Favipiravir for COVID-19 in adults in the community in PRINCIPLE, an open-label, randomised, controlled, adaptive platform trial of short- and longer-term outcomes

Fd Richard Hobbs,Oghenekome A Gbinigie,Milensu Shanyinde,Ly-Mee Yu,Victoria Harris,Jienchi Dorward,Gail Hayward,Benjamin R Saville,Nicholas S Berry,Philip H Evans,Nicholas Pb Thomas,Mahendra G Patel,Duncan Richards,Oliver Van Hecke,Michelle A Detry,Christina T Saunders,Mark Fitzgerald,Jared Robinson,Charlotte Latimer-Bell,Julie Allen,Emma Ogburn,Jenna Grabey,Simon de Lusignan,Monique Andersson,Paul Little,Christopher C Butler,PRINCIPLE Trial Collaborative Group
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2024.106248
2024-08-29
Abstract:Background: Evidence for the effect of favipiravir treatment of acute COVID-19 on recovery, hospital admissions and longer-term outcomes in community settings is limited. Methods: In this multicentre. open-label, multi-arm, adaptive platform randomised controlled trial participants aged ≥18 years in the community with a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 and symptoms lasting ≤14 days were randomised to: usual care; usual care plus favipiravir tablets (loading dose of 3600mg in divided doses on day one, then 800mg twice a day for four days); or, usual care plus other interventions. Co-primary endpoints were time to first self-reported recovery and hospitalisation/death related to COVID-19, within 28 days, analysed using Bayesian models. Recovery at six months was the primary longer-term outcome. Trial registration: ISRCTN86534580. Findings: The primary analysis model included 8811 SARS-CoV-2 positive mostly COVID vaccinated participants, randomised to favipiravir (n=1829), usual care (n=3256), and other treatments (n=3726). Time to self-reported recovery was shorter in the favipiravir group than usual care (estimated hazard ratio 1·23 [95% credible interval 1·14 to 1·33]), a reduction of 2·98 days [1·99 to 3·94] from 16 days in median time to self-reported recovery for favipiravir versus usual care alone. COVID-19 related hospitalisations/deaths were similar (estimated odds ratio 0·99 [0·61 to 1·61]; estimated difference 0% [-0·9% to 0·6%]). 14 serious adverse events occurred in the favipiravir group and 4 in usual care. By six months, the proportion feeling fully recovered was 74·9% for favipiravir versus 71·3% for usual care (RR = 1·05, [1·02 to 1·08]). Interpretation: In this open-label trial in a largely vaccinated population with COVID-19 in the community, favipiravir did not reduce hospital admissions, but shortened time to recovery and had a marginal positive impact on long term outcomes.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?