Several repurposed drugs are currently under investigation in the fight against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Candidates are often selected solely by their effective concentrations in vitro, an approach that has largely not lived up to expectations in COVID-19. Cell lines used in in vitro experiments are not necessarily representative of lung tissue. Yet, even if the proposed mode of action is indeed true, viral dynamics in vivo, host response, and concentration-time profiles must also be considered. Here we address the latter issue and describe a model of human SARS-CoV-2 viral kinetics with acquired immune response to investigate the dynamic impact of timing and dosing regimens of hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, ivermectin, artemisinin, and nitazoxanide. We observed greatest benefits when treatments were given immediately at the time of diagnosis. Even interventions with minor antiviral effect may reduce host exposure if timed correctly. Ivermectin seems to be at least partially effective: given on positivity, peak viral load dropped by 0.3-0.6 log units and exposure by 8.8-22.3%. The other drugs had little to no appreciable effect. Given how well previous clinical trial results for hydroxychloroquine and lopinavir/ritonavir are explained by the models presented here, similar strategies should be considered in future drug candidate prioritization efforts.

Introduction The global progress against malaria has slowed significantly since 2017. As the current malaria control tools seem insufficient to get the trend back on track, several clinical trials are investigating ivermectin mass drug administration (iMDA) as a potential additional vector control tool; however, the health impacts and cost-effectiveness of this new strategy remain unclear. Methods We developed an analytical tool based on a full factorial experimental design to assess the potential impact of iMDA in nine high burden sub-Saharan African countries. The simulated iMDA regimen was assumed to be delivered monthly to the targeted population for 3 months each year from 2023 to 2027. A broad set of parameters of ivermectin efficacy, uptake levels and global intervention scenarios were used to predict averted malaria cases and deaths. We then explored the potential averted treatment costs, expected implementation costs and cost-effectiveness ratios under different scenarios. Results In the scenario where coverage of malaria interventions was maintained at 2018 levels, we found that iMDA in these nine countries has the potential to reverse the predicted growth of malaria burden by averting 20-50 million cases and 36 000-90 000 deaths with an assumed efficacy of 20%. If iMDA has an efficacy of 40%, we predict between 40-99 million cases and 73 000-179 000 deaths will be averted with an estimated net cost per case averted between US$2 and US$7, and net cost per death averted between US$1460 and US$4374. Conclusion This study measures the potential of iMDA to reverse the increasing number of malaria cases for several sub-Saharan African countries. With additional efficacy information from ongoing clinical trials and country-level modifications, our analytical tool can help determine the appropriate uptake strategies of iMDA by calculating potential marginal gains and costs under different scenarios.

BackgroundDespite remarkable success obtained with current malaria vector control strategies in the last 15 years, additional innovative measures will be needed to achieve the ambitious goals for malaria control set for 2030 by the World Health Organization (WHO). New tools will need to address insecticide resistance and residual transmission as key challenges. Endectocides such as ivermectin are drugs that kill mosquitoes which feed on treated subjects. Mass administration of ivermectin can effectively target outdoor and early biting vectors, complementing the still effective conventional tools. Although this approach has garnered attention, development of ivermectin resistance is a potential pitfall. Herein, we evaluate the potential role of xenobiotic pumps and cytochrome P450 enzymes in protecting mosquitoes against ivermectin by active efflux and metabolic detoxification, respectively.MethodsWe determined the lethal concentration 50 for ivermectin in colonized Anopheles gambiae; then we used chemical inhibitors and inducers of xenobiotic pumps and cytochrome P450 enzymes in combination with ivermectin to probe the mechanism of ivermectin detoxification.ResultsDual inhibition of xenobiotic pumps and cytochromes was found to have a synergistic effect with ivermectin, greatly increasing mosquito mortality. Inhibition of xenobiotic pumps alone had no effect on ivermectin-induced mortality. Induction of xenobiotic pumps and cytochromes may confer partial protection from ivermectin.ConclusionThere is a clear pathway for development of ivermectin resistance in malaria vectors. Detoxification mechanisms mediated by cytochrome P450 enzymes are more important than xenobiotic pumps in protecting mosquitoes against ivermectin.

Objectives: The primary objective is to determine the effect of a daily dose of ivermectin administered in three consecutive days to non-severe COVID-19 patients with no more than 96 hours of symptoms, on the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by PCR from nasopharyngeal swabs at day seven post-treatment initiation. The secondary objectives are: 1. To assess the efficacy of ivermectin to reduce the SARS-CoV-2 viral load in the nasopharyngeal swab on days 4, 7, 14 and 21 post-treatment initiation 2. To assess the efficacy of ivermectin on the improvement of symptoms 3. To assess the proportion of seroconversions at day 21 4. To assess the safety of ivermectin at the proposed dose 5. To determine the magnitude of the immune response against SARS-CoV-2 6. To assess correlation of the presence of intestinal helminths on participants on baseline and day 14 with COVID-19 progression and treatment. Trial design: SAINT PERU is a triple-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial with two parallel arms to evaluate the efficacy of ivermectin in negativizing nasopharyngeal PCR in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants: The trial is conducted in two national hospitals in Lima-Peru. The study population is patients with a positive PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 in a nasopharyngeal specimen, symptomatic for 96 hours or less, with non-severe COVID-19 disease at baseline, regardless of the presence of risk factors for progression to severity. The study will not include pregnant women or minors (17 years old or younger). Inclusion criteria 1. COVID-19 symptomatology (cough, fever, anosmia, etc.) lasting no more than 96 hours, with a positive nasopharyngeal swab PCR test for SARS-CoV-2. 2. 18 years or older. 3. No use of ivermectin in the month prior to the visit. 4. No known history of ivermectin allergy. 5. Capable to give informed consent. 6. Not current use of CYP 3A4 or P-gp inhibitor drugs such as quinidine, amiodarone, diltiazem, spironolactone, verapamil, clarithromycin, erythromycin, itraconazole, ketoconazole, cyclosporine, tacrolimus, indinavir, ritonavir, cobicistat or critical CYP3A4 substrate drugs such as warfarin. Exclusion criteria 1. COVID-19 pneumonia diagnosed by the attending physician (oxygen saturation < 95% or lung examination) 2. Positive pregnancy test for women at childbearing age. 3. Positive IgG against SARS-CoV-2 by rapid diagnostic test at screening. Participants will be recruited by the investigators at the emergency services of the study sites. They are expected to remain in the trial for a period of 21 days. Follow-up visits will be conducted by the trial medical staff at the participant's home or at a hospital in case of hospitalization. Follow-up visits will assess clinical and laboratory parameters of the patients. Intervention and comparator: Ivermectin (300 mcg/kg) or placebo will be administered in one daily dose for three consecutive days. Currently, there is no solid data on the efficacy of ivermectin against the virus in vivo; therefore the use of placebo in the control group is ethically justified. Main outcomes: Primary Proportion of patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR from a nasopharyngeal swab at day 7 post-treatment. Secondary 1. Mean viral load as determined by PCR cycle threshold (Ct) on days 4, 7, 14, and 21 2. Proportion of patients with fever and cough at days 4, 7, 14, and 21 as well as proportion of patients progressing to severe disease or death during the trial 2. Proportion of patients with a positive rapid diagnostic test at day 21 3. Proportion of drug-related adverse events during the trial 4. Median levels of IgG, IgM, IgA measured by Luminex RANDOMIZATION: Participants will be randomized to receive one dose of 300 mcg/kg ivermectin or placebo daily for three consecutive days. The epidemiologist will generate a list of correlative numbers, in randomized blocks of size 4, with the assignment to the treatment groups (a and b). The randomization list will be kept in an encrypted file accessible only to the trial statistician. This list will be handed directly to the pharmacist. Independently, the principal investigator will randomly assign the intervention (ivermectin) to one of the two groups (a or b) by tossing a coin, and will inform the pharmacist of the result of this process. The pharmacist will prepare and label the treatment vials according to the randomization list prepared by the epidemiologist and the treatment assignment given by the principal investigator. Eligible patients will be allocated in a 1:1 ratio using this randomization list. Blinding (masking): The clinical trial team, the statistician, and the patients will be blinded as to arm allocation. The vials with placebo will be visibly identical to the ones with the active drug. Treatment will be administered by staff not involved in the clinical care or participant's follow up. Numbers to be randomized (sample size): The planned sample size is 186 SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive patients: 93 patients to treatment and 93 to the placebo group. Trial status: Current protocol version: 2.0 dated January 15th, 2021. Recruitment started on Aug 29th, 2020. Recruitment is expected to be completed April 30th 2021. Trial registration: "Ensayo Clínico aleatorizado de Fase IIa para comparar la efectividad de la ivermectina versus placebo en la negativización del PCR en pacientes en fase temprana de COVID-19" Peru National Health Institute REPEC with number: PER-034-20 , registered July 17th 2020 (National Peruvian Registration before the first participant enrolled). "Randomized Phase IIA Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy of Ivermectin to Obtain Negative PCR Results in Patients With Early Phase COVID-19" Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04635943 , retrospectively registered in November 19th 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Background: Ivermectin inhibits the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro at concentrations not readily achievable with currently approved doses. There is limited evidence to support its clinical use in COVID-19 patients. We conducted a Pilot, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of a single dose of ivermectin reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 when administered early after disease onset. Methods: Consecutive patients with non-severe COVID-19 and no risk factors for complicated disease attending the emergency room of the Clínica Universidad de Navarra between July 31, 2020 and September 11, 2020 were enrolled. All enrollments occurred within 72 h of onset of fever or cough. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive ivermectin, 400 mcg/kg, single dose (n = 12) or placebo (n = 12). The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA by PCR from nasopharyngeal swab at day 7 post-treatment. The primary outcome was supported by determination of the viral load and infectivity of each sample. The differences between ivermectin and placebo were calculated using Fisher's exact test and presented as a relative risk ratio. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04390022. Findings: All patients recruited completed the trial (median age, 26 [IQR 19-36 in the ivermectin and 21-44 in the controls] years; 12 [50%] women; 100% had symptoms at recruitment, 70% reported headache, 62% reported fever, 50% reported general malaise and 25% reported cough). At day 7, there was no difference in the proportion of PCR positive patients (RR 0·92, 95% CI: 0·77-1·09, p = 1·0). The ivermectin group had non-statistically significant lower viral loads at day 4 (p = 0·24 for gene E; p = 0·18 for gene N) and day 7 (p = 0·16 for gene E; p = 0·18 for gene N) post treatment as well as lower IgG titers at day 21 post treatment (p = 0·24). Patients in the ivermectin group recovered earlier from hyposmia/anosmia (76 vs 158 patient-days; p < 0.001). Interpretation: Among patients with non-severe COVID-19 and no risk factors for severe disease receiving a single 400 mcg/kg dose of ivermectin within 72 h of fever or cough onset there was no difference in the proportion of PCR positives. There was however a marked reduction of self-reported anosmia/hyposmia, a reduction of cough and a tendency to lower viral loads and lower IgG titers which warrants assessment in larger trials. Funding: ISGlobal, Barcelona Institute for Global Health and Clínica Universidad de Navarra.

Schistosoma mansoni is less susceptible to the antiparasitic drug ivermectin than other helminths. By inhibiting the P-glycoprotein or cytochrome P450 3A in mice host or parasites in a murine model, we aimed at increasing the sensitivity of S. mansoni to the drug and thus preventing infection. We assigned 124 BALB/c mice to no treatment, treatment with ivermectin only or a combination of ivermectin with either cobicistat or elacridar once daily for three days before infecting them with 150 S. mansoni cercariae each. The assignment was done by batches without an explicit randomization code. Toxicity was monitored. At eight weeks post-infection, mice were euthanized. We determined number of eggs in intestine and liver, adult worms in portal and mesenteric veins. Disease was assessed by counting granulomas/cm(2) of liver and studying organ weight indices and total weight. IgG levels in serum were also considered. No difference between groups treated with ivermectin only or in combination with cobicistat or elacridar compared with untreated, infected controls. Most mice treated with ivermectin and elacridar suffered severe neurological toxicity. In conclusion, systemic treatment with ivermectin, even in the presence of pharmacological inhibition of P-glycoprotein or cytochrome P450 3A, did not result in effective prophylaxis for S. mansoni infection in an experimental murine model.

Mosquitoes are vectors of major diseases such as dengue fever and malaria. Mass drug administration of endectocides to humans and livestock is a promising complementary approach to current insecticide-based vector control measures. The aim of this study was to establish an insect model for pharmacokinetic and drug-drug interaction studies to develop sustainable endectocides for vector control. Female Aedes aegypti mosquitoes were fed with human blood containing either ivermectin alone or ivermectin in combination with ketoconazole, rifampicin, ritonavir, or piperonyl butoxide. Drug concentrations were quantified by LC-MS/MS at selected time points post-feeding. Primary pharmacokinetic parameters and extent of drug-drug interactions were calculated by pharmacometric modelling. Lastly, the drug effect of the treatments was examined. The mosquitoes could be dosed with a high precision (%CV: <= 13.4%) over a range of 0.01-1 mu g/ml ivermectin without showing saturation (R-2: 0.99). The kinetics of ivermectin were characterised by an initial lag phase of 18.5 h (CI90%: 17.0-19.8 h) followed by a slow zero-order elimination rate of 5.5 pg/h (CI90%: 5.1-5.9 pg/h). By contrast, ketoconazole, ritonavir, and piperonyl butoxide were immediately excreted following first order elimination, whereas rifampicin accumulated over days in the mosquitoes. Ritonavir increased the lag phase of ivermectin by 11.4 h (CI90%: 8.7-14.2 h) resulting in an increased exposure (+29%) and an enhanced mosquitocidal effect. In summary, this study shows that the pharmacokinetics of drugs can be investigated and modulated in an Ae. aegypti animal model. This may help in the development of novel vector-control interventions and further our understanding of toxicology in arthropods. Author summary Mosquitoes are responsible for the transmission of pathogens, which cause diseases that are of major health significance such as dengue fever and malaria. Preventive strategies involving the use of insecticides, however, have led to the emergence of resistant mosquitoes. Consequently, development of complementary approaches is urgently needed to stop the spread of these pathogens. Our study reports on a pioneering approach to investigate how well drugs are taken up by the mosquitoes and how long they reside in their body. We focused on ivermectin, which is toxic for mosquitoes, and several drugs that interfere with drug metabolising enzymes. We demonstrated that the exposure of drugs can be precisely determined in individual mosquitoes and that drugs interact with each other in the same way as observed in vertebrates. In this regard, we were able to increase the exposure and mosquito toxicity of ivermectin by co-administering ritonavir, a broad-spectrum inhibitor of drug metabolising enzymes. This study establishes Aedes mosquitoes as a new model organism for pharmacokinetic studies. It opens the door for the investigation of novel insecticide strategies and optimisation of lead compounds against mosquitoes.

To date, pregnant women are excluded from programmes delivering community-directed treatment of ivermectin (CDTI) for onchocerciasis and preventive chemotherapy of other helminthiases because of concerns over ivermectin safety during pregnancy. This systematic exclusion sustains an infection reservoir at the community level and deprives a vulnerable population from known benefits-there are indications that treating O. volvulus infected women may improve pregnancy outcomes and reduce the risk that their children develop onchocerciasis-associated morbidities. Furthermore, teratogenic effects are seen in non-clinical experiments at doses that far exceed those used in CDTI. Lastly, early, undetected and undeclared pregnancies are being systematically exposed to ivermectin in practice. Treatment of this population requires appropriate supporting evidence, for which we propose a three-pronged approach. First, to develop a roadmap defining the key steps needed to obtain regulatory clearance for the safe and effective use of ivermectin in all pregnant women who need it. Second, to conduct a randomised placebo-controlled double-blind clinical trial to evaluate the safety and benefits of ivermectin treatment in O. volvulus infected pregnant women. Such a trial should evaluate the possible effects of ivermectin in reducing adverse pregnancy outcomes and neonatal mortality, as well as in reducing the incidence of onchocerciasis-associated epilepsy. Third, to establish a pregnancy registry for women who inadvertently received ivermectin during pregnancy. This situation is not unique to ivermectin. Access to valuable therapies is often limited, delayed, or denied to pregnant women due to a lack of evidence. Concerns over protecting vulnerable people may result in harming them. We need to find acceptable ways to build robust evidence towards providing essential interventions during pregnancy.

Background: Ivermectin is a potential new vector control tool to reduce malaria transmission. Mosquitoes feeding on a bloodmeal containing ivermectin have a reduced lifespan, meaning they are less likely to live long enough to complete sporogony and become infectious. We aimed to estimate the effect of ivermectin on malaria transmission in various scenarios of use. Methods: We validated an existing population-level mathematical model of the effect of ivermectin mass drug administration (MDA) on the mosquito population and malaria transmission against two datasets: clinical data from a cluster- randomised trial done in Burkina Faso in 2015 wherein ivermectin was given to individuals taller than 90 cm and entomological data from a study of mosquito outcomes after ivermectin MDA for onchocerciasis or lymphatic filariasis in Burkina Faso, Senegal, and Liberia between 2008 and 2013. We extended the existing model to include a range of complementary malaria interventions (seasonal malaria chemoprevention and MDA with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine) and to incorporate new data on higher doses of ivermectin with a longer mosquitocidal effect. We consider two ivermectin regimens: a single dose of 400 ¿g/kg (1 × 400 ¿g/kg) and three consecutive daily doses of 300 ¿g/kg per day (3 × 300 ¿g/kg). We simulated the effect of these two doses in a range of usage scenarios in different transmission settings (highly seasonal, seasonal, and perennial). We report percentage reductions in clinical incidence and slide prevalence. Findings: We estimate that MDA with ivermectin will reduce prevalence and incidence and is most effective in areas with highly seasonal transmission. In a highly seasonal moderate transmission setting, three rounds of ivermectin only MDA at 3 × 300 ¿g/kg (rounds spaced 1 month apart) and 70% coverage is predicted to reduce clinical incidence by 71% and prevalence by 34%. We predict that adding ivermectin MDA to seasonal malaria chemoprevention in this setting would reduce clinical incidence by an additional 77% in children younger than 5 years compared with seasonal malaria chemoprevention alone; adding ivermectin MDA to MDA with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine in this setting would reduce incidence by an additional 75% and prevalence by an additional 64% (all ages) compared with MDA with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine alone. Interpretation: Our modelling predictions suggest that ivermectin could be a valuable addition to the malaria control toolbox, both in areas with persistently high transmission where existing interventions are insufficient and in areas approaching elimination to prevent resurgence.

Ivermectin is a widely used antiparasitic drug with known efficacy against several single-strain RNA viruses. Recent data shows significant reduction of SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro by ivermectin concentrations not achievable with safe doses orally. Inhaled therapy has been used with success for other antiparasitics. An ethanol-based ivermectin formulation was administered once to 14 rats using a nebulizer capable of delivering particles with alveolar deposition. Rats were randomly assigned into three target dosing groups, lower dose (80-90 mg/kg), higher dose (110-140 mg/kg) or ethanol vehicle only. A toxicology profile including behavioral and weight monitoring, full blood count, biochemistry, necropsy and histological examination of the lungs was conducted. The pharmacokinetic profile of ivermectin in plasma and lungs was determined in all animals. There were no relevant changes in behavior or body weight. There was a delayed elevation in muscle enzymes compatible with rhabdomyolysis, that was also seen in the control group and has been attributed to the ethanol dose which was up to 11 g/kg in some animals. There were no histological anomalies in the lungs of any rat. Male animals received a higher ivermectin dose adjusted by adipose weight and reached higher plasma concentrations than females in the same dosing group (mean Cmax 86.2 ng/ml vs. 26.2 ng/ml in the lower dose group and 152 ng/ml vs. 51.8 ng/ml in the higher dose group). All subjects had detectable ivermectin concentrations in the lungs at seven days post intervention, up to 524.3 ng/g for high-dose male and 27.3 ng/g for low-dose females. nebulized ivermectin can reach pharmacodynamic concentrations in the lung tissue of rats, additional experiments are required to assess the safety of this formulation in larger animals.

Objectives: The primary objective is to determine the efficacy of a single dose of ivermectin, administered to low risk, non-severe COVID-19 patients in the first 48 hours after symptom onset to reduce the proportion of patients with detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA by Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) test from nasopharyngeal swab at day 7 post-treatment. The secondary objectives are: 1.To assess the efficacy of ivermectin to reduce the SARS-CoV-2 viral load in the nasopharyngeal swab at day 7 post treatment.2.To assess the efficacy of ivermectin to improve symptom progression in treated patients.3.To assess the proportion of seroconversions in treated patients at day 21.4.To assess the safety of ivermectin at the proposed dose.5.To determine the magnitude of immune response against SARS-CoV-2.6.To assess the early kinetics of immunity against SARS-CoV-2. Trial design: SAINT is a single centre, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, superiority trial with two parallel arms. Participants will be randomized to receive a single dose of 400 ¿g/kg ivermectin or placebo, and the number of patients in the treatment and placebo groups will be the same (1:1 ratio). Participants: The population for the study will be patients with a positive nasopharyngeal swab PCR test for SARS-CoV-2, with non-severe COVID-19 disease, and no risk factors for progression to severity. Vulnerable populations such as pregnant women, minors (i.e.; under 18 years old), and seniors (i.e.; over 60 years old) will be excluded. Inclusion criteria 1. Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in the emergency room of the Clínica Universidad de Navarra (CUN) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR. 2. Residents of the Pamplona basin ("Cuenca de Pamplona"). 3. The patient must be between the ages of 18 and 60 years of age. 4. Negative pregnancy test for women of child bearing age*. 5. The patient or his/her representative, has given informed consent to participate in the study. 6. The patient should, in the PI's opinion, be able to comply with all the requirements of the clinical trial (including home follow up during isolation). Exclusion criteria 1. Known history of ivermectin allergy. 2. Hypersensitivity to any component of ivermectin. 3. COVID-19 pneumonia. Diagnosed by the attending physician.Identified in a chest X-ray. 4. Fever or cough present for more than 48 hours. 5. Positive IgG against SARS-CoV-2 by rapid diagnostic test. 6. Age under 18 or over 60 years. 7. The following co-morbidities (or any other disease that might interfere with the study in the eyes of the PI): Immunosuppression.Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.Diabetes.Hypertension.Obesity.Acute or chronic renal failure.History of coronary disease.History of cerebrovascular disease.Current neoplasm. 8. Recent travel history to countries that are endemic for Loa loa (Angola, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Equatorial, Guinea, Gabon, Republic of Congo, Nigeria and Sudan). 9. Current use of CYP 3A4 or P-gp inhibitor drugs such as quinidine, amiodarone, diltiazem, spironolactone, verapamil, clarithromycin, erythromycin, itraconazole, ketoconazole, cyclosporine, tacrolimus, indinavir, ritonavir or cobicistat. Use of critical CYP3A4 substrate drugs such as warfarin. *Women of child bearing age may participate if they use a safe contraceptive method for the entire period of the study and at least one month afterwards. A woman is considered to not have childbearing capacity if she is post-menopausal (minimum of 2 years without menstruation) or has undergone surgical sterilization (at least one month before the study). The trial is currently planned at a single center, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, in Navarra (Spain), and the immunology samples will be analyzed at the Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ISGlobal), in Barcelona (Spain). Participants will be recruited by the investigators at the emergency room and/or COVID-19 area of the CUN. They will remain in the trial for a period of 28 days at their homes since they will be patients with mild disease. In the interest of public health and to contain transmission of infection, follow-up visits will be conducted in the participant's home by a clinical trial team comprising nursing and medical members. Home visits will assess clinical and laboratory parameters of the patients. Intervention and comparator: Ivermectin will be administered to the treatment group at a 400¿g/Kg dose (included in the EU approved label of Stromectol and Scabioral). The control group will receive placebo. There is no current data on the efficacy of ivermectin against the virus in vivo, therefore the use of placebo in the control group is ethically justified. Main outcomes: Primary Proportion of patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR from a nasopharyngeal swab at day 7 post-treatment. Secondary 1.Mean viral load as determined by PCR cycle threshold (Ct) at baseline and on days 4, 7, 14, and 21.2.Proportion of patients with fever and cough at days 4, 7, 14, and 21 as well as proportion of patients progressing to severe disease or death during the trial.3.Proportion of patients with seroconversion at day 21.4.Proportion of drug-related adverse events during the trial.5.Median levels of IgG, IgM, IgA measured by Luminex, frequencies of innate and SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells assessed by flow cytometry, median levels of inflammatory and activation markers measured by Luminex and transcriptomics.6.Median kinetics of IgG, IgM, IgA levels during the trial, until day 28. Randomisation: Eligible patients will be allocated in a 1:1 ratio using a randomization list generated by the trial statistician using blocks of four to ensure balance between the groups. A study identification code with the format "SAINT-##" (##: from 01 to 24) will be generated using a sequence of random numbers so that the randomization number does not match the subject identifier. The sequence and code used will be kept in an encrypted file accessible only to the trial statistician. A physical copy will be kept in a locked cabinet at the CUN, accessible only to the person administering the drug who will not enrol or attend to patient care. A separate set of 24 envelopes for emergency unblinding will be kept in the study file. Blinding (masking): The clinical trial team and the patients will be blinded. The placebo will not be visibly identical, but it will be administered by staff not involved in the clinical care or participant follow up. Numbers to be randomised (sample size): The sample size is 24 patients: 12 participants will be randomised to the treatment group and 12 participants to the control group. Trial status: Current protocol version: 1.0 dated 16 of April 2020. Recruitment is envisioned to begin by May 14th and end by June 14th. Trial registration: EudraCT number: 2020-001474-29, registered April 1st. Clinicaltrials.gov: submitted, pending number FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Treating cattle with endectocide is a longstanding veterinary practice to reduce the load of endo and ectoparasites, but has the potential to be added to the malaria control and elimination toolbox, as it also kills malaria mosquitoes feeding on the animals. Here we used openly available data to map the areas of the African continent where high malaria prevalence in 2-10 year old children coincides with a high density of cattle and high density of the partly zoophilic malaria vector Anopheles arabiensis. That is, mapping the areas where treating cattle with endectocide would potentially have the greatest impact on reducing malaria transmission. In regions of Africa that are not dominated by rainforest nor desert, the map shows a scatter of areas in several countries where this intervention shows potential, including central and eastern sub-Saharan Africa. The savanna region underneath the Sahel in West Africa appears as the climatic block that would benefit to the largest extent from this intervention, encompassing several countries. West Africa currently presents the highest under-10 malaria prevalence and elimination within the next twenty years cannot be contemplated there with currently available interventions alone, making the use of endectocide treated cattle as a complementary intervention highly appealing.

Background: Mosquitoes that feed on animals can survive and mediate residual transmission of malaria even after most humans have been protected with insecticidal bednets or indoor residual sprays. Ivermectin is a widely-used drug for treating parasites of humans and animals that is also insecticidal, killing mosquitoes that feed on treated subjects. Mass administration of ivermectin to livestock could be particularly useful for tackling residual malaria transmission by zoophagic vectors that evade human-centred approaches. Ivermectin comes from a different chemical class to active ingredients currently used to treat bednets or spray houses, so it also has potential for mitigating against emergence of insecticide resistance. However, the duration of insecticidal activity obtained with ivermectin is critical to its effectiveness and affordability. Results: A slow-release formulation for ivermectin was implanted into cattle, causing 40 weeks of increased mortality among Anopheles arabiensis that fed on them. For this zoophagic vector of residual malaria transmission across much of Africa, the proportion surviving three days after feeding (typical mean duration of a gonotrophic cycle in field populations) was approximately halved for 25 weeks. Conclusions: This implantable ivermectin formulation delivers stable and sustained insecticidal activity for approximately 6 months. Residual malaria transmission by zoophagic vectors could be suppressed by targeting livestock with this long-lasting formulation, which would be impractical or unacceptable for mass treatment of human populations.

Mass administration of endectocides, drugs that kill blood-feeding arthropods, has been proposed as a complementary strategy to reduce malaria transmission. Ivermectin is one of the leading candidates given its excellent safety profile. Here we provide proof that the effect of ivermectin can be boosted at two different levels by drugs inhibiting the cytochrome or ABC transporter in the mammal host and the target mosquitoes. Using a mini-pig model, we show that drug-mediated cytochrome P450/ABC transporter inhibition results in a 3-fold increase in the time ivermectin remains above mosquito-killing concentrations. In contrast, P450/ABC transporter induction with rifampicin markedly impaired ivermectin absorption. The same ketoconazole-mediated cytochrome/ABC transporter inhibition also occurs outside the mammal host and enhances the mortality of Anopheles gambiae. This was proven by using the samples from the mini-pig experiments to conduct an ex-vivo synergistic bioassay by membrane-feeding Anopheles mosquitoes. Inhibiting the same cytochrome/xenobiotic pump complex in two different organisms to simultaneously boost the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic activity of a drug is a novel concept that could be applied to other systems. Although the lack of a dose-response effect in the synergistic bioassay warrants further exploration, our study may have broad implications for the control of parasitic and vector-borne diseases.

Malaria is a curable disease, provided timely access to efficacious drugs is sought. Poor quality and, in particular, falsified antimalarial drugs harm the population of malaria endemic areas; they put lives in peril, cause economic losses to patients, families, industry, and generally undermine the trust in health systems. The extent of the problem is not easily assessed, and although a prevalence of up to 35% of poor-quality antimalarials has been reported, this number should be interpreted with caution given the heterogeneity of methods used to measure it. The trade in falsified antimalarials can be curtailed by putting in place drug quality surveillance, better legislation and improving the access and affordability of these essential drugs.

Background: The prospect of eliminating malaria is challenged by emerging insecticide resistance and vectors with outdoor and/or crepuscular activity. Ivermectin can simultaneously tackle these issues by killing mosquitoes feeding on treated animals and humans. A single oral dose, however, confers only short-lived mosquitocidal plasma levels. Methods: Three different slow-release formulations of ivermectin were screened for their capacity to sustain mosquito-killing levels of ivermectin for months. Thirty rabbits received a dose of one, two or three silicone implants containing different proportions of ivermectin, deoxycholate and sucrose. Animals were checked for toxicity and ivermectin was quantified periodically in blood. Potential impact of corresponding long-lasting formulation was mathematically modelled. Results: All combinations of formulation and dose released ivermectin for more than 12 weeks; four combinations sustained plasma levels capable of killing 50% of Anopheles gambiae feeding on a treated subject for up to 24 weeks. No major adverse effects attributable to the drug were found. Modelling predicts a 98% reduction in infectious vector density by using an ivermectin formulation with a 12-week duration. Conclusions: These results indicate that relatively stable mosquitocidal plasma levels of ivermectin can be safely sustained in rabbits for up to six months using a silicone-based subcutaneous formulation. Modifying the formulation of ivermectin promises to be a suitable strategy for malaria vector control.