[Analysis of the intraventricular pressure curve in the isolated heart using a microcomputer].

F. Papoušek,F. Kolář,B. Ošt'ádal,V. Pribík

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The relationship between viral clearance rates and disease progression in early symptomatic COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis

Shivani Singh,Simon Boyd,William H K Schilling,James A Watson,Mavuto Mukaka,Nicholas J White

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkae045

2024-02-22

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

Abstract:Abstract Background Effective antiviral drugs accelerate viral clearance in acute COVID-19 infections; the relationship between accelerating viral clearance and reducing severe clinical outcomes is unclear. Methods A systematic review was conducted of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of antiviral therapies in early symptomatic COVID-19, where viral clearance data were available. Treatment benefit was defined clinically as the relative risk of hospitalization/death during follow-up (≥14 days), and virologically as the SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance rate ratio (VCRR). The VCRR is the ratio of viral clearance rates between the intervention and control arms. The relationship between the clinical and virological treatment effects was assessed by mixed-effects meta-regression. Results From 57 potentially eligible RCTs, VCRRs were derived for 44 (52 384 participants); 32 had ≥1 clinical endpoint in each arm. Overall, 9.7% (R2) of the variation in clinical benefit was explained by variation in VCRRs with an estimated linear coefficient of −0.92 (95% CI: −1.99 to 0.13; P = 0.08). However, this estimate was highly sensitive to the inclusion of the recent very large PANORAMIC trial. Omitting this outlier, half the variation in clinical benefit (R2 = 50.4%) was explained by variation in VCRRs [slope −1.47 (95% CI −2.43 to −0.51); P = 0.003], i.e. higher VCRRs were associated with an increased clinical benefit. Conclusion Methods of determining viral clearance in COVID-19 studies and the relationship to clinical outcomes vary greatly. As prohibitively large sample sizes are now required to show clinical treatment benefit in antiviral therapeutic assessments, viral clearance is a reasonable surrogate endpoint.

pharmacology & pharmacy,infectious diseases,microbiology
The Efficiency of Convalescent Plasma in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

Zhenbei Qian,Zhijin Zhang,Hao Ma,Shuai Shao,Hanyujie Kang,Zhaohui Tong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2022.964398

IF: 7.3

2022-01-01

Frontiers in Immunology

Abstract:The objective of this study was to assess whether convalescent plasma therapy could offer survival advantages for patients with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). An electronic search of Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane library and MedRxiv was performed from January 1st, 2020 to April 1st, 2022. We included studies containing patients with COVID-19 and treated with CCP. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers and synthesized with a random-effect analysis model. The primary outcome was 28-d mortality. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, ventilation-free days, 14-d mortality, improvements of symptoms, progression of diseases and requirements of mechanical ventilation. Safety outcomes included the incidence of all adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs). The Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool 2.0 was used to assess the potential risk of bias in eligible studies. The heterogeneity of results was assessed by I^2 test and Q statistic test. The possibility of publication bias was assessed by conducting Begg and Egger test. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) method were used for quality of evidence. This study had been registered on PROSPERO, CRD42021273608. 32 RCTs comprising 21478 patients with Covid-19 were included. Compared to the control group, COVID-19 patients receiving CCP were not associated with significantly reduced 28-d mortality (CCP 20.0% vs control 20.8%; risk ratio 0.94; 95% CI 0.87-1.02; p = 0.16; I² = 8%). For all secondary outcomes, there were no significant differences between CCP group and control group. The incidence of AEs (26.9% vs 19.4%,; risk ratio 1.14; 95% CI 0.99-01.31; p = 0.06; I² = 38%) and SAEs (16.3% vs 13.5%; risk ratio 1.03; 95% CI 0.87-1.20; p = 0.76; I² = 42%) tended to be higher in the CCP group compared to the control group, while the differences did not reach statistical significance. In all, CCP therapy was not related to significantly improved 28-d mortality or symptoms recovery, and should not be viewed as a routine treatment for COVID-19 patients. Trial registration number CRD42021273608. Registration on February 28, 2022 Systematic review registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , Identifier CRD42022313265.
The transcription factor, Nuclear factor, erythroid 2 (Nfe2), is a regulator of the oxidative stress response during Danio rerio development.

L. M. Williams,B. A. Lago,A. McArthur,A. Raphenya,Nicholas Pray,N. Saleem,Sophia Salas,Katherine R Paulson,Roshni S. Mangar,Yang Liu,Andy H. Vo,J. Shavit

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquatox.2016.09.019

IF: 5.202

2016-11-01

Aquatic Toxicology

Abstract:
Temporal changes in SARS-CoV-2 clearance kinetics and the optimal design of antiviral pharmacodynamic studies: an individual patient data meta-analysis of a randomised, controlled, adaptive platform study (PLATCOV)

Phrutsamon Wongnak,William H K Schilling,Podjanee Jittamala,Simon Boyd,Viravarn Luvira,Tanaya Siripoon,Thundon Ngamprasertchai,Elizabeth M Batty,Shivani Singh,Jindarat Kouhathong,Watcharee Pagornrat,Patpannee Khanthagan,Borimas Hanboonkunupakarn,Kittiyod Poovorawan,Mayfong Mayxay,Kesinee Chotivanich,Mallika Imwong,Sasithon Pukrittayakamee,Elizabeth A Ashley,Arjen M Dondorp,Nicholas P J Day,Mauro M Teixeira,Watcharapong Piyaphanee,Weerapong Phumratanaprapin,Nicholas J White,James A Watson,James Callery,Cintia Cruz,Walter Taylor,Janjira Thaipadungpanit,Maneerat Ekkapongpisit,Varaporn Kruabkontho,Thatsanun Ngernseng,Jaruwan Tubprasert,Mohammad Abdad,Srisuda Keayarsa,Orawan Anunsittichai,Maliwan Hongsuwan,Yutatirat Singhaboot,Wanassanan Madmanee,Runch Tuntipaiboontana,Amornrat Promsongsil,Manisaree Saroj,Kanokon Suwannasin,Ellen Beer,Tanatchakorn Asawasriworanan,Stuart Blacksell,Salwaluk Panapipat,Naomi Waithira,Joel Tarning,Nuttakan Tanglakmankhong,Pedro J Almeida,Renato S Aguiar,Fernando Ascencao,Lisia Esper,Manivanh Vongsouvath,Koukeo Phommasone,Audrey Dubot-Pérès,Sisouphanh Vidhamaly,Ammala Chingsanoon,Sixiong Bisayher,Danoy Chommanam,Terry Evans,Vayouly Vidhamaly,Latsaniphone Boutthasavong,Susath Vongphachanh,Manus Potaporn,Attasit Srisubat,Bootsakorn Loharjun,M Asim Beg,Abdul Momin Kazi,Farah Qamar,Najia Ghanchi,Syed Faisal Mahmood,Pongtorn Hanboonkunupakarn,Sakol Sookprome,Vasin Chotivanich,Wiroj Ruksakul,Chunlanee Sangketchon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s1473-3099(24)00183-x

IF: 71.421

2024-04-26

The Lancet Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Summary Background Effective antiviral drugs prevent hospitalisation and death from COVID-19. Antiviral efficacy can be efficiently assessed in vivo by measuring rates of SARS-CoV-2 clearance estimated from serial viral genome densities quantitated in nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab eluates. We conducted an individual patient data meta-analysis of unblinded arms in the PLATCOV platform trial to characterise changes in viral clearance kinetics and infer optimal design and interpretation of antiviral pharmacometric evaluations. Methods Serial viral density data were analysed from symptomatic, previously healthy, adult patients (within 4 days of symptom onset) enrolled in a large multicentre, randomised, adaptive, pharmacodynamic, platform trial (PLATCOV) comparing antiviral interventions for SARS-CoV-2. Viral clearance rates over 1 week were estimated under a hierarchical Bayesian linear model with B-splines used to characterise temporal changes in enrolment viral densities and clearance rates. Bootstrap re-sampling was used to assess the optimal duration of follow-up for pharmacometric assessment, where optimal was defined as maximising the expected Z score when comparing effective antivirals with no treatment. PLATCOV is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT05041907 . Findings Between Sept 29, 2021, and Oct 20, 2023, 1262 patients were randomly assigned in the PLATCOV trial. Unblinded data were available from 800 patients (who provided 16 818 oropharyngeal viral quantitative PCR [qPCR] measurements), of whom 504 (63%) were female. 783 (98%) patients had received at least one vaccine dose and 703 (88%) were fully vaccinated. SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance was biphasic (bi-exponential). The first phase (α) was accelerated by effective interventions. For all the effective interventions studied, maximum discriminative power (maximum expected Z score) was obtained when evaluating serial data from the first 5 days after enrolment. Over the 2-year period studied, median viral clearance half-lives estimated over 7 days shortened from 16·6 h (IQR 15·3 to 18·2) in September, 2021, to 9·2 h (8·0 to 10·6) in October, 2023, in patients receiving no antiviral drugs, equivalent to a relative reduction of 44% (95% credible interval [CrI] 19 to 64). A parallel reduction in viral clearance half-lives over time was observed in patients receiving antiviral drugs. For example, in the 158 patients assigned to ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir (3380 qPCR measurements), the median viral clearance half-life reduced from 6·4 h (IQR 5·7 to 7·3) in June, 2022, to 4·8 h (4·2 to 5·5) in October, 2023, a relative reduction of 26% (95% CrI –4 to 42). Interpretation SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance kinetics in symptomatic, vaccinated individuals accelerated substantially over 2 years of the pandemic, necessitating a change to how new SARS-CoV-2 antivirals are compared (ie, shortening the period of pharmacodynamic assessment). As of writing (October, 2023), antiviral efficacy in COVID-19 can be efficiently assessed in vivo using serial qPCRs from duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates taken daily for 5 days after drug administration. Funding Wellcome Trust.

infectious diseases
Delayed Clearance of Viral RNA in Sputum for Severity COVID-19 Patients with Initial High Viral Load

Hong Zhao,Huilan Tu,Xia Yu,Junwei Su,Xuan Zhang,Kaijin Xu,Yu Shi,Yunqing Qiu,Jifang Sheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/idr.s353688

2022-01-01

Infection and Drug Resistance

Abstract:Aim:To analyze the possible risk factors of delayed virus clearance in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Methods:Retrospective analysis of patients with COVID-19 admitted to the isolation wards from our hospital from 19th Jan 2020 to 18th March 2020. We were collected patient's data including demographic, epidemiologic, and clinical information, as well as laboratory and radiologic findings. The possible confounding risk factors for prolonged viral RNA shedding of COVID-19 during hospitalization were explored by univariate analysis and any variables with a p value less than 0.05 after univariate analysis were included in a subsequent multivariate logistic regression model analysis.Results:The 104 patients included 30 mild patients and 74 severe or critically ill patients. The median duration of viral RNA positivity in sputum was 11 days, and the longest duration of viral RNA positivity was 49 days after admission. Multivariate analysis shown that the used with darunavir/cobicistat treatment (odds ratio [OR]: 4.25, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.25-14.42, p = 0.020), duration of fever (OR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.03-1.30, p = 0.015) and time to radiological improvement (OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.01-1.30, p = 0.033) were associated with delayed clearance of SARS-CoV-2 in sputum from COVID-19 patients. Then adjusted in the multivariate binary logistic regression analysis model in severe COVID-19 and found that critical COVID-19 patients (OR: 13.25, 95% CI: 1.45-12.07, p = 0.022), lower virus cycle threshold (CT) values of RT-PCR (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.93-0.99, p = 0.004) and used with darunavir/cobicistat treatment (OR: 8.44, 95% CI: 2.21-32.28, p = 0.022) were associated with delayed clearance of SARS-CoV-2 in sputum from COVID-19 patients.Conclude:Clearance of viral RNA in sputum was delayed in severe COVID-19 patients, especially with lower virus CT value. And antivirals with darunavir/cobicistat has little advantage in eliminating SARS-CoV-2.
Functional Limitations in Older Adults Who Have Cognitive Impairment Without Dementia

T. Gure,K. Langa,Gwenith G Fisher,J. Piette,B. Plassman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0891988713481264

2013-04-04

Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology

Abstract:Objective: To characterize the prevalence of functional limitations among older adults with cognitive impairment without dementia (CIND). Methods: Secondary data analysis was performed using the Aging, Demographics, and Memory Study data set. A total of 856 individuals aged ≥ 71 years were assigned to 3 diagnostic cognitive categories. A questionnaire was completed by a proxy informant regarding functional limitations for 744 of the 856 respondents. Results: Of the 744 patients, 263 (13.9%) had dementia, 201 (21.3%) had CIND, and 280 (64.8%) had normal cognition. Informants reported ≥1 instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) limitation in 45% of the patients with CIND compared to 13% of the patients with normal cognition and 85% of the patients with dementia (P < .001). The ADL impairments among individuals with CIND were primarily attributed to physical health problems (n = 41; 40%). Conclusions: Many individuals with CIND have impairment in a range of complex and basic daily activities, largely due to physical health problems.
Efficacy and Safety of Antiviral Agents against SARS-CoV-2, based on Data from Studies of COVID-19 and Other Acute Viral Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Wei Liu,Pengxiang Zhou,Ken Chen,Zhikang Ye,Fang Liu,Xiaotong Li,Na He,Ziyang Wu,Qi Zhang,Xuepeng Gong,Qiyu Tang,Xin Du,Yingqiu Ying,Xiaohan Xu,Yahui Zhang,Jinyu Liu,Yun Li,Ning Shen,Rachel J. Couban,Quazi I. Ibrahim,Gordon Guyatt,Suodi Zhai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.200647-f

2020-01-01

Canadian Medical Association Journal

Abstract:RESUME CONTEXTE: On donne de facon empirique des agents antiviraux a certains patients atteints de la maladie a coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). Dans le but d'appuyer la redaction de lignes directrices sur la prise en charge de la COVID-19, nous avons realise une revue systematique des benefices et des prejudices associes a 7 traitements antiviraux contre cette infection. METHODES: Nous avons effectue des recherches dans MEDLINE, Embase, le Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed et 3 bases de donnees chinoises (CNKI, Wanfang Data et SinoMed) jusqu'au 19 avril 2020, dans medRxiv et ChinaXiv jusqu'au 27 avril 2020, ainsi que dans Chongqing VIP jusqu'au 30 avril 2020. Nous avons selectionne des etudes sur la ribavirine, la chloroquine, l'hydroxychloroquine, l'umifenovir (Arbidol), le favipiravir, l'interferon et le lopinavir/ritonavir. Lorsqu'il n'y avait pas de donnees directes d'etudes sur la COVID-19, nous avons retenu des donnees indirectes d'etudes sur le syndrome respiratoire aigu severe (SRAS) et le syndrome respiratoire du Moyen-Orient (SRMO) pour l'analyse de l'efficacite, et d'etudes sur d'autres infections respiratoires virales aigues pour l'analyse de l'innocuite. RESULTATS: Le taux de deces chez les patients atteints d'une forme sans signe clinique de gravite de COVID-19 etait extremement bas, ce qui ne permet pas de conclure a un effet important sur la mortalite. Nous n'avons obtenu que des donnees de tres faible qualite indiquant que la plupart des traitements avaient peu ou pas de benefices sur les parametres a l'etude, quelle que soit la gravite de la COVID-19. Seule exception : le traitement au lopinavir/ritonavir, pour lequel nous avons obtenu des donnees de faible qualite faisant etat d'une reduction de la duree du sejour en unite de soins intensifs (difference des risques [DR] 5 jours de moins, intervalle de confiance [IC] de 95 % 0 a 9 jours) et de la duree d'hospitalisation (DR 1 jour de moins, IC de 95 % 0 a 2 jours). En ce qui concerne l'innocuite, les donnees etaient de faible ou de tres faible qualite, sauf pour le traitement au lopinavir/ritonavir, oU des donnees de qualite moyenne laissaient supposer une augmentation probable de la diarrhee, des nausees et des vomissements. INTERPRETATION: l'heure actuelle, rien ne prouve de facon convaincante que les traitements antiviraux apportent des benefices importants dans la lutte contre la COVID-19, bien que les donnees propres a chaque traitement n'excluent pas cette possibilite. D'autres essais randomises et controles menes aupres de patients atteints de la COVID-19 sont necessaires avant de pouvoir recourir a ces traitements en toute confiance.
SARS-CoV-2 viral dynamics in a placebo-controlled phase 2 study of patients infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant and treated with pomotrelvir

Katyna Borroto-Esoda,David Wilfret,Xiao Tong,Andrew Plummer,Brian Kearney,Ann D. Kwong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02980-23

IF: 3.7

2024-02-06

Microbiology Spectrum

Abstract:ABSTRACT Current guidelines recommend that individuals with moderate COVID-19 disease isolate for 5 days after the first appearance of symptoms or a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. It would be useful to understand the time course of infectious virus production and its correlation with virus detection using a rapid antigen test (RAT) or quantitative reverse transcriptase (qRT)-PCR. In a phase 2 study, 242 vaccinated patients with COVID-19 and at low risk for progression to severe disease initiated 5 days of treatment with pomotrelvir (PBI-0451, a SARS-CoV-2 main protease inhibitor) or placebo within 5 days after symptom onset. The primary endpoint, the proportion of subjects with SARS-CoV-2 viral titers below the limit of detection on Day 3 of treatment in the pomotrelvir versus placebo groups, was not met. No between-group differences in SARS-CoV-2 clearance or symptom resolution or alleviation were observed. Additional analyses evaluated the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 replication in mid-turbinate nasal swabs and saliva samples using infectious virus assay (IVA), RAT, and qRT-PCR. SARS-CoV-2 cleared rapidly, with negative results first determined by IVA (TCID 50 below the limit of detection), followed by the RAT (negative for SARS-CoV-2 N antigen), and qRT-PCR (RNA below the limit of detection), which suggests that delayed initiation of treatment (up to 5 days after symptom onset) may have contributed to the lack of treatment response. Symptom resolution lagged behind viral clearance assessed by IVA and RAT. These data support reliance on a negative RAT to determine when an individual is no longer producing infectious virus and may end isolation. IMPORTANCE A phase 2 double-blind, placebo-controlled study was performed evaluating pomotrelvir, a SARS-CoV-2 Mpro inhibitor, compared with placebo in 242 non-hospitalized, vaccinated, symptomatic adults with COVID-19 (Omicron). No improvement in the decrease of viral replication or relief of symptoms was observed between the two groups when treatment was initiated ≥3 days after symptom onset. These results suggest that future COVID-19 antiviral studies using a similar patient population may need to initiate treatment earlier, like influenza studies. This is the first study to prospectively evaluate SARS-CoV-2 viral dynamics and the time to viral clearance in a significant number of patients using concurrently obtained results from an infectious virus assay, a rapid antigen test (RAT), and a qRT-PCR assay over a 15-day time course. These results suggest that a negative RAT assay is a good indicator of loss of infectious virus and the ability to return to normal activities.

microbiology
Efficacy and Safety of Novel Oral Antivirals in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Haoshuang Liu,Jingfeng Chen,Weihao Shao,Su Yan,Suying Ding

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S422386

2023-11-01

Abstract:Objective: Numerous pharmacological interventions are now under investigation for the treatment of the 2019 coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19), and the evidence is rapidly evolving. Our aim is to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of these drugs. Methods: We searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of novel oral antivirals for the treatment of hospitalized COVID-19 patients until November 30, 2022, including baricitinib, ivermectin (IVM), favipiravir (FVP), chloroquine (CQ), lopinavir and ritonavir (LPV/RTV), hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), and hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin (HCQ+AZT). The main outcomes of this network meta-analysis (NMA) were in-hospital mortality, adverse event (AE), recovery time, and improvement in peripheral capillary oxygen saturation (SpO2). For dichotomous results, the odds ratio (OR) was used, and the 95% confidence interval (CI) was determined. We also used meta-regression to explore whether different treatments affected efficacy and safety. STATA 15.0 was used to conduct the NMA. The research protocol was registered with PROSPERO (#CRD 42023415743). Results: Thirty-six RCTs, with 33,555 hospitalized COVID-19 patients, were included in this analysis. First, we compared the efficacy of different novel oral antivirals. Baricitinib (OR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.90) showed the highest probability of being the optimal probiotic species in reducing in-hospital mortality and suggested that none of the interventions reduced AE better than placebo. In terms of safety outcomes, IVM ranked first in improving the recovery time of hospitalized COVID-19 patients (mean difference (MD) -1.36, 95% CI: -2.32 to -0.39). In addition, patients were most likely to increase SpO2 (OR 1.77, 95% CI: 0.09 to 3.45). The meta-regression revealed no significant differences between participants using different novel oral antivirals in all outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Conclusion: Currently, baricitinib has reduced in-hospital mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, with moderate certainty of evidence. IVM appeared to be a safer option than placebo in improving recovery time, while FVP was associated with increased SpO2 safety outcomes. These preliminary evidence-based observations should guide clinical practice until more data are made public.
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.
Efficacy and safety of antiviral treatment for COVID-19 from evidence in studies of SARS-CoV-2 and other acute viral infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Wei Liu,Pengxiang Zhou,Ken Chen,Zhikang Ye,Fang Liu,Xiaotong Li,Na He,Ziyang Wu,Qi Zhang,Xuepeng Gong,Qiyu Tang,Xin Du,Yingqiu Ying,Xiaohan Xu,Yahui Zhang,Jinyu Liu,Yun Li,Ning Shen,Rachel J Couban,Quazi I Ibrahim,Gordon Guyatt,Suodi Zhai,Rachel J. Couban,Quazi I. Ibrahim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.200647

2020-06-03

Canadian Medical Association Journal

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Antiviral medications are being given empirically to some patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To support the development of a COVID-19 management guideline, we conducted a systematic review that addressed the benefits and harms of 7 antiviral treatments for COVID-19.METHODS:We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed and 3 Chinese databases (CNKI, WANFANG and SinoMed) through Apr. 19, medRxiv and Chinaxiv through Apr. 27, and Chongqing VIP through Apr. 30, 2020. We included studies of ribavirin, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, umifenovir (arbidol), favipravir, interferon and lopinavir/ritonavir. If direct evidence from COVID-19 studies was not available, we included indirect evidence from studies of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) for efficacy outcomes and other acute respiratory viral infections for safety outcomes.RESULTS:In patients with nonsevere COVID-19 illness, the death rate was extremely low, precluding an important effect on mortality. We found only very low-quality evidence with little or no suggestion of benefit for most treatments and outcomes in both nonsevere and severe COVID-19. An exception was treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir, for which we found low-quality evidence for a decrease in length of stay in the intensive care unit (risk difference 5 d shorter, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0 to 9 d) and hospital stay (risk difference 1 d shorter, 95% CI 0 to 2 d). For safety outcomes, evidence was of low or very low quality, with the exception of treatment with lopinavir/ritonavir for which moderate-quality evidence suggested likely increases in diarrhea, nausea and vomiting.INTERPRETATION:To date, persuasive evidence of important benefit in COVID-19 does not exist for any antiviral treatments, although for each treatment evidence has not excluded important benefit. Additional randomized controlled trials involving patients with COVID-19 will be needed before such treatments can be administered with confidence.

medicine, general & internal
Evaluating Clinical Efficacy of Antiviral Therapy for COVID-19: A Surrogate Endpoint Approach

Hsiao-Hsuan Jen,Wei-Jung Chang,Ting-Yu Lin,Chen-Yang Hsu,Amy Ming-Fang Yen,Chao-Chih Lai,Tony Hsiu-Hsi Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-021-00431-9

2021-03-18

Infectious Diseases and Therapy

Abstract:Efficient evaluation with an early surrogate endpoint, taking into account the process of disease evolution, may not only clarify inconsistent or underpowered results but also provide a new insight into the exploration of a new antiviral therapy for treating COVID-19 patients.

infectious diseases
Small-molecule antivirals treatment for COVID-19: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Bei Zheng,Qinqin Zhao,Wenjuan Yang,Pinpin Feng,Chuanwei Xin,Yin Ying,Bo Yang,Bing Han,Jun Zhu,Meiling Zhang,Gonghua Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2024.107096

IF: 15.441

2024-01-19

International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents

Abstract:Objective This study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of small-molecule antivirals for treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods Seven databases were searched from their inception to June 1, 2023. The risk of bias in randomized controlled trials and retrospective studies was evaluated individually using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Results In total, 160 studies involving 933,409 COVID-19 patients were evaluated. Compared to placebo or standard of care, proxalutamide demonstrated remarkable efficacy in reducing mortality rates, hospitalization rates, serious adverse events, and the need for mechanical ventilation. Furthermore, it significantly enhanced both the rate of clinical improvement and expedited the duration of clinical recovery when compared to control groups. In patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, proxalutamide exhibited the above advantages, except for mortality reduction. Triazavirin was the most effective treatment for reducing the time required for viral clearance and improving the discharge rate. Leritrelvir and VV116 were ranked first in terms of enhancing the viral clearance rate on days 7 and 14, respectively. Molnupiravir was the most effective treatment for reducing the need for oxygen support. Overall, these findings remained consistent across the various subgroups. Conclusions A thorough evaluation of effectiveness, applicable to both mild-to-moderate and unstratified populations, highlights the specific advantages of proxalutamide, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, triazavirin, azvudine, molnupiravir, and VV116 in combating COVID-19. Additional clinical data are required to confirm the efficacy and safety of simnotrelvir/ritonavir and leritrelvir. The safety profiles of these antivirals were deemed acceptable.

pharmacology & pharmacy,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.
The efficacy of antivirals, corticosteroids, and monoclonal antibodies as acute COVID-19 treatments in reducing the incidence of long COVID: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Gangqiang Sun,Ke Lin,Jingwen Ai,Wenhong Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2024.07.006

Abstract:Background: Whether treatment during acute COVID-19 results in protective efficacy against long COVID incidence remains unclear. Objectives: To assess the relationship between acute COVID-19 treatments of antivirals, corticosteroids, and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and long COVID incidence, and their effects in different populations and individual symptoms. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources: Searches were conducted up to January 29, 2024 in PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, and Embase. Study eligibility criteria: Articles that reported long COVID incidence post-acute COVID with a follow-up of at least 30 days with no language restrictions. Participants: Patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis history. Interventions: Patients treated with antivirals, corticosteroids or mAbs. Assessment of risk of bias: Quality assessment was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions-I and Cochrane risk of bias tool. Methods of data synthesis: Basic characteristics were documented for each study. Random forest model and meta-regression were used to evaluate the correlation between treatments and long COVID. Results: Our search identified 2363 records, 32 of which were included in the qualitative synthesis and 25 included into the meta-analysis. Effect size from 14 papers investigating acute COVID-19 antiviral treatment concluded its protective efficacy against long COVID (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.48-0.79; p 0.0002); however, corticosteroid (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.80-3.09; p 0.1913), and mAbs treatments (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.56-1.56; p 0.8012) did not generate such effect. Subsequent subgroup analysis revealed that antivirals provided stronger protection in the aged, male, unvaccinated and nondiabetic populations. Furthermore, antivirals effectively reduced 8 out of the 22 analysed long COVID symptoms. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis determined that antivirals reduced long COVID incidence across populations and should thus be recommended for acute COVID-19 treatment. There was no relationship between mAbs treatment and long COVID, but studies should be conducted to clarify acute COVID-19 corticosteroids' potential harmful effects on the post-acute phase of COVID-19.
Troubleshooting in the Treatment of Pseudoarthrosis After a Humeral Diaphyseal Fracture: A Case Report.

N. Kurinomaru,Y. Zenke,K. Furukawa,Y. Yamanaka,A. Sakai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7888/JUOEH.38.297

2016-12-01

Journal of UOEH

Abstract:We report a case of a patient with a history of surgery for insufficient pseudoarthrosis after a humeral diaphyseal fracture. Although most humeral nonunions are successfully treated with a single procedure, some humeral nonunions are more difficult to heal and require multiple procedures. A-61-year-old man presented at our hospital with pain and deformity in his left upper arm. The humeral diaphyseal fracture had been previously treated elsewhere with open reduction and internal fixation. Some days prior to his visit at our hospital, he had had pain in his left upper arm, without a particular cause, and was admitted to our hospital for initial evaluation. After a complete physical examination, symptoms of infection and any neurovascular deficit were ruled out. Radiographic examination revealed atrophic nonunion of the middle third of the humeral shaft associated with disuse osteopenia. Anterograde intramedullary nailing and bone grafting were performed for the resistant atrophic nonunion of the humeral diaphysis. In addition to the intramedullary nailing, additional fixation was performed for residual rotational instability. A postoperative evaluation revealed a periprosthetic fracture in the distal part of the humerus. Poor bone quality or a deficient plate technique might have lead to the facture. We performed open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF): he underwent fixation with a 2-plate construct for the nonunion of the humeral diaphyseal fracture, together with decortication, debridement, and bone grafting. Eight months after surgery, the patient's bone had healed and he had recovered flexion (110°) and extension (-30°) without complications. An orthopedic surgeon should be aware of these complications when choosing open reduction and internal fixation for the treatment of a history of insufficient pseudoarthrosis. Patients should be closely followed up for evidence of any complications such as infections and malunions. Fracture fixation in patients with pseudoarthrosis requires strategies to overcome the technical difficulties faced during the procedure.
Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of 32 Pharmacological Interventions Recommended by Guidelines for COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis Combining 66 Trials

Shanshan Wu,Qingxin Zhou,Xueyang Zeng,Jingxue Zhang,Zhirong Yang,Qingqing Yang,Zilu Zhang,Yahong Chen,Feng Sun,Siyan Zhan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-104497/v1

2020-01-01

Abstract:Abstract Background: To evaluate comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions in patients with coronavirus disease 2019. Methods: Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients infected with SARS-COV-2/SARS-COV. Random-effects network meta-analysis within Bayesian framework was performed, followed by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system assessing quality of evidence. The primary outcome of interest includes mortality, cure, viral negative conversion (VNC) and overall adverse events (OAE). Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated as the measure of effect size.Results: 66 RCTs with 19,095 patients were included, involving standard care (SOC), 8 different antiviral agents, 6 different antibiotics, high and low dose chloroquine (CQ_HD, CQ_LD), traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), corticosteroids and other treatments. Compared with SOC, significant reduction of mortality was observed for TCM (OR=0.34, 95%CI: 0.20-0.56, moderate quality) and corticosteroids (OR=0.84, 0.75-0.96, low quality) with improved cure rate (OR=2.16, 1.60-2.91, low quality for TCM; OR=1.17, 1.05-1.30, low quality for corticosteroids). However, increased risk of mortality was found for CQ_HD versus SOC (OR=3.20, 1.18-8.73, low quality). TCM was associated with decreased risk of OAE (OR=0.52, 0.38-0.70, very low quality) but CQ_HD (OR=2.51, 1.20-5.24) and IFN (OR=2.69, 1.02-7.08) versus SOC with very low quality) were associated with an increased risk. Conclusions: Corticosteroids and TCM may reduce mortality and increase cure rate with no increased risk of OAEs compared with standard care. CQ_HD might increase the risk of mortality. CQ, IFN and other antiviral agents could increase the risk of OAEs. The current evidence is generally uncertain with low quality and further high-quality trials are needed.
A randomized trial to assess the acceleration of viral clearance by the combination Favipiravir/Ivermectin/Niclosamide in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 adult patients (FINCOV)

Taweegrit Siripongboonsitti,Kriangkrai Tawinprai,Panisadee Avirutnan,Kunlakanya Jitobaom,Prasert Auewarakul

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2024.03.030

IF: 7.537

2024-04-04

Journal of Infection and Public Health

Abstract:Background The efficacy of the viral clearance and clinical outcomes of favipiravir (FPV) in outpatients being treated for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unclear. Ivermectin (IVM), niclosamide (NCL), and FPV demonstrated synergistic effects in vitro for exceed 78% inhibiting severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) replication. Methods A phase 2, open-label, 1:1, randomized, controlled trial was conducted on Thai patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who received either combination FPV/IVM/NCL therapy or FPV alone to assess the rate of viral clearance among individuals with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. Results Sixty non-high-risk comorbid patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 were randomized; 30 received FPV/IVM/NCL, and 30 received FPV alone. Mixed-effects multiple linear regression analysis of the cycle threshold value from SARS-CoV-2 PCR demonstrated no statistically significant differences in viral clearance rates between the combined FPV/IVM/NCL therapy group and the FPV-alone group. World Health Organization Clinical Progression scores and symptomatic improvement did not differ between arms on days 3, 6, and 10, and no adverse events were reported. No patients required hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, or supplemental oxygen or died within 28 days. C-reactive protein on day 3 was lower in the FPV/IVM/NCL group. Conclusion Viral clearance rates did not differ significantly between the FPV/IVM/NCL combination therapy and FPV-alone groups of individuals with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, although the combined regimen demonstrated a synergistic effect in vitro. No discernible clinical benefit was observed. Further research is required to explore the potential benefits of FVP beyond its antiviral effects. Trial registration: TCTR20230403007 , Registered 3 April 2023 - Retrospectively registered, https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=TCTR20230403007

infectious diseases,public, environmental & occupational health
Hospitalization Endpoint in Clinical Trials of Outpatient Settings: using Anti-SARS-COV-2 Therapy as an Example

Alhanouf Alnafisah,Ahmed Alkhalidi,Hanin Aljohani,Manal Almutairi,Adel Alharf,Hadeel Alkofide

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/clep.s464310

2024-05-24

Clinical Epidemiology

Abstract:Alhanouf Yousef Alnafisah, 1 Ahmed Fawaz Alkhalidi, 1 Hanin Aljohani, 1 Manal Almutairi, 1 Adel Alharf, 2 Hadeel Alkofide 3 1 Efficacy and Safety Evaluation Department, Benefit and Risk Evaluation Directorate, Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; 2 Drug Sector, Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; 3 Department of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Correspondence: Ahmed Fawaz Alkhalidi, Efficacy and Safety Evaluation Department, Benefit and Risk Evaluation Directorate, SFDA, Riyadh, 5163, Saudi Arabia, Tel +966555546169, Email Purpose: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the World Health Organization (WHO) developed a set of outcome measures for trials primarily aimed at hospitalised patients. However, a gap exists in defining outcome standards for non-hospitalised patients. Therefore, this study aims to discuss hospitalisation as a primary outcome in outpatient trials and its potential pitfalls, specifically focusing on trials related to anti-SARS-COV-2 therapy. Methods: In this narrative review, researchers thoroughly searched MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials.gov from January 2020 to December 2022, targeting Phase III randomized controlled trials involving outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. The trials were specifically related to anti-SARS-COV-2 monoclonal antibodies or antiviral agents. The study collected essential data, including the type of intervention, comparator, primary objective, primary endpoint, and the use of estimands in the trial. Results: The search identified 12 trials that evaluated the efficacy of anti-SARS COV-2 therapies in a predefined population. Three studies used hospitalisation and death as primary endpoints in high-risk patients receiving monoclonal antibodies. Nine studies assessed the efficacy of several antiviral agents: four trials used hospitalisation and death as the main endpoints, while others used different measures such as virologic measures using the Reverse Transcription-Polymerase Chain Reaction test (RT-PCR), the eight-point WHO ordinal scale, symptom alleviation by Day 7 and time to clinical response. Conclusion: Choosing hospitalization as an endpoint may provide meaningful data such as the cost-effectiveness ratio of a drug. However, different hospital utilisation patterns and investigator decisions could bias clinical outcomes if no specific criteria are considered. Therefore, investigators should have clear criteria for determining variables that influence this measure. Keywords: COVID-19, outcome measures, non-hospitalized patients, monoclonal antibodies, antiviral agents SARS-COV-2 or COVID-19 is a global health-threatening pandemic that was initially detected in Wuhan in Hubei Province, China, in December 2019. 1 The virus causes acute atypical respiratory disease, and the World Health Organization (WHO) Emergency Committee declared it a global health emergency in January 2020. 2 More than 80% of infections were mild and approximately 14% were severe. 3 Studies have shown that 75% of patients with severe disease progress to pneumonia possibly requiring hospitalization and critical care admissions. 2 Disease severity is strongly related to patients' age, with adults aged over 65 accounting for 80% of hospitalisations. Furthermore, the severity of COVID-19 is strongly linked to health issues such as hypertension, diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease, and respiratory conditions. 4 Many clinical trials on interventions have been conducted over the past three years to tackle the pandemic. For instance, as of 15 December 2022, there have been over 4, 800 clinical trials of COVID-19 interventions on ClinicalTrials.gov. In response to this pandemic and the growing number of COVID-19 trials, a WHO-led working group developed a minimum set of outcome measures for COVID-19 trials. 5 This set included three elements: measure of viral burden, measure of patient survival and measure of patient progression through the healthcare system, using the WHO Clinical Progression Scale. 5 However, these core outcomes are more likely to be applicable to trials conducted on hospitalized patients, and there is a need to set standards for outcomes that capture different settings of care, such as non-hospitalized patients. 6 One of the options that has been widely used in COVID-19 trials in non-hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate disease is the hospital admission rate. 7–9 However, evaluating the overall impact of hospitalization is not feasible and may have certain limitations. Therefore, this study aimed to revie -Abstract Truncated-

public, environmental & occupational health
Clinical Trials of Respiratory Virus Infections: How to Address Challenges and Prepare for the Future

Ai Jingwen,Zhang Wenhong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/id9.0000000000000120

2024-01-01

Infectious Diseases & Immunity

Abstract:1. Backgrounds Prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, the only antiviral treatment widely used in clinical settings was for influenza. However, following the global pandemic, there has been renewed research interest in medications for respiratory viral infections. Clinical trials of antiviral medications often need to consider multiple dimensions because of the significant differences in disease severity among populations. For example, during respiratory viral epidemic seasons, the clinical spectrum of diseases is usually complex, including asymptomatic infections, symptomatic infections (mild to moderate without hospitalization), severe cases (requiring hospitalization), and fatalities. Currently, for respiratory viral infections that are in localized outbreaks, including respiratory syncytial virus and human metapneumovirus, multiple small-molecule drugs are in preclinical or early clinical trial stages. The rapid achievement of success in clinical trials remains a significant challenge. Different respiratory viral infections present difficulties in adopting similar clinical endpoint standards during trials. Therefore, choosing primary clinical endpoints and objectively evaluating the efficacy of antiviral medications are crucial. 2. Experiences to be learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic The COVID-19 pandemic served as a typical case. During the early stages of the pandemic, there were a high proportion of severe cases, leading to a batch of antiviral medications being quickly approved for emergency use after the completion of clinical trials. The primary clinical endpoints included reduced mortality in high-risk populations, promoted recovery from severe cases, and decreased severity. However, as the pandemic subsided and transitioned to localized outbreaks, conducting clinical trials for antiviral medications became challenging because of the decreasing virulence of the strains over time, which led to increased difficulties in reaching the primary endpoint during studies. Around 2021–2022, researchers, globally, were experiencing difficulties in reducing mortality in high-risk populations and decreasing severity, as primary clinical endpoints have become increasingly challenging. To overcome this obstacle, the ability of drugs to shorten symptom duration and prevent infections was proposed as a rationale for gaining government and market approval. However, the use of symptom duration as the main endpoint introduces subjectivity in assessing efficacy, making it difficult to achieve statistically significant results. For example, in the case of COVID-19 antiviral therapy, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir conducted was used in the EPIC-HR (NCT04960202), EPIC-SR (NCT05011513), and EPIC-PEP (NCT05047601) trials to reduce severity, shorten symptom duration, and prevent infection. Only the EPIC-HR trial demonstrated a reduction in disease severity; the other two trials did not yield positive results.[1] The failure of the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir EPIC-SR trial has significantly impacted global confidence in similar antiviral therapy clinical trials. The trial used 14 COVID-19 symptoms as the endpoint for evaluating symptom resolution time. The study did not yield positive results, mainly because, at the time the trial was conducted, a large portion of the population had been vaccinated or had previous infections and the transformation of the COVID-19 strain from Delta to Omicron. Therefore, patients experienced milder symptoms post-infection, leading to a decreased likelihood of consistent improvement during multiple symptom evaluations. In such cases, negative clinical trial results may indicate several possibilities: (1) the drug is ineffective for mild-to-moderate patients; (2) the drug is effective, but its efficacy standards are unreliable; and (3) the efficacy standard is unreliable and the drug is ineffective against mild-to-severe infections, indicating issues with the study inclusion criteria. Following the market approval of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, a Chinese antiviral therapy study also used the percentage of severity progression as an endpoint. However, owing to the rapid changes in the global pandemic situation, it has become difficult to observe the expected number of events, leading to the termination and initiation of another clinical trial using symptom relief as an endpoint.[2] These studies highlight the challenges in evaluating the clinical efficacy of a new drug when diseases evolve rapidly, especially when the rates of severe cases decrease rapidly. These experiences indicate that, when global immunity is gradually established following a pandemic, the disease will have reduced severity and lower mortality rates and using severity progression as the primary endpoint during clinical trials will become increasingly difficult. Conducting clinical trials of antiviral drugs would then become a challenge. We gathered valuable experience from several studies on how to design future studies on respiratory viral infections. A phase 3 randomized controlled study led by Li et al. on treating mild-to-moderate COVID-19 with oral VV116 used sustained clinical symptom relief time as the endpoint.[3] Meanwhile, Dr. Bin Cao conducted a phase 2–3 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, during which patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 within 3 days of symptom onset were randomly assigned to receive simnotrelvir/ritonavir orally twice daily (750 mg/100 mg) or placebo for 5 days.[4] The primary efficacy endpoint was the time to recovery from 11 core symptoms, which required 2 days without relapse. From this study, a new endpoint indicator "recovery time from 11 core symptoms" applicable to mild to moderate cases was identified. Compared with EPIC-SR's evaluation of 14 COVID-19 symptoms, several less common clinical symptoms were removed while not using "severity" as a primary endpoint. By day 5 of treatment initiation, simnotrelvir significantly reduced the viral load compared with placebo (−1.51 ± 0.14 log10 copies/mL; 95% CI, −1.79 to −1.24). Furthermore, as per the results from secondary endpoints on symptom reduction and subgroup analyses, simnotrelvir could shorten symptom duration in COVID-19 patients. My research team's completion of a market study on a new flu drug also involved a phase 2–3 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial that adopted an adaptive design, during which flu symptom relief time was set as the primary endpoint, while fever relief time was included among the secondary endpoints.[5] 3. Future expectations As the COVID-19 pandemic transitions into localized outbreaks and specific antiviral treatments remain lacking for viruses, such as RSV, hMPV, and adenovirus infections during localized outbreaks post-pandemic, researchers must be aware of the challenges that may exist when conducting clinical research. In fact, the COVID-19 pandemic is not the first time that researchers have attempted to use alternative indicators, such as symptom relief time during RCTs. This concept has been adopted in several clinical antiviral studies. However, awareness of the importance of setting the right endpoints at different phases of an epidemic is significantly raised post-pandemic. Future studies are needed to leverage experiences from influenza and COVID-19 antiviral drug market approvals and creatively address internationally recognized challenges in clinical trials for respiratory virus infections. To achieve positive results in clinical trials during respiratory virus epidemics or pandemics, detailed evaluation criteria for clinical efficacy must be established, and thorough communication with regulatory agencies is essential. With the continuous global emergence of innovative drugs, innovative thinking will be required to solve these issues.

[Analysis of the intraventricular pressure curve in the isolated heart using a microcomputer].

The relationship between viral clearance rates and disease progression in early symptomatic COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis

The Efficiency of Convalescent Plasma in COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

The transcription factor, Nuclear factor, erythroid 2 (Nfe2), is a regulator of the oxidative stress response during Danio rerio development.

Temporal changes in SARS-CoV-2 clearance kinetics and the optimal design of antiviral pharmacodynamic studies: an individual patient data meta-analysis of a randomised, controlled, adaptive platform study (PLATCOV)

Delayed Clearance of Viral RNA in Sputum for Severity COVID-19 Patients with Initial High Viral Load

Functional Limitations in Older Adults Who Have Cognitive Impairment Without Dementia

Efficacy and Safety of Antiviral Agents against SARS-CoV-2, based on Data from Studies of COVID-19 and Other Acute Viral Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

SARS-CoV-2 viral dynamics in a placebo-controlled phase 2 study of patients infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant and treated with pomotrelvir

Efficacy and Safety of Novel Oral Antivirals in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

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

Efficacy and safety of antiviral treatment for COVID-19 from evidence in studies of SARS-CoV-2 and other acute viral infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Evaluating Clinical Efficacy of Antiviral Therapy for COVID-19: A Surrogate Endpoint Approach

Small-molecule antivirals treatment for COVID-19: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

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

The efficacy of antivirals, corticosteroids, and monoclonal antibodies as acute COVID-19 treatments in reducing the incidence of long COVID: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Troubleshooting in the Treatment of Pseudoarthrosis After a Humeral Diaphyseal Fracture: A Case Report.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of 32 Pharmacological Interventions Recommended by Guidelines for COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis Combining 66 Trials

A randomized trial to assess the acceleration of viral clearance by the combination Favipiravir/Ivermectin/Niclosamide in mild-to-moderate COVID-19 adult patients (FINCOV)

Hospitalization Endpoint in Clinical Trials of Outpatient Settings: using Anti-SARS-COV-2 Therapy as an Example

Clinical Trials of Respiratory Virus Infections: How to Address Challenges and Prepare for the Future