Around the world, researchers are working extremely hard to develop new treatments and interventions for COVID-19 with new clinical trials opening nearly every day. This directory provides you with information, including enrollment detail, about these trials. In some cases, researchers are able to offer expanded access (sometimes called compassionate use) to an investigational drug when a patient cannot participate in a clinical trial.
The information provided here is drawn from ClinicalTrials.gov. If you do not find a satisfactory expanded access program here, please search in our COVID Company Directory. Some companies consider expanded access requests for single patients, even if they do not show an active expanded access listing in this database. Please contact the company directly to explore the possibility of expanded access.
Emergency INDs
To learn how to apply for expanded access, please visit our Guides designed to walk healthcare providers, patients and/or caregivers through the process of applying for expanded access. Please note that given the situation with COVID-19 and the need to move as fast as possible, many physicians are requesting expanded access for emergency use. In these cases, FDA will authorize treatment by telephone and treatment can start immediately. For more details, consult FDA guidance. Emergency IND is the common route that patients are receiving convalescent plasma.
Search Tips
To search this directory, simply type a drug name, condition, company name, location, or other term of your choice into the search bar and click SEARCH. For broadest results, type the terms without quotation marks; to narrow your search to an exact match, put your terms in quotation marks (e.g., “acute respiratory distress syndrome” or “ARDS”). You may opt to further streamline your search by using the Status of the study and Intervention Type options. Simply click one or more of those boxes to refine your search.
Displaying 270 of 646Modum Bad
The present study seeks to investigate the levels of parental burnout in the general parental population during the COVID-19 pandemic. Parental burnout is measured three months following (T2) the initiated viral mitigation protocols in Norway, a period where schools and kindergartens were closed, involving a period of home isolation for parents with their children. The burden of parents during this period is thought to have increased, as they were expected to conduct their own work virtually where possible, while at the same time acting as teachers for their children. The study aims to investigate the level of burnout among parents after months of viral mitigation strategies involved in the pandemic, in addition to predictors of parental burnout measured at (T1) are associated with parental burnout after three months (T2). Hypothesis and research question: Research Question 1: What is the level of parental burnout in the general parental population three months following initiated viral mitigation protocols (i.e., physical distancing) as compared to other similar pre-pandemic samples? Hypothesis 1: Parental burnout will be higher in the present sample three months into the pandemic as compared to similar pre-pandemic samples in similar populations. Hypothesis 2: Levels of parental stress, parental satisfaction, general self-efficacy, positive metacognitions, negative metacognitions, unhelpful coping strategies, marital quality and insomnia, all at T2 will significantly predict levels of parental burnout at T2. Exploratory: Do the predictors parental stress, parental satisfaction, general self-efficacy, positive metacognitions, negative metacognitions, unhelpful coping strategies, all at baseline (T1), predict parental burnout at T2, beyond and above these same aforementioned predictors at T2 and pre-existing mental health condition, age, gender, and education? Exploratory: Levels of parental burnout will be explored across subgroups in the sample.
Modum Bad
Study description: The present study seeks to investigate the impact of various sources of information on psychopathology, and specifically health anxiety, depression, and general anxiety, during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study will investigate the divergent impact of various information sources on these psychopathological symptoms during the pandemic. Hypotheses and research questions: Hypothesis 1: Media consumption across all information sources will significantly be associated with depression and anxiety symptoms, with increased media consumption in general associated with higher levels of health anxiety, depression, and general anxiety. Hypothesis 2: Using social media and online interactive platforms to obtain news about the pandemic in comparison to using traditional media (e.g., TV, radio, and newspapers) will be associated with higher levels of health anxiety, depression, and general anxiety. Actively staying away from information will further significantly be associated with higher levels of higher levels of health anxiety, depression, and general anxiety. Research Question 1: Is there a differential effect among different information sources on health anxiety, depression and general anxiety? To what extend and how are different information sources related to symptoms of health anxiety, depression, and general anxiety. Exploratory: Additionally, we will exploratory investigate to what extent the amount of use of different information sources impact health anxiety, depression, and general anxiety. We will also examine effect sizes with part correlations, to investigate information sources with the most and least detrimental impact on health anxiety, depression, and general anxiety. Furthermore, we will report which information platforms participants reported as most useful with regards to information concerning how to best deal with the pandemic.
Modum Bad
Study description: The present study seeks to investigate the predictors and maintaining mechanisms of depression and anxiety symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic, exactly 3 months following the strictest viral mitigation strategies initiated in Norway in response to the pandemic. This is the time period where the major pandemic protocols are lifted in Norway, following three months of strict pandemic mitigation protocols. The study further aims to identify subgroups with highest levels of depressive and anxiety symptoms during the measurement period, to identify vulnerable subgroups with maintained symptoms three months following the pandemic. Hypotheses and research questions: Research Question 1: What is the level of depressive and anxiety symptoms three months following the employment of the strict viral mitigation protocols (i.e., physical distancing protocols) in the general adult population? What are the proportion above the validated cut-offs for depression and general anxiety? Hypothesis 1: There will be a significant decrease in the levels of depression and anxiety symptoms from the baseline (T1) with the strictest mitigation protocols to measurement the measurement period three months into pandemic (T2) where major pandemic mitigation protocols are lifted. Additionally, there will be a significant decrease in the proportion of the sample meeting validated cut-offs for depression and anxiety from T1 to T2. Hypothesis 2: Higher level at T1 and less reduction from T1 to T2 in positive metacognitions, negative metacognitions, and unhelpful coping strategies all measured with CAS-1, will be related to less reduction in depression and anxiety, above and beyond age, gender, and education. Higher level at T1 and increases from T1 to T2 in physical activity and perceived competence will be related to greater reduction in depression and anxiety, above and beyond, age, gender, and education. Exploratory: The investigators will further explore the proportion showing reliable change in depression and anxiety and investigate the differences in changes in depression and anxiety across different demographic subgroups in the sample
Modum Bad
Study description: The preset study seeks to investigate factors associated with of hygiene-related behaviors and adherence to viral mitigation protocols during the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, factors associated with of adherence to WHO-advised hygiene-related behaviors and adherence to governmental mitigation protocols are investigations. The aim of the project is to: - Inform the policymakers, the general public, scientists, and health practitioners about the cognitive, behavioral, emotional, motivational, and trait components underlying hygiene-related behaviors and adherence. - Help policymakers better understand adherence and the factors it is associated with, providing empirical grounds to advance societies battle against the COVID-19-virus from an epidemiological perspective by promoting factors that increase adherence. Hypothesis/Research questions Hypothesis 1: Risk perception, altruism and governmental trust will significantly be associated with both adherence and hygiene-related behavior, with increased risk perception, altruism, and governmental trust associated with higher rates of adherence and hygiene-related behavior. The personality traits conscientiousness and agreeableness will significantly be associated with both adherence and hygiene related behavior, with increased conscientiousness, and agreeableness associated with higher rates of adherence and hygiene-related behavior. Furthermore, beliefs about pandemic protocol efficacy and beliefs about collective mitigation behavior (i.e., "it is only useful to follow transmission protocols if everyone else does") will be associated with adherence to viral mitigation protocols and hygiene-related behaviors. Research Question 1: Is there a difference between the use of various platforms to obtain information about COVID with regards to adherence to viral mitigation protocols and hygiene-related behaviors? Research Question 2: To what extend are different sources of obtaining information associated with adherence to hygiene-related behavior and adherence to viral mitigation protocols? Research Question 3: To what extent are different personality traits (measured with the Short Big Five Inventory-10 (BFI-10)) associated with adherence to viral mitigation protocols and hygiene-related behaviors?
Cairo University
- This clinical trial proposal is based on the FDA protocol for emergency use of convalescent plasma for treatment of COVID-19 cases, and on the WHO guidelines for use of convalescent plasma in other infectious diseases. - This Clinical trial is to be applied in Cairo University quarantine hospital. The collection, testing and storage of convalescent plasma will be done inside CUH main blood bank. The concept of this clinical trial is built on the collection of convalescent plasma from individuals who had recovered from documented infection with SARS-CoV-2, to be used for patients with- or at high risk of progression to- severe/life-threatening clinical conditions due to SARS-CoV-2 infection. An informed consent is required to join this clinical trial; patients will be transfused with one or two units of ABO compatible convalescent plasma. Those patients will be followed up and the clinical and laboratory data will be compiled, including adverse events related to the administration of convalescent plasma (CP). Other data to be collected retrospectively will include patient demographics, acute care facility resource utilization (total length of stay, days in ICU, days intubated, and survival till discharge from an acute care facility).
University of Illinois at Chicago
Patients who are ill with COVID-19 may benefit from receiving convalescent plasma infusions containing antibodies from donors who have recovered from the disease and are proven to no longer be infected. Given the current public health emergency due to COVID-19, the FDA has recently fast-tracked the use of convalescent plasma. The purpose for this study is to assess if convalescent plasma collected from donors previously infected with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes COVID-19, can provide clinical benefit to those acutely ill with the virus and to evaluate if such treatment is safe. There will be two arms in the interventional study, where subjects will either be treated with convalescent plasma or fresh frozen plasma in a randomized and blinded manner. As an additional comparison, the clinical course of subjects enrolled during the period of the study who do not receive an alternative treatment for COVID-19 will be assessed.
Johns Hopkins University
Stem cell therapy has emerged as a revolutionary treatment for diseases that were considered untreatable only a few years ago. Umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stem cells (UCMSCs) have been shown to repair damaged liver, kidney, heart, pancreas, skin, cartilage, and cornea in animal models and several human trials. In addition to cellular replacement through regeneration, UCMSCs mediate through paracrine signaling pathways resulting in immune modulation. Clinical manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), are believed to arise from septic shock and cytokine storm that cause acute respiratory dysfunction and acute cardiac injury. There is presently no cure for the COVID-19 viral disease; however, multi-treatment strategies are being examined. During the past two months, four reports were published that suggest, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), owing to their powerful immunomodulatory ability, may prevent the cytokine storm and thus reduce the COVID-19 related morbidity. All studies reported that COVID-19 patients responded favorably to MSCs therapy. These reports, taken together with the previous successes of stem cell therapy in animal models, the investigators, a seven-institution consortium, propose to explore the efficacy of UCMSC treatment in COVID-19 patients at Jinnah hospital, Lahore. The investigators propose to administer UCMSCs in patients with acute pulmonary inflammation due to COVID-19 infection with moderate to severe symptoms. In the first cohort of 15 patients, UCMSCs will be administered with three intravenous infusions of 500,000 UCMSCs per Kg body weight each on days 1, 3, and 5. The second group of five patients serving as control will only receive standard treatment. During the 30-day post-infusion period, a battery of tests will be performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the UCMSCs treatment. In parallel, the investigators propose a comparative study to determine COVID-19 viral count by quantitative real-time PCR and through viral coat protein ELISA, developed in the investigator advisor lab (Dr. Tauseef Butt, Progenra Inc. Philadelphia, USA) with the ultimate objective to locally developing a rapid diagnostic assay.
Shanghai Junshi Bioscience Co., Ltd.
This is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase I clinical study to evaluate the tolerability, safety, pharmacokinetic profile and immunogenicity of JS016 (anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody) injection in Chinese healthy subjects after intravenous infusion of single dose.Eligible patients will be injection JS016 (anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody)
University Hospital, Caen
Since the description of the first cases of infection in December 2019 in the Hubei province in China, a new coronavirus, called SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2), emerged and caused a pandemic. This new virus is responsible for an infectious disease with respiratory and potent severe symptoms, called COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019). The first data concerned essentially the adult population and gave a clinical description of the disease. However, data is missing in the pediatric population. The first published studies indicate that children seem to have a lower risk to get a severe form of COVID-19. Except the case of a child with leukemia recently described with the diagnosis of COVID-19, there is currently no data about pediatric patients with an oncology history or under chemotherapeutic drugs. Cancers are rare among children and is estimated to concern about 1700 new cases in a year in France. Malignant tumor or its treatment can affect self-immunity, which could favor SARS-CoV-2 infection or its aggravation. Thus, the investigators propose in this study to collect data about French children with a cancer and diagnosed with COVID-19.The analysis of the collected data will refine clinical characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infection in this population. It will be critical for elaborating recommendations for the management of COVID-19 in children with cancer.
Yale University
In times of pandemics, social distancing, isolation and quarantine exacerbate depression and anxiety as confined people are detached from their loved ones, deprived of personal liberties, and devoid of purpose owing to altered routine and livelihood (1,2). Those with pre-existing mental health problems or illnesses (MHPIs) might suffer from limiting interpersonal interactions that are central to their self-management, as well as reduced access to helpful but "non-essential" (often cancelled) psychiatric services (3). In response to this situation, this feasibility study of a trial consists of offering a transitional measure of online peer support for people suffering from (a) psychotic disorders or (b) anxiety and mood disorders, and to determine an effect size to this Peer Support Workers-delivered intervention in terms of both personal-civic recovery and clinical recovery (4). Peer Support Workers (PSWs) are persons with first-hand lived experience of MHPIs, and who are further along in their own recovery journey. As recommended by recovery-oriented best practices guidelines (5,6), upon training and certification they can provide supportive services when hired to fill such a paid specialty position directly in, or in conjunction with, current psychiatric services. Indeed, recovery focuses on how individuals can have more active control over their lives (agency). It is characterized by a search for the person's strengths and capacities, satisfying and meaningful social roles, and mobilizing formal and informal support systems. Peer support has thus become one predominant concept in the recovery paradigm and PSWs are specialized in peer support. Yet, not much is known about the efficacy of PSWs from a consumer's perspective of personal-civic recovery. The five principal research questions are whether this online intervention will have an impact in terms of (Q1) personal-civic recovery potential and (Q2) clinical recovery potential, (Q3) how these potentials can be impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, (Q4) how the lived experience of people in recovery can be mobilized to cope with such a situation, and (Q5) how sex and gender considerations can be taken into account for the pairing of PSWs with service users, beyond considerations based solely on psychiatric diagnoses or specific MHPIs.