COVID-19 PrEP HCW HCQ Study

Belmont et al., ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354870, NCT04354870, Oct 2021
Symp. case 79% improvement lower risk ← → higher risk Case 14% HCQ for COVID-19  Belmont et al.  PROPHYLAXIS Is pre-exposure prophylaxis with HCQ beneficial for COVID-19? Prospective study of 80 patients in the USA Fewer symptomatic cases with HCQ (not stat. sig., p=0.21) c19early.org Belmont et al., ClinicalTrials.gov, NC.., Oct 2021 0 0.5 1 1.5 2+ RR
HCQ for COVID-19
1st treatment shown to reduce risk in March 2020, now with p < 0.00000000001 from 424 studies, used in 59 countries.
No treatment is 100% effective. Protocols combine treatments.
6,200+ studies for 200+ treatments. c19early.org
Prospective study of HCQ prophylaxis in the USA, with 56 HCQ patients and 24 control patients, showing no significant differences. NCT04354870 (history)
Standard of Care (SOC) for COVID-19 in the study country, the USA, is very poor with very low average efficacy for approved treatments1. Only expensive, high-profit treatments were approved for early treatment. Low-cost treatments were excluded, reducing the probability of early treatment due to access and cost barriers, and eliminating complementary and synergistic benefits seen with many low-cost treatments.
risk of symptomatic case, 78.6% lower, RR 0.21, p = 0.21, treatment 1 of 56 (1.8%), control 2 of 24 (8.3%), NNT 15.
risk of case, 14.3% lower, RR 0.86, p = 1.00, treatment 4 of 56 (7.1%), control 2 of 24 (8.3%), NNT 84.
Effect extraction follows pre-specified rules prioritizing more serious outcomes. Submit updates
Belmont et al., 6 Oct 2021, prospective, USA, preprint, 1 author, trial NCT04354870 (history).
$0 $500 $1,000+ Efficacy vs. cost for COVID-19 treatment protocols c19early.org November 2025 USA Russia Sudan Angola Colombia Kenya Mozambique Vietnam Peru Philippines Spain Brazil Italy France Japan Canada China Uzbekistan Nepal Ethiopia Iran Ghana Mexico South Korea Germany Bangladesh Saudi Arabia Algeria Morocco Yemen Poland India DR Congo Madagascar Thailand Uganda Venezuela Nigeria Egypt Bolivia Taiwan Zambia Fiji Bosnia-Herzegovina Ukraine Côte d'Ivoire Bulgaria Greece Slovakia Singapore Iceland New Zealand Czechia Mongolia Israel Trinidad and Tobago Hong Kong North Macedonia Belarus Qatar Panama Serbia CAR USA favored high-profit treatments.The average efficacy of treatments was very low.High-cost protocols reduce early treatment, andforgo complementary/synergistic benefits. More effective More expensive 75% 50% 25% ≤0%
$0 $500 $1,000+ Efficacy vs. cost for COVID-19treatment protocols worldwide c19early.org November 2025 USA Russia Sudan Angola Colombia Kenya Mozambique Vietnam Peru Philippines Spain Brazil Italy France Japan Canada China Uzbekistan Nepal Ethiopia Iran Ghana Mexico South Korea Germany Bangladesh Saudi Arabia Algeria Morocco Yemen Poland India DR Congo Madagascar Thailand Uganda Venezuela Nigeria Egypt Bolivia Taiwan Zambia Fiji Ukraine Côte d'Ivoire Eritrea Bulgaria Greece Slovakia Singapore New Zealand Malawi Czechia Mongolia Israel Trinidad and Tobago North Macedonia Belarus Qatar Panama Serbia Syria USA favored high-profit treatments.The average efficacy was very low.High-cost protocols reduce early treatment,and forgo complementary/synergistic benefits. More effective More expensive 75% 50% 25% ≤0%
Please send us corrections, updates, or comments. c19early involves the extraction of 200,000+ datapoints from thousands of papers. Community updates help ensure high accuracy. Treatments and other interventions are complementary. All practical, effective, and safe means should be used based on risk/benefit analysis. No treatment or intervention is 100% available and effective for all current and future variants. We do not provide medical advice. Before taking any medication, consult a qualified physician who can provide personalized advice and details of risks and benefits based on your medical history and situation. IMA and WCH provide treatment protocols.
  or use drag and drop   
Submit