BACKGROUNDCoronavirus disease 2019 occurs after exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). For persons who are exposed, the standard of care is observation and quarantine. Whether hydroxychloroquine can prevent symptomatic infection after SARS-CoV-2 exposure is unknown. METHODSWe conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial across the United States and parts of Canada testing hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis. We enrolled adults who had household or occupational exposure to someone with confirmed Covid-19 at a distance of less than 6 ft for more than 10 minutes while wearing neither a face mask nor an eye shield (high-risk exposure) or while wearing a face mask but no eye shield (moderate-risk exposure). Within 4 days after exposure, we randomly assigned participants to receive either placebo or hydroxychloroquine (800 mg once, followed by 600 mg in 6 to 8 hours, then 600 mg daily for 4 additional days). The primary outcome was the incidence of either laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 or illness compatible with Covid-19 within 14 days. RESULTSWe enrolled 821 asymptomatic participants. Overall, 87.6% of the participants (719 of 821) reported a high-risk exposure to a confirmed Covid-19 contact. The incidence of new illness compatible with Covid-19 did not differ significantly between participants receiving hydroxychloroquine (49 of 414 [11.8%]) and those receiving placebo (58 of 407 [14.3%]); the absolute difference was −2.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval, −7.0 to 2.2; P = 0.35). Side effects were more common with hydroxychloroquine than with placebo (40.1% vs. 16.8%), but no serious adverse reactions were reported. CONCLUSIONSAfter high-risk or moderate-risk exposure to Covid-19, hydroxychloroquine did not prevent illness compatible with Covid-19 or confirmed infection when used as postexposure prophylaxis within 4 days after exposure. (Funded by David Baszucki and Jan Ellison Baszucki and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04308668.

Background: No effective oral therapy exists for early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objective: To investigate whether hydroxychloroquine could reduce COVID-19 severity in adult outpatients. Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from 22 March through 20 May 2020. (ClinicalTrials .gov: NCT04308668) Setting: Internet-based trial across the United States and Canada (40 states and 3 provinces). Participants: Symptomatic, nonhospitalized adults with laboratoryconfirmed COVID-19 or probable COVID-19 and high-risk exposure within 4 days of symptom onset. Intervention: Oral hydroxychloroquine (800 mg once, followed by 600 mg in 6 to 8 hours, then 600 mg daily for 4 more days) or masked placebo. Measures: Symptoms and severity at baseline and then at days 3, 5, 10, and 14 using a 10-point visual analogue scale. The primary end point was change in overall symptom severity over 14 days. Results: Of 491 patients randomly assigned to a group, 423 contributed primary end point data. Of these, 341 (81%) had laboratory-confirmed infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or epidemiologically linked exposure to a person with laboratory-confirmed infection; 56% (236 of 423) were enrolled within 1 day of symptoms starting. Change in symptom severity over 14 days did not differ between the hydroxychloroquine and placebo groups (difference in symptom severity: relative, 12%; absolute, Ϫ0.27 points [95% CI, Ϫ0.61 to 0.07 points]; P = 0.117). At 14 days, 24% (49 of 201) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine had ongoing symptoms compared with 30% (59 of 194) receiving placebo (P = 0.21). Medication adverse effects occurred in 43% (92 of 212) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine versus 22% (46 of 211) receiving placebo (P < 0.001). With placebo, 10 hospitalizations occurred (2 non-COVID-19-related), including 1 hospitalized death. With hydroxychloroquine, 4 hospitalizations occurred plus 1 nonhospitalized death (P = 0.29). Limitations: Only 58% of participants received SARS-CoV-2 testing because of severe U.S. testing shortages. Conclusion: Hydroxychloroquine did not substantially reduce symptom severity in outpatients with early, mild COVID-19.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a rapidly emerging viral infection causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have garnered unprecedented attention as potential therapeutic agents against COVID-19 following several small clinical trials, uncontrolled case series, and public figure endorsements. While there is a growing body of scientific data, there is also concern for harm, particularly QTc prolongation and cardiac arrhythmias. Here, we perform a rapid narrative review and discuss the strengths and limitations of existing in vitro and clinical studies. We call for additional randomized controlled trial evidence prior to the widespread incorporation of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine into national and international treatment guidelines.

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a rapidly emerging virus causing the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic with no known effective prophylaxis. We investigated whether hydroxychloroquine could prevent SARS-CoV-2 in healthcare workers at high risk of exposure. Methods We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of healthcare workers with ongoing exposure to persons with SARS-CoV-2, including those working in emergency departments, intensive care units, Covid-19 hospital wards, and first responders. Participants across the United States and in the Canadian province of Manitoba were randomized to hydroxychloroquine 400mg once weekly or twice weekly for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was confirmed or probable Covid-19-compatible illness. We measured hydroxychloroquine whole blood concentrations. Results We enrolled 1483 healthcare workers, of which 79% reported performing aerosol-generating procedures. The incidence of Covid-19 (laboratory-confirmed or symptomatic compatible illness) was 0.27 events per person-year with once-weekly and 0.28 events per person-year with twice-weekly hydroxychloroquine compared with 0.38 events per person-year with placebo. For once weekly hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis, the hazard ratio was 0.72 (95%CI 0.44 to 1.16; P=0.18), and for twice-weekly was 0.74 (95%CI 0.46 to 1.19; P=0.22) as compared with placebo. Median hydroxychloroquine concentrations in whole blood were 98 ng/mL (IQR, 82-120) with once-weekly and 200 ng/mL (IQR, 159-258) with twice-weekly dosing. Hydroxychloroquine concentrations did not differ between participants who developed Covid-19-compatible illness (154 ng/mL) versus participants without Covid-19 (133 ng/mL; P=0.08). Conclusions Pre-exposure prophylaxis with hydroxychloroquine once or twice weekly did not significantly reduce laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 or Covid-19-compatible illness among healthcare workers.

Recent advances in the diagnosis and management of cryptococcal meningitis are promising and have been improving long-term survival. Point of care testing has made diagnosing cryptococcal meningitis rapid, practical, and affordable. Targeted screening and treatment programs for cryptococcal antigenemia are a cost effective method for reducing early mortality on antiretroviral therapy (ART). Optimal initial management with amphotericin and flucytosine improves survival against alternative therapies, although amphotericin is difficult to administer and flucytosine is not available in middle or low income countries, where cryptococcal meningitis is most prevalent. Controlling increased intracranial pressure with serial therapeutic lumbar punctures has a proven survival benefit. Delaying ART initiation for 4 weeks after the diagnosis of cryptococcal meningitis is associated with improved survival. Fortunately, new approaches have been leading the way toward improving care for cryptococcal meningitis patients. New trials utilizing different combinations of antifungal therapy are reviewed, and we summarize the efficacy of different regimens.

Background Cryptococcus is the most common cause of adult meningitis in Africa. We evaluated the activity of adjunctive sertraline, previously demonstrated to have in vitro and in vivo activity against Cryptococcus. Methods We enrolled 172 HIV-infected Ugandans with cryptococcal meningitis from August 2013 through August 2014 into an open-label dose-finding study to assess safety and microbiologic efficacy. Sertraline 100–400mg/day was added to standard therapy of amphotericin + fluconazole 800mg/day. We evaluated early fungicidal activity via Cryptococcus cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) clearance rate, sertraline pharmacokinetics, and in vitro susceptibility. Findings Participants receiving any sertraline dose averaged a CSF clearance rate of −0·37 (95%CI: −0·41, −0·33) colony forming units (CFU)/mL/day. Incidence of paradoxical immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS) was 5% (2/43) and relapse was 0% through 12-weeks. Sertraline reached steady state concentrations in plasma by day 7, with median steady-state concentrations of 201 ng/mL (IQR, 90–300; n=49) with 200mg/day and 399 ng/mL (IQR, 279–560; n=30) with 400mg/day. Plasma concentrations reached 83% of steady state levels by day 3. The median projected steady state brain tissue concentration at 200mg/day was 3·7 (IQR, 2·0–5·7) mcg/mL and 6·8 (IQR, 4·6–9·7) mcg/mL at 400mg/day. Minimum inhibitory concentrations were ≤2 mcg/mL for 27% (35/128), ≤4 mcg/mL for 84% (108/128), ≤6 mcg/mL for 91% (117/128), and ≤8 mcg/mL for 100% of 128 Cryptococcus isolates. Interpretation Sertraline had faster cryptococcal CSF clearance, decreased IRIS, and decreased relapse compared with historical experiences. Sertraline reaches therapeutic levels in a clinical setting. This inexpensive and off-patent oral medication is a promising adjunctive antifungal therapy. Funding National Institutes of Health, Grand Challenges Canada.

Background: Identifying new antifungals for cryptococcal meningitis remains a priority given the inadequacy of current therapy. Sertraline has previously demonstrated in vitro and in vivo activity against Cryptococcus. We evaluated the efficacy of adjunctive sertraline for cryptococcal meningitis in a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Methods: We assessed 18-week survival among HIV-infected Ugandan adults with cryptococcal meningitis enrolled from 09 March 2015 to 29 May 2017. Participants were randomly assigned to receive standard therapy with 7-14 days of amphotericin (0•7-1•0 mg/kg/day) + fluconazole (starting at 800 mg/day) with either adjunctive sertraline or placebo. Sertraline was administered at a dose of 400 mg/day for 2 weeks, followed by 200 mg/day for 12 weeks, then tapered off over 3 weeks. Randomisation in a 1:1 ratio was performed with variable block sizes of 2 and 4, with stratification by site (Kampala or Mbarara) and antiretroviral status (experienced or naïve). Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number .

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a novel pathogen causing the current worldwide coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Due to insufficient diagnostic testing in the United States, there is a need for clinical decision-making algorithms to guide testing prioritization. Methods We recruited participants nationwide for a randomized clinical trial. We categorized participants into three groups: 1) those with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, 2) those with probable SARS-CoV-2 infection (pending test or not tested but with a confirmed COVID-19 contact), and 3) those with possible SARS-CoV-2 infection (pending test or not tested and with a contact for whom testing was pending or not performed). We compared the frequency of self-reported symptoms in each group and categorized those reporting symptoms in early infection (0 – 2 days), mid-infection (3 – 5 days), and late infection (&gt;5 days). Results Among 1,252 symptomatic persons screened, 316 had confirmed, 393 had probable, and 543 had possible SARS-CoV-2 infection. In early infection, those with confirmed and probable SARS-CoV-2 infection shared similar symptom profiles, with fever most likely in confirmed cases (p = 0.002). Confirmed cases did not show any statistically significant differences compared to unconfirmed cases in symptom frequency at any time points. The most commonly reported symptoms in those with confirmed infection were cough (82%), fever (67%), fatigue (62%), and headache (60%), with only 52% reporting both fever and cough. Conclusion Symptomatic persons with probable SARS-CoV-2 infection present similarly to those with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. There was no pattern of symptom frequency over time.