Efficacy and Safety of Remdesivir in COVID-19 Positive Dialysis Patients

Efficacy and Safety of Remdesivir in Adult Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Scoping Review

The SARS-CoV-2 infection has been associated with important mortality, particularly in immunocompromised patients, including solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. Remdesivir (RDV) is an antiviral drug that has proven to be effective in reducing the replication of the virus in host cells, by which it may reduce the progression of symptoms and, consequently, the length of hospital stay and mortality. Randomized controlled trials have evaluated its use in the general population but never in SOT recipients. For the first time in this review, the safety and efficacy of RDV is evaluated in this specific population. The literature research was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus databases from 1 January 2020 to 24 November 2023, and 23 studies were analyzed. Although no clinical studies specifically evaluating this population have been conducted yet, RDV is likely safe for SOT patients when compared to the general population, so prescribers should consider utilizing RDV in SOT patients who are at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19. Future research will allow for the confirmation of the observed results and the acquisition of broader and clearer data regarding the safety and efficacy of the drug in this specific setting.

Safety and effectiveness of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19 patients with end-stage renal disease: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Remdesivir has been used to treat severe coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19); however, its safety and effectiveness in patients remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the safety and effectiveness of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19 with end-stage renal disease (ESRD).

METHODS

This retrospective study used the Chang Gung Research Database (CGRD) and extracted data from 21,621 adult patients with COVID-19 diagnosed between April 2021 and September 2022. The patients were divided into groups based on their remdesivir use and the presence of ESRD. The adverse effects of remdesivir and their outcomes were analyzed after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

To compare the adverse effects of remdesivir, propensity scores were used for one-to-one matching between patients with and without ESRD treated with remdesivir (N = 110). There were no statistically significant differences in heart rates, blood glucose levels, variations in hemoglobin levels before and after remdesivir use, or liver function between the two groups after remdesivir use. A comparison was made between patients with ESRD using remdesivir and those not using remdesivir after propensity score matching (N = 44). Although a shorter length of stay (LOS), lower intensive care unit (ICU) admission rate, and lower intubation rate were noted in the ESRD group treated with remdesivir, the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Remdesivir is safe for use in patients with COVID-19 and ESRD; no increased adverse effects were noted compared with patients without ESRD. However, the effectiveness of remdesivir use in patients with COVID-19 and ESRD remains uncertain.

Effects of Anti-COVID-19 Vaccination and Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis with Tixagevimab-Cilgavimab in Kidney and Liver Transplant Recipients

Background and Objectives: Underpowered immune response to vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 was observed in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. A novel combination of monoclonal antibodies tixagevimab-cilgavimab (TGM/CGM) received authorization as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in those with reduced response to vaccine. We aimed to evaluate the response rate to COVID-19 vaccination in kidney transplant (KT), compared to liver transplant (LT) recipients, and the efficacy and safety of PrEP with TGM/CGM. Material and Methods: Between March and November 2022, adult KT and LT recipients who had completed the vaccination schedule (3 doses) were tested for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies titer. SOT recipients with anti-SARS-CoV-2 titer ≥ 100 IU/mL were considered protected against infection, while those with titer < 100 UI/mL were defined non-protected. Patients with inadequate response were invited to PrEP. Results: In total, 306 patients were enrolled [KT:197 (64.4%), LT:109 (35.6%)]. After the complete scheme of vaccination, 246 (80.3%) patients developed a protective titer, while 60 (19.6%) did not have a protective titer. KT recipients had a lower rate of protective anti-COVID-19 titer compared to LT patients [149 (75.6%) vs. 97 (89.0%), p = 0.004]. Recipients with non-protective anti-COVID-19 titer received mainly tacrolimus-based regimen associated with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (70%) e steroids (46.7%) as maintenance immunosuppression, while those treated with everolimus were associated with higher protective titer. Of 35 (58.3%) patients who received PrEP, within 12 months, 6 (17.1%) (all KT) developed pauci-symptomatic COVID-19 disease, while 15/25 (60%) of non-responders, who did not receive the prophylaxis, developed COVID-19 disease. After PrEP, hospitalization rate was lower (2.8% vs. 16%), and no adverse events, neither graft loss nor rejection, were observed. Conclusions: Despite complete COVID-19 vaccination, SOT recipients might be not protected from the SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially after KT. In non-protected SOT patients, the subsequent pre-exposure prophylaxis with combination of monoclonal antibodies (TGM/CGM) might be an efficacy and safe strategy to prevent COVID-19 severe disease and hospitalization.

Real-World Experience of the Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Combination Therapy with Remdesivir and Monoclonal Antibodies versus Remdesivir Alone for Patients with Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19 and Immunosuppression: A Retrospective Single-Center Study in Aichi, Japan

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic continues to threaten global public health. Remdesivir and monoclonal antibodies have shown promise for COVID-19 treatment of patients who are immunocompromised, including those with cancer, transplant recipients, and those with autoimmune disorder. However, the effectiveness and safety of this combination therapy for patients who are immunosuppressed remain unclear. We compared the efficacy and safety of combination therapy and remdesivir monotherapy for patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who were immunosuppressed. Eighty-six patients treated in July 2021-March 2023 were analyzed. The combination therapy group (CTG) showed a statistically significant reduction in viral load compared with the monotherapy group (MTG) (p < 0.01). Patients in the CTG also experienced earlier resolution of fever than those in the MTG (p = 0.02), although this difference was not significant in the multivariate analysis (p = 0.21). Additionally, the CTG had significantly higher discharge rates on days 7, 14, and 28 than the MTG (p < 0.01, p < 0.01, and p = 0.04, respectively). No serious adverse events were observed with combination therapy. These findings suggest that combination therapy may improve the clinical outcomes of immunosuppressed COVID-19 patients by reducing the viral load and hastening recovery. Further studies are required to fully understand the benefits of this combination therapy for immunocompromised COVID-19 patients.

Triple Combination Therapy With 2 Antivirals and Monoclonal Antibodies for Persistent or Relapsed Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection in Immunocompromised Patients

BACKGROUND

Severely immunocompromised patients are at risk for prolonged or relapsed Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), leading to increased morbidity and mortality. We aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of combination treatment in immunocompromised COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

We included all immunocompromised patients with prolonged/relapsed COVID-19 treated with combination therapy with 2 antivirals (remdesivir plus nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, or molnupiravir in case of renal failure) plus, if available, anti-spike monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), between February and October 2022. The main outcomes were virological response at day 14 (negative Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2] swab) and virological and clinical response (alive, asymptomatic, with negative SARS-CoV-2 swab) at day 30 and the last follow-up.

RESULTS

Overall, 22 patients (Omicron variant in 17/18) were included: 18 received full combination of 2 antivirals and mAbs and 4 received 2 antivirals only; in 20 of 22 (91%) patients, 2 antivirals were nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus remdesivir. Nineteen (86%) patients had hematological malignancy, and 15 (68%) had received anti-CD20 therapy. All were symptomatic; 8 (36%) required oxygen. Four patients received a second course of combination treatment. The response rate at day 14, day 30, and last follow-up was 75% (15/20 evaluable), 73% (16/22), and 82% (18/22), respectively. Day 14 and 30 response rates were significantly higher when combination therapy included mAbs. Higher number of vaccine doses was associated with better final outcome. Two patients (9%) developed severe side effects (bradycardia leading to remdesivir discontinuation and myocardial infarction).

CONCLUSIONS

Combination therapy including 2 antivirals (mainly remdesivir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) and mAbs was associated with high rate of virological and clinical response in immunocompromised patients with prolonged/relapsed COVID-19.

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.

Remdesivir Administration in COVID-19 Patients With Renal Impairment: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Remdesivir (RDV) is the main antiviral for the treatment of moderate to severe forms of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Several studies revealed a shortening time to clinical improvement of COVID-19 and mortality benefits in patients receiving RDV. The patients with renal disease were excluded from large clinical trials of RDV, and the probable nephrotoxicity of the drug, its metabolites, and the vehicle (sulfobutylether-β-cyclodextrin) have led to the recommendation against using RDV in patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of <30 mL/min.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

This systematic review aimed to collect data about the necessity and safety administration of RDV in the setting of renal impairment.

DATA SOURCES

Search through databases including MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and PubMed was performed. The studies were carried out in adults and enrolled patients with different types of renal impairment (ie, acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, kidney transplant, and renal replacement therapy) were included. Eligible studies were assessed, and required data were extracted.

RESULTS

Twenty-two cross-sectional studies, cohorts, case reports, and case series were included in this review. The mortality rate was between 7.3% and 50%, and various severity of COVID-19 was included in the studies. None of them reported an increase in adverse effects attributed to RDV administration. A decrease in inflammatory mediators and other benefits were obvious.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the manufacturer's labeling does not recommend RDV administration in patients with severe renal impairment, it seems that nephrotoxicity is less concerning in the population of these patients. Moreover, RDV may be helpful in acute kidney injury induced by the viral invasion of COVID-19. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review of the use of RDV in kidney failure. Larger, well-designed, and pharmacokinetic studies are required to have a safe and logical recommendation about the use of RDV in patients with renal disorders.

Antibiotics and Therapeutic Agent Prescription in COVID-19 Management

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, only few therapeutic options have been approved for the treatment of COVID-19 with substantial evidence [...]