Clinical efficacy and safety of SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing monoclonal antibody in patients with COVID-19: A living systematic review and meta-analysis

Considerations for the development of monoclonal antibodies to address new viral variants in COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapies proved safe and effective in preventing progression of COVID-19 to hospitalization, but most were eventually defeated by continued viral evolution. mAb combinations and those mAbs that were deliberatively selected to target conserved regions of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein proved more resilient to viral escape variants as evident by longer clinical useful lives.

AREAS COVERED

We searched PubMed for literature covering the need, development, and use of mAb therapies for COVID-19. As much of humanity now has immunity to SARS-CoV-2, the population at most risk is that of immunocompromised individuals. Hence, there continues to be a need for mAb therapies for immunocompromised patients. However, mAb use in this population carries the risk for selecting mAb-resistant variants, which could pose a public health concern if they disseminate to the general population.

EXPERT OPINION

Going forward, structural knowledge of the interactions of Spike with its cellular receptor has identified several regions that may be good targets for future mAb therapeutics. A focus on designing variant-resistant mAbs together with cocktails that target several epitopes and the use of other variant mitigating strategies such as the concomitant use of small molecule antivirals and polyclonal preparations could extend the clinical usefulness of future preparations.

Unveiling therapeutic dynamics: An in-depth comparative analysis of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies and favipiravir in alleviating COVID-19 outpatients impacts among middle-aged and special populations (MA-FAST)

BACKGROUND

Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (NMabs) are recognized for their efficacy against non-severe COVID-19. However, spike protein mutations may confer resistance. This study evaluates the effectiveness of favipiravir (FPV) versus NMabs in preventing severe COVID-19 in special populations.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort was conducted on middle-aged, elderly, diabetic, or obese patients with COVID-19 treated with either FPV or NMabs. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used for analysis.

RESULTS

The study included 1410 patients, resulting in four cohorts: middle-aged (36), elderly (48), diabetic (46), and obese (28) post-PSM. No significant differences were noted in 28-day emergency department (ED) visits across all groups between NMabs and FPV treatments, despite lower immunity in the FPV group. However, the diabetic group treated with FPV had higher 28-day hospitalization and oxygen supplemental, with no differences in the other groups. Intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, invasive mechanical ventilation, and mortality rates were similar between the two treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Early dose-adjusted FPV showed no difference from NMabs in preventing ED visits, ICU admissions, ventilator needs, or mortality among patients with major comorbidities. Diabetic patients on FPV experienced higher hospitalizations and oxygen needs, with no observed differences in other groups. FPV may be a viable alternative, especially in settings with limited resources.

The effectiveness of novel oral antiviral treatment for non-hospitalized high-risk patients with COVID-19 during predominance of omicron XBB subvariants

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the association between nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir (NMV-r) or molnupiravir and the outcomes of non-hospitalized high-risk patients with COVID-19 during Omicron XBB subvariants.

METHODS

The retrospective cohort study used the TriNetX US collaborative network to identify non-hospitalized high-risk adult patients with COVID-19 between 1 February 2023, and 31 August 2023. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match patients receiving NMV-r or MOV (the study group) with those not receiving antivirals (the control group).

RESULTS

Using PSM, two cohorts of 17,654 patients each with balanced baseline characteristics were identified. During the follow-up period, the study group had a lower risk of all-cause hospitalization, or death (3.2% [n = 564] versus 3.8% [n = 669]; HR, 0.796; 95% confidence interval [CI], 95% CI, 0.712-0.891). Compared with the control group, the study group had a significantly lower risk of all-cause hospitalization (3.1% vs. 3.4%; HR, 0.847; 95% CI, 0.754-0.950) and mortality (0.1% vs. 0.4%; HR, 0.295; 95% CI, 0.183-0.476).

CONCLUSION

The use of novel oral antiviral including NMV-r or MOV can be associated with a lower risk of all-cause hospitalization, or death in non-hospitalized high-risk patients with COVID-19 during Omicron XBB wave.

Therapeutic antibodies and alternative formats against SARS-CoV-2

The COVID-19 pandemic caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) heavily burdened the entire world. Despite a prompt generation of vaccines and therapeutics to confront infection, the virus remains a threat. The ancestor viral strain has evolved into several variants of concern, with the Omicron variant now having many distinct sublineages. Consequently, most available antibodies targeting the spike went obsolete and thus new therapies or therapeutic formats are needed. In this review we focus on antibody targets, provide an overview of the therapeutic progress made so far, describe novel formats being explored, and lessons learned from therapeutic antibodies that can enhance pandemic preparedness.