[Self-measurement of blood pressure].

E. Paran,T. Ben Tal

1993-02-01

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Effectiveness of Sotrovimab in the Omicron Storm Time: A Case Series

Gaetano Cicchitto,Lorena Cardillo,Davide Sequino,Paola Sabatini,Luisa Adamo,Rosita Marchitiello,Maurizio Viscardi,Loredana Cozzolino,Antonietta Cavallera,Marialuisa Bocchino,Alessandro Sanduzzi Zamparelli,Francesco Ferrigno,Esterina de Carlo,Claudio de Martinis,Giovanna Fusco

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v15010102

2022-12-30

Viruses

Abstract:Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are largely used to prevent the progression of the disease by blocking viral attachment, host cell entry, and infectivity. Sotrovimab, like other available mAbs, has been developed against the receptor binding Domain of the Spike (S) glycoprotein of the virus. Nevertheless, the latest Omicron variant has shown marked mutations within the S gene, thus opening the question of the efficacy of these neutralizing molecules towards this novel variant. In the present observational study, we describe the effects of Sotrovimab in the treatment of 15 fully vaccinated patients, infected by SARS-CoV-2 Omicron sub-variants, who were selected on the basis of factors widely considered to affect a worse prognosis: immune suppression (n = 12) and/or chronic kidney disease (n = 5) with evidence of interstitial pneumonia in nine patients. The effectiveness of Sotrovimab in the treatment of severe cases of COVID-19 was demonstrated by the regression of symptoms (mean 5.7 days), no need of hospitalisation, improvement of general health conditions and viral clearance within 30 days in all patients. In conclusion, although loss or reduction of mAbs neutralizing activity against the Omicron variant have been described, Sotrovimab has clinically proven to be a safe and useful treatment for patients with high risk of progression to severe COVID-19 infected by Omicron sub-variants.
Triple Combination Therapy With 2 Antivirals and Monoclonal Antibodies for Persistent or Relapsed Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection in Immunocompromised Patients

Malgorzata Mikulska,Chiara Sepulcri,Chiara Dentone,Federica Magne,Elisa Balletto,Federico Baldi,Laura Labate,Chiara Russo,Michele Mirabella,Laura Magnasco,Carmen Di Grazia,Chiara Ghiggi,Anna Maria Raiola,Daniele Roberto Giacobbe,Antonio Vena,Sabrina Beltramini,Bianca Bruzzone,Roberto M Lemoli,Emanuele Angelucci,Matteo Bassetti

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciad181

2023-07-26

Abstract: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.
Early combination of sotrovimab with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or remdesivir is associated with low rate of persisting SARS CoV-2 infection in immunocompromised outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19: a prospective single center study.

Ivan Gentile,Giulio Viceconte,Federica Cuccurullo,Daria Pietroluongo,Alessia D'Agostino,Maria Silvitelli,Simona Mercinelli,Riccardo Scotto,Francesco Grimaldi,Salvatore Palmieri,Angela Gravetti,Fabio Trastulli,Marcello Moccia,Antonio Riccardo Buonomo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.07.15.24310384

2024-07-15

Abstract:Background Immunocompromised patients are at high risk of developing persisting/prolonged COVID-19. Data concerning early combined use of antivirals and monoclonal antibodies in this population are scarce. Research design and methods We performed an observational, prospective study, enrolling immunocompromised outpatient adults with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 treated with a combination of sotrovimab plus one antiviral (remdesivir or nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) within 7 days from symptoms onset. Results We enrolled 52 patients. No patient was hospitalized within 30 days from the disease onset, needed oxygen administration or died within 60 days, or experienced a reinfection or a clinical relapse within 90 days. Clearance rates were 67% and 97% at 14th day after the end of therapy and at the end of follow-up, respectively. Factors associated with longer infection were initiation of therapy after 3 days from symptoms onset, and enrollment more than 180 days from the beginning of the study. However, only the latter factor was independently associated with longer SARS-CoV-2 infection, suggesting a loss of efficacy of this strategy with the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 variants Conclusions Early administration of combination therapy with a direct antiviral and sotrovimab seems to be effective in preventing hospitalization, progression to severe COVID-19 and the development of prolonged/persisting SARS-CoV-2 infection in immunocompromised patients.

Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS)
Clinical and Virological Outcome of Monoclonal Antibody Therapies Across Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Variants in 245 Immunocompromised Patients: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Sammy Huygens,Corine GeurtsvanKessel,Arvind Gharbharan,Susanne Bogers,Nathalie Worp,Marjan Boter,Hannelore I Bax,Linda M Kampschreur,Robert-Jan Hassing,Roel B Fiets,Henriette Levenga,Pedro Miranda Afonso,Marion Koopmans,Bart J A Rijnders,Bas B Oude Munnink

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciae026

IF: 20.999

2024-03-06

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Abstract Background Immunocompromised patients (ICPs) have an increased risk for a severe and prolonged COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) were extensively used in these patients, but data from randomized trials that focus on ICPs are lacking. We evaluated the clinical and virological outcome of COVID-19 in ICPs treated with mAbs across SARS-CoV-2 variants. Methods In this multicenter prospective cohort study, we enrolled B-cell– and/or T-cell–deficient patients treated with casirivimab/imdevimab, sotrovimab, or tixagevimab/cilgavimab. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was quantified and sequenced weekly, and time to viral clearance, viral genome mutations, hospitalization, and death rates were registered. Results Two hundred and forty five patients infected with the Delta (50%) or Omicron BA.1, 2, or 5 (50%) variant were enrolled. Sixty-seven percent were vaccinated; 78 treated as outpatients, of whom 2 required hospital admission, but both survived. Of the 159 patients hospitalized at time of treatment, 43 (27%) required mechanical ventilation or died. The median time to viral clearance was 14 days (interquartile range, 7–22); however, it took >30 days in 15%. Resistance-associated spike mutations emerged in 9 patients in whom the median time to viral clearance was 63 days (95% confidence interval, 57–69; P < .001). Spike mutations were observed in 1 of 42 (2.4%) patients after treatment with 2 active mAbs, in 5 of 34 (14.7%) treated with actual monotherapy (sotrovimab), and 3 of 20 (12%) treated with functional monotherapy (ie, tixagevimab/cilgavimab against tixagevimab-resistant variant). Conclusions Despite treatment with mAbs, morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 in ICPs remained substantial. Combination antiviral therapy should be further explored and may be preferred in severely ICPs.

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
Real-world effectiveness of early anti-SARS therapy in severely immunocompromised COVID-19 outpatients during the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant era: a propensity score-adjusted retrospective cohort study

Héctor Pinargote-Celorio,Óscar Moreno-Pérez,Pilar González-De-La-Aleja,Jara Llenas-García,Pedro María Martínez Pérez-Crespo,Juan-Carlos Rodríguez-Díaz,Belén Martínez-López,Nicolás Merchante Gutiérrez,José-Manuel Ramos-Rincón,Esperanza Merino

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkae351

2024-10-07

Abstract:Background: The effectiveness of the early treatment for antiviral agents in SARS-CoV-2 infection is closely related to patient comorbidities. Data on effectiveness in immunocompromised patients are limited, with reports involving highly heterogeneous and not well-defined populations. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of treatment in reducing hospitalizations in a real-world cohort of severely immunocompromised COVID-19 outpatients. Patients and methods: We conducted a multicentre, retrospective, observational cohort study of immunocompromised outpatients attended in infectious diseases departments from 1 January to 31 December 2022. Propensity score matching (PSM) multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate the adjusted odds ratio [(aOR, 95% confidence interval (CI)] for the association between antiviral prescription and outcome (COVID-19-related hospitalization up to Day 90). Results: We identified 746 immunocompromised outpatients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. After eligibility criteria and PSM, a total of 410 patients were analysed: 205 receiving treatment (remdesivir, sotrovimab or nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) and 205 matched controls. Fifty-two patients required at least one COVID-19-related hospitalization 8 (3.9%) versus 44 (21.5%) in the antiviral and matched control cohorts, respectively. There were 13 deaths at 90 days, of which only 4 were COVID-19-related and none in the antiviral treatment group. After adjustment for residual confounders, the use of early therapy was associated with a protective effect on the risk of hospitalization [aOR 0.13 (0.05-0.29)], as was the use of biological immunomodulators [aOR 0.27 (0.10-0.74)], whereas chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [aOR 4.65 (1.09-19.69)] and anti-CD20 use [aOR 2.76 (1.31-5.81)] increased the odds. Conclusions: Early antiviral treatment was associated with a reduced risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization in ambulatory severely immunocompromised COVID-19 patients.
Early combination therapy of COVID-19 in high-risk patients

Hans Martin Orth,Charlotte Flasshove,Moritz Berger,Tessa Hattenhauer,Kaja D Biederbick,Rebekka Mispelbaum,Uwe Klein,Jannik Stemler,Matthis Fisahn,Anna D Doleschall,Ben-Niklas Baermann,Eva Koenigshausen,Olga Tselikmann,Alexander Killer,Clara de Angelis,Smaranda Gliga,Johannes Stegbauer,Nikolai Spuck,Gerda Silling,Jürgen K Rockstroh,Christian P Strassburg,Peter Brossart,Jens P Panse,Björn-Erik Ole Jensen,Tom Luedde,Christoph Boesecke,Annkristin Heine,Oliver A Cornely,Malte B Monin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-023-02125-5

Infection

Abstract:Purpose: Prolonged shedding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been observed in immunocompromised hosts. Early monotherapy with direct-acting antivirals or monoclonal antibodies, as recommended by the international guidelines, does not prevent this with certainty. Dual therapies may therefore have a synergistic effect. Methods: This retrospective, multicentre study compared treatment strategies for corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19) with combinations of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, remdesivir, molnupiravir, and/ or mABs during the Omicron surge. Co-primary endpoints were prolonged viral shedding (≥ 106 copies/ml at day 21 after treatment initiation) and days with SARS-CoV-2 viral load ≥ 106 copies/ml. Therapeutic strategies and risk groups were compared using odds ratios and Fisher's tests or Kaplan-Meier analysis and long-rank tests. Multivariable regression analysis was performed. Results: 144 patients were included with a median duration of SARS-CoV-2 viral load ≥ 106 copies/ml of 8.0 days (IQR 6.0-15.3). Underlying haematological malignancies (HM) (p = 0.03) and treatment initiation later than five days after diagnosis (p < 0.01) were significantly associated with longer viral shedding. Prolonged viral shedding was observed in 14.6% (n = 21/144), particularly in patients with underlying HM (OR 3.5; 95% CI 1.2-9.9; p = 0.02). Clinical courses of COVID-19 were mild to moderate with only few adverse effects potentially related to combination treatment. Conclusion: Early combination treatment of COVID-19 effectively prevented prolonged viral shedding in 85.6% of cases. Considering the rapid viral clearance rates and low toxicity, individualized dual therapy approaches may be beneficial in high-risk patients.
Real-world effectiveness of sotrovimab for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection during Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 subvariant predominance: a systematic literature review

Myriam Drysdale,Mehmet Berktas,Daniel C. Gibbons,Catherine Rolland,Louis Lavoie,Emily J. Lloyd

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-024-02245-6

2024-04-12

Infection

Abstract:Purpose To evaluate clinical outcomes associated with sotrovimab use during Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 predominance. Methods Electronic databases were searched for observational studies published in peer-reviewed journals, preprint articles and conference abstracts from January 1, 2022 to February 27, 2023. Results The 14 studies identified were heterogeneous in terms of study design, population, endpoints and definitions. They included > 1.7 million high-risk patients with COVID-19, of whom approximately 41,000 received sotrovimab (range n = 20–5979 during BA.2 and n = 76–1383 during BA.5 predominance). Four studies compared the effectiveness of sotrovimab with untreated or no monoclonal antibody treatment controls, two compared sotrovimab with other treatments, and three single-arm studies compared outcomes during BA.2 and/or BA.5 versus BA.1. Five studies descriptively reported rates of clinical outcomes in patients treated with sotrovimab. Rates of COVID-19-related hospitalization or mortality (0.95–4.0% during BA.2; 0.5–2.0% during BA.5) and all-cause mortality (1.7–2.0% during BA.2; 3.4% during combined BA.2 and BA.5 periods) among sotrovimab-treated patients were consistently low. During BA.2, a lower risk of all-cause hospitalization or mortality was reported across studies with sotrovimab versus untreated cohorts. Compared with other treatments, sotrovimab was associated with a lower (molnupiravir) or similar (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization or mortality during BA.2 and BA.5. There was no significant difference in outcomes between the BA.1, BA.2 and BA.5 periods. Conclusions This systematic literature review suggests continued effectiveness of sotrovimab in preventing severe clinical outcomes during BA.2 and BA.5 predominance, both against active/untreated comparators and compared with BA.1 predominance.

infectious diseases
Comparison of Dual Monoclonal Antibody Therapies for COVID-19 Evolution: A Multicentric Retrospective Study

Karen Zafilaza,Jonathan Bellet,Aurélie Truffot,Vincent Foulongne,Manuela Mireille Onambele,Maud Salmona,Camille Vellas,Claire Périllaud-Dubois,Audrey Mirand,Elisabeth André-Garnier,Enagnon Kazali Alidjinou,Ségolène Brichler,Honorine Fenaux,Magali Bouvier-Alias,Cédric Hartard,Céline Dorival,Fabrice Carrat,Anne-Geneviève Marcelin,Karl Stefic,Cathia Soulie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/v16101542

2024-09-30

Viruses

Abstract:Background: Neutralizing antibodies targeting the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein reduce COVID-19-related risk of hospitalization, particularly in high-risk individuals. The COCOPREV-R study aimed to evaluate and compare clinical outcomes in high-risk SARS-CoV-2 patients treated with dual monoclonal antibody therapies and to identify associated virological factors. Methods: The COCOPREV-R study retrospectively collected real-world data from high-risk patients receiving Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab or Casirivimab/Imdevimab dual monoclonal antibody therapies (22 February 2021 to 15 June 2021). Results: The study included 1004 patients with COVID-19, of whom 691 received Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab and 313 received Casirivimab/Imdevimab. The alpha variant represented 90.1% of those for whom data were available. The risk of hospitalization within 30 days was lower with Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab (12.7%, CI 95% [9.9–16.3%]) compared to Casirivimab/Imdevimab (28.4%, CI 95% [22.7–35.1%) (p < 0.001). The 30-day mortality rates were comparable between both groups (p = 0.982). Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 PCR negativity showed no difference between the two treatment groups (95.2% [93.0–96.9%] and 93.5% [89.1–96.6%] until day 30, p = 0.851 for Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab and Casirivimab/Imdevimab, respectively). Among persistently positive samples with available sequencing results (n = 43), Spike protein changes occurred only in Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab (42.9%) vs. Casirivimab/Imdevimab (0.0%) groups. Q493R (25.0%) and E484K (12.5%) were the most common mutations selected by Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab in follow-up samples. Other factors (immunodepression, comorbidities, and age) did not appear to be associated with the occurrence of Spike protein mutations. Conclusions: A higher rate of hospitalization was seen with Casirivimab/Imdevimab (RONAPREVE®) in comparison with Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab treatment, but with the emergence of Spike mutations only in the Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab group.

virology
Efficacy of sotrovimab on omicron BA.2, BA.4 and BA.5 subvariants of sars-cov-2 vs. other early therapies: a systematic review and meta-analysis of literature data

Antonio Russo,Pierantonio Grimaldi,Mariantonietta Pisaturo,Lorenzo Onorato,Nicola Coppola

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2024.1295029

IF: 7.3

2024-01-31

Frontiers in Immunology

Abstract:Background: The aim of this meta-analysis was to ascertain whether sotrovimab was effective in reducing COVID-19 related hospitalization and mortality also in Omicron BA.2, BA.4 and BA.5 subvariants compared to other antivirals effective in index period. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing the efficacy of early treatment with sotrovimab compared to other early treatment effective in index period, antivirals or monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), in patients with COVID-19 during BA.2, BA.4, BA.5 waves, conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. We searched MEDLINE, Google Scholar and the Cochrane Library. Mortality and hospitalization were defined as outcomes. Results: Four studies were included, allowing a meta-analysis of 8,041 patients. Meta-analysis showed no statistical difference between groups in hospitalization and mortality. Precisely, the RR of mortality showed no difference in the sotrovimab group compared to treatment with other drugs (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.10-1.49, p<0.166). As regards the rate of hospitalization, no significant difference resulted between the patients treated with sotrovimab and those with other drugs (OR 1.66, 95% CI 0.41-6.66, p=0.477). Interpretation: In conclusion, this meta-analysis showed no significant difference between sotrovimab or other antivirals in reducing COVID-19 evolution in patients with a high risk of progression, considering both hospitalization and mortality.

immunology
Cannabinoid CB1 Receptor and Gastric Acid Secretion

F. Borrelli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-006-9507-4

2007-04-03

Digestive Diseases and Sciences

Abstract:
Antibiotics and antivirals do not modify experimentally-induced Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in mice

J. Tateishi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.44.8.723

1981-08-01

Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

Abstract:Thiamphenicol, rifampicin, amantadine, cytosine arabinoside and isoprinosine were administered to mice which were inoculated with brain tissue containing Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD). All the mice developed disease within 3 to 6 months after inoculation. As there was no significant shift in incubation periods among animal groups of each drug administration and non-administration, these compounds had no effect in controlling experimental CJD.
Comparable outcomes of outpatient remdesivir and sotrovimab among high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 during the omicron BA.1 surge

Supavit Chesdachai,Christina G. Rivera,Kristin C. Cole,Hilary R. Teaford,Maria L. Gonzalez Suarez,Jennifer J. Larsen,Ravindra Ganesh,Sidna Tulledge-Scheitel,Raymund R. Razonable

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-56195-y

IF: 4.6

2024-03-07

Scientific Reports

Abstract:Studies conducted prior to SARS-CoV-2 Omicron demonstrated that sotrovimab and remdesivir reduced hospitalization among high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. However, their effectiveness has not been directly compared. This study examined all high-risk outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 who received either remdesivir or sotrovimab at Mayo Clinic during the Omicron BA.1 surge from January to March 2022. COVID-19-related hospitalization or death within 28 days were compared between the two treatment groups. Among 3257 patients, 2158 received sotrovimab and 1099 received remdesivir. Patients treated with sotrovimab were younger and had lower comorbidity but were more likely to be immunocompromised than remdesivir-treated patients. The majority (89%) had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. COVID-19-related hospitalization (1.5% and 1.0% in remdesivir and sotrovimab, respectively, p = .15) and mortality within 28 days (0.4% in both groups, p = .82) were similarly low. A propensity score weighted analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the outcomes between the two groups. We demonstrated favorable outcomes that were not significantly different between patients treated with remdesivir or sotrovimab.

multidisciplinary sciences
Antiviral combination therapies for persistent COVID-19 in immunocompromised patients.

Daniele Focosi,Fabrizio Maggi,Alessandra D'Abramo,Emanuele Nicastri,David J Sullivan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2023.09.021

IF: 12.073

2023-10-01

International Journal of Infectious Diseases

Abstract:After the third year of the COVID-19 pandemic, most of the severe COVID-19 burden falls upon immunocompromised patients who cannot mount endogenous immune response after both vaccination and/or natural infection. They also experience persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection with high viral loads often unsuccessfully managed by the standard antiviral monotherapy regimen initially validated for treatment of COVID-19 immunocompetent patients, only. The off-label prescription of such monotherapy regimens in immunocompromised patients is likely to drive the emergence of treatment-related immune escape, relapses, excess morbidity and mortality from both COVID-19 and delayed treatment of the underlying disorders. A possible treatment approach to mitigate such consequence is based on combined antiviral therapies. In this narrative review, we show that combinations of either small molecule antivirals or small molecule antiviral plus passive immunotherapies are safe and effective in small cohorts reported so far. Considering the progressive loss of efficacy of all authorized anti-Spike monoclonal antibodies, promising regimen options are reserved to combinations of small molecule antivirals and COVID-19 convalescent plasma from vaccinated donors.

infectious diseases
Impact analysis of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients treated with monoclonal antibodies: A monocentric experience

Nicola Perrotta,Luigi Angelo Fiorito,Cristiana Leanza,Silvia Di Bari,Gianfranco Casini,Rossella Gentile,Roberta Vescovo,Alfonso Piciocchi,Camilla Ajassa,Giancarlo Iaiani,Enrica Maria Proli,Gianluca Russo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intimp.2024.113101

2024-12-05

Abstract:Background: Since the discovery of SARS-CoV-2, no treatment has been able to completely eradicate the virus. The study aimed to evaluate the virological and clinical impact of the vaccination in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients treated with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Methods: This single-centre, observational, retrospective, real-life study was performed on SARS-CoV-2 symptomatic outpatients and inpatients treated with mAbs from March 2021 to November 2022 includes 726 patients. Each patient received available mAbs (bamlanivimab-etesevimab or casirivimab-indevimab or sotrovimab or tixagevimab-cilgavimab) according to the circulating virus strains. Age, comorbidities, vaccination status, death rates, duration of virological clearance, average length of stay, risk factors, and hospitalization or ICU admission were recorded. Results: Of 726 patients with complete data analyzed (median age 64), 516 outpatients and 210 inpatients were included. Vaccination status was known for all participants: 74.4 % and 51.7 % were vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 among inpatients and outpatients, respectively. A shorter duration of virological clearance was observed in the vaccinated group, with a median of 16 days (IQR 15-17), compared to 19 days (IQR 18-21) in the unvaccinated group [HR 1.21; p < 0.032]. Multivariate analysis of virological clearance also showed statistical significance with tixagevimab cilgavimab 300 mg/300 mg (HR 2.73, p value < 0.001). No significant difference was found in worsening [OR 1,29; p = 0.57] and mortality [OR 0.65; p = 0.81] rates between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients treated with mAbs. Conclusions: Key findings include a shorter duration of virological clearance in vaccinated outpatients but no significant differences in worsening or mortality rates between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients treated with mAbs. The study suggests a potential synergistic role of mAbs in accelerating virological clearance in vaccinated patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, with differing effects in hospitalized patients. Therefore, it is essential to implement health surveillance in high-risk patients with comorbidities in order to identify early any variants that might otherwise escape neutralizing antibodies.
Pooled analysis of the MANTICO2 and MONET randomized controlled trials comparing drug efficacy for early treatment of COVID-19 during Omicron waves

Valentina Mazzotta,Fulvia Mazzaferri,Simone Lanini,Massimo Mirandola,Alessandro Cozzi Lepri,Alessandra Vergori,Alessia Savoldi,Andrea Santoro,Gaia Maccarrone,Ilaria Mastrorosa,Omar Simonetti,Federico De Zottis,Emanuele Nicastri,Giulia Rosini,Laura Rovigo,Lorenzo Tavernaro,Loredana Sarmati,Carlo Tascini,Enrico Girardi,Anna Maria Cattelan,Andrea Antinori,Evelina Tacconelli,MANTICO2/MONET study group

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2024.106294

Abstract:Background: The clinical effectiveness of early therapies for mild-to-moderate COVID-19, comparing antivirals and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) during the Omicron era, has not been conclusively assessed through a post-approval comparative trial. We present a pooled analysis of two randomized clinical trials conducted during Omicron waves. Methods: The MANTICO2/MONET trial is a pooled analysis of two multicentric, independent, phase-4, three-arm, superiority, randomized, open-label trials. Nonhospitalized patients with early mild-to-moderate COVID-19 (≤5 days after symptoms' onset) and at least one risk factor for disease progression were randomized 1:1:1 to receive 500 mg of intravenous sotrovimab (SOT) or 600 mg of intramuscular tixagevimab/cilgavimab (TGM/CGM) or oral 5-days course of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMV/r) 300/100 mg BID. Primary outcome was COVID-19-related hospitalization or death within 29 days after randomization. Fisher's exact test for pooled data and incidence of failure was reported as overall and by arm with respective 95% CI. Pairwise comparisons across the arms were conducted using unadjusted exact logistic regression. An analysis by means of a doubly robust marginal model using augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW) was also conducted to estimate the potential outcomes (Pom) in each treatment group and their difference by the average treatment effect (ATE). Analysis of symptom persistence within 30 days after randomization was performed using a 2-level hierarchical mixed-effects logistic model with a random intercept at the patient's level. Point estimates and 95% confidence intervals were adjusted for age and sex and calculated using ANOVA-like methods for the mixed effects logistic model. These trials are registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, EudraCT2021-002612-31 (MANTICO2) and EudraCT2021-004188-28 (MONET) and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05321394 (MANTICO2). Findings: Between March 2022 and February 2023, 991 patients (SOT = 332, TGM/CGM = 327, NMV/r = 332) were enrolled in 15 Italian centers. The overall mean age was 66 years; 482 participants (48.80%) were male, and 856 were vaccinated with at least a primary course (86%). Among the 8/991 hospitalizations observed, one resulted in death. The overall estimate of failure was 0.81% (95%CI; 0.35-1.58%). The odds ratio (OR) for the primary outcome in the NMV/r arm compared to the TGM/CGM and SOT arms was 8.41 (95% CI 1.21 to infinity; p = 0.015) and 2.42 (95% CI 0.19 to infinity; p = 0.499), respectively. No significant difference was observed between SOT and TGM/CGM (OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.032-1.83; p = 0.174). Results were similar when we applied the marginal weighted model accounting for potential residual confounding bias. There was no evidence for a difference in the prevalence of symptoms between treatment groups, except for cough, which was higher in the SOT group compared to the other two groups at the 21-day follow-up (P = 0.039) and a higher prevalence of nausea at the 7-day follow-up in the NMV/r group compared to the mAbs group (p = 0.036). Interpretation: NMV/r was superior to TGM/CGM in reducing hospital admission or death in clinically vulnerable patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection treated within 5 days of symptoms' onset. No significant difference in symptom prevalence over time across the arms was found.
Bebtelovimab, alone or together with bamlanivimab and etesevimab, as a broadly neutralizing monoclonal antibody treatment for mild to moderate, ambulatory COVID-19

Michael Dougan,Masoud Azizad,Peter Chen,Barry Feldman,Matthew Frieman,Awawu Igbinadolor,Princy Kumar,Jason Morris,Jeffrey Potts,Lauren Baracco,Lisa Macpherson,Nicole L. Kallewaard,Dipak R. Patel,Matthew M. Hufford,Linda Wietecha,Emmanuel Chigutsa,Sarah L. Demmon,Bryan E. Jones,Ajay Nirula,Daniel M. Skovronsky,Mark Williams,Robert L. Gottlieb

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.10.22272100

2022-03-12

Abstract:BACKGROUND Bebtelovimab is a potent, fully human IgG1 monoclonal antibody (mAb) targeting the S-protein of SARS-CoV-2, with broad neutralizing activity to all currently known SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including omicron variant lineages. Specialized developmental approaches accelerated the initiation of a clinical trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bebtelovimab alone (BEB) or together with bamlanivimab (BAM) and etesevimab (ETE) delivered via slow intravenous push for the treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19. METHODS This portion of the phase 2, BLAZE-4 trial (J2X-MC-PYAH; NCT04634409 ) enrolled 714 patients (between May and July 2021) with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 within 3 days (≤3 days) of laboratory diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients at low risk for severe COVID-19 were randomized 1:1:1 (double-blinded) to placebo, BEB 175 mg, or BEB 175 mg+BAM 700 mg+ETE 1400 mg (BEB+BAM+ETE). Patients at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19 were randomized 2:1 (open-label) to BEB or BEB+BAM+ETE, and a subsequent treatment arm enrolled patients to BEB+BAM+ETE using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) updated criteria for High-risk. All treatments were administered intravenously over ≥30 seconds (open-label BEB) or ≥6.5 minutes (all other treatment arms). For the placebo-controlled patients (termed Low-risk), the primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with persistently high viral load (PHVL) (log viral load >5.27) on Day 7. For the open-label patients (termed High-risk), the primary endpoint was safety. In nonclinical studies, SARS-CoV-2 isolates were tested using an endpoint neutralization assay to measure BEB’s inhibitory concentration greater than 99% (IC 99 ). RESULTS Baseline viral sequencing data were available from 611 patients; 90.2% (n=551) aligned with a variant of interest or concern (WHO designation), with the majority infected with delta (49.8%) or alpha (28.6%) variants. Among the Low-risk patients, PHVL occurred in 19.8% of patients treated with placebo, as compared to 12.7% (p=0.132) of patients treated with BEB+BAM+ETE and 12.0% (p=0.097) of patients treated with BEB, a 36% and 40% relative risk reduction, respectively. Viral load-area under the curve analysis from baseline to Day 11 showed statistically signficant reductions for patients treated with BEB (p=0.006) and BEB+BAM+ETE (p=0.043) compared to patients who received placebo. Time to sustained symptom resolution was reduced by a median of 2 days for patients treated with BEB (6 days; p=0.003) and 1 day for patients treated with BEB+BAM+ETE (7 days; p=0.289) compared to placebo (8 days). The incidence of COVID-19-related hospitalization or all-cause deaths by day 29 were similar across treatment arms, as expected given the patients’ risk status (the Low risk cohorts had a Low risk of hospitalization, and High risk cohorts received only active therapy without placebo). Overall, safety results were consistent with previous studies investigating mAbs targeting SARS-CoV-2. The proportion of patients with treatment emergent adverse events (AEs) were 9.7% in Low-risk (n=37/380) and 14.7% in High-risk (n=48/326) patients treated with BEB or BEB+BAM+ETE; majority of AEs were considered mild or moderate in severity. Serious AEs were reported in 2.1% of High-risk patients (n=7/326), including one death (a cerebrovascular accident); 1 serious AE was reported among Low-risk patients. In an in vitro neutralization assay, BEB neutralized the omicron isolate (BA.1) with <2.44ng/ml estimated IC 99 . CONCLUSIONS In patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, treatment with BEB or BEB+BAM+ETE was associated with greater viral clearance, a reduction in time to sustained symptom resolution, and safety results consistent with mAbs that target SARS-CoV-2. Integration of clinical findings with in vitro neutralization of emerging viral variants offered a pragmatic framework for investigating the efficacy of a new antiviral mAb agent, as demonstrated by bebtelovimab.
Phase memory effects in mesoscopic rings with superconducting "mirrors"

V. T. Petrashov,Vladimir Antonov,P. Delsing,T. Claeson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-4526(94)90882-6

IF: 8.6

1993-01-18

Physical Review Letters

Abstract:
Antiviral combination treatment strategies for SARS-CoV-2 infection in immunocompromised patients

Chiara Sepulcri,Claudia Bartalucci,Malgorzata Mikulska

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/qco.0000000000001070

2024-10-31

Current Opinion in Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Purpose of review The purpose of this review is to report the available evidence regarding the use of combination regimens of antivirals and/or antibody-based therapy in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 in immunocompromised patients. Recent findings Literature search identified 24 articles, excluding single case reports, which included mainly patients with hematological malignancies and/or B-cell depletion. Data were divided based on the timing and reason for administration of combination treatment, that is, early treatment to prevent progression to severe COVID-19 and treatment of prolonged or relapsed infection. We described the treated populations, treatment duration and composition of combination treatment. We briefly addressed new treatment options and we proposed an algorithm for the management of COVID-19 infection in patients affected by hematological malignancies. Summary Combination treatment seems an effective (73–100%) and well tolerated (<5% reported bradycardia, hepatotoxicity, neutropenia) strategy for treating prolonged/relapsed SARS-CoV-2 infections in the immunocompromised host, although its optimal composition and duration cannot be defined based on the currently available evidence. The role of combination treatment as an early treatment strategy for immunocompromised patients at a high risk of progression to severe disease/persistent shedding requires further evidence from comparison with monotherapy, even though high efficacy was reported for combinations of antivirals plus mAbs in case of previous viral variants.

infectious diseases
Early initiation of combined therapy in severely immunocompromised patients with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study

Salvatore Rotundo,Lavinia Berardelli,Sara Gullì,Valentina La Gamba,Rosaria Lionello,Alessandro Russo,Enrico Maria Trecarichi,Carlo Torti

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-09466-y

IF: 3.7

2024-06-08

BMC Infectious Diseases

Abstract:This single-centre retrospective cohort study reports on the results of a descriptive (non-comparative) retrospective cohort study of early initiation of antivirals and combined monoclonal antibody therapy (mAbs) in 48 severely immunocompromised patients with COVID-19. The study assessed the outcomes and the duration of viral shedding. The patients started early combined therapy (ECT) a median of 2 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 1–3 days) after the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Except for 1 patient who died due COVID-19-related respiratory failure, patients had their first negative nasopharyngeal swab result after a median of 11 days (IQR: 6–17 days) after starting combined therapy. There were no reports of severe side effects. During a follow-up period of 512 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 413–575 days), 6 patients (12.5%) died and 16 (33.3%) were admitted to hospital. Moreover, 12 patients (25%) were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 reinfection a median of 245 days (IQR: 138–401 days) after starting combined treatment. No relapses were reported. Although there was no comparison group, these results compare favourably with the outcomes of severely immunocompromised patients with COVID-19 reported in the literature.

infectious diseases
Characterization of treatment resistance and viral kinetics in the setting of single- versus dual-active monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2

Manish C Choudhary,Rinki Deo,Teresa H Evering,Kara W Chew,Mark J Giganti,Carlee Moser,Justin Ritz,James Regan,James P Flynn,Charles R Crain,David Alain Wohl,Judith S Currier,Joseph J Eron,David Margolis,Qing Zhu,Lijie Zhon,Li Ya,Alexander L Greninger,Michael D Hughes,Davey Smith,Eric S Daar,Jonathan Z Li,Kara Chew,David (Davey) Smith,Eric Daar,David Wohl,Judith Currier,Joseph Eron,Arzhang Cyrus Javan,Michael Hughes,Carlee Moser,Mark Giganti,Justin Ritz,Lara Hosey,Jhoanna Roa,Nilam Patel,Kelly Colsh,Irene Rwakazina,Justine Beck,Scott Sieg,Jonathan Li,Courtney Fletcher,William Fischer,Teresa H Evering,Rachel Bender Ignacio,Sandra Cardoso,Katya Corado,Prasanna Jagannathan,Nikolaus Jilg,Alan Perelson,Sandy Pillay,Cynthia Riviere,Upinder Singh,Babafemi Taiwo,Joan Gottesman,Matthew Newell,Susan Pedersen,Joan Dragavon,Cheryl Jennings,Brian Greenfelder,William Murtaugh,Jan Kosmyna,Morgan Gapara,Akbar Shahkolahi,for the ACTIV-2/A5401 Study Team

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiae192

2024-05-09

The Journal of Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Background Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) represent a crucial antiviral strategy for SARS-CoV-2 infection, but it is unclear whether combination mAbs offer a benefit over single-active mAb treatment. Amubarvimab and romlusevimab significantly reduced the risk of hospitalizations or death in the ACTIV-2/A5401 trial. Certain SARS-CoV-2 variants are intrinsically resistant against romlusevimab, leading to only single-active mAb therapy with amubarvimab in these variants. We evaluated virologic outcomes in individuals treated with single- versus dual-active mAbs. Methods Participants were non-hospitalized adults at higher risk of clinical progression randomized to amubarvimab plus romlusevimab or placebo. Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 RNA levels and targeted S gene next-generation sequencing was performed on anterior nasal samples. We compared viral load kinetics and resistance emergence between individuals treated with effective single- versus dual-active mAbs depending on the infecting variant. Results Study participants receiving single- and dual-active mAbs had similar demographics, baseline nasal viral load, symptom score, and symptom duration. Compared to single-active mAb, treatment with dual-active mAbs led to faster viral load decline at study day 3 (p < 0.001) and day 7 (p < 0.01). Treatment-emergent resistance mutations were more likely to be detected after amubarvimab plus romlusevimab treatment than placebo (2.6% vs 0%, P < 0.001), and more frequently detected in the setting of single-active compared to dual-active mAb treatment (7.2% vs 1.1%, p < 0.01). Single-active and dual-active mAb treatment resulted in similar decrease in rates of hospitalizations or death. Conclusion Compared to single-active mAb therapy, dual-active mAbs led to similar clinical outcomes, but significantly faster viral load decline and a lower risk of emergent resistance.

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology

[Self-measurement of blood pressure].

Effectiveness of Sotrovimab in the Omicron Storm Time: A Case Series

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

Early combination of sotrovimab with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or remdesivir is associated with low rate of persisting SARS CoV-2 infection in immunocompromised outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19: a prospective single center study.

Clinical and Virological Outcome of Monoclonal Antibody Therapies Across Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Variants in 245 Immunocompromised Patients: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Real-world effectiveness of early anti-SARS therapy in severely immunocompromised COVID-19 outpatients during the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant era: a propensity score-adjusted retrospective cohort study

Early combination therapy of COVID-19 in high-risk patients

Real-world effectiveness of sotrovimab for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection during Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 subvariant predominance: a systematic literature review

Comparison of Dual Monoclonal Antibody Therapies for COVID-19 Evolution: A Multicentric Retrospective Study

Efficacy of sotrovimab on omicron BA.2, BA.4 and BA.5 subvariants of sars-cov-2 vs. other early therapies: a systematic review and meta-analysis of literature data

Cannabinoid CB1 Receptor and Gastric Acid Secretion

Antibiotics and antivirals do not modify experimentally-induced Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in mice

Comparable outcomes of outpatient remdesivir and sotrovimab among high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 during the omicron BA.1 surge

Antiviral combination therapies for persistent COVID-19 in immunocompromised patients.

Impact analysis of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients treated with monoclonal antibodies: A monocentric experience

Pooled analysis of the MANTICO2 and MONET randomized controlled trials comparing drug efficacy for early treatment of COVID-19 during Omicron waves

Bebtelovimab, alone or together with bamlanivimab and etesevimab, as a broadly neutralizing monoclonal antibody treatment for mild to moderate, ambulatory COVID-19

Phase memory effects in mesoscopic rings with superconducting "mirrors"

Antiviral combination treatment strategies for SARS-CoV-2 infection in immunocompromised patients

Early initiation of combined therapy in severely immunocompromised patients with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study

Characterization of treatment resistance and viral kinetics in the setting of single- versus dual-active monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2