Hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of anti-histamine refractory chronic spontaneous urticaria, randomized single-blinded placebo-controlled trial and an open label comparison study

Boonpiyathad, Tadech; Sangasapaviliya, Atik

doi:10.23822/eurannaci.1764-1489.11

Cited by 36 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thirty-six [ 28 – 34 , 36 , 38 – 40 , 42 – 46 , 48 – 50 , 53 – 55 , 57 – 63 , 67 – 71 , 73 , 76 , 78 ] of the 53 included studies, consisting of 4229 patients, reported SAEs. In the HCQ group, 2173 patients reported 55 SAEs, while in the control group, 2056 patients reported 38 SAEs.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 and other diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 53 randomized trials

Chen

Pan

et al. 2020

Eur J Clin Pharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Many concerns still exist regarding the safety of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objectives The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19 and other diseases by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the safety of HCQ in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were retrieved starting from the establishment of the database till June 5, 2020. Literature screening, data extraction, and assessment of risk bias were performed independently by two reviewers. Results We identified 53 eligible studies involving 5496 patients. The meta-analysis indicated that the risk of adverse effects (AEs) in the HCQ group was significantly increased compared with that in the control group (RD 0.05, 95%CI, 0.02 to 0.07, P = 0.0002), and the difference was also statistically significant in the COVID-19 subgroup (RD 0.15, 95%CI, 0.07 to 0.23, P = 0.0002) as well as in the subgroup for other diseases (RD 0.03, 95%CI, 0.01 to 0.04, P = 0.003). Conclusions HCQ is associated with a high total risk of AEs compared with the placebo or no intervention in the overall population. Given the small number of COVID-19 participants included, we should be cautious regarding the conclusion stating that HCQ is linked with an increase incidence of AEs in patients with COVID-19, which we hope to confirm in the future through well-designed and larger sample size studies. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00228-020-02962-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 and other diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 53 randomized trials

Chen

Pan

et al. 2020

Eur J Clin Pharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The search process identified 713 articles, and a total of nine RCTs [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] were included after screening by title/abstract followed by full text review (Fig. 1).…”

Section: Search Results and Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The characteristics of studies are summarized in Table 1, and the study quality assessment is summarized in Table 2. Eight RCTs were double-blind [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18], and one was single-blind [10]. Only three RCTs were funded by drug companies [11,12,18].…”

Section: Search Results and Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hydroxychloroquine safety: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Eljaaly

Alireza

Alshehri

et al. 2020

Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is currently being examined for COVID-19. No previous meta-analysis has evaluated its side effects versus placebo. We conducted this meta-analysis to compare the safety of HCQ versus placebo. Methods: Two authors independently searched PubMed and EMBASE databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adults comparing the adverse events (AEs) of HCQ versus placebo for any indication. Peto odds ratios (Peto ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated based on random-effects models. The heterogeneity (I 2) was assessed using Cochran's Q test. Results: Nine RCTs (eight were double-blind) with a total of 916 patients were included. HCQ caused significantly more skin pigmentation than placebo

show abstract

“…Out of 92 studies included, eight were on COVID-19 [21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28], 13 studies were on malaria [29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41], 11 on other infectious conditions [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53], 31 were on rheumatology , four on dermatologic diseases [85][86][87][88], eight on cancer [89][90][91][92][93][94][95][96], ve were on metabolic disease [97][98][99][100][101],...…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Safety of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine From Randomized Controlled Trials on Malarial and Non-malarial Conditions

Botelho

Bolfi

Leite

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Despite the expectations regarding the effectiveness of chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) management, concerns about their adverse events have remained. Objectives: The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the safety of CQ and HCQ from malarial and non-malarial randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Methods: The primary outcomes were the frequencies of serious adverse events (SAEs), retinopathy, and cardiac complications. Search strategies were applied to MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL, Scopus, and Trip databases. We used random-effects model to pool results across studies and Peto one-step odds ratio (OR) for event rates below 1 %. Both-armed zero-event studies were excluded from the meta-analyses. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system to evaluate the certainty of evidence.Results: Ninety-two RCTs were included. We found no significant difference between CQ/HCQ and control (placebo or non-CQ/HCQ) in the frequency of SAEs (OR: 0.98, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.71–1.36, 25 trials, 11,605 participants, moderate certainty of evidence). No clear relationship was observed between CQ/HCQ and retinopathy (OR: 1,63, 95 % CI: -0.4–6.57, 5 trials, 344 participants, very low certainty of evidence). There was a low certainty of evidence of the effect of CQ/HCQ versus control on cardiac complications (Relative risk: 1.48, 95 % CI: 1.1–1.98, 8 trials, 5,970 participants).Conclusions: CQ and HCQ might be safe, with low frequency of SAEs on malarial and non-malarial conditions. No clear effect of their use on the incidence of retinopathy and cardiac complications was observed.The protocol for this systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020177818)

show abstract

Hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of anti-histamine refractory chronic spontaneous urticaria, randomized single-blinded placebo-controlled trial and an open label comparison study

Abstract: Summary Background. The management of anti-histamine refractory chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) has poorly defined therapeutic options. Some patients with CSU respond poorly to a fourfold increase in dosage of

Cited by 36 publications

References 8 publications

Safety of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 and other diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 53 randomized trials

Safety of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 and other diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 53 randomized trials

Hydroxychloroquine safety: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Safety of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine From Randomized Controlled Trials on Malarial and Non-malarial Conditions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About