The effect of sofosbuvir-based treatment on the clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Why Certain Repurposed Drugs Are Unlikely to Be Effective Antivirals to Treat SARS-CoV-2 Infections

Most repurposed drugs have proved ineffective for treating COVID-19. We evaluated median effective and toxic concentrations (EC50, CC50) of 49 drugs, mostly from previous clinical trials, in Vero cells. Ratios of reported unbound peak plasma concentrations, (Cmax)/EC50, were used to predict the potential in vivo efficacy. The 20 drugs with the highest ratios were retested in human Calu-3 and Caco-2 cells, and their CC50 was determined in an expanded panel of cell lines. Many of the 20 drugs with the highest ratios were inactive in human Calu-3 and Caco-2 cells. Antivirals effective in controlled clinical trials had unbound Cmax/EC50 ≥ 6.8 in Calu-3 or Caco-2 cells. EC50 of nucleoside analogs were cell dependent. This approach and earlier availability of more relevant cultures could have reduced the number of unwarranted clinical trials.

Small-molecule antiviral treatments for COVID-19: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

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 01 June 2023. The risk of bias in randomised 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 with placebo or standard of care, proxalutamide demonstrated remarkable efficacy in reducing mortality rates, hospitalisation 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 with 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.

Evaluation of oral small molecule drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

At present, there are some randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of oral small molecule drugs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral small molecule drug treatment for COVID-19.

METHODS

RCTs were identified through systematic searches of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through 1 April 2023. A total of nine RCTs were included, including 30,970 COVID-19 patients comparing five treatments (azvudine, molnupiravir, paxlovid, VV116, and placebo). The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB) was used to assess the bias risk of the included studies. The direct and indirect evidence were combined using a Bayesian network meta-analysis (PROSPERO Code No: CRD42023397837).

RESULTS

Direct analysis showed that paxlovid was associated with a reduced risk of mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.06-0.25) and hospitalization (OR = 0.04, 95% CI: 0.00-0.67) compared with placebo. Network meta-analysis showed that paxlovid had the highest probability of being the best management strategy in patients with COVID-19, reducing mortality (OR = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.01-1.99; surface under the cumulative ranking curve [SUCRA]: 0.77) and hospitalization (OR = 0.06, 95% CI: 0.00-1.03; SUCRA: 0.95). For prespecified safety outcomes, SUCRA values ranked VV116 (OR = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.00-2.07: SUCRA 0.86) as the most beneficial intervention for the prevention of serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

When compared to other antiviral medications, paxlovid can reduce the mortality and hospitalization of COVID-19 patients.

Protein structure-based in-silico approaches to drug discovery: Guide to COVID-19 therapeutics

With more than 5 million fatalities and close to 300 million reported cases, COVID-19 is the first documented pandemic due to a coronavirus that continues to be a major health challenge. Despite being rapid, uncontrollable, and highly infectious in its spread, it also created incentives for technology development and redefined public health needs and research agendas to fast-track innovations to be translated. Breakthroughs in computational biology peaked during the pandemic with renewed attention to making all cutting-edge technology deliver agents to combat the disease. The demand to develop effective treatments yielded surprising collaborations from previously segregated fields of science and technology. The long-standing pharmaceutical industry's aversion to repurposing existing drugs due to a lack of exponential financial gain was overrun by the health crisis and pressures created by front-line researchers and providers. Effective vaccine development even at an unprecedented pace took more than a year to develop and commence trials. Now the emergence of variants and waning protections during the booster shots is resulting in breakthrough infections that continue to strain health care systems. As of now, every protein of SARS-CoV-2 has been structurally characterized and related host pathways have been extensively mapped out. The research community has addressed the druggability of a multitude of possible targets. This has been made possible due to existing technology for virtual computer-assisted drug development as well as new tools and technologies such as artificial intelligence to deliver new leads. Here in this article, we are discussing advances in the drug discovery field related to target-based drug discovery and exploring the implications of known target-specific agents on COVID-19 therapeutic management. The current scenario calls for more personalized medicine efforts and stratifying patient populations early on for their need for different combinations of prognosis-specific therapeutics. We intend to highlight target hotspots and their potential agents, with the ultimate goal of using rational design of new therapeutics to not only end this pandemic but also uncover a generalizable platform for use in future pandemics.

Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir compared with other antiviral drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

At present, there are some differences in the research results of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir compared with other antiviral drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 patients. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir compared with other antiviral drugs and the impact of different antiviral drugs on the short- and long-term effects of COVID-19. PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), Web of Science, Google Scholar, and MedRxiv were searched to identify relevant studies from inception to March 30, 2023. We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the effects of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir compared with other antiviral drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 patients and safety outcomes. The RoB1 and ROBINS-I were used to assess the bias risk of the included studies. Revman 5.4 software was used for meta-analysis (PROSPERO Code No: CRD42023397816). Twelve studies were included, including 30 588 COVID-19 patients, of whom 13 402 received nirmatrelvir-ritonavir. The meta-analysis results showed that the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group had a lower proportion of patients than the control group in terms of long-term mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.66), hospitalization (OR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.37-0.53, short term; OR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.36-0.77, long term), and disease progression (OR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.38-0.83, short term; OR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.48-0.74, long term), and nirmatrelvir ritonavir showed little difference in safety compared to the control group. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir can reduce the mortality and hospitalization of COVID-19 patients compared with other antiviral drugs. Further large-scale studies remain to validate these findings.

Clinical outcomes, virological efficacy and safety of nitazoxanide in the treatment of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

This study investigated the clinical outcomes, virological efficacy and safety of nitazoxanide in the treatment of patients with COVID-19.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for relevant articles written before August 23, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the usefulness and safety of nitazoxanide in patients with COVID-19 were included.

RESULTS

Five RCTs were included. The overall mortality of COVID-19 patients receiving nitazoxanide (study group) was 1.3% (9/670), which was lower than the control group (1.8%, 12/681), but this difference did not reach statistical significance (risk difference [RD], 0.00; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.01; P =0.97). However, nitazoxanide was associated with a higher virological eradication rate than placebo or standard care (RD, 0.09; 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.17; P = 0.03). Compared with the placebo or standard care, nitazoxanide were associated with a similar risk of any adverse event (RD, -0.02; 95% CI: -0.07 to 0.03; P = 0.44).

CONCLUSIONS

Although nitazoxanide can help virological eradication and is also tolerable, it does not provide additional clinical benefits. Based on these evidences, the use of nitazoxanide in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 is not recommended.

Impact of COVID-19 on the liver and on the care of patients with chronic liver disease, hepatobiliary cancer, and liver transplantation: An updated EASL position paper

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented a serious challenge to the hepatology community, particularly healthcare professionals and patients. While the rapid development of safe and effective vaccines and treatments has improved the clinical landscape, the emergence of the omicron variant has presented new challenges. Thus, it is timely that the European Association for the Study of the Liver provides a summary of the latest data on the impact of COVID-19 on the liver and issues guidance on the care of patients with chronic liver disease, hepatobiliary cancer, and previous liver transplantation, as the world continues to deal with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Anti-Viral Agents for Non-Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

This network meta-analysis compared the clinical efficacy and safety of anti-viral agents for the prevention of disease progression among non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched from their inception to 28 May 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the clinical efficacy of anti-viral agents for non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were included. Three RCTs involving 4241 patients were included. Overall, anti-viral agents were associated with a significantly lower risk of COVID-19 related hospitalization or death compared with the placebo (OR, 0.23; 95% CI: 0.06-0.96; p = 0.04). Compared with the placebo, patients receiving nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir had the lowest risk of hospitalization or death (OR, 0.12; 95% CI: 0.06-0.24), followed by remdesivir (OR, 0.13; 95% CI: 0.03-0.57) and then molnupiravir (OR, 0.67; 95% CI: 0.46-0.99). The rank probability for each treatment calculated using the P-score revealed that nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir was the best anti-viral treatment, followed by remdesivir and then molnupiravir. Finally, anti-viral agents were not associated with an increased risk of adverse events compared with the placebo. For non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who are at risk of disease progression, the currently recommended three anti-viral agents, nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir, molnupiravir and remdesivir, should continue to be recommended for the prevention of disease progression. Among them, oral nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir and intravenous remdesivir seem to be the better choice, followed by molnupiravir, as determined by this network meta-analysis. Additionally, these three anti-viral agents were shown to be as tolerable as the placebo in this clinical setting.

Effect of Sofosbuvir on Length of Hospital Stay in Moderate COVID-19 Cases; a Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Efforts to control the COVID-19 pandemic are still on. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of sofosbuvir on length of hospital stay and complications in COVID-19 cases with moderate severity.

METHODS

This randomized clinical trial was done on moderate COVID-19 cases, who were admitted to Shohadaye Tajrish Hospital, Tehran, Iran, from 4/2021 to 9/2021. Eligible patients were randomly allocated into two groups of intervention (sofosbuvir) and control, and their outcomes were compared regarding the length of hospital stay and complications.

RESULTS

100 COVID-19 cases were randomly divided into two groups of 50 patients, as the intervention and control groups. The mean age of patients was 50.56 ± 12.23 and 57.1±14.1 years in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p = 0.02). The two groups were similar regarding distribution of gender (p = 0.15), underlying diseases (p = 0.08), the severity of COVID-19 (p = 0.80) at the time of admission, signs and symptoms (p > 0.05), and essential laboratory profile (p > 0.05). The length of hospital stay in the control and intervention groups was 7.7 ± 4.09 days and 4.7±1.6 days, respectively (p = 0.02). None of our patients needed ICU or mechanical ventilation.

CONCLUSION

Sofosbuvir may decrease the length of hospital stay of COVID-19 cases with moderate severity, without a significant effect on the rate of intensive care unit (ICU) need and mortality.

Favipiravir-based treatment for outcomes of patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigated the clinical efficacy and safety of favipiravir for patients with mild-to-critical COVID-19.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for RCTs published before October 30, 2021. Only RCTs that compared the clinical efficacy and safety of favipiravir -based antiviral regimens (study group) with other alternative treatments or placebos (control group) in patients with COVID-19 were included.

RESULTS

Overall, the clinical improvement rate was significantly higher in the study group than in the control group at the assessment conducted after 14 days (OR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.12-2.98). The rate of virological eradication was significantly higher in the study group than in the control group at the assessment conducted after 28 days (OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.15-3.78). No significant difference was observed in the rates of invasive mechanical ventilation requirement or ICU admission, mortality, or risk of an adverse event between the study and control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Except the clinical improvement rate within 14 days and the virological eradication rate within 28 days, favipiravir-based treatment did not provide significantly additional benefit for patients with COVID-19. Therefore, more evidence is necessary.