Source: MedRxiv. Full Study in PDF here

Xabier Garcia-Albeniz, Julia Del Amo, Rosa Polo, Jose Miguel Morales Asencio, Miguel A HernanmedRxiv 2020.09.29.20203869; doi:


Background: There is disagreement about whether hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is effective as prophylaxis for COVID-19. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials that study the effectiveness of HCQ to prevent COVID-19.

Methods and Findings: A search of PubMed, Embase, medRxiv, and found three completed randomized trials: one pre-exposure prophylaxis trial and two post-exposure prophylaxis trials. We obtained or calculated the risk ratio of COVID-19 diagnosis for assignment to HCQ versus no HCQ (either placebo or usual care) for each trial, and then pooled the risk ratio estimates. The risk ratio estimated for each of the individual trials were 0.74 (95% CI 0.50-1.10), 0.83 (95% CI: 0.58-1.18), and 0.69 (95% CI: 0.35-1.37). The pooled risk ratio estimate was 0.78 (95% CI: 0.61-0.99).

All three trials found a similar rate of adverse effects in the HCQ and no HCQ groups.


The available evidence indicates that HCQ reduces the risk of COVID-19 by about 20%.

Yet the findings from the randomized trials were widely interpreted as evidence of lack of effectiveness of HCQ, simply because they were not statistically significant when taking them individually. Completion of the ongoing prophylaxis trials is needed to generate more precise estimates of the effectiveness of HCQ to prevent COVID-19.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This work was not funded

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.


The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Not applicable

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.


I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).


I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.


Data Availability

Data used in the analysis are publicly available

Related: update: Now 118 international studies (71 peer reviewed) show positive hydroxychloroquine treatment outcomes

Melbourne healthcare workers recruited for hydroxychloroquine prophylactic trial

How hydroxychloroquine works at the cellular level

Belgium revisits: Hydrochloroquine has indeed been shown to decrease the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, both ex vivo and in a pulmonary model.

Hydroxychloroquine Safety Outcome within Approved Therapeutic Protocol for COVID-19 Outpatients in Saudi Arabia

Open Letter from Medical Doctors and Health Professionals to All Belgian Authorities and All Belgian Media

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on whatsapp
On Trend

Latest Stories

Dr. Harvey Risch: Hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin, and Other Therapeutics Highly Effective in Early COVID Treatment

I’ve railed against this in the media that we are a part of, and the way that the propaganda reacts to this is, “Ignore it. Ignore all of this.” I’m saying this now because the general public has to be the one that gets angry. The general public should be furious at the way people have been treated in the country by suppression of these drugs, by that kind of website that suppresses the ability of doctors to practice medicine.

Read More »

A Judge Stands up to a Hospital: “Step Aside” and Give a Dying Man Ivermectin

The judge’s finest moment may have been when he dashed the most glaring myth about ivermectin—that it is not safe, despite decades of use that shows otherwise. Noting that all drugs have side effects, Judge Fullerton listed ivermectin’s effects from a government website.
“(N)umber one, generally well tolerated; number two, dizziness; number three, pruritus; number four, nausea/diarrhea. These are the side effects for the dosage that’s being asked to be administered,” he said. “The risks of these side effects are so minimal that Mr. Ng’s current situation outweighs that risk by one-hundredfold.”

Read More »