ReviewJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences
Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine in Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19: What Is Known?
Review in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antimicrobial activity of clioquinol and nitroxoline: a scoping review.Archives of microbiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the entire world causing huge economic losses and considerable morbidity and mortality. Considering the explosive growth of the pandemic repurposing existing medicines may be cost-effective and may be approved for use in COVID-19 faster. Researchers and medical practitioners worldwide have explored the use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, in few occasions combined with the macrolide antibiotic azithromycin, for COVID-19 treatment. These two drugs are economic and easily available, and hence gained attention as a potential option for COVID-19 management. As per the available evidence, the outcomes of treatments with these medications are conflicting from both the efficacy and safety (predominantly cardiac related) perspectives. Currently, multiple studies are underway to test the safety and efficacy of these medications and more results are expected in the near future. The retina, the endocrine system (with risk of hypoglycemia), the musculoskeletal system, the hematological system, and the neurological system may also be affected. The use of these drugs is contraindicated in patients with arrhythmias, known hypersensitivity, and in patients on amiodarone. In addition to the published literature, personal communication with doctors treating COVID-19 patients seems to suggest the drugs may be effective in reducing symptoms and hastening clinical recovery. The literature evidence is still equivocal and further results are awaited. There has been recent controversy including retraction of articles published in prestigious journals about these medicines. Their low cost, long history of use, and easy availability are positive factors with regard to use of these drugs in COVID-19.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.