110
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effect of High-Dose Zinc and Ascorbic Acid Supplementation vs Usual Care on Symptom Length and Reduction Among Ambulatory Patients With SARS-CoV-2 Infection : The COVID A to Z Randomized Clinical Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      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.

          Key Points

          Question

          Do high-dose zinc, high-dose ascorbic acid, and/or a combination of the 2 reduce the duration of symptoms of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)?

          Findings

          In this randomized clinical trial of 214 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection receiving outpatient care, there was no significant difference in the duration of symptoms among the 4 groups.

          Meaning

          These findings suggest that treatment with zinc, ascorbic acid, or both does not affect SARS-CoV-2 symptoms.

          Abstract

          This randomized clinical trial examines whether high-dose zinc and/or high-dose ascorbic acid reduces the severity or duration of symptoms compared with usual care among ambulatory patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

          Abstract

          Importance

          There is limited evidence regarding early treatment of novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection to mitigate symptom progression.

          Objective

          To examine whether high-dose zinc and/or high-dose ascorbic acid reduce the severity or duration of symptoms compared with usual care among ambulatory patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          This multicenter, single health system randomized clinical factorial open-label trial enrolled 214 adult patients with a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed with a polymerase chain reaction assay who received outpatient care in sites in Ohio and Florida. The trial was conducted from April 27, 2020, to October 14, 2020.

          Intervention

          Patients were randomized in a 1:1:1:1 allocation ratio to receive either 10 days of zinc gluconate (50 mg), ascorbic acid (8000 mg), both agents, or standard of care.

          Outcomes

          The primary end point was the number of days required to reach a 50% reduction in symptoms, including severity of fever, cough, shortness of breath, and fatigue (rated on a 4-point scale for each symptom). Secondary end points included days required to reach a total symptom severity score of 0, cumulative severity score at day 5, hospitalizations, deaths, adjunctive prescribed medications, and adverse effects of the study supplements.

          Results

          A total of 214 patients were randomized, with a mean (SD) age of 45.2 (14.6) years and 132 (61.7%) women. The study was stopped for a low conditional power for benefit with no significant difference among the 4 groups for the primary end point. Patients who received usual care without supplementation achieved a 50% reduction in symptoms at a mean (SD) of 6.7 (4.4) days compared with 5.5 (3.7) days for the ascorbic acid group, 5.9 (4.9) days for the zinc gluconate group, and 5.5 (3.4) days for the group receiving both (overall P = .45). There was no significant difference in secondary outcomes among the treatment groups.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          In this randomized clinical trial of ambulatory patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection, treatment with high-dose zinc gluconate, ascorbic acid, or a combination of the 2 supplements did not significantly decrease the duration of symptoms compared with standard of care.

          Trial Registration

          ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04342728

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

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

          Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China

          Summary Background A recent cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan, China, was caused by a novel betacoronavirus, the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). We report the epidemiological, clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics and treatment and clinical outcomes of these patients. Methods All patients with suspected 2019-nCoV were admitted to a designated hospital in Wuhan. We prospectively collected and analysed data on patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection by real-time RT-PCR and next-generation sequencing. Data were obtained with standardised data collection forms shared by WHO and the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium from electronic medical records. Researchers also directly communicated with patients or their families to ascertain epidemiological and symptom data. Outcomes were also compared between patients who had been admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and those who had not. Findings By Jan 2, 2020, 41 admitted hospital patients had been identified as having laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection. Most of the infected patients were men (30 [73%] of 41); less than half had underlying diseases (13 [32%]), including diabetes (eight [20%]), hypertension (six [15%]), and cardiovascular disease (six [15%]). Median age was 49·0 years (IQR 41·0–58·0). 27 (66%) of 41 patients had been exposed to Huanan seafood market. One family cluster was found. Common symptoms at onset of illness were fever (40 [98%] of 41 patients), cough (31 [76%]), and myalgia or fatigue (18 [44%]); less common symptoms were sputum production (11 [28%] of 39), headache (three [8%] of 38), haemoptysis (two [5%] of 39), and diarrhoea (one [3%] of 38). Dyspnoea developed in 22 (55%) of 40 patients (median time from illness onset to dyspnoea 8·0 days [IQR 5·0–13·0]). 26 (63%) of 41 patients had lymphopenia. All 41 patients had pneumonia with abnormal findings on chest CT. Complications included acute respiratory distress syndrome (12 [29%]), RNAaemia (six [15%]), acute cardiac injury (five [12%]) and secondary infection (four [10%]). 13 (32%) patients were admitted to an ICU and six (15%) died. Compared with non-ICU patients, ICU patients had higher plasma levels of IL2, IL7, IL10, GSCF, IP10, MCP1, MIP1A, and TNFα. Interpretation The 2019-nCoV infection caused clusters of severe respiratory illness similar to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus and was associated with ICU admission and high mortality. Major gaps in our knowledge of the origin, epidemiology, duration of human transmission, and clinical spectrum of disease need fulfilment by future studies. Funding Ministry of Science and Technology, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, National Natural Science Foundation of China, and Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            Characteristics of and Important Lessons From the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak in China: Summary of a Report of 72 314 Cases From the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention

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

              Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 is a functional receptor for the SARS coronavirus

              Spike (S) proteins of coronaviruses, including the coronavirus that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), associate with cellular receptors to mediate infection of their target cells 1,2 . Here we identify a metallopeptidase, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) 3,4 , isolated from SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-permissive Vero E6 cells, that efficiently binds the S1 domain of the SARS-CoV S protein. We found that a soluble form of ACE2, but not of the related enzyme ACE1, blocked association of the S1 domain with Vero E6 cells. 293T cells transfected with ACE2, but not those transfected with human immunodeficiency virus-1 receptors, formed multinucleated syncytia with cells expressing S protein. Furthermore, SARS-CoV replicated efficiently on ACE2-transfected but not mock-transfected 293T cells. Finally, anti-ACE2 but not anti-ACE1 antibody blocked viral replication on Vero E6 cells. Together our data indicate that ACE2 is a functional receptor for SARS-CoV. Supplementary information The online version of this article (doi:10.1038/nature02145) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Network Open
                American Medical Association
                2574-3805
                12 February 2021
                February 2021
                12 February 2021
                : 4
                : 2
                : e210369
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
                [2 ]Neurologic Institute, Respiratory Institute, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
                [3 ]Department of Infectious Diseases, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: January 9, 2021.
                Published: February 12, 2021. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.0369
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2021 Thomas S et al. JAMA Network Open.
                Corresponding Author: Milind Y. Desai, MD, MBA, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Ave, Desk J1-5, Cleveland, OH 44195 ( desaim2@ 123456ccf.org ).
                Author Contributions: Dr Desai had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: Thomas, Patel, Bittel, Kumar, Mehra, McWilliams, Nissen, Desai.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Thomas, Patel, Bittel, Wolski, Wang, Kumar, Il’Giovine, Mehra, Nissen, Desai.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Thomas, Patel, Bittel, Kumar, Il’Giovine, Mehra, Desai.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.
                Statistical analysis: Wolski, Wang, Kumar, Desai.
                Obtained funding: Thomas, Kumar, Desai.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Thomas, Bittel, Kumar, Nissen, Desai.
                Supervision: Thomas, Bittel, Kumar, Il’Giovine, Nissen, Desai.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr McWilliams reported receiving consulting fees from Gilead Sciences outside the submitted work. Dr Desai reported receiving grants from Myokardia outside the submitted work and being supported by the Haslam Family Endowed Chair in Cardiovascular Medicine. No other disclosures were reported.
                Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement 3.
                Additional Contributions: Serpil Erzurum, MD, James Young, MD, Daniel Culver, MD, Joan Booth, RN, Nancy Obuchowski, MPH, and John Petrich, RPh (Cleveland Clinic), were members of the operational and safety monitoring board. They were not compensated for their time. We would like to thank Samantha Xu, BS (Cleveland Clinic), for help with logistics of study set-up and coordination. She was compensated for her time.
                Article
                zoi210024
                10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.0369
                7881357
                33576820
                793f5145-3354-4133-8ac2-e91139f27ab7
                Copyright 2021 Thomas S et al. JAMA Network Open.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 19 November 2020
                : 9 January 2021
                Categories
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online Only
                Public Health

                Comments

                Comment on this article