Background: Colchicine has been proposed as a COVID-19 treatment.Aim: To determine whether colchicine reduces time to recovery and COVID-19-related admissions to hospital and/or deaths among people in the community.Design and setting: Prospective, multicentre, open-label, multi-arm, randomised, controlled, adaptive platform trial (PRINCIPLE).Method: Adults aged ≥65 years or ≥18 years with comorbidities or shortness of breath, and unwell for ≤14 days with suspected COVID-19 in the community, were randomised to usual care, usual care plus colchicine (500 µg daily for 14 days), or usual care plus other interventions. The co-primary endpoints were time to first self-reported recovery and admission to hospital/death related to COVID-19, within 28 days, analysed using Bayesian models.Results: The trial opened on 2 April 2020. Randomisation to colchicine started on 4 March 2021 and stopped on 26 May 2021 because the prespecified time to recovery futility criterion was met. The primary analysis model included 2755 participants who were SARS-CoV-2 positive, randomised to colchicine (n = 156), usual care (n = 1145), and other treatments (n = 1454). Time to first self-reported recovery was similar in the colchicine group compared with usual care with an estimated hazard ratio of 0.92 (95% credible interval (CrI) = 0.72 to 1.16) and an estimated increase of 1.4 days in median time to self-reported recovery for colchicine versus usual care. The probability of meaningful benefit in time to recovery was very low at 1.8%. COVID-19-related admissions to hospital/deaths were similar in the colchicine group versus usual care, with an estimated odds ratio of 0.76 (95% CrI = 0.28 to 1.89) and an estimated difference of −0.4% (95% CrI = −2.7 to 2.4).Conclusion: Colchicine did not improve time to recovery in people at higher risk of complications with COVID-19 in the community.

Introduction There is an urgent need to idenfy treatments for COVID-19 that reduce illness duration and hospital admission in those at higher risk of a longer illness course and complications. Methods and analysis The Platform Randomised trial of INterventions against COVID-19 In older peoPLE trial is an open-label, multiarm, prospective, adaptive platform, randomised clinical trial to evaluate potential treatments for COVID-19 in the community. A master protocol governs the addition of new interventions as they become available, as well as the inclusion and cessation of existing intervention arms via frequent interim analyses. The first three interventions are hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and doxycycline. Eligible participants must be symptomatic in the community with possible or confirmed COVID-19 that started in the preceding 14 days and either (1) aged 65 years and over or (2) aged 50–64 years with comorbidities. Recruitment is through general practice, health service helplines, COVID-19 ‘hot hubs’ and directly through the trial website. Participants are randomised to receive either usual care or a study drug plus usual care, and outcomes are collected via daily online symptom diary for 28 days from randomisation. The research team contacts participants and/or their study partner following days 7, 14 and 28 if the online diary is not completed. The trial has two coprimary endpoints: time to first self-report of feeling recovered from possible COVID-19 and hospital admission or death from possible COVID-19 infection, both within 28 days from randomisation. Prespecified interim analyses assess efficacy or futility of interventions and to modify randomisation probabilities that allocate more participants to interventions with better outcomes. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval Ref: 20/SC/0158 South Central - Berkshire Research Ethics Committee; IRAS Project ID: 281958; EudraCT Number: 2020-001209-22. Results will be presented to policymakers and at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration number ISRCTN86534580.

To critically appraise and evaluate the diagnostic value of symptoms and signs in identifying UTI in older adult outpatients, using evidence from observational studies. We searched Medline and Medline in process, Embase and Web of Science, from inception up to September 2017. We included studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of symptoms and/or signs in predicting UTI in outpatients aged 65 years and above. Study quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. We identified 15 eligible studies of variable quality, with a total of 12,039 participants (range 65-4259), and assessed the diagnostic accuracy of 66 different symptoms and signs in predicting UTI. A number of symptoms and signs typically associated with UTI, such as nocturia, urgency and abnormal vital signs, were of limited use in older adult outpatients. Inability to perform a number of acts of daily living were predictors of UTI: For example, disability in feeding oneself, + ve LR: 11.8 (95% CI 5.51-25.2) and disability in washing one's hands and face, + ve LR: 6.84 (95% CI 4.08-11.5). The limited evidence of varying quality shows that a number of symptoms and signs traditionally associated with UTI may have limited diagnostic value in older adult outpatients.

Background: Effective alternatives to antibiotics for alleviating symptoms of acute infections may be appealing to patients and enhance antimicrobial stewardship. Cranberry-based products are already in wide use for symptoms of acute urinary tract infection (UTI). The aim of this review was to identify and critically appraise the supporting evidence. Methods: The protocol was registered on PROSPERO. Searches were conducted of Medline, Embase, Amed, Cinahl, The Cochrane library, Clinicaltrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We included randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies evaluating the effect of cranberry extract in the management of acute, uncomplicated UTI on symptoms, antibiotic use, microbiological assessment, biochemical assessment and adverse events. Study risk of bias assessments were made using Cochrane criteria. Results: We included three RCTs (n = 688) judged to be at moderate risk of bias. One RCT (n = 309) found that advice to consume cranberry juice had no statistically significant effect on UTI frequency symptoms (mean difference (MD) −0.01 (95% CI: −0.37 to 0.34), p = 0.94)), on UTI symptoms of feeling unwell (MD 0.02 (95% CI: −0.36 to 0.39), p = 0.93)) or on antibiotic use (odds ratio 1.27 (95% CI: 0.47 to 3.43), p = 0.64), when compared with promoting drinking water. One RCT (n = 319) found no symptomatic benefit from combining cranberry juice with immediate antibiotics for an acute UTI, compared with placebo juice combined with immediate antibiotics. In one RCT (n = 60), consumption of cranberry extract capsules was associated with a within-group improvement in urinary symptoms and Escherichia coli load at day 10 compared with baseline (p < 0.01), which was not found in untreated controls (p = 0.72). Two RCTs were under-powered to detect differences between groups for outcomes of interest. There were no serious adverse effects associated with cranberry consumption. Conclusion: The current evidence base for or against the use of cranberry extract in the management of acute, uncomplicated UTIs is inadequate; rigorous trials are needed.

The evidence for whether ivermectin impacts recovery, hospital admissions, and longer-term outcomes in COVID-19 is contested. The WHO recommends its use only in the context of clinical trials. In this multicentre, open-label, multi-arm, adaptive platform randomised controlled trial, we included participants aged ≥18 years in the community, with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and symptoms lasting ≤14 days. Participants were randomised to usual care, usual care plus ivermectin tablets (target 300-400 μg/kg per dose, once daily for 3 days), or usual care plus other interventions. Co-primary endpoints were time to first self-reported recovery, and COVID-19 related hospitalisation/death within 28 days, analysed using Bayesian models. Recovery at 6 months was the primary, longer term outcome. ISRCTN86534580. The primary analysis included 8811 SARS-CoV-2 positive participants (median symptom duration 5 days), randomised to ivermectin (n = 2157), usual care (n = 3256), and other treatments (n = 3398) from June 23, 2021 to July 1, 2022. Time to self-reported recovery was shorter in the ivermectin group compared with usual care (hazard ratio 1·15 [95% Bayesian credible interval, 1·07 to 1·23], median decrease 2.06 days [1·00 to 3·06]), probability of meaningful effect (pre-specified hazard ratio ≥1.2) 0·192). COVID-19-related hospitalisations/deaths (odds ratio 1·02 [0·63 to 1·62]; estimated percentage difference 0% [-1% to 0·6%]), serious adverse events (three and five respectively), and the proportion feeling fully recovered were similar in both groups at 6 months (74·3% and 71·2% respectively (RR = 1·05, [1·02 to 1·08]) and also at 3 and 12 months. Ivermectin for COVID-19 is unlikely to provide clinically meaningful improvement in recovery, hospital admissions, or longer-term outcomes. Further trials of ivermectin for SARS-Cov-2 infection in vaccinated community populations appear unwarranted. UKRI/National Institute of Health Research (MC_PC_19079).