RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 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) JF medRxiv FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press SP 2020.04.07.20056424 DO 10.1101/2020.04.07.20056424 A1 Silva Borba, Mayla Gabriela A1 Almeida Val, Fernando Fonseca A1 Sampaio, Vanderson Sousa A1 Araújo Alexandre, Marcia Almeida A1 Melo, Gisely Cardoso A1 Brito, Marcelo A1 Gomes Mourão, Maria Paula A1 Brito-Sousa, José Diego A1 Baía-da-Silva, Djane A1 Farias Guerra, Marcus Vinitius A1 Abrahão Hajjar, Ludhmila A1 Pinto, Rosemary Costa A1 Silva Balieiro, Antonio Alcirley A1 Naveca, Felipe Gomes A1 Simão Xavier, Mariana A1 Salomão, Alexandre A1 Siqueira, André Machado A1 Schwarzbolt, Alexandre A1 Rosa Croda, Júlio Henrique A1 Nogueira, Maurício Lacerda A1 Sierra Romero, Gustavo Adolfo A1 Bassat, Quique A1 Fontes, Cor Jesus A1 Cláudio Albuquerque, Bernardino A1 Daniel-Ribeiro, Cláudio Tadeu A1 Monteiro, Wuelton Marcelo A1 Guimarães Lacerda, Marcus Vinícius A1 CloroCovid-19 Team YR 2020 UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/04/11/2020.04.07.20056424.abstract AB 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.Funding This study was funded by the Government of the Amazonas State, Farmanguinhos (Fiocruz), SUFRAMA, CAPES, FAPEAM, and federal funds granted by a coalition of Brazilian senators.Evidence before this study Before the CloroCovid-19 trial began, to our knowledge, there were no published reports of robust clinical studies on the safety and/or efficacy of chloroquine (CQ) and/or hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for the treatment of COVID-19 during the recent 2020 pandemic. We searched PubMed and also MedRxiv.org (pre-print server for health sciences, without peer review), without any language restrictions and including Chinese publications, for studies published between Dec 2019 and April 5, 2020, using the search terms ‘COVID-19, coronavirus, SARS-Cov-2’. We found three non-randomized studies with limited sample sizes in which (1) HCQ use led to a decrease in SARS-Cov-2 detected in respiratory secretions five days after treatment, together with azithromycin (France, 36 patients); (2) HCQ use shortened time to clinical recovery (China, 62 patients); and (3) CQ was superior to control treatment in inhibiting the exacerbation of pneumonia, improving lung imaging findings, and promoting virus-negative conversion and shortening the disease course (China, 100 patients). We found no published studies comparing different dosages of CQ/HCQ and their thorough safety assessment.Added value of this study In a larger patient population, we found that a higher dose of CQ for 10 days presented toxicity red flags, particularly affecting QTc prolongation. The limited sample size recruited so far does not allow to show any benefit regarding treatment efficacy, however the trend towards higher fatality associated with the higher dose by day 6 of follow-up resulted in a premature halting of this arm. This is the first double-blinded, randomized clinical trial addressing different dosages of CQ for the treatment of severe patients with COVID-19 in the absence of a control group using placebo. Due to the impossibility of not using the drug recommended at the national level, we used historical data from the literature to infer comparisons for lethality endpoints. Follow-up until day 28 is ongoing with a larger sample size, in which long-term lethality will be better estimated.Implications of all the available evidence The preliminary findings from CloroCovid-19 trial suggest that the higher dosage of CQ (12 g total dose over 10 days) in COVID-19 should not be recommended because of safety concerns regarding QTc prolongation and increased lethality, in the Brazilian population, and more often in older patients in use of drugs such as azithromycin and oseltamivir, which also prolong QTc interval. Among patients randomized to the lower dosage group (5 days of treatment, total dose 2.7 g), given the limited number of patients so far enrolled, it is still not possible to estimate a clear benefit of CQ in patients with severe ARDS. Preliminary data on viral clearance in respiratory secretions in our confirmed cases are also indicative of little effect of the drug at high dosage. More studies initiating CQ prior to the onset of the severe phase of the disease are urgently needed.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialNCT04323527.Clinical Protocols https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04323527?term=NCT04323527.&draw=2&rank=1 Funding StatementThis study was funded by the Government of the Amazonas State, Farmanguinhos (Fiocruz), SUFRAMA, CAPES, FAPEAM, and federal funds granted by a coalition of Brazilian senators.Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.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.YesAll datas are available