Evaluation of the effect of sofosbuvir and daclatasvir in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: a randomized double-blind clinical trial (DISCOVER)

Antivirals in COVID-19: A Focus on Pediatric Cardiac Patients

The COVID-19 pandemic created an unprecedented public health crisis, driven by its rapid global spread and the urgent need for worldwide collaborative interventions to contain it. This urgency spurred the search for therapeutic agents to prevent or manage the infection. Among these, various types of antivirals emerged as a prominent treatment option, supported by a wealth of observational studies and randomized controlled trials. The results from such studies conflict, with some concluding efficacy and others the lack thereof, with variability also occurring depending on the severity of COVID-19 in the studied population. In addition, many agents have been explored using randomized controlled trials-the gold standard in evaluating the efficacy of an intervention-to only a limited degree, with most of the evidence behind their use concluded using observational studies. Thus, the sheer volume of data has made it challenging to resolve inconsistencies and determine true efficacy. Furthermore, there is a paucity in the literature regarding the use of antivirals in the pediatric population infected with COVID-19, with their use being extrapolated from the results of studies done on adult patients. As such, additional trials are needed to solidify the effectiveness of antivirals in managing COVID-19, particularly in the underexplored and especially vulnerable pediatric cardiac patients. Therefore, utilizing the results from randomized controlled trials, this narrative review evaluates the rationale behind the use of antivirals, summarizes the findings from the literature, and concludes with a focused discussion on their application in pediatric cardiac patients.

Newly Proposed Dose of Daclatasvir to Prevent Lethal SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Human Transgenic ACE-2 Mice

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) still causes death in elderly and immunocompromised individuals, for whom the sustainability of the vaccine response may be limited. Antiviral treatments, such as remdesivir or molnupiravir, have demonstrated limited clinical efficacy. Nirmatrelvir, an acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) major protease inhibitor, is clinically effective but has been associated with viral rebound and antiviral resistance. It is thus necessary to study novel and repurposed antivirals for the treatment of COVID-19. We previously demonstrated that daclatasvir (DCV), an inhibitor of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS5A protein, impairs SARS-CoV-2 replication by targeting viral RNA polymerase and exonuclease, but the doses of DCV used to inhibit the new coronavirus are greater than the standard human plasma exposure for hepatitis C. Because any potential use of DCV against SARS-CoV-2 would be shorter than that reported here and short-term toxicological studies on DCV show that higher doses are tolerable, we searched for doses of DCV that could protect transgenic mice expressing the human ACE2 receptor (K18-hACE-2) from lethal challenge with SARS-CoV-2. We found that a dose of 60 mg/kg/day provides this protection by reducing virus replication and virus-induced lung insult. This dose is tolerable in different animal models. Taken together, our data provide preclinical evidence that can support phase I clinical trials to confirm the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of new doses of daclatasvir for a short duration in humans to further advance this compound's utility against COVID-19.

Shaping the future of antiviral Treatment: Spotlight on Nucleobase-Containing drugs and their revolutionary impact

Nucleobases serve as essential molecular frameworks present in both natural and synthetic compounds that exhibit notable antiviral activity. Through molecular modifications, novel nucleobase-containing drugs (NCDs) have been developed, exhibiting enhanced antiviral activity against a wide range of viruses, including the recently emerged SARS‑CoV‑2. This article provides a detailed examination of the significant advancements in NCDs from 2015 till current, encompassing various aspects concerning their mechanisms of action, pharmacology and antiviral properties. Additionally, the article discusses antiviral prodrugs relevant to the scope of this review. It fills in the knowledge gap by examining the structure-activity relationship and trend of NCDs as therapeutics against a diverse range of viral diseases, either as approved drugs, clinical candidates or as early-stage development prospects. Moreover, the article highlights on the status of this field of study and addresses the prevailing limitations encountered.

Comparison of effect estimates between preprints and peer-reviewed journal articles of COVID-19 trials

BACKGROUND

Preprints are increasingly used to disseminate research results, providing multiple sources of information for the same study. We assessed the consistency in effect estimates between preprint and subsequent journal article of COVID-19 randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

The study utilized data from the COVID-NMA living systematic review of pharmacological treatments for COVID-19 (covid-nma.com) up to July 20, 2022. We identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating pharmacological treatments vs. standard of care/placebo for patients with COVID-19 that were originally posted as preprints and subsequently published as journal articles. Trials that did not report the same analysis in both documents were excluded. Data were extracted independently by pairs of researchers with consensus to resolve disagreements. Effect estimates extracted from the first preprint were compared to effect estimates from the journal article.

RESULTS

The search identified 135 RCTs originally posted as a preprint and subsequently published as a journal article. We excluded 26 RCTs that did not meet the eligibility criteria, of which 13 RCTs reported an interim analysis in the preprint and a final analysis in the journal article. Overall, 109 preprint-article RCTs were included in the analysis. The median (interquartile range) delay between preprint and journal article was 121 (73-187) days, the median sample size was 150 (71-464) participants, 76% of RCTs had been prospectively registered, 60% received industry or mixed funding, 72% were multicentric trials. The overall risk of bias was rated as 'some concern' for 80% of RCTs. We found that 81 preprint-article pairs of RCTs were consistent for all outcomes reported. There were nine RCTs with at least one outcome with a discrepancy in the number of participants with outcome events or the number of participants analyzed, which yielded a minor change in the estimate of the effect. Furthermore, six RCTs had at least one outcome missing in the journal article and 14 RCTs had at least one outcome added in the journal article compared to the preprint. There was a change in the direction of effect in one RCT. No changes in statistical significance or conclusions were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Effect estimates were generally consistent between COVID-19 preprints and subsequent journal articles. The main results and interpretation did not change in any trial. Nevertheless, some outcomes were added and deleted in some journal articles.

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

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

Successes in antiviral drug discovery: a tribute to Nick Meanwell

Drug discovery is a difficult task, and is even more challenging when the target evolves during therapy. Antiviral drug therapy is an excellent example, exemplified by the evolution of therapeutic approaches for treatment of hepatitis C and HIV-1. Nick Meanwell and his colleagues made important contributions leading to molecules for treatment of hepatitis C and HIV-1, each with distinct mechanisms of action. This review summarizes the discovery and impact of these drugs, and will highlight, where applicable, the broader contributions of these discoveries to medicinal chemistry and drug discovery.

Severe COVID-19: Drugs and Clinical Trials

By January of 2023, the COVID-19 pandemic had led to a reported total of 6,700,883 deaths and 662,631,114 cases worldwide. To date, there have been no effective therapies or standardized treatment schemes for this disease; therefore, the search for effective prophylactic and therapeutic strategies is a primary goal that must be addressed. This review aims to provide an analysis of the most efficient and promising therapies and drugs for the prevention and treatment of severe COVID-19, comparing their degree of success, scope, and limitations, with the aim of providing support to health professionals in choosing the best pharmacological approach. An investigation of the most promising and effective treatments against COVID-19 that are currently available was carried out by employing search terms including "Convalescent plasma therapy in COVID-19" or "Viral polymerase inhibitors" and "COVID-19" in the Clinicaltrials.gov and PubMed databases. From the current perspective and with the information available from the various clinical trials assessing the efficacy of different therapeutic options, we conclude that it is necessary to standardize certain variables-such as the viral clearance time, biomarkers associated with severity, hospital stay, requirement of invasive mechanical ventilation, and mortality rate-in order to facilitate verification of the efficacy of such treatments and to better assess the repeatability of the most effective and promising results.

Efficacy and safety of regdanvimab in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19: A rapid review and meta-analysis

AIMS

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of regdanvimab, an anti-SARS-COV-2 monoclonal antibody approved by the European Medicines Agency in November 2021, for the treatment of confirmed COVID-19 disease.

METHODS

Cochrane Library, PubMed, medRxiv and Google Scholar were searched for relevant evidence up to October 27, 2022. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tools. Data were analysed using RevMan software.

RESULTS

Eight studies involving 4793 patients were included. A significant difference was observed between the regdanvimab and no-regdanvimab groups in terms of length of hospital stay (mean difference [MD] = -1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.80 to -0.43), clinical recovery (odds ratio [OR] = 2.09, 95% CI: 1.38 to 3.18), disease progression (OR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.33), the need for oxygen therapy (OR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.43) and duration of oxygen therapy (MD = -3.00, 95% CI: -4.44 to -1.56). However, no significant difference was detected between 2 groups regarding mortality rate (OR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.11 to 1.89), need for mechanical ventilation (OR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.08 to 1.89) and hospital admission rate (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.35 to 1.03). The incidence of adverse events was similar in both groups (OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.18).

CONCLUSION

Regdanvimab was not effective in reducing mortality and hospital admission rate in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, but it was effective in improving other efficacy outcomes. Further research is needed to confirm these findings.

Antivirals for adult patients hospitalised with SARS-CoV-2 infection: a randomised, phase II/III, multicentre, placebo-controlled, adaptive study, with multiple arms and stages. COALITION COVID-19 BRAZIL IX - REVOLUTIOn trial

Background

Repurposed drugs for treatment of new onset disease may be an effective therapeutic shortcut. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of repurposed antivirals compared to placebo in lowering SARS-CoV2 viral load of COVID-19 patients.

Methods

REVOLUTIOn is a randomised, parallel, blinded, multistage, superiority and placebo controlled randomised trial conducted in 35 centres in Brazil. We include patients aged 18 years or older admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, symptoms onset 9 days or less and SpO₂ 94% or lower at room air were eligible. All participants were randomly allocated to receive either atazanavir, daclatasvir or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir or placebo for 10 days. The primary outcome was the decay rate (slope) of the SARS-CoV-2 viral load logarithm assessed in the modified intention to-treat population. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04468087.

Findings

Between February 09, 2021, and August 04, 2021, 255 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to atazanavir (n = 64), daclatasvir (n = 66), sofosbuvir/daclatasvir (n = 67) or placebo (n = 58). Compared to placebo group, the change from baseline to day 10 in log viral load was not significantly different for any of the treatment groups (0.05 [95% CI, -0.03 to 0.12], -0.02 [95% CI, -0.09 to 0.06], and -0.03 [95% CI, -0.11 to 0.04] for atazanavir, daclatasvir and sofosbuvir/daclatasvir groups respectively). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of serious adverse events between treatment groups.

Interpretation

No significant reduction in viral load was observed from the use of atazanavir, daclatasvir or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir compared to placebo in hospitalised COVID-19 patients who need oxygen support with symptoms onset 9 days or less.

Funding

Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação (MCTI) - Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPQ); Cia Latino-Americana de Medicamentos (Clamed); Cia Industrial H. Carlos Schneider (Ciser); Hospital Research Foundation Incorporation, Australia, HCor São Paulo; Blanver Farmoquímica; Instituto de Tecnologia em Fármacos (Farmanguinhos) da Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz); Coordenação Geral de Planejamento Estratégico (Cogeplan)/Fiocruz; and Fundação de apoio a Fiocruz (Fiotec, VPGDI-054-FIO-20-2-13).

Safety and efficacy of four drug regimens versus standard-of-care for the treatment of symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19: A randomised, open-label, multi-arm, phase 2 clinical trial

Background

This exploratory study investigated four repurposed anti-infective drug regimens in outpatients with COVID-19.

Methods

This phase 2, single centre, randomised, open-label, clinical trial was conducted in South Africa between 3rd September 2020 and 23rd August 2021. Symptomatic outpatients aged 18–65 years, with RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were computer randomised (1:1:1:1:1) to standard-of-care (SOC) with paracetamol, or SOC plus artesunate-amodiaquine (ASAQ), pyronaridine-artesunate (PA), favipiravir plus nitazoxanide (FPV + NTZ), or sofosbuvir-daclatasvir (SOF-DCV). The primary endpoint was the incidence of viral clearance, i.e., the proportion of patients with a negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR on day 7, compared to SOC using a log-binomial model in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population.

Findings

The mITT population included 186 patients: mean age (SD) 34.9 (10.3) years, body weight 78.2 (17.1) kg. Day 7 SARS-CoV-2 clearance rates (n/N; risk ratio [95% CI]) were: SOC 34.2% (13/38), ASAQ 38.5% (15/39; 0.80 [0.44, 1.47]), PA 30.3% (10/33; 0.69 [0.37, 1.29]), FPV + NTZ 27.0% (10/37; 0.60 [0.31, 1.18]) and SOF-DCV 23.5% (8/34; 0.47 [0.22, 1.00]). Three lower respiratory tract infections occurred (PA 6.1% [2/33]; SOF-DCV 2.9% [1/34]); two required hospitalisation (PA, SOF-DCV). There were no deaths. Adverse events occurred in 55.3% (105/190) of patients, including one serious adverse event (pancytopenia; FPV + NTZ).

Interpretation

There was no statistical difference in viral clearance for any regimen compared to SOC. All treatments were well tolerated.

Funding

10.13039/501100004167Medicines for Malaria Venture, with funding from the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, within the Covid-19 Therapeutics Accelerator in partnership with 10.13039/100004440Wellcome, the 10.13039/100000865Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and Mastercard.

Randomized clinical trial of nitazoxanide or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection

BACKGROUND

The COVER trial evaluated whether nitazoxanide or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir could lower the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nitazoxanide was selected given its favourable pharmacokinetics and in vitro antiviral effects against SARS-CoV-2. Sofosbuvir/daclatasvir had shown favourable results in early clinical trials.

METHODS

In this clinical trial in Johannesburg, South Africa, healthcare workers and others at high risk of infection were randomized to 24 weeks of either nitazoxanide or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir as prevention, or standard prevention advice only. Participants were evaluated every 4 weeks for COVID-19 symptoms and had antibody and PCR testing. The primary endpoint was positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR and/or serology ≥7 days after randomization, regardless of symptoms. A Poisson regression model was used to estimate the incidence rate ratios of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 between each experimental arm and control.

RESULTS

Between December 2020 and January 2022, 828 participants were enrolled. COVID-19 infections were confirmed in 100 participants on nitazoxanide (2234 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI 1837-2718), 87 on sofosbuvir/daclatasvir (2125 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI 1722-2622) and 111 in the control arm (1849 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI 1535-2227). There were no significant differences in the primary endpoint between the treatment arms, and the results met the criteria for futility. In the safety analysis, the frequency of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was low and similar across arms.

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomized trial, nitazoxanide and sofosbuvir/daclatasvir had no significant preventative effect on infection with SARS-CoV-2 among healthcare workers and others at high risk of infection.

Need for a Standardized Translational Drug Development Platform: Lessons Learned from the Repurposing of Drugs for COVID-19

In the absence of drugs to treat or prevent COVID-19, drug repurposing can be a valuable strategy. Despite a substantial number of clinical trials, drug repurposing did not deliver on its promise. While success was observed with some repurposed drugs (e.g., remdesivir, dexamethasone, tocilizumab, baricitinib), others failed to show clinical efficacy. One reason is the lack of clear translational processes based on adequate preclinical profiling before clinical evaluation. Combined with limitations of existing in vitro and in vivo models, there is a need for a systematic approach to urgent antiviral drug development in the context of a global pandemic. We implemented a methodology to test repurposed and experimental drugs to generate robust preclinical evidence for further clinical development. This translational drug development platform comprises in vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo models of SARS-CoV-2, along with pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation approaches to evaluate exposure levels in plasma and target organs. Here, we provide examples of identified repurposed antiviral drugs tested within our multidisciplinary collaboration to highlight lessons learned in urgent antiviral drug development during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our data confirm the importance of assessing in vitro and in vivo potency in multiple assays to boost the translatability of pre-clinical data. The value of pharmacokinetic modeling and simulations for compound prioritization is also discussed. We advocate the need for a standardized translational drug development platform for mild-to-moderate COVID-19 to generate preclinical evidence in support of clinical trials. We propose clear prerequisites for progression of drug candidates for repurposing into clinical trials. Further research is needed to gain a deeper understanding of the scope and limitations of the presented translational drug development platform.

Antiviral drug treatment for nonsevere COVID-19: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Randomized trial evidence suggests that some antiviral drugs are effective in patients with COVID-19. However, the comparative effectiveness of antiviral drugs in nonsevere COVID-19 is unclear.

METHODS

We searched the Epistemonikos COVID-19 L·OVE (Living Overview of Evidence) database for randomized trials comparing antiviral treatments, standard care or placebo in adult patients with nonsevere COVID-19 up to Apr. 25, 2022. Reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We performed a frequentist network meta-analysis and assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

We identified 41 trials, which included 18 568 patients. Compared with standard care or placebo, molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir each reduced risk of death with moderate certainty (10.9 fewer deaths per 1000, 95% confidence interval [CI] 12.6 to 4.5 fewer for molnupiravir; 11.7 fewer deaths per 1000, 95% CI 13.1 fewer to 2.6 more). Compared with molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir-ritonavir probably reduced risk of hospital admission (27.8 fewer admissions per 1000, 95% CI 32.8 to 18.3 fewer; moderate certainty). Remdesivir probably has no effect on risk of death, but may reduce hospital admissions (39.1 fewer admissions per 1000, 95% CI 48.7 to 13.7 fewer; low certainty).

INTERPRETATION

Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir probably reduce risk of hospital admissions and death among patients with nonsevere COVID-19. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is probably more effective than molnupiravir for reducing risk of hospital admissions. Most trials were conducted with unvaccinated patients, before the emergence of the Omicron variant; the effectiveness of these drugs must thus be tested among vaccinated patients and against newer variants.

Efficacy and safety of the sofosbuvir/velpatasvir combination for the treatment of patients with early mild to moderate COVID-19

SARS-CoV-2 is still a health problem worldwide despite the availability of vaccines. Therefore, there is a need for effective and safe antiviral. SARS-CoV-2 and HCV necessitate RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) for replication; therefore, it has been hypothesized that RdRp inhibitors used to treat HCV may be effective treating SARS-CoV-2. Accordingly, we evaluated the effect of the sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) combination in early SARS-CoV-2 infection. A multicenter case-control study was conducted, enrolling 120 patients with mild or moderate COVID-19, of whom 30, HCV coinfected or not, received SOF/VEL tablets (400/100 mg) once daily for 9 days within a median of 6 days from the beginning of infection and 90 controls were treated with standard care. The primary endpoint was the effect on viral clearance, and the secondary endpoint was the improvement of clinical outcomes. Nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR were performed every 5-7 days. Between 5-14 days after starting SOF/VEL treatment, SAS-CoV-2 clearance was observed in 83% of patients, while spontaneous clearance in the control was 13% (p < 0.001). An earlier SARS-CoV-2 clearance was observed in the SOF/VEL group than in the control group (median 14 vs 22 days, respectively, p < 0.001) also when the first positivity was considered. None of the patients in the SOF/VEL group showed disease progression, while in the control group, 24% required more intensive treatment (high flow oxygen or noninvasive/invasive ventilation), and one patient died (p < 0.01). No significant side effects were observed in the SOF/VEL group. Early SOF/VEL treatment in mild/moderate COVID-19 seems to be safe and effective for faster elimination of SARS-CoV-2 and to prevent disease progression.