Therapeutic efficacy and adverse events of hydroxychloroquine administration in Japanese systemic/cutaneous lupus erythematosus patients

Kishi, Chikako; Motegi, Sei‐ichiro; Yasuda, Masahito; Ishikawa, Osamu

doi:10.1111/1346-8138.14512

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(9 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies revealed that skin ADRs generally occurred 5~14 days after the beginning of HCQ therapy, and the rash was characterized as lichen-like, urticaria or simply rash. Additionally, the symptoms were generally mild, which could be relieved after withdrawal of therapy [88,89]. The skin and subcutaneous tissue SAEs associated with HCQ that were frequently reported in the literature were acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP) [12][13][14][90][91][92][93], pigmentation [15,17,[94][95][96][97][98][99][100], Stevens-Johnson syndrome [19,101], and toxic epidermal necrolysis [18,102,103].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

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: Discussionmentioning

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

“…Forty-seven articles reported data on the safety of CQ or HCQ when used alone and nine others provided data for when CQ or HCQ were combined with one of the drugs of interest [ 126 , 127 , 128 , 129 , 130 , 131 , 132 , 133 , 134 , 135 , 136 , 137 , 138 , 139 , 140 , 141 , 142 , 143 , 144 , 145 , 146 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 150 , 151 , 152 , 153 , 154 , 155 , 156 , 157 , 158 , 159 , 160 , 161 , 162 , 163 , 164 , 165 , 166 , 167 , 168 , 169 , 170 ...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety of Short-Term Treatments with Oral Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine in Patients with and without COVID-19: A Systematic Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have recently become the focus of global attention as possible treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). The current systematic review aims to assess their safety in short treatments (≤14 days), whether used alone or in combination with other drugs. Following the PRISMA and SWiM recommendations, a search was conducted using four health databases for all relevant English-, Chinese-, and Spanish-language studies from inception through 30 July 2021. Patients treated for any condition and with any comparator were included. The outcomes of interest were early drug adverse effects and their frequency. A total of 254 articles met the inclusion criteria, including case and case-control reports as well as cross-sectional, cohort, and randomised studies. The results were summarised either qualitatively in table or narrative form or, when possible (99 studies), quantitatively in terms of adverse event frequencies. Quality evaluation was conducted using the CARE, STROBE, and JADAD tools. This systematic review showed that safety depended on drug indication. In COVID-19 patients, cardiac adverse effects, such as corrected QT interval prolongation, were relatively frequent (0–27.3% and up to 33% if combined with azithromycin), though the risk of torsade de pointes was low. Compared to non-COVID-19 patients, COVID-19 patients experienced a higher frequency of cardiac adverse effects regardless of the regimen used. Dermatological adverse effects affected 0–10% of patients with autoimmune diseases and COVID-19. A broad spectrum of neuropsychiatric adverse effects affected patients treated with CQ for malaria with variable frequencies and some cases were reported in COVID-19 patients. Gastrointestinal adverse effects occurred regardless of drug indication affecting 0–50% of patients. In conclusion, CQ and HCQ are two safe drugs widely used in the treatment of malaria and autoimmune diseases. However, recent findings on their cardiac and neuropsychiatric adverse effects should be considered if these drugs were to be proposed as antivirals again.

show abstract

“…B formulation and HCQS had comparable and better results than BPRT for several efficacy measures. HCQS long-term therapy had proven adverse effects 31 and the possibility of adverse effects in Ayurvedic herbal drugs was less. All three interventions showed an impressive fall in serum IL-1β.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Pain: An Ayurvedic Approach

Mahesh¹,

Wele²,

Patgiri³

et al. 2019

Int. Res. J. Pharm.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pain is a serious problem globally due to its high prevalence and is regarded as the fifth vital sign. The standard methods comprising of NSAID and opioid group, interventional methods and implantable methods; although often very effective, have known adverse effects on gastrointestinal, renal and cardiovascular systems and surgical risks. Ayurvedic pain management comprises of pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches. In this review, we have discussed pain management using herbal and herbomineral formulations. We began with comparison of Ayurvedic concept of pain with that of Biomedicine to arrive at concurrence and then systematically searched the databases PubMed and Scopus using search terms 'pain management, animal models of pain, Ayurveda and herbal medicine'. Out of 160 initial papers, 16 studies involving a total of 1591 participants befitting inclusion criteria were analyzed for the type of pain, intervention, outcome measures and results and others were rejected. PRISMA is followed to report the findings. Studies on Ayurvedic medicines were conducted in three different countries. Eight of them were RCT's with five multi-centered studies. Three single herbs, six polyherbal formulation, one herbomineral formulation and various external therapies were identified. The studies used standard scales like VAS or WOMAC index for analyzing the intensity of pain and showed statistically significant results to Ayurvedic medications in various pain conditions without any adverse effects. This review gives a comprehensive understanding of the concept of pain and its management from both Biomedicine and Ayurveda. It also highlights the unexplored potential of many herbomineral formulations to treat pain.

show abstract

Therapeutic efficacy and adverse events of hydroxychloroquine administration in Japanese systemic/cutaneous lupus erythematosus patients

Cited by 11 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

Safety of Short-Term Treatments with Oral Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine in Patients with and without COVID-19: A Systematic Review

Review of Pain: An Ayurvedic Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About