In this direction, a randomized, open-label trial in China in COVID-19 patients (n = 199), who were hospitalized with severe illness, compared lopinavir/ritonavir (400 mg/100 mg twice a day for 14 days) along with the standard care to the standard care alone [94]. The trial found that the time to achieve clinical improvement was similar in the two groups and that no statistically significant improvement, with respect to the viral load, oxygen therapy duration, hospitalization duration, or time to death, was achieved by the use of the drug combination [95]. Furthermore, a retrospective cohort study in China evaluated the use of lopinavir/ritonavir with or without umifenovir in COVID-19 patients (n = 16). On the seventh day, SARS-CoV-2 was not detected in the nasopharyngeal specimens of 35% of lopinavir/ritonavir-treated patients compared to 75% of lopinavir/ritonavir/umifenovir-treated patients. Chest computerized tomography scans were also better in the latter group (29% versus 69%) [96]. Moreover, a randomized, open-label trial in COVID-19 adults (n = 127) with mild to moderate symptoms in Hong Kong suggested that adding ribavirin and INF-β-1b to lopinavir/ritonavir increased the efficacy of the treatment when it was initiated within 7 days of the symptoms onset [59]. Other studies also suggested a limited benefit of lopinavir/ritonavir with or without INFs in patients with COVID-19 [97,98,99]. Recently, a small, randomized study in hospitalized COVID-19 adults (n = 22) in China compared lopinavir/ritonavir (lopinavir 400 mg/ritonavir 100 mg twice daily for 10 days) against chloroquine (500 mg twice daily for 10 days) and found that chloroquine was linked to a shorter time to RT-PCR conversion and a faster recovery [100].