Substantial COVID-19 research investment has been allocated to randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, which currently face recruitment challenges or early discontinuation. We aim to estimate the effects of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine on survival in COVID-19 from all currently available RCT evidence, published and unpublished. We present a rapid meta-analysis of ongoing, completed, or discontinued RCTs on hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine treatment for any COVID-19 patients (protocol: https://osf.io/QESV4/). We systematically identified unpublished RCTs (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Cochrane COVID-registry up to June 11, 2020), and published RCTs (PubMed, medRxiv and bioRxiv up to October 16, 2020). All-cause mortality has been extracted (publications/preprints) or requested from investigators and combined in random-effects meta-analyses, calculating odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), separately for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine. Prespecified subgroup analyses include patient setting, diagnostic confirmation, control type, and publication status. Sixty-three trials were potentially eligible. We included 14 unpublished trials (1308 patients) and 14 publications/preprints (9011 patients). Results for hydroxychloroquine are dominated by RECOVERY and WHO SOLIDARITY, two highly pragmatic trials, which employed relatively high doses and included 4716 and 1853 patients, respectively (67% of the total sample size). The combined OR on all-cause mortality for hydroxychloroquine is 1.11 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.20; I² = 0%; 26 trials; 10,012 patients) and for chloroquine 1.77 (95%CI: 0.15, 21.13, I² = 0%; 4 trials; 307 patients). We identified no subgroup effects. We found that treatment with hydroxychloroquine is associated with increased mortality in COVID-19 patients, and there is no benefit of chloroquine. Findings have unclear generalizability to outpatients, children, pregnant women, and people with comorbidities.

Metastatic infection is an important complication of bacteremia (SAB). Early diagnosis of metastatic infection is crucial, because specific treatment is required. However, metastatic infection can be asymptomatic and difficult to detect. In this study, we investigated the role ofF-FDG PET/CT in patients with SAB for detection of metastatic infection and its consequences for treatment and outcome. All patients with SAB at Radboud University Medical Center were included between January 2013 and April 2016. Clinical data and results ofF-FDG PET/CT and other imaging techniques, including echocardiography, were collected. Primary outcomes were newly diagnosed metastatic infection by F-FDG PET/CT, subsequent treatment modifications, and patient outcome. A total of 184 patients were included, and F-FDG PET/CT was performed in 105 patients, of whom 99 had a high-risk bacteremia.F-FDG PET/CT detected metastatic infectious foci in 73.7% of these high-risk patients. In 71.2% of patients with metastatic infection, no signs and symptoms suggesting metastatic complications were present before F-FDG PET/CT was performed.F-FDG PET/CT led to a total of 104 treatment modifications in 74 patients. Three-month mortality was higher in high-risk bacteremia patients without F-FDG PET/CT performed than in those in whomF-FDG PET/CT was performed (32.7% vs. 12.4%, = 0.003). In multivariate analysis,F-FDG PET/CT was the only factor independently associated with reduced mortality ( = 0.005; odds ratio, 0.204; 95% confidence interval, 0.066-0.624). A higher comorbidity score was independently associated with increased mortality ( = 0.003; odds ratio, 1.254; 95% confidence interval, 1.078-1.457). F-FDG PET/CT is a valuable technique for early detection of metastatic infectious foci, often leading to treatment modification. PerformingF-FDG PET/CT is associated with significantly reduced 3-mo mortality.

Background The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) situation demands a lot from citizens, health care providers, and governmental institutions. Citizens need to cope with guidelines on social interaction, work, home isolation, and symptom recognition. Additionally, health care providers and policy makers have to cope with unprecedented and unpredictable pressure on the health care system they need to manage. By providing citizens with an app, they always have access to the latest information and can assess their own health. This data could be used to support policy makers and health care providers to get valuable insights in the regional distribution of infection load and health care consumption. Objective The aim of this observational study is to assess people’s use of an app to support them with COVID-19 education, self-assessment, and monitoring of their own health for a 7-day period. In addition, we aim to assess the usability of this data for health care providers and policy makers by applying it to an interactive map and combining it with hospital data. The secondary outcomes of the study were user’s satisfaction with the information provided in the app, perceived usefulness of the app, health care providers they contacted, and the follow-up actions from this contact. Methods This observational cohort study was carried out at the nonacademic teaching hospital “Elisabeth Twee Steden” (ETZ) in Tilburg, Netherlands. From April 1, 2020, onwards ETZ offered the COVID-19 education, self-assessment, and symptom tracking diary to their already existing app for patient education and monitoring. Results Between April 1 and April 20, 2020, a total of 6194 people downloaded the app. The self-assessment functionality was used abundantly to check one’s health status. In total, 5104 people responded to the question about severe symptoms, from which 242 indicated to suffer from severe symptoms. A total of 4929 people responded to the question about mild symptoms, from which 3248 indicated to suffer from these. The data was successfully applied to an interactive map, displaying user demographics and health status. Furthermore, the data was linked to clinical data. App users were satisfied with the information in the app and appreciated the symptom diary functionality. In total, 102 users reached out to a health care provider, leading to 91 contacts. Conclusions Our study demonstrated the successful implementation and use of an app with COVID-19 education, self-assessment, and a 7-day symptom diary. Data collected with the app were successfully applied to an interactive map. In addition, we were able to link the data to COVID-19 screening results from the hospital’s microbiology laboratory. This data could be used to support policy makers and health care providers to get valuable insights in the regional distribution of infection load and health care consumption. Trial Registration Netherlands Trial Register NL8501; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8501

Background: Substantial COVID-19 research investment has been allocated to randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, which currently face recruitment challenges or early discontinuation. We aimed to estimate the effects of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine on survival in COVID-19 from all currently available RCT evidence, published and unpublished. Methods: Rapid meta-analysis of ongoing, completed, or discontinued RCTs on hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine treatment for any COVID-19 patients (protocol: https://osf.io/QESV4/). We systematically identified published and unpublished RCTs by September 14, 2020 (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, PubMed, Cochrane COVID-19 registry). All-cause mortality was extracted (publications/preprints) or requested from investigators and combined in random-effects meta-analyses, calculating odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), separately for hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine. Prespecified subgroup analyses included patient setting, diagnostic confirmation, control type, and publication status. Results: Sixty-two trials were potentially eligible. We included 16 unpublished trials (1596 patients) and 10 publications/preprints (6317 patients). The combined summary OR on all-cause mortality for hydroxychloroquine was 1.08 (95%CI: 0.99, 1.18; I-square=0%; 24 trials; 7659 patients) and for chloroquine 1.77 (95%CI: 0.15, 21.13, I-square=0%; 4 trials; 307 patients). We identified no subgroup effects. Conclusions: We found no benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine on the survival of COVID-19 patients. For hydroxychloroquine, the confidence interval is compatible with increased mortality (OR 1.18) or negligibly reduced mortality (OR 0.99). Findings have unclear generalizability to outpatients, children, pregnant women, and people with comorbidities.

Oral prednisolone seems effective in the acute phase of neuralgic amyotrophy with the current results supporting previous case reports. A regimen of oral prednisolone is therefore recommended in the acute phase of the syndrome pending a prospective, randomised trial verifying the results obtained.