Oral Nirmatrelvir and Ritonavir for Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Vaccinated, Nonhospitalized Adults Aged 18-50 Years

Antiviral effectiveness and safety of azvudine in hospitalized SARS‐CoV‐2 patients with pre‐existing chronic respiratory diseases: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study

Although azvudine has become a priority in the treatment of SARS‐CoV‐2, its effectiveness and safety among COVID‐19 patients who already have chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) have not been sufficiently validated. A retrospective, multicenter cohort study involving 10 hospitals in Henan Province was performed to assess inpatients with COVID‐19 and CRDs (Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT06349655). Azvudine recipients and the control group were matched at a 1:1 ratio using propensity scores. The clinical outcomes (all‐cause death and composite disease progression) were analyzed using Kaplan‒Meier and Cox regression analyses, with additional subgroup and sensitivity analyses performed. Eighteen clinical features were included to construct a nomogram for predicting the survival of inpatients with COVID‐19 and CRDs. Out of 37,606 hospitalized COVID‐19 patients, 1462 azvudine recipients and 1462 matched controls were included in the analysis. The results of Kaplan‒Meier and multivariate Cox regression analyses demonstrated that in contrast to the controls, azvudine use was associated with a decreased risk of all‐cause death in patients with COVID‐19 and pre‐existing CRDs (log‐rank: p = .012; HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.553‒0.956); but was not significantly different in terms of composite disease progression (log‐rank: p = .82; HR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.948‒1.383). An analysis of subgroups and three sensitivity appraisals validate the above outcomes. The number and type of adverse events associated with azvudine treatment were acceptable. The concordance index (0.8499, 0.8497) and area under the curve (86.1%, 80.4%) of the nomogram showed satisfactory discriminative ability in the training and test sets. Azvudine could be effective in reducing all‐cause death among inpatients with COVID‐19 and CRDs and had few serious adverse events.

Short- and long-term comparative effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir in asthma patients: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Few studies evaluated the effectiveness of COVID-19 antivirals specifically in the asthma population This study assessed short- and long-term effects of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir versus molnupiravir in asthma population.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study on adult asthma patients infected with COVID-19, using real-world data obtained from the health officials in Hong Kong. Key inclusion criteria were infection with COVID-19 between March 16, 2022, and Oct 30, 2023, age ≥ 18 years, previous asthma diagnosis, and prescription history of an asthma medication. Outcomes included acute and post-acute mortality, post-acute all-cause hospitalization, and cause-specific hospitalization.

RESULTS

1,745 patients were eligible for this study, with a median follow-up time of 365 days (IQR: 335-365). Patients in the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir group had significantly lower risks of acute inpatient death (HR, 0·27 [95% CI, 0·12 to 0·59]; p = 0·0011), post-acute inpatient death (HR, 0·49 [95% CI, 0·28 to 0·85]; p = 0·011), all-cause hospitalization (HR, 0·72 [95% CI, 0·58 to 0·89]; p = 0·0020), and myocardial infarction (HR, 0·10 [95% CI, 0·01 to 0·92]; p = 0·042) than patients in the control group. The risk of all-cause hospitalization was significantly lower in the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir group compared to the molnupiravir group (HR, 0·65 [95% CI, 0·52 to 0·81]; p = 0·00012). Among patients who were prescribed medium-/ high-dose inhaled corticosteroids, the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir group had a lower hazard of asthma exacerbation than the molnupiravir group (HR, 0·58 [95% CI, 0·35 to 0·95]; p = 0.030).

CONCLUSION

Compared with molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir may offer more benefits in reducing the risk of post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 among asthma patients. In addition, the post-acute benefits of the antivirals were also demonstrated in patients with mild asthma, which have not been generally recommended in existing clinical management guidelines.

Clinical effectiveness of oral antivirals for non-hospitalized adult COVID-19 patients aged 18-60 years

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness of oral antiviral agents - nirmatrelvir - ritonavir or molnupiravir in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients aged < 60 years.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed data of patients aged 18-60 years diagnosed with COVID-19 between 1 January 2022, and 30 June 2023. Propensity score matching was used to balance the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients receiving oral antivirals (nirmatrelvir - ritonavir or molnupiravir) and untreated controls. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause emergency department visits, hospitalizations, or mortality within 30 days. The secondary outcomes included each individual component of the primary composite outcome.

RESULTS

Two matched cohorts (antiviral group and control group) comprising 52,585 patients with balanced baseline characteristics were created using propensity score-matching. During follow-up period, the antiviral group demonstrated a lower risk of the primary outcome than the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.772, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.736-0.808, p < 0.001). The antiviral group also exhibited a reduced risk of individual secondary outcomes, including emergency department visits (HR 0.780, 95% CI, 0.738-0.825), hospitalization (HR 0.755, 95% CI, 0.715-0.840), and mortality (HR 0.297, 95% CI, 0.147-0.600).

CONCLUSION

Oral antiviral agents were associated with lower risks of all-cause emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and mortality in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients aged < 60 years.

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.

The effect of oral antiviral therapy for COVID-19 in managing non-hospitalized patients with lung cancer

BACKGROUNDS

The effectiveness of oral antiviral therapy including nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir and molnupiravir in managing COVID-19 among individuals with pre-existing lung cancer was unclear. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the usefulness of antiviral agents in the management of COVID-19 among patients with lung cancer.

METHODS

Utilizing data from the TriNetX - a global health research network, a retrospective cohort study was conducted involving 2484 patients diagnosed with both lung cancer and COVID-19. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to create well-balanced cohorts. The study assessed the primary outcome of all-cause hospitalization or mortality within a 30-day follow-up.

RESULTS

After PSM, the oral antiviral group exhibited a significantly lower risk of the primary composite outcome compared to the control group (6.1 % vs. 9.9 %; HR: 0.60; 95 % CI: 0.45-0.80). This association was consistent across various subgroups according to age, sex, vaccine status, type of oral antiviral agent, and lung cancer characteristics. Additionally, the oral antiviral group showed a lower risk of all-cause hospitalization (HR: 0.73; 95 % CI: 0.54-0.99) and a significantly lower risk of mortality (HR: 0.16; 95 % CI: 0.06-0.41).

CONCLUSION

The study suggests a favorable impact of oral antiviral therapy on the outcomes of COVID-19 in individuals with lung cancer and support the potential utility of oral antiviral agents in improving outcomes in this vulnerable population.

A novel nanocomposite drug delivery system for SARS-CoV-2 infections

To develop an inhalable drug delivery system, we synthesized poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) nanoparticles with Remdesivir (RDV NPs) as an antiviral agent against SARS-CoV-2 replication and formulated Remdesivir-loaded nanocomposites (RDV NCs) via coating of RDV NPs with novel supramolecular cell-penetrating peptide nanofibers (NFs) to enhance cellular uptake and intracellular drug delivery. RDV NPs and RDV NCs were characterized using variou techniques, including Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), Dynamic Light Scattering (DLS), and fluorescent microscopy. The cytotoxicity of RDV NCs was assessed in Vero E6 cells and primary human lung epithelial cells, with no significant cytotoxicity observed up to 1000 μg mL-1 and 48 h. RDV NCs were spherically shaped with a size range of 200-300 nm and a zeta potential of ∼+31 mV as well as indicating the presence of coated nanofibers. Reverse Transcription-quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-qPCR), immunofluorescence and plaque assays of SARS-CoV-2 infected Vero E6 treated with RDV NCs showed significantly higher antiviral activities compared to those of free drug and uncoated RDV NPs. RDV NCs exhibited high antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2, and the nanocomposite platform has the potential to be developed into an inhalable drug delivery system for other viral infections in the lungs.

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.

Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir for Acute COVID-19 in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease and Postacute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Background

There is limited evidence of association of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (NMV-r) and incidence of postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease (CVD).

Objectives

The objective of this study was to assess the association of NMV-r in nonhospitalized, vaccinated patients with pre-existing CVD and occurrence of PASC.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study utilizing the TriNetX research network, including vaccinated patients with pre-existing CVD who developed COVID-19 between December 2021 and December 2022. Two cohorts were created based on NMV-r administration within 5 days of diagnosis: NMV-r and non-NMV-r cohort. The main outcome was presence of PASC, assessed between 30 to 90 days and 90 to 180 days after index COVID-19 infection. After propensity score matching, both cohorts were compared using t-test and chi-square test for continuous and categorical variables, respectively.

Results

A total of 26,953 patients remained in each cohort after propensity score matching. Broadly defined PASC occurred in 6,925 patients (26%) in the NMV-r cohort vs 8,150 patients (30.6%) in the non-NMV-r cohort (OR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.76-0.82; P < 0.001) from 30 to 90 days and in 6,692 patients (25.1%) as compared to 8,910 patients (33.5%) (OR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.23-0.29; P < 0.001) from 90 to 180 days. Similarly, narrowly defined PASC occurred in 5,335 patients (20%) in the NMV-r cohort vs 6,271 patients (23.6%) in the non-NMV-r cohort between 30 and 90 days (OR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.78-0.84, P < 0.001) and in 5,121 patients (19.2%) as compared to 6,964 patients (26.1%) (OR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.64-0.70, P < 0.001) between 90 and 180 days.

Conclusions

NMV-r in nonhospitalized vaccinated patients with pre-existing CVD with COVID-19 was associated with a reduction in PASC and health care utilization.

Safety of RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase Inhibitors, Molnupiravir and VV116, for Oral Treatment of COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis

Background

The RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) inhibitors, molnupiravir and VV116, have the potential to maximize clinical benefits in the oral treatment of COVID-19. Subjects who consume these drugs may experience an increased incidence of adverse events. This study aimed to evaluate the safety profile of molnupiravir and VV116.

Methods

A comprehensive search of scientific and medical databases, such as PubMed Central/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, was conducted to find relevant articles in English from January 2020 to June 2023. Any kind of adverse events reported in the study were pooled and analyzed in the drug group versus the control group. Estimates of risk effects were summarized through the random effects model using Review Manager version 5.2, and sensitivity analysis was performed by Stata 17.0 software.

Results

Fifteen studies involving 32,796 subjects were included. Eleven studies were placebo-controlled, and four were Paxlovid-controlled. Twelve studies reported adverse events for molnupiravir, and three studies described adverse events for VV116. The total odds ratio (OR) for adverse events in the RdRp inhibitor versus the placebo-controlled group was 1.01 (95% CI=0.84-1.22; I2=26%), P=0.88. The total OR for adverse events in the RdRp inhibitor versus the Paxlovid-controlled group was 0.32 (95% CI=0.16-0.65; I2=87%), P=0.002. Individual drug subgroup analysis in the placebo-controlled study showed that compared with the placebo group, a total OR for adverse events was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.85-1.10; I2=0%) in the molnupiravir group and 3.77 (95% CI=0.08-175.77; I2=85%) in the VV116 group.

Conclusion

The RdRp inhibitors molnupiravir and VV116 are safe for oral treatment of COVID-19. Further evidence is necessary that RdRp inhibitors have a higher safety profile than Paxlovid.

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.

Clinical Effectiveness of Ritonavir-Boosted Nirmatrelvir-A Literature Review

Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir is an oral treatment for mild to moderate COVID-19 cases with a high risk for a severe course of the disease. For this paper, a comprehensive literature review was performed, leading to a summary of currently available data on Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir's ability to reduce the risk of progressing to a severe disease state. Herein, the focus lies on publications that include comparisons between patients receiving Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir and a control group. The findings can be summarized as follows: Data from the time when the Delta-variant was dominant show that Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir reduced the risk of hospitalization or death by 88.9% for unvaccinated, non-hospitalized high-risk individuals. Data from the time when the Omicron variant was dominant found decreased relative risk reductions for various vaccination statuses: between 26% and 65% for hospitalization. The presented papers that differentiate between unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals agree that unvaccinated patients benefit more from treatment with Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir. However, when it comes to the dependency of potential on age and comorbidities, further studies are necessary. From the available data, one can conclude that Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir cannot substitute vaccinations; however, its low manufacturing cost and easy administration make it a valuable tool in fighting COVID-19, especially for countries with low vaccination rates.

Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Use and Hospitalizations or Death in a Previously Uninfected Nonhospitalized High-Risk Population With COVID-19: A Matched Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the association of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMV/r) with hospitalization or death within 30 days as compared with untreated controls previously uninfected and nonhospitalized.

METHODS

We used a matched cohort design using inverse probability of treatment weight (IPTW). Individuals prescribed NMV/r within 3 days of COVID-19 diagnosis were compared with IPTW-based untreated controls. Variables for IPTW included age, race, sex, body mass index, geographic location, vaccination status, and multiple comorbidities. Additional analyses were conducted on NMV/r-treated and propensity score-matched untreated controls.

RESULTS

Among 7615 individuals prescribed NMV/r and 62 077 controls identified between 1 January 2022 and 25 February 2023, the risk of hospitalization/death was lower among NMV/r-treated persons vs untreated controls (243 vs 3468 events; absolute risk difference [ARD], -2.36 [95% CI, -2.57 to -2.14]). The difference was significant for those >60 and ≤60 years old (ARD, -3.86 [95% CI, -4.19 to -3.54] vs -0.27 [95% CI, -0.51 to -0.03]) and for persons asymptomatic and symptomatic (ARD, -7.09 [95% CI, -7.62 to -6.55] vs -1.46 [95% CI, -1.66 to -1.25]). Significant benefit was observed among individuals unvaccinated and vaccinated, with or without a booster dose.

CONCLUSIONS

NMV/r is associated with a significant reduction in 30-day hospitalization or death among individuals previously uninfected and nonhospitalized.

Efficacy and Safety of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antiviral Agents and Monoclonal Antibodies in Patients with SLE: A Case-Control Study

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-related disease (COVID-19) has spread pandemically with high rates of morbidity and mortality. COVID-19 has also posed unprecedented challenges in terms of rapid development of pharmacological countermeasures to prevent or contrast SARS-CoV-2 pathogenicity. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antiviral agents and monoclonal antibodies have been specifically designed to attenuate COVID-19 morbidity and prevent mortality in vulnerable subjects, such as patients with immune-mediated diseases, but evidence for the safe and effective use of these drugs in this latter population group is scarce. Therefore, we designed a retrospective, multicentre, observational, case-control study to analyse the impact of these treatments in COVID-19 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), a paradigmatic, multi-organ autoimmune disease. We identified 21 subjects treated with antivirals and/or monoclonal antibodies who were matched with 42 untreated patients by age, sex, SLE extension and duration. Treated patients had higher baseline SLE disease activity index 2000 scores [SLEDAI-2K median (interquartile range) = 4 (1-5) vs. 0 (0-2); p = 0.009], higher prednisone doses [5 (0-10) mg vs. 0 (0-3) mg; p = 0.002], and more severe COVID-19 symptoms by a five-point World Health Organisation-endorsed analogue scale [1 (0-1) vs. 0 (0-1); p < 0.010] compared to untreated patients. There was no difference between groups in terms of COVID-19 outcomes and sequelae, nor in terms of post-COVID-19 SLE exacerbations. Three subjects reported mild adverse events (two with monoclonal antibodies, one with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir). These data suggest that anti-SARS-CoV-2 antivirals and monoclonal antibodies might be safely and effectively used in patients with SLE, especially with active disease and more severe COVID-19 symptoms at presentation.