Real-World Evidence of the Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibody Sotrovimab for Preventing Hospitalization and Mortality in COVID-19 Outpatients

COVID-19 outcomes in haemopoietic stem cell transplant recipients in Western Australia: the value of vaccination and antiviral therapy

Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) mortality rates among haemopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients are high, ranging between 20% and 40%. We prospectively evaluated the mortality outcomes of COVID-19 in Western Australian HSCT patients. A total of 32/492 (6.5%) HSCT recipients contracted COVID-19 during the study, of whom 30/32 (94%) developed mild or asymptomatic disease. Two allogeneic HSCT patients were hospitalised for severe COVID-19; one patient died. Stringent healthcare, social isolation practices, aggressive vaccination programmes and rapid access to COVID-19 antivirals may have promoted mild COVID-19 illness in Western Australian HSCT patients, resulting in one of the lowest COVID-19 mortality rates in HSCT recipients worldwide.

Association between monoclonal antibody therapy, vaccination, and longer-term symptom resolution after acute COVID-19

Effective therapies for reducing post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) symptoms are lacking. Evaluate the association between monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatment or COVID-19 vaccination with symptom recovery in COVID-19 participants. The longitudinal survey-based cohort study was conducted from April 2021 to January 2022 across a multihospital Colorado health system. Adults ≥18 years with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test were included. Primary exposures were mAb treatment and COVID-19 vaccination. The primary outcome was time to symptom resolution after SARS-CoV-2 positive test date. The secondary outcome was hospitalization within 28 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Analysis included 1612 participants, 539 mAb treated, and 486 with ≥2 vaccinations. Time to symptom resolution was similar between mAb treated versus untreated patients (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.90, 95% CI: 0.77-1.04). Time to symptom resolution was shorter for patients who received ≥2 vaccinations compared to those unvaccinated (aHR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.31-1.88). 28-day hospitalization risk was lower for patients receiving mAb therapy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.19-0.50) and ≥2 vaccinations (aOR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.20-0.55), compared with untreated or unvaccinated status. Analysis included 1612 participants, 539 mAb treated, and 486 with ≥2 vaccinations. Time to symptom resolution was similar between mAb treated versus untreated patients (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.90, 95% CI: 0.77-1.04). Time to symptom resolution was shorter for patients who received ≥2 vaccinations compared to those unvaccinated (aHR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.31-1.88). 28-day hospitalization risk was lower for patients receiving mAb therapy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.19-0.50) and ≥2 vaccinations (aOR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.20-0.55), compared with untreated or unvaccinated status. COVID-19 vaccination, but not mAb therapy, was associated with a shorter time to symptom resolution. Both were associated with lower 28-day hospitalization.

Real-World Effectiveness of Sotrovimab for the Early Treatment of COVID-19: Evidence from the US National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been an unprecedented healthcare crisis, one that threatened to overwhelm health systems and prompted an urgent need for early treatment options for patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at high risk for progression to severe disease. Randomised clinical trials established the safety and efficacy of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) early in the pandemic; in vitro data subsequently led to use of the mAbs being discontinued, without clear evidence on how these data were linked to outcomes. In this study, we describe and compare real-world outcomes for patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19 treated with sotrovimab versus untreated patients.

METHODS

Electronic health records from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) were used to identify US patients (aged ≥ 12 years) diagnosed with COVID-19 (positive test or ICD-10: U07.1) in an ambulatory setting (27 September 2021-30 April 2022) who met Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) high-risk criteria. Patients receiving the mAb sotrovimab within 10 days of diagnosis were assigned to the sotrovimab cohort, with the day of infusion as the index date. Untreated patients (no evidence of early mAb treatment, prophylactic mAb or oral antiviral treatment) were assigned to the untreated cohort, with an imputed index date based on the time distribution between diagnosis and sotrovimab infusion in the sotrovimab cohort. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation or death (both all-cause) within 29 days of index, reported as descriptive rate and adjusted [via inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)] odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Of nearly 2.9 million patients diagnosed with COVID-19 during the analysis period, 4992 met the criteria for the sotrovimab cohort, and 541,325 were included in the untreated cohort. Before weighting, significant differences were noted between the cohorts; for example, patients in the sotrovimab cohort were older (60 years versus 54 years), were more likely to be white (85% versus 75%) and met more EUA criteria (mean 3.1 versus 2.2) versus the untreated cohort. The proportions of patients with 29-day hospitalisation or death were 3.5% (176/4992) and 4.5% (24,163/541,325) in the sotrovimab and untreated cohorts, respectively (unadjusted OR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.67, 0.91; p = 0.001). In adjusted analysis, sotrovimab was associated with a 25% reduction in the odds of hospitalisation or death compared with the untreated cohort (IPTW-adjusted OR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.61, 0.92; p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Sotrovimab demonstrated clinical effectiveness in preventing severe outcomes (hospitalisation, mortality) in the period 27 September 2021-30 April 2022, which included Delta and Omicron BA.1 variants and an early surge of Omicron BA.2 variant.

Real-world use of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in COVID-19 outpatients during BQ.1, BQ.1.1., and XBB.1.5 predominant omicron variants in three U.S. health systems: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Ritonavir-boosted Nirmatrelvir (NMV-r), a protease inhibitor with in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, can reduce risk of progression to severe COVID-19 among high-risk individuals infected with earlier variants, but less is known about its effectiveness against omicron variants BQ.1/BQ.1.1/XBB.1.5. We sought to evaluate effectiveness of NMV-r in BQ.1/BQ.1.1/XBB.1.5 omicron variants by comparing hospitalisation rates to NMV-r treated patients during a previous omicron phase and to contemporaneous untreated patients.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of non-hospitalised adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection using real-world data from three health systems in Colorado and Utah, and compared hospitalisation rates in NMV-r-treated patients in a BA.2/BA.2.12.1/BA.4/BA.5 variant-predominant (first) phase (April 3, 2022-November 12, 2022), with a BQ.1/BQ.1.1/XBB.1.5 variant-predominant (second) phase (November 13, 2022-March 7, 2023). In the primary analysis, we used Firth logistic regression with a two-segment (phase) linear time model, and pre-specified non-inferiority bounds for the mean change between segments. In a pre-specified secondary analysis, we inferred NMV-r effectiveness in a cohort of treated and untreated patients infected during the second phase. For both analyses, the primary outcome was 28-day all-cause hospitalisation. Subgroup analyses assessed treatment effect heterogeneity.

Findings

In the primary analysis, 28-day all-cause hospitalisation rates in NMV-r treated patients in the second phase (n = 12,061) were non-inferior compared to the first phase (n = 25,075) (198 [1.6%] vs. 345 [1.4%], adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 0.76 [95% CI 0.54-1.06]), with consistent results among secondary endpoints and key subgroups. Secondary cohort analyses revealed additional evidence for NMV-r effectiveness, with reduced 28-day hospitalisation rates among treated patients compared to untreated patients during a BQ.1/BQ.1.1/XBB.1.5 predominant phase (198/12,061 [1.6%] vs. 376/10,031 [3.7%], aOR 0.34 [95% CI 0.30-0.38), findings robust to additional sensitivity analyses.

Interpretation

Real-world evidence from major US healthcare systems suggests ongoing NMV-r effectiveness in preventing hospitalisation during a BQ.1/BQ.1.1/XBB.1.5-predominant phase in the U.S, supporting its continued use in similar patient populations.

Funding

U.S. National Institutes of Health.

Sotrovimab: A Review of Its Efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 Variants

Among the anti-Spike monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), the S-309 derivative sotrovimab was the most successful in having the longest temporal window of clinical use, showing a high degree of resiliency to SARS-CoV-2 evolution interrupted only by the appearance of the BA.2.86* variant of interest (VOI). This success undoubtedly reflects rational selection to target a highly conserved epitope in coronavirus Spike proteins. We review here the efficacy of sotrovimab against different SARS-CoV-2 variants in outpatients and inpatients, discussing both randomized controlled trials and real-world evidence. Although it could not be anticipated at the time of its development and introduction, sotrovimab's use in immunocompromised individuals who harbor large populations of variant viruses created the conditions for its eventual demise, as antibody selection and viral evolution led to its eventual withdrawal due to inefficacy against later variant lineages. Despite this, based on observational and real-world data, some authorities have continued to promote the use of sotrovimab, but the lack of binding to newer variants strongly argues for the futility of continued use. The story of sotrovimab highlights the power of modern biomedical science to generate novel therapeutics while also providing a cautionary tale for the need to devise strategies to minimize the emergence of resistance to antibody-based therapeutics.

Efficacy of combined COVID-19 convalescent plasma with oral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase inhibitor treatment versus neutralizing monoclonal antibody therapy in COVID-19 outpatients: a multi-center, non-inferiority, open-label randomized controlled trial (PlasMab)

IMPORTANCE

This pivotal study reveals that high neutralizing titer COVID-19 convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) combined with favipiravir (FPV) is non-inferior to sotrovimab in preventing hospitalization and severe outcomes in outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and high-risk comorbidities. It underscores the potential of CPT-FPV as a viable alternative to neutralizing monoclonal antibodies like sotrovimab, especially amid emerging variants with spike protein mutations. The study's unique approach, comparing a monoclonal antibody with CPT, demonstrates the efficacy of early intervention using high neutralizing antibody titer CPT, even in populations with a significant proportion of elderly patients. These findings are crucial, considering the alternative treatment challenges, especially in resource-limited countries, posed by the rapidly mutating SARS-CoV-2 virus and the need for adaptable therapeutic strategies.

Passive antibody therapy in emerging infectious diseases

The epidemic of corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 and its variants of concern (VOCs) has been ongoing for over 3 years. Antibody therapies encompassing convalescent plasma, hyperimmunoglobulin, and neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) applied in passive immunotherapy have yielded positive outcomes and played a crucial role in the early COVID-19 treatment. In this review, the development path, action mechanism, clinical research results, challenges, and safety profile associated with the use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma, hyperimmunoglobulin, and mAbs were summarized. In addition, the prospects of applying antibody therapy against VOCs was assessed, offering insights into the coping strategies for facing new infectious disease outbreaks.

Effectiveness of Sotrovimab in Preventing COVID-19-Related Hospitalizations or Deaths Among US Veterans During Omicron BA.1

Background

The real-world clinical effectiveness of sotrovimab in preventing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related hospitalization or mortality among high-risk patients diagnosed with COVID-19, particularly after the emergence of the Omicron variant, needs further research.

Method

Using data from the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system, we adopted a target trial emulation design in our study. Veterans aged ≥18 years, diagnosed with COVID-19 between December 1, 2021, and April 4, 2022, were included. Patients treated with sotrovimab (n = 2816) as part of routine clinical care were compared with all eligible but untreated patients (n = 11,250). Cox proportional hazards modeling estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for the association between receipt of sotrovimab and outcomes.

Results

Most (90%) sotrovimab recipients were ≥50 years old, and 64% had ≥2 mRNA vaccine doses or ≥1 dose of Ad26.COV2. During the period that BA.1 was dominant, compared with patients not treated, sotrovimab-treated patients had a 70% lower risk of hospitalization or mortality within 30 days (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.23-0.40). During BA.2 dominance, sotrovimab-treated patients had a 71% (HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.08-0.98) lower risk of 30-day COVID-19-related hospitalization, emergency room visits, or urgent care visits (defined as severe COVID-19) compared with patients not treated.

Conclusions

Using national real-world data from high-risk and predominantly vaccinated veterans, administration of sotrovimab, compared with contemporary standard treatment regimens, was associated with reduced risk of 30-day COVID-19-related hospitalization or all-cause mortality during the Omicron BA.1 period.

Using a web platform for equitable distribution of COVID-19 monoclonal antibodies: a case study in resource allocation

While medical countermeasures in COVID-19 have largely focused on vaccinations, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) were early outpatient treatment options for COVID-positive patients. In Minnesota, a centralized access platform was developed to offer access to mAbs that linked over 31,000 patients to care during its operation. The website allowed patients, their representative, or providers to screen the patient for mAbs against Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) criteria and connect them with a treatment site if provisionally eligible. A validated clinical risk scoring system was used to prioritize patients during times of scarcity. Both an ethics and a clinical subject matter expert group advised the Minnesota Department of Health on equitable approaches to distribution across a range of situations as the pandemic evolved. This case study outlines the implementation of this online platform and clinical outcomes of its users. We assess the impact of referral for mAbs on hospitalizations and death during a period of scarcity, finding in particular that vaccination conferred a substantially larger protection against hospitalization than a referral for mAbs, but among unvaccinated users that did not get a referral, chances of hospitalization increased by 4.1 percentage points.

Real-world data to evaluate effects of a multi-level dissemination strategy on access, outcomes, and equity of monoclonal antibodies for COVID-19

Introduction

Multi-level dissemination strategies are needed to increase equitable access to effective treatment for high-risk outpatients with COVID-19, particularly among patients from disproportionately affected communities. Yet assessing population-level impact of such strategies can be challenging.

Methods

In collaboration with key contributors in Colorado, we conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate a multi-level dissemination strategy for neutralizing monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatment. Real-world data included county-level, de-identified output from a statewide mAb referral registry linked with publicly available epidemiological data. Outcomes included weekly number of mAb referrals, unique referring clinicians, and COVID-19 hospitalization rates. We assessed weekly changes in outcomes after dissemination strategies launched in July 2021.

Results

Overall, mAb referrals increased from a weekly average of 3.0 to 15.5, with an increase of 1.3 to 42.1 additional referrals per county in each post-period week (p < .05). Number of referring clinicians increased from a weekly average of 2.2 to 9.7, with an additional 1.5 to 22.2 unique referring clinicians observed per county per week beginning 5 weeks post-launch (p < .001). Larger effects were observed in communities specifically prioritized by the dissemination strategies. There were no observed differences in COVID-19 hospitalization rates between counties with and without mAb treatment sites.

Conclusion

Real-world data can be used to estimate population impact of multi-level dissemination strategies. The launch of these strategies corresponded with increases in mAb referrals, but no apparent population-level effects on hospitalization outcomes. Strengths of this analytic approach include pragmatism and efficiency, whereas limitations include inability to control for other contemporaneous trends.

What Is the Efficacy of Sotrovimab in Reducing Disease Progression and Death in People with COVID-19 during the Omicron Era? Answers from a Real-Life Study

(1) Introduction: Since May 2021, sotrovimab has been available in Italy for early treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection and to prevent disease progression. However, some in vitro studies have questioned its efficacy on Omicron variants. Therefore, we aim to further investigate the efficacy of sotrovimab in real-life settings. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective study collecting medical records of people with SARS-CoV-2 infection evaluated in the infectious diseases units of Sassari, Foggia, and Bari, Italy. We included people with SARS-CoV-2 infection treated with sotrovimab and people who did not receive any treatment in 2022. The primary study outcome was to evaluate the efficacy of sotrovimab in reducing disease progression (defined as the necessity of starting oxygen supplementation) and COVID-19-related death. The secondary outcome was to evaluate the safety of sotrovimab. (3) Results: We included 689 people; of them, 341 were treated with sotrovimab, while 348 did not receive any treatment. Overall, we registered 161 (23.4%) disease progressions and 65 (9.4%) deaths, with a significant difference between treated and not-treated people (p < 0.001). In the multivariate logistic regression, increasing age [OR for ten years increasing age 1.23 (95%CI 1.04-1.45)] was associated with a higher risk of disease progression. In addition, cardiovascular disease [OR 1.69 (1.01-2.80), fever [OR 3.88 (95%CI 2.35-6.38)], and dyspnea [OR 7.24 (95%CI 4.17-12.58)] were associated with an increased risk of disease progression. In contrast, vaccination [OR 0.21 (95%CI 0.12-0.37)] and sotrovimab administration [OR 0.05 (95%CI 0.02-0.11)] were associated with a lower risk of developing severe COVID-19. Regarding mortality, people with older age [OR for ten years increasing age 1.36 (95%CI 1.09-1.69)] had a higher risk of death. In addition, in the multivariate analysis, cardiovascular disease lost statistical significance, while people on chemotherapy for haematological cancer [OR 4.07 (95%CI 1.45-11.4)] and those with dyspnea at diagnosis [OR 3.63 (95%CI 2.02-6.50)] had an increased risk of death. In contrast, vaccination [OR 0.37 (95%CI 0.20-0.68)] and sotrovimab treatment [OR 0.16 (95%CI 0.06-0.42)] were associated with lower risk. Only two adverse events were reported; one person complained of diarrhoea a few hours after sotrovimab administration, and one had an allergic reaction with cutaneous rash and itching. (4) Conclusions: Our study showed that sotrovimab treatment was associated with a reduction of the risk of disease progression and death in SARS-CoV-2-infected people, 70% of whom were over 65 years and a with high vaccination rate, with excellent safety. Therefore, our results reinforce the evidence about the efficacy and safety of sotrovimab during the Omicron era in a real-world setting.

Aptamer-Based Strategies to Address Challenges in COVID-19 Diagnosis and Treatments

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19), a highly contagious and rapidly spreading disease with significant fatality in the elderly population, has swept across the world since 2019. Since its first appearance, the causative agent, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has undergone multiple mutations, with Omicron as the predominant circulating variant of concern at the moment. The gold standard for diagnosis of COVID-19 by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) to detect the virus is laborious and requires well-trained personnel to perform sophisticated procedures. Also, the genetic variants of SARS-CoV-2 that arise regularly could result in false-negative detection. Meanwhile, the current COVID-19 treatments such as conventional medicine, complementary and alternative medicine, passive antibody therapy, and respiratory therapy are associated with adverse effects. Thus, there is an urgent need to discover novel diagnostic and therapeutic approaches against SARS-CoV-2 and its variants. Over the past 30 years, nucleic acid-based aptamers have gained increasing attention and serve as a promising alternative to the antibodies in the diagnostic and therapeutic fields with their uniqueness of being small, nonimmunogenicity, and thermally stable. Aptamer targeting the SARS-CoV-2 structural proteins or the host receptor proteins represent a powerful tool to control COVID-19 infection. In this review, challenges faced by currently available diagnostic and therapeutic tools for COVID-19 are underscored, along with how aptamers can shed a light on the current COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the critical factors affecting the discovery of high-affinity aptamers and their potential applications to control COVID-19 infection.

Real-world use of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in outpatients with COVID-19 during the era of omicron variants including BA.4 and BA.5 in Colorado, USA: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Nirmatrelvir is a protease inhibitor with in-vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, and ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir can reduce the risk of progression to severe COVID-19 among individuals at high risk infected with delta and early omicron variants. However, less is known about the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir during more recent BA.2, BA2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5 omicron variant surges. We used our real-world data platform to evaluate the effect of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment on 28-day hospitalisation, mortality, and emergency department visits among outpatients with early symptomatic COVID-19 during a SARS-CoV-2 omicron (BA.2, BA2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5) predominant period in Colorado, USA.

METHODS

We did a propensity-matched, retrospective, observational cohort study of non-hospitalised adult patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 between March 26 and Aug 25, 2022, using records from a statewide health system in Colorado. We obtained data from the electronic health records of University of Colorado Health, the largest health system in Colorado, with 13 hospitals and 141 000 annual hospital admissions, and with numerous ambulatory sites and affiliated pharmacies around the state. Included patients had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir medication order. Exclusion criteria were an order for or administration of other SARS-CoV-2 treatments within 10 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, hospitalisation at the time of positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and positive SARS-CoV-2 test more than 10 days before a nirmatrelvir-ritonavir order. We propensity score matched patients treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir with untreated patients. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause hospitalisation.

FINDINGS

Among 28 167 patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 between March 26 and Aug 25, 2022, 21 493 met the study inclusion criteria. 9881 patients received treatment with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and 11 612 were untreated. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment was associated with reduced 28-day all-cause hospitalisation compared with no antiviral treatment (61 [0·9%] of 7168 patients vs 135 [1·4%] of 9361 patients, adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0·45 [95% CI 0·33-0·62]; p<0·0001). Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment was also associated with reduced 28-day all-cause mortality (two [<0·1%] of 7168 patients vs 15 [0·2%] of 9361 patients; adjusted OR 0·15 [95% CI 0·03-0·50]; p=0·0010). Using subsequent emergency department visits as a surrogate for clinically significant relapse, we observed a decrease after nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment (283 [3·9%] of 7168 patients vs 437 [4·7%] of 9361 patients; adjusted OR 0·74 [95% CI 0·63-0·87]; p=0·0002).

INTERPRETATION

Real-world evidence reported during a BA.2, BA2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5 omicron surge showed an association between nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment and reduced 28-day all-cause hospitalisation, all-cause mortality, and visits to the emergency department. With results that are among the first to suggest effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for non-hospitalised patients during an omicron period inclusive of BA.4 and BA.5 subvariants, these data support nirmatrelvir-ritonavir as an ongoing first-line treatment for adults acutely infected with SARS-CoV-2.

FUNDING

US National Institutes of Health.

Clinical Efficacy of the Neutralizing Antibody Therapy Sotrovimab in Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 Subvariant Infections

Sotrovimab, an antibody active against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 that neutralizes antibodies, reduced the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization or death in studies conducted before the emergence of the Omicron variant. The objective of this study is to evaluate the clinical efficacy of sotrovimab in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 subvariant infections using a propensity score matching method. The propensity score-matched cohort study population was derived from patients who received sotrovimab. We derived a comparator group from an age- and sex-matched population who were recuperating in a medical facility after COVID-19 infection or from elderly person entrance facilities during the same period who were eligible for but did not receive sotrovimab treatment. In total, 642 patients in the BA.1 subvariant group and 202 in the BA.2 subvariant group and matched individuals were analyzed. The outcome was the requirement for oxygen therapy. In the treatment group, 26 patients with the BA.1 subvariant and 8 patients with the BA.2 subvariant received oxygen therapy. The administration of oxygen therapy was significantly lower in the treatment group than in the control group (BA.1 subvariant group, 4.0% vs. 8.7%, p = 0.0008; BA.2 subvariant group, 4.0% vs. 9.9%, p = 0.0296). All these patients were admitted to our hospitals and received additional therapy and then recovered. No deaths were observed in either group. Our results demonstrate that the sotrovimab antibody treatment may be associated with a reduction in the requirement for oxygen therapy among high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 subvariants.

Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibody Use and COVID-19 Infection Outcomes

Importance

Evidence on the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 therapies across a diverse population with varied risk factors is needed to inform clinical practice.

Objective

To assess the safety of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (nMAbs) for the treatment of COVID-19 and their association with adverse outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study included 167 183 patients from a consortium of 4 health care systems based in California, Minnesota, Texas, and Utah. The study included nonhospitalized patients 12 years and older with a positive COVID-19 laboratory test collected between November 9, 2020, and January 31, 2022, who met at least 1 emergency use authorization criterion for risk of a poor outcome.

Exposure

Four nMAb products (bamlanivimab, bamlanivimab-etesevimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, and sotrovimab) administered in the outpatient setting.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Clinical and SARS-CoV-2 genomic sequence data and propensity-adjusted marginal structural models were used to assess the association between treatment with nMAbs and 4 outcomes: all-cause emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalization, death, and a composite of hospitalization or death within 14 days and 30 days of the index date (defined as the date of the first positive COVID-19 test or the date of referral). Patient index dates were categorized into 4 variant epochs: pre-Delta (November 9, 2020, to June 30, 2021), Delta (July 1 to November 30, 2021), Delta and Omicron BA.1 (December 1 to 31, 2021), and Omicron BA.1 (January 1 to 31, 2022).

Results

Among 167 183 patients, the mean (SD) age was 47.0 (18.5) years; 95 669 patients (57.2%) were female at birth, 139 379 (83.4%) were White, and 138 900 (83.1%) were non-Hispanic. A total of 25 241 patients received treatment with nMAbs. Treatment with nMAbs was associated with lower odds of ED visits within 14 days (odds ratio [OR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68-0.85), hospitalization within 14 days (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.45-0.59), and death within 30 days (OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.10-0.20). The association between nMAbs and reduced risk of hospitalization was stronger in unvaccinated patients (14-day hospitalization: OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.44-0.59), and the associations with hospitalization and death were stronger in immunocompromised patients (hospitalization within 14 days: OR, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.24-0.41]; death within 30 days: OR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.06-0.27]). The strength of associations of nMAbs increased incrementally among patients with a greater probability of poor outcomes; for example, the ORs for hospitalization within 14 days were 0.58 (95% CI, 0.48-0.72) among those in the third (moderate) risk stratum and 0.41 (95% CI, 0.32-0.53) among those in the fifth (highest) risk stratum. The association of nMAb treatment with reduced risk of hospitalizations within 14 days was strongest during the Delta variant epoch (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.31-0.43) but not during the Omicron BA.1 epoch (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.68-2.47). These findings were corroborated in the subset of patients with viral genomic data. Treatment with nMAbs was associated with a significant mortality benefit in all variant epochs (pre-Delta: OR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.08-0.33]; Delta: OR, 0.14 [95% CI, 0.09-0.22]; Delta and Omicron BA.1: OR, 0.10 [95% CI, 0.03-0.35]; and Omicron BA.1: OR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.02-0.93]). Potential adverse drug events were identified in 38 treated patients (0.2%).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, nMAb treatment for COVID-19 was safe and associated with reductions in ED visits, hospitalization, and death, although it was not associated with reduced risk of hospitalization during the Omicron BA.1 epoch. These findings suggest that targeted risk stratification strategies may help optimize future nMAb treatment decisions.

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.

Change in effectiveness of sotrovimab for preventing hospitalization and mortality for at-risk COVID-19 outpatients during an Omicron BA.1 and BA.1.1-predominant phase

OBJECTIVES

Sotrovimab effectively prevented progression to severe disease and mortality following infection with pre-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants. We sought to determine whether sotrovimab is similarly effective against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection.

METHODS

Observational cohort study of non-hospitalized adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection from December 26, 2021, to March 10, 2022, using electronic health records from a statewide health system. We propensity-matched patients not receiving authorized treatment for each patient treated with sotrovimab. The primary outcome was 28-day hospitalization; secondary outcomes included mortality. We also propensity-matched sotrovimab-treated patients from the Omicron and Delta phases. Logistic regression was used to determine sotrovimab effectiveness during Omicron and between variant phases.

RESULTS

Of 30,247 SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infected outpatients, we matched 1542 receiving sotrovimab to 3663 not receiving treatment. Sotrovimab treatment was not associated with reduced odds of 28-day hospitalization (2.5% vs 3.2%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.82, 95% CI 0.55, 1.19) or mortality (0.1% vs 0.2%; adjusted OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.07, 2.78). Between phases, the observed treatment OR was higher during Omicron than during Delta (OR 0.85 vs 0.39, respectively; interaction P-value = 0.053).

CONCLUSION

Real-world evidence demonstrated that sotrovimab was not associated with reduced 28-day hospitalization or mortality among COVID-19 outpatients during the Omicron BA.1 phase.

Real-World Effectiveness of Sotrovimab for the Early Treatment of COVID-19 During SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron Waves in the USA

INTRODUCTION

Sotrovimab, a recombinant human monoclonal antibody (mAb) against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had US Food and Drug Administration Emergency Use Authorization for the treatment of high-risk outpatients with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from 26 May 2021 to 5 April 2022. Real-world clinical effectiveness of sotrovimab in reducing the risk of 30-day all-cause hospitalization and/or mortality was evaluated for the period when the prevalence of circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants changed between Delta and Omicron in the USA.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted of de-identified patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between 1 September 2021 to 30 April 2022 in the FAIR Health National Private Insurance Claims database. Patients meeting high-risk criteria were divided into two cohorts: sotrovimab and not treated with a mAb ("no mAb"). All-cause hospitalizations and facility-reported mortality ≤ 30 days of diagnosis ("30-day hospitalization or mortality") were identified. Multivariable and propensity score-matched Poisson and logistic regressions were conducted to estimate the adjusted relative risk (RR) and odds of 30-day hospitalization or mortality in each cohort.

RESULTS

Compared with the no mAb cohort (n = 1,514,868), the sotrovimab cohort (n = 15,633) was older and had a higher proportion of patients with high-risk conditions. In the no mAb cohort, 84,307 (5.57%) patients were hospitalized and 8167 (0.54%) deaths were identified, while in the sotrovimab cohort, 418 (2.67%) patients were hospitalized and 13 (0.08%) deaths were identified. After adjusting for potential confounders, the sotrovimab cohort had a 55% lower risk of 30-day hospitalization or mortality (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.41-0.49) and an 85% lower risk of 30-day mortality (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.08-0.29). Monthly, from September 2021 to April 2022, the RR reduction for 30-day hospitalization or mortality in the sotrovimab cohort was maintained, ranging from 46% to 71% compared with the no mAb cohort; the RR estimate in April 2022 was uncertain, with wide confidence intervals due to the small sample size.

CONCLUSION

Sotrovimab was associated with reduced risk of 30-day all-cause hospitalization and mortality versus no mAb treatment. Clinical effectiveness persisted during Delta and early Omicron variant waves and among all high-risk subgroups assessed.

Efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) for COVID-19: A rapid review and meta-analysis

This study aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and Google Scholar were searched to identify the relevant evidence up to November 10, 2022. The reference lists of key studies were also scanned to find additional records. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Cochrane tools for assessing the risk of bias. The Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software version 3.0 was employed for data analysis. Twenty-three studies involving 314 353 patients were included in the analysis. The findings of the meta-analysis showed a significant difference between the Paxlovid and no-Paxlovid groups in terms of mortality rate (odds ratio [OR] = 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.14-0.45), hospitalization rate (OR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.24-0.69), polymerase chain reaction negative conversion time (mean difference [MD] = -2.46; 95% CI: -4.31 to -0.61), and hospitalization or death rate (OR = 0.17; 95% CI: 0.06-0.46). However, no significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of COVID-19 rebound (OR = 0.84; 95% CI: 0.67-1.04), emergency department visit (OR = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.45-1.24), intensive care unit admission (OR = 0.37; 95% CI: 0.13-1.01), and adverse events (OR = 2.20; 95% CI: 0.42-11.47). The results of the present study support the efficacy and safety of Paxlovid in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. Further research is needed to investigate the COVID-19 rebound after Paxlovid treatment.

Experience with sotrovimab treatment of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients in Denmark

AIMS

To evaluate the experience with use of sotrovimab following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in high-risk groups.

METHODS

In a nationwide, population-based cohort study, we identified all individuals treated with sotrovimab (N = 2933) and stratified them by 4 high-risk groups: (A) malignant haematological disease, (B) solid organ transplantation, (C) anti-CD20 therapy ≤1 year and (D) other risks. Cox regression analysis was used to calculate hazard ratios for hospitalization, death and associated prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Of 2933 sotrovimab-treated individuals, 83% belonged to high-risk groups (37.6% haematological malignancy, 27.4% solid organ transplantation and 17.5% treatment with anti-CD20 ≤1 year). Only 17.8% had other risks (11.8% were pregnant, 10.7% primary immunodeficiency, 21.2% other malignancy, 4.3% received anti-CD20 >1 year and 52.0% other/unknown causes). Within 90 days of infusion, 30.2% were hospitalized and 5.3% died. The main prognostic factors were the predefined high-risk groups, mainly malignant haematological disease and age ≥65 years. Number of COVID-19 vaccines (≥3) was associated with a decreased risk of hospitalization. The Delta but not the Omicron BA.2 variant was associated with a higher risk of death compared to the BA.1 variant.

CONCLUSION

More than 90% of the patients treated with sotrovimab belonged to the very high-risk groups as described in the Danish guidelines. Sotrovimab-treated individuals remained at a high risk of hospitalization and death which was strongly associated with the underlying immunocompromised state and age. Having received >3 COVID-19 vaccines was association with decreased risk of death and hospitalization.

Trends, variation, and clinical characteristics of recipients of antiviral drugs and neutralising monoclonal antibodies for covid-19 in community settings: retrospective, descriptive cohort study of 23.4 million people in OpenSAFELY

Objective

To ascertain patient eligibility status and describe coverage of antiviral drugs and neutralising monoclonal antibodies (nMAB) as treatment for covid-19 in community settings in England.

Design

Retrospective, descriptive cohort study, approved by NHS England.

Setting

Routine clinical data from 23.4 million people linked to data on covid-19 infection and treatment, within the OpenSAFELY-TPP database.

Participants

Outpatients with covid-19 at high risk of severe outcomes.

Interventions

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (paxlovid), sotrovimab, molnupiravir, casirivimab/imdevimab, or remdesivir, used in the community by covid-19 medicine delivery units.

Results

93 870 outpatients with covid-19 were identified between 11 December 2021 and 28 April 2022 to be at high risk of severe outcomes and therefore potentially eligible for antiviral or nMAB treatment (or both). Of these patients, 19 040 (20%) received treatment (sotrovimab, 9660 (51%); molnupiravir, 4620 (24%); paxlovid, 4680 (25%); casirivimab/imdevimab, 50 (<1%); and remdesivir, 30 (<1%)). The proportion of patients treated increased from 9% (190/2220) in the first week of treatment availability to 29% (460/1600) in the latest week. The proportion treated varied by high risk group, being lowest in those with liver disease (16%; 95% confidence interval 15% to 17%); by treatment type, with sotrovimab favoured over molnupiravir and paxlovid in all but three high risk groups (Down's syndrome (35%; 30% to 39%), rare neurological conditions (45%; 43% to 47%), and immune deficiencies (48%; 47% to 50%)); by age, ranging from ≥80 years (13%; 12% to 14%) to 50-59 years (23%; 22% to 23%); by ethnic group, ranging from black (11%; 10% to 12%) to white (21%; 21% to 21%); by NHS region, ranging from 13% (12% to 14%) in Yorkshire and the Humber to 25% (24% to 25%) in the East of England); and by deprivation level, ranging from 15% (14% to 15%) in the most deprived areas to 23% (23% to 24%) in the least deprived areas. Groups that also had lower coverage included unvaccinated patients (7%; 6% to 9%), those with dementia (6%; 5% to 7%), and care home residents (6%; 6% to 7%).

Conclusions

Using the OpenSAFELY platform, we were able to identify patients with covid-19 at high risk of severe outcomes who were potentially eligible to receive treatment and assess the coverage of these new treatments among these patients. In the context of a rapid deployment of a new service, the NHS analytical code used to determine eligibility could have been over-inclusive and some of the eligibility criteria not fully captured in healthcare data. However targeted activity might be needed to resolve apparent lower treatment coverage observed among certain groups, in particular (at present): different NHS regions, ethnic groups, people aged ≥80 years, those living in socioeconomically deprived areas, and care home residents.

Use of Sotrovimab for COVID-19 in a Patient with International Germ Cell Consensus Classification Poor Prognosis Testicular Germ Cell Tumor

A 35-year-old man was diagnosed with stage IIIC non-seminoma with paralysis of the lower half of his body due to 8th thoracic spine metastasis. The patient received bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) therapy. On day 4 of the second course of BEP, the patient developed a fever and was diagnosed with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). COVID-19 was suspected to worsen because of cancer and chemotherapy-induced immunosuppression. However, the benefits of continuing BEP therapy outweighed these risks. After obtaining fully informed consent, BEP therapy was continued from day 5, while sotrovimab (anti-COVID-19 drug) was administered. The second course of BEP was completed without worsening severe COVID-19 or bleomycin-induced lung injury. The patient completed four courses of BEP, with normalization of tumor markers, partial response on imaging, and improvement in lower body paralysis. In this case, we successfully treated a patient with testicular germ cell tumor with chemotherapy while having COVID-19 without treatment delay. During the COVID-19 pandemic, concomitant chemotherapy and COVID-19 treatment are warranted because delaying treatment will decrease the efficacy of highly curative diseases such as germ cell tumors.

Effectiveness of Subcutaneous Casirivimab and Imdevimab in Ambulatory Patients with COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Data on real-world effectiveness of subcutaneous (SC) casirivimab and imdevimab (CAS+IMD) for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are limited. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of SC CAS+IMD versus no antibody treatment among patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study linked Komodo Health and CDR Maguire Health and Medical data. Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in ambulatory settings (August 1-October 30, 2021) treated with SC CAS+IMD were exact- and propensity score-matched to fewer than five untreated treatment-eligible patients and followed for the composite endpoint of 30-day all-cause mortality or COVID-19-related hospitalization. Kaplan-Meier estimators were used to calculate outcome risk overall and across subgroups. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Of 13,522 patients treated with CAS+IMD, 12,972 were matched to 41,848 untreated patients. The 30-day composite outcome risk was 1.9% (95% CI 1.7-2.2) and 4.4% (95% CI 4.2-4.6) in the treated and untreated cohorts, respectively; treated patients had a 49% lower relative risk of the composite outcome (aHR 0.51; 95% CI 0.46-0.58) and a 67% relative risk of 30-day mortality (aHR 0.33, 95% CI 0.18-0.60). Effectiveness was consistent across vaccination status and various subgroups.

DISCUSSION

Patients with COVID-19 benefitted from treatment with SC CAS+IMD versus untreated patients. The results were consistent across subgroups of patients, including older adults, immunocompromised patients, and patients vaccinated against COVID-19. Results were robust across numerous sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

SC CAS+IMD is effective in reducing 30-day COVID-19-related hospitalization or mortality in real-world outpatient settings during the Delta-dominant period.

Association between treatment failure and hospitalization after receipt of neutralizing monoclonal antibody treatment for COVID-19 outpatients

BACKGROUND

Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are highly effective in reducing hospitalization and mortality among early symptomatic COVID-19 patients in clinical trials and real-world data. While resistance to some mAbs has since emerged among new variants, characteristics associated with treatment failure of mAbs remain unknown.

METHODS

This multicenter, observational cohort study included patients with COVID-19 who received mAb treatment between November 20, 2020, and December 9, 2021. We utilized electronic health records from a statewide health system plus state-level vaccine and mortality data. The primary outcome was mAb treatment failure, defined as hospitalization or death within 28 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test.

RESULTS

COVID-19 mAb was administered to 7406 patients. Hospitalization within 28 days of positive SARS-CoV-2 test occurred in 258 (3.5%) of all patients who received mAb treatment. Ten patients (0.1%) died within 28 days, and all but one were hospitalized prior to death. Characteristics associated with treatment failure included having two or more comorbidities excluding obesity and immunocompromised status (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.52-5.56), lack of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (OR 2.73, 95% CI 2.01-3.77), non-Hispanic black race/ethnicity (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.20-3.82), obesity (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.36-2.34), one comorbidity (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.11-2.57), age ≥ 65 years (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.13-2.35), and male sex (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.21-2.02). Immunocompromised status (none, mild, or moderate/severe), pandemic phase, and type of mAb received were not associated with treatment failure (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Comorbidities, lack of prior SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, non-Hispanic black race/ethnicity, obesity, age ≥ 65 years, and male sex are associated with treatment failure of mAbs.

Efficacy and safety of sotrovimab in patients with COVID-19: A rapid review and meta-analysis

The therapeutic potential of sotrovimab in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a controversial issue. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sotrovimab in COVID-19 patients. To this end, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, medRxiv, and Google Scholar were searched up to 15 August 2022. The reference lists of key studies were also scanned to find additional records. Meta-analysis was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Seventeen studies involving 27,429 patients were included. A significant difference was observed in mortality rate (odds ratio [OR] = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.25-0.63, p = 0.00), hospitalisation rate (OR = 0.53; 95% CI: 0.43-0.65. p = 0.00), hospital or death rate (OR = 0.43; 95% CI: 0.25-0.73, p = 0.00), the need for mechanical ventilation (OR = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.33-0.96, p = 0.03), and ICU admission (OR = 0.33; 95% CI: 0.17-0.67, p = 0.00) of the sotrovimab-receiving group compared to those having no sotrovimab. However, no significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of disease progression (OR = 0.45; 95% CI: 0.16-1.24, p = 0.12) and emergency department visit (OR = 1.01; 95% CI: 0.83-1.24, p = 0.87). The two groups had no significant difference in terms of incidence of adverse events (OR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.78-1.23, p = 0.88). The findings of the present meta-analysis support that sotrovimab could be an effective and safe treatment option to reduce mortality and hospitalisation rate in both Delta and Omicron Variants of COVID-19.

Biologics in COVID-19 So Far: Systematic Review

This systematic review aimed to reevaluate the available evidence of the use of biologics as treatment candidates for the treatment of severe and advanced COVID-19 disease; what are the rationale for their use, which are the most studied, and what kind of efficacy measures are described? A search through Cochrane, Embase, Pubmed, Medline, medrxiv.org, and Google scholar was performed on the use of biologic interventions in COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 infection, viral pneumonia, and sepsis, until 11 January 2022. Throughout the research, we identified 4821 records, of which 90 were selected for qualitative analysis. Amongst the results, we identified five popular targets of use: IL6 and IL1 inhibitors, interferons, mesenchymal stem cells treatment, and anti-spike antibodies. None of them offered conclusive evidence of their efficacy with consistency and statistical significance except for some studies with anti-spike antibodies; however, Il6 and IL1 inhibitors as well as interferons show encouraging data in terms of increased survival and favorable clinical course that require further studies with better methodology standardization.