Nirmatrelvir combined with ritonavir for preventing and treating COVID-19

The impact of ivermectin on COVID-19 outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in approximately seven million deaths globally, underscores the urgency for effective treatments. Ivermectin, among several repurposed drugs, garnered interest due to its antiviral properties. However, conflicting evidence from observational studies and randomized controlled trials raised questions about its efficacy and safety.

Method

This systematic review and meta-analysis followed MOOSE and PRISMA guidelines. Comprehensive searches were conducted in databases including Scopus, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science up to April 2024. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers and analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis V3 software.

Results

Across 33 studies encompassing 15,376 participants, ivermectin showed no significant impact on critical outcomes such as mortality [risk ratio (RR) 0.911, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.732-1.135], mechanical ventilation (RR 0.727, 95% CI 0.521-1.016), polymerase chain reaction conversion (RR 1.024, 95% CI 0.936-1.120), ICU admissions (RR 0.712, 95% CI 0.274-1.850), or hospitalization rates (RR 0.735, 95% CI 0.464-1.165) compared to controls. However, it significantly reduced time to symptom alleviation (standardized mean difference -0.302, 95% CI -0.587 to -0.018) and sustained symptom relief (RR 0.897, 95% CI 0.873-0.921). Adverse event (AE) rates were similar between the ivermectin and control groups (RR 0.896, 95% CI 0.797-1.007). Meta-regression indicated older age and diabetes as predictors of AEs.

Conclusion

Despite its observed benefits in symptom management, ivermectin did not significantly influence critical clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients. These findings highlight the importance of continued research to identify effective treatments for COVID-19, emphasizing the need for high-quality studies with robust methodology to inform clinical practice and public health policy effectively.

Population pharmacokinetics of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in critically ill Chinese COVID-19 patients and recommendations for medication use: a two-center retrospective study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to establish population pharmacokinetics (PPK) models of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in critically ill Chinese patients with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection, explore factors affecting the pharmacokinetics (PK) of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir.

METHODS

A total of 285 serum samples and clinical data were collected from 152 patients. The PPK models of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were analyzed using nonlinear mixed-effect modeling (NONMEM) approach. The optimal dosing regimen for patients with different renal function was determined using Monte Carlo simulations.

RESULTS

The population typical values of apparent clearance (CL/F) and apparent volume of distribution (V/F) of nirmatrelvir were 2.26 L/h and 15.3 L, respectively. Notably, creatinine clearance (CrCL) significantly influenced the PK variation of nirmatrelvir. Monte Carlo simulations suggested that patients with mild-to-moderate renal impairment experienced a 22.0-59.9% increase in the area under the curve (AUC) when they were administered a standard dose of nirmatrelvir compared to those with normal renal function. The AUC in patients with severe renal impairment after administration of 150 mg q12h nirmatrelvir was similar to that in patients with normal renal function after administration of 300 mg q12h nirmatrelvir.

CONCLUSIONS

PPK modeling and simulation provided a reference for the rational clinical application of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in critically ill Chinese patients.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of GST-HG171, a novel 3CL protease inhibitor, in Chinese subjects with impaired and normal liver function

GST-HG171 is a potent, broad-spectrum, orally bioavailable small-molecule 3C-like (3CL) protease inhibitor that was recently approved for treating mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 patients in China. Since cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes, primarily CYP3A, are the main metabolic enzymes of GST-HG171, hepatic impairment may affect its pharmacokinetic (PK) profile. Aiming to guide clinical dosing for patients with hepatic impairment, this study, using a non-randomized, open-label, single-dose design, assessed the impact of hepatic impairment on the PK, safety, and tolerability of GST-HG171. Patients with mild and moderate hepatic impairment along with healthy subjects were enrolled (n = 8 each), receiving a single oral dose of 150 mg GST-HG171, with concurrent administration of 100 mg ritonavir to sustain CYP3A inhibition before and after GST-HG171 administration (-12, 0, 12, and 24 hours). Compared to subjects with normal hepatic function, the geometric least-squares mean ratios (90% confidence intervals) for GST-HG171's maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), area under the concentration-time curve up to the last quantifiable time (AUC0-t), and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-∞) in subjects with mild hepatic impairment were 1.14 (0.99, 1.31), 1.07 (0.88, 1.30), and 1.07 (0.88, 1.29), respectively. For moderate hepatic impairment, the ratios were 0.87 (0.70, 1.07), 0.82 (0.61, 1.10), and 0.82 (0.61, 1.10), respectively. Hepatic impairment did not significantly alter GST-HG171's peak time (Tmax) and elimination half-life (T1/2). GST-HG171 exhibited good safety and tolerability in the study. Taken together, mild to moderate hepatic impairment minimally impacted GST-HG171 exposure, suggesting no need to adjust GST-HG171 dosage for patients with mild to moderate hepatic impairment in the clinic.Clinical TrialsRegistered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06106113).

Coordination chemistry suggests that independently observed benefits of metformin and Zn2+ against COVID-19 are not independent

Independent trials indicate that either oral Zn2+ or metformin can separately improve COVID-19 outcomes by approximately 40%. Coordination chemistry predicts a mechanistic relationship and therapeutic synergy. Zn2+ deficit is a known risk factor for both COVID-19 and non-infectious inflammation. Most dietary Zn2+ is not absorbed. Metformin is a naked ligand that presumably increases intestinal Zn2+ bioavailability and active absorption by cation transporters known to transport metformin. Intracellular Zn2+ provides a natural buffer of many protease reactions; the variable "set point" is determined by Zn2+ regulation or availability. A Zn2+-interactive protease network is suggested here. The two viral cysteine proteases are therapeutic targets against COVID-19. Viral and many host proteases are submaximally inhibited by exchangeable cell Zn2+. Inhibition of cysteine proteases can improve COVID-19 outcomes and non-infectious inflammation. Metformin reportedly enhances the natural moderating effect of Zn2+ on bioassayed proteome degradation. Firstly, the dissociable metformin-Zn2+ complex could be actively transported by intestinal cation transporters; thereby creating artificial pathways of absorption and increased body Zn2+ content. Secondly, metformin Zn2+ coordination can create a non-natural protease inhibitor independent of cell Zn2+ content. Moderation of peptidolytic reactions by either or both mechanisms could slow (a) viral multiplication (b) viral invasion and (c) the pathogenic host inflammatory response. These combined actions could allow development of acquired immunity to clear the infection before life-threatening inflammation. Nirmatrelvir (Paxlovid®) opposes COVID-19 by selective inhibition the viral main protease by a Zn2+-independent mechanism. Pending safety evaluation, predictable synergistic benefits of metformin and Zn2+, and perhaps metformin/Zn2+/Paxlovid® co-administration should be investigated.

Clinical Outcome and 7-Day Virological Clearance in High-Risk Patients with Mild-Moderate COVID-19 Treated with Molnupiravir, Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir, or Remdesivir

INTRODUCTION

We compared the effectiveness and virological clearance (VC) at day 7 (T7) post-treatment with molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and remdesivir in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients at high risk (HR) for clinical progression.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study enrolling HR patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 (Jan-Oct 2022) treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir or 3 days of remdesivir. We investigated clinical recovery at T7 (resolution of symptoms for ≥ 72 h or all-cause death), VC at T7 (PCR/antigenic negative nasopharyngeal swab), and median time to VC (days from symptom onset to the first negative swab). Factors associated with VC were investigated by logistic regression.

RESULTS

In the study, 92/376 (43.8%) patients received molnupiravir, 150/376 (24.7%) nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and 134/376 (31.5%) remdesivir. Forty-nine (13%) patients were unvaccinated or incompletely vaccinated. Patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were younger and presented immunodeficiencies more frequently; remdesivir was used more commonly in patients hospitalized for other diseases. A high proportion of patients obtained clinical recovery without differences among the therapies (97.5% for molnupiravir, 98.3% for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and 93.6% for remdesivir); 12 (3.7%) patients died. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was associated with a higher proportion of T7 VC and a shorter time to VC compared to molnupiravir/remdesivir, also after adjustment for age and immunodeficiency (AOR 0.445 RDV vs. NMV-r, 95% CI 0.240-0.826, p = 0.010; AOR 0.222 MNP vs. NMV-r, 95% CI 0.105-0.472, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-COV-2 antiviral treatments are an excellent therapeutic strategy in HR patients. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir showed a higher proportion of VC as early as 7 days after treatment, confirming its likely superiority in indirect comparisons.

Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Regimen for Mild/Moderately Severe COVID-19: A Rapid Review With Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of the approved nirmatrelvir/ritonavir regimen for treatment of laboratory-confirmed mild/moderately severe COVID-19 remains unclear.

METHODS

We systematically identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world studies (RWS; observational studies) of the efficacy/effectiveness and/or safety of the approved nirmatrelvir/ritonavir regimen for COVID-19. We pooled appropriate data (adjusted estimates for RWS) using an inverse variance, random-effects model. We calculated statistical heterogeneity using the I 2 statistic. Results are presented as relative risk (RR) with associated 95% CI. We further assessed risk of bias/study quality and conducted trial sequential analysis of the evidence from RCTs.

RESULTS

We included 4 RCTs (4,070 persons) and 16 RWS (1,925,047 persons) of adults (aged ≥18 years). One and 3 RCTs were of low and unclear risk of bias, respectively. The RWS were of good quality. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir significantly decreased COVID-19 hospitalization compared with placebo/no treatment (RR = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.10-0.31; I 2 = 77.2%; 2 RCTs, 3,542 persons), but there was no significant difference for decrease of worsening severity (RR = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.66-1.01; I 2 = 47.5%; 3 RCTs, 1,824 persons), viral clearance (RR = 1.19; 95% CI, 0.93-1.51; I 2 = 82%; 2 RCTs, 528 persons), adverse events (RR = 1.41; 95% CI, 0.92-2.14; I 2 = 70.6%; 4 RCTs, 4,070 persons), serious adverse events (RR = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.41-1.62; I 2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, 3,806 persons), and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.27; 95% CI, 0.04-1.70; I 2 = 49.9%; 3 RCTs, 3,806 persons), although trial sequential analysis suggested that the current total sample sizes for these outcomes were not large enough for conclusions to be drawn. Real-world studies also showed significantly decreased COVID-19 hospitalization (RR = 0.48; 95% CI, 0.37-0.60; I 2 = 95.0%; 11 RWS, 1,421,398 persons) and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.24; 95% CI, 0.14-0.34; I 2 = 65%; 7 RWS, 286,131 persons) for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir compared with no treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir appears to be promising for preventing hospitalization and potentially decreasing all-cause mortality for persons with mild/moderately severe COVID-19, but the evidence is weak. More studies are needed.

Safety Profile of Paxlovid in the Treatment of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

With the urgent and widespread application of Paxlovid, a novel antiviral drug for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in clinical practice, concerns regarding its actual efficacy and safety have emerged. In order to provide more evidence to support its clinical application, we sought to perform a descriptive analysis of cases who experienced at least one Paxlovid-related adverse event (AEs) and reported to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) in the post-marketing period.

METHODS

Individual adverse event reports between January 1, 2022 and September 30, 2022, were downloaded from the FAERS website. We completed a descriptive study about the safety of Paxlovid in the treatment of COVID-19. Further, we also analyzed the onset time of Paxlovid-related AEs.

RESULTS

As of 30 September 2022, 16,529 de-duplicated cases were submitted to the FDA, and 5,860 (35.45%) were female. The average age was 58.38 years (S.D. 15.50). Most reports (12,390, 74.96%) were submitted by consumers and 1,436 (8.68%) concerned serious outcomes. The most frequently reported AEs were disease recurrence (7,724, 16.23%), dysgeusia (2,877, 6.05%), and diarrhoea (1,448, 3.04%). The median onset time of Paxlovid-related AEs was 8 days (interquartile range,1-10 days), and most of the cases (2,629, 19.12%) occurred on the day after Paxlovid initiation.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that the most common AEs reported with Paxlovid in post-marketing experience are consistent with the safety assessment of antiviral drugs. Even without emerging apparent safety concerns, the incidence of serious outcomes was unexpectedly high, and a few cases of potential new AEs occurred.

Nirmatrelvir combined with ritonavir for preventing and treating COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Oral nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) aims to avoid severe COVID-19 in asymptomatic people or those with mild symptoms, thereby decreasing hospitalization and death. It remains to be evaluated for which indications and patient populations the drug is suitable.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus standard of care (SoC) compared to SoC with or without placebo, or any other intervention for treating COVID-19 or preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection. To explore equity aspects in subgroup analyses. To keep up to date with the evolving evidence base using a living systematic review (LSR) approach and make new relevant studies available to readers in-between publication of review updates.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, Scopus, and World Health Organization COVID-19 Research Database, identifying completed and ongoing studies without language restrictions and incorporating studies up to 15 May 2023. This is a LSR. We conduct update searches every two months and make them publicly available on the open science framework (OSF) platform.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC to SoC with or without placebo, or any other intervention for treatment of people with confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis, irrespective of disease severity or treatment setting, and for prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We screened all studies for research integrity. Studies were ineligible if they had been retracted, or if they were not prospectively registered including appropriate ethics approval.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology and used the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the following outcomes: 1. to treat outpatients with mild COVID-19; 2. to treat inpatients with moderate to severe COVID-19: mortality, clinical worsening or improvement, quality of life, (serious) adverse events, and viral clearance; 3. to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection in postexposure prophylaxis (PEP); and 4. pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) scenarios: SARS-CoV-2 infection, development of COVID-19 symptoms, mortality, admission to hospital, quality of life, and (serious) adverse events. We explored inequity by subgroup analysis for elderly people, socially-disadvantaged people with comorbidities, populations from low-income countries and low- to middle-income countries, and people from different ethnic and racial backgrounds.

MAIN RESULTS

As of 15 May 2023, we included two RCTs with 2510 participants with mild and mild to moderate symptomatic COVID-19 in outpatient and inpatient settings comparing nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC to SoC with or without placebo. All trial participants were without previous confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and at high risk for progression to severe disease. Randomization coincided with the Delta wave for outpatients and Omicron wave for inpatients. Outpatient trial participants and 73% of inpatients were unvaccinated. Symptom onset in outpatients was no more than five days before randomisation and prior or concomitant therapies including medications highly dependent on CYP3A4 were not allowed. We excluded two studies due to concerns with research integrity. We identified 13 ongoing studies. Three studies are currently awaiting classification. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for treating people with asymptomatic or mild COVID-19 in outpatient settings Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC compared to SoC plus placebo may reduce all-cause mortality at 28 days (risk ratio (RR) 0.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.68; 1 study, 2224 participants; low-certainty evidence) and admission to hospital or death within 28 days (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.27; 1 study, 2224 participants; low-certainty evidence). Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC may reduce serious adverse events during the study period compared to SoC plus placebo (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.41; 1 study, 2224 participants; low-certainty evidence). Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC probably has little or no effect on treatment-emergent adverse events (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.10; 1 study, 2224 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and probably increases treatment-related adverse events such as dysgeusia and diarrhoea during the study period compared to SoC plus placebo (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.95; 1 study, 2224 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC probably decreases discontinuation of study drug due to adverse events compared to SoC plus placebo (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.80; 1 study, 2224 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No studies reported improvement of clinical status, quality of life, or viral clearance. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for treating people with moderate to severe COVID-19 in inpatient settings We are uncertain whether nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus SoC compared to SoC reduces all-cause mortality at 28 days (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.86; 1 study, 264 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or increases viral clearance at seven days (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.58; 1 study, 264 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and 14 days (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.20; 1 study, 264 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported improvement or worsening of clinical status and quality of life. We did not include data for safety outcomes due to insufficient and inconsistent information. Subgroup analyses for equity For outpatients, the outcome 'admission to hospital or death' was investigated for equity regarding age (less than 65 years versus 65 years or greater) and ethnicity. There were no subgroup differences for age or ethnicity. For inpatients, the outcome 'all-cause mortality' was investigated for equity regarding age (65 years or less versus greater than 65 years). There was no difference between subgroups of age. No further equity-related subgroups were reported, and no subgroups were reported for other outcomes. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection (PrEP and PEP) No studies available.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-certainty evidence suggests nirmatrelvir/ritonavir reduces the risk of all-cause mortality and hospital admission or death in high-risk, unvaccinated COVID-19 outpatients infected with the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2. There is low- to moderate-certainty evidence of the safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Very low-certainty evidence exists regarding the effects of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir on all-cause mortality and viral clearance in mildly to moderately affected, mostly unvaccinated COVID-19 inpatients infected with the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2. Insufficient and inconsistent information prevents the assessment of safety outcomes. No reliable differences in effect size and direction were found regarding equity aspects. There is no available evidence supporting the use of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection. We are continually updating our search and making search results available on the OSF platform.

Appraisal of evidence reliability and applicability of Paxlovid as treatment for SARS-COV-2 infection: A systematic review

This study aimed to clarify the beneficial effect and the clinical application value of Paxlovid in the treatment of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) through a systematic review. Databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched for interventional or observational studies on the efficacy and safety of Paxlovid in the treatment of SARS-COV-2. The relative and absolute effect sizes for the outcomes were calculated based on the data reported in the original intervention literature. The external applicability of the evidence was analysed in terms of clinical application scenarios, patient willingness, and cost utility. One interventional and three observational studies were conducted. Four studies published in 2022, had participation sample sizes ranging 1780-109,254. Based on the randomised controlled trial data, the risk of all-cause mortality, all-cause death, and hospitalisation was significantly reduced in the Paxlovid group. Serious adverse events were reduced during the study. Based on observational studies, Paxlovid can significantly reduce the risk of death and hospitalisation in older patients with COVID-19 (moderate certainty) and improve in-hospital disease progression, composite disease progression, and viral load (low certainty). Paxlovid did not improve the outcomes of death and hospitalisation (low certainty) in patients aged <65 years. As per the economic utility analysis, the economic cost of reducing one death dramatically decreased with increasing age. Early use of Paxlovid in the older adult population with COVID-19 is beneficial. However, in the setting of limited resources, Paxlovid should be prioritised for older patients.

Drug treatment for Covid-19 - three years later

There has been a profusion of trials for SARS CoV2 drugs. A review dating from May 2020 listed 115 medicines, most of which previously existed, having been investigated since the onset of the pandemic. Over an exceedingly short lapse of time, the perspective of the arrival of a new antiviral treatment specifically targeting COVID-19 appeared highly improbable. Three years later, only one treatment is recommended in France: the nirmatrelvir + ritonavir combination. While remdesivir remains available, it is only proposed when this combination is officially contraindicated. Three monoclonal antibodies, taken alone or in association, are currently available in France:: tixagevimab/cilgavimab, casirivimab/imdevimab and sotrovimab. While all three of them have received European market authorization for patients presenting with an increased risk of evolution toward a severe form of COVID-19, and while early access is possible, they are no longer recommended, the reason being a loss or alteration of activity on variants carrying a Spike protein mutation. RoActemra is a humanized monoclonal antibody that blocks the action of interleukin 6 receptors; it is exclusively reserved for adult patients receiving systemic corticotherapy and necessitating oxygen supplementation, while patients under invasive mechanical ventilation are excluded. All in all, since the onset of the pandemic dozens of products have been subjected to tests or trials; three years later, only a highly limited number of "candidates" remain, and definitive assessment has yet to be achieved.

Impact of some antiviral drugs on health care utilization for patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to assess the impact of antiviral drugs (fluvoxamine,remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r), molnupiravir, andnirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NRV/r)) on health care utilization (HCU) inCOVID-19 patients. We summarized findings from randomized controlledtrials (RCTs) and observational studies.

METHODS

We systematically searched four medical databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library) for COVID-19 studies up to February 15, 2023. A comprehensive review, meta-analysis, sensitivity analysis, and subgroup analysis were conducted. Pooled effects with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for antiviral drugs' impact on hospitalization, mechanical ventilation (MV), and intensive care unit (ICU) outcomes.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 34 studies (584,978 patients). Meta-analysisindicated potential benefits: remdesivir and molnupiravir potentiallyreduced MV risk, and NRV/r correlated with lower hospitalizationrates. However, LPV/r did not notably curb HCU. Remdesivir waspreferable for high-risk COVID-19 patients, while molnupiravir andNRV/r were recommended for those aged 60 and above.

CONCLUSION

Remdesivir, molnupiravir, and NRV/r may reduce HCU during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, due to limited study details and significant heterogeneity in effect estimates, further precise evidence is crucial, especially concerning emerging variants.

Deuteration for Metabolic Stabilization of SARS-CoV-2 Inhibitors GC373 and Nirmatrelvir

Nirmatrelvir and GC373 inhibit the SARS-CoV-2 3CL protease and hinder viral replication in COVID-19. As nirmatrelvir in Paxlovid is oxidized by cytochrome P450 3A4, ritonavir is coadministered to block this. However, ritonavir undesirably alters the metabolism of other drugs. Hydrogens can be replaced with deuterium in nirmatrelvir and GC373 to slow oxidation. Results show that deuterium slows oxidation of nirmatrelvir adjacent to nitrogen by ∼40% and that the type of warhead can switch the site of oxidative metabolism.

Pragmatic and open science-based solution to a current problem in the reporting of living systematic reviews

Living systematic reviews (LSRs) are an increasingly common approach to keeping reviews up to date, in which new relevant studies are incorporated as they become available, so as to inform healthcare policy and practice in a timely manner. While journal publishers have been exploring the publication of LSRs using different updating and publishing approaches, readers cannot currently assess if the evidence underpinning a published LSR is up to date, as neither the search details, the selection process, nor the list of identified studies is made available between the publication of updates. We describe a new method to transparently report the living evidence surveillance process that occurs between published LSR versions. We use the example of the living Cochrane Review on nirmatrelvir combined with ritonavir (Paxlovid) for preventing and treating COVID-19 to illustrate how this can work in practice. We created a publicly accessible spreadsheet on the Open Science Framework platform, linking to the living Cochrane Review, that details the search and study selection process, enabling readers to track the progress of eligible ongoing or completed studies. Further automation of the evidence surveillance process should be explored.

Antiplatelet agents for the treatment of adults with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can cause thrombotic events that lead to severe complications or death. Antiplatelet agents, such as acetylsalicylic acid, have been shown to effectively reduce thrombotic events in other diseases: they could influence the course of COVID-19 in general.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of antiplatelets given with standard care compared to no treatment or standard care (with/without placebo) for adults with COVID-19.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (which comprises MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, medRxiv, CENTRAL), Web of Science, WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease and the Epistemonikos COVID-19 L*OVE Platform to identify completed and ongoing studies without language restrictions to December 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating antiplatelet agents for the treatment of COVID-19 in adults with COVID-19, irrespective of disease severity, gender or ethnicity.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2) for RCTs. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Antiplatelets plus standard care versus standard care (with/without placebo) Adults with a confirmed diagnosis of moderate to severe COVID-19 We included four studies (17,541 participants) that recruited hospitalised people with a confirmed diagnosis of moderate to severe COVID-19. A total of 8964 participants were analysed in the antiplatelet arm (either with cyclooxygenase inhibitors or P2Y12 inhibitors) and 8577 participants in the control arm. Most people were older than 50 years and had comorbidities such as hypertension, lung disease or diabetes. The studies were conducted in high- to lower middle-income countries prior to wide-scale vaccination programmes. Antiplatelets compared to standard care: - probably result in little to no difference in 28-day mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.05; 3 studies, 17,249 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this means that for every 177 deaths per 1000 people not receiving antiplatelets, there were 168 deaths per 1000 people who did receive the intervention (95% CI 151 to 186 per 1000 people); - probably result in little to no difference in worsening (new need for invasive mechanical ventilation or death up to day 28) (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.01; 2 studies, 15,266 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); - probably result in little to no difference in improvement (participants discharged alive up to day 28) (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.04; 2 studies, 15,454 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); - probably result in a slight reduction of thrombotic events at longest follow-up (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.02; 4 studies, 17,518 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); - may result in a slight increase in serious adverse events at longest follow-up (Peto odds ratio (OR) 1.57, 95% CI 0.48 to 5.14; 1 study, 1815 participants; low-certainty evidence), but non-serious adverse events during study treatment were not reported; - probably increase the occurrence of major bleeding events at longest follow-up (Peto OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.19; 4 studies, 17,527 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Adults with a confirmed diagnosis of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection or mild COVID-19 We included two RCTs allocating participants, of whom 4209 had confirmed mild COVID-19 and were not hospitalised. A total of 2109 participants were analysed in the antiplatelet arm (treated with acetylsalicylic acid) and 2100 participants in the control arm. No study included people with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Antiplatelets compared to standard care: - may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality at day 45 (Peto OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.45 to 2.22; 2 studies, 4209 participants; low-certainty evidence); - may slightly decrease the incidence of new thrombotic events up to day 45 (Peto OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.46; 2 studies, 4209 participants; low-certainty evidence); - may make little or no difference to the incidence of serious adverse events up to day 45 (Peto OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.64; 1 study, 3881 participants; low-certainty evidence), but non-serious adverse events were not reported. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antiplatelets on the following outcomes (compared to standard care plus placebo): - admission to hospital or death up to day 45 (Peto OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.10; 2 studies, 4209 participants; very low-certainty evidence); - major bleeding events up to longest follow-up (no event occurred in 328 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Quality of life and adverse events during study treatment were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 and moderate to severe disease, we found moderate-certainty evidence that antiplatelets probably result in little to no difference in 28-day mortality, clinical worsening or improvement, but probably result in a slight reduction in thrombotic events. They probably increase the occurrence of major bleeding events. Low-certainty evidence suggests that antiplatelets may result in a slight increase in serious adverse events. In people with confirmed COVID-19 and mild symptoms, we found low-certainty evidence that antiplatelets may result in little to no difference in 45-day mortality and serious adverse events, and may slightly reduce thrombotic events. The effects on the combined outcome admission to hospital or death up to day 45 and major bleeding events are very uncertain. Quality of life was not reported. Included studies were conducted in high- to lower middle-income settings using antiplatelets prior to vaccination roll-outs. We identified a lack of evidence concerning quality of life assessments, adverse events and people with asymptomatic infection. The 14 ongoing and three completed, unpublished RCTs that we identified in trial registries address similar settings and research questions as in the current body of evidence. We expect to incorporate the findings of these studies in future versions of this review.

Nirmatrelvir and ritonavir combination: an antiviral therapy for COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

The emergence of the Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern in late November 2021 presaged yet another stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. Paxlovid, a co-packaged dosage form of two antiviral drugs (nirmatrelvir and ritonavir) developed by Pfizer, received its first FDA Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) and conditional marketing by European Medical Agency in patients at high risk of developing severe COVID-19.

AREAS COVERED

We reviewed the timeline of the drug nirmatrelvir from its discovery to authorization by FDA. After 1 year of its authorization, numerous studies and reports on paxlovid's use and post-use consequences are available. This review summarizes the complete journey of paxlovid from its development, preclinical studies, clinical trials, regulatory approvals, ongoing clinical trials, and safety measures, followed by discussions on recent updates on drug-drug interactions, adverse effects, and relapse of COVID-19.

EXPERT OPINION

Paxlovid, a new oral antiviral therapy for COVID-19, has shown promising results in clinical trials and has the potential to be effective against the pandemic, particularly for individuals at high risk of severe illness. Comorbidity usage and pharmacovigilance will play a significant stake in the future of paxlovid development. Second-generation Mpro inhibitors play an important role in the upcoming problems associated with COVID-19.

Drug-drug interaction of Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and tacrolimus: A potential risk disproportionality analysis of nephrotoxicity from COVID-19 reports in FAERS

BACKGROUND

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir is a new oral antiviral agent for COVID-19, and tacrolimus is a widely used immunosuppressant. Drug-drug interaction between Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and tacrolimus is expected. However, information regarding the drug-drug interaction in a real-world setting is limited. We aim to evaluate drug-drug interaction between tacrolimus and Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and perform a disproportionality analysis to assess the potential risk of nephrotoxicity due to their combination for COVID-19 treatment based on the FAERS database.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Disproportionality analysis was performed using the reporting odds ratio (ROR) method, and subset analysis was conducted based on the background of COVID-19 drugs combined with tacrolimus more than 10 times.

RESULTS

In disproportionality analysis, combination of Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and tacrolimus was significantly associated with acute kidney injury (41.13%), serum creatinine increased (14.18%), renal failure (2.84%), and renal impairment (2.84%). These positive signals of acute kidney injury and serum creatinine increased still strongly retained in subset analysis. No similar positive signals were detected in Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir-single group. Only in Cilgavimab/Tixagevimab-tacrolimus group and Remdesivir-tacrolimus group, acute kidney injury was recognized as weakly positive signals and disappeared in subset analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The study results show significant drug-drug interaction between Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and tacrolimus and confirm that their combination for COVID-19 treatment greatly increases risk of acute kidney injury.

Dicoumarol is an effective post-exposure prophylactic for SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection in human airway epithelium

Repurposing existing drugs to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 infection in airway epithelial cells (AECs) is a quick way to find novel treatments for COVID-19. Computational screening has found dicoumarol (DCM), a natural anticoagulant, to be a potential SARS-CoV-2 inhibitor, but its inhibitory effects and possible working mechanisms remain unknown. Using air-liquid interface culture of primary human AECs, we demonstrated that DCM has potent antiviral activity against the infection of multiple Omicron variants (including BA.1, BQ.1 and XBB.1). Time-of-addition and drug withdrawal assays revealed that early treatment (continuously incubated after viral absorption) of DCM could markedly inhibit Omicron replication in AECs, but DCM did not affect the absorption, exocytosis and spread of viruses or directly eliminate viruses. Mechanistically, we performed single-cell sequencing analysis (a database of 77,969 cells from different airway locations from 10 healthy volunteers) and immunofluorescence staining, and showed that the expression of NAD(P)H quinone oxidoreductase 1 (NQO1), one of the known DCM targets, was predominantly localised in ciliated AECs. We further found that the NQO1 expression level was positively correlated with both the disease severity of COVID-19 patients and virus copy levels in cultured AECs. In addition, DCM treatment downregulated NQO1 expression and disrupted signalling pathways associated with SARS-CoV-2 disease outcomes (e.g., Endocytosis and COVID-19 signalling pathways) in cultured AECs. Collectively, we demonstrated that DCM is an effective post-exposure prophylactic for SARS-CoV-2 infection in the human AECs, and these findings could help physicians formulate novel treatment strategies for COVID-19.

Simultaneous green TLC determination of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir in the pharmaceutical dosage form and spiked human plasma

Quantitative analysis of pharmaceutical compounds up to Nano gram levels is highly recommended to introduce feasible and sensitive tool for determination of the compounds in the pharmaceutical and biological samples. Nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir was recently approved in the US, the UK and Europe as a new co-packaged dosage form for the treatment of COVID-19. The objective of this work was to develop a more sensitive TLC method based on using β-cyclodextrin as a chiral selector additive in the mobile phase for simultaneous determination of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir in pure form, pharmaceutical formulation and spiked human plasma. The analysis procedures were developed using TLC aluminum silica gel plates and methanol-water- 2% urea solution of β-cyclodextrin (40:10:.5, by volume) as a mobile phase with UV detection at 215 nm. The developed method was successfully applied over a linearity range of 10-50 ng/band for both nirmatrelvir and ritonavir. The method was validated for limits of detection and quantitation, accuracy, precision, specificity, system suitability, and robustness. Furthermore, the eco-friendliness of the proposed method was assessed using the analytical eco-scale and the green analytical procedure index. The described method exhibited compliance with green analytical chemistry principles based on common green metric values.

COVID-19 Therapeutics: An Update on Effective Treatments Against Infection With SARS-CoV-2 Variants

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is one of the most consequential global health crises in over a century. Since its discovery in 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to mutate into different variants and sublineages, rendering previously potent treatments and vaccines ineffective. With significant strides in clinical and pharmaceutical research, different therapeutic strategies continue to be developed. The currently available treatments can be broadly classified based on their potential targets and molecular mechanisms. Antiviral agents function by disrupting different stages of SARS-CoV-2 infection, while immune-based treatments mainly act on the human inflammatory response responsible for disease severity. In this review, we discuss some of the current treatments for COVID-19, their mode of actions, and their efficacy against variants of concern. This review highlights the need to constantly evaluate COVID-19 treatment strategies to protect high risk populations and fill in the gaps left by vaccination.

The Substitutions L50F, E166A, and L167F in SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro Are Selected by a Protease Inhibitor In Vitro and Confer Resistance To Nirmatrelvir

The SARS-CoV-2 main protease (3CLpro) has an indispensable role in the viral life cycle and is a therapeutic target for the treatment of COVID-19. The potential of 3CLpro-inhibitors to select for drug-resistant variants needs to be established. Therefore, SARS-CoV-2 was passaged in vitro in the presence of increasing concentrations of ALG-097161, a probe compound designed in the context of a 3CLpro drug discovery program. We identified a combination of amino acid substitutions in 3CLpro (L50F E166A L167F) that is associated with a >20× increase in 50% effective concentration (EC₅₀) values for ALG-097161, nirmatrelvir (PF-07321332), PF-00835231, and ensitrelvir. While two of the single substitutions (E166A and L167F) provide low-level resistance to the inhibitors in a biochemical assay, the triple mutant results in the highest levels of resistance (6× to 72×). All substitutions are associated with a significant loss of enzymatic 3CLpro activity, suggesting a reduction in viral fitness. Structural biology analysis indicates that the different substitutions reduce the number of inhibitor/enzyme interactions while the binding of the substrate is maintained. These observations will be important for the interpretation of resistance development to 3CLpro inhibitors in the clinical setting. IMPORTANCE Paxlovid is the first oral antiviral approved for treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Antiviral treatments are often associated with the development of drug-resistant viruses. In order to guide the use of novel antivirals, it is essential to understand the risk of resistance development and to characterize the associated changes in the viral genes and proteins. In this work, we describe for the first time a pathway that allows SARS-CoV-2 to develop resistance against Paxlovid in vitro. The characteristics of in vitro antiviral resistance development may be predictive for the clinical situation. Therefore, our work will be important for the management of COVID-19 with Paxlovid and next-generation SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro inhibitors.

The Substitutions L50F, E166A, and L167F in SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro Are Selected by a Protease Inhibitor In Vitro and Confer Resistance To Nirmatrelvir

The SARS-CoV-2 main protease (3CLpro) has an indispensable role in the viral life cycle and is a therapeutic target for the treatment of COVID-19. The potential of 3CLpro-inhibitors to select for drug-resistant variants needs to be established. Therefore, SARS-CoV-2 was passaged in vitro in the presence of increasing concentrations of ALG-097161, a probe compound designed in the context of a 3CLpro drug discovery program. We identified a combination of amino acid substitutions in 3CLpro (L50F E166A L167F) that is associated with a >20× increase in 50% effective concentration (EC₅₀) values for ALG-097161, nirmatrelvir (PF-07321332), PF-00835231, and ensitrelvir. While two of the single substitutions (E166A and L167F) provide low-level resistance to the inhibitors in a biochemical assay, the triple mutant results in the highest levels of resistance (6× to 72×). All substitutions are associated with a significant loss of enzymatic 3CLpro activity, suggesting a reduction in viral fitness. Structural biology analysis indicates that the different substitutions reduce the number of inhibitor/enzyme interactions while the binding of the substrate is maintained. These observations will be important for the interpretation of resistance development to 3CLpro inhibitors in the clinical setting. IMPORTANCE Paxlovid is the first oral antiviral approved for treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Antiviral treatments are often associated with the development of drug-resistant viruses. In order to guide the use of novel antivirals, it is essential to understand the risk of resistance development and to characterize the associated changes in the viral genes and proteins. In this work, we describe for the first time a pathway that allows SARS-CoV-2 to develop resistance against Paxlovid in vitro. The characteristics of in vitro antiviral resistance development may be predictive for the clinical situation. Therefore, our work will be important for the management of COVID-19 with Paxlovid and next-generation SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro inhibitors.

Outpatient Treatment of Confirmed COVID-19: A Living, Rapid Review for the American College of Physicians

BACKGROUND

Clinicians and patients want to know the benefits and harms of outpatient treatment options for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

PURPOSE

To assess the benefits and harms of 12 different COVID-19 treatments in the outpatient setting.

DATA SOURCES

Epistemonikos COVID-19 L·OVE Platform, searched on 4 April 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts against a priori-defined criteria. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared COVID-19 treatments in adult outpatients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

One reviewer extracted data and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence (COE). A second reviewer verified data abstraction and assessments.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The 26 included studies collected data before the emergence of the Omicron variant. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and casirivimab-imdevimab probably reduced hospitalizations (1% vs. 6% [1 RCT] and 1% vs. 4% [1 RCT], respectively; moderate COE). Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir probably reduced all-cause mortality (0% vs. 1% [1 RCT]; moderate COE), and regdanvimab probably improved recovery (87% vs. 72% [1 RCT]; moderate COE). Casirivimab-imdevimab reduced time to recovery by a median difference of 4 days (10 vs. 14 median days [1 RCT]; high COE). Molnupiravir may reduce all-cause mortality, sotrovimab may reduce hospitalization, and remdesivir may improve recovery (low COE). Lopinavir-ritonavir and azithromycin may have increased harms, and hydroxychloroquine may result in lower recovery rates (low COE). Other treatments had insufficient evidence or no statistical difference in efficacy and safety versus placebo.

LIMITATION

Many outcomes had few events and small samples.

CONCLUSION

Some antiviral medications and monoclonal antibodies may improve outcomes for outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. However, the generalizability of the findings to the currently dominant Omicron variant is limited.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

American College of Physicians. (PROSPERO: CRD42022323440).

Involvement of the STING signaling in COVID-19

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by the infection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has cast a notorious damage to the public health and global economy. The Stimulator of Interferon Genes (STING) is a crucial element of the host antiviral pathway and plays a pivotal but complex role in the infection and development of COVID-19. Herein, we discussed the antagonistic mechanism of viral proteins to the STING pathway as well as its activation induced by host cells. Specifically, we highlighted that the persistent activation of STING by SARS-CoV-2 led to abnormal inflammation, and STING inhibitors could reduce the excessive inflammation. In addition, we also emphasized that STING agonists possessed antiviral potency against diverse coronavirus and showed adjuvant efficacy in SARS-CoV-2 vaccines by inducing IFN responses.