Skip to main content
PLOS Medicine logoLink to PLOS Medicine
. 2021 Jul 1;18(7):e1003682. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003682

Sales of antibiotics and hydroxychloroquine in India during the COVID-19 epidemic: An interrupted time series analysis

Giorgia Sulis 1,2, Brice Batomen 3, Anita Kotwani 4, Madhukar Pai 1,2, Sumanth Gandra 5,*
Editor: Gwenan M Knight6
PMCID: PMC8248656  PMID: 34197449

Abstract

Background

We assessed the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic in India on the consumption of antibiotics and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the private sector in 2020 compared to the expected level of use had the epidemic not occurred.

Methods and findings

We performed interrupted time series (ITS) analyses of sales volumes reported in standard units (i.e., doses), collected at regular monthly intervals from January 2018 to December 2020 and obtained from IQVIA, India. As children are less prone to develop symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, we hypothesized a predominant increase in non-child-appropriate formulation (non-CAF) sales. COVID-19-attributable changes in the level and trend of monthly sales of total antibiotics, azithromycin, and HCQ were estimated, accounting for seasonality and lockdown period where appropriate. A total of 16,290 million doses of antibiotics were sold in India in 2020, which is slightly less than the amount in 2018 and 2019. However, the proportion of non-CAF antibiotics increased from 72.5% (95% CI: 71.8% to 73.1%) in 2019 to 76.8% (95% CI: 76.2% to 77.5%) in 2020. Our ITS analyses estimated that COVID-19 likely contributed to 216.4 million (95% CI: 68.0 to 364.8 million; P = 0.008) excess doses of non-CAF antibiotics and 38.0 million (95% CI: 26.4 to 49.2 million; P < 0.001) excess doses of non-CAF azithromycin (equivalent to a minimum of 6.2 million azithromycin treatment courses) between June and September 2020, i.e., until the peak of the first epidemic wave, after which a negative change in trend was identified. In March 2020, we estimated a COVID-19-attributable change in level of +11.1 million doses (95% CI: 9.2 to 13.0 million; P < 0.001) for HCQ sales, whereas a weak negative change in monthly trend was found for this drug. Study limitations include the lack of coverage of the public healthcare sector, the inability to distinguish antibiotic and HCQ sales in inpatient versus outpatient care, and the suboptimal number of pre- and post-epidemic data points, which could have prevented an accurate adjustment for seasonal trends despite the robustness of our statistical approaches.

Conclusions

A significant increase in non-CAF antibiotic sales, and particularly azithromycin, occurred during the peak phase of the first COVID-19 epidemic wave in India, indicating the need for urgent antibiotic stewardship measures.


Giorgia Sulis and co-workers analyze sales of antimicrobials and hydroxchloroquine in India during 2018-20 to assess possible changes across the COVID-19 epidemic.

Author summary

Why was this study done?

  • There are concerns that the widespread and often inappropriate use of antibiotics has been aggravated by the COVID-19 pandemic, but little is known regarding the true impact of the pandemic on antibiotic use, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

  • India is the largest antibiotic user in the world and is among the countries that are most severely affected by the pandemic.

  • About 75% of healthcare in India is private, and this unregulated and fragmented private sector accounts for 90% of antibiotic consumption, raising major concerns about the potential effects of COVID-19 on prescribing and dispensing practices.

What did the researchers do and find?

  • Using an interrupted time series (ITS) design, we examined sales volumes of total antibiotics, azithromycin alone, and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in India’s private sector from January 2018 to December 2020.

  • Focusing on non-pediatric formulations and adjusting for underlying seasonal and non-seasonal trends and accounting for the effect of lockdown, we estimated the impact of the first epidemic wave on monthly sales.

  • Based on our models, COVID-19 likely contributed to about 216 million excess doses (95% CI: 68.0 to 364.8 million; P = 0.008) of total antibiotics and 38.0 million excess doses (95% CI: 26.4 to 49.2 million; P < 0.001) of azithromycin between June and September 2020 (i.e., after the lockdown and until the epidemic peak).

  • HCQ sales peaked in March 2020, reflecting the widespread use of this drug for both prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19 (+11.1 million doses [95% CI: 9.2 to 13.0 million]; P < 0.001), followed by a slow decline afterwards.

What do these findings mean?

  • Our findings indicate a significant increase in antibiotic sales, particularly of azithromycin, during the peak phase of the first COVID-19 epidemic wave in India.

  • Similar trends are likely to have occurred in other LMICs, where antibiotics are often overused.

  • The medium- and long-term consequences for bacterial resistance patterns are highly concerning, highlighting the need for urgent antibiotic stewardship measures.

Introduction

India is the largest consumer of antibiotics in the world [1,2]. Broad spectrum antibiotics such as second- and third-generation cephalosporins, macrolides, and quinolones are overused for acute respiratory tract infections in India [3]. There is a concern that symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), could lead to a substantial increase in antibiotic consumption (often inappropriately), thus promoting antibiotic resistance [4].

In many countries, azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) are reportedly being used off label in prophylactic and therapeutic regimens either alone or in combination. In India, azithromycin is typically utilized to treat a range of conditions, including acute respiratory tract infections, bacterial dysentery, and enteric fever [5]. This macrolide antibiotic was repurposed for the treatment of COVID-19 based on in its hypothetical anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties [68]. On the other hand, HCQ in India is mainly utilized for treatment of autoimmune diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus, and post-viral infectious arthritis, such as chikungunya arthritis, and is not part of national malaria treatment guidelines [912]. It has been suggested that HCQ could have antiviral activity as well as indirect anti-inflammatory properties through the activation of CD8+ T cells and the reduction of pro-inflammatory cytokine response, thus leading to its widespread use in the management of COVID-19 as well as in pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis [13,14]. However, an increasing number of studies have observed no beneficial effects from the use of azithromycin and/or HCQ, and a number of safety concerns have also been raised [1519].

A growing body of evidence from observational studies across multiple countries consistently indicates that only a small proportion of hospitalized COVID-19 patients develop secondary bacterial infections, with higher rates observed in intensive care units [20,21]. The risk of developing bacterial co-infections remains presumably very low in non-hospitalized patients with mild disease, who represent the majority of individuals with COVID-19.

These observations suggest against the routine empirical use of antibiotics in the treatment of COVID-19 cases unless there is evidence of bacterial infection, as recommended by WHO and Indian Ministry of Health guidelines [22,23]. A few before-and-after studies have been conducted to determine the impact of COVID-19 on antibiotic use, but these were all done in high-income countries (see S1 Text and S1 and S2 Tables) [2431].

With about 27.2 million COVID-19 cases reported as of 25 May 2021, India is among the hardest hit countries in the world [32]. In this study, we assessed the impact of the first COVID-19 epidemic wave on the consumption of antibiotics and HCQ in 2020 in India’s private sector, which accounts for three-quarters of healthcare delivery and 90% of antibiotic sales in the country [33,34].

Methods

Study design

We conducted interrupted time series (ITS) analyses using total antibiotics, azithromycin, and HCQ sales volumes as our continuous outcome, and COVID-19 epidemic as the exposure of interest [35]. Our counterfactual (i.e., sales volumes had the pandemic not occurred) was thus the extrapolation of the pre-epidemic period. Although a formal detailed protocol was not developed, our analytic plan was designed a priori, before performing the analyses. However, our original study included sales data only up to September 2020 and was updated during the review process as more recent data became available to the study team. In the absence of a validated checklist for impact evaluation studies such as this, we followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines (S1 STROBE Checklist).

Temporal data on COVID-19 in India

The first imported case of SARS-CoV-2 infection in India was identified on 30 January 2020. Until late March 2020 the number of cases detected across the country remained very low (about 0.1 per 100,000 population), although this might be partly explained by the limited number of tests being performed. In order to examine associations between drug sales volumes and COVID-19 cases, national and state-wise data regarding the monthly number of new cases detected in India were obtained from the publicly accessible online repository compiled by the Indian non-profit organization PRS Legislative Research, based on data from the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India [32]. The monthly number of tests performed in the country was obtained from Our World in Data [36]; however, this information is not available for individual states. Projected population estimates as determined by the National Commission on Population, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, were utilized to calculate cumulative monthly rates of new cases and tests per 100,000 population [37].

For the purpose of our regression analyses, the exposure was treated as a binary variable (pre-epidemic phase coded 0 versus epidemic phase coded 1) as detailed below.

Antibiotic and HCQ sales data

The main outcomes of interest for this study were the sales volumes of antibiotics and HCQ in India, using data obtained from IQVIA, which is a reliable source of drug sales data [1,38]. IQVIA is a company that collects over-the-counter (OTC) and prescription-based sales data by auditing sales from a representative panel of drug stockists. The data are then extrapolated to all stockists in the country using a proprietary projection algorithm. This accounts for an estimated 95% of the total pharmaceutical market in terms of value sales combining the retail sector, hospitals, and dispensing doctors. In India, all antibiotics are included in Schedule H or H1. Schedule H is a class of prescription drugs that cannot be purchased without the prescription of a qualified doctor. For Schedule H1 drugs, in addition to having a prescription, the dispenser should record the prescriber and patient details, the drug, and the quantity dispensed and maintain the record for 3 years, and the record should be open for inspection by regulatory officials. However, OTC dispensing of antibiotics is common in India [39]. Regular monthly data points from January 2018 to December 2020 were available for the purpose of our analyses. Sales volumes were reported in standard units (SU), and 1 SU (i.e., 1 dose) was defined as a single tablet, capsule, ampoule, vial, or a 5-mL liquid preparation for oral consumption, as reported previously [38]. Information on formulation type with regard to the route of administration (oral, parenteral, topical) was also available. We further classified oral drugs as child-appropriate formulations (CAFs) or non-CAFs based on the description of the package content (the list of formulation types considered for this purpose is provided in S3 Table), as reported previously [38]. Antibiotics were categorized according to the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) Index 2020 and the WHO Access, Watch, Reserve (AWaRe) framework 2019 [40,41]. The full list of drugs (intended as active molecule) included in our dataset is available in S4 Table.

Data analysis

We performed descriptive analyses of antibiotics and HCQ sales data throughout the observation period, reporting the absolute number of doses sold along with crude percentages of each drug class relative to the total. Medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs) were also used to describe overall and stratum-specific monthly sales volumes. Descriptive analyses were also performed to explore trends up to September 2020 (peak of the epidemic wave) in selected states/territories reporting either a very high number of cases (Andhra Pradesh, Delhi, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu) or a very low number of cases (Bihar, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, West Bengal).

Next we conducted segmented regression analyses of time series data to assess how much the epidemic onset affected monthly sales volumes of (1) all antibiotics (including azithromycin), (2) azithromycin only (categorized as Schedule H), and (3) HCQ (categorized as Schedule H1 since March 2020) [35,42]. We decided a priori to exclude CAFs from these assessments as we anticipated an increase in antibiotic sales mainly among adult patients. Children constitute a small proportion of reported COVID-19 cases and are much less likely to develop symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection [43,44]. Furthermore, social distancing measures and school closure remained in place in most Indian states throughout the study period. As also documented in the United States [31,45], such a scenario likely plays a role in reducing the transmission of many respiratory infections that typically spread among children, leading to lower antibiotic use.

Our models for total non-CAF antibiotics and azithromycin estimated the following measures: (1) pre-epidemic trend (January 2018 to March 2020), (2) average level of change in mean monthly sales during the preventive lockdown, (3) the slope (trend) change in the outcome after the lockdown phase (i.e., from June 2020 onwards), and (4) the slope (trend) change in the outcome during the declining phase of the first epidemic wave (i.e., after September 2020) relative to the rising phase. We introduced the term “declining phase” when the analyses were updated to incorporate more recent data from October to December 2020, to better reflect the change in the epidemic trend during the study period. The model described above allowed us to account for the effect of the nationwide lockdown enforced by the Government of India between 24 March and 31 May 2020. During this time, several restrictions were imposed on the entire population, including—but not limited to—closure of schools and all nonessential services, ban on stepping out from home, and curfew. For this reason and because of the still limited circulation of the SARS-CoV-2 infection within the community, we hypothesized that antibiotic sales could have been negatively affected. A fixed effect term for the rainy season (July to October) was included in the model for antibiotics to adjust for seasonality. As this approach did not perform equally well for azithromycin sales, for this outcome we used a harmonic seasonal model to better account for seasonal changes [46], along with further adjustments for non-seasonal autocorrelation.

Given the initial recommendation for HCQ-based prophylaxis, particularly among healthcare workers [47], we expected a weaker effect of lockdown on HCQ sales and did not account for it in the model. We thus estimated the average change in level and the slope change in the outcome assuming the start of the COVID-19 epidemic in March 2020. Autocorrelated errors were also included to correct for the remaining serial correlation in the data, whereas no adjustments for seasonality were deemed necessary. HCQ is not recommended for malaria treatment according to Indian guidelines, so no major seasonal changes are expected to occur in its use.

A detailed description of model specification and diagnostics is provided in S2 Text and S1S3 Figs.

Descriptive analyses were performed in STATA version 16.1 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, US), and regression analyses were conducted in R (version 4.0.3).

Ethics considerations

The institutional review boards of Washington University in St. Louis and McGill University exempted this study from ethics review as no identifiable information about living individuals was obtained (i.e., secondary use of anonymous information).

Results

Pattern of antibiotic and HCQ sales throughout the study period

The absolute cumulative volume of antibiotics sold in 2020 was 16,290 million doses, which is slightly lower than the 18,167 million doses and 18,002 million doses sold in the same period of 2019 and 2018, respectively (Table 1). The CAF sales volume amounted to 3,779 million doses in 2020 as opposed to 4,998 million doses in 2019 and 4,934 million doses in 2018. The proportion of non-CAF sales among total antibiotics, likely prescribed and dispensed to adolescents and adults (although pediatric and non-pediatric use are indistinguishable for injectables), increased from 72.5% (95% CI: 71.8% to 73.1%) in 2019 to 76.8% (95% CI: 76.2% to 77.5%) in 2020 (Fig 1).

Table 1. Cumulative antibiotic sales volume per year (2018–2020), and distribution by AWaRe category and ATC class for formulations other than child-appropriate ones (non-CAF).

Category Cumulative sales volume, in million standard units
2018 2019 2020
Sales volume Percent Sales volume Percent Sales volume Percent
All antibiotics 18,002 100 18,167 100 16,290 100
Non-CAFs* 13,068 72.6 13,169 72.5 12,512 76.8
CAFs* 4,934 27.4 4,998 27.5 3,779 23.2
AWaRe category (non-CAF)**
Access 5,479 41.9 5,656 42.9 5,621 44.9
Watch 4,821 36.9 4,820 36.6 4,569 36.5
Reserve 87 0.7 113 0.9 115 0.9
Discouraged 2,578 19.7 2,484 18.9 2,142 17.1
Not included in AWaRe 103 0.8 96 0.7 65 0.5
ATC class (non-CAF)**
Aminoglycosides 240 1.8 237 1.8 184 1.5
BL-BLI 1,228 9.4 1,380 10.5 1,141 9.1
Carbapenems*** 39 0.3 46 0.3 48 0.4
Cephalosporin-BLI 425 3.3 477 3.6 402 3.2
Cephalosporins (first generation) 397 3.0 395 3.0 374 3.0
Cephalosporins (second generation) 232 1.8 248 1.9 216 1.7
Cephalosporins (third generation) 1,451 11.1 1,657 12.6 1,489 11.9
Cephalosporins (fourth generation+) 2 <0.1 2 <0.1 1 <0.1
Combinations 2,206 16.9 2,053 15.6 1,768 14.1
Glycopeptides 3 <0.1 4 <0.1 3 <0.1
Imidazoles 1,419 10.9 1,485 11.3 1,445 11.5
Macrolides 947 7.2 1,009 7.7 1,124 9.0
Penicillins 1,114 8.5 1,154 8.8 1,207 9.6
Polymyxins 2 <0.1 2 <0.1 1 <0.1
Quinolones 1,718 13.1 1,664 12.6 1,546 12.4
Sulfonamides 329 2.5 203 1.5 321 2.6
Tetracyclines 869 6.6 669 5.1 611 4.9
Other antibiotics 446 3.4 484 3.7 467 3.7

ATC, Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical; AWaRe, Access, Watch, Reserve; BL, beta-lactam; BLI, beta-lactamase inhibitor; CAF, child-appropriate formulation.

*Percentages are calculated relative to all antibacterial drugs.

**Percentages are calculated relative to non-CAFs of antibacterial drugs.

***Including combinations of carbapenems and BLI.

Fig 1. Trend in sales volumes of total antibiotics, azithromycin, doxycycline, faropenem, and HCQ in India from January 2018 to December 2020.

Fig 1

CAF, non-CAF, and total sales are presented in the graphs, as relevant. Data on antibiotics are inclusive of azithromycin. HCQ and faropenem are only shown as non-CAFs because CAFs are not available for these drugs. As only a very small proportion of doxycycline is sold as CAF, this is omitted in the graph. CAF, child appropriate formulations; HCQ, hydroxychloroquine, SU, standard unit.

The distribution of AWaRe categories remained almost stable over time except for a slight decline in the use of “discouraged” fixed-dose antibiotic combinations, which could be ascribed to a policy change introduced in September 2018 and was accompanied by an increase in the use of “access” antibiotics (Table 1; S4 and S5 Figs). The median (IQR) percentages of the different AWaRe categories relative to the total non-CAF antibiotics sold monthly throughout the entire study period (2018–2020) were as follows: “access”, 43.0% (42.2%–44.4%); “watch”, 36.8% (35.4%–37.6%); “reserve”, 0.8% (0.7%–0.9%); and “discouraged”, 18.8% (17.4%–19.7%).

The distribution of antibiotics by ATC class remained stable except for a noteworthy increase in non-CAF macrolide (J01F) sales, jumping from 947 million doses in 2018 to 1,124 million doses in 2020 (Table 1; S6 Fig). After the end of lockdown, between June and September 2020, azithromycin (J01FA10) sales were 34.4% higher than observed in the corresponding months of the previous year, followed by a decline after the peak of the first epidemic wave (Fig 1). Besides azithromycin, 2 other antibiotics, doxycycline and faropenem, that are commonly used for respiratory tract infections showed increased consumption. Monthly doxycycline (J01AA02) sales did not change much until September 2020, when a considerable peak was observed (+25.9% compared to September 2019). Faropenem (J01DI03) use has been rising constantly over the years, but a 23.4% increase was registered in September 2020 versus the year before (Fig 1). No major changes were observed in the sales volumes of other broad spectrum antibiotic classes, such as second- and third-generation cephalosporins and quinolones. Similarly, monthly sales of selected parenteral antibiotics that are typically used in inpatient care, such as carbapenems, glycopeptides, third-generation cephalosporins, and polymyxins, remained almost stable (S7 Fig).

Furthermore, cumulative HCQ sales (only available as non-CAF) increased by approximately 35.4% between 2019 and 2020 (from 274 million doses in 2019 to 371 million doses in 2020) (Fig 1).

Impact of COVID-19 on antibiotic and HCQ sales

Crude monthly sales of non-CAF antibiotics increased with the number of new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population, a pattern that is clearly observable both nationally (Fig 2) and in selected Indian states with different epidemic curves (Figs 3, S8, and S9). Rising trends are evident both in states with a high number of reported cases and in those with lower incidence. The reported number of COVID-19 cases in India remained quite low until June, reflecting the difficulties in testing scale-up across the country, particularly during the first half of 2020 (S10 Fig).

Fig 2. Relationship between new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 (cumulative rate per month) and national sales volumes of antibiotics, azithromycin, doxycycline, faropenem, and HCQ from January to December 2020.

Fig 2

CAF, non-CAF, and total sales are reported. Data on antibiotics are inclusive of azithromycin. HCQ and faropenem are only shown as non-CAFs because CAFs are not available for these drugs. As only a very small proportion of doxycycline is sold as CAF, this is omitted in the graph. CAF, child-appropriate formulation; HCQ, hydroxychloroquine, SU, standard unit.

Fig 3. Relationship between new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 (cumulative rate per month) and azithromycin sales volumes per 100,000 population (only non-child-appropriate formulations) in 10 states of India from January to September 2020.

Fig 3

States with the highest rates of detected COVID-19 cases are shown on the left side of the graph, whereas states with the lowest rates of detected COVID-19 cases are on the right.

Antibiotic sales volumes declined during the lockdown phase (April to May 2020). As estimated through segmented regression analyses (Table 2; Fig 4), non-CAF antibiotic and azithromycin sales in April 2020 decreased on average by 197.3 million doses (95% CI: −294.7 to −99.9 million; P < 0.001) and 11.3 million doses (95% CI: −17.6 to −5.0 million; P < 0.001), respectively. Moreover, we observed a monthly increase in trend after the lockdown period for both non-CAF antibiotics (+54.1 million doses [95% CI: 17.0 to 91.2 million]; P = 0.008) and non-CAF azithromycin (+9.5 million doses [95% CI: 6.6 to 12.3 million]; P < 0.001) from June to September 2020. Cumulative excess antibiotic sales from June to September 2020 amounted to 216.4 million doses (95% CI: 68.0 to 364.8 million; P = 0.008) for non-CAF antibiotics and 38.0 million doses (95% CI: 26.4 to 49.2 million; P < 0.001) for non-CAF azithromycin. The latter is equivalent to about 6.2 million azithromycin treatment courses for respiratory tract infection, considering a course to be 500 mg daily for 5 days (S2 Text). After the epidemic peak in September 2020, a declining trend in sales was observed from October to December 2020, but this was significant only for azithromycin (−20.8 million doses [95% CI: −26.93 to −14.73 million]; P < 0.001) (Table 2).

Table 2. Estimated change in monthly sales volume (expressed in million SU) according to adjusted segmented regression models for total antibiotics and azithromycin.

Measure Sales volume in million SU
All antibiotics* Azithromycin**
Estimate (95% CI) P value Estimate (95% CI) P value
Baseline level (January 2018) 1,014.2 (963.4 to 1,065.1) <0.001 39.4 (36.5 to 42.4) <0.001
Pre-epidemic trend (monthly change from January 2018 to March 2020) 0.6 (−2.6 to 3.8) 0.725 0.6 (0.5 to 0.8) <0.001
Average change in level during lockdown (April to May 2020) versus the pre-epidemic period −197.3 (−294.7 to −99.9) <0.001 −11.3 (−17.6 to −5.0) <0.001
Change in trend after lockdown (after May 2020) 54.1 (17.0 to 91.2) 0.008 9.5 (6.6 to 12.3) <0.001
Change in trend after the epidemic peak (i.e., after September 2020) relative to the rising phase of the epidemic −64.3 (−150.6 to 21.9) 0.154 −20.8 (−26.9 to −14.7) <0.001

SU, standard unit. Only non-child-appropriate formulations were considered for these analyses.

*Model adjusted for seasonality using a fixed effect term indicating the rainy season.

**Harmonic seasonal model to adjust for seasonality, and autocorrelated errors to account for the remaining serial correlation in the data.

Fig 4. Results of segmented regression analysis for monthly sales volumes of non-CAF antibiotics, azithromycin, and HCQ between January 2018 and December 2020.

Fig 4

We also estimated a change of +11.1 million doses (95% CI: 9.2 to 13.0 million; P < 0.001) for HCQ sales in March 2020 (Table 3; Fig 4). After this peak, sales began declining slowly, as confirmed by the weak negative change in trend suggested by our model (−0.6 million doses [95% CI: −1.0 to −0.1 million]; P = 0.010), which became more pronounced after September 2020 (−3.1 million doses [95% CI: −4.3 to −1.9 million]; P < 0.001).

Table 3. Estimated change in monthly sales volume (expressed in million SU) according to adjusted segmented regression models for HCQ.

Measure HCQ sales volume in million SU*
Estimate (95% CI) P value
Baseline level (January 2018) 20.2 (19.3 to 21.2) <0.001
Pre-epidemic trend (monthly change from January 2018 to March 2020) 0.2 (0.1 to 0.2) <0.001
Change in level in March 2020 versus the pre-epidemic period** 11.1 (9.2 to 13.0) <0.001
Change in trend after March 2020*** −0.6 (−1.01 to −0.14) 0.010
Change in trend after the epidemic peak (i.e., after September 2020) relative to the rising phase of the epidemic −3.08 (−4.3 to −1.9) <0.001

HCQ, hydroxychloroquine; SU, standard unit. Only non-child-appropriate formulations were considered for these analyses.

*Model adjusted for non-seasonal autocorrelation.

**In March 2020 (i.e., when the number of cases in India was still very low), India’s Ministry of Health and Family Welfare issued a recommendation for use of HCQ in prophylaxis.

***The effect of the lockdown phase was not considered in this model based on the assumption that HCQ was predominantly used for prophylaxis among healthcare workers and thus unlikely to be negatively impacted by the lockdown as observed for antibiotics, and azithromycin in particular.

Discussion

We estimate that between June and September 2020, with peak epidemic activity, COVID-19 likely contributed to excess sales of 216 million doses of non-CAF antibiotics and 38 million doses of non-CAF azithromycin. The excess antibiotic sales likely resulted from the sudden surge in the number of patients seeking medical care for presumptive or confirmed COVID-19 both in the community and in the hospitals, as suggested by the abrupt increase in use of azithromycin, often prescribed for this condition. Assuming perfect adherence to the recommended dosage and duration of azithromycin treatment for respiratory tract infections not related to COVID-19 per Indian national guidelines (i.e., 500 mg daily for 5 days), 38 million excess doses from June to September 2020 corresponds to about 6.2 million treatment courses. During this period, 6 million new COVID-19 cases were reported in India across both public and private sectors, suggesting empirical use of azithromycin in the private sector in the absence of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection [32]. Moreover, azithromycin is often prescribed for shorter duration (e.g., 500 mg per day for 3 days) [48], potentially indicating that more people could have been treated empirically without diagnostic confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection. To support this, in states like Bihar, Gujarat, and West Bengal, where the number of cases is reportedly low and tests are not widely available nor accessible, azithromycin consumption has risen considerably. It should also be noted that healthcare-seeking behaviors have changed substantially during the pandemic period, with fewer people presenting to healthcare facilities for conditions other than acute respiratory infections (i.e., COVID-19 suspicion). Therefore, we expect antibiotics to be less commonly prescribed for other types of illness as compared to the previous years, suggesting that the COVID-19-attributable excess sales indicated by our models might be an underestimation. On the other hand, we observed a notable reduction in CAF sales, suggesting that antibiotic use among children has declined since the start of the pandemic, which is in line with our hypotheses [31,43,45].

Notably, the massive increase in azithromycin use raises several serious concerns. First, a recent randomized controlled study investigating the effects of mass distribution of azithromycin in Nigerian children demonstrated an increase not only in macrolide resistance determinants but also non-macrolide resistance in the gut flora such as resistance to beta-lactams [49]. Multi-drug-resistant Enterobacterales, including extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)–producing strains, are highly prevalent among healthy adults in the community and could be further aggravated with this unexpected increase in azithromycin use [50]. Second, the sudden ongoing mass consumption of azithromycin has the potential to further exacerbate the selection of azithromycin-resistant typhoidal and non-typhoidal Salmonella strains [51]. This is of particular concern for India, where enteric fever is highly endemic, with an estimated annual incidence of 377 cases per 100,000 population, and azithromycin has been increasingly chosen for empirical treatment [52]. The recent emergence of azithromycin-resistant Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi (S. Typhi) strains in India sounds a further alarm bell [53]. Another threat coming from this unexpected increase in azithromycin use is the possible selection of pan-oral-drug-resistant S. Typhi, requiring hospitalization for parenteral treatment administration [51]. Furthermore, azithromycin is currently recommended by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for travelers’ diarrhea in South Asia and Southeast Asia due to increasing fluoroquinolone-resistant strains among common bacterial diarrheal pathogens such as Salmonella, Shigella, and Campylobacter spp. [54]. The growing use of azithromycin could further jeopardize the available therapeutic choices for travelers’ diarrhea. Finally, the empirical use of azithromycin for presumptive COVID-19 could lead to a progressive substitution of beta-lactam antibiotics (J01C) for any acute respiratory tract illness, aggravating the concerns regarding resistance selection.

Among other oral agents commonly used for respiratory tract infections, doxycycline and faropenem sales peaked in September 2020. Faropenem is an oral “penem” drug that has been approved in India for several clinical indications including community-acquired respiratory tract infections [55]. A recent in vitro study demonstrated cross-resistance to carbapenems among ESBL-producing Escherichia coli isolates [55]. The unnecessary use of faropenem could promote intestinal colonization of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales in a context like India where there is a high community burden of ESBL positivity. However, the decline in faropenem sales after September 2020 was not as apparent as the declines in azithromycin and doxycycline sales, indicating that faropenem may have been used for non-respiratory-tract-infection indications. Regarding HCQ, the sudden increase in consumption registered in March 2020 could be attributed to prophylaxis for healthcare workers, as initially recommended by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare [47]. The national guidelines were subsequently revised on 27 June 2020, limiting the prescription of HCQ to moderate to severe COVID-19 cases and to patients with mild disease if immunocompromised or under 5 years old [56]. This change in recommendations is reflected in the slowly declining trend observed after the initial peak. Moreover, HCQ is unlikely to be prescribed for mild cases evaluated by primary care physicians or informal healthcare providers, who often recommend/dispense antibiotics like azithromycin but have less experience in handling HCQ-based treatment. Additionally, in March 2020, the Indian government issued an emergency order imposing stronger restrictions on HCQ sales by including it in Schedule H1 [57]. Among the biggest threats associated with the widespread use of HCQ is the occurrence of adverse events and toxic effects, particularly when given in combination with other drugs with similar adverse effects.

There are some limitations in our study. First, IQVIA data only cover the private healthcare sector. Although this does not allow us to draw conclusions regarding the impact of the pandemic on antibiotic usage in the public sector, it should be highlighted that the private sector accounts for 75% of healthcare in India and 90% of national antibiotic sales [33,34]. Second, our data could not distinguish between inpatient and outpatient use of antibiotics, but the latter is known to be largely predominant. Third, while we applied the most appropriate techniques to adjust for seasonal variations in the outcome, the suboptimal number of pre- and post-pandemic data points available for our analyses remains a limitation in that sense. Nonetheless, our models were quite robust and fitted the data reasonably well, as the residuals of each model were behaving as white noise; yet we recommend caution in interpreting the estimated impact on HCQ sales owing to the non-stationary nature of the time series. Fourth, we did not have data in defined daily doses (DDDs); however, there is a very good correlation between DDDs and standard units when estimating antibiotic consumption per person [58]. Fifth, while data from IQVIA are widely utilized to evaluate pharmaceutical sales, it should be highlighted that the company adopts a propriety method for estimating national sales. Finally, there is a lag time between sales from stockists and purchase by the end customer at the retail pharmacy, which could not be determined through the dataset. This could be a source of measurement error in the outcome data, although the lag time was likely lower during the epidemic due to the increase in demand for antibiotics.

Our findings have important implications for antimicrobial resistance globally and even more so for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Like in India, the overuse of antibiotics is common in other LMICs [2,59], where similar prescribing patterns among presumptive or confirmed COVID-19 cases likely exist. The situation could be even worse in other countries like Pakistan where azithromycin is the only treatment option for S. Typhi infections, and an outbreak of extremely drug-resistant strains recently occurred [60]. Policy makers in India and other LMICs should recognize this substantial overuse of antibiotics induced by COVID-19. A second and substantially more devastating epidemic wave hit India from April 2021 onwards. This could result in severe antimicrobial resistance consequences if the amount of antibiotic use follows a similar pattern as in the first wave, and thus warrants reexamining the impact of the second wave on antibiotic use. Considering the ongoing trends, the very low vaccination coverage level, and the amount of time necessary to eventually vaccinate the entire population, immediate action is needed to reduce the overuse of antibiotics for COVID-19. India will need to greatly increase COVID-19 testing access to reduce empirical treatments. Issuing further restrictions on azithromycin prescription by moving it from Schedule H to H1, as done with HCQ, could potentially help limit the widespread use of this important antibiotic. Similar restrictions on azithromycin use should also be considered in other LMICs. Antimicrobial stewardship interventions have never been so critical, and mass media awareness campaigns targeting prescribers and the general public to discourage the routine use of antibiotics for COVID-19 need to be rapidly implemented in India and other LMICs.

Supporting information

S1 STROBE Checklist

(PDF)

S1 Fig. Autocorrelation, partial autocorrelation, and distribution of residuals from model 1 for total antibiotic sales.

(TIF)

S2 Fig. Autocorrelation, partial autocorrelation, and distribution of residuals from model 3 for azithromycin sales.

(TIF)

S3 Fig. Autocorrelation, partial autocorrelation, and distribution of residuals from model 5 for hydroxychloroquine sales.

(TIF)

S4 Fig. Monthly sales volume of each AWaRe category in India between January 2018 and December 2020, separated for child-appropriate formulations (CAFs) and non-CAFs.

(TIF)

S5 Fig. Cumulative volume of antibiotics sold per year (2018–2020), stratified by AWaRe category, presented separately for child-appropriate formulations (CAFs) and non-CAFs.

(TIF)

S6 Fig. Cumulative volume of antibiotics sold per year (2018–2020), stratified by ATC class and presented separately for child-appropriate formulations (CAFs) and non-CAFs.

(TIF)

S7 Fig. Monthly sales volumes between January 2018 and December 2020 for selected antibiotic ATC classes: Parenteral carbapenems, glycopeptides, polymyxins, and parenteral third-generation cephalosporins (including those associated with a beta-lactamase inhibitor [BLI]).

(TIF)

S8 Fig. Relationship between new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 (cumulative rate per month) and antibiotic sales volumes per 100,000 (only non-child appropriate formulations [non-CAFs]) in 10 states of India from January to September 2020.

States with the highest rates of detected COVID-19 cases are shown on the left side of the graph, whereas states with the lowest rates of detected COVID-19 cases are on the right.

(TIF)

S9 Fig. Relationship between new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 (cumulative rate per month) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) sales volumes per 100,000 (only non-child appropriate formulations [non-CAFs]) in 10 states of India from January to September 2020.

States with the highest rates of detected COVID-19 cases are shown on the left side of the graph, whereas states with the lowest rates of detected COVID-19 cases are on the right.

(TIF)

S10 Fig. Number of SARS-CoV-2 tests performed and number of new COVID-19 cases detected each month in India per 100,000 inhabitants between January and December 2020.

(TIF)

S1 Table. Search strategy used in the rapid systematic review regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on antibiotic use.

(PDF)

S2 Table. Features and findings of studies that evaluated the impact of COVID-19 on antibiotic use.

(PDF)

S3 Table. List of oral formulations considered child-appropriate.

(PDF)

S4 Table. List of all antibiotics included in our dataset, along with ATC class, AWaRe category (2019), and Schedule H/H1.

(PDF)

S1 Text. Summary of the evidence regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on antibiotic use.

(PDF)

S2 Text. Detailed methods.

(PDF)

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge Dr. Nimalan Arinaminpathy (School of Public Health, Imperial College London, UK), Dr. Puneet Dewan (Global Health Labs, Seattle, WA, US), and Dr. Sophie Huddart (School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, US) for providing their valuable feedback on this work.

Abbreviations

ATC

Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical

AWaRe

Access, Watch, Reserve

CAF

child-appropriate formulation COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019

ESBL

extended spectrum beta-lactamase

HCQ

hydroxychloroquine

ITS

interrupted time series

S. Typhi

Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi

SARS-CoV-2

severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

Data Availability

Data cannot shared publicly because of license agreement with the IQVIA Inc. The data underlying the results presented in the study are available from IQVIA Consulting and Information Services India Pvt. Ltd. https://www.iqvia.com/locations/india.

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Klein EY, Van Boeckel TP, Martinez EM, Pant S, Gandra S, Levin SA, et al. Global increase and geographic convergence in antibiotic consumption between 2000 and 2015. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018;115(15):E3463–70. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1717295115 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Sulis G, Daniels B, Kwan A, Gandra S, Daftary A, Das J, et al. Antibiotic overuse in the primary health care setting: a secondary data analysis of standardised patient studies from India, China and Kenya. BMJ Glob Health. 2020;5(9):e003393. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003393 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Farooqui HH, Mehta A, Selvaraj S. Outpatient antibiotic prescription rate and pattern in the private sector in India: evidence from medical audit data. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(11):e0224848. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224848 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Nieuwlaat R, Mbuagbaw L, Mertz D, Burrows L, Bowdish DME, Moja L, et al. COVID-19 and antimicrobial resistance: parallel and interacting health emergencies. Clin Infect Dis. 2021;72(9):1657–9. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa773 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Indian Council of Medical Research. Treatment guidelines for antimicrobial use in common syndromes. New Delhi: Indian Council of Medical Research; 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Zarogoulidis P, Papanas N, Kioumis I, Chatzaki E, Maltezos E, Zarogoulidis K. Macrolides: from in vitro anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties to clinical practice in respiratory diseases. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2012;68(5):479–503. doi: 10.1007/s00228-011-1161-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Amsden GW. Anti-inflammatory effects of macrolides—an underappreciated benefit in the treatment of community-acquired respiratory tract infections and chronic inflammatory pulmonary conditions? J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;55(1):10–21. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkh519 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Kanoh S, Rubin BK. Mechanisms of action and clinical application of macrolides as immunomodulatory medications. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2010;23(3):590–615. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00078-09 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Lahita R. New treatments for systemic lupus erythematosus. Indian J Rheumatol. 2017;12(1):48–51. doi: 10.4103/injr.injr_1_17 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Pathak H, Mohan MC, Ravindran V. Chikungunya arthritis. Clin Med (Lond). 2019;19(5):381–5. doi: 10.7861/clinmed.2019-0035 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Directorate of National Vector Borne Disease Control Programme. National drug policy on malaria. New Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Malaviya AN, Gogia SB. Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in India-how and by whom: results from a speciality clinic-use of low-dose methotrexate (MTX) was inexplicably suboptimal. Clin Rheumatol. 2016;35(9):2163–73. doi: 10.1007/s10067-016-3283-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Wang M, Cao R, Zhang L, Yang X, Liu J, Xu M, et al. Remdesivir and chloroquine effectively inhibit the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in vitro. Cell Res. 2020;30(3):269–71. doi: 10.1038/s41422-020-0282-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Devaux CA, Rolain JM, Colson P, Raoult D. New insights on the antiviral effects of chloroquine against coronavirus: what to expect for COVID-19? Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020;55(5):105938. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105938 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Boulware DR, Pullen MF, Bangdiwala AS, Pastick KA, Lofgren SM, Okafor EC, et al. A randomized trial of hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis for Covid-19. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(6):517–25. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2016638 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Rodríguez-Molinero A, Pérez-López C, Gálvez-Barrón C, Miñarro A, Macho O, López GF, et al. Observational study of azithromycin in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(9):e0238681. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238681 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Horby P, Mafham M, Linsell L, Bell JL, Staplin N, Emberson JR, et al. Effect of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalized patients with Covid-19. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(21):2030–40. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2022926 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Mitjà O, Corbacho-Monné M, Ubals M, Alemany A, Suñer C, Tebé C, et al. A cluster-randomized trial of hydroxychloroquine for prevention of Covid-19. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(5):417–27. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2021801 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.PRINCIPLE Trial Collaborative Group. Azithromycin for community treatment of suspected COVID-19 in people at increased risk of an adverse clinical course in the UK (PRINCIPLE): a randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial. Lancet. 2021;397(10279):1063–74. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00461-X [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Lansbury L, Lim B, Baskaran V, Lim WS. Co-infections in people with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Infect. 2020;81(2):266–75. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.05.046 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Langford BJ, So M, Raybardhan S, Leung V, Westwood D, MacFadden DR, et al. Bacterial co-infection and secondary infection in patients with COVID-19: a living rapid review and meta-analysis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020;26(12):1622–9. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.07.016 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.World Health Organization. Clinical management of COVID-19. Interim guidance—27 May 2020. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020. [cited 2021 Jun 14]. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/332196/WHO-2019-nCoV-clinical-2020.5-eng.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Clinical Management Protocol: COVID-19. New Delhi, India: Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare - Directorate General of Health Services; 2020 Jun 27 [cited 2021 Mar 15]. Available from: https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/ClinicalManagementProtocolforCOVID19dated27062020.pdf.
  • 24.Abelenda-Alonso G, Padullés A, Rombauts A, Gudiol C, Pujol M, Alvarez-Pouso C, et al. Antibiotic prescription during the COVID-19 pandemic: a biphasic pattern. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2020;41(11):1371–2. doi: 10.1017/ice.2020.381 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Buehrle DJ, Decker BK, Wagener MM, Adalja A, Singh N, McEllistrem MC, et al. Antibiotic consumption and stewardship at a hospital outside of an early coronavirus disease 2019 epicenter. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2020;64(11):e01011–20. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01011-20 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Dieringer TD, Furukawa D, Graber CJ, Stevens VW, Jones MM, Rubin MA, et al. Inpatient antibiotic utilization in the Veterans’ Health Administration during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2021;42(6):751–3. doi: 10.1017/ice.2020.1277 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Gonzalez-Zorn B. Antibiotic use in the COVID-19 crisis in Spain. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021;27(4):646–7. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.09.055 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Nestler MJ, Godbout E, Lee K, Kim J, Noda AJ, Taylor P, et al. Impact of COVID-19 on pneumonia-focused antibiotic use at an academic medical center. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2020. Jul 23. doi: 10.1017/ice.2020.362 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Staub MB, Beaulieu RM, Graves J, Nelson GE. Changes in antimicrobial utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic after implementation of a multispecialty clinical guidance team. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2020. Oct 26. doi: 10.1017/ice.2020.1291 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Velasco-Arnaiz E, López-Ramos MG, Simó-Nebot S, Jordan I, Ríos-Barnés M, Urrea-Ayala M, et al. Pediatric antimicrobial stewardship in the COVID-19 outbreak. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2021;42(5):642–4. doi: 10.1017/ice.2020.312 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Katz SE, Spencer H, Zhang M, Banerjee R. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on infectious diagnoses and antibiotic use in pediatric ambulatory practices. J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc. 2021;10(1):62–4. doi: 10.1093/jpids/piaa124 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.PRS Legislative Research. COVID-19: details on cases. New Delhi: PRS Legislative Research; 2020. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Mackintosh M, Channon A, Karan A, Selvaraj S, Cavagnero E, Zhao H. What is the private sector? Understanding private provision in the health systems of low-income and middle-income countries. Lancet. 2016;388(10044):596–605. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00342-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Kumar AK, Chen LC, Choudhury M, Ganju S, Mahajan V, Sinha A, et al. Financing health care for all: challenges and opportunities. Lancet. 2011;377(9766):668–79. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61884-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Lopez Bernal J, Soumerai S, Gasparrini A. A methodological framework for model selection in interrupted time series studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;103:82–91. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.05.026 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Our World in Data. Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). Our World in Data; 2021. [2021 Mar 15]. Available from: doi: 10.1111/cup.13867 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.National Commission on Population. Census of India 2011. Population projections for India and States, 2011–2036: report of the Technical Group on population projections. New Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare; 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Hsia Y, Sharland M, Jackson C, Wong ICK, Magrini N, Bielicki JA. Consumption of oral antibiotic formulations for young children according to the WHO Access, Watch, Reserve (AWaRe) antibiotic groups: an analysis of sales data from 70 middle-income and high-income countries. Lancet Infect Dis. 2019;19(1):67–75. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30547-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Nafade V, Huddart S, Sulis G, Daftary A, Miraj SS, Saravu K, et al. Over-the-counter antibiotic dispensing by pharmacies: a standardised patient study in Udupi district, India. BMJ Glob Health. 2019;4(6):e001869. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001869 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology. ATC/DDD index 2021. Oslo: WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology; 2021. [cited 2021 Mar 15]. Available from: https://www.whocc.no/atc_ddd_index/. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Sharland M, Gandra S, Huttner B, Moja L, Pulcini C, Zeng M, et al. Encouraging AWaRe-ness and discouraging inappropriate antibiotic use-the new 2019 Essential Medicines List becomes a global antibiotic stewardship tool. Lancet Infect Dis. 2019;19(12):1278–80. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(19)30532-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Xiao H, Augusto O, Wagenaar BH. Reflection on modern methods: a common error in the segmented regression parameterization of interrupted time-series analyses. Int J Epidemiol. 2020. Oct 23. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyaa148 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Davies NG, Klepac P, Liu Y, Prem K, Jit M, Pearson CAB, et al. Age-dependent effects in the transmission and control of COVID-19 epidemics. Nat Med. 2020;26(8):1205–11. doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-0962-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. COVID data tracker: demographic trends of COVID-19 cases and deaths in the US reported to CDC. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2020. [cited 2020 Dec 5]. Available from: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#demographics. [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Hatoun J, Correa ET, Donahue SMA, Vernacchio L. Social distancing for COVID-19 and diagnoses of other infectious diseases in children. Pediatrics. 2020;146(4):e2020006460. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-006460 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Jebb AT, Tay L, Wang W, Huang Q. Time series analysis for psychological research: examining and forecasting change. Front Psychol. 2015;6:727. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00727 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. Revised advisory on the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as prophylaxis for COVID-19 infection (in supersession of previous advisory dated 23rd March, 2020). New Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare; 2020. May 25. [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Donde S, Mishra A, Kochhar P. Azithromycin in acute bacterial upper respiratory tract infections: an Indian non-interventional study. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014;66(Suppl 1):225–30. doi: 10.1007/s12070-011-0437-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Doan T, Worden L, Hinterwirth A, Arzika AM, Maliki R, Abdou A, et al. Macrolide and nonmacrolide resistance with mass azithromycin distribution. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(20):1941–50. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2002606 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Babu R, Kumar A, Karim S, Warrier S, Nair SG, Singh SK, et al. Faecal carriage rate of extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae in hospitalised patients and healthy asymptomatic individuals coming for health check-up. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2016;6:150–3. doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2016.05.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Hooda Y, Tanmoy AM, Sajib MSI, Saha S. Mass azithromycin administration: considerations in an increasingly resistant world. BMJ Glob Health. 2020;5(6):e002446. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002446 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.John J, Van Aart CJ, Grassly NC. The burden of typhoid and paratyphoid in India: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(4):e0004616. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004616 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Carey ME, Jain R, Yousuf M, Maes M, Dyson ZA, Thu TNH, et al. spontaneous emergence of azithromycin resistance in independent lineages of Salmonella Typhi in northern India. Clin Infect Dis. 2021;72(5):e120–7. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1773 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Brunette GW, Nemhauser JB, editors. CDC yellow book 2020: health information for international travel. New York: Oxford University Press; 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Gandra S, Choi J, McElvania E, Green SJ, Harazin M, Thomson RB, et al. Faropenem resistance causes in vitro cross-resistance to carbapenems in ESBL-producing Escherichia coli. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020;55(3):105902. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105902 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Directorate General of Health Services. Clinical management protocol: COVID-19. Version 4. New Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare; 2020. [cited 2021 Jun 14]. Available from: https://www.mohfw.gov.in/pdf/ClinicalManagementProtocolforCOVID19dated27062020.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Department of Health and Family Welfare. Notification. The Gazette of India: extraordinary. New Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare; 2020. Mar 26 [cited 2021 Jun 14]. Available from: https://cdsco.gov.in/opencms/opencms/system/modules/CDSCO.WEB/elements/download_file_division.jsp?num_id=NjMyNw==. [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Van Boeckel TP, Gandra S, Ashok A, Caudron Q, Grenfell BT, Levin SA, et al. Global antibiotic consumption 2000 to 2010: an analysis of national pharmaceutical sales data. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14(8):742–50. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(14)70780-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Sulis G, Adam P, Nafade V, Gore G, Daniels B, Daftary A, et al. Antibiotic prescription practices in primary care in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2020;17(6):e1003139. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003139 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Qamar FN, Yousafzai MT, Khalid M, Kazi AM, Lohana H, Karim S, et al. Outbreak investigation of ceftriaxone-resistant Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi and its risk factors among the general population in Hyderabad, Pakistan: a matched case-control study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18(12):1368–76. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30483-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Raffaella Bosurgi

5 Feb 2021

Dear Dr Gandra,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript entitled "Impact of COVID-19 on antibiotics and hydroxychloroquine sales in India: an interrupted time series analysis" for consideration by PLOS Medicine.

Your manuscript has now been evaluated by the PLOS Medicine editorial staff as well as by an academic editor with relevant expertise and I am writing to let you know that we would like to send your submission out for external peer review.

However, before we can send your manuscript to reviewers, we need you to complete your submission by providing the metadata that is required for full assessment. To this end, please login to Editorial Manager where you will find the paper in the 'Submissions Needing Revisions' folder on your homepage. Please click 'Revise Submission' from the Action Links and complete all additional questions in the submission questionnaire.

Please re-submit your manuscript within two working days, i.e. by .

Login to Editorial Manager here: https://www.editorialmanager.com/pmedicine

Once your full submission is complete, your paper will undergo a series of checks in preparation for peer review. Once your manuscript has passed all checks it will be sent out for review.

Feel free to email us at plosmedicine@plos.org if you have any queries relating to your submission.

Kind regards,

Dr Raffaella Bosurgi

Executive Editor

PLOS Medicine

Decision Letter 1

Raffaella Bosurgi

24 Mar 2021

Dear Dr. Gandra,

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript "Impact of COVID-19 on antibiotics and hydroxychloroquine sales in India: an interrupted time series analysis" (PMEDICINE-D-21-00574R1) for consideration at PLOS Medicine.

Your paper was evaluated by the editorial team and myself. It was also sent to independent reviewers, including a statistical reviewer. The reviews are appended at the bottom of this email and any accompanying reviewer attachments can be seen via the link below:

[LINK]

In light of these reviews, I am afraid that we will not be able to accept the manuscript for publication in the journal in its current form, but we would like to consider a revised version that addresses the reviewers' and editors' comments. Obviously we cannot make any decision about publication until we have seen the revised manuscript and your response, and we plan to seek re-review by one or more of the reviewers.

In revising the manuscript for further consideration, your revisions should address the specific points made by each reviewer and the editors. Please also check the guidelines for revised papers at http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/revising-your-manuscript for any that apply to your paper. In your rebuttal letter you should indicate your response to the reviewers' and editors' comments, the changes you have made in the manuscript, and include either an excerpt of the revised text or the location (eg: page and line number) where each change can be found. Please submit a clean version of the paper as the main article file; a version with changes marked should be uploaded as a marked up manuscript.

In addition, we request that you upload any figures associated with your paper as individual TIF or EPS files with 300dpi resolution at resubmission; please read our figure guidelines for more information on our requirements: http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/figures. While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the PACE digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at PLOSMedicine@plos.org.

We expect to receive your revised manuscript by Apr 14 2021 11:59PM. Please email us (plosmedicine@plos.org) if you have any questions or concerns.

***Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.***

We ask every co-author listed on the manuscript to fill in a contributing author statement, making sure to declare all competing interests. If any of the co-authors have not filled in the statement, we will remind them to do so when the paper is revised. If all statements are not completed in a timely fashion this could hold up the re-review process. If new competing interests are declared later in the revision process, this may also hold up the submission. Should there be a problem getting one of your co-authors to fill in a statement we will be in contact. YOU MUST NOT ADD OR REMOVE AUTHORS UNLESS YOU HAVE ALERTED THE EDITOR HANDLING THE MANUSCRIPT TO THE CHANGE AND THEY SPECIFICALLY HAVE AGREED TO IT. You can see our competing interests policy here: http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/competing-interests.

Please use the following link to submit the revised manuscript:

https://www.editorialmanager.com/pmedicine/

Your article can be found in the "Submissions Needing Revision" folder.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option to publish peer-reviewed clinical study protocols. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

Please ensure that the paper adheres to the PLOS Data Availability Policy (see http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/data-availability), which requires that all data underlying the study's findings be provided in a repository or as Supporting Information. For data residing with a third party, authors are required to provide instructions with contact information for obtaining the data. PLOS journals do not allow statements supported by "data not shown" or "unpublished results." For such statements, authors must provide supporting data or cite public sources that include it.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Sincerely,

Dr Raffaella Bosurgi,

Executive Editor

PLOS Medicine

plosmedicine.org

-----------------------------------------------------------

Requests from the editors:

Comments from the reviewers:

Reviewer #1: Regarding PLOS Medicine

"Impact of COVID-19 on antibiotics and hydroxychloroquine sales in India: an interrupted time series analysis"

Thank you for the opportunity to read and comment on your study. You have collected a lot of data and it is interesting to get to understand more about prescribing during the pandemic.

My understanding of the aim is that you wanted to assess the impact of COVID-19 pandemic in India on the national consumption of antibiotics before-and-after, and to determine the impact of COVID-19 on antibiotic use in general, azithromycin and hydroxochloroquine.

Methods

The main outcomes of interest for this study was the sales volume of antibiotics and HCQ. The drug sales data was obtained from IQVIA Inc. From your information, we understand that IQVIA Inc. collects over-the-counter (OTC) and prescription-based sales data in India through a representative panel of drug stockists and offers an overall 95% coverage of the total pharmaceutical market combining the retail sector, hospitals and dispensing doctors. I have some questions to the collection of drug data,

1) For me this was a bit blurry - I understand that the sales data then cover hospitals and out-patients, but please explain: if you have a representative sample then the 95% coverage is actually an estimate and not true coverage?

2) Furthermore, please add whether the coverage is similar in all geographical regions

3) IQVIA Inc. collects data from drug stockists - how long lag-time would you expect from the data sold from the stockiest to the actual sale to patients (hospitals, pharmacies and dispensing doctors - and all do probably also have a stock) - do you think that could have an impact on your figures? (maybe you could touch upon this in discussion?)

Another issue that was contradictive: Under "What did the researchers do and find?" you state that "Using an interrupted time-series (ITS) design, we examined national sales volumes of total antibiotics, azithromycin alone, and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in India's private sector from January 2018 to September 2020". I have always understood "national sales volumes" as total sales (i.e. both private and public sector), but as you stated in discussion: "IQVIA data only cover the private healthcare sector thus…." As I read this, IQVIA Inc. data probably only cover the private sector - I suggest that this is made clearer in methods. Maybe the discussion also should be broadened a bit around this issue and whether the lack of information from the public sector matters? (Or would you say that they are similar e.g. with regard to patients drugs used, antibiotics available etc.?

With regard to schedule H/H1, please add where azithromycin is classified. Furthermore, it would also be nice to know the prescription status of HCQ and whether that is a drug that could be sold as OTC.

Results

In result you find that "Antibiotic sales volumes declined in April and May 2020" and then you have added "likely due to the very limited mobility allowed during the lockdown phase" But could another explanation be because it was less access to antibiotics due to mobility - or because it was less need - i.e. lower infection pressure? And further you say "Moreover, we observed a monthly increase in trend after the lockdown period for non-CAF antibiotics" I suggest to addressed this further in discussion.

Discussion

Regarding "HCQ, the sudden increase in consumption registered in March 2020 could be attributed to prophylaxis for healthcare workers as initially recommended by the Ministry of Health". I agree, increased use was seen in many countries in the first days of the pandemic, however HCQ was also given as treatment to COVID-19 patients.

Under limitations

With regard to the coverage of data (see also Q in methods); private versus public sector "First, IQVIA data only cover the private healthcare sector thus potentially underestimating the excess use of antibiotics and HCQ due to COVID-19". Could it be the other way around - that there is excess use in private sector and not in the public sector?

With regard to inpatient versus outpatient use: "Second, our data could not distinguish between inpatient and outpatient use of antibiotics……". Somehow you could, as you state in results; "Similarly, monthly sales of selected parenteral antibiotics that are typically used in inpatient care such as carbapenems, glycopeptides, third generation cephalosporins and polymyxins, has remained almost stable". Don't this indicate that the changes in antibiotics could be more due to the use in outpatients than the use in hospitals?

With regard to seasonal variations in the outcome, see comments in Text S2

With regard to other possible treatments for COVID, you mention that ivermectin is also used off-label for COVID-19 treatment in India, but what about other treatment regimens that have been discussed during the pandemic e.g. corticosteroids, some antivirals etc?

Then you mention DDDs: " Finally, we did not have data in daily defined doses (DDDs); however, the antibiotic consumption data in standard units correlates very well with DDDs" But your reference (no. 46) refers to DOT and not to DDDs.

Text S2: Detailed methods, model 4

Here you claim that HCQ is predominantly used as an immunomodulator and most commonly for non-infectious conditions, hence adjustment for seasonality was deemed unnecessary"

However, HCQ is also indicated for Malaria (both prophylaxis and therapy) - and those are approved indications among others both in Europe and in US (FDA ), therefore it is strange if you do not have those indications in India. Moreover, according to an article about Seasonal variations in incidence of severe and complicated malaria in central India (Indian J Med Sci. 2001 Jan;55(1):43-6.) claims that the maximum prevalence of malaria in most parts of India is from July to November months, which is the malaria season in India and are among the months you address in the study. It would be nice to address this point in discussion

Table S4: List of all antimicrobials included in our dataset, along with AWaRe (2019) and ATC categories (2020).

In the column for ATC you have grouped antibacterials, but not necessarily according to ATC. If you want to name the column ATC you should use the ATC code in addition to the antibiotic group, e.g. J01G Aminoglycosides. I also see that you diverge from the ATC groups for some of the substances e.g. tigecycline is grouped under tetracyclins (J01AA) in the ATC-system. It is of course OK to group the antibiotics the way you decide, and it is very clear in the Table how you group them, but be aware that it is not ATC grouping.

For international readers it would have been nice to have an extra column for which antibiotics are schedule H, H1 and OTC

Then, in the footnote you have mentioned : "CQ, chloroquine; HCQ, hydroxychloroquine" I could not find that you had used the abbreviations in the Table?

Reviewer #2:

Thanks for the opportunity to review your manuscript. My role is as a statistical reviewer, so my comments and questions are focused on the data and analysis. This manuscript presents an interrupted time-series analysis of national-level sales of antibiotics (AZM and the one we have heard so much about in the last 12 months, HCQ). I've put general comments/queries first and followed this with questions about specific sections of the manuscript.

The manuscript is good quality, it's well-written and clear and the approach to analysis is overall good (the details in the Supplementary appendix weren't just helpful for the review but were interesting to read as well).

The supplementary appendix was a useful addition for my review - the detailed methods you provided were very helpful in my review and answered several questions I had from reading the main manuscript. The final models selected after observing autocorrelation in the original formulation are appropriate and the limitations with the model for HCQ are acknowledged.

My main concern is about the data used in the analysis. The data is sourced from a private company that estimates sales through sampling over the counter sales and prescription records. This is briefly discussed in S2 Text - that there is a risk that the approach used to estimate national sales becomes biased during the COVID-19 period of 2020. The references (1, 25) provided are for two published studies with international comparisons (which include India) using the same database. I spent some time looking through IQVIA's website, but I didn't find any more detailed information. I was looking for the specific methodology used to estimate the total sales information (including how this was done in India) and any quality assessments of their methodology. The two publications provided to point to this being a legitimate source of data but for the review I would like to see the methodology used to estimate total sales so that I can make a complete and robust assessment of this work. I don't harbor any suspicions here but after the retraction of the work using the Surgisphere dataset last year in The Lancet I would like to be able to fully recommend your work with no doubts about the data used in the analysis.

P9. The association between sales volume and new COVID-19 cases was analysed with Pearson's correlation. There is a risk with this approach of an inflated correlation coefficient due to common underlying trends captured as an 'association'. There are a variety of approaches to dealing with this e.g. in the environmental epidemiology context I have used GAMs with a non-linear time effect to detrend and get a less biased estimate of association. I would recommend to either use a more appropriate approach (there are several to choose from) or to leave this out and present the summary figures which show a clear pattern of association as is.

In the figures (particularly Fig 1) the x-axis is quite noisy with the month and year displayed for each data point - this could be refined (e.g. year not displayed in each label, not every month labelled on the axis) to be clearer.

In Figure 2, I was unclear about the rate. Is this the rate of new infections per 100,00 in each month, or a cumulative rate of all COVID19 infections to the end of each months?

Text S2. The method used is described as 'generalized linear models with least-squares', I think this would be more accurately called ''general linear model' if least squares where used with a normal distribution.

Reviewer #3: This is important data to show the wider impact of COVID-19 on antibiotic use. I have some clarification comments and suggestions for strengthening the introduction and discussion. For example, I think more is needed on the background on azithromycin and HCQ use, as well as what a "lockdown" was in India. There is also some subtlety that could be included around the discussion about when and why antibiotic use might change with COVID-19 (e.g. direct and indirect effects). I cannot assess the time series analysis in detail but I think more justification of the choices made is needed.

Minor comments

Introduction

- COVID-19 is the disease with symptoms not "infection designated as coronavirus disease". Unclear please change

- Why were people using azithromycin and HCQ? More information on the early evidence on this regimen and subsequent rebuttal

- More subtlety is needed around why a patient might receive an antibiotic: the symptoms of hospitalised COVID-19 look like a bacterial pneumonia. Similarly, in the community, it is unlikely that people are taking an antibiotic because they think they have a bacterial infection but more because there are no treatments for COVID-19 and they want to take something

- What are azithromycin / HCQ used for in India "normally"? (i.e. pre-COVID-19?)

Methods

- Why is the information on schedule H / H1 in there?

- Why does social distancing / school closures affect why CAF formulas were not included? Suggest to cut this sentence (middle page 9), unless they could also assess the impact of such NPIs on the number of respiratory infections and hence the reduction in CAF antibiotic use.

- The recommendation for HCQ-based prophylaxis should be included in the introduction - was this just for India?

- (Top of page 10) If HCQ is not recommended for malaria why is it a concern to be used more for COVID-19? More background on this needed in the introduction.

- What does it mean " this approach did not perform equally well for azithromycin"? I think the model needs to be the same for all or at least all the same model types tested for each data set.

Results

- How are the confidence intervals generated around the proportion of non-CAF? Why do you have confidence intervals? Is it not just a single proportion?

- How did AWaRE classifications vary in the COVID period?

- Is azithromycin a macrolide? Can you explicitly say that this could have caused the jump? (bottom of page 11).

- Figure 2: the trend is not completely obvious to me and why is there no trend with HCQ? Can you discuss /explain the non-trends in this graph?

- Figure 3: the correlation / trend is clearer here: did you analyse this statistically?

- It's not completely clear to my why lockdown would affect antibiotic usage - can explain what "lockdown" meant in the Indian setting and this link in the background.

- How did doxycycline levels compare to September 2018? Why is this and farpenem singled out for analysis?

- Why was there a change in September 2020?

- In April 2020 non-CAF and azithromycin decreased vs 2018/19 or the start of 2020?

Discussion

- Is azithromycin really often prescribe for this condition? In India private / OTC settings?

- Is there a potential that other diseases, not being treated in hospital settings, could explain the increase in some antibiotic usage?

- In line with the above why might you expect the number for COVID-19 to be an underestimate? Surely if not attending healthcare facilities they may self-medicate?

- Could some of this background on azithromycin use go into the introduction to justify the focus and concern?

- What proportion of the healthcare prescribing in India is not in the private sector? (to assess the limitations)

Any attachments provided with reviews can be seen via the following link:

[LINK]

Decision Letter 2

Richard Turner

26 May 2021

Dear Dr. Gandra,

Thank you very much for re-submitting your manuscript "Impact of COVID-19 on antibiotics and hydroxychloroquine sales in India: an interrupted time series analysis" (PMEDICINE-D-21-00574R2) for consideration at PLOS Medicine.

I have discussed the paper with editorial colleagues and it was also seen again by two reviewers. I am pleased to tell you that, provided the remaining editorial and production issues are dealt with, we expect to be able to accept the paper for publication in the journal.

The issues that need to be addressed are listed at the end of this email. Any accompanying reviewer attachments can be seen via the link below. Please take these into account before resubmitting your manuscript:

[LINK]

***Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.***

In revising the manuscript for further consideration here, please ensure you address the specific points made by each reviewer and the editors. In your rebuttal letter you should indicate your response to the reviewers' and editors' comments and the changes you have made in the manuscript. Please submit a clean version of the paper as the main article file. A version with changes marked must also be uploaded as a marked up manuscript file.

Please also check the guidelines for revised papers at http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/revising-your-manuscript for any that apply to your paper. If you haven't already, we ask that you provide a short, non-technical Author Summary of your research to make findings accessible to a wide audience that includes both scientists and non-scientists. The Author Summary should immediately follow the Abstract in your revised manuscript. This text is subject to editorial change and should be distinct from the scientific abstract.

We hope to receive your revised manuscript within 1 week. Please email us (plosmedicine@plos.org) if you have any questions or concerns.

We ask every co-author listed on the manuscript to fill in a contributing author statement. If any of the co-authors have not filled in the statement, we will remind them to do so when the paper is revised. If all statements are not completed in a timely fashion this could hold up the re-review process. Should there be a problem getting one of your co-authors to fill in a statement we will be in contact. YOU MUST NOT ADD OR REMOVE AUTHORS UNLESS YOU HAVE ALERTED THE EDITOR HANDLING THE MANUSCRIPT TO THE CHANGE AND THEY SPECIFICALLY HAVE AGREED TO IT.

Please ensure that the paper adheres to the PLOS Data Availability Policy (see http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/data-availability), which requires that all data underlying the study's findings be provided in a repository or as Supporting Information. For data residing with a third party, authors are required to provide instructions with contact information for obtaining the data. PLOS journals do not allow statements supported by "data not shown" or "unpublished results." For such statements, authors must provide supporting data or cite public sources that include it.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option to publish peer-reviewed clinical study protocols. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript.

Please note, when your manuscript is accepted, an uncorrected proof of your manuscript will be published online ahead of the final version, unless you've already opted out via the online submission form. If, for any reason, you do not want an earlier version of your manuscript published online or are unsure if you have already indicated as such, please let the journal staff know immediately at plosmedicine@plos.org.

Please let me know if you have any questions, and we look forward to receiving the revised manuscript.   

Sincerely,

Richard Turner, PhD

Senior Editor, PLOS Medicine

rturner@plos.org

------------------------------------------------------------

Requests from Editors:

Please adapt the title to "Sales of antibiotics and hydroxychloroquine in India during the COVID-19 epidemic: An interrupted time-series analysis" or similar.

At line 32, please make that "the private sector".

At line 47, would "... first epidemic wave ..." be appropriate?

In the abstract and throughout the paper, please quote p values alongside 95% CI where available.

Please add a new final sentence to the "Methods and findings" subsection of your abstract, which should begin "Study limitations include ..." or similar and should quote 2-3 of the main study limitations.

At line 82, please make that "... likely to have occurred in other LMICs ...".

Early in your Methods section, please state whether or not the study had a protocol or prespecified analysis plan, and if so attach the relevant document(s) as a supplementary file, referred to in the text.

Please highlight non-prespecified analyses.

Please remove the information on funding and competing interests from the end of the main text. In the event of publication, this information will appear in the article metadata via entries in the submission form.

Throughout the text, please remove spaces from within the reference call-outs (e.g., "... post-exposure prophylaxis [13,14].").

In the reference list, please use the abbreviation "PLoS ONE".

Noting references 36 and 57, can some additional access information, or a URL, be added?

Please add "[preprint]" to reference 53 and any other cited preprints, and correct the mis-formatting.

Please add a completed checklist for the most appropriate reporting guideline, e.g., STROBE, as a supplementary document. This should be labelled "S1_STROBE_Checklist" or similar and referred to as such in your Methods section.

In the checklist, please refer to individual items by section (e.g., "Methods") and paragraph number, not line or page numbers (as the latter generally change in the event of publication).

Comments from Reviewers:

*** Reviewer #2:

Thanks for the revised manuscript and response to my original queries. Figures 1 and 2 are both improved and clear to read. The additional information on IQVIA was helpful - the IQVIA pharmacy data does seem to be widely used and legitimate.

The limitation with the data is that without information about the proprietary method that is used to estimate national data from the sample panel of sellers there is the possibility that this method becomes biased under unusual conditions, e.g. COVID-19. This is acknowledged with respect to changes in lag-time, I think that a general acknowledgement of the limitation of using a propriety estimation method, along with the specific issue of lag time in the discussion would be a sufficient clarification of the issue.

*** Reviewer #3:

[supportive report received]

***

Any attachments provided with reviews can be seen via the following link:

[LINK]

Decision Letter 3

Richard Turner

30 May 2021

Dear Dr Gandra, 

On behalf of my colleagues and the Academic Editor, Dr Knight, I am pleased to inform you that we have agreed to publish your manuscript "Sales of antibiotics and hydroxychloroquine in India during the COVID-19 epidemic: an interrupted time series analysis" (PMEDICINE-D-21-00574R3) in PLOS Medicine.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. Please be aware that it may take several days for you to receive this email; during this time no action is required by you. Once you have received these formatting requests, please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes.

Prior to final acceptance, please amend the typo in the file name for the STROBE checklist.

In the meantime, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pmedicine/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information to ensure an efficient production process. 

PRESS

We frequently collaborate with press offices. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximise its impact. If the press office is planning to promote your findings, we would be grateful if they could coordinate with medicinepress@plos.org. If you have not yet opted out of the early version process, we ask that you notify us immediately of any press plans so that we may do so on your behalf.

We also ask that you take this opportunity to read our Embargo Policy regarding the discussion, promotion and media coverage of work that is yet to be published by PLOS. As your manuscript is not yet published, it is bound by the conditions of our Embargo Policy. Please be aware that this policy is in place both to ensure that any press coverage of your article is fully substantiated and to provide a direct link between such coverage and the published work. For full details of our Embargo Policy, please visit http://www.plos.org/about/media-inquiries/embargo-policy/.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option to publish peer-reviewed clinical study protocols. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

Thank you again for submitting to PLOS Medicine. We look forward to publishing your paper. 

Sincerely, 

Richard Turner, PhD 

Senior Editor, PLOS Medicine

rturner@plos.org

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 STROBE Checklist

    (PDF)

    S1 Fig. Autocorrelation, partial autocorrelation, and distribution of residuals from model 1 for total antibiotic sales.

    (TIF)

    S2 Fig. Autocorrelation, partial autocorrelation, and distribution of residuals from model 3 for azithromycin sales.

    (TIF)

    S3 Fig. Autocorrelation, partial autocorrelation, and distribution of residuals from model 5 for hydroxychloroquine sales.

    (TIF)

    S4 Fig. Monthly sales volume of each AWaRe category in India between January 2018 and December 2020, separated for child-appropriate formulations (CAFs) and non-CAFs.

    (TIF)

    S5 Fig. Cumulative volume of antibiotics sold per year (2018–2020), stratified by AWaRe category, presented separately for child-appropriate formulations (CAFs) and non-CAFs.

    (TIF)

    S6 Fig. Cumulative volume of antibiotics sold per year (2018–2020), stratified by ATC class and presented separately for child-appropriate formulations (CAFs) and non-CAFs.

    (TIF)

    S7 Fig. Monthly sales volumes between January 2018 and December 2020 for selected antibiotic ATC classes: Parenteral carbapenems, glycopeptides, polymyxins, and parenteral third-generation cephalosporins (including those associated with a beta-lactamase inhibitor [BLI]).

    (TIF)

    S8 Fig. Relationship between new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 (cumulative rate per month) and antibiotic sales volumes per 100,000 (only non-child appropriate formulations [non-CAFs]) in 10 states of India from January to September 2020.

    States with the highest rates of detected COVID-19 cases are shown on the left side of the graph, whereas states with the lowest rates of detected COVID-19 cases are on the right.

    (TIF)

    S9 Fig. Relationship between new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 (cumulative rate per month) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) sales volumes per 100,000 (only non-child appropriate formulations [non-CAFs]) in 10 states of India from January to September 2020.

    States with the highest rates of detected COVID-19 cases are shown on the left side of the graph, whereas states with the lowest rates of detected COVID-19 cases are on the right.

    (TIF)

    S10 Fig. Number of SARS-CoV-2 tests performed and number of new COVID-19 cases detected each month in India per 100,000 inhabitants between January and December 2020.

    (TIF)

    S1 Table. Search strategy used in the rapid systematic review regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on antibiotic use.

    (PDF)

    S2 Table. Features and findings of studies that evaluated the impact of COVID-19 on antibiotic use.

    (PDF)

    S3 Table. List of oral formulations considered child-appropriate.

    (PDF)

    S4 Table. List of all antibiotics included in our dataset, along with ATC class, AWaRe category (2019), and Schedule H/H1.

    (PDF)

    S1 Text. Summary of the evidence regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on antibiotic use.

    (PDF)

    S2 Text. Detailed methods.

    (PDF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to editors & reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    Data cannot shared publicly because of license agreement with the IQVIA Inc. The data underlying the results presented in the study are available from IQVIA Consulting and Information Services India Pvt. Ltd. https://www.iqvia.com/locations/india.


    Articles from PLoS Medicine are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES