Abstract
Background While there was a lack of pharmacological interventions proven to be effective in early, outpatient settings for COVID-19, in a prospective, open-label observational study (pre-AndroCoV Trial) the use of nitazoxanide, ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine demonstrated similar effects, and apparent improvement of outcomes compared to untreated patients. The unexpected apparent positive results led to ethical questions on the employment of further full placebo-control studies in early stage COVID-19. The objective of the present study was to elucidate whether the conduction of a full placebo-control RCT was still ethically viable, through a comparative analysis with two control-groups.
Materials and methods Active group (AG) consisted of mild-to-moderate early stage COVID-19 patients enrolled in the Pre AndroCoV-Trial, treated with nitazoxanide ivermectin, or hydroxychloroquine in selected cases, in association with azithromycin. Vitamin D, vitamin C, zinc, glucocorticoids and anticoagulants, when clinically recommended. Control Group 1 (CG1) consisted of a retrospectively obtained group of untreated patients from the same population as those from the Pre-AndroCoV Trial, and Control Group 2 (CG2) resulted from a precise prediction of clinical outcomes, based on a thorough and structured review of articles indexed in PubMed and MEDLINE and statements by official government agencies and specific medical societies. For both CGs, patients were matched for proportion between sex, age, obesity and other comorbidities. Results: Compared to CG1 and CG2, AG showed a reduction of 31.5 to 36.5% in viral shedding (p < 0.0001), 70 to 85% and 70 to 73% in duration of COVID-19 clinical symptoms when including and not including anosmia and ageusia, respectively ((p < 0.0001 for both), and 100% in respiratory complications through the parameters of the Brescia COVID-19 Respiratory Scale (p < 0.0001). For every 1,000 confirmed cases for COVID-19, a minimum of 140 patients were prevented from hospitalization (p < 0.0001), 50 from mechanical ventilation, and five deaths, when comparing to age-, sex- and comorbidity-matched non-treated patients with similar initial disease severity at the moment of diagnosis.
Conclusion Apparent benefits of the combination between early detection and early pharmacological approaches for COVID-19 demonstrated to be consistent when when compared to different control groups of untreated patients. The potential benefits could allow a large number of patients prevented from hospitalizations, deaths and persistent symptoms after COVID-19 remission. The potential impact on COVID-19 disease course and numbers of negative outcomes and the well-established safety profile of the drugs proposed by the Pre-AndroCoV Trial led to ethical questions regarding the conduction of further placebo control randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for early COVID-19. Early pharmacological approaches including azithromycin in combination with any of the options between nitazoxanide, ivermectin or optionally hydroxychloroquine should be considered for those diagnosed with COVID-19 presenting less than seven days of symptoms. Of the three drugs, we opted for nitazoxanide, due to more extensive demonstration of in vitro and in vivo antiviral activity, proven efficacy against other viruses in humans, and steadier safety profile.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT04446429
Funding Statement
The funding of present study was fully supported by Corpometria Institute (Brasilia, DF, Brazil) and Applied Biology Inc (Irvine, CA, USA).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Patients that fulfilled criteria for the observational study consented in a formal written manner exactly as determined by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the Ethics Committee of the National Board of Ethics Committee of the Ministry of Health, Brazil (CEP/CONEP: Parecer 4.173.074 / CAAE: 34110420.2.0000.0008). The RCT resulted from this active observational is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04446429, available at clinicaltrials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04446429?term=NCT04446429&draw=2&rank=1
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I 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).
Yes
I 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.
Yes
Data Availability
Full raw data is available at a public repository (https://osf.io/cm4f8/).