Search

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) are well-established medications used in treating systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis, as well as skin conditions such as cutaneous lupus erythematosus. In rare cases, arrhythmias and conduction system abnormalities, as well as cardiomyopathy, have been reported in association with HCQ/CQ use. Recently, however, the corrected QT interval (QTc)-prolonging potential of these medications, and risk of torsade de pointes (TdP) in particular, have been highlighted in the setting of their experimental use for COVID-19 infection. This report was undertaken to summarize the current understanding of HCQ/CQ cardiac toxicity, describe QTc prolongation and TdP risks, and discuss areas of priority for future research. A working group of experts across rheumatology, cardiology, and dermatology performed a nonsystematic literature review and offered a consensus-based expert opinion. Current data clearly indicate that HCQ and CQ are invaluable medications in the management of rheumatic and dermatologic diseases, but they are associated with QTc prolongation by directly affecting cardiac repolarization. Prescribing clinicians should be cognizant of this small effect, especially in patients taking additional medications that prolong the QTc interval. Long-term use of HCQ/CQ may lead to a cardiomyopathy associated with arrhythmias and heart failure. Risk and benefit assessment should be considered prior to initiation of any medication, and both initial and ongoing risk-benefit assessments are important with regard to prescription of HCQ/CQ. While cardiac toxicity related to HCQ/CQ treatment of rheumatic diseases is rarely reported, it can be fatal. Awareness of the potential adverse cardiac effects of HCQ and CQ can increase the safe use of these medications. There is a clear need for additional research to allow better understanding of the cardiovascular risk and safety profile of these therapies used in the management of rheumatic and cutaneous diseases., (© 2021, American College of Rheumatology.)

Adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATLL) originates from human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 (HTLV-1) infection due to the activation of the nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) signaling pathway to maintain proliferation and survival. An important mechanism of the activated NF-κB signaling pathway in ATLL is the activation of the macroautophagy (herafter referred to as autophagy in the remainder of this manuscript)-lysosomal degradation of p47 (NSFL1C), a negative regulator of the NF-κB pathway. Therefore, we considered the use of chloroquine (CQ) or hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) (CQ/HCQ) as an autophagy inhibitor to treat ATLL; these drugs were originally approved by the FDA as antimalarial drugs and have recently been used to treat autoimmune diseases, such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). In this paper, we determined the therapeutic efficacy of CQ/HCQ, as NF-κB inhibitors, in ATLL mediated by blockade of p47 degradation. Administration of CQ/HCQ to ATLL cell lines and primary ATLL cells induced cell growth inhibition in a dose-dependent manner, and the majority of cells underwent apoptosis after CQ administration. As to the molecular mechanism, autophagy was inhibited in CQ-treated ATLL cells, and activation of the NF-κB pathway was suppressed with the restoration of the p47 level. When the antitumor effect of CQ/HCQ was examined using immunodeficient mice transplanted with ATLL cell lines, CQ/HCQ significantly suppressed tumor growth and improved the survival rate in the ATLL xenograft mouse model. Importantly, HCQ selectively induced ATLL cell death in the ATLL xenograft mouse model at the dose used to treat SLE. Taken together, our results suggest that the inhibition of autophagy by CQ/HCQ may become a novel and effective strategy for the treatment of ATLL., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Aim of this paper is to remind the risk of ototoxicity when using chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, in particular as prophylactic agents against SARS-CoV-2, during the pandemic. Healthy subjects taking chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine as prophylactic agents against SARS-CoV-2, during the pandemic, should be screened periodically, at least by Otoacoustic Emissions (OAEs) in order to detect early manifestations of possible cochlear ototoxic damages., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The rapid spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has created a severe global health crisis. In this paper, we used docking and simulation methods to identify potential targets and the mechanism of action of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) against SARS-CoV-2. Our results showed that both CQ and HCQ influenced the functionality of the envelope (E) protein, necessary in the maturation processes of the virus, due to interactions that modify the flexibility of the protein structure. Furthermore, CQ and HCQ also influenced the proofreading and capping of viral RNA in SARS-CoV-2, performed by nsp10/nsp14 and nsp10/nsp16. In particular, HCQ demonstrated a better energy binding with the examined targets compared to CQ, probably due to the hydrogen bonding of the hydroxyl group of HCQ with polar amino acid residues.

Background and Objectives: Chloroquine and its analog hydroxychloroquine are derivatives of 4-aminoquinoline and are regularly used in the treatment of malaria and autoimmune diseases. Among the side effects of these drugs, alterations associated with the auditory system are frequently mentioned. Thus, the aim of this systematic review is to systematically review publications on hearing disorders and chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine use. Materials and Methods: Inclusion criteria were observational or interventional studies on audiological assessment in participants who were using chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine. The methodological quality was independently assessed by two reviewers using the Meta-Analysis of Statistics: assessment and review Instrument. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE tool. Results: A total of 1,372 non-duplicate papers were screened, out of which 17 were included in the final qualitative synthesis, and 5 studies in the meta-analysis. The odds ratio for the two subgroups evaluated did not show significance with no heterogeneity between the effects observed between the different diseases (I²=0%) and obtaining the global estimate of 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI]=0.41-1.39; p>0.05). Despite the inclusion of papers with different disease samples, the heterogeneity observed in the analysis was low (I²= 0%) and prediction interval (95% PI=0.32-1.80; p>0.05) remained close to that estimated by the CI (95% CI=0.41-1.39; p>0.05). The certainty of the evidence assessed by the GRADE tool was considered very low due to the risk of bias, indirect evidence, and imprecision. Conclusions: The findings of this study suggest that the use of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine is not associated with hearing disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We explored the degree to which political bias in medicine and study authors could explain the stark variation in Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)/Chloroquine (CQ) study favorability in the US compared to the rest of the world. COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 preprint and published papers between January 1, 2020-July 26, 2020 with Hydroxychloroquine and/or Chloroquine; 267 met study criteria, 68 from the US. A control subset was selected. HCQ/CQ study result favorability (favorable, unfavorable, or neutral) was noted. First and last main authors of each US study were entered into FollowTheMoney.org Website, extracting any history of political party donation. Of all US studies (68 total), 39/68 (57.4%) were unfavorable, with only 7/68 (10.3%) of US studies yielding favorable results-compared to 199 non-US studies, 66/199 (33.2%) unfavorable, 69/199 (34.7%) favorable, and 64/199 (32.2%) neutral. Studies with at least one US main author were 20.4% (SE 0.053, P < 0.05) more likely to report unfavorable results than non-US studies. US Studies with at least one main author donating to any political party were 25.6% (SE 0.085, P < 0.01) more likely to have unfavorable results. US studies with at least one author donating to the Democratic party were 20.4% (SE 0.045, P < 0.05) more likely to have unfavorable results. US authors were more likely to publish studies with medically harmful conclusions than non-US authors. Cardiology-specific HCQ/CQ studies were 44.2% more likely to yield harmful conclusions (P < 0.01). Inaccurate propagation of HCQ/CQ cardiac adverse effects with individual scientific author political bias has contributed to unfavorable US HCQ/CQ publication patterns and political polarization of the medications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Alceu: Revista de Comunicação, Cultura e Política is the property of Faculdades Catolicas, Associacao sem fins lucrativos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Autophagy has been of novel interest since it was first demonstrated to have effect in Burkitt's lymphoma. Since that time, the autophagy agents chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have become the only FDA (Food and Drug Administration)-approved autophagy inhibitors. While not approved for cancer therapy, there are ongoing clinical trials to evaluate their safety and efficacy. Pevonedistat has emerged as a novel inhibitor through the neddylation pathway and is an autophagy activator. This paper summarizes and presents current clinical trials for hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), chloroquine (CQ), and Pevonedistat for the clinician. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the world extraordinarily. This disease has a potential to cause a significantly severe course of disease leading to respiratory complications, multiple organ failure and possibly death. In the fight against this pandemic-causing disease, medical professionals around the world are searching for pharmacological agents that could treat and prevent disease progression and mortality. To speed the search of promising treatment options, already existing pharmacological agents are repurposed for the potential treatment of COVID-19 and tested in clinical trials. The aim of this literature review is to investigate the efficacy and safety of repurposed pharmacological agents for the treatment of COVID-19 at different pathophysiologic stages of the disease. For this literature review, online-databases PubMed and Google Scholar were utilised. Keywords "COVID-19", "SARS-CoV-2", "pathogenesis", "drug targets", "pharmacological treatment", "cytokine storm", "coagulopathy" and individual drug names were used. Scientific articles, including reviews, clinical trials, and observational cohorts, were collected and analysed. Furthermore, these articles were examined for references to find more clinical trials testing for the potential treatment of COVID-19. In total, 97 references were used to conduct this research paper.Results: The most beneficial pharmacological agent for the treatment of COVID-19 are corticosteroids, especially dexamethasone, for the treatment of mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients. Other promising agents are remdesivir for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring minimal supplemental oxygen therapy, and IL-6 receptor antagonist monoclonal antibodies in severe COVID-19. Lopinavir/ritonavir, as well as chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin demonstrate the least efficacy in the treatment of COVID-19. The clinical benefits of the treatment of a COVID-19-specific coagulopathy with increased dosing of anticoagulation need further research and confirmation of randomised controlled trials.Conclusion: The search for pharmacological treatment of COVID-19 has elicited great controversy. Whereas drugs like chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and lopinavir/ritonavir have not shown proven benefit, the agents remdesivir and dexamethasone are recommended for clinical use for the treatment of COVID-19. Further randomised trials for other pharmacological treatment strategies are awaited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multiple methodologies have been developed to identify and predict adverse events (AEs); however, many of these methods do not consider how patient population characteristics, such as diseases, age, and gender, affect AEs seen. In this study, we evaluated the utility of collecting and analyzing AE data related to hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) from US Prescribing Information (USPIs, also called drug product labels or package inserts), the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), and peer-reviewed literature from PubMed/EMBASE, followed by AE classification and modeling using the Ontology of Adverse Events (OAE). Our USPI analysis showed that CQ and HCQ AE profiles were similar, although HCQ was reported to be associated with fewer types of cardiovascular, nervous system, and musculoskeletal AEs. According to EMBASE literature mining, CQ and HCQ were associated with QT prolongation (primarily when treating COVID-19), heart arrhythmias, development of Torsade des Pointes, and retinopathy (primarily when treating lupus). The FAERS data was analyzed by proportional ratio reporting, Chi-square test, and minimal case number filtering, followed by OAE classification. HCQ was associated with 63 significant AEs (including 21 cardiovascular AEs) for COVID-19 patients and 120 significant AEs (including 12 cardiovascular AEs) for lupus patients, supporting the hypothesis that the disease being treated affects the type and number of certain CQ/HCQ AEs that are manifested. Using an HCQ AE patient example reported in the literature, we also ontologically modeled how an AE occurs and what factors (e.g., age, biological sex, and medical history) are involved in the AE formation. The methodology developed in this study can be used for other drugs and indications to better identify patient populations that are particularly vulnerable to AEs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research describes the modification of a glassy carbon electrode with spent coffee grounds hydrochar (HDC) and copper nanoparticles (CuNPs) for the simultaneous determination of hydroxychloroquine sulfate (HCS) and bisphenol A (BPA). Scanning electron microscopy, EDS and cyclic voltammetry were used to characterize the nanocomposite. The analytical parameters were optimized and the sensing platform was applied for the determination of HCS and BPA using square-wave voltammetry (SWV). For HCS, the linear range was from 1.0 μmol L−1 to 50 μmol L−1, with an LOD and LOQ of 0.46 and 1.53 μmol L−1, respectively. For BPA, the linear range was from 0.5 μmol L−1 to 10 μmol L−1, with an LOD and LOQ of 0.31 μmol L−1 and 1.06 μmol L−1, respectively. Finally, the developed electrochemical sensor was applied for the quantification of the emerging contaminants in natural water, with recoveries between 94.8% and 106.8% for HCS and 99.6% and 105.2% for BPA. Therefore, HDC-CuNPs demonstrated themselves to be a good alternative as a sustainable and cheaper material for application in electroanalyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista FAMECOS - Mídia, Cultura e Tecnologia is the property of EDIPUCRS - Editora Universitaria da PUCRS and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The COVID-19 pandemic has required clinicians to urgently identify new treatment options or the re-purposing of existing drugs. Of particular interest are chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). The aims of this systematic review are to systematically identify and collate 24 studies describing the use of CQ and HCQ in human clinical trials and to provide a detailed synthesis of evidence of its efficacy and safety. Of clinical trials, 100% showed no significant difference in the probability of viral transmission or clearance in prophylaxis or therapy, respectively, compared to the control group. Among observational studies employing an endpoint specific to efficacy, 58% concurred with the finding of no significant difference in the attainment of outcomes. Three-fifths of clinical trials and half 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. Of the total papers focusing on cardiac side-effects, 44% found a greater incidence of QTc prolongation and/or arrhythmias, 44% found no evidence of a significant difference, and 11% mixed results. The strongest available evidence points towards the inefficacy of CQ and HCQ in prophylaxis or in the treatment of hospitalised COVID-19 patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To report an unusual fundus autofluorescence aspect in a patient with suspected hydroxychloroquine retinal toxicity. Method: Case report of an unusual presentation of a patient treated for 9 consecutive years with a therapeutically recommended dose of hydroxychloroquine. Result: We report the case of a 53-year-old Caucasian female treated with 400 mg hydroxychloroquine for rheumatoid arthritis over 9 years, currently on methotrexate and folinic acid, who stopped treatment 3 years ago. The cumulative dose is estimated at 1.314 kg. She recently noticed a reduction of vision in both eyes to 0.34 logMAR, with colour vision problems and major distortion in central vision. Fundus autofluorescence revealed minimal foveal pigmentary changes and more pronounced changes in the retina elsewhere. Foveal changes were confirmed by optical coherence tomography in both eyes. The patient did not report any colour perception difficulties or night vision problems and has no family history of any eye condition. Her visual field tested by an optician was full, with some central changes. Conclusion: Retinal toxicity from hydroxychloroquine can present in a different aspect than the commonly known retinal toxicity, and it happens even after years of cessation of the drug. The role of cumulative dose in toxicity is supported in this paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Organic anion transporter 3 (OAT3), at the basolateral membrane of kidney proximal tubule cells, facilitates the elimination of numerous widely used drugs. Earlier investigation from our laboratory revealed that ubiquitin conjugation to OAT3 leads to OAT3 internalization from the cell surface, followed by degradation in the proteasome. In the current study, we examined the roles of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), two well-known anti-malarial drugs, in their action as proteasome inhibitors and their effects on OAT3 ubiquitination, expression, and function. We showed that in cells treated with CQ and HCQ, the ubiquitinated OAT3 was considerably enhanced, which correlated well with a decrease in 20S proteasome activity. Furthermore, in CQ- and HCQ-treated cells, OAT3 expression and OAT3-mediated transport of estrone sulfate, a prototypical substrate, were significantly increased. Such increases in OAT3 expression and transport activity were accompanied by an increase in the maximum transport velocity and a decrease in the degradation rate of the transporter. In conclusion, this study unveiled a novel role of CQ and HCQ in enhancing OAT3 expression and transport activity by preventing the degradation of ubiquitinated OAT3 in proteasomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Antimalarial drugs (AD) are a group of widespread therapeutic agents in multiple rheumatic indications. Although the effect of AD is mild and extended in time, low toxicity is their appreciated value. This paper describes the current state of knowledge on the mechanism of action, use, toxicity and pleiotropic effects of AD in the pharmacotherapy of autoimmune diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To describe the pattern and risk factors for antimalarial (AM)‐induced retinopathy in patients with rheumatic diseases. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted at an urban Canadian center for patients with AM use of more than 3 months and documented retinopathy screening. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to determine risk factors for retinopathy. Sensitivity analyses included stratification of analysis by method of screening and by hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) versus chloroquine (CQ). Results: A total of 613 patients were included in the final analysis, with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (n = 259) as the most common diagnosis. Definite AM‐induced retinal toxicity was observed in 12 patients, 11 of whom had SLE. The earliest diagnosis of toxicity occurred after 5.4 years of AM therapy, and the prevalence beyond 5 years was 3.1%. In univariate analysis, a diagnosis of SLE (P = 0.009; odds ratio [OR]: 15.66; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.01‐122.05), the daily weight‐based dose of HCQ (P = 0.044; OR: 1.49; 95% CI: 1.01‐2.20), cumulative CQ dose (P = 0.014; OR: 4.80; CI: 1.37‐16.84), and daily CQ weight‐based dose (P = 0.0001; OR: 5.70; 95% CI: 2.41‐13.49) were significantly associated with toxicity. In multivariate analysis, diagnosis of SLE (P = 0.022; OR: 12.14; 95% CI: 1.44‐102.44) and daily CQ weight‐based dose (P = 0.005; OR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.83‐26.75) were significant after adjusting for standard covariates. Conclusion: The risk of AM‐induced retinopathy increases after 5 years of therapy. There may be higher rates of toxicity in patients with SLE because of longer duration of treatment, higher weight‐based dosages, and more CQ use in this population, and SLE may be an independent risk factor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mitochondria is an important drug target for ailments ranging from neoplastic to neurodegenerative diseases and metabolic diseases. Here, we describe the synthesis of chloroquine analogs and show the results of mitochondrial ATP inhibition testing. The 2,4-dinitrobenzene-based analogs showed concentration-dependent mitochondrial (mito.) ATP inhibition. The most potent mito. ATP inhibitor was found to be N-(4-((2,4-Dinitrophenyl)amino)pentyl)-N-ethylacetamide (17). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ongoing chronic use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine (HCQ/CQ) in rheumatic patients might impact their outcomes after a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Therefore, we sought to assess the mortality in rheumatic patients with chronic HCQ/CQ use who developed a COVID-19 infection through a comparison between individuals chronically using HCQ/CQ with those not taking these drugs. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central. We included full-length reports, prospective observational cohorts, and clinical trials of adult patients (aged ≥ 18 years) who were diagnosed with a COVID-19 infection. Case studies, case series, letters, comments, and editorials were excluded. The main outcome was all-cause mortality. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022341678). We identified 541 studies, of which 20 studies were included, comprising 236,997 patients. All-cause mortality was significantly lower in patients with prior chronic use of HCQ/CQ compared to those with no previous usage (OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.62–0.94; p = 0.01). There was a considerably lower incidence of hospitalization among patients with chronic HCQ/CQ use compared to their counterparts without HCQ/CQ usage (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.65–0.99; p = 0.04). All-cause mortality and hospitalization were significantly lower in rheumatic patients with chronic HCQ/CQ use who developed a COVID-19 infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Autophagy has been of novel interest since it was first demonstrated to have effect in Burkitt’s lymphoma. Since that time, the autophagy agents chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have become the only FDA (Food and Drug Administration)-approved autophagy inhibitors. While not approved for cancer therapy, there are ongoing clinical trials to evaluate their safety and efficacy. Pevonedistat has emerged as a novel inhibitor through the neddylation pathway and is an autophagy activator. This paper summarizes and presents current clinical trials for hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), chloroquine (CQ), and Pevonedistat for the clinician.

Background: Many of the known coronaviruses cause a wide range of respiratory infections in humans, and the novel coronavirus is no exception to this rule. Although no drug has yet been discovered to prevent or treat this disease, chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)have been widely used in studies showing different results. Methods: The present study is an umbrella study. The search was conducted for the articles published from January 2020 to November 2020 using the keywords ("COVID-19" OR "SARSCoV-2" AND "Hydroxychloroquine" OR "Chloroquine" AND "Systematic Review" OR"Metanalysis"). This study was limited to human samples and systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis. The quality of the articles was also evaluated independently by two researchers. Results: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of HCQ and CQ, a total of 176 papers and 643569 cases ranging from patients with mild pneumonia to intubated critically ill patients were evaluated. Finally, 8 studies were included. Conclusion: There are conflicting results regarding HCQ or CQ efficacy and safety in the systematic reviews. More evidence is needed to confirm whether these drugs are useful in COVID-19 infection, and their usage as the standard care cannot be recommended based on the majority of the studies included in this umbrella review.

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the world extraordinarily. This disease has a potential to cause a significantly severe course of disease leading to respiratory complications, multiple organ failure and possibly death. In the fight against this pandemic-causing disease, medical professionals around the world are searching for pharmacological agents that could treat and prevent disease progression and mortality. To speed the search of promising treatment options, already existing pharmacological agents are repurposed for the potential treatment of COVID-19 and tested in clinical trials. The aim of this literature review is to investigate the efficacy and safety of repurposed pharmacological agents for the treatment of COVID-19 at different pathophysiologic stages of the disease. For this literature review, online-databases PubMed and Google Scholar were utilised. Keywords “COVID-19”, “SARS-CoV-2”, “pathogenesis”, “drug targets”, “pharmacological treatment”, “cytokine storm”, “coagulopathy” and individual drug names were used. Scientific articles, including reviews, clinical trials, and observational cohorts, were collected and analysed. Furthermore, these articles were examined for references to find more clinical trials testing for the potential treatment of COVID-19. In total, 97 references were used to conduct this research paper. Results The most beneficial pharmacological agent for the treatment of COVID-19 are corticosteroids, especially dexamethasone, for the treatment of mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients. Other promising agents are remdesivir for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring minimal supplemental oxygen therapy, and IL-6 receptor antagonist monoclonal antibodies in severe COVID-19. Lopinavir/ritonavir, as well as chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin demonstrate the least efficacy in the treatment of COVID-19. The clinical benefits of the treatment of a COVID-19-specific coagulopathy with increased dosing of anticoagulation need further research and confirmation of randomised controlled trials. Conclusion The search for pharmacological treatment of COVID-19 has elicited great controversy. Whereas drugs like chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and lopinavir/ritonavir have not shown proven benefit, the agents remdesivir and dexamethasone are recommended for clinical use for the treatment of COVID-19. Further randomised trials for other pharmacological treatment strategies are awaited.

Copyright of Kemija u Industriji is the property of Croatian Society of Chemical Engineers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background and Purpose: Hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine and azithromycin are three drugs that were proposed to treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). While concern already existed around their proarrhythmic potential, there are little data regarding how altered physiological states encountered in patients such as febrile state, electrolyte imbalances or acidosis might change their risk profiles. Experimental Approach Potency of human ether‐à‐go‐go related gene (hERG) block was measured using high‐throughput electrophysiology in the presence of variable environmental factors. These potencies informed simulations to predict population risk profiles. Effects on cardiac repolarisation were verified in human induced pluripotent stem cell‐derived cardiomyocytes from multiple individuals. Key Results: Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine blocked hERG with IC50 of 1.47 ± 0.07 and 3.78 ± 0.17 μM, respectively, indicating proarrhythmic risk at concentrations effective against severe acute respiratory syndrome‐coronovirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) in vitro. Hypokalaemia and hypermagnesaemia increased potency of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, indicating increased proarrhythmic risk. Acidosis significantly reduced potency of all drugs, whereas increased temperature decreased potency of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine against hERG but increased potency for azithromycin. In silico simulations demonstrated that proarrhythmic risk was increased by female sex, hypokalaemia and heart failure and identified specific genetic backgrounds associated with emergence of arrhythmia. Conclusion and Implications: Our study demonstrates how proarrhythmic risk can be exacerbated by metabolic changes and pre‐existing disease. More broadly, the study acts as a blueprint for how high‐throughput in vitro screening, combined with in silico simulations, can help guide both preclinical screening and clinical management of patients in relation to drugs with potential to prolong repolarisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drug repositioning may be a promising way to find potential therapies against coronavirus disease 2019. Although chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine showed controversial results against the coronavirus disease 2019 disease, the potential common and diverging mechanisms of action are not reported and need to be dissected for better understanding them. An integrated strategy was proposed to systematically decipher the common and diverging aspects of mechanism of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine against coronavirus disease 2019-disease network based on network pharmacology and in silico molecular docking. Potential targets of the two drugs and coronavirus disease 2019 related genes were collected from online public databases. Target function enrichment analysis, tissue enrichment maps and molecular docking analysis were carried out to facilitate the systematic understanding of common and diverging mechanisms of the two drugs. Our results showed that 51 chloroquine targets and 47 hydroxychloroquine targets were associated with coronavirus disease 2019. The core targets include tumor necrosis factor, glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase, lymphocyte-specific protein-tyrosine kinase, beta-2 microglobulin, nuclear receptor coactivator 1, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma and glutathione disulfide reductase. Both chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine had good binding affinity towards tumor necrosis factor (affinity=-8.6 and -8.4 kcal/mol, respectively) and glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (-7.5 and -7.5 kcal/mol). Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine both had good affinity with angiotensin converting enzyme 2, 3-chymotrypsin-like protease and transmembrane serine protease 2. However, hydroxychloroquine manifested better binding affinity with the three proteins comparing with that of chloroquine. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine could have potential to inhibit over-activated immunity and inflammation. The potential tissue-specific regulation of the two drugs against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection may related with the lung, liver, brain, placenta, kidney, blood, eye, etc. In conclusion, our data systematically demonstrated chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine may have potential regulatory effects on coronavirus disease 2019 disease network, which may affect multiple organs, protein targets and pathways. Routine measurements of the chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine blood concentrations and tailored therapy regimen may be essential. But, further rigorous and high quality randomized controlled clinical trials are warranted to validate the antiviral effects of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Our proposed strategy could facilitate the drug repurposing efforts for coronavirus disease 2019 treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to discuss the therapeutic mechanism of action of antimalarials, in particular hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), in patients with lupus erythematosus. It examines the results of recent studies indicating the need to revise the indications, dosage and duration of safe therapy, thus limiting the possibility of adverse effects. Historically, HCQ was recommended for patients with arthritis as a predominant symptom, whereas today, it is recommended for all lupus patients, even those with lupus nephritis and pregnant women; it has a favourable therapeutic profile, particularly regarding its effect on the activity of the disease, and the possibility of prolonging survival time and preventing organ damage and dysfunction. Antimalarials are basic, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, which not only relieve the symptoms of inflammation, but also affect the underlying processes; therefore, they should be administered chronically, and the expected effects may sometimes take a long time to become apparent. In the past, the recommended dose was 6.5 mg/kg ideal body weight, whereas today it is up to 5.0 mg/kg real body weight. A very important aspect of long-term therapy is the strict adherence to the medical prescription; hence, the introduction of a new formulation containing 400 mg of hydroxychloroquine sulphate per tablet is an interesting proposal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We explored the degree to which political bias in medicine and study authors could explain the stark variation in Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)/Chloroquine (CQ) study favorability in the US compared to the rest of the world. COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 preprint and published papers between January 1, 2020-July 26, 2020 with Hydroxychloroquine and/or Chloroquine; 267 met study criteria, 68 from the US. A control subset was selected. HCQ/CQ study result favorability (favorable, unfavorable, or neutral) was noted. First and last main authors of each US study were entered into FollowTheMoney.org Website, extracting any history of political party donation. Of all US studies (68 total), 39/68 (57.4%) were unfavorable, with only 7/68 (10.3%) of US studies yielding favorable results-compared to 199 non-US studies, 66/199 (33.2%) unfavorable, 69/199 (34.7%) favorable, and 64/199 (32.2%) neutral. Studies with at least one US main author were 20.4% (SE 0.053, P < 0.05) more likely to report unfavorable results than non-US studies. US Studies with at least one main author donating to any political party were 25.6% (SE 0.085, P < 0.01) more likely to have unfavorable results. US studies with at least one author donating to the Democratic party were 20.4% (SE 0.045, P < 0.05) more likely to have unfavorable results. US authors were more likely to publish studies with medically harmful conclusions than non-US authors. Cardiology-specific HCQ/CQ studies were 44.2% more likely to yield harmful conclusions (P < 0.01). Inaccurate propagation of HCQ/CQ cardiac adverse effects with individual scientific author political bias has contributed to unfavorable US HCQ/CQ publication patterns and political polarization of the medications.

The COVID-19 pandemic has required clinicians to urgently identify new treatment options or the re-purposing of existing drugs. Of particular interest are chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). The aims of this systematic review are to systematically identify and collate 24 studies describing the use of CQ and HCQ in human clinical trials and to provide a detailed synthesis of evidence of its efficacy and safety. Of clinical trials, 100% showed no significant difference in the probability of viral transmission or clearance in prophylaxis or therapy, respectively, compared to the control group. Among observational studies employing an endpoint specific to efficacy, 58% concurred with the finding of no significant difference in the attainment of outcomes. Three-fifths of clinical trials and half 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. Of the total papers focusing on cardiac side-effects, 44% found a greater incidence of QTc prolongation and/or arrhythmias, 44% found no evidence of a significant difference, and 11% mixed results. The strongest available evidence points towards the inefficacy of CQ and HCQ in prophylaxis or in the treatment of hospitalised COVID-19 patients.

Introduction: Though chloroquine derivatives are used in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in many countries worldwide, doubts remain about the safety and efficacy of these drugs, especially in African communities where published data are scarce.Methods: We conducted an observational prospective cohort study from April 24 to September 03, 2020, in Burkina Faso to assess (as primary outcome) the clinical, biological, and cardiac (electrocardiographic) safety of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin administered to COVID-19 patients. The main secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and median time of viral clearance.Results: A total of 153 patients were enrolled and followed for 21 days. Among patients who took at least one dose of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine (90.1% [138/153]), few clinical adverse events were reported and were mainly rash/pruritus, diarrhea, chest pain, and palpitations. No statistically significant increase in hepatic, renal, and hematological parameters or electrolyte disorders were reported. However, there was a significant increase in the QTc value without exceeding 500ms, especially in those who received chloroquine phosphate. Three adverse events of special interest classified as serious (known from chloroquine derivatives) were recorded namely pruritus, paresthesia, and drowsiness. One case of death occurred. The average onset of SARS-CoV-2 PCR negativity was estimated at 7.0 (95% CI: 5.0-10.0) days.Conclusion: Hydroxychloroquine appeared to be well tolerated in treated COVID-19 patients in Burkina Faso. In the absence of a robust methodological approach that could generate a high level of scientific evidence, our results could at least contribute to guide health decisions that should be made based on different sources of scientific evidence including those from our study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To ascertain if the use of hydroxychloroquine(HCQ)/cloroquine(CLQ) and other conventional DMARDs (cDMARDs) and rheumatic diseases per se may be associated with COVID-19-related risk of hospitalization and mortality. Methods This case–control study nested within a cohort of cDMARD users was conducted in the Lombardy, Veneto, Tuscany and Lazio regions and Reggio Emilia province. Claims databases were linked to COVID-19 surveillance registries. The risk of COVID-19-related outcomes was estimated using a multivariate conditional logistic regression analysis comparing HCQ/CLQ vs MTX, vs other cDMARDs and vs non-use of these drugs. The presence of rheumatic diseases vs their absence in a non-nested population was investigated. Results A total of 1275 patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 were matched to 12 734 controls. Compared with recent use of MTX, no association between HCQ/CLQ monotherapy and COVID-19 hospitalization [odds ratio (OR) 0.83 (95% CI 0.69, 1.00)] or mortality [OR 1.19 (95% CI 0.85, 1.67)] was observed. A lower risk was found when comparing HCQ/CLQ use with the concomitant use of other cDMARDs and glucocorticoids. HCQ/CLQ was not associated with COVID-19 hospitalization as compared with non-use. An increased risk for recent use of either MTX monotherapy [OR 1.19 (95% CI 1.05, 1.34)] or other cDMARDs [OR 1.21 (95% CI 1.08, 1.36)] vs non-use was found. Rheumatic diseases were not associated with COVID-19-related outcomes. Conclusion HCQ/CLQ use in rheumatic patients was not associated with a protective effect against COVID-19-related outcomes. The use of other cDMARDs was associated with an increased risk when compared with non-use and, if concomitantly used with glucocorticoids, also vs HCQ/CLQ, probably due to immunosuppressive action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

“Chloroquine phosphate” was listed as a trial drug in diagnosis and treatment program of COVID-19(trial sixth edition), and the application of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine treatment for COVID-19 in medical institutions also increased. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have certain retinal toxicity, its mechanism is still unclear, due to different drug tolerance, the risk degree of retinal toxicity in COVID-19 treatment is unclear. Therefore, when using chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19, it is recommended to choose the appropriate dosage according to patients' situation, and adopt necessary ophthalmic screening for patients with high risk to prevent the occurrence of retinopathy. In this paper, we described the risk factors, clinical manifestations and screening methods of retinal toxicity caused by chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, in order to provide references for the safer use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19.

Substantial COVID-19 research investment has been allocated to randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, which currently face recruitment challenges or early discontinuation. We aim to estimate the effects of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine on survival in COVID-19 from all currently available RCT evidence, published and unpublished. We present a rapid meta-analysis of ongoing, completed, or discontinued RCTs on hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine treatment for any COVID-19 patients (protocol: https://osf.io/QESV4/). We systematically identified unpublished RCTs (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Cochrane COVID-registry up to June 11, 2020), and published RCTs (PubMed, medRxiv and bioRxiv up to October 16, 2020). All-cause mortality has been extracted (publications/preprints) or requested from investigators and combined in random-effects meta-analyses, calculating odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), separately for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine. Prespecified subgroup analyses include patient setting, diagnostic confirmation, control type, and publication status. Sixty-three trials were potentially eligible. We included 14 unpublished trials (1308 patients) and 14 publications/preprints (9011 patients). Results for hydroxychloroquine are dominated by RECOVERY and WHO SOLIDARITY, two highly pragmatic trials, which employed relatively high doses and included 4716 and 1853 patients, respectively (67% of the total sample size). The combined OR on all-cause mortality for hydroxychloroquine is 1.11 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.20; I² = 0%; 26 trials; 10,012 patients) and for chloroquine 1.77 (95%CI: 0.15, 21.13, I² = 0%; 4 trials; 307 patients). We identified no subgroup effects. We found that treatment with hydroxychloroquine is associated with increased mortality in COVID-19 patients, and there is no benefit of chloroquine. Findings have unclear generalizability to outpatients, children, pregnant women, and people with comorbidities. Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have been investigated as a potential treatment for Covid-19 in several clinical trials. Here the authors report a meta-analysis of published and unpublished trials, and show that treatment with hydroxychloroquine for patients with Covid-19 was associated with increased mortality, and there was no benefit from chloroquine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this systematic review was to perform qualitative and quantitative analysis on the toxic effects of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) on skeletal muscles. We designed the study according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies for qualitative and quantitative analyses were selected according to the following inclusion criteria: English language; size of sample (> 5 patients), adult (> age of 18) patients, treated with CQ/HCQ for inflammatory diseases, and presenting and not presenting with toxic effects on skeletal muscles. We collected data published from 1990 to April 2020 using PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and SciELO. Risk of bias for observational studies was assessed regarding the ROBIN-I scale. Studies with less than five patients (case reports) were selected for an additional qualitative analysis. We used the software Comprehensive Meta-Analysis at the confidence level of 0.05. We identified 23 studies for qualitative analysis (17 case-reports), and five studies were eligible for quantitative analysis. From case reports, 21 patients presented muscle weakness and confirmatory biopsy for CQ/HCQ induced myopathy. From observational studies, 37 patients out of 1,367 patients from five studies presented muscle weakness related to the use of CQ/HCQ, and 252 patients presented elevated levels of muscle enzymes (aldolase, creatine phosphokinase, and lactate dehydrogenase). Four studies presented data on 34 patients with confirmatory biopsy for drug-induced myopathy. No study presented randomized samples. The chronic use of CQ/HCQ may be a risk for drug-induced myopathy. There is substantiated need for proper randomized trials and controlled prospective studies needed to assess the clinical and subclinical stages of CQ/HCQ -induced muscle myopathy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the current paper, we describe the design, synthesis and antiproliferative screening of novel chloroquine derivatives with a quinoline core linked to a hydroxy or halogen amine through a flexible aminobutyl chain and urea spacer. Synthetic pathway leading to chloroquine urea derivatives 4-10 includes two crucial steps: i) synthesis of chloroquine benzotriazolide 3 and ii) formation of urea derivatives through the reaction of compound 3 with the corresponding amine. Testing of antiproliferative activity against four human cancer cell lines revealed that chloroquine urea derivatives 9 and 10 with aromatic moieties show activity at micromolar concentrations. Therefore, these molecules represent interesting lead compounds that might provide an insight into the design of new anticancer agents.

The corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the entire world causing huge economic losses and considerable morbidity and mortality. Considering the explosive growth of the pandemic repurposing existing medicines may be cost-effective and may be approved for use in COVID-19 faster. Researchers and medical practitioners worldwide have explored the use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, in few occasions combined with the macrolide antibiotic azithromycin, for COVID-19 treatment. These two drugs are economic and easily available, and hence gained attention as a potential option for COVID-19 management. As per the available evidence, the outcomes of treatments with these medications are conflicting from both the efficacy and safety (predominantly cardiac related) perspectives. Currently, multiple studies are underway to test the safety and efficacy of these medications and more results are expected in the near future. The retina, the endocrine system (with risk of hypoglycemia), the musculoskeletal system, the hematological system, and the neurological system may also be affected. The use of these drugs is contraindicated in patients with arrhythmias, known hypersensitivity, and in patients on amiodarone. In addition to the published literature, personal communication with doctors treating COVID-19 patients seems to suggest the drugs may be effective in reducing symptoms and hastening clinical recovery. The literature evidence is still equivocal and further results are awaited. There has been recent controversy including retraction of articles published in prestigious journals about these medicines. Their low cost, long history of use, and easy availability are positive factors with regard to use of these drugs in COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many recent studies have investigated the role of either Chloroquine (CQ) or Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) alone or in combination with azithromycin (AZM) in the management of the emerging coronavirus. This systematic review and meta-analysis of either published or preprint observational studies or randomized control trials (RCT) aimed to assess mortality rate, duration of hospital stay, need for mechanical ventilation (MV), virologic cure rate (VQR), time to a negative viral polymerase chain reaction (PCR), radiological progression, experiencing drug side effects, and clinical worsening. A search of the online database through June 2020 was performed and examined the reference lists of pertinent articles for in-vivo studies only. Pooled relative risks (RRs), standard mean differences of 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated with the random-effects model. Mortality was not different between the standard care (SC) and HCQ groups (RR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.61–1.59, I2 = 82%), meta-regression analysis proved that mortality was significantly different across the studies from different countries. However, mortality among the HCQ + AZM was significantly higher than among the SC (RR = 1.8, 95% CI 1.19–2.27, I2 = 70%). The duration of hospital stay in days was shorter in the SC in comparison with the HCQ group (standard mean difference = 0.57, 95% CI 0.20–0.94, I2 = 92%), or the HCQ + AZM (standard mean difference = 0.77, 95% CI 0.46–1.08, I2 = 81). Overall VQR, and that at days 4, 10, and 14 among patients exposed to HCQ did not differ significantly from the SC [(RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.69–1.23, I2 = 67%), (RR = 1.11, 95% CI 0.26–4.69, I2 = 85%), (RR = 1.21, 95% CI 0.70–2.01, I2 = 95%), and (RR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.76–1.27, I2 = 85%)] respectively. Exposure to HCQ + AZM did not improve the VQR as well (RR = 3.23, 95% CI 0.70–14.97, I2 = 58%). The need for MV was not significantly different between the SC and HCQ (RR = 1.5, 95% CI 0.78–2.89, I2 = 81%), or HCQ + AZM (RR = 1.27, 95% CI 0.7–2.13, I2 = 88%). Side effects were more reported in the HCQ group than in the SC (RR = 3.14, 95% CI 1.58–6.24, I2 = 0). Radiological improvement and clinical worsening were not statistically different between HCQ and SC [(RR = 1.11, 95% CI 0.74–1.65, I2 = 45%) and (RR = 1.28, 95% CI 0.33–4.99), I2 = 54%] respectively. Despite the scarcity of published data of good quality, the effectiveness and safety of either HCQ alone or in combination with AZM in treating COVID-19 cannot be assured. Future high-quality RCTs need to be carried out. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020192084. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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 and 8 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 10,659 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. Authors' Conclusion: 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 has been announced pandemic by WHO and over 17,000,000 people infected (Till April 21st 2020). The disease is currently under control in China, with a curative rate of 86.8%. Chloroquine (CQ) is an old anti-malarial drug with good tolerability, which had proved to be effective in previous SARS-coronavirus, which spread and disappeared between 2002-2003. In vitro studies demonstrated the efficacy of CQ in curing COVID-19. Consequently, via analytical PBPK modeling, a further preliminary clinical trial has proved the efficacy and safety of CQ in China., and multiple clinical trials were registered and approved to investigate the activity of other analogs of CQ against COVID-19. We have listed all the clinical trials and made a meta-analysis of published data of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). HCQ could increase the CT improvement and adverse reactions (ADRs) significantly though there was considerable heterogeneity among current researches. Actually, CQ and its analogs have unique pharmacokinetic characteristics, which would induce severe side effects in some circumstances. We have then summarized pharmacological considerations for these drugs so as to provide to the busy clinicians to avoid potential side effects when administered CQ or its analogs to COVID-19 patients, especially in the elderly, pediatrics, and pregnancies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chloroquine (CQ) and its derivative hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have recently 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 MEDLINE, the Cochrane library, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the ClinicalTrials.gov for all the RCTs comparing CQ or HCQ with placebo or other active agents, published before June 20, 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 19 studies for CQ and HCQ, respectively, that satisfied our inclusion criteria. Of these studies, we performed meta-analysis on 6 studies for CQ and 18 studies for HCQ. We did not limit our analysis to published records 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 2,675 participants (n = 1,345 HCQ and n = 1,330 control). The overall mild and total AEs were significantly higher in CQ-treated non–COVID-19 patients, HCQ-treated non–COVID-19 patients, and HCQ-treated COVID-19 patients. The AEs were further categorized into four groups and analyses revealed that neurologic, gastrointestinal (GI), dermatologic, and sensory AEs were higher in participants taking CQ compared to placebo, while GI, dermatologic, sensory, and cardiovascular AEs were higher in HCQ-treated COVID-19 patients compared to control patients. Moreover, subgroup analysis suggested higher AEs with respect to dosage and duration in HCQ group. Data were acquired from studies with perceived low risk of bias, so plausible bias is unlikely to seriously affect the main findings of the current study. Conclusions: Taken together, we found that participants taking either CQ or HCQ exhibited more AEs than participants taking placebo or control. Precautionary measures should be taken when using these drugs to treat COVID-19. The meta-analysis was registered on OSF (https://osf.io/jm3d9). Registration: The meta-analysis was registered on OSF (https://osf.io/jm3d9). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has been identified as the etiological agent of the severe acute respiratory syndrome, COVID-19, the source and cause of the 2019– 20 coronavirus pandemic. Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have gathered extraordinary attention as therapeutic candidates against SARS-CoV-2 infections. While there is growing scientific data on the therapeutic effect, there is also concern for toxicity of the medications. The therapy of COVID-19 by hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine is off-label. Studies to analyze the personalized effect and safety are lacking. Methods: A review of the literature was performed using Medline/PubMed/Embase database. A variety of keywords were employed in keyword/title/abstract searches. The electronic search was followed by extensive hand searching using reference lists from the identified articles. Results: A total of 126 results were obtained after screening all sources. Mechanisms underlying variability in drug concentrations and therapeutic response with chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in mediating beneficial and adverse effects of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine were reviewed and analyzed. Pharmacogenomic studies from various disease states were evaluated to elucidate the role of genetic variation in drug response and toxicity. Conclusion: Knowledge of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenomics of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine is necessary for effective and safe dosing and to avoid treatment failure and severe complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) are derivatives of 4-aminoquinoline compounds with over 60 years of safe clinical usage. CQ and HCQ are able to inhibit the production of cytokines such as interleukin- (IL-) 1, IL-2, IL-6, IL-17, and IL-22. Also, CQ and HCQ inhibit the production of interferon- (IFN-) α and IFN-γ and/or tumor necrotizing factor- (TNF-) α. Furthermore, CQ blocks the production of prostaglandins (PGs) in the intact cell by inhibiting substrate accessibility of arachidonic acid necessary for the production of PGs. Moreover, CQ affects the stability between T-helper cell (Th) 1 and Th2 cytokine secretion by augmenting IL-10 production in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). Additionally, CQ is capable of blocking lipopolysaccharide- (LPS-) triggered stimulation of extracellular signal-modulated extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 in human PBMCs. HCQ at clinical levels effectively blocks CpG-triggered class-switched memory B-cells from differentiating into plasmablasts as well as producing IgG. Also, HCQ inhibits cytokine generation from all the B-cell subsets. IgM memory B-cells exhibits the utmost cytokine production. Nevertheless, CQ triggers the production of reactive oxygen species. A rare, but serious, side effect of CQ or HCQ in nondiabetic patients is hypoglycaemia. Thus, in critically ill patients, CQ and HCQ are most likely to deplete all the energy stores of the body leaving the patient very weak and sicker. We advocate that, during clinical usage of CQ and HCQ in critically ill patients, it is very essential to strengthen the CQ or HCQ with glucose infusion. CQ and HCQ are thus potential inhibitors of the COVID-19 cytokine storm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 is continuing as a big challenge for the globe and several types of research are continued to find safe and effective treatment and preventive options. Although there is a lack of conclusive evidence of their benefit, there is worldwide controversy to use anti-malarial drugs, hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, for the treatment of COVID-19. FDA issued an emergency use authorization to the use of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. On the contrary to the FDA, the European Medicines Agency has warned against the widespread use of these drugs to treat COVID-19. Finally, the WHO declared that clinical trials on these drugs are halted after the devastating findings of the study published in the medical journal called The Lancet. Against this fact, there are several rumors about the irresponsible use of these drugs in Africa for the treatment of COVID-19. This work aimed to review the off-label use of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 in African countries against WHO recommendation. Data on the use of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 in African countries were searched from credible sources including Scopus, PubMed, Hindawi, Google Scholar, and from local and international media. The study showed that many African countries have already approved at the national level to use these drugs to treat COVID-19 by opposing WHO warnings. In addition to this, falsified and substandard chloroquine products started to emerge in some African countries. The health sectors of the African government should critically compare the risks and benefits before using these drugs. The WHO and African drug regulatory organizations should intervene to stop the off-label use practice of these drugs against the licensed purpose and distribution of falsified and substandard products in the continent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The rising burden of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has led to the mass use of hydroxychloroquine by healthcare workers (HCWs). Adverse event profile of this drug when used as prophylaxis is not well known in the literature. Methods A retrospective, cross-sectional study was conducted across the country using semi-structured web-based questionnaire among COVID-19 negative and asymptomatic healthcare workers, taking hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis. Descriptive and multivariate logistic-regression models were applied for analysis. Results Of the 166 participants, at least one adverse event was experienced by 37.9% participants, gastrointestinal being the most common (30.7%). Risk was higher in participants <40 years age (odd's ratio (OR): 2.44, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.18–5.05) and after first dose of hydroxychloroquine (51.2%, OR: 2.38, 95%CI: 1.17–4.84). Hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis was initiated without electrocardiography by 80.1% of HCWs. Only 21.6% of those with cardiovascular disease could get prior ECG. Conclusions A higher incidence of adverse events was observed when results were compared with studies involving patients on long-term hydroxychloroquine therapy. Younger age and first dose were associated with greater incidence of adverse events though all were self-limiting. Monitoring prior and during prophylaxis was inadequate even among those with cardiovascular disease and risk-factors. However, no serious cardiovascular events were reported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rapid spread, severity, and lack of specific treatment for COVID-19 resulted in hasty drug repurposing. Conceptually, trials of antivirals were well-accepted, but twentieth century antimalarials sparked an impassioned global debate. Notwithstanding, antiviral and immunomodulatory effects of aminoquinolines have been investigated in vitro, in vivo and in clinical trials for more than 30 years. We review the mechanisms of action of (hydroxy)chloroquine on immune cells and networks and discuss promises and pitfalls in the fight against SARS-CoV-2, the agent of the COVID-19 outbreak. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]