS. METHODS: The Therapeutic Iloprost during ARDS trial (ThIlo trial) is a multicenter, randomized, single blinded, clinical phase II trial assessing the efficacy of inhaled iloprost for the prevention of the development and progression of ARDS in critically ill patients. One hundred fifty critically ill patients suffering from acute ARDS will be treated either by nebulized iloprost or NaCl 0.9% for 5 days. Blood samples will be drawn at defined time points to elucidate the serum levels of iloprost and inflammatory markers during treatment. Mechanical ventilation will be standardized. In follow-up visits at days 28 and 90 as well as 6 months after enrollment, functional status according to the Barthel Index and a health care-related questionnaire, and frailty (Vulnerable Elders Survey) will be evaluated. The primary endpoint is the improvement of oxygenation, defined as the ratio of PaO(2)/FiO(2). Secondary endpoints include 90-day all-cause mortality, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores during the study period up to day 90, the duration of mechanical ventilation, the length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, ventilator-associated pneumonia, delirium, ICU-acquired weakness, and discharge localization. The study will be conducted in three university ARDS centers in Germany. DISCUSSION: The results of the ThIlo trial will highlight the anti-inflammatory effect of iloprost on early inflammatory processes during ARDS, resulting in the improvement of outcome parameters in patients with ARDS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EUDRA-CT: 2016-003168-37. Registered on 12 April 2017. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03111212. Registered on 4 June 2017.

negative: Increased vulnerability of clinical research units during the COVID‐19 crisis and their protection Currently, the complexity of clinical trial development in oncology is being further complicated by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, which is reducing the resources needed to comply with protocol‐specific procedures while putting patients in units, who are already vulnerable, at increased general risk not only for COVID‐19 infection but also with respect to their baseline disease. Individualizing the management of patients while ensuring their safety and adherence to the study protocol, establishing specific staff contingency plans, and maintaining sponsor and contract research organization (CRO) alignment are some of the key issues for maintaining the continuity of cancer patients’ investigational treatment and minimizing their infection risk as well as the risk to staff members of the unit, sponsors, and CROs while maintaining the integrity of data quality and compliance with good clinical practice.

negative: A Call for Pediatric COVID-19 Clinical Trials

negative: Clinical course and outcomes of critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a single-centered, retrospective, observational study Summary Background An ongoing outbreak of pneumonia associated with the severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) started in December, 2019, in Wuhan, China. Information about critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection is scarce. We aimed to describe the clinical course and outcomes of critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Methods In this single-centered, retrospective, observational study, we enrolled 52 critically ill adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of Wuhan Jin Yin-tan hospital (Wuhan, China) between late December, 2019, and Jan 26, 2020. Demographic data, symptoms, laboratory values, comorbidities, treatments, and clinical outcomes were all collected. Data were compared between survivors and non-survivors. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, as of Feb 9, 2020. Secondary outcomes included incidence of SARS-CoV-2-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and the proportion of patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Findings Of 710 patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, 52 critically ill adult patients were included. The mean age of the 52 patients was 59·7 (SD 13·3) years, 35 (67%) were men, 21 (40%) had chronic illness, 51 (98%) had fever. 32 (61·5%) patients had died at 28 days, and the median duration from admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) to death was 7 (IQR 3–11) days for non-survivors. Compared with survivors, non-survivors were older (64·6 years [11·2] vs 51·9 years [12·9]), more likely to develop ARDS (26 [81%] patients vs 9 [45%] patients), and more likely to receive mechanical ventilation (30 [94%] patients vs 7 [35%] patients), either invasively or non-invasively. Most patients had organ function damage, including 35 (67%) with ARDS, 15 (29%) with acute kidney injury, 12 (23%) with cardiac injury, 15 (29%) with liver dysfunction, and one (2%) with pneumothorax. 37 (71%) patients required mechanical ventilation. Hospital-acquired infection occurred in seven (13·5%) patients. Interpretation The mortality of critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia is considerable. The survival time of the non-survivors is likely to be within 1–2 weeks after ICU admission. Older patients (>65 years) with comorbidities and ARDS are at increased risk of death. The severity of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia poses great strain on critical care resources in hospitals, especially if they are not adequately staffed or resourced. Funding None.

negative: Stem-loop IV in the 5' untranslated region is a cis-acting element in bovine coronavirus defective interfering RNA replication. The 210-nucleotide (nt) 5' untranslated region (UTR) in the positive-strand bovine coronavirus (BCoV) genome is predicted to contain four higher-order structures identified as stem-loops I to IV, which may function as cis-acting elements in genomic RNA replication. Here, we describe evidence that stem-loop IV, a bulged stem-loop mapping at nt 186 through 215, (i) is phylogenetically conserved among group 2 coronaviruses and may have a homolog in groups 1 and 3, (ii) exists as a higher-order structure on the basis of enzyme probing, (iii) is required as a higher-order element for replication of a BCoV defective interfering (DI) RNA in the positive but not the negative strand, and (iv) as a higher-order structure in wild-type (wt) and mutant molecules that replicate, specifically binds six cellular proteins in the molecular mass range of 25 to 58 kDa as determined by electrophoretic mobility shift and UV cross-linking assays; binding to viral proteins was not detected. Interestingly, the predicted stem-loop IV homolog in the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus appears to be group 1-like in that it is in part duplicated with a group 1-like conserved loop sequence and is not group 2-like, as would be expected by the SARS coronavirus group 2-like 3' UTR structure. These results together indicate that stem-loop IV in the BCoV 5' UTR is a cis-acting element for DI RNA replication and that it might function through interactions with cellular proteins. It is postulated that stem-loop IV functions similarly in the virus genome.

negative: NSAIDs in patients with viral infections, including Covid-19: victims or perpetrators? Abstract Taking anti-inflammatory drugs, including non-steroidal (NSAIDs), during Covid-19 infection, how much is risky? The French Minister of Health, who has raised an alarm on a possible risk deriving from the use of ibuprofen for the control of fever and other symptoms during the disease, opened the debate a few days ago. In this paper we examine available evidence from preclinical and clinical studies that had analysed the role of COX in the inflammatory process and the effects of NSAIDs in patients with infections. Most of the published studies that suggested not protective effects of NSAIDs were mainly performed in vitro or on animals. Therefore, their meaning in humans is to be considered with great caution. Based also on data suggesting protective effects of NSAIDs, we concluded that currently there is no evidence suggesting a correlation between NSAIDs and a worsening of infections. Further studies will be certainly needed to better define the role of NSAIDs and particularly COX2 inhibitors in patients with infections. In the meantime, we must wait for results of the revision started by the PRAC on May 2019 on the association ibuprofen/ketoprofen and worsening of infections. Since nowadays no scientific evidence establishes a correlation between NSAIDS and worsening of COVID-19, patients should be advice against any NSAIDs self-medication when COVID-19 like symptoms are present.

negative: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus BACKGROUND: Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) is caused by a coronavirus (MERS‐CoV) and is characterized by hypoxemic respiratory failure. The objective of this study is to compare the outcomes of MERS-CoV patients before and after the availability of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as a rescue therapy in severely hypoxemic patients who failed conventional strategies. METHODS: We collected data retrospectively on MERS-CoV patients with refractory respiratory failure from April 2014 to December 2015 in 5 intensive care units (ICUs) in Saudi Arabia. Patients were classified into two groups: ECMO versus conventional therapy. Our primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; secondary outcomes included ICU and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were included; 17 received ECMO and 18 received conventional therapy. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics. The ECMO group had lower in-hospital mortality (65 vs. 100%, P = 0.02), longer ICU stay (median 25 vs. 8 days, respectively, P < 0.01), and similar hospital stay (median 41 vs. 31 days, P = 0.421). In addition, patients in the ECMO group had better PaO2/FiO2 at days 7 and 14 of admission to the ICU (124 vs. 63, and 138 vs. 36, P < 0.05), and less use of norepinephrine at days 1 and 14 (29 vs. 80%; and 36 vs. 93%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: ECMO use, as a rescue therapy, was associated with lower mortality in MERS patients with refractory hypoxemia. The results of this, largest to date, support the use of ECMO as a rescue therapy in patients with severe MERS-CoV.

negative: Antivirals for influenza-Like Illness? A randomised Controlled trial of Clinical and Cost effectiveness in primary CarE (ALIC(4) E): the ALIC(4) E protocol INTRODUCTION: Effective management of seasonal and pandemic influenza is a high priority internationally. Guidelines in many countries recommend antiviral treatment for older people and individuals with comorbidity at increased risk of complications. However, antivirals are not often prescribed in primary care in Europe, partly because its clinical and cost effectiveness has been insufficiently demonstrated by non-industry funded and pragmatic studies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Antivirals for influenza-Like Illness? An rCt of Clinical and Cost effectiveness in primary CarE is a European multinational, multicentre, open-labelled, non-industry funded, pragmatic, adaptive-platform, randomised controlled trial. Initial trial arms will be best usual primary care and best usual primary care plus treatment with oseltamivir for 5 days. We aim to recruit at least 2500 participants ≥1 year presenting with influenza-like illness (ILI), with symptom duration ≤72 hours in primary care over three consecutive periods of confirmed high influenza incidence. Participant outcomes will be followed up to 28 days by diary and telephone. The primary objective is to determine whether adding antiviral treatment to best usual primary care is effective in reducing time to return to usual daily activity with fever, headache and muscle ache reduced to minor severity or less. Secondary objectives include estimating cost-effectiveness, benefits in subgroups according to age (<12, 12–64 and >64 years), severity of symptoms at presentation (low, medium and high), comorbidity (yes/no), duration of symptoms (≤48 hours/>48–72 hours), complications (hospital admission and pneumonia), use of additional prescribed medication including antibiotics, use of over-the-counter medicines and self-management of ILI symptoms. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics committee (REC) approval was granted by the NRES Committee South Central (Oxford B) and Clinical Trial Authority (CTA) approval by The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. All participating countries gained national REC and CTA approval as required. Dissemination of results will be through peer-reviewed scientific journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN27908921; Pre-results.

negative: Xylitol for the prevention of acute otitis media episodes in children aged 2–4 years: protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial INTRODUCTION: Xylitol (or ‘birch sugar’) is a naturally occurring sugar with antibacterial properties that has been used as a natural non-sugar sweetener in chewing gums, confectionery, toothpaste and medicines. In this preventative randomised trial, xylitol will be tested for the prevention of acute otitis media (AOM), a common and costly condition in young children. The primary outcome will be the incidence of AOM. Secondary outcomes will include upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) and dental caries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will be a pragmatic, blinded (participant and parents, practitioners and analyst), two-armed superiority, placebo-controlled randomised trial with 1:1 allocation, stratified by clinical site. The trial will be conducted in the 11 primary care group practices participating in the TARGet Kids! research network in Canada. Eligible participants between the ages of 2–4 years will be randomly assigned to the intervention arm of regular xylitol syrup use or the control arm of regular sorbitol use for 6 months. We expect to recruit 236 participants, per treatment arm, to detect a 20% relative risk reduction in AOM episodes. AOM will be identified through chart review. The secondary outcomes of URTIs and dental caries will be identified through monthly phone calls with specified questions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval from the Research Ethics Boards at the Hospital for Sick Children and St. Michael’s Hospital has been obtained for this study and also for the TARGet Kids! research network. Results will be submitted for publication to a peer-reviewed journal and will be discussed with decision makers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03055091; Pre-results.

negative: Clinical trials (and tribulations): the immediate effects of COVID-19 on IBD clinical research activity in the United Kingdom There have been immediate and profound impacts of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 on healthcare services worldwide with major consequences for non-COVID-19 related healthcare. Alongside efforts to reconfigure services and enable continued delivery of safe clinical care for patients with IBD, consideration must also be given to management of IBD research activity. In many centres there has been an effective shutdown of IBD clinical trial activity as research sites have switched focus to either COVID-19 related research or clinical care only. As a result, the early termination of trial programmes and loss of potentially effective therapeutic options for IBD, has become a real and worrying prospect. Moreover, in many countries research activity has become embedded into clinical care – with clinical trials often providing access to new therapies or strategies - which would otherwise not have been available in standard clinical pathways. This pandemic has significant implications for the design, conduct, analysis and reporting of clinical trials in IBD. In this Viewpoint, we share our experiences from a clinical and academic perspective in the United Kingdom, highlighting the early challenges encountered and consider implications for patients and staff at research sites, sponsors, research ethics committees, funders and regulators. We also offer potential solutions both for now and for when we enter a recovery phase from the pandemic.

negative: Impact of pantoprazole on absorption and disposition of hydroxychloroquine, a drug used in Corona Virus Disease-19 (Covid-19): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial OBJECTIVES: Primary objective: Evaluation of the effect of the proton pump inhibitor (PPI) pantoprazole on the absorption of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). Secondary objectives: • Evaluation of the relationship between HCQ concentrations in whole blood, plasma and intracellular concentrations in target cells - peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). • Evaluation of HCQ as a potential perpetrator in drug-drug interactions at the level of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 and CYP2D6 (major drug metabolizing enzymes). TRIAL DESIGN: Single centre, open-label, parallel group, two-arm, phase I drug-drug interaction trial. PARTICIPANTS: Healthy volunteers (18-60 years old) are treated in the Clinical Pharmacological Trial Center of Heidelberg University Hospital, Germany. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: • Participants are randomized in a group to either receive a nine-day course of pantoprazole, or to a control group without pantoprazole. All participants receive a single dose of HCQ 400 mg. • Additionally, CYP3A4 and CYP2D6 phenotyping with microdosed probe drugs is performed using midazolam and yohimbine as enzyme activity markers, respectively. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary endpoint: Area under the curve (AUC)(0-72 h) and maximum concentration (C(max)) of a single oral dose of 400 mg HCQ with and without pantoprazole (changes in these two values describe relevant aspects of exposure to HCQ with and without administration of pantoprazole). Secondary endpoints: • AUC(2-4 h), AUC(0-6 h) and C(max) of midazolam and yohimbine. • Correlation of HCQ concentrations in whole blood with concentrations in plasma and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC). RANDOMISATION: Participants are assigned to treatment groups by using a randomisation list (1:1, block size = 4) and consecutive enrolment. BLINDING (MASKING): The trial is an open-label trial, participants and investigators are not blinded. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): A total number of 24 participants (12 per group) are planned to be randomised. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol version 2.1 dated 24/04/2020, first patient first visit. April 30th, 2020, recruitment ongoing, anticipated end of study June 30th, 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT Number: 2020-001470-30, registered on 31 March 2020 German Clinical trials register number / International Clinical Trials Registry Platform: DRKS00021573, registered on 27 April 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full trial protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full trial protocol. The trial protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).

negative: One-Health: a Safe, Efficient, Dual-Use Vaccine for Humans and Animals against Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus and Rabies Virus. Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) emerged in 2012 and is a highly pathogenic respiratory virus. There are no treatment options against MERS-CoV for humans or animals, and there are no large-scale clinical trials for therapies against MERS-CoV. To address this need, we developed an inactivated rabies virus (RABV) that contains the MERS-CoV spike (S) protein expressed on its surface. Our initial recombinant vaccine, BNSP333-S, expresses a full-length wild-type MERS-CoV S protein; however, it showed significantly reduced viral titers compared to those of the parental RABV strain and only low-level incorporation of full-length MERS-CoV S into RABV particles. Therefore, we developed a RABV-MERS vector that contained the MERS-CoV S1 domain of the MERS-CoV S protein fused to the RABV G protein C terminus (BNSP333-S1). BNSP333-S1 grew to titers similar to those of the parental vaccine vector BNSP333, and the RABV G-MERS-CoV S1 fusion protein was efficiently expressed and incorporated into RABV particles. When we vaccinated mice, chemically inactivated BNSP333-S1 induced high-titer neutralizing antibodies. Next, we challenged both vaccinated mice and control mice with MERS-CoV after adenovirus transduction of the human dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (hDPP4) receptor and then analyzed the ability of mice to control MERS-CoV infection. Our results demonstrated that vaccinated mice were fully protected from the MERS-CoV challenge, as indicated by the significantly lower MERS-CoV titers and MERS-CoV and mRNA levels in challenged mice than those in unvaccinated controls. These data establish that an inactivated RABV-MERS S-based vaccine may be effective for use in animals and humans in areas where MERS-CoV is endemic. IMPORTANCE Rabies virus-based vectors have been proven to be efficient dual vaccines against rabies and emergent infectious diseases such as Ebola virus. Here we show that inactivated rabies virus particles containing the MERS-CoV S1 protein induce potent immune responses against MERS-CoV and RABV. This novel vaccine is easy to produce and may be useful to protect target animals, such as camels, as well as humans from deadly MERS-CoV and RABV infections. Our results indicate that this vaccine approach can prevent disease, and the RABV-based vaccine platform may be a valuable tool for timely vaccine development against emerging infectious diseases.

negative: Clinical Trial Drug Safety Assessment for Studies and Submissions Impacted by COVID-19 In this paper, we provide guidance on how standard safety analyses and reporting of clinical trial safety data may need to be modified, given the potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The impact could include missed visits, alternative methods for assessments (such as virtual visits), alternative locations for assessments (such as local labs), and study drug interruptions. We focus on safety planning for Phase 2-4 clinical trials and integrated summaries for submissions. Starting from the recommended safety analyses proposed in white papers and a workshop, created as part of an FDA/PHUSE collaboration (PHUSE 2013, 2015, 2017, 2019), we assess what modifications might be needed. Impact from COVID-19 will likely affect treatment arms equally, so analyses of adverse events from controlled data can, to a large extent, remain unchanged. However, interpretation of summaries from uncontrolled data (summaries that include open-label extension data) will require even more caution than usual. Special consideration will be needed for safety topics of interest, especially events expected to have a higher incidence due to a COVID-19 infection or due to quarantine or travel restrictions (e.g., depression). Analyses of laboratory measurements may need to be modified to account for the combination of measurements from local and central laboratories.

negative: SARS-COV-2 infection (coronavirus disease 2019) for the gastrointestinal consultant The current pandemic due to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has caused an extreme burden for health care systems globally, and the number of cases is expected to continue to increase, at least in the immediate future. The virus is estimated to have infected more than 1.5 million individuals. The available reports suggest that gastrointestinal (GI) involvement in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is common and in some cases the GI symptoms may precede the respiratory symptoms. In addition to direct effects of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the infected patients remain at risk for the complications commonly managed by gastroenterology and hepatology consultants. The most commonly reported GI manifestation of COVID-19 is diarrhea, which is reported in a third to up to more than half of the patients. Mild to moderate elevation of the liver enzymes are also common, although no case of acute liver failure has been reported so far. Many of the medications used for treatment of COVID-19 can also be associated with GI symptoms or liver injury and can be included in the differential diagnosis in these patients. Although the diagnosis of the infection is currently based on RNA analysis in respiratory samples, the available literature on fecal shedding of this virus suggests that fecal RNA testing might prove to be a useful diagnostic test. It is reasonable to delay all non-urgent endoscopic procedures during the peak of the pandemic and use additional protective equipment such as N95 respirators during endoscopy while most patients can be considered high risk for having been exposed to the virus.

negative: The Evaluation of Sleep Disturbances for Chinese Frontline Medical Workers under the Outbreak of COVID-19 Background The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 in China remains to be a serious challenge for frontline medical workers (fMW). They are under high risk of being infected and high mental stress, which may lead to sleep disturbances, anxiety, and depression. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study to evaluate sleep disturbances of fMW and made a comparison with non-fMW. The medical workers from multiple hospitals in Hubei Province, China, were volunteered to participate. An online questionnaire, including Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Athens Insomnia Scale (AIS), and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), was used to evaluate sleep disturbances and mental status of fMW. Sleep disturbances were defined as PSQI>7 points or/and AIS>6 points. We compared the scores of PSQI, AIS, anxiety and depression VAS, and prevalence of sleep disturbances between fMW and non-fMW. Subgroup analysis for different gender in fMW was conducted. Findings A total of 1306 subjects (including 801 fMW and 505 non-fMW) were enrolled. Compared to non-fMW, fMW had significantly higher scores of PSQI (p＜0.0001), AIS (p＜0.0001), anxiety (p＜0.0001) and depression (p=0.0010), and higher prevalence of sleep disturbances with PSQI > 7 points (p＜0.0001) and AIS > 6 points (p＜0.0001). In subgroup analysis, compared to male fMW, female fMW had significantly higher scores of PSQI (p=0.022) and higher prevalence of sleep disturbances with PSQI > 7 points (p<0.0001). Interpretation fMW had higher prevalence of sleep disturbances and worse sleep quality than non-fMW. Female fMW were more vulnerable to having sleep disturbances than male fMW. Funding None.

negative: Clinical trials press on for conditions other than COVID-19. Will the pandemic’s effects sneak into their data? Myron Cohen has run clinical trials through hurricanes and civil unrest Now, the infectious disease researcher at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, says he and his colleagues are in a new situation: trying to carry out large, international trials in the midst of coronavirus lockdowns Cohen co-leads a network of HIV prevention trials, some of which have paused during the pandemic But for other studies, he says, “stopping would be of grave consequence” to participants So study teams have bought and shipped protective equipment to personnel at clinical trial sites, secured special permits where necessary for trial participants to leave their homes for medical visits, and arranged their private transportation to avoid public buses Not all clinical trials have had to go through such logistical gymnastics But across diverse fields, investigators have managed to keep treating patients who might benefit from experimental therapies Slowdowns and pauses in recruiting new participants will delay results—but for many studies, data are still flowing in

negative: Cell-Based Therapies for COVID-19: Proper Clinical Investigations are Essential Abstract The serious consequences of the global COVID-19 pandemic have prompted a rapid gobal response to develop effective therapies that can lessen disease severity in infected patients. Cell-based approaches, primarily using mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs), have demonstrated a strong safety profile and possible efficacy in patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but whether these therapies are effective for treating respiratory virus-induced ARDS is unknown. According to the WHO ICTRP and the NIH clinicaltrials.gov databases, 27 clinical investigations of MSC-based cell therapy approaches have begun in China since the onset of the COVID-19 outbreak, as well as a growing number of academic and industry trials elsewhere. Several recent published reports have suggested potential efficacy; however, the available data presented is either anecdotal or from incomplete, poorly controlled investigations. Therefore, while there may be a potential role for MSCs and other cell-based therapies in treatment of COVID-19, these need to be investigated in a rationally designed, controlled approach if safety and efficacy are to be demonstrated accurately. We urge that the field proceeds by finding balance between swift experimentation and communication of results, and scientifically coherent generation and analysis of clinical data.

negative: Strategies to Improve Participation of Older Adults in Cancer Research Cancer is a disease associated with aging. As the US population ages, the number of older adults with cancer is projected to dramatically increase. Despite this, older adults remain vastly underrepresented in research that sets the standards for cancer treatments and, consequently, clinicians struggle with how to interpret data from clinical trials and apply them to older adults in practice. A combination of system, clinician, and patient barriers bar opportunities for trial participation for many older patients, and strategies are needed to address these barriers at multiple fronts, five of which are offered here. This review highlights the need to (1) broaden eligibility criteria, (2) measure relevant end points, (3) expand standard trial designs, (4) increase resources (e.g., institutional support, interdisciplinary care, and telehealth), and (5) develop targeted interventions (e.g., behavioral interventions to promote patient enrollment). Implementing these solutions requires a substantial investment in engaging and collaborating with community-based practices, where the majority of older patients with cancer receive their care. Multifaceted strategies are needed to ensure that older patients with cancer, across diverse healthcare settings, receive the highest-quality, evidence-based care.

negative: COVID‐2019: The role of the nsp2 and nsp3 in its pathogenesis Last December 2019, a new virus, named novel Coronavirus (COVID‐2019) causing many cases of severe pneumonia was reported in Wuhan, China. The virus knowledge is limited and especially about COVID‐2019 pathogenesis. The Open Reading Frame 1ab (ORF1ab) of COVID‐2019 has been analyzed to evidence the presence of mutation caused by selective pressure on the virus. For selective pressure analysis fast‐unconstrained Bayesian approximation (FUBAR) was used. Homology modelling has been performed by SwissModel and HHPred servers. The presence of transmembrane helical segments in Coronavirus ORF1ab non structural protein 2 (nsp2) and nsp3 was tested by TMHMM, MEMSAT, and MEMPACK tools. Three‐dimensional structures have been analyzed and displayed using PyMOL. FUBAR analysis revealed the presence of potential sites under positive selective pressure (P < .05). Position 723 in the COVID‐2019 has a serine instead a glycine residue, while at aminoacidic position 1010 a proline instead an isoleucine. Significant (P < .05) pervasive negative selection in 2416 sites (55%) was found. The positive selective pressure could account for some clinical features of this virus compared with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Bat SARS‐like CoV. The stabilizing mutation falling in the endosome‐associated‐protein‐like domain of the nsp2 protein could account for COVID‐2019 high ability of contagious, while the destabilizing mutation in nsp3 proteins could suggest a potential mechanism differentiating COVID‐2019 from SARS. These data could be helpful for further investigation aimed to identify potential therapeutic targets or vaccine strategy, especially in the actual moment when the epidemic is ongoing and the scientific community is trying to enrich knowledge about this new viral pathogen.

negative: Structural disorder in the proteome and interactome of Alkhurma virus (ALKV) Infection by the Alkhurma virus (ALKV) leading to the Alkhurma hemorrhagic fever is a common thread in Saudi Arabia, with no efficient treatment or prevention available as of yet. Although the rational drug design traditionally uses information on known 3D structures of viral proteins, intrinsically disordered proteins (i.e., functional proteins that do not possess unique 3D structures), with their multitude of disorder-dependent functions, are crucial for the biology of viruses. Here, viruses utilize disordered regions in their invasion of the host organisms and in hijacking and repurposing of different host systems. Furthermore, the ability of viruses to efficiently adjust and accommodate to their hostile habitats is also intrinsic disorder-dependent. However, little is currently known on the level of penetrance and functional utilization of intrinsic disorder in the ALKV proteome. To fill this gap, we used here multiple computational tools to evaluate the abundance of intrinsic disorder in the ALKV genome polyprotein. We also analyzed the peculiarities of intrinsic disorder predisposition of the individual viral proteins, as well as human proteins known to be engaged in interaction with the ALKV proteins. Special attention was paid to finding a correlation between protein functionality and structural disorder. To the best of our knowledge, this work represents the first systematic study of the intrinsic disorder status of ALKV proteome and interactome. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00018-018-2968-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

negative: Virus-like particles: The new frontier of vaccines for animal viral infections Abstract Vaccination continues to be the main approach to protect animals from infectious diseases. Until recently, all licensed vaccines were developed using conventional technologies. Subunit vaccines are, however, gaining attention from researchers in the field of veterinary vaccinology, and among these, virus-like particles (VLPs) represent one of the most appealing approaches. VLPs are robust protein cages in the nanometer range that mimic the overall structure of the native virions but lack the viral genome. They are often antigenically indistinguishable from the virus from which they were derived and present important advantages in terms of safety. VLPs can stimulate strong humoral and cellular immune responses and have been shown to exhibit self-adjuvanting abilities. In addition to their suitability as a vaccine for the homologous virus from which they are derived, VLPs can also be used as vectors for the multimeric presentation of foreign antigens. VLPs have therefore shown dramatic effectiveness as candidate vaccines. Here, we review the current status of VLPs as a vaccine technology in the veterinary field, and discuss the potential advantages and challenges of this technology.

negative: Perception of emergent epidemic of COVID-2019 / SARS CoV-2 on the Polish Internet Problem: Due to the spread of SARS CoV-2 virus infection and COVID-2019 disease, there is an urgent need to analyze COVID-2019 epidemic perception in Poland. This would enable authorities for preparation of specific actions minimizing public health and economic risks. Methods: We study the perception of COVID-2019 epidemic in Polish society using quantitative analysis of its digital footprints on the Internet (on Twitter, Google, YouTube, Wikipedia and electronic media represented by Event Registry) from January 2020 to 12.03.2020 (before and after official introduction to Poland on 04.03.2020). To this end we utilize data mining, social network analysis, natural language processing techniques. Each examined internet platform was analyzed for representativeness and composition of the target group. Results: We identified three major cluster of the interest before disease introduction on the topic COVID-2019: China- and Italy-related peaks on all platforms, as well as a peak on social media related to the recent special law on combating COVID-2019. Besides, there was a peak in interest on the day of officially confirmed introduction as well as an exponential increase of interest when the Polish government declared war against disease with a massive mitigation program. From sociolingistic perspective, we found that concepts and issues of threat, fear and prevention prevailed before introduction. After introduction, practical concepts about disease and epidemic dominate. Twitter reflected the clear, structural division of the Polish political sphere. We were able to identify potential sources of misinformation as well as key actors (especially early adopters) and influencers. Conclusions: Traditional and social media not only reflect reality, but also create it. Polish authorities, having a reliable analysis of the perception of the problem, could optimally prepare and manage the social dimension of the current epidemic and future ones. Due to filter bubbles observed on Twitter, public information campaigns might have less impact on society than expected. For greater penetration, it might be necessary to diversify information channels to reach as many people as possible which might already be happening. Moreover, it might be necessary to prevent the spread of disinformation, which is now possible due to the special law on combating COVID-2019.

negative: Understanding the Mosaic of COVID-19: A Review of the Ongoing Crisis In late 2019, a queer type of pneumonia emerged in Wuhan city in the central part of China. On investigation, it was found to be caused by the coronavirus. Human coronaviruses were discovered in the 1960s. There are a total of seven types of coronaviruses that infect humans: 229E and NL63 are the alpha coronaviruses; OC43, HKU1, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV are beta coronaviruses, and SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 is a novel coronavirus. COVID-19 surfaced in China at the culmination of the year 2019. The pandemic then fanned out rapidly, involving Italy, Japan, South Korea, Iran, and the rest of the world.

negative: Chapter 17 Antimicrobial lead compounds from marine plants Abstract Marine environment is a home to a very wide diversity of flora and fauna, which includes an array of genetically diverse coastline and under seawater plant species, animal species, microbial species, their habitats, ecosystems, and supporting ecological processes. The Earth is home to an estimated 10million species, of which a large chunk belongs to marine environment. Marine plants are a store house of a variety of antimicrobial compounds like classes of marine flavonoids—flavones and flavonols, terpenoids, alkaloids, peptides, carbohydrates, fatty acids, polyketides, polysaccharides, phenolic compounds, and steroids. Lot of research today is directed toward marine species, which have proved to be a potent source of structurally widely diverse and yet highly bioactive secondary metabolites. Varied species of phylum Porifera, algae including diatoms, Chlorophyta, Euglenophyta, Dinoflagellata, Chrysophyta, cyanobacteria, Rhodophyta, and Phaeophyta, bacteria, fungi, and weeds have been exploited by mankind for their inherent indigenous biological antimicrobial compounds, produced under the extreme stressful underwater conditions of temperature, atmospheric pressure, light, and nutrition. The present study aims at presenting a brief review of bioactive marine compounds possessing antimicrobial potency.

negative: Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): An Emerging Infectious Disease in the 21st Century Background: At the beginning of the New Year 2020, China alerted the world health organization (WHO) to a cluster of unusual pneumonia cases in Wuhan After extensive speculation, eventually a new species of coronavirus introduced as the causative pathogen of the disease Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a name for the disease, and the virus that causes it is known SARS-CoV-2 The very rapid spread of the COVID-19 in China and in many other countries has caused fear among people across the world The novel coronavirus outbreak declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on 30 January 2020 Materials and Methods: Several databases such as PubMed, Scopus, Google scholar, and BioRxiv were searched for publications reporting on the novel coronavirus up to 29 February 2020 Literature searches were performed using keywords including “Coronavirus 2019”, “2019-nCoV”, “COVID-19”, and “SARS-CoV-2” Moreover, websites such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) were searched to retrieve updated data and statistics regarding the novel coronavirus We extracted data on the epidemiology, pathogenesis, virology, clinical manifestations, transmission routes, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention measures Results: From the 1416 articles identified in the initial search, 53 were remained after title and abstract screening After full-text review, 37 articles were eligible to include in our study Incubation period for COVID-19 is between 2-10 days, according to the World Health Organization (WHO) The case fatality rate in patients infected with SARC-CoV-2 is 4 3%, and the results indicate that the mortality is higher in elderly individuals and patients with chronic conditions including patients with coronary artery disease, diabetes, chronic pulmonary disease, and hypertension The mortality rate in healthy subjects is less than 1% Conclusion: The outbreak caused by the novel coronavirus is larger than the previous human coronaviruses, showing that the SARS-CoV-2 is an extremely contagious virus However, the mortality rate of COVID-19 is lower than that of other coronaviruses diseases such as SARS or MERS and other viruses like HIV and Ebola Currently, due to the lack of an effective treatment and vaccine, the best way to deal with the COVID-19 disease is to prevent transmission and spread of the virus and to execute personal protective measures

negative: Randomized controlled trials for everything?

negative: The epidemic of 2019-novel-coronavirus (2019-nCoV) pneumonia and insights for emerging infectious diseases in the future Abstract At the end of December 2019, a novel coronavirus, 2019-nCoV, caused an outbreak of pneumonia spreading from Wuhan, Hubei province, to the whole country of China, which has posed great threats to public health and attracted enormous attention around the world. To date, there are no clinically approved vaccines or antiviral drugs available for these human coronavirus infections. Intensive research on the novel emerging human infectious coronaviruses is urgently needed to elucidate their route of transmission and pathogenic mechanisms, and to identify potential drug targets, which would promote the development of effective preventive and therapeutic countermeasures. Herein, we describe the epidemic and etiological characteristics of 2019-nCoV, discuss its essential biological features, including tropism and receptor usage, summarize approaches for disease prevention and treatment, and speculate on the transmission route of 2019-nCoV.

negative: DNA Vaccines: Developing New Strategies against Cancer Due to their rapid and widespread development, DNA vaccines have entered into a variety of human clinical trials for vaccines against various diseases including cancer. Evidence that DNA vaccines are well tolerated and have an excellent safety profile proved to be of advantage as many clinical trials combines the first phase with the second, saving both time and money. It is clear from the results obtained in clinical trials that such DNA vaccines require much improvement in antigen expression and delivery methods to make them sufficiently effective in the clinic. Similarly, it is clear that additional strategies are required to activate effective immunity against poorly immunogenic tumor antigens. Engineering vaccine design for manipulating antigen presentation and processing pathways is one of the most important aspects that can be easily handled in the DNA vaccine technology. Several approaches have been investigated including DNA vaccine engineering, co-delivery of immunomodulatory molecules, safe routes of administration, prime-boost regimen and strategies to break the immunosuppressive networks mechanisms adopted by malignant cells to prevent immune cell function. Combined or single strategies to enhance the efficacy and immunogenicity of DNA vaccines are applied in completed and ongoing clinical trials, where the safety and tolerability of the DNA platform are substantiated. In this review on DNA vaccines, salient aspects on this topic going from basic research to the clinic are evaluated. Some representative DNA cancer vaccine studies are also discussed.

negative: Recommendations on the clinical management of the COVID-19 infection by the «new coronavirus» SARS-CoV2. Spanish Paediatric Association working group Abstract On 31 December 2019, the Wuhan Municipal Committee of Health and Healthcare (Hubei Province, China) reported that there were 27 cases of pneumonia of unknown origin with symptoms starting on the 8 December. There were 7 serious cases with common exposure in market with shellfish, fish, and live animals, in the city of Wuhan. On 7 January 2020, the Chinese authorities identified that the agent causing the outbreak was a new type of virus of the Coronaviridae family, temporarily called «new coronavirus», 2019-nCoV. On January 30th, 2020, the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared the outbreak an International Emergency. On 11 February 2020 the WHO assigned it the name of SARS-CoV2 and COVID-19 (SARS-CoV2 and COVID-19). The Ministry of Health summoned the Specialties Societies to prepare a clinical protocol for the management of COVID-19. The Spanish Paediatric Association appointed a Working Group of the Societies of Paediatric Infectious Diseases and Paediatric Intensive Care to prepare the present recommendations with the evidence available at the time of preparing them.

negative: Infección por coronavirus (COVID-19) en Anales de Pediatría

negative: Balloon expulsion testing for the diagnosis of dyssynergic defecation in women with chronic constipation. INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS Dyssynergic defecation can be difficult to diagnose. Anorectal manometry and defecography are often used to make this diagnosis. However, these tests are expensive and require expertise. Balloon expulsion testing may be a simple alternative. We compared balloon expulsion to anorectal manometry and defecography for diagnosing dyssynergia in women with chronic constipation. METHODS We conducted a retrospective review. All women presenting for evaluation of chronic constipation who underwent concurrent balloon testing, manometry, and defecography were included. A diagnosis of dyssynergic defecation was established by either defecography revealing prolonged/incomplete rectal evacuation and/or by manometry revealing paradoxical contraction/inadequate relaxation of the pelvic floor. Inability to expel a 50-ml balloon defined dyssynergic defecation by balloon testing. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated. RESULTS A total of 61 women met inclusion criteria. Mean age was 50 years. There were 36 women (59 %) who met Rome III criteria for dyssynergic defecation on defecography and/or manometry. Only 12 of these 36 (33 %) were similarly diagnosed by balloon testing. The sensitivity and positive predictive value of balloon testing for dyssynergia were 33 and 71 %, respectively. Of the 25 (41 %) women who did not meet Rome III criteria for dyssynergia on defecography and/or manometry, 20 (80 %) also had negative balloon testing. Thus, the specificity and negative predictive value of balloon testing for diagnosing dyssynergia were 80 and 50 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS In our population, balloon expulsion was not an ideal screening test for dyssynergic defecation in women with constipation. Multimodal testing is necessary for more accurate diagnosis.

negative: International expert consensus statement regarding radiotherapy treatment options for rectal cancer during the COVID 19 pandemic

negative: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) and the GDP. Part II: Implications for GDPs The transmission modes of SARS-coronavirus appear to be through droplet spread, close contact and fomites although air borne transmission has not been ruled out. This clearly places dental personnel at risks as they work in close proximity to their patients employing droplet and aerosol generating procedures. Although the principle of universal precautions is widely advocated and followed throughout the dental community, additional precautionary measures — termed standard precaution may be necessary to help control the spread of this highly contagious disease. Patient assessment should include questions on recent travel to SARS infected areas and, contacts of patients, fever and symptoms of respiratory infections. Special management protocols and modified measures that regulate droplet and aerosol contamination in a dental setting have to be introduced and may include the reduction or avoidance of droplet/aerosol generation, the disinfection of the treatment field, application of rubber dam, pre-procedural antiseptic mouthrinse and the dilution and efficient removal of contaminated ambient air. The gag, cough or vomiting reflexes that lead to the generation of aerosols should also be prevented.

negative: Traditional Chinese medicine in the treatment of acute respiratory tract infections Summary Aims To review the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews for the effectiveness of traditional Chinese medicinal (TCM) herbs for treating acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs) and to discuss the limitations of current clinical trials of TCM. Findings Evidence from six Cochrane systematic reviews was weak owing to the lack of high-quality TCM trials. Limitations were usually due to biases that influenced the validity of results. Conclusions TCM is widely used for treating ARTIs. However, none of the identified studies has been well designed or conducted. In this overview, we suggest that clinical trials of TCM for ARTIs need to be re-run in accordance with internationally recognized standards.

negative: Abstracts Presented at the Neurocritical Care Society (NCS) 15th Annual Meeting

negative: Initial public health response and interim clinical guidance for the 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak — United States, December 31, 2019–February 4, 2020 This article summarizes what is currently known about the 2019 novel coronavirus and offers interim guidance.

negative: Early epidemiological analysis of the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak based on crowdsourced data: a population-level observational study Summary Background As the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) progresses, epidemiological data are needed to guide situational awareness and intervention strategies. Here we describe efforts to compile and disseminate epidemiological information on COVID-19 from news media and social networks. Methods In this population-level observational study, we searched DXY.cn, a health-care-oriented social network that is currently streaming news reports on COVID-19 from local and national Chinese health agencies. We compiled a list of individual patients with COVID-19 and daily province-level case counts between Jan 13 and Jan 31, 2020, in China. We also compiled a list of internationally exported cases of COVID-19 from global news media sources (Kyodo News, The Straits Times, and CNN), national governments, and health authorities. We assessed trends in the epidemiology of COVID-19 and studied the outbreak progression across China, assessing delays between symptom onset, seeking care at a hospital or clinic, and reporting, before and after Jan 18, 2020, as awareness of the outbreak increased. All data were made publicly available in real time. Findings We collected data for 507 patients with COVID-19 reported between Jan 13 and Jan 31, 2020, including 364 from mainland China and 143 from outside of China. 281 (55%) patients were male and the median age was 46 years (IQR 35–60). Few patients (13 [3%]) were younger than 15 years and the age profile of Chinese patients adjusted for baseline demographics confirmed a deficit of infections among children. Across the analysed period, delays between symptom onset and seeking care at a hospital or clinic were longer in Hubei province than in other provinces in mainland China and internationally. In mainland China, these delays decreased from 5 days before Jan 18, 2020, to 2 days thereafter until Jan 31, 2020 (p=0·0009). Although our sample captures only 507 (5·2%) of 9826 patients with COVID-19 reported by official sources during the analysed period, our data align with an official report published by Chinese authorities on Jan 28, 2020. Interpretation News reports and social media can help reconstruct the progression of an outbreak and provide detailed patient-level data in the context of a health emergency. The availability of a central physician-oriented social network facilitated the compilation of publicly available COVID-19 data in China. As the outbreak progresses, social media and news reports will probably capture a diminishing fraction of COVID-19 cases globally due to reporting fatigue and overwhelmed health-care systems. In the early stages of an outbreak, availability of public datasets is important to encourage analytical efforts by independent teams and provide robust evidence to guide interventions. Funding Fogarty International Center, US National Institutes of Health.

negative: [Strategy of dental clinics to cope with the epidemic period of infectious diseases based on the experience of corona virus disease outbreak]. The outbreak of corona virus disease (COVID-19) has raised concerns among dentists to develop strategies to prevent infection of dental equipment, materials, and patients during an epidemic period. Strategies following the National Laws and Standards of China and local standards of several provinces for controlling cross-infection and instituting protective measures for medical staff in dental clinics during an epidemic period are discussed. A proposal is put forth for dental clinics that will face similar situations in the future. Further research is warranted to address potential problems that will be encountered under such dire circumstances.

negative: Predicted protein interactions of IFITMs may shed light on mechanisms of Zika virus-induced microcephaly and host invasion After the first reported case of Zika virus (ZIKV) in Brazil, in 2015, a significant increase in the reported cases of microcephaly was observed. Microcephaly is a neurological condition in which the infant’s head is significantly smaller with complications in brain development. Recently, two small membrane-associated interferon-inducible transmembrane proteins (IFITM1 and IFITM3) have been shown to repress members of the flaviviridae family which includes ZIKV. However, the exact mechanisms leading to the inhibition of the virus are yet unknown. Here, we assembled an interactome of IFITM1 and IFITM3 with known protein-protein interactions (PPIs) collected from publicly available databases and novel PPIs predicted using the High-confidence Protein-Protein Interaction Prediction (HiPPIP) model. We analyzed the functional and pathway associations of the interacting proteins, and found that there are several immunity pathways (toll-like receptor signaling, cd28 signaling in T-helper cells, crosstalk between dendritic cells and natural killer cells), neuronal pathways (axonal guidance signaling, neural tube closure and actin cytoskeleton signaling) and developmental pathways (neural tube closure, embryonic skeletal system development) that are associated with these interactors. Our novel PPIs associate cilia dysfunction in ependymal cells to microcephaly, and may also shed light on potential targets of ZIKV for host invasion by immunosuppression and cytoskeletal rearrangements. These results could help direct future research in elucidating the mechanisms underlying host defense to ZIKV and other flaviviruses.

negative: Comment on “Should COVID-19 Concern Nephrologists? Why and to What Extent? The Emerging Impasse of Angiotensin Blockade”

negative: Nosocomial Infection in the Intensive Care Unit

negative: The Author's Response: Case of the Index Patient Who Caused Tertiary Transmission of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Korea: the Application of Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the Treatment of COVID-19 Pneumonia Monitored by Quantitative RT-PCR.

negative: Covid-19: surge in cases in Italy and South Korea makes pandemic look more likely.

negative: Estimating Probabilities of Success of Clinical Trials for Vaccines and Other Anti-Infective Therapeutics A key driver in biopharmaceutical investment decisions is the probability of success of a drug development program. We estimate the probabilities of success (PoS) of clinical trials for vaccines and other anti-infective therapeutics using 43,414 unique triplets of clinical trial, drug, and disease between January 1, 2000, and January 7, 2020, yielding 2,544 vaccine programs and 6,829 non-vaccine programs targeting infectious diseases. The overall estimated PoS for an industry-sponsored vaccine program is 39.6%, and 16.3% for an industry-sponsored anti-infective therapeutic. Among industry-sponsored vaccines programs, only 12 out of 27 disease categories have seen at least one approval, with the most successful being against monkeypox (100%), rotavirus (78.7%), and Japanese encephalitis (67.6%). The three infectious diseases with the highest PoS for industry-sponsored non-vaccine therapeutics are smallpox (100%), CMV (31.8%), and onychomycosis (29.8%). Non-industry-sponsored vaccine and non-vaccine development programs have lower overall PoSs: 6.8% and 8.2%, respectively. Viruses involved in recent outbreaks---MERS, SARS, Ebola, Zika---have had a combined total of only 45 non-vaccine development programs initiated over the past two decades, and no approved therapy to date (Note: our data was obtained just before the COVID-19 outbreak and do not contain information about the programs targeting this disease.) These estimates offer guidance both to biopharma investors as well as to policymakers seeking to identify areas most likely to be undeserved by private-sector engagement and in need of public-sector support.

negative: Efficacy of Zinc Against Common Cold Viruses: An Overview ABSTRACT Objective To review the laboratory and clinical evidence of the medicinal value of zinc for the treatment of the common cold. Data Sources Published articles identified through Medline (1980–2003) using the search terms zinc, rhinovirus, and other pertinent subject headings. Additional sources were identified from the bibliographies of the retrieved articles. Study Selection By the author. Data Extraction By the author. Data Synthesis Human rhinoviruses, by attaching to the nasal epithelium via the intracellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1) receptor, cause most colds. Ionic zinc, based on its electrical charge, also has an affinity for ICAM-1 receptor sites and may exert an antiviral effect by attaching to the ICAM-1 receptors in the rhinovirus structure and nasal epithelial cells. Clinical tests of zinc for treatment of common colds have been inconsistent, primarily because of study design, blinding, and lozenge contents. Early formulations of lozenges also were unpalatable. In three trials with similar study designs, methodologies, and efficacy assessments, zinc effectively and significantly shortened the duration of the common cold when it was administered within 24 hours of the onset of symptoms. Recent reports of trials with zinc gluconate administered as a nasal gel have supported these findings; in addition, they have shown that treatment with zinc nasal gel is effective in reducing the duration and severity of common cold symptoms in patients with established illness. Conclusion Clinical trial data support the value of zinc in reducing the duration and severity of symptoms of the common cold when administered within 24 hours of the onset of common cold symptoms. Additional clinical and laboratory evaluations are warranted to further define the role of ionic zinc for the prevention and treatment of the common cold and to elucidate the biochemical mechanisms through which zinc exerts its symptom-relieving effects.

negative: Moderate mutation rate in the SARS coronavirus genome and its implications BACKGROUND: The outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) caused a severe global epidemic in 2003 which led to hundreds of deaths and many thousands of hospitalizations. The virus causing SARS was identified as a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and multiple genomic sequences have been revealed since mid-April, 2003. After a quiet summer and fall in 2003, the newly emerged SARS cases in Asia, particularly the latest cases in China, are reinforcing a wide-spread belief that the SARS epidemic would strike back. With the understanding that SARS-CoV might be with humans for years to come, knowledge of the evolutionary mechanism of the SARS-CoV, including its mutation rate and emergence time, is fundamental to battle this deadly pathogen. To date, the speed at which the deadly virus evolved in nature and the elapsed time before it was transmitted to humans remains poorly understood. RESULTS: Sixteen complete genomic sequences with available clinical histories during the SARS outbreak were analyzed. After careful examination of multiple-sequence alignment, 114 single nucleotide variations were identified. To minimize the effects of sequencing errors and additional mutations during the cell culture, three strategies were applied to estimate the mutation rate by 1) using the closely related sequences as background controls; 2) adjusting the divergence time for cell culture; or 3) using the common variants only. The mutation rate in the SARS-CoV genome was estimated to be 0.80 – 2.38 × 10(-3 )nucleotide substitution per site per year which is in the same order of magnitude as other RNA viruses. The non-synonymous and synonymous substitution rates were estimated to be 1.16 – 3.30 × 10(-3 )and 1.67 – 4.67 × 10(-3 )per site per year, respectively. The most recent common ancestor of the 16 sequences was inferred to be present as early as the spring of 2002. CONCLUSIONS: The estimated mutation rates in the SARS-CoV using multiple strategies were not unusual among coronaviruses and moderate compared to those in other RNA viruses. All estimates of mutation rates led to the inference that the SARS-CoV could have been with humans in the spring of 2002 without causing a severe epidemic.

negative: Early Impact of COVID-19 on the Conduct of Oncology Clinical Trials and Long-Term Opportunities for Transformation: Findings From an American Society of Clinical Oncology Survey The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted all aspects of clinical care, including cancer clinical trials. In March 2020, ASCO launched a survey of clinical programs represented on its Cancer Research Committee and Research Community Forum Steering Group and taskforces to learn about the types of changes and challenges that clinical trial programs were experiencing early in the pandemic. There were 32 survey respondents; 14 represented academic programs, and 18 represented community-based programs. Respondents indicated that COVID-19 is leading programs to halt or prioritize screening and/or enrollment for certain clinical trials and cease research-only visits. Most reported conducting remote patient care where possible and remote visits and monitoring with sponsors and/or contract research organizations (CROs); respondents viewed this shift positively. Numerous challenges with conducting clinical trials were reported, including enrollment and protocol adherence difficulties with decreased patient visits, staffing constraints, and limited availability of ancillary services. Interactions with sponsors and CROs about modifying trial procedures were also challenging. The changes in clinical trial procedures identified by the survey could serve as strategies for other programs attempting to maintain their clinical trial portfolios during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, many of the adaptations to trials made during the pandemic provide a long-term opportunity to improve and transform the clinical trial system. Specific improvements could be expanded use of more pragmatic or streamlined trial designs, fewer clinical trial-related patient visits, and minimized sponsor and CRO visits to trial programs.

negative: Prognostic factors for severity and mortality in patients infected with COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol Objective The objective of our systematic review is to identify prognostic factors that can potentially be used in decision-making related to the care of patients infected with COVID-19. Design This is the protocol of a living systematic review. Data sources We will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature and in a centralised repository in L-OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L-OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L-OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies and methods We will follow a common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews, already published and submitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation). We will include studies that assess patients with confirmed or suspected infection with SARS-CoV-2 and inform the relation of potential prognostic factors with death or disease severity. Two groups of two reviewers will independently screen studies for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will perform meta-analyses and use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each prognostic factor and outcome. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it if the conclusions change or there are substantial updates. Ethics and dissemination No ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media.

negative: Virus-Vectored Ebola Vaccines The Ebola virus disease (EVD) is one of the most dangerous infections affecting humans and animals. The first EVD outbreaks occurred in 1976 in Sudan and Zaire. Since then, more than 20 outbreaks have occurred; the largest of which (2014−2016) evolved into an epidemic in West Africa and claimed the lives of more than 11,000 people. Although vaccination is the most effective way to prevent epidemics, there was no licensed vaccine for EVD at the beginning of the latest outbreak. The development of the first vaccines for EVD started in 1980 and has come a long technological way, from inactivated to genetically engineered vaccines based on recombinant viral vectors. This review focuses on virus-vectored Ebola vaccines that have demonstrated the greatest efficacy in preclinical trials and are currently under different phases of clinical trial. Particular attention is paid to the mechanisms of immune response development, which are important for protection from EVD, and the key vaccine parameters necessary for inducing long-term protective immunity against EVD.

negative: Going global – Travel and the 2019 novel coronavirus

negative: Clinical Trials and Tribulations in the COVID-19 Era Advances in treating and preventing Alzheimer's disease and other neurocognitive disorders of aging arise from rigorous preclinical and clinical research, with randomized controlled treatment trials as the last and definitive test. The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly disrupted ongoing interventional studies and researchers are scrambling to find ways to safely continue this critical work amidst rapidly shifting guidelines from sponsors, institutions, and state and federal guidelines. Here we describe novel approaches and work-flow adaptations to study visits, drug delivery and interim and endpoint safety and outcomes assessments to avoid sacrificing years of preparation and substantial financial investments, to work in the best interest of participants and their caregivers, and to continue on the path towards discovering disease-modifying treatments for the millions of individuals impacted by major neurocognitive disorders.

negative: A Decade On: Systematic Review of ClinicalTrials.gov Infectious Disease Trials, 2007–2017 BACKGROUND: Registration of interventional trials of Food and Drug Administration–regulated drug and biological products and devices became a legal requirement in 2007; the vast majority of these trials are registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. An analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov offers an opportunity to define the clinical research landscape; here we analyze 10 years of infectious disease (ID) clinical trial research. METHODS: Beginning with 166 415 interventional trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov from 2007–2017, ID trials were selected by study conditions and interventions. Relevance to ID was confirmed through manual review, resulting in 13 707 ID trials and 152 708 non-ID trials. RESULTS: ID-related trials represented 6.9%–9.9% of all trials with no significant trend over time. ID trials tended to be more focused on treatment and prevention, with a focus on testing drugs, biologics, and vaccines. ID trials tended to be large, randomized, and nonblinded with a greater degree of international enrollment. Industry was the primary funding source for 45.2% of ID trials. Compared with the global burden of disease, human immunodeficiency virus/AIDS and hepatitis C trials were overrepresented, and lower respiratory tract infection trials were underrepresented. Hepatitis C trials fluctuated, keeping with a wave of new drug development. Influenza vaccine trials peaked during the 2009 H1N1 swine influenza outbreak. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents the most comprehensive characterization of ID clinical trials over the past decade. These results help define how clinical research aligns with clinical need. Temporal trends reflect changes in disease epidemiology and the impact of scientific discovery and market forces. Periodic review of ID clinical trials can help identify gaps and serve as a mechanism to realign resources.

negative: Carrageenan nasal spray in virus confirmed common cold: individual patient data analysis of two randomized controlled trials BACKGROUND: Clinical trials applying iota-carrageenan nasal spray have previously shown to reduce duration of virus-confirmed common cold. The present study pooled data of two similar clinical trials to provide further evidence for the antiviral effectiveness of carrageenan. METHODS: Individual patient data were analyzed from two randomized double blind placebo controlled trials assessing the therapeutic effectiveness of carrageenan nasal spray in acute common cold. Patients with virus-confirmed common cold (n = 254, verum 126, placebo 128) were included and the following parameters were appraised: duration of disease, number of patients with relapses, number of respiratory viruses and viral titers at inclusion (visit 1) compared to days 3–5 (visit 2). RESULTS: Carrageenan treated patients showed a significant reduction in duration of disease of almost 2 days (p < 0.05) as well as significantly fewer relapses during 21 days of observation period (p < 0.05). The virus clearance between visit 1 and visit 2 was significantly more pronounced in the carrageenan group (p < 0.05). In both studies, virus-confirmed common cold was caused by three main virus subtypes: human rhinovirus (46%), human coronavirus (25%) and influenza A (14%) virus. Carrageenan nasal spray showed significant antiviral efficacy in all three virus subgroups, the highest effectiveness was observed in human corona virus-infected patients. The reduced duration of disease was 3 days (p < 0.01) and the number of relapses was three times less (p < 0.01) in carrageenan treated corona-virus-infected patients compared to control patients. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of carrageenan nasal spray in children as well as in adults suffering from virus-confirmed common cold reduced duration of disease, increased viral clearance and reduced relapses of symptoms. Carrageenan nasal spray appeared as an effective treatment of common cold in children and adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pooled data from ISRCTN52519535 and ISRCTN80148028

negative: Is There Any Difference in Risk Factors between Male and Female Patients in New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting? BACKGROUND We aimed to investigate the risk factors of post-coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) atrial fibrillation (AF) in male and female patients without any history of AF, to identify the sex-specific risk factors, and to examine the effect of sex-specific risk factors on the overall population. METHODS This retrospective study was conducted using the hospital database with 4,758 patients who underwent CABG surgery. Among them, 2,836 patients with complete data participated in this study. The female patients were divided into two groups as patients who developed new-onset AF after CABG and those who did not. The relationship between the patients' variables and risk factors of post-CABG AF was examined. RESULTS The overall incidence of post CABG AF was 12.9% (386/2,836). Sex-specific incidence of AF was similar: 3.2% (91/690) and 12.9% (277/2146) in female and male patients, respectively (p = 0.849). Multiple analysis revealed the independent risk factors for male and female patients, respectively: mean age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.057, OR = 1,076), age over 65 years (OR = 2.156, OR = 2.736), the European System For Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation Scores (EuroSCORE) (OR = 1.13, OR = 1.218), COPD (OR = 1.589, OR = 1.789), BUN level (OR = 1.026, OR = 1.019), mean cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time (OR = 1.007, OR = 1.010), prolonged CPB time (OR = 1.604, OR = 2.309), mean cross-clamp time (OR = 1.009, OR = 1.017), need of inotropic support (OR = 2.249, OR = 2.731), and mean mechanical ventilation time (VT) (OR = 1.026, OR = 1.027).Low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (OR = 1.419), left ventricular (LV) aneurysm repair (OR = 1.533), carotid artery disease (OR = 1.750), prolonged VT (OR = 1.729), and use of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) (OR = 2.436) were found to be the risk factors only for male AF patients.Unstable angina (OR = 1.969), right coronary artery (RCA) disease (OR = 2), prolonged cross-clamp time (OR = 2.152), and the number of grafts per operation (OR = 1.298) were found to be the risk factors only for female AF patients. CONCLUSION This study suggests that predictors of AF in the overall population may be due to isolated patient groups. Multiple regression analysis and artificial intelligence modelling should be performed on large-scale, isolated groups to make strong AF prediction.

negative: Cardiovascular Clinical Trials in a Pandemic: Immediate Implications of Coronavirus Disease 2019 The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic started in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, in December 2019, and by 24 April 2020, it had affected >2.73 million people in 185 countries and caused >192,000 deaths. Despite diverse societal measures to reduce transmission of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, such as implementing social distancing, quarantine, curfews and total lockdowns, its control remains challenging. Healthcare practitioners are at the frontline of defence against the virus, with increasing institutional and governmental supports. Nevertheless, new or ongoing clinical trials, not related to the disease itself, remain important for the development of new therapies, and require interactions among patients, clinicians and research personnel, which is challenging, given isolation measures. In this article, the authors summarise the acute effects and consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on current cardiovascular trials.

negative: Transplantation of ACE2(-) Mesenchymal Stem Cells Improves the Outcome of Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia A coronavirus (HCoV-19) has caused the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in Wuhan, China. Preventing and reversing the cytokine storm may be the key to save the patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been shown to possess a comprehensive powerful immunomodulatory function. This study aims to investigate whether MSC transplantation improves the outcome of 7 enrolled patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in Beijing YouAn Hospital, China, from Jan 23, 2020 to Feb 16, 2020. The clinical outcomes, as well as changes of inflammatory and immune function levels and adverse effects of 7 enrolled patients were assessed for 14 days after MSC injection. MSCs could cure or significantly improve the functional outcomes of seven patients without observed adverse effects. The pulmonary function and symptoms of these seven patients were significantly improved in 2 days after MSC transplantation. Among them, two common and one severe patient were recovered and discharged in 10 days after treatment. After treatment, the peripheral lymphocytes were increased, the C-reactive protein decreased, and the overactivated cytokine-secreting immune cells CXCR3+CD4+ T cells, CXCR3+CD8+ T cells, and CXCR3+ NK cells disappeared in 3-6 days. In addition, a group of CD14+CD11c+CD11b(mid) regulatory DC cell population dramatically increased. Meanwhile, the level of TNF-α was significantly decreased, while IL-10 increased in MSC treatment group compared to the placebo control group. Furthermore, the gene expression profile showed MSCs were ACE2(-) and TMPRSS2(-) which indicated MSCs are free from COVID-19 infection. Thus, the intravenous transplantation of MSCs was safe and effective for treatment in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, especially for the patients in critically severe condition.

negative: ESICM LIVES 2016: part one: Milan, Italy. 1-5 October 2016

negative: COVID-19: An Update on the Epidemiological, Clinical, Preventive and Therapeutic Evidence and Guidelines of Integrative Chinese-Western Medicine for the Management of 2019 Novel Coronavirus Disease. As of 22 February 2020, more than 77662 cases of confirmed COVID-19 have been documented globally with over 2360 deaths. Common presentations of confirmed cases include fever, fatigue, dry cough, upper airway congestion, sputum production, shortness of breath, myalgia/arthralgia with lymphopenia, prolonged prothrombin time, elevated C-reactive protein, and elevated lactate dehydrogenase. The reported severe/critical case ratio is approximately 7-10% and median time to intensive care admission is 9.5-10.5 days with mortality of around 1-2% varied geographically. Similar to outbreaks of other newly identified virus, there is no proven regimen from conventional medicine and most reports managed the patients with lopinavir/ritonavir, ribavirin, beta-interferon, glucocorticoid and supportive treatment with remdesivir undergoing clinical trial. In China, Chinese medicine is proposed as a treatment option by national and provincial guidelines with substantial utilization. We reviewed the latest national and provincial clinical guidelines, retrospective cohort studies, and case series regarding the treatment of COVID-19 by add-on Chinese medicine. We have also reviewed the clinical evidence generated from SARS and H1N1 management with hypothesized mechanisms and latest in silico findings to identify candidate Chinese medicines for the consideration of possible trials and management. Given the paucity of strongly evidence-based regimens, the available data suggest that Chinese medicine could be considered as an adjunctive therapeutic option in the management of COVID-19.

negative: Effectiveness of zinc supplementation on diarrhea and average daily gain in pre-weaned dairy calves: A double-blind, block-randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial The objective of this clinical trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of zinc supplementation on diarrhea and average daily weight gain (ADG) in pre-weaned dairy calves. A total of 1,482 healthy Holstein heifer and bull calves from a large California dairy were enrolled at 24 to 48 hours of age until hutch exit at approximately 90 days of age. Calves were block-randomized by time to one of three treatments: 1) placebo, 2) zinc methionine (ZM), or 3) zinc sulfate (ZS) administered in milk once daily for 14 days. Serum total protein at enrollment and body weight at birth, treatment end, and hutch exit were measured. Fecal consistency was assessed daily for 28 days post-enrollment. For a random sample of 127 calves, serum zinc concentrations before and after treatment and a fecal antigen ELISA at diarrhea start and resolution for Escherichia coli K99, rotavirus, coronavirus, and Cryptosporidium parvum were performed. Linear regression showed that ZM-treated bull calves had 22 g increased ADG compared to placebo-treated bulls (P = 0.042). ZM-treated heifers had 9 g decreased ADG compared to placebo-treated heifers (P = 0.037), after adjusting for average birth weight. Sex-stratified models showed that high birth weight heifers treated with ZM gained more than placebo-treated heifers of the same birth weight, which suggests a dose-response effect rather than a true sex-specific effect of ZM on ADG. Cox regression showed that ZM and ZS-treated calves had a 14.7% (P = 0.015) and 13.9% (P = 0.022) reduced hazard of diarrhea, respectively, compared to placebo-treated calves. Calves supplemented for at least the first five days of diarrhea with ZM and ZS had a 21.4% (P = 0.027) and 13.0% (P = 0.040) increased hazard of cure from diarrhea, respectively, compared to placebo-treated calves. Logistic regression showed that the odds of microbiological cure at diarrhea resolution for rotavirus, C. parvum, or any single fecal pathogen was not different between treatment groups. Zinc supplementation delayed diarrhea and expedited diarrhea recovery in pre-weaned calves. Additionally, zinc improved weight gain differentially in bulls compared to heifers, indicating a research need for sex-specific dosing.

negative: The EMPOWER-SUSTAIN e-Health Intervention to improve patient activation and self-management behaviours among individuals with Metabolic Syndrome in primary care: study protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies conducted in various parts of the world have clearly demonstrated that metabolic syndrome (MetS) is an increasing global health problem, not only in Western societies but also in Asian populations. Web-based and mobile phone-based self-management applications have been proven to be effective in improving self-management behaviour of patients with MetS components (i.e., diabetes or hypertension). However, evidence is lacking in terms of their effectiveness specifically for patients with MetS. The aim of this pilot study is to evaluate the feasibility and potential effectiveness of the EMPOWER-SUSTAIN Self-Management e-Health Intervention in improving activation and self-management behaviours among patients with MetS. This paper presents the study protocol. METHODS: A pilot randomised controlled trial will be conducted in a university primary care clinic. A total of 232 patients aged 18–60 years with MetS will be recruited; 116 will be randomised to receive the EMPOWER-SUSTAIN intervention for 6 months, and another 116 patients will continue with usual care. The EMPOWER-SUSTAIN intervention is a multifaceted chronic disease management strategy based on the Chronic Care Model and persuasive technology theory. It consists of training primary care physicians, nurses and patients to use the EMPOWER-SUSTAIN web-based self-management mobile app, strengthening the patient–physician relationship and reinforcing the use of relevant clinical practice guidelines to guide management and prescribing. The primary outcome is the mean change in patient activation score using the Patient Activation Measure short form Malay version (PAM-13-M) questionnaire. The secondary outcomes include the changes in waist circumference, body mass index, blood pressure, patient physical activity level, eating behaviour, perception of chronic illness care, satisfaction with patient–physician interaction, and perceived absolute 10-year cardiovascular disease risk. Feasibility of implementing the intervention will be evaluated. This includes acceptability of the intervention, estimating the likely rate of participant recruitment and retention, appropriateness of the outcome measures, calculation of sample size, and the intervention’s potential effectiveness. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study in Malaysia that aims to determine the feasibility of a multifaceted e-health intervention, as well as to indicate more useful aspects of this intervention for further exploration in a larger trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04120779. Registered on 9 October 2019, protocol version 1.

negative: Pharmacokinetic bases of the hydroxychloroquine response in COVID-19: implications for therapy and prevention Chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine has recently been the subject of intense debate in regard to its potential antiviral activity against SARS-Cov-2, the etiological agent of COVID-19. Some report possible curative effects, others do not. In order to shed some light on this rather controversial topic, we used mathematical modelling to simulate possible scenarios of response to hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 patients. Our computer-aided simulations show that hydroxychloroquine may have an impact on the amplitude of the viral load peak but that viral clearance is not significantly accelerated if the drug is not administered early enough (i.e. when viral loads range from 1 to 1,000 copies/mL). Although some authors had used the trough plasma concentrations or the theoretical drug distribution in the lung to model the effect of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine on COVID-19, the theoretical drug response based on the trough whole blood concentrations of the drug agreed well with the results of the clinical trials so far reported. Moreover, the effects of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine could be fully explained when taking into account also the capacity of this drug to raise cell-mediated responses against the productively SARS-Cov-2-infected cells. On the whole, the present study suggests that chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine has a narrow therapeutic window, which overlaps with the highest tolerated doses. These considerations may have implications for development of anti-COVID-19 combination therapies and prevention strategies.

negative: Hepatitis C Virus RNA Replication Depends on Specific Cis- and Trans-Acting Activities of Viral Nonstructural Proteins Many positive-strand RNA viruses encode genes that can function in trans, whereas other genes are required in cis for genome replication. The mechanisms underlying trans- and cis-preferences are not fully understood. Here, we evaluate this concept for hepatitis C virus (HCV), an important cause of chronic liver disease and member of the Flaviviridae family. HCV encodes five nonstructural (NS) genes that are required for RNA replication. To date, only two of these genes, NS4B and NS5A, have been trans-complemented, leading to suggestions that other replicase genes work only in cis. We describe a new quantitative system to measure the cis- and trans-requirements for HCV NS gene function in RNA replication and identify several lethal mutations in the NS3, NS4A, NS4B, NS5A, and NS5B genes that can be complemented in trans, alone or in combination, by expressing the NS3–5B polyprotein from a synthetic mRNA. Although NS5B RNA binding and polymerase activities can be supplied in trans, NS5B protein expression was required in cis, indicating that NS5B has a cis-acting role in replicase assembly distinct from its known enzymatic activity. Furthermore, the RNA binding and NTPase activities of the NS3 helicase domain were required in cis, suggesting that these activities play an essential role in RNA template selection. A comprehensive complementation group analysis revealed functional linkages between NS3-4A and NS4B and between NS5B and the upstream NS3–5A genes. Finally, NS5B polymerase activity segregated with a daclatasvir-sensitive NS5A activity, which could explain the synergy of this antiviral compound with nucleoside analogs in patients. Together, these studies define several new aspects of HCV replicase structure-function, help to explain the potency of HCV-specific combination therapies, and provide an experimental framework for the study of cis- and trans-acting activities in positive-strand RNA virus replication more generally.

negative: Risk-adapted Treatment Strategy For COVID-19 Patients BACKGROUND: There are no clear expert consensus or guidelines on how to treat 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The objective of this study is to investigate the short-term effect of risk-adapted treatment strategy on patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We collected the medical records of 55 COVID-19 patients for analysis. We divided these patients into mild, moderate and severe groups, and risk-adapted treatment approaches were given according to the illness severity. RESULTS: Twelve patients were in mild group and 22 were in moderate group (non-severe group, n = 34), and 21 patients were in severe group. At the end of the first two weeks after admission, clinical manifestations had completely despeared in 31(91.2%)patients in non-severe group, and 18(85.7%) patients in severe group (p = 0.85). Both groups had a satisfied chest CT imaging recovery, which includes 22(64.7%) patients in non-severe group and 12(57.1%) patients in severe group recovered at least 50% of the whole leisions in the first week, and 28(82.4%) and 16(76.2%) recovered at least 75% in the second week, respectively. There were no significant differences in SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid negativity (p = 0.92). There were also no significant differences in the levels of SARS-CoV-2-IgM and IgG antibody production between the two groups (p = 0.13, 0.62). There were 45 cases were discharged from the hospital, and no patients died at the time of this clinical analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Risk-adapted treatment strategy was associated with significant clinical manifestations alleviation and clinical imaging recovery. In severe COVID-19 patients, early and short-term use of low-dose methylprednisolone was beneficial and did not delay SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid clearance and influence IgG antibody production.

negative: Are adaptive randomised trials or non-randomised studies the best way to address the Ebola outbreak in west Africa? Summary The Ebola outbreak that has devastated parts of west Africa represents an unprecedented challenge for research and ethics. Estimates from the past three decades emphasise that the present effort to contain the epidemic in the three most affected countries (Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone) has been insufficient, with more than 24 900 cases and about 10 300 deaths, as of March 25, 2015. Faced with such an exceptional event and the urgent response it demands, the use of randomised controlled trials (RCT) for Ebola-related research might be both unethical and infeasible and that potential interventions should be assessed in non-randomised studies on the basis of compassionate use. However, non-randomised studies might not yield valid conclusions, leading to large residual uncertainty about how to interpret the results, and can also waste scarce intervention-related resources, making them profoundly unethical. Scientifically sound and rigorous study designs, such as adaptive RCTs, could provide the best way to reduce the time needed to develop new interventions and to obtain valid results on their efficacy and safety while preserving the application of ethical precepts. We present an overview of clinical studies registered at present at the four main international trial registries and provide a simulation on how adaptive RCTs can behave in this context, when mortality varies simultaneously in either the control or the experimental group.

negative: Severe respiratory syndromes: Travel history matters Summary History of travel or contact is an important clue to emerging infections. Common and novel respiratory viruses can occasionally cause epidemics of viral pneumonitis with severe acute respiratory symptoms (sars). In 2003, World Health Organisation (WHO) coined the word SARS for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome in patients with a relevant travel/contact history and sars. The WHO case definition of suspected SARS was fever, respiratory symptoms and close contact with SARS patients or travel history to an epidemic area. The clinical features are essentially the same as for any respiratory viral infections or pneumonitis. Since 2003, many new surveillance guidelines and confusing abbreviations appeared in the city of Hong Kong. In 2012, another outbreak of coronavirus pneumonitis occurred in the Middle-East. More case definitions such as MERS (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome) and SARI (Severe Acute Respiratory Infections) were coined for the viral pneumonitis. In medicine, a definition or syndrome representing “a constellation of symptomatology seen in association” should stand the trial of time after it is coined. Health organisations should provide consistent definitions for index surveillance, epidemiological and prognostication studies. Travel or contact history is pivotal in formulating management protocol during any outbreak when the pathogen is not initially clear.

negative: Is the discovery of the novel human betacoronavirus 2c EMC/2012 (HCoV-EMC) the beginning of another SARS-like pandemic? Summary Fouchier et al. reported the isolation and genome sequencing of a novel coronavirus tentatively named “human betacoronavirus 2c EMC/2012 (HCoV-EMC)” from a Saudi patient presenting with pneumonia and renal failure in June 2012. Genome sequencing showed that this virus belongs to the group C species of the genus betacoronavirus and phylogenetically related to the bat coronaviruses HKU4 and HKU5 previously found in lesser bamboo bat and Japanese Pipistrelle bat of Hong Kong respectively. Another patient from Qatar with similar clinical presentation and positive RT-PCR test was reported in September 2012. We compare and contrast the clinical presentation, laboratory diagnosis and management of infection due to this novel coronavirus and that of SARS coronavirus despite the paucity of published information on the former. Since 70% of all emerging infectious pathogens came from animals, the emergence of this novel virus may represent another instance of interspecies jumping of betacoronavirus from animals to human similar to the group A coronavirus OC43 possibly from a bovine source in the 1890s and the group B SARS coronavirus in 2003 from bat to civet and human. Despite the apparently low transmissibility of the virus at this stage, research preparedness against another SARS-like pandemic is an important precautionary strategy.

negative: An Invited Commentary on “The Socio-Economic Implications of the Coronavirus and COVID-19 Pandemic: A Review”

negative: Advances in respiratory virus therapeutics – A meeting report from the 6th isirv Antiviral Group conference Abstract The International Society for Influenza and other Respiratory Virus Diseases held its 6th Antiviral Group (isirv-AVG) conference in Rockville, Maryland, November 13–15, 2018. The three-day program was focused on therapeutics towards seasonal and pandemic influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, coronaviruses including MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, human rhinovirus, and other respiratory viruses. Updates were presented on several influenza antivirals including baloxavir, CC-42344, VIS410, immunoglobulin, immune plasma, MHAA4549A, pimodivir (JNJ-63623872), umifenovir, and HA minibinders; RSV antivirals including presatovir (GS-5806), ziresovir (AK0529), lumicitabine (ALS-008176), JNJ-53718678, JNJ-64417184, and EDP-938; broad spectrum antivirals such as favipiravir, VH244, remdesivir, and EIDD-1931/EIDD-2801; and host directed strategies including nitazoxanide, eritoran, and diltiazem. Other topics included considerations of novel endpoints such as ordinal scales and patient reported outcomes (PRO), and study design issues, and other regulatory considerations for antiviral drug development. The aim of this report is to provide a summary of the presentations given at this meeting.

negative: The CoRisk-Index: A data-mining approach to identify industry-specific risk assessments related to COVID-19 in real-time While the coronavirus spreads, governments are attempting to reduce contagion rates at the expense of negative economic effects. Market expectations plummeted, foreshadowing the risk of a global economic crisis and mass unemployment. Governments provide huge financial aid programmes to mitigate the economic shocks. To achieve higher effectiveness with such policy measures, it is key to identify the industries that are most in need of support. In this study, we introduce a data-mining approach to measure industry-specific risks related to COVID-19. We examine company risk reports filed to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This alternative data set can complement more traditional economic indicators in times of the fast-evolving crisis as it allows for a real-time analysis of risk assessments. Preliminary findings suggest that the companies' awareness towards corona-related business risks is ahead of the overall stock market developments. Our approach allows to distinguish the industries by their risk awareness towards COVID-19. Based on natural language processing, we identify corona-related risk topics and their perceived relevance for different industries. The preliminary findings are summarised as an up-to-date online index. The CoRisk-Index tracks the industry-specific risk assessments related to the crisis, as it spreads through the economy. The tracking tool is updated weekly. It could provide relevant empirical data to inform models on the economic effects of the crisis. Such complementary empirical information could ultimately help policymakers to effectively target financial support in order to mitigate the economic shocks of the crisis.

negative: Vaccine development for emerging virulent infectious diseases Abstract The recent outbreak of Zaire Ebola virus in West Africa altered the classical paradigm of vaccine development and that for emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) in general. In this paper, the precepts of vaccine discovery and advancement through pre-clinical and clinical assessment are discussed in the context of the recent Ebola virus, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), and Zika virus outbreaks. Clinical trial design for diseases with high mortality rates and/or high morbidity in the face of a global perception of immediate need and the factors that drive design in the face of a changing epidemiology are presented. Vaccines for EIDs thus present a unique paradigm to standard development precepts.

negative: Medical treatment of 55 patients with COVID-19 from seven cities in northeast China who fully recovered: a single-center, retrospective, observational study Background: COVID-19 is an emerging disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus; no specific medication has been identified to date. We aimed to investigate the administered medications and intervention times for patients who completely recovered from COVID-19. Methods: This single-center, retrospective, and observational study included 55 patients with COVID-19 who were transferred to Shenyang Sixth People's Hospital between January 20 and March 15, 2020. Demographic information, symptoms, laboratory indicators, treatment processes, and clinical outcomes were collected. Administered drugs and intervention times were compared in 47 and eight patients with mild and severe symptoms, respectively. Findings: All 55 patients recovered. Fifty-three patients (96.36%) received antiviral therapy, including 45 in the mild group (median treatment: 14 days; 17 received umifenovir) and all eight severe-group patients (median treatment: 17.5 days; four received lopinavir/ritonavir). Twenty-nine patients (52.72%) were administered antibiotics, including 21 in the mild group (median treatment: 13.5 days; 15 received moxifloxacin) and all eight in the severe group (median treatment: 9 days; two received linezolid). Moreover, seven patients (12.72%) were treated with glucocorticoids and nine (16.36%) with immunomodulators. Interpretation: Given the 100% recovery rate, early administration of antiviral drugs can be considered. Umifenovir may benefit patients with mild symptoms, while lopinavir/ritonavir may benefit those with severe symptoms. Prophylactic administration of common antibiotics may reduce the risk of co-infection. The use of glucocorticoids is usually not necessary.

negative: Offering patients more: how the West Africa Ebola outbreak can shape innovation in therapeutic research for emerging and epidemic infections Although, after an epidemic of over 28 000 cases, there are still no licensed treatments for Ebola virus disease (EVD), significant progress was made during the West Africa outbreak. The pace of pre-clinical development was exceptional and a number of therapeutic clinical trials were conducted in the face of considerable challenges. Given the on-going risk of emerging infectious disease outbreaks in an era of unprecedented population density, international travel and human impact on the environment it is pertinent to focus on improving the research and development landscape for treatments of emerging and epidemic-prone infections. This is especially the case since there are no licensed therapeutics for some of the diseases considered by the World Health Organization as most likely to cause severe outbreaks—including Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, Marburg virus, Crimean Congo haemorrhagic fever and Nipah virus. EVD, therefore, provides a timely exemplar to discuss the barriers, enablers and incentives needed to find effective treatments in advance of health emergencies caused by emerging infectious diseases. This article is part of the themed issue ‘The 2013–2016 West African Ebola epidemic: data, decision-making and disease control’.

negative: Clinical trials suspended in UK to prioritise covid-19 studies and free up staff.

negative: Equitably Sharing the Benefits and Burdens of Research: Covid-19 Raises the Stakes One of the central principles of research ethics is that the benefits and burdens of research with human participants should be equitably distributed. This principle has important implications for where research will be conducted, how participants will be recruited, what questions will be investigated, and who will control the distribution of any innovations that result. In the context of Covid-19, key issues include providing support to clinical trials in low- and middle-income countries, without taking needed resources away from other critical clinical and public health needs; designing recruitment strategies likely to generate sufficient enrollment from groups that have been disproportionately burdened by the virus, such as African Americans; supporting studies designed to improve outcomes in high-risk environments, such as nursing homes and group homes for the developmentally disabled; and ensuring that the medical products resulting from research are made available throughout the world at an affordable price. If clinical trials are not designed with equity considerations consciously in mind, the response to the pandemic may further exacerbate disparities in health status between population groups.

negative: Pandémie COVID-19 : impact sur le systeme cardiovasculaire. Données disponibles au 1er avril 2020 Résumé Le syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infecte les cellules hôtes par les récepteurs de l’angiotensine, conduisant à une pneumonie liée au COVID-19. À un niveau cardiaque, le virus a un double impact ; en effet, l’infection sera plus grave si l’hôte possède des comorbidités cardiovasculaires, et le virus peut causer des lésions cardiovasculaires pouvant engager le pronostic vital. Les thérapeutiques associées au COVID-19 peuvent avoir des effets indésirables cardiovasculaires. Une attention particulière doit être accordée à la protection cardiovasculaire pendant l’infection au COVID-19. Abstract Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infects host cells with angiotensin receptors, leading to pneumonia linked to COVID-19. The virus has a double impact on the cardiovascular system, the infection will be more intense if the host has cardiovascular co-morbidities and the virus can cause life-threatening cardiovascular lesions. Therapies associated with COVID-19 may have adverse cardiovascular effects. Therefore, special attention should be given to cardiovascular protection during COVID-19 infection.

negative: Vaccine Development Against Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Various types of vaccines are under pre-clinical and clinical development to address the recent appearance of Middle East respiratory syndrome or MERS, an emerging infectious disease that has already caused over 600 deaths and remains a threat to world health. The causative agent for this respiratory disease is a member of the betacoronavirus genus, phylogenetically closely related to the SARS coronavirus that caused an international health emergency in 2002. With lessons learned from the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome, and with undeniable technological advances, vaccine development against MERS was initially fast-paced and has produced several DNA and protein vaccine candidates with promising results during early pre-clinical testing. At least one vaccine candidate has even entered first-in-humans clinical trials now. With the number of MERS cases declining though and other infectious diseases attracting increased attention, the question remains, whether, similar to the situation after the SARS pandemic, vaccine development is halted or remains the priority it rightfully should.

negative: Social Media as a Sensor of Air Quality and Public Response in China BACKGROUND: Recent studies have demonstrated the utility of social media data sources for a wide range of public health goals, including disease surveillance, mental health trends, and health perceptions and sentiment. Most such research has focused on English-language social media for the task of disease surveillance. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the value of Chinese social media for monitoring air quality trends and related public perceptions and response. The goal was to determine if this data is suitable for learning actionable information about pollution levels and public response. METHODS: We mined a collection of 93 million messages from Sina Weibo, China’s largest microblogging service. We experimented with different filters to identify messages relevant to air quality, based on keyword matching and topic modeling. We evaluated the reliability of the data filters by comparing message volume per city to air particle pollution rates obtained from the Chinese government for 74 cities. Additionally, we performed a qualitative study of the content of pollution-related messages by coding a sample of 170 messages for relevance to air quality, and whether the message included details such as a reactive behavior or a health concern. RESULTS: The volume of pollution-related messages is highly correlated with particle pollution levels, with Pearson correlation values up to .718 (n=74, P<.001). Our qualitative results found that 67.1% (114/170) of messages were relevant to air quality and of those, 78.9% (90/114) were a firsthand report. Of firsthand reports, 28% (32/90) indicated a reactive behavior and 19% (17/90) expressed a health concern. Additionally, 3 messages of 170 requested that action be taken to improve quality. CONCLUSIONS: We have found quantitatively that message volume in Sina Weibo is indicative of true particle pollution levels, and we have found qualitatively that messages contain rich details including perceptions, behaviors, and self-reported health effects. Social media data can augment existing air pollution surveillance data, especially perception and health-related data that traditionally requires expensive surveys or interviews.

negative: Epidemiological, Clinical Characteristics and Outcome of Medical Staff Infected with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: A Retrospective Case Series Analysis Backgrounds Since December 2019, a novel coronavirus epidemic has emerged in Wuhan city, China and then rapidly spread to other areas. As of 20 Feb 2020, a total of 2,055 medical staff confirmed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-Cov-2 in China had been reported. We sought to explore the epidemiological, clinical characteristics and prognosis of novel coronavirus-infected medical staff. Methods In this retrospective study, 64 confirmed cases of novel coronavirus-infected medical staff admitted to Union Hospital, Wuhan between 16 Jan, 2020 to 15 Feb, 2020 were included. Two groups concerned were extracted from the subjects based on duration of symptoms: group 1 (<= 10 days) and group 2 (>10 days). Epidemiological and clinical data were analyzed and compared across groups. The Kaplan-Meier plot was used to inspect the change in hospital discharge rate. The Cox regression model was utilized to identify factors associated with hospital discharge. Findings The median age of medical staff included was 35 years old. 64% were female and 67% were nurses. None had an exposure to Huanan seafood wholesale market or wildlife. A small proportion of the cohort had contact with specimens (5%) as well as patients in fever clinics (8%) and isolation wards (5%). Fever (67%) was the most common symptom, followed by cough (47%) and fatigue (34%). The median time interval between symptoms onset and admission was 8.5 days. On admission, 80% of medical staff showed abnormal IL-6 levels and 34% had lymphocytopenia. Chest CT mainly manifested as bilateral (61%), subpleural (80%) and ground-glass (52%) opacities. During the study period, no patients was transferred to intensive care unit or died, and 34 (53%) had been discharged. Higher body mass index (BMI) (HR 0.14; 95% CI 0.03-0.73), fever (HR 0.24; 95% CI 0.09-0.60) and higher levels of IL-6 on admission (HR 0.31; 95% CI 0.11-0.87) were unfavorable factors for discharge. Interpretation In this study, medical staff infected with COVID-19 have relatively milder symptoms and favorable clinical course, which may be partly due to their medical expertise, younger age and less underlying diseases. Smaller BMI, absence of fever symptoms and normal IL-6 levels on admission are favorable for discharge for medical staff. Further studies should be devoted to identifying the exact patterns of SARS-CoV-2 infection among medical staff.

negative: The Effectiveness of Convalescent Plasma and Hyperimmune Immunoglobulin for the Treatment of Severe Acute Respiratory Infections of Viral Etiology: A Systematic Review and Exploratory Meta-analysis Background. Administration of convalescent plasma, serum, or hyperimmune immunoglobulin may be of clinical benefit for treatment of severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) of viral etiology. We conducted a systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis to assess the overall evidence. Methods. Healthcare databases and sources of grey literature were searched in July 2013. All records were screened against the protocol eligibility criteria, using a 3-stage process. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were undertaken. Results. We identified 32 studies of SARS coronavirus infection and severe influenza. Narrative analyses revealed consistent evidence for a reduction in mortality, especially when convalescent plasma is administered early after symptom onset. Exploratory post hoc meta-analysis showed a statistically significant reduction in the pooled odds of mortality following treatment, compared with placebo or no therapy (odds ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, .14–.45; I(2) = 0%). Studies were commonly of low or very low quality, lacked control groups, and at moderate or high risk of bias. Sources of clinical and methodological heterogeneity were identified. Conclusions. Convalescent plasma may reduce mortality and appears safe. This therapy should be studied within the context of a well-designed clinical trial or other formal evaluation, including for treatment of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus CoV infection.

negative: Drive-Through Screening Center for COVID-19: a Safe and Efficient Screening System against Massive Community Outbreak As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak is ongoing, the number of individuals to be tested for COVID-19 is rapidly increasing. For safe and efficient screening for COVID-19, drive-through (DT) screening centers have been designed and implemented in Korea. Herein, we present the overall concept, advantages, and limitations of the COVID-19 DT screening centers. The steps of the DT centers include registration, examination, specimen collection, and instructions. The entire service takes about 10 minutes for one testee without leaving his or her cars. Increased testing capacity over 100 tests per day and prevention of cross-infection between testees in the waiting space are the major advantages, while protection of staff from the outdoor atmosphere is challenging. It could be implemented in other countries to cope with the global COVID-19 outbreak and transformed according to their own situations.

negative: Transmission patterns of smallpox: systematic review of natural outbreaks in Europe and North America since World War II BACKGROUND: Because smallpox (variola major) may be used as a biological weapon, we reviewed outbreaks in post-World War II Europe and North America in order to understand smallpox transmission patterns. METHODS: A systematic review was used to identify papers from the National Library of Medicine, Embase, Biosis, Cochrane Library, Defense Technical Information Center, WorldCat, and reference lists of included publications. Two authors reviewed selected papers for smallpox outbreaks. RESULTS: 51 relevant outbreaks were identified from 1,389 publications. The median for the effective first generation reproduction rate (initial R) was 2 (range 0–38). The majority outbreaks were small (less than 5 cases) and contained within one generation. Outbreaks with few hospitalized patients had low initial R values (median of 1) and were prolonged if not initially recognized (median of 3 generations); outbreaks with mostly hospitalized patients had higher initial R values (median 12) and were shorter (median of 3 generations). Index cases with an atypical presentation of smallpox were less likely to have been diagnosed with smallpox; outbreaks in which the index case was not correctly diagnosed were larger (median of 27.5 cases) and longer (median of 3 generations) compared to outbreaks in which the index case was correctly diagnosed (median of 3 cases and 1 generation). CONCLUSION: Patterns of spread during Smallpox outbreaks varied with circumstances, but early detection and implementation of control measures is a most important influence on the magnitude of outbreaks. The majority of outbreaks studied in Europe and North America were controlled within a few generations if detected early.

negative: Middle East Respiratory Syndrome and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome: Current Therapeutic Options and Potential Targets for Novel Therapies No specific antivirals are currently available for two emerging infectious diseases, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). A literature search covering pathogenesis, clinical features and therapeutics, clinically developed drugs for repurposing and novel drug targets was performed. This review presents current knowledge on the epidemiology, pathogenesis and clinical features of the SARS and MERS coronaviruses. The rationale for and outcomes with treatments used for SARS and MERS is discussed. The main focus of the review is on drug development and the potential that drugs approved for other indications provide for repurposing. The drugs we discuss belong to a wide range of different drug classes, such as cancer therapeutics, antipsychotics, and antimalarials. In addition to their activity against MERS and SARS coronaviruses, many of these approved drugs have broad-spectrum potential and have already been in clinical use for treating other viral infections. A wealth of knowledge is available for these drugs. However, the information in this review is not meant to guide clinical decisions, and any therapeutic described here should only be used in context of a clinical trial. Potential targets for novel antivirals and antibodies are discussed as well as lessons learned from treatment development for other RNA viruses. The article concludes with a discussion of the gaps in our knowledge and areas for future research on emerging coronaviruses.

negative: Conformational change of the coronavirus peplomer glycoprotein at pH 8.0 and 37 degrees C correlates with virus aggregation and virus-induced cell fusion. We have obtained biochemical and electron microscopic evidence of conformational changes at pH 8.0 and 37 degrees C in the coronavirus spike glycoprotein E2 (S). The importance of these changes is reflected in the loss of virus infectivity, the aggregation of virions, and increased virus-induced cell fusion at the same pH. Coronavirus (MHV-A59) infectivity is exquisitely sensitive to pH. The virus was quite stable at pH 6.0 and 37 degrees C (half-life, approximately 24 h) but was rapidly and irreversibly inactivated by brief treatment at pH 8.0 and 37 degrees C (half-life, approximately 30 min). Virions treated at pH 8.0 and 37 degrees C formed clumps and large aggregates. With virions treated at pH 8.0 and 37 degrees C, the amino-terminal peptide E2N (or S1) was released from virions and the remaining peptide, E2C (S2), was aggregated. Viral spikes isolated from detergent-treated virions also aggregated at pH 8.0 and 37 degrees C. Loss of virus infectivity and E2 (S) aggregation at pH 8.0 and 37 degrees C were markedly enhanced in the presence of dithiothreitol. On the basis of the effects of dithiothreitol on the reactions of the peplomer, we propose that release of E2N (S1) and aggregation of E2C (S2) may be triggered by rearrangement of intramolecular disulfide bonds. The aggregation of virions and the isolated E2 (S) glycoprotein at pH 8.0 and 37 degrees C or following treatment with guanidine and urea at pH 6.0 and 37 degrees C indicate that an irreversible conformational change has been induced in the peplomer glycoprotein by these conditions. It is interesting that coronavirus-induced cell fusion also occurred under mildly alkaline conditions and at 37 degrees C. Some enveloped viruses, including influenza viruses and alphaviruses, show conformational changes of spike glycoproteins at a low pH, which correlates with fusion and penetration of those viruses in acidified endocytic vesicles. For coronavirus MHV-A59, comparable conformational change of the spike glycoprotein E2 (S) and cell fusion occurred at a mildly alkaline condition, suggesting that coronavirus infection-penetration, like that of paramyxoviruses and lentiviruses, may occur at the plasma membrane, rather than within endocytic vesicles.

negative: Antiviral Efficacy of Verdinexor In Vivo in Two Animal Models of Influenza A Virus Infection Influenza A virus (IAV) causes seasonal epidemics of respiratory illness that can cause mild to severe illness and potentially death. Antiviral drugs are an important countermeasure against IAV; however, drug resistance has developed, thus new therapeutic approaches are being sought. Previously, we demonstrated the antiviral activity of a novel nuclear export inhibitor drug, verdinexor, to reduce influenza replication in vitro and pulmonary virus burden in mice. In this study, in vivo efficacy of verdinexor was further evaluated in two animal models or influenza virus infection, mice and ferrets. In mice, verdinexor was efficacious to limit virus shedding, reduce pulmonary pro-inflammatory cytokine expression, and moderate leukocyte infiltration into the bronchoalveolar space. Similarly, verdinexor-treated ferrets had reduced lung pathology, virus burden, and inflammatory cytokine expression in the nasal wash exudate. These findings support the anti-viral efficacy of verdinexor, and warrant its development as a novel antiviral therapeutic for influenza infection.

negative: Hospital pharmacists’ pharmaceutical care for hospitalized patients with COVID-19: Recommendations and guidance from clinical experience Abstract Objective To discuss hospital pharmacists’ role in providing pharmaceutical care for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 to promote patient care and management during the pandemic. Method Based on the method of evidence-based pharmacy, clinical evidence of therapeutical drugs for COVID-19 were retrieved and summarized. Based on clinical experience Chinese hospital pharmacists gained from providing pharmaceutical care services during COVID-19 pandemic, taking COVID-19 hospitalized patients’ needs into consideration, the methods and strategies hospital pharmacists shall use to provide pharmaceutical care were analyzed and summarized. Results Hospital pharmacists shall support pharmaceutical care services by participating in making evidence-based decisions for medication, monitoring and evaluation of medication safety and efficacy, providing strengthened care for special population and patients with combined underlying diseases, monitoring and management of convalescent plasma therapy, providing emotional counselling and psychological support, and providing scientific information about COVID-19 vaccines. Conclusion The need of pharmaceutical care services in COVID-19 hospitalized patients during this pandemic was quite distinguished from the past. Hospital pharmacists shall join the collaborative multidisciplinary team to improve COVID-19 patients’ outcome and reduce mortality, and to facilitate the pandemic control.

negative: Use of emerging oral anticoagulants in clinical practice: translating results from clinical trials to orthopedic and general surgical patient populations. OBJECTIVE A review of clinical data from oral anticoagulant studies in orthopedic/general surgery and extrapolation to actual clinical practice. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA In all surgical patients, there is a risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE). Parenteral unfractionated heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, and fondaparinux are available for VTE prophylaxis. Vitamin K antagonists, the only available oral anticoagulants, are widely used in the United States for thromboprophylaxis in joint replacement surgery in spite of being associated with several disadvantages, limiting their effectiveness in the postoperative setting. The oral direct thrombin inhibitor ximelagatran, briefly approved outside the United States for thromboprophylaxis in orthopedic patients, was discontinued due to severe hepatotoxicity concerns. Recently, the oral factor Xa inhibitors rivaroxaban and apixaban have entered late phase development for VTE thromboprophylaxis and treatment and the oral direct thrombin inhibitor dabigatran has received marketing approval from the European Medicines Agency. METHODS Review of clinical studies of the oral anticoagulants in VTE prevention in orthopedic surgery and comparison with large observational registries. RESULTS : Results from Phase II/III studies suggest that new oral anticoagulants may provide an efficacious alternative in VTE prevention in orthopedic surgery. Furthermore, these new oral agents have, so far, shown a good overall safety profile, with no evidence of increased hepatotoxicity. However, comparison with large observational registries reveals differences between real-life patient populations, which make extrapolation of clinical trial data to actual clinical practice difficult. Differences in endpoint definitions also prevent indirect comparison of agents. Specific compliance and postmarketing safety issues (especially liver enzyme monitoring requirements) need to be clarified before these agents are widely accepted into routine clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS Although new oral anticoagulants appear promising, clinical trial results should be viewed with caution until they can be replicated in routine care settings across a broad spectrum of surgical patients.

negative: An evidence-based framework for priority clinical research questions for COVID-19 BACKGROUND: On 31 December, 2019, the World Health Organization China Country Office was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown aetiology. Since then, there have been over 75 000 cases globally of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), 2000 deaths, and over 14 000 cases recovered. Outbreaks of novel agents represent opportunities for clinical research to inform real-time public health action. In 2018, we conducted a systematic review to identify priority research questions for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-related coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome-related coronavirus (MERS-CoV). Here, we review information available on COVID-19 and provide an evidenced-based framework for priority clinical research in the current outbreak. METHODS: Three bibliographic databases were searched to identify clinical studies published on SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV in the outbreak setting. Studies were grouped thematically according to clinical research questions addressed. In February 2020, available information on COVID19 was reviewed and compared to the results of the SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV systematic review. RESULTS: From the research objectives for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, ten themes in the literature were identified: Clinical characterisation, prognosis, diagnosis, clinical management, viral pathogenesis, epidemiological characterisation, infection prevention and control/transmission, susceptibility, psychosocial, and aetiology. For COVID19, some information on clinical presentation, diagnostic testing, and aetiology is available but many clinical research gaps have yet to be filled. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a systematic review of other severe coronaviruses, we summarise the state of clinical research for COVID-19, highlight the research gaps, and provide recommendations for the implementation of standardised protocols. Data based on internationally standardised protocols will inform clinical practice real-time.

negative: Patients with cancer in the COVID-19 era: the clinical trial issue. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospital reorganization may result in reduced ability for the hospital to fully use its armamentarium for battling cancer. Thus different therapeutic modalities have been recommended. During the pandemic, despite regulatory agencies' recommendations, several considerations and doubts remain for oncologic clinical trials. Considering patients who had been enrolled before the pandemic, and who plan to take the study medication, the situation becomes complicated. These patients should undergo monitoring visits, blood sampling, questionnaire, physical examination, and drug and radiation administration. To avoid deviations from the protocol and trial discontinuation, follow-up should be performed regularly, in concordance with safety guidelines. Here we report several considerations.

negative: Benefits of xiphoidectomy in total gastrectomy: Technical note. OBJECTIVE The esophago-gastric junction may be challenging during total gastrectomy due to gastric cancer. This situation may compromise the security of both the dissection and anastomosis. The purpose of this study was to investigate the usefulness of xiphoidectomy to overcome this issue. MATERIAL AND METHODS The files of patients who underwent total gastrectomy + D2 lymph node dissection due to proximal gastric cancer or cardia cancer between April 2002-December 2013 were retrospectively evaluated. We assessed the outcome in patients with xiphoidectomy in addition to the midline incision in terms of xiphoidectomy technique, xiphoidectomy time, and operative and postoperative complications. RESULTS Thirty cases were identified to undergo xiphoidectomy. Nineteen patients were male and 11 were female, with a mean age of 51 (21-80) years. The time required for xiphoidectomy was 7-15 minutes (mean 8.7 minutes). The mean additional time required for the closure of the incision in cases with xiphoidectomy was 2 minutes. There was minimal arterial bleeding from the diaphragmatic surface in one patient, which was controlled by electrocautery. Only two patients developed wound infection. CONCLUSION Performing xiphoidectomy is quite easy, after a certain learning phase. The operative time was 7-15 minutes longer due to excision of xiphoid and closure of the related defect. Minor hemorrhage was a problem during surgery. There were no early or late post-operative complications. We suggest that the procedure is beneficial in selected cases with requirement of a wider operative field or better exposure of the esophago-gastric junction during total gastrectomy for gastric cancer, and recommend removal of the xiphoid bone.

negative: Bibliometric Analysis of Global Scientific Research on SARSCoV-2 (COVID-19) Background and Aim: Since late 2019, an unknown-origin pneumonia outbreak detected in Wuhan city, Hubei Province, China. We aimed to build a model to qualitatively and quantitatively assess publications of research of COVID-19 from 2019 to 2020. Materials and Methods: Data were obtained from the Web of Science (WOS), PubMed, and Scopus Core Collection on March 02, 2020, and updated on March 10. We conducted a qualitative and quantitative analysis of publication outputs, journals, authors, institutions, countries, cited references, keywords, and terms according to bibliometric methods using VOS viewer c software packages. Results: Initially, we identified 227 papers, of which after an exclusion process, 92 studies were selected for statistical analyses. China accounted for the highest proportion of published research (44 papers, 40.48%), followed by the United States (21 papers, 19.32%), and Canada (7 papers, 6.44%). Adjusted by gross domestic product (GDP), ranked first, with 0.003 articles per billion GDP. In total, the top 10 journals published 47 articles, which accounted for 51.08% of all publications in this Feld. A total of 6 studies (05.52%) were supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China. Chinese Academy of Sciences ranked second 2, 2.76%). Conclusion: Bibliometric and visualized mapping may quantitatively monitor research performance in science and present predictions. The subject of this study was the fast growing publication on COVID-19. Most studies are published in journals with very high impact factors (IFs) and other journals are more interested in this type of research.

negative: Low serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels are associated with increased risk of viral coinfections in wheezing children

negative: A Stable Calcium Alumanyl A seven‐membered N,N′‐heterocyclic potassium alumanyl nucleophile is introduced and utilised in the metathetical synthesis of Mg−Al and Ca−Al bonded derivatives. Both species have been characterised by experimental and theoretical means, allowing a rationalisation of the greater reactivity of the heavier group 2 species implied by an initial assay of their reactivity.

negative: A review of vaccine research and development: Human acute respiratory infections() Worldwide, acute respiratory infections (ARIs) constitute the leading cause of acute illnesses, being responsible for nearly 4 million deaths every year, mostly in young children and infants in developing countries. The main infectious agents responsible for ARIs include influenza virus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), parainfluenza virus type 3 (PIV-3), Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae. While effective vaccines against influenza, H. influenzae type b (Hib) and S. pneumoniae infections have been available for several years, no vaccine is available at present against illnesses caused by RSV, PIV-3, metapneumovirus or any of the three novel coronaviruses. In addition, the threat constituted by the multiple outbreaks of avian influenza during the last few years is urgently calling for the development of new influenza vaccines with broader spectrum of efficacy, which could provide immunity against an avian influenza virus pandemic. This article reviews the state of the art in vaccine R&D against ARIs and attempts to address these basic public health questions.

negative: Molecular Mechanics of RNA Translocases Historically, research on RNA helicase and translocation enzymes has seemed like a footnote to the extraordinary progress in studies on DNA-remodeling enzymes. However, during the past decade, the rising wave of activity in RNA science has engendered intense interest in the behaviors of specialized motor enzymes that remodel RNA molecules. Functional, mechanistic, and structural investigations of these RNA enzymes have begun to reveal the molecular basis for their key roles in RNA metabolism and signaling. In this chapter, we highlight the structural and mechanistic similarities among monomeric RNA translo-case enzymes, while emphasizing the many divergent characteristics that have caused this enzyme family to become one of the most important in metabolism and gene expression.

negative: Hi Sigma, do I have the Coronavirus?: Call for a New Artificial Intelligence Approach to Support Health Care Professionals Dealing With The COVID-19 Pandemic Just like your phone can detect what song is playing in crowded spaces, we show that Artificial Intelligence transfer learning algorithms trained on cough phone recordings results in diagnostic tests for COVID-19. To gain adoption by the health care community, we plan to validate our results in a clinical trial and three other venues in Mexico, Spain and the USA . However, if we had data from other on-going clinical trials and volunteers, we may do much more. For example, for confirmed stay-at-home COVID-19 patients, a longitudinal audio test could be developed to determine contact-with-hospital recommendations, and for the most critical COVID-19 patients a success ratio forecast test, including patient clinical data, to prioritize ICU allocation. As a challenge to the engineering community and in the context of our clinical trial, the authors suggest distributing cough recordings daily, hoping other trials and crowdsourcing users will contribute more data. Previous approaches to complex AI tasks have either used a static dataset or were private efforts led by large corporations. All existing COVID-19 trials published also follow this paradigm. Instead, we suggest a novel open collective approach to large-scale real-time health care AI. We will be posting updates at https://opensigma.mit.edu. Our personal view is that our approach is the right one for large scale pandemics, and therefore is here to stay - will you join?

negative: Perspectives: potential therapeutic options for SARS-CoV-2 patients based on feline infectious peritonitis strategies: central nervous system invasion and drug coverage

negative: Dynamic and Cell-Infiltratable Hydrogels as Injectable Carrier of Therapeutic Cells and Drugs for Treating Challenging Bone Defects [Image: see text] Biopolymeric hydrogels have been widely used as carriers of therapeutic cells and drugs for biomedical applications. However, most conventional hydrogels cannot be injected after gelation and do not support the infiltration of cells because of the static nature of their network structure. Here, we develop unique cell-infiltratable and injectable (Ci-I) gelatin hydrogels, which are physically cross-linked by weak and highly dynamic host–guest complexations and are further reinforced by limited chemical cross-linking for enhanced stability, and then demonstrate the outstanding properties of these Ci-I gelatin hydrogels. The highly dynamic network of Ci-I hydrogels allows injection of prefabricated hydrogels with encapsulated cells and drugs, thereby simplifying administration during surgery. Furthermore, the reversible nature of the weak host–guest cross-links enables infiltration and migration of external cells into Ci-I gelatin hydrogels, thereby promoting the participation of endogenous cells in the healing process. Our findings show that Ci-I hydrogels can mediate sustained delivery of small hydrophobic molecular drugs (e.g., icaritin) to boost differentiation of stem cells while avoiding the adverse effects (e.g., in treatment of bone necrosis) associated with high drug dosage. The injection of Ci-I hydrogels encapsulating mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and drug (icaritin) efficiently prevented the decrease in bone mineral density (BMD) and promoted in situ bone regeneration in an animal model of steroid-associated osteonecrosis (SAON) of the hip by creating the microenvironment favoring the osteogenic differentiation of MSCs, including the recruited endogenous cells. We believe that this is the first demonstration on applying injectable hydrogels as effective carriers of therapeutic cargo for treating dysfunctions in deep and enclosed anatomical sites via a minimally invasive procedure.

negative: Current practices for treatment of respiratory syncytial virus and other non‐influenza respiratory viruses in high‐risk patient populations: a survey of institutions in the Midwestern Respiratory Virus Collaborative BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection in adult immunocompromised patients is unknown. We assessed the management of RSV and other non‐influenza respiratory viruses in Midwestern transplant centers. METHODS: A survey assessing strategies for RSV and other non‐influenza respiratory viral infections was sent to 13 centers. RESULTS: Multiplex polymerase chain reaction assay was used for diagnosis in 11/12 centers. Eight of 12 centers used inhaled ribavirin (RBV) in some patient populations. Barriers included cost, safety, lack of evidence, and inconvenience. Six of 12 used intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), mostly in combination with RBV. Inhaled RBV was used more than oral, and in the post‐stem cell transplant population, patients with lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI), graft‐versus‐host disease, and more recent transplantation were treated at higher rates. Ten centers had experience with lung transplant patients; all used either oral or inhaled RBV for LRTI, 6/10 treated upper respiratory tract infection (URTI). No center treated non‐lung solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with URTI; 7/11 would use oral or inhaled RBV in the same group with LRTI. Patients with hematologic malignancy without hematopoietic stem cell transplantation were treated with RBV at a similar frequency to non‐lung SOT recipients. Three of 12 centers, in severe cases, treated parainfluenza and metapneumovirus, and 1/12 treated coronavirus. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of RSV in immunocompromised patients varied greatly. While most centers treat LRTI, treatment of URTI was variable. No consensus was found regarding the use of oral versus inhaled RBV, or the use of IVIG. The presence of such heterogeneity demonstrates the need for further studies defining optimal treatment of RSV in immunocompromised hosts.

negative: A review of treatment modalities for Middle East Respiratory Syndrome The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) has been a focus of international attention since its identification in 2012. Epidemiologically it is characterized by sporadic community cases, which are amplified by hospital-based outbreaks. Healthcare facilities in 27 countries from most continents have experienced imported cases, with the most significant outbreak involving 186 cases in Korea. The mortality internationally is 36% and guidance for clinical management has yet to be developed. Most facilities and healthcare providers outside of the Middle East receiving patients have no or little experience in the clinical management of MERS. When a case does occur there is likely little time for a critical appraisal of the literature and putative pharmacological options. We identified published literature on the management of both MERS-CoV and the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) through searches of PubMed and WHO and the US CDC websites up to 30 April 2016. A total of 101 publications were retrieved for critical appraisal. Most published literature on therapeutics for MERS are in vitro experiments, animal studies and case reports. Current treatment options for MERS can be categorized as: immunotherapy with virus-specific antibodies in convalescent plasma; polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies produced in vitro or in genetically modified animals; and antiviral agents. The use of any therapeutics in MERS-CoV remains investigational. The therapeutic agents with potential benefits and warranting further investigation include convalescent plasma, interferon-β/ribavirin combination therapy and lopinavir. Corticosteroids, ribavirin monotherapy and mycophenolic acid likely have toxicities that exceed potential benefits.

negative: Correlation between hypophosphatemia and the severity of Corona Virus Disease 2019 patients Objective: Retrospectively analyze the clinical data of Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients and explore the value of serum phosphorus level in evaluating the severity and prognosis of the disease. Methods: COVID-19 patients transferred from the first emergency ward of Taiyuan fourth people's Hospital from February 8 to March 3, 2020 were selected. The information of general conditions, clinical manifestations, laboratory indexes, nucleic acid detection and treatment were collected. The changes of blood phosphorus level and absolute value of lymphocytes in ordinary and severe/critical patients were recorded and compared. Results: A total of 32 patients with COVID-19 were collected, including 12 cases of common type and 20 cases of severe/critical type. Before treatment, the serum phosphorus levels of the two groups were significantly lower than the normal level, and the serum phosphorus levels of the severe/critical patients were lower than those of the common type patients (t = 2.767, P < 0.010). After treatment, the serum phosphorus levels of the two groups reached normal, and there was no significant difference between the two groups (t = 0.231, P > 0.819). The level of lymphocytes in severe/critical patients was lower than that in normal patients (t = 4.636, P < 0.001) before treatment. After treatment, the absolute value of lymphocytes in the two groups reached normal, and there was no significant difference between the two groups (t=1.208, P=0.237). There was a positive correlation between lymphocytes and serum phosphorus, and the correlation coefficient was 0.479. Conclusion: hypophosphatemia is related to the severity of COVID-19, and strengthening the monitoring of serum phosphorus level of COVID-19's severe/critical patients and correcting hypophosphatemia in time are of significance to improve the prognosis.

negative: World Health Organization declares global emergency: A review of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) Abstract An unprecedented outbreak of pneumonia of unknown aetiology in Wuhan City, Hubei province in China emerged in December 2019. A novel coronavirus was identified as the causative agent and was subsequently termed COVID-19 by the World Health Organization (WHO). Considered a relative of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), COVID-19 is caused by a betacoronavirus named SARS-CoV-2 that affects the lower respiratory tract and manifests as pneumonia in humans. Despite rigorous global containment and quarantine efforts, the incidence of COVID-19 continues to rise, with 90,870 laboratory-confirmed cases and over 3,000 deaths worldwide. In response to this global outbreak, we summarise the current state of knowledge surrounding COVID-19.

negative: Potential Maternal and Infant Outcomes from Coronavirus 2019-nCoV (SARS-CoV-2) Infecting Pregnant Women: Lessons from SARS, MERS, and Other Human Coronavirus Infections In early December 2019 a cluster of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause was identified in Wuhan, a city of 11 million persons in the People’s Republic of China. Further investigation revealed these cases to result from infection with a newly identified coronavirus, initially termed 2019-nCoV and subsequently SARS-CoV-2. The infection moved rapidly through China, spread to Thailand and Japan, extended into adjacent countries through infected persons travelling by air, eventually reaching multiple countries and continents. Similar to such other coronaviruses as those causing the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), the new coronavirus was reported to spread via natural aerosols from human-to-human. In the early stages of this epidemic the case fatality rate is estimated to be approximately 2%, with the majority of deaths occurring in special populations. Unfortunately, there is limited experience with coronavirus infections during pregnancy, and it now appears certain that pregnant women have become infected during the present 2019-nCoV epidemic. In order to assess the potential of the Wuhan 2019-nCoV to cause maternal, fetal and neonatal morbidity and other poor obstetrical outcomes, this communication reviews the published data addressing the epidemiological and clinical effects of SARS, MERS, and other coronavirus infections on pregnant women and their infants. Recommendations are also made for the consideration of pregnant women in the design, clinical trials, and implementation of future 2019-nCoV vaccines.

negative: Influenza virus h5 DNA vaccination is immunogenic by intramuscular and intradermal routes in humans. Avian influenza virus causes outbreaks in domestic and wild birds around the world, and sporadic human infections have been reported. A DNA vaccine encoding hemagglutinin (HA) protein from the A/Indonesia/5/05 (H5N1) strain was initially tested in two randomized phase I clinical studies. Vaccine Research Center study 304 (VRC 304) was a double-blinded study with 45 subjects randomized to placebo, 1 mg of vaccine, or 4 mg of vaccine treatment groups (n = 15/group) by intramuscular (i.m.) Biojector injection. VRC 305 was an open-label study to evaluate route, with 44 subjects randomized to intradermal (i.d.) injections of 0.5 mg by needle/syringe or by Biojector or 1 mg delivered as two 0.5-mg Biojector injections in the same deltoid or as 0.5 mg in each deltoid (n = 11/group). Injections were administered at weeks 0, 4, and 8 in both studies. Antibody responses to H5 were assessed by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and neutralization assay, and the H5 T cell responses were assessed by enzyme-linked immunospot and intracellular cytokine staining assays. There were no vaccine-related serious adverse events, and the vaccine was well tolerated in all groups. At 1 mg, i.d. vaccination compared to i.m. vaccination induced a greater frequency and magnitude of response by ELISA, but there were no significant differences in the frequency or magnitude of response between the i.d. and i.m. routes in the HAI or neutralization assays. T cell responses were more common in subjects who received the 1- or 4-mg dose i.m. These studies demonstrated that the DNA vaccine encoding H5 is safe and immunogenic and served to define the proper dose and route for further studies. The i.d. injection route did not offer a significant advantage over the i.m. route, and no difference was detected by delivery to one site versus splitting the dose between two sites for i.d. vaccine administration. The 4-mg dose (i.m) was further investigated in prime-boost regimens.

negative: Zinc Supplementation Promotes a Th1 Response and Improves Clinical Symptoms in Fewer Hours in Children With Pneumonia Younger Than 5 Years Old. A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Background: Pneumonia caused 704,000 deaths in children younger than 5 years in 2015. Zinc is an important micronutrient due to its role in immune function. Since 2004, WHO recommends zinc supplementation for children with diarrhea to shorten the duration and decrease severity. Zinc supplementation for children with pneumonia is controversial. Methods: A randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted, and 103 children 1 month to 5 years old with pneumonia were included. Zinc or placebo was given during hospitalization. Clinical symptoms were recorded, and a blood draw was obtained to determine serum zinc levels, lymphoproliferation, and cytokines at hospitalization and at discharge of the patient; a nasal wash was obtained to detect viral or bacterial pathogens by multiplex RT-PCR. Results: Zinc supplementation improved in fewer hours the clinical status (76 ± 7 vs. 105 ± 8, p = 0.01), the respiratory rate (37 ± 6 vs. 57 ± 7, p = 0.04), and the oxygen saturation (53 ± 7 vs. 87 ± 9, p = 0.007) compared to the placebo group. An increase in IFNγ and IL-2 after treatment in the zinc group was observed. Conclusions: Zinc supplementation improved some clinical symptoms in children with pneumonia in fewer hours and induced a cellular immune response. Clinical Trial Registration: The trial was retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03690583, URL https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03690583?term=zinc+children&cond=Pneumonia&draw=2&rank=1.

negative: Randomised controlled trial of rhinothermy for treatment of the common cold: a feasibility study OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of rhinothermy for the common cold. DESIGN: Open label, randomised, controlled feasibility study. SETTING: Single-centre research institute in New Zealand recruiting participants from the community. PARTICIPANTS: 30 adult participants with symptoms of a common cold, presenting within 48 hours of the onset of symptoms. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive either 35 L/min of 100% humidified air at 41°C via high flow nasal cannulae, 2 hours per day for up to 5 days (rhinothermy), or vitamin C 250 mg daily for 5 days (control). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of screened candidates who were randomised. Secondary outcomes included: proportion of randomised participants who completed the study; modified Jackson scores from randomisation to 10 days after initiation of randomised regimen; time until feeling ‘a lot better’ compared with study entry; time until resolution of symptoms or symptom score at 10 days postrandomisation; proportion of organisms identified by PCR analysis of nasal swabs taken at baseline; the patterns of use of the rhinothermy device; estimated adherence of the control group; and rhinothermy device tolerability. RESULTS: In all 30/79 (38%, 95% CI 27% to 50%) of potential participants screened for eligibility were randomised. Rhinothermy was well tolerated, and all randomised participants completed the study (100%, 95% CI 88% to 100%). The reduction from baseline in the modified Jackson score was greater with rhinothermy compared with control at days 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, with the maximum difference at day 4 (−6.4, 95% CI −9.4 to −3.3). The substantial clinical benefit threshold for modified Jackson score was a 5-unit change. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that an RCT of rhinothermy compared with low-dose vitamin C in the treatment of the common cold is feasible. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12616000470493; Results.

negative: Impact of multiplex respiratory virus testing on antimicrobial consumption in adults in acute care: a randomized clinical trial Abstract Objectives Inappropriate use of antibiotics is associated with development of antimicrobial resistance. In respiratory infections it is often difficult to differentiate between viral and bacterial infections, and empirical treatment is common. Enhanced viral testing is expected to clarify clinical decision-making and reduce the prescription of antibacterial agents, but the impact of such information on patient care is unclear. Methods We conducted a (1:1) randomized controlled clinical trial involving 998 adults with respiratory symptoms, fever, chest pain or poor general condition in the emergency unit of a tertiary hospital. Multiplex PCR results for 496 patients were available in 24 hours (intervention group) and those for the remaining 502 patients were available in 7 days (control group). Our primary outcome measures were the duration of hospitalization and the consumption of antibiotics within 30 days of enrolment. Results In all, 841 of 998 (84%) patients had respiratory symptoms at study entry. A respiratory virus was detected in 175 (17.5%). The mean duration of hospitalization was 4.2 days (SD 5.4) in the intervention group and 4.1 days (SD 4.9) in the control group (difference 0.1, 95% CI –0.5 to 0.6, p 0.810). The mean days on antibiotics were 11.3 days (SD 12.6) in the intervention group and 10.4 days (SD 11.4) in the control group (difference 0.9, 95% CI –0.6 to 2.4, p 0.235). Conclusions Multiplex PCR testing for respiratory viruses with results available within 24 hours did not reduce the consumption of bacterial antibiotics or the length of hospital stay in adults presenting with respiratory symptoms, fever, chest pain or reduced general condition in acute care.

negative: Efficacy and safety of Ban-Lan-Gen granules in the treatment of seasonal influenza: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial BACKGROUND: Ban-Lan-Gen (BLG) is a traditional Chinese herbal medicine. It has been used for the prevention and treatment of virus-related respiratory diseases such as influenza virus infection. BLG contains some antiviral compounds, but few evidence-based clinical studies have been conducted to assess its efficacy against influenza. We assessed the effects of BLG (including efficacy and safety) on the treatment of seasonal influenza in an evidence-based clinical trial. METHODS/DESIGN: We conducted a randomized, double-blinded, oseltamivir- and placebo-controlled, parallel-design clinical trial. A total of 177 subjects are going to be recruited after satisfying the criteria: (i) 18 to 65 years of age; (ii) illness onset within 36 h; (3) axillary temperature ≥38.0°C; and (iv) positive influenza (type A/B) virus test. Subjects will be assigned randomly into three groups in equal proportions: oseltamivir treatment, BLG granule treatment, and placebo treatment. Each group receives 5-day treatment and is followed up 1, 3, 5, 7 and 21 days later. Symptoms and patient compliance are recorded, and virus/serum viral antibodies tested. We will use the primary outcome, secondary outcome, and safety indicators to evaluate the efficacy and safety of BLG granules in the treatment of seasonal influenza. DISCUSSION: We have described the first clinical trial for treatment using a single herb against influenza A and B viruses in China. We will hold a large-scale clinical trial to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness and safety of BLG against influenza infection based on the results of this pilot study. And this clinical trial will serve as an example for the study of other traditional herbal medicines in evidence-based clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02232945 (3 September 2014). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0645-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

negative: Preliminary epidemiological analysis on children and adolescents with novel coronavirus disease 2019 outside Hubei Province, China: an observational study utilizing crowdsourced data Background: The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to expand across the world. Though both the number of cases and mortality rate in children and adolescents is reported to be low in comparison to adults, limited data has been reported on the outbreak with respect to pediatric patients. To elucidate information, we utilized crowdsourced data to perform a preliminary epidemiologic analysis of pediatric patients with COVID-19 Methods: In this observational study, data was collected from two open-access, line list crowdsourced online databases. Pediatric cases of COVID-19 were defined as patients ≤19 years of age with a laboratory confirmed diagnosis. The primary outcomes were case counts and cumulative case counts. Secondary outcomes included days between symptoms onset and first medical care and days between first medical care and reporting. Tertiary outcomes were rate of travel to Wuhan, rate of infected family members and rates of symptoms. Results: A total of 82 patients were included. The median age was 10 [IQR: 5-15] years. Patients from mainland China (outside Hubei) accounted for 46.3% of cases, while the remaining 53.7% of cases were international. Males and females accounted for 52.4% and 32.9% of cases, respectively, with the remaining 14.6% being designated as unknown. A male skew persisted across subgroup analyses by age group (p=1.0) and location (inside/outside China) (p=0.22). While the number of reported international cases has been steadily increasing over the study period, the number of reported cases in China rapidly decreased from the start point. The median reporting delay was 3 [IQR: 2-4.8] days. The median delay between symptom onset and first seeking medical care was 1 [IQR: 0-3.25] day. In international cases, time to first seeking medical care was a median of 2.5 days longer than in China (p=0.04). When clinical features were reported, fever was the most common presentation (68.0%), followed by cough (36.0%). Conclusions: The number of reported international pediatric COVID-19 cases is rapidly increasing. COVID-19 infections are, to-date, more common in males than females in both the children and adolescent age groups. Additionally, this male predominance remains the case both inside and outside of China. Crowdsourced data enabled early analysis of epidemiologic variables in pediatric patients with COVID-19. Further data sharing is required to enable analyses that are required to understand the course of this infection in children.

negative: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): current status and future perspectives ABSTRACT Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) originated in the city of Wuhan, Hubei Province, Central China, and has spread quickly to 72 countries to date. COVID-19 is caused by a novel coronavirus, named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) [previously provisionally known as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)]. At present, the newly identified SARS-CoV-2 has caused a large number of deaths with tens of thousands of confirmed cases worldwide, posing a serious threat to public health. However, there are no clinically approved vaccines or specific therapeutic drugs available for COVID-19. Intensive research on the newly emerged SARS-CoV-2 is urgently needed to elucidate the pathogenic mechanisms and epidemiological characteristics and to identify potential drug targets, which will contribute to the development of effective prevention and treatment strategies. Hence, this review will focus on recent progress regarding the structure of SARS-CoV-2 and the characteristics of COVID-19, such as the aetiology, pathogenesis and epidemiological characteristics.

negative: Suppression of innate antiviral response by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus M protein is mediated through the first transmembrane domain Coronaviruses have developed various measures to evade innate immunity. We have previously shown that severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus M protein suppresses type I interferon (IFN) production by impeding the formation of functional TRAF3-containing complex. In this study, we demonstrate that the IFN-antagonizing activity is specific to SARS coronavirus M protein and is mediated through its first transmembrane domain (TM1) located at the N terminus. M protein from human coronavirus HKU1 does not inhibit IFN production. Whereas N-linked glycosylation of SARS coronavirus M protein has no influence on IFN antagonism, TM1 is indispensable for the suppression of IFN production. TM1 targets SARS coronavirus M protein and heterologous proteins to the Golgi apparatus, yet Golgi localization is required but not sufficient for IFN antagonism. Mechanistically, TM1 is capable of binding with RIG-I, TRAF3, TBK1 and IKKε, and preventing the interaction of TRAF3 with its downstream effectors. Our work defines the molecular architecture of SARS coronavirus M protein required for suppression of innate antiviral response.

negative: 2786. The Role of Respiratory Panel PCR in Decreasing Antibiotic Exposure in Patients Diagnosed With a Respiratory Viral Infection BACKGROUND: Respiratory viral infections (RVI) are becoming increasingly recognized as an important cause of pneumonia. There is limited data regarding the role of rapid PCR testing for RVI and its effect on antibiotic duration and length of stay (LOS). METHODS: We performed a single-center, retrospective chart review in adult patients who were admitted and underwent evaluation with the FilmArray Multiplex Respiratory Panel (RP) (Biomerieux™) using a random sample from July 1, 2016 through April 1, 2018. Patient clinical and virologic characteristics, LOS, antibiotic use, and duration of treatment were collected. A Student’s t-test was performed for all comparisons. RESULTS: We identified 540 patients who were admitted and underwent RP testing. The mean age was 57.1 years (range 19–99), 50.2% were immunocompromised, 23.8% were transplant recipients, 70.4% had respiratory symptoms, and 35.7% had an admitting diagnosis of pneumonia. 55.6% required supplemental O(2) and 24.6% had an ICU admission that required either noninvasive or mechanical ventilation. 22.6% (N = 122) of these patients were diagnosed with an RVI, of which 15 were co-infected with two or more respiratory viruses. There were 41 (34%) rhinovirus/enterovirus, 41 (34%) influenza (Types A/H1, A/H3, A/H1-2209, and B), 16 (13%) RSV, 15 (12%) coronavirus (Types NL63, OC43, 229E, and HKU1), 13 (11%) metapneumovirus, and 7 (5%) parainfluenza (Types 2, 3, and 4). 85.2% (104/122) of patients with an RVI received antibiotics. The mean LOS and antibiotic duration were 9.07 days and 7.31 days for patients with an RVI when compared with 11.5 days and 10.4 days for patients without an RVI (P = 0.098; P = 0.032), respectively. In patients with an RVI and negative bacterial cultures, the mean LOS was 8.4 days and mean antibiotic duration was 5.9 days when compared with 16.4 days and 15.5 days for all patients with positive bacterial cultures (P = 0.003; P < 0.0001), respectively. The mean time from available results of + RP to antibiotic discontinuation was 5.1 days in the setting of negative bacterial cultures. CONCLUSION: Although antibiotic exposure and time to discontinuation still remained significant in patients diagnosed with an RVI, there was a marked reduction in LOS and antibiotic duration in the subset of patients with an RVI and negative bacterial cultures. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures.

negative: Therapeutic options for the treatment of 2019-novel coronavirus: An evidence-based approach

negative: The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Radiology Research Enterprise: Radiology Scientific Expert Panel The current COVID-19 crisis continues to grow and has resulted in marked changes to clinical operations. In parallel with clinical preparedness, universities have shut down the majority of scientific research activities. Radiology researchers are currently grappling with these challenges that will continue to affect current and future imaging research. The purpose of this article is to describe the collective experiences of a diverse international group of academic radiology research programs in managing their response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The acute response at six distinct institutions will first be described, exploring common themes, challenges, priorities, and practices. This will be followed by reflections about the future of radiology research in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

negative: Prevention of severe infectious complications after colorectal surgery using oral non-absorbable antimicrobial prophylaxis: results of a multicenter randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are common complications after colorectal surgery. Oral non-absorbable antibiotic prophylaxis (OAP) can be administered preoperatively to reduce the risk of SSIs. Its efficacy without simultaneous mechanical cleaning is unknown. METHODS: The Precaution trial was a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial conducted in six Dutch hospitals. Adult patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery were randomized to receive either a three-day course of preoperative OAP with tobramycin and colistin or placebo. The primary composite endpoint was the incidence of deep SSI or mortality within 30 days after surgery. Secondary endpoints included both infectious and non-infectious complications at 30 days and six months after surgery. RESULTS: The study was prematurely ended due to the loss of clinical equipoise. At that time, 39 patients had been randomized to active OAP and 39 to placebo, which reflected 8.1% of the initially pursued sample size. Nine (11.5%) patients developed the primary outcome, of whom four had been randomized to OAP (4/39; 10.3%) and five to placebo (5/39; 12.8%). This corresponds to a risk ratio in the intention-to-treat analysis of 0.80 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23–2.78). In the per-protocol analysis, the relative risk was 0.64 (95% CI 0.12–3.46). CONCLUSIONS: Observational data emerging during the study provided new evidence for the effectiveness of OAP that changed both the clinical and medical ethical landscape for infection prevention in colorectal surgery. We therefore consider it unethical to continue randomizing patients to placebo. We recommend the implementation of OAP in clinical practice and continuing monitoring of infection rates and antibiotic susceptibilities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PreCaution trial is registered in the Netherlands Trial Register under NL5932 (previously: NTR6113) as well as in the EudraCT register under 2015–005736-17.

negative: Physiotherapy management for COVID-19 in the acute hospital setting: clinical practice recommendations Abstract This document outlines recommendations for physiotherapy management for COVID-19 in the acute hospital setting. It includes: recommendations for physiotherapy workforce planning and preparation; a screening tool for determining requirement for physiotherapy; and recommendations for the selection of physiotherapy treatments and personal protective equipment. It is intended for use by physiotherapists and other relevant stakeholders in the acute care setting caring for adult patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19.

negative: Pattern of early human-to-human transmission of Wuhan 2019-nCoV On December 31, 2019, the World Health Organization was notified about a cluster of pneumonia of unknown aetiology in the city of Wuhan, China. Chinese authorities later identified a new coronavirus (2019-nCoV) as the causative agent of the outbreak. As of January 23, 2020, 655 cases have been confirmed in China and several other countries. Understanding the transmission characteristics and the potential for sustained human-to-human transmission of 2019-nCoV is critically important for coordinating current screening and containment strategies, and determining whether the outbreak constitutes a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC). We performed stochastic simulations of early outbreak trajectories that are consistent with the epidemiological findings to date. We found the basic reproduction number, R0, to be around 2.2 (90% high density interval 1.4—3.8), indicating the potential for sustained human-to-human transmission. Transmission characteristics appear to be of a similar magnitude to severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and the 1918 pandemic influenza. These findings underline the importance of heightened screening, surveillance and control efforts, particularly at airports and other travel hubs, in order to prevent further international spread of 2019-nCoV.

negative: Detection of the New Human Coronavirus HKU1: A Report of 6 Cases Background. Human coronavirus HKU1 (HCoV-HKU1), a new group 2 coronavirus, was first characterized in 2005 from 2 adults with pneumonia in Hong Kong, China. To the best of our knowledge, there is no other report to date about the detection of this new virus. We report a molecular method allowing for the detection of HCoV-HKU1 and also report the clinical presentation of 6 infected patients. Methods. We screened 141 specimens (135 nasal samples and 6 stool samples) received in February and March 2005 in our laboratory and obtained from 135 hospitalized patients (61.5% of whom were <5 years old and 34.1% of whom were >20 years old) for HCoV-HKU1. Results. HCoV-HKU1 was detected in 6 (4.4%) of the 135 nasal specimens and in 2 (33.3%) of the 6 stool samples; the positive samples were obtained from 6 patients (5 children and 1 adult). The clinical presentation of these 6 patients was as follows: 3 were admitted to the hospital for acute enteric disease resulting in severe dehydration associated with upper respiratory symptoms; 1 had fever, otitis, and febrile seizure; 1 had a sample obtained to investigate failure to thrive; and 1 had a sample obtained for exploration of X-linked agammaglobulinemia and hyperleucocytosis. Conclusion. HCoV-HKU1 can be detected in respiratory and stool samples from children and adults in a part of the world other than Hong Kong. Our results suggest that HCoV-HKU1 could be associated with respiratory and enteric diseases, and its detection can be related to a persistent asymptomatic infection in patients with poor underlying conditions.

negative: Partial RdRp sequences offer a robust method for Coronavirus subgenus classification The recent reclassification of the Riboviria, and the introduction of multiple new taxonomic categories including both subfamilies and subgenera for coronaviruses (family Coronaviridae, subfamily Orthocoronavirinae) represents a major shift in how official classifications are used to designate specific viral lineages. While the newly defined subgenera provide much-needed standardisation for commonly cited viruses of public health importance, no method has been proposed for the assignment of subgenus based on partial sequence data, or for sequences that are divergent from the designated holotype reference genomes. Here, we describe the genetic variation of a partial region of the coronavirus RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp), which is one of the most used partial sequence loci for both detection and classification of coronaviruses in molecular epidemiology. We infer Bayesian phylogenies from more than 7000 publicly available coronavirus sequences and examine clade groupings relative to all subgenus holotype sequences. Our phylogenetic analyses are largely coherent with genome-scale analyses based on designated holotype members for each subgenus. Distance measures between sequences form discrete clusters between taxa, offering logical threshold boundaries that can attribute subgenus or indicate sequences that are likely to belong to unclassified subgenera both accurately and robustly. We thus propose that partial RdRp sequence data of coronaviruses is sufficient for the attribution of subgenus-level taxonomic classifications and we supply the R package, “MyCoV”, which provides a method for attributing subgenus and assessing the reliability of the attribution. The analysis of polymerase chain reaction amplicons derived from biological samples is the most common modern method for detection and classification of infecting viral agents, such as Coronaviruses. Recent updates to the official standard for taxonomic classification of Coronaviruses, however, may leave researchers unsure as to whether the viral sequences they obtain by these methods can be classified into specific viral taxa due to variations in the sequences when compared to type strains. Here, we present a plausible method for defining genetic dissimilarity cut-offs that will allow researchers to state which taxon their virus belongs to and with what level of certainty. To assist in this, we also provide the R package ‘MyCoV’ which classifies user generated sequences.

negative: Données de vie réelle et Covid 19: la troisième voie Abstract The analysis of real-life data from hospital information systems could make possible to decide on the efficacy and safety of covid19 treatments by avoiding the pitfalls of preliminary studies and randomized clinical trials. The different drugs tested in current clinical trials are already widely prescribed to patients by doctors in hospitals, and can therefore be immediately analysed according to validated methodological standards.

negative: Clinical Characteristics of Children with COVID-19: A Rapid Review and Meta-Analysis Abstract Background: Most guidelines on COVID-19 published so far include recommendations for patients regardless of age. Clinicians need a more accurate understanding of the clinical characteristics of children with COVID-19. Methods: We searched studies reporting clinical characteristics in children with COVID-19 published until March 31, 2020. We screened the literature, extracted the data and evaluated the risk of bias and quality of evidence of the included studies. We combined some of the outcomes (symptoms) in a single-arm meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Results: Our search retrieved 49 studies, including 25 case reports, 23 case series and one cohort study, with a total of 1667 patients. Our meta-analysis showed that most children with COVID-19 have mild symptoms. Eighty-three percent of the children were within family clusters of cases, and 19% had no symptoms. At least 7% with digestive symptoms. The main symptoms of children were fever (48%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 39%, 56%) and cough (39%, 95% CI: 30%, 48%). The lymphocyte count was below normal level in only 15% [95% CI: 8%, 22%] of children which is different from adult patients. 66% [95% CI: 55%, 77%] of children had abnormal findings in CT imaging. Conclusions: Most children with COVID-19 have only mild symptoms, and many children are asymptomatic. Fever and cough are the most common symptoms in children. Vomiting and diarrhea were not common in children. The lymphocyte count is usually within the normal range in children.

negative: Development of Medical Countermeasures to Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Preclinical development of and research on potential Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) medical countermeasures remain preliminary; advancements are needed before most countermeasures are ready to be tested in human clinical trials. Research priorities include standardization of animal models and virus stocks for studying disease pathogenesis and efficacy of medical countermeasures; development of MERS-CoV diagnostics; improved access to nonhuman primates to support preclinical research; studies to better understand and control MERS-CoV disease, including vaccination studies in camels; and development of a standardized clinical trial protocol. Partnering with clinical trial networks in affected countries to evaluate safety and efficacy of investigational therapeutics will strengthen efforts to identify successful medical countermeasures.

negative: Old Drugs for Newly Emerging Viral Disease, COVID-19: Bioinformatic Prospective Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak in late 2019 and 2020 comprises a serious and more likely a pandemic threat worldwide. Given that the disease has not approved vaccines or drugs up to now, any efforts for drug design and or clinical trails of old drugs based on their mechanism of action are worthy and creditable in such circumstances. Experienced docking experiments using the newly released coordinate structure for COVID-19 protease as a receptor and thoughtfully selected chemicals among antiviral and antibiotics drugs as ligands may be leading in this context. We selected nine drugs from HIV-1 protease inhibitors and twenty-one candidates from anti bronchitis drugs based on their chemical structures and enrolled them in blind and active site-directed dockings in different modes and in native-like conditions of interactions. Our findings suggest the binding capacity and the inhibitory potency of candidates are as follows Tipranavir>Indinavir>Atazanavir>Darunavir>Ritonavir>Amprenavir for HIV-1 protease inhibitors and Cefditoren>Cefixime>Erythromycin>Clarithromycin for anti bronchitis medicines. The drugs bioavailability, their hydrophobicity and the hydrophobic properties of their binding sites and also the rates of their metabolisms and deactivations in the human body are the next determinants for their overall effects on viral infections, the net results that should survey by clinical trials to assess their therapeutic usefulness for coronavirus infections.

negative: Insight into 2019 novel coronavirus — an updated intrim review and lessons from SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV Abstract Background The rapid spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by a zoonotic beta-coronavirus entitled 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), has become a global threat. Awareness of the biological features of 2019-nCoV should be updated in time and needs to be comprehensively summarized to help optimize control measures and make therapeutic decisions. Methods Based on recently published literatures, official documents and selected up-to-date preprint studies, we reviewed the virology and origin, epidemiology, clinical manifestations, pathology and treatment of 2019-nCoV infection, in comparison with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and middle east respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection. Results The genome of 2019-nCoV partially resembled SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, and indicating a bat origin. The COVID-19 generally had a high reproductive number, a long incubation period, a short serial interval and a low case fatality rate (much higher in patients with comorbidities) than SARS and MERS. Clinical presentation and pathology of COVID-19 greatly resembled SARS and MERS, with less upper respiratory and gastrointestinal symptoms, and more exudative lesions in post-mortems. Potential treatments included remdesivir, chloroquine, tocilizumab, convalescent plasma and vaccine immunization (when possible). Conclusion The initial experience from the current pandemic and lessons from the previous two pandemics can help improve future preparedness plans and combat disease progression.

negative: Clinical observation and management of COVID-19 patients Three leading infectious disease experts in China were invited to share their bedside observations in the management of COVID-19 patients. Professor Taisheng Li was sent to Wuhan to provide frontline medical care. He depicts the clinical course of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Furthermore, he observes the significant abnormality of coagulation function and proposes that the early intravenous immunoglobulin and low molecular weight heparin anticoagulation therapy are very important. Professor Hongzhou Lu, a leader in China to try various anti-viral drugs, expresses concern on the quality of the ongoing clinical trials as most trials are small in scale and repetitive in nature, and emphasizes the importance of the quick publication of clinical trial results. Regarding the traditional Chinese medicine, Professor Lu suggests to develop a creative evaluation system because of the complicated chemical compositions. Professor Wenhong Zhang is responsible for Shanghai's overall clinical management of the COVID-19 cases. He introduces the team approach to manage COVID-19 patients. For severe or critically ill patients, in addition to the respiratory supportive treatment, timely multiorgan evaluation and treatment is very crucial. The medical decisions and interventions are carefully tailored to the unique characteristics of each patient.

negative: Epidemiologic and Clinical Characteristics of 91 Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 in Zhejiang, China: A retrospective, multi-centre case series Background Recent studies have focused initial clinical and Epidemiologic characteristics on the COVID-19, mainly revealing situation in Wuhan, Hubei. Aim To reveal more data on the epidemiologic and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 patients outside of Wuhan, in Zhejiang, China. Design Retrospective case series. Methods 88 cases of laboratory-confirmed and 3 cases of clinical-confirmed COVID-19 were admitted to five hospitals in Zhejiang province, China. Data were collected from 20 January 2020 to 11 February 2020. Results Of all 91 patients, 88 (96.70%) were laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 with throat swab samples that tested positive for SARS-Cov-2 while 3 (3.30%) were clinical-diagnosed COVID-19 cases. The median age of the patients was 50 (36.5-57) years, and female accounted for 59.34%. In this sample 40 (43.96%) patients had contracted the diseases from local cases, 31 (34.07%) patients had been to Wuhan/Hubei, 8 (8.79%) cases had contacted with people from Wuhan, 11 (12.09%) cases were confirmed aircraft transmission. In particular within the city of Ningbo, 60.52% cases can be traced back to an event held in a temple. The most common symptoms were fever (71.43%), cough (60.44%) and fatigue (43.96%). The median of incubation period was 6 (IQR, 3-8) days and the median time from first visit to a doctor to confirmed diagnosis was 1 (1-2) days. According to the Chest computed tomography scans, 67.03% cases had bilateral pneumonia. Conclusions Social activity cluster, family cluster and travel by airplane were how COVID-19 patients get transmitted and could be rapidly diagnosed COVID-19 in Zhejiang.

negative: A Methodology for Determining Which Diseases Warrant Care in a High-Level Containment Care Unit † Although the concept of high-level containment care (HLCC or ‘biocontainment’), dates back to 1969, the 2014–2016 outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD) brought with it a renewed emphasis on the use of specialized HLCC units in the care of patients with EVD. Employment of these units in the United States and Western Europe resulted in a significant decrease in mortality compared to traditional management in field settings. Moreover, this employment appeared to significantly lessen the risk of nosocomial transmission of disease; no secondary cases occurred among healthcare workers in these units. While many now accept the wisdom of utilizing HLCC units and principles in the management of EVD (and, presumably, of other transmissible and highly hazardous viral hemorrhagic fevers, such as those caused by Marburg and Lassa viruses), no consensus exists regarding additional diseases that might warrant HLCC. We propose here a construct designed to make such determinations for existing and newly discovered diseases. The construct examines infectivity (as measured by the infectious dose needed to infect 50% of a given population (ID(50))), communicability (as measured by the reproductive number (R(0))), and hazard (as measured by morbidity and mortality). Diseases fulfilling all three criteria (i.e., those that are highly infectious, communicable, and highly hazardous) are considered candidates for HLCC management if they also meet a fourth criterion, namely that they lack effective and available licensed countermeasures.

negative: The Case for Laboratory Developed Procedures: Quality and Positive Impact on Patient Care An explosion of knowledge and technology is revolutionizing medicine and patient care. Novel testing must be brought to the clinic with safety and accuracy, but also in a timely and cost-effective manner, so that patients can benefit and laboratories can offer testing consistent with current guidelines. Under the oversight provided by the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments, laboratories have been able to develop and optimize laboratory procedures for use in-house. Quality improvement programs, interlaboratory comparisons, and the ability of laboratories to adjust assays as needed to improve results, utilize new sample types, or incorporate new mutations, information, or technologies are positive aspects of Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments oversight of laboratory-developed procedures. Laboratories have a long history of successful service to patients operating under Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments. A series of detailed clinical examples illustrating the quality and positive impact of laboratory-developed procedures on patient care is provided. These examples also demonstrate how Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments oversight ensures accurate, reliable, and reproducible testing in clinical laboratories.

negative: Construction and characterization of porcine single-chain fragment variable antibodies that neutralize transmissible gastroenteritis virus in vitro Transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV) infection causes severe diarrhea in piglets and imposes a significant economic burden on pig farms. Single-chain fragment variable (scFv) antibodies effectively inhibit virus infection and could be a potential therapeutic reagent for preventing disease. In this study, a recombinant scFv antibody phage display library was constructed from peripheral blood lymphocytes of piglets infected with TGEV. The library was screened with four rounds of biopanning using purified TGEV antigen, and scFv antibodies that bound to TGEV were obtained. The scFv gene was subcloned into the pET-28a(+), and the constituted plasmid was introduced into Escherichia coli BL21 (DE3) for protein expression. All three scFv clones identified had neutralizing activity against TGEV. An immunofluorescence assay and western blot analysis demonstrated that two scFv antibodies reacted with the spike protein of TGEV. These results indicate that scFv antibodies provide protection against viral infection in vitro and may be a therapeutic candidate for both prevention and treatment of TGEV infection in swine.

negative: The Acute Respiratory Infection Consortium: A Multi-Site, Multi-Disciplinary Clinical Research Network in the Department of Defense INTRODUCTION: Acute respiratory infections (ARI) result in substantial annual morbidity among military personnel and decrease operational readiness. Herein, we summarize the research efforts of the Infectious Disease Clinical Research Program (IDCRP) related to ARIs. METHODS: The ARI Research Area of the IDCRP was established in response to the 2009 emergence of pandemic influenza A/H1N1. That year, IDCRP investigators deployed the ARI Consortium Natural History Study (ARIC NHS), a multi-centered, longitudinal observational study to assess etiology, epidemiology, and clinical characteristics of influenza-like illness (ILI) and severe acute respiratory infections (SARI) in the U.S. military. The success of this initial effort spurred implementation of several new initiatives. These include the FluPlasma trial, designed to evaluate the efficacy of hyperimmune anti-influenza plasma for the treatment of severe influenza; the self-administered live-attenuated influenza vaccine (SNIF) trial, which assessed the immunogenicity and acceptance of a self-administered live-attenuated influenza vaccine in military personnel; the Study to Address Threats of ARI in Congregate Military Populations (ATARI), a prospective study of ILI transmission, etiology and epidemiology in recruits; and the Flu Breath Test (FBT) study, a preliminary study of exhaled volatile organic compounds (VOC) in influenza patients. In addition, the InFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) survey, a daily diary to measure influenza symptoms during clinical trials, was developed. Lastly, the Pragmatic Assessment of Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in the DoD (PAIVED) study, a two-year randomized trial designed to compare the effectiveness of the three types of licensed vaccines, launched in Fall 2018. RESULTS: The on-going ARIC NHS has enrolled over 2000 ILI and SARI cases since its inception, providing data on burden and clinical manifestations of ARI in military personnel and their families. The FluPlasma 2 trial concluded subject enrollment in 2018. Preliminary results from ATARI study show a high frequency of respiratory viruses circulating during the first two weeks of recruit training. Based on assessment of FLU-PRO responses, which were found to be reliable and reproducible, the survey may be a useful tool in clinical trials and epidemiological studies. The Flu Breath Study will complete enrollment in 2019. Findings from PAIVED are intended to provide evidence needed for assessing influenza vaccination policy in the military. CONCLUSIONS: The ARI burden in the armed services remains significant every year and the threat is dynamic given emergent and evolving threats, such as influenzas. With strong successes to date, future initiatives of the ARI Research Area will focus on interventional studies, ARI transmission dynamics in congregate military settings, and determinants of risk of pandemic influenza and other emergent respiratory viruses.

negative: Towards the first multi-epitope recombinant vaccine against Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus: A computer-aided vaccine design approach Abstract Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever (CCHF) is considered one of the major public health concerns with case fatality rates of up to 80%. Currently, there is no effective approved vaccine for CCHF. In this study, we used a computer-aided vaccine design approach to develop the first multi-epitope recombinant vaccine for CCHF. For this purpose, linear B-cell and T-cell binding epitopes from two structural glycoproteins of CCHF virus including Gc and Gn were predicted. The epitopes were further studied regarding their antigenicity, allergenicity, hydrophobicity, stability, toxicity and population coverage. A total number of seven epitopes including five T-cell and two B-cell epitopes were screened for the final vaccine construct. Final vaccine construct composed of 382 amino acid residues which were organized in four domains including linear B-cell, T-cell epitopes and cholera toxin B-subunit (CTxB) along with heat labile enterotoxin IIc B subunit (LT-IIc) as adjuvants. All the segments were joined using appropriate linkers. The physicochemical properties as well as the presence of IFN-γ inducing epitopes in the proposed vaccine, was also checked to determining the vaccine stability, solubility and its ability to induce cell-mediated immune responses. The 3D structure of proposed vaccine was subjected to the prediction of computational B-cell epitopes and molecular docking studies with MHC-I and II molecules. Furthermore, molecular dynamics stimulations were performed to study the vaccine-MHCs complexes stability during stimulation time. The results suggest that our proposed vaccine was stable, well soluble in water and potentially antigenic. Results also demonstrated that the vaccine can induce both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses and could serve as a promising anti-CCHF vaccine candidate.

negative: COVID-19 to delay clinical trials Big drug companies and biotech firms are working overtime on therapies and vaccines aimed at stopping COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2 At the same time, these companies are struggling, amid social distancing and the diversion of clinical resources, to keep clinical trials going for the rest of their therapeutic pipelines Eli Lilly and Company’s stated strategy is typical of big pharma The firm says it will delay the start of most new studies and pause enrollment in most ongoing ones Lilly will continue clinical trials for people who are already enrolled “By delaying most new study starts and pausing enrollment of new patients or healthy volunteers in most ongoing studies, we hope to ease the burden on participating healthcare facilities and allow physicians to focus more of their efforts on combatting COVID-19,” Tim Garnett, Lilly’s chief medical officer, says in a statement “We will maintain ongoing

negative: Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Pneumonia 2019 (COVID-19): An Updated Systematic Review OBJECTIVE Clinical characteristics of novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19) have been described in numerous studies but yielded varying results. We aimed to conduct a systematic review on scientific literatures and to synthesize critical data on clinical traits of COVID-19 from its initial outbreak to pandemic. METHODS Systematic searches were conducted to identify retrospective observational study that contained clinical characteristics on COVID-19 through multiple databases. Two reviewers independently evaluated eligible publications. Data on clinical characteristics of COVID-19 were extracted and analyzed. RESULTS Seventy-two retrospective studies demonstrating the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 were included. A total of 3470 COVID-19 patients were synthesized to the final analysis in an unbiased manner. The most common symptom was fever (2878 [83.0%]), and 63.4% of the patients presented fever as onset symptom. There were 2528 [88.2%] of 2866 cases had abnormal lung findings on chest CT scan. Laboratory findings showed that 1498 [62.8%] of 2387 cases had lymphopenia, and 1354 [64.8%] of 2091 cases had an increased level of C-reactive protein (CRP). A total of 185 [11.5%] patients were admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) while the overall case fatality rate (CFR) was 3.7%. Compared to patients admitted outside of Hubei, China, those from Hubei had a significant higher ICU admission rate (21.9% vs. 2.5%, p<0.001). Also, CFR attributed to COVID-19 was significantly higher in Hubei than that of non-Hubei admissions (10.4% vs. 0.6%, p<0.001). INTERPRETATION This large patient-based systematic review presents a more precise profiling of the COVID-19 from its outbreak to current pandemic. Dynamic evolvements of COVID-19 are needed to be characterized in future studies.

negative: COVID-19 Infection: Implications for Perioperative and Critical Care Physicians Healthcare systems worldwide are responding to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), an emerging infectious syndrome caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. Patients with COVID-19 can progress from asymptomatic or mild illness to hypoxemic respiratory failure or multisystem organ failure, necessitating intubation and intensive care management. Healthcare providers, and particularly anesthesiologists, are at the frontline of this epidemic, and they need to be aware of the best available evidence to guide therapeutic management of patients with COVID-19 and to keep themselves safe while doing so. Here, the authors review COVID-19 pathogenesis, presentation, diagnosis, and potential therapeutics, with a focus on management of COVID-19–associated respiratory failure. The authors draw on literature from other viral epidemics, treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome, and recent publications on COVID-19, as well as guidelines from major health organizations. This review provides a comprehensive summary of the evidence currently available to guide management of critically ill patients with COVID-19.

negative: Cuidado respiratorio en COVID-19 Resumen Antecedentes El COVID-19 forma parte de la familia de los virus conocida como Coronaviridae. El nuevo patógeno β-coronavirus del subgénero Sarbecovirus se denominó inicialmente como el nuevo coronavirus (2019-nCoV); fue identificado en un brote de neumonía en Wuhan. Los pacientes desarrollan alteraciones en el sistema respiratorio, pudiendo llegar a padecer neumonía severa, edema pulmonar o síndrome de dificultad respiratoria aguda. Objetivo Revisar la evidencia científica disponible relacionada con el cuidado del sistema respiratorio, estableciendo pautas generales de tratamiento. Métodos Revisión narrativa de la literatura. Se realizó una búsqueda, selección y revisión de artículos originales y secundarios escritos en inglés o español, en las diferentes bases de datos: NCBI, CENTRAL, MEDLINE y EMBASE, publicados hasta marzo del 2020. Resultados No se ha definido un tratamiento específico ante la nueva enfermedad, teniendo como principal medida terapéutica el control sintomático. Se recomienda utilizar elementos de bioseguridad: gafas, gorros, guantes, bata larga impermeable, tapabocas de alta eficiencia en personal sanitario (FFP2 o N95). En el paciente sintomático, utilizar tapabocas quirúrgico, jabón hospitalario, toallas de papel y alcohol al 70% o isopropílico. Utilizar oxígeno mediante sistemas de bajo flujo. En ventilación mecánica, programar modos VCP o VCV, Vt 4-6ml/kg, Fr≤35, FiO2 para PaO2 de 60mmHg o SpO2 de 92-96%, PEEP 12-17cmH2O, ventilación prono si PAFI≤150 con una relación 16/8 o 18/6, óxido nítrico 5-20ppm. Conclusiones Usar equipos de bioseguridad con el fin de interrumpir la transmisión. En hipoxemia, utilizar sistemas de oxigenoterapia a bajo flujo. Usar estrategias de protección pulmonar, disminución de volúmenes corrientes, presiones de meseta y frecuencias respiratorias, implementación de valores de PEEP elevados, bajos valores de presión de conducción y ventilación en prono, los cuales han demostrado mejoraría en la hipoxemia y la sobrevida en pacientes con síndrome de dificultad respiratoria aguda. Abstract Background COVID-19 is part of the family of viruses known as Coronaviridae. The new pathogen β-coronavirus of the subgenus Sarbecovirus was initially named as a novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), identified in a pneumonia outbreak in Wuhan. Patients developed alterations in the respiratory system leading to severe pneumonia, pulmonary oedema, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Objective To review the available scientific evidence related to the care of the respiratory system in order to establish general treatment guidelines. Methods Narrative review of the literature was carried out that included a search, selection, and review of original and secondary articles written in English or Spanish in the different databases: NCBI, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE published up to March 2020. Results No specific treatment for the new disease has been defined, with symptomatic control as the main therapeutic measure. The use of biosecurity elements, such as goggles, hats, gloves, long waterproof aprons, high efficiency masks for healthcare personnel (FFP2 or N95) is recommended. In symptomatic patients use surgical masks, hospital soap, paper towels, and 70% alcohol or isopropyl alcohol. Use oxygen through low flow systems. A mechanical ventilation program in VCP or VCV modes, Vt 4-6ml/Kg, Fr≤35, FiO2 for PaO2 =60mmHg or SpO2 92-96%, PEEP 12-17cmH2O, prone ventilation if PAFI≤150 with ratio 16/8 or 18/6, nitric oxide 5-20ppm. Conclusions Use biosecurity equipment in order to prevent transmission. In hypoxaemia use low flow oxygen therapy systems. Use lung protection strategies, decrease in tidal volumes, plateau pressures and respiratory rates, plus implementation of high PEEP values, low conduction pressure values and prone ventilation. These have been shown to improve hypoxaemia and survival in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome.

negative: Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Guidelines on the Management of Critically Ill Adults with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting thousands of people around the world. Urgent guidance for clinicians caring for the sickest of these patients is needed. METHODS: We formed a panel of 36 experts from 12 countries. All panel members completed the World Health Organization conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel proposed 53 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 in the ICU. We searched the literature for direct and indirect evidence on the management of COVID-19 in critically ill patients in the ICU. We identified relevant and recent systematic reviews on most questions relating to supportive care. We assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then generated recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice recommendations. RESULTS: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued 54 statements, of which four are best practice statements, nine are strong recommendations, and 35 are weak recommendations. No recommendation was provided for six questions. The topics were: 1) infection control, 2) laboratory diagnosis and specimens, 3) hemodynamic support, 4) ventilatory support, and 5) COVID-19 therapy. CONCLUSION: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued several recommendations to help support healthcare workers caring for critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. When available, we will provide new evidence in further releases of these guidelines.

negative: Localization to the nucleolus is a common feature of coronavirus nucleoproteins, and the protein may disrupt host cell division. The subcellular localization of transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV) and mouse hepatitis virus (MHV) (group I and group II coronaviruses, respectively) nucleoproteins (N proteins) were examined by confocal microscopy. The proteins were shown to localize either to the cytoplasm alone or to the cytoplasm and a structure in the nucleus. This feature was confirmed to be the nucleolus by using specific antibodies to nucleolin, a major component of the nucleolus, and by confocal microscopy to image sections through a cell expressing N protein. These findings are consistent with our previous report for infectious bronchitis virus (group III coronavirus) (J. A. Hiscox et al., J. Virol. 75:506-512, 2001), indicating that nucleolar localization of the N protein is a common feature of the coronavirus family and is possibly of functional significance. Nucleolar localization signals were identified in the domain III region of the N protein from all three coronavirus groups, and this suggested that transport of N protein to the nucleus might be an active process. In addition, our results suggest that the N protein might function to disrupt cell division. Thus, we observed that approximately 30% of cells transfected with the N protein appeared to be undergoing cell division. The most likely explanation for this is that the N protein induced a cell cycle delay or arrest, most likely in the G(2)/M phase. In a fraction of transfected cells expressing coronavirus N proteins, we observed multinucleate cells and dividing cells with nucleoli (which are only present during interphase). These findings are consistent with the possible inhibition of cytokinesis in these cells.

negative: iGPCR-Drug: A Web Server for Predicting Interaction between GPCRs and Drugs in Cellular Networking Involved in many diseases such as cancer, diabetes, neurodegenerative, inflammatory and respiratory disorders, G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are among the most frequent targets of therapeutic drugs. It is time-consuming and expensive to determine whether a drug and a GPCR are to interact with each other in a cellular network purely by means of experimental techniques. Although some computational methods were developed in this regard based on the knowledge of the 3D (dimensional) structure of protein, unfortunately their usage is quite limited because the 3D structures for most GPCRs are still unknown. To overcome the situation, a sequence-based classifier, called “iGPCR-drug”, was developed to predict the interactions between GPCRs and drugs in cellular networking. In the predictor, the drug compound is formulated by a 2D (dimensional) fingerprint via a 256D vector, GPCR by the PseAAC (pseudo amino acid composition) generated with the grey model theory, and the prediction engine is operated by the fuzzy K-nearest neighbour algorithm. Moreover, a user-friendly web-server for iGPCR-drug was established at http://www.jci-bioinfo.cn/iGPCR-Drug/. For the convenience of most experimental scientists, a step-by-step guide is provided on how to use the web-server to get the desired results without the need to follow the complicated math equations presented in this paper just for its integrity. The overall success rate achieved by iGPCR-drug via the jackknife test was 85.5%, which is remarkably higher than the rate by the existing peer method developed in 2010 although no web server was ever established for it. It is anticipated that iGPCR-Drug may become a useful high throughput tool for both basic research and drug development, and that the approach presented here can also be extended to study other drug – target interaction networks.

negative: Changing transmission dynamics of COVID-19 in China: a nationwide population-based piecewise mathematical modelling study Background: The first case of COVID-19 atypical pneumonia was reported in Wuhan, China on December 1, 2019. Since then, at least 33 other countries have been affected and there is a possibility of a global outbreak. A tremendous amount of effort has been made to understand its transmission dynamics; however, the temporal and spatial transmission heterogeneity and changing epidemiology have been mostly ignored. The epidemic mechanism of COVID-19 remains largely unclear. Methods: Epidemiological data on COVID-19 in China and daily population movement data from Wuhan to other cities were obtained and analyzed. To describe the transmission dynamics of COVID-19 at different spatio-temporal scales, we used a three-stage continuous-time Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Recovered (SEIR) meta-population model based on the characteristics and transmission dynamics of each stage: 1) local epidemic from December 1, 2019 to January 9, 2020; 2) long-distance spread due to the Spring Festival travel rush from January 10 to 22, 2020; and 3) intra-provincial transmission from January 23, 2020 when travel restrictions were imposed. Together with the basic reproduction number (R_0) for mathematical modelling, we also considered the variation in infectivity and introduced the controlled reproduction number (R_c) by assuming that exposed individuals to be infectious; we then simulated the future spread of COVID across Wuhan and all the provinces in mainland China. In addition, we built a novel source tracing algorithm to infer the initial exposed number of individuals in Wuhan on January 10, 2020, to estimate the number of infections early during this epidemic. Findings: The spatial patterns of disease spread were heterogeneous. The estimated controlled reproduction number (R_c) in the neighboring provinces of Hubei province were relatively large, and the nationwide reproduction number (except for Hubei) ranged from 0.98 to 2.74 with an average of 1.79 (95% CI 1.77-1.80). Infectivity was significantly greater for exposed than infectious individuals, and exposed individuals were predicted to have become the major source of infection after January 23. For the epidemic process, most provinces reached their epidemic peak before February 10, 2020. It is expected that the maximum number of infections will be approached by the end of March. The final infectious size is estimated to be about 58,000 for Wuhan, 20,800 for the rest of Hubei province, and 17,000 for the other provinces in mainland China. Moreover, the estimated number of the exposed individuals is much greater than the officially reported number of infectious individuals in Wuhan on January 10, 2020. Interpretation: The transmission dynamics of COVID-19 have been changing over time and were heterogeneous across regions. There was a substantial underestimation of the number of exposed individuals in Wuhan early in the epidemic, and the Spring Festival travel rush played an important role in enhancing and accelerating the spread of COVID-19. However, China's unprecedented large-scale travel restrictions quickly reduced R_c. The next challenge for the control of COVID-19 will be the second great population movement brought by removing these travel restrictions.

negative: Inpatient Care of Patients with COVID-19: A Guide for Hospitalists Abstract Since its emergence in December 2019, the virus known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has quickly caused a pandemic. This virus causes a disease now known as coronavirus disease 2019, or COVID-19. As an increasing proportion of the at-risk population becomes infected, and patients with severe illness are hospitalized, it is essential for hospitalists to remain current on how to best care for people with suspected or confirmed disease. Establishing a system for logistical planning, and accurate information sharing is strongly recommended. Infection control remains the ultimate goal. As such, healthcare workers should be educated on universal and isolation precautions, and the appropriate use of personal protective equipment. Social distancing should be encouraged to prevent the spread of infection, and creative and innovative ways to reduce contact may need to be considered. Moreover, it is imperative to prepare for contingencies as medical staff will inevitably get sick or become unavailable. Hospitalists have the difficult task of caring for patients, while also adapting to the many logistical and social elements of a pandemic.

negative: A review of candidate therapies for Middle East respiratory syndrome from a molecular perspective There have been 2040 laboratory-confirmed cases of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in 27 countries, with a mortality rate of 34.9 %. There is no specific therapy. The current therapies have mainly been adapted from severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV) treatments, including broad-spectrum antibiotics, corticosteroids, interferons, ribavirin, lopinavir–ritonavir or mycophenolate mofetil, and have not been subject to well-organized clinical trials. The development of specific therapies and vaccines is therefore urgently required. We examine existing and potential therapies and vaccines from a molecular perspective. These include viral S protein targeting; inhibitors of host proteases, including TMPRSS2, cathepsin L and furin protease, and of viral M(pro) and the PL(pro) proteases; convalescent plasma; and vaccine candidates. The Medline database was searched using combinations and variations of terms, including ‘Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus’, ‘MERS-CoV’, ‘SARS’, ‘therapy’, ‘molecular’, ‘vaccine’, ‘prophylactic’, ‘S protein’, ‘DPP4’, ‘heptad repeat’, ‘protease’, ‘inhibitor’, ‘anti-viral’, ‘broad-spectrum’, ‘interferon’, ‘convalescent plasma’, ‘lopinavir ritonavir’, ‘antibodies’, ‘antiviral peptides’ and ‘live attenuated viruses’. There are many options for the development of MERS-CoV-specific therapies. Currently, MERS-CoV is not considered to have pandemic potential. However, the high mortality rate and potential for mutations that could increase transmissibility give urgency to the search for direct, effective therapies. Well-designed and controlled clinical trials are needed, both for existing therapies and for prospective direct therapies.

negative: COVID-19 pneumonia manifestations at the admission on chest ultrasound, radiographs, and CT: single-center study and comprehensive radiologic literature review PURPOSE: To investigate the imaging features of emerging COVID-19 pneumonia on chest ultrasound (US), radiographs (CXR) and computed tomography (CT) examinations performed at admission and to provide a comprehensive radiological literature review on ongoing radiological data from recent publications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective single-center study, we enrolled consecutive patients from February 15, 2020, to March 15, 2020, with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 hospitalized in Valduce Hospital (Como, Italy). Multi-modality imaging findings were evaluated and compared. Literature research was conducted through a methodical search on Pubmed and Embase databases. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients (36 men, 22 women; age range, 18–98 years) were included in the study. Among these, chest US, CXR, and CT were performed respectively in twenty-two, thirty-two and forty-two patients. Lung US findings were consistent with diffuse B lines (100%) and subpleural consolidations (27.3%). CXR showed prevalent manifestations of consolidations (46.9%) and hazy increased opacities (37.5%). Typical CT features included bilateral and multilobar ground-glass opacities (GGO) with (59.5%) and without (35.7%) consolidations having a predominantly peripheral distribution (64.3%). Other imaging features included crazy paving pattern (57.1%), fibrous stripes (50%), subpleural lines (35.7%), architectural distortion (28.6%), air bronchogram sign (26.2%), vascular thickening (23.8%) and nodules (2.4%). Also, enlarged lymph nodes (14.3 %) and pleural effusion (7.1%) were observed. The literature review identified twenty-six original studies supporting our imaging chest findings. CONCLUSION: The spectrum of chest imaging manifestations of COVID-19 pneumonia upon admission includes B-lines and consolidations on US, consolidations and hazy increased opacities on CXR, and multifocal GGO with consolidations on CT.

negative: Shotgun Transcriptome and Isothermal Profiling of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Reveals Unique Host Responses, Viral Diversification, and Drug Interactions The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused thousands of deaths worldwide, including >18,000 in New York City (NYC) alone. The sudden emergence of this pandemic has highlighted a pressing clinical need for rapid, scalable diagnostics that can detect infection, interrogate strain evolution, and identify novel patient biomarkers. To address these challenges, we designed a fast (30-minute) colorimetric test (LAMP) for SARS-CoV-2 infection from naso/oropharyngeal swabs, plus a large-scale shotgun metatranscriptomics platform (total-RNA-seq) for host, bacterial, and viral profiling. We applied both technologies across 857 SARS-CoV-2 clinical specimens and 86 NYC subway samples, providing a broad molecular portrait of the COVID-19 NYC outbreak. Our results define new features of SARS-CoV-2 evolution, nominate a novel, NYC-enriched viral subclade, reveal specific host responses in interferon, ACE, hematological, and olfaction pathways, and examine risks associated with use of ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers. Together, these findings have immediate applications to SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics, public health, and new therapeutic targets.

negative: Practical Strategies Against the Novel Coronavirus and COVID-19—the Imminent Global Threat The last month of 2019 harbingered the emergence of a viral outbreak that is now a major public threat globally. COVID-19 was first diagnosed and confirmed in a couple of cases with unknown pneumonia; the patients lived in, or travelled to, Wuhan, the capital of China's Hubei province. People now face a complex challenge that deserves urgent intervention by all involved in medical healthcare globally. Conventional antiviral therapies or vaccines are the most referred means of tackling the virus, but we think establishing these ideal management strategies is presently far-fetched. In-house isolation or quarantine of suspected cases to keep hospital admissions manageable and prevent in-hospital spread of the virus, and promoting general awareness about transmission routes are the practical strategies used to tackle the spread of COVID-19. Cases with weakened or compromised immune systems—for example, elderly individuals, young children, and those with pre-existing conditions such as diabetes, cancer, hypertension, and chronic respiratory diseases—are particularly more susceptible to COVID-19. Hopefully, cumulative data using whole-genome sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 genome in parallel with mathematical modeling will help the molecular biologists to understand unknown features of the pathogenesis and epidemiology of COVID-19.

negative: Abstracts from the 36th Annual Meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine

negative: Current progress in innovative engineered antibodies As of May 1, 2017, 74 antibody-based molecules have been approved by a regulatory authority in a major market. Additionally, there are 70 and 575 antibody-based molecules in phase III and phase I/II clinical trials, respectively. These total 719 antibody-based clinical stage molecules include 493 naked IgGs, 87 antibody-drug conjugates, 61 bispecific antibodies, 37 total Fc fusion proteins, 17 radioimmunoglobulins, 13 antibody fragments, and 11 immunocytokines. New uses for these antibodies are being discovered each year. For oncology, many of the exciting new approaches involve antibody modulation of T-cells. There are over 80 antibodies in clinical trials targeting T cell checkpoints, 26 T-cell-redirected bispecific antibodies, and 145 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) cell-based candidates (all currently in phase I or II clinical trials), totaling more than 250 T cell interacting clinical stage antibody-based candidates. Finally, significant progress has been made recently on routes of delivery, including delivery of proteins across the blood-brain barrier, oral delivery to the gut, delivery to the cellular cytosol, and gene- and viral-based delivery of antibodies. Thus, there are currently at least 864 antibody-based clinical stage molecules or cells, with incredible diversity in how they are constructed and what activities they impart. These are followed by a next wave of novel molecules, approaches, and new methods and routes of delivery, demonstrating that the field of antibody-based biologics is very innovative and diverse in its approaches to fulfill their promise to treat unmet medical needs.

negative: Croup Summary Most children who present with acute onset of barky cough, stridor, and chest-wall indrawing have croup. A careful history and physical examination is the best method to confirm the diagnosis and to rule out potentially serious alternative disorders such as bacterial tracheitis and other rare causes of upper-airway obstruction. Epinephrine delivered via a nebuliser is effective for temporary relief of symptoms of airway obstruction. Corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment, and benefit is seen in children with all levels of severity of croup, including mild cases.

negative: COVID-19 coronavirus vaccine design using reverse vaccinology and machine learning To ultimately combat the emerging COVID-19 pandemic, it is desired to develop an effective and safe vaccine against this highly contagious disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. Our literature and clinical trial survey showed that the whole virus, as well as the spike (S) protein, nucleocapsid (N) protein, and membrane protein, have been tested for vaccine development against SARS and MERS. We further used the Vaxign reverse vaccinology tool and the newly developed Vaxign-ML machine learning tool to predict COVID-19 vaccine candidates. The N protein was found to be conserved in the more pathogenic strains (SARS/MERS/COVID-19), but not in the other human coronaviruses that mostly cause mild symptoms. By investigating the entire proteome of SARS-CoV-2, six proteins, including the S protein and five non-structural proteins (nsp3, 3CL-pro, and nsp8–10) were predicted to be adhesins, which are crucial to the viral adhering and host invasion. The S, nsp3, and nsp8 proteins were also predicted by Vaxign-ML to induce high protective antigenicity. Besides the commonly used S protein, the nsp3 protein has not been tested in any coronavirus vaccine studies and was selected for further investigation. The nsp3 was found to be more conserved among SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV than among 15 coronaviruses infecting human and other animals. The protein was also predicted to contain promiscuous MHC-I and MHC-II T-cell epitopes, and linear B-cell epitopes localized in specific locations and functional domains of the protein. Our predicted vaccine targets provide new strategies for effective and safe COVID-19 vaccine development.

negative: Efficacy and safety of ultra-low dose 0.005% estriol vaginal gel for the treatment of vulvovaginal atrophy in postmenopausal women with early breast cancer treated with nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors: a phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of ultra-low dose 0.005% estriol vaginal gel in women with breast cancer receiving nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors (NSAIs) and experiencing treatment-related vulvovaginal symptoms and signs. METHODS: Women with hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer receiving NSAIs were randomized to either estriol vaginal gel or placebo for 12 weeks. Vaginal maturation, vaginal pH, and total and individual scores of symptoms and signs of vulvovaginal atrophy were assessed at baseline and at weeks 3 and 12; sexual functioning was also evaluated using the Female Sexual Functioning Index (FSFI) questionnaire, as well as circulating estrogens, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH). RESULTS: Sixty-one women with a mean age of 59 years were included: 50 received 0.005% estriol vaginal gel and 11 received placebo. Active treatment significantly improved maturation value and pH, vaginal dryness and global scores of symptoms and signs. Active treatment also increased the total FSFI score and all the FSFI domains, with the exception of pain. Small oscillations were observed in FSH and LH, which remained within the postmenopausal range. Estriol levels increased initially and normalized by week 12, and estradiol and estrone remained mostly undetectable throughout the study. CONCLUSIONS: Ultra-low dose 0.005% estriol vaginal gel showed efficacy in improving the symptoms and signs of vulvovaginal atrophy. These results, together with minimal oscillations in hormonal levels throughout the treatment, support the use of ultra-low dose 0.005% estriol vaginal gel as a treatment option for vulvovaginal atrophy in women with breast cancer receiving NSAIs with an indication for treatment with vaginal estrogens.

negative: Review of the Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) In late December 2019, a cluster of cases with 2019 Novel Coronavirus pneumonia (SARS-CoV-2) in Wuhan, China, aroused worldwide concern. Previous studies have reported epidemiological and clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The purpose of this brief review is to summarize those published studies as of late February 2020 on the clinical features, symptoms, complications, and treatments of COVID-19 and help provide guidance for frontline medical staff in the clinical management of this outbreak.

negative: Dynamics and Control of Diseases in Networks with Community Structure The dynamics of infectious diseases spread via direct person-to-person transmission (such as influenza, smallpox, HIV/AIDS, etc.) depends on the underlying host contact network. Human contact networks exhibit strong community structure. Understanding how such community structure affects epidemics may provide insights for preventing the spread of disease between communities by changing the structure of the contact network through pharmaceutical or non-pharmaceutical interventions. We use empirical and simulated networks to investigate the spread of disease in networks with community structure. We find that community structure has a major impact on disease dynamics, and we show that in networks with strong community structure, immunization interventions targeted at individuals bridging communities are more effective than those simply targeting highly connected individuals. Because the structure of relevant contact networks is generally not known, and vaccine supply is often limited, there is great need for efficient vaccination algorithms that do not require full knowledge of the network. We developed an algorithm that acts only on locally available network information and is able to quickly identify targets for successful immunization intervention. The algorithm generally outperforms existing algorithms when vaccine supply is limited, particularly in networks with strong community structure. Understanding the spread of infectious diseases and designing optimal control strategies is a major goal of public health. Social networks show marked patterns of community structure, and our results, based on empirical and simulated data, demonstrate that community structure strongly affects disease dynamics. These results have implications for the design of control strategies.

negative: Targeting viral entry as a strategy for broad-spectrum antivirals The process of entry into a host cell is a key step in the life cycle of most viruses. In recent years, there has been a significant increase in our understanding of the routes and mechanisms of entry for a number of these viruses. This has led to the development of novel broad-spectrum antiviral approaches that target host cell proteins and pathways, in addition to strategies focused on individual viruses or virus families. Here we consider a number of these approaches and their broad-spectrum potential.

negative: Antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 in patients of novel coronavirus disease 2019 Summary Background The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is a newly emerging virus. The antibody response in infected patient remains largely unknown, and the clinical values of antibody testing have not been fully demonstrated. Methods A total of 173 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were enrolled. Their serial plasma samples (n = 535) collected during the hospitalization period were tested for total antibodies (Ab), IgM and IgG against SARS-CoV-2 using immunoassays. The dynamics of antibodies with the progress and severity of disease was analyzed. Findings Among 173 patients, the seroconversion rate for Ab, IgM and IgG was 93.1% (161/173), 82.7% (143/173) and 64.7% (112/173), respectively. Twelve patients who had not seroconverted were those only blood samples at the early stage of illness were collected. The seroconversion sequentially appeared for Ab, IgM and then IgG, with a median time of 11, 12 and 14 days, respectively. The presence of antibodies was < 40% among patients in the first 7 days of illness, and then rapidly increased to 100.0%, 94.3% and 79.8% for Ab, IgM and IgG respectively since day 15 after onset. In contrast, the positive rate of RNA decreased from 66.7% (58/87) in samples collected before day 7 to 45.5% (25/55) during days 15 to 39. Combining RNA and antibody detections significantly improved the sensitivity of pathogenic diagnosis for COVID-19 patients (p < 0.001), even in early phase of 1-week since onset (p = 0.007). Moreover, a higher titer of Ab was independently associated with a worse clinical classification (p = 0.006). Interpretation The antibody detection offers vital clinical information during the course of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The findings provide strong empirical support for the routine application of serological testing in the diagnosis and management of COVID-19 patients.

negative: Meteorological factors correlate with transmission of 2019-nCoV: Proof of incidence of novel coronavirus pneumonia in Hubei Province, China Objective: many potential factors contribute to the outbreak of COVID-19.It aims to explore the effects of various meteorological factors on the incidence of COVID-19. Methods: Taking Hubei province of China as an example, where COVID-19 was first reported and there were the most cases, we collected 53 days of confirmed cases (total 67773 cases) and ten meteorological parameters up to March 10. Correlation analysis and linear regression were used to judge the relationship of meteorological factors and increment of COVID-19 confirmed cases. Results: Under 95% CI, the increment of confirmed cases in Hubei were correlated with four meteorological parameters of average pressure, average temperature, minimum temperature and average water vapor pressure (equivalent to absolute humidity).The average pressure was positively correlated with the increment (r=+0.358).The negative correlations included average temperature (r=-0.306), minimum temperature (r=-0.347), and average water vapor pressure (r=-0.326). The linear regression results show if minimum temperature increases by 1℃, the incremental confirmed cases in Hubei decreases by 72.470 units on average. Conclusion: Statistically, the incidence of COVID-19 was correlated with average pressure, average temperature, minimum temperature and average water vapor pressure. It is positively correlated with the average pressure and negatively correlated with the other three parameters. Compared with relative humidity, 2019-nCov is more sensitive to water vapor pressure. The reason why the epidemic situation in Hubei expanded rapidly is significantly related to the climate characteristics of low temperature and dryness of Hubei in winter.

negative: Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Obstetric Procedures OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence and provide recommendations on antibiotic prophylaxis for obstetrical procedures. OUTCOMES: Outcomes evaluated include need and effectiveness of antibiotics to prevent infections in obstetrical procedures. EVIDENCE: Published literature was retrieved through searches of Medline and The Cochrane Library on the topic of antibiotic prophylaxis in obstetrical procedures. Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. Searches were updated on a regular basis and articles published from January 1978 to June 2009 were incorporated in the guideline. Current guidelines published by the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology were also incorporated. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology assessment-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies. VALUES: The evidence obtained was reviewed and evaluated by the Infectious Diseases Committee of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada under the leadership of the principal authors, and recommendations were made according to guidelines developed by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table 1). BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: Implementation of this guideline should reduce the cost and harm resulting from the administration of antibiotics when they are not required and the harm resulting from failure to administer antibiotics when they would be beneficial. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: 1. Available evidence does not support the use of prophylactic antibiotics to reduce infectious morbidity following operative vaginal delivery. (II-1); 2. There is insufficient evidence to argue for or against the use of prophylactic antibiotics to reduce infectious morbidity for manual removal of the placenta. (III); 3. There is insufficient evidence to argue for or against the use of prophylactic antibiotics at the time of postpartum dilatation and curettage for retained products of conception. (III); 4. Available evidence does not support the use of prophylactic antibiotics to reduce infectious morbidity following elective or emergency cerclage. (II-3). RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. All women undergoing elective or emergency Caesarean section should receive antibiotic prophylaxis. (I-A); 2. The choice of antibiotic for Caesarean section should be a single dose of a first-generation cephalosporin. If the patient has a penicillin allergy, clindamycin or erythromycin can be used. (I-A); 3. The timing of prophylactic antibiotics for Caesarean section should be 15 to 60 minutes prior to skin incision. No additional doses are recommended. (I-A); 4. If an open abdominal procedure is lengthy (> 3 hours) or estimated blood loss is greater than 1500 mL, an additional dose of the prophylactic antibiotic may be given 3 to 4 hours after the initial dose. (III-L); 5. Prophylactic antibiotics may be considered for the reduction of infectious morbidity associated with repair of third and fourth degree perineal injury. (I-B); 6. In patients with morbid obesity (BMI > 35), doubling the antibiotic dose may be considered. (III-B); 7. Antibiotics should not be administered solely to prevent endocarditis for patients who undergo an obstetrical procedure of any kind. (III-E.

negative: Coronavirus (COVID-19), First Indication of Efficacy of Gene-Eden-VIR/Novirin in SARS-CoV-2 Infections

negative: DNA vaccines: prime time is now Recently newer synthetic DNA vaccines have been rapidly advanced to clinical study and have demonstrated an impressive degree of immune potency and tolerability. Improvements in DNA delivery over prior needle and syringe approaches include jet delivery, gene gun delivery, among others. Among the most effective of these new delivery methods, advanced electroporation (EP), combined with other advances, induces robust humoral and cellular immunity in both preventative as well as therapeutic studies. Advancements in the design of the DNA inserts include leader sequence changes, RNA and codon optimizations, improved insert designs, increased concentrations of DNA, and skin delivery, appear to complement newer delivery strategies. These advances also provide a framework for the in vivo production of synthetic DNA biologics. In this review, we focus on recent studies of synthetic DNA vaccines in the clinic for the prevention or treatment of infectious diseases with a focus on adaptive electroporation for delivery, and briefly summarize novel preclinical data advancing the in vivo delivery of DNA-encoded antibody-like biologics.

negative: 2019-novel coronavirus outbreak: A new challenge OBJECTIVES: Following the public health emergency declared by the World Health Organization and the recent outbreak by 2019-nCoV in China and through other 29 countries, we aimed to summarize the clinical aspects of novel beta-coronavirus infection and its possible clinical presentations together with suggested therapeutic algorithms for patients who may require antibiotic treatment. METHODS: We reviewed the currently available literature of microbiologically confirmed infections by 2019-ConV (or COVID-19) occurred at the time of writing (13 February 2020). A literature search was performed using the PubMed database and the Cochrane library. Search terms included "novel coronavirus" or "2019-nCoV" or “COVID-19”. RESULTS: Published cases occurred mostly in males (age ranged from 8 to 92). Cardiovascular, digestive and endocrine system diseases were commonly reported, except previous chronic pulmonary diseases (e.g., COPD, asthma, bronchiectasis) that were surprisingly underreported. Fever was presented in all the case series available, flanked by cough, dyspnea, myalgias and fatigue. Multiple bilateral lobular and subsegmental areas of consolidation or bilateral ground-glass opacities were the main reported radiological features of 2019-nCoV, at least in the early phases of disease. CONCLUSIONS: The new 2019-nCoV epidemics is mainly associated with respiratory disease and few extrapulmonary signs. However, there is a low rate of associated pre-existing respiratory comorbidities.

negative: Forecasting the dynamics of COVID-19 Pandemic in Top 15 countries in April 2020: ARIMA Model with Machine Learning Approach We here predicted some trajectories of COVID-19 in the coming days (until April 30, 2020) using the most advanced Auto-Regressive Integrated Moving Average Model (ARIMA). Our analysis predicted very frightening outcomes, which defines to worsen the conditions in Iran, entire Europe, especially Italy, Spain, and France. While South Korea, after the initial blast, has come to stability, the same goes for the COVID-19 origin country China with more positive recovery cases and confirm to remain stable. The United States of America (USA) will come as a surprise and going to become the epicenter for new cases during the mid-April 2020. Based on our predictions, public health officials should tailor aggressive interventions to grasp the power exponential growth, and rapid infection control measures at hospital levels are urgently needed to curtail the COVID-19 pandemic.

negative: Unprecedented disruptions of lives and work: Health, distress and life satisfaction of working adults in China one month into the COVID-19 outbreak We assess the health and wellbeing of normal adults living and working after one month of confinement to contain the COVID-19 outbreak in China. On Feb 20 and 21, 2020, we surveyed 369 adults in 64 cities in China that varied in their rates of confirmed coronavirus cases on their health conditions, distress and life satisfaction. 27% of the participants worked at the office, 38% resorted to working from home, and 25% stopped working due to the outbreak. Those who stopped working reported worse mental and physical health conditions as well as distress. The severity of COVID-19 in a location predicts life satisfaction, and this relationship is contingent upon the existing chronic health issues and hours of exercise of the individuals. Our evidence supports the need to pay attention to the health of people who were not affected by the virus epidemiologically, especially for people who stopped working during the outbreak. Our results highlight that physically active people might be more susceptible to wellbeing issues during the lockdown. Policymakers who are considering introducing restrictive measures to contain COVID-19 may benefit from understanding such health and wellbeing implications.

negative: Clinical trials for inflammatory bowel disease: a global guidance during COVID-19 pandemic The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]-causing coronavirus disease [COVID]-19 pandemic poses major challenges for patients with inflammatory bowel disease to be recruited and maintained in clinical trials. However, clinical trials offer patients who have failed multiple drugs access to study medications with alternative mode of action and the potential for relief from inflammation-mediated symptoms. Therefore, the continuation of clinical trials in IBD during the COVID-19 pandemic is important both for participants and the community of IBD patients, due to the dire need of an expanded therapeutic armamentarium. As the safety of patients in clinical trials is the leading principle, we are providing ten specific rules to guide patients and principal investigators safely through the challenging time.

negative: Epidemiology, causes, clinical manifestation and diagnosis, prevention and control of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) during the early outbreak period: a scoping review BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been identified as the cause of an outbreak of respiratory illness in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China beginning in December 2019. As of 31 January 2020, this epidemic had spread to 19 countries with 11 791 confirmed cases, including 213 deaths. The World Health Organization has declared it a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted following the methodological framework suggested by Arksey and O’Malley. In this scoping review, 65 research articles published before 31 January 2020 were analyzed and discussed to better understand the epidemiology, causes, clinical diagnosis, prevention and control of this virus. The research domains, dates of publication, journal language, authors’ affiliations, and methodological characteristics were included in the analysis. All the findings and statements in this review regarding the outbreak are based on published information as listed in the references. RESULTS: Most of the publications were written using the English language (89.2%). The largest proportion of published articles were related to causes (38.5%) and a majority (67.7%) were published by Chinese scholars. Research articles initially focused on causes, but over time there was an increase of the articles related to prevention and control. Studies thus far have shown that the virus’ origination is in connection to a seafood market in Wuhan, but specific animal associations have not been confirmed. Reported symptoms include fever, cough, fatigue, pneumonia, headache, diarrhea, hemoptysis, and dyspnea. Preventive measures such as masks, hand hygiene practices, avoidance of public contact, case detection, contact tracing, and quarantines have been discussed as ways to reduce transmission. To date, no specific antiviral treatment has proven effective; hence, infected people primarily rely on symptomatic treatment and supportive care. CONCLUSIONS: There has been a rapid surge in research in response to the outbreak of COVID-19. During this early period, published research primarily explored the epidemiology, causes, clinical manifestation and diagnosis, as well as prevention and control of the novel coronavirus. Although these studies are relevant to control the current public emergency, more high-quality research is needed to provide valid and reliable ways to manage this kind of public health emergency in both the short- and long-term.

negative: SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines: Status Report SARS-CoV-2, the causal agent of COVID-19, first emerged in late 2019 in China. It has since infected more than 870,000 individuals and caused more than 43,000 deaths globally. Here, we discuss therapeutic and prophylactic interventions for SARS-CoV-2 with a focus on vaccine development and its challenges. Vaccines are being rapidly developed but will likely come too late to affect the first wave of a potential pandemic. Nevertheless, critical lessons can be learned for the development of vaccines against rapidly emerging viruses. Importantly, SARS-CoV-2 vaccines will be essential to reducing morbidity and mortality if the virus establishes itself in the population.

negative: COVID-19 and Moral Imperialism in Multinational Clinical Research Abstract A TV debate in April 2020 between two French doctors regarding the benefits of testing a coronavirus vaccine in Africa where there are no masks or treatments available has led to international criticism. This case highlights a problematic ethical double standard in multinational clinical research: trials that would be considered unethical in high income countries (e.g., placebo-controlled where there is an existing treatment) are nonetheless justified in low-and-middle-income countries because the existing standards of care are less (i.e., no access to a treatment). Underlying this ethical double standard in some multinational clinical trials is a moral imperialism and persistent colonialist thinking that must be rejected.

negative: Short- and long-term efficacy of prednisolone for first acute rhinovirus-induced wheezing episode Background Rhinovirus-induced wheezing is an important risk factor for recurrent wheezing. There are no randomized controlled trials on the effect of systemic corticosteroids in patients with this disease. Objective We sought to study the short- and long-term effects of prednisolone treatment of the first acute, moderate-to-severe, rhinovirus-induced wheezing episode in young children. Methods After confirming rhinovirus from nasopharyngeal aspirate by using PCR, 79 children with a first wheezing episode at age 3 to 23 months were randomized to receive oral prednisolone (first dose of 2 mg/kg, followed by 2 mg/kg/d in 2 divided doses for 3 days) or placebo. The trial was double blind throughout the 12-month follow-up. The primary outcomes were long term: new physician-confirmed wheezing episode within 2 months, number of physician-confirmed wheezing episodes within 12 months, and initiation of regular controller medication for asthma symptoms within 12 months. The primary interaction analysis examined rhinovirus load. Results Seventy-four patients completed the study (mean age, 13 months; 28% atopic). Long-term outcomes did not differ between groups (all P ≥ .30). For short-term outcomes, the prednisolone group had less cough, rhinitis, noisy breathing, severe breathing difficulties, and nocturnal respiratory symptoms at home within 2 weeks (all P < .05). The 25 children with greater than 7000 rhinovirus copies/mL (most sensitive cutoff) benefitted from prednisolone in terms of less risk of physician-confirmed recurrence within 2 and 12 months compared with placebo (both P < .05). Conclusions Prednisolone cannot be routinely recommended for all young children experiencing their first acute, moderate-to-severe, rhinovirus-induced wheezing episode. Prednisolone might be beneficial in a subgroup of children with high viral loads.

negative: Estimation of the asymptomatic ratio of novel coronavirus infections (COVID-19)

negative: Impact of different influenza cultivation conditions on HA N-Glycosylation

negative: Chinese Herbal Formula Xiao Yao San for Treatment of Depression: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials Objectives. To assess the beneficial and adverse effects of Xiaoyaosan for depression. Search Strategy. Electronic databases were searched until December 2009. Inclusion Criteria. We included randomized clinical trials testing Xiaoyaosan against placebo, antidepressants, or combined with antidepressants against antidepressants alone. Data Extraction and Analyses. Study selection, data extraction, quality assessment, and data analyses were conducted according to the Cochrane standards. Results. 26 randomized trials (involving 1837 patients) were included and the methodological quality was evaluated as generally low. The pooled results showed that Xiaoyaosan combined with antidepressants was more effective in comprehensive effect, the score of HAMD and the score of SDS compared with antidepressants alone. Xiaoyaosan was superior to antidepressants for the score of HAMD. However, Xiaoyaosan was not different from placebo for the score of SDS. There was no adverse effects reported in the trials from Xiaoyaosan. Conclusions. Xiaoyaosan appears to be effective on improving symptoms in patients with depression. However, due to poor methodological quality in the majority of included trials, the potential benefit from Xiaoyaosan need to be confirmed in rigorous trials and the design and reporting of trials should follow international standards.

negative: Randomized controlled trial demonstrating the benefits of delta inulin adjuvanted immunotherapy in patients with bee venom allergy Background Allergic reactions to Hymenoptera insect stings remain a major global clinical problem. Although effective, parenteral desensitization regimens require use of costly venom extracts and require frequent visits over extended periods of time. Objective Adjuvants are commonly used to enhance the efficacy of infectious disease vaccines, and this study asked whether Advax (Vaxine Pty Ltd, Adelaide, Australia), a novel noninflammatory polysaccharide adjuvant, might provide similar benefits for allergy desensitization. Methods A randomized, controlled phase 1/2 trial was undertaken in 27 adults with a history of rapid-onset systemic allergic reactions to honeybee stings and positive specific IgE levels to evaluate the safety and efficacy of honeybee venom immunotherapy (HBVIT) combined with Advax adjuvant. Venom immunotherapy (VIT) was administered monthly for 30 months after achievement of maintenance doses. Results Advax-adjuvanted HBVIT was well tolerated. Around week 14 of VIT, specific IgG4 responses peaked in both groups but increased earlier, peaked higher, and were better maintained through the end of the study in the Advax-adjuvanted arm. Several different patterns of serologic response to VIT were seen; some subjects had a dominant IgG4 response, some had a combined IgG4 and IgG1 response, and some had an exclusively IgG1 response. In some subjects specific IgE levels increased during the induction phase and then decreased, whereas in others specific IgE levels progressively decreased from the start of VIT. Conclusion Advax adjuvant favorably enhanced the immunogenicity of HBVIT, with an early and prolonged switch to specific IgG4 production. The ability of Advax adjuvant to enhance VIT efficacy warrants further study.

negative: Seaweed Secondary Metabolites with Beneficial Health Effects: An Overview of Successes in In Vivo Studies and Clinical Trials Macroalgae are increasingly viewed as a source of secondary metabolites with great potential for the development of new drugs. In this development, in vitro studies are only the first step in a long process, while in vivo studies and clinical trials are the most revealing stages of the true potential and limitations that a given metabolite may have as a new drug. This literature review aims to give a critical overview of the secondary metabolites that reveal the most interesting results in these two steps. Phlorotannins show great pharmaceutical potential in in vivo models and, among the several examples, the anti-dyslipidemia activity of dieckol must be highlighted because it was more effective than lovastatin in an in vivo model. The IRLIIVLMPILMA tridecapeptide that exhibits an in vivo level of activity similar to the hypotensive clinical drug captopril should still be stressed, as well as griffithsin which showed such stunning results over a variety of animal models and which will probably move onto clinical trials soon. Regarding clinical trials, studies with pure algal metabolites are scarce, limited to those carried out with kahalalide F and fucoxanthin. The majority of clinical trials currently aim to ascertain the effect of algae consumption, as extracts or fractions, on obesity and diabetes.

negative: Treatment and vaccines for severe acute respiratory syndrome Summary The causative agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), which affected over 8000 individuals worldwide and was responsible for over 700 deaths in the 2002–2003 outbreak, is a coronavirus that was unknown before the outbreak. Although many different treatments were used during the outbreak, none were implemented in a controlled fashion. Thus, the optimal treatment for SARS is unknown. Since the outbreak, much work has been done testing new agents against SARS using in-vitro methods and animal models. In addition, global research efforts have focused on the development of vaccines against SARS. Efforts should be made to evaluate the most promising treatments and vaccines in controlled clinical trials, should another SARS outbreak occur.

negative: Chinese patent medicines for the treatment of the common cold: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials BACKGROUND: Many Chinese patent medicines (CPMs) have been authorized by the Chinese State of Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of the common cold. A number of clinical trials have been conducted and published. However, there is no systematic review or meta-analysis on their efficacy and safety for the common cold to justify their clinical use. METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SinoMed, CNKI, VIP, China Important Conference Papers Database, China Dissertation Database, and online clinical trial registry websites for published and unpublished randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of CPMs for the common cold till 31 March 2013. Revman 5.2 software was used for data analysis with effect estimate presented as relative risk (RR) and mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of five RCTs were identified. All of the RCTs were of high risk of bias with flawed study design and poor methodological quality. All RCTs included children aged between 6 months to 14 years. Results of individual trials showed that Shuanghuanglian oral liquid (RR 4.00; 95% CI: 2.26 to 7.08), and Xiaoer Resuqing oral liquid (RR 1.43; 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.77) had higher cure rates compared with antivirus drugs. Most of the trials did not report adverse events, and the safety of CPMs was still uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: Some CPMs showed a potential positive effect for the common cold on cure rate. However, due to the poor methodology quality and the defects in the clinical design of the included RCTs, such as the lack of placebo controlled trials, the inappropriate comparison intervention and outcome measurement, the confirmative conclusions on the beneficial effect of CPMs for the common cold could not be drawn.

negative: Equitably Sharing the Benefits and Burdens of Research: Covid‐19 Raises the Stakes One of the central principles of research ethics is that the benefits and burdens of research with human participants should be equitably distributed. This principle has important implications for where research will be conducted, how participants will be recruited, what questions will be investigated, and who will control the distribution of any innovations that result. In the context of Covid‐19, key issues include providing support to clinical trials in low‐ and middle‐income countries, without taking needed resources away from other critical clinical and public health needs; designing recruitment strategies likely to generate sufficient enrollment from groups that have been disproportionately burdened by the virus, such as African Americans; supporting studies designed to improve outcomes in high‐risk environments, such as nursing homes and group homes for the developmentally disabled; and ensuring that the medical products resulting from research are made available throughout the world at an affordable price. If clinical trials are not designed with equity considerations consciously in mind, the response to the pandemic may further exacerbate disparities in health status between population groups.

negative: A multicentre collaboration to investigate the cause of severe acute respiratory syndrome Summary Severe Acute respiratory syndrome is a new disease in human beings, first recognised in late February, 2003, in Hanoi, Vietnam. The severity of the disease, combined with its rapid spread along international air-travel routes, prompted WHO to set up a network of scientists from 11 laboratories around the world to try to identify the causal agent and develop a diagnostic test. The network unites laboratories with different methods and capacities to rapidly fulfil all postulates for establishing a virus as the cause of a disease. Results are shared in real time via a secure website, on which microscopy pictures, protocols for testing, and PCR primer sequences are also posted. Findings are discussed in daily teleconferences. Progress is further facilitated through sharing between laboratories of samples and test materials. The network has identified a new coronavirus, consistently detected in samples of SARS patients from several countries, and conclusively named it as the causative agent of SARS; the strain is unlike any other known member of the genus Coronavirus. Three diagnostic tests are now available, but all have limitations.

negative: Barriers and enablers to patient recruitment for randomised controlled trials on treatment of chronic wounds: A systematic review. Randomised controlled trials represent the gold standard in intervention efficacy evaluation. However, suboptimal recruitment affects completion and the power of a therapeutic trial in detecting treatment differences. We conducted a systematic review to examine the barriers and enablers to patient recruitment for randomised controlled trials on chronic wound treatment. Review registration was under PROSPERO 2017:CRD42017062438. We conducted a systematic search of Ovid MEDLINE, EBSCOhost CINAHL, Ovid Cochrane Library, Ovid EMBASE, and Ovid PsycINFO databases in June 2017 for chronic wound treatment randomised controlled trials. Twenty-seven randomised controlled trials or qualitative studies met the inclusion criteria. Among the 24 randomised controlled trials, 21 were assessed as low quality in relation to recruitment, and 3 were assessed as high quality. All 27 studies reported barriers to recruitment in chronic wound randomised controlled trials. The reported barriers to recruitment were: study-related, patient-related, clinician-related, health system-related, and/or operational-related. No study reported recruitment enablers. To enhance randomised controlled trial recruitment, we propose the need for improved integration of research and clinical practice. To alleviate the problems arising from inadequate reporting of randomised controlled trials, the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Statement could include an additional item on recruitment barriers. This approach will allow for increased awareness of the potential barriers to recruitment for Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in both wound management and other health care research.

negative: Middle East respiratory syndrome: what we learned from the 2015 outbreak in the Republic of Korea Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) was first isolated from a patient with severe pneumonia in 2012. The 2015 Korea outbreak of MERSCoV involved 186 cases, including 38 fatalities. A total of 83% of transmission events were due to five superspreaders, and 44% of the 186 MERS cases were the patients who had been exposed in nosocomial transmission at 16 hospitals. The epidemic lasted for 2 months and the government quarantined 16,993 individuals for 14 days to control the outbreak. This outbreak provides a unique opportunity to fill the gap in our knowledge of MERS-CoV infection. Therefore, in this paper, we review the literature on epidemiology, virology, clinical features, and prevention of MERS-CoV, which were acquired from the 2015 Korea outbreak of MERSCoV.

negative: The origin, transmission and clinical therapies on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak – an update on the status An acute respiratory disease, caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2, previously known as 2019-nCoV), the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread throughout China and received worldwide attention. On 30 January 2020, World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared the COVID-19 epidemic as a public health emergency of international concern. The emergence of SARS-CoV-2, since the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in 2002 and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in 2012, marked the third introduction of a highly pathogenic and large-scale epidemic coronavirus into the human population in the twenty-first century. As of 1 March 2020, a total of 87,137 confirmed cases globally, 79,968 confirmed in China and 7169 outside of China, with 2977 deaths (3.4%) had been reported by WHO. Meanwhile, several independent research groups have identified that SARS-CoV-2 belongs to β-coronavirus, with highly identical genome to bat coronavirus, pointing to bat as the natural host. The novel coronavirus uses the same receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) as that for SARS-CoV, and mainly spreads through the respiratory tract. Importantly, increasingly evidence showed sustained human-to-human transmission, along with many exported cases across the globe. The clinical symptoms of COVID-19 patients include fever, cough, fatigue and a small population of patients appeared gastrointestinal infection symptoms. The elderly and people with underlying diseases are susceptible to infection and prone to serious outcomes, which may be associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and cytokine storm. Currently, there are few specific antiviral strategies, but several potent candidates of antivirals and repurposed drugs are under urgent investigation. In this review, we summarized the latest research progress of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and clinical characteristics of COVID-19, and discussed the current treatment and scientific advancements to combat the epidemic novel coronavirus.

negative: Estimation of the probability of reinfection with COVID-19 coronavirus by the SEIRUS model With sensitivity of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test used to detect the presence of the virus in the human host, the global health community has been able to record a great number of recovered population. Therefore, in a bid to answer a burning question of reinfection in the recovered class, the model equations which exhibits the disease-free equilibrium (E_0 ) state for COVID-19 coronavirus was developed in this study and was discovered to both exist as well as satisfy the criteria for a locally or globally asymptotic stability with a basic reproductive number R_0=0 for and endemic situation. Hence, there is a chance of no secondary reinfections from the recovered population as the rate of incidence of the recovered population vanishes, that is, B=0. Furthermore, numerical simulations were carried to complement the analytical results in investigating the effect of the implementation of quarantine and observatory procedures has on the projection of the further spread of the virus globally. Result shows that the proportion of infected population in the absence of curative vaccination will continue to grow globally meanwhile the recovery rate will continue slowly which therefore means that the ratio of infection to recovery rate will determine the death rate that is recorded globally and most significant for this study is the rate of reinfection by the recovered population which will decline to zero over time as the virus is cleared clinically from the system of the recovered class.

negative: A Randomized, Single-blind, Group sequential, Active-controlled Study to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of Î±-Lipoic acid for critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) Object: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of -Lipoic acid (ALA) for critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: A randomized, single-blind, group sequential, active-controlled trial was performed at JinYinTan Hospital, Wuhan, China. Between February 2020 and March 2020, 17 patients with critically ill COVID-19 were enrolled in our study. Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either ALA (1200 mg/d, intravenous infusion) once daily plus standard care or standard care plus equal volume saline infusion (placebo) for 7 days. All patients were monitored within the 7 days therapy and followed up to day 30 after therapy. The primary outcome of this study was the Sequential Organ Failure Estimate (SOFA) score, and the secondary outcome was the all-cause mortality within 30 days. Result: Nine patients were randomized to placebo group and 8 patients were randomized to ALA group. SOFA score was similar at baseline, increased from 4.3 to 6.0 in the placebo group and increased from 3.8 to 4.0 in the ALA group (P=0.36) after 7 days. The 30-day all-cause mortality tended to be lower in the ALA group (3/8, 37.5%) compared to that in the placebo group (7/9, 77.8%, P=0.09). Conclusion: In our study, ALA use is associated with lower SOFA score increase and lower 30-day all-cause mortality as compared with the placebo group. Although the mortality rate was two-folds higher in placebo group than in ALA group, only borderline statistical difference was evidenced due to the limited patient number. Future studies with larger patient cohort are warranted to validate the role of ALA in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Keywords: Pneumonia; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2 ; -Lipoic acid

negative: A study of non-prescription usage of antibiotics in the upper respiratory tract infections in the urban population

negative: A phage-displayed peptide recognizing porcine aminopeptidase N is a potent small molecule inhibitor of PEDV entry Abstract Three phage-displayed peptides designated H, S and F that recognize porcine aminopeptidase N (pAPN), the cellular receptor of porcine transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV) were able to inhibit cell infection by TGEV. These same peptides had no inhibitory effects on infection of Vero cells by porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV). However, when PEDV, TGEV and porcine pseudorabies virus were incubated with peptide H (HVTTTFAPPPPR), only infection of Vero cells by PEDV was inhibited. Immunofluoresence assays indicated that inhibition of PEDV infection by peptide H was independent of pAPN. Western blots demonstrated that peptide H interacted with PEDV spike protein and that pre-treatment of PEDV with peptide H led to a higher inhibition than synchronous incubation with cells. These results indicate direct interaction with the virus is necessary to inhibit infectivity. Temperature shift assays demonstrated that peptide H inhibited pre-attachment of the virus to the cells.

negative: Prolonged presence of SARS-CoV-2 in feces of pediatric patients during the convalescent phase Background: Severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a newly identified virus which mainly spreads from person-to-person. Fecal shedding of SARS-CoV-2 has been constantly reported in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Most published studies focus on adult populations, whereas data concerning pediatric patients is relatively scarce. Methods: From January 17, 2020 to March 6, 2020, three pediatric cases of COVID-19 were reported in Qingdao, Shandong Province, China. Epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics and treatment data of these children were collected. Real-time fluorescence reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain reaction (RT-PCR) was performed to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA in throat swabs and fecal specimens. Results: All the three pediatric cases were household contacts of adults whose symptoms developed earlier. There has been no evidence showing the virus was transmitted from the children to others. Severity of disease of these children was mild to moderate and fever was the most consistent and predominant symptom at onset of illness (two cases had body temperature higher than 38.5 Celsius). All children showed increased lymphocytes (>4.4*109/L) with normal white blood cell counts on admission. One child had elevated serum levels of procalcitonin and C-reaction protein. Radiological changes were not typical for COVID-19. All children showed good response to supportive treatment. Clearance of SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory tract occurred within two weeks after abatement of fever, whereas persistent presence of viral RNA was found in stools of all children. One case had fecal SARS-CoV-2 turned negative 8 days after throat swabs showing negative, while that of another child lagged behind for 20 days. At the time of writing, one child still had positive results for RT-PCR analysis in stools after negative conversion of viral RNA in respiratory samples (over 19 days behind). Conclusions: Pediatric patients with COVID-19 are very different from adult patients in regards to epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics. Prolonged shedding of SARS-CoV-2 in stools of infected children indicates the potential for the virus to be transmitted through fecal excretion. Massive efforts should be made at all levels to prevent spreading of the infection among children after reopening of kindergartens and schools.

negative: Therapeutic options for the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV).

negative: Update on therapeutic options for Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) Introduction: The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) is an important emerging respiratory pathogen. MERS-CoV resulted in multiple hospital outbreaks within and outside the Arabian Peninsula. The disease has a high case fatality rate, with the need for a therapeutic option. Areas covered: In this review, we provide an overview of the progress in the development of therapeutic strategies for MERS. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Google Scholar, using the following terms: ‘MERS’, ‘MERS-CoV’, ‘Middle East respiratory syndrome’ in combination with ‘treatment’ or ‘therapy’. Expert commentary: There are multiple agents tried in vitro and in vivo. None of these agents were used in large clinical studies. Available clinical studies are limited to the use of the combination of interferon and other agents. These clinical studies are based solely on case reports and case series. There are no prospective or randomized trials. There is a need to have prospective and randomized clinical trials for the therapy of MERS-CoV. However, this strategy might be hampered by the sporadic cases outside the large hospital outbreaks.

negative: Access to Care for Dementia patients suffering from COVID-19

negative: A Simulated Single Ventilator / Dual Patient Ventilation Strategy for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome During the COVID-19 Pandemic The potential for acute shortages of ventilators at the peak of Covid-19 pandemic has raised the possibility of needing to support two patients from a single ventilator. To provide a system for understanding and prototyping designs we have developed a mathematical model of two patients supported by a mechanical ventilator. We propose a standard setup where we simulate the introduction of T-splitters to supply air to two patients and a modified setup where we introduce a variable resistance in each inhalation pathway and one-way valves in each exhalation pathway. Using the standard setup, we demonstrate that ventilating two patients with mismatched lung compliances from a single ventilator will lead to clinically-significant reductions in tidal volume in the patient with the lowest respiratory compliance. Using the modified setup, we demonstrate that it is possible to achieve the same tidal volumes in two patients with mismatched lung compliances, and we show that the tidal volume of one patient can be manipulated independently of the other. The results indicate that, with appropriate modifications, two patients could be supported from a single ventilator with independent control of tidal volumes.

negative: Literature-related discovery: Potential treatments and preventatives for SARS Abstract Literature-related discovery (LRD) is the linking of two or more previously disjoint concepts in order to produce novel, interesting, plausible, and intelligible connections (i.e., potential discovery). LRD has been used to identify potential treatments or preventative actions for challenging medical problems, among myriad other applications. Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) was the first pandemic of the 21st century. SARS was eventually controlled through increased hygienic measures (e.g., face mask protection, frequent hand washing, living quarter disinfection), travel restrictions, and quarantine. According to recent reviews of SARS, none of the drugs that were used during the pandemic worked. For the present paper, SARS was selected as the first application of LRD to an infectious disease. The main goal of this research was to identify non-drug non-surgical treatments that would 1) prevent the occurrence, or 2) reduce the progression rate, or 3) stop/reverse the progression of SARS. The MeSH taxonomy of Medline was used to restrict potential discoveries to selected semantic classes, and to identify potential discoveries efficiently. To enhance the volume of potential discovery, databases were used in addition to Medline. These included the Science Citation Index (SCI) and, in contrast to previous work, a full text database. Because of the richness of the full text, ‘surgical’ queries were developed that targeted the exact types of potential discovery of interest while eliminating clutter more efficiently.

negative: Protease inhibitors broadly effective against feline, ferret and mink coronaviruses Abstract Ferret and mink coronaviruses typically cause catarrhal diarrhea in ferrets and minks, respectively. In recent years, however, systemic fatal coronavirus infection has emerged in ferrets, which resembles feline infectious peritonitis (FIP) in cats. FIP is a highly fatal systemic disease caused by a virulent feline coronavirus infection in cats. Despite the importance of coronavirus infections in these animals, there are no effective commercial vaccines or antiviral drugs available for these infections. We have previously reported the efficacy of a protease inhibitor in cats with FIP, demonstrating that a virally encoded 3C-like protease (3CLpro) is a valid target for antiviral drug development for coronavirus infections. In this study, we extended our previous work on coronavirus inhibitors and investigated the structure-activity relationships of a focused library of protease inhibitors for ferret and mink 3CLpro. Using the fluorescence resonance energy transfer assay, we identified potent inhibitors broadly effective against feline, ferret and mink coronavirus 3CLpro. Multiple amino acid sequence analysis and modelling of 3CLpro of ferret and mink coronaviruses were conducted to probe the structural basis for these findings. The results of this study provide support for further research to develop broad-spectrum antiviral agents for multiple coronavirus infections. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report on small molecule inhibitors of ferret and mink coronaviruses.

negative: Serology characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infection since the exposure and post symptoms onset Background Timely diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection is the prerequisite for treatment and preventive quarantine. The serology characteristics and complement diagnosis value of antibody test to RNA test needs to be demonstrated. Method A patient cohort study was conducted at the first affiliated hospital of Zhejiang University, China. Serial sera of COVID-19 patients were collected and total antibody (Ab), IgM and IgG antibody against SARS-CoV-2 were detected. The antibody dynamics during the infection were described. Results The seroconversion rate for Ab, IgM and IgG in COVID-19 patients was 98.8% (79/80), 93.8% (75/80) and 93.8% (75/80), respectively. The first detectible serology marker is total antibody and followed by IgM and IgG, with a median seroconversion time of 15, 18 and 20 day post exposure (d.p.e) or 9, 10 and 12 days post onset, separately. The antibody levels increased rapidly since 6 d.p.o and accompanied with the decline of viral load. For patients in the early stage of illness (0-7d.p.o),Ab showed the highest sensitivity (64.1%) compared to the IgM and IgG (33.3% for both, p<0.001). The sensitivities of Ab, IgM and IgG detection increased to 100%, 96.7% and 93.3% two weeks later, respectively. Conclusions Typical acute antibody response is induced during the SARS-CoV-2 infection. The serology testing provides important complementation to RNA test for pathogenic specific diagnosis and helpful information to evaluate the adapted immunity status of patient. It should be strongly recommended to apply well-validated antibody tests in the clinical management and public health practice to improve the control of COVID-19 infection.

negative: Treatment preference and recruitment to pediatric RCTs: A systematic review. Background Recruitment to pediatric randomised controlled trials (RCTs) can be a challenge, with ethical issues surrounding assent and consent. Pediatric RCTs frequently recruit from a smaller pool of patients making adequate recruitment difficult. One factor which influences recruitment and retention in pediatric trials is patient and parent preferences for treatment. Purpose To systematically review pediatric RCTs reporting treatment preference. Methods Database searches included: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and COCHRANE.Qualitative or quantitative papers were eligible if they reported: pediatric population, (0-17 years) recruited to an RCT and reported treatment preference for all or some of the participants/parents in any clinical area. Data extraction included: Number of eligible participants consenting to randomisation arms, number of eligible patients not randomised because of treatment preference, and any further information reported on preferences (e.g., if parent preference was different from child). Results Fifty-two studies were included. The number of eligible families declining participation in an RCT because of preference for treatment varied widely (between 2 and 70%) in feasibility, conventional and preference trial designs. Some families consented to trial involvement despite having preferences for a specific treatment. Data relating to 'participant flow and recruitment' was not always reported consistently, therefore numbers who were lost to follow-up or withdrew due to preference could not be extracted. Conclusions Families often have treatment preferences which may affect trial recruitment. Whilst children appear to hold treatment preferences, this is rarely reported. Further investigation is needed to understand the reasons for preference and the impact preference has on RCT recruitment, retention and outcome.

negative: Cumulative biological source index: Volumes 1–20

negative: Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses. Part 2 - Hand hygiene and other hygiene measures: systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of hand hygiene, surface disinfecting, and other hygiene interventions in preventing or reducing the spread of illnesses from respiratory viruses. DESIGN: Update of a systematic review and meta-analysis focussing on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs (c-RCTs) evidence only. DATA SOURCES: Eligible trials from the previous Cochrane review, search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Embase and CINAHL from 01 October 2010 to 01 April 2020, and forward and backward citation analysis of included studies. DATA SELECTION: RCTs and c-RCTs involving people of any age, testing the use of hand hygiene methods, surface disinfection or cleaning, and other miscellaneous barrier interventions. Face masks, eye protection, and person distancing are covered in Part 1 of our systematic review. Outcomes included acute respiratory illness (ARI), influenza-like illness (ILI) or laboratory-confirmed influenza (influenza) and/or related consequences (e.g. death, absenteeism from school or work). DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: Six authors working in pairs independently assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane tool and extracted data. The generalised inverse variance method was used for pooling by using the random-effects model, and results reported with risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We identified 51 eligible trials. We included 25 randomised trials comparing hand hygiene interventions with a control; 15 of these could be included in meta-analyses. We pooled 8 trials for the outcome of ARI. Hand hygiene showed a 16% relative reduction in the number of participants with ARI (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.86) in the intervention group. When we considered the more strictly defined outcomes of ILI and influenza, the RR for ILI was 0.98 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.14), and for influenza the RR was 0.91 (95% CI 0.61 to 1.34). Three trials measured absenteeism. We found a 36% relative reduction in absentee numbers in the hand hygiene group (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.71). Comparison of different hand hygiene interventions did not favour one intervention type over another. We found no incremental effects of combining hand hygiene with using face masks or disinfecting surfaces or objects. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lack of evidence for the impact of hand hygiene in reducing ILI and influenza, the modest evidence for reducing the burden of ARIs, and related absenteeism, justifies reinforcing the standard recommendation for hand hygiene measures to reduce the spread of respiratory viruses. Funding for relevant trials with an emphasis on adherence and compliance with such a measure is crucial to inform policy and global pandemic preparedness with confidence and precision.

negative: Research Communications of the 25th ECVIM‐CA Congress

negative: Delays in managing neurosurgical patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

negative: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pneumonia in a Hemodialysis Patient Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly infective disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus (SARS-CoV-2). Previous studies of the COVID-19 pneumonia outbreak were based on information from the general population. Limited data are available for hemodialysis patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. This report describes the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 in an in-center hemodialysis patient, as well as our experience in implementing steps to prevent the spread of COVID-19 pneumonia among in-center hemodialysis patients. The diagnosis, infection control, and treatment of COVID-19 in hemodialysis patients are discussed in this report, and we conclude with recommendations for how a dialysis facility can respond to COVID-19 based on our experiences.

negative: Chapter 12 Clinical Trials of Vaccines for Biodefense and Emerging and Neglected Diseases Abstract The development of safe and effective vaccines for the prevention and control of emerging and neglected infectious diseases is an international priority, as is the development of similar control measures for bioterrorist threats. International standards have been established to ensure the protection of human subjects and the scientific integrity of clinical trial study design and data collection. A general overview of the history of the regulatory guidelines and ethical principles underpinning the vaccine development process is provided, with an emphasis on clinical trials conducted in the United States. The contemporary vaccine development process involves sequential assessment of safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy in phase1, 2, and 3 clinical trials. The process is not always linear or straightforward, and adaptive flexible clinical trial designs can increase the likelihood of a successful outcome. Because the efficacy of vaccines for a number of the diseases discussed in this volume cannot be tested directly in humans, alternative approaches have been developed to address this challenge. The major elements of typical clinical trial protocol are discussed, and a checklist of essential documents supporting the trial is provided. As novel vaccine approaches and technologies emerge, the regulatory and ethical considerations will need to be revisited and adapted to respond to the ever-changing landscape.

negative: Genetic manipulation of porcine deltacoronavirus reveals insights into NS6 and NS7 functions: a novel strategy for vaccine design Porcine deltacoronavirus (PDCoV) is an emerging swine coronavirus that causes severe diarrhea, resulting in high mortality in neonatal piglets. Despite widespread outbreaks in many countries, no effective PDCoV vaccines are currently available. Here, we generated, for the first time, a full-length infectious cDNA clone of PDCoV. We further manipulated the infectious clone by replacing the NS6 gene with a green fluorescent protein (GFP) to generate rPDCoV-ΔNS6-GFP; likewise, rPDCoV-ΔNS7 was constructed by removing the ATG start codons of the NS7 gene. Growth kinetics studies suggest that rPDCoV-ΔNS7 could replicate similarly to that of the wild-type PDCoV, whereas rPDCoV-ΔNS6-GFP exhibited a substantial reduction of viral titer in vitro and in vivo. Piglets inoculated with rPDCoV-ΔNS7 or wild-type PDCoV showed similar diarrheic scores and pathological injury. In contrast, rPDCoV-ΔNS6-GFP-infected piglets did not show any clinical signs, indicating that the NS6 protein is an important virulence factor of PDCoV and that the NS6-deficient mutant virus might be a promising live-attenuated vaccine candidate. Taken together, the reverse genetics platform described here not only provides more insights into the role of PDCoV accessory proteins in viral replication and pathogenesis, but also allows the development of novel vaccines against PDCoV infection.

negative: A Social Network Model of the COVID-19 Pandemic In the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic, currently vaccines and specific anti-viral treatment are not yet available. Thus, preventing viral transmission by case isolation, quarantine, and social distancing is essential to slowing its spread. Here we model social networks using weighted graphs, where vertices represent individuals and edges represent contact. As public health measures are implemented, connectivity in the graph decreases, resulting in lower effective reproductive numbers, and reduced viral transmission. For COVID-19, model parameters were derived from the coronavirus epidemic in China, validated by epidemic data in Italy, then applied to the United States. We calculate that, in the U.S., the public is able to contain viral transmission by limiting the average number of contacts per person to less than 7 unique individuals over each 5 day period. This increases the average social distance between individuals to 10 degrees of separation.

negative: Harnessing T-Cell Immunity to Target Brain Tumors T-cell mediated immunotherapy is a conceptually attractive treatment option to envisage for glioma, since T lymphocytes can actively seek out neoplastic cells in the brain, and they have the potential to safely and specifically eliminate tumor. Some antigenic targets on glioma cells are already defined, and we can be optimistic that more will be discovered from progress in T-cell epitope identification and gene expression profiling of brain tumors. In parallel, advances in immunology (regional immunology, neuroimmunology, tumor immunology) now equip us to build upon the results from current immunotherapy trials in which the safety and feasibility of brain tumor immunotherapy have already been confirmed. We can now look to the next phase of immunotherapy, in which we must harness the most promising basic science advances and existing clinical expertise, and apply these to randomized clinical trials to determine the real clinical impact and applicability of these approaches for treating patients with currently incurable malignant brain tumors.

negative: Pilot test of an online training module on near-infrared spectroscopy monitoring for the randomised clinical trial SafeBoosC-III BACKGROUND: SafeBoosC-III is an international randomised clinical trial to evaluate the effect of treatment of extremely preterm infants during the first 3 days of life based on cerebral near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) monitoring versus treatment and monitoring as usual. To ensure high quality of the trial intervention as well as of patient care, we have developed a multilingual web-based training program to train relevant staff and test their competence. As we enter an under-explored area of e-learning, we have conducted a pilot study on the first of the five modules comprising the web-based training program to test the feasibility of developing such a program for an international trial with limited resources. METHODS: The module in this study focuses on the principles and practice of NIRS monitoring. The pedagogical idea was to integrate training and certification. One-hundred doctors and nurses from five Neonatal Intensive Care Units across China, Spain and Denmark were invited to participate in the pilot study. Upon completion of the NIRS module, participants were invited to evaluate their experience by completing an online survey. Data from closed-ended questions were analysed using descriptive statistics while data from open-ended questions underwent thematic analysis. RESULTS: In total, 81 of 100 invited staff members entered the training module and completed the online survey. The median time and the number of questions to pass the module was 15 minutes and seven questions, respectively. Most staff found the academic level of the learning material and quiz appropriate (85% and 93% of all staff members, respectively), as well as agreeing that the module was relevant to prepare them to ‘use the NIRS device’ (90%). Thematic analysis revealed issues such as a discrepancy between learning material and quiz questions, lack of clarity, and technical issues. CONCLUSION: We provide evidence of the feasibility of developing a multilingual web-based training program for an international trial, despite challenges such as low budget, language barriers and possibly differences in the clinical training of staff. Exploring the integration of training and certification for international trials, the positive results of this study motivate further developments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT03770741. Registered 10 December 2018.

negative: Emerging novel and antimicrobial-resistant respiratory tract infections: new drug development and therapeutic options Summary The emergence and spread of antimicrobial-resistant bacterial, viral, and fungal pathogens for which diminishing treatment options are available is of major global concern. New viral respiratory tract infections with epidemic potential, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome, swine-origin influenza A H1N1, and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection, require development of new antiviral agents. The substantial rise in the global numbers of patients with respiratory tract infections caused by pan-antibiotic-resistant Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and multiazole-resistant fungi has focused attention on investments into development of new drugs and treatment regimens. Successful treatment outcomes for patients with respiratory tract infections across all health-care settings will necessitate rapid, precise diagnosis and more effective and pathogen-specific therapies. This Series paper describes the development and use of new antimicrobial agents and immune-based and host-directed therapies for a range of conventional and emerging viral, bacterial, and fungal causes of respiratory tract infections.

negative: A segregated-team model to maintain cancer care during the COVID-19 outbreak at an academic center in Singapore

negative: Use of Available Data To Inform The COVID-19 Outbreak in South Africa: A Case Study The coronavirus disease (COVID-19), caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) in February 2020. Currently, there are no vaccines or treatments that have been approved after clinical trials. Social distancing measures, including travel bans, school closure, and quarantine applied to countries or regions are being used to limit the spread of the disease and the demand on the healthcare infrastructure. The seclusion of groups and individuals has led to limited access to accurate information. To update the public, especially in South Africa, announcements are made by the minister of health daily. These announcements narrate the confirmed COVID-19 cases and include the age, gender, and travel history of people who have tested positive for the disease. Additionally, the South African National Institute for Communicable Diseases updates a daily infographic summarising the number of tests performed, confirmed cases, mortality rate, and the regions affected. However, the age of the patient and other nuanced data regarding the transmission is only shared in the daily announcements and not on the updated infographic. To disseminate this information, the Data Science for Social Impact research group at the University of Pretoria, South Africa, has worked on curating and applying publicly available data in a way that is computer-readable so that information can be shared to the public - using both a data repository and a dashboard. Through collaborative practices, a variety of challenges related to publicly available data in South Africa came to the fore. These include shortcomings in the accessibility, integrity, and data management practices between governmental departments and the South African public. In this paper, solutions to these problems will be shared by using a publicly available data repository and dashboard as a case study.

negative: Impact of the COVID-19 crisis on imaging in oncological trials

negative: Prevention and Treatment of Respiratory Virus Infection There is increasing recognition of infections caused by respiratory viruses (RVs) as a major cause of morbidity and mortality in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, especially within the thoracic and pediatric population. In addition to their direct, cytopathic, and tissue-invasive effects, RVs can create an inflammatory environment, autoimmune responses, resulting in acute and chronic rejection, although this relationship remains controversial. A laboratory diagnosis in SOT with respiratory syndrome should be performed with nucleic acid amplification tests on respiratory specimens, mainly nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL). Treatment options remain limited and consist of supportive care, reduction of immunosuppression, and, if available, antiviral therapy. The use of immunomodulatory agents remains a clinical dilemma. Since treatment options for RVs are limited, maximizing prevention measures against viral infections in SOT is mandatory. The main preventive strategy against influenza remains the administration of yearly inactivated influenza vaccine in all SOT. The aim of this review is to summarize the evidence-based recommendations on the diagnostic, preventive, and therapeutic strategies to decrease the burden of RV infections in SOT recipients.

negative: Meditation or exercise for preventing acute respiratory infection (MEPARI-2): A randomized controlled trial BACKGROUND: Practice of meditation or exercise may enhance health to protect against acute infectious illness. OBJECTIVE: To assess preventive effects of meditation and exercise on acute respiratory infection (ARI) illness. DESIGN: Randomized controlled prevention trial with three parallel groups. SETTING: Madison, Wisconsin, USA. PARTICIPANTS: Community-recruited adults who did not regularly exercise or meditate. METHODS: 1) 8-week behavioral training in mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR); 2) matched 8-week training in moderate intensity sustained exercise (EX); or 3) observational waitlist control. Training classes occurred in September and October, with weekly ARI surveillance through May. Incidence, duration, and area-under-curve ARI global severity were measured using daily reports on the WURSS-24 during ARI illness. Viruses were identified multiplex PCR. Absenteeism, health care utilization, and psychosocial health self-report assessments were also employed. RESULTS: Of 413 participants randomized, 390 completed the trial. In the MBSR group, 74 experienced 112 ARI episodes with 1045 days of ARI illness. Among exercisers, 84 had 120 episodes totaling 1010 illness days. Eighty-two of the controls had 134 episodes with 1210 days of ARI illness. Mean global severity was 315 for MBSR (95% confidence interval 244, 386), 256 (193, 318) for EX, and 336 (268, 403) for controls. A prespecified multivariate zero-inflated regression model suggested reduced incidence for MBSR (p = 0.036) and lower global severity for EX (p = 0.042), compared to control, not quite attaining the p<0.025 prespecified cut-off for null hypothesis rejection. There were 73 ARI-related missed-work days and 22 ARI-related health care visits in the MBSR group, 82 days and 21 visits for exercisers, and 105 days and 24 visits among controls. Viruses were identified in 63 ARI episodes in the MBSR group, compared to 64 for EX and 72 for control. Statistically significant (p<0.05) improvements in general mental health, self-efficacy, mindful attention, sleep quality, perceived stress, and depressive symptoms were observed in the MBSR and/or EX groups, compared to control. CONCLUSIONS: Training in mindfulness meditation or exercise may help protect against ARI illness. LIMITATIONS: This trial was likely underpowered. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01654289

negative: In vitro susceptibility of 10 clinical isolates of SARS coronavirus to selected antiviral compounds Abstract Effective antiviral agents are urgently needed to combat the possible return of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Commercial antiviral agents and pure chemical compounds extracted from traditional Chinese medicinal herbs were screened against 10 clinical isolates of SARS coronavirus by neutralisation tests with confirmation by plaque reduction assays. Interferon-beta-1a, leukocytic interferon-alpha, ribavirin, lopinavir, rimantadine, baicalin and glycyrrhizin showed antiviral activity. The two interferons were only active if the cell lines were pre-incubated with the drugs 16h before viral inoculation. Results were confirmed by plaque reduction assays. Antiviral activity varied with the use of different cell lines. Checkerboard assays for synergy were performed showing combinations of interferon beta-1a or leukocytic interferon-alpha with ribavirin are synergistic. Since the clinical and toxicity profiles of these agents are well known, they should be considered either singly or in combination for prophylaxis or treatment of SARS in randomised placebo controlled trials in future epidemics.

negative: Prevention of Pain During Screening for Retinopathy of Prematurity: A Randomized Control Trial Comparing Breast Milk, 10% Dextrose and Sterile Water OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of orally administered 10% dextrose, breast milk and sterile water on pain prevention during screening examination for Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) in preterm neonates as measured by Premature infant pain profile (PIPP). METHODS: A three-limbed double-blinded randomized control trial was conducted in a Level 3 neonatal intensive care unit. Forty five preterm neonates undergoing ROP screening were included. Eligible babies were randomly assigned to one of the three groups that orally received either expressed breast milk (n = 14), 10% dextrose solution (n = 14) or sterile water (n = 17), one minute before eye examination. The outcome measure was PIPP score. RESULTS: All 3 groups were similar in baseline characteristics. The mean PIPP scores were comparable (p = 0.18) in the three groups (11.8 ± 2.8 vs. 9.8 ± 3.3 vs. 10.2 ± 2.9). The behavioral and physiological variables were also similar across all three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Expressed breast milk, 10% dextrose or sterile water administered orally before ROP screening in preterm neonates have similar analgesic effects and do not significantly alleviate pain during the procedure.

negative: Evidence from the Cochrane Collaboration for Traditional Chinese Medicine therapies. BACKGROUND The Cochrane Collaboration, an international not-for-profit organization that prepares and maintains systematic reviews of randomized trials of health care therapies, has produced reviews summarizing much of the evidence on Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM). Our objective was to review the evidence base according to Cochrane systematic reviews. METHODS In order to detect reviews focusing on TCM, we searched the titles and abstracts of all reviews in Issue 4, 2008 of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. For each review, we extracted data on the number of trials included and the total number of participants. We provided an indication of the strength of the review findings by assessing the reviewers' abstract conclusions statement. We supplemented our assessment of the abstract conclusions statements with a listing of the comparisons and outcomes showing statistically significant meta-analyses results. RESULTS We identified 70 Cochrane systematic reviews of TCM, primarily acupuncture (n = 26) and Chinese herbal medicine (n = 42), and 1 each of moxibustion and t'ai chi. Nineteen (19) of 26 acupuncture reviews and 22/42 herbal medicine reviews concluded that there was not enough good quality trial evidence to make any conclusion about the efficacy of the evaluated treatment, while the remaining 7 acupuncture and 20 herbal medicine reviews and each of the moxibustion and t'ai chi reviews indicated a suggestion of benefit, which was qualified by a caveat about the poor quality and quantity of studies. Most reviews included many distinct interventions, controls, outcomes, and populations, and a large number of different comparisons were made, each with a distinct forest plot. CONCLUSIONS Most Cochrane systematic reviews of TCM are inconclusive, due specifically to the poor methodology and heterogeneity of the studies reviewed. Some systematic reviews provide preliminary evidence of Chinese medicine's benefits to certain patient populations, underscoring the importance and appropriateness of further research. These preliminary findings should be considered tentative and need to be confirmed with rigorous randomized controlled trials.

negative: 21 Respiratory viruses Abstract: Respiratory viruses are commonly detected in both healthy and immunocompromised children. In most healthy children, respiratory viruses are associated with self-limited upper respiratory tract infections and are not accompanied by significant morbidity. In immunocompromised hosts, including hematopoietic cell transplant recipients, solid organ transplant recipients, and oncology patients, respiratory viruses can be associated with significant clinical manifestations, including prolonged viral shedding, lower respiratory tract disease, the need for supplemental oxygen, late airflow obstruction, and even death. This chapter reviews the major respiratory viruses, including respiratory syncytial virus, human metapneumovirus, influenza, parainfluenza viruses, human rhinoviruses, and human coronaviruses. Other viruses can manifest as pulmonary infection; however, these viruses are discussed elsewhere (see Chapter 17 for discussion of cytomegalovirus and Chapter 22 for discussion of adenoviruses).

negative: Efficacy of glutathione therapy in relieving dyspnea associated with COVID-19 pneumonia: A report of 2 cases PURPOSE: Infection with COVID-19 potentially can result in severe outcomes and death from “cytokine storm syndrome”, resulting in novel coronavirus pneumonia (NCP) with severe dyspnea, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), fulminant myocarditis and multiorgan dysfunction with or without disseminated intravascular coagulation. No published treatment to date has been shown to adequately control the inflammation and respiratory symptoms associated with COVID-19, apart from oxygen therapy and assisted ventilation. We evaluated the effects of using high dose oral and/or IV glutathione in the treatment of 2 patients with dyspnea secondary to COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: Two patients living in New York City (NYC) with a history of Lyme and tick-borne co-infections experienced a cough and dyspnea and demonstrated radiological findings consistent with novel coronavirus pneumonia (NCP). A trial of 2 g of PO or IV glutathione was used in both patients and improved their dyspnea within 1 h of use. Repeated use of both 2000 mg of PO and IV glutathione was effective in further relieving respiratory symptoms. CONCLUSION: Oral and IV glutathione, glutathione precursors (N-acetyl-cysteine) and alpha lipoic acid may represent a novel treatment approach for blocking NF-κB and addressing “cytokine storm syndrome” and respiratory distress in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

negative: The novel coronavirus 2019 epidemic and kidneys

negative: Patients with cancer in the era of 2019 novel coronavirus disease

negative: Current State and Predicting Future Scenario of Highly Infected Nations for COVID-19 Pandemic Since the first report of COVID-19 from Wuhan China, the virus has rapidly spread across the globe now presently reported in 177 countries with positive cases crossing 400 thousand and rising. In the current study, prediction is made for highly infected countries by a simple and novel method using only cumulative positive cases reported. The rate of infection per week (R_w) coefficient delineated three phases for the current COVID-19 pandemic. All the countries under study have passed Phase 1 and are currently in Phase 2 except for South Korea which is in Phase 3. Early detection with rapid and large-scale testing helps in controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. Staying in Phase 2 for longer period would lead to increase in COVID-19 positive cases.

negative: Augmented Curation of Unstructured Clinical Notes from a Massive EHR System Reveals Specific Phenotypic Signature of Impending COVID-19 Diagnosis Understanding the temporal dynamics of COVID-19 patient phenotypes is necessary to derive fine-grained resolution of the pathophysiology. Here we use state-of-the-art deep neural networks over an institution-wide machine intelligence platform for the augmented curation of 8.2 million clinical notes from 14,967 patients subjected to COVID-19 PCR diagnostic testing. By contrasting the Electronic Health Record (EHR)-derived clinical phenotypes of COVID-19-positive (COVIDpos, n=272) versus COVID-19-negative (COVIDneg, n=14,695) patients over each day of the week preceding the PCR testing date, we identify diarrhea (2.8-fold), change in appetite (2-fold), anosmia/dysgeusia (28.6-fold), and respiratory failure (2.1-fold) as significantly amplified in COVIDpos over COVIDneg patients. The specific combination of cough and diarrhea has a 4-fold amplification in COVIDpos patients during the week prior to PCR testing, and along with anosmia/dysgeusia, constitutes the earliest EHR-derived signature of COVID-19 (4-7 days prior to typical PCR testing date). This study introduces an Augmented Intelligence platform for the real-time synthesis of institutional knowledge captured in EHRs. The platform holds tremendous potential for scaling up curation throughput, with minimal need for training underlying neural networks, thus promising EHR-powered early diagnosis for a broad spectrum of diseases.

negative: SARS-CoV-2: an Emerging Coronavirus that Causes a Global Threat An ongoing outbreak of pneumonia caused by a novel coronavirus, currently designated as the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), was reported recently. However, as SARS-CoV-2 is an emerging virus, we know little about it. In this review, we summarize the key events occurred during the early stage of SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, the basic characteristics of the pathogen, the signs and symptoms of the infected patients as well as the possible transmission pathways of the virus. Furthermore, we also review the current knowledge on the origin and evolution of the SARS-CoV-2. We highlight bats as the potential natural reservoir and pangolins as the possible intermediate host of the virus, but their roles are waiting for further investigation. Finally, the advances in the development of chemotherapeutic options are also briefly summarized.

negative: Testing of Adenoviral Vector Gene Transfer Products: FDA Expectations This chapter describes the agency requirements and guidelines for drug development of adenoviral-containing products. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) assessment of safety and ultimately effectiveness of adenovirus containing products involves thorough evaluation of the information contained in the Investigational New Drug Application (IND), and any supporting information cross-referenced to another IND or drug master file. Many factors contribute to development of FDA recommendations and requirements for characterization of adenovirus vectors. The FDA receives input and feedback from a variety of sources in formulating recommendations regarding adenovirus manufacturing and characterization. The recommendations may change with advances in technology and through accumulating experience. FDA considers the potential risks and benefits of each vector product and each proposed clinical trial when making its recommendations. The FDA is cognizant of the need for flexibility in its recommendations and will consider many factors, including the intended target population, the seriousness of the disease under study, the potential benefits and risks from the investigational product, when advising sponsors about their adenovirus development program.

negative: Abstracts of FIS/HIS 2016 – Poster Presentations

negative: ELM—the database of eukaryotic linear motifs Linear motifs are short, evolutionarily plastic components of regulatory proteins and provide low-affinity interaction interfaces. These compact modules play central roles in mediating every aspect of the regulatory functionality of the cell. They are particularly prominent in mediating cell signaling, controlling protein turnover and directing protein localization. Given their importance, our understanding of motifs is surprisingly limited, largely as a result of the difficulty of discovery, both experimentally and computationally. The Eukaryotic Linear Motif (ELM) resource at http://elm.eu.org provides the biological community with a comprehensive database of known experimentally validated motifs, and an exploratory tool to discover putative linear motifs in user-submitted protein sequences. The current update of the ELM database comprises 1800 annotated motif instances representing 170 distinct functional classes, including approximately 500 novel instances and 24 novel classes. Several older motif class entries have been also revisited, improving annotation and adding novel instances. Furthermore, addition of full-text search capabilities, an enhanced interface and simplified batch download has improved the overall accessibility of the ELM data. The motif discovery portion of the ELM resource has added conservation, and structural attributes have been incorporated to aid users to discriminate biologically relevant motifs from stochastically occurring non-functional instances.

negative: Asymptomatic carrier state, acute respiratory disease, and pneumonia due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2): Facts and myths Abstract Since the emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (formerly known as the 2019 novel coronavirus [2019-nCoV]) in Wuhan, China in December 2019, which is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), more than 75,000 cases have been reported in 32 countries/regions, resulting in more than 2000 deaths worldwide. Despite the fact that most COVID-19 cases and mortalities were reported in China, the WHO has declared this outbreak as the sixth public health emergency of international concern. The COVID-19 can present as an asymptomatic carrier state, acute respiratory disease, and pneumonia. Adults represent the population with the highest infection rate; however, neonates, children, and elderly patients can also be infected by SARS-CoV-2. In addition, nosocomial infection of hospitalized patients and healthcare workers, and viral transmission from asymptomatic carriers are possible. The most common finding on chest imaging among patients with pneumonia was ground-glass opacity with bilateral involvement. Severe cases are more likely to be older patients with underlying comorbidities compared to mild cases. Indeed, age and disease severity may be correlated with the outcomes of COVID-19. To date, effective treatment is lacking; however, clinical trials investigating the efficacy of several agents, including remdesivir and chloroquine, are underway in China. Currently, effective infection control intervention is the only way to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2.

negative: Association of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak With Enrollment in Cancer Clinical Trials This cohort study investigates how the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is associated with national enrollment in cancer clinical trials.

negative: Teicoplanin potently blocks the cell entry of 2019-nCoV Since December 2019, the outbreak of a new coronavirus, named 2019-nCoV, has greatly threatened the public health in China and raised great concerns worldwide. No specific treatment for this infection is currently available. We previously reported that teicoplanin, a glycopeptide antibiotic which has routinely been used in the clinic to treat bacterial infection with low toxicity, significantly inhibits the invasion of cells by Ebola virus, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, via specifically inhibiting the activity of cathepsin L. Here, we tested the efficacy of teicoplanin against 2019-nCoV virus infection and found that teicoplanin potently prevents the entrance of 2019-nCoV-Spike-pseudoviruses into the cytoplasm, with an IC50 of 1.66 μM. Although the inhibitory effect upon the replication of wildtype viruses ex vivo and in vivo remains to be determined, our preliminary result indicates that the potential antiviral activity of teicoplanin could be applied for the treatment of 2019-nCoV virus infection.

negative: Designing clinical trials for future space missions as a pathway to changing how clinical trials are conducted on Earth OBJECTIVE: The project aims to build a framework for conducting clinical trials for long-term interplanetary missions to contribute to innovation in clinical trials on Earth, especially around patient involvement and ownership. METHODS: We conducted two workshops in which participants were immersed in the speculative scenario of an interplanetary mission in which health problems emerged that required medical trials to resolve. The workshops used virtual reality and live simulation to mimic a zero-gravity environment and visual perception shifts and were followed by group discussion. RESULTS: Some key aspects for the framework that emerged from the workshops included: (a) approaches to be inclusive in the management of the trial, (b) approaches to be inclusive in designing the research project (patient preference trials, n-of-1 trials, designing clinical trials to be part of a future prospective meta-analysis, etc), (c) balancing the research needs and the community needs (eg, allocation of the participants based on both research and community need), (d) ethics and partnerships (ethics and consent issues and how they relate to partnerships and relationships). CONCLUSION: In identifying some key areas that need to be incorporated in future planning of clinical trials for interplanetary missions, we also identified areas that are relevant to engaging patients in clinical trials on Earth. We will suggest using the same methodology to facilitate more in-depth discussions on specific aspects of clinical trials in aerospace medicine. The methodology can be more widely used in other areas to open new inclusive conversations around innovating research methodology.

negative: Unrevealing sequence and structural features of novel coronavirus using in silico approaches: The main protease as molecular target Direct-acting antivirals are effective tools to control viral infections. SARS-CoV-2 is a coronavirus associated with the epidemiological outbreak in late 2019. Previous reports showed that HIV-1 protease inhibitors could block SARS-CoV main protease. Based on that and using an in silico approach, we evaluated SARS-CoV-2 main protease as a target for HIV-1 protease inhibitors to reveal the structural features related to their antiviral effect. Our results showed that several HIV inhibitors such as lopinavir, ritonavir, and saquinavir produce strong interaction with the active site of SARS-CoV-2 main protease. Furthermore, broad library protease inhibitors obtained from PubChem and ZINC (www.zinc.docking.org) were evaluated. Our analysis revealed 20 compounds that could be clustered into three groups based on their chemical features. Then, these structures could serve as leading compounds to develop a series of derivatives optimizing their activity against SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses. Altogether, the results presented in this work contribute to gain a deep understanding of the molecular pharmacology of SARS-CoV-2 treatment and validate the use of protease inhibitors against SARS-CoV-2.

negative: Ginkgo leaf extract and dipyridamole injection for chronic cor pulmonale: a PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Ginkgo leaf extract and dipyridamole injection (GLED), a kind of Chinese herbal medicine preparation, has been considered as a promising supplementary treatment for chronic cor pulmonale (CCP). Although an analysis of the published literature has been performed, the exact effects and safety of GLED have yet to be systematically investigated. Therefore, a wide-ranging systematic search of electronic databases from which to draw conclusions was conducted. All randomized controlled trials concerning the GLED plus conventional treatments for CCP were selected in the present study. Main outcomes were treatment efficacy, blood gas and hemorrheology indexes, and adverse events. Data from 28 trials with 2457 CCP patients were analyzed. The results indicated that, compared with conventional treatments alone, the combination of conventional treatments with GLED obviously improved the markedly effective rate (RR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.31–1.58, P < 0.00001) and total effective rate (RR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.18–1.38, P < 0.00001). Moreover, the hemorrheology (PaO(2), P < 0.00001; PaCO(2), P < 0.00001; SaO(2), P < 0.00001; pH value, P = 0.05) and blood gas indexes (PV, WBHSV, WBMSV, WBLSV, hematocrit and FBG, P < 0.01) of CCP patients were also significantly ameliorated after the combined therapy. The frequency of adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups (P > 0.05). In summary, evidence from the meta-analysis suggested that the combination of conventional treatments and GLED appeared to be effective and relatively safe for CCP. Therefore, GLED mediated therapy could be recommended as an adjuvant treatment for CCP.

negative: Developing therapeutic monoclonal antibodies at pandemic pace The time from discovery to proof-of-concept trials could be reduced to 5–6 months from a traditional timeline of 10–12 months.

negative: Annotation of long non-coding RNAs expressed in Collaborative Cross founder mice in response to respiratory virus infection reveals a new class of interferon-stimulated transcripts The outcome of respiratory virus infection is determined by a complex interplay of viral and host factors. Some potentially important host factors for the antiviral response, whose functions remain largely unexplored, are long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs). Here we systematically inferred the regulatory functions of host lncRNAs in response to influenza A virus and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) based on their similarity in expression with genes of known function. We performed total RNA-Seq on viral-infected lungs from eight mouse strains, yielding a large data set of transcriptional responses. Overall 5,329 lncRNAs were differentially expressed after infection. Most of the lncRNAs were co-expressed with coding genes in modules enriched in genes associated with lung homeostasis pathways or immune response processes. Each lncRNA was further individually annotated using a rank-based method, enabling us to associate 5,295 lncRNAs to at least one gene set and to predict their potential cis effects. We validated the lncRNAs predicted to be interferon-stimulated by profiling mouse responses after interferon-α treatment. Altogether, these results provide a broad categorization of potential lncRNA functions and identify subsets of lncRNAs with likely key roles in respiratory virus pathogenesis. These data are fully accessible through the MOuse NOn-Code Lung interactive database (MONOCLdb).

negative: Impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome on the status of lung cancer chemotherapy patients and a correlation of the signs and symptoms Abstract Our aim was to describe the impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) on the status and chemotherapy of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who had entered clinical trials, and to review how to differentiate the signs and symptoms of SARS from lung cancer and its treatment-related toxicities. A prospective case series involving 79 NSCLC patients who were enrolled in clinical trials undergoing chemotherapy at Taipei Veterans General Hospital, between April 1 and July 15, 2003, was studied. Whether or not there existed a delay, omission, or refusal of scheduled chemotherapy, was recorded. Whether or not our patients had been suspected of or treated as having SARS, was recorded. The patients filled out questionnaires regarding lung cancer treatment and the risk of getting SARS from the hospital. Among these patients, five were placed in an isolation unit to rule out SARS infection during this period of time, and no patient was documented to have suffered from a SARS infection after examinations. Of 373 scheduled chemotherapy injections in 79 patients, a delay in treatment occurred only 10 times. Three patients refused further chemotherapy because of a fear of getting SARS if they visited the hospital. Fifty-eight patients responded to our questionnaires. Thirty-seven patients (63.8%) were afraid of visiting hospital during this SARS infection period. Twenty-one patients (36.2%) felt that a SARS infection was more severe and fatal than their lung cancer. In conclusion, SARS is a new disease entity that is highly contagious. Its clinical manifestations overlap with the signs and symptoms of lung cancer. Thus, a clear differentiation between the two conditions is needed, especially for those patients who are under active anti-cancer treatment.

negative: Emerging viral diseases from a vaccinology perspective: preparing for the next pandemic Emerging infectious diseases will continue to threaten public health and are sustained by global commerce, travel and disruption of ecological systems. Most pandemic threats are caused by viruses from either zoonotic sources or vector-borne sources. Developing better ways to anticipate and manage the ongoing microbial challenge will be critical for achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and, conversely, each such goal will affect the ability to control infectious diseases. Here we discuss how technology can be applied effectively to better prepare for and respond to new viral diseases with a focus on new paradigms for vaccine development.

negative: Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR BACKGROUND: The ongoing outbreak of the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) poses a challenge for public health laboratories as virus isolates are unavailable while there is growing evidence that the outbreak is more widespread than initially thought, and international spread through travellers does already occur. AIM: We aimed to develop and deploy robust diagnostic methodology for use in public health laboratory settings without having virus material available. METHODS: Here we present a validated diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV, its design relying on close genetic relatedness of 2019-nCoV with SARS coronavirus, making use of synthetic nucleic acid technology. RESULTS: The workflow reliably detects 2019-nCoV, and further discriminates 2019-nCoV from SARS-CoV. Through coordination between academic and public laboratories, we confirmed assay exclusivity based on 297 original clinical specimens containing a full spectrum of human respiratory viruses. Control material is made available through European Virus Archive – Global (EVAg), a European Union infrastructure project. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrates the enormous response capacity achieved through coordination of academic and public laboratories in national and European research networks.

negative: Clinical Manifestations of Children with COVID-19: a Systematic Review Context: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak is an unprecedented global public health challenge, leading to thousands of deaths every day worldwide. Despite the epidemiological importance, clinical patterns of children with COVID-19 remain unclear. Objective: To describe the clinical, laboratorial and radiological characteristics of children with COVID-19. Data Sources: The Medline database was searched between December 1st 2019 and March 30th 2020. Study Selection: Inclusion criteria were: (1) studied patients younger than 18 years old; (2) presented original data from cases of COVID-19 confirmed by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction; and (3) contained descriptions of clinical manifestations, laboratory tests or radiological examinations. Data Extraction: Number of cases, gender, age, clinical manifestations, laboratory tests, radiological examinations and outcomes. Results: A total of 34 studies (1,118 cases) were included. From all the cases, 1,111 had their severity classified: 14.3% were asymptomatic, 36.4% were mild, 46.0% were moderate, 2.2% were severe and 1.2% were critical. The most prevalent symptom was fever (16.3%), followed by cough (14.4%), nasal symptoms (3.6%), diarrhea (2.7%) and nausea/vomiting (2.5%). One hundred forty-five (12.9%) children were diagnosed with pneumonia and 43 (3.8%) upper airway infections were reported. Reduced lymphocyte count were reported in 13.1% of cases. Abnormalities on computed tomography was reported in 62.7% of cases. The most prevalent abnormalities reported were ground glass opacities, patchy shadows and consolidations. Only one death was reported. Conclusions: Clinical manifestations of children with COVID-19 differ widely from adults cases. Fever and respiratory symptoms should not be considered a hallmark of COVID-19 in children.

negative: Molecular dynamic simulations analysis of ritronavir and lopinavir as SARS-CoV 3CLpro inhibitors Abstract Since the emergence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) to date, neither an effective antiviral drug nor a vaccine against SARS is available. However, it was found that a mixture of two HIV-1 proteinase inhibitors, lopinavir and ritonavir, exhibited some signs of effectiveness against the SARS virus. To understand the fine details of the molecular interactions between these proteinase inhibitors and the SARS virus via complexation, molecular dynamics simulations were carried out for the SARS-CoV 3CLpro free enzyme (free SARS) and its complexes with lopinavir (SARS–LPV) and ritonavir (SARS–RTV). The results show that flap closing was clearly observed when the inhibitors bind to the active site of SARS-CoV 3CLpro. The binding affinities of LPV and RTV to SARS-CoV 3CLpro do not show any significant difference. In addition, six hydrogen bonds were detected in the SARS–LPV system, while seven hydrogen bonds were found in SARS–RTV complex.

negative: Clinical trials and the COVID-19 pandemic "...but why think? Why not try the experiment?..." John Hunter (1728-1793), in a letter to Edward Jenner. August 2nd, 1775. When Galen of Pergamum (2nd c. A.D.), physician, philosopher and experimentalist, sought to ascertain the therapeutic properties of Theriac, an antidote of repute against poisons, he resorted to an experiment. Theriac or Theriaca was a compound drug, containing in some versions used in antiquity numerous components; Galen's own composition included over 70 ingredients! One of its uses was as an antidote against snakebites, a frequent peril for the Roman armies marching on in sandals. Galen spent most of his life in Rome and was elevated to Imperial Physician at the court of Marcus Aurelius, who apparently took daily doses of Theriac, which among other components included opium. Describing the experiment to his friend Pison, Galen wrote, "as I could not possibly conduct a trial on humans, I experimented on roosters" For his experiment, Galen, studied two groups of roosters, but he doesn't tell us how many animals he included in each category. Both groups were exposed to poisonous snakebites. All roosters who were fed with theriac prior to exposure to viper bites survived, whereas in the second group that had not received prophylactic Theriac, all roosters died. Not only is Galen's methodology remarkable, preceding the modern randomised trial by eighteen centuries, but more importantly, it is notable for his ethical stance at a time when sensitivities about human rights, prevalent in our times, were largely absent in societies of widespread slavery. For example, Mithridates VI (132-63 BC), the King of Pontus who is credited with the first use of Theriac, tested its efficacy on criminals and slaves. For his experiment Galen used the random allocation of treatment, today's prospective randomised clinical trial, implemented in the evaluation of novel therapies, widely used internationally, particularly in cancer research! This experimental method used for ascertaining the efficacy of new drugs became established after the second half of the 20th century and is now firmly entrenched as a research tool. On the other hand, the retrieval of information from observational studies or non-randomised series is considered scientifically inferior and is often dismissed or ignored as irrelevant or anecdotal. Such is the compulsion for the randomised study that in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, respected physicians and scientists appeared in the media hesitant to recommend the use of protective facial masks, as there was no evidence of benefit for their use from prospective randomised studies in the general population! Logic had no place in the argument! COVID-19, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 new corona virus, brought to the fore the randomised trial, as well as, the ethical dilemmas that surround the allocation of treatment at random, in the face of a devastating pandemic. Anthony Fauci, distinguished infectious diseases expert and an adviser to the President of the USA, at a recent briefing from the Situation Room of the White House, endorsed categorically and unreservedly the randomised trial for the evaluation of drugs potentially effective against SARS-CoV-2, in patients afflicted with COVID-19. A few days later on April 8th, 2020, Professor Sotiris Tsiodras, scientific advisor to the Greek Government for COVID-19 and an expert on infectious diseases, when asked by a journalist about chloroquine, he responded, "Antony Fauci is correct. Nevertheless, we give the drug to everyone, that is, not half of the patients will receive it, and the other half will not". If we accept that the randomised trial represents the unique, impregnable method of evaluating new treatments-several clinicians dispute this dogma. -the question arises how will treatments be allocated to patients? According to the Declaration of Helsinki participation of a subject in a clinical trial requires their explicit written consent. Will, a potentially hypoxic patient rapidly deteriorating, be able to understand what is being asked of them, and will that patient be in a position to provide consent? And if that patient refuses to be randomised, what are the options? Is it his/her right to request the active treatment that a fellow patient is receiving in the next bed? Although the Declaration of Helsinki allows the option of no treatment or even placebo, where no known treatment is available for a certain condition, such as COVID-19, it also emphasizes that "while the primary purpose of medical research is to generate new knowledge, this goal can never take precedence over the rights and interests of individual research subjects". Consider now the physicians and nurses on the first line of the battle against the pandemic; to the enormous pressures and risks that they experience daily, they may have to endure the added psychological burden of the randomised trial, knowing that half of their patients are receiving the promising drug, whilst the other half are denied the chance of potential benefit. When during the Medical Research Council's randomized trial of streptomycin, one senior physician contracted tuberculosis, the Medical Research Council obtained supplies for him outside the trial. In this brief instance of medical history, the equipoise, the scientific imperative, all arguments and other justifications for providing treatment at random, were thrown out of the window in favour of the human factor! Why is randomization necessary? Because-it is presumed-the process of randomising subjects, protects the study from the selective inclusion of patients with favourable characteristics, thus inadvertently allowing or facilitating a falsely favourable result for the drug or treatment under investigation. However, the process of randomising patients does not necessarily result in the randomisation of the characteristics of their disease. Exactly because of this, at the end of a randomised study, even if the prognostic variables are evenly represented and balanced in the strata, further confirmation of the result is sought with a statistical multifactorial analysis. Such multifactorial analyses can also be applied to a non-randomised group of patients engaged in the trial of a new drug. Since the middle of the 20th century a generation of physicians have been trained to dismiss, or are incapable of evaluating the validity of a treatment beyond the established etiquette of the randomised study. This, some have argued, constitutes intellectual indolence, it is not scientific robustness. Pandits foresee that the world will be different after the end of this pandemic. Perhaps human ingenuity will seek new investigative methods that will render the randomised clinical trial obsolete, both, on methodological and ethical grounds. Until then and even if we have to accept the scientific supremacy of the randomised study in the evaluation of novel therapies, the ethical considerations in the unprecedented circumstances of a relentless pandemic demand a more humane approach, befitting the beneficent precepts of the Hippocratic tradition.

negative: COVID-19: Immunology and treatment options Abstract The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV2 causes COVID-19, a pandemic threatening millions. As protective immunity does not exist in humans and the virus is capable of escaping innate immune responses, it can proliferate, unhindered, in primarily infected tissues. Subsequent cell death results in the release of virus particles and intracellular components to the extracellular space, which result in immune cell recruitment, the generation of immune complexes and associated damage. Infection of monocytes/macrophages and/or recruitment of uninfected immune cells can result in massive inflammatory responses later in the disease. Uncontrolled production of pro-inflammatory mediators contributes to ARDS and cytokine storm syndrome. Antiviral agents and immune modulating treatments are currently being trialled. Understanding immune evasion strategies of SARS-CoV2 and the resulting delayed massive immune response will result in the identification of biomarkers that predict outcomes as well as phenotype and disease stage specific treatments that will likely include both antiviral and immune modulating agents.

negative: Advances in antivirals for non‐influenza respiratory virus infections Progress in the development of antivirals for non‐influenza respiratory viruses has been slow with the result that many unmet medical needs and few approved agents currently exist. This commentary selectively reviews examples of where specific agents have provided promising clinical benefits in selected target populations and also considers potential therapeutics for emerging threats like the SARS and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronaviruses. Recent studies have provided encouraging results in treating respiratory syncytial virus infections in lung transplant recipients, serious parainfluenza virus and adenovirus infections in immunocompromised hosts, and rhinovirus colds in outpatient asthmatics. While additional studies are needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of the specific agents tested, these observations offer the opportunity to expand therapeutic studies to other patient populations.

negative: New FDA Guidance on General Clinical Trial Conduct in the Era of COVID-19

negative: DNA vaccines: ready for prime time? Since the discovery, over a decade and a half ago, that genetically engineered DNA can be delivered in vaccine form and elicit an immune response, there has been much progress in understanding the basic biology of this platform. A large amount of data has been generated in preclinical model systems, and more sustained cellular responses and more consistent antibody responses are being observed in the clinic. Four DNA vaccine products have recently been approved, all in the area of veterinary medicine. These results suggest a productive future for this technology as more optimized constructs, better trial designs and improved platforms are being brought into the clinic.

negative: Antibodies and vaccines against Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus The Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) has spread through 27 countries and infected more than 2,200 people since its first outbreak in Saudi Arabia in 2012. The high fatality rate (35.4%) of this novel coronavirus and its persistent wide spread infectiousness in animal reservoirs have generated tremendous global public health concern. However, no licensed therapeutic agents or vaccines against MERS-CoV are currently available and only a limited few have entered clinical trials. Among all the potential targets of MERS-CoV, the spike glycoprotein (S) has been the most well-studied due to its critical role in mediating viral entry and in inducing a protective antibody response in infected individuals. The most notable studies include the recent discoveries of monoclonal antibodies and development of candidate vaccines against the S glycoprotein. Structural characterization of MERS-CoV S protein bound with these monoclonal antibodies has provided insights into the mechanisms of humoral immune responses against MERS-CoV infection. The current review aims to highlight these developments and discuss possible hurdles and strategies to translate these discoveries into ultimate medical interventions against MERS-CoV infection.

negative: Vaccines for the common cold. BACKGROUND The common cold is a spontaneously remitting infection of the upper respiratory tract, characterised by a runny nose, nasal congestion, sneezing, cough, malaise, sore throat, and fever (usually < 37.8º C). The widespread morbidity caused by the common cold worldwide is related to its ubiquitousness rather than its severity. The development of vaccines for the common cold has been difficult because of antigenic variability of the common cold virus and the indistinguishable multiple other viruses and even bacteria acting as infective agents. There is uncertainty regarding the efficacy and safety of interventions for preventing the common cold in healthy people. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2011 and previously updated in 2013. OBJECTIVES To assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of vaccines for preventing the common cold in healthy people. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (September 2016), MEDLINE (1948 to September 2016), Embase (1974 to September 2016), CINAHL (1981 to September 2016), and LILACS (1982 to September 2016). We also searched three trials registers for ongoing studies and four websites for additional trials (February 2017). We included no language or date restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any virus vaccines compared with placebo to prevent the common cold in healthy people. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently evaluated methodological quality and extracted trial data. We resolved disagreements by discussion or by consulting a third review author. MAIN RESULTS We found no additional RCTs for inclusion in this update. This review includes one RCT dating from the 1960s with an overall high risk of bias. The RCT included 2307 healthy participants, all of whom were included in analyses. This trial compared the effect of an adenovirus vaccine against placebo. No statistically significant difference in common cold incidence was found: there were 13 (1.14%) events in 1139 participants in the vaccines group and 14 (1.19%) events in 1168 participants in the placebo group (risk ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 2.02; P = 0.90). No adverse events related to the live vaccine were reported. The quality of the evidence was low due to limitations in methodological quality and a wide 95% confidence interval. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS This Cochrane Review was based on one study with low-quality evidence. We found no conclusive results to support the use of vaccines for preventing the common cold in healthy people compared with placebo. We identified a need for well-designed, adequately powered RCTs to investigate vaccines for the common cold in healthy people. Any future trials on medical treatments for preventing the common cold should assess a variety of virus vaccines for this condition. Outcome measures should include common cold incidence, vaccine safety, and mortality related to the vaccine.

negative: A Phylogeny-Based Global Nomenclature System and Automated Annotation Tool for H1 Hemagglutinin Genes from Swine Influenza A Viruses The H1 subtype of influenza A viruses (IAVs) has been circulating in swine since the 1918 human influenza pandemic. Over time, and aided by further introductions from nonswine hosts, swine H1 viruses have diversified into three genetic lineages. Due to limited global data, these H1 lineages were named based on colloquial context, leading to a proliferation of inconsistent regional naming conventions. In this study, we propose rigorous phylogenetic criteria to establish a globally consistent nomenclature of swine H1 virus hemagglutinin (HA) evolution. These criteria applied to a data set of 7,070 H1 HA sequences led to 28 distinct clades as the basis for the nomenclature. We developed and implemented a web-accessible annotation tool that can assign these biologically informative categories to new sequence data. The annotation tool assigned the combined data set of 7,070 H1 sequences to the correct clade more than 99% of the time. Our analyses indicated that 87% of the swine H1 viruses from 2010 to the present had HAs that belonged to 7 contemporary cocirculating clades. Our nomenclature and web-accessible classification tool provide an accurate method for researchers, diagnosticians, and health officials to assign clade designations to HA sequences. The tool can be updated readily to track evolving nomenclature as new clades emerge, ensuring continued relevance. A common global nomenclature facilitates comparisons of IAVs infecting humans and pigs, within and between regions, and can provide insight into the diversity of swine H1 influenza virus and its impact on vaccine strain selection, diagnostic reagents, and test performance, thereby simplifying communication of such data. IMPORTANCE A fundamental goal in the biological sciences is the definition of groups of organisms based on evolutionary history and the naming of those groups. For influenza A viruses (IAVs) in swine, understanding the hemagglutinin (HA) genetic lineage of a circulating strain aids in vaccine antigen selection and allows for inferences about vaccine efficacy. Previous reporting of H1 virus HA in swine relied on colloquial names, frequently with incriminating and stigmatizing geographic toponyms, making comparisons between studies challenging. To overcome this, we developed an adaptable nomenclature using measurable criteria for historical and contemporary evolutionary patterns of H1 global swine IAVs. We also developed a web-accessible tool that classifies viruses according to this nomenclature. This classification system will aid agricultural production and pandemic preparedness through the identification of important changes in swine IAVs and provides terminology enabling discussion of swine IAVs in a common context among animal and human health initiatives.

negative: The Use of Ebola Convalescent Plasma to Treat Ebola Virus Disease in Resource-Constrained Settings: A Perspective From the Field The clinical evaluation of convalescent plasma (CP) for the treatment of Ebola virus disease (EVD) in the current outbreak, predominantly affecting Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Liberia, was prioritized by the World Health Organization in September 2014. In each of these countries, nonrandomized comparative clinical trials were initiated. The Ebola-Tx trial in Conakry, Guinea, enrolled 102 patients by 7 July 2015; no severe adverse reactions were noted. The Ebola-CP trial in Sierra Leone and the EVD001 trial in Liberia have included few patients. Although no efficacy data are available yet, current field experience supports the safety, acceptability, and feasibility of CP as EVD treatment. Longer-term follow-up as well as data from nontrial settings and evidence on the scalability of the intervention are required. CP sourced from within the outbreak is the most readily available source of anti-EVD antibodies. Until the advent of effective antivirals or monoclonal antibodies, CP merits further evaluation.

negative: Core Minimal Datasets to Advance Clinical Research for Priority Epidemic Diseases The Ebola virus disease outbreak in west Africa has prompted significant progress in responding to the clinical needs of patients affected by emerging infectious disease outbreaks. Among the noteworthy successes of vaccine trials, and the commendable efforts to implement clinical treatment trials during Ebola outbreaks, we should also focus on strengthening the collection and curation of epidemiological and observational data that can improve the conception and design of clinical research.

negative: Revisión Narrativa Sobre La Respuesta Inmunitaria Frente A Coronavirus: Descripción General, Aplicabilidad Para Sars-Cov2 E Implicaciones Terapéuticas Abstract The new coronavirus (SARS-CoV2) that causes a severe acute respiratory syndrome emerged in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. It produces the aforementioned disease due to coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), and has led to a declaration of a world public health emergency by the World Health Organisation. This new SARS-CoV2 virus could share characteristics and an immune response similar to those described for other coronavirus. Given its activity on the interferon pathway, and the manner in which it dysregulates innate immunity, the use of treatments directed at modulating or containing this could be of interest. A narrative review was made of the current evidence about immunity against coronavirus and it applicability to SARS-CoV2. The physiopathogenesis is also described, along with the underlying leucocyte activity, with the intention of clarifying the possible usefulness of inflammatory biomarkers and the development of personalised treatments.

negative: A pilot randomized controlled trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment for bloodstream infection on non-intensive care versus intensive care wards BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment duration for patients with bloodstream infection is understudied. The Bacteremia Antibiotic Length Actually Needed for Clinical Effectiveness (BALANCE) pilot randomized clinical trial (RCT) determined that it was feasible to enroll and randomize intensive care unit (ICU) patients with bloodstream infection to 7 versus 14 days of treatment, and served as the vanguard for the ongoing BALANCE main RCT. We performed this BALANCE-Ward pilot RCT to examine the feasibility and impact of potentially extending the BALANCE main RCT to include patients hospitalized on non-ICU wards. METHODS: We conducted an open pilot RCT among a subset of six sites participating in the ongoing BALANCE RCT, randomizing patients with positive non-Staphylococcus aureus blood cultures on non-ICU wards to 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment. The co-primary feasibility outcomes were recruitment rate and adherence to treatment duration protocol. We compared feasibility outcomes, patient/pathogen characteristics, and overall outcomes among those enrolled in this BALANCE-Ward and prior BALANCE-ICU pilot RCTs. We estimated the sample size and non-inferiority margin impacts of expanding the BALANCE main RCT to include non-ICU patients. RESULTS: A total of 134 patients were recruited over 47 site-months (mean 2.9 patients/site-month, median 1.0, range 0.1–4.4 patients/site-month). The overall recruitment rate exceeded the BALANCE-ICU pilot RCT (mean 1.10 patients/site-month, p < 0.0001). Overall protocol adherence also exceeded the adherence in the BALANCE-ICU pilot RCT (125/134, 93% vs 89/115, 77%, p = 0.0003). BALANCE-Ward patients were older, with lower Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores, and higher proportions of infections caused by Escherichia coli and genito-urinary sources of bloodstream infection. The BALANCE-Ward pilot RCT patients had an overall 90-day mortality rate of 17/133 (12.8%), which was comparable to the 90-day mortality rate in the ICU pilot RCT (17/115, 14.8%) (p = 0.65). Simulation models indicated there would be minimal sample size and non-inferiority margin implications of expanding enrolment to increasing proportions of non-ICU versus ICU patients. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to enroll non-ICU patients in a trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotics for bloodstream infection, and expanding the BALANCE RCT hospital-wide has the potential to improve the timeliness and generalizability of trial results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02917551. Registered on September 28, 2016.

negative: Tetracyclines: a pleitropic family of compounds with promising therapeutic properties. Review of the literature. There must be something unique about a class of drugs (discovered and developed in the mid-1940s) where there are more than 130 ongoing clinical trials currently listed. Tetracyclines were developed as a result of the screening of soil samples for antibiotic organisms. The first of these compounds chlortetracycline was introduced in 1948. Soon after their development tetracyclines were found to be highly effective against various pathogens including rickettsiae, Gram-positive, and Gram-negative bacteria, thus, becoming a class of broad-spectrum antibiotics. The mechanism of action of tetracyclines is thought to be related to the inhibition of protein synthesis by binding to the 30S bacterial ribosome. Tetracyclines are also an effective anti-malarial drug. Over time, many other "protective" actions have been described for tetracyclines. Minocycline, which can readily cross cell membranes, is known to be a potent anti-apoptotic agent. Its mechanism of action appears to relate to specific effects exerted on apoptosis signaling pathways. Another tetracycline, doxycycline is known to exert antiprotease activities. Doxycycline can inhibit matrix metalloproteinases, which contribute to tissue destruction activities in diseases such as gingivitis. A large body of literature has provided additional evidence for the "beneficial" actions of tetracyclines, including their ability to act as oxygen radical scavengers and anti-inflammatory agents. This increasing volume of published work and ongoing clinical trials supports the notion that a more systematic examination of their possible therapeutic uses is warranted. This review provides a summary of tetracycline's multiple mechanisms of action and while using the effects on the heart as an example, this review also notes their potential to benefit patients suffering from various pathologies such as cancer, Rosacea, and Parkinson's disease.

negative: Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak: What the Department of Radiology Should Know Abstract In December 2019, a novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia emerged in Wuhan, China. Since then, this highly contagious COVID-19 has been spreading worldwide, with a rapid rise in the number of deaths. Novel COVID-19–infected pneumonia (NCIP) is characterized by fever, fatigue, dry cough, and dyspnea. A variety of chest imaging features have been reported, similar to those found in other types of coronavirus syndromes. The purpose of the present review is to briefly discuss the known epidemiology and the imaging findings of coronavirus syndromes, with a focus on the reported imaging findings of NCIP. Moreover, the authors review precautions and safety measures for radiology department personnel to manage patients with known or suspected NCIP. Implementation of a robust plan in the radiology department is required to prevent further transmission of the virus to patients and department staff members.

negative: A Canadian Critical Care Trials Group project in collaboration with the international forum for acute care trialists - Collaborative H1N1 Adjuvant Treatment pilot trial (CHAT): study protocol and design of a randomized controlled trial BACKGROUND: Swine origin influenza A/H1N1 infection (H1N1) emerged in early 2009 and rapidly spread to humans. For most infected individuals, symptoms were mild and self-limited; however, a small number developed a more severe clinical syndrome characterized by profound respiratory failure with hospital mortality ranging from 10 to 30%. While supportive care and neuraminidase inhibitors are the main treatment for influenza, data from observational and interventional studies suggest that the course of influenza can be favorably influenced by agents not classically considered as influenza treatments. Multiple observational studies have suggested that HMGCoA reductase inhibitors (statins) can exert a class effect in attenuating inflammation. The Collaborative H1N1 Adjuvant Treatment (CHAT) Pilot Trial sought to investigate the feasibility of conducting a trial during a global pandemic in critically ill patients with H1N1 with the goal of informing the design of a larger trial powered to determine impact of statins on important outcomes. METHODS/DESIGN: A multi-national, pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) of once daily enteral rosuvastatin versus matched placebo administered for 14 days for the treatment of critically ill patients with suspected, probable or confirmed H1N1 infection. We propose to randomize 80 critically ill adults with a moderate to high index of suspicion for H1N1 infection who require mechanical ventilation and have received antiviral therapy for ≤ 72 hours. Site investigators, research coordinators and clinical pharmacists will be blinded to treatment assignment. Only research pharmacy staff will be aware of treatment assignment. We propose several approaches to informed consent including a priori consent from the substitute decision maker (SDM), waived and deferred consent. The primary outcome of the CHAT trial is the proportion of eligible patients enrolled in the study. Secondary outcomes will evaluate adherence to medication administration regimens, the proportion of primary and secondary endpoints collected, the number of patients receiving open-label statins, consent withdrawals and the effect of approved consent models on recruitment rates. DISCUSSION: Several aspects of study design including the need to include central randomization, preserve allocation concealment, ensure study blinding compare to a matched placebo and the use novel consent models pose challenges to investigators conducting pandemic research. Moreover, study implementation requires that trial design be pragmatic and initiated in a short time period amidst uncertainty regarding the scope and duration of the pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN45190901

negative: Cryo-EM structure of infectious bronchitis coronavirus spike protein reveals structural and functional evolution of coronavirus spike proteins As cell-invading molecular machinery, coronavirus spike proteins pose an evolutionary conundrum due to their high divergence. In this study, we determined the cryo-EM structure of avian infectious bronchitis coronavirus (IBV) spike protein from the γ-genus. The trimeric IBV spike ectodomain contains three receptor-binding S1 heads and a trimeric membrane-fusion S2 stalk. While IBV S2 is structurally similar to those from the other genera, IBV S1 possesses structural features that are unique to different other genera, thereby bridging these diverse spikes into an evolutionary spectrum. Specifically, among different genera, the two domains of S1, the N-terminal domain (S1-NTD) and C-terminal domain (S1-CTD), diverge from simpler tertiary structures and quaternary packing to more complex ones, leading to different functions of the spikes in receptor usage and membrane fusion. Based on the above structural and functional comparisons, we propose that the evolutionary spectrum of coronavirus spikes follows the order of α-, δ-, γ-, and β-genus. This study has provided insight into the evolutionary relationships among coronavirus spikes and deepened our understanding of their structural and functional diversity.

negative: Vicarious traumatization in the general public, members, and non-members of medical teams aiding in COVID-19 control Since December 2019, more than 79,000 people have been diagnosed with infection of the Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). A large number of medical staff were dispersed for Wuhan city and Hubei province to aid COVID-19 control. Psychological stress, especially vicarious traumatization (VT) caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, should not be ignored. To address this concern, the study employed a total of 214 general public (GP) and 526 nurses to evaluate VT scores via a mobile app-based questionnaire. Results showed that the VT scores slightly increased across periods of aiding COVID-19 control, although no statistical difference was noted (P = 0.083). However, the study found lower scores for VT in nurses [median = 69; interquartile range (IQR) = 56-85] than those of the GP (median = 75.5; IQR = 62-88.3) (P = 0.017). In addition, the VT scores for front-line nurses (FLNs; median = 64; IQR = 52-75), including scores for physiological and psychological responses, were significantly lower than those of non-front-line nurses (nFLNs; median = 75.5; IQR = 63-92) (P < 0.001). Interestingly, the VT scores of the GP were significantly higher than those of the FLNs (P < 0.001). However, no statistical difference was observed compared with those of nFLNs (P > 0.05). Importantly, nFLNs are more likely to suffer from VT, which might be related to two factors, namely, gender [odds ratio (OR) = 3.1717; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 4.247-18.808; P = 0.002] and fertility [OR = 2.072; 95%CI = 0.626-24.533; P = 0.039]. Therefore, increased attention should be paid to the psychological problems of the medical staff, especially nFLNs, and GP under the situation of the spread and control of COVID-19. Early strategies that aim to prevent and treat VT in medical staff and GP are extremely necessary.

negative: ElaD, a Deubiquitinating Protease Expressed by E. coli BACKGROUND: Ubiquitin and ubiquitin-like proteins (Ubl) are designed to modify polypeptides in eukaryotes. Covalent binding of ubiquitin or Ubls to substrate proteins can be reversed by specific hydrolases. One particular set of cysteine proteases, the CE clan, which targets ubiquitin and Ubls, has homologs in eukaryotes, prokaryotes, and viruses. FINDINGS: We have cloned and analyzed the E. coli protein elaD, which is distantly related to eukaryotic CE clan members of the ULP/SENP protease family that are specific for SUMO and Nedd8. Previously misannotated as a putative sulfatase/phosphatase, elaD is an efficient and specific deubiquitinating enzyme in vitro. Interestingly, elaD is present in all intestinal pathogenic E. coli strains, but conspicuously absent from extraintestinal pathogenic strains (ExPECs). Further homologs of this protease can be found in Acanthamoeba Polyphaga Mimivirus, and in Alpha-, Beta-and Gammaproteobacteria. CONCLUSION: The expression of ULP/SENP-related hydrolases in bacteria therefore extends to plant pathogens and medically relevant strains of Escherichia coli, Legionella pneumophila, Rickettsiae, Chlamydiae, and Salmonellae, in which the elaD ortholog sseL has recently been identified as a virulence factor with deubiquitinating activity. As a counterpoint, our phylogenetic and functional examination reveals that ancient eukaryotic ULP/SENP proteases also have the potential of ubiquitin-specific hydrolysis, suggesting an early common origin of this peptidase clan.

negative: This journal issue contains abstracts that have been accepted for presentation as the 8th Annual Conference of the International Society for Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL)

negative: First clinical trial of a MERS coronavirus DNA vaccine

negative: Structural breaks, tourism development, and economic growth: Evidence from Taiwan Abstract Our paper differs from previous studies by examining the issue of whether regime changes have broken down the stability of the long-run relationships between tourism development and real GDP in Taiwan for the 1959–2003 period. We empirically investigate the co-movements and the causal relationships among real GDP, tourism development, and the real exchange rate in a multivariate model. We use two different tourism variables—international tourism receipts and number of international tourist arrivals. To employ the unit root tests and the cointegration tests allowing for a structural break, the empirical evidence clearly shows that the causality between tourism and economic growth is bi-directional. Lastly, the international and cross-strait political change, economic shocks, and the relaxing of some tourism control and policies would break down the stability of the relationships between tourism development and economic growth. Overall, we do find the structural breakpoints, and they look to match clearly with the corresponding critical economic, political, or tourist incidents.

negative: Treatment With Lopinavir/Ritonavir or Interferon-β1b Improves Outcome of MERS-CoV Infection in a Nonhuman Primate Model of Common Marmoset Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) causes severe disease in human with an overall case-fatality rate of >35%. Effective antivirals are crucial for improving the clinical outcome of MERS. Although a number of repurposed drugs, convalescent-phase plasma, antiviral peptides, and neutralizing antibodies exhibit anti-MERS-CoV activity in vitro, most are not readily available or have not been evaluated in nonhuman primates. We assessed 3 repurposed drugs with potent in vitro anti-MERS-CoV activity (mycophenolate mofetil [MMF], lopinavir/ritonavir, and interferon-β1b) in common marmosets with severe disease resembling MERS in humans. The lopinavir/ritonavir-treated and interferon-β1b-treated animals had better outcome than the untreated animals, with improved clinical (mean clinical scores ↓50.9%–95.0% and ↓weight loss than the untreated animals), radiological (minimal pulmonary infiltrates), and pathological (mild bronchointerstitial pneumonia) findings, and lower mean viral loads in necropsied lung (↓0.59–1.06 log(10) copies/glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase [GAPDH]; P < .050) and extrapulmonary (↓0.11–1.29 log(10) copies/GAPDH; P < .050 in kidney) tissues. In contrast, all MMF-treated animals developed severe and/or fatal disease with higher mean viral loads (↑0.15–0.54 log(10) copies/GAPDH) than the untreated animals. The mortality rate at 36 hours postinoculation was 67% (untreated and MMF-treated) versus 0–33% (lopinavir/ritonavir-treated and interferon-β1b-treated). Lopinavir/ritonavir and interferon-β1b alone or in combination should be evaluated in clinical trials. MMF alone may worsen MERS and should not be used.

negative: Geographical tracking and mapping of coronavirus disease COVID-19/severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) epidemic and associated events around the world: how 21st century GIS technologies are supporting the global fight against outbreaks and epidemics In December 2019, a new virus (initially called ‘Novel Coronavirus 2019-nCoV’ and later renamed to SARS-CoV-2) causing severe acute respiratory syndrome (coronavirus disease COVID-19) emerged in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, and rapidly spread to other parts of China and other countries around the world, despite China’s massive efforts to contain the disease within Hubei. As with the original SARS-CoV epidemic of 2002/2003 and with seasonal influenza, geographic information systems and methods, including, among other application possibilities, online real-or near-real-time mapping of disease cases and of social media reactions to disease spread, predictive risk mapping using population travel data, and tracing and mapping super-spreader trajectories and contacts across space and time, are proving indispensable for timely and effective epidemic monitoring and response. This paper offers pointers to, and describes, a range of practical online/mobile GIS and mapping dashboards and applications for tracking the 2019/2020 coronavirus epidemic and associated events as they unfold around the world. Some of these dashboards and applications are receiving data updates in near-real-time (at the time of writing), and one of them is meant for individual users (in China) to check if the app user has had any close contact with a person confirmed or suspected to have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 in the recent past. We also discuss additional ways GIS can support the fight against infectious disease outbreaks and epidemics.

negative: COVID-19: A promising cure for the global panic Abstract The novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by SARS-CoV-2, which is the causative agent of a potentially fatal disease that is of great global public health concern. The outbreak of COVID-19 is wreaking havoc worldwide due to inadequate risk assessment regarding the urgency of the situation. The COVID-19 pandemic has entered a dangerous new phase. When compared with SARS and MERS, COVID-19 has spread more rapidly, due to increased globalization and adaptation of the virus in every environment. Slowing the spread of the COVID-19 cases will significantly reduce the strain on the healthcare system of the country by limiting the number of people who are severely sick by COVID-19 and need hospital care. Hence, the recent outburst of COVID-19 highlights an urgent need for therapeutics targeting SARS-CoV-2. Here, we have discussed the structure of virus; varying symptoms among COVID-19, SARS, MERS and common flu; the probable mechanism behind the infection and its immune response. Further, the current treatment options, drugs available, ongoing trials and recent diagnostics for COVID-19 have been discussed. We suggest traditional Indian medicinal plants as possible novel therapeutic approaches, exclusively targeting SARS-CoV-2 and its pathways.

negative: Chapter 8 The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus: An Emerging Virus of Global Threat Abstract Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) is a viral respiratory illness caused by a coronavirus (CoV), first identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012. Since then, almost 2000 cases have been reported from 27 countries, with Saudi Arabia being the epicenter. This newly emerging virus is highly pathogenic and has a case mortality rate of 35%. It is similar to the CoV causing severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV) in that both belong to the genus beta CoVs that are of zoonotic origin and cause lower respiratory infection. The natural reservoir for MERS-CoV remains unknown. Serological studies indicate that most dromedary camels in the Middle East have been infected with this virus, and they maybe the potential intermediate host. However, the mode of transmission from camels to humans is poorly understood. The majority of confirmed human cases have resulted from human-to-human transmission, most probably via respiratory route. Patients most at risk of developing severe MERS-CoV infection appear to be those with underlying conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, obesity, cardiac diseases, chronic respiratory diseases, and cancer. Unlike SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV is considered an ongoing public health problem, particularly for the Middle East region. In this chapter, we outline the prevailing information regarding the emergence and epidemiology of this virus, its mode of transmission and pathogenicity, its clinical features, and the potential strategies for prevention.

negative: Tidal changes on CT and progression of ARDS BACKGROUND: Uncertain prediction of outcome in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) impedes individual patient management and clinical trial design. OBJECTIVES: To develop a radiological metric of injurious inflation derived from matched inspiratory and expiratory CT scans, calibrate it in a model of experimental lung injury, and test it in patients with ARDS. METHODS: 73 anaesthetised rats (acid aspiration model) were ventilated (protective or non-protective) for up to 4 hours to generate a spectrum of lung injury. CT was performed (inspiratory and expiratory) at baseline each hour, paired inspiratory and expiratory images were superimposed and voxels tracked in sequential scans. In nine patients with ARDS, paired inspiratory and expiratory CT scans from the first intensive care unit week were analysed. RESULTS: In experimental studies, regions of lung with unstable inflation (ie, partial or reversible airspace filling reflecting local strain) were the areas in which subsequent progression of injury was greatest in terms of progressive infiltrates (R=0.77) and impaired compliance (R=0.67, p<0.01). In patients with ARDS, a threshold fraction of tissue with unstable inflation was apparent: >28% in all patients who died and ≤28% in all who survived, whereas segregation of survivors versus non-survivors was not possible based on oxygenation or lung mechanics. CONCLUSIONS: A single set of superimposed inspiratory–expiratory CT scans may predict progression of lung injury and outcome in ARDS; if these preliminary results are validated, this could facilitate clinical trial recruitment and individualised care.

negative: Current status of treatment for 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia/ 中华微生物学和免疫学杂志 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) is a new member of coronavirus family that can cause serious respiratory diseases after the emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and middle east respiratory syndrome-coronavirus (MERS-CoV). At present, there is no specific antiviral drug targeting 2019-nCoV. In facing of the increasingly serious epidemic of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia and the urgent needs in drug treatment strategies, this paper reviewed the current research situation and progress in antiviral treatment for the newly identified disease.

negative: Predicting the Speed of Epidemics Spreading in Networks Global transport and communication networks enable information, ideas, and infectious diseases to now spread at speeds far beyond what has historically been possible. To effectively monitor, design, or intervene in such epidemic-like processes, there is a need to predict the speed of a particular contagion in a particular network, and to distinguish between nodes that are more likely to become infected sooner or later during an outbreak. Here, we study these quantities using a message-passing approach to derive simple and effective predictions that are validated against epidemic simulations on a variety of real-world networks with good agreement. In addition to individualized predictions for different nodes, we find an overall sudden transition from low density to almost full network saturation as the contagion progresses in time. Our theory is developed and explained in the setting of simple contagions on treelike networks, but we are also able to show how the method extends remarkably well to complex contagions and highly clustered networks.

negative: Conducting Clinical Trials During the COVID-19 Pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly impacted dermatology clinical trial operations due to mandated governmental and institutional shut-downs and newly implemented restrictions. During this unprecedented time, measures should be taken to maintain research conduct compliance while also ensuring the safety of trial staff and participants. Herein, we underscore the challenges facing dermatology trials during the COVID-19 pandemic, and offer strategies to maintain compliant and safe conduct.

negative: Tilorone: a Broad-Spectrum Antiviral Invented in the USA and Commercialized in Russia and beyond For the last 50 years we have known of a broad-spectrum agent tilorone dihydrochloride (Tilorone). This is a small-molecule orally bioavailable drug that was originally discovered in the USA and is currently used clinically as an antiviral in Russia and the Ukraine. Over the years there have been numerous clinical and non-clinical reports of its broad spectrum of antiviral activity. More recently we have identified additional promising antiviral activities against Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, Chikungunya, Ebola and Marburg which highlights that this old drug may have other uses against new viruses. This may in turn inform the types of drugs that we need for virus outbreaks such as for the new coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Tilorone has been long neglected by the west in many respects but it deserves further reassessment in light of current and future needs for broad-spectrum antivirals.

negative: Tabagisme et maladie à coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19)

negative: The effect of intranasal nedocromil sodium on viral upper respiratory tract infections in human volunteers Two studies involving double‐blind group comparative trials in human volunteers compared the effects of intranasal nedocromil sodium (2·6 mg active drug per nostril, q.i.d.) with placebo on clinical symptoms and performance impairment associated with the common cold. In the first study volunteers were challenged with rhinoviruses (RV9 and RV14), and in the second study with respiratory coronavirus. In both studies, active and placebo groups of volunteers were demographically similar. Infection rates in both groups were also similar. There were no withdrawals resulting from unusual symptoms related to either treatment. In the rhinovirus study (19, placebo; 20, nedocromil sodium) daily symptom scores and daily mean nasal secretion weights were significantly lower in the nedocromil sodium‐treated group. In the coronavirus study (26, placebo; 27, nedocromil sodium) there was little difference in the severity of colds between the active and placebo‐treated groups, but trends favoured nedocromil sodium. In both studies the impairment of performance in volunteers who developed a cold was significantly less in those treated with nedocromil sodium than in those treated with placebo.

negative: The Novel Coronavirus – A Snapshot of Current Knowledge Another animal to human transmission of a coronavirus occurred in December 2019 on a live animal market in the Chinese city of Wuhan causing an epidemic in China, reaching now different continents. This minireview summarizes the research literature on the virological, clinical and epidemiological aspects of this epidemic published until end of February 2020.

negative: Coronavirus, humanpathogenes Humanes Coronavirus, Gruppe 1 Coronavirus

negative: Social and administrative issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic in Pakistan: better late than never The study critically reviewed Pakistan’s provincial updates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and discussed the current challenges faced by the government in a given context. The coronavirus-associated death tolls have been increasing rapidly in a country. The provincial status of confirmed cases of coronavirus is higher in Punjab, followed by the Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), and Balochistan. The case fatality ratio shows that KPK has a higher ratio, i.e., 5.11%, followed by the Punjab, i.e., 1.82%; Sindh, i.e., 1.80%; Balochistan, i.e., 1.28%; Gilgit-Baltistan, i.e., 0.71%; and Federal territory, i.e., 0.66%. The country has a less testing capacity to identify more suspected coronavirus patients. The study calculated that if we increase five times our testing capacity from the current date, the total registered cases will be reached to 137,370 and death tolls will increase up to 3090. It is highly needed to increase testing capacity across Pakistan in order to minimize the outbreak of coronavirus. The provincial government should follow the Federal Government instructions to contain coronavirus by increasing testing capacities, tracing suspected patients, smart lockdowns, emergency relief to the poor, and vigilant monitoring system.

negative: Efficacy and safety of herbal medicine (Dangguijagyag-san) for primary dysmenorrhea: study protocol for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multi-center trial. Background Dangguijagyag-san, also known as Dangguishaoyao-san in Chinese and Toki-shakuyakui-san in Japanese, has been frequently used to treat symptoms associated with dysmenorrhea. The purpose of this trial is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the herbal medicine, Dangguijagyag-san, relative to those of active control, Gamisoyo-san, and a placebo control for primary dysmenorrhea. Methods This protocol details a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multi-center, investigator-initiated, controlled trial evaluating treatment of primary dysmenorrhea. Two hundred and forty participants will be randomly divided into one of three groups: 1) the Dangguijagyag-san experimental group (EG) (n = 105), 2) the Gamisoyo-san active control group (ACG) (n = 30), and 3) the placebo control group (PCG) (n = 105). The interventions will be administered for two menstrual cycles, and the follow-up will be carried out for the following six menstrual cycles. The primary outcomes are difference in response rates between the EG and the ACG (non-inferiority comparison) and difference in changes from baseline in average pain intensity measured by the visual analogue scale between the EG and PCG (superiority comparison). The secondary outcomes are pain scores derived from pain assessment tools (verbal multidimensional scoring system, retrospective symptom scale, and short form McGill pain questionnaire), dosage of analgesics, pattern diagnosis questionnaires, and short form 36 health survey. Adverse events and vital signs will be checked at every visit, and laboratory tests will be performed for safety evaluation. Discussion The results of this clinical trial will offer evidence for the efficacy and safety of Dangguijagyag-san for primary dysmenorrhea. Trial registration Clinical Research Information Service of Korea: KCT0003005.

negative: Why are pregnant women susceptible to COVID-19? An immunological viewpoint Abstract The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was first detected in December 2019 and became epidemic in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. COVID-19 has been rapidly spreading out in China and all over the world. The virus causing COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 has been known to be genetically similar to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) but distinct from it. Clinical manifestation of COVID-19 can be characterized by mild upper respiratory tract infection, lower respiratory tract infection involving non-life threatening pneumonia, and life-threatening pneumonia with acute respiratory distress syndrome. It affects all age groups, including newborns, to the elders. Particularly, pregnant women may be more susceptible to COVID-19 since pregnant women, in general, are vulnerable to respiratory infection. In pregnant women with COVID-19, there is no evidence for vertical transmission of the virus, but an increased prevalence of preterm deliveries has been noticed. The COVID-19 may alter immune responses at the maternal-fetal interface, and affect the well-being of mothers and infants. In this review, we focused on the reason why pregnant women are more susceptible to COVID-19 and the potential maternal and fetal complications from an immunological viewpoint.

negative: Nitazoxanide: A first-in-class broad-spectrum antiviral agent Abstract Originally developed and commercialized as an antiprotozoal agent, nitazoxanide was later identified as a first-in-class broad-spectrum antiviral drug and has been repurposed for the treatment of influenza. A Phase 2b/3 clinical trial recently published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases found that oral administration of nitazoxanide 600mg twice daily for five days reduced the duration of clinical symptoms and reduced viral shedding compared to placebo in persons with laboratory-confirmed influenza. The same study also suggested a potential benefit for subjects with influenza-like illness who did not have influenza or other documented respiratory viral infection. From a chemical perspective, nitazoxanide is the scaffold for a new class of drugs called thiazolides. These small-molecule drugs target host-regulated processes involved in viral replication. Nitazoxanide is orally bioavailable and safe with extensive post-marketing experience involving more than 75 million adults and children. A new dosage formulation of nitazoxanide is presently undergoing global Phase 3 clinical development for the treatment of influenza. Nitazoxanide inhibits a broad range of influenza A and B viruses including influenza A(pH1N1) and the avian A(H7N9) as well as viruses that are resistant to neuraminidase inhibitors. It is synergistic with neuraminidase inhibitors, and combination therapy with oseltamivir is being studied in humans as part of ongoing Phase 3 clinical development. Nitazoxanide also inhibits the replication of a broad range of other RNA and DNA viruses including respiratory syncytial virus, parainfluenza, coronavirus, rotavirus, norovirus, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, dengue, yellow fever, Japanese encephalitis virus and human immunodeficiency virus in cell culture assays. Clinical trials have indicated a potential role for thiazolides in treating rotavirus and norovirus gastroenteritis and chronic hepatitis B and chronic hepatitis C. Ongoing and future clinical development is focused on viral respiratory infections, viral gastroenteritis and emerging infections such as dengue fever.

negative: MERS coronavirus outbreak: Implications for emerging viral infections Abstract In September 2012, a novel coronavirus was isolated from a patient who died in Saudi Arabia after presenting with acute respiratory distress and acute kidney injury. Analysis revealed the disease to be due to a novel virus which was named Middle East Respiratory Coronavirus (MERS-CoV). There have been several MERS-CoV hospital outbreaks in KSA, continuing to the present day, and the disease has a mortality rate in excess of 35%. Since 2012, the World Health Organization has been informed of 2220 laboratory-confirmed cases resulting in at least 790 deaths. Cases have since arisen in 27 countries, including an outbreak in the Republic of Korea in 2015 in which 36 people died, but more than 80% of cases have occurred in Saudi Arabia.. Human-to-human transmission of MERS-CoV, particularly in healthcare settings, initially caused a ‘media panic’, however human-to-human transmission appears to require close contact and thus far the virus has not achieved epidemic potential. Zoonotic transmission is of significant importance and evidence is growing implicating the dromedary camel as the major animal host in spread of disease to humans. MERS-CoV is now included on the WHO list of priority blueprint diseases for which there which is an urgent need for accelerated research and development as they have the potential to cause a public health emergency while there is an absence of efficacious drugs and/or vaccines. In this review we highlight epidemiological, clinical, and infection control aspects of MERS-CoV as informed by the Saudi experience. Attention is given to recommended treatments and progress towards vaccine development.

negative: Phase 2 study of NAB-paclitaxel in SensiTivE and refractory relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC) (NABSTER TRIAL). BACKGROUND Despite sensitivity to first-line chemotherapy, most small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients relapse. In this setting, topotecan demonstrated modest activity with significant toxicity. Paclitaxel was also active. This study was designed to evaluate activity and safety of nab-paclitaxel in relapsed SCLC. METHODS In this multicentre prospective Phase 2 trial, patients with refractory or sensitive SCLC progressed to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy received nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/smq on days 1, 8, 15 every 4 weeks up to six cycles, progressive disease or intolerable toxicity. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective tumour response. Secondary endpoints were toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS Of the 68 patients treated, partial response was 8% in the refractory cohort and 14% in the sensitive cohort. Most common toxicities of any grade were fatigue (54%), anaemia (38%), neutropenia (29%), leukopenia (26%) and diarrhoea (21%). Median PFS was similar in both refractory (1.8 months) and sensitive cohorts (1.9 months), while median OS was longer in sensitive one (6.6 versus 3.6 months). CONCLUSIONS Although nab-paclitaxel has shown some modest anti-tumour activity in relapsed SCLC, associated with a favourable toxicity profile, the primary end-point of the study was not met. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinical Trial registration number is ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03219762.

negative: A novel coronavirus outbreak of global health concern

negative: Critical Care for Severe COVID-19: A Population-based Study from a Province with Low Case-fatality Rate in China Background Data regarding critical care for patients with severe COVID-19 are limited. We aimed to describe and analyse the clinical course, multi-strategy management, and respiratory support usage for the severe COVID-19 at the provincial level. Methods Using data from Sichuan Provincial Department of Health and the population-based multicentre cohort study, all microbiologically confirmed COVID-19 patients in Sichuan who met the national severe criteria were included from January 16 to March 15, 2020. All patients were followed-up from the day of inclusion, noted as Day one (D1), until discharge, death, or the end of the study. Findings Out of 539 COVID-19 patients, 81 severe cases (15.0%) were identified. The median (IQR) age was 50 (39-65) years, 37% were female, and 53.1% had chronic comorbidities. All severe cases were identified before requiring mechanical ventilation. Among the five predefined criteria for severe illness, low PaO2:FiO2 ratio (<300 mmHg) was the most commonly reported, accounting for 87.7% of the severe diagnosed. By establishing provisional ICUs, all 81 patients were admitted to hospitals capable of providing critical care, among whom 51 (63.0%) were treated in provisional ICUs. On D1, 77 patients (95.1%) were admitted, 76 (93.8%) were administered by respiratory support, including 51 (67.9%) by conventional oxygen therapy (COT). By D28, 53 (65.4%) were discharged, three (3.7%) were deceased, and 25 (30.9%) were still hospitalized. COT, administered to 95.1% of the patients, was the most commonly used respiratory support and met 62.7% of the respiratory support needed, followed by high-flow nasal cannula (19.5%) and non-invasive mechanical ventilation (10%). Interpretation The multi-strategy management for severe COVID-19 patients included early identification and timely critical care, including appropriate respiratory support in particular. Preparation of sufficient conventional oxygen equipment should be prioritized.

negative: Knowledge gaps in therapeutic and non-therapeutic research on the Middle East respiratory syndrome

negative: Prior and Novel Coronaviruses, COVID-19, and Human Reproduction: What Is Known? Structured Abstract Objective To summarize current understanding of the effects of novel and prior coronaviruses on human reproduction, specifically male and female gametes, and in pregnancy. Design Review of English publications in PubMed and Embase to April 6, 2020. Methods Manuscripts were screened for reports including coronavirus, reproduction, including pathophysiology and pregnancy. Intervention(s) None. Main Outcome Measure(s) Reproductive outcomes; effects on gametes; pregnancy outcomes; neonatal complications. Results Seventy-nine reports formed the basis of the review. Coronavirus binding to cells involves the S1 domain of the spike protein to receptors present in reproductive tissues, including angiotensin converting enzyme-2 (ACE2), CD26, Ezrin, and cyclophilins. SARS-CoV-1 may cause severe orchitis leading to germ cell destruction in males. Reports indicate decreased sperm concentration and motility for 72-90 days following COVID-19 infection. Gonadotropin-dependent expression of ACE2 was found in human ovaries, but it is unclear whether SARS-CoV-2 adversely affects female gametogenesis. Evidence suggests that COVID-19 infection has a lower maternal case fatality rate than SARS or MERS, but anecdotal reports suggest that infected, asymptomatic women may develop respiratory symptoms postpartum. COVID-19 infections in pregnancy are associated with preterm delivery. Postpartum neonatal transmission from mother to child has been reported. Conclusion COVID-19 infection may adversely affect some pregnant women and their offspring. Additional studies are needed to assess effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection on male and female fertility.

negative: Recent progress in understanding 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) associated with human respiratory disease: detection, mechanisms and treatment ABSTRACT Viral respiratory diseases such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) always pose a severe threat to people. First identified in late December 2019, a novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV; SARS-CoV-2) has affected many provinces in China and multiple countries worldwide. The viral outbreak has aroused panic and a public-health emergency around the world, and the number of infections continues to rise. However, the causes and consequences of the pneumonia remain unknown. To effectively implement epidemic prevention, early identification and diagnosis are critical to disease control. Here we scrutinise a series of available studies by global scientists on the clinical manifestations, detection methods and treatment options for the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, named coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and also propose potential strategies for preventing the infection.

negative: Hydrogen sulfide ameliorates chronic renal failure in rats by inhibiting apoptosis and inflammation through ROS/MAPK and NF-κB signaling pathways Chronic renal failure (CRF) is a major public health problem worldwide. Hydrogen sulfide (H(2)S) plays important roles in renal physiological and pathophysiological processes. However, whether H(2)S could protect against CRF in rats remains unclear. In this study, we found that H(2)S alleviated gentamicin-induced nephrotoxicity by reducing reactive oxygen species (ROS)-mediated apoptosis in normal rat kidney-52E cells. We demonstrated that H(2)S significantly improved the kidney structure and function of CRF rats. We found that H(2)S decreased the protein levels of Bax, Caspase-3, and Cleaved-caspase-3, but increased the expression of Bcl-2. Treatment with H(2)S reduced the levels of malondialdehyde and ROS and increased the activities of superoxide dismutase and glutathione peroxidase. H(2)S significantly abolished the phosphorylation of extracellular signal-regulated protein kinase 1/2, c-Jun N-terminal kinase, and p38 in the kidney of CRF rats. Furthermore, H(2)S decreased the expression levels of tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-10, and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, as well as the protein levels of p50, p65, and p-p65 in the kidney of CRF rats. In conclusion, H(2)S could ameliorate adenine-induced CRF in rats by inhibiting apoptosis and inflammation through ROS/mitogen-activated protein kinase and nuclear factor-kappa B signaling pathways.

negative: Therapeutic management of Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever Abstract Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever has been reported in more than 30 countries in Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Eastern Europe, with an increasing incidence in recent years, especially in Europe. Because no specific treatments have demonstrated efficacy, supportive treatment is essential, as well as the provision of a centre with the appropriate means to guarantee the safety of its healthcare professionals. Laboratory monitoring of thrombocytopenia, severe coagulopathy or liver failure is of critical importance. Patients with Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever should be admitted to High Level Isolation Units where appropriate biocontainment procedures can prevent nosocomial transmission through infected fluids or accidents with contaminated material. In case of high-risk exposures, early administration of ribavirin should be considered.

negative: PRSS contributes to cetuximab resistance in colorectal cancer Cetuximab improves the survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. The main limitation is primary and secondary resistance, the underlying mechanism of which requires extensive investigation. We proved that PRSS expression levels are significantly negatively associated with the sensitivity of cancer cells to cetuximab. Detailed mechanistic analysis indicated that PRSS can cleave cetuximab, leading to resistance. Cetuximab or bevacizumab combined with SPINK1, a PRSS inhibitor, inhibited cell growth more efficiently than cetuximab or bevacizumab alone in xenograft models. PRSS levels in the serum of 156 patients with mCRC were analyzed, and poor efficacy of cetuximab therapy was observed in patients with aberrant PRSS expression. PRSS expression in monoclonal antibody (mAb)–treated patients with cancer from The Cancer Genome Atlas database was also evaluated to determine whether patients with higher PRSS expression have significantly reduced progression-free survival. Our work provides a strong scientific rationale for targeting PRSS in combination with cetuximab therapy.

negative: Comparing Human Metapneumovirus and Respiratory Syncytial Virus: Viral Co-Detections, Genotypes and Risk Factors for Severe Disease BACKGROUND: It is unclarified as to whether viral co-detection and human metapneumovirus (HMPV) genotypes relate to clinical manifestations in children with HMPV and lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI), and if the clinical course and risk factors for severe LRTI differ between HMPV and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). METHODS: We prospectively enrolled hospitalized children aged <16 years with LRTI from 2006 to 2015. Children were clinically examined, and nasopharyngeal aspirates were analyzed using semi-quantitative, real-time polymerase chain reaction tests for HMPV, RSV and 17 other pathogens. HMPV-positive samples were genotyped. RESULTS: A total of 171 children had HMPV infection. HMPV-infected children with single virus (n = 106) and co-detections (n = 65) had similar clinical manifestations. No clinical differences were found between HMPV genotypes A (n = 67) and B (n = 80). The HMPV-infected children were older (median 17.2 months) than RSV-infected children (median 7.3 months, n = 859). Among single virus-infected children, no differences in age-adjusted LRTI diagnoses were found between HMPV and RSV. Age was an important factor for disease severity among single virus-infected children, where children <6 months old with HMPV had a milder disease than those with RSV, while in children 12–23 months old, the pattern was the opposite. In multivariable logistic regression analysis for each virus type, age ≥12 months (HMPV), and age <6 months (RSV), prematurity, ≥1 chronic disease and high viral loads of RSV, but not high HMPV viral loads, were risk factors for severe disease. CONCLUSIONS: Among hospitalized children with LRTI, HMPV manifests independently of viral co-detections and HMPV genotypes. Disease severity in HMPV- and RSV-infected children varies in relation to age. A history of prematurity and chronic disease increases the risk of severe LRTI among HMPV- and RSV-infected children.

negative: Prospective nonrandomized comparison of quality of life and recurrence between high ligation and stripping and radiofrequency ablation for varicose veins. PURPOSE Varicose veins are a major problem worldwide and improvement in quality of life (QoL) is the ultimate goal after treatment of this benign disease. However QoL is highly dependent on personal and social factors. This study compares high ligation and stripping (HS) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in terms of QoL and recurrence in Korea. METHODS A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data between August 2006 and October 2008 was performed for patients undergoing HS and RFA at a single institution. QoL was assessed with a questionnaire preoperatively, at 3 months postoperatively and annually thereafter. Recurrence was assessed by Duplex ultrasound annually after surgery. RESULTS A total of 272 patients completed the questionnaire at 3 months. Among these patients, 155 patients returned for their annual follow-up. There were no significant differences between HS and RFA in global QoL scores, although RFA showed less pain. However, paresthesia rates were also higher after RFA. Recurrence rates were similar between the two modalities, although technical failures were more common after RFA. CONCLUSION Overall QoL and recurrence rates were similar between the two modalities. The benefits of RFA do not seem to be enough to overcome the higher costs of HS in Korea.

negative: Letter to the Editor: Case of the Index Patient Who Caused Tertiary Transmission of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Korea: the Application of Lopinavir/Ritonavir for the Treatment of COVID-19 Pneumonia Monitored by Quantitative RT-PCR

negative: The epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19 Abstract In December 2019, the outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in China spread worldwide, becoming an emergency of major international concern. SARS-CoV-2 infection causes clusters of severe respiratory illness similar to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus. Human-to-human transmission via droplets, contaminated hands or surfaces has been described, with incubation times of 2-14 days. Early diagnosis, quarantine, and supportive treatments are essential to cure patients. This paper reviews the literature on all available information about the epidemiology, diagnosis, isolation and treatments of COVID-19. Treatments, including antiviral agents, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, corticosteroids, antibodies, convalescent plasma transfusion and vaccines, are discussed in this article. In addition, registered trials investigating treatment options for COVID-19 infection are listed.

negative: Simian adenovirus vector production for early-phase clinical trials: A simple method applicable to multiple serotypes and using entirely disposable product-contact components A variety of Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) compliant processes have been reported for production of non-replicating adenovirus vectors, but important challenges remain. Most clinical development of adenovirus vectors now uses simian adenoviruses or rare human serotypes, whereas reported manufacturing processes mainly use serotypes such as AdHu5 which are of questionable relevance for clinical vaccine development. Many clinically relevant vaccine transgenes interfere with adenovirus replication, whereas most reported process development uses selected antigens or even model transgenes such as fluorescent proteins which cause little such interference. Processes are typically developed for a single adenovirus serotype – transgene combination, requiring extensive further optimization for each new vaccine. There is a need for rapid production platforms for small GMP batches of non-replicating adenovirus vectors for early-phase vaccine trials, particularly in preparation for response to emerging pathogen outbreaks. Such platforms must be robust to variation in the transgene, and ideally also capable of producing adenoviruses of more than one serotype. It is also highly desirable for such processes to be readily implemented in new facilities using commercially available single-use materials, avoiding the need for development of bespoke tools or cleaning validation, and for them to be readily scalable for later-stage studies. Here we report the development of such a process, using single-use stirred-tank bioreactors, a transgene-repressing HEK293 cell – promoter combination, and fully single-use filtration and ion exchange components. We demonstrate applicability of the process to candidate vaccines against rabies, malaria and Rift Valley fever, each based on a different adenovirus serotype. We compare performance of a range of commercially available ion exchange media, including what we believe to be the first published use of a novel media for adenovirus purification (NatriFlo® HD-Q, Merck). We demonstrate the need for minimal process individualization for each vaccine, and that the product fulfils regulatory quality expectations. Cell-specific yields are at the upper end of those previously reported in the literature, and volumetric yields are in the range 1 × 10(13) – 5 × 10(13) purified virus particles per litre of culture, such that a 2–4 L process is comfortably adequate to produce vaccine for early-phase trials. The process is readily transferable to any GMP facility with the capability for mammalian cell culture and aseptic filling of sterile products.

negative: Abstracts of the MASCC/ISOO Annual Meeting 2018

negative: A multisite, randomized field trial to evaluate the influence of lactoferrin on the morbidity and mortality of dairy calves with diarrhea ABSTRACT Diarrhea is one of the most common causes of antimicrobial use and mortality in young calves. To reduce antimicrobial use and resistance on dairy farms, research on alternative therapies for calf diarrhea is necessary. Our laboratory previously conducted a randomized clinical trial investigating the effectiveness of lactoferrin, an iron-binding protein found in colostrum, as a treatment for calf diarrhea. The trial showed significantly reduced calf mortality in diarrheic calves that were administered lactoferrin. Thus, the objective of this study was to corroborate the results of our prior clinical trial across multiple farms and to investigate the effect of lactoferrin on the morbidity and mortality of preweaned calves with naturally occurring cases of diarrhea. This randomized field trial was conducted on 5 commercial dairy farms in Ohio. In total, 485 calves (≤21 d of age) were enrolled at first diarrhea diagnosis (fecal score ≥2 defined as loose to watery) and randomly assigned to receive an oral dose of lactoferrin (3 g of lactoferrin powder dissolved in 30 mL of water) or 30 mL of water (control) once daily for 3 consecutive days. Health assessments were conducted on the day of diarrhea diagnosis (d 0) and 1, 2, 3, 7, 14, 21, 28, and 35 d following diagnosis. Producer records of disease treatment and mortality were collected 120 d following diagnosis. A Poisson regression model was used to test differences between treatments in disease frequency through 35 d post-diarrhea diagnosis and the incidence risk of treatment and mortality risk 120 d post-diarrhea diagnosis; the model controlled for calf age at enrollment, farm, and treatment. Median calf age at enrollment was 11 d and ranged from 1 to 26 d of age. At study enrollment, 51.3% (123/240) and 52.2% (128/245) of calves in the control and lactoferrin treatment groups, respectively, were diagnosed with severe diarrhea (fecal score = 3). The frequency of disease (diarrhea, dehydration, depression, signs of respiratory disease) through 35 d following diarrhea diagnosis was not significantly different for calves in the lactoferrin and control groups. Overall mortality risk for enrolled calves was 9.9%, and 10.7% (22/243) and 9.1% (26/242) of calves in the lactoferrin and control groups, respectively, died or were culled in the 120 d following diarrhea diagnosis. The relative risk of death or culling did not differ between treatment groups, however. Therefore, as performed in this study, lactoferrin as a treatment for calf diarrhea was not beneficial.

negative: The clinical impact of coronavirus infection in patients with hematologic malignancies and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients Abstract Background Compared to other respiratory viruses, relatively little is known about the clinical impact of coronavirus (CoV) infection after hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) or in patients with hematologic malignancies. Objectives To characterize the role of CoV in respiratory tract infections among HSCT and hematologic malignancy patients. Study design We conducted a retrospective review of all cases of CoV infection documented by polymerase chain reaction, (PCR)-based testing on nasopharyngeal and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid samples between June 2010 and 2013. Cases of CoV infection occurring in HSCT and hematologic malignancy patients were identified and the clinical characteristics of these cases were compared to other respiratory viruses. Results CoV was identified in 2.6% (n =43) of all samples analyzed (n =1661) and in 6.8% of all samples testing positive for a respiratory virus (n =631). 33 of 38 (86.8%) of patients in whom CoV was identified were HSCT and hematologic malignancy patients. Among these patients, CoV was detected in 9.7% of unique infection episodes, with only rhinovirus/enterovirus (RhV/EnV) infection being more common. Group I CoV subtypes accounted for 76.3% of cases, and 57% of infections were diagnosed between December and March. CoV infection was associated with upper respiratory tract symptoms in most patients, similar to other respiratory viruses. Possible and proven lower respiratory tract disease was less common compared to other respiratory viruses except RhV/EnV. Conclusions CoV is frequently detected in HSCT and hematologic malignancy patients in whom suspicion for a respiratory viral infection exists, but is less likely to progress to lower respiratory tract disease than most other respiratory viruses.

negative: Abstract of 29th Regional Congress of the ISBT

negative: Abstracts for MASCC/ISOO Annual Meeting 2019

negative: Know Your Enemy: Successful Bioinformatic Approaches to Predict Functional RNA Structures in Viral RNAs Structured RNA elements may control virus replication, transcription and translation, and their distinct features are being exploited by novel antiviral strategies. Viral RNA elements continue to be discovered using combinations of experimental and computational analyses. However, the wealth of sequence data, notably from deep viral RNA sequencing, viromes, and metagenomes, necessitates computational approaches being used as an essential discovery tool. In this review, we describe practical approaches being used to discover functional RNA elements in viral genomes. In addition to success stories in new and emerging viruses, these approaches have revealed some surprising new features of well-studied viruses e.g., human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis C virus, influenza, and dengue viruses. Some notable discoveries were facilitated by new comparative analyses of diverse viral genome alignments. Importantly, comparative approaches for finding RNA elements embedded in coding and non-coding regions differ. With the exponential growth of computer power we have progressed from stem-loop prediction on single sequences to cutting edge 3D prediction, and from command line to user friendly web interfaces. Despite these advances, many powerful, user friendly prediction tools and resources are underutilized by the virology community.

negative: The role of endoscopy in the management of GERD. We recommend that uncomplicated GERD be diagnosed on the basis of typical symptoms without the use of diagnostic testing, including EGD. We recommend EGD for patients who have symptoms suggesting complicated GERD or alarm symptoms. We recommend that EGD not be routinely performed solely for the assessment of extraesophageal GERD symptoms. We recommend that endoscopic findings of reflux esophagitis be classified according to an accepted grading scale or described in detail. We suggest that repeat EGD be performed in patients with severe erosive esophagitis after at least an 8-week course of PPI therapy to exclude underlying BE or dysplasia. 44BB We recommend against obtaining tissue samples from endoscopically normal tissue to diagnose GERD or exclude BE in adults. We suggest that endoscopy be considered in patients with multiple risk factors for Barrett’s esophagus. We recommend that tissue samples be obtained to confirm endoscopically suspected Barrett’s esophagus. We suggest that endoscopic antireflux therapy be considered for selected patients with uncomplicated GERD after careful discussion with the patient regarding potential adverse effects, benefits, and other available therapeutic options.

negative: Clinical features, Diagnosis, and Treatment of COVID-19: A systematic review of case reports and case series Objectives: The 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) has been declared a public health emergency worldwide. The objective of this systematic review was to characterize the clinical, diagnostic, and treatment characteristics of patients presenting with COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a structured search using PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library to collect both case reports and case series on COVID-19 published up to February 30, 2020. Results: Thirty-four articles were included analyzing a total of 99 patients with a mean age of 46.2 years. The most common presenting symptom in patients who tested positive for COVID-19 was fever, reported in up to 83% of patients from 76.4% of the analyzed studies. Other symptoms including rhinorrhea, dizziness, and chills were less frequently reported. Additionally, in studies which reported C-reactive protein (CRP) measurements (44%), a large majority of patients displayed an elevated CRP (73%). Progression to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was the most common complication of patients testing positive for COVID-19 (33%). CT images displayed ground-glass opacification (GGO) patterns (80%) as well as bilateral lung involvement (71.0%). The most commonly used antiviral treatment modalities included, lopinavir (HIV protease inhibitor), arbidiol hydrochloride (influenza fusion inhibitor), and oseltamivir (neuraminidase inhibitor). Conclusions: Development of ARDS may play a role in estimating disease progression and mortality risk. Early detection of elevations in serum CRP, combined with a clinical COVID-19 symptom presentation may be used as a surrogate marker for presence and severity of disease. There is a paucity of data surrounding the efficacy of treatments. There is currently not a well-established gold standard therapy for the treatment of diagnosed COVID-19. Further prospective investigations are necessary.

negative: Early dynamics of transmission and control of COVID-19: a mathematical modelling study BACKGROUND: An outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to 95 333 confirmed cases as of March 5, 2020. Understanding the early transmission dynamics of the infection and evaluating the effectiveness of control measures is crucial for assessing the potential for sustained transmission to occur in new areas. Combining a mathematical model of severe SARS-CoV-2 transmission with four datasets from within and outside Wuhan, we estimated how transmission in Wuhan varied between December, 2019, and February, 2020. We used these estimates to assess the potential for sustained human-to-human transmission to occur in locations outside Wuhan if cases were introduced. METHODS: We combined a stochastic transmission model with data on cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan and international cases that originated in Wuhan to estimate how transmission had varied over time during January, 2020, and February, 2020. Based on these estimates, we then calculated the probability that newly introduced cases might generate outbreaks in other areas. To estimate the early dynamics of transmission in Wuhan, we fitted a stochastic transmission dynamic model to multiple publicly available datasets on cases in Wuhan and internationally exported cases from Wuhan. The four datasets we fitted to were: daily number of new internationally exported cases (or lack thereof), by date of onset, as of Jan 26, 2020; daily number of new cases in Wuhan with no market exposure, by date of onset, between Dec 1, 2019, and Jan 1, 2020; daily number of new cases in China, by date of onset, between Dec 29, 2019, and Jan 23, 2020; and proportion of infected passengers on evacuation flights between Jan 29, 2020, and Feb 4, 2020. We used an additional two datasets for comparison with model outputs: daily number of new exported cases from Wuhan (or lack thereof) in countries with high connectivity to Wuhan (ie, top 20 most at-risk countries), by date of confirmation, as of Feb 10, 2020; and data on new confirmed cases reported in Wuhan between Jan 16, 2020, and Feb 11, 2020. FINDINGS: We estimated that the median daily reproduction number (R(t)) in Wuhan declined from 2·35 (95% CI 1·15–4·77) 1 week before travel restrictions were introduced on Jan 23, 2020, to 1·05 (0·41–2·39) 1 week after. Based on our estimates of R(t), assuming SARS-like variation, we calculated that in locations with similar transmission potential to Wuhan in early January, once there are at least four independently introduced cases, there is a more than 50% chance the infection will establish within that population. INTERPRETATION: Our results show that COVID-19 transmission probably declined in Wuhan during late January, 2020, coinciding with the introduction of travel control measures. As more cases arrive in international locations with similar transmission potential to Wuhan before these control measures, it is likely many chains of transmission will fail to establish initially, but might lead to new outbreaks eventually. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, Health Data Research UK, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and National Institute for Health Research.

negative: New evidence-based clinical practice guideline timely supports hospital infection control of coronavirus disease 2019

negative: Designing clinical trials for future space missions as a pathway to changing how clinical trials are conducted on Earth. OBJECTIVE The project aims to build a framework for conducting clinical trials for long-term interplanetary missions to contribute to innovation in clinical trials on Earth, especially around patient involvement and ownership. METHODS We conducted two workshops in which participants were immersed in the speculative scenario of an interplanetary mission in which health problems emerged that required medical trials to resolve. The workshops used virtual reality and live simulation to mimic a zero-gravity environment and visual perception shifts and were followed by group discussion. RESULTS Some key aspects for the framework that emerged from the workshops included: (a) approaches to be inclusive in the management of the trial, (b) approaches to be inclusive in designing the research project (patient preference trials, n-of-1 trials, designing clinical trials to be part of a future prospective meta-analysis, etc), (c) balancing the research needs and the community needs (eg, allocation of the participants based on both research and community need), (d) ethics and partnerships (ethics and consent issues and how they relate to partnerships and relationships). CONCLUSION In identifying some key areas that need to be incorporated in future planning of clinical trials for interplanetary missions, we also identified areas that are relevant to engaging patients in clinical trials on Earth. We will suggest using the same methodology to facilitate more in-depth discussions on specific aspects of clinical trials in aerospace medicine. The methodology can be more widely used in other areas to open new inclusive conversations around innovating research methodology.

negative: COVID-19 outbreak at a large homeless shelter in Boston: Implications for universal testing The circumstances of homelessness create the potential for rapid transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in this vulnerable population. Upon observing a cluster of COVID-19 cases from a single large homeless shelter in Boston, Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program conducted symptom assessments and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2 among all guests residing at the shelter over a 2-day period. Of 408 participants, 147 (36.0%) were PCR-positive for SARS-CoV-2. COVID-positive individuals were more likely to be male (p<0.001) but did not differ significantly from COVID-negative individuals with respect to other demographic and clinical characteristics. Cough (7.5%), shortness of breath (1.4%), and fever (0.7%) were all uncommon among COVID-positive individuals. Our findings illustrate the rapidity with which COVID-19 can be widely transmitted in a homeless shelter setting and suggest that universal PCR testing, rather than a symptom triggered approach, may be a better strategy for identifying and mitigating COVID-19 among people experiencing homelessness.

negative: Emerging infectious disease laboratory and diagnostic preparedness to accelerate vaccine development Rapid vaccine development in response to an outbreak of a new emerging infectious disease (EID) is a goal targeted by public health agencies worldwide. This goal becomes more complicated when there are no standardized sets of viral and immunological assays, no accepted and well-characterized samples, standards or reagents, and no approved diagnostic tests for the EID pathogen. The diagnosis of infections is of critical importance to public health, but also in vaccine development in order to track incident infections during clinical trials, to differentiate natural infection responses from those that are vaccine-related and, if called for by study design, to exclude subjects with prior exposure from vaccine efficacy trials. Here we review emerging infectious disease biological standards development, vaccine clinical assay development and trial execution with the recent experiences of MERS-CoV and Zika virus as examples. There is great need to establish, in advance, the standardized reagents, sample panels, controls, and assays to support the rapid advancement of vaccine development efforts in response to EID outbreaks.

negative: Inpatient and outpatient case prioritization for patients with neuro-oncologic disease amid the COVID-19 pandemic: general guidance for neuro-oncology practitioners from the AANS/CNS Tumor Section and Society for Neuro-Oncology The Coronavirus pandemic has created unprecedented strain on medical resources at health care institutions around the world. At many institutions, this has resulted in efforts to prioritize cases with an attempt to balance the acuity of medical needs with available resources. Here, we provide a framework for institutions and governments to help adjudicate treatment allocations to patients with neuro-oncologic disease.

negative: Management of acute kidney injury in patients with COVID-19 The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly evolved into a global pandemic. Most patients with COVID-19 have mild symptoms, but about 5% develop severe symptoms, which can include acute respiratory distress syndrome, septic shock, and multiple organ failure. Kidney involvement is frequent, with clinical presentation ranging from mild proteinuria to progressive acute kidney injury (AKI) necessitating renal replacement therapy (RRT). An understanding of the pathophysiology and mechanisms of kidney damage and AKI in the setting of critical illness and COVID-19 is emerging, although further research is needed to identify patients at risk of AKI and to guide management strategies. As no specific treatment options exist for AKI secondary to COVID-19, intensive care is largely supportive. Current approaches to prevention and management of AKI, and identification of potential indications for use of RRT and sequential extracorporeal therapies, are based mainly on clinical experience, and AKI strategies are adapted empirically to patients with COVID-19. International collaborative and cross-disciplinary research is needed to obtain adequate evidence to support current clinical approaches and to develop new approaches to management.

negative: Clinical trials in the pandemic age: What is fit for purpose? It is critical to ensure that COVID-19 studies provide clear and timely answers to the scientific questions that will guide us to scalable solutions for all global regions. Significant challenges in operationalizing trials include public policies for managing the pandemic, public health and clinical capacity, travel and migration, and availability of tests and infrastructure. These factors lead to spikes and troughs in patient count by location, disrupting the ability to predict when or if a trial will reach recruitment goals. The focus must also be on understanding how to provide equitable access to these interventions ensuring that interventions reach those who need them the most, be it patients in low resource settings or vulnerable groups. We introduce a website to be used by The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust, and other funders of the COVID Therapeutics Accelerator that accept proposals for future clinical research. The portal enables evaluations of clinical study applications that focus on study qualities most likely to lead to informative outcomes and completed studies.

negative: Use of ribavirin in viruses other than hepatitis C. A review of the evidence Abstract Ribavirin is a molecule with antiviral activity against different viruses. In clinical practice, it has made its niche almost exclusively for the treatment of the hepatitis C virus. However, there are other diseases in which it could be of benefit and it has the advantage of being suitable for oral, intravenous and inhaled administration. We conducted a review of the indications of the main drug agencies (Spanish, European and American) and other possible indications, mainly haemorrhagic fevers and coronavirus.

negative: Molecular Modeling Evaluation of the Binding Effect of Ritonavir, Lopinavir and Darunavir to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Proteases Three anti-HIV drugs, ritonavir, lopinavir and darunavir, might have therapeutic effect on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this study, the structure models of two severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) proteases, coronavirus endopeptidase C30 (CEP_C30) and papain like viral protease (PLVP), were built by homology modeling. Ritonavir, lopinavir and darunavir were then docked to the models, respectively, followed by energy minimization of the protease-drug complexes. In the simulations, ritonavir can bind to CEP_C30 most suitably, and induce significant conformation changes of CEP_C30; lopinavir can also bind to CEP_C30 suitably, and induce significant conformation changes of CEP_C30; darunavir can bind to PLVP suitably with slight conformation changes of PLVP. It is suggested that the therapeutic effect of ritonavir and lopinavir on COVID-19 may be mainly due to their inhibitory effect on CEP_C30, while ritonavir may have stronger efficacy; the inhibitory effect of darunavir on SARS-CoV-2 and its potential therapeutic effect may be mainly due to its inhibitory effect on PLVP.

negative: Initial Simulation of SARS-CoV2 Spread and Intervention Effects in the Continental US Here we use a metapopulation model applied at county resolution to simulate the spread and growth of COVID-19 incidence in the continental United States. We calibrate the model against county-level incidence data collected between February 21, 2020 and March 13, 2020, and estimate epidemiological parameters including the fraction of undocumented infections and their contagiousness1. Using the calibrated model, we project the outbreak in the continental US for 180 days after March 13, 2020, and evaluate the effects of social distancing and travel restrictions on the outbreak.

negative: SARS vaccines speed towards clinic Researchers urge caution to avoid jabs pitfall.

negative: A high efficient hospital emergency responsive mode is the key of successful treatment of 100 COVID-19 patients in Zhuhai Background: Since December 2019, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged in Wuhan city and rapidly spread throughout China. The mortality of novel coronavirus pneumonia (NCP) in severe and critical cases is very high. Facing this kind of public health emergency, high efficient administrative emergency responsive mode in designated hospital is needed. Method: As an affiliated hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, our hospital is the only designated one for diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19 in Zhuhai, a medium-sized city. Novel coronavirus pneumonia department, which is administrative led by the president of hospital directly, has been established at early stage of epidemic crisis in my hospital. In NCP department, there are core members of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine (PCCM) specialist and multidisciplinary team. Don't stick to national guidelines of NCP, based on professional opinion by respiratory professor and expert group, we focused on individualized treatment and timely adjustment of treatment and management strategies in working about COVID-19 patients. Results: 1. High working efficiency: By Mar 02, 2020, we have completed 2974 citywide consultations and treatment of 366 inpatients, including 101 patients diagnosed with COVID-19. 2. Excellent therapeutic effectAmong 101 hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19, all were cured and discharged, except for one death. No secondary hospital infection, no pipeline infection and no pressure sore were found in all patients. 3. Finding and confirming person-to-person transmission characteristic of COVID-19 prior to official release conference: Strengthened protection is key point to zero infection in healthcare group and medical faculty and lower rate of second generation infectious patients. 4. Timely adjustment management and treatment strategy prior to guideline update: The first evidence of digestive tract involvement in COVID-19 has been found, and the earliest clinical trial of chloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 has been carried out in our hospital. Conclusions: In our hospital, establishment of NCP department, which is administratively led by the president of hospital directly and specialized conduct by respiratory professor, is the key to success in management and treatment of COVID-19 patients. This hospital emergency responsive mode could provide reference for other hospitals and cities in epidemic situation.

negative: Initial Public Health Response and Interim Clinical Guidance for the 2019 Novel Coronavirus Outbreak — United States, December 31, 2019–February 4, 2020 On December 31, 2019, Chinese health officials reported a cluster of cases of acute respiratory illness in persons associated with the Hunan seafood and animal market in the city of Wuhan, Hubei Province, in central China. On January 7, 2020, Chinese health officials confirmed that a novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) was associated with this initial cluster (1). As of February 4, 2020, a total of 20,471 confirmed cases, including 2,788 (13.6%) with severe illness,* and 425 deaths (2.1%) had been reported by the National Health Commission of China (2). Cases have also been reported in 26 locations outside of mainland China, including documentation of some person-to-person transmission and one death (2). As of February 4, 11 cases had been reported in the United States. On January 30, the World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General declared that the 2019-nCoV outbreak constitutes a Public Health Emergency of International Concern.† On January 31, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary declared a U.S. public health emergency to respond to 2019-nCoV.§ Also on January 31, the president of the United States signed a "Proclamation on Suspension of Entry as Immigrants and Nonimmigrants of Persons who Pose a Risk of Transmitting 2019 Novel Coronavirus," which limits entry into the United States of persons who traveled to mainland China to U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents and their families (3). CDC, multiple other federal agencies, state and local health departments, and other partners are implementing aggressive measures to slow transmission of 2019-nCoV in the United States (4,5). These measures require the identification of cases and their contacts in the United States and the appropriate assessment and care of travelers arriving from mainland China to the United States. These measures are being implemented in anticipation of additional 2019-nCoV cases in the United States. Although these measures might not prevent the eventual establishment of ongoing, widespread transmission of the virus in the United States, they are being implemented to 1) slow the spread of illness; 2) provide time to better prepare health care systems and the general public to be ready if widespread transmission with substantial associated illness occurs; and 3) better characterize 2019-nCoV infection to guide public health recommendations and the development of medical countermeasures including diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines. Public health authorities are monitoring the situation closely. As more is learned about this novel virus and this outbreak, CDC will rapidly incorporate new knowledge into guidance for action by CDC and state and local health departments.

negative: Randomized controlled trial of the effect of regular paracetamol on influenza infection BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Anti‐pyretic treatment is recommended in the management of influenza infection. In animal models anti‐pyretic treatment increases mortality from influenza. We investigated the effects of paracetamol on viral and clinical outcomes in adults with influenza infection. METHODS: This is a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial of adults aged 18–65 years with influenza‐like illness and positive influenza rapid antigen test. Treatments were 1 g paracetamol four times a day, or matching placebo, for 5 days. Pernasal swabs were taken for influenza quantitative RT‐PCR at Baseline and Days 1, 2 and 5. Temperature and symptom scores were recorded for 5–14 days or time of resolution respectively. The primary outcome variable was area under the curve (AUC) for quantitative PCR log(10) viral load from Baseline to Day 5. RESULTS: A total of 80 participants were randomized: no one was lost to follow up, and one withdrew after 4 days. There were 22 and 24 participants who were influenza PCR‐positive in placebo and in paracetamol groups respectively. Mean (SD) AUC PCR log(10) viral load was 4.40 (0.91) in placebo and 4.64 (0.88) in paracetamol; difference was −0.24, 95% CI: −0.78 to 0.29, P = 0.36. In all participants there were no differences in symptom scores, temperature, time to resolution of illness and health status, with no interaction between randomized treatment and whether influenza was detected by PCR. CONCLUSION: Regular paracetamol had no effect on viral shedding, temperature or clinical symptoms in patients with PCR‐confirmed influenza. There remains an insufficient evidence base for paracetamol use in influenza infection. Clinical trial registration: ACTRN12611000497909 at the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry.

negative: Evaluation of phosphatidylinositol-4-kinase IIIα as a hepatitis C virus drug target. Phosphatidylinositol-4-kinase IIIα (PI4KIIIα) is an essential host cell factor for hepatitis C virus (HCV) replication. An N-terminally truncated 130-kDa form was used to reconstitute an in vitro biochemical lipid kinase assay that was optimized for small-molecule compound screening and identified potent and specific inhibitors. Cell culture studies with PI4KIIIα inhibitors demonstrated that the kinase activity was essential for HCV RNA replication. Two PI4KIIIα inhibitors were used to select cell lines harboring HCV replicon mutants with a 20-fold loss in sensitivity to the compounds. Reverse genetic mapping isolated an NS4B-NS5A segment that rescued HCV RNA replication in PIK4IIIα-deficient cells. HCV RNA replication occurs on specialized membranous webs, and this study with PIK4IIIα inhibitor-resistant mutants provides a genetic link between NS4B/NS5A functions and PI4-phosphate lipid metabolism. A comprehensive assessment of PI4KIIIα as a drug target included its evaluation for pharmacologic intervention in vivo through conditional transgenic murine lines that mimic target-specific inhibition in adult mice. Homozygotes that induce a knockout of the kinase domain or knock in a single amino acid substitution, kinase-defective PI4KIIIα, displayed a lethal phenotype with a fairly widespread mucosal epithelial degeneration of the gastrointestinal tract. This essential host physiologic role raises doubt about the pursuit of PI4KIIIα inhibitors for treatment of chronic HCV infection.

negative: Efficacy and safety of Chou-Ling-Dan granules in the treatment of seasonal influenza via combining Western and traditional Chinese medicine: protocol for a multicentre, randomised controlled clinical trial INTRODUCTION: Chou-Ling-Dan (CLD) (Laggerapterodonta) granules are an ethnic herbal medicine from Yunnan province of China. CLD granules have been used for the treatment of inflammatory conditions and feverish diseases in China, including seasonal influenza, but few evidence-based medicine (EBM) clinical studies have been conducted to assess its efficacy and safety in the treatment of influenza. Here, we performed an EBM clinical trial combining Western Chinese medicine and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) evaluation systems to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CLD granules in the treatment of seasonal influenza. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is designed as a multicentre, randomised, double-blinded, double-simulation, oseltamivir-controlled and placebo-controlled, parallel-design clinical trial. Eligible subjects (n=318) will be allocated after satisfying the criteria (Western medicine). Subjects will be randomised to receive CLD granules, oseltamivir, or a placebo for 5 days of treatment and with follow-up after treatment to record symptoms and signs and to collect pharyngeal/throat swabs and serum samples for detecting the virus and antibodies. At the same time, the syndrome differentiation criteria of TCM, such as tongue body, furred tongue and type of pulse, will be recorded as determined by doctors of both Western and Chinese medicine. Participants will be instructed to comply with the protocol and to keep a daily record of symptoms. The primary and secondary outcomes and safety indicators will be used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CLD granules in the treatment of seasonal influenza based on both Western Chinese medicine and TCM evaluation systems. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The CLD granules clinical trial will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice and has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University. All participants must provide written informed consent. The results obtained will be disseminated at international medical conferences and in peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02662426; Pre-results.

negative: Progress Toward In Vivo Use of siRNAs-II RNA interference (RNAi) has been extensively employed for in vivo research since its use was first demonstrated in mammalian cells 10 years ago. Design rules have improved, and it is now routinely possible to obtain reagents that suppress expression of any gene desired. At the same time, increased understanding of the molecular basis of unwanted side effects has led to the development of chemical modification strategies that mitigate these concerns. Delivery remains the single greatest hurdle to widespread adoption of in vivo RNAi methods. However, exciting advances have been made and new delivery systems under development may help to overcome these barriers. This review discusses advances in RNAi biochemistry and biology that impact in vivo use and provides an overview of select publications that demonstrate interesting applications of these principles. Emphasis is placed on work with synthetic, small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) published since the first installment of this review which appeared in 2006.

negative: The 8ab protein of SARS-CoV is a luminal ER membrane-associated protein and induces the activation of ATF6 Abstract The 8ab protein of SARS-CoV is a group-specific accessory protein, which is lost when the virus was transmitted from animals to humans due to a 29-nucleotide deletion in the ORF8ab region. Here we found that 8ab protein is associated with ER membrane at luminal surface. 8ab protein was found to up-regulate the synthesis of endogenous ER-resident chaperons involved in protein folding through the activation of the transcription factor ATF6, while it showed no effect on the CHOP induction and XBP1 splicing associated with the unfolded protein response (UPR). When ectopically expressed in mammalian cells, 8ab induced the proteolysis of ATF6 and the translocation of its cleaved DNA-binding and transcription-activation domains from the ER to the nucleus. Finally, we showed that 8ab binds to the luminal domain of ATF6. These findings suggest that 8ab could modulate the UPR by activating ATF6 to facilitate protein folding and processing. Thus, the loss of 8ab in SARS-CoV through viral evolution in animals may play a role in its pathogenicity.

negative: Mesenchymal stromal cells for COVID-19: A living systematic review protocol OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of mesenchymal stromal cells outcomes important to patients with COVID-19. DESIGN: This is the protocol of a living systematic review. DATA SOURCES: We will conduct searches in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), grey literature and in a centralised repository in L-OVE (Living OVerview of Evidence). L-OVE is a platform that maps PICO questions to evidence from Epistemonikos database. In response to the COVID-19 emergency, L-OVE was adapted to expand the range of evidence it covers and customised to group all COVID-19 evidence in one place. The search will cover the period until the day before submission to a journal. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES AND METHODS: We adapted an already published common protocol for multiple parallel systematic reviews to the specificities of this question. We will include randomised trials evaluating the effect of mesenchymal stromal cells versus placebo or no treatment in patients with COVID-19. Randomised trials evaluating other coronavirus infections, such as MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, and non-randomised studies in COVID-19 will be searched in case we find no direct evidence from randomised trials, or if the direct evidence provides low- or very low-certainty for critical outcomes. Two reviewers will independently screen each study for eligibility, extract data, and assess the risk of bias. We will pool the results using meta-analysis and will apply the GRADE system to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. A living, web-based version of this review will be openly available during the COVID-19 pandemic. We will resubmit it every time the conclusions change or whenever there are substantial updates. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is considered necessary. The results of this review will be widely disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, social networks and traditional media. PROSPERO Registration Submitted to PROSPERO (awaiting ID allocation).

negative: Intensive care management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): challenges and recommendations Summary As coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spreads across the world, the intensive care unit (ICU) community must prepare for the challenges associated with this pandemic. Streamlining of workflows for rapid diagnosis and isolation, clinical management, and infection prevention will matter not only to patients with COVID-19, but also to health-care workers and other patients who are at risk from nosocomial transmission. Management of acute respiratory failure and haemodynamics is key. ICU practitioners, hospital administrators, governments, and policy makers must prepare for a substantial increase in critical care bed capacity, with a focus not just on infrastructure and supplies, but also on staff management. Critical care triage to allow the rationing of scarce ICU resources might be needed. Researchers must address unanswered questions, including the role of repurposed and experimental therapies. Collaboration at the local, regional, national, and international level offers the best chance of survival for the critically ill.

negative: Ebola vaccines: keep the clinical trial protocols on the shelf and ready to roll out

negative: A Machine Learning alternative to placebo-controlled clinical trials upon new diseases: A primer The appearance of a new dangerous and contagious disease requires the development of a drug therapy faster than what is foreseen by usual mechanisms. Many drug therapy developments consist in investigating through different clinical trials the effects of different specific drug combinations by delivering it into a test group of ill patients, meanwhile a placebo treatment is delivered to the remaining ill patients, known as the control group. We compare the above technique to a new technique in which all patients receive a different and reasonable combination of drugs and use this outcome to feed a Neural Network. By averaging out fluctuations and recognizing different patient features, the Neural Network learns the pattern that connects the patients initial state to the outcome of the treatments and therefore can predict the best drug therapy better than the above method. In contrast to many available works, we do not study any detail of drugs composition nor interaction, but instead pose and solve the problem from a phenomenological point of view, which allows us to compare both methods. Although the conclusion is reached through mathematical modeling and is stable upon any reasonable model, this is a proof-of-concept that should be studied within other expertises before confronting a real scenario. All calculations, tools and scripts have been made open source for the community to test, modify or expand it. Finally it should be mentioned that, although the results presented here are in the context of a new disease in medical sciences, these are useful for any field that requires a experimental technique with a control group.

negative: ISNI 2010 Abstracts: Tuesday October 26(th), 2010 10th Course of the European School of Neuroimmunology

negative: Rapid AI Development Cycle for the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic: Initial Results for Automated Detection&Patient Monitoring using Deep Learning CT Image Analysis Purpose: Develop AI-based automated CT image analysis tools for detection, quantification, and tracking of Coronavirus; demonstrate they can differentiate coronavirus patients from non-patients. Materials and Methods: Multiple international datasets, including from Chinese disease-infected areas were included. We present a system that utilizes robust 2D and 3D deep learning models, modifying and adapting existing AI models and combining them with clinical understanding. We conducted multiple retrospective experiments to analyze the performance of the system in the detection of suspected COVID-19 thoracic CT features and to evaluate evolution of the disease in each patient over time using a 3D volume review, generating a Corona score. The study includes a testing set of 157 international patients (China and U.S). Results: Classification results for Coronavirus vs Non-coronavirus cases per thoracic CT studies were 0.996 AUC (95%CI: 0.989-1.00) ; on datasets of Chinese control and infected patients. Possible working point: 98.2% sensitivity, 92.2% specificity. For time analysis of Coronavirus patients, the system output enables quantitative measurements for smaller opacities (volume, diameter) and visualization of the larger opacities in a slice-based heat map or a 3D volume display. Our suggested Corona score measures the progression of disease over time. Conclusion: This initial study, which is currently being expanded to a larger population, demonstrated that rapidly developed AI-based image analysis can achieve high accuracy in detection of Coronavirus as well as quantification and tracking of disease burden.

negative: Chinese Medicine Shenfu Injection for Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Objective. Heart failure (HF) is a global public health problem. Early literature studies manifested that Shenfu injection (SFI) is one of the most commonly used traditional Chinese patent medicine for HF in China. This article intended to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of SFI for HF. Methods. An extensive search was performed within 6 English and Chinese electronic database up to November 2011. Ninety-nine randomized controlled trails (RCTs) were collected, irrespective of languages. Two authors extracted data and assessed the trial quality independently. RevMan 5.0.2 was used for data analysis. Results. Compared with routine treatment and/or device support, SFI combined with routine treatment and/or device support showed better effect on clinical effect rate, mortality, heart rate, NT-proBNP and 6-minute walk distance. Results in ultrasonic cardiography also showed that SFI combined with routine treatment improved heart function of HF patients. There were no significant difference in blood pressure between SFI and routine treatment groups. Adverse events were reported in thirteen trails with thirteen specific symptoms, while no serious adverse effect was reported. Conclusion. SFI appear to be effective for treating HF. However, further rigorously designed RCTs are warranted because of insufficient methodological rigor in the majority of included trials.

negative: Clinical Research and Trials—A “Nonessential” Victim of the COVID-19 Pandemic?

negative: Asymptomatic novel coronavirus pneumonia patient outside Wuhan: The value of CT images in the course of the disease Abstract The purpose of this case report is to describe the imaging and associated clinical features of an asymptomatic novel coronavirus pneumonia (COVID-19) patient outside Wuhan, China. The principle findings are that in this patient with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, CT findings preceded symptoms and included bilateral pleural effusions, previously not reported in association with COVID-19. The role of this case report is promotion of potential recognition amongst radiologists of this new disease, which has been declared a global health emergency by the World Health Organization (WHO).

negative: How to handle patients with autoimmune rheumatic and inflammatory bowel diseases in the COVID-19 era: An expert opinion • A correct patient risk stratification is of paramount importance for the proper management of economic and human resources. • It's fundamental to prioritize clinical trials evaluating dosing, prophylaxis, and treatment with immunosuppressant in COVID-19 in order to avoid either an overuse and a treatment shortage. • Future controlled studies may highlight in our patients a potential preventive role of immunosuppressant therapies in the development of severe forms of Covid-19. • Despite the overall risk of infection in rheumatic and gastroenterological diseases a conclusive association between these diseases and COVID −19 remains questionable.

negative: Medical imaging informatics research and development trends—an editorial

negative: Multiple-dose therapy with bovine colostrum confers significant protection against diarrhea in a mouse model of human rotavirus-induced gastrointestinal disease Abstract Rotavirus is the most important etiologic agent of severe gastroenteritis. Previously, we reported that skimmed and concentrated bovine late colostrum (SCBLC) obtained from normal unimmunized cows at 6 to 7d after parturition effectively prevented against human rotavirus (HRV)-induced severe gastroenteritis in vivo, when administered as a single dose 60min before viral inoculation. In the present study, we examined the efficacy of multiple administrations of SCBLC at smaller dosages after viral inoculation in vivo. We demonstrate that multiple administrations within 24h after virus inoculation resulted in earlier recovery from diarrheal symptoms, in an administration frequency-dependent manner. Furthermore, we investigated whether isolated IgG anti-HRV activity in SCBLC was equivalent to that of IgG isolated from bovine mature milk as measured by in vitro activity assays. We found that IgG-containing fractions from SCBLC and mature milk exhibited approximately the same level of anti-HRV activity. We concluded that the SCBLC contains a high level of IgG against HRV-induced severe gastroenteritis, which will be possible to use in protective effects in immunocompromised hosts, such as children and the elderly. Multiple doses of SCBLC during the early stages of infection or lower dosage of SCBLC given as a single dose both resulted in relief of diarrheal symptoms.

negative: Review on the global epidemiological situation and the efficacy of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 Covid-19 disease is caused by SARS-CoV-2, a virus belonging to the coronavirus family. Covid-19 is so new that there is currently no specific vaccine or treatment. Clinical trials are currently underway. In vitro tests are also being conducted to assess the efficacy of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of this epidemic, which is considered a pandemic by the WHO. We note that the content of this review is dated. The information it contains is subject to change and modification as the epidemic progresses.

negative: Trialstreamer: a living, automatically updated database of clinical trial reports Objective Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard method for evaluating whether a treatment works in healthcare, but can be difficult to find and make use of. We describe the development and evaluation of a system to automatically find and categorize all new RCT reports. Materials and Methods Trialstreamer, continuously monitors PubMed and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), looking for new RCTs in humans using a validated classifier. We combine machine learning and rule-based methods to extract information from the RCT abstracts, including free-text descriptions of trial populations, interventions and outcomes (the 'PICO') and map these snippets to normalised MeSH vocabulary terms. We additionally identify sample sizes, predict the risk of bias, and extract text conveying key findings. We store all extracted data in a database which we make freely available for download, and via a search portal, which allows users to enter structured clinical queries. Results are ranked automatically to prioritize larger and higher-quality studies. Results As of May 2020, we have indexed 669,895 publications of RCTs, of which 18,485 were published in the first four months of 2020 (144/day). We additionally include 303,319 trial registrations from ICTRP. The median trial sample size in the RCTs was 66. Conclusions We present an automated system for finding and categorising RCTs. This yields a novel resource: A database of structured information automatically extracted for all published RCTs in humans. We make daily updates of this database available on our website (trialstreamer.robotreviewer.net).

negative: Importation and Human-to-Human Transmission of a Novel Coronavirus in Vietnam

negative: A Systematic Review of therapeutic agents for the treatment of the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) Abstract Background The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) was first described in 2012 and attracted a great international attention due to multiple healthcare associated outbreaks. The disease carries a high case fatality rate of 34.5%, and there is no internationally or nationally recommended therapy. Method We searched MEDLINE, Science Direct, Embase and Scopus databases for relevant papers published till March 2019 describing in vitro, in vivo or human therapy of MERS. Results Initial search identified 62 articles: 52 articles were from Medline, 6 from Embase, and 4 from Science Direct. Based on the inclusions and exclusions criteria, 30 articles were included in the final review and comprised: 22 in vitro studies, 8 studies utilizing animal models, 13 studies in humans, and one study included both in vitro and animal model. There are a few promising therapeutic agents on the horizon. The combination of lopinavir/ritonavir and interferon-beta- 1b showed excellent results in common marmosets and currently is in a randomized control trial. Ribavirin and interferon were the most widely used combination and experience comes from a number of observational studies. Although, the data are heterogenous, this combination might be of potential benefit and deserve further investigation. There were no randomized clinical trials to recommend specific therapy for the treatment of MERS-CoV infection. Only one such study is planned for randomization and is pending completion. The study is based on a combination of lopinavir/ritonavir and interferon-beta- 1b. A fully human polyclonal IgG antibody (SAB-301) was safe and well tolerated in healthy individuals and this agent may deserve further testing for efficacy. Conclusion Despite multiple studies in humans there is no consensus on the optimal therapy for MERS-CoV. Randomized clinical trials are needed and potential therapies should be evaluated only in such clinical trials. In order to further enhance the therapeutic aroma for MERS-CoV infection, repurposing old drugs against MERS-CoV is an interesting strategy and deserves further consideration and use in clinical settings.

negative: Enhancing immunity in viral infections, with special emphasis on COVID-19: A review Abstract Background and aims Balanced nutrition which can help in maintaining immunity is essential for prevention and management of viral infections. While data regarding nutrition in coronavirus infection (COVID-19) are not available, in this review, we aimed to evaluated evidence from previous clinical trials that evaluated nutrition-based interventions for viral diseases (with special emphasis on respiratory infections), and summaries our observations. Methods A systematic search strategy was employed using keywords to search the literature in 3 key medical databases: PubMed®, Web of Science® and SciVerse Scopus®. Studies were considered eligible if they were controlled trials in humans, measuring immunological parameters, on viral and respiratory infections. Clinical trials on vitamins, minerals, nutraceuticals and probiotics were included. Results total of 640 records were identified initially and 22 studies were included from other sources. After excluding duplicates and articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria, 43 studies were obtained (vitamins: 13; minerals: 8; nutraceuticals: 18 and probiotics: 4). Among vitamins, A and D showed a potential benefit, especially in deficient populations. Among trace elements, selenium and zinc have also shown favourable immune-modulatory effects in viral respiratory infections. Several nutraceuticals and probiotics may have some role in enhancing immune functions. Micronutrients may be beneficial in nutritionally depleted elderly population. Conclusions We summaries possible benefits of some vitamins, trace elements, nutraceuticals and and probiotics. Nutrition principles based on these data could be useful in possible prevention and management of COVID-19

negative: Managing emerging infectious diseases: Is a federal system an impediment to effective laws? In the 1980's and 1990's HIV/AIDS was the emerging infectious disease. In 2003–2004 we saw the emergence of SARS, Avian influenza and Anthrax in a man made form used for bioterrorism. Emergency powers legislation in Australia is a patchwork of Commonwealth quarantine laws and State and Territory based emergency powers in public health legislation. It is time for a review of such legislation and time for consideration of the efficacy of such legislation from a country wide perspective in an age when we have to consider the possibility of mass outbreaks of communicable diseases which ignore jurisdictional boundaries.

negative: HATRIC: a study of Pelargonium sidoides root extract EPs®7630 (Kaloba®) for the treatment of acute cough due to lower respiratory tract infection in adults—study protocol for a double blind, placebo-controlled randomised feasibility trial BACKGROUND: Acute lower respiratory tract infection is a common acute infection managed in primary care. The current dominant management strategy in the UK is antibiotics, despite widespread publicity regarding antimicrobial resistance and evidence that the small benefits of antibiotics do not outweigh the harms. There is a need to address the rising problem of antibiotic resistance by providing credible alternative strategies, which reduce symptom burden. There is sufficient evidence to recommend the use of Pelargonium sidoides root extract in order to warrant undertaking an independent clinical trial. We propose a feasibility study to demonstrate our ability to recruit and retain patients and conduct a placebo-controlled trial of Pelargonium sidoides extract EPs®7630 in lower respiratory tract infection where pneumonia is not suspected. Both the tablet and liquid formulations will be included. METHODS: The HATRIC trial is a double-blind randomised placebo-controlled feasibility study aiming to determine the potential to conduct a fully powered trial of Pelargonium sidoides root extract as an alternative to the inappropriate use of antibiotics for acute bronchitis in UK primary care. Primary care sites will be equally randomised to one of two formulation groups (tablet or liquid preparation). Additionally, within each site, patients will be evenly randomised to active or placebo treatment. Antibiotic consumption will be monitored during the trial, but the use of a delayed prescription strategy is encouraged. The target sample size for this study is 160 patients overall or 40 per arm, recruited from approximately 20 primary care sites. The analysis will be descriptive focusing on estimation with no formal comparison of groups taking place. DISCUSSION: If this trial demonstrates the feasibility of recruitment and delivery, we will seek funding for a fully powered placebo-controlled trial of Pelargonium sidoides root extract for the treatment of lower respiratory tract infections in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: HATRIC was registered on the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN17672884) on 16 August 2018.

negative: Coronavirus infections in hospitalized pediatric patients with acute respiratory tract disease BACKGROUND: Acute viral respiratory infections are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in humans worldwide. The etiological backgrounds of these infections remain unconfirmed in most clinical cases. The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of human coronavirus infections in a series of children hospitalized with symptoms of acute respiratory tract disease in a one-year period in Slovenia. METHODS: The 664 specimens from 592 children under six years of age hospitalized at the University Children’s Hospital in Ljubljana were sent for the routine laboratory detection of respiratory viruses. Respiratory viruses were detected with a direct immunofluorescence assay and human coronaviruses were detected with a modified real-time RT–PCR. RESULTS: HCoV RNA was detected in 40 (6%, 95% CI: 4.3%–8.1%) of 664 samples. Of these specimens, 21/40 (52.5%) were identified as species HKU1, 7/40 (17.5%) as OC43, 6/40 (15%) as 229E, and 6/40 (15%) as NL63. Infection with HCoV occurred as a coinfection with one or more other viruses in most samples (70%). Of the HCoV-positive children, 70.3% had lower respiratory tract infections. CONCLUSION: The results of our study show that HCoV are frequently detected human pathogens, often associated with other respiratory viruses and acute respiratory tract infections in hospitalized children. An association between age and the viral load was found. The highest viral load was detected in children approximately 10 months of age.

negative: Structure of Mpro from COVID-19 virus and discovery of its inhibitors A new coronavirus (CoV) identified as COVID-19 virus is the etiological agent responsible for the 2019-2020 viral pneumonia outbreak that commenced in Wuhan1–4. Currently there is no targeted therapeutics and effective treatment options remain very limited. In order to rapidly discover lead compounds for clinical use, we initiated a program of combined structure-assisted drug design, virtual drug screening and high-throughput screening to identify new drug leads that target the COVID-19 virus main protease (Mpro). Mpro is a key CoV enzyme, which plays a pivotal role in mediating viral replication and transcription, making it an attractive drug target for this virus5,6. Here, we identified a mechanism-based inhibitor, N3, by computer-aided drug design and subsequently determined the crystal structure of COVID-19 virus Mpro in complex with this compound. Next, through a combination of structure-based virtual and high-throughput screening, we assayed over 10,000 compounds including approved drugs, drug candidates in clinical trials, and other pharmacologically active compounds as inhibitors of Mpro. Six of these inhibit Mpro with IC50 values ranging from 0.67 to 21.4 μM. Ebselen also exhibited promising antiviral activity in cell-based assays. Our results demonstrate the efficacy of this screening strategy, which can lead to the rapid discovery of drug leads with clinical potential in response to new infectious diseases where no specific drugs or vaccines are available.

negative: Analysis of the lung microbiota in dogs with Bordetella bronchiseptica infection and correlation with culture and quantitative polymerase chain reaction Infection with Bordetella bronchiseptica (Bb), a pathogen involved in canine infectious respiratory disease complex, can be confirmed using culture or qPCR. Studies about the canine lung microbiota (LM) are recent, sparse, and only one paper has been published in canine lung infection. In this study, we aimed to compare the LM between Bb infected and healthy dogs, and to correlate sequencing with culture and qPCR results. Twenty Bb infected dogs diagnosed either by qPCR and/or culture and 4 healthy dogs were included. qPCR for Mycoplasma cynos (Mc) were also available in 18 diseased and all healthy dogs. Sequencing results, obtained from bronchoalveolar lavage fluid after DNA extraction, PCR targeting the V1–V3 region of the 16S rDNA and sequencing, showed the presence of Bb in all diseased dogs, about half being co-infected with Mc. In diseased compared with healthy dogs, the β-diversity changed (P = 0.0024); bacterial richness and α-diversity were lower (P = 0.012 and 0.0061), and bacterial load higher (P = 0.004). Bb qPCR classes and culture results correlated with the abundance of Bb (r = 0.71, P < 0.001 and r = 0.70, P = 0.0022). Mc qPCR classes also correlated with the abundance of Mc (r = 0.73, P < 0.001). Bb infection induced lung dysbiosis, characterized by high bacterial load, low richness and diversity and increased abundance of Bb, compared with healthy dogs. Sequencing results highly correlate with qPCR and culture results showing that sequencing can be reliable to identify microorganisms involved in lung infectious diseases.

negative: Providing pharmacy services during the coronavirus pandemic The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is quickly spreading across China and globally. Pharmacy services are an important pillar in public health to prevent and contain the COVID-19 pandemic. Chinese pharmacists have acted swiftly in the public health response in China, such as drafting professional service guidance to pharmacists and pharmacies, establishing emergency drug formularies, monitoring and resolving drug shortages, establishing remote pharmacy services to prevent human-to-human infections, providing event-driven pharmaceutical care, educating the public on infection prevention and disease management, and participating in clinical trials and drug evaluation. This commentary reviews the unique needs of pharmacy services in the COVID-19 pandemic, and shares our experiences with the international pharmacy community in the response to these needs.

negative: UK vaccines network: Mapping priority pathogens of epidemic potential and vaccine pipeline developments During the 2013–2016 Ebola outbreak in West Africa an expert panel was established on the instructions of the UK Prime Minister to identify priority pathogens for outbreak diseases that had the potential to cause future epidemics. A total of 13 priority pathogens were identified, which led to the prioritisation of spending in emerging diseases vaccine research and development from the UK. This meeting report summarises the process used to develop the UK pathogen priority list, compares it to lists generated by other organisations (World Health Organisation, National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases) and summarises clinical progress towards the development of vaccines against priority diseases. There is clear technical progress towards the development of vaccines. However, the availability of these vaccines will be dependent on sustained funding for clinical trials and the preparation of clinically acceptable manufactured material during inter-epidemic periods.

negative: Hiding in Plain Sight: an Approach to Treating Patients with Severe COVID-19 Infection Patients with COVID-19 infection are at risk of acute respiratory disease syndrome (ARDS) and death. The tissue receptor for COVID-19 is ACE2, and higher levels of ACE2 can protect against ARDS. Angiotensin receptor blockers and statins upregulate ACE2. Clinical trials are needed to determine whether this drug combination might be used to treat patients with severe COVID-19 infection.

negative: Polyprenyl Immunostimulant Treatment of Cats with Presumptive Non-Effusive Feline Infectious Peritonitis In a Field Study Feline infectious peritonitis (FIP) is a fatal disease with no clinically effective treatment. This field study evaluated treatment with Polyprenyl Immunostimulant (PI) in cats with the non-effusive form of FIP. Because immune suppression is a major component in the pathology of FIP, we hypothesized that treatment with an immune system stimulant would increase survival times of cats with dry FIP. Sixty cats, diagnosed with dry FIP by primary care and specialist veterinarians and meeting the acceptance criteria, were treated with PI without intentional selection of less severe cases. The survival time from the start of PI treatment in cats diagnosed with dry FIP showed that of the 60 cats with dry FIP treated with PI, 8 survived over 200 days, and 4 of 60 survived over 300 days. A literature search identified 59 cats with non-effusive or dry FIP; no cat with only dry FIP lived longer than 200 days. Veterinarians of cats treated with PI that survived over 30 days reported improvements in clinical signs and behavior. The survival times in our study were significantly longer in cats who were not treated with corticosteroids concurrently with PI. While not a cure, PI shows promise in the treatment of dry form FIP, but a controlled study will be needed to verify the benefit.

negative: Prophylaxie post-exposition ou traitement préventif pour le syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère du coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) : protocole d'étude pour une étude randomisée contrôlée pragmatique./ Post-exposure prophylaxis or pre-emptive therapy for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2): study protocol for a pragmatic randomized-controlled trial BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in December 2019 causing the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Currently, there is a lack of evidence-based therapies to prevent COVID-19 following exposure to the virus, or to prevent worsening of symptoms following confirmed infection. We describe the design of a clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine for post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) and pre-emptive therapy (PET) for COVID-19. METHODS: We will conduct two nested multicentre international double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine for: 1) PEP of asymptomatic household contacts or healthcare workers exposed to COVID-19 within the past four days, and 2) PET for symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 showing symptoms for less than four days. We will recruit 1,500 patients each for the PEP and PET trials. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to receive five days of hydroxychloroquine or placebo. The primary PEP trial outcome will be the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19. The primary PET trial outcome will be an ordinal scale of disease severity (not hospitalized, hospitalized without intensive care, hospitalization with intensive care, or death). Participant screening, informed consent, and follow-up will be exclusively internet-based with appropriate regulatory and research ethics board approvals in Canada and the United States. DISCUSSION: These complementary randomized-controlled trials are innovatively designed and adequately powered to rapidly answer urgent questions regarding the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine to reduce virus transmission and disease severity of COVID-19 during a pandemic. In-person participant follow-up will not be conducted to facilitate social distancing strategies and reduce risks of exposure to study personnel. Innovative trial approaches are needed to urgently assess therapeutic options to mitigate the global impact of this pandemic. TRIALS REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04308668); registered 16 March, 2020.

negative: Cyberbiosecurity Challenges of Pathogen Genome Databases Pathogen detection, identification, and tracking is shifting from non-molecular methods, DNA fingerprinting methods, and single gene methods to methods relying on whole genomes. Viral Ebola and influenza genome data are being used for real-time tracking, while food-borne bacterial pathogen outbreaks and hospital outbreaks are investigated using whole genomes in the UK, Canada, the USA and the other countries. Also, plant pathogen genomes are starting to be used to investigate plant disease epidemics such as the wheat blast outbreak in Bangladesh. While these genome-based approaches provide never-seen advantages over all previous approaches with regard to public health and biosecurity, they also come with new vulnerabilities and risks with regard to cybersecurity. The more we rely on genome databases, the more likely these databases will become targets for cyber-attacks to interfere with public health and biosecurity systems by compromising their integrity, taking them hostage, or manipulating the data they contain. Also, while there is the potential to collect pathogen genomic data from infected individuals or agricultural and food products during disease outbreaks to improve disease modeling and forecast, how to protect the privacy of individuals, growers, and retailers is another major cyberbiosecurity challenge. As data become linkable to other data sources, individuals and groups become identifiable and potential malicious activities targeting those identified become feasible. Here, we define a number of potential cybersecurity weaknesses in today's pathogen genome databases to raise awareness, and we provide potential solutions to strengthen cyberbiosecurity during the development of the next generation of pathogen genome databases.

negative: Clinical and epidemiological characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients Background: Numerous groups have reported the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases; however, the data remained inconsistent. This paper aimed to pool the available data to provide a more complete picture of the characteristics of COVID-19 patients. Methods: A systematic review and pooled analysis was performed. Eligible studies were identified from database and hand searches up to March 2, 2020. Data on clinical (including laboratory and radiological) and epidemiological (including demographic) characteristics of confirmed COVID-19 cases were extracted and combined by simple pooling. Results: Of 644 studies identified, 69 studies (involving 48,926 patients) were included in the analysis. The average age of the patients was 49.16 years. A total of 51.46% of the patients were men and 52.32% were non-smokers. Hypertension (50.82%) and diabetes (20.89%) were the most frequent comorbidities observed. The most common symptoms were fever (83.21%), cough (61.74%), and myalgia or fatigue (30.22%). Altered levels of blood and biochemical parameters were observed in a proportion of the patients. Most of the patients (78.50%) had bilateral lung involvements, and 5.86% showed no CT findings indicative of viral pneumonia. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (28.36%), acute cardiac injury (7.89%) and acute kidney injury (7.60%) were the most common complications recorded. Conclusions: Clinical and epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 patients were mostly heterogeneous and non-specific. This is the most comprehensive report of the characteristics of COVID-19 patients to date. The information presented is important for improving our understanding of the spectrum and impact of this novel disease.

negative: Diseases of the Alimentary Tract: Nonruminant

negative: Ethnopharmacology, phytochemistry, biological activities, and therapeutic applications of Cedrela serrata Royle: A mini review Abstract Ethnopharmacological relevance Cedrela serrata Royle (C. serrata) is a medicinal plant not only used for constructions but also an important conventional medicine for the treatment of various diseases such as; diabetes, jaundice, liver diseases, diarrhea, fever, chronic infantile dysentery, intestinal worms, hypertension, skin and blood diseases. Aims This review article documents and critically assesses, for the first time; up to date categorized information about C. serrata including its reported pharmacological activities, cultural uses, active compounds, and botanical description. Materials and method s: All provided information about C. serrata was collected using the electronic databases (e.g. Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Science Direct and Springer Link), books (e.g. Trees of Pakistan and Herbalism, Phytochemistry, and Ethnopharmacology) and thesis. Results Qualitative and quantitative phytochemical studies on C. serrata revealed the presence of important chemical constituents such as; flavonoids, phenolic acids, alkaloids, saponins, tannins, and cardiac glycosides. The phytochemicals showed various in vitro activities like antioxidant, anti-infective, antiglycation, cytotoxic activities. Major areas of research conducted on C. serrata are its antioxidant and anti-infective activities. Few historical uses of C. serrata are supported by modern in vitro pharmacological studies such as; antidiarrheal, antidiabetic, and leishmanicidal activity. Conclusion There were convincing evidence in in vitro studies supporting C. serrata antioxidant, anti-infective, anti-diabetic, anti-glycating, and cytotoxic activities. Nevertheless, all reported pharmacological activities were carried out in vitro and a gap in research i.e. preclinical and clinical investigation still exists. The authors emphasize the need for future in-depth research and clinical trials to investigate C. serrata pharmacological activity, clinical efficacy and safety. The potential chemical compounds with suggestive classes may need to be isolated and pharmacological activities must be established for these compounds. The plant has very limited information about pharmacological activities and the data available for supportive cultural uses needs proper validation.

negative: The CREST-2 experience with the evolving challenges of COVID-19: A clinical trial in a pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the lives of whole communities and nations. The multinational multicenter National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) Carotid Revascularization and Medical Management for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Trial (CREST-2) stroke prevention trial rapidly experienced the effects of the pandemic, and had to temporarily suspend new enrollments and shift patient follow-up activities from in-person clinic visits to telephone contacts. There is an ethical obligation to the patients to protect their health while taking every feasible step to ensure that the goals of the trial are successfully met. Here we describe the effects of the pandemic on the trial and steps that are being taken to mitigate the effects of the pandemic so that trial objectives can be met.

negative: Genetic Profiles in Pharmacogenes Indicate Personalized Drug Therapy for COVID-19 Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic currently. Many drugs showed potential for COVID-19 therapy. However, genetic factors which can lead to different drug efficiency and toxicity among populations are still undisclosed in COVID-19 therapy. Methods: We selected 67 potential drugs for COVID-19 therapy (DCTs) from clinical guideline and clinical trials databases. 313 pharmaco-genes related to these therapeutic drugs were included. Variation information in 125,748 exomes were collected for racial differences analyses. The expression level of pharmaco-genes in single cell resolution was evaluated from single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data of 17 healthy adults. Results: Pharmacogenes, including CYP3A4, ABCB1, SLCO1B1, ALB, CYP3A5, were involved in the process of more than multi DCTs. 224 potential drug-drug interactions (DDI) of DCTs were predicted, while 112 of them have been reported. Racial discrepancy of common nonsynonymous mutations was found in pharmacogenes including: VDR, ITPA, G6PD, CYP3A4 and ABCB1 which related to DCTs including ribavirin, -interferon, chloroquine and lopinavir. Moreover, ACE2, the target of 2019-nCoV, was only found in parts of lung cells, which makes drugs like chloroquine that prevent virus binding to ACE2 more specific than other targeted drugs such as camostat mesylate. Conclusions: At least 17 drugs for COVID-19 therapy with predictable pharmacogenes should be carefully utilized in risk races which are consisted of more risk allele carriers. At least 29 drugs with potential of DDIs are reported to be affected by other DDIs, they should be replaced by similar drugs without interaction if it is possible. Drugs which specifically targeted to infected cells with ACE2 such as chloroquine are preferred in COVID-19 therapy.

negative: A randomized controlled trial of low-dose recombinant human interferons α-2b nasal spray to prevent acute viral respiratory infections in military recruits Abstract The military population has a high disease burden of acute viral respiratory infections in China. To assess the efficacy and safety of a low-dose recombinant human interferon α-2b (rIFNα-2b) nasal spray in preventing acute viral respiratory infections in military population, we performed this randomized controlled trial. The results showed that application of the rIFNα-2b nasal spray had the benefits in prevention of infections caused by influenza A virus, influenza B virus parainfluenza viruses 1–3 and adenovirus species B. However, no benefit was seen in preventing respiratory syncytial virus. No severe adverse events were reported. Therefore, the rIFNα-2b nasal spray was effective and well tolerated for preventing common viral respiratory infections in the military recruits.

negative: Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury: An Overview of Pathophysiology, Models and Acute Injury Mechanisms Traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) is a life changing neurological condition with substantial socioeconomic implications for patients and their care-givers. Recent advances in medical management of SCI has significantly improved diagnosis, stabilization, survival rate and well-being of SCI patients. However, there has been small progress on treatment options for improving the neurological outcomes of SCI patients. This incremental success mainly reflects the complexity of SCI pathophysiology and the diverse biochemical and physiological changes that occur in the injured spinal cord. Therefore, in the past few decades, considerable efforts have been made by SCI researchers to elucidate the pathophysiology of SCI and unravel the underlying cellular and molecular mechanisms of tissue degeneration and repair in the injured spinal cord. To this end, a number of preclinical animal and injury models have been developed to more closely recapitulate the primary and secondary injury processes of SCI. In this review, we will provide a comprehensive overview of the recent advances in our understanding of the pathophysiology of SCI. We will also discuss the neurological outcomes of human SCI and the available experimental model systems that have been employed to identify SCI mechanisms and develop therapeutic strategies for this condition.

negative: Efficacy of a 3C-like protease inhibitor in treating various forms of acquired feline infectious peritonitis OBJECTIVES: The safety and efficacy of the 3C-like protease inhibitor GC376 was tested on a cohort of client-owned cats with various forms of feline infectious peritonitis (FIP). METHODS: Twenty cats from 3.3–82 months of age (mean 10.4 months) with various forms of FIP were accepted into a field trial. Fourteen cats presented with wet or dry-to-wet FIP and six cats presented with dry FIP. GC376 was administered subcutaneously every 12 h at a dose of 15 mg/kg. Cats with neurologic signs were excluded from the study. RESULTS: Nineteen of 20 cats treated with GC376 regained outward health within 2 weeks of initial treatment. However, disease signs recurred 1–7 weeks after primary treatment and relapses and new cases were ultimately treated for a minimum of 12 weeks. Relapses no longer responsive to treatment occurred in 13 of these 19 cats within 1–7 weeks of initial or repeat treatment(s). Severe neurologic disease occurred in 8/13 cats that failed treatment and five cats had recurrences of abdominal lesions. At the time of writing, seven cats were in disease remission. Five kittens aged 3.3–4.4 months with wet FIP were treated for 12 weeks and have been in disease remission after stopping treatment and at the time of writing for 5–14 months (mean 11.2 months). A sixth kitten was in remission for 10 weeks after 12 weeks of treatment, relapsed and is responding to a second round of GC376. The seventh was a 6.8-year-old cat with only mesenteric lymph node involvement that went into remission after three relapses that required progressively longer repeat treatments over a 10 month period. Side effects of treatment included transient stinging upon injection and occasional foci of subcutaneous fibrosis and hair loss. There was retarded development and abnormal eruption of permanent teeth in cats treated before 16–18 weeks of age. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: GC376 showed promise in treating cats with certain presentations of FIP and has opened the door to targeted antiviral drug therapy.

negative: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in pregnant women: A report based on 116 cases Abstract Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is a global public health emergency. Data on the effect of COVID-19 in pregnancy are limited to small case series. Objectives To evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcomes in pregnancy and the vertical transmission potential of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Study Desigh Clinical records were retrospectively reviewed for 116 pregnant women with COVID-19 pneumonia from 25 hospitals in China between January 20 and March 24, 2020. Evidence of vertical transmission was assessed by testing for SARS-CoV-2 in amniotic fluid, cord blood, and neonatal pharyngeal swab samples. Results The median gestational age on admission was 38+0 (IQR 36+0-39+1) weeks. The most common symptoms were fever (50.9%, 59/116) and cough (28.4%, 33/116); 23.3% (27/116) patients presented without symptoms. Abnormal radiologic findings were found in 96.3% (104/108) of cases. There were eight cases (6.9%, 8/116) of severe pneumonia but no maternal deaths. One of eight patients (1/8) that presented in the first- and early-second-trimester had a missed spontaneous abortion. Twenty-one of 99 patients (21.2%, 21/99) that had delivered had preterm birth, including six with preterm premature ruptured of membranes. The rate of spontaneous preterm birth before 37 weeks was 6.1% (6/99). There was one case of severe neonatal asphyxia that resulted in neonatal death. Eighty-six of the 100 neonates that had testing for SARS-CoV-2 had negative results, of these ten neonates had paired amniotic fluid and cord blood samples that were tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Conclusions SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy is not associated with an increased risk of spontaneous abortion and spontaneous preterm birth. There is no evidence of vertical transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection when the infection manifests during the third-trimester of pregnancy.

negative: Ethics of Clinical Science in a Public Health Emergency: Drug Discovery at the Bedside Clinical research under the usual regulatory constraints may be difficult or even impossible in a public health emergency. Regulators must seek to strike a good balance in granting as wide therapeutic access to new drugs as possible at the same time as gathering sound evidence of safety and effectiveness. To inform current policy, I reexamine the philosophical rationale for restricting new medicines to clinical trials, at any stage and for any population of patients (which resides in the precautionary principle), to show that its objective to protect public health, now or in the future, could soon be defeated in a pandemic. Providing wider therapeutic access and coordinating observations and natural experiments, including service delivery by cluster (wedged cluster trials), may provide such a balance. However, there are important questions of fairness to resolve before any such research can proceed.

negative: COVID-19 Clinical Trials: A Primer for the Cardiovascular and Cardio-Oncology Communities The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a proliferation of clinical trials that are designed to slow the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. The overwhelming majority of cardiovascular and cancer patients are at increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection; accordingly, the cardiovascular and cardio-oncology communities are playing a major role in caring for COVID-19 patients. Many of the therapeutic agents that are being used to treat patients with COVID-19 are repurposed treatments for influenza, drugs that were not effective in Ebola patients, or treatments for malaria that were developed decades ago, and are unlikely to be familiar to the cardiovascular and cardio-oncology communities. Here we have provided a foundation for cardiovascular and cardio-oncology physicians who are on the frontline providing care to COVID-19 patients, so that they can better understand the emerging cardiovascular epidemiology of COVID-19, as well as the biological rationale for the clinical trials that are ongoing for the treatment of COVID-19 patients.

negative: A cluster-randomised controlled trial to test the efficacy of facemasks in preventing respiratory viral infection among Hajj pilgrims Abstract Background Cost-effective interventions are needed to control the transmission of viral respiratory tract infections (RTIs) in mass gatherings. Facemasks are a promising preventive measure, however, previous studies on the efficacy of facemasks have been inconclusive. This study proposes a large-scale facemask trial during the Hajj pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia and presents this protocol to illustrate its feasibility and to promote both collaboration with other research groups and additional relevant studies. Methods/design A cluster-randomised controlled trial is being conducted to test the efficacy of standard facemasks in preventing symptomatic and proven viral RTIs among pilgrims during the Hajj season in Mina, Mecca, Saudi Arabia. The trial will compare the ‘supervised use of facemasks’ versus ‘standard measures’ among pilgrims over several Hajj seasons. Cluster-randomisation will be done by accommodation tents with a 1:1 ratio. For the intervention tents, free facemasks will be provided to be worn consistently for 7days. Data on flu-like symptoms and mask use will be recorded in diaries. Nasal samples will be collected from symptomatic recruits and tested for nucleic acid of respiratory viruses. Data obtained from questionnaires, diaries and laboratory tests will be analysed to examine whether mask use significantly reduces the frequency of laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infection and syndromic RTI as primary outcomes. Conclusions This trial will provide valuable evidence on the efficacy of standard facemask use in preventing viral respiratory tract infections at mass gatherings. This study is registered at the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ACTRN: ACTRN12613001018707 (http://www.anzctr.org.au).

negative: What Have We Learned About Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Emergence in Humans? A Systematic Literature Review Background: Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) was first identified in humans in 2012. A systematic literature review was conducted to synthesize current knowledge and identify critical knowledge gaps. Materials and Methods: We conducted a systematic review on MERS-CoV using PRISMA guidelines. We identified 407 relevant, peer-reviewed publications and selected 208 of these based on their contributions to four key areas: virology; clinical characteristics, outcomes, therapeutic and preventive options; epidemiology and transmission; and animal interface and the search for natural hosts of MERS-CoV. Results: Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4/CD26) was identified as the human receptor for MERS-CoV, and a variety of molecular and serological assays developed. Dromedary camels remain the only documented zoonotic source of human infection, but MERS-like CoVs have been detected in bat species globally, as well as in dromedary camels throughout the Middle East and Africa. However, despite evidence of camel-to-human MERS-CoV transmission and cases apparently related to camel contact, the source of many primary cases remains unknown. There have been sustained health care-associated human outbreaks in Saudi Arabia and South Korea, the latter originating from one traveler returning from the Middle East. Transmission mechanisms are poorly understood; for health care, this may include environmental contamination. Various potential therapeutics have been identified, but not yet evaluated in human clinical trials. At least one candidate vaccine has progressed to Phase I trials. Conclusions: There has been substantial MERS-CoV research since 2012, but significant knowledge gaps persist, especially in epidemiology and natural history of the infection. There have been few rigorous studies of baseline prevalence, transmission, and spectrum of disease. Terms such as “camel exposure” and the epidemiological relationships of cases should be clearly defined and standardized. We strongly recommend a shared and accessible registry or database. Coronaviruses will likely continue to emerge, arguing for a unified “One Health” approach.

negative: Common Respiratory Diseases The self-medication phenomenon in upper respiratory tract infections, rhinosinusitis, asthma, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are significant and will continue to increase. Current level of evidence is poor because of the small number of good quality studies, small sample size, short duration, and variation in the composition of the herbal interventions or therapies. The current review points to several potential therapies that could be effective either alone, or as adjuncts to conventional therapies.

negative: Human monoclonal IgG selection of Plasmodium falciparum for the expression of placental malaria-specific variant surface antigens Pregnancy-associatedPlasmodium falciparum malaria (PAM) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in African women and their offspring. PAM is characterized by accumulation of infected erythrocytes (IEs) that adhere to chondroitin sulphate A (CSA) in the placental intervillous space. We show here that human monoclonal IgG antibodies with specificity for variant surface antigens (VSA) specifically expressed by CSA-adhering IEs (VSA(PAM)) can be used in vitro to select parasites from nonpregnant donors to express VSA(PAM) and that this selection for VSA(PAM) expression results in preferential transcription of var2csa. The results corroborate current efforts to develop PAM-specific vaccines based on VAR2CSA.

negative: Effects of temperature on COVID-19 transmission Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID19) is an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARSCoV2), it was first identified in 2019 in Wuhan, China and has resulted in the 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic. As of March 1, 2020, 79,968 patients in China and 7169 outside of China had tested positive for COVID19 and a mortality rate of 3.6% has been observed amongst Chinese patients. Its primary mode of transmission is via respiratory droplets from coughs and sneezes. The virus can remain viable for up to three days on plastic and stainless steel or in aerosols for upto 3 hours and is relatively more stable than the known human coronaviruses. It is stable in faeces at room temperature for at least 1-2 days and can be stable in infected patients for up to 4 days. Heat at 56 degree Celsius kills the SARS coronavirus at around 10000 units per 15 minutes. Thus, temperature is an important factor in survival of COVID19 virus and this article focuses on understanding the relationship between temperature and COVID19 transmission from the data available between January-March 2020.

negative: Impact of point-of-care testing for respiratory viruses on antibiotic use in adults with exacerbation of airways disease Summary Background The ResPOC study demonstrated that syndromic molecular point-of-care testing (POCT) for respiratory viruses was associated with early discontinuation of unnecessary antibiotics compared to routine clinical care. Subgroup analysis suggests these changes occur predominantly in patients with exacerbation of airways disease. Use of molecular POCT for respiratory viruses is becoming widespread but there is a lack of evidence to inform the choice between multiplex syndromic panels versus POCT for influenza only. Materials/methods We evaluated patients from the ResPOC study with exacerbation of asthma or COPD who were treated with antibiotics. The duration of antibiotics and proportion with early discontinuation were compared between patients testing positive and negative for viruses by POCT, and controls. Patients testing positive for viruses by POCT were compared according to virus types. Results 118 patient with exacerbation of airways disease received antibiotics in the POCT group and 111 in the control group. In the POCT group 49/118 (42%) patients tested positive for viruses. Of those testing positive for viruses 17/49 (35%) had early discontinuation of antibiotics versus 9/69 (13%) testing negative and 7/111 (6%) of controls, p<0.0001. Of those positive for viruses by POCT 10/49 (20%) were positive for influenza, 21/49 (43%) for rhinovirus and 18/49 (37%) for other viruses. The proportion with early discontinuation of antibiotics was not different between the virus types (p = 0.34). Conclusions This data suggests that syndromic molecular POCT for respiratory viruses should be favoured over POCT for influenza alone in adults with exacerbation of airways disease.

negative: Teicoplanin: an alternative drug for the treatment of coronavirus COVID-19? In December 2019, a new coronavirus, named SARS-CoV-2, has emerged from China causing pneumonia outbreaks first in the Wuhan region and have now spread worldwide because of its probable high transmission efficiency. Due to the lack of efficient and specific treatments and the need to contain the epidemic, drug repurposing appears to be the best tool to find therapeutic solution. Chloroquine, remdesivir, lopinavir, ribavirin or ritonavir have shown efficacy to inhibit coronavirus in vitro. Teicoplanin, an antibiotic used to treat staphylococci infection, previously showed efficacy to inhibit the first stage of MERS-coronarivus viral cycle in human cells. This activity is conserved on the SARS-Cov-2, thus placing teicoplanin as a potential treatment for patients with this virus.

negative: A deductive approach to modeling the spread of COVID-19 Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2), previously known as 2019-nCoV, is responsible for the atypical pneumonia pandemic designated as Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). The confirmed number of cases continues to grow exponentially reaching 492,000 people in 175 countries as of March 25, 2020. 22,169 people (~4.5%) infected with SARS-COV-2 virus have died. We have developed an exponential regression model using the COVID-19 case data (Jan 22 - Mar 22, 2020). Our primary model uses designated Phase 1 countries, who exceed 2500 cases on Mar 22. The model is then applied to Phase 2 countries: those that escaped the initial Phase 1 global expansion of COVID-19. With the exception of stabilizing countries (South Korea, Japan, and Iran) all Phase 1 countries are growing exponentially, as per I2500(t)=120.4 × e0.238t, with a rate, r = 0.238 ± 0.068. Excluding China, the BRICS developing nations and Australia are in Phase 2. Case data from Phase 2 countries are following the model derived from Phase 1 countries. In the absence of measures employed to flatten the curve including social distancing, quarantine, and healthcare expansion, our model projects over 274,000 cases and 12,300 deaths in the US by Mar 31. India can expect 123,000 cases by April 16. By flattening the curve to the growth rate of stabilizing countries (r = 0.044 ± 0.062), the US would prevent 8,500 deaths by Mar 31, and India would prevent 5,500 deaths by April 16.

negative: Proceedings of Réanimation 2019, the French Intensive Care Society International Congress

negative: An antibiotic stewardship programme to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory infections in rural Chinese primary care facilities: study protocol for a clustered randomised controlled trial BACKGROUND: Inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections at the primary care level represents the major source of antibiotic misuse in healthcare, and is a major driver for antimicrobial resistance worldwide. In this study we will develop, pilot and evaluate the effectiveness of a comprehensive antibiotic stewardship programme in China’s primary care hospitals to reduce inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections among all ages. METHODS: We will use a parallel-group, cluster-randomised, controlled, superiority trial with blinded outcome evaluation but unblinded treatment (providers and patients). We will randomise 34 primary care hospitals from two counties within Guangdong province into the intervention and control arm (1:1 overall ratio) stratified by county (8:9 within-county ratio). In the control arm, antibiotic prescribing and management will continue through usual care. In the intervention arm, we will implement an antibiotic stewardship programme targeting family physicians and patients/caregivers. The family physician components include: (1) training using new operational guidelines, (2) improved management and peer-review of antibiotic prescribing, (3) improved electronic medical records and smart phone app facilitation. The patient/caregiver component involves patient education via family physicians, leaflets and videos. The primary outcome is the proportion of prescriptions for acute respiratory infections (excluding pneumonia) that contain any antibiotic(s). Secondary outcomes will address how frequently specific classes of antibiotics are prescribed, how frequently key non-antibiotic alternatives are prescribed and the costs of consultations. We will conduct a qualitative process evaluation to explore operational questions regarding acceptability, cultural appropriateness and burden of technology use, as well as a cost-effectiveness analysis and a long-term benefit evaluation. The duration of the intervention will be 12 months, with another 24 months’ post-trial long-term follow-up. DISCUSSION: Our study is one of the first trials to evaluate the effect of an antibiotic stewardship programme in primary care settings in a low- or middle-income country (LMIC). All interventional activities will be designed to be embedded into routine primary care with strong local ownership. Through the trial we intend to impact on clinical practice and national policy in antibiotic prescription for primary care facilities in rural China and other LMICs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ID: ISRCTN96892547. Registered on 18 August 2019.

negative: Assay Challenges for Emerging Infectious Diseases: The Zika Experience From the perspective of vaccine development, it is imperative to accurately diagnose target infections in order to exclude subjects with prior exposure from evaluations of vaccine effectiveness, to track incident infection during the course of a clinical trial and to differentiate immune reactions due to natural infections from responses that are vaccine related. When vaccine development is accelerated to a rapid pace in response to emerging infectious disease threats, the challenges to develop such diagnostic tools is even greater. This was observed through the recent expansion of Zika virus infections into the Western Hemisphere in 2014–2017. When initial Zika vaccine clinical trials were being designed and launched in response to the outbreak, there were no standardized sets of viral and immunological assays, and no approved diagnostic tests for Zika virus infection. The diagnosis of Zika virus infection is still an area of active research and development on many fronts. Here we review emerging infectious disease vaccine clinical assay development and trial execution with a special focus on the state of Zika virus clinical assays and diagnostics.

negative: CD200 Receptor Controls Sex-Specific TLR7 Responses to Viral Infection Immunological checkpoints, such as the inhibitory CD200 receptor (CD200R), play a dual role in balancing the immune system during microbial infection. On the one hand these inhibitory signals prevent excessive immune mediated pathology but on the other hand they may impair clearance of the pathogen. We studied the influence of the inhibitory CD200-CD200R axis on clearance and pathology in two different virus infection models. We find that lack of CD200R signaling strongly enhances type I interferon (IFN) production and viral clearance and improves the outcome of mouse hepatitis corona virus (MHV) infection, particularly in female mice. MHV clearance is known to be dependent on Toll like receptor 7 (TLR7)-mediated type I IFN production and sex differences in TLR7 responses previously have been reported for humans. We therefore hypothesize that CD200R ligation suppresses TLR7 responses and that release of this inhibition enlarges sex differences in TLR7 signaling. This hypothesis is supported by our findings that in vivo administration of synthetic TLR7 ligand leads to enhanced type I IFN production, particularly in female Cd200(−/−) mice and that CD200R ligation inhibits TLR7 signaling in vitro. In influenza A virus infection we show that viral clearance is determined by sex but not by CD200R signaling. However, absence of CD200R in influenza A virus infection results in enhanced lung neutrophil influx and pathology in females. Thus, CD200-CD200R and sex are host factors that together determine the outcome of viral infection. Our data predict a sex bias in both beneficial and pathological immune responses to virus infection upon therapeutic targeting of CD200-CD200R.

negative: The effect of human mobility and control measures on the COVID-19 epidemic in China The ongoing COVID-19 outbreak has expanded rapidly throughout China. Major behavioral, clinical, and state interventions are underway currently to mitigate the epidemic and prevent the persistence of the virus in human populations in China and worldwide. It remains unclear how these unprecedented interventions, including travel restrictions, have affected COVID-19 spread in China. We use real-time mobility data from Wuhan and detailed case data including travel history to elucidate the role of case importation on transmission in cities across China and ascertain the impact of control measures. Early on, the spatial distribution of COVID-19 cases in China was well explained by human mobility data. Following the implementation of control measures, this correlation dropped and growth rates became negative in most locations, although shifts in the demographics of reported cases are still indicative of local chains of transmission outside Wuhan. This study shows that the drastic control measures implemented in China have substantially mitigated the spread of COVID-19.

negative: Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19): A primer for emergency physicians INTRODUCTION: Rapid worldwide spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in a global pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This review article provides emergency physicians with an overview of the most current understanding of COVID-19 and recommendations on the evaluation and management of patients with suspected COVID-19. DISCUSSION: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus responsible for causing COVID-19, is primarily transmitted from person-to-person through close contact (approximately 6 ft) by respiratory droplets. Symptoms of COVID-19 are similar to other viral upper respiratory illnesses. Three major trajectories include mild disease with upper respiratory symptoms, non-severe pneumonia, and severe pneumonia complicated by acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Emergency physicians should focus on identifying patients at risk, isolating suspected patients, and informing hospital infection prevention and public health authorities. Patients with suspected COVID-19 should be asked to wear a facemask. Respiratory etiquette, hand washing, and personal protective equipment are recommended for all healthcare personnel caring for suspected cases. Disposition depends on patient symptoms, hemodynamic status, and patient ability to self-quarantine. CONCLUSION: This narrative review provides clinicians with an updated approach to the evaluation and management of patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected COVID-19.

negative: Quercetin supplementation and upper respiratory tract infection: A randomized community clinical trial Abstract Quercetin in culture with target cells and pathogens exerts anti-pathogenic activities against a wide variety of viruses and bacteria. A few small-scale human quercetin supplementation studies have produced conflicting results regarding quercetin's effects on upper respiratory tract infection rates, and little is known regarding the appropriate human dose. The purpose of this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial was to measure the influence of two quercetin doses (500 and 1000mg/day) compared to placebo on upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) rates in a large community group (N =1002) of subjects varying widely in age (18–85 years). Subjects ingested supplements for 12 weeks and logged URTI symptoms on a daily basis using the Wisconsin Upper Respiratory Symptom Survey (WURSS). No significant group differences were measured for URTI outcomes for all subjects combined, or when analyzing separately by gender, body mass index, and age categories. Regression analysis revealed that the strongest interaction effect with group status was self-reported fitness level. A separate analysis of subjects 40 years of age and older rating themselves in the top half of the entire group for fitness level (N =325) showed lower URTI severity (36% reduction, P =0.020) and URTI total sick days (31% reduction, P =0.048) for the Q-1000 group compared to placebo. In summary, for all subjects combined, quercetin supplementation over 12 weeks had no significant influence on URTI rates or symptomatology compared to placebo. A reduction in URTI total sick days and severity was noted in middle aged and older subjects ingesting 1000mgquercetin/day for 12 weeks who rated themselves as physically fit.

negative: Emerging Influenza and Psychosis: An Important Story in Psychological Medicine

negative: Repurposing of clinically approved drugs for treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 in a 2019-novel coronavirus-related coronavirus model BACKGROUND: Medicines for the treatment of 2019-novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infections are urgently needed. However, drug screening using live 2019-nCoV requires high-level biosafety facilities, which imposes an obstacle for those institutions without such facilities or 2019-nCoV. This study aims to repurpose the clinically approved drugs for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a 2019-nCoV-related coronavirus model. METHODS: A 2019-nCoV-related pangolin coronavirus GX_P2V/pangolin/2017/Guangxi was described. Whether GX_P2V uses angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) as the cell receptor was investigated by using small interfering RNA (siRNA) -mediated silencing of ACE2. The pangolin coronavirus model was used to identify drug candidates for treating 2019-nCoV infection. Two libraries of 2406 clinically approved drugs were screened for their ability to inhibit cytopathic effects on Vero E6 cells by GX_P2V infection. The anti-viral activities and anti-viral mechanisms of potential drugs were further investigated. Viral yields of RNAs and infectious particles were quantified by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and plaque assay, respectively. RESULTS: The spike protein of coronavirus GX_P2V shares 92.2% amino acid identity with that of 2019-nCoV isolate Wuhan-hu-1, and uses ACE2 as the receptor for infection just like 2019-nCoV. Three drugs, including cepharanthine (CEP), selamectin, and mefloquine hydrochloride, exhibited complete inhibition of cytopathic effects in cell culture at 10 μmol/L. CEP demonstrated the most potent inhibition of GX_P2V infection, with a concentration for 50% of maximal effect [EC(50)] of 0.98 μmol/L. The viral RNA yield in cells treated with 10 μmol/L CEP was 15,393-fold lower than in cells without CEP treatment ([6.48 ± 0.02] × 10(−4)vs. 1.00 ± 0.12, t = 150.38, P < 0.001) at 72 h post-infection (p.i.). Plaque assays found no production of live viruses in media containing 10 μmol/L CEP at 48 h p.i. Furthermore, we found CEP had potent anti-viral activities against both viral entry (0.46 ± 0.12, vs.1.00 ± 0.37 t = 2.42, P < 0.05) and viral replication ([6.18 ± 0.95] × 10(−4)vs. 1.00 ± 0.43, t = 3.98, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our pangolin coronavirus GX_P2V is a workable model for 2019-nCoV research. CEP, selamectin, and mefloquine hydrochloride are potential drugs for treating 2019-nCoV infection. Our results strongly suggest that CEP is a wide-spectrum inhibitor of pan-betacoronavirus, and further study of CEP for treatment of 2019-nCoV infection is warranted.

negative: Medical treatment of viral pneumonia including SARS in immunocompetent adult Abstract Since no randomized controlled trials have been conducted on the treatment of viral pneumonia by antivirals or immunomodulators in immunocompetent adults, a review of such anecdotal experience are needed for the more rational use of such agents. Case reports (single or case series) with details on their treatment and outcome in the English literature can be reviewed for pneumonia caused by human or avian influenza A virus (50 patients), varicella zoster virus (120), adenovirus (29), hantavirus (100) and SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV) (841). Even with steroid therapy alone, the mortality rate appeared to be lower when compared with conservative treatment for pneumonia caused by human influenza virus (12.5% vs. 42.1%) and hantavirus (13.3% vs. 63.4%). Combination of an effective antiviral, acyclovir, with steroid in the treatment of varicella zoster virus may be associated with a lower mortality than acyclovir alone (0% vs. 10.3%). Combination of interferon alfacon-1 plus steroid, or lopinavir/ritonavir, ribavirin plus steroid were associated with a better outcome than ribavirin plus steroid (0% vs. 2.3% vs. 7.7%, respectively). Combination of lopinavir/ritonavir plus ribavirin significantly reduced the virus load of SARS-CoV in nasopharyngeal, serum, stool and urine specimens taken between day 10 and 15 after symptom onset when compared with the historical control group treated with ribavirin. It appears that the combination of an effective antiviral and steroid was associated with a better outcome. Randomized therapeutic trial should be conducted to ascertain the relative usefulness of antiviral alone or in combination with steroid.

negative: Rapid development of vaccines against emerging pathogens: The replication-deficient simian adenovirus platform technology Despite the fact that there had been multiple small outbreaks of Ebola Virus Disease, when a large outbreak occurred in 2014 there were no vaccines or drugs available for use. Clinical development of multiple candidate vaccines was then initiated in parallel with attempts to contain the outbreak but only one vaccine was eventually tested in a phase III trial. In order to be better prepared for future outbreaks of known human pathogens, platform technologies to accelerate vaccine development should be employed, allowing vaccine developers to take advantage of detailed knowledge of the vaccine platform and facilitating rapid progress to clinical trials and eventually to vaccine stockpiles. This review gives an example of one such vaccine platform, replication-deficient simian adenoviruses, and describes progress in human and livestock vaccine development for three outbreak pathogens, Ebola virus, Rift Valley Fever Virus and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus.

negative: COVID-19, SARS and MERS: are they closely related? Abstract Background The 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is a new human coronavirus which is spreading with epidemic features in China and other Asian countries; cases have also been reported worldwide. This novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is associated with a respiratory illness that may lead to severe pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Although related to the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), COVID-19 shows some peculiar pathogenetic, epidemiological and clinical features which to date are not completely understood. Aims To provide a review of the differences in pathogenesis, epidemiology and clinical features of COVID-19, SARS and MERS. Sources The most recent literature in the English language regarding COVID-19 has been reviewed, and extracted data have been compared with the current scientific evidence about SARS and MERS epidemics. Content COVID-19 seems not to be very different from SARS regarding its clinical features. However, it has a fatality rate of 2.3%, lower than that of SARS (9.5%) and much lower than that of MERS (34.4%). The possibility cannot be excluded that because of the less severe clinical picture of COVID-19 it can spread in the community more easily than MERS and SARS. The actual basic reproductive number (R0) of COVID-19 (2.0–2.5) is still controversial. It is probably slightly higher than the R0 of SARS (1.7–1.9) and higher than that of MERS (<1). A gastrointestinal route of transmission for SARS-CoV-2, which has been assumed for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, cannot be ruled out and needs further investigation. Implications There is still much more to know about COVID-19, especially as concerns mortality and its capacity to spread on a pandemic level. Nonetheless, all of the lessons we learned in the past from the SARS and MERS epidemics are the best cultural weapons with which to face this new global threat.

negative: A double-blind block randomized clinical trial on the effect of zinc as a treatment for diarrhea in neonatal Holstein calves under natural challenge conditions Abstract Diarrhea is the leading cause of death in neonatal calves and contributes to major economic losses. The objective of this double-blind randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the effect of oral inorganic or organic zinc supplementation as a treatment for neonatal diarrhea in calves. Seventy nine 1 to 8 day old male Holstein calves on a California calf ranch were block randomized to one of 3 treatments within 24h from their first onset of diarrhea. Calves received a daily dose of either a placebo composed of 80mg of zinc-free powder, 381.54mg of zinc methionine (Met) (equivalent to 80mg of zinc), or 99.69mg of zinc oxide (ZO) (equivalent to 80mg of zinc) in 2L of a zinc-free oral rehydration solution (ORS). Calves were treated once daily until normal fecal consistency or for a maximum of 14 days. Upon enrollment and exit, calves were weighed, and blood, feces, and liver biopsies were collected for trace mineral analysis. Fecal samples at enrollment and exit were tested for E. coli K99, Cryptosporidium spp., rotavirus and coronavirus. Pre-treatment liver zinc concentrations for the 71 calves in the placebo, zinc Met, and ZO treatment groups were 710.6 (SEM=147.7), 852.3 (SEM=129.6), and 750.7 (SEM=202.9)mg/kg dry weight (DW), respectively. Exit liver zinc concentrations for the calves in the placebo, zinc Met, and ZO treatment groups were 728.9 (SEM=182.9), 1141.0 (SEM=423.8), and 636.8 (SEM=81.5)mg/kg dry weight, respectively. Although statistically non-significant, there were clinically important findings identified for each of zinc Met and ZO treatments. Calves treated with zinc Met gained on average 40g/day during a diarrhea episode compared to a weight loss of 67g/day on average in the placebo-treated calves (Power 19.9%). Calves treated with ZO had 1.4 times higher hazard of clinical cure compared to calves in the placebo group (Power 5.3%). Calves that were fecal positive to cryptosporidium spp. at enrollment and treated with zinc Met had higher odds of testing negative at exit compared to placebo calves (Odds Ratio (OR)=16.0). In contrast, calves treated with ZO tended to recover (fecal score=1) one day earlier compared to calves treated with a placebo (8.5 d vs. 9.7 d). The current trial identified clinically important findings that warrant further research to investigate zinc's therapeutic effect for calf diarrhea.

negative: 39th ESCP European symposium on clinical pharmacy & 13th SFPC congress: clinical pharmacy at the front line of innovations. 21–23 October 2010, Lyon, France

negative: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and pregnancy: what obstetricians need to know Coronavirus disease 2019 is an emerging disease with a rapid increase in cases and deaths since its first identification in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. Limited data are available about coronavirus disease 2019 during pregnancy; however, information on illnesses associated with other highly pathogenic coronaviruses (ie, severe acute respiratory syndrome and the Middle East respiratory syndrome) might provide insights into coronavirus disease 2019’s effects during pregnancy. Coronaviruses cause illness ranging in severity from the common cold to severe respiratory illness and death. Currently the primary epidemiologic risk factors for coronavirus disease 2019 include travel from mainland China (especially Hubei Province) or close contact with infected individuals within 14 days of symptom onset. Data suggest an incubation period of ∼5 days (range, 2–14 days). Average age of hospitalized patients has been 49–56 years, with a third to half with an underlying illness. Children have been rarely reported. Men were more frequent among hospitalized cases (54–73%). Frequent manifestations include fever, cough, myalgia, headache, and diarrhea. Abnormal testing includes abnormalities on chest radiographic imaging, lymphopenia, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia. Initial reports suggest that acute respiratory distress syndrome develops in 17–29% of hospitalized patients. Overall case fatality rate appears to be ∼1%; however, early data may overestimate this rate. In 2 reports describing 18 pregnancies with coronavirus disease 2019, all were infected in the third trimester, and clinical findings were similar to those in nonpregnant adults. Fetal distress and preterm delivery were seen in some cases. All but 2 pregnancies were cesarean deliveries and no evidence of in utero transmission was seen. Data on severe acute respiratory syndrome and Middle East respiratory syndrome in pregnancy are sparse. For severe acute respiratory syndrome, the largest series of 12 pregnancies had a case-fatality rate of 25%. Complications included acute respiratory distress syndrome in 4, disseminated intravascular coagulopathy in 3, renal failure in 3, secondary bacterial pneumonia in 2, and sepsis in 2 patients. Mechanical ventilation was 3 times more likely among pregnant compared with nonpregnant women. Among 7 first-trimester infections, 4 ended in spontaneous abortion. Four of 5 women with severe acute respiratory syndrome after 24 weeks’ gestation delivered preterm. For Middle East respiratory syndrome, there were 13 case reports in pregnant women, of which 2 were asymptomatic, identified as part of a contact investigation; 3 patients (23%) died. Two pregnancies ended in fetal demise and 2 were born preterm. No evidence of in utero transmission was seen in severe acute respiratory syndrome or Middle East respiratory syndrome. Currently no coronavirus-specific treatments have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. Because coronavirus disease 2019 might increase the risk for pregnancy complications, management should optimally be in a health care facility with close maternal and fetal monitoring. Principles of management of coronavirus disease 2019 in pregnancy include early isolation, aggressive infection control procedures, oxygen therapy, avoidance of fluid overload, consideration of empiric antibiotics (secondary to bacterial infection risk), laboratory testing for the virus and coinfection, fetal and uterine contraction monitoring, early mechanical ventilation for progressive respiratory failure, individualized delivery planning, and a team-based approach with multispecialty consultations. Information on coronavirus disease 2019 is increasing rapidly. Clinicians should continue to follow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website to stay up to date with the latest information (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nCoV/hcp/index.html).

negative: Animal models and antibody assays for evaluating candidate SARS vaccines: Summary of a technical meeting 25–26 August 2005, London, UK Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) emerged in the Guangdong province of China in late 2002 and spread to 29 countries. By the end of the outbreak in July 2003, the CDC and WHO reported 8437 cases with a 9.6% case fatality rate. The disease was caused by a previously unrecognized coronavirus, SARS-CoV. Drawing on experience with animal coronavirus vaccines, several vaccine candidates have been developed and evaluated in pre-clinical trials. Available data suggest that vaccines should be based on the the 180 kDa viral spike protein, S, the only significant neutralization antigen capable of inducing protective immune responses in animals. In the absence of clinical cases of SARS, candidate vaccines should be evaluated for efficacy in animal models, and although it is uncertain whether the United States Food and Drug Administration's “animal rule” would apply to licensure of a SARS vaccine, it is important to develop standardized animal models and immunological assays in preparation for this eventuality. This report summarizes the recommendations from a WHO Technical Meeting on Animal Models and Antibody Assays for Evaluating Candidate SARS Vaccines held on 25–26 August 2005 in South Mimms, UK, provides guidance on the use of animal models, and outlines the steps to develop standard reagents and assays for immunological evaluation of candidate SARS vaccines.

negative: Photoantimicrobials—are we afraid of the light? Although conventional antimicrobial drugs have been viewed as miraculous cure-alls for the past 80 years, increasing antimicrobial drug resistance requires a major and rapid intervention. However, the development of novel but still conventional systemic antimicrobial agents, having only a single mode or site of action, will not alleviate the situation because it is probably only a matter of time until any such agents will also become ineffective. To continue to produce new agents based on this notion is unacceptable, and there is an increasing need for alternative approaches to the problem. By contrast, light-activated molecules called photoantimicrobials act locally via the in-situ production of highly reactive oxygen species, which simultaneously attack various biomolecular sites in the pathogenic target and therefore offer both multiple and variable sites of action. This non-specificity at the target circumvents conventional mechanisms of resistance and inhibits the development of resistance to the agents themselves. Photoantimicrobial therapy is safe and easy to implement and, unlike conventional agents, the activity spectrum of photoantimicrobials covers bacteria, fungi, viruses, and protozoa. However, clinical trials of these new, truly broad-spectrum, and minimally toxic agents have been few, and the funding for research and development is almost non-existent. Photoantimicrobials constitute one of the few ways forward through the morass of drug-resistant infectious disease and should be fully explored. In this Personal View, we raise awareness of the novel photoantimicrobial technologies that offer a viable alternative to conventional drugs in many relevant application fields, and could thus slow the pace of resistance development.

negative: Radionuclide treatment of painful bone metastases in patients with breast cancer: a systematic review. Bone-seeking radionuclides, such as Sr-89, Sm-153, and Re-186, have been shown to have an effect on pain from bone metastasis in prostate cancer. The effect on bone pain in other cancer types, including breast cancer, remains unclear. The purpose of the study was to perform a systematic review of the use of radioisotopes for pain relief in metastatic breast cancer. A literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science (1970 to September 2009) for clinical studies with a primary outcome of pain, performance status, or quality of life. Eligibility criteria were the following: (1) the trial must include at least 10 breast cancer patients with painful bone metastasis, (2) the radionuclide has been approved by regulatory authorities in Europe or the United States and is commercially available (Sr-89, Sm-153, and Re-186), (3) the dose of radionuclides must be clinically effective, (4) the primary endpoint must be pain, performance status or quality of life, and (5) separate reporting of efficacy should be available for breast cancer patients provided the trial included patients with various types of cancer. The literature search identified 189 individual studies of which 19 trials fulfilled the eligibility criteria. There were three randomized controlled trials of which two trials compared two different radionuclides, and one trial compared two doses of Sm-153. In addition, there were 16 uncontrolled trials. Reporting of trial research methodology in the randomized as well as the uncontrolled trials was low (median Jadad score of 1, range 1-2). Key trial details, such as patient recruitment, description of prior palliative therapies, baseline characteristics, follow up, and reporting of outcome was insufficient in a large proportion of the trials. According to Center of Evidence-based Medicine criteria, there is level 4 documentation for the effect of radionuclides in painful bone metastasis in breast cancer. It has been concluded that there is limited clinical evidence supporting the clinical effect of radionuclides in relieving pain from bone metastasis in breast cancer. Large, randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the utility of bone-seeking radionuclides in the palliative care of breast cancer patients.

negative: Assessing Ebola-related web search behaviour: insights and implications from an analytical study of Google Trends-based query volumes BACKGROUND: The 2014 Ebola epidemic in West Africa has attracted public interest worldwide, leading to millions of Ebola-related Internet searches being performed during the period of the epidemic. This study aimed to evaluate and interpret Google search queries for terms related to the Ebola outbreak both at the global level and in all countries where primary cases of Ebola occurred. The study also endeavoured to look at the correlation between the number of overall and weekly web searches and the number of overall and weekly new cases of Ebola. METHODS: Google Trends (GT) was used to explore Internet activity related to Ebola. The study period was from 29 December 2013 to 14 June 2015. Pearson’s correlation was performed to correlate Ebola-related relative search volumes (RSVs) with the number of weekly and overall Ebola cases. Multivariate regression was performed using Ebola-related RSV as a dependent variable, and the overall number of Ebola cases and the Human Development Index were used as predictor variables. RESULTS: The greatest RSV was registered in the three West African countries mainly affected by the Ebola epidemic. The queries varied in the different countries. Both quantitative and qualitative differences between the affected African countries and other Western countries with primary cases were noted, in relation to the different flux volumes and different time courses. In the affected African countries, web query search volumes were mostly concentrated in the capital areas. However, in Western countries, web queries were uniformly distributed over the national territory. In terms of the three countries mainly affected by the Ebola epidemic, the correlation between the number of new weekly cases of Ebola and the weekly GT index varied from weak to moderate. The correlation between the number of Ebola cases registered in all countries during the study period and the GT index was very high. CONCLUSION: Google Trends showed a coarse-grained nature, strongly correlating with global epidemiological data, but was weaker at country level, as it was prone to distortions induced by unbalanced media coverage and the digital divide. Global and local health agencies could usefully exploit GT data to identify disease-related information needs and plan proper communication strategies, particularly in the case of health-threatening events. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40249-015-0090-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

negative: Acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a clinical review Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a chronic and progressive fibrotic disease limited to the lung, with high variability in the course of disease from one patient to another. Patients with IPF may experience acute respiratory deteriorations; many of these acute declines are idiopathic and are termed acute exacerbations (AE) of IPF. In these cases, the exclusion of alternative causes of rapid deterioration, including heart failure, bilateral pneumonia or pulmonary embolism, is a challenging goal. AE may occur at any time during the course of IPF, although they are more common in patients with more progressive disease and gastroesophageal reflux. Surgical lung biopsy or even surgical procedures in organs other than the lungs may also trigger AE, mainly in rapidly progressive or advanced IPF. Current diagnostic criteria include the presence of new-onset ground glass opacities or airspace consolidation superimposed on an underlying usual interstitial pneumonia pattern seen on high-resolution computed tomography. The outcome is poor with a short-term mortality in excess of 50 % despite therapy. Currently, there is no treatment with demonstrated efficacy for AE-IPF: empirical high-dose corticosteroid therapy is generally used, with or without immunosuppressive agents, with limited evidence. On the other hand, there is hope that new treatments to slow down progression of IPF will translate into a reduction of AE-IPF’s occurrence. In conclusion, although significant progress in assessing disease severity in IPF has been made, AEs remain unpredictable and are associated with a high risk of death. Improvements in our understanding of the etiology, risk factors, clinical predictors and epidemiology are needed. It is the goal of clinical researchers in the field to provide respiratory physicians with evidence-based guidance to identify patients who may benefit from therapy for preventing or treating AE-IPF.

negative: Screening of faecal microbiota transplant donors during the COVID-19 outbreak: suggestions for urgent updates from an international expert panel