Oral Nirmatrelvir for High-Risk, Nonhospitalized Adults with Covid-19

Democratising the design and delivery of large-scale randomised, controlled clinical trials in primary care: A personal view

BACKGROUND

Rapid identification of effective treatments for use in the community during a pandemic is vital for the well-being of individuals and the sustainability of healthcare systems and society. Furthermore, identifying treatments that do not work reduces research wastage, spares people unnecessary side effects, rationalises the cost of purchasing and stockpiling medication, and reduces inappropriate medication use. Nevertheless, only a small minority of therapeutic trials for SARS-CoV-2 infections have been in primary care: most opened too late, struggled to recruit, and few produced actionable results. Participation in research is often limited by where one lives or receives health care, and trial participants may not represent those for whom the treatments are intended.

INNOVATIVE TRIALS

The ALIC4E, PRINCIPLE and the ongoing PANORAMIC trial have randomised over 40,500 people with COVID-19. This personal view describes how these trials have innovated in: trial design (by using novel adaptive platform designs); trial delivery (by complementing traditional site-based recruitment ('the patient comes to the research') with mechanisms to enable sick, infectious people to participate without having to leave home ('taking research to the people'), and by addressing the 'inverse research participation law,' which highlights disproportionate barriers faced by those who have the most to contribute, and benefit from, research, and; in transforming the evidence base by evaluating nine medicines to support guidelines and care decisions world-wide for COVID-19 and contribute to antimicrobial stewardship.

CONCLUSION

The PRINCIPLE and PANORAMIC trials represent models of innovation and inclusivity, and exemplify the potential of primary care to lead the way in addressing pressing global health challenges.

Associations of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment with death and clinical improvement in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 during the Omicron wave in Beijing, China: a multicentre, retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir has mainly been shown in non-hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The real-world effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir urgently needs to be determined using representative in-hospital patients with COVID-19 during the Omicron wave of the pandemic.

METHODS

We performed a multicentre, retrospective study in five Chinese PLA General Hospital medical centers in Beijing, China. Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from 10 December 2022 to 20 February 2023 were eligible for inclusion. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed between the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group and the control group.

RESULTS

1010 recipients of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and 1010 matched controls were finally analyzed after matching. Compared with matched controls, the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group had a lower incidence rate of all-cause death (4.6/1000 vs. 6.3/1000 person-days, p = 0.013) and a higher incidence rate of clinical improvement (47.6/1000 vs. 45.8/1000 person-days, p = 0.012). Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was associated with a 22% lower all-cause mortality and a 14% higher incidence of clinical improvement. Initiation of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir within 5 days after symptom onset was associated with a 50% lower mortality and a 26% higher clinical improvement rate. By contrast, no significant associations were identified among patients receiving nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment more than 5 days after symptom onset. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was also associated with a 50% increase in survival days and a 12% decrease in days to clinical improvement.

CONCLUSION

Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 during the Omicron wave in Beijing, China, the early initiation of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was associated with clinical benefits of lowering mortality and improving clinical recovery.

Interaction and antiviral treatment of coinfection between SARS-CoV-2 and influenza in vitro

BACKGROUND

The pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has lasted for three years. Coinfection with seasonal influenza may occur resulting in more severe diseases. The interaction between these two viruses for infection and the effect of antiviral treatment remains unclear.

METHODS

A SARS-CoV-2 and influenza H1N1 coinfection model on Calu-3 cell line was established, upon which the simultaneous and sequential coinfection was evaluated by comparing the viral load. The efficacy of molnupiravir and baloxavir against individual virus and coinfection were also studied.

RESULTS

The replication of SARS-CoV-2 was significantly interfered when the influenza virus was infected simultaneously or in advance (p < 0.05). On the contrary, the replication of the influenza virus was not affected by the SARS-CoV-2. Molnupiravir monotherapy had significant inhibitory effect on SARS-CoV-2 when the concentration reached to 6.25 μM but did not show any significant anti-influenza activity. Baloxavir was effective against influenza within the dosage range and showed significant effect of anti-SARS-CoV-2 at 16 μM. In the treatment of coinfection, molnupiravir had significant effect for SARS-CoV-2 from 6.25 μM to 100 μM and inhibited H1N1 at 100 μM (p < 0.05). The tested dosage range of baloxavir can inhibit H1N1 significantly (p < 0.05), while at the highest concentration of baloxavir did not further inhibit SARS-CoV-2, and the replication of SARS-CoV-2 significantly increased in lower concentrations. Combination treatment can effectively inhibit influenza H1N1 and SARS-CoV-2 replication during coinfection. Compared with molnupiravir or baloxavir monotherapy, combination therapy was more effective in less dosage to inhibit the replication of both viruses.

CONCLUSIONS

In coinfection, the replication of SARS-CoV-2 would be interfered by influenza H1N1. Compared with molnupiravir or baloxavir monotherapy, treatment with a combination of molnupiravir and baloxavir should be considered for early treatment in patients with SARS-CoV-2 and influenza coinfection.

Non-peptidic inhibitors targeting SARS-CoV-2 main protease: A review

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to pose a threat to global health, and sounds the alarm for research & development of effective anti-coronavirus drugs, which are crucial for the patients and urgently needed for the current epidemic and future crisis. The main protease (Mpro) stands as an essential enzyme in the maturation process of SARS-CoV-2, playing an irreplaceable role in regulating viral RNA replication and transcription. It has emerged as an ideal target for developing antiviral agents against SARS-CoV-2 due to its high conservation and the absence of homologous proteases in the human body. Among the SARS-CoV-2 Mpro inhibitors, non-peptidic compounds hold promising prospects owing to their excellent antiviral activity and improved metabolic stability. In this review, we offer an overview of research progress concerning non-peptidic SARS-CoV-2 Mpro inhibitors since 2020. The efforts delved into molecular structures, structure-activity relationships (SARs), biological activity, and binding modes of these inhibitors with Mpro. This review aims to provide valuable clues and insights for the development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents as well as broad-spectrum coronavirus Mpro inhibitors.

Comparison of safety and efficacy between Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir in the treatment of COVID-19 infection in patients with advanced kidney disease: a retrospective observational study

Background

Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is used in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with normal or mild renal impairment (eGFR ≥30 ml/min per 1.73 m2). There is limited data regarding its use in advanced kidney disease (eGFR <30 ml/min per 1.73 m2). We performed a retrospective territory-wide observational study evaluating the safety and efficacy of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir when compared with molnupiravir in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 with advanced kidney disease.

Methods

We adopted target trial emulation using data from a territory-wide electronic health record database on eligible patients aged ≥18 years with advanced kidney disease (history of eGFR <30 ml/min per 1.73 m2) who were infected with COVID-19 and were prescribed with either molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir within five days of infection during the period from 16 March 2022 to 31 December 2022. A sequence trial approach and 1:4 propensity score matching was applied based on the baseline covariates including age, sex, number of COVID-19 vaccine doses received, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), hospitalisation, eGFR, renal replacement therapy, comorbidities (cancer, respiratory disease, myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, diabetes, hypertension), and drug use (renin-angiotensin-system agents, beta blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics, nitrates, lipid lowering agents, insulins, oral antidiabetic drugs, antiplatelets, immuno-suppressants, corticosteroids, proton pump inhibitors, histamine H2 receptor antagonists, monoclonal antibody infusion) within past 90 days. Individuals were followed up from the index date until the earliest outcome occurrence, death, 90 days from index date or the end of data availability. Stratified Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted with baseline covariates was used to compare the risk of outcomes between nirmatrelvir-ritonavir recipients and molnupiravir recipients which include (i) all-cause mortality, (ii) intensive care unit (ICU) admission, (iii) ventilatory support, (iv) hospitalisation, (v) hepatic impairment, (vi) ischaemic stroke, and (vii) myocardial infarction. Subgroup analyses included age (<70; ≥70 years); sex, Charlson comorbidity index (≤5; >5), and number of COVID-19 vaccine doses received (0-1; ≥2 doses).

Findings

A total of 4886 patients were included (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 1462; molnupiravir: 3424). There were 347 events of all-cause mortality (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 74, 5.06%; molnupiravir: 273, 7.97%), 10 events of ICU admission (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 4, 0.27%; molnupiravir: 6, 0.18%), 48 events of ventilatory support (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 13, 0.89%; molnupiravir: 35, 1.02%), 836 events of hospitalisation (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 218, 23.98%; molnupiravir: 618, 28.14%), 1 event of hepatic impairment (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 0, 0%; molnupiravir: 1, 0.03%), 8 events of ischaemic stroke (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 3, 0.22%; molnupiravir: 5, 0.16%) and 9 events of myocardial infarction (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 2, 0.15%; molnupiravir: 7, 0.22%). Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir users had lower rates of all-cause mortality (absolute risk reduction (ARR) at 90 days 2.91%, 95% CI: 1.47-4.36%) and hospitalisation (ARR at 90 days 4.16%, 95% CI: 0.81-7.51%) as compared with molnupiravir users. Similar rates of ICU admission (ARR at 90 days -0.09%, 95% CI: -0.4 to 0.2%), ventilatory support (ARR at 90 days 0.13%, 95% CI: -0.45 to 0.72%), hepatic impairment (ARR at 90 days 0.03%, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.09%), ischaemic stroke (ARR at 90 days -0.06%, 95% CI: -0.35 to 0.22%), and myocardial infarction (ARR at 90 days 0.07%, 95% CI: -0.19 to 0.33%) were found between nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir users. Consistent results were observed in relative risk adjusted with baseline characteristics. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was associated with significantly reduced risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 0.624, 95% CI: 0.455-0.857) and hospitalisation (HR: 0.782, 95% CI: 0.64-0.954).

Interpretation

Patients with COVID-19 with advanced kidney disease receiving nirmatrelvir-ritonavir had a lower rate of all-cause mortality and hospital admission when compared with molnupiravir. Other adverse clinical outcomes were similar in both treatment groups.

Funding

Health and Medical Research Fund (COVID1903010), Health Bureau, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.

Olgotrelvir as a Single-Agent Treatment of Nonhospitalized Patients with Covid-19

BACKGROUND

Olgotrelvir is an oral antiviral with dual mechanisms of action targeting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 main protease (i.e., Mpro) and human cathepsin L. It has potential to serve as a single-agent treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19).

METHODS

We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of olgotrelvir in 1212 nonhospitalized adult participants with mild to moderate Covid-19, irrespective of risk factors, who were randomly assigned to receive orally either 600 mg of olgotrelvir or placebo twice daily for 5 days. The primary and key secondary end points were time to sustained recovery of a panel of 11 Covid-19-related symptoms and the viral ribonucleic acid (RNA) load. The safety end point was incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics of 1212 participants were similar in the two groups. In the modified intention-to-treat population (567 patients in the placebo group and 558 in the olgotrelvir group), the median time to symptom recovery was 205 hours in the olgotrelvir group versus 264 hours in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13 to 1.46; P<0.001). The least squares mean (95% CI) changes of viral RNA load from baseline were -2.20 (-2.59 to -1.81) log10 copies/ml in olgotrelvir-treated participants and -1.40 (-1.79 to -1.01) in participants receiving placebo at day 4. Skin rash (3.3%) and nausea (1.5%) were more frequent in the olgotrelvir group than in the placebo group; there were no treatment-related serious adverse events, and no deaths were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Olgotrelvir as a single-agent treatment significantly improved symptom recovery. Adverse effects were not dose limiting. (Funded by Sorrento Therapeutics, a parent company of ACEA Therapeutics; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05716425.).

Early combination therapy of COVID-19 in high-risk patients

PURPOSE

Prolonged shedding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been observed in immunocompromised hosts. Early monotherapy with direct-acting antivirals or monoclonal antibodies, as recommended by the international guidelines, does not prevent this with certainty. Dual therapies may therefore have a synergistic effect.

METHODS

This retrospective, multicentre study compared treatment strategies for corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19) with combinations of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, remdesivir, molnupiravir, and/ or mABs during the Omicron surge. Co-primary endpoints were prolonged viral shedding (≥ 106 copies/ml at day 21 after treatment initiation) and days with SARS-CoV-2 viral load ≥ 106 copies/ml. Therapeutic strategies and risk groups were compared using odds ratios and Fisher's tests or Kaplan-Meier analysis and long-rank tests. Multivariable regression analysis was performed.

RESULTS

144 patients were included with a median duration of SARS-CoV-2 viral load ≥ 106 copies/ml of 8.0 days (IQR 6.0-15.3). Underlying haematological malignancies (HM) (p = 0.03) and treatment initiation later than five days after diagnosis (p < 0.01) were significantly associated with longer viral shedding. Prolonged viral shedding was observed in 14.6% (n = 21/144), particularly in patients with underlying HM (OR 3.5; 95% CI 1.2-9.9; p = 0.02). Clinical courses of COVID-19 were mild to moderate with only few adverse effects potentially related to combination treatment.

CONCLUSION

Early combination treatment of COVID-19 effectively prevented prolonged viral shedding in 85.6% of cases. Considering the rapid viral clearance rates and low toxicity, individualized dual therapy approaches may be beneficial in high-risk patients.

Molnupiravir versus favipiravir in at-risk outpatients with COVID-19: A randomized controlled trial in Thailand

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of molnupiravir and favipiravir in outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 and at risk of severe COVID-19.

METHODS

In an open-label, parallel-group, multicenter trial in Thailand, participants with moderate COVID-19 and at least one factor associated with severe COVID-19 were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive oral molnupiravir or oral favipiravir (standard of care). Phone calls for remote symptom assessment were made on Days 6, 15, and 29. Participants with worsening symptoms were instructed to return to the hospital. The primary endpoint was pulmonary involvement by Day 29, as evidenced by ≥2 of the following: dyspnea, oxygen saturation <92% or imaging.

RESULTS

Nine hundred seventy-seven participants (487 molnupiravir, 490 favipiravir) were enrolled from 8 July 2022 to 19 January 2023. 98% had received ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine and 83% ≥3 doses. By Day 29, pulmonary involvement occurred in 0% (0/483) in molnupiravir arm versus 1% (5/482) in favipiravir arm (-1.0%; Newcombe 95.2% CI: -2.4% to -0.0%; P = 0.021); all-cause death in 0% (0/483) and <1% (1/482); COVID-19 related hospitalization in <1% (1/483) and 1% (3/482); treatment-related adverse event in 1% (5/483) and 1% (4/486); and serious adverse event in 1% (4/483) and 1% (4/486).

CONCLUSIONS

Favipiravir and molnupiravir had a similar efficacy and safety profile. Whether either of the two reduced the risk of complications during the omicron era in this population with a low risk of pulmonary involvement and a high vaccine coverage remains unclear. There were no differences in any of the safety endpoints.

THAI CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY ID

TCTR20230111009.

Efficacy and safety of ivermectin in patients with mild COVID-19 in Japan and Thailand

BACKGROUND

Ivermectin is an antiparasitic drug administered to hundreds of millions of people worldwide. Fundamental research suggests that ivermectin is effective against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); therefore, we investigated the efficacy and safety of ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment option.

METHODS

This multi-regional (Japan and Thailand), multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, Phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ivermectin in patients with mild COVID-19 (IVERMILCO Study). The participants took a specified number of the investigational product (ivermectin or placebo) tablets of, adjusted to a dose of 0.3-0.4 mg/kg, orally on an empty stomach once daily for three days. The primary efficacy endpoint was the time at which clinical symptoms first showed an improving trend by 168 h after investigational product administration.

RESULTS

A total of 1030 eligible participants were assigned to receive the investigational product; 502 participants received ivermectin and 527 participants received a placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was approximately 96 h (approximately four days) for both ivermectin and placebo groups, which did not show statistically significant difference (stratified log-rank test, p = 0.61). The incidence of adverse events and adverse drug reactions did not show statistically significant differences between the ivermectin and placebo groups (chi-square test, p = 0.97, p = 0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that ivermectin (0.3-0.4 mg/kg), as a treatment for patients with mild COVID-19, is ineffective; however, its safety has been confirmed for participants, including minor participants of 12 years or older (IVERMILCO Study ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05056883.).

Effect of Chinese Medicine in Patients with COVID-19: A Multi-center Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Chinese medicine (CM) in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China.

METHODS

A multi-center retrospective cohort study was carried out, with cumulative CM treatment period of ⩾3 days during hospitalization as exposure. Data came from consecutive inpatients from December 19, 2019 to May 16, 2020 in 4 medical centers in Wuhan, China. After data extraction, verification and cleaning, confounding factors were adjusted by inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), and the Cox proportional hazards regression model was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 2,272 COVID-19 patients were included. There were 1,684 patients in the CM group and 588 patients in the control group. Compared with the control group, the hazard ratio (HR) for the deterioration rate in the CM group was 0.52 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.41 to 0.64, P<0.001]. The results were consistent across patients of varying severity at admission, and the robustness of the results were confirmed by 3 sensitivity analyses. In addition, the HR for all-cause mortality in the CM group was 0.29 (95% CI: 0.19 to 0.44, P<0.001). Regarding of safety, the proportion of patients with abnormal liver function or renal function in the CM group was smaller.

CONCLUSION

This real-world study indicates that the combination of a full-course CM therapy on the basic conventional treatment, may safely reduce the deterioration rate and all-cause mortality of COVID-19 patients. This result can provide the new evidence to support the current treatment of COVID-19. Additional prospective clinical trial is needed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of specific CM interventions. (Registration No. ChiCTR2200062917).

Effectiveness of azvudine against severe outcomes among hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Xinjiang, China: a single-center, retrospective, matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Since the end of 2022, Azvudine was widely used to treat hospitalized novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in China. However, data on the clinical effectiveness of Azvudine against severe outcomes and post-COVID-19-conditions (PCC) among patients infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron variants was limited. This study evaluates the effectiveness of Azvudine in hospitalized COVID-19 patients during a SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.5 dominance period.

METHODS

From 1 November 2022 to 1 July 2023, we conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study based on hospitalized COVID-19 patients from a tertiary hospital in Shihezi, China, recruiting laboratory-confirmed hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients treated with Azvudine and usual care were propensity-score matched (PSM) at a 1:1 ratio to a control group in which patients undergone usual care only, with matching based on covariates such as sex, age, ethnicity, number of preexisting conditions, antibiotic use upon admission, and complete blood cell count. The primary outcomes were all-cause death and PCC at short-term (60 days) post discharge. The secondary outcomes included the initiation of invasive mechanical ventilation and PCC at long-term post discharge (120 days). Cox proportional hazards (PH) regression models were employed to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) for both all-cause death and invasive mechanical ventilation, and logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratios (OR) for short-term and long-term PCC. Subgroup analyses were performed based on the matched covariates.

RESULTS

A total of 2,639 hospitalized patients diagnosed with COVID-19 were initially identified, and 2,069 patients were screened following the exclusion criteria. After matching, 297 Azvudine recipients and 297 matched controls were eligible for analyses. The incidence rate of all-cause death was lower in the Azvudine group than in the control group (0.007 per person, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.001, 0.024 vs 0.128, 95% CI: 0.092, 0.171), and the use of Azvudine was associated with a significant lower risk of death and the use of Azvudine was associated with a reduced risk of death (HR: 0.049, 95% CI: 0.012, 0.205). Subgroup analyses indicated a significant effectiveness of Azvudine against the risk of all-cause death among men, age over 65, patients without the preexisting conditions, and patients with antibiotics dispensed at admission. Statistical difference were not observed between Azvudine group and control group in the invasive mechanical ventilation and short-term and long-term PCC.

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings indicate that receipt of Azvudine was associated with lower risk of all-cause death among hospitalized patients with Omicron BA.5 infection a in real-world setting. Further research is urgently needed to validate the effectiveness of Azvudine on the PCC.

Effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir in non-hospitalized adults with COVID-19: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir among vaccinated and unvaccinated non-hospitalized adults with COVID-19.

METHODS

Observational studies of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir compared to no antiviral drug treatment for COVID-19 in non-hospitalized adults with data on vaccination status were included. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, WHO COVID-19 Research Database and medRxiv for reports published between 1 January 2022 and 8 November 2023. The primary outcome was a composite of hospitalization or mortality up to 35 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. Risk of bias was assessed with ROBINS-I. Risk ratios (RR), hazard ratios (HR) and risk differences (RD) were separately estimated using random-effects models.

RESULTS

We included 30 cohort studies on adults treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (n = 462 279) and molnupiravir (n = 48 008). Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir probably reduced the composite outcome (RR 0.62, 95%CI 0.55-0.70; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty) with no evidence of effect modification by vaccination status (RR Psubgroup = 0.47). In five studies, RD estimates against the composite outcome for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were 1.21% (95%CI 0.57% to 1.84%) in vaccinated and 1.72% (95%CI 0.59% to 2.85%) in unvaccinated subgroups.Molnupiravir may slightly reduce the composite outcome (RR 0.75, 95%CI 0.67-0.85; I2 = 32%; low certainty). Evidence of effect modification by vaccination status was inconsistent among studies reporting different effect measures (RR Psubgroup = 0.78; HR Psubgroup = 0.08). In two studies, RD against the composite outcome for molnupiravir were -0.01% (95%CI -1.13% to 1.10%) in vaccinated and 1.73% (95%CI -2.08% to 5.53%) in unvaccinated subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among cohort studies of non-hospitalized adults with COVID-19, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir is effective against the composite outcome of severe COVID-19 independent of vaccination status. Further research and a reassessment of molnupiravir use among vaccinated adults are warranted.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023429232.

Dynamic heterogeneity in COVID-19: Insights from a mathematical model

Critical illness, such as severe COVID-19, is heterogenous in presentation and treatment response. However, it remains possible that clinical course may be influenced by dynamic and/or random events such that similar patients subject to similar injuries may yet follow different trajectories. We deployed a mechanistic mathematical model of COVID-19 to determine the range of possible clinical courses after SARS-CoV-2 infection, which may follow from specific changes in viral properties, immune properties, treatment modality and random external factors such as initial viral load. We find that treatment efficacy and baseline patient or viral features are not the sole determinant of outcome. We found patients with enhanced innate or adaptive immune responses can experience poor viral control, resolution of infection or non-infectious inflammatory injury depending on treatment efficacy and initial viral load. Hypoxemia may result from poor viral control or ongoing inflammation despite effective viral control. Adaptive immune responses may be inhibited by very early effective therapy, resulting in viral load rebound after cessation of therapy. Our model suggests individual disease course may be influenced by the interaction between external and patient-intrinsic factors. These data have implications for the reproducibility of clinical trial cohorts and timing of optimal treatment.

Supratherapeutic INR During Treatment With Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir and Warfarin and Acute Illness With COVID-19: A Case Report

Background: Several studies have examined INR fluctuations using pharmacokinetic (PK) models or post-hoc INR values after completing nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, but further study of the effects of the drug interaction with warfarin during treatment is necessary. Case Summary: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir is largely utilized in the outpatient setting so data regarding INR trends in hospitalized patients on warfarin is limited. However, many who receive nirmatrelvir/ritonavir outpatient experience difficulty with presenting to clinic for INR checks due to feeling acutely ill along with isolation precautions. We present the case of a patient receiving warfarin and utilizing home INR testing for monitoring. After diagnosis of coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19), she was started on nirmatrelvir/ritonavir on day five after testing positive. Most recent INR prior to the start of therapy was 2.7 and had been stable on the same dose for months prior to infection. On day two of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, her INR rose to 4.0 on home point of care INR testing. Despite reducing her dose of warfarin by 15%, her INR remained supratherapeutic the day after completing nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (4.0) and for several checks after. One month after completion of therapy, her INR returned to therapeutic levels. Practice Implications: While PK models and case series have hypothesized both potential increases or decreases in INR with the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and warfarin interaction, COVID-19 infection itself can cause several pharmacodynamic changes which can increase INR, including decreased appetite and, in severe cases, organ dysfunction. This case provides real-world insight into the drug interaction between nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and the drug-disease state interaction between warfarin and COVID-19.

Population Pharmacokinetics of Nirmatrelvir in Chinese Patients with COVID-19: Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Dosing Regimen Selection in Clinical Practice

OBJECTIVES

To establish a population pharmacokinetics (PopPK) model of nirmatrelvir in Chinese COVID-19 patients and provide reference for refining the dosing strategy of nirmatrelvir in patients confirmed to be infected with SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

A total of 80 blood samples were obtained from 35 mild moderate COVID-19 patients who were orally administered nirmatrelvir/ritonavir tablets. The PopPK model of nirmatrelvir was developed using a nonlinear mixed effects modeling approach. The stability and prediction of the final model were assessed through a combination of goodness-of-fit and bootstrap method. The exposure of nirmatrelvir across various clinical scenarios was simulated using Monte Carlo simulations.

RESULTS

The pharmacokinetics of nirmatrelvir were well characterized by a one-compartment model with first-order absorption, and with creatinine clearance (Ccr) as the significant covariate. Typical population parameter estimates of apparent clearance and distribution volume for a patient with a Ccr of 95.5 mL·min-1were 3.45 L·h-1 and 48.71 L, respectively. The bootstrap and visual predictive check procedures demonstrated satisfactory predictive performance and robustness of the final model.

CONCLUSION

The final model was capable of offering an early prediction of drug concentration ranges for different nirmatrelvir dosing regimens and optimize the dose regimen of nirmatrelvir in individuals with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Development of a SARS-CoV-2 viral dynamic model for patients with COVID-19 based on the amount of viral RNA and viral titer

The target-cell limited model, which is one of the mathematical modeling approaches providing a quantitative understanding of viral dynamics, has been applied to describe viral RNA profiles of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in previous studies. However, these models have been developed mainly using patient data from the early phase of the pandemic. Furthermore, no reports focused on the profiles of the viral titer. In this study, the dynamics of both viral RNA and viral titer were characterized using data reflecting the current clinical situation in which the Omicron variant has become epidemic and vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 have become available. Consecutive data for 5212 viral RNA levels and 5216 viral titers were obtained from 720 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a phase II/III study for ensitrelvir. Our model assumed that productively infected cells would produce only infectious viruses, which could be transformed into non-infectious viruses, and has been used to describe the dynamics of both viral RNA levels and viral titer. The time from infection to symptom onset (tinf) of unvaccinated patients was estimated to be 3.0 days, which was shorter than that of the vaccinated patients. The immune-related parameter as a power function for the vaccinated patients was 1.1 times stronger than that for the unvaccinated patients. Our model allows the prediction of the viral dynamics in patients with COVID-19 from the time of infection to symptom onset. Vaccination status was identified as a factor influencing tinf and the immune function.

Efficacy of late-onset antiviral treatment in immune-compromised hosts with persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection

The immunocompromised are at high risk of prolonged SARS-CoV-2 infection and progression to severe COVID-19. However, efficacy of late-onset direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy with therapeutics in clinical use and experimental drugs to mitigate persistent viral replication is unclear. In this study, we employed an immunocompromised mouse model, which supports prolonged replication of SARS-CoV-2 to explore late-onset treatment options. Tandem immuno-depletion of CD4 + and CD8 + T cells in C57BL/6 mice followed by infection with SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern (VOC) beta B.1.351 resulted in prolonged infection with virus replication for five weeks after inoculation. Early-onset treatment with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (paxlovid) or molnupiravir was only moderately efficacious, whereas the experimental therapeutic 4'-fluorourdine (4'-FlU, EIDD-2749) significantly reduced virus load in upper and lower respiratory compartments four days post infection (dpi). All antivirals significantly lowered virus burden in a 7-day treatment regimen initiated 14 dpi, but paxlovid-treated animals experienced rebound virus replication in the upper respiratory tract seven days after treatment end. Viral RNA was detectable 28 dpi in paxlovid-treated animals, albeit not in the molnupiravir or 4'-FlU groups, when treatment was initiated 14 dpi and continued for 14 days. Low-level virus replication continued 35 dpi in animals receiving vehicle but had ceased in all treatment groups. These data indicate that late-onset DAA therapy significantly shortens the duration of persistent virus replication in an immunocompromised host, which may have implications for clinical use of antiviral therapeutics to alleviate the risk of progression to severe disease in highly vulnerable patients.

Importance

Four years after the onset of the global COVID-19 pandemic, the immunocompromised are at greatest risk of developing life-threatening severe disease. However, specific treatment plans for this most vulnerable patient group have not yet been developed. Employing a CD4 + and CD8 + T cell-depleted immunocompromised mouse model of SARS-CoV-2 infection, we explored therapeutic options of persistent infections with standard-of-care paxlovid, molnupiravir, and the experimental therapeutic 4'-FlU. Late-onset treatment initiated 14 days after infection was efficacious, but only 4'-FlU was rapidly sterilizing. No treatment-experienced viral variants with reduced susceptibility to the drugs emerged, albeit virus replication rebounded in animals of the paxlovid group after treatment end. This study supports the use of direct-acting antivirals for late-onset management of persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection in immunocompromised hosts. However, treatment courses likely require to be extended for maximal therapeutic benefit, calling for appropriately powered clinical trials to meet the specific needs of this patient group.

Hospitalization Endpoint in Clinical Trials of Outpatient Settings: using Anti-SARS-COV-2 Therapy as an Example

Purpose

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the World Health Organization (WHO) developed a set of outcome measures for trials primarily aimed at hospitalised patients. However, a gap exists in defining outcome standards for non-hospitalised patients. Therefore, this study aims to discuss hospitalisation as a primary outcome in outpatient trials and its potential pitfalls, specifically focusing on trials related to anti-SARS-COV-2 therapy.

Methods

In this narrative review, researchers thoroughly searched MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials.gov from January 2020 to December 2022, targeting Phase III randomized controlled trials involving outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. The trials were specifically related to anti-SARS-COV-2 monoclonal antibodies or antiviral agents. The study collected essential data, including the type of intervention, comparator, primary objective, primary endpoint, and the use of estimands in the trial.

Results

The search identified 12 trials that evaluated the efficacy of anti-SARS COV-2 therapies in a predefined population. Three studies used hospitalisation and death as primary endpoints in high-risk patients receiving monoclonal antibodies. Nine studies assessed the efficacy of several antiviral agents: four trials used hospitalisation and death as the main endpoints, while others used different measures such as virologic measures using the Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction test (RT-PCR), the eight-point WHO ordinal scale, symptom alleviation by Day 7 and time to clinical response.

Conclusion

Choosing hospitalization as an endpoint may provide meaningful data such as the cost-effectiveness ratio of a drug. However, different hospital utilisation patterns and investigator decisions could bias clinical outcomes if no specific criteria are considered. Therefore, investigators should have clear criteria for determining variables that influence this measure.

The oral nucleoside prodrug GS-5245 is efficacious against SARS-CoV-2 and other endemic, epidemic, and enzootic coronaviruses

Despite the wide availability of several safe and effective vaccines that prevent severe COVID-19, the persistent emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern (VOCs) that can evade vaccine-elicited immunity remains a global health concern. In addition, the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 VOCs that can evade therapeutic monoclonal antibodies underscores the need for additional, variant-resistant treatment strategies. Here, we characterize the antiviral activity of GS-5245, obeldesivir (ODV), an oral prodrug of the parent nucleoside GS-441524, which targets the highly conserved viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp). We show that GS-5245 is broadly potent in vitro against alphacoronavirus HCoV-NL63, SARS-CoV, SARS-CoV-related bat-CoV RsSHC014, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), SARS-CoV-2 WA/1, and the highly transmissible SARS-CoV-2 BA.1 Omicron variant. Moreover, in mouse models of SARS-CoV, SARS-CoV-2 (WA/1 and Omicron B1.1.529), MERS-CoV, and bat-CoV RsSHC014 pathogenesis, we observed a dose-dependent reduction in viral replication, body weight loss, acute lung injury, and pulmonary function with GS-5245 therapy. Last, we demonstrate that a combination of GS-5245 and main protease (Mpro) inhibitor nirmatrelvir improved outcomes in vivo against SARS-CoV-2 compared with the single agents. Together, our data support the clinical evaluation of GS-5245 against coronaviruses that cause or have the potential to cause human disease.

COVID-19 therapeutics

SUMMARYSince the emergence of COVID-19 in 2020, an unprecedented range of therapeutic options has been studied and deployed. Healthcare providers have multiple treatment approaches to choose from, but efficacy of those approaches often remains controversial or compromised by viral evolution. Uncertainties still persist regarding the best therapies for high-risk patients, and the drug pipeline is suffering fatigue and shortage of funding. In this article, we review the antiviral activity, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, and safety of COVID-19 antiviral therapies. Additionally, we summarize the evidence from randomized controlled trials on efficacy and safety of the various COVID-19 antivirals and discuss unmet needs which should be addressed.

New Thiazolidine-4-One Derivatives as SARS-CoV-2 Main Protease Inhibitors

It has been more than four years since the first report of SARS-CoV-2, and humankind has experienced a pandemic with an unprecedented impact. Moreover, the new variants have made the situation even worse. Among viral enzymes, the SARS-CoV-2 main protease (Mpro) has been deemed a promising drug target vs. COVID-19. Indeed, Mpro is a pivotal enzyme for viral replication, and it is highly conserved within coronaviruses. It showed a high extent of conservation of the protease residues essential to the enzymatic activity, emphasizing its potential as a drug target to develop wide-spectrum antiviral agents effective not only vs. SARS-CoV-2 variants but also against other coronaviruses. Even though the FDA-approved drug nirmatrelvir, a Mpro inhibitor, has boosted the antiviral therapy for the treatment of COVID-19, the drug shows several drawbacks that hinder its clinical application. Herein, we report the synthesis of new thiazolidine-4-one derivatives endowed with inhibitory potencies in the micromolar range against SARS-CoV-2 Mpro. In silico studies shed light on the key structural requirements responsible for binding to highly conserved enzymatic residues, showing that the thiazolidinone core acts as a mimetic of the Gln amino acid of the natural substrate and the central role of the nitro-substituted aromatic portion in establishing π-π stacking interactions with the catalytic His-41 residue.

Combination of spironolactone and DPP-4 inhibitors for treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection: a literature review

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still causing hospitalization and death, and vaccination appears to become less effective with each emerging variant. Spike, non-spike, and other possible unrecognized mutations have reduced the efficacy of recommended therapeutic approaches, including monoclonal antibodies, plasma transfusion, and antivirals. SARS-CoV-2 binds to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and probably dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) to initiate the process of endocytosis by employing host proteases such as transmembrane serine protease-2 (TMPRSS-2) and ADAM metallopeptidase domain 17 (ADAM17). Spironolactone reduces the amount of soluble ACE2 and antagonizes TMPRSS-2 and ADAM17. DPP-4 inhibitors play immunomodulatory roles and may block viral entry. The efficacy of treatment with a combination of spironolactone and DPP-4 inhibitors does not appear to be affected by viral mutations. Therefore, the combination of spironolactone and DPP-4 inhibitors might improve the clinical outcome for COVID-19 patients by decreasing the efficiency of SARS-CoV-2 entry into cells and providing better anti-inflammatory, antiproliferative, and antifibrotic effects than those achieved using current therapeutic approaches such as antivirals and monoclonal antibodies.

Symptoms, Viral Loads, and Rebound Among COVID-19 Outpatients Treated With Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Compared With Propensity Score-Matched Untreated Individuals

BACKGROUND

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (N/R) reduces severe outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, rebound after treatment has been reported. We compared symptom and viral dynamics in individuals with COVID-19 who completed N/R treatment and similar untreated individuals.

METHODS

We identified symptomatic participants who tested severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-positive and were N/R eligible from a COVID-19 household transmission study. Index cases from ambulatory settings and their households contacts were enrolled. We collected daily symptoms, medication use, and respiratory specimens for quantitative polymerase chain reaction for 10 days during March 2022-May 2023. Participants who completed N/R treatment (treated) were propensity score matched to untreated participants. We compared symptom rebound, viral load (VL) rebound, average daily symptoms, and average daily VL by treatment status measured after N/R treatment completion or 7 days after symptom onset if untreated.

RESULTS

Treated (n = 130) and untreated participants (n = 241) had similar baseline characteristics. After treatment completion, treated participants had greater occurrence of symptom rebound (32% vs 20%; P = .009) and VL rebound (27% vs 7%; P < .001). Average daily symptoms were lower among treated participants without symptom rebound (1.0 vs 1.6; P < .01) but not statistically lower with symptom rebound (3.0 vs 3.4; P = .5). Treated participants had lower average daily VLs without VL rebound (0.9 vs 2.6; P < .01) but not statistically lower with VL rebound (4.8 vs 5.1; P = .7).

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals who completed N/R treatment experienced fewer symptoms and lower VL but rebound occured more often compared with untreated individuals. Providers should prescribe N/R, when indicated, and communicate rebound risk to patients.

What's Hot This Year in Infectious Diseases Clinical Science

The field of infectious diseases saw numerous exciting advances in 2023. Trials of new antibiotics and treatment regimens sought to address rising rates of antimicrobial resistance. Other studies focused on the most appropriate use of currently available treatments, balancing the dual goals of providing effective treatment and impactful antimicrobial stewardship. Improvements in disease prevention were made through trials of both new vaccines and new chemoprophylaxis approaches. Concerning trends this year included increasing rates of invasive group A streptococcal infections, medical tourism-associated cases of fungal meningitis, and the return of locally acquired malaria to the United States. This review covers some of these notable trials and clinical developments in infectious diseases in the past year.

Nucleotide-Binding Oligomerization Domain 1 (NOD1) Agonists Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Human Lung Epithelial Cells through Harnessing the Innate Immune Response

The lung is prone to infections from respiratory viruses such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). A challenge in combating these infections is the difficulty in targeting antiviral activity directly at the lung mucosal tract. Boosting the capability of the respiratory mucosa to trigger a potent immune response at the onset of infection could serve as a potential strategy for managing respiratory infections. This study focused on screening immunomodulators to enhance innate immune response in lung epithelial and immune cell models. Through testing various subfamilies and pathways of pattern recognition receptors (PRRs), the nucleotide-binding and oligomerization domain (NOD)-like receptor (NLR) family was found to selectively activate innate immunity in lung epithelial cells. Activation of NOD1 and dual NOD1/2 by the agonists TriDAP and M-TriDAP, respectively, increased the number of IL-8+ cells by engaging the NF-κB and interferon response pathways. Lung epithelial cells showed a stronger response to NOD1 and dual NOD1/2 agonists compared to control. Interestingly, a less-pronounced response to NOD1 agonists was noted in PBMCs, indicating a tissue-specific effect of NOD1 in lung epithelial cells without inducing widespread systemic activation. The specificity of the NOD agonist pathway was confirmed through gene silencing of NOD1 (siRNA) and selective NOD1 and dual NOD1/2 inhibitors in lung epithelial cells. Ultimately, activation induced by NOD1 and dual NOD1/2 agonists created an antiviral environment that hindered SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro in lung epithelial cells.

Effect of a biomimetic pathogen adsorbing device on inflammatory biomarkers in COVID-19 patients

INTRODUCTION

The Seraph 100 Microbind Affinity blood filter eliminate bacteria, viruses, fungi and toxins from blood stream.

METHODS

This is a prospective multicenter observational biomarker trial in PCR-positive SARS-CoV-2 patients with acute respiratory failure. Biomarkers were sequentially tested at three time points.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients with SARS-CoV-2 detected by PCR with acute respiratory failure were included. When receiving hemoperfusion treatment, 27 (64%) patients were on mechanical ventilation, 41 (98%) patients were treated in the ICU. The 3-month survival was 52%. After one hemoperfusion treatment cycle, D-dimer (p = 0.014), hemoglobin (p = 0.003) and LDH (p = 0.001) concentrations were significantly reduced 4 days after treatment. From the multiplex assay IL-1b, CXCL8/ IL-8, IL-10, IL-13, IL-15, CCL11/Eotaxin, G-CSF, and CXCL10/IP-10 were significantly reduced 1 h after treatment, however not 4 days later.

CONCLUSION

Hemoperfusion with Seraph 100 Microbind Affinity Filter in patients with severe COVID-19 can transiently reduce several inflammatory biomarkers in the blood.

Clinical effectiveness of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir for patients with COVID-19 and preexisting psychiatric disorders

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the clinical effectiveness of the combination of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir (NMV-r) in treating nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19 who have preexisting psychiatric disorders.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and psychiatric disorders between 1 March 2020, and 1 December 2022, were included using the TriNetX network. The primary outcome was the composite outcome of all-cause emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalization, or death within 30 days.

RESULTS

Propensity score matching yielded two cohorts of 20,633 patients each. The composite outcome of all-cause ED visits, hospitalization, or death within 30 days was 3.57% (737 patients) in the NMV-r cohort and 5.69% (1176) in the control cohort, resulting in a reduced risk in the NMV-r cohort (HR: 0.657; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.599-0.720). The NMV-r cohort exhibited a lower risk of all-cause hospitalization (HR: 0.385; 95% CI: 0.328-0.451) and all-cause death (HR: 0.110; 95% CI: 0.053-0.228) compared with the control group.

CONCLUSION

NMV-r could mitigate the risk of adverse outcomes in nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19 and preexisting psychiatric disorders. However, only a limited number of patients in this population received adequate treatment, thus emphasizing the importance of promoting its appropriate use.

The Scabbard of Excalibur: An Allegory on the Role of an Efficient and Effective Healthcare System under Universal Health Coverage during the Pandemic Response

During the COVID-19 pandemic, while some countries succeeded in reducing their rate of death after SARS-CoV-2 infection via vaccination by the end of 2021, some of them also faced hospital capacity strain, leading to social anxiety about delays in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with other diseases. This essay presents an allegory to explain the situation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Through an allegory and Le Morte d'Arthur (Arthur's Death), this essay indicates that "the scabbard of Excalibur" that we are looking for is an efficient and effective healthcare system that can diagnose patients who might become severely ill due to COVID-19 and to treat them without hospital capacity strain. In Le Morte d'Arthur, the scabbard of Excalibur was lost, and we have not been able to find any alternatives to end the COVID-19 pandemic. We can choose a future in which "the scabbard of Excalibur" exists, providing a different ending for the next pandemic.

SRX3177, a CDK4/6-PI3K-BET inhibitor, in combination with an RdRp inhibitor, Molnupiravir, or an entry inhibitor MU-UNMC-2, has potent antiviral activity against the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2

Despite considerable progress in developing vaccines and antivirals to combat COVID-19, the rapid mutations of the SARS-CoV-2 genome have limited the durability and efficacy of the current vaccines and therapeutic interventions. Hence, it necessitates the development of novel therapeutic approaches or repurposing existing drugs that target either viral life cycle, host factors, or both. Here, we report that SRX3177, a potent triple-activity CDK4/6-PI3K-BET inhibitor, blocks replication of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant with IC50 values at sub-micromolar concentrations without any impact on the cell proliferation of Calu-3 cells at and below its IC50 concentration. When SRX3177 is combined with EIDD-1931 (active moiety of a small-molecule prodrug Molnupiravir) or MU-UNMC-2 (a SARS-CoV-2 entry inhibitor) at a fixed doses matrix, a synergistic effect was observed, leading to the significant reduction in the dose of the individual compounds to achieve similar inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 replication. Herein, we report that the combination of SRX3177/MPV or SRX3177/UM-UNMC-2 has the potential for further development as a combinational therapy against SARS-CoV-2 and in any future outbreak of beta coronavirus.

Effectiveness of recently-approved oral antiviral medications on the outcome of patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and pre-existing chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the effectiveness of the oral antiviral agents nirmatrelvir - ritonavir (NMV-r) and molnupiravir (MOV) for treating mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with COPD.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study extracted data from the TriNetX platform and examined 94,984 COVID-19 patients with preexisting COPD from 1 January 2022, to 1 October 2023. Patients receiving NMV-r or MOV (study group) were compared with those not receiving oral antiviral agents (control group) after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

After PSM, 7,944 patients were classified into the study and control groups. The primary composite outcome of all-cause hospitalization, or death in 30 days was reported in 458 (5.7%) patients in the study group and 566 (7.1%) patients in the control cohort, yielding a hazard ratio [HR] of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-0.89; Table 2). Compared with the control group, the study group had a significantly lower risk of all-cause hospitalization (HR, 0.87; 95% CI: 0.76-0.99) and death (HR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.13-0.35).

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that oral antivirals - NMV-r or MOV might improve clinical outcomes in patients with preexisting COPD and COVID-19. However, only a small proportion of preexisting COPD patients with COVID-19 received oral antiviral treatment.

Catalytic Asymmetric Synthesis of Chiral α,α-Dialkyl Aminonitriles via Reaction of Cyanoketimines

Chiral aminonitriles not only are broadly useful building blocks but also increasingly appear as structural motifs in bioactive molecules and pharmaceuticals. The catalytic asymmetric synthesis of chiral aminonitriles, therefore, has been intensively investigated, as reflected in numerous reports of catalytic asymmetric Strecker reactions. Despite such great progress, the catalytic asymmetric synthesis of chiral α,α-dialkyl aminonitriles in a highly selective and efficient manner is still a formidable challenge. Here, we report a new approach for the catalytic asymmetric synthesis of chiral α,α-dialkyl aminonitriles via reaction of cyanoketimines with enals. We demonstrate that this reaction could be carried out with as low as 20 ppm catalyst loading.

Paxlovid™ reduces the incidence of pneumonia, hospitalization, and death in a cohort of COVID-19 patients from northeast Mexico

BACKGROUND

Information on Paxlovid™ effectiveness must be monitored and updated in real world scenarios. Our research question was what is the effectiveness of Paxlovid™ in adult patients with COVID-19? Therefore, we investigated the effectiveness of Paxlovid™ on reducing the incidence of pneumonia, hospitalization, and mortality in a cohort of COVID-19 positive adult patients from northeast Mexico.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 positive adult patients from Nuevo Leon, Mexico from December 2020 to May 2023 (after Omicron BA-5 circulation) was performed. Paxlovid™ use was authorized in September 2022. Therefore, we analyzed effectiveness in patients with confirmed diagnosis who met selection criteria between September 2022 and May 2023 (n = 20,799; 5,673 with and 15,126 without Paxlovid™).

RESULTS

The pneumonia (0.1% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.0001), hospitalization (0.1% vs. 1.2%, p < 0.0001), and death rates (0.04% vs. 0.2%, p < 0.0001) were lower in patients with Paxlovid™ treatment independently of age, sex, comorbidity, and COVID-19 and pneumococcal vaccination history. Effectiveness was 88.2%, 95.9% y 91.9% for pneumonia, hospitalization, and death, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Paxlovid™ reduces the presentation of pneumonia, hospitalization, and death secondary to COVID-19. It is recommended to continue monitoring Paxlovid™ effectiveness, as other SARS-CoV-2 variants continue to emerge.

Protocol implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic: experiences from a randomized trial of stress ulcer prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many intensive care units (ICUs) halted research to focus on COVID-19-specific studies.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the conduct of an international randomized trial of stress ulcer prophylaxis (Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions in the ICU [REVISE]) during the pandemic, addressing enrolment patterns, center engagement, informed consent processes, data collection, a COVID-specific substudy, patient transfers, and data monitoring.

METHODS

REVISE is a randomized trial among mechanically ventilated patients, comparing pantoprazole 40 mg IV to placebo on the primary efficacy outcome of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding and the primary safety outcome of 90-day mortality. We documented protocol implementation status from March 11th 2020-August 30th 2022.

RESULTS

The Steering Committee did not change the scientific protocol. From the first enrolment on July 9th 2019 to March 10th 2020 (8 months preceding the pandemic), 267 patients were enrolled in 18 centers. From March 11th 2020-August 30th 2022 (30 months thereafter), 41 new centers joined; 59 were participating by August 30th 2022 which enrolled 2961 patients. During a total of 1235 enrolment-months in the pandemic phase, enrolment paused for 106 (8.6%) months in aggregate (median 3 months, interquartile range 2;6). Protocol implementation involved a shift from the a priori consent model pre-pandemic (188, 58.8%) to the consent to continue model (1615, 54.1%, p < 0.01). In one new center, an opt-out model was approved. The informed consent rate increased slightly (80.7% to 85.0%, p = 0.05). Telephone consent encounters increased (16.6% to 68.2%, p < 0.001). Surge capacity necessitated intra-institutional transfers; receiving centers continued protocol implementation whenever possible. We developed a nested COVID-19 substudy. The Methods Centers continued central statistical monitoring of trial metrics. Site monitoring was initially remote, then in-person when restrictions lifted.

CONCLUSION

Protocol implementation adaptations during the pandemic included a shift in the consent model, a sustained high consent rate, and launch of a COVID-19 substudy. Recruitment increased as new centers joined, patient transfers were optimized, and monitoring methods were adapted.

Association of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir with post-acute sequelae and mortality in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Studies have established the short-term efficacy of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in managing COVID-19, yet its effect on post-COVID-19 condition, especially in patients admitted to hospital, remains understudied. This study aimed to examine the effect of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir on post-COVID-19 condition among patients admitted to hospital in Hong Kong.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used real-world, territory-wide inpatient records, vaccination records, and confirmed COVID-19 case data from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority and Department of Health, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Patients aged 18 years and older who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between March 11, 2022, and Oct 10, 2023, and who were admitted to hospital with COVID-19 were included. The treatment group included patients prescribed nirmatrelvir-ritonavir within 5 days of symptom onset, excluding those prescribed molnupiravir within 21 days, and the control group had no exposure to either nirmatrelvir-ritonavir or molnupiravir. The outcomes were post-acute inpatient death and 13 sequelae (congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, deep vein thrombosis, chronic pulmonary disease, acute respiratory distress syndrome, interstitial lung disease, seizure, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, end-stage renal disease, acute kidney injury, and pancreatitis). These outcomes were evaluated starting at 21 days after the positive RT-PCR date in each respective cohort constructed for the outcome. Standardised mortality ratio weights were applied to balance covariates, and Cox proportional hazards regression was used to investigate the relationship between nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and outcomes.

FINDINGS

136 973 patients were screened for inclusion, among whom 50 055 were eligible and included in the analysis (24 873 [49·7%] were female and 25 182 [50·3%] were male). 15 242 patients were prescribed nirmatrelvir-ritonavir during acute COVID-19 and 23 756 patients were included in the control group; 11 057 patients did not meet our definition for the exposed and unexposed groups. Patients were followed up for a median of 393 days (IQR 317-489). In the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group compared with the control group, there was a significantly lower hazard of post-acute inpatient death (hazard ratio 0·62 [95% CI 0·57-0·68]; p<0·0001), congestive heart failure (0·70 [0·58-0·85]; p=0·0002), atrial fibrillation (0·63 [0·52-0·76]; p<0·0001), coronary artery disease (0·71 [0·59-0·85]; p=0·0002), chronic pulmonary disease (0·68 [0·54-0·86]; p=0·0011), acute respiratory distress syndrome (0·71 [0·58-0·86]; p=0·0007), interstitial lung disease (0·17 [0·04-0·75]; p=0·020), and end-stage renal disease (0·37 [0·18-0·74]; p=0·0049). There was no evidence indicating difference between the groups in deep vein thrombosis, seizure, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, acute kidney injury, and pancreatitis.

INTERPRETATION

This study showed extended benefits of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for reducing the risk of post-acute inpatient death as well as cardiovascular and respiratory complications among patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Further research is essential to uncover the underlying mechanisms responsible for these observed negative associations and to devise effective strategies for preventing the onset of post-acute sequelae.

FUNDING

Health and Medical Research Fund, Research Grants Council theme-based research schemes, and Research Grants Council Collaborative Research Fund.

The relationship between viral clearance rates and disease progression in early symptomatic COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis

BACKGROUND

Effective antiviral drugs accelerate viral clearance in acute COVID-19 infections; the relationship between accelerating viral clearance and reducing severe clinical outcomes is unclear.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of antiviral therapies in early symptomatic COVID-19, where viral clearance data were available. Treatment benefit was defined clinically as the relative risk of hospitalization/death during follow-up (≥14 days), and virologically as the SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance rate ratio (VCRR). The VCRR is the ratio of viral clearance rates between the intervention and control arms. The relationship between the clinical and virological treatment effects was assessed by mixed-effects meta-regression.

RESULTS

From 57 potentially eligible RCTs, VCRRs were derived for 44 (52 384 participants); 32 had ≥1 clinical endpoint in each arm. Overall, 9.7% (R2) of the variation in clinical benefit was explained by variation in VCRRs with an estimated linear coefficient of -0.92 (95% CI: -1.99 to 0.13; P = 0.08). However, this estimate was highly sensitive to the inclusion of the recent very large PANORAMIC trial. Omitting this outlier, half the variation in clinical benefit (R2 = 50.4%) was explained by variation in VCRRs [slope -1.47 (95% CI -2.43 to -0.51); P = 0.003], i.e. higher VCRRs were associated with an increased clinical benefit.

CONCLUSION

Methods of determining viral clearance in COVID-19 studies and the relationship to clinical outcomes vary greatly. As prohibitively large sample sizes are now required to show clinical treatment benefit in antiviral therapeutic assessments, viral clearance is a reasonable surrogate endpoint.

A year in pharmacology: new drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2023

With 54 new drugs and seven cellular and gene therapy products, the approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recovered 2023 from the 2022 dent back to the levels of 2020-2021. As in previous years of this annual review, we assign these new drugs to one of three levels of innovation: first drug against a condition ("first-in-indication"), first drug using a novel molecular mechanism ("first-in-class"), and "next-in-class," i.e., a drug using an already exploited molecular mechanism. We identify four (7%) "first-in-indication," 22 (36%) "first-in-class," and 35 (57%) "next-in-class" drugs. By treatment area, rare diseases (54%) and cancer drugs (23%) were once again the most prevalent (and partly overlapping) therapeutic areas. Other continuing trends were the use of accelerated regulatory approval pathways and the reliance on biopharmaceuticals (biologics). 2023 marks the approval of a first therapy based on CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing.

Viral clearance as a surrogate of clinical efficacy for COVID-19 therapies in outpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Surrogates of antiviral efficacy are needed for COVID-19. We aimed to investigate the relationship between the virological effect of treatment and clinical efficacy as measured by progression to severe disease in outpatients treated for mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Scopus, and medRxiv from database inception to Aug 16, 2023, for randomised placebo-controlled trials that tested virus-directed treatments (ie, any monoclonal antibodies, convalescent plasma, or antivirals) in non-hospitalised individuals with COVID-19. We only included studies that reported both clinical outcomes (ie, rate of disease progression to hospitalisation or death) and virological outcomes (ie, viral load within the first 7 days of treatment). We extracted summary data from eligible reports, with discrepancies resolved through discussion. We used an established meta-regression model with random effects to assess the association between clinical efficacy and virological treatment effect, and calculated I2 to quantify residual study heterogeneity.

FINDINGS

We identified 1718 unique studies, of which 22 (with a total of 16 684 participants) met the inclusion criteria, and were in primarily unvaccinated individuals. Risk of bias was assessed as low in 19 of 22 studies for clinical outcomes, whereas for virological outcomes, a high risk of bias was assessed in 11 studies, some risk in ten studies, and a low risk in one study. The unadjusted relative risk of disease progression for each extra log10 copies per mL reduction in viral load in treated compared with placebo groups was 0·12 (95% CI 0·04-0·34; p<0·0001) on day 3, 0·20 (0·08-0·50; p=0·0006) on day 5, and 0·53 (0·30-0·94; p=0·030) on day 7. The residual heterogeneity in our meta-regression was estimated as low (I2=0% [0-53] on day 3, 0% [0-71] on day 5, and 0% [0-43] on day 7).

INTERPRETATION

Despite the aggregation of studies with differing designs, and evidence of risk of bias in some virological outcomes, this review provides evidence that treatment-induced acceleration of viral clearance within the first 5 days after treatment is a potential surrogate of clinical efficacy to prevent hospitalisation with COVID-19. This work supports the use of viral clearance as an early phase clinical trial endpoint of therapeutic efficacy.

FUNDING

Australian Government Department of Health, Medical Research Future Fund, and Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

SARS-CoV-2 Viral Load in the Nasopharynx at Time of First Infection Among Unvaccinated Individuals: A Secondary Cross-Protocol Analysis of 4 Randomized Trials

Importance

SARS-CoV-2 viral load (VL) in the nasopharynx is difficult to quantify and standardize across settings, but it may inform transmission potential and disease severity.

Objective

To characterize VL at COVID-19 diagnosis among previously uninfected and unvaccinated individuals by evaluating the association of demographic and clinical characteristics, viral variant, and trial with VL, as well as the ability of VL to predict severe disease.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This secondary cross-protocol analysis used individual-level data from placebo recipients from 4 harmonized, phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine efficacy trials sponsored by Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax. Participants were SARS-CoV-2 negative at baseline and acquired COVID-19 during the blinded phase of the trials. The setting included the US, Brazil, South Africa, Colombia, Argentina, Peru, Chile, and Mexico; start dates were July 27, 2020, to December 27, 2020; data cutoff dates were March 26, 2021, to July 30, 2021. Statistical analysis was performed from November 2022 to June 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Linear regression was used to assess the association of demographic and clinical characteristics, viral variant, and trial with polymerase chain reaction-measured log10 VL in nasal and/or nasopharyngeal swabs taken at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis.

Results

Among 1667 participants studied (886 [53.1%] male; 995 [59.7%] enrolled in the US; mean [SD] age, 46.7 [14.7] years; 204 [12.2%] aged 65 years or older; 196 [11.8%] American Indian or Alaska Native, 150 [9%] Black or African American, 1112 [66.7%] White; 762 [45.7%] Hispanic or Latino), median (IQR) log10 VL at diagnosis was 6.18 (4.66-7.12) log10 copies/mL. Participant characteristics and viral variant explained only 5.9% of the variability in VL. The independent factor with the highest observed differences was trial: Janssen participants had 0.54 log10 copies/mL lower mean VL vs Moderna participants (95% CI, 0.20 to 0.87 log10 copies/mL lower). In the Janssen study, which captured the largest number of COVID-19 events and variants and used the most intensive post-COVID surveillance, neither VL at diagnosis nor averaged over days 1 to 28 post diagnosis was associated with COVID-19 severity.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study of placebo recipients from 4 randomized phase 3 trials, high variability was observed in SARS-CoV-2 VL at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, and only a fraction was explained by individual participant characteristics or viral variant. These results suggest challenges for future studies of interventions seeking to influence VL and elevates the importance of standardized methods for specimen collection and viral load quantitation.

Risk factors for progressing to critical illness in patients with hospital-acquired COVID-19

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Risk factors for progression to critical illness in hospital-acquired coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain unknown. Here, we assessed the incidence and risk factors for progression to critical illness and determined their effects on clinical outcomes in patients with hospital-acquired COVID-19.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed patients admitted to the tertiary hospital between January 2020 and June 2022 with confirmed hospital-acquired COVID-19. The primary outcome was the progression to critical illness of hospital- acquired COVID-19. Patients were stratified into high-, intermediate-, or low-risk groups by the number of risk factors for progression to critical illness.

RESULTS

In total, 204 patients were included and 37 (18.1%) progressed to critical illness. In the multivariable logistic analysis, patients with preexisting respiratory disease (OR, 3.90; 95% CI, 1.04-15.18), preexisting cardiovascular disease (OR, 3.49; 95% CI, 1.11-11.27), immunocompromised status (OR, 3.18; 95% CI, 1.11-9.16), higher sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.28-1.96), and higher clinical frailty scale (OR, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.62-4.13) showed significantly increased risk of progression to critical illness. As the risk of the groups increased, patients were significantly more likely to progress to critical illness and had higher 28-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with hospital-acquired COVID-19, preexisting respiratory disease, preexisting cardiovascular disease, immunocompromised status, and higher clinical frailty scale and SOFA scores at baseline were risk factors for progression to critical illness. Patients with these risk factors must be prioritized and appropriately isolated or treated in a timely manner, especially in pandemic settings.

Efficacy and safety of GST-HG171 in adult patients with mild to moderate COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trial

Background

GST-HG171 is a potent, broad-spectrum, orally bioavailable small-molecule 3C like protease inhibitor that has demonstrated greater potency and efficacy compared to Nirmatrelvir in pre-clinical studies. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of orally administered GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infected with emerging XBB and non-XBB variants.

Methods

This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trial was conducted in 47 sites in China among adult patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 with symptoms onset ≤72 h. Eligible patients were randomised 1:1 to receive GST-HG171 (150 mg) plus Ritonavir (100 mg) or corresponding placebo tablets twice daily for 5 days, with stratification factors including the risk level of disease progression and vaccination status. The primary efficacy endpoint was time to sustained recovery of clinical symptoms within 28 days, defined as a score of 0 for 11 COVID-19-related target symptoms for 2 consecutive days, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05656443) and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200067088).

Findings

Between Dec 19, 2022, and May 4, 2023, 1525 patients were screened. Among 1246 patients who underwent randomisation, most completed basic (21.2%) or booster (74.9%) COVID-19 immunization, and most had a low risk of disease progression at baseline. 610 of 617 who received GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir and 603 of 610 who received placebo were included in the mITT population. Patients who received GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir showed shortened median time to sustained recovery of clinical symptoms compared to the placebo group (13.0 days [95.45% confidence interval 12.0-15.0] vs. 15.0 days [14.0-15.0], P = 0.031). Consistent results were observed in both SARS-CoV-2 XBB (45.7%, 481/1053 of mITT population) and non-XBB variants (54.3%, 572/1053 of mITT population) subgroups. Incidence of adverse events was similar in the GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir (320/617, 51.9%) and placebo group (298/610, 48.9%). The most common adverse events in both placebo and treatment groups were hypertriglyceridaemia (10.0% vs. 14.7%). No deaths occurred.

Interpretation

Treatment with GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir has demonstrated benefits in symptom recovery and viral clearance among low-risk vaccinated adult patients with COVID-19, without apparent safety concerns. As most patients were treated within 2 days after symptom onset in our study, confirming the potential benefits of symptom recovery for patients with a longer duration between symptom onset and treatment initiation will require real-world studies.

Funding

Fujian Akeylink Biotechnology Co., Ltd.

Coronavirus Disease 2019: Past, Present, and Future

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is one of the most impactful diseases experienced in the past century. While the official national health emergency concluded in May of 2023, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to mutate. As the summer of 2023, all countries were experiencing a new surge of cases from the EG.5 Omicron variant. Additionally, a new genetically distinct Omicron descendant BA2.86 had been detected in multiple countries including the United States. This article seeks to offer lessons learned from the pandemic, summarize best evidence for current management of patients with COVID-19, and give insights into future directions with this disease.

Favorable Antiviral Effect of Metformin on Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Viral Load in a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of Coronavirus Disease 2019

BACKGROUND

Metformin has antiviral activity against RNA viruses including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The mechanism appears to be suppression of protein translation via targeting the host mechanistic target of rapamycin pathway. In the COVID-OUT randomized trial for outpatient coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), metformin reduced the odds of hospitalizations/death through 28 days by 58%, of emergency department visits/hospitalizations/death through 14 days by 42%, and of long COVID through 10 months by 42%.

METHODS

COVID-OUT was a 2 × 3 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial that assessed metformin, fluvoxamine, and ivermectin; 999 participants self-collected anterior nasal swabs on day 1 (n = 945), day 5 (n = 871), and day 10 (n = 775). Viral load was quantified using reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

The mean SARS-CoV-2 viral load was reduced 3.6-fold with metformin relative to placebo (-0.56 log10 copies/mL; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.05 to -.06; P = .027). Those who received metformin were less likely to have a detectable viral load than placebo at day 5 or day 10 (odds ratio [OR], 0.72; 95% CI, .55 to .94). Viral rebound, defined as a higher viral load at day 10 than day 5, was less frequent with metformin (3.28%) than placebo (5.95%; OR, 0.68; 95% CI, .36 to 1.29). The metformin effect was consistent across subgroups and increased over time. Neither ivermectin nor fluvoxamine showed effect over placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial of outpatient treatment of SARS-CoV-2, metformin significantly reduced SARS-CoV-2 viral load, which may explain the clinical benefits in this trial. Metformin is pleiotropic with other actions that are relevant to COVID-19 pathophysiology.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT04510194.

Effectiveness of Molnupiravir and Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir in CKD Patients With COVID-19

Introduction

Even with effective vaccines, patients with CKD have a higher risk of hospitalization and death subsequent to COVID-19 infection than those without CKD. Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir have been approved for emergency use, but their effectiveness for the CKD population is still unknown. This study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of these drugs in reducing mortality and severe COVID-19 in the CKD population.

Methods

This was a target trial emulation study using electronic health databases in Hong Kong. Patients with CKD aged 18 years or older who were hospitalized with COVID-19 were included. The per-protocol average treatment effect among COVID-19 oral antiviral initiators, including all-cause mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and ventilatory support within 28 days, were compared to noninitiators.

Results

Antivirals have been found to lower the risk of all-cause mortality, with Molnupiravir at a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 0.95] and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir at an HR of 0.78 [95% CI, 0.60 to 1.00]. However, they do not significantly reduce the risk of ICU admission (molnupiravir: HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.30]; nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.56 to 1.32]) or ventilatory support (molnupiravir: HR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.76 to 1.33]; nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: HR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.74 to 1.37]). There was a greater risk reduction in males and those with higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). The nirmatrelvir-ritonavir trial also showed reduced risk for those who had antiviral treatment and received 3 or more vaccine doses.

Conclusion

Both molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir reduced mortality rates for hospitalized COVID-19 patients with CKD.

A randomized trial to assess the acceleration of viral clearance by the combination Favipiravir/Ivermectin/Niclosamide in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 adult patients (FINCOV)

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of the viral clearance and clinical outcomes of favipiravir (FPV) in outpatients being treated for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unclear. Ivermectin (IVM), niclosamide (NCL), and FPV demonstrated synergistic effects in vitro for exceed 78% inhibiting severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) replication.

METHODS

A phase 2, open-label, 1:1, randomized, controlled trial was conducted on Thai patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who received either combination FPV/IVM/NCL therapy or FPV alone to assess the rate of viral clearance among individuals with mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

RESULTS

Sixty non-high-risk comorbid patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 were randomized; 30 received FPV/IVM/NCL, and 30 received FPV alone. Mixed-effects multiple linear regression analysis of the cycle threshold value from SARS-CoV-2 PCR demonstrated no statistically significant differences in viral clearance rates between the combined FPV/IVM/NCL therapy group and the FPV-alone group. World Health Organization Clinical Progression scores and symptomatic improvement did not differ between arms on days 3, 6, and 10, and no adverse events were reported. No patients required hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, or supplemental oxygen or died within 28 days. C-reactive protein on day 3 was lower in the FPV/IVM/NCL group.

CONCLUSION

Viral clearance rates did not differ significantly between the FPV/IVM/NCL combination therapy and FPV-alone groups of individuals with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, although the combined regimen demonstrated a synergistic effect in vitro. No discernible clinical benefit was observed. Further research is required to explore the potential benefits of FVP beyond its antiviral effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

TCTR20230403007, Registered 3 April 2023 - Retrospectively registered,https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=TCTR20230403007.

Ritonavir: 25 Years' Experience of Concomitant Medication Management. A Narrative Review

Ritonavir is a potent inhibitor of the cytochrome P450 3A4 enzyme and is commonly used as a pharmacokinetic (PK) enhancer in antiviral therapies because it increases bioavailability of concomitantly administered antivirals. Decades of experience with ritonavir-enhanced HIV therapies and, more recently, COVID-19 therapies demonstrate that boosting doses of ritonavir are well tolerated, with an established safety profile. The mechanisms of PK enhancement by ritonavir result in the potential for drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with several classes of drugs, thus making co-medication management an important consideration with enhanced antiviral therapies. However, rates of DDIs with contraindicated medications are low, suggesting these risks are manageable by infectious disease specialists who have experience with the use of PK enhancers. In this review, we provide an overview of ritonavir's mechanisms of action and describe approaches and resources available to mitigate adverse events and manage concomitant medication in both chronic and short-term settings.

Effectiveness of Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir for the Prevention of COVID-19-Related Hospitalization and Mortality: A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMV/r) is an oral antiviral drug used to treat mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients aged 12 years or older at high risk of progression to severe disease (eg, hospitalization and death). Despite being the preferred option for outpatient treatment in the majority of countries worldwide, NMV/r is currently underutilized in real-world clinical practice.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

As numerous real-world studies have described patient outcomes following treatment with NMV/r, this systematic literature review provides a comprehensive summary of evidence on NMV/r effectiveness against hospitalization and mortality further organized by clinically meaningful categories, such as acute versus longer-term follow-up, age, underlying health conditions, and vaccination status, to help inform health care decision making.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Embase and PubMed (December 22, 2021-March 31, 2023) and congress abstracts (December 1, 2021-December 31, 2022) for reports describing NMV/r effectiveness.

THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES

In total, 18 real-world studies met final selection criteria. The evidence showed that NMV/r significantly reduced postinfection risk of all-cause and COVID-19-related hospitalization and mortality in both acute (≤30 days) (21%-92%) and longer-term (>30 days) (1%-61%) follow-up. The reduction in postinfection risk was higher when treatment was received within 5 days of symptom onset. Real-world effectiveness of NMV/r treatment was observed regardless of age, underlying high-risk conditions, and vaccination status.

CONCLUSION

The systematic literature review findings demonstrated the effectiveness of NMV/r against hospitalization and mortality during the Omicron period among individuals at high risk of progression to severe COVID-19 disease.

Nirmatrelvir Resistance in an Immunocompromised Patient with Persistent Coronavirus Disease 2019

Although the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is coming to an end, it still poses a threat to the immunocompromised and others with underlying diseases. Especially in cases of persistent COVID-19, new mutations conferring resistance to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) therapies have considerable clinical implications. We present a patient who independently acquired a T21I mutation in the 3CL protease after nirmatrelvir exposure. The T21I mutation in the 3CL protease is one of the most frequent mutations responsible for nirmatrelvir resistance. However, limited reports exist on actual cases of SARS-CoV-2 with T21I and other mutations in the 3CL protease. The patient, a 55 year-old male, had COVID-19 during chemotherapy for multiple myeloma. He was treated with nirmatrelvir early in the course of the disease but relapsed, and SARS-CoV-2 with a T21I mutation in the 3CL protease was detected in nasopharyngeal swab fluid. The patient had temporary respiratory failure but later recovered well. During treatment with remdesivir and dexamethasone, viruses with the T21I mutation in the 3CL protease showed a decreasing trend during disease progression while increasing during improvement. The impact of drug-resistant SARS-CoV-2 on the clinical course, including its severity, remains unknown. Our study is important for examining the clinical impact of nirmatrelvir resistance in COVID-19.