Search

Biologics are recommended to treat paediatric ulcerative colitis (UC) that is chronically active or steroid-dependent despite aminosalicylic acids (5-ASA) and thiopurine treatments. Anti-tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (Anti-TNF inhibitors) are the agents of choice and vedolizumab could be considered as second-line biologic therapy.In the current case, we aim to describe a successful long-term treatment with vedolizumab in a 9-year-old boy with severe UC and primary non-response to infliximab. Concomitant azathioprine was used, and steroid refractoriness was also detected. Drug and anti-drug antibody levels were negative after infliximab induction so a switch to a 6-week-induction vedolizumab regimen followed by a maintenance regimen as a monotherapy was decided. The clinical response and tolerability to vedolizumab allowed long-term disease remission. Vedolizumab is currently non-authorised to treat paediatric patients and there is limited data on long-term treatments to date. This case contributes to the literature by adding evidence on the long-term efficacy and safety of vedolizumab in paediatric UC.

Introduction: Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention has been implemented in several countries. Previous literature has shown that its cost-effectiveness (and, under some specifications, cost-saving character) is dependent on the reduction in price due to generics, the time-horizon and its effectiveness. The intervention has never been studied in Catalonia, a territory with extensive implementation. Methods: Economic evaluation of the implementation of HIV pre-exposition prophylaxis using administrative data from Men who have Sex with Men (MSM) who receive the treatment (at the generic price). A deterministic compartmental model and a social perspective with a micro-costing approach over the time horizon 2022-2062 are used. A baseline 86% effectiveness of PrEP is assumed. Results: Daily oral PrEP is found to be cost-saving: discounted savings in costs are attained after 16 years, and after 40 years they reach 81 million euros. In terms of health indicators, 10,322 additional discounted QALYs are generated by the intervention. Results are sensitive to sexual behavioral patterns among MSM, the price of PrEP (reduced if offered on-demand), its effectiveness and the discount rate. Conclusions: The use and promotion of PrEP in Catalonia is predicted to result in substantial health and monetary benefits because of reductions in HIV infections. Short-term investments in the promotion of PrEP will result in important cost-savings in the long term.

BackgroundCurrent strategies for preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are limited to nonpharmacologic interventions. Hydroxychloroquine has been proposed as a postexposure therapy to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), but definitive evidence is lacking. MethodsWe conducted an open-label, cluster-randomized trial involving asymptomatic contacts of patients with polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR)-confirmed Covid-19 in Catalonia, Spain. We randomly assigned clusters of contacts to the hydroxychloroquine group (which received the drug at a dose of 800 mg once, followed by 400 mg daily for 6 days) or to the usual-care group (which received no specific therapy). The primary outcome was PCR-confirmed, symptomatic Covid-19 within 14 days. The secondary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 infection, defined by symptoms compatible with Covid-19 or a positive PCR test regardless of symptoms. Adverse events were assessed for up to 28 days. ResultsThe analysis included 2314 healthy contacts of 672 index case patients with Covid-19 who were identified between March 17 and April 28, 2020. A total of 1116 contacts were randomly assigned to receive hydroxychloroquine and 1198 to receive usual care. Results were similar in the hydroxychloroquine and usual-care groups with respect to the incidence of PCR-confirmed, symptomatic Covid-19 (5.7% and 6.2%, respectively; risk ratio, 0.86 [95% confidence interval, 0.52 to 1.42]). In addition, hydroxychloroquine was not associated with a lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2 transmission than usual care (18.7% and 17.8%, respectively). The incidence of adverse events was higher in the hydroxychloroquine group than in the usual-care group (56.1% vs. 5.9%), but no treatment-related serious adverse events were reported. ConclusionsPostexposure therapy with hydroxychloroquine did not prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection or symptomatic Covid-19 in healthy persons exposed to a PCR-positive case patient. (Funded by the crowdfunding campaign YoMeCorono and others; BCN-PEP-CoV2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04304053.) In a trial involving asymptomatic contacts of patients with PCR-confirmed Covid-19 in Spain, the authors compared the use of hydroxychloroquine with usual care. Postexposure therapy with hydroxychloroquine did not prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection or symptomatic Covid-19 in healthy persons.

Background: The outbreak of COVID19 evolved rapidly into a global pandemic, forcing hospitals, including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) referral units, to change their practices to ensure quality of care. Aims: To describe the clinical outcomes and the fulfilment of the treatment schedule of patients with IBD treated with biological agents in a single-center of a red-zone of the pandemic, and to report the patients' perceptions about COVID-19 and the measures adopted at our center. Methods Therapeutic adherence and clinical outcomes were collected for all patients undergoing treatment with intravenous biologicals and subcutaneous biologicals at our center. A telephone survey was also performed to assess these patients' perceptions of the COVID pandemic and the related measures adopted at their IBD unit. Results: A total of 234 patients were included (117 on intravenous and 117 on subcutaneous biologicals). Only 10% of patients postponed intravenous infusions intentionally and 5% postponed the collection of subcutaneous biologicals at the hospital pharmacy. Only five confirmed COVID-19 cases were registered (2.1%), all of them of mild severity. One hundred and fifty-five patients participated in the survey (77 on intravenous and 78 on subcutaneous drugs). Fear of going to the hospital was the most common reason for postponing biological administrations. Among those on combination therapy, only 7% admitted to have withdrawn immunosuppressants. Conclusions: Adherence to intravenous and subcutaneous biological therapies during the pandemic was high in a single-center cohort of IBD patients even though the cumulative incidence of confirmed COVID-19 was low.

Background Current strategies for preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections are limited to non-pharmacological interventions. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has been proposed as a postexposure therapy to prevent Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) but definitive evidence is lacking. Methods We conducted an open-label, cluster-randomized trial including asymptomatic contacts exposed to a PCR-positive Covid-19 case in Catalonia, Spain. Clusters were randomized to receive no specific therapy (control arm) or HCQ 800mg once, followed by 400mg daily for 6 days (intervention arm). The primary outcome was PCR-confirmed symptomatic Covid-19 within 14 days. The secondary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 infection, either symptomatically compatible or a PCR-positive result regardless of symptoms. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed up to 28 days. Results The analysis included 2,314 healthy contacts of 672 Covid-19 index cases identified between Mar 17 and Apr 28, 2020. A total of 1,198 were randomly allocated to usual care and 1,116 to HCQ therapy. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of PCR-confirmed, symptomatic Covid-19 disease (6.2% usual care vs. 5.7% HCQ; risk ratio 0.89 [95% confidence interval 0.54-1.46]), nor evidence of beneficial effects on prevention of SARS-CoV-2 transmission (17.8% usual care vs. 18.7% HCQ). The incidence of AEs was higher in the intervention arm than in the control arm (5.9% usual care vs 51.6% HCQ), but no treatment-related serious AEs were reported. Conclusions Postexposure therapy with HCQ did not prevent SARS-CoV-2 disease and infection in healthy individuals exposed to a PCR-positive case. Our findings do not support HCQ as postexposure prophylaxis for Covid-19., This study was mainly supported by the crowdfunding campaign JoEmCorono (https://www.yomecorono.com/) with the contribution of over 72,000 citizens and corporations. The study also received financial support from Laboratorios Rubió, Gebro Pharma, Zurich Seguros, SYNLAB Barcelona, and Generalitat de Catalunya. Laboratorios Rubió also contributed to the study with the required doses of hydroxychloroquine (Dolquine®).

No effective treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) exist. We aimed to determine whether early treatment with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) would be efficacious for outpatients with COVID-19., The authors thank Gerard Carot-Sans, PhD, for providing medical writing support during the revisions of the subsequent drafts of the manuscript; the personnel from the Fights Aids and Infectious Diseases Foundation for their support in administration, human resources and supply chain management; Eric Ubals (Pierce AB) and Òscar Palao (Opentic) for website and database management; Óscar Camps and OpenArms nongovernmental organization for nursing home operations; and Anna Valentí and the Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol Human Resources Department for telephone monitoring. We thank Consorci Sanitari del Maresme, Centre Sociosanitari El Carme, l'Hospital General de Granollers and occupational hazards department of Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol for their contribution with patient enrollment. We are very grateful to Marc Clotet and Natalia Sánchez who coordinated the JoEmCorono crowd-funding campaign. We thank the Hospital Germans Trias Pujol Institutional Review Board and the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices for their prompt action for consideration and approvals to the protocol. Financial support. This work was mainly supported by the crowd-funding campaign JoEmCorono (https://www.yomecorono.com/) with contributions from more than 72 000 citizens and corporations. The study also received financial support from Laboratorios Rubió, Laboratorios Gebro Pharma, Zurich Seguros, SYNLAB Barcelona, and Generalitat de Catalunya. Laboratorios Rubió also contributed to the study with the required doses of hydroxychloroquine (Dolquine®). Foundation Dorneur partly funded lab equipment at Irsi-Caixa.

There is an urgent need to identify therapeutics for the treatment of Coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19). Although different antivirals are given for the clinical management of SARS-CoV-2 infection, their efficacy is still under evaluation. Here, we have screened existing drugs approved for human use in a variety of diseases, to compare how they counteract SARS-CoV-2-induced cytopathic effect and viral replication in vitro. Among the potential 72 antivirals tested herein that were previously proposed to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 infection, only 18% had an IC50 below 25 μM or 102 IU/mL. These included plitidepsin, novel cathepsin inhibitors, nelfinavir mesylate hydrate, interferon 2-alpha, interferon-gamma, fenofibrate, camostat along the well-known remdesivir and chloroquine derivatives. Plitidepsin was the only clinically approved drug displaying nanomolar efficacy. Four of these families, including novel cathepsin inhibitors, blocked viral entry in a cell-type specific manner. Since the most effective antivirals usually combine therapies that tackle the virus at different steps of infection, we also assessed several drug combinations. Although no particular synergy was found, inhibitory combinations did not reduce their antiviral activity. Thus, these combinations could decrease the potential emergence of resistant viruses. Antivirals prioritized herein identify novel compounds and their mode of action, while independently replicating the activity of a reduced proportion of drugs which are mostly approved for clinical use. Combinations of these drugs should be tested in animal models to inform the design of fast track clinical trials.

Background: No therapeutics have yet been proven effective for the treatment of mild-illness caused by SARS-CoV-2. We assessed the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) alone or in combination with cobicistat-boosted darunavir (DRVc) for treating patients with mild Covid-19. Methods: We conducted a randomized, prospective, controlled, open-label trial in three health regions of Catalonia. After confirmation of a case of Covid-19 disease, we enumerated on a list a ring of the case and all their contacts and randomly assigned the ring to either control or intervention arm on a 1:1 ratio. Here we present the methods concerning eligible index cases, which involved non-hospitalized adult patients with recently confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and less than seven days of symptoms. Patients were assigned to receive HCQ (800 mg on day 1, followed by 400 mg once daily for six days) in combination with DRVc (800 mg/150 mg tablets, once daily for seven days) or no antiviral treatment. The protocol was adapted during the course of the trial to use HCQ alone after findings of no benefit of the protease inhibitor lopinavir-ritonavir. Study outcomes were the reduction of viral RNA load in nasopharyngeal swabs and time to clinical improvement within 28 days of follow-up in the per-protocol population. Adverse events were assessed up to 28 days. Findings: Between Mar 17 and Apr 28, 2020, 353 Covid-19 patients met the criteria for the per-protocol analysis: 165 in the control arm and 142 in the intervention arm. The median time from symptom onset to treatment start was 3 days (IQR 2–4). The per-protocol analysis revealed no significant differences in the mean reduction of viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs at day-3 compared to baseline between the control group (-1·28 Log 10 copies/mL, SD 1·68) and the intervention group (-1·47, SD 1·50); difference -0·18 [95% CI -0.59 to 0·22]. The same pattern was observed at day-7 and -14 after treatment. Time to complete alleviation of symptoms was similar in both groups (22 vs. 20·5 days, p = 0·37). Adverse events included self-limited nausea and diarrhea. Twenty patients required hospitalization, all due to Covid-19 progression. No patients died during the study. Interpretation: In patients with mild Covid-19, no benefit was observed with HCQ alone or in combination with DRVc beyond the usual care. Future testing of other agents in randomized trials may help to identify other drugs that provide a treatment benefit., Crowdfunding campaign YoMeCorono (https://www.yomecorono.com/), Laboratorios Rubió, Laboratorios Gebro Pharma, Zurich Seguros, SYNLAB Barcelona, and Generalitat de Catalunya. Laboratorios Rubió also contributed to the study with the required doses of hydroxychloroquine (Dolquine®).