View clinical trials related to SARS-CoV Infection.
Filter by:The benefit of the research is to provide information regarding the efficacy and safety of Favipiravir plus the Standard of Care (SoC) for mild-moderate COVID-19 patients to be a reference for policy recommendations regarding the use of Favipiravir as an antiviral drug for the treatment of Covid-19.
This is a phase 3, randomized, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 rS with Matrix-M1 adjuvant in adult participants and adolescent participants. Additionally providing a Booster Dose to fully vaccinated participants. A substudy is to be conducted at selected sites to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of a fourth dose (second booster) of NVX-CoV2373 in adults and adolescents, previously fully vaccinated and subsequently boosted with a third dose (first booster)
The purpose of this multi center, open label, randomized, study is to obtain information on the safety and efficacy of 150 ppm Nitric Oxide given in addition to the standard of care of patients with viral pneumonia
This is a study that will attempt to validate the process for detecting SARS-CoV-2 (COVID19) on a non-FDA-approved technology using self-collected saliva as the specimen. Investigators will compare self-collected saliva samples and healthcare-worker collected nasopharyngeal samples (Nasal swabs) to see if the self-collected saliva samples are similar in terms of diagnostic accuracy. Investigators will be performing this testing at the site where patients regularly go for COVID19 testing. There will be minimal risk of harm as consenting patients will only have to provide a small amount of saliva into a tube.
There are several clinical presentations of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among the severe forms, pulmonary involvement with respiratory failure is common. Although severe lung involvement with SARS-CoV-2 meets the Berlin criteria for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), it differs from classic ARDS in that compliance (reflecting distensibility of the lung parenchyma) is frequently preserved. If the interest of Electrical Impedance Tomography has been demonstrated in classical ARDS, this is not the case in ARDS with COVID-19. However, the use of this technique in this particular patient population would make it possible to distinguish patients with severe hypoxemia linked to derecruitment from those without derecruitment, in whom hypoxemia is more likely to be linked to the loss of hypoxic vasoconstriction.
This is a single center, randomized, double-blind, 2-arm, parallel-group study of DuACT in participants with clinical symptoms of COVID-19 that have begun within the past 72 hours prior to testing.
This is a randomised, multi-center, open label, adaptive, exploratory trial to assess the efficacy of two different drug regimens in terms of preventing symptomatic COVID-19 disease in healthcare workers at high risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2. The trial will compare two different experimental medication arms to the control arm comprising the use of standard personal protective equipment (PPE) with no additional pharmacological intervention.
In recent months severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged as a novel human pathogen and, susceptibility amongst humans is presumed to be universal. Prevention measures of COVID-19 have included distancing, quarantines, use of facemasks in public places, and hand hygiene measures. Mandatory quarantines have also been applied on index cases and their contacts, as well as an active search for asymptomatic patients. Current strategies to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 do not include measures that could prevent transmission prior to the onset of symptoms. Subjects infected with SARS-CoV-2 have been known to shed virus and be contagious for up to 5 days prior to developing symptoms ('pre-symptomatic transmission'). In fact, nearly 60% of all infected subjects can shed virus pre-symptomatically. Pre- or even asymptomatic shedding occurs across all age groups, contributing to the rapidly expanding pandemic. Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) using type 1 interferon (IFN) can potentially eliminate the spread of SARS-CoV-2. IFN could reduce the period of viral shedding by ~1 week. Since pre-symptomatic shedding of virus can start up to 5 days prior to symptom onset, our approach of a PEP intervention to all contacts recently exposed to a case could possibly entirely interrupt the spread of the virus, and with that, the pandemic. The current study focuses on prevention of the disease in addition to its treatment. Thus, the key distinction between these other trials and this study is that this study focuses on containing coronavirus (i.e. cause) in the community, rather than simply its treatment (i.e. consequence) in the individual. Viral spread could be eliminated through interventions effective at abolishing viral transmission. However, such post-exposure prophylaxis interventions, that is initiation of antiviral therapy in pre-infectious contacts to reduce or even eliminate such spread, must be safe since they are given to asymptomatic and possibly uninfected subjects. In none of the previous clinical trials of IFN therapy for SARS-CoV-2 have serious adverse events been recorded. Furthermore, the IFN chosen for this study (pegylated IFN 1b) has been extensively studied in clinical trials, and has been in clinical use for years for multiple sclerosis. Pegylated IFN formulations allow for weekly injections while maintaining serum levels and limiting dose-dependent side effects. Together these data support a sound safety profile for the planned intervention. The aim of this study is to ascertain whether IFN administered to index cases and household contacts of an index case, starting immediately following confirmed exposure (index case confirmed positive for SARS-CoV-2), will reduce duration of SARS-CoV-2 detectable by PCR in the index cases, and incidence of SARS-CoV-2 detectable by PCR in household contacts.
Since March 2020, the SARS-CoV type coronavirus infection (SARS-CoV-2; nCoV19; COVID-19) is considered pandemic. As early as April 2020, the World Health Organization recommended the implementation of mass screening of populations, with the aim of identifying cases and contacts and controlling viral spread. Since the end of lock-down on May 11, 2020,the screening policy has been intensified to fight against COVID-19. Virological tests by RT-PCR are thus accessible to all, without a prescription and reimbursed by health insurance. The French government has also set a quantitative target of 1 million tests per week. In order to meet this target, the number of sampling centers has been increased (mobile structures, etc.). Screening tests are currently carried out using a nasopharyngeal swab analyzed by RT-PCR for the detection of viral RNA. This type of sample has several technical and logistic constraints. It must be carried out by personnel who are authorized and trained in this procedure and in appropriate hospital hygiene practices. It exposes the sampling personnel to possible contamination through nasopharyngeal secretions or coughing that may occur during sampling. With the increase in screening, there are sometimes insufficient numbers of sampling personnel and there is significant market pressure for swabs and virological transport media. In addition, these swabs are uncomfortable or even painful for the patient, which could imply a reluctance to be screened. They are also complicated in children, whether they are rhino- or oropharyngeal. An alternative to the nasopharyngeal swab, which is the subject of this project, would be to have one or more reliable sampling methods that are less restrictive than the nasopharyngeal swab ("gold standard"). Thus, we propose to test and compare the results obtained by molecular biology techniques on nasopharyngeal, salivary and buccal swabs.
As dental practices reopen their practices during a global pandemic, the risk of 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) infection that dental hygienists face in providing dental care remains unknown. Estimating the occupational risk of COVID-19, and producing evidence on the types of infection control practices and dental practices that may affect COVID-19 risk, is therefore imperative. These findings could be used to describe the prevalence and incidence of COVID-19 among dental hygienists, determine what infection control steps dental hygienists take over time, describe dental hygienists' employment during the COVID-19 pandemic, and estimate whether infection control adherence in dental practice is related to COVID-19 incidence.