A Perspective on the Majority of Current Coronavirus Medications is either orally or intravenously

Pulmonary & Respiratory Medicine

ISSN: 2161-105X

Open Access

Perspective - (2022) Volume 12, Issue 8

A Perspective on the Majority of Current Coronavirus Medications is either orally or intravenously

Sunena Williams*
*Correspondence: Sunena Williams, Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Stony Brook University, New York, USA, Email:
Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Stony Brook University, New York, USA

Received: 02-Aug-2022, Manuscript No. jprm-22-85327; Editor assigned: 04-Aug-2022, Pre QC No. P-85327; Reviewed: 16-Aug-2022, QC No. Q-85327; Revised: 22-Aug-2022, Manuscript No. R-85327; Published: 29-Aug-2022 , DOI: 10.37421/2161-105X.2022.12.616
Citation: Williams, Sunena. “A Perspective on the Majority of Current Coronavirus Medications is either orally or intravenously." J Pulm Respir Med 12 (2022): 616.
Copyright: © 2022 Williams S. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the creative commons attribution license which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.


A small amount of the drug is delivered to the lung because to poor absorption or gastrointestinal degradation in the vast majority of ongoing antiviral/hostile to SARS-CoV-2 specialists that are taken orally. In order to treat pneumonic diseases like the Coronavirus, breathed-in treatment by pneumonic medicine conveyance could be considered an expected strategy. It is possible to directly deliver pharmaceuticals to the lung using pneumonic conveyance, which ensures higher medication fixation in the lung and avoids unpleasant side effects because lesser dosages are needed.


Coronavirus • Medicine • CoV-2


Although the course of an effective immunisation is a protracted interaction, vaccinations are one of the effective methods against contagious viral illnesses [1]. Due to the antigenic float caused by modifications, this interaction may also be made worse. For instance, currently available antibodies for the Coronavirus are assisting in the invulnerability against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, despite the fact that the long-term efficacy of these vaccines falls and contrasts with the current variants previously mentioned.


It was determined that current antibodies were less effective overall against variants than the wild form. This makes it obvious that this virus will persist in us for a considerable amount of time. Effective medications are anticipated to treat the coronavirus until a safe and effective vaccination is available [2]. For all ages and non-hospitalized patients, there are currently no entirely effective direct-acting antiviral treatments available against SARS-CoV-2; in all cases, we rely on pharmaceuticals used to treat previous viral diseases. Remdesivir is the only intravenously administered restorative agent currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (US FDA). Two more antiviral specialists, molnupiravir and paxlovid, were independently developed by Merck and Pfizer and are both available for oral administration for use as EUA treatment for coronavirus by the U.S. FDA. While paxlovid is a combination of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir, molnupiravir is the prodrug of N-hydroxycytidine. Other than that, choosing carefully blended medications that work in concert with one another and definitions delivered through breathing exercises can be a clever strategy to manage this incurable illness and reduce the likelihood of unfavourable pharmaceutical blockage. Although pneumonic conveyance has advantages, illicit emanations during therapy (during nebulization) are the key test for infectious diseases administrations because they can harm both patients and medical professionals because they remain airborne inside for a long time. As a result, choosing an appropriate conveyance device and having insurance are crucial [3].

In this examination, we have looked at the severe drawbacks of currently available coronavirus treatment as well as the benefits of inhaled therapy. This condition still has not been fully understood, however the extents of inhaled combinational drugs over a single treatment are explored. The appropriate device selection for inward breath along with related capacity and plan issues are also investigated [4].

A number of drugs are now undergoing clinical trials to evaluate their efficacy and survivability against SARS-CoV-2. Currently, the majority of coronavirus medications available are repurposed medications. Reused medications in a pandemic situation are unparalleled since their safety has already been investigated for various ailments and the development of new medication(s) is a lengthy process. The development of previously used treatments for new diseases requires less testing and funding, thus these drugs can easily enter the clinical preliminary stage. Compared to brand-new pharmaceuticals, repurposed drugs are inexpensive and easily accessible. For instance, the revelation of a stolen drug typically takes 10-15 years, with an achievement rate of less than 10% and a contribution of about 2.5 billion dollars, but the disclosure of a repurposed drug takes 3-12 years, with an achievement rate of 30-75% and a contribution of $300 million. Once more, continued advancements in the reuse of demonstrating frameworks can provide fresh results and shorten the development cycle. based on the U.S. More than 690 drugs are currently in the planning transformational phases, according to the FDA (through May 9, 2022). The U.S. FDA has proactively examined more than 460 preliminary reports and selected a few drugs for EUA, with remdesivir being the primary antiviral expert for Coronavirus. If there is a major risk factor, there is evidence supporting the treatment's efficacy, and there are no other available options, a medication may be granted an EUA. The U.S. FDA provides a list of supported and approved drugs for coronavirus.

Many medications have been used and are still being used to treat this illness in addition to those approved by the U.S. FDA and the EUA. In clinical studies, many promising previously used medications that suppress SARSCoV- 2 in lab cell-based tests have virtually little survivability. One of the main causes is the organisation of excessively high oral dosages of medications that generate various adverse effects, which results in a deficient convergence of drug(s) in the lung, the primary disease site for Coronavirus. For instance, niclosamide and ivermectin demonstrated antiviral activity in vitro tests, but the two drugs have extremely poor oral retention, so only a small amount of drug reaches the lungs. Although niclosamide was thought to be more potent than the 3000 FDA- and IND-supported drugs, the dosage is extremely high (2 g orally on day 1 followed by 500 mg twice daily for 10 days), which leads to a variety of side effects such as discomfort, pruritus, gastrointestinal aggravations, and so on [5]. The U.S. FDA has given its approval for clinical research of a trial medication by endorsing the IND. Near the beginning of the Coronavirus pandemic, hydroxychloroquine—a purported "sorcery drug”— caused a lot of excitement. However, because to its high oral dosage, it could produce major side effects such liver damage, heart problems, kidney damage, and issues with the blood and lymphatic systems. As a result, the US FDA advised against using hydroxychloroquine. Favipiravir, a guanine simple drug, has significant dosage requirements (1600 mg orally twice daily on day 1 and 600 mg orally twice daily from that point on for 7–10 days), variable pharmacokinetics in different nationalities, and rapid debasement following oral administration. Remdesivir, which when administered intravenously causes incidental consequences including liver injury, reduced blood oxygen levels, hypersensitive response, and breathing difficulties, is the main antiviral drug for Coronavirus supported by the U.S. FDA. The main limitations of currently used medications for coronavirus are, roughly speaking, excessive dosages, severe side effects, first-pass digestion, and unfortunate ingestion. The problems with commonly used anti-coronavirus medications are noted.

The treatment for respiratory illnesses that is breathed in is excellent because it can ensure a higher concentration of a medication in the blood and lungs at lower dosages than its oral components, meaning little to no side effects and superior healing outcomes. For instance, inhaling 100–200 g of salbutamol is therapeutically equivalent to taking 2-4 mg orally, hence there is less chance that this treatment will have side effects. Extreme Coronavirus patients are concerned when activity picks up quickly since a respiratory emergency could arise at any time and could be complicated by treatment that must be breathed in. The effects of the coronavirus worsen the conditions of the comorbid patient, especially for those who have asthma or COPD. In these circumstances, a rapid start to exercise will necessitate more frequently than usual. It is possible to use assistant treatment, as described in detail, to lessen these adverse effects, which may directly lower virus loads. For example, salbutamol is administered via inhaler to treat asthma attacks since its effects can be felt immediately. Treatment that is breathed in is risk-free, simple, and patient-friendly. As a result, the members of the International Society for Sprayers in Medicine (ISAM) placed a lot of emphasis on quickening the pace of breathed-in treatment for Coronavirus-affected patients. In fact, the first manufacturer Gilead Sciences, USA, is currently conducting clinical trials for remdesivir in breathed-in form in an effort to get an improved outcome (NCT04539262). The potential benefits of inhalation therapy were highlighted by a few published studies involving a small group of patients, but more research in clinical trials with a larger population is necessary to reach meaningful conclusions. For instance, stage II randomised, twice visually impaired, and fake treatment controlled tests using breathed-in interferon beta- 1a demonstrated improved results with fewer adverse effects (44% versus 22%). Compared to patients receiving the control treatment, patients receiving the breathed-in adenosine treatment needed less time in the emergency clinic. In individuals with Coronavirus, hydroxychloroquine inhaled can be effective in reducing side effects linked to oral measurement structure.


A multicenter, non-interventional partner study with 954 seriously ill Coronavirus patients demonstrated that inhaled corticosteroids significantly decreased the death rate. In a randomised, open-label Stage 2 study involving 61 patients with mild to moderate Coronavirus illness, it was discovered that inhaled ciclesonide significantly more effectively killed SARS-CoV-2 than the conventional treatment. In a multicenter, open-label, multi-arm, randomised, controlled, multi-stage study involving more than 4700 participants, it was discovered that inhaled budesonide could lengthen recovery time and reduce the risk of mortality. From these tests, it is extremely likely that a more effective compelling treatment for Coronavirus is possible by inhaled medication than oral treatment.


In order to treat coronaviruses, the breathed-in part of anti-SARS-CoV-2 specialists should be adjusted based on the drug's qualities and an analysis of the safety and efficacy data from preclinical and clinical tests. It's important to consider the produced details' aerosolization characteristics as well. Given the specifics of the tool used, it seems to reason that the affidavit of drugs in the lungs would alter. The anticipated breathing in piece of distinct SARS-CoV-2 enemies has been announced by several experts.



Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.


  1. Corritori, Suzana, Nikolay Savchuk and David Pauza. “Risk/benefit profiles of currently approved oral antivirals for treatment of covid-19: Similarities and differences.” COVID 2 (2022): 1057-1076.
  2. Google Scholar, Crossref

  3. Marchini, Leonardo and Ronald L Ettinger. "COVID‐19 pandemics and oral health care for older adults." Special Care in Dentistry 40 (2020): 329.
  4. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  5. Huang, Junqing, Gabriel Tao and Jia-xu Chen, et al. "Current prevention of COVID-19: Natural products and herbal medicine." Front Pharmacol 11 (2020): 588508.
  6. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  7. Fassihi, Safa C, Neel R Nabar and Reza Fassihi. "Novel approach for low‐dose pulmonary delivery of hydroxychloroquine in COVID‐19." Br J Pharmacol 177 (2020): 4997.
  8. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  9. Yamini, Ravella Sai, Ravella Sai Bhargavi and Kotha Bhuvaneswari. "Drug repositioning in the treatment of Covid-19." J Med Pharm Allied Sci 9 (2020): 2412-2417.
  10. Google Scholar, Crossref

50+ Million Readerbase

Recommended Conferences

Journal Highlights

Google Scholar citation report
Citations: 1347

Pulmonary & Respiratory Medicine received 1347 citations as per Google Scholar report

Pulmonary & Respiratory Medicine peer review process verified at publons

Indexed In

arrow_upward arrow_upward