Methods for deriving criteria for assessing the quality of medical care.

A. Donabedian

Medical Care Review

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Olgotrelvir As a Single-Agent Treatment of Nonhospitalized Patients with Covid-19.

Rongmeng Jiang,Bing Han,Wanhong Xu,Xiaoying Zhang,Chunxian Peng,Qiang Dang,Wei Sun,Ling Lin,Yuanlong Lin,Lingyan Fan,Dongqing Lv,Lei Shao,Ying Chen,Yunqing Qiu,Limei Han,Weixiang Kong,Guangming Li,Kai Wang,Jie Peng,Bingliang Lin,Zhaowei Tong,Xiaobo Lu,Lifeng Wang,Feng Gao,Jiemei Feng,Yongxia Li,Xiaojun Ma,Jinxiang Wang,Shanbo Wang,Wei Shen,Chao Wang,Kuan Yan,Zhenhao Lin,Can Jin,Long Mao,Jia Liu,Yulia Kushnareva,Olivia Kotoi,Zhenghong Zhu,Mike Royal,Mark Brunswick,Henry Ji,Xiao Xu,Hongzhou Lu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/evidoa2400026

2024-01-01

NEJM Evidence

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Olgotrelvir is an oral antiviral with dual mechanisms of action targeting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 main protease (i.e., Mpro) and human cathepsin L. It has potential to serve as a single-agent treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19).METHODS:We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of olgotrelvir in 1212 nonhospitalized adult participants with mild to moderate Covid-19, irrespective of risk factors, who were randomly assigned to receive orally either 600 mg of olgotrelvir or placebo twice daily for 5 days. The primary and key secondary end points were time to sustained recovery of a panel of 11 Covid-19-related symptoms and the viral ribonucleic acid (RNA) load. The safety end point was incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events.RESULTS:The baseline characteristics of 1212 participants were similar in the two groups. In the modified intention-to-treat population (567 patients in the placebo group and 558 in the olgotrelvir group), the median time to symptom recovery was 205 hours in the olgotrelvir group versus 264 hours in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13 to 1.46; P<0.001). The least squares mean (95% CI) changes of viral RNA load from baseline were -2.20 (-2.59 to -1.81) log10 copies/ml in olgotrelvir-treated participants and -1.40 (-1.79 to -1.01) in participants receiving placebo at day 4. Skin rash (3.3%) and nausea (1.5%) were more frequent in the olgotrelvir group than in the placebo group; there were no treatment-related serious adverse events, and no deaths were reported.CONCLUSIONS:Olgotrelvir as a single-agent treatment significantly improved symptom recovery. Adverse effects were not dose limiting. (Funded by Sorrento Therapeutics, a parent company of ACEA Therapeutics; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05716425.).
An Open, Prospective Cohort Study of VV116 in Chinese Participants Infected with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variants.

Yinzhong Shen,Jingwen Ai,Na Lin,Haocheng Zhang,Yang Li,Hongyu Wang,Sen Wang,Zhen Wang,Tao Li,Feng Sun,Zhenyu Fan,Liqun Li,Yunfei Lu,Xianmin Meng,Hong Xiao,Huiliang Hu,Yun Ling,Feng Li,Hongdi Li,Chunmei Xi,Liping Gu,Wenhong Zhang,Xiaohong Fan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/22221751.2022.2078230

2022-01-01

Emerging Microbes & Infections

Abstract:Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 has become the predominant variant worldwide. VV116 is an oral drug with robust anti-SARS-CoV-2 efficacy in preclinical studies. We conducted an open, prospective cohort study to evaluate its safety and effectiveness in Chinese participants infected with the omicron variant from March 8th, 2022 to March 24th, 2022. 136 hospitalized nonsevere patients confirmed with COVID-19 were enrolled including 60 patients who received VV116 (300 mg, BID×5 days) in the treatment group and 76 patients who didn’t receive VV116 in the control group besides standard treatment. Viral load shedding time and adverse events were collected during the follow-up. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between the VV116 group and the control group, except for a higher symptom prevalence in the control group (P = 0.021). The median time from the first positive test to the first VV116 administration was 5 (range: 2-10) days. Participants who received VV116 within 5 days since the first positive test had a shorter viral shedding time than the control group (8.56 vs 11.13 days), and cox regression analysis showed adjusted HR of 2.37 [95%CI 1.50-3.75], P < 0.001. In symptomatic subgroup, VV116 group had a shorter viral shedding time than the control group (P = 0.016). A total of 9 adverse events with no serious adverse events were reported in the VV116 group, all of them were resolved without intervention. VV116 is a safe, effective oral antiviral drug, which shows a better performance within the early onset of omicron infection.
The safety and efficacy of oral antiviral drug VV116 for treatment of COVID-19: A systematic review

Ningkun Xiao,Xinlin Huang,Xiaotian Kang,Wanli Zang,Bo Li,Sergey Kiselev

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000034105

IF: 1.6

2023-07-07

Medicine

Abstract:Background: Recent trials have highlighted the potential of oral antiviral VV116 in the treatment of patients with mild COVID-19. However, no comprehensive studies have assessed the safety and efficacy of VV116. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to assess the safety and efficacy of VV116. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted on PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar websites, with a cutoff date of March 23, to identify pertinent studies. Results: The results from the 3 included studies indicated that no serious adverse events were reported in the VV116 experimental groups, which exhibited a 2.57-day faster time to viral shedding than the control group and demonstrated non-inferiority to the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir control group in alleviating major symptoms. Discussion: Collectively, available studies suggest a reliable safety and efficacy profile for VV116. However, the limited number of trials was insufficient for meta-analysis, and the included population consisted of younger individuals with mild and moderate symptoms, not encompassing the elderly who are severely affected by COVID-19. We hope that more studies will be conducted in the future to ensure that VV116 has a more reliable safety and efficacy profile in the clinical setting, especially in severe or critical patients.

medicine, general & internal
Early antiviral therapy of abidor combined with lopinavir/ritonavir and re combinant interferonα 2b in patients with novel coronavirus pneumonia in Zhejiang: A multicenter and prospective study

Runan Wei,Nanhong Zheng,Xiangao Jiang,Chunlian Ma,Xiaowei Xu,Shourong Liu,Yongping Chen,Kaijin Xu,Hainv Gao,Jiansheng Zhu,Qiang Shu,Jifang Sheng,Xiaoqiang Zhang,Minghui Li,Yan Zhang,Mengjie Ma,Xuan Zhang,Shibo Li,Qiujing Wang,Lingjun Ying,Yongjun Zhang,Yunzhen Shi,Lingyan Fan,Wanjun Yu,Huaying Wang,Dandan Sun,Xiaodong Wang,Jichan Shi,Yinghu Chen,Xinsheng Xie,Yunqing Chen,Weihong Wang,Zhaowei Tong,Lingling Tang,Mengfei Zhu,Lingjian Zhang,Lanjuan Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.CN115673-20200224-00069

2020-01-01

Abstract:Objective@#Comparing the benefit of Abidor, lopinavir/ritonavir and recombinant interferon α-2b triple combination antiviral therapy and lopinavir/ritonavir and interferon dual combination antiviral therapy to hospitalized novel coronavirus pneumonia 2019 in Zhejiang province.@*Methods@#A multi-center prospective study was carried out to compare the effect of triple combination antiviral therapy with dual combination antiviral therapy in 15 medical institutions of Zhejiang Province. All patients were treated with recombinant interferon α-2b (5 million U, 2 times/d) aerosol inhalation. 196 patients were treated with abidol (200 mg, 3 times/d) + lopinavir / ritonavir (2 tablets, 1 time/12 h) as the triple combination antiviral treatment group. 41 patients were treated with lopinavir / ritonavir (2 tablets, 1 time/12 h) as the dual combination antiviral treatment group. The patients who received triple combination antiviral therapy were divided into three groups: within 48 hours, 3-5 days and \u003e 5 days after the symptom onset. To explore the therapeutic effects of triple combination antiviral drugs and dual combination antiviral drugs, as well as triple combination antiviral drugs with different antiviral initiate time. SPSS17.0 software was used to analyze the data.@*Results@#The time of virus nucleic acid turning negative was (12.2 ± 4.7) days in the triple combination antiviral drug group, which was shorter than that in the dual combination antiviral drug group [(15.0 ± 5.0) days] (t = 6.159, P 5 days after the symptom onset of triple combination antiviral drug group, the time from the symptom onset to the negative of viral shedding was 13 (10,16.8), 17 (13,22) and 21 (18-24) days respectively (Z = 32.983, P \u003c 0.01), and the time from antiviral therapy to the negative of viral shedding was (11.8±3.9) , (13.5±5.1) and (11.2±4.3) d. The differences among the three groups were statistically significant (Z=32.983 and 6.722, P\u003c0.01 or\u003c0.05).@*Conclusions@#The triple combination antiviral therapy of Abidor, Lopinavir/Litonavir and recombinant interferon α-2b showed shorter viral shedding time and hospitalization time compared with the dual combination antiviral therapy. The earlier the time to initiate triple antiviral treatment, the shorter the time of virus shedding.
Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of VV116, an oral nucleoside analog against SARS-CoV-2, in Chinese healthy subjects

Hong-jie Qian,Yu Wang,Meng-qi Zhang,Yuan-chao Xie,Qing-qing Wu,Li-yu Liang,Ye Cao,Hua-qing Duan,Guang-hui Tian,Juan Ma,Zhuo-bing Zhang,Ning Li,Jing-ying Jia,Jing Zhang,Haji Akber Aisa,Jing-shan Shen,Chen Yu,Hua-liang Jiang,Wen-hong Zhang,Zhen Wang,Gang-yi Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41401-022-00895-6

IF: 7.169

2022-03-16

Acta Pharmacologica Sinica

Abstract:Abstract VV116 (JT001) is an oral drug candidate of nucleoside analog against SARS-CoV-2. The purpose of the three phase I studies was to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of single and multiple ascending oral doses of VV116 in healthy subjects, as well as the effect of food on the pharmacokinetics and safety of VV116. Three studies were launched sequentially: Study 1 (single ascending-dose study, SAD), Study 2 (multiple ascending-dose study, MAD), and Study 3 (food-effect study, FE). A total of 86 healthy subjects were enrolled in the studies. VV116 tablets or placebo were administered per protocol requirements. Blood samples were collected at the scheduled time points for pharmacokinetic analysis. 116-N1, the metabolite of VV116, was detected in plasma and calculated for the PK parameters. In SAD, AUC and C max increased in an approximately dose-proportional manner in the dose range of 25–800 mg. T 1/2 was within 4.80–6.95 h. In MAD, the accumulation ratio for C max and AUC indicated a slight accumulation upon repeated dosing of VV116. In FE, the standard meal had no effect on C max and AUC of VV116. No serious adverse event occurred in the studies, and no subject withdrew from the studies due to adverse events. Thus, VV116 exhibited satisfactory safety and tolerability in healthy subjects, which supports the continued investigation of VV116 in patients with COVID-19.

pharmacology & pharmacy,chemistry, multidisciplinary
Early antiviral therapy of abidol combined with lopinavir/ritonavir and recombinant interferon α-2b for patients with COVID-19 in Zhejiang: A multicenter prospective study

魏茹楠,郑南红,蒋贤高,马春莲,徐小微,刘寿荣,陈永平,徐凯进,高海女,朱坚胜,舒强,盛吉芳,张晓强,李明辉,张研,马梦洁,张旋,李世波,王秋景,应灵军,张勇军,施云珍,范玲燕,俞万钧,王华英,孙丹丹,王晓东,施伎婵,陈英虎,谢新生,陈云清,王伟洪,童照威,汤灵玲,朱梦飞,张灵剑,李兰娟

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-2397.2020.01.003

2020-01-01

Abstract:Objective:To compare the efficacy of the combination of abidol, lopinavir/ritonavir plus recombinant interferon α-2b (rIFNα-2b) and the combination of lopinavir/ritonavir plus rIFNα-2b for patients with COVID-19 in Zhejiang province.Methods:A multicenter prospective study was carried out to compare the efficacy of triple combination antiviral therapy and dual combination antiviral therapy in 15 medical institutions of Zhejiang province during January 22 to February 16, 2020. All patients were treated with rIFNα-2b (5 million U, 2 times/d) aerosol inhalation, in addition 196 patients were treated with abidol (200 mg, 3 times/d) + lopinavir/ritonavir (2 tablets, 1 time/12 h) (triple combination group) and 41 patients were treated with lopinavir/ritonavir (2 tablets, 1 time/12 h) (dual combination group). The patients who received triple combination antiviral therapy were further divided into three subgroups: <48 h, 3-5 d and >5 d according the time from the symptom onset to medication starting. The therapeutic efficacy was compared between triple combination group and dual combination group, and compared among 3 subgroups of patients receiving triple combination antiviral therapy. SPSS 17.0 software was used to analyze the data.Results:The virus nucleic acid-negative conversion time in respiratory tract specimens was (12.2±4.7) d in the triple combination group, which was shorter than that in the dual combination group [(15.0±5.0) d] ( t=6.159, P<0.01). The length of hospital stay in the triple combination group [12.0 (9.0, 17.0) d] was also shorter than that in the dual combination group [15.0 (10.0, 18.0) d] ( H=2.073, P<0.05). Compared with the antiviral treatment which was started within after the symptom onset of in the triple combination group, the time from the symptom onset to the viral negative conversion was 13.0 (10.0, 17.0), 17.0 (13.0, 22.0) and 21.0 (18.0, 24.0) d in subgroups of 48 h, 3-5 d and >5 d, respectively ( Z=32.983, P<0.01), while the time from antiviral therapy to viral negative conversion was (11.8±3.9), (13.5±5.1) and (11.2±4.3) d, respectively( Z=6.722, P<0.05). Conclusions:The triple combination antiviral therapy of abidol, lopinavir/litonavir and rIFNα-2b shows shorter viral shedding time and shorter hospitalization time, compared with the dual combination antiviral therapy; and the earlier starting triple combination antiviral therapy will result in better antiviral efficacy.
Real-world effectiveness and safety of simnotrelvir/ritonavir for COVID-19: A nationwide, multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study in China

Bing Han,Chunling Du,Min Deng,Renhong Tang,Jianping Dong,Xu Song,Yunfeng Qiao,Zheng Ni,WenJie Yang,Jiankun Yang,Tianxin Xiang,Yan Huang,Yu Zhong,Zhongfa Zhang,Lisheng Yang,Jikang Yang,Huaying Wang,Lanbing Zheng,Libing Ma,Zhinan Shou,Ran Cao,Huajing Ma,Gang He,Jing Yuan,Chongjie Pang,Jing Xu,Jing Huang,Xiaomei Yuan,Yunfeng Wu,Yong Xiong,Xiangjie Zhang,Hongying Liu,Binfeng Gao,Huan Chen,Tengfei Ma,Shuangsuo Dang,Qingyu Zhang,Rui Yuan,Yunqing Wei,Tongbai Xu,Zhulian Deng,Yan Gong,Jianfen Gao,Rongmeng Jiang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2024.106339

IF: 28.2

2024-11-10

Journal of Infection

Abstract:Summary Background Simnotrelvir has demonstrated potent anti-viral activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In a Phase II/III study, Simnotrelvir plus ritonavir (S/R, co-packaged) shortened the time to the resolution of symptoms in adult COVID-19 patients. However, real-world data on effectiveness of simnotrelvir/ritonavir against SARS-CoV-2 during XBB omicron variant surges are still limited. Study design and methods This was a nationwide, multicenter, prospective, observational real-world study at 42 sites in China. Adult patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 and at disease onset were eligible for participation. Patients were grouped in S/R group (treated with S/R) and control group (not receiving oral antivirals for COVID-19). The primary endpoint was the COVID-19-related hospitalization or all-cause mortality within 28 days. Secondary endpoints included the time from confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection to negative conversion, and the time to resolution of COVID-19 symptoms. Besides, serious adverse events (SAE), adverse drug reactions (ADR) and combined medication were reported. Propensity Score-Matched (PSM) analysis (1:1) was performed for adjustment for baseline variables. Hazard ratios (HR) and adjusted risk ratios (aRR) were estimated using the Cox and Modified poisson regression, respectively. Results Between June 6, 2023 and December 27, 2023, 3522 patients were enrolled. S/R was associated with a reduced incidence of COVID-19-related hospitalization (6/1896 [0.3%] vs. 43/1408 [3.1%]; HR: 0.110, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.043 to 0.283, p<0.001 vs control), consistently with the results after PSM (4/1381 [0.3%] in S/R vs. 40/1381 patients [2.9%]; aRR: 0.12; 95% CI: 0.05, 0.29; P <0.001). No deaths occurred in both S/R and control groups. Matched Patients over 65 and patients with risk factors who received S/R achieved significantly reduced risk of COVID-19 related hospitalization (aRR: 0.032; 95% CI: 0.004, 0.268; aRR: 0.034; 95% CI: 0.005, 0.252, respectively; all P <0.001). Furthermore, S/R shortened the median time to viral clearance by 1 day (6.0 vs 7.0 days; 95% CI: -2.0 to -1.0; P <0.001) and reduced the median time to symptom resolution by 2 days (8.0 days vs 10.0 days; 95% CI: -2.0 to -1.0; P <0.001). Besides, the proportion of patients in the S/R group using combined medication was significantly lower than that in the control group (30.2% vs 49.4%). Subgroup analysis showed potential protective effect of S/R in the elderly and patients with more than 1 risk factor. Conclusion In real world, S/R significantly reduced the incidence of COVID-19-related hospitalization, demonstrated favorable safety profiles, and less use of combined medication.

infectious diseases
Efficacy and safety of GST-HG171 in adult patients with mild to moderate COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trial

Hongzhou Lu,George Zhang,John Mao,Xiaochun Chen,Yangqing Zhan,Ling Lin,Tianxiang Zhang,Yanan Tang,Feng Lin,Feiyue Zhu,Yuanlong Lin,Yiming Zeng,Kaiyu Zhang,Wenfang Yuan,Zhenyu Liang,Ruilin Sun,Liya Huo,Peng Hu,Yihua Lin,Xibin Zhuang,Zhaohui Wei,Xia Chen,Wenhao Yan,Xiuping Yan,Lisa Mu,Zhuhua Lin,Xinyu Tu,Hongshan Tan,Fuhu Huang,Zhiqiang Hu,Hongming Li,Guoping Li,Haijun Fu,Zifeng Yang,Xinwen Chen,Fu-Sheng Wang,Nanshan Zhong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102582

IF: 15.1

2024-04-10

EClinicalMedicine

Abstract:Background: GST-HG171 is a potent, broad-spectrum, orally bioavailable small-molecule 3C like protease inhibitor that has demonstrated greater potency and efficacy compared to Nirmatrelvir in pre-clinical studies. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of orally administered GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infected with emerging XBB and non-XBB variants. Methods: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trial was conducted in 47 sites in China among adult patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 with symptoms onset ≤72 h. Eligible patients were randomised 1:1 to receive GST-HG171 (150 mg) plus Ritonavir (100 mg) or corresponding placebo tablets twice daily for 5 days, with stratification factors including the risk level of disease progression and vaccination status. The primary efficacy endpoint was time to sustained recovery of clinical symptoms within 28 days, defined as a score of 0 for 11 COVID-19-related target symptoms for 2 consecutive days, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05656443) and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200067088). Findings: Between Dec 19, 2022, and May 4, 2023, 1525 patients were screened. Among 1246 patients who underwent randomisation, most completed basic (21.2%) or booster (74.9%) COVID-19 immunization, and most had a low risk of disease progression at baseline. 610 of 617 who received GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir and 603 of 610 who received placebo were included in the mITT population. Patients who received GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir showed shortened median time to sustained recovery of clinical symptoms compared to the placebo group (13.0 days [95.45% confidence interval 12.0-15.0] vs. 15.0 days [14.0-15.0], P = 0.031). Consistent results were observed in both SARS-CoV-2 XBB (45.7%, 481/1053 of mITT population) and non-XBB variants (54.3%, 572/1053 of mITT population) subgroups. Incidence of adverse events was similar in the GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir (320/617, 51.9%) and placebo group (298/610, 48.9%). The most common adverse events in both placebo and treatment groups were hypertriglyceridaemia (10.0% vs. 14.7%). No deaths occurred. Interpretation: Treatment with GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir has demonstrated benefits in symptom recovery and viral clearance among low-risk vaccinated adult patients with COVID-19, without apparent safety concerns. As most patients were treated within 2 days after symptom onset in our study, confirming the potential benefits of symptom recovery for patients with a longer duration between symptom onset and treatment initiation will require real-world studies. Funding: Fujian Akeylink Biotechnology Co., Ltd.
Efficacy and safety of GST-HG171 in adult patients with mild to moderate COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trialResearch in context

Hongzhou Lu,George Zhang,John Mao,Xiaochun Chen,Yangqing Zhan,Ling Lin,Tianxiang Zhang,Yanan Tang,Feng Lin,Feiyue Zhu,Yuanlong Lin,Yiming Zeng,Kaiyu Zhang,Wenfang Yuan,Zhenyu Liang,Ruilin Sun,Liya Huo,Peng Hu,Yihua Lin,Xibin Zhuang,Zhaohui Wei,Xia Chen,Wenhao Yan,Xiuping Yan,Lisa Mu,Zhuhua Lin,Xinyu Tu,Hongshan Tan,Fuhu Huang,Zhiqiang Hu,Hongming Li,Guoping Li,Haijun Fu,Zifeng Yang,Xinwen Chen,Fu-Sheng Wang,Nanshan Zhong

IF: 15.1

2024-01-01

EClinicalMedicine

Abstract:Summary: Background: GST-HG171 is a potent, broad-spectrum, orally bioavailable small-molecule 3C like protease inhibitor that has demonstrated greater potency and efficacy compared to Nirmatrelvir in pre-clinical studies. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of orally administered GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infected with emerging XBB and non-XBB variants. Methods: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trial was conducted in 47 sites in China among adult patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 with symptoms onset ≤72 h. Eligible patients were randomised 1:1 to receive GST-HG171 (150 mg) plus Ritonavir (100 mg) or corresponding placebo tablets twice daily for 5 days, with stratification factors including the risk level of disease progression and vaccination status. The primary efficacy endpoint was time to sustained recovery of clinical symptoms within 28 days, defined as a score of 0 for 11 COVID-19-related target symptoms for 2 consecutive days, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05656443) and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200067088). Findings: Between Dec 19, 2022, and May 4, 2023, 1525 patients were screened. Among 1246 patients who underwent randomisation, most completed basic (21.2%) or booster (74.9%) COVID-19 immunization, and most had a low risk of disease progression at baseline. 610 of 617 who received GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir and 603 of 610 who received placebo were included in the mITT population. Patients who received GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir showed shortened median time to sustained recovery of clinical symptoms compared to the placebo group (13.0 days [95.45% confidence interval 12.0–15.0] vs. 15.0 days [14.0–15.0], P = 0.031). Consistent results were observed in both SARS-CoV-2 XBB (45.7%, 481/1053 of mITT population) and non-XBB variants (54.3%, 572/1053 of mITT population) subgroups. Incidence of adverse events was similar in the GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir (320/617, 51.9%) and placebo group (298/610, 48.9%). The most common adverse events in both placebo and treatment groups were hypertriglyceridaemia (10.0% vs. 14.7%). No deaths occurred. Interpretation: Treatment with GST-HG171 plus Ritonavir has demonstrated benefits in symptom recovery and viral clearance among low-risk vaccinated adult patients with COVID-19, without apparent safety concerns. As most patients were treated within 2 days after symptom onset in our study, confirming the potential benefits of symptom recovery for patients with a longer duration between symptom onset and treatment initiation will require real-world studies. Funding: Fujian Akeylink Biotechnology Co., Ltd.
Clinical Efficacy of Arbidol in Patients with 2019 Novel Coronavirus-Infected Pneumonia: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Kaijin Xu,Yanfei Chen,Jing Yuan,Ping Yi,Cheng Ding,Wenrui Wu,Yongtao Li,Qin Ni,Rongrong Zhou,Xiaohe Li,Min Xu,Ying Zhang,Hong Zhao,Xuan Zhang,Liang Yu,Junwei Su,Guanjing Lang,Jun Liu,Xiaoxin Wu,Yongzheng Guo,Jingjing Tao,Ding Shi,Ling Yu,Qing Cao,Bing Ruan,Lei Liu,Zhaoqin Wang,Yan Xu,Yingxia Liu,Jifang Sheng,Lanjuan Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3542148

2020-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:Background: The urgency of the 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak has led to demand of effective antiviral agents. Preliminary experiment indicated that Arbidol concentrations might inhibit the replication of coronavirus in vitro. However, there was limited data about the clinical efficacy of Arbidol in 2019 novel coronavirus-infected pneumonia (NCP). Methods: We did a retrospective cohort study of NCP patients who received empiric al antiviral regimens with or without Arbidol. A total of 111 patients from two clinical centers in China were enrolled. Findings: Among these patients, 49 were assigned to the empirical treatment with Arbidol group ( group A+ER ) and 62 were assigned to the empirical regimens group (group ER). During the observation period, we found 59.2% patients in group A+ER had virologic conversion at least once, which was significantly higher than 40.3% in group ER (P=0.048). The need for high flow nasal catheter (HFNC) oxygen therapy in hospitalization was obviously reduced in group A+ER than in group ER (P=0.002). About 55.1% patients in group A+ER had focal absorption on chest CT images, obviously higher than 32.2% in group ER (P=0.016). The beneficial effect of Arbidol was more apparent in patients with mild illness severity at admission. The median conversion time of the stable virologic conversion of mild patients in group A+ER can be shortened 2 days than that in group ER (P=0.020). Side effects of the Arbidol were minimal in this study. Interpretation: Our results suggest that Arbidol could accelerate and enhance the process of viral clearance, improve focal absorption on radiologic images, and reduce the demand for HFNC oxygen therapy in hospitalization. These effects were particularly pronounced in patients with mild illness at admission. The results provide basis for clinical use of Arbidol and supports for further randomized controlled trials in patients with NCP. Funding Statement: This study was funded by the National Science and Technology Major Project of China (2017ZX10105001); National Human Genetic Resources Sharing Service Platform (Grant No. 2005DKA21300); Sanming Project of Medicine in Shenzhen (No. SZSM201512005). Declaration of Interests: The authors declare no competing interests. Ethics Approval Statement: Ethics approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of the First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University and the Shenzhen Third People’s Hospital.
No Statistically Apparent Difference in Antiviral Effectiveness Observed Among Ribavirin Plus Interferon-Alpha, Lopinavir/Ritonavir Plus Interferon-Alpha, and Ribavirin Plus Lopinavir/Ritonavir Plus Interferon-Alpha in Patients With Mild to Moderate Coronavirus Disease 2019: Results of a Randomized, Open-Labeled Prospective Study

Yin-Qiu Huang,Sheng-Quan Tang,Xiao-Lei Xu,Yan-Ming Zeng,Xiao-Qing He,Yao Li,Vijay Harypursat,Yan-Qiu Lu,Yan Wan,Lu Zhang,Qiang-Zhong Sun,Nan-Nan Sun,Gui-Xue Wang,Zhong-Ping Yang,Yao-Kai Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2020.01071

IF: 5.6

2020-07-14

Frontiers in Pharmacology

Abstract:Background: Currently, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread globally, causing an unprecedented pandemic. However, there is no specific antiviral therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We conducted a clinical trial to compare the effectiveness of three antiviral treatment regimens in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.Methods: This was a single-center, randomized, open-labeled, prospective clinical trial. Eligible patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 were randomized into three groups: ribavirin (RBV) plus interferon-α (IFN-α), lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) plus IFN-α, and RBV plus LPV/r plus IFN-α at a 1:1:1 ratio. Each patient was invited to participate in a 28-d follow-up after initiation of an antiviral regimen. The outcomes include the difference in median interval to SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid negativity, the proportion of patients with SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid negativity at day 14, the mortality at day 28, the proportion of patients re-classified as severe cases, and adverse events during the study period.Results: In total, we enrolled 101 patients in this study. Baseline clinical and laboratory characteristics of patients were comparable among the three groups. In the analysis of intention-to-treat data, the median interval from baseline to SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid negativity was 12 d in the LPV/r+IFN-α-treated group, as compared with 13 and 15 d in the RBV+IFN-α-treated group and in the RBV+LPV/r+ IFN-α-treated group, respectively (p=0.23). The proportion of patients with SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid negativity in the LPV/r+IFN-α-treated group (61.1%) was higher than the RBV+ IFN-α-treated group (51.5%) and the RBV+LPV/r+IFN-α-treated group (46.9%) at day 14; however, the difference between these groups was calculated to be statistically insignificant. The RBV+LPV/r+IFN-α-treated group developed a significantly higher incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events than the LPV/r+ IFN-α-treated group and the RBV+ IFN-α-treated group.Conclusions: Our results indicate that there are no significant differences among the three regimens in terms of antiviral effectiveness in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Furthermore, the combination of RBV and LPV/r is associated with a significant increase in gastrointestinal adverse events, suggesting that RBV and LPV/r should not be co-administered to COVID-19 patients simultaneously.Clinical Trial Registration: <a href="http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov">www.ClinicalTrials.gov</a>, ID: ChiCTR2000029387. Registered on January 28, 2019.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Leritrelvir for the treatment of mild or moderate COVID-19 without co-administered ritonavir: a multicentre randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial

Yangqing Zhan,Zhengshi Lin,Jingyi Liang,Ruilin Sun,Yueping Li,Bingliang Lin,Fangqi Ge,Ling Lin,Hongzhou Lu,Liang Su,Tianxin Xiang,Hongqiu Pan,Chaolin Huang,Ying Deng,Furong Wang,Ruhong Xu,Dexiong Chen,Ping Zhang,Jianlin Tong,Xifu Wang,Qingwei Meng,Zhigang Zheng,Shuqiang Ou,Xiaoyun Guo,Herui Yao,Tao Yu,Weiyang Li,Yu Zhang,Mei Jiang,Zhonghao Fang,Yudi Song,Ruifeng Chen,Jincan Luo,Changyuan Kang,Shiwei Liang,Haijun Li,other Collaborative Institutes,Jingping Zheng,Nanshan Zhong,Zifeng Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102359

IF: 15.1

2023-12-16

EClinicalMedicine

Abstract:Summary Background Leritrelvir is a novel α-ketoamide based peptidomimetic inhibitor of SARS-CoV-2 main protease. A preclinical study has demonstrated leritrelvir poses similar antiviral activities towards different SARS-CoV-2 variants compared with nirmatrelvir. A phase 2 clinical trial has shown a comparable antiviral efficacy and safety between leritrelvir with and without ritonavir co-administration. This trial aims to test efficacy and safety of leritrelvir monotherapy in adults with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. Methods This was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trial at 29 clinical sites in China. Enrolled patients were from 18 to 75 years old, diagnosed with mild or moderate COVID-19 and not requiring hospitalization. Patients had a positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test (NAT) and at least one of the COVID-19 symptoms within 48 h before randomization, and the interval between the first positive SARS-CoV-2 NAT and randomization was ≤120 h (5 days). Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a 5-day course of either oral leritrelvir 400 mg TID or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the time from the first dose to sustained clinical recovery of all 11 symptoms (stuffy or runny nose, sore throat, shortness of breath or dyspnea, cough, muscle or body aches, headache, chills, fever ≥37 °C, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea). The safety endpoint was the incidence of adverse events (AE). Primary and safety analyses were performed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT05620160 . Findings Between Nov 12 and Dec 30, 2022 when the zero COVID policy was abolished nationwide, a total of 1359 patients underwent randomization, 680 were assigned to leritrelvir group and 679 to placebo group. The median time to sustained clinical recovery in leritrelvir group was significantly shorter (251.02 h [IQR 188.95–428.68 h]) than that of Placebo (271.33 h [IQR 219.00–529.63 h], P = 0.0022, hazard ratio [HR] 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07–1.35). Further analysis of subgroups for the median time to sustained clinical recovery revealed that (1) subgroup with positive viral nucleic acid tested ≤72 h had a 33.9 h difference in leritrelvir group than that of placebo; (2) the subgroup with baseline viral load >8 log 10 Copies/mL in leritrelvir group had 51.3 h difference than that of placebo. Leritrelvir reduced viral load by 0.82 log10 on day 4 compared to placebo. No participants in either group progressed to severe COVID-19 by day 29. Adverse events were reported in two groups: leritrelvir 315 (46.46%) compared with placebo 292 (43.52%). Treatment-relevant AEs were similar 218 (32.15%) in the leritrelvir group and 186 (27.72%) in placebo. Two cases of COVID-19 pneumonia were reported in placebo group, and one case in leritrelvir group, none of them were considered by the investigators to be leritrelvir related. The most frequently reported AEs (occurring in ≥5% of participants in at least one group) were laboratory finding: hypertriglyceridemia (leritrelvir 79 [11.7%] vs . placebo 70 [10.4%]) and hyperlipidemia (60 [8.8%] vs . 52 [7.7%]); all of them were nonserious. Interpretation Leritrelvir monotherapy has good efficacy for mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and without serious safety concerns. Funding This study was funded by the National Multidisciplinary Innovation Team Project of Traditional Chinese Medicine , Guangdong Science and Technology Foundation , Guangzhou Science and Technology Planning Project and R&D Program of Guangzhou Laboratory .
Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Remdesivir in Adult Patients with Severe COVID-19: Study Protocol for a Phase 3 Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicentre Trial

Yeming Wang,Fei Zhou,Dingyu Zhang,Jianping Zhao,Ronghui Du,Yi Hu,Zhenshun Cheng,Ling Gao,Yang Jin,Guangwei Luo,Shouzhi Fu,Qiaofa Lu,Guanhua Du,Ke Wang,Yang Lu,Guohui Fan,Yi Zhang,Ying Liu,Shunan Ruan,Wen Liu,Thomas Jaki,Frederick G. Hayden,Peter W. Horby,Bin Cao,Chen Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04352-9

IF: 2.728

2020-01-01

Trials

Abstract:Background: A novel coronavirus emerged in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China towards the end of 2019 (SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 virus). Large scale spread within China and internationally led the World Health Organisation to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on 30th January 2020. The clinical manifestations of COVID-19 virus infection include asymptomatic infection, mild upper respiratory symptoms, severe viral pneumonia with respiratory failure and even death. There are no antivirals of proven clinical efficacy in coronavirus infections. Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue, has inhibitory effects on animal and human highly pathogenic coronaviruses, including MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, in in-vitro and in-vivo experiments. It is also inhibitory against the COVID-19 virus in-vitro. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of remdesivir in adult patients with severe pneumonia caused by COVID-19 virus infection.Methods: The protocol is prepared in accordance with the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) guidelines. This is a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Adults (≥18 years) with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 virus infection, and severe pneumonia signs or symptoms, and radiologically confirmed severe pneumonia are randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenous remdesivir or placebo for 10 days. The primary endpoint is time to clinical improvement (censored at Day 28), defined as the time (in days) from randomization of study treatment (remdesivir or placebo) until a decline of two categories on a six-category ordinal scale of clinical status (1 ꞊ discharged; 6 ꞊ death) or live discharge from hospital. One interim analysis for efficacy and futility will be conducted once half of the total number of events required had been observed.Discussion: This is the first randomized, placebo-controlled trial in 2019-nCoV. Enrolment began in sites in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China on 6th February 2020.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04257656, 6th February 2020.
Impact of Lianhua Qingwen on viral shedding in omicron mild/asymtomatic patients: a real-world study

Xiaoyan Gai,Changjian Yan,Chaoling Wu,Zhonghui Duan,Jiarun Fan,Shengren Yuan,Ping Yang,Fang Bao,Hongmei Jing,Chao Cai,Yingmin Ma,Weilong Zhang,Yongchang Sun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2024.1357299

IF: 3.9

2024-03-26

Frontiers in Medicine

Abstract:Background Lianhuaqingwen (LHQW), a traditional Chinese medicine comprised of 13 herbal extracts renowned for their robust heat-clearing and detoxifying properties, has gained widespread utilization in China but has yet to garner similar recognition abroad. It is believed to exhibit efficacy in ameliorating symptoms in individuals afflicted with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the precise impact of LHQW on viral shedding (VS), particularly in the context of mild or asymptomatic infections caused by the Omicron BF.4/5 or BF.7 variants of COVID-19, remained inadequately elucidated. Consequently, a real-world study was conducted, involving patients diagnosed with COVID-19, with the primary objective of ascertaining the effectiveness of LHQW in this specific clinical context. Methods We conducted an investigation on Omicron-infected patients through a single-center, propensity score-matched real-world study conducted at Xiaotangshan Fangcang Hospital from May to November 2022. A total of 3,368 COVID-19 patients were enrolled in the study, all of whom presented mild or asymptomatic infections caused by either BF.4/5 or BF.7 strains of the virus. Demographic and clinical data were systematically collected from medical records. Patients were allocated to receive treatment with LHQW (designated as the treatment group) or received no LHQW treatment (designated as the not-treated/no-treatment group). Viral load was quantified utilizing quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR), and the duration of VS was defined as the time interval between the initial negative test result and the date of COVID-19 diagnosis or symptom onset. Results The study encompassed a cohort of 3,368 patients, and following propensity score matching, a subset of 296 patients was meticulously chosen for subsequent analysis. Notably, baseline characteristics exhibited disparities between the treatment and not-treated/no-treatment groups. However, post-matching, these characteristics achieved a commendable level of comparability. Our findings unequivocally demonstrated that there existed no statistically significant disparity in VS. This holds true when comparing patients subjected to LHQW treatment against those not administered LHQW, as well as when contrasting individuals presenting asymptomatic and mild COVID-19 manifestations. Conclusion No statistically significant difference in VS was observed between patients who underwent LHQW treatment and those who did not. Additional investigations are imperative to provide a comprehensive assessment of LHQW’s efficacy, particularly in patients afflicted with severe COVID-19 or those infected with viral strains distinct from BF.4/5 or BF.7.

medicine, general & internal
VV116 as a potential treatment for COVID-19

Matthew W. McCarthy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14656566.2023.2193668

2023-03-22

Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy

Abstract:VV116 is a chemically-modified version of the antiviral remdesivir with oral bioavailability and potent activity against SARS-CoV-2. The optimal treatment of standard-risk outpatients who develop mild-to-moderate COVID-19 is controversial. While several therapeutic are currently recommended, including nirmatrelvir–ritonavir (Paxlovid), molnupiravir, and remdesivir, these treatments have substantial drawbacks, including drug-drug interactions and questionable efficacy in vaccinated adults. Novel therapeutic options are urgently needed. On 28 December 2022, a phase 3, observer-blinded, randomized trial was published evaluating 771 symptomatic adults with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 with a high risk of progression to severe disease. Participants were assigned to receive a 5-day course of either Paxlovid)\, which is recommended by the World Health Organization for treating mild-to-moderate COVID-19, or VV116 and the primary end point was the time to sustained clinical recovery through day 28. Among study subjects, VV116 was found to be noninferior to Paxlovid with respect to the time to sustained clinical recovery and with fewer safety concerns. This manuscript examines what is known about VV116 and explores how this novel treatment option may be used in the future to address the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

pharmacology & pharmacy
An Open-Label, Randomized Trial of the Combination of IFN-κ Plus TFF2 with Standard Care in the Treatment of Patients with Moderate COVID-19.

Weihui Fu,Yan Liu,Li Liu,Huiliang Hu,Xiaobo Cheng,Ping Liu,Zhigang Song,Lijun Zha,Shimeng Bai,Tingting Xu,Songhua Yuan,Fengru Lu,Zhiying Shang,Yihong Zhao,Jing Wang,Jun Zhao,Longfei Ding,Jun Chen,Lin Zhang,Tongyu Zhu,Xiaoyan Zhang,Hongzhou Lu,Jianqing Xu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100547

IF: 15.1

2020-01-01

EClinicalMedicine

Abstract:Background: Epidemic outbreaks caused by SARS-CoV-2 are worsening around the world, and there are no target drugs to treat COVID-19. IFN-κ inhibits the replication of SARS-CoV-2; and TFF2 is a small secreted polypeptide that promotes the repair of mucosal injury and reduces the inflammatory responses. We used the synergistic effect of both proteins to treat COVID-19. Methods: We conducted an open-label, randomized, clinical trial involving patients with moderate COVID-19. Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either aerosol inhalation treatment with IFN-κ and TFF2 every 24 h for six consecutive dosages in addition to standard care (experimental group) or standard care alone (control group). The primary endpoint was the time until a viral RNA negative conversion for SARS-CoV-2 in all clinical samples. The secondary clinical endpoint was the time of CT imaging improvement. Data analysis was performed per protocol. This study was registered with chictr.org.cn, ChiCTR2000030262. Findings: Between March 23 and May 23 of 2020, 86 COVID-19 patients with symptoms of moderate illness were recruited, and 6 patients were excluded due to not matching the inclusion criteria (patients with pneumonia through chest radiography). Among the remaining 80 patients, 40 patients were assigned to experimental group, and the others were assigned to control group to only receive standard care. Efficacy and safety were evaluated for both groups. The time of viral RNA negative conversion in experimental group (Mean, 3·80 days, 95% CI 2·07–5·53), was significantly shorter than that in control group (7·40 days, 95% CI 4·57 to 10·23) (p = 0.031), and difference between means was 3·60 days. The percentage of patients in experimental group with reversion to negative viral RNA was significantly increased compared with control group on all sampling days (every day during the 12-day observation period) (p = 0·037). For the secondary endpoint, the experimental group had a significantly shorter time until improvement was seen by CT (Mean 6·21 days, N = 38/40, 95% CI 5·11–7·31) than that in control group (8·76 days, N = 34/40, 95% CI 7·57–9·96) (p = 0.002), and difference between means was 2·55 days. No discomfort or complications during aerosol inhalation were reported to the nurses by any experimental patients. Interpretation: In conclusion, we found that aerosol inhalation of IFN-κ plus TFF2 in combination with standard care is safe and superior to standard care alone in shortening the time up to viral RNA negative conversion in all clinical samples. In addition, the patients in experimental group had a significantly shortened CT imaging improvement time than those in control group. This study suggested that this combination treatment is able to facilitate clinical improvement (negative for virus, improvement by CT, reduced hospitalization stay) and thereby result in an early release from the hospital. These data support the need for exploration with a large-scale trial of IFN-κ plus TFF2 to treat COVID-19. Funding: Funding was provided by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, National Major Project for Control and Prevention of Infectious Disease in China, Shanghai Science and Technology Commission, Shanghai Municipal Health Commission.
Efficacy and Safety of SIM0417 (SSD8432) Plus Ritonavir for COVID-19 Treatment: a Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 1b Trial

Fuxiang Wang,Wen Xiao,Yimin Tang,Mengli Cao,Dan Shu,Tetsuya Asakawa,Yechun Xu,Xiangrui Jiang,Leike Zhang,Wei Wang,Jianxing Tang,Yuansheng Huang,Yang,Yumei Yang,Renhong Tang,Jingshan Shen,Hongzhou Lu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanwpc.2023.100835

2023-01-01

Abstract:Background SIM0417 (SSD8432) is an orally administered coronavirus main proteinase (3CLpro) inhibitor with po-tential anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy , safety of SIM0417 plus ritonavir (a pharmacokinetic enhancer) in adults with COVID-19.Methods This was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1b study in China. Adults with asymptomatic infection, mild or moderate COVID-19 were randomly assigned (3:3:2) to receive either 750 mg SIM0417 plus 100 mg ritonavir, 300 mg SIM0417 plus 100 mg ritonavir or placebo every 12 h for 10 doses. The main efficacy endpoints included SARS-CoV-2 viral load, proportion of participants with positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test and time to alleviation of COVID-19 symptoms. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05369676.Findings Between May 12 and August 29, 2022, 32 participants were enrolled and randomised to high dose group (n = 12), low dose group (n = 12) or placebo (n = 8). The viral load change from baseline in high dose group was statistically lower compared with placebo, with a maximum mean difference of -2.16 & PLUSMN; 0.761 log10 copies/mL (p = 0.0124) on Day 4. The proportion of positive SARS-CoV-2 in both active groups were lower than the placebo. The median time to sustained alleviation of COVID-19 symptoms was 2.0 days in high dose group versus 6.0 days in the placebo group (HR = 3.08, 95% CI 0.968-9.818). SIM0417 plus ritonavir were well tolerated with all adverse events in grade 1.Interpretation SIM0417 plus ritonavir was generally well tolerated. The efficacy of SIM0417 showed a monotonic dose-response relationship , the 750 mg SIM0417 plus 100 mg ritonavir was selected as the recommended clinical dose.
Efficacy and safety of three new oral antiviral treatment (molnupiravir, fluvoxamine and Paxlovid) for COVID-19:a meta-analysis

Wen Wen,Chen Chen,Jiake Tang,Chunyi Wang,Mengyun Zhou,Yongran Cheng,Xiang Zhou,Qi Wu,Xingwei Zhang,Zhanhui Feng,Mingwei Wang,Qin Mao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2022.2034936

IF: 5.348

2022-02-04

Annals of Medicine

Abstract:BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic has not been completely controlled. Although great achievements have been made in COVID-19 research and many antiviral drugs have shown good therapeutic effects against COVID-19, a simple oral antiviral drug for COVID-19 has not yet been developed. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the improvement in mortality or hospitalization rates and adverse events among COVID-19 patients with three new oral antivirals (including molnupiravir, fluvoxamine and Paxlovid).METHODS: We searched scientific and medical databases, such as PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane Library for relevant articles and screened the references of retrieved studies on COVID-19.RESULTS: A total of eight studies were included in this study. The drug group included 2440 COVID-19 patients, including 54 patients who died or were hospitalized. The control group included a total of 2348 COVID-19 patients, including 118 patients who died or were hospitalized. The overall odds ratio (OR) of mortality or hospitalization was 0.33 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22-0.49) for COVID-19 patients in the drug group and placebo group, indicating that oral antiviral drugs were effective for COVID-19 patients and reduced the mortality or hospitalization by approximately 67%.CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that three novel oral antivirals (molnupiravir, fluvoxamine and Paxlovid) are effective in reducing the mortality and hospitalization rates in patients with COVID-19. In addition, the three oral drugs did not increase the occurrence of adverse events, thus exhibiting good overall safety. These three oral antiviral drugs are still being studied, and the available data suggest that they will bring new hope for COVID-19 recovery and have the potential to be a breakthrough and very promising treatment for COVID-19.KEY MESSAGESMany antiviral drugs have shown good therapeutic effects, and there is no simple oral antiviral drug for COVID-19 patients.Meta-analysis was conducted for three new oral antivirals to evaluate the improvement in mortality or hospitalization rates and adverse events among COVID-19 patients.We focussed on three new oral Coronavirus agents (molnupiravir, fluvoxamine and Paxlovid) and hope to provide guidance for the roll-out of oral antivirals.

medicine, general & internal
Efficacy and safety of azvudine in symptomatic adult COVID-19 participants who are at increased risk of progressing to critical illness: a study protocol for a multicentre randomized double-blind placebo-controlled phase III trial

Xinlun Tian,Yan Xu,Luo Wang,Chongya Dong,Xiaoyan Yan,Junping Fan,Huaiya Xie,Hong Zhang,Jinglan Wang,Yongjian Liu,Yaqi Wang,Siqi Pan,Aohua Wu,Xueqi Liu,Chen Yao,Mengzhao Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-024-07914-3

IF: 2.728

2024-01-23

Trials

Abstract:Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 will coexist with humans for a long time, and it is therefore important to develop effective treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Recent studies have demonstrated that antiviral therapy is a key factor in preventing patients from progressing to severe disease, even death. Effective and affordable antiviral medications are essential for disease treatment and are urgently needed. Azvudine, a nucleoside analogue, is a potential low-cost candidate with few drug interactions. However, validation of high-quality clinical studies is still limited.

medicine, research & experimental
Clinical update: deep vein thrombosis.

L. Gorski

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00004045-200105000-00013

2001-05-01

Home Healthcare Nurse

Abstract:no. 5 • May 2001 http://www.nursingcenter.com Home Healthcare Nurse 307 Home management of patients with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) continues to be a growing trend for home care agencies. The movement toward the use of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in the treatment of DVT has been a primary force in making home treatment an option and is well supported by medical practice guidelines (American College of Chest Physicians [Hyers et al., 1998]; American Academy of Home Care Physicians, 2000). Formerly, intravenous infusion of heparin for 4 to 5 days in the acute care setting was standard treatment for DVT. A discussion of LMWH and a clinical pathway for home care patients with DVT have been previously addressed in Home Healthcare Nurse (Carroll, 2000; Gorski, 2000). This clinical update presents additional information about DVT and its clinical management. When caring for patients with DVT at home, it is easy to primarily focus on the task of administering and teaching injections. However, it is important to understand that:

Methods for deriving criteria for assessing the quality of medical care.

Olgotrelvir As a Single-Agent Treatment of Nonhospitalized Patients with Covid-19.

An Open, Prospective Cohort Study of VV116 in Chinese Participants Infected with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variants.

The safety and efficacy of oral antiviral drug VV116 for treatment of COVID-19: A systematic review

Early antiviral therapy of abidor combined with lopinavir/ritonavir and re combinant interferonα 2b in patients with novel coronavirus pneumonia in Zhejiang: A multicenter and prospective study

Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of VV116, an oral nucleoside analog against SARS-CoV-2, in Chinese healthy subjects

Early antiviral therapy of abidol combined with lopinavir/ritonavir and recombinant interferon α-2b for patients with COVID-19 in Zhejiang: A multicenter prospective study

Real-world effectiveness and safety of simnotrelvir/ritonavir for COVID-19: A nationwide, multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study in China

Efficacy and safety of GST-HG171 in adult patients with mild to moderate COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trial

Efficacy and safety of GST-HG171 in adult patients with mild to moderate COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trialResearch in context

Clinical Efficacy of Arbidol in Patients with 2019 Novel Coronavirus-Infected Pneumonia: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Leritrelvir for the treatment of mild or moderate COVID-19 without co-administered ritonavir: a multicentre randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial

Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Remdesivir in Adult Patients with Severe COVID-19: Study Protocol for a Phase 3 Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicentre Trial

Impact of Lianhua Qingwen on viral shedding in omicron mild/asymtomatic patients: a real-world study

VV116 as a potential treatment for COVID-19

An Open-Label, Randomized Trial of the Combination of IFN-κ Plus TFF2 with Standard Care in the Treatment of Patients with Moderate COVID-19.

Efficacy and Safety of SIM0417 (SSD8432) Plus Ritonavir for COVID-19 Treatment: a Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 1b Trial

Efficacy and safety of three new oral antiviral treatment (molnupiravir, fluvoxamine and Paxlovid) for COVID-19:a meta-analysis

Efficacy and safety of azvudine in symptomatic adult COVID-19 participants who are at increased risk of progressing to critical illness: a study protocol for a multicentre randomized double-blind placebo-controlled phase III trial

Clinical update: deep vein thrombosis.