5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Translating scientific discoveries during pandemics: ensuring equity for people affected by COVID-19 and tuberculosis

      editorial

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has reached almost every corner of the globe. Trillions of dollars are being invested in the COVID-19 pandemic response to support frontline clinical and public health efforts and spur rapid advances in scientific research. Concurrently, we are in the grip of a pandemic of greater longevity that receives scant public attention despite causing 4000 deaths each day [1]. It strikes disproportionately at the poor, treatment is unsatisfactory, and there is no effective vaccine with lasting immunity. This is tuberculosis (TB), another respiratory pathogen that has much in common with COVID-19. In contrast to COVID-19, citizens of rich countries do not feel threatened by TB, which has long been associated with poverty and is therefore not a strategic priority. The rise in isolationism, nationalism, xenophobia, and racism has had negative impacts on health policy that have impaired global and national responses to TB [2]. It is against these barriers that the global response to COVID-19 has also been struggling. Worryingly, early models predict that the COVID-19 pandemic may drive an additional 6.3 million TB cases and 1.3 million deaths by 2025 [3] and early data indicate interactions between these diseases [4, 5]. Despite the political rhetoric suggesting that “we are all in this together” when it comes to COVID-19, closer inspection through the lens of TB reminds us that when it comes to benefitting from scientific advances to improve health, we are not all equal.

          Abstract

          The #COVID19 pandemic has emphasised major global health inequities: this editorial argues lessons learnt from TB must remind us of the gaps in the research agenda that must be addressed to ensure that scientific advances are equitably disseminated https://bit.ly/3bTZHS3

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Dexamethasone in Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19 — Preliminary Report

          Abstract Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with diffuse lung damage. Glucocorticoids may modulate inflammation-mediated lung injury and thereby reduce progression to respiratory failure and death. Methods In this controlled, open-label trial comparing a range of possible treatments in patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19, we randomly assigned patients to receive oral or intravenous dexamethasone (at a dose of 6 mg once daily) for up to 10 days or to receive usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Here, we report the preliminary results of this comparison. Results A total of 2104 patients were assigned to receive dexamethasone and 4321 to receive usual care. Overall, 482 patients (22.9%) in the dexamethasone group and 1110 patients (25.7%) in the usual care group died within 28 days after randomization (age-adjusted rate ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 0.93; P<0.001). The proportional and absolute between-group differences in mortality varied considerably according to the level of respiratory support that the patients were receiving at the time of randomization. In the dexamethasone group, the incidence of death was lower than that in the usual care group among patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (29.3% vs. 41.4%; rate ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.81) and among those receiving oxygen without invasive mechanical ventilation (23.3% vs. 26.2%; rate ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.94) but not among those who were receiving no respiratory support at randomization (17.8% vs. 14.0%; rate ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.55). Conclusions In patients hospitalized with Covid-19, the use of dexamethasone resulted in lower 28-day mortality among those who were receiving either invasive mechanical ventilation or oxygen alone at randomization but not among those receiving no respiratory support. (Funded by the Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research and others; RECOVERY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04381936; ISRCTN number, 50189673.)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Final Report

            Abstract Background Although several therapeutic agents have been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), none have yet been shown to be efficacious. Methods We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous remdesivir in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 with evidence of lower respiratory tract involvement. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remdesivir (200 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for up to 9 additional days) or placebo for up to 10 days. The primary outcome was the time to recovery, defined by either discharge from the hospital or hospitalization for infection-control purposes only. Results A total of 1063 patients underwent randomization. The data and safety monitoring board recommended early unblinding of the results on the basis of findings from an analysis that showed shortened time to recovery in the remdesivir group. Preliminary results from the 1059 patients (538 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo) with data available after randomization indicated that those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 11 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 12), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 19) in those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.55; P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality by 14 days were 7.1% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.04). Serious adverse events were reported for 114 of the 541 patients in the remdesivir group who underwent randomization (21.1%) and 141 of the 522 patients in the placebo group who underwent randomization (27.0%). Conclusions Remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 and evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ACTT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04280705.)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Compassionate Use of Remdesivir for Patients with Severe Covid-19

              Abstract Background Remdesivir, a nucleotide analogue prodrug that inhibits viral RNA polymerases, has shown in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2. Methods We provided remdesivir on a compassionate-use basis to patients hospitalized with Covid-19, the illness caused by infection with SARS-CoV-2. Patients were those with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who had an oxygen saturation of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or who were receiving oxygen support. Patients received a 10-day course of remdesivir, consisting of 200 mg administered intravenously on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for the remaining 9 days of treatment. This report is based on data from patients who received remdesivir during the period from January 25, 2020, through March 7, 2020, and have clinical data for at least 1 subsequent day. Results Of the 61 patients who received at least one dose of remdesivir, data from 8 could not be analyzed (including 7 patients with no post-treatment data and 1 with a dosing error). Of the 53 patients whose data were analyzed, 22 were in the United States, 22 in Europe or Canada, and 9 in Japan. At baseline, 30 patients (57%) were receiving mechanical ventilation and 4 (8%) were receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. During a median follow-up of 18 days, 36 patients (68%) had an improvement in oxygen-support class, including 17 of 30 patients (57%) receiving mechanical ventilation who were extubated. A total of 25 patients (47%) were discharged, and 7 patients (13%) died; mortality was 18% (6 of 34) among patients receiving invasive ventilation and 5% (1 of 19) among those not receiving invasive ventilation. Conclusions In this cohort of patients hospitalized for severe Covid-19 who were treated with compassionate-use remdesivir, clinical improvement was observed in 36 of 53 patients (68%). Measurement of efficacy will require ongoing randomized, placebo-controlled trials of remdesivir therapy. (Funded by Gilead Sciences.)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                ERJ Open Res
                ERJ Open Res
                ERJOR
                erjor
                ERJ Open Research
                European Respiratory Society
                2312-0541
                October 2020
                19 October 2020
                : 6
                : 4
                : 00562-2020
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Institute for Infection and Immunity, St George's, University of London, London, UK
                [2 ]Division of Infectious Diseases, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School Boston, Boston, MA, USA
                Author notes
                Jessica Carter, Institute for Infection and Immunity, St George's University, Cranmer Terrace, Tooting, London SW17 0RE, UK. E-mail: jcarter@ 123456sgul.ac.uk
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7789-9649
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3989-0795
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3544-5021
                Article
                00562-2020
                10.1183/23120541.00562-2020
                7659031
                ba8564ba-12f3-40e7-8205-b9b6dfc5717e
                Copyright ©ERS 2020

                This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0.

                History
                : 09 August 2020
                : 01 September 2020
                Categories
                Editorials
                4

                Comments

                Comment on this article