Int J Rheum Dis. 2020;23:613-619. | 613 wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/apl 1 | INTRODUC TI ON The present world is experiencing a pandemic (coronavirus disease-19 or COVID-19) caused by a novel strain of coronavirus, called SARS-CoV-2, previously called 2019-CoV. At the time of writing this article, 3 72 757 cases spanning over 195 countries and territories and 1 international conveyance have been reported. 1 This could be an underestimate due to the lower number of diagnostic tests and case identification partly due to poor health services in most countries. The mortality rate stands at 0.5-4.4% 2 ;however, this could be an overestimate as the exact denominator of actual number of cases is underreported. Diversion of all healthcare facilities toward the COVID-19 pandemic is likely to increase the morbidity and mortality due to other health problems. AbstractObjective: The pandemic coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) has pushed the global healthcare system to a crisis and amounted to a huge economic burden. Different drugs for prophylaxis against COVID-19 including chloroquine (CQ) or hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have been tried. This study was performed to systematically review the role of CQ and HCQ in preventing the spread of COVID-19. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies that evaluated the prophylactic role of CQ or HCQ on SARS-CoV-2 (pre-clinical studies) or COVID-19 (clinical studies) until 30 March 2020. The available literature was critically appraised. Results: A total of 45 articles were screened and 5 (3 in vitro pre-clinical studies and 2 clinical opinions) were included. The pre-clinical studies showed the prophylactic effects of CQ and HCQ against SARS-CoV-2. On the other hand, the clinical opinions advocated the prophylactic use of CQ and HCQ against COVID-19. However, no original clinical studies on the prophylactic role of CQ or HCQ on COVID-19 were available.Conclusion: Although pre-clinical results are promising, to date there is a dearth of evidence to support the efficacy of CQ or HCQ in preventing COVID-19. Considering potential safety issues and the likelihood of imparting a false sense of security, prophylaxis with CQ or HCQ against COVID-19 needs to be thoroughly evaluated in observational studies or high-quality randomized controlled studies. K E Y W O R D Schloroquine, COVID-19, high-risk, hydroxychloroquine, prevention, SARS-CoV-2

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is likely to pose new challenges to the rheumatology community in the near and distant future. Some of the challenges, like the severity of COVID-19 among patients on immunosuppressive agents, are predictable and are being evaluated with great care and effort across the globe. A few others, such as atypical manifestations of COVID-19 mimicking rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) are being reported. Like in many other viral infections, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection can potentially lead to an array of rheumatological and autoimmune manifestations by molecular mimicry (cross-reacting epitope between the virus and the host), bystander killing (virus-specific CD8 + T cells migrating to the target tissues and exerting cytotoxicity), epitope spreading, viral persistence (polyclonal activation due to the constant presence of viral antigens driving immune-mediated injury) and formation of neutrophil extracellular traps. In addition, the myriad of antiviral drugs presently being tried in the treatment of COVID-19 can result in several rheumatic musculoskeletal adverse effects. In this review, we have addressed the possible spectrum and mechanisms of various autoimmune and rheumatic musculoskeletal manifestations that can be precipitated by COVID-19 infection, its therapy, and the preventive strategies to contain the infection. Keywords Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) • Rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) • Autoimmunity • Rheumatology Abbreviations AAV Anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodyassociated vasculitis ACE2 Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 ANA Antinuclear antibodies AIDS Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome APCs Antigen-presenting cells APS Antiphospholipid antibody syndrome ARDS Acute respiratory distress syndrome CAHA Coronavirus-associated hemostatic lung abnormality CART Chimeric antigen receptor T cell CCL2 Chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 2 CK Creatine kinase COVID-19 Coronavirus disease-2019 CSF Cerebrospinal fluid CRS Cytokine release syndrome CXCL8 C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 8 DADA-2 Deficiency of adenosine deaminase-2 DIC Disseminated intravascular coagulation Rheumatology INTERNATIONAL Sanket Shah and Debashish Danda have contributed equally as first authors.

Background and ObjectiveThe world is currently experiencing the Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. There is no approved drug for the definitive treatment of the disease. Various drugs are being tried for the treatment of COVID-19, including hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). This study was performed to systematically review the therapeutic role of HCQ in COVID-19 from the available literature. Methods PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, ICTRP (WHO), Cochrane Library databases, and two pre-print servers (medRxiv.org and Research Square) were searched for clinical studies that evaluated the therapeutic role of HCQ on COVID-19 until 10 May 2020. The available studies were critically analyzed and the data were extracted. Results A total of 663 articles were screened and 12 clinical studies (seven peer-reviewed and published studies and five non-peer-reviewed studies from pre-print servers) with a total sample size of 3543 patients were included. Some of the clinical studies demonstrated good virological and clinical outcomes with HCQ alone or in combination with azithromycin in COVID-19 patients, although the studies had major methodological limitations. Some of the other studies showed negative results with HCQ therapy along with the risk of adverse reactions. ConclusionThe results of efficacy and safety of HCQ in COVID-19, as obtained from the clinical studies, are not satisfactory, although many of these studies had major methodological limitations. Stronger evidence from well-designed robust randomized clinical trials is required before conclusively determining the role of HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19. Clinical prudence is required in advocating HCQ as a therapeutic armamentarium in COVID-19. Key PointsEfficacy and safety results obtained from clinical studies on the therapeutic role of HCQ in COVID-19 are not satisfactory.The majority of the published studies have major methodological limitations.Safety aspects associated with the use of HCQ along with azithromycin in COVID-19 warrants caution.Large and robust randomized controlled trials will conclusively determine the role of HCQ in COVID-19.

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is a serious and potentially fatal adverse effect to therapeutic medications. The incidence of this condition varies among different ethnicities because of the difference in the genetic makeup. Though fever, rash and eosinophilia are essential features for the diagnosis of this syndrome, these vary from patient to patient along with the involvement of various organs such as liver, kidney, lungs, pancreas, etc. Some of the atypical features are dysphagia, agranulocytosis, and chylous ascites. Phenytoin, phenobarbitone, carbamazepine, and allopurinol are the most common drugs responsible for developing this syndrome, although the list is fairly long. Among the criteria used for the diagnosis of DRESS syndrome, European Registry of Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions to Drugs and Collection of Biological Samples (RegiSCAR) criteria is the most commonly used one. The management of this syndrome involves early removal of the causative agent and treatment with anti-histamines and emollients in the mild form, corticosteroids in the moderate form and plasmapheresis in the severe form along with other alternatives drugs. Healthcare professionals should be more vigilant about the early manifestations of this syndrome, as early diagnosis and treatment improve outcomes considerably.

We examined the effect of a structured educational programme on explanatory models of illness among the relatives of people with schizophrenia, in a randomised controlled trial. Participants were assessed at baseline (n=100) and after 2 weeks (n=75) using a vignette from the Short Explanatory Model Interview. There was a reduction in non-biomedical causal explanatory models at follow-up among those who had completed the structured educational programme compared with the control group. There was no significant difference in non-biomedical treatment explanatory models between the two groups.

Background The causality assessment of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) remains a challenge, and none of the different available method of causality assessment used for assessing adverse reactions has been universally accepted as the gold standard. Objective To examine the agreement and correlation among three broad approaches for causality assessment of ADRs viz. World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Centre (WHO-UMC) system, Naranjo algorithm, and updated Logistic method. Setting ADR monitoring centre (AMC) of a tertiary care teaching hospital in India. Method A total of 230 cases of ADR from April 2017 to August 2017 were retrospectively analyzed by each of these three methods. The agreement among the different methods was calculated by Cohen's kappa (κ), and Spearman's correlation was used to find the correlation among these methods. Main outcome measures Cohen's kappa value and Spearman's correlation coefficient for comparison among the different methods. Results The Cohen's κ used for analyzing the agreement between WHO-UMC system and Naranjo algorithm was 0.45, between WHO-UMC system and updated Logistic method was 0.405, and between Naranjo algorithm and updated Logistic method was 0.606. The Spearman's correlation coefficient was 0.793 for Naranjo algorithm vs. updated Logistic method, 0.735 for WHO-UMC system vs. Naranjo algorithm, and 0.696 for WHO-UMC system vs. updated Logistic method. Conclusion Causality assessment based on objective measurements (scores and probabilities) like updated Logistic method and Naranjo algorithm are less prone to subjective variations compared to the WHO-UMC system which is based on expert judgement.

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) immunization is safe and has been accepted worldwide as a routine practice. The target of such vaccination is to induce the immune response in the host, resulting in the prevention of replication of HBV. There are several immunological and clinical factors which determine the clinical efficacy and safety of the HBV vaccine. In this article we have highlighted the response of the host immune system to HBV vaccination (immunogenicity), efficacy, and safety of the vaccine, issues with booster dosing, paths of development (preclinical and clinical) of the HBV vaccine, novel and upcoming strategies for improvement of HBV vaccination, and the concept of therapeutic HBV vaccination. The different aspects and regulatory recommendations pertaining to HBV vaccine development are also discussed. The new strategies for improvement of HBV vaccination include pre-S1 and pre-S2 portions of the HBV surface antigen, increasing the antigen dose, accelerated vaccination schedules, alternative vaccination route, use of adjuvants like immunostimulatory DNA sequences, etc. Therapeutic vaccination is being explored for initiation of a multifunctional and multispecific T cell response against the major HBV antigens and also effective activation of humoral immunity for viral control.

This article describes the role of a newly approved antipsychotic agent brexpiprazole in the treatment of schizophrenia and major depressive disorder. This drug has high affinity for 5-HT 1A , 5-HT 2A , D 2 and α 1B,2C receptors. It displays partial agonism at 5-HT 1A and D 2 receptors and potent antagonism at 5-HT 2A and α 1B,2C adrenergic receptors. It also has some affinity (antagonism) for D 3 , 5-HT 2B , 5-HT 7 and α 1A,1D receptors, and moderate affinity for H 1 and low affinity for M 1 receptors. These all lead to a favorable antipsychotic profile in terms of improvement of cognitive performance and sleep patterns, as well as effects on affective states and potential to treat core symptoms in schizophrenia and major depressive disorder, including cognitive deficits with a low risk of adverse effects (extrapyramidal symptoms, metabolic complications, weight gain, akathisia potential) that are commonly encountered with other typical and second-generation antipsychotic drugs. In our review, we have made an attempt to decipher the pharmacological profile of brexpiprazole from two major trials (VECTOR and BEACON). We have also tried to give a concise but detailed overview of brexpiprazole by head to head comparison of the pharmacological profile of brexpiprazole and its earlier congeners aripiprazole and prototype antipsychotic drug chlorpromazine by accessing individual summaries of product characteristics from the US Food and Drug Administration database, 2015. Relevant preclinical and clinical studies associated with this drug have been discussed with emphasis on efficacy and safety concerns. From the studies done so far, it can be concluded that brexpiprazole can be an effective monotherapy for schizophrenia and as an adjunct to other antidepressant medications in major depressive disorder.