Back

Hydroxychloroquine Proves Ineffective in Hamsters and Macaques Infected with SARS-CoV-2

Rosenke, K.; Jarvis, M.; Feldmann, F.; Schwarz, B.; Okumura, A.; Lovaglio, J.; Saturday, G.; Hanley, P.; Meade-White, K.; Williamson, B.; Hansen, F.; Perez-Perez, L.; Leventhal, S.; Tang-Huau, T.-L.; Nason, M.; Callison, J.; Haddock, E.; Scott, D.; Sewell, G.; Bosio, C.; Hawman, D.; de Wit, E.; Feldmann, H.

2020-06-11 pharmacology and toxicology
10.1101/2020.06.10.145144 bioRxiv
Show abstract

We remain largely without effective prophylactic/therapeutic interventions for COVID-19. Although many human clinical trials are ongoing, there remains a deficiency of supportive preclinical drug efficacy studies. Here we assessed the prophylactic/therapeutic efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), a drug of interest for COVID-19 management, in two animal models. When used for prophylaxis or treatment neither the standard human malaria dose (6.5 mg/kg) nor a high dose (50 mg/kg) of HCQ had any beneficial effect on clinical disease or SARS-CoV-2 kinetics (replication/shedding) in the Syrian hamster disease model. Similarly, HCQ prophylaxis/treatment (6.5 mg/kg) did not significantly benefit clinical outcome nor reduce SARS-CoV-2 replication/shedding in the upper and lower respiratory tract in the rhesus macaque disease model. In conclusion, our preclinical animal studies do not support the use of HCQ in prophylaxis/treatment of COVID-19.One Sentence Summary Hydroxychloroquine prophylaxis/treatment showed no beneficial effect in SARS-CoV-2 hamster and macaque disease models.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.View Full Text

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.