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of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine on survival in COVID-19 from all currently available RCT evidence, published and unpublished.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 We systematically identified unpublished RCTs (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Cochrane COVID-registry up to June 11, 2020), and published RCTs (PubMed,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 We included 14 unpublished trials (1308 patients) and 14 publications/preprints (9011 patients).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.

Background. The objective of this quasi-experimental study was to determine whether bolus vitamin D supplementation taken either regularly over the preceding year or after the diagnosis of COVID-19 was effective in improving survival among hospitalized frail elderly COVID-19 patients. Methods. Seventy-seven patients consecutively hospitalized for COVID-19 in a geriatric unit were included. Intervention groups were participants regularly supplemented with vitamin D over the preceding year (Group 1), and those supplemented with vitamin D after COVID-19 diagnosis (Group 2). The comparator group involved participants having received no vitamin D supplements (Group 3). Outcomes were 14-day mortality and highest (worst) score on the ordinal scale for clinical improvement (OSCI) measured during COVID-19 acute phase. Potential confounders were age, gender, functional abilities, undernutrition, cancer, hypertension, cardiomyopathy, glycated hemoglobin, number of acute health issues at admission, hospital use of antibiotics, corticosteroids, and pharmacological treatments of respiratory disorders. Results. The three groups (n = 77; mean ± SD, 88 ± 5 years; 49% women) were similar at baseline (except for woman proportion, p = 0.02), as were the treatments used for COVID-19. In Group 1 (n = 29), 93.1% of COVID-19 participants survived at day 14, compared to 81.2% survivors in Group 2 (n = 16) (p = 0.33) and 68.7% survivors in Group 3 (n = 32) (p = 0.02). While considering Group 3 as reference (hazard ratio (HR) = 1), the fully-adjusted HR for 14-day mortality was HR = 0.07 (p = 0.017) for Group 1 and HR = 0.37 (p = 0.28) for Group 2. Group 1 had longer survival time than Group 3 (log-rank p = 0.015), although there was no difference between Groups 2 and 3 (log-rank p = 0.32). Group 1, but not Group 2 (p = 0.40), was associated with lower risk of OSCI score ≥5 compared to Group 3 (odds ratio = 0.08, p = 0.03). Conclusions. Regular bolus vitamin D supplementation was associated with less severe COVID-19 and better survival in frail elderly.

Enterococcus faecalis infective endocarditis (EFIE) is characterized by a higher frequency of relapses than other infective endocarditis. The role of the treatment on its occurrence remains poorly understood. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the antibiotic regimen could impact the risk of relapse in EFIE. This was a multicenter retrospective study of patients diagnosed with definite EFIE between 2015 and 2019 in 14 French hospitals. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of relapses within the year following endocarditis diagnosis. As death was a competing risk for relapse, Fine and Gray models were used for studying risk factors and impact of treatment. Of the 279 patients included, 83 (29.7%) received the amoxicillin-gentamicin (A-G) combination, 114 (40.9%) amoxicillin-ceftriaxone (A-C), 63 (22.6%) A-G and A-C (A-G/A-C) sequentially, 9 (3.2%) amoxicillin (A), and 10 received other treatments. One-year-relapse rate was 9.3% (26 patients). Relapse occurred after a median delay of 107 days from EFIE diagnosis; 6 occurred after 6 months, and 6 were diagnosed by blood cultures in asymptomatic patients. In multivariate analysis, surgery during treatment was a protective factor against one-year relapse and death. The cumulative incidence of relapse 1 year after endocarditis was 46.2% for patients treated with amoxicillin, 13.4% with A-G, 14.7% with A-C, and 4.3% with A-G/A-C (P≥.05 in multivariate analysis). Relapses after treatment of EFIE are frequent, frequently asymptomatic, and may occur more than 6 months after the initial episode.

To determine whether hydroxychloroquine decreases the risk of adverse outcome in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at high risk of worsening. We conducted a multicentre randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial evaluating hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 patients with at least one of the following risk factors for worsening: need for supplemental oxygen, age ≥75 years, age between 60 - 74 years and presence of at least one comorbidity. Severely ill patients requiring oxygen therapy > 3L/min or intensive care were excluded. Eligible patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 800mg hydroxychloroquine on Day 0 followed by 400mg per day for 8 days or a placebo. The primary endpoint was a composite of death or start of invasive mechanical ventilation within 14 days following randomization. Secondary endpoints included mortality and clinical evolution at Day 14 and 28, viral shedding at Day 5 and 10. The trial was stopped after 250 patients were included due to a slowdown of the pandemic in France. The intention-to-treat population comprised 123 and 124 patients in the placebo and hydroxychloroquine groups, respectively. The median age was 77 (interquartile range 58 – 86) years and 151/250 (60.4%) patients required oxygen therapy. The primary endpoint occurred in 9/124 (7.3%) patients in the hydroxychloroquine group and 8/123 (6.5%) patients in the placebo group (relative risk 1.12; 95% confidence interval 0.45– 2.80). The rate of positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR at day 5 and 10 was 72.8% (75/103) and 57.1% (52/91) in the hydroxychloroquine group, versus 73.0% (73/100) and 56.6% (47/83) in the placebo group, respectively. No difference was observed between the two groups in any of the other secondary endpoints. In this underpowered trial involving mainly older patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, patients treated with hydroxychloroquine did not experience better clinical or virological outcomes than those receiving the placebo.

The optimal treatment of streptococcal prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) is unclear. A cohort of streptococcal PJIs was reviewed retrospectively in seven reference centers for the management of complex bone and joint infections, covering the period January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012. Seventy patients with monomicrobial infections were included: 47 had infections of total hip arthroplasty and 23 had infections of total knee arthroplasty. The median age was 77 years (interquartile range (IQR) 69-83 years), the median Charlson comorbidity score was 4 (IQR 3-6), and 15.6% (n=11) had diabetes. The most commonly identified streptococcal species were Streptococcus agalactiae and Streptococcus dysgalactiae (38.6% (n=27) and 17.1% (n=12), respectively). Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) was performed after a median time of 7 days (IQR 3-8 days), with polyethylene exchange (PE) in 21% of cases. After a minimum follow-up of 2 years, 27% of patients had relapsed, corresponding to 51.4% of DAIR treatment cases and 0% of one-stage (n=15) or two-stage (n=17) exchange strategy cases. Rifampicin or levofloxacin in combination therapy was not associated with a better outcome (adjusted p= 0.99). S. agalactiae species and DAIR treatment were associated with a higher risk of failure. On multivariate analysis, only DAIR treatment and S. agalactiae were independent factors of relapse. Compared to DAIR without PE, DAIR with PE was only associated with a trend towards a benefit (odds ratio 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.06-1.96; adjusted p= 0.44). Streptococcal PJIs managed with DAIR have a poor prognosis and S. agalactiae seems to be an independent factor of treatment failure.