  Understanding public discourse on emergency use of unproven therapeutics is
crucial for monitoring safe use and combating misinformation. We developed a
natural language processing-based pipeline to comprehend public perceptions of
and stances on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related drugs on Twitter
over time. This retrospective study included 609,189 US-based tweets from
January 29, 2020, to November 30, 2021, about four drugs that garnered
significant public attention during the COVID-19 pandemic: (1)
Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin, therapies with anecdotal evidence; and (2)
Molnupiravir and Remdesivir, FDA-approved treatments for eligible patients.
Time-trend analysis was employed to understand popularity trends and related
events. Content and demographic analyses were conducted to explore potential
rationales behind people's stances on each drug. Time-trend analysis indicated
that Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin were discussed more than Molnupiravir
and Remdesivir, particularly during COVID-19 surges. Hydroxychloroquine and
Ivermectin discussions were highly politicized, related to conspiracy theories,
hearsay, and celebrity influences. The distribution of stances between the two
major US political parties was significantly different (P < .001); Republicans
were more likely to support Hydroxychloroquine (55%) and Ivermectin (30%) than
Democrats. People with healthcare backgrounds tended to oppose
Hydroxychloroquine (7%) more than the general population, while the general
population was more likely to support Ivermectin (14%). Our study found that
social media users have varying perceptions and stances on off-label versus
FDA-authorized drug use at different stages of COVID-19. This indicates that
health systems, regulatory agencies, and policymakers should design tailored
strategies to monitor and reduce misinformation to promote safe drug use.
