Vaccinated patients have reduced rates of hospitalization after receiving casirivimab and imdevimab for COVID-19

A Descriptive, Retrospective Analysis of COVID-19 Passive Antibody Therapy and Its Effects on Morbidity and Mortality in Patients Receiving B-Cell-Depleting Therapies

Patients receiving B-cell-depleting therapies (BCDT) are at an increased risk for severe COVID-19. Passive antibody therapy (PAT), including COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) and monoclonal antibodies (mAb), may be an effective treatment in this population. Real-world data on PAT effectiveness are limited. To evaluate response to PAT measured through 90-day all-cause morbidity and mortality, we performed a retrospective review of patients who contracted COVID-19 within a year from the last BCDT. From 64 included patients, the majority were Caucasians (95%), female (56%), vaccinated (67%), treated outpatients (64%), with multiple comorbidities. Examined BCDT were rituximab (55%), obinutuzumab (33%), ocrelizumab (11%) and ofatumumab (1%), used for underlying hematological malignancy (HEM) (40%), multiple sclerosis (34%), and rheumatoid arthritis (16%). Of seven deceased patients, three died from COVID-19. All three were elderly males with multiple comorbidities, treated inpatient for severe COVID-19. Four of 41 patients treated as outpatients were hospitalized for non-COVID-19-related reasons. All deceased and hospitalized patients had an underlying HEM. All but one were on rituximab. PAT may be an effective treatment for patients receiving BCDT, especially if given early for non-severe disease. Patients with underlying HEM may be at increased risk for severe disease compared with others receiving the same BCDT.

Retrospective Analysis of Vaccinated and Unvaccinated COVID-19 Patients Treated with Monoclonal Antibodies (mAb) and Their Emergent Needs (RAVEN)

Strategies to combat COVID-19 include vaccines and Monoclonal Antibody Therapy. While vaccines aim to prevent development of symptoms, Monoclonal Antibody Therapy aims to prevent the progression of mild to severe disease. An increasing number of COVID-19 infections in vaccinated patients raised the question of whether vaccinated and unvaccinated COVID-19 positive patients respond differently to Monoclonal Antibody Therapy. The answer can help prioritize patients if resources are scarce. We performed a retrospective study to evaluate and compare the outcomes and risks for disease progression between vaccinated and unvaccinated COVID-19 patients treated with Monoclonal Antibody Therapy by measuring the number of Emergency Department visits and hospitalizations within 14 days as well as the progression to severe disease, defined through the Intensive Care Unit admissions within 14 days, and death within 28 days from the Monoclonal Antibody infusion. From 3898 included patients, 2009 (51.5%) were unvaccinated at the time of Monoclonal Antibody infusion. Unvaccinated patients had more Emergency Department visits (217 vs. 79, p < 0.0001), hospitalizations (116 vs. 38, p < 0.0001), and progression to severe disease (25 vs. 19, p = 0.016) following treatment with Monoclonal Antibody Therapy. After adjustment for demographics and comorbidities, unvaccinated patients were 2.45 times more likely to seek help in the Emergency Department and 2.70 times more likely to be hospitalized. Our data suggest the added benefit between the COVID-19 vaccine and Monoclonal Antibody Therapy.

Discrepancies in Outcomes by Race and Ethnicity in COVID-19 Patients Receiving Casirivimab and Imdevimab

OBJECTIVES

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reported increased rates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related hospitalizations and deaths in Black and Hispanic individuals. One contributing factor to this may be a difference in access to treatment. We thus sought to compare the outcomes of Black, non-Hispanic patients and Hispanic patients with White, non-Hispanic individuals using a group of patients with COVID-19 who received casirivimab/imdevimab.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of data from a previously published retrospective chart review of patients who received casirivimab/imdevimab for COVID-19 between December 9, 2020 and August 20, 2021, when they were treated at one of three facilities within a single hospital system. We compared the baseline characteristics (including age, sex, body mass index, duration of symptoms, and vaccination status) and outcomes of Black, non-Hispanic patients and Hispanic patients with those of White, non-Hispanic patients. Our primary outcome was the odds of a return visit to the emergency department (ED) within 28 days of treatment as assessed by multivariate logistic regression. We also assessed the rates of return visits to the ED for symptoms caused by COVID-19, hospitalizations, and hospitalizations from hypoxia.

RESULTS

In total, 1318 patients received casirivimab/imdevimab for COVID-19 at the three study facilities. Of these, 410 (31.1%) identified themselves as White and non-Hispanic, 88 (6.7%) as Black and non-Hispanic, and 736 (55.8%) as Hispanic. Vaccination rates at the time of treatment were as follows: Black, non-Hispanic 10.2%, Hispanic 13.6%, and White, non-Hispanic 21.5%. On multivariate analysis, the odds of return visits to the ED within 28 days were higher for Black, non-Hispanic patients and Hispanic patients as compared with White, non-Hispanic patients, with odds ratios of 2.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4-5.5, P = 0.003) and of 2.3 (95% CI 1.5-3.6, P = 0.0002), respectively. For hospitalizations caused by hypoxia within 28 days of treatment, the adjusted odds ratio for Black, non-Hispanic patients was 3.4 (95% CI 1.1-10.5, P = 0.03) as compared with White, non-Hispanic patients. There were no other statistically significant differences among groups in regard to subsequent hospitalizations within 28 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Black, non-Hispanic patients and Hispanic patients are more likely to make a return visit to the ED within 28 days after casirivimab/imdevimab treatment for COVID-19 as compared with White, non-Hispanic patients. This holds true even when adjusting for higher vaccination rates among White, non-Hispanic individuals.

James G, Zeltner M, Platt T. Impact of a subcutaneous casirivimab and imdevimab clinic in outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19: A single-center, propensity-matched cohort study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the success of a clinic for subcutaneous administration of casirivmab and imdevimab (REGEN-COV; Regeneron) for treatment of patients with symptomatic mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in terms of preventing disease progression and healthcare utilization.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center, propensity-matched cohort study examined healthcare utilization outcomes for patients who received subcutaneous casirivimab and imdevimab at a pharmacist-led clinic of an academic health system. Eligible patients were treated between August 1, 2021, and January 5, 2022, and were at high risk for COVID-19 disease progression. Treatment patients were propensity matched with high-risk control patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 in the same timeframe who did not receive casirivimab and imdevimab. Patients were followed for 30 days for collection of data on inpatient admissions, emergency department visits, and mortality. Risk of a 30-day healthcare utilization event was assessed and tested for statistical significance utilizing McNemar's test.

RESULTS

A total of 585 patients who received treatment with subcutaneous casirivimab and imdevimab were matched with 585 patients who did not receive casirivimab and imdevimab therapy. Patients who received casirivimab and imdevimab had significantly lower risk of a 30-day all-cause inpatient admission event than untreated patients (relative risk reduction, 62.4%; P < 0.0001). Treated patients also had a significantly lower risk of 30-day all-cause emergency department visit than untreated subjects (relative risk reduction, 36.5%; P = 0.0021). There were 6 mortality events in the untreated group and no mortality events in the treatment group.

CONCLUSION

This study provides evidence for the effectiveness of a subcutaneous casirivimab and imdevimab clinic in preventing progression of symptomatic mild to moderate COVID-19.

Casirivimab/imdevimab treatment for outpatient COVID-19 during a SARS-CoV-2 B1.617.2 (Delta) surge at a community hospital

CONTEXT

Vaccination status has been shown to be linked to patient-centered outcomes in those with COVID-19. However, minimal data have explored the relationship between vaccination status and representation rates after receiving monoclonal antibodies (MABs) the Delta strain of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a community setting.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to determine if there was a difference in patient-centered outcomes between those who were vaccinated and unvaccinated after the administration of casirivimab/imdevimab for mild-to-moderate COVID-19 during the time when the Delta strain was most prevalent.

METHODS

A convenience sample of consecutive adults given casirivimab/imdevimab at either an outpatient infusion center or within the emergency department (ED) were included in analysis. Patient demographics, authorized-use qualifiers from the emergency use authorization (EUA), baseline vital signs at the time of infusion, representation rates to a healthcare provider within the hospital's network, and any admissions to the hospital following infusion were all collected from the patient's electronic medical record. Vaccination status was confirmed in both the patient's electronic medical record and the Arizona State Immunization Information System (ASIIS). Analysis was conducted utilizing descriptive statistics, the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous data, and the chi-squared analysis for nominal data.

RESULTS

In total, 743 patients were included in the study, with 585 being unvaccinated and 158 being vaccinated at the time of administration. Those in the vaccinated group were more likely to be older (60.0 vs. 55.0 years; p<0.001) and to have a history of diabetes (18.4% vs. 11.3%; p=0.02), hypertension (39.9% vs. 28.5%; p=0.006), immunosuppression (7.0% vs. 1.4%; p<0.001), and chronic kidney disease (7.0% vs. 3.4%; p=0.05). In the entire sample, 105 (14.1%) patients had an unexpected return visit to either the ED or urgent care at 28 days, with 17 (2.3%) requiring hospitalization. Patients who were vaccinated were more likely to represent for care after casirivimab/imdevimab infusion (20.3% vs. 12.5%; p=0.01), but no difference was noted in hospitalization rates between the two groups (18.8% vs. 15.1%; p=0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

MAB therapy with casirivimab/imdevimab for the outpatient treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19 was associated with a low rate of hospitalization. However, those who were vaccinated were more likely to present for unexpected return care at either the ED or urgent care within 28 days of the initial infusion.

Real-World Use of Sotrovimab for Pre-Emptive Treatment in High-Risk Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: An Observational Cross-Sectional Study

Data on use of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in hospitalized patients are limited. In this cross-sectional study, we evaluated the use of mAbs for early treatment of unvaccinated hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. All inpatients at our center were screened on 27 October 2021. Primary outcome was in-hospital deterioration as defined by a composite of oxygen requirement, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or mortality within 28 days of admission. Ninety-four out of 410 COVID-19 inpatients were included in the final analysis, of whom 19 (20.2%) received early treatment with sotrovimab. The median age was 73 years (IQR 61–83), and 35 (37.2%) were female. Although the treatment group was significantly older and had more comorbidities, there was a lower proportion of progression to oxygen requirement (31.6% vs. 54.7%), ICU admission (10.5% vs. 24.0%), or mortality (5.3% vs. 13.3%). Kaplan–Meier curves showed a significant difference in time to in-hospital deterioration (log-rank test, p = 0.043). Cox proportional hazards model for in-hospital deterioration showed that sotrovimab treatment was protective (hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.17–0.99; p = 0.047) after adjustment for baseline ISARIC deterioration score. Our findings support the use of sotrovimab for early treatment in hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at a high risk of disease progression.