Clinical outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated with remdesivir: a retrospective analysis of a large tertiary care center in Germany

Temporal trends in 90-day survival of hospitalised individuals during two years of the COVID-19 pandemic in Denmark

BACKGROUND

Mortality rates peaked early in the COVID-19 pandemic and then declined. Possible explanations are pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments, vaccines and changing demographics. We sought to evaluate temporal trends in clinical characteristics and survival of patients hospitalised with COVID-19 during the first two years of the pandemic in Denmark.

METHODS

In this observational study, we included all adults with COVID-19 consecutively admitted to three hospitals in Copenhagen, Denmark, from March 2020 through March 2022. The primary outcome was overall survival up to day 90 from admission. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the association of survival within five consecutive time-periods, based on admission date, adjusted for baseline characteristics, vaccination status, remdesivir and dexamethasone treatment.

RESULTS

In 1630 included patients, the median age [IQR] was 68 [52, 79] years, 56.6% were men and 86.2% had comorbidity. Clinical characteristics changed over time. The crude 90-day mortality rate peaked in March-June 2020 with 28.9%, decreased from July 2020 to 17.5%, and increased again in January-March 2022 to 28.6%. Lower hazard ratios for death were observed in individuals admitted from July 2020 and persisted after adjusting for baseline characteristics. Adjusting for vaccination, remdesivir treatment and dexamethasone treatment attenuated the association in patients requiring low-flow oxygen.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests lower hazard rates for mortality in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 from July 2020 compared to March-June 2020, mainly driven by lower mortality in patients with a need of oxygen at baseline.

COVID-19 treatment strategies with drugs centrally procured by the German Federal Ministry of Health in a representative tertiary care hospital: a temporal analysis

Introduction

To ensure the fastest and earliest possible treatment, the German Federal Ministry of Health (BMG) initiated central procurement and nationwide distribution of new drugs against COVID-19. A single centre was used for a retrospective temporal analysis of this procedure.

Methods

A descriptive analysis of hospitalization and treatment of COVID-19 patients with drugs centrally procured by the BMG at St. Georg Hospital, Leipzig, Germany, for the period from 1 March 2020 to 28 February 2023 was employed considering the approval status, evolving guidelines and recommendations of medical societies.

Results

In total, 3,412 patients ≥18 years (54.9% men) with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were admitted. The mean age was 64 years during the reporting period and 66.1/70.6 years during the first and second COVID-19 waves, respectively. 964 patients (28.2%) received COVID-19 therapy with drugs procured centrally by the BMG. Remdesivir was the most commonly used (63%). SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing monoclonal antibodies represented 23% of the therapies. Peroral antivirals (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir) were used in 14% of COVID-19 patients, with molnupiravir being insignificant (five prescriptions).

Conclusions

Specific therapeutic approaches were mainly based on antiviral therapy in the early phase of COVID-19 to prevent severe disease progression in vulnerable patient groups. Most drugs had not been approved at the time of central procurement; therefore, prescriptions were given on a case-by-case basis after careful risk-benefit assessments. All available neutralizing monoclonal SARS-CoV-2 antibodies lost efficacy during the pandemic due to different circulating immune escape variants. Remdesivir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir remained effective therapies in the early phase of COVID-19.

Remdesivir: A Review in COVID-19

Remdesivir (Veklury®), a nucleotide analogue prodrug with broad-spectrum antiviral activity, is approved for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the illness caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. Unlike some antivirals, remdesivir has a low potential for drug-drug interactions. In the pivotal ACTT-1 trial in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, daily intravenous infusions of remdesivir significantly reduced time to recovery relative to placebo. Subsequent trials provided additional support for the efficacy of remdesivir in hospitalized patients with moderate or severe COVID-19, with a greater benefit seen in patients with minimal oxygen requirements at baseline. Clinical trials also demonstrated the efficacy of remdesivir in other patient populations, including outpatients at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19, as well as hospitalized paediatric patients. In terms of mortality, results were equivocal. However, remdesivir appeared to have a small mortality benefit in hospitalized patients who were not already being ventilated at baseline. Remdesivir was generally well tolerated in clinical trials, but pharmacovigilance data found an increased risk of hepatic, renal and cardiovascular adverse drug reactions in the real-world setting. In conclusion, remdesivir represents a useful treatment option for patients with COVID-19, particularly those who require supplemental oxygen.

Tocilizumab vs. baricitinib in hospitalized severe COVID-19 patients: results from a real-world cohort

BACKGROUND

Tocilizumab and baricitinib are recommended treatment options for hospitalized COVID-19 patients requiring oxygen support. Literature about its efficacy and safety in a head-to-head comparison is scarce.

METHODS

Hospitalized COVID-19 patients requiring oxygen were treated with tocilizumab or baricitinib additionally to dexamethasone. Tocilizumab was available from February till the 19th of September 2021 and baricitinib from 21st of September. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcome parameters were progression to mechanical ventilation (MV), length-of-stay (LOS) and potential side effects.

RESULTS

159 patients (tocilizumab 68, baricitinib 91) with a mean age of 60.5 years, 64% male were included in the study. Tocilizumab patients were admitted 1 day earlier, were in a higher WHO category at the time of inclusion and had a higher CRP level on admission and treatment initiation. Patients receiving Tocilizumab were treated with remdesivir more often and only patients in the baricitinib group were treated with monoclonal antibodies. Other characteristics did not differ significantly. In-hospital mortality (18% vs. 11%, p = 0.229), progression to MV (19% vs. 11%, p = 0.173) and LOS (13 vs. 12 days, p = 0.114) did not differ between groups. Side effects were equally distributed between groups, except ALAT elevation which was significantly more often observed in the tocilizumab group (43% vs. 25%, p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital mortality, progression to MV and LOS were not significantly different in patients treated with tocilizumab or baricitinib additionally to standard of care. Both drugs seem equally effective but further head-to-head trials are needed.

Real-life experience with remdesivir for treatment of hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients: matched case-control study from a large tertiary hospital registry

AIM

To evaluate the association of remdesivir use and the survival of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 5959 COVID-19 patients admitted to our tertiary-level hospital from March 2020 to June 2021. A total of 876 remdesivir-treated patients were matched with 876 control patients in terms of age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), WHO-defined COVID-19 severity on admission, and oxygen requirement at the time of remdesivir use.

RESULTS

Among 1752 COVID-19 patients (median age 66 years, 61.8% men), 1405 (80.2%) had severe and 311 (17.8%) had critically severe COVID-19 on admission. Remdesivir was given at a median of one day after hospital admission and at a median of eight days from the onset of symptoms. Overall, 645 (73.6%) patients received remdesivir before high-flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) or mechanical ventilation (MV), 198 (22.6%) after HFOT institution, and 83 (9.5%) after MV institution. Remdesivir use was associated with improved survival in the entire cohort (hazard ratio 0.79, P=0.006). Survival benefit was evident among patients receiving remdesivir during low-flow oxygen requirement (hazard ratio 0.61, P<0.001) but not among patients who received it after starting HFOT (P=0.499) or MV (P=0.380).

CONCLUSION

Remdesivir, if given during low-flow oxygen therapy, might be associated with survival benefit in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Real-life experience with remdesivir for treatment of hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients: matched case-control study from a large tertiary hospital registry

AIM

To evaluate the association of remdesivir use and the survival of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 5959 COVID-19 patients admitted to our tertiary-level hospital from March 2020 to June 2021. A total of 876 remdesivir-treated patients were matched with 876 control patients in terms of age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), WHO-defined COVID-19 severity on admission, and oxygen requirement at the time of remdesivir use.

RESULTS

Among 1752 COVID-19 patients (median age 66 years, 61.8% men), 1405 (80.2%) had severe and 311 (17.8%) had critically severe COVID-19 on admission. Remdesivir was given at a median of one day after hospital admission and at a median of eight days from the onset of symptoms. Overall, 645 (73.6%) patients received remdesivir before high-flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) or mechanical ventilation (MV), 198 (22.6%) after HFOT institution, and 83 (9.5%) after MV institution. Remdesivir use was associated with improved survival in the entire cohort (hazard ratio 0.79, P=0.006). Survival benefit was evident among patients receiving remdesivir during low-flow oxygen requirement (hazard ratio 0.61, P<0.001) but not among patients who received it after starting HFOT (P=0.499) or MV (P=0.380).

CONCLUSION

Remdesivir, if given during low-flow oxygen therapy, might be associated with survival benefit in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Evaluation of Remdesivir for Mildly to Moderately Ill Patients with COVID-19: A Single-Arm, Single-Center, Retrospective Study

Background and Objectives: Remdesivir (RDV) is the first antiviral agent approved in Japan for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of our study was to assess the efficacy and safety of RDV treatment in mildly to moderately ill patients with COVID-19. Materials and Methods: A single-center, retrospective study was performed in Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital. Patients admitted to our hospital from June to October 2021 for RDV treatment against COVID-19 were enrolled. The primary end point was clinical status on days 10 and 14, using a 6-point ordinal scale ranging from death (category 6) to discharge (category 1). Adverse events were assessed and graded using the Japanese version of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0. Results: In total, 47 COVID-19 patients receiving RDV treatment were assessed during the study period. Thirty-four (72.3%) out of 47 patients required oxygen therapy. Out of these 34 patients, 30 (88.2%) showed a 2-point clinical improvement on day 14 after RDV was initiated. Serum alanine aminotransferase levels were elevated in three patients (6.4%) (CTCAE Grade 3) and neutropenia was detected in one patient (2.1%) out of the 47 patients. Conclusions: RDV may be highly effective, with good safety profiles, in patients with COVID-19 requiring oxygen therapy.