Safety and effectiveness of azithromycin in patients with COVID-19: An open-label randomised trial

Sekhavati, Ehsan; Jafari, Fatemeh; SeyedAlinaghi, SeyedAhmad; Jamalimoghadamsiahkali, Saeidreza; Sadr, Sara; Tabarestani, Mohammad; Pirhayati, Mohammad; Zendehdel, Abolfazl; Manafi, Navid; Hajiabdolbaghi, Mahboubeh; Ahmadinejad, Zahra; Kouchak, Hamid Emadi; Jafari, Sirous; Khalili, Hosseinali; Salehi, Mohammad Amin; Seifi, Arash; Golestan, Fereshteh Shahmari; Ghiasvand, Fereshteh

doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.106143

Cited by 82 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a new strain of coronavirus, causes coronavirus disease 2019 (CoVID-19), which was first reported in China in late 2019 and then spread rapidly worldwide[ 1 - 5 ]. The symptoms of CoVID-19 are high temperature, dry cough, shortness of breath, headache, tiredness, loss of taste or smell, and gastrointestinal symptoms such as diarrhea, anorexia, nausea, and abdominal pain[ 6 - 8 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reinfection risk of novel coronavirus (CoVID-19): A systematic ‎review of current evidence

SeyedAlinaghi¹,

Oliaei²,

Kianzad³

et al. 2020

WJV

Self Cite

114

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND There is recently a concern regarding the reinfection and reactivation of previously reCoVered coronavirus disease 2019 (CoVID-19) patients. AIM To summarize the recent findings and reports of CoVID-19 reinfection in patients previously reCoVered from the disease. METHODS This study was a systematic review of current evidence conducted in August 2020. The authors studied the probable reinfection risk of novel coronavirus (CoVID-19). We performed a systematic search using the keywords in online databases. The investigation adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist to ensure the reliability and validity of this study and results. RESULTS We reviewed 31 studies. Eight studies described reCoVered patients with reinfection. Only one study reported reinfected patients who died. In 26 studies, there was no information about the status of the patients. Several studies indicated that reinfection is not probable and that post-infection immunity is at least temporary and short. CONCLUSION Based on our review, we concluded that a positive polymerase chain reaction retest could be due to several reasons and should not always be considered as reinfection or reactivation of the disease. Most relevant studies in positive retest patients have shown relative and probably temporary immunity after the reCoVery of the disease.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reinfection risk of novel coronavirus (CoVID-19): A systematic ‎review of current evidence

SeyedAlinaghi¹,

Oliaei²,

Kianzad³

et al. 2020

WJV

Self Cite

114

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We read the recent article entitled ‘Safety and effectiveness of azithromycin in patients with COVID-19: an open-label randomized trial’ by Sekhavati et al. regarding the treatment of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with azithromycin [1] . We wish to highlight some points regarding this trial based on our clinical experience and review of the current literature.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These findings suggest that patients in the control group were sicker upon hospital admission, which could have overestimated the effect of azithromycin in the case group. Furthermore, an inclusion criterion was radiographic evidence of COVID-19 pulmonary involvement on computed tomography (CT) scan [1] . However, no details of the CT scan findings were provided for either group.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Azithromycin, a questionable treatment for COVID-19

Belfaqeeh

Janapala

Patel

et al. 2021

International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We thank the authors of the letter to the editor, “Azithromycin, treatment in COVID-19” for their careful reading of our paper “Safety and effectiveness of azithromycin in patients with COVID-19: An open-label randomised trial” [1] and their precise and helpful comments. We would like to discuss the issues raised by the authors of the letter and to provide further information and an update on our paper.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In response, we emphasize that no false claim was made in our discussion. The paper demonstrating effectiveness of azithromycin against Zika and Ebola viruses has been cited to be based on an in vitro study [1] , [8] . Although we agree that effectiveness in human models based on in vitro studies cannot be assumed, in vitro studies are a crucial step before progression to in vivo studies and clinical trials.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%