Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
  • About Us
    • About the Ochsner Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • Ochsner Journal Blog

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Ochsner Journal
  • Other Publications
    • Ochsner Journal Blog
  • My alerts
  • Log in
Ochsner Journal

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
  • About Us
    • About the Ochsner Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
EditorialEDITORIAL
Open Access

Hydroxychloroquine Use in Patients With COVID-19: A Brief Perspective on Current Clinical Trials

Alaa A. Abd-Elsayed, David Hao, Robert Chu, Ivan Urits, Omar Viswanath and Vwaire Orhurhu
Ochsner Journal December 2020, 20 (4) 350-357; DOI: https://doi.org/10.31486/toj.20.0124
Alaa A. Abd-Elsayed
1Department of Anesthesiology, Division of Pain Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David Hao
2Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert Chu
3Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
BA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ivan Urits
4Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Omar Viswanath
5Department of Anesthesiology, Creighton University School of Medicine, Omaha, NE; Valley Anesthesiology and Pain Consultants, Envision Physician Services, Phoenix, AZ; and Department of Anesthesiology, University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Vwaire Orhurhu
2Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

INTRODUCTION

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus responsible for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), remains elusive and nonresponsive to medication management. As the medical community forges ahead with exploring therapies, we must understand and learn from the clinical trials that have investigated the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) in patients with COVID-19.

Initial interest in the use of HCQ was triggered by a small nonrandomized study that has since received heavy criticism for both its statistical methods and potential conflicts of interest, as the journal editor-in-chief was included as an author.1-3 As a result of this controversial study and the subsequent widespread discussion of HCQ in the lay media, rigorous study of HCQ and CQ use in patients with COVID-19 was needed.

OVERVIEW OF CLINICAL TRIALS

Since the first case of COVID-19 was reported in December 2019, a total of 10 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have investigated treatment with HCQ (Table).4-13 These clinical trials included patients at multiple stages of severity, including asymptomatic without hospitalization, symptomatic with mild or moderate illness, and symptomatic with severe illness. From the outset, the external validity of studies investigating HCQ use in patients with COVID-19 has been challenged by heterogeneous methods of patient selection that have ranged from asymptomatic individuals with an identified exposure to hospitalized patients with clinical suspicion to positive reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) with chest computed tomography (CT) evidence of pneumonia. In one RCT, methods of diagnostic confirmation of COVID-19 were not even specified.4 Drawing conclusions from highly variable clinical and laboratory diagnostic methodologies is fraught with potential error. Irrespective of the ultimate conclusions of the studies, we start first with the appreciation that not all studies are created equal. To add to the variability of the trials, the intervention and treatment dosing fluctuated substantially from center to center. Although the majority of studies elected to compare HCQ to standard of care, the dose and duration of HCQ treatment in the experimental group and what constituted standard of care varied significantly among studies. To add perspective, only 2 trials had an identical intervention regimen of 400 mg HCQ for a cumulative 5 days.4,5 With these caveats in mind, we turn to the outcomes of these trials.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table.

Characteristics of Clinical Trials Investigating Hydroxychloroquine Use in Patients With Coronavirus Disease

The largest study as of October 2020 (n=821) observed development of positive molecular assay or COVID-19–related symptoms in previously asymptomatic individuals with exposure to confirmed COVID-19.6 No significant difference was observed between the HCQ treatment group (one-time 800-mg dose followed by 600 mg/day for 5 days) and placebo group in the development of COVID-19, with the notable caveat that the majority of participants had limited access to COVID-19 testing.

An open-label RCT among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 used a regimen of HCQ (400 mg twice daily) plus standard of care or HCQ with azithromycin (500 mg daily) plus standard of care. Results indicated no significant differences in the primary outcome of clinical status at day 15 or any secondary outcomes, including use of noninvasive ventilation, in-hospital mortality, or duration of hospital stay.7 Two relatively large (n>100) RCTs also failed to demonstrate improvement in viral parameters (viral load) or clinical outcomes (hospitalization, mortality, symptom resolution) in nonhospitalized patients treated with HCQ compared to standard of care or placebo.12,13

As we turn to 5 small trials from China, we observe a possible suggestion of clinical improvement. An RCT comparing HCQ (400 mg daily) plus standard of care to standard of care alone in 62 COVID-19–positive patients with chest CT confirmation and mild illness (partial pressure arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen [PaO2/FiO2] >300) demonstrated a significantly quicker time to clinical recovery (defined as afebrile body temperature and resolution of cough) and improvement in chest CT imaging in the HCQ group.5 L. Chen et al corroborated a trend to shorter recovery with HCQ (200 mg twice daily) in a small study (n=48) of HCQ and standard of care vs CQ (500 to 1,000 mg daily) and standard of care vs standard of care.8 Only patients with mild or moderate illness (generally patients with oxygen saturation [SaO2] >93% and/or PaO2/FiO2 >300) were enrolled in these 2 studies. Standard of care was based on clinician judgment and was either not specified or varied widely to include antivirals, antibiotics, immunoglobulins, and/or corticosteroids.5,8 Thus, the generalizability of such studies to patients with severe COVID-19 who may need more aggressive intervention is questionable.

The 3 other small studies (n ranging from 30 to 150) from China were uniform in identifying a lack of significant difference in proportion or time to negative seroconversion in patients with confirmed COVID-19.4,9,10 Tang et al also observed no difference in clinical course, inflammatory markers, or mortality when HCQ 800 to 1,200 mg/day was added to standard of care therapy.9 Similarly, J. Chen et al and C. P. Chen et al observed no difference in mortality or side effects when HCQ 200 to 400 mg/day was added to standard-of-care therapy.4,10 These studies also primarily focused on patients with mild or moderate illness.

Turning back to trials outside of China, the potential drawbacks of HCQ and CQ regimens emerge. The Borba et al trial terminated prematurely because of the increased incidence of QTc interval prolongation and lethality in a high-dose (600 mg twice daily) CQ group.11 Boulware et al observed an increased risk of mild adverse events, including nausea (22.9% vs 7.7%) and diarrhea/abdominal discomfort (23.2% vs 4.3%), in the HCQ treatment group compared to the placebo group, a finding corroborated by the Mitjà et al study.6,12 The unblinded Mitjà et al trial had a high enrollment of health care workers (86.7% of study subjects), and 72.0% of patients taking HCQ reported adverse events vs 8.7% of patients in the control arm.6 Elevated aminotransferases were also noted as an adverse effect of HCQ in multiple trials and required discontinuation of the study drug in 1 patient in the J. Chen et al study.4,7,8 While these adverse events were mild in many cases, decreased adherence to HCQ compared to placebo was noted in 2 studies of HCQ use in outpatient populations; thus, mild adverse events—especially gastrointestinal symptoms including nausea, abdominal discomfort, and diarrhea—may affect the efficacy of HCQ treatment for asymptomatic patients or patients with low-acuity cases of COVID-19.6,13 Another consideration is that several RCTs specifically excluded patients with preexisting cardiac pathology, underlying QTc interval prolongation, or concomitant use of QTc-prolonging medications, therefore perhaps providing insufficient information about the deleterious cardiac outcomes of HCQ in the population at large.6,8,10,12

Confusion about what role, if any, HCQ should play in COVID-19 treatment is driven in part by significant study limitations, especially in terms of heterogeneous standard-of-care treatments and limited external validity. Themes that originated in the first studies from China were small sample sizes and skew of the patient populations to mild and moderate disease.4,5,8-10 More concerning from a methodology perspective were the frequent protocol deviations and the lack of placebo groups, control group treatment specifications, and blinding. We have summarized the limitations and challenges with the study designs for these 10 clinical trials in the Table. Ultimately, robust statistical understanding beyond simple P value dichotomy may be necessary to understand the nuances of and draw reasonable conclusions from underpowered trials.

STUDY CHALLENGES DURING A PANDEMIC

COVID-19 has presented major challenges to the medical-academic community in terms of conducting clinical trials in an epidemiologically valid yet timely manner. From the studies presented here, we have determined that treatment with HCQ in patients with COVID-19 has not been shown to consistently improve clinical outcomes, although the majority of studies had significant design limitations. HCQ may not become part of the standard treatment for patients with COVID-19, but we can still glean lessons that can inform research in future pandemics. Even in the midst of a rapidly evolving pandemic, potential therapeutics should be rigorously tested. Although avenues for timely data dissemination should exist, the peer review process must continue to be held to a high standard and remain uninfluenced by political or personal conflicts of interest. Standard-of-care treatments used as comparisons should be truly standardized and specified in detail, even in preliminary scientific manuscripts. In addition, patient populations included in early studies must be chosen carefully; discussion of the utility of therapeutics that were only investigated in patients with mild or moderate illness must be heavily tempered when considering their use in patients with more serious disease. Further, the safety profile of novel interventions should be rigorously investigated in the general population. COVID-19 has provided fertile soil for the flourishing of clinical research, but both study designers and the reading audience must take great care to determine how the combined body of research ought to affect clinical care.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors have no financial or proprietary interest in the subject matter of this article.

  • ©2020 by the author(s); Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY)

©2020 by the author(s); licensee Ochsner Journal, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode) that permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Gautret P,
    2. Lagier JC,
    3. Parola P,
    4. et al.
    Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020;56(1):105949. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105949
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.
    1. Rosendaal FR
    . Review of: Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial Gautret et al 2010, DOI:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105949. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020;56(1):106063. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.106063
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. 3.↵
    1. Voss A,
    2. Coombs G,
    3. Unal S,
    4. Saginur R,
    5. Hsueh PR
    . Publishing in face of the COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020;56(1):106081. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.106081
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Chen J,
    2. Liu D,
    3. Liu L,
    4. et al.
    A pilot study of hydroxychloroquine in treatment of patients with moderate COVID-19 [in Chinese]. Zhejiang Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2020;49(2):215-219.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Chen Z,
    2. Hu J,
    3. Zhang Z,
    4. et al.
    Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19: results of a randomized clinical trial. medRxiv. Preprint posted online April 10, 2020. doi: 10.1101/2020.03.22.20040758
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Boulware DR,
    2. Pullen MF,
    3. Bangdiwala AS,
    4. et al.
    A randomized trial of hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis for Covid-19. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(6):517-525. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2016638
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Cavalcanti AB,
    2. Zampieri FG,
    3. Rosa RG
    , et al; Coalition Covid-19 Brazil I Investigators. Hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin in mild-to-moderate Covid-19. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(21):2041-2052. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2019014
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Chen L,
    2. Zhang Z,
    3. Fu J,
    4. et al.
    Efficacy and safety of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine in moderate type of Covid-19: a prospective open-label randomized study. medRxiv. Preprint posted online June 22, 2020. doi: 10.1101/2020.06.19.20136093
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. Tang W,
    2. Cao Z,
    3. Han M,
    4. et al.
    Hydroxychloroquine in patients mainly with mild to moderate COVID-19: an open-label, randomized, controlled trial. medRxiv. Preprint posted online May 7, 2020. doi: 10.1101/2020.04.10.20060558
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Chen CP,
    2. Lin YC,
    3. Chen TC,
    4. et al.
    A multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of hydroxychloroquine and a retrospective study in adults with mild to moderate Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). medRxiv. Preprint posted online July 10, 2020. doi: 10.1101/2020.07.08.20148841
  11. 11.↵
    1. Borba MGS,
    2. Val FFA,
    3. Sampaio VS
    , et al; CloroCovid-19 Team. Effect of high vs low doses of chloroquine diphosphate as adjunctive therapy for patients hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(4):e208857. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.8857
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  12. 12.↵
    1. Mitjà O,
    2. Corbacho-Monné M,
    3. Ubals M
    , et al; BCN PEP-CoV-2 Research Group. Hydroxychloroquine for early treatment of adults with mild Covid-19: a randomized-controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;ciaa1009. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1009
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Skipper CP,
    2. Pastick KA,
    3. Engen NW,
    4. et al.
    Hydroxychloroquine in nonhospitalized adults with early Covid-19: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2020;173(8):623-631. doi: 10.7326/M20-4207
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Ochsner Journal: 20 (4)
Ochsner Journal
Vol. 20, Issue 4
Dec 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Ochsner Journal.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Hydroxychloroquine Use in Patients With COVID-19: A Brief Perspective on Current Clinical Trials
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Ochsner Journal
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Ochsner Journal web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Hydroxychloroquine Use in Patients With COVID-19: A Brief Perspective on Current Clinical Trials
Alaa A. Abd-Elsayed, David Hao, Robert Chu, Ivan Urits, Omar Viswanath, Vwaire Orhurhu
Ochsner Journal Dec 2020, 20 (4) 350-357; DOI: 10.31486/toj.20.0124

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Hydroxychloroquine Use in Patients With COVID-19: A Brief Perspective on Current Clinical Trials
Alaa A. Abd-Elsayed, David Hao, Robert Chu, Ivan Urits, Omar Viswanath, Vwaire Orhurhu
Ochsner Journal Dec 2020, 20 (4) 350-357; DOI: 10.31486/toj.20.0124
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • INTRODUCTION
    • OVERVIEW OF CLINICAL TRIALS
    • STUDY CHALLENGES DURING A PANDEMIC
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • So What?
  • Physician Well-Being and the Promise of Positive Psychology
  • Gratitude and Suicide
Show more Editorial

Similar Articles

Ochsner Journal Blog

Current Post

Be Careful Where You Publish -- Part 2

Our Content

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive
  • Featured Contributors
  • Ochsner Journal Blog
  • Archive at PubMed Central

Information & Forms

  • Instructions for Authors
  • Instructions for Reviewers
  • Submission Checklist
  • FAQ
  • License for Publishing-Author Attestation
  • Patient Consent Form
  • Submit a Manuscript

Services & Contacts

  • Permissions
  • Sign up for our electronic table of contents
  • Feedback Form
  • Contact Us

About Us

  • Editorial Board
  • About the Ochsner Journal
  • Ochsner Health
  • University of Queensland-Ochsner Clinical School
  • Alliance of Independent Academic Medical Centers

© 2025 Ochsner Clinic Foundation

Powered by HighWire