First-in-Human Study of Bamlanivimab in a Randomized Trial of Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19

Efficacy and safety of bamlanivimab in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have shown clinical benefits against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Several studies have reported the use of bamlanivimab as a promising treatment option for COVID-19.

AIM

To synthesize the latest evidence for the efficacy and safety of bamlanivimab alone in the treatment of adult patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and Google Scholar using "SARS-CoV-2", "COVID-19", "LY-CoV555", and "Bamlanivimab" keywords up to January 25, 2023. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane bias tools. The Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software version 3.0 was used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies involving 47368 patients were included. A significant difference was observed between the bamlanivimab and standard of care/placebo groups in terms of mortality rate [risk ratio (RR) = 50, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.70], hospitalization rate (RR = 0.51; 95%CI: 0.39-0.68), and emergency department (ED) visits (RR = 0.69; 95%CI: 0.47-0.99); while the two groups exhibited no significant difference in terms of intensive care unit (ICU) admission (P > 0.05). Compared to other mAbs, bamlanivimab was associated with a higher rate of hospitalization (RR = 1.44; 95%CI: 1.07-1.94). However, no significant difference was detected between the bamlanivimab and other mAbs groups in terms of mortality rate, ICU admission, and ED (P > 0.05). The incidence of any adverse events was similar between the bamlanivimab and control groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Although the results suggest the efficacy and safety of bamlanivimab in COVID-19 patients, further research is required to confirm the efficacy of this drug for the current circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Rapid isolation of anti-idiotype aptamers for quantification of human monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein

Therapeutic antibodies that block viral entry have already proven to be important, first line drugs for treatments of viral infections. In the case of SARS-CoV-2, combinations of multiple therapeutic antibodies may need to be rapidly identified and formulated in a way that blocks each new, predominant variant of the virus. For efficient introduction of any new antibody combination into patients, it is important to be able to monitor patient-specific pharmacokinetics of individual antibodies, which would include the time course of their specific capacity to block the viral spike proteins. Here, we present three examples of microfluidic-based rapid isolation of companion reagents useful for establishing combination antibody therapies. These reagents are specific three-dimensional imprints of variable regions of individual human monoclonal antibodies against the -spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 virus in the form of oligonucleotide-based ligands (aptamers). We implement these anti-idiotypic aptamers as bioreceptors in graphene-based field-effect transistor sensors to accomplish label free, rapid, and sensitive detection of matching antibodies within minutes. Through this work we have demonstrated the general applicability of anti-idiotype aptamers as capture reagents in quantification of active forms of monoclonal antibodies in complex biological mixtures.

Utilizing targeted integration CHO pools to potentially accelerate the GMP manufacturing of monoclonal and bispecific antibodies

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are effective therapeutic agents against many acute infectious diseases including COVID-19, Ebola, RSV, Clostridium difficile, and Anthrax. mAbs can therefore help combat a future pandemic. Unfortunately, mAb development typically takes years, limiting its potential to save lives during a pandemic. Therefore "pandemic mAb" timelines need to be shortened. One acceleration tool is "deferred cloning" and leverages new Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) technology based on targeted gene integration (TI). CHO pools, instead of CHO clones, can be used for Phase I/II clinical material production. A final CHO clone (producing the mAb with a similar product quality profile and preferably with a higher titer) can then be used for Phase III trials and commercial manufacturing. This substitution reduces timelines by ~3 months. We evaluated our novel CHO TI platform to enable deferred cloning. We created four unique CHO pools expressing three unique mAbs (mAb1, mAb2, and mAb3), and a bispecific mAb (BsAb1). We then performed single-cell cloning for mAb1 and mAb2, identifying three high-expressing clones from each pool. CHO pools and clones were inoculated side-by-side in ambr15 bioreactors. CHO pools yielded mAb titers as high as 10.4 g/L (mAb3) and 7.1 g/L (BsAb1). Subcloning yielded CHO clones expressing higher titers relative to the CHO pools while yielding similar product quality profiles. Finally, we showed that CHO TI pools were stable by performing a 3-month cell aging study. In summary, our CHO TI platform can increase the speed to clinic for a future "pandemic mAb."

An Update on SARS-CoV-2 Clinical Trial Results-What We Can Learn for the Next Pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has claimed over 7 million lives worldwide, providing a stark reminder of the importance of pandemic preparedness. Due to the lack of approved antiviral drugs effective against coronaviruses at the start of the pandemic, the world largely relied on repurposed efforts. Here, we summarise results from randomised controlled trials to date, as well as selected in vitro data of directly acting antivirals, host-targeting antivirals, and immunomodulatory drugs. Overall, repurposing efforts evaluating directly acting antivirals targeting other viral families were largely unsuccessful, whereas several immunomodulatory drugs led to clinical improvement in hospitalised patients with severe disease. In addition, accelerated drug discovery efforts during the pandemic progressed to multiple novel directly acting antivirals with clinical efficacy, including small molecule inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies. We argue that large-scale investment is required to prepare for future pandemics; both to develop an arsenal of broad-spectrum antivirals beyond coronaviruses and build worldwide clinical trial networks that can be rapidly utilised.

Cell-based passive immunization for protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection

BACKGROUND

Immunologically impaired individuals respond poorly to vaccines, highlighting the need for additional strategies to protect these vulnerable populations from COVID-19. While monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have emerged as promising tools to manage infectious diseases, the transient lifespan of neutralizing mAbs in patients limits their ability to confer lasting, passive prophylaxis from SARS-CoV-2. Here, we attempted to solve this problem by combining cell and mAb engineering in a way that provides durable immune protection against viral infection using safe and universal cell therapy.

METHODS

Mouse embryonic stem cells equipped with our FailSafe™ and induced allogeneic cell tolerance technologies were engineered to express factors that potently neutralize SARS-CoV-2, which we call 'neutralizing biologics' (nBios). We subcutaneously transplanted the transgenic cells into mice and longitudinally assessed the ability of the cells to deliver nBios into circulation. To do so, we quantified plasma nBio concentrations and SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing activity over time in transplant recipients. Finally, using similar cell engineering strategies, we genetically modified FailSafe™ human-induced pluripotent stem cells to express SARS-CoV-2 nBios.

RESULTS

Transgenic mouse embryonic stem cells engineered for safety and allogeneic-acceptance can secrete functional and potent SARS-CoV-2 nBios. As a dormant, subcutaneous tissue, the transgenic cells and their differentiated derivatives long-term deliver a supply of protective nBio titers in vivo. Moving toward clinical relevance, we also show that human-induced pluripotent stem cells, similarly engineered for safety, can secrete highly potent nBios.

CONCLUSIONS

Together, these findings show the promise and potential of using 'off-the-shelf' cell products that secrete neutralizing antibodies for sustained protective immunity against current and future viral pathogens of public health significance.

Clinical efficacy and safety of SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing monoclonal antibody in patients with COVID-19: A living systematic review and meta-analysis

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) with usual care in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of neutralizing mAb treatment in patients with COVID-19 were identified using electronic database searches through March 10, 2023. This systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Overall, 13 trials (23 articles) involving 25,646 patients were included in this systematic review. Compared with usual care, neutralizing mAbs were associated with significantly reduced all-cause mortality in outpatients with COVID-19 (pooled risk ratios [RR], 0.41; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.20-0.83; 12 studies), but not in inpatients. In the subgroup analysis, only outpatients infected prior to the emergence of Delta variant or those with mAb-VOC match had significantly reduced mortality, while no significant benefit was observed in patients infected with Delta and post-Delta variants or mAb-VOC mismatch. Moreover, the rate of hospitalization and number of hospital visits had significantly reduced only in outpatients infected prior to the emergence of the Delta variant and those with mAb-VOC match. Our systematic review used majority of the high-certainty evidence. Our study found neutralizing mAbs were beneficial for outpatients infected prior to Delta variant or mAb-VOC match. In the face of the continuous emergence of new COVID-19 variants, additional clinical data are needed to determine whether neutralizing mAb treatment will be effective for the newly emerging variants.

Quality of reporting of adverse events in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs: systematic review

Objective

To assess the quality of reporting of adverse events in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs based on the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) harms extension and according to clinical trial design, and to examine reporting of serious adverse events in drug trials published on PubMed versus clinical trial summaries on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Design

Systematic review.

Data sources

PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov registries were searched from 1 December 2019 to 17 February 2022.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies

Randomised clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of drugs used to treat covid-19 disease in participants of all ages with suspected, probable, or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. Clinical trials were screened on title, abstract, and text by two authors independently. Only articles published in French and English were selected. The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) was used to assess risk of bias.

Results

The search strategy identified 1962 randomised clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of drugs used to treat covid-19, published in the PubMed database; 1906 articles were excluded after screening and 56 clinical trials were included in the review. Among the 56 clinical trials, no study had a high score for quality of reporting of adverse events, 60.7% had a moderate score, 33.9% had a low score, and 5.4% had a very low score. All clinical trials with a very low score for quality of reporting of adverse events were randomised open label trials. For reporting of serious adverse events, journal articles published on PubMed under-reported 51% of serious adverse events compared with clinical trial summaries published on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Conclusions

In one in three published clinical trials on covid-19 drugs, the quality of reporting of adverse events was low or very low. Differences were found in the number of serious adverse events reported in journal articles versus clinical trial summaries. During the covid-19 pandemic, risk assessment of drugs in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs did not comply with good practice recommendations for publication of results.

Systematic review registration

European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (ENCePP) EUPAS45959.

Safety, Pharmacokinetics, Serum Neutralizing Titers, and Immunogenicity of Adintrevimab, a Monoclonal Antibody Targeting SARS-CoV-2: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 1 Dose-escalation Study in Healthy Adults

INTRODUCTION

Adintrevimab is a fully human immunoglobulin G1 extended half-life monoclonal antibody that was developed to have broad neutralization against SARS-CoV, SARS-CoV-2, and other SARS-like CoVs with pandemic potential. Here we report the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), serum viral neutralizing antibody (sVNA) titers, and immunogenicity results of the first three cohorts evaluated in the first-in-human study of adintrevimab in healthy adults.

METHODS

This is a phase 1, randomized, placebo-controlled, single ascending-dose study of adintrevimab administered intramuscularly (IM) or intravenously (IV) to healthy adults aged ≥ 18-55 years with no current or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants were randomized 8:2 to adintrevimab or placebo in each of three dose cohorts: adintrevimab 300 mg IM (cohort 1), 500 mg IV (cohort 2), and 600 mg IM (cohort 3). Follow-up was 12 months. Blood samples were taken predose and at multiple time points postdose up to month 12 to assess sVNA, PK, and antidrug antibodies (ADAs).

RESULTS

Thirty participants received a single dose of adintrevimab (n = 24; 8 per cohort) or placebo (n = 6). All except one adintrevimab participant in cohort 1 completed the study. No participants in any treatment arm experienced a study drug-related adverse event. Across adintrevimab-treated participants, 11 (45.8%) experienced at least one TEAE. All but one TEAE were mild in severity, and all were either viral infection or respiratory symptoms. There were no serious adverse events, discontinuations due to adverse events, or deaths. Adintrevimab exhibited a linear and dose-proportional PK profile and extended serum half-life (mean 96, 89, and 100 days in cohorts 1, 2, and 3, respectively). Participants receiving adintrevimab demonstrated dose-dependent increased sVNA titers and breadth across multiple variants.

CONCLUSION

Adintrevimab at doses of 300 mg IM, 500 mg IV, and 600 mg IM was well tolerated in healthy adults. Adintrevimab demonstrated dose-proportional exposure, rapid development of neutralizing antibody titers, and an extended half-life.

Differential efficacy and safety of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody therapies for the management of COVID-19: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To assess and compare the relative efficacy and safety of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody regimens for COVID-19.

METHODS

This systematic review and random-effects network meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA-NMA. Literature searches were conducted across MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and CNKI up to February 20th, 2022. Interventions were ranked using P scores.

RESULTS

Fifty-five RCTs (N = 45,005) were included in the review. Bamlanivimab + etesevimab (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02-0.77) was associated with a significant reduction in mortality compared to standard of care/placebo. Casirivimab + imdevimab reduced mortality (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50-0.91) in baseline seronegative patients only. Four different regimens led to a significant decrease in the incidence of hospitalization compared to standard of care/placebo with sotrovimab ranking first in terms of efficacy (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.08-0.48). No treatment improved incidence of mechanical ventilation, duration of hospital/ICU stay, and time to viral clearance. Convalescent plasma and anti-COVID IVIg both led to a significant increase in adverse events compared to standard of care/placebo, but no treatment increased the odds of serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAbs are safe, and could be effective in improving mortality and incidence of hospitalization. Convalescent plasma and anti-COVID IVIg were not efficacious and could increase odds of adverse events. Future trials should further examine the effect of baseline seronegativity, disease severity, patient risk factors, and SARS-CoV-2 strain variation on the efficacy of these regimes.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO-CRD42021289903.

Phase 1 study of safety, pharmacokinetics, and antiviral activity of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing monoclonal antibody ABBV-47D11 in patients with COVID-19

ABBV-47D11 is a neutralizing monoclonal antibody that targets a mutationally conserved hydrophobic pocket distal to the ACE2 binding site of SARS-CoV-2. This first-in-human safety, pharmacokinetics, and antiviral pharmacodynamic assessment in patients with COVID-19 provide an initial evaluation of this antibody that may allow further development. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled single ascending dose study of ABBV-47D11 (180, 600, or 2400 mg) as an intravenous infusion, was in hospitalized and non-hospitalized (confined) adults with mild to moderate COVID-19. Primary outcomes were grade 3 or higher study drug-related adverse events and infusion-related reactions. Secondary outcomes were pharmacokinetic parameters and concentration-time profiles to Day 29, immunogenicity (anti-drug antibodies), and antiviral activity (change in RT-PCR viral load) from baseline to Days 15 and 29. ABBV-47D11 single doses up to 2400 mg were safe and tolerated and no safety signals were identified. The pharmacokinetics of ABBV-47D11 were linear and showed dose-proportional increases in serum concentrations with ascending doses. The exploratory anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity revealed a reduction of viral load at and above the 600 mg dose of ABBV-47D11 regardless of patient demographics and baseline characteristics, however; because of the high inter-individual variability and small sample size a statistical significance was not reached. There is potential for anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity with ABBV-47D11 doses of 600 mg or higher, which could be evaluated in future clinical trials designed and powered to assess viral load reductions and clinical benefit.

Monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of COVID-19 infection in children

INTRODUCTION

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been authorized for the treatment of COVID-19 in pediatric populations, however, there is a lack of evidence for their use in these populations.

AREAS COVERED

We outline the evidence of mAbs for COVID-19, discuss their use in the treatment of COVID-19 infection for pediatric patients, and consider alternative treatment options and challenges to COVID-19 drug approvals.

EXPERT OPINION

Limited evidence exists for the safety and efficacy of mAbs to treat COVID-19 in children as new variants emerge. In rare pediatric outpatient settings, such as profound immunodeficiency or severe pulmonary disease, the benefits of antiviral treatment for COVID-19 likely outweigh the relatively small risks. However, for the great majority of pediatric patients, mAb treatment is likely not indicated. Small molecule antiviral therapies are another potential treatment for COVID-19 in children in an outpatient setting, though neither mAb nor small molecule antiviral treatments have significant supporting evidence in children and developing a strong evidence base for these decisions will be challenging if not impractical. Ultimately, these decisions are likely to be made at the level of individual cases using expert opinion as the primary guiding principle.

Cardiovascular Adverse Events Associated with Monoclonal Antibody Products in Patients with COVID-19

Little is known about cardiovascular safety profiles for monoclonal antibody products that received the FDA Emergency Use Authorization for COVID-19. In this study, data from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System from the first quarter of 2020 to the second quarter of 2022 were used to investigate cardiovascular safety signals associated with seven monoclonal antibody products (casirivimab + imdevimab, bamlanivimab, bamlanivimab + etesevimab, sotrovimab, tocilizumab, bebtelovimab, tixagevimab + cilgavimab) in COVID-19 patients. Disproportionality analyses were conducted using reporting odds ratio and information component to identify safety signals. About 10% of adverse events in COVID-19 patients were cardiovascular adverse events. Four monoclonal antibody products (casirivimab + imdevimab, bamlanivimab, bamlanivimab + etesevimab, and bebtelovimab) were associated with higher reporting of hypertension. Tocilizumab was associated with higher reporting of cardiac failure and embolic and thrombotic event. Casirivimab + imdevimab and bamlanivimab were also associated with higher reporting of ischemic heart disease. No cardiovascular safety signals were identified for sotrovimab and tixagevimab + cilgavimab. The results indicate differential cardiovascular safety profiles in monoclonal antibodies. Careful monitoring of cardiovascular events may be considered for certain COVID-19 patients at risk when they are treated with monoclonal antibodies.

Evolution of a globally unique SARS-CoV-2 Spike E484T monoclonal antibody escape mutation in a persistently infected, immunocompromised individual

Prolonged infections in immunocompromised individuals may be a source for novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants, particularly when both the immune system and antiviral therapy fail to clear the infection and enable within-host evolution. Here we describe a 486-day case of SARS-CoV-2 infection in an immunocompromised individual. Following monotherapy with the monoclonal antibody Bamlanivimab, the individual's virus acquired resistance, likely via the earliest known occurrence of Spike amino acid variant E484T. Recently, E484T has arisen again as a derivative of E484A in the Omicron Variant of Concern, supporting the hypothesis that prolonged infections can give rise to novel variants long before they become prevalent in the human population.

Long-term cellular immune response in immunocompromised unvaccinated COVID-19 patients undergoing monoclonal antibody treatment

Immunocompromised patients are at increased risk for a severe course of COVID-19. Treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) has become widely accepted. However, the effects of mAb treatment on the long-term primary cellular response to SARS-CoV-2 are unknown. In the following study, we investigated the long-term cellular immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 Spike S1, Membrane (M) and Nucleocapsid (N) antigens using the ELISpot assay in unvaccinated, mAb-treated immunocompromised high-risk patients. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAb untreated though vaccinated COVID-19 immunocompromised patients, vaccinated SARS-CoV-2 immunocompromised patients without COVID-19 and vaccinated healthy control subjects served as control groups. The cellular immune response was determined at a median of 5 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our data suggest that immunocompromised patients develop an endogenous long-term cellular immune response after COVID-19, although at low levels. A better understanding of the cellular immune response will help guide clinical decision making for these vulnerable patient cohorts.

Antiviral and clinical activity of bamlanivimab in a randomized trial of non-hospitalized adults with COVID-19

Anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies are mainstay COVID-19 therapeutics. Safety, antiviral, and clinical efficacy of bamlanivimab were evaluated in the randomized controlled trial ACTIV-2/A5401. Non-hospitalized adults were randomized 1:1 within 10 days of COVID-19 symptoms to bamlanivimab or blinded-placebo in two dose-cohorts (7000 mg, n = 94; 700 mg, n = 223). No differences in bamlanivimab vs placebo were observed in the primary outcomes: proportion with undetectable nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RNA at days 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28 (risk ratio = 0.82-1.05 for 7000 mg [p(overall) = 0.88] and 0.81-1.21 for 700 mg [p(overall) = 0.49]), time to symptom improvement (median 21 vs 18.5 days [p = 0.97], 7000 mg; 24 vs 20.5 days [p = 0.08], 700 mg), or grade 3+ adverse events. However, bamlanivimab was associated with lower day 3 nasopharyngeal viral levels and faster reductions in inflammatory markers and viral decay by modeling. This study provides evidence of faster reductions in nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RNA levels but not shorter symptom durations in non-hospitalized adults with early variants of SARS-CoV-2.

SARS-CoV-2-neutralising monoclonal antibodies to prevent COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are laboratory-produced molecules derived from the B cells of an infected host. They are being investigated as potential prophylaxis to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of SARS-CoV-2-neutralising mAbs, including mAb fragments, to prevent infection with SARS-CoV-2 causing COVID-19; and to maintain the currency of the evidence, using a living systematic review approach.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, MEDLINE, Embase, and three other databases on 27 April 2022. We checked references, searched citations, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated SARS-CoV-2-neutralising mAbs, including mAb fragments, alone or combined, versus an active comparator, placebo, or no intervention, for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) of COVID-19. We excluded studies of SARS-CoV-2-neutralising mAbs to treat COVID-19, as these are part of another review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed search results, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using Cochrane RoB 2. Prioritised outcomes were infection with SARS-CoV-2, development of clinical COVID-19 symptoms, all-cause mortality, admission to hospital, quality of life, adverse events (AEs), and serious adverse events (SAEs). We rated the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four RCTs of 9749 participants who were previously uninfected and unvaccinated at baseline. Median age was 42 to 76 years. Around 20% to 77.5% of participants in the PrEP studies and 35% to 100% in the PEP studies had at least one risk factor for severe COVID-19. At baseline, 72.8% to 82.2% were SARS-CoV-2 antibody seronegative. We identified four ongoing studies, and two studies awaiting classification. Pre-exposure prophylaxis Tixagevimab/cilgavimab versus placebo One study evaluated tixagevimab/cilgavimab versus placebo in participants exposed to SARS-CoV-2 wild-type, Alpha, Beta, and Delta variant. About 39.3% of participants were censored for efficacy due to unblinding and 13.8% due to vaccination. Within six months, tixagevimab/cilgavimab probably decreases infection with SARS-CoV-2 (risk ratio (RR) 0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.70; 4685 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), decreases development of clinical COVID-19 symptoms (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.35; 5172 participants; high-certainty evidence), and may decrease admission to hospital (RR 0.03, 95% CI 0 to 0.59; 5197 participants; low-certainty evidence). Tixagevimab/cilgavimab may result in little to no difference on mortality within six months, all-grade AEs, and SAEs (low-certainty evidence). Quality of life was not reported. Casirivimab/imdevimab versus placebo One study evaluated casirivimab/imdevimab versus placebo in participants who may have been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 wild-type, Alpha, and Delta variant. About 36.5% of participants opted for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and had a mean of 66.1 days between last dose of intervention and vaccination. Within six months, casirivimab/imdevimab may decrease infection with SARS-CoV-2 (RR 0.01, 95% CI 0 to 0.14; 825 seronegative participants; low-certainty evidence) and may decrease development of clinical COVID-19 symptoms (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0 to 0.27; 969 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether casirivimab/imdevimab affects mortality regardless of the SARS-CoV-2 antibody serostatus. Casirivimab/imdevimab may increase all-grade AEs slightly (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.31; 969 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effects on grade 3 to 4 AEs and SAEs within six months. Admission to hospital and quality of life were not reported. Postexposure prophylaxis Bamlanivimab versus placebo One study evaluated bamlanivimab versus placebo in participants who may have been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 wild-type. Bamlanivimab probably decreases infection with SARS-CoV-2 versus placebo by day 29 (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.98; 966 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), may result in little to no difference on all-cause mortality by day 60 (R 0.83, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.70; 966 participants; low-certainty evidence), may increase all-grade AEs by week eight (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.46; 966 participants; low-certainty evidence), and may increase slightly SAEs (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.91; 966 participants; low-certainty evidence). Development of clinical COVID-19 symptoms, admission to hospital within 30 days, and quality of life were not reported. Casirivimab/imdevimab versus placebo One study evaluated casirivimab/imdevimab versus placebo in participants who may have been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 wild-type, Alpha, and potentially, but less likely to Delta variant. Within 30 days, casirivimab/imdevimab decreases infection with SARS-CoV-2 (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.48; 1505 participants; high-certainty evidence), development of clinical COVID-19 symptoms (broad-term definition) (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.35; 1505 participants; high-certainty evidence), may result in little to no difference on mortality (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.12 to 73.43; 1505 participants; low-certainty evidence), and may result in little to no difference in admission to hospital. Casirivimab/imdevimab may slightly decrease grade 3 to 4 AEs (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.02; 2617 participants; low-certainty evidence), decreases all-grade AEs (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.80; 2617 participants; high-certainty evidence), and may result in little to no difference on SAEs in participants regardless of SARS-CoV-2 antibody serostatus. Quality of life was not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For PrEP, there is a decrease in development of clinical COVID-19 symptoms (high certainty), infection with SARS-CoV-2 (moderate certainty), and admission to hospital (low certainty) with tixagevimab/cilgavimab. There is low certainty of a decrease in infection with SARS-CoV-2, and development of clinical COVID-19 symptoms; and a higher rate for all-grade AEs with casirivimab/imdevimab. For PEP, there is moderate certainty of a decrease in infection with SARS-CoV-2 and low certainty for a higher rate for all-grade AEs with bamlanivimab. There is high certainty of a decrease in infection with SARS-CoV-2, development of clinical COVID-19 symptoms, and a higher rate for all-grade AEs with casirivimab/imdevimab.   Although there is high-to-moderate certainty evidence for some outcomes, it is insufficient to draw meaningful conclusions. These findings only apply to people unvaccinated against COVID-19. They are only applicable to the variants prevailing during the study and not other variants (e.g. Omicron). In vitro, tixagevimab/cilgavimab is effective against Omicron, but there are no clinical data. Bamlanivimab and casirivimab/imdevimab are ineffective against Omicron in vitro. Further studies are needed and publication of four ongoing studies may resolve the uncertainties.

The anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody, bamlanivimab, minimally impacts the endogenous immune response to COVID-19 vaccination

As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic evolves and vaccine rollout progresses, the availability and demand for monoclonal antibodies for the prevention and treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are also accelerating. This longitudinal serological study evaluated the magnitude and potency of the endogenous antibody response to COVID-19 vaccination in participants who first received a COVID-19 monoclonal antibody in a prevention study. Over the course of six months, serum samples were collected from a population of nursing home residents and staff enrolled in a clinical trial who were randomized to either bamlanivimab treatment or placebo. In an unplanned component of this trial, a subset of these participants was subsequently fully vaccinated with two doses of either SpikeVax (Moderna) or Comirnaty (BioNTech/Pfizer) COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. This post-hoc analysis assessed the immune response to vaccination for 135 participants without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Antibody titers and potency were assessed using three assays against SARS-CoV-2 proteins that bamlanivimab does not efficiently bind to, thereby reflecting the endogenous antibody response. All bamlanivimab and placebo recipients mounted a robust immune response to full COVID-19 vaccination, irrespective of age, risk-category, and vaccine type with any observed differences of uncertain clinical importance. These findings are pertinent for informing public health policy with results that suggest that the benefit of receiving COVID-19 vaccination at the earliest opportunity outweighs the minimal effect on the endogenous immune response due to prior prophylactic COVID-19 monoclonal antibody infusion.

Antibody-Mediated Neutralization of SARS-CoV-2

Neutralizing antibodies can block infection, clear pathogens, and are essential to provide long-term immunity. Since the onset of the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies have been comprehensively investigated and critical information on their development, function, and potential use to prevent and treat COVID-19 have been revealed. With the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 immune escape variants, humoral immunity is being challenged, and a detailed understanding of neutralizing antibodies is essential to guide vaccine design strategies as well as antibody-mediated therapies. In this review, we summarize some of the key findings on SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies, with a focus on their clinical application.

Relationship between gene expression patterns from nasopharyngeal swabs and serum biomarkers in patients hospitalized with COVID-19, following treatment with the neutralizing monoclonal antibody bamlanivimab

Background

A thorough understanding of a patient’s inflammatory response to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is crucial to discerning the associated, underlying immunological processes and to the selection and implementation of treatment strategies. Defining peripheral blood biomarkers relevant to SARS-CoV-2 infection is fundamental to detecting and monitoring this systemic disease. This safety-focused study aims to monitor and characterize the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection via analysis of peripheral blood and nasopharyngeal swab samples obtained from patients hospitalized with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), in the presence or absence of bamlanivimab treatment.

Methods

23 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were randomized to receive a single dose of the neutralizing monoclonal antibody, bamlanivimab (700 mg, 2800 mg or 7000 mg) or placebo, at study initiation (Clinical Trial; NCT04411628). Serum samples and nasopharyngeal swabs were collected at multiple time points over 1 month. A Proximity Extension Array was used to detect inflammatory profiles from protein biomarkers in the serum of hospitalized COVID-19 patients relative to age/sex-matched healthy controls. RNA sequencing was performed on nasopharyngeal swabs. A Luminex serology assay and Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay were used to detect endogenous antibody formation and to monitor seroconversion in each cohort over time. A mixed model for repeated measures approach was used to analyze changes in serology and serum proteins over time.

Results

Levels of IL-6, CXCL10, CXCL11, IFNγ and MCP-3 were > fourfold higher in the serum of patients with COVID-19 versus healthy controls and linked with observations of inflammatory and viral-induced interferon response genes detected in nasopharyngeal swab samples from the same patients. While IgA and IgM titers peaked around 7 days post-dose, IgG titers remained high, even after 28 days. Changes in biomarkers over time were not significantly different between the bamlanivimab and placebo groups.

Conclusions

Similarities observed between nasopharyngeal gene expression patterns and peripheral blood biomarker profiles reveal a connection between the circulation and processes in the nasopharyngeal cavity, reinforcing the potential utility of systemic blood biomarker profiling for therapeutic monitoring of patient response. Serological antibody responses in patients correlated closely with reductions in the COVID-19 inflammatory protein biomarker signature. Bamlanivimab did not affect the biomarker dynamics in this hospitalized patient population.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12967-022-03345-3.

Endogenous Antibody Responses to SARS-CoV-2 in Patients With Mild or Moderate COVID-19 Who Received Bamlanivimab Alone or Bamlanivimab and Etesevimab Together

Background

Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) to SARS-CoV-2 are clinically efficacious when administered early, decreasing hospitalization and mortality in patients with mild or moderate COVID-19. We investigated the effects of receiving mAbs (bamlanivimab alone and bamlanivimab and etesevimab together) after SARS-CoV-2 infection on the endogenous immune response.

Methods

Longitudinal serum samples were collected from patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 in the BLAZE-1 trial who received placebo (n=153), bamlanivimab alone [700 mg (n=100), 2800 mg (n=106), or 7000 mg (n=98)], or bamlanivimab (2800 mg) and etesevimab (2800 mg) together (n=111). A multiplex Luminex serology assay measured antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 antigens, including SARS-CoV-2 protein variants that evade bamlanivimab or etesevimab binding, and SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus neutralization assays were performed.

Results

The antibody response in patients who received placebo or mAbs had a broad specificity. Titer change from baseline against a receptor-binding domain mutant (Spike-RBD E484Q), as well as N-terminal domain (Spike-NTD) and nucleocapsid protein (NCP) epitopes were 1.4 to 4.1 fold lower at day 15-85 in mAb recipients compared with placebo. Neutralizing activity of day 29 sera from bamlanivimab monotherapy cohorts against both spike E484Q and beta variant (B.1.351) were slightly reduced compared with placebo (by a factor of 3.1, p=0.001, and 2.9, p=0.002, respectively). Early viral load correlated with the subsequent antibody titers of the native, unmodified humoral response (p<0.0001 at Day 15, 29, 60 and 85 for full-length spike).

Conclusions

Patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 treated with mAbs develop a wide breadth of antigenic responses to SARS-CoV-2. Small reductions in titers and neutralizing activity, potentially due to a decrease in viral load following mAb treatment, suggest minimal impact of mAb treatment on the endogenous immune response.

Bamlanivimab reduces nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RNA levels but not symptom duration in non-hospitalized adults with COVID-19: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The antiviral activity and efficacy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies to accelerate recovery from COVID-19 is important to define.

Objective

To determine safety and efficacy of the mAb bamlanivimab to reduce nasopharyngeal (NP) SARS-CoV-2 RNA levels and symptom duration.

Design

ACTIV-2/A5401 is a randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled platform trial. Two dose cohorts were enrolled between August 19 and November 17, 2020 for phase 2 evaluation: in the first, participants were randomized 1:1 to bamlanivimab 7000 mg versus placebo, and in the second to bamlanivimab 700 mg versus placebo. Randomization was stratified by time from symptom onset (≤ or >5 days) and risk of progression to severe COVID-19 ("higher" vs "lower").

Setting

Multicenter trial conducted at U.S. sites.

Participants

Non-hospitalized adults ≥18 years of age with positive SARS-CoV-2 antigen or nucleic acid test within 7 days, ≤10 days of COVID-19 symptoms, and with oxygen saturation ≥92% within 48 hours prior to study entry.

Intervention

Single infusion of bamlanivimab (7000 or 700 mg) or placebo.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Detection of NP SARS-CoV-2 RNA at days 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28, time to improvement of all of 13 targeted COVID-19 symptoms by daily self-assessment through day 28, and grade 3 or higher treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) through day 28. Secondary measures included quantitative NP SARS-CoV-2 RNA, all-cause hospitalizations and deaths (composite), area under the curve of symptom scores from day 0 through day 28, plasma bamlanivimab concentrations, plasma and serum inflammatory biomarkers, and safety through week 24.

Results

Ninety-four participants were enrolled to the 7000 mg cohort and 223 to the 700 mg cohort and initiated study intervention. The proportion meeting protocol criteria for "higher" risk for COVID-19 progression was 42% and 51% for the 7000 and 700 mg cohort, respectively. Median time from symptom onset at study entry for both cohorts was 6 days. There was no difference in the proportion with undetectable NP SARS-CoV-2 RNA at any post-treatment timepoints (risk ratio compared to placebo, 0.82-1.05 for 7000 mg dose [overall p=0.88] and 0.81-1.21 for 700 mg dose [overall p=0.49]), time to symptom improvement (median of 21 vs 18.5 days, p=0.97, for 7000 mg bamlanivimab vs placebo and 24 vs 20.5 days, p=0.08, for 700 mg bamlanivimab vs placebo), or grade 3+ TEAEs with either dose compared to placebo. Median NP SARS-CoV-2 RNA levels were lower at day 3 and C-reactive protein, ferritin, and fibrinogen levels significantly reduced at days 7 and 14 for bamlanivimab 700 mg compared to placebo, with similar trends observed for bamlanivimab 7000 mg. Viral decay modeling supported more rapid decay with bamlanivimab compared to placebo.

Conclusions and Relevance

Treatment with bamlanivimab 7000 mg and 700 mg was safe and compared to placebo led to more rapid reductions in NP SARS-CoV-2 RNA and inflammatory biomarkers, but did not decrease time to symptom improvement. The clinical utility of mAbs for outcomes other than hospitalizations and deaths is uncertain.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04518410.

A Quantitative Modeling and Simulation Framework to Support Candidate and Dose Selection of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Monoclonal antibodies to Advance Bamlanivimab into a First-in-Human Clinical Trial

Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAb), novel therapeutics for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome‐coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), have been urgently researched from the start of the pandemic. The selection of the optimal mAb candidate and therapeutic dose were expedited using open‐access in silico models. The maximally effective therapeutic mAb dose was determined through two approaches; both expanded on innovative, open‐science initiatives. A physiologically‐based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model, incorporating physicochemical properties predictive of mAb clearance and tissue distribution, was used to estimate mAb exposure that maintained concentrations above 90% inhibitory concentration of in vitro neutralization in lung tissue for up to 4 weeks in 90% of patients. To achieve fastest viral clearance following onset of symptoms, a longitudinal SARS‐CoV‐2 viral dynamic model was applied to estimate viral clearance as a function of drug concentration and dose. The PBPK model‐based approach suggested that a clinical dose between 175 and 500 mg of bamlanivimab would maintain target mAb concentrations in the lung tissue over 28 days in 90% of patients. The viral dynamic model suggested a 700 mg dose would achieve maximum viral elimination. Taken together, the first‐in‐human trial (NCT04411628) conservatively proceeded with a starting therapeutic dose of 700 mg and escalated to higher doses to evaluate the upper limit of safety and tolerability. Availability of open‐access codes and application of novel in silico model‐based approaches supported the selection of bamlanivimab and identified the lowest dose evaluated in this study that was expected to result in the maximum therapeutic effect before the first‐in‐human clinical trial.