Effectiveness of Paxlovid, an Oral Antiviral Drug, Against the Omicron BA.5 Variant in Korea: Severe Progression and Death Between July and November 2022

[Effectiveness and safety of nirmatrelvir + ritonavir in COVID-19. NiRCoV Study]

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effectiveness and potential safety concerns of Nirmatrelvir + ritonavir (NMV-r) (Paxlovid®) in adults with mild-moderate COVID-19 disease at high risk of progression.

DESIGN

Descriptive cross-sectional observational study.

SETTING

Castilla y León, Spain.

PARTICIPANTS

134 patients ≥18 years old with COVID-19 at high risk of progression to severe disease, who were treated between June and September 2022 with NMV-r.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS

The most relevant drug interactions with concomitant medication were obtained from pharmaceutical validation records. From the monitoring of hospital admissions and deaths in the 28 days following the start of treatment, information regarding the effectiveness of the treatment was obtained.

RESULTS

57.5% were women, the average age±SD was 69.7±17.1, 68.0% received NMV-r in the first two days of the start of symptoms, 74.6% were at home, and 95.7% were vaccinated. The main risk condition for disease progression was being immunocompromised (74.5%), followed by being >65 years old, vaccinated, but with risk factors (21.2%). A total of 62.9% had relevant interactions, with an average±SD of 1.7±1.0 per patient. 2.2% required hospital admission and 3.0% died.

CONCLUSIONS

NMV-r has been effective in preventing severe forms of COVID-19 and hospital admissions in at-risk populations with a high vaccination rate. The prevalence of potential interactions is high, however, collaboration between family physicians and pharmacists allows NMV-r to be used safely.

Selected Acute Safety Events Following the Use of Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir or Molnupiravir for COVID-19: A Nationwide Cohort Study in South Korea

There had been concerns about the acute complications during or shortly after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMVr) and molnupiravir (MOL). This study aimed to compare the risks of selected acute safety events in patients treated with or without NMVr or MOL using the COVID-19 oral treatment safety assessment data, constructed through the linkage of nationwide databases: National COVID-19 registry, Real-time Prescription Surveillance, and National Health Insurance data. We identified all adults diagnosed with COVID-19 between January and November 2022, and then constructed two cohorts by matching up to four patients without antiviral treatment records to NMVr or MOL users using propensity score matching. Outcomes of interest were incident-selected cardiac (i.e., atrial fibrillation, other arrhythmia, bradycardia), neurological (i.e., seizure, neuropathy, encephalomyelitis), and miscellaneous (i.e., acute pancreatitis, acute liver injury, dysgeusia) events. A total of 739,935 NMVr users were matched with 2,951,690 comparators and 150,431 MOL users with 759,521 comparators. NMVr users were at lower risk for developing selected cardiac events (hazard ratio 0.74 [95% CI 0.65-0.87] for atrial fibrillation, 0.81 [0.65-0.99] for other arrhythmia, and 0.82 [0.70-0.96] for bradycardia) and dysgeusia (0.58 [0.45-0.74]). For MOL users, the risk was lower for atrial fibrillation (0.72 [0.53-0.96]) and dysgeusia (0.34 [0.18-0.65]). Overall, there were no increased risks of acute complications during and shortly after treatment with oral COVID-19 antivirals. Rather, the findings underscore their effectiveness in attenuating the risk of potential acute sequelae of COVID-19.

Amphibian-Derived Peptides as Natural Inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 Main Protease (Mpro): A Combined In Vitro and In Silico Approach

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has highlighted the urgent need for novel therapeutic agents targeting viral enzymes such as the main protease (Mpro), which plays a crucial role in viral replication. In this study, we investigate the inhibitory potential of 23 peptides isolated from the skin of amphibians belonging to the Hylidae and Leptodactylidae families against SARS-CoV-2 Mpro. Five peptides demonstrated significant inhibition using a colorimetric Mpro inhibition assay, with IC50 values ranging from 41 to 203 µM. Among these, peptides Hp-1081 and Hp-1971, derived from Boana pulchella, exhibited the strongest activity, comparable to the natural Mpro inhibitor quercetin. The binding mechanism of the most potent peptide, Hp-1081, was further investigated through docking and molecular dynamics (MDs) simulations and energetic analysis, which revealed key Mpro residues involved in the binding process. Moreover, because SARS-CoV-2 infection can induce ROS overproduction, the antioxidant activity of Hp-1081 was assessed, reaching 48% of DPPH radical scavenging activity at 100 µM. The most potent peptides also showed no toxicity against human erythrocytes and Artemia salina. This study provides insight into the antiviral potential of amphibian-derived peptides and highlights their applicability as natural templates for drug development targeting coronaviruses.

Nationwide Target Trial Emulation Evaluating the Clinical Effectiveness of Oral Antivirals for COVID-19 in Korea

BACKGROUND

Despite the proven effectiveness of oral antivirals against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in randomized trials, their clinical reevaluation is vital in the context of widespread immunity and milder prevalent variants. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of oral antivirals for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study utilized a target trial emulation framework to analyze patients with COVID-19 aged 60+ from January to December 2022. Data were obtained from the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency and Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. The study involved 957,036 patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and 243,360 treated with molnupiravir, each compared with the matched control groups. Primary outcome was progression to critical COVID-19 requiring advanced respiratory support. Secondary outcomes included progression to severe COVID-19, need for supplemental oxygen, and death within 30 days of the onset of COVID-19. Number needed to treat (NNT) derived from the absolute risk reduction.

RESULTS

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was significantly associated with a reduced risk of severe (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.823; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.803-0.843), critical (aOR, 0.560; 95% CI, 0.503-0.624), and fatal COVID-19 (aOR, 0.694; 95% CI, 0.647-0.744). Similarly, molnupiravir reduced the risk of severe (aOR, 0.895; 95% CI, 0.856-0.937), critical (aOR, 0.672; 95% CI, 0.559-0.807), and fatal cases (aOR, 0.679; 95% CI, 0.592-0.779). NNTs for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were 203.71 (severe), 1,230.12 (critical), and 691.50 (death); for molnupiravir, they were 352.70 (severe), 1,398.62 (critical), and 862.98 (death). Higher effectiveness was associated with older adults, unvaccinated individuals, and the late pandemic phase.

CONCLUSION

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir are effective in preventing progression to severe disease in elderly adults with COVID-19.

Current status and clinical outcomes of pharmacotherapies according to SARS-CoV-2 mutations in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19: a retrospective single center study

BACKGROUND

During the pandemic period, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mutated, leading to changes in the disease's severity and the therapeutic effect of drugs accordingly. This study aimed to present the actual use of therapeutics and clinical outcomes based on the prevalence of each variant using real-world data.

METHODS

We analyzed the electronic medical records of adult patients admitted to Busan Medical Center after confirming coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from February 1, 2020, to June 30, 2022. Patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who were at a high risk of disease progression were selected as study subjects, and the time period was classified according to the variants as ancestral strain, Delta variant, or Omicron variant. We compared drug use status and clinical outcomes by time period.

RESULTS

Among all 3,091 patients, corticosteroids were the most commonly used therapy (56.0%), being used most frequently in the Delta variant (93.0%), followed by the Omicron variant (42.9%) and ancestral strain (21.2%). Regdanvimab accounted for the majority of therapeutic use in the Delta variant (82.9%) and ancestral strain (76.8%), whereas remdesivir was most frequently used during the Omicron variant period (68.9%). The composite outcomes of death or disease aggravation were ranked in the order of the Delta variant, Omicron variant, and ancestral strain (14.5, 11.9, and 6.0%, respectively, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Regdanvimab was primarily used during the ancestral strain period, regdanvimab plus corticosteroids during the Delta variant period, and remdesivir during the Omicron variant period. The rate of death or disease aggravation was highest in the Delta variant, followed by the Omicron variant and the ancestral strain.

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.

Effect of Paxlovid in COVID-19 treatment during the periods of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.5 and BN.1 subvariant dominance in the Republic of Korea: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study was conducted to assess the efficacy of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), particularly those aged 60 years and older. Using real-world data, the period during which the BN.1 Omicron variant was dominant was compared to the period dominated by the BA.5 variant.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, data were collected regarding 2,665,281 patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 between July 24, 2022, and March 31, 2023. Propensity score matching was utilized to match patients who received nirmatrelvir/ ritonavir in a 1:4 ratio between BN.1 and BA.5 variant groups. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was employed to assess the effects of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir within these groups.

RESULTS

Compared to the prior period, the efficacy of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir did not significantly differ during the interval of Omicron BN.1 variant dominance in the Republic of Korea. Among patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, a significantly lower risk of mortality was observed in the BN.1 group (odds ratio [OR], 0.698; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.557-0.875) compared to the BA.5 group. However, this treatment did not significantly reduce the risk of severe or critical illness, including death, for those in the BN.1 group (OR, 0.856; 95% CI, 0.728-1.007).

CONCLUSION

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir has maintained its effectiveness against COVID-19, even with the emergence of the BN.1 Omicron subvariant. Consequently, we strongly recommend the administration of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir to patients exhibiting COVID-19-related symptoms, irrespective of the dominant Omicron variant or their vaccination status, to mitigate disease severity and decrease the risk of mortality.

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.

Efficacy and safety of casirivimab-imdevimab combination on COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis randomized controlled trial

Background

The advantages and disadvantages of casirivimab-imdevimab for coronavirus disease 2019 are not well understood. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of relevant literature to determine the therapeutic effectiveness and potential side effects of casirivimab-imdevimab in COVID-19 patients.

Methods

Databases were searched from the time of their commencement until February 28th, 2023. The primary results evaluated were the death rate at 28 days, progression of current clinical symptoms within 28 days, viral load, discharge from hospital, and any adverse events. Also, we contrasted the effects of the casirivimab-imdevimab treatment with placebo or standard of care. The protocol registration for this systematic review and meta-analysis was recorded in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023412835).

Results

A total of eight studies were included, comprising 19,819 patients, and conducted a qualitative assessment of their risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Casirivimab-imdevimab effectively reduced the mortality rate (OR = 0.62; 95 % CI of 0.40-0.98; p = 0.04; I2 = 30 %) and reduced the progression of clinical symptoms (OR = 0.86; 95 % CI of 0.79-0.93; p = 0.0003; I2 = 57 %). Casirivimab-imdevimab also improved viral load clearance and hospital discharge. Additionally, the trials' findings demonstrated a slight decrease in the likelihood of adverse events occurring with the use of casirivimab-imdevimab.

Conclusion

Our research suggests that casirivimab-imdevimab may be a valuable, safe, and effective anti-SARS-CoV-2 regimen.

Effectiveness of Molnupiravir Treatment in Patients with COVID-19 in Korea: A Propensity Score Matched Study

BACKGROUND

The MOVe-OUT (efficacy and safety of molnupiravir [MK-4482] in non-hospitalized adult participants with COVID-19 [MK-4482-002]) trial reported that the administration of molnupiravir in unvaccinated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) before the Omicron epidemic showed a preventive effect of 31% against hospitalization and death. However, studies on the preventive effect of molnupiravir against progression to severe disease and death in patients with COVID-19 during the Omicron epidemic are limited. This study aimed to evaluate the preventive effect of molnupiravir against severe/critical illness or death and death in Korean patients with COVID-19 who were vaccinated mostly during the Omicron epidemic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study used large-scale retrospective cohort data to select patients with COVID-19 who were either treated or not treated with molnupiravir, between August 2022 and March 2023, at a ratio of 1 : 4 using the propensity score matching method. In total, 762,768 patients comprised the non- administered group, and 190,692 patients comprised the molnupiravir-administered group. The preventive effect of molnupiravir against severe/critical illness or death and death was analyzed using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The preventive effect of molnupiravir against severe/critical illness or death and death, represented by the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI), in the molnupiravir-administered and non-administered group was (OR: 0.714; CI: 0.667 - 0.764) and (OR: 0.749; CI: 0.682 - 0.823), respectively. As age increased, the preventive effect against severe/critical illness or death and death increased. The preventive effect against severe/critical illness or death at ≥60 years was (OR: 0.669; CI: 0.624 - 0.717), at ≥70 years was (OR: 0.614; CI: 0.570 - 0.661), and at ≥80 years was (OR: 0.563; CI: 0.515 - 0.615). The preventive effect against death at ≥60 years was (OR: 0.729; CI: 0.663 - 0.802), at ≥70 years was (OR: 0.676; CI: 0.612 - 0.747), and at ≥80 years was (OR: 0.622; CI: 0.554 - 0.698).

CONCLUSION

Although molnupiravir showed a relatively weak preventive effect against severe/critical illness or death (29%) and death (25%) among patients with COVID-19, it exhibited a stronger protective effect in older patients than in younger patients. In particular, the preventive effect against severe/critical illness or death (44%) and death (38%) in those aged ≥80 years was pronounced. This study strongly suggests that molnupiravir administration can alleviate the burden on the medical system, and treat patients with COVID-19 effectively by reducing its progression to severe disease and death.

Effectiveness and Adverse Events of Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Versus Molnupiravir for COVID-19 in Outpatient Setting: Multicenter Prospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

In this study, we aimed to compare the effectiveness and adverse reactions of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir in high-risk outpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

This multicenter prospective observational study evaluated the rate of hospitalization, death, and adverse events within 28 days of oral antiviral agent prescription (molnupiravir, n = 240; nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, n = 240) to 480 nonhospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 from August 2, 2022 to March 31, 2023.

RESULTS

Patients receiving molnupiravir had a higher prevalence of comorbidities (85.8% vs. 70.4%; P < 0.001) and a higher Charlson comorbidity index (2.8 ± 1.4 vs. 2.5 ± 1.5; P = 0.009) than those receiving nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Three patients required hospitalization (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir group, n = 1 [0.4%]; molnupiravir group, n = 2 [0.8%]; P = 1.000). Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was associated with a higher risk of adverse events than molnupiravir (odds ratio [OR], 1.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-3.03), especially for patients aged 65 years and older (OR, 3.04; 95% CI, 1.71-5.39). The severity of adverse events in both groups was mild to moderate and improved after discontinuation of medication. In the molnupiravir group, age ≥ 65 years (OR, 0.43 95% CI, 0.22-0.86) and appropriate vaccination (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.15-0.91) reduced the occurrence of adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The rates of hospitalization and death were low and not significantly different between high-risk patients who received either nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir. Although adverse events were more frequent with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir than with molnupiravir, none were severe. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir can be safely used to treat COVID-19, while molnupiravir could be considered as an alternative treatment option for high-risk groups.