In:
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science (PLoS), Vol. 16, No. 1 ( 2021-1-6), p. e0244778-
Abstract:
Populations such as healthcare workers (HCW) that are unable to practice physical distancing are at high risk of acquiring Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). In these cases pharmacological prophylaxis would be a solution to reduce severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS CoV-2) transmission. Hydroxychloroquine has in vitro antiviral properties against SARS CoV-2. We therefore sought to determine the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine as prophylaxis for COVID-19. Methods and findings We electronically searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane COVID-19 Register of Controlled Trials, Epistemonikos COVID-19, clinicaltrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform up to September 28 th , 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We calculated pooled relative risks (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effect model. We identified four RCTs (n = 4921) that met our eligibility criteria. The use of hydroxychloroquine, compared to placebo, did not reduce the risks of developing COVID-19 (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.04, moderate certainty), hospitalization (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.50, moderate certainty), or mortality (RR 3.26, 95% CI 0.13 to 79.74, low certainty), however, hydroxychloroquine use increased the risk of adverse events (RR 2.76, 95% CI 1.38 to 5.55, moderate certainty). Conclusion Although pharmacologic prophylaxis is an attractive preventive strategy against COVID-19, the current body of evidence failed to show clinical benefit for prophylactic hydroxychloroquine and showed a higher risk of adverse events when compared to placebo or no prophylaxis.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
1932-6203
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.g001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.g002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.g003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.g004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.g005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.g006
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.t001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.t002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s001
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s002
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s003
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s004
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s005
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s006
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s007
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s008
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s009
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s010
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s011
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s012
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s013
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s014
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s015
DOI:
10.1371/journal.pone.0244778.s016
Language:
English
Publisher:
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Publication Date:
2021
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2267670-3
Bookmarklink