RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: An individual participant data meta-analysis
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.01.10.22269008
DO 10.1101/2022.01.10.22269008
A1 Leon Di Stefano
A1 Elizabeth L. Ogburn
A1 Malathi Ram
A1 Daniel O. Scharfstein
A1 Tianjing Li
A1 Preeti Khanal
A1 Sheriza N. Baksh
A1 Nichol McBee
A1 Joshua Gruber
A1 Marianne R. Gildea
A1 Megan R. Clark
A1 Neil A. Goldenberg
A1 Yussef Bennani
A1 Samuel M. Brown
A1 Whitney R. Buckel
A1 Meredith E. Clement
A1 Mark J. Mulligan
A1 Jane A. O’Halloran
A1 Adriana M. Rauseo
A1 Wesley H. Self
A1 Matthew W. Semler
A1 Todd Seto
A1 Jason E. Stout
A1 Robert J. Ulrich
A1 Jennifer Victory
A1 Barbara E. Bierer
A1 Daniel F. Hanley
A1 Daniel Freilich
A1 the Pandemic Response COVID-19 Research Collaboration Platform for HCQ/CQ Pooled Analyses
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/16/2022.01.10.22269008.abstract
AB Background Results from observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have led to the consensus that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) are not effective for COVID-19 prevention or treatment. Pooling individual participant data, including unanalyzed data from trials terminated early, enables more detailed investigation of the efficacy and safety of HCQ/CQ among subgroups of hospitalized patients.Methods We searched ClinicalTrials.gov in May and June 2020 for US-based RCTs evaluating HCQ/CQ in hospitalized COVID-19 patients in which the outcomes defined in this study were recorded or could be extrapolated. The primary outcome was a 7-point ordinal scale measured between day 28 and 35 post enrollment; comparisons used proportional odds ratios. Harmonized de-identified data were collected via a common template spreadsheet sent to each principal investigator. The data were analyzed by fitting a prespecified Bayesian ordinal regression model and standardizing the resulting predictions.Results Eight of 19 trials met eligibility criteria and agreed to participate. Patient-level data were available from 770 participants (412 HCQ/CQ vs 358 control). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. We did not find evidence of a difference in COVID-19 ordinal scores between days 28 and 35 post-enrollment in the pooled patient population (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% credible interval, 0.76-1.24; higher favors HCQ/CQ), and found no convincing evidence of meaningful treatment effect heterogeneity among prespecified subgroups. Adverse event and serious adverse event rates were numerically higher with HCQ/CQ vs control (0.39 vs 0.29 and 0.13 vs 0.09 per patient, respectively).Conclusions The findings of this individual participant data meta-analysis reinforce those of individual RCTs that HCQ/CQ is not efficacious for treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients.Competing Interest StatementDr. Baksh, Ms. McBee, Ms. Clark, and Dr. Hanley reported receiving research funding from the Department of Defense for clinical trials of convalescent plasma for COVID-19 outside the submitted work. Dr. Goldenberg reported receiving salary support from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences via a Johns Hopkins Clinical and Translational Science Award. Dr. Bennani reported being a site investigator for Janssen outside the submitted work. Dr. Brown reported service as chair of a data and safety monitoring board for a Hamilton clinical trial in respiratory failure; fees paid to Intermountain Healthcare from Faron Pharmaceuticals and Sedana Pharmaceuticals for steering committee service for a clinical trial in acute respiratory distress syndrome; research grants to Intermountain Healthcare from Janssen, NIH, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Department of Defense; and royalties from Oxford University Press and Brigham Young University, outside the submitted work. Dr. Clement reported service on a Roche advisory board and as a site investigator for Janssen outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.Clinical Protocols https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021254261 Funding StatementThis collaboration was supported by the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences grant U24TR001609. Mr. Di Stefano is supported by an American Australian Association Sir Keith Murdoch Scholarship. Dr. Ogburn is supported by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Dr. Brown and Dr. Buckel were funded by the Intermountain Research and Medical Foundation; Intermountain Heart and Lung Foundation; and Intermountain Office of Research for the HAHPS study. Dr. O'Halloran was funded by NIH Clinical and Translational Science Award grant UL1TR002345, and the WU352 study was supported by the Institute of Clinical and Translational Research at the Washington University School of Medicine. Dr. Self and the ORCHID trial were supported by the following grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute: 3U01HL123009-06S1, U01HL123009, U01HL122998, U01HL123018, U01HL123023, U01HL123008, U01HL123031, U01HL123004, U01HL123027, U01HL123010, U01HL123033, U01HL122989, U01HL123022, and U01HL123020. Sandoz, a Novartis division, supplied the hydroxychloroquine and placebo used in the ORCHID trial. Dr. Stout was funded by Duke University School of Medicine for the NCT04335552 study. Ms. Victory and Dr. Freilich are supported by the Bassett Research Institute. Dr. Bierer is supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences grant UL1TR002541 and Brigham and Women's Hospital. The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The IRB of Johns Hopkins Medicine gave ethical approval for this work.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe ORCHID trial data underlying the results presented in the study are available from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Biologic Specimen and Data Repository Information Coordinating Center (https://biolincc.nhlbi.nih.gov/; accession number HLB02372021a). The data for the other studies presented are available from Vivli (https://www.vivli.org): COVID MED, https://doi.org/10.25934/00006535; HAHPS, https://doi.org/10.25934/00006626; NCT04335552, https://doi.org/10.25934/00006861; NCT04344444, https://doi.org/10.25934/00006865; OAHU-COVID19, https://doi.org/10.25934/00006595; TEACH, https://doi.org/10.25934/00006627; and WU352, https://doi.org/10.25934/00006713. Policies for accessing these third-party datasets vary somewhat by study and repository, but requests must be approved and require a signed agreement.