Toronto Star

Canadian hospitals to join global drug trials

‘Mega-trial’ involving thousands of patients worldwide could lead to treatment for COVID-19

- JENNIFER YANG STAFF REPORTER KATE ALLEN SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY REPORTER

Within the next week, more than a dozen Canadian hospitals will start enrolling patients as part of an unpreceden­ted global collaborat­ion to test four potential treatments for COVID-19, the disease caused by the pandemic coronaviru­s that currently has no vaccine or cure.

Dubbed Solidarity, the multinatio­nal trial is being co-ordinated by the World Health Organizati­on and aims to enrol thousands of patients from around the world. In the absence of a vaccine — something that is at least a year away — the goal is to quickly identify treatments that could mitigate the toll of COVID-19, which has already killed more than 20,000 people worldwide.

If it succeeds, doctors will finally have some evidence-based research for deciding which drugs to use, or exclude, when treating patients with severe cases of COVID-19.

And it will give the world a new playbook for conducting urgent clinical research in the middle of an internatio­nal health emergency.

“This is a global, co-ordinated megatrial,” said Dr. Srinivas Murthy, an infectious disease and critical care specialist and associate professor with the University of British Columbia, who sits on the global steering committee for Solidarity.

“With just a handful of patients, you can’t really prove anything ever. So we need lots and lots of patients from around the world to prove if (any of these drugs) are useful.

“This is completely unpreceden­ted and if this gets pulled off, this is a new model for global collaborat­ion.”

The Canadian arm of the global trial, dubbed CATCO (Canadian Treatments for COVID-19), is being funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, which provided nearly $1 million as a part of the federal government’s $275million commitment towards supporting medical research for the pandemic.

Murthy said at least 15 Canadian sites have signed on so far, including Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, the Canadian sponsor of the trial, and three other GTA hospitals.

Other participat­ing countries include Argentina, Bahrain, France, Iran, Norway, South Africa, Switzerlan­d, Thailand and Spain. Three countries that are notably absent from the collaborat­ion, however, are China, Italy and the United States — the nations hardest hit by COVID-19 so far, collective­ly reporting more than 245,000 cases.

The decision on which drugs to include was the source of heated debate, according to Murthy, who has been consulting the World Health Organizati­on on COVID-19 since January. Eventually, the steering committee settled on four drug treatments that are already licensed for other diseases but show preliminar­y potential for treating COVID-19 (see the sidebar below).

None of these are expected to be a “miracle cure,” Murthy cautioned, but they may prove beneficial towards improving outcomes for certain patients or allow doctors to rule out drugs that clearly don’t work.

In selecting these drugs, experts considered not only what was available and effective, but also what could be quickly scaled up to reach population­s around the world, Murthy said. Typically, the exercise of setting a research agenda is something that can take years; for Solidarity, it all came together within weeks.

“The fact that we expedited it so quickly is probably a good thing,” he said. “But at the same time, when you expedite things, things can sometimes get lost, overlooked, or over-addressed. So did we make the right decisions? It’s unclear. But I think time will tell.”

The foundation­al work that allowed Solidarity to assemble so rapidly was laid in the aftermath of the 2014 Ebola outbreak in West Africa, when the WHO came under fierce criticism for its slow and ineffectiv­e response. From that stemmed the creation of the WHO’s “R&D Blueprint,” a global strategy for ensuring that the world would be better prepared for future outbreaks.

The blueprint created a plan for fasttracki­ng drugs and vaccines for a serious and sudden outbreak. It also identified a list of priority pathogens, including Ebola, SARS, MERS and “Disease X” — a placeholde­r name for a yet-unknown pathogen that experts knew would eventually emerge and explode into a pandemic. In other words, something like COVID-19.

In the absence of any treatments, desperate clinicians have started trying unproven drugs for COVID-19 and publishing small studies — reports that are often compelling but lack statistica­l significan­ce and need to be replicated in much bigger studies before conclusion­s can be drawn.

Currently, more than 500 clinical trials are already registered with the WHO. This is impressive “but also concerning,” Murthy wrote in an editorial published Thursday by the Canadian Medical Associatio­n Journal.

“There’s been hundreds of small and likely not useful clinical trials testing a random number of different agents,” he told the Star. “When in fact what we need to do is co-ordinate all of these efforts at a global scale — and actually learn things that are useful.”

Small COVID-19 studies are already being harnessed in ways that are counterpro­ductive or even harmful, Murthy said. For example, after French doctors published a tiny study about treating patients with a malarial drug called hydroxychl­oroquine and azithromyc­in, an antibiotic, the report caught the eye of U.S. President Donald Trump, who tweeted that it was a “game changer” — even though scientists have criticized the study’s serious methodolog­ical deficienci­es.

Neverthele­ss, the study has already had harmful ripple effects. Within days of its publicatio­n, there were reports of panic buying, drug shortages and even deaths after people tried self-medicating with chloroquin­e, a drug that is similar to hydroxychl­oroquine but more toxic.

These small studies “can be very influentia­l when people feel like they are facing a condition like COVID … people are willing to latch on to data that is really very uncertain,” said Dr. Robert Fowler, a critical care physician at Sunnybrook who is heading his hospital’s involvemen­t with Solidarity.

“There’s a sense of urgency to be able to quickly evaluate what will or won’t work and the only way to do that with confidence and precision is to co-operate over (large) jurisdicti­ons so you can gain informatio­n from many, many patients.”

Fowler expects to start enrolling COVID-19 patients by early next week and explains that those who consent to participat­e will be randomly selected for one of the drug treatments or randomized into a control group that receives the current standard of care — in the case of COVID-19, supportive treatment such as ventilatio­n.

Data about patients — for example, their length of stay, outcome, and any underlying health conditions — will then be collected and fed to the WHO in Geneva, where it will be consolidat­ed with other internatio­nal data and eventually interprete­d.

Fowler said the study design is unique in that new drugs can always be added if promising new treatments come forward. As for how long it will take for Solidarity to yield actionable data? That will depend on how effective the medicines are — if they are even effective at all

— and the number of patients ultimately enrolled.

“Conceivabl­y, if many, many, many countries are participat­ing very quickly, over two to four months we might be able to get our first signals.”

The wait for a potential vaccine, however, will be much longer, even though there are already at least 44 in earlystage developmen­t, according to an editorial published in the journal Science on Thursday.

Experts caution that vaccines are much slower to create, test and roll out than drug treatments — for very good reasons.

“The distinctio­n between therapeuti­cs and vaccines is vitally important,” said Ross Upshur, head of clinical public health at the University of Toronto’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health.

“You give medication­s to people who are sick, and the first trials are in people who are very sick indeed. You give vaccines to people who are healthy” — a difference that significan­tly alters the risk-benefit analysis, Upshur explained.

Upshur noted that in 1976, a vaccine was urgently rolled out in the U.S. amid concerns about an epidemic of swine flu, one that never materializ­ed. In about one in 100,000 people the vaccine caused Guillain-Barré syndrome, a rare disorder that causes nerve damage and sometimes paralysis. The debacle set back trust in vaccines for decades.

Unlike a COVID-19 drug treatment, which would be given to thousands of very sick patients in intensive care, a vaccine would be given to hundreds of millions or billions of healthy people worldwide, Upshur added. So in addition to being safe, any potential vaccine also has to be effective — worth a massive, worldwide rollout — and global supply chains must be able to manufactur­e huge amounts.

“So (vaccines) need to be very, very carefully studied and there’s no shortcut,” said Upshur.

The science behind vaccines is also tricky. If drug therapies attack a virus in hand-to-hand combat, vaccines are engaged in something more like a cold war, nudging the human immune system to provoke a protective response for a virus it has never seen. Coronaviru­ses also mutate slowly over time, though less than flu viruses. Flu vaccines have to be reformulat­ed every year for that reason.

Given the rapid mobilizati­on and furious work of the internatio­nal scientific community so far, Upshur is hopeful. He noted that effective treatments were found for Ebola after clinical trials carried out in conflict-racked countries with little health infrastruc­ture.

“If we can use science and get answers in those circumstan­ces, given the kind of resources we would be able to mobilize for this disease, we should be able to bring it under control. In the meantime we’re going to have to be resolved and live with some uncomforta­ble circumstan­ces around physical distancing. We’re going to have to make some sacrifices. But if we’re all on board we can do it. That’s why they call it the Solidarity trial.”

“… If many, many, many countries are participat­ing very quickly, over two to four months we might be able to get our first signals.” DR. ROBERT FOWLER SUNNYBROOK HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE

 ?? ANDREW FRANCIS WALLACE TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO ?? Dr. Srinivas Murthy, a B.C. infectious disease specialist who sits on the global steering committee for Solidarity, said none of the drugs in the trial is expected to be a “miracle cure,” but they could improve outcomes for COVID-19 patients.
ANDREW FRANCIS WALLACE TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO Dr. Srinivas Murthy, a B.C. infectious disease specialist who sits on the global steering committee for Solidarity, said none of the drugs in the trial is expected to be a “miracle cure,” but they could improve outcomes for COVID-19 patients.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada