The first cases of the new coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) were reported in December 2019 when a group of patients was admitted to hospitals in Wuhan, the capital of Hubei province in central China, with an initial diagnosis of pneumonia of unknown etiology.¹ Initially, the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was confined to Hubei province, but it rapidly spread to many other countries,^2,3 compelling the World Health Organization to officially declare a global pandemic on March 11, 2020. SARS-CoV-2 infection appears to cause a wide range of symptoms.^4,5 Most deaths involve older adults, many of whom had underlying chronic diseases.^6,7

Treatment of Plasmodium vivax malaria requires the clearing of asexual parasites, but relapse can be prevented only if dormant hypnozoites are cleared from the liver (a treatment termed “radical cure”). Tafenoquine is a single-dose 8-aminoquinoline that has recently been registered for the radical cure of P. vivax. This multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group, randomized, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in Ethiopia, Peru, Brazil, Cambodia, Thailand, and the Philippines. We enrolled 522 patients with microscopically confirmed P. vivax infection (>100 to <100,000 parasites per microliter) and normal glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) activity (with normal activity defined as ≥70% of the median value determined at each trial site among 36 healthy male volunteers who were otherwise not involved in the trial). All patients received a 3-day course of chloroquine (total dose of 1500 mg). In addition, patients were assigned to receive a single 300-mg dose of tafenoquine on day 1 or 2 (260 patients), placebo (133 patients), or a 15-mg dose of primaquine once daily for 14 days (129 patients). The primary outcome was the Kaplan–Meier estimated percentage of patients who were free from recurrence at 6 months, defined as P. vivax clearance without recurrent parasitemia. In the intention-to-treat population, the percentage of patients who were free from recurrence at 6 months was 62.4% in the tafenoquine group (95% confidence interval [CI], 54.9 to 69.0), 27.7% in the placebo group (95% CI, 19.6 to 36.6), and 69.6% in the primaquine group (95% CI, 60.2 to 77.1). The hazard ratio for the risk of recurrence was 0.30 (95% CI, 0.22 to 0.40) with tafenoquine as compared with placebo (P<0.001) and 0.26 (95% CI, 0.18 to 0.39) with primaquine as compared with placebo (P<0.001). Tafenoquine was associated with asymptomatic declines in hemoglobin levels, which resolved without intervention. Single-dose tafenoquine resulted in a significantly lower risk of P. vivax recurrence than placebo in patients with phenotypically normal G6PD activity. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline and Medicines for Malaria Venture; DETECTIVE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01376167.)

Tafenoquine, a single-dose therapy for Plasmodium vivax malaria, has been associated with relapse prevention through the clearance of P. vivax parasitemia and hypnozoites, termed “radical cure.” We performed a phase 3, prospective, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, controlled trial to compare tafenoquine with primaquine in terms of safety and efficacy. The trial was conducted at seven hospitals or clinics in Peru, Brazil, Colombia, Vietnam, and Thailand and involved patients with normal glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) enzyme activity and female patients with moderate G6PD enzyme deficiency; all patients had confirmed P. vivax parasitemia. The patients were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive a single 300-mg dose of tafenoquine or 15 mg of primaquine once daily for 14 days (administered under supervision); all patients received a 3-day course of chloroquine and were followed for 180 days. The primary safety outcome was a protocol-defined decrease in the hemoglobin level (>3.0 g per deciliter or ≥30% from baseline or to a level of <6.0 g per deciliter). Freedom from recurrence of P. vivax parasitemia at 6 months was the primary efficacy outcome in a planned patient-level meta-analysis of the current trial and another phase 3 trial of tafenoquine and primaquine (per-protocol populations), and an odds ratio for recurrence of 1.45 (tafenoquine vs. primaquine) was used as a noninferiority margin. A protocol-defined decrease in the hemoglobin level occurred in 4 of 166 patients (2.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 6.0) in the tafenoquine group and in 1 of 85 patients (1.2%; 95% CI, 0.2 to 6.4) in the primaquine group, for a between-group difference of 1.2 percentage points (95% CI, −4.2 to 5.0). In the patient-level meta-analysis, the percentage of patients who were free from recurrence at 6 months was 67.0% (95% CI, 61.0 to 72.3) among the 426 patients in the tafenoquine group and 72.8% (95% CI, 65.6 to 78.8) among the 214 patients in the primaquine group. The efficacy of tafenoquine was not shown to be noninferior to that of primaquine (odds ratio for recurrence, 1.81; 95% CI, 0.82 to 3.96). Among patients with normal G6PD enzyme activity, the decline in hemoglobin level with tafenoquine did not differ significantly from that with primaquine. Tafenoquine showed efficacy for the radical cure of P. vivax malaria, although tafenoquine was not shown to be noninferior to primaquine. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline and Medicines for Malaria Venture; GATHER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02216123.)

Bothrops atrox snakes are mostly endemic of the Amazon rainforest and is certainly the South American pit viper responsible for most of the snakebites in the region. The composition of B. atrox venom is significantly known and has been used to trace the relevance of the venom phenotype for snake biology and for the impacts in the clinics of human patients involved in accidents by B. atrox. However, in spite of the wide distribution and the great medical relevance of B. atrox snakes, B. atrox taxonomy is not fully resolved and the impacts of the lack of taxonomic resolution on the studies focused on venom or envenoming are currently unknown. B. atrox venom presents different degrees of compositional variability and is generally coagulotoxic, inducing systemic hematological disturbances and local tissue damage in snakebite patients. Antivenoms are the effective therapy for attenuating the clinical signs. This review brings a comprehensive discussion of the literature concerning B. atrox snakes encompassing from snake taxonomy, diet and venom composition, towards clinical aspects of snakebite patients and efficacy of the antivenoms. This discussion is highly supported by the contributions that venomics and antivenomics added for the advancement of knowledge of B. atrox snakes, their venoms and the treatment of accidents they evoke.

Although high mortality has been reported in many COVID-19 studies, very limited postmortem information from complete autopsies is available. We report the findings in the adrenal glands in 28 autopsies with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Microscopic lesions were identified in the adrenal glands in 12/28 patients (46%). Seven cases showed necrosis, generally ischemic; four showed cortical lipid degeneration; two showed hemorrhage; and one unspecific focal adrenalitis. Vascular thrombosis in one patient and focal inflammation in association with other findings in three patients were observed. No case presented adrenal insufficiency. In conclusion, adrenal lesions are frequent in patients with severe COVID-19. The lesions are mild but could contribute to the lethal outcome.

Snakebites are more frequent in the Brazilian Amazon than in other parts of Brazil, representing a high cost for the health system since antivenoms are only available through medical prescription from central municipal hospitals in most cases. The need for a cold chain and physicians usually restricts access to the only effective treatment of a snakebite, the antivenom. The complex topography of the rivers contributes to delays in treatment, and consequently increases the risk of severe complications, chronic sequelae and death. Thus, decentralization of antivenom treatment to primary healthcare facilities in the interior would increase access by indigenous population groups to proper healthcare. To standardize and evaluate the decentralization to low complexity indigenous healthcare units, we suggest the (i) development and validation of standardized operational procedures, (ii) training of professionals in the validated protocol in a referral health unit, (iii) implementation of the protocol in an indigenous healthcare unit, (iv) assessment of perceptions towards and acceptability of the protocol, and (v) estimation of the impact of the protocol’s implementation. We expect that antivenom decentralization would shorten the time between diagnosis and treatment and, as such, improve the prognosis of snakebites. As health cosmology among indigenous populations has an important role in maintaining their way of life, the introduction of a new therapeutic strategy to their customs must take into account the beliefs of these peoples. Thus, antivenom administration would be inserted as a crucial therapeutic tool in a world of diverse social, natural and supernatural representations. The information presented here also serves as a basis to advocate for support and promotion of health policy initiatives focused on evidence-based care in snakebite management.