Favipiravir in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 (PIONEER trial): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial of early intervention versus standard care

In silico evaluation of bisphosphonates identifies leading candidates for SARS-CoV-2 RdRp inhibition

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in 777 million confirmed cases and over 7 million deaths worldwide, with insufficient treatment options. Innumerable efforts are being made around the world for faster identification of therapeutic agents to treat the deadly disease. Post Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 (PASC), also called Long COVID, is still being understood and lacks treatment options as well. A growing list of drugs are being suggested by various in silico, in vitro and ex vivo models, however currently only two treatment options are widely used: the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) inhibitor remdesivir, and the main protease inhibitor nirmatrelvir in combination with ritonavir. Computational drug development tools and in silico studies involving molecular docking, molecular dynamics, entropy calculations and pharmacokinetics can be useful to identify new targets to treat COVID-19 and PASC, as shown in this work and our recent paper that identified alendronate as a promising candidate. In this study, we have investigated all bisphosphonates (BPs) on the ChEMBL database which can bind competitively to nidovirus RdRp-associated nucleotidyl (NiRAN) transferase domain, and systematically down selected seven candidates (CHEMBL608526, CHEMBL196676, CHEMBL164344, CHEMBL4291724, CHEMBL4569308, CHEMBL387132, CHEMBL98211), two of which closely resemble the approved drugs minodronate and zoledronate. This work and our recent paper together provide an in silico mechanistic explanation for alendronate and zoledronate users having dramatically reduced odds of SARS-CoV-2 testing, COVID-19 diagnosis, and COVID-19-related hospitalizations, and indicate that similar observational studies in Japan with minodronate could be valuable.

A Potential 3-in-1 Combined AntiSARS-CoV-2 Therapy Using Pulmonary MIL-100(Fe) Formulation

The emergence and rapid propagation of infectious diseases, including the COVID-19 pandemic, has evidenced the vulnerabilities in global health surveillance, the ease of transmission, and the imperative need for effective treatments. In this context, nanomedicines based on metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) have garnered great relevance as promising drug delivery platforms in a large range of complex diseases (e.g., cancer, and infections). However, most research has focused on sensing with scarce examples in antiviral therapies. Hence, here a pioneer combined 3-in-1 effect anti-COVID pulmonary multitherapy based on the mesoporous iron(III) carboxylate MIL-100(Fe) nanoparticles is proposed, with the proven intrinsic MOF effect, associated with favipiravir drug into their porosity and heparin on their external surface. A significant antiviral effect against a real scenario of COVID-19 infection is demonstrated (≈70% inhibition), ensuring a suitable cellular viability. Further, a convenient pulmonary formulation is prepared based on mannitol-based microspheres, testing its safety and biodistribution in healthy mice. No significant side effects are observed, reaching successfully the deep lungs, emphasizing a reduced immunological response compared to their controls. Therefore, these promising results open new horizons for future (pre)clinical trials targeting challenging infectious/pulmonary pathologies, enhancing the feasibility of designing customized therapeutic MOF platforms.

Safety of Breastfeeding During Favipiravir Therapy: A Case Study

INTRODUCTION

Favipiravir is a known anti-influenza agent that has been used globally, especially during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This drug has been important for treating influenza and other emerging infectious diseases, although it was ultimately proven to be ineffective for COVID-19. Currently, no studies have reported the human-milk transfer of favipiravir at doses of 1,600-3,600 mg/day in the treatment of diseases, including COVID-19.

MAIN ISSUE

A 38-year-old mother gave birth at 38 gestational weeks because of severe respiratory distress caused by COVID-19. Considering her illness and the inadequate information available on the safety of favipiravir in breastfeeding, she chose formula feeding for her infant. However, she still provided human milk and blood samples for the analysis of drug concentrations.

MANAGEMENT

Five concentrations of favipiravir in the mother's milk and four in maternal blood were measured (3.0-80.9 and 3.5-78.4 μg/ml, respectively). Metabolites of favipiravir were not measured. The relative infant dose was 15.2%. The favipiravir concentration in human milk was as high as 80.9 μg/ml at 1.3 hours after the medication was given, when maternal blood levels are considered to be at their highest; however, favipiravir concentration was low in human milk immediately before medication administration (5.9-9.7 μg/ml).

CONCLUSION

Breastfeeding is not contraindicated in mothers undergoing favipiravir therapy and would be safer immediately before medication. Avoiding feeding at the peak time (1.3 hours after medication) minimizes infant exposure.

The development of therapeutics and vaccines against COVID-19

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, it has caused a great threat to the global economy and public health, initiatives have been launched to control the spread of the virus. To explore the efficacy of drugs, a large number of clinical trials have been carried out, with the purpose of providing guidelines based on high-quality evidence for clinicians. We mainly discuss therapeutic agents for COVID-19 and explain the mechanism, including antiviral agents, tocilizumab, Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, neutralizing antibody therapies and corticosteroids. In addition, the COVID-19 vaccine has been proven to be efficacious in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection. We systematically analyzed four mainstream vaccine platforms: messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines, viral vector vaccines, inactivated vaccines and protein subunit vaccines. We evaluated the therapeutic effects of drugs and vaccines through enumerating the most typical clinical trials. However, the emergence of novel variants has further complicated the interpretation of the available clinical data, especially vaccines and antibody therapies. In the post-epidemic era, therapeutic agents are still the first choice for controlling the progression of disease, whereas the protective effect of vaccines against different strains should be assessed comprehensively.

Favipiravir pharmacokinetics in Thai adults with mild COVID-19: A sub-study of interpatient variability and ethnic differences in exposure

This sub-study sought to characterize the pharmacokinetics (PK) of favipiravir (FPV) within Thai adults and quantitatively assess differences in exposure to those previously reported in other populations as a basis to understand putative differences in efficacy between studies conducted in different regions. It was nested within a prospective trial of adults with symptomatic COVID-19 infection without pneumonia receiving 1800 mg FPV twice-daily on day 1 and 800 mg twice-daily thereafter. Individual PK profiles were fitted with a one-compartment disposition model (first-order absorption). Eight adults (seven female) with a median age of 39 years and BMI of 27.9 kg/m2 were included. Seven adults achieved plasma concentrations above the EC90 in vitro target (25 mg/L), with minimum-maximum concentrations decreasing with repeat dosing. The mean FPV apparent clearance observed in this study was 1.1 L/h (coefficient of variation [CV]: 60%), apparent volume of distribution 20.6 L (CV: 40%), absorption rate constant 6.1 h (CV: 100%), and 2.4 daily % change in apparent clearance (CV: 315%). Higher exposures were observed in these Thai adults compared with data from previous studies in Chinese, Japanese, and Turkish populations, respectively. Current FPV doses recommended in Thailand achieved target plasma concentrations with higher exposures than those described previously in other populations. The limited sample size prohibits firm conclusions from being drawn but the presented data warrants confirmation with a view to interrogate the appropriateness of doses used in randomized clinical trials that failed to demonstrate efficacy.

Advancements in Antiviral Therapy: Favipiravir Sodium in Nasal Formulation

Favipiravir (FPV) is an Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) known to have lower solubility in aqueous solvents. In the current study, efforts were made to generate a crystalline Favipiravir Sodium Salt (NaFPV) for enhanced solubility in aqueous media. The in-house generated NaFPV was characterized by NMR studies and its sodium content was determined by Flame Emission Spectroscopy (FES) as a confirmation of salt formation. Its solubility was determined where-in the solubility of NaFPV in water was about 100 times greater than FVP. FPV and NaFPV nasal spray formulations were prepared and its activity was determined against human coronavirus (hCoV) 229E strain. In the anti-hCoV assay as compared to FPV, NaFPV showed almost threefold higher anti-viral activity than its unmodified counterpart. Accelerated stability and spray pattern characteristics of both the formulations were studied. Interestingly, NaFPV showed higher physical stability during storage at conditions 40 ± 2 °C/ 75% ± 5% RH. The nasal spray formulations of both FPV and NaFPV showed ideal plume geometry and spray pattern of acceptable specifications. Due to its improvement in terms of solubility, NaFPV will have higher rate and extent of absorption, and faster onset of the therapeutic effect and may appear to be a feasible alternative to regular favipiravir for use in solid dosage forms.

COVID 19: Prevention and treatment through the Indian perspective

The most destructive period the world has experienced seems to be behind us. Not a single nation was spared by this disease, and many continue to struggle today. Even after recovering from COVID, patient may continue to experience some post-COVID effects, such as heart irregularities or a decline in lung vitality. In the past three years (2019-2022), the world has witnessed the power of a small entity, a single peculiar virus. Science initially appeared to be helpless in this regard, but due to the emergence of disease, pharmaceutics (the development of anti-covid drugs), immunology (the rapid antigen test), microbiology (the isolation of viruses from infected people), biotechnology (the development of recombinant vaccines), biochemistry (the blood profile, the D-dimer test), and biochemistry (blood profile, D-dimer test), biophysics (PCR, RT-PCR, CT Scan, MRI) had worked together to fight the disease. The results of these efforts are the development of new diagnostic techniques, possible treatment and finally the availability of vaccines against COVID-19. However, it is not proven that the treatment through the traditional medical system is directly active on SARS-CoV-2 but is instead indirectly acting on SARS-CoV-2 effects by improving symptoms derived from the viral disease. In India, the traditional system of medicine and tradition knowledge together worked in the pandemic and proved effective strategies in prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2. The use of effective masks, PPE kits, plasma therapy, yoga, lockdowns and social seclusion, use of modern antiviral drugs, monoclonal antibodies, herbal remedies, homoeopathy, hygienic practice, as well as the willpower of people, are all contributing to the fight against COVID. Which methods or practices will be effective against COVID nobody is aware since medical professionals who wear PPE kits do not live longer, and some people in India who remained unprotected and roamed freely were not susceptible to infection. The focus of this review is on the mode of transmission, diagnosis, preventive measures, vaccines currently under development, modern medicine developed against SARS-CoV-2, ayurvedic medicine used during pandemic, homoeopathic medicine used during pandemic, and specific yoga poses that can be used to lessen COVID-related symptoms.

Comparative Preclinical Pharmacokinetics and Disposition of Favipiravir Following Pulmonary and Oral Administration as Potential Adjunct Therapy Against Airborne RNA Viruses

BACKGROUND

Favipiravir is administered orally, even against airborne RNA viruses, in a loading-dose/maintenance dose regimen. We investigated whether-(a) pulmonary delivery of favipiravir would generate high concentrations in the luminal side of the respiratory tract; and (b) avoiding first-pass metabolism by the liver by inhaled drug would generate comparable pharmacokinetics (PK) with doses significantly smaller than the oral maintenance dose.

METHODS

A dry powder inhalation (DPI) of favipiravir formulated by mixing with Inhalac 400® was prepared and characterized. Inhalations of ~ 120 µg dose strength, with or without a prior oral loading dose were administered to mice. Comparator mice received human-equivalent oral doses (3 mg). Three mice per sampling time point were sacrificed and favipiravir concentrations in the blood plasma, bronchio-alveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and lung tissue homogenate determined by HPLC.

RESULTS

One-compartment PK modeling of concentration-time data indicated that the area under the curve (AUC0-24 h) generated in the BALF recovered from mice receiving inhalations of ~ 1/25th of the oral dose subsequent to an oral loading dose was 86.72 ± 4.48 µg⋅mL-1⋅h. This was consistently higher than the AUC observed in the BALF of orally-dosed mice (56.71 ± 53.89 µg mL-1⋅h). In blood serum, the respective values of AUC were 321.55 ± 124.91 and 354.71 ± 99.60 µg⋅mL-1⋅h.

CONCLUSION

Pulmonary delivery of significantly smaller doses of favipiravir generates meaningful drug disposition and pharmacokinetics at the site of respiratory viral infections. We provide the rationale for designing a self-administered, non-invasive, low-cost, targeted drug delivery system against airborne RNA virus infection.

SARS-CoV-2 replication and drug discovery

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has killed millions of people and continues to wreak havoc across the globe. This sudden and deadly pandemic emphasizes the necessity for anti-viral drug development that can be rapidly administered to reduce morbidity, mortality, and virus propagation. Thus, lacking efficient anti-COVID-19 treatment, and especially given the lengthy drug development process as well as the critical death tool that has been associated with SARS-CoV-2 since its outbreak, drug repurposing (or repositioning) constitutes so far, the ideal and ready-to-go best approach in mitigating viral spread, containing the infection, and reducing the COVID-19-associated death rate. Indeed, based on the molecular similarity approach of SARS-CoV-2 with previous coronaviruses (CoVs), repurposed drugs have been reported to hamper SARS-CoV-2 replication. Therefore, understanding the inhibition mechanisms of viral replication by repurposed anti-viral drugs and chemicals known to block CoV and SARS-CoV-2 multiplication is crucial, and it opens the way for particular treatment options and COVID-19 therapeutics. In this review, we highlighted molecular basics underlying drug-repurposing strategies against SARS-CoV-2. Notably, we discussed inhibition mechanisms of viral replication, involving and including inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 proteases (3C-like protease, 3CLpro or Papain-like protease, PLpro) by protease inhibitors such as Carmofur, Ebselen, and GRL017, polymerases (RNA-dependent RNA-polymerase, RdRp) by drugs like Suramin, Remdesivir, or Favipiravir, and proteins/peptides inhibiting virus-cell fusion and host cell replication pathways, such as Disulfiram, GC376, and Molnupiravir. When applicable, comparisons with SARS-CoV inhibitors approved for clinical use were made to provide further insights to understand molecular basics in inhibiting SARS-CoV-2 replication and draw conclusions for future drug discovery research.

Adverse drug reactions associated with COVID-19 management

The emergence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak, which causes COVID-19, had a devastating impact on both people's lives and the global economy. During the course of the pandemic, the lack of specific drugs or treatments tailored for COVID-19 led to extensive repurposing of existing drugs in the pursuit of effective treatments. Some drug molecules demonstrated efficacy, while others proved ineffective. In this context, the approach of drug repurposing emerged as a novel strategy for combating COVID-19. Repurposed drugs and biologics have shown effectiveness, leading to improved clinical outcomes among patients with COVID-19. Similarly, It is equally important to assess the risk-benefit ratio associated with drugs and biologics adapted for COVID-19 treatment. Herein, we primarily focus on evaluating adverse drug events linked to repurposed COVID-19 medications, repurposed biologics, and COVID-specific drug molecules.

Structural and virologic mechanism of the emergence of resistance to Mpro inhibitors in SARS-CoV-2

We generated SARS-CoV-2 variants resistant to three SARS-CoV-2 main protease (Mpro) inhibitors (nirmatrelvir, TKB245, and 5h), by propagating the ancestral SARS-CoV-2WK521WT in VeroE6TMPRSS2 cells with increasing concentrations of each inhibitor and examined their structural and virologic profiles. A predominant E166V-carrying variant (SARS-CoV-2WK521E166V), which emerged when passaged with nirmatrelvir and TKB245, proved to be resistant to the two inhibitors. A recombinant SARS-CoV-2E166V was resistant to nirmatrelvir and TKB245, but sensitive to 5h. X-ray structural study showed that the dimerization of Mpro was severely hindered by E166V substitution due to the disruption of the presumed dimerization-initiating Ser1'-Glu166 interactions. TKB245 stayed bound to MproE166V, whereas nirmatrelvir failed. Native mass spectrometry confirmed that nirmatrelvir and TKB245 promoted the dimerization of Mpro, and compromised the enzymatic activity; the Ki values of recombinant MproE166V for nirmatrelvir and TKB245 were 117±3 and 17.1±1.9 µM, respectively, indicating that TKB245 has a greater (by a factor of 6.8) binding affinity to MproE166V than nirmatrelvir. SARS-CoV-2WK521WT selected with 5h acquired A191T substitution in Mpro (SARS-CoV-2WK521A191T) and better replicated in the presence of 5h, than SARS-CoV-2WK521WT. However, no significant enzymatic or structural changes in MproA191T were observed. The replicability of SARS-CoV-2WK521E166V proved to be compromised compared to SARS-CoV-2WK521WT but predominated over SARS-CoV-2WK521WT in the presence of nirmatrelvir. The replicability of SARS-CoV-2WK521A191T surpassed that of SARS-CoV-2WK521WT in the absence of 5h, confirming that A191T confers enhanced viral fitness. The present data should shed light on the understanding of the mechanism of SARS-CoV-2's drug resistance acquisition and the development of resistance-repellant COVID-19 therapeutics.

Competing Risks in Clinical Trials: Do They Matter and How Should We Account for Them?

During patient follow-up in a randomized trial, some deaths may occur. Where death (or noncardiovascular death) is not part of an outcome of interest it is termed a competing risk. Conventional analyses (eg, Cox proportional hazards model) handle death similarly to other censored follow-up. Patients still alive are unrealistically assumed to be representative of those who died. The Fine and Gray model has been used to handle competing risks, but is often used inappropriately and can be misleading. We propose an alternative multiple imputation approach that plausibly accounts for the fact that patients who die tend also to be at high risk for the (unobserved) outcome of interest. This provides a logical framework for exploring the impact of a competing risk, recognizing that there is no unique solution. We illustrate these issues in 3 cardiovascular trials and in simulation studies. We conclude with practical recommendations for handling competing risks in future trials.

Lessons learnt from broad-spectrum coronavirus antiviral drug discovery

INTRODUCTION

Highly pathogenic coronaviruses (CoVs), such as severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV (SARS-CoV), Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV), and the most recent SARS-CoV-2 responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, pose significant threats to human populations over the past two decades. These CoVs have caused a broad spectrum of clinical manifestations ranging from asymptomatic to severe distress syndromes (ARDS), resulting in high morbidity and mortality.

AREAS COVERED

The accelerated advancements in antiviral drug discovery, spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic, have shed new light on the imperative to develop treatments effective against a broad spectrum of CoVs. This perspective discusses strategies and lessons learnt in targeting viral non-structural proteins, structural proteins, drug repurposing, and combinational approaches for the development of antivirals against CoVs.

EXPERT OPINION

Drawing lessons from the pandemic, it becomes evident that the absence of efficient broad-spectrum antiviral drugs increases the vulnerability of public health systems to the potential onslaught by highly pathogenic CoVs. The rapid and sustained spread of novel CoVs can have devastating consequences without effective and specifically targeted treatments. Prioritizing the effective development of broad-spectrum antivirals is imperative for bolstering the resilience of public health systems and mitigating the potential impact of future highly pathogenic CoVs.

A systematic review and meta-analysis, investigating dose and time of fluvoxamine treatment efficacy for COVID-19 clinical deterioration, death, and Long-COVID complications

There have been 774,075,242 cases of COVID-19 and 7,012,986 deaths worldwide as of January 2024. In the early stages of the pandemic, there was an urgent need to reduce the severity of the disease and prevent the need for hospitalization to avoid stress on healthcare systems worldwide. The repurposing of drugs to prevent clinical deterioration of COVID-19 patients was trialed in many studies using many different drugs. Fluvoxamine (an SSRI and sigma-1 receptor agonist) was initially identified to potentially provide beneficial effects in COVID-19-infected patients, preventing clinical deterioration and the need for hospitalization. Fourteen clinical studies have been carried out to date, with seven of those being randomized placebo-controlled studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis covers the literature from the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 in late 2019 until January 2024. Search terms related to fluvoxamine, such as its trade names and chemical names, along with words related to COVID-19, such as SARS-CoV-2 and coronavirus, were used in literature databases including PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and the ClinicalTrials.gov database from NIH, to identify the trials used in the subsequent analysis. Clinical deterioration and death data were extracted from these studies where available and used in the meta-analysis. A total of 7153 patients were studied across 14 studies (both open-label and double-blind placebo-controlled). 681 out of 3553 (19.17%) in the standard care group and 255 out of 3600 (7.08%) in the fluvoxamine-treated group experienced clinical deterioration. The estimated average log odds ratio was 1.087 (95% CI 0.200 to 1.973), which differed significantly from zero (z = 2.402, p = 0.016). The seven placebo-controlled studies resulted in a log odds ratio of 0.359 (95% CI 0.1111 to 0.5294), which differed significantly from zero (z = 3.103, p = 0.002). The results of this study identified fluvoxamine as effective in preventing clinical deterioration, and subgrouping analysis suggests that earlier treatment with a dose of 200 mg or above provides the best outcomes. We hope the outcomes of this study can help design future studies into respiratory viral infections and potentially improve clinical outcomes.

Host factors of SARS-CoV-2 in infection, pathogenesis, and long-term effects

SARS-CoV-2 is the causative virus of the devastating COVID-19 pandemic that results in an unparalleled global health and economic crisis. Despite unprecedented scientific efforts and therapeutic interventions, the fight against COVID-19 continues as the rapid emergence of different SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and the increasing challenge of long COVID-19, raising a vast demand to understand the pathomechanisms of COVID-19 and its long-term sequelae and develop therapeutic strategies beyond the virus per se. Notably, in addition to the virus itself, the replication cycle of SARS-CoV-2 and clinical severity of COVID-19 is also governed by host factors. In this review, we therefore comprehensively overview the replication cycle and pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 from the perspective of host factors and host-virus interactions. We sequentially outline the pathological implications of molecular interactions between host factors and SARS-CoV-2 in multi-organ and multi-system long COVID-19, and summarize current therapeutic strategies and agents targeting host factors for treating these diseases. This knowledge would be key for the identification of new pathophysiological aspects and mechanisms, and the development of actionable therapeutic targets and strategies for tackling COVID-19 and its sequelae.

Remdesivir versus Favipiravir in Hospitalized Patients with Moderate to Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Remdesivir treatment was associated with a reduced 28-day mortality and recovery time among patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19. Favipiravir is broadly used to treat COVID-19. However, various studies have had conflicting results on the efficacy of favipiravir for COVID-19. We hypothesized that remdesivir is more effective in clinical outcomes regarding the 29-day mortality rates, length of stay, and recovery rate than favipiravir in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study that included adult hospitalized COVID-19 pneumonia patients with hypoxemia. Patients were classified into two groups according to the antiviral drugs. Age, oxygen saturation, fraction of inspired oxygen, and Charlson comorbidity index were used for propensity score matching. The primary objective was to determine whether the type of antiviral agent is associated with 29-day mortality. Other outcomes were the 15-day recovery rate and the length of intensive care unit or hospital stay.

Results

A total of 249 patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia were included. With an adjustment for propensity score-matched, there were 204 patients for further analysis (102 patients in each antiviral drug group). Remdesivir patients had higher Radiographic Assessment of Lung Edema (RALE) scores on Chest X-ray (14.32±9.08 vs 11.34±8.46; standardized mean difference =33.9%). The Charlson Comorbidity Index Scores were comparable. The prevalences of diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and non-HIV immunocompromised state were higher in the remdesivir group. Regarding the primary outcomes, after adjusting by diabetes, obesity, and RALE score, there was no difference in the 29-day mortality rate between both groups [26 patients (25.5%) in the remdesivir group vs 28 patients (27.5%) in the favipiravir group]. The Kaplan-Meier curve analysis at 29 days indicated no significant difference in cumulative survival rate. The two groups' adjusted hazard ratio was 0.72; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.25, p=0.24. A Kaplan-Meier analysis on the 15-day cumulative survival rate observed a trend towards a higher survival rate in the remdesivir group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.41; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.84; p= 0.02) The proportion of patients who recovered on day 15, the length of intensive care unit(ICU) stays, and the hospital stay were not different between remdesivir and favipiravir groups (62 patients (60.8%) vs 56 patients (54.9%), p=0.39; 11.48 ± 11.88 days vs 10.87 ± 9.31 days, p=0.69; and 16.64±14.28 days vs 16.59 ±11.31 days, p=0.98, respectively).

Conclusion

In patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia, Remdesivir did not demonstrate superior benefits over Favipiravir regarding 29-day mortality, 15-day recovery rates, or hospital and ICU stay lengths. However, further investigation into the 15-day cumulative survival rate revealed a trend towards improved survival in the Remdesivir group.

Safety and efficacy of favipiravir in COVID-19 patients with pneumonia. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (FAVID)

PURPOSE

To design a randomized clinical trial to assess the efficacy and safety of favipiravir in patients with COVID-19 disease with pneumonia.

METHODS

A randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of favipiravir in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia was conducted in three Spanish sites. Randomization 1:1 to favipiravir or placebo (in both groups added to the Standard of Care) was performed to treat the patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. The primary endpoint was "time to clinical improvement," measured as an improvement for ≥ two categories on a 7-point WHO ordinal scale in an up to 28 days' time frame.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients were randomized (23 in the favipiravir group and 21 in the placebo group). The median time to clinical improvement was not different between the favipiravir and the placebo arms (10 days for both groups) and none of the secondary endpoints showed significant differences between arms. The proportion of adverse events (both serious and non-serious) was statistically different between the favipiravir group (68.29%) and the placebo group (31.7%) (p = 0.019), but there was insufficient statistical evidence to correlate the degree of severity of the events with the treatment group.

CONCLUSIONS

Favipiravir administered for ten days to patients with COVID-19 and pneumonia did not improve outcomes compared with placebo. Although this is an underpowered negative study, efficacy results align with other randomized trials. However, in the present study, the non-serious adverse events were more frequent in the favipiravir group.

Favipiravir for treating COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to challenge the health workforce and societies worldwide. Favipiravir was suggested by some experts to be effective and safe to use in COVID-19. Although this drug has been evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), it is still unclear if it has a definite role in the treatment of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of favipiravir compared to no treatment, supportive treatment, or other experimental antiviral treatment in people with acute COVID-19.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, MEDLINE, Embase, the World Health Organization (WHO) COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease, and three other databases, up to 18 July 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for RCTs evaluating the efficacy of favipiravir in treating people with COVID-19.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures for data collection and analysis. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 trials that randomized 5750 adults (most under 60 years of age). The trials were conducted in Bahrain, Brazil, China, India, Iran, Kuwait, Malaysia, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, the UK, and the USA. Most participants were hospitalized with mild to moderate disease (89%). Twenty-two of the 25 trials investigated the role of favipiravir compared to placebo or standard of care, whilst lopinavir/ritonavir was the comparator in two trials, and umifenovir in one trial. Most trials (24 of 25) initiated favipiravir at 1600 mg or 1800 mg twice daily for the first day, followed by 600 mg to 800 mg twice a day. The duration of treatment varied from five to 14 days. We do not know whether favipiravir reduces all-cause mortality at 28 to 30 days, or in-hospital (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 1.46; 11 trials, 3459 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We do not know if favipiravir reduces the progression to invasive mechanical ventilation (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.09; 8 trials, 1383 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Favipiravir may make little to no difference in the need for admission to hospital (if ambulatory) (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.46; 4 trials, 670 participants; low-certainty evidence). We do not know if favipiravir reduces the time to clinical improvement (defined as time to a 2-point reduction in patients' admission status on the WHO's ordinal scale) (hazard ratio (HR) 1.13, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.83; 4 trials, 721 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Favipiravir may make little to no difference to the progression to oxygen therapy (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.75; 2 trials, 543 participants; low-certainty evidence). Favipiravir may lead to an overall increased incidence of adverse events (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.54; 18 trials, 4699 participants; low-certainty evidence), but may result in little to no difference inserious adverse eventsattributable to the drug (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.42; 12 trials, 3317 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The low- to very low-certainty evidence means that we do not know whether favipiravir is efficacious in people with COVID-19 illness, irrespective of severity or admission status. Treatment with favipiravir may result in an overall increase in the incidence of adverse events but may not result in serious adverse events.

Off-label Use of Medicines in COVID-19: A Lesson For Future

Abstract:

The COVID-19 infection is rapidly spreading worldwide. Treating this new viral infection is a great challenge worldwide. There is no specific and approved medication for its treatment, so some medications are considered off-label. Antivirals, corticosteroids, antimalarial agents, and antibiotics are proposed in different countries to treat COVID-19. This narrative review discussed the off-label use of medications for COVID-19 and the beneficial and adverse effects of them. Evidence was collected and sorted from the literature ranging from 2019 to 2022 on scientific databases such as Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus with suitable keywords. All papers, namely systematic reviews, case studies, and clinical guidelines, were evaluated. Antimalarial agents, antivirals, antibiotics, corticosteroids, NSAIDs, biological medicines, Ivermectin, and melatonin were reviewed in this study. Some medications have direct antiviral effects, and many can reduce infection symptoms and hospitalization. In some clinical trial trials, even some of them, such as corticosteroids, can lower death rates, particularly during the cytokine storm period. However, the effectiveness of some medications has not been understood. Besides, the side effects of off-label use of these medications must be considered a serious concern. There are no proven medications for COVID-19 yet. Off-label use of medications is a double-edged sword that can have advantages outweighing its disadvantages. The COVID-19 crisis taught us many lessons about dealing with health-related crises and their treatment management. One of the most important lessons is paying more attention to the discovery and development of novel drugs and vaccines based on modern technology.

Heartland Virus Disease-An Underreported Emerging Infection

First recognized 15 years ago, Heartland virus disease (Heartland) is a tickborne infection contracted from the transmission of Heartland virus (HRTV) through tick bites from the lone star tick (Amblyomma americanum) and potentially other tick species. Heartland symptoms include a fever <100.4 °F, lethargy, fatigue, headaches, myalgia, a loss of appetite, nausea, diarrhea, weight loss, arthralgia, leukopenia and thrombocytopenia. We reviewed the existing peer-reviewed literature for HRTV and Heartland to more completely characterize this rarely reported, recently discovered illness. The absence of ongoing serosurveys and targeted clinical and tickborne virus investigations specific to HRTV presence and Heartland likely contributes to infection underestimation. While HRTV transmission occurs in southern and midwestern states, the true range of this infection is likely larger than now understood. The disease's proliferation benefits from an expanded tick range due to rising climate temperatures favoring habitat expansion. We recommend HRTV disease be considered in the differential diagnosis for patients with a reported exposure to ticks in areas where HRTV has been previously identified. HRTV testing should be considered early for those matching the Heartland disease profile and nonresponsive to initial broad-spectrum antimicrobial treatment. Despite aggressive supportive therapy, patients deteriorating to sepsis early in the course of the disease have a very grim prognosis.

Antivirals for Broader Coverage against Human Coronaviruses

Coronaviruses (CoVs) are enveloped positive-sense single-stranded RNA viruses with a genome that is 27-31 kbases in length. Critical genes include the spike (S), envelope (E), membrane (M), nucleocapsid (N) and nine accessory open reading frames encoding for non-structural proteins (NSPs) that have multiple roles in the replication cycle and immune evasion (1). There are seven known human CoVs that most likely appeared after zoonotic transfer, the most recent being SARS-CoV-2, responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic. Antivirals that have been approved by the FDA for use against COVID-19 such as Paxlovid can target and successfully inhibit the main protease (MPro) activity of multiple human CoVs; however, alternative proteomes encoded by CoV genomes have a closer genetic similarity to each other, suggesting that antivirals could be developed now that target future CoVs. New zoonotic introductions of CoVs to humans are inevitable and unpredictable. Therefore, new antivirals are required to control not only the next human CoV outbreak but also the four common human CoVs (229E, OC43, NL63, HKU1) that circulate frequently and to contain sporadic outbreaks of the severe human CoVs (SARS-CoV, MERS and SARS-CoV-2). The current study found that emerging antiviral drugs, such as Paxlovid, could target other CoVs, but only SARS-CoV-2 is known to be targeted in vivo. Other drugs which have the potential to target other human CoVs are still within clinical trials and are not yet available for public use. Monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatment and vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 can reduce mortality and hospitalisation rates; however, they target the Spike protein whose sequence mutates frequently and drifts. Spike is also not applicable for targeting other HCoVs as these are not well-conserved sequences among human CoVs. Thus, there is a need for readily available treatments globally that target all seven human CoVs and improve the preparedness for inevitable future outbreaks. Here, we discuss antiviral research, contributing to the control of common and severe CoV replication and transmission, including the current SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. The aim was to identify common features of CoVs for antivirals, biologics and vaccines that could reduce the scientific, political, economic and public health strain caused by CoV outbreaks now and in the future.

An Update on SARS-CoV-2 Clinical Trial Results-What We Can Learn for the Next Pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has claimed over 7 million lives worldwide, providing a stark reminder of the importance of pandemic preparedness. Due to the lack of approved antiviral drugs effective against coronaviruses at the start of the pandemic, the world largely relied on repurposed efforts. Here, we summarise results from randomised controlled trials to date, as well as selected in vitro data of directly acting antivirals, host-targeting antivirals, and immunomodulatory drugs. Overall, repurposing efforts evaluating directly acting antivirals targeting other viral families were largely unsuccessful, whereas several immunomodulatory drugs led to clinical improvement in hospitalised patients with severe disease. In addition, accelerated drug discovery efforts during the pandemic progressed to multiple novel directly acting antivirals with clinical efficacy, including small molecule inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies. We argue that large-scale investment is required to prepare for future pandemics; both to develop an arsenal of broad-spectrum antivirals beyond coronaviruses and build worldwide clinical trial networks that can be rapidly utilised.

Effects of COVID-19 on the Liver and Mortality in Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Pneumonia Caused by Delta and Non-Delta Variants: An Analysis in a Single Centre

The aim of this study was to ascertain patient characteristics, outcomes, and liver injuries in patients infected with different SARS-CoV-2 variants. Data from consecutive adult patients with severe/critical COVID-19 admitted to our hospital during the peak month of the Delta wave were compared to the ancestral, Alpha, and Omicron waves. The dataset of 551 hospitalized patients was similar in the Delta/non-Delta waves. At admission and discharge, the median aminotransferase levels were normal or slightly increased. During the Delta wave (172 vs. 379 non-Delta patients), more patients died (OR 1.69, 95%CI 1.09-2.56) or had liver injury at discharge (alanine aminotransferase, ALT ≥ 2 ULN) (OR 1.97, 95%CI 1.08-3.54). In-hospital mortality was associated with age, lung injury, intensive care unit admission, number of and cardiovascular comorbidities, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and all inflammatory biomarkers. Serious liver injury at admission (ALT ≥ 5 × ULN) was significantly associated with in-hospital mortality (OR = 7.9, 95%CI 2-28.9). At discharge, drug-induced liver injury (DILI) was found in patients treated with remdesivir, ALT ≥ 2 ULN (OR = 2.62, 95%CI 1.22-5.75). Treatment with dexamethasone, remdesivir, and immunomodulators showed improved survival, OR = 0.50 (95%CI 0.33-0.77). Regardless of the variant and treatment options, less than 2% of patients displayed serious liver injury, which was not found to be a death predictor in multivariable analysis.

Quantum DFT studies on the drug delivery of favipiravir using pristine and functionalized chitosan nanoparticles

Considering the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, finding new drugs along with the development of effective drug delivery methods can help in the treatment of this disease. For this reason, in this research work, the possibility of drug-delivery of Favipiravir (FP), one of the drugs approved in the treatment of COVID-19, by pristine chitosan (Chit) nanoparticles (NP), and functionalized chitosan nanoparticles with N-acylate, N-methyl, O-acetyl, and Oxazoline functional groups was studied using quantum mechanical DFT methods at B3LYP-D3(BJ)/6-311 + g(d,p) theoretical level in water medium. The QTAIM, NBO, DOS, frontier orbital, conceptual-DFT indices, and non-covalent interaction analysis were further implemented to investigate the possible interactions between FP and Chit NPs. The results show that the adsorption of FP on Chit NPs is done through the creation of hydrogen bonds, and the highest absorption energy of - 18.15 kcal/mol between pristine chitosan and FP. In the case of all functionalized Chit NPs, a decrease in the absorption energy is observed, which is more noticeable in the case of N-acylated and O-acetyl functionalize Chit NPs, and indicates the weakening of the van der Waals interactions for these cases. Considering the compatibility of Chit NPs with the human body and their non-toxicity, as well as the fact that factors such as pH, solubility, the ionic strength, and so on can be adjusted to control the release rate using the functionalized Chit NPs, it seems that the results of this work can be a comprehensive guide to design the drug delivery methods of FP drug using Chit NPs, to reduce the symptoms of COVID-19 disease.

Insights into COVID-19: Perspectives on Drug Remedies and Host Cell Responses

In light of the COVID-19 global pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2, ongoing research has centered on minimizing viral spread either by stopping viral entry or inhibiting viral replication. Repurposing antiviral drugs, typically nucleoside analogs, has proven successful at inhibiting virus replication. This review summarizes current information regarding coronavirus classification and characterization and presents the broad clinical consequences of SARS-CoV-2 activation of the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor expressed in different human cell types. It provides publicly available knowledge on the chemical nature of proposed therapeutics and their target biomolecules to assist in the identification of potentially new drugs for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

COVID-19: An Update on Epidemiology, Prevention and Treatment, September-2023

After a downward trend for more than 12 months, the incidence of COVID-19 has increased in the last months. Although COVID-19 is not as frequent as in the first years of the pandemic, case numbers are still very high, and it causes a significant number of deaths. COVID-19 is not seen with a predictable frequency, at least two times more deadly than the flu, continues as an epidemic, and has not reached the endemic level yet. Currently, the Omicron strains EG.5 and XBB.1.16 are dominant worldwide. Although BA.2.86 and FLip variants, including FL.1.5.1 are not widespread at the moment, both were shown to be highly immune-evasive and require close monitoring. Prevention of COVID-19 relies on vaccinations, surveillance, proper ventilation of enclosed spaces, isolation of patients, and mask usage. Currently, monovalent COVID-19 vaccines, including XBB.1.5 Omicron SARS-CoV-2, are recommended for both primary and booster vaccinations against COVID-19. Monovalent vaccines, including only original SARS-CoV-2 strain, and bivalent vaccines, including original virus plus BA4/5 variant, are no longer recommended against COVID-19. Booster vaccination with XBB.1.5 containing vaccine should be prioritized for patients at high risk for severe COVID-19. Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination does not seem to be effective in preventing COVID-19. At the current phase of the pandemic, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, remdesivir, molnupiravir, sotrovimab (for patients from XBB.1.5 variant dominant settings), and convalescent plasma can be considered for the treatment of high-risk early-stage outpatients with COVID-19, while hospitalized patients with more severe disease can be treated with dexamethasone, anti cytokines including tocilizumab, sarilumab, baricitinib, and tofacitinib and antithrombotic agents including enoxaparin. Remdesivir oral analogues and ensitrelvir fumarate are promising agents for treating acute COVID-19, which are in phase trials now; however, ivermectin, fluvoxamine, and metformin were shown to be ineffective.

How to use COVID-19 antiviral drugs in patients with chronic kidney disease

Antiviral drugs such as Remdesivir (Veklury), Nirmatrelvir with Ritonavir (Paxlovid), Azvudine, and Molnupiravir (Lagevrio) can reduce the risk for severe and fatal Coronavirus Disease (COVID)-19. Although chronic kidney disease is a highly prevalent risk factor for severe and fatal COVID-19, most clinical trials with these drugs excluded patients with impaired kidney function. Advanced CKD is associated with a state of secondary immunodeficiency (SIDKD), which increases the susceptibility to severe COVID-19, COVID-19 complications, and the risk of hospitalization and mortality among COVID-19 patients. The risk to develop COVID-19 related acute kidney injury is higher in patients with precedent CKD. Selecting appropriate therapies for COVID-19 patients with impaired kidney function is a challenge for healthcare professionals. Here, we discuss the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of COVID-19-related antiviral drugs with a focus on their potential use and dosing in COVID-19 patients with different stages of CKD. Additionally, we describe the adverse effects and precautions to be taken into account when using these antivirals in COVID-19 patients with CKD. Lastly, we also discuss about the use of monoclonal antibodies in COVID-19 patients with kidney disease and related complications.