氯喹和羟氯喹停用后抗疟药作为新冠肺炎换药的疗效和安全性

IF 3.1 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Clinical Pharmacology : Advances and Applications Pub Date : 2025-01-16 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/CPAA.S493750
Irma Rahayu Latarissa, Miski Aghnia Khairinisa, Ghina Nadhifah Iftinan, Anna Meiliana, Ida Paulina Sormin, Melisa Intan Barliana, Keri Lestari
{"title":"氯喹和羟氯喹停用后抗疟药作为新冠肺炎换药的疗效和安全性","authors":"Irma Rahayu Latarissa, Miski Aghnia Khairinisa, Ghina Nadhifah Iftinan, Anna Meiliana, Ida Paulina Sormin, Melisa Intan Barliana, Keri Lestari","doi":"10.2147/CPAA.S493750","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Various repurposing drugs have been tested for their efficacy on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including antimalarial drugs. During the pandemic, Chloroquine (CQ) and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) demonstrated good potential against COVID-19, but further studies showed both drugs had side effects that were more dangerous than the efficacy. This made World Health Organization (WHO) ban the usage for COVID-19 patients. In this context, there is a need to explore other antimalarial drugs as potential therapies for COVID-19. This study provides a descriptive synthesis of clinical trials evaluating antimalarial drugs for COVID-19 treatment conducted after the withdrawal of CQ and HCQ. The method was a literature study using the keywords \"antimalarial\", \"COVID-19\", \"SARS-CoV-2\", \"clinical trial\", and \"randomized controlled trial\" on the MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. Inclusion criteria were published clinical trials with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of single antimalarial drugs for COVID-19, published in English and excluding combination therapies. The results showed 3 antimalarial drugs, namely Quinine Sulfate (QS), Atovaquone (AQ), and Artemisinin-Piperaquine (AP), had gone through clinical trial to assess efficacy and safety against COVID-19 patients. Out of the 3 drugs, only AP showed significant results in the primary outcome, which was the time required to reach undetectable levels of SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, the intervention group took 10.6 days, and the control group took 19.3 days (p=0.001). Based on this review, AP showed significant potential as a therapy in the fight against COVID-19.</p>","PeriodicalId":10406,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Pharmacology : Advances and Applications","volume":"17 ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11748038/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and Safety of Antimalarial as Repurposing Drug for COVID-19 Following Retraction of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine.\",\"authors\":\"Irma Rahayu Latarissa, Miski Aghnia Khairinisa, Ghina Nadhifah Iftinan, Anna Meiliana, Ida Paulina Sormin, Melisa Intan Barliana, Keri Lestari\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/CPAA.S493750\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Various repurposing drugs have been tested for their efficacy on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including antimalarial drugs. During the pandemic, Chloroquine (CQ) and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) demonstrated good potential against COVID-19, but further studies showed both drugs had side effects that were more dangerous than the efficacy. This made World Health Organization (WHO) ban the usage for COVID-19 patients. In this context, there is a need to explore other antimalarial drugs as potential therapies for COVID-19. This study provides a descriptive synthesis of clinical trials evaluating antimalarial drugs for COVID-19 treatment conducted after the withdrawal of CQ and HCQ. The method was a literature study using the keywords \\\"antimalarial\\\", \\\"COVID-19\\\", \\\"SARS-CoV-2\\\", \\\"clinical trial\\\", and \\\"randomized controlled trial\\\" on the MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. Inclusion criteria were published clinical trials with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of single antimalarial drugs for COVID-19, published in English and excluding combination therapies. The results showed 3 antimalarial drugs, namely Quinine Sulfate (QS), Atovaquone (AQ), and Artemisinin-Piperaquine (AP), had gone through clinical trial to assess efficacy and safety against COVID-19 patients. Out of the 3 drugs, only AP showed significant results in the primary outcome, which was the time required to reach undetectable levels of SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, the intervention group took 10.6 days, and the control group took 19.3 days (p=0.001). Based on this review, AP showed significant potential as a therapy in the fight against COVID-19.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10406,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Pharmacology : Advances and Applications\",\"volume\":\"17 \",\"pages\":\"1-11\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11748038/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Pharmacology : Advances and Applications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/CPAA.S493750\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Pharmacology : Advances and Applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/CPAA.S493750","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

已经测试了各种再利用药物对2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)的疗效,包括抗疟疾药物。在大流行期间,氯喹(CQ)和羟氯喹(HCQ)显示出对抗COVID-19的良好潜力,但进一步的研究表明,这两种药物的副作用比疗效更危险。因此,世界卫生组织(WHO)禁止新冠肺炎患者使用。在此背景下,有必要探索其他抗疟药物作为COVID-19的潜在治疗方法。本研究对停用CQ和HCQ后评估抗疟药物治疗COVID-19的临床试验进行了描述性综合。方法是在MEDLINE、Scopus和Cochrane数据库中以“抗疟药”、“COVID-19”、“SARS-CoV-2”、“临床试验”和“随机对照试验”为关键词进行文献研究。纳入标准为已发表的临床试验和随机对照试验(rct),以英文发表的单一抗疟药物治疗COVID-19的疗效和安全性,不包括联合治疗。结果显示,硫酸奎宁(QS)、阿托伐醌(AQ)和青蒿素-哌喹(AP) 3种抗疟药物已通过临床试验,对COVID-19患者进行了疗效和安全性评估。在这三种药物中,只有AP在主要结局(即达到无法检测到的SARS-CoV-2水平所需的时间)方面显示出显著效果。干预组用时10.6 d,对照组用时19.3 d (p=0.001)。基于这一综述,AP在对抗COVID-19方面显示出巨大的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy and Safety of Antimalarial as Repurposing Drug for COVID-19 Following Retraction of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine.

Various repurposing drugs have been tested for their efficacy on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including antimalarial drugs. During the pandemic, Chloroquine (CQ) and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) demonstrated good potential against COVID-19, but further studies showed both drugs had side effects that were more dangerous than the efficacy. This made World Health Organization (WHO) ban the usage for COVID-19 patients. In this context, there is a need to explore other antimalarial drugs as potential therapies for COVID-19. This study provides a descriptive synthesis of clinical trials evaluating antimalarial drugs for COVID-19 treatment conducted after the withdrawal of CQ and HCQ. The method was a literature study using the keywords "antimalarial", "COVID-19", "SARS-CoV-2", "clinical trial", and "randomized controlled trial" on the MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. Inclusion criteria were published clinical trials with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of single antimalarial drugs for COVID-19, published in English and excluding combination therapies. The results showed 3 antimalarial drugs, namely Quinine Sulfate (QS), Atovaquone (AQ), and Artemisinin-Piperaquine (AP), had gone through clinical trial to assess efficacy and safety against COVID-19 patients. Out of the 3 drugs, only AP showed significant results in the primary outcome, which was the time required to reach undetectable levels of SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, the intervention group took 10.6 days, and the control group took 19.3 days (p=0.001). Based on this review, AP showed significant potential as a therapy in the fight against COVID-19.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信