Psychiatric side effects induced by chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine: a systematic review of case reports and population studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are commonly used drugs in the treatment of malaria as well as chronic diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis, and systemic lupus erythematosus. Although various reports on possible psychiatric side effects of these drugs exist, the nature and extent of these effects remain poorly understood. Moreover, the relevance of these drugs in the treatment of early stages of COVID-19 necessitates a careful estimation of their side effects. Here, we provide a systematic review of the psychiatric side effects associated with chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine. We used PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science platforms to identify relevant literature published between 1962 and 2020. Search terms included chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, psychiatry, psychosis, depression, anxiety, bipolar disorder, delirium, and psychotic disorders. Only case reports and clinical trials were included. All studies included records of psychiatric side effects induced by either chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine or both. Both retrospective and prospective, randomized as well as non-randomized population studies were included. Overall, the psychiatric side effects are dose- and sex-independent. The most common psychiatric side effects reported are increased speech output/ excessive talking, increased psychomotor activity, irritable mood, auditory hallucinations, delusion of grandiosity, and suicide attempts, likely due to brain intoxicationbe of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine. The symptoms can develop in a few hours to 11 weeks after drug intake and are normally reversed within a week after the drug withdrawal. We conclude that CQ and HCQ have the potential to induce psychiatric side effects. This study calls for further investigation of psychiatric symptoms induced by these drugs in the short and long term.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".