<strong>Doxycycline and Pentoxifylline for Mild and Mild-To-Moderate Covid-19</strong>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We are proposing, for any interested investigator, a randomized open clinical trial for mild and mild-to-moderate Covid-19 comparing a treatment regimen with standard of care, and eventually with another investigational regimen, if ongoing or will be implemented. The patients could be hospitalized or ambulatory but not requiring admission to intensive care units and mechanical ventilation. The proposed therapeutic regimen consists of doxycycline (an antimicrobial having also anti-inflammatory properties, probable antioxidant and possible some antiviral effects), and pentoxifylline, a hemorheological compound used in occlusive arterial diseases but also having proven anti-inflammatory properties. Doxycycline is included in the WHO’s list of essential medicine being an effective, safe, widely available, and inexpensive medication and widely accessible. It will be administered at a dosage of 100 mg orally twice daily for ten days. Pentoxifylline, in clinical use since 1972, and also widely accessible, will be given at a dosage of 400 mg orally, also twice daily, for ten days. The primary outcome measures are: 1) Progression of disease to a severe form requiring intensive care admission and mechanical ventilation; 2) Fatality rates and 3) Time to clinical recovery.This proposal was presented to the National Directors and Core Leads meeting of the Canadian Trials Network (CTN) on May 6, 2020. The interventional trial template suggested by CTN was used for designing the trial.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".