The Effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine Versus Hydroxychloroquine Plus Lopinavir/Ritonavir Therapy in SARSCoV- 2 Pneumonia

Introduction: There is no specific antiviral treatment with proven efficacy and safety in the management of Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to compare the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine (HQ) monotherapy and HQ-lopinavir/ritonavir (Lpv/r) combined therapy in patients with laborator...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Mediterranean Journal of Infection, Microbes and Antimicrobials
Main Authors: Ayşe BATIREL, Selda TEKİN, Halit BATIREL, Çiğdem AKALAN KUYUMCU, Nurten BAKAN
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology Specialty Society of Turkey 2021-12-01
Subjects:
Online Access:http://mjima.org/abstract.php?id=225
_version_ 1848650411988221952
author Ayşe BATIREL
Selda TEKİN
Halit BATIREL
Çiğdem AKALAN KUYUMCU
Nurten BAKAN
author_facet Ayşe BATIREL
Selda TEKİN
Halit BATIREL
Çiğdem AKALAN KUYUMCU
Nurten BAKAN
author_sort Ayşe BATIREL
collection DOAJ
container_title Mediterranean Journal of Infection, Microbes and Antimicrobials
description Introduction: There is no specific antiviral treatment with proven efficacy and safety in the management of Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to compare the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine (HQ) monotherapy and HQ-lopinavir/ritonavir (Lpv/r) combined therapy in patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and to determine the independent factors predicting mortality. Materials and Methods: Retrospective observational multi-centered cohort study. Results: In total, 151 patients (mean age 61±17 years, 66% male) with COVID-19 pneumonia were included: 68 patients received combination therapy, i.e., Lpv/r in addition to HQ, and 83 patients received only HQ. The patients in both groups were similar regarding the majority of baseline variables except for white blood cell count, procalcitonin, lactate dehydrogenase levels, intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates, which were significantly higher, and decreased oxygen saturation in the combination group. The mean duration of symptoms and hospital stay were 5.6±2.3 days and 12.7±9.4 days, respectively. Nearly 43% (n=65) of patients were admitted to the ICU. Patients in the HQ monotherapy group had a shorter stay in hospital than those in the combination group (10 vs. 16 days, p<0.005). The primary end points were 14- and 28-day mortality. Neither treatment group revealed significant differences with respect to 14-day and 28-day survival before and after propensity score matching. Age, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and ICU stay length were variable predictors of 14-day mortality, while CCI [Hazard ratio (HR) 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85 (0.43-0.9)] and ICU stay length [HR (95% CI): 1.5 (1.39-1.76)] were the independent predictors of 28-day mortality. Conclusion: Combination therapy with Lpv/r and HQ did not provide any benefit compared with HQ monotherapy. Charlson Comorbidity Index and ICU stay were independent predictors of 28-day mortality.
format Article
id doaj-fb12e210c7804ac19e76f9dde8abebee
institution Directory of Open Access Journals
issn 2147-673X
language English
publishDate 2021-12-01
publisher Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology Specialty Society of Turkey
record_format Article
spelling doaj-fb12e210c7804ac19e76f9dde8abebee2025-11-03T03:03:40ZengInfectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology Specialty Society of TurkeyMediterranean Journal of Infection, Microbes and Antimicrobials2147-673X2021-12-0110110.4274/mjima.galenos.2021.2020.8The Effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine Versus Hydroxychloroquine Plus Lopinavir/Ritonavir Therapy in SARSCoV- 2 PneumoniaAyşe BATIREL0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6005-636XSelda TEKİN1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6005-636XHalit BATIREL2https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6566-8704Çiğdem AKALAN KUYUMCU3https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4357-5467Nurten BAKAN4https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4547-9698University of Health Sciences Turkey, Kartal Dr. Lütfi Kırdar City Hospital, Clinic of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, İstanbul, TurkeySancaktepe Şehit Prof. Dr. İlhan Varank Training and Research Hospital; Çekmeköy State Hospital, Clinic of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, İstanbul, TurkeySancaktepe Şehit Prof. Dr. İlhan Varank Training and Research Hospital; Çekmeköy State Hospital, Clinic of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, İstanbul, TurkeySancaktepe Şehit Prof. Dr. İlhan Varank Training and Research Hospital; Çekmeköy State Hospital, Clinic of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, İstanbul, TurkeySancaktepe Şehit Prof. Dr. İlhan Varank Training and Research Hospital; Çekmeköy State Hospital, Clinic of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, İstanbul, TurkeyIntroduction: There is no specific antiviral treatment with proven efficacy and safety in the management of Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to compare the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine (HQ) monotherapy and HQ-lopinavir/ritonavir (Lpv/r) combined therapy in patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and to determine the independent factors predicting mortality. Materials and Methods: Retrospective observational multi-centered cohort study. Results: In total, 151 patients (mean age 61±17 years, 66% male) with COVID-19 pneumonia were included: 68 patients received combination therapy, i.e., Lpv/r in addition to HQ, and 83 patients received only HQ. The patients in both groups were similar regarding the majority of baseline variables except for white blood cell count, procalcitonin, lactate dehydrogenase levels, intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates, which were significantly higher, and decreased oxygen saturation in the combination group. The mean duration of symptoms and hospital stay were 5.6±2.3 days and 12.7±9.4 days, respectively. Nearly 43% (n=65) of patients were admitted to the ICU. Patients in the HQ monotherapy group had a shorter stay in hospital than those in the combination group (10 vs. 16 days, p<0.005). The primary end points were 14- and 28-day mortality. Neither treatment group revealed significant differences with respect to 14-day and 28-day survival before and after propensity score matching. Age, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and ICU stay length were variable predictors of 14-day mortality, while CCI [Hazard ratio (HR) 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85 (0.43-0.9)] and ICU stay length [HR (95% CI): 1.5 (1.39-1.76)] were the independent predictors of 28-day mortality. Conclusion: Combination therapy with Lpv/r and HQ did not provide any benefit compared with HQ monotherapy. Charlson Comorbidity Index and ICU stay were independent predictors of 28-day mortality.http://mjima.org/abstract.php?id=225sars-cov 2covid-19treatmenthydroxychloroquinelopinavir/ritonavir
spellingShingle Ayşe BATIREL
Selda TEKİN
Halit BATIREL
Çiğdem AKALAN KUYUMCU
Nurten BAKAN
The Effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine Versus Hydroxychloroquine Plus Lopinavir/Ritonavir Therapy in SARSCoV- 2 Pneumonia
sars-cov 2
covid-19
treatment
hydroxychloroquine
lopinavir/ritonavir
title The Effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine Versus Hydroxychloroquine Plus Lopinavir/Ritonavir Therapy in SARSCoV- 2 Pneumonia
title_full The Effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine Versus Hydroxychloroquine Plus Lopinavir/Ritonavir Therapy in SARSCoV- 2 Pneumonia
title_fullStr The Effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine Versus Hydroxychloroquine Plus Lopinavir/Ritonavir Therapy in SARSCoV- 2 Pneumonia
title_full_unstemmed The Effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine Versus Hydroxychloroquine Plus Lopinavir/Ritonavir Therapy in SARSCoV- 2 Pneumonia
title_short The Effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine Versus Hydroxychloroquine Plus Lopinavir/Ritonavir Therapy in SARSCoV- 2 Pneumonia
title_sort effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine versus hydroxychloroquine plus lopinavir ritonavir therapy in sarscov 2 pneumonia
topic sars-cov 2
covid-19
treatment
hydroxychloroquine
lopinavir/ritonavir
url http://mjima.org/abstract.php?id=225
work_keys_str_mv AT aysebatirel theeffectivenessofhydroxychloroquineversushydroxychloroquinepluslopinavirritonavirtherapyinsarscov2pneumonia
AT seldatekin theeffectivenessofhydroxychloroquineversushydroxychloroquinepluslopinavirritonavirtherapyinsarscov2pneumonia
AT halitbatirel theeffectivenessofhydroxychloroquineversushydroxychloroquinepluslopinavirritonavirtherapyinsarscov2pneumonia
AT cigdemakalankuyumcu theeffectivenessofhydroxychloroquineversushydroxychloroquinepluslopinavirritonavirtherapyinsarscov2pneumonia
AT nurtenbakan theeffectivenessofhydroxychloroquineversushydroxychloroquinepluslopinavirritonavirtherapyinsarscov2pneumonia
AT aysebatirel effectivenessofhydroxychloroquineversushydroxychloroquinepluslopinavirritonavirtherapyinsarscov2pneumonia
AT seldatekin effectivenessofhydroxychloroquineversushydroxychloroquinepluslopinavirritonavirtherapyinsarscov2pneumonia
AT halitbatirel effectivenessofhydroxychloroquineversushydroxychloroquinepluslopinavirritonavirtherapyinsarscov2pneumonia
AT cigdemakalankuyumcu effectivenessofhydroxychloroquineversushydroxychloroquinepluslopinavirritonavirtherapyinsarscov2pneumonia
AT nurtenbakan effectivenessofhydroxychloroquineversushydroxychloroquinepluslopinavirritonavirtherapyinsarscov2pneumonia