Exploring bifunctional molecules for anti-SARS-CoV-2 and anti-inflammatory activity through structure-based virtual screening, SAR investigation, and biological evaluation

As new variants of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continue to emerge, they raise increasing concerns about the efficacy of neutralizing antibodies and vaccines. This situation underscores the urgent need for specific drugs against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Given that COVID-19 is particularly associated with substantial inflammation, the development of novel, effective antiviral and anti-inflammatory agents represents a promising research direction. In this study, we virtually screened a library consisting of 2900 anti-inflammatory small molecules for their inhibitory effects on the 3-chymotrypsin-like protease (3CLpro) of SARS-CoV-2 and selected 23 promising candidates for further testing using a fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) assay. The results indicated that Gnetol had the most potent inhibitory effect against SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro. Further structural modifications led to the identification of compounds 38 and 39, which displayed superior inhibitory activity. Compound 39 showed good selectivity for host proteases. Subsequently, Gnetol and its structural analogs, which demonstrated SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro inhibitory activity, were tested for their anti-inflammatory effects. Among these, Piceatannol and compound 39 exhibited enhanced anti-inflammatory effects, with compound 39 alone showing the most potent antiviral and anti-inflammatory activity. Thus, our study has explored a new research strategy for discovering antiviral and anti-inflammatory bifunctional molecules. The discovery of Gnetol and its structural analogs has provided new lead candidates for the development of COVID-19 therapeutics.

In Vitro Screening of an In-House Library of Structurally Distinct Chemotypes Towards the Identification of Novel SARS-CoV-2 Inhibitors

Background/Objectives: Four years after the COVID-19 pandemic, a very limited number of drugs has been marketed; thus, the search for new medications still represents a compelling need. In our previous work on antiviral, antiparasitic, and antiproliferative agents, we described several compounds (1-13 and 16-20) structurally related to clofazimine, chloroquine, and benzimidazole derivatives. Thus, we deemed it worthwhile to test them against the replication of SARS-CoV-2, together with a few other compounds (14, 15 and 21-25), which showed some analogy to miscellaneous anti-coronavirus agents. Methods: Twenty-five structurally assorted compounds were evaluated in vitro for cytotoxicity against Vero E6 and for their ability to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication. Results: Several compounds (2, 3, 10, 11, 13-15, 18-20) demonstrated antiviral activity (IC50 range 1.5-28 µM) and six of them exhibited an interesting selectivity index in the range 4.5-20. The chloroquine analogs 10 and 11 were more potent than the reference chloroquine itself and doubled its SI value (20 versus 11). Also, the benzimidazole ring emerged as a valuable scaffold, originating several compounds (13-15 and 18-20) endowed with anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity. Despite the modest activity, the cytisine and the arylamino enone derivatives 23 and 25, respectively, also deserve further consideration as model compounds. Conclusions: The investigated chemotypes may represent valuable hit compounds, deserving further in-depth biological studies to define their mechanisms of action. The derived information will guide the subsequent chemical optimization towards the development of more efficient anti-SARS-CoV-2 agents.

K-Means Clustering Identifies Diverse Clinical Phenotypes in COVID-19 Patients: Implications for Mortality Risks and Remdesivir Impact

INTRODUCTION

The impact of remdesivir on mortality in patients with COVID-19 is still controversial. We aimed to identify clinical phenotype clusters of COVID-19 hospitalized patients with highest benefit from remdesivir use and validate these findings in an external cohort.

METHODS

We included consecutive patients hospitalized between February 2020 and February 2021 for COVID-19. The derivation cohort comprised subjects admitted to Hospital Clinic of Barcelona. The validation cohort included patients from Hospital Universitari Mutua de Terrassa (Terrassa) and Hospital Universitari La Fe (Valencia), all tertiary centers in Spain. We employed K-means clustering to group patients according to reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) cycle threshold (Ct) values and lymphocyte counts at diagnosis, and pre-test symptom duration. The impact of remdesivir on 60-day mortality in each cluster was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 1160 patients (median age 66, interquartile range (IQR) 55-78) were included. We identified five clusters, with mortality rates ranging from 0 to 36.7%. Highest mortality rate was observed in the cluster including patients with shorter pre-test symptom duration, lower lymphocyte counts, and lower Ct values at diagnosis. The absence of remdesivir administration was associated with worse outcome in the high-mortality cluster (10.5% vs. 36.7%; p < 0.001), comprising subjects with higher viral loads. These results were validated in an external multicenter cohort of 981 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with COVID-19 exhibit varying mortality rates across different clinical phenotypes. K-means clustering aids in identifying patients who derive the greatest mortality benefit from remdesivir use.

Patterns of corticosteroid use among remdesivir and matched patients and associated clinical outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to investigate patterns of corticosteroid use and their relationship with remdesivir use and clinical outcomes in a large real-life cohort of COVID-19 patients treated in a tertiary-level institution.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed a total of 1558 severe and critical COVID-19 patients, including 779 patients treated with remdesivir and 779 matched control patients.

RESULTS

A total of 167 (10.7%) patients received none, 710 (45.6%) low, 539 (34.6%) high, and 142 (9.1%) very high corticosteroid doses. Patients treated with remdesivir had significantly longer exposure to corticosteroids, received higher average and maximal daily doses, and cumulative corticosteroid doses. In the multivariate analysis remdesivir use, lower cumulative comorbidity burden, higher severity of COVID-19 symptoms, and mechanical ventilation were recognized as mutually independent predictors of the use of higher corticosteroid doses. Higher corticosteroid doses were associated with significantly increased mortality.Among non-remdesivir treated patients, there was a U-shaped relationship between maximal daily corticosteroid dose and mortality. Among remdesivir treated patients gradual increase in mortality with increasing corticosteroid doses was observed.

CONCLUSION

Patterns of corticosteroid use differ regarding the use of remdesivir and may moderate its association with survival among severe and critical COVID-19 patients.

Integrating SARS-CoV-2-specific interferon-γ release assay testing in the evaluation of patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE

The cellular immune response is essential in the protection against severe disease in patients with established SARS-CoV-2 infection. The novelty of this study lies in the evaluation of the overall performance of a standardized assay to measure cellular immune response, the SARS-CoV-2-specific interferon-γ release assay (IGRA), in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19. The SARS-CoV-2 IGRA was shown to accurately classify patients based on disease severity and prognosis, and the study revealed that test performance was not affected by the SARS-CoV-2 variant or control tube results. We identified an assay cut-off point with a high negative predictive value against mortality. The SARS-CoV-2 IGRA in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 may be a useful tool to assess cellular immunity and adopt targeted therapeutic and preventive measures.

Effects of remdesivir on SARS-CoV-2 viral dynamics and mortality in viraemic patients hospitalized for COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Studies on the antiviral effects of remdesivir have shown conflicting results. SARS-CoV-2 viraemia could identify patients in whom antiviral treatment may be particularly beneficial.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate antiviral effects and clinical outcomes of remdesivir treatment in viraemic patients.

METHODS

Viraemic patients hospitalized for COVID-19 with ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen of ≤300, symptom duration ≤10 days, and estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥30 mL/min were included in a cohort. The rate of serum viral clearance and serum viral load decline, 60 day mortality and in-hospital outcomes were estimated. A subgroup analysis including patients with symptom duration ≤7 days was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 318 viraemic patients were included. Thirty-three percent (105/318) received remdesivir. The rate of serum viral clearance [subhazard risk ratio (SHR) 1.4 (95% CI 0.9-2.0), P = 0.11] and serum viral load decline (P = 0.11) were not significantly different between remdesivir-treated patients and controls. However, the rate of serum viral clearance was non-significantly higher [SHR 1.6 (95% CI 1.0-2.7), P = 0.051] and the viral load decline was faster (P = 0.03) in remdesivir-treated patients with symptom duration ≤7 days at admission. The 60 day mortality [HR 1.0 (95% CI 0.6-1.8), P = 0.97] and adverse in-hospital outcomes [OR 1.4 (95% CI 0.8-2.4), P = 0.31] were not significantly different between remdesivir-treated patients and controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Remdesivir treatment did not significantly change the duration of SARS-CoV-2 viraemia, decline of serum viral load, 60 day mortality or in-hospital adverse outcomes in patients with ≤10 days of symptoms at admission. Remdesivir appeared to reduce the duration of viraemia in a subgroup of patients with ≤7 days of symptoms at admission.

T-Cell Immunity Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Measured by an Interferon-γ Release Assay Is Strongly Associated With Patient Outcomes in Vaccinated Persons Hospitalized With Delta or Omicron Variants

BACKGROUND

We measured T-cell and antibody responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vaccinated patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and explored their potential value to predict outcomes.

METHODS

This was a prospective, longitudinal study including vaccinated patients hospitalized with Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants. TrimericS-IgG antibodies and SARS-CoV-2 T-cell response were measured using a specific quantitative interferon-γ release assay (IGRA). Primary outcome was all-cause 28-day mortality or need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Cox models were used to assess associations with outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 181 individuals, 158 (87.3%) had detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, 92 (50.8%) showed SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses, and 87 (48.1%) had both responses. Patients who died within 28 days or were admitted to ICU were less likely to have both unspecific and specific T-cell responses in IGRA. In adjusted analyses (adjusted hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]), for the entire cohort, having both T-cell and antibody responses at admission (0.16 [.05-.58]) and Omicron variant (0.38 [.17-.87]) reduced the hazard of 28-day mortality or ICU admission, whereas higher Charlson comorbidity index score (1.27 [1.07-1.51]) and lower oxygen saturation to fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (2.36 [1.51-3.67]) increased the risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Preexisting immunity against SARS-CoV-2 is strongly associated with patient outcomes in vaccinated individuals requiring hospital admission for COVID-19. Persons showing both T-cell and antibody responses have the lowest risk of severe outcomes.

Rapid Response to Remdesivir in Hospitalised COVID-19 Patients: A Propensity Score Weighted Multicentre Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Remdesivir is a registered treatment for hospitalised patients with COVID-19 that has moderate clinical effectiveness. Anecdotally, some patients' respiratory insufficiency seemed to recover particularly rapidly after initiation of remdesivir. In this study, we investigated if this rapid improvement was caused by remdesivir, and which patient characteristics might predict a rapid clinical improvement in response to remdesivir.

METHODS

This was a multicentre observational cohort study of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who required supplemental oxygen and were treated with dexamethasone. Rapid clinical improvement in response to treatment was defined by a reduction of at least 1 L of supplemental oxygen per minute or discharge from the hospital within 72 h after admission. Inverse probability of treatment-weighted logistic regression modelling was used to assess the association between remdesivir and rapid clinical improvement. Secondary endpoints included in-hospital mortality, ICU admission rate and hospitalisation duration.

RESULTS

Of 871 patients included, 445 were treated with remdesivir. There was no influence of remdesivir on the occurrence of rapid clinical improvement (62% vs 61% OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.79-1.40; p = 0.76). The in-hospital mortality was lower (14.7% vs 19.8% OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.48-1.02; p = 0.06) for the remdesivir-treated patients. Rapid clinical improvement occurred more often in patients with low C-reactive protein (≤ 75 mg/L) and short duration of symptoms prior to hospitalisation (< 7 days) (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.07-7.56).

CONCLUSION

Remdesivir generally does not increase the incidence of rapid clinical improvement in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, but it might have an effect in patients with short duration of symptoms and limited signs of systemic inflammation.

Impact of some antiviral drugs on health care utilization for patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to assess the impact of antiviral drugs (fluvoxamine,remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r), molnupiravir, andnirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NRV/r)) on health care utilization (HCU) inCOVID-19 patients. We summarized findings from randomized controlledtrials (RCTs) and observational studies.

METHODS

We systematically searched four medical databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library) for COVID-19 studies up to February 15, 2023. A comprehensive review, meta-analysis, sensitivity analysis, and subgroup analysis were conducted. Pooled effects with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for antiviral drugs' impact on hospitalization, mechanical ventilation (MV), and intensive care unit (ICU) outcomes.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 34 studies (584,978 patients). Meta-analysisindicated potential benefits: remdesivir and molnupiravir potentiallyreduced MV risk, and NRV/r correlated with lower hospitalizationrates. However, LPV/r did not notably curb HCU. Remdesivir waspreferable for high-risk COVID-19 patients, while molnupiravir andNRV/r were recommended for those aged 60 and above.

CONCLUSION

Remdesivir, molnupiravir, and NRV/r may reduce HCU during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, due to limited study details and significant heterogeneity in effect estimates, further precise evidence is crucial, especially concerning emerging variants.

Remdesivir: A Review in COVID-19

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

Remdesivir Use in the Real-World Setting: An Overview of Available Evidence

In the years of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), various treatment options have been utilized. COVID-19 continues to circulate in the global population, and the evolution of the Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus has posed significant challenges to the treatment and prevention of infection. Remdesivir (RDV), an anti-viral agent with in vitro efficacy against coronaviruses, is a potent and safe treatment as suggested by a plethora of in vitro and in vivo studies and clinical trials. Emerging real-world data have confirmed its effectiveness, and there are currently datasets evaluating its efficacy and safety against SARS-CoV-2 infections in various clinical scenarios, including some that are not in the SmPC recommendations according for COVID-19 pharmacotherapy. Remdesivir increases the chance of recovery, reduces progression to severe disease, lowers mortality rates, and exhibits beneficial post-hospitalization outcomes, especially when used early in the course of the disease. Strong evidence suggests the expansion of remdesivir use in special populations (e.g., pregnancy, immunosuppression, renal impairment, transplantation, elderly and co-medicated patients) where the benefits of treatment outweigh the risk of adverse effects. In this article, we attempt to overview the available real-world data of remdesivir pharmacotherapy. With the unpredictable course of COVID-19, we need to utilize all available knowledge to bridge the gap between clinical research and clinical practice and be sufficiently prepared for the future.

Time from symptoms onset to remdesivir is associated with the risk of ICU admission: a multicentric analyses

BACKGROUND

Shorter duration of symptoms before remdesivir has been associated with better outcomes. Our goal was to evaluate variables associated with the need of ICU admission in a cohort of hospitalized patients for COVID-19 under remdesivir including the period from symptoms onset to remdesivir.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective multicentric study analysing all patients admitted with COVID-19 in 9 Spanish hospitals who received treatment with remdesivir in October 2020. The main outcome was the need of ICU admission after 24 h of the first dose of remdesivir.

RESULTS

In our cohort of 497 patients, the median of days from symptom onset to remdesivir was 5 days, and 70 of them (14.1%) were later admitted into ICU. The clinical outcomes associated with ICU admission were days from symptoms onset (5 vs. 6; p = 0.023), clinical signs of severe disease (respiratory rate, neutrophil count, ferritin levels and very-high mortality rate in SEIMC-Score) and the use of corticosteroids and anti-inflammatory drugs before ICU. The only variable significatively associated with risk reduction in the Cox-regression analyses was ≤ 5 days from symptoms onset to RDV (HR: 0.54, CI95%: 0.31-0.92; p = 0.024).

CONCLUSION

For patients admitted to the hospital with COVID-19, the prescription of remdesivir within 5 days from symptoms onset diminishes the need of ICU admission.

Association between the overall burden of comorbidity and Ct values among the older patients with Omicron infection: Mediated by inflammation

Objectives

To investigate the associations between the overall burden of comorbidity, inflammatory indicators in plasma and Ct values among the elderly with COVID-19.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective observational study. The results of each nucleic acid test of during hospitalization were obtained. Linear regression models assessed the associations between the overall burden of comorbidity, inflammatory indicators in plasma and Ct values among the elderly. A causal mediation analysis was performed to assess the mediation effects of inflammatory indicators on the association between the overall burden of comorbidity and Ct values.

Results

A total of 767 COVID-19 patients aged ≥ 60 years were included between April 2022 and May 2022. Patients with a high burden of comorbidity had significantly lower Ct values of the ORF gene than subjects with a low burden of comorbidity (median, 24.81 VS 26.58, P &lt; 0.05). Linear regression models showed that a high burden of comorbidity was significantly associated with higher inflammatory responses, including white blood cell count, neutrophil count and C-reactive protein. Also, white blood cell count, neutrophil count, C-reactive protein and the overall burden of comorbidity assessed by age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index were independent risk factors for the Ct values. A mediation analysis detected the mediation effect of white blood cells on the association between the burden of comorbidity and Ct values, with the indirect effect estimates of 0.381 (95% CI: 0.166, 0.632, P &lt; 0.001). Similarly, the indirect effect of C-reactive protein was -0.307 (95% CI: -0.645, -0.064, P = 0.034). White blood cells and C-reactive protein significantly mediated the relationship between the burden of comorbidity and Ct values by 29.56% and 18.13% of the total effect size, respectively.

Conclusions

Inflammation mediated the association between the overall burden of comorbidity and Ct values among elderly with COVID-19, which suggests that combined immunomodulatory therapies could reduce the Ct values for such patients with a high burden of comorbidity.

Remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Remdesivir is an antiviral medicine approved for the treatment of mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This led to widespread implementation, although the available evidence remains inconsistent. This update aims to fill current knowledge gaps by identifying, describing, evaluating, and synthesising all evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the effects of remdesivir on clinical outcomes in COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of remdesivir and standard care compared to standard care plus/minus placebo on clinical outcomes in patients treated for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (which comprises the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and medRxiv) as well as Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded and Emerging Sources Citation Index) and WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies, without language restrictions. We conducted the searches on 31 May 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We included RCTs evaluating remdesivir and standard care for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to standard care plus/minus placebo irrespective of disease severity, gender, ethnicity, or setting. We excluded studies that evaluated remdesivir for the treatment of other coronavirus diseases.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess risk of bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane RoB 2 tool for RCTs. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach for outcomes that were reported according to our prioritised categories: all-cause mortality, in-hospital mortality, clinical improvement (being alive and ready for discharge up to day 28) or worsening (new need for invasive mechanical ventilation or death up to day 28), quality of life, serious adverse events, and adverse events (any grade). We differentiated between non-hospitalised individuals with asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection or mild COVID-19 and hospitalised individuals with moderate to severe COVID-19.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs with 11,218 participants diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection and a mean age of 53.6 years, of whom 5982 participants were randomised to receive remdesivir. Most participants required low-flow oxygen at baseline. Studies were mainly conducted in high- and upper-middle-income countries. We identified two studies that are awaiting classification and five ongoing studies. Effects of remdesivir in hospitalised individuals with moderate to severe COVID-19 With moderate-certainty evidence, remdesivir probably makes little or no difference to all-cause mortality at up to day 28 (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.06; risk difference (RD) 8 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 21 fewer to 6 more; 4 studies, 7142 participants), day 60 (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.05; RD 35 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 73 fewer to 12 more; 1 study, 1281 participants), or in-hospital mortality at up to day 150 (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.03; RD 11 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 25 fewer to 5 more; 1 study, 8275 participants). Remdesivir probably increases the chance of clinical improvement at up to day 28 slightly (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.17; RD 68 more per 1000, 95% CI 37 more to 105 more; 4 studies, 2514 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). It probably decreases the risk of clinical worsening within 28 days (hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.82; RD 135 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 198 fewer to 69 fewer; 2 studies, 1734 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). Remdesivir may make little or no difference to the rate of adverse events of any grade (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.18; RD 23 more per 1000, 95% CI 46 fewer to 104 more; 4 studies, 2498 participants; low-certainty evidence), or serious adverse events (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.07; RD 44 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 96 fewer to 19 more; 4 studies, 2498 participants; low-certainty evidence). We considered risk of bias to be low, with some concerns for mortality and clinical course. We had some concerns for safety outcomes because participants who had died did not contribute information. Without adjustment, this leads to an uncertain amount of missing values and the potential for bias due to missing data. Effects of remdesivir in non-hospitalised individuals with mild COVID-19 One of the nine RCTs was conducted in the outpatient setting and included symptomatic people with a risk of progression. No deaths occurred within the 28 days observation period. We are uncertain about clinical improvement due to very low-certainty evidence. Remdesivir probably decreases the risk of clinical worsening (hospitalisation) at up to day 28 (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.75; RD 46 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 57 fewer to 16 fewer; 562 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not find any data for quality of life. Remdesivir may decrease the rate of serious adverse events at up to 28 days (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.70; RD 49 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 60 fewer to 20 fewer; 562 participants; low-certainty evidence), but it probably makes little or no difference to the risk of adverse events of any grade (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.10; RD 42 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 111 fewer to 46 more; 562 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We considered risk of bias to be low for mortality, clinical improvement, and safety outcomes. We identified a high risk of bias for clinical worsening.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence up to 31 May 2022, remdesivir probably has little or no effect on all-cause mortality or in-hospital mortality of individuals with moderate to severe COVID-19. The hospitalisation rate was reduced with remdesivir in one study including participants with mild to moderate COVID-19. It may be beneficial in the clinical course for both hospitalised and non-hospitalised patients, but certainty remains limited. The applicability of the evidence to current practice may be limited by the recruitment of participants from mostly unvaccinated populations exposed to early variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus at the time the studies were undertaken.  Future studies should provide additional data on the efficacy and safety of remdesivir for defined core outcomes in COVID-19 research, especially for different population subgroups.

Antiviral drugs against SARS-CoV-2

The use of antiviral drugs represents an important progress in the therapeutic management of COVID-19, leading to a substantial reduction of SARS-CoV-2-related complications and mortality. In immunocompetent host, peak viral replication occurs around the symptom's onset, and it prolongs for 5 to 7 days that is the window of opportunity for giving an antiviral. Accordingly, early and rapid diagnostic of the infection in the outpatient clinic is essential as well as the availability of oral agents that can be easily prescribe. Remdesivir has demonstrated its efficacy in hospitalized patients requiring oxygen support and in mild/moderate cases to avoid the hospitalization, however, the intravenous administration limits its use among outpatients. Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir are potent oral antiviral agents. In the present review we discuss the potential targets against SARS-CoV-2, and an overview of the main characteristics and clinical results with the available antiviral agents for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2.

Qualitative Subgenomic RNA to Monitor the Response to Remdesivir in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: Impact on the Length of Hospital Stay and Mortality

BACKGROUND

There is no reliable microbiological marker to guide the indication and the response to antiviral treatment in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to evaluate the dynamics of subgenomic RNA (sgRNA) in patients with COVID-19 before and after receiving treatment with remdesivir.

METHODS

We included consecutive patients admitted for COVID-19 who received remdesivir according to our institutional protocol and accepted to participate in the study. A nasopharyngeal swab for quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) was collected at baseline and after 3 and 5 days of treatment with remdesivir. Genomic and sgRNA were analyzed in those samples and main comorbidities and evolution were collected for the analyses. The main outcomes were early discharge (≤10 days) and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 117 patients were included in the study, of whom 24 had a negative sgRNA at baseline, with 62.5% (15/24) receiving early discharge (≤10 days) and no deaths in this group. From the 93 remaining patients, 62 had a negative sgRNA at day 5 with 37/62 (59.6%) with early discharge and a mortality rate of 4.8% (3/62). In the subgroup of 31 patients with positive sgRNA after 5 days of remdesivir, the early discharge rate was 29% (9/31) and the mortality rate was 16.1% (5/31). In multivariable analyses, the variables associated with early discharge were negative sgRNA at day 3 and not needing treatment with corticosteroids or intensive care unit admission.

CONCLUSIONS

Qualitative sgRNA could help in monitoring the virological response in patients who receive remdesivir. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Adjunctive Recombinant Human Plasma Gelsolin for Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pneumonia

Background

Excessive inflammation contributes to the morbidity and mortality of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. Recombinant human plasma gelsolin (rhu-pGSN) improves disease outcomes in diverse experimental models of infectious and noninfectious inflammation.

Methods

In a blinded, randomized study, 61 subjects with documented COVID-19 pneumonia having a World Health Organization (WHO) Severity Score of 4 to 6 and evidence of a hyperinflammatory state were treated with standard care and either adjunctive rhu-pGSN 12 mg/kg or an equal volume of saline placebo given intravenously at entry, 12 hours, and 36 hours. The prespecified coprimary outcomes were survival without major respiratory, hemodynamic, or renal support on Day 14 and the incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) during the 90-day study period.

Results

All subjects receiving ≥1 dose of study drug were analyzed. Fifty-four of 61 subjects (88.5%) were WHO severity level 4 at entry. The proportions of subjects alive without support on Day 14 were 25 of 30 rhu-pGSN recipients (83.3%) and 27 of 31 placebo recipients (87.1%). Over the duration of the study, WHO Severity Scores improved similarly in both treatment groups. No statistically significant differences were observed between treatment groups at any time point examined. Two subjects died in each group. Numerically fewer subjects in the rhu-pGSN group had SAEs (5 subjects; 16.7%) or ≥ Grade 3 adverse events (5 subjects; 16.7%) than in the placebo group (8 subjects [25.8%] and 9 subjects [29.0%], respectively), mostly involving the lungs. Three rhu-pGSN recipients (10.0%) were intubated compared to 6 placebo recipients (19.4%).

Conclusions

Overall, subjects in this study did well irrespective of treatment arm. When added to dexamethasone and remdesivir, no definitive benefit was demonstrated for rhu-pGSN relative to placebo. Safety signals were not identified after the administration of 3 doses of 12 mg/kg rhu-pGSN over 36 hours. The frequencies of SAEs and intubation were numerically fewer in the rhu-pGSN group compared with placebo.

Real-life data on monoclonal antibodies and antiviral drugs in Italian inborn errors of immunity patients during COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with Inborn Errors of Immunity have been infected by SARS-CoV-2 virus showing a spectrum of disease ranging from asymptomatic to severe COVID-19. A fair number of patients did not respond adequately to SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations, thus early therapeutic or prophylactic measures were needed to prevent severe or fatal course or COVID-19 and to reduce the burden of hospitalizations.

METHODS

Longitudinal, multicentric study on patients with Inborn Errors of Immunity immunized with mRNA vaccines treated with monoclonal antibodies and/or antiviral agents at the first infection and at reinfection by SARS-CoV-2. Analyses of efficacy were performed according to the different circulating SARS-CoV-2 strains.

RESULTS

The analysis of the cohort of 192 SARS-CoV-2 infected patients, across 26 months, showed the efficacy of antivirals on the risk of hospitalization, while mabs offered a positive effect on hospitalization, and COVID-19 severity. This protection was consistent across the alpha, delta and early omicron waves, although the emergence of BA.2 reduced the effect of available mabs. Hospitalized patients treated with mabs and antivirals had a lower risk of ICU admission. We reported 16 re-infections with a length of SARS-CoV-2 positivity at second infection shorter among patients treated with mabs. Treatment with antivirals and mabs was safe.

CONCLUSIONS

The widespread use of specific therapy, vaccination and better access to care might have contributed to mitigate risk of mortality, hospital admission, and severe disease. However, the rapid spread of new viral strains underlines that mabs and antiviral beneficial effects should be re- evaluated over time.