Randomized Trial of Molnupiravir or Placebo in Patients Hospitalized with Covid-19

Mass spectrometry-based metabolomics reveals metabolism of molnupiravir may lead to metabolic disorders and hepatotoxicity

Molnupiravir (MO) is a pyrimidine nucleoside anti-SARS-CoV-2 drug. MO treatment could cause mild liver injury. However, the underlying mechanism of MO-induced liver injury and the metabolic pathway of MO in vivo are unclear. In this study, metabolomics analysis and molecular biology methods were used to explore these issues. Through metabolomics analysis, it was found that the homeostasis of pyrimidine, purine, lysophosphatidylcholine (LPC), and amino acids in mice was destroyed after MO treatment. A total of 80 changed metabolites were detected. Among these changed metabolites, 4-ethylphenyl sulfate, dihydrouracil, and LPC 20:0 was related to the elevation of alkaline phosphatase (ALP), interleukin-6 (IL6), and nuclear factor kappa-B (NF-κB). The levels of 4-ethylphenyl sulfate, dihydrouracil, and LPC 20:0 in plasma were positively correlated with their levels in the liver, suggesting that these metabolites were associated with MO-induced liver injury. MO treatment could increase NHC and cytidine levels, activate cytidine deaminase (CDA), and increase LPC levels. CDA and LPC could increase the mRNA expression level of toll-like receptor (TLR). The current study indicated that the elevation of hepatic TLR may be an important reason for MO leading to the liver injury.

Potential of traditional medicines in alleviating COVID-19 symptoms

This review discusses the prevention and treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by infection with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Mutations in its spike glycoprotein have driven the emergence of variants with high transmissibility and immune escape capabilities. Some antiviral drugs are ineffective against the BA.2 subvariant at the authorized dose. Recently, 150 natural metabolites have been identified as potential candidates for development of new anti-COVID-19 drugs with higher efficacy and lower toxicity than those of existing therapeutic agents. Botanical drug-derived bioactive molecules have shown promise in dampening the COVID-19 cytokine storm and thus preventing pulmonary fibrosis, as they exert a strong binding affinity for viral proteins and inhibit their activity. The Health Ministry of Thailand has approved Andrographis paniculata (Jap. Senshinren) extracts to treat COVID-19. In China, over 85% of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 receive treatments based on traditional Chinese medicine. A comprehensive map of the stages and pathogenetic mechanisms related to the disease and effective natural products to treat and prevent COVID-19 are presented. Approximately 10% of patients with COVID-19 are affected by long COVID, and COVID-19 infection impairs mitochondrial DNA. As the number of agents to treat COVID-19 is limited, adjuvant botanical drug treatments including vitamin C and E supplementation may reduce COVID-19 symptoms and inhibit progression to long COVID.

Efficacy of COVID-19 Oral antivirals in hospitalised oldest-old with high morbidity burden: a target trial emulation study

BACKGROUND

Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir are orally administered pharmacotherapies for mild to moderate COVID-19. However, the effectiveness of these drugs among very old (≥80 years), hospitalised patients remains unclear, limiting the risk-benefit assessment of these antivirals in this specific group. This study investigates the effectiveness of these antivirals in reducing mortality among this group of hospitalised patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

Using a territory-wide public healthcare database in Hong Kong, a target trial emulation study was conducted with data from 13 642 eligible participants for the molnupiravir trial and 9553 for the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir trial. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Immortal time and confounding bias was minimised using cloning-censoring-weighting approach. Mortality odds ratios were estimated by pooled logistic regression after adjusting confounding biases by stabilised inverse probability weights.

RESULTS

Both molnupiravir (HR: 0.895, 95% CI: 0.826-0.970) and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (HR: 0.804, 95% CI: 0.678-0.955) demonstrated moderate mortality risk reduction among oldest-old hospitalised patients. No significant interaction was observed between oral antiviral treatment and vaccination status. The 28-day risk of mortality was lower in initiators than non-initiators for both molnupiravir (risk difference: -1.09%, 95% CI: -2.29, 0.11) and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (risk difference: -1.71%, 95% CI: -3.30, -0.16) trials. The effectiveness of these medications was observed regardless of the patients' prior vaccination status.

CONCLUSIONS

Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir are moderately effective in reducing mortality risk among hospitalised oldest-old patients with COVID-19, regardless of their vaccination status.

Cost-utility analysis of molnupiravir for high-risk, community-based adults with COVID-19: an economic evaluation of the PANORAMIC trial

BACKGROUND

The cost-effectiveness of molnupiravir, an oral antiviral for early treatment of SARS-CoV-2, has not been established in vaccinated populations.

AIM

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of molnupiravir relative to usual care alone among mainly vaccinated community-based people at higher risk of severe outcomes from COVID-19 over 6 months.

DESIGN AND SETTING

An economic evaluation of the PANORAMIC trial in the UK.

METHOD

A cost-utility analysis that adopted a UK NHS and personal social services perspective and a 6-month time horizon was performed using PANORAMIC trial data. Cost-effectiveness was expressed in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses assessed the impacts of uncertainty and heterogeneity. Threshold analysis explored the price for molnupiravir consistent with likely reimbursement.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis, molnupiravir had higher mean costs of £449 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 445 to 453) and higher mean QALYs of 0.0055 (95% CI = 0.0044 to 0.0067) than usual care (mean incremental cost per QALY of £81 190). Sensitivity and subgroup analyses showed similar results, except for those aged ≥75 years, with a 55% probability of being cost-effective at a £30 000 per QALY threshold. Molnupiravir would have to be priced around £147 per course to be cost-effective at a £15 000 per QALY threshold.

CONCLUSION

At the current cost of £513 per course, molnupiravir is unlikely to be cost-effective relative to usual care over a 6-month time horizon among mainly vaccinated patients with COVID-19 at increased risk of adverse outcomes, except those aged ≥75 years.

Azvudine versus Paxlovid in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of azvudine versus nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) in treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The researchers conducted searches on PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and Google Scholar until January 2024. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was utilised to evaluate the quality of the included studies, and data analysis was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. Thirteen studies, including 4949 patients, were analysed. The meta-analysis results showed no significant difference between the azvudine and Paxlovid groups in terms of mortality rate (odds rate [OR] = 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-1.21), negative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) conversion time (standard mean difference [SMD] = 1.52, 95% CI: -1.07-4.11), and hospital stay (SMD = -0.39, 95% CI: -1.12-0.33). However, a significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of intensive care unit admission (OR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.23-0.75) and the need for mechanical ventilation (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.44-0.86) in favour of azvudine. The incidence of adverse events in the azvudine group was significantly lower (OR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.43-0.99). The certainty of evidence was rated as low and moderate. Azvudine and Paxlovid demonstrated similar effectiveness in reducing mortality rates, negative PCR conversion time and hospital stay. However, azvudine showed better effectiveness in improving other outcomes. Regarding the level of certainty of evidence, further research is needed to validate or challenge these results.

COVID-19 therapeutics

SUMMARYSince the emergence of COVID-19 in 2020, an unprecedented range of therapeutic options has been studied and deployed. Healthcare providers have multiple treatment approaches to choose from, but efficacy of those approaches often remains controversial or compromised by viral evolution. Uncertainties still persist regarding the best therapies for high-risk patients, and the drug pipeline is suffering fatigue and shortage of funding. In this article, we review the antiviral activity, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, and safety of COVID-19 antiviral therapies. Additionally, we summarize the evidence from randomized controlled trials on efficacy and safety of the various COVID-19 antivirals and discuss unmet needs which should be addressed.

A path from synthesis to emergency use authorization of molnupiravir as a COVID-19 therapy

Coronaviruses are a group of enveloped viruses with non-segmented, single-stranded, and positive-sense RNA genomes. It belongs to the 'Coronaviridae family', responsible for various diseases, including the common cold, SARS, and MERS. The COVID-19 pandemic, which began in March 2020, has affected 209 countries, infected over a million people, and claimed over 50,000 lives. Significant efforts have been made by repurposing several approved drugs including antiviral, to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Molnupiravir is found to be the first orally acting efficacious drug to treat COVID-19 cases. It was approved for medical use in the UK in November 2021 and other countries, including USFDA, which granted approval an emergency use authorization (EUA) for treating adults with mild to moderate COVID-19 patients. Considering the importance of molnupiravir, the present review deals with its various synthetic strategies, pharmacokinetics, bio-efficacy, toxicity, and safety profiles. The comprehensive information along with critical analysis will be very handy for a wide range of audience including medicinal chemists in the arena of antiviral drug discovery especially anti-viral drugs against any variant of COVID-19.

Joint analysis of vaccination effectiveness and antiviral drug effectiveness for COVID-19: a causal inference approach

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to estimate the causal effects of oral antivirals and vaccinations in the prevention of all-cause mortality and progression to severe COVID-19 in an integrative setting with both antivirals and vaccinations considered as interventions.

METHODS

We identified hospitalized adult patients (i.e. aged 18 or above) in Hong Kong with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March 16, 2022, and December 31, 2022. An inverse probability-weighted (IPW) Andersen-Gill model with time-dependent predictors was used to address immortal time bias and produce causal estimates for the protection effects of oral antivirals and vaccinations against severe COVID-19.

RESULTS

Given prescription is made within 5 days of confirmed infection, nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is more effective in providing protection against all-cause mortality and development into severe COVID-19 than molnupiravir. There was no significant difference between CoronaVac and Comirnaty in the effectiveness of reducing all-cause mortality and progression to severe COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of oral antivirals and vaccinations causes lower risks of all-cause mortality and progression to severe COVID-19 for hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 patients.

Effectiveness of Molnupiravir and Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir in CKD Patients With COVID-19

Introduction

Even with effective vaccines, patients with CKD have a higher risk of hospitalization and death subsequent to COVID-19 infection than those without CKD. Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir have been approved for emergency use, but their effectiveness for the CKD population is still unknown. This study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of these drugs in reducing mortality and severe COVID-19 in the CKD population.

Methods

This was a target trial emulation study using electronic health databases in Hong Kong. Patients with CKD aged 18 years or older who were hospitalized with COVID-19 were included. The per-protocol average treatment effect among COVID-19 oral antiviral initiators, including all-cause mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and ventilatory support within 28 days, were compared to noninitiators.

Results

Antivirals have been found to lower the risk of all-cause mortality, with Molnupiravir at a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 0.95] and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir at an HR of 0.78 [95% CI, 0.60 to 1.00]. However, they do not significantly reduce the risk of ICU admission (molnupiravir: HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.30]; nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.56 to 1.32]) or ventilatory support (molnupiravir: HR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.76 to 1.33]; nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: HR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.74 to 1.37]). There was a greater risk reduction in males and those with higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). The nirmatrelvir-ritonavir trial also showed reduced risk for those who had antiviral treatment and received 3 or more vaccine doses.

Conclusion

Both molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir reduced mortality rates for hospitalized COVID-19 patients with CKD.

Safety of RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase Inhibitors, Molnupiravir and VV116, for Oral Treatment of COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis

Background

The RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) inhibitors, molnupiravir and VV116, have the potential to maximize clinical benefits in the oral treatment of COVID-19. Subjects who consume these drugs may experience an increased incidence of adverse events. This study aimed to evaluate the safety profile of molnupiravir and VV116.

Methods

A comprehensive search of scientific and medical databases, such as PubMed Central/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, was conducted to find relevant articles in English from January 2020 to June 2023. Any kind of adverse events reported in the study were pooled and analyzed in the drug group versus the control group. Estimates of risk effects were summarized through the random effects model using Review Manager version 5.2, and sensitivity analysis was performed by Stata 17.0 software.

Results

Fifteen studies involving 32,796 subjects were included. Eleven studies were placebo-controlled, and four were Paxlovid-controlled. Twelve studies reported adverse events for molnupiravir, and three studies described adverse events for VV116. The total odds ratio (OR) for adverse events in the RdRp inhibitor versus the placebo-controlled group was 1.01 (95% CI=0.84-1.22; I2=26%), P=0.88. The total OR for adverse events in the RdRp inhibitor versus the Paxlovid-controlled group was 0.32 (95% CI=0.16-0.65; I2=87%), P=0.002. Individual drug subgroup analysis in the placebo-controlled study showed that compared with the placebo group, a total OR for adverse events was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.85-1.10; I2=0%) in the molnupiravir group and 3.77 (95% CI=0.08-175.77; I2=85%) in the VV116 group.

Conclusion

The RdRp inhibitors molnupiravir and VV116 are safe for oral treatment of COVID-19. Further evidence is necessary that RdRp inhibitors have a higher safety profile than Paxlovid.

Virology and safety profile of Molnupiravir at three different doses for treatment of SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Molnupiravir is incorporated into the viral genome, thereby increasing errors, mismatching, and misdirecting the viral polymerase thereby, halting viral RNA replication of SARS-CoV-2. Following PRISMA guidelines, a thorough literature search was performed on electronic and medical databases from December 2022 till January 2023. Molnupiravir 800 mg showed significance in creating viral RNA error rate at Day 5 (WMD: 4.91; 95% CI; [1.19, 8.63] p = 0.01; I2  = 0%). Similarly, at 400 mg, Molnupiravir creates an RNA error rate (WMD: 2.27; 95% CI; 2.27 [0.50, 4.65] p = 0.02; I2  = 0%). Furthermore, exhibit a significant outcome for mean change in SARS-CoV-2 RNA viral load from baseline in nasopharyngeal sample at 800 mg Molnupiravir on Day 3 (WMD: -0.22; 95% CI; [-0.35, -0.08] p = 0.002; I2  = 0%), Day 5 (WMD: -0.32; 95% CI; [-0.53, -0.11] p = 0.003; I2  = 24%) and overall pooled analysis (WMD: -0.17; 95% CI; [-0.29, 0.33] p = 0.003; I2  = 32%). Moreover, Molnupiravir 400 mg significantly reduced the incidence of death compared to the placebo group (RR: 0.17; 95% CI; [0.07, 0.43] p = 0.0002; I2  = 0%). Molnupiravir effectively treats SARS-CoV-2 patients by eliminating the virus from the host.

Determining and Comparing the Real-World Effectiveness of Molnupiravir and Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend using nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment, but its potential drug interactions and contraindications limit its applicability in certain categories of patients. The aim of the study was to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in managing COVID-19 among hospitalized patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study among hospitalized COVID-19 patients who received molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and did not require baseline supplemental oxygen from February 2022 to January 2023. We compared the effectiveness of molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir with a focus on disease progression.

RESULTS

The study included 401 high-risk, hospitalized adult COVID-19 patients who received molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir. No significant difference was found in disease progression, the composite outcome of disease progression (4.0% vs. 1.4%, P = 0.782), and O2 supplementation via nasal prong (21.8% vs. 14.8%, P = 0.115) between the patients treated with molnupiravir and those treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir. This finding was similar after 1:1 propensity-score matching. In the multivariate analysis, molnupiravir treatment was not significantly associated with progression to severe disease.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our findings suggest that similar to nirmatrelvir-ritonavir, molnupiravir has a distinct potential role in COVID-19 treatment, transcending its current perceived status as only a secondary option.

Uridine-cytidine kinase 2 potentiates the mutagenic influence of the antiviral β-d-N4-hydroxycytidine

Molnupiravir (EIDD-2801) is an antiviral that received approval for the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) infection. Treatment of bacteria or cell lines with the active form of molnupiravir, β-d-N4-hydroxycytidine (NHC, or EIDD-1931), induces mutations in DNA. Yet these results contrast in vivo genotoxicity studies conducted during registration of the drug. Using a CRISPR screen, we found that inactivating the pyrimidine salvage pathway component uridine-cytidine kinase 2 (Uck2) renders cells more tolerant of NHC. Short-term exposure to NHC increased the mutation rate in a mouse myeloid cell line, with most mutations being T:A to C:G transitions. Inactivating Uck2 impaired the mutagenic activity of NHC, whereas over-expression of Uck2 enhanced mutagenesis. UCK2 is upregulated in many cancers and cell lines. Our results suggest differences in ribonucleoside metabolism contribute to the variable mutagenicity of NHC observed in cancer cell lines and primary tissues.

Virologic Outcomes with Molnupiravir in Non-hospitalized Adult Patients with COVID-19 from the Randomized, Placebo-Controlled MOVe-OUT Trial

INTRODUCTION

The randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind MOVe-OUT trial demonstrated molnupiravir (800 mg every 12 h for 5 days) as safe and effective for outpatient treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19, significantly reducing the risk of hospitalization/death in high-risk adults. At the time of that report, virologic assessments from the trial were partially incomplete as a result of their time-intensive nature. Here we present final results from all prespecified virology endpoints in MOVe-OUT based on the full trial dataset.

METHODS

Nasopharyngeal swabs were collected at baseline (day 1, prior to first dose) and days 3, 5 (end-of-treatment visit), 10, 15, and 29. From these samples, change from baseline in SARS-CoV-2 RNA titers (determined by quantitative PCR), detection of infectious SARS-CoV-2 (by plaque assay), and SARS-CoV-2 viral error induction (determined by whole genome next-generation sequencing) were assessed as exploratory endpoints.

RESULTS

Molnupiravir was associated with greater mean reductions from baseline in SARS-CoV-2 RNA than placebo (including 50% relative reduction at end-of-treatment) through day 10. Among participants with infectious virus detected at baseline (n = 96 molnupiravir, n = 97 placebo) and evaluable post-baseline samples, no molnupiravir-treated participant had infectious SARS-CoV-2 by day 3, whereas infectious virus was recovered from 21% of placebo-arm participants on day 3 and 2% at end-of-treatment. Consistent with molnupiravir's mechanism of action, sequence analysis demonstrated that molnupiravir was associated with an increased number of low-frequency transition errors randomly distributed across the SARS-CoV-2 RNA genome compared with placebo (median 143.5 molnupiravir, 15 placebo), while transversion errors were infrequent overall (median 2 in both arms). Outcomes were consistent regardless of baseline SARS-CoV-2 clade, presence of SARS-CoV-2-specific immune response, or viral load.

CONCLUSIONS

A 5-day course of orally administered molnupiravir demonstrated a consistently greater virologic effect than placebo, including rapidly eliminating infectious SARS-CoV-2, in high-risk outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04575597.

Neurological side effects and drug interactions of antiviral compounds against SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2), rapidly spread across the globe. Tremendous efforts have been mobilized to create effective antiviral treatment options to reduce the burden of the disease. This article summarizes the available knowledge about the antiviral drugs against SARS-CoV-2 from a neurologist's perspective.

METHODS

We summarize neurological aspects of antiviral compounds against SARS-CoV-2 with full, conditional, or previous marketing authorization by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

RESULTS

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir targets the SARS-CoV-2 3c-like protease using combinatorial chemistry. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir levels are affected by medications metabolized by or inducing CYP3A4, including those used in neurological diseases. Dysgeusia with a bitter or metallic taste is a common side effect of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Molnupiravir is a nucleotide analog developed to inhibit the replication of viruses. No clinically significant interactions with other drugs have been identified, and no specific considerations for people with neurological comorbidity are required. In the meantime, inconsistent results from clinical trials regarding efficacy have led to the withdrawal of marketing authorization by the EMA. Remdesivir is a viral RNA polymerase inhibitor and interferes with the production of viral RNA. The most common side effect in patients with COVID-19 is nausea. Remdesivir is a substrate for CYP3A4.

CONCLUSIONS

Neurological side effects and drug interactions must be considered for antiviral compounds against SARS-CoV-2. Further studies are required to better evaluate their efficacy and adverse events in patients with concomitant neurological diseases. Moreover, evidence from real-world studies will complement the current knowledge.

Population pharmacokinetics of molnupiravir in adults with COVID-19: Lack of clinically important exposure variation across individuals

Effective antiviral treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are needed to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, particularly in patients with risk factors for severe disease. Molnupiravir (MK-4482, EIDD-2801) is an orally administered, ribonucleoside prodrug of β-D-N4-hydroxycytidine (NHC) with submicromolar potency against SARS-CoV-2. A population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) analysis for molnupiravir exposure was conducted using 4202 NHC plasma concentrations collected in 1207 individuals from a phase I trial in healthy participants, a phase IIa trial in non-hospitalized participants with COVID-19, a phase II trial in hospitalized participants with COVID-19, and a phase II/III trial in non-hospitalized participants with COVID-19. Molnupiravir pharmacokinetics (PK) was best described by a two-compartment model with a transit-compartment absorption model and linear elimination. Molnupiravir apparent elimination clearance increased with body weight less-than-proportionally (power 0.412) and was estimated as 70.6 L/h in 80-kg individuals with a moderate interindividual variability (43.4% coefficient of variation). Additionally, effects of sex and body mass index on apparent central volume and food status and formulation on the absorption mean transit time were identified as statistically significant descriptors of variability in these PK parameters. However, none of the identified covariate effects caused clinically relevant changes in the area under the NHC concentration versus time curve between doses, the exposure metric most closely related to clinical response. Overall, the PopPK model indicates that molnupiravir can be administered in adults without dose adjustment based on age, sex, body size, food, and mild-to-moderate renal or mild hepatic impairment.

Sustainable Stability-Indicating spectra manipulations for the concurrent quantification of a novel Anti-COVID-19 drug and its active Metabolite: Green profile assessment

Millions of individuals have lost their lives and changed their routines as a direct consequence of exposure to the coronavirus (Covid-19). Molnupiravir (MOL) is an orally bioavailable tiny molecule antiviral prodrug that is effective for curing the coronavirus that produces serious acute respiratory disorder (SARS-CoV-2). Fully green-assessed stability-indicating simple spectrophotometric methods have been developed and fully validated as per ICH criteria. The potential impact of degradation products of drug components on the safety and efficacy of a medication's shelf life is likely to be negligible. The field of pharmaceutical analysis necessitates various stability testing under different conditions. The conduct of such inquiries affords the prospect of predicting the most probable routes of degradation and ascertaining the inherent stability characteristics of the active drugs. Consequently, a surge in demand arose for the creation of an analytical methodology that could consistently measure the degradation products and/or impurities that may be present in pharmaceuticals. Herein, five smart and simple spectrophotometric data manipulation techniques have been produced for the concurrent estimation of MOL and its active metabolite as its possible acid degradation product namely; N-hydroxycytidine (NHC). Structure confirmation of NHC build-up through IR, MS and NMR analyses. All current techniques verified linearity ranging from 10 to 150 μg/ml and 10-60 μg/ml for MOL and NHC, respectively. The limit of quantitation (LOQ) values were in the range of 4.21-9.59 μg/ml, while the limit of detection (LOD) values were ranging from 1.38 - 3.16 μg/ml. The current methods were evaluated in terms of greenness by four assessing methods and confirmed to be green. The significant novelty of these methods depends on their being the first environmentally soundness stability-indicating spectrophotometric approaches for the concurrent estimation of MOL and its active metabolite, NHC. Also, the preparation of purified NHC delivers significant cost savings, instead of purchasing an expensive ingredient. These smart methods were utilized for analyzing the pharmaceutical dosage form which may be of great benefit to the pharmaceutical market.

Oral delivery of a host-directed antiviral, niclosamide, as a cholate-coated nanoformulation

Potentially significant drug candidates often face elimination from consideration due to the lack of an effective method for systemic delivery. The poor solubility of these candidates has posed a major obstacle for their development as oral pills or injectables. Niclosamide, a host-directed antiviral, is a good example. In this study, a nanoformulation technology that allows for the non-covalent formulation of niclosamide with cholic acids was developed. This formulation enables efficient systemic delivery through endocytosis and enterohepatic circulation of bile-acid-coated nanoparticles. The oral bioavailability of niclosamide-delivery nanoparticles (NDNs) was significantly enhanced to 38.3%, representing an eight-fold increase compared with pure niclosamide. Consequently, the plasma concentration of niclosamide for the NDN formulation reached 1179.6 ng/mL, which is 11 times higher than the therapeutic plasma level. This substantial increase in plasma level contributed to the complete resolution of clinical symptoms in animals infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). This nanoformulation not only provides an orally deliverable antiviral drug for SARS-CoV-2 with improved pharmaceutical bioavailability, but also offers a solution to the systemic delivery challenges faced by potentially significant drug candidates.

Can Nitazoxanide and/or other anti-viral medications be a solution to long COVID? Case report with a brief literature review

Key Clinical Message

Findings here imply lingering of virus, SARS-CoV-2, in the body for months. Thus, Nitazoxanide and/or other anti-viral medications might be potential options to combat long COVID. This could transform treatment for long COVID patients globally.

Abstract

Long COVID or post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) continues to affect many people even after a relatively mild acute illness. Underlying causes of PASC are poorly understood. There is no particular treatment or management program developed yet. Thus, the possibility of well-known, safe anti-viral medications use against PASC is proposed here.

Oral Molnupiravir and Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir for the Treatment of COVID-19: A Literature Review with a Focus on Real-World Evidence

Vaccines remain the cornerstone of medical prevention and are highly effective in reducing the risk of severe disease and death due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In the context of expanding the therapeutic armamentarium against COVID-19, molnupiravir (Lagevrio) and ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir (Paxlovid) were developed, constituting the first effective oral treatments against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this narrative review, we retrospectively inquired into the clinical trials and real-world studies investigating the efficacy of these agents. Overall, clinical trials and real-world studies have demonstrated the efficacy of both agents in reducing hospitalization and death rates in COVID-19 patients. As per current recommendations, their use is suggested in patients with mild to moderate symptoms who are at high risk of developing severe disease. Nevertheless, limited data exist regarding their efficacy in specific subpopulations, such as immunocompromised patients, those with severe kidney disease, pregnant women, and children.

Effectiveness of molnupiravir vs nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in non-hospitalised and hospitalised patients with COVID-19: a target trial emulation study

Background

Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir have emerged as promising options for COVID-19 treatment, but direct comparisons of their effectiveness have been limited. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of these two oral antiviral drugs in non-hospitalised and hospitalised patients with COVID-19.

Methods

In this target trial emulation study, we used data from a territory-wide electronic health records database on eligible patients aged ≥18 years infected with COVID-19 who were prescribed either molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir within five days of infection between 16 March 2022 and 31 December 2022 in the non-hospitalised and hospitalised settings in Hong Kong. A sequence trial approach and 1:1 propensity score matching was applied based on age, sex, number of COVID-19 vaccine doses received, Charlson comorbidity index, comorbidities, and drug use within past 90 days. Cox regression adjusted with patients' characteristics was used to compare the risk of effectiveness outcomes (all-cause mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission or ventilatory support and hospitalisation) between groups. Subgroup analyses included age (<70; ≥70 years); sex, Charlson comorbidity index (<4; ≥4), and number of COVID-19 vaccine doses received (0-1; ≥2 doses).

Findings

A total of 63,522 non-hospitalised (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 31,761; molnupiravir: 31,761) and 11,784 hospitalised (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 5892; molnupiravir: 5892) patients were included. In non-hospitalised setting, 336 events of all-cause mortality (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 71, 0.22%; molnupiravir: 265, 0.83%), 162 events of ICU admission or ventilatory support (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 71, 0.22%; molnupiravir: 91, 0.29%), and 4890 events of hospitalisation (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 1853, 5.83%; molnupiravir: 3037, 9.56%) were observed. Lower risks of all-cause mortality (absolute risk reduction (ARR) at 28 days: 0.61%, 95% CI: 0.50-0.72; HR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.33-0.56) and hospital admission (ARR at 28 days: 3.73%, 95% CI: 3.31-4.14; HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.67-0.76) were observed in nirmatrelvir-ritonavir users compared to molnupiravir users. In hospitalised setting, 509 events of all-cause mortality (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 176, 2.99%; molnupiravir: 333, 5.65%), and 50 events of ICU admission or ventilatory support (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 26, 0.44%; molnupiravir: 24, 0.41%) were observed. Risk of all-cause mortality was lower for nirmatrelvir-ritonavir users than for molnupiravir users (ARR at 28 days: 2.66%, 95% CI: 1.93-3.40; HR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.49-0.71). In both settings, there was no difference in the risk of intensive care unit admission or ventilatory support between groups. The findings were consistent across all subgroup's analyses.

Interpretation

Our analyses suggest that nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was more effective than molnupiravir in reducing the risk of all-cause mortality in both non-hospitalised and hospitalised patients. When neither drug is contraindicated, nirmatrelvir-ritonavir may be considered the more effective option.

Funding

HMRF Research on COVID-19, The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government; Collaborative Research Fund, University Grants Committee, the HKSAR Government; and Research Grant from the Food and Health Bureau, the HKSAR Government; the Laboratory of Data Discovery for Health (D24H) funded by the AIR@InnoHK administered by Innovation and Technology Commission.

Key Considerations during the Transition from the Acute Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Narrative Review

The COVID-19 pandemic has been met with an unprecedented response from the scientific community, leading to the development, investigation, and authorization of vaccines and antivirals, ultimately reducing the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on global public health. However, SARS-CoV-2 is far from being eradicated, continues to evolve, and causes substantial health and economic burdens. In this narrative review, we posit essential points on SARS-CoV-2 and its responsible management during the transition from the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. As discussed, despite Omicron (sub)variant(s) causing clinically milder infections, SARS-CoV-2 is far from being a negligible pathogen. It requires continued genomic surveillance, particularly if one considers that its future (sub)lineages do not necessarily have to be milder. Antivirals and vaccines remain the essential elements in COVID-19 management. However, the former could benefit from further development and improvements in dosing, while the seasonal administration of the latter requires simplification to increase interest and tackle vaccine hesitancy. It is also essential to ensure the accessibility of COVID-19 pharmaceuticals and vaccines in low-income countries and improve the understanding of their use in the context of the long-term goals of SARS-CoV-2 management. Regardless of location, the primary role of COVID-19 awareness and education must be played by healthcare workers, who directly communicate with patients and serve as role models for healthy behaviors.

Molnupiravir: an antiviral drug against COVID-19

SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, has caused numerous deaths worldwide and poses significant challenges. Researchers have recently studied a new antiviral drug called molnupiravir for treating COVID-19. This review examines the causes and immunopathogenesis of COVID-19, as well as the role of molnupiravir in its treatment. Molnupiravir is a prodrug of β-D-N4-hydroxyctytidine (NHC) and has demonstrated activity against various viruses, including MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV, SARS-CoV-2, and influenza virus. The active form of molnupiravir, NHC triphosphate, acts as a nucleoside analog that disrupts viral replication by causing mutations in the viral RNA, thereby inhibiting viral growth. This review summarizes the results of multiple clinical trials that have evaluated the effectiveness of molnupiravir against SARS-CoV-2 and its variants. Animal studies have also shown that molnupiravir significantly reduces the viral load and prevents transmission to other animals. Overall, molnupiravir has demonstrated strong efficacy and reasonable safety, reducing hospitalization rates by nearly 50% among COVID-19-positive individuals at risk of complications. Patients in clinical settings have tolerated molnupiravir well and experienced positive outcomes, such as clearance of viral RNA, decreased viral load, and reduced hospitalization rates. Additionally, compared to a placebo, molnupiravir has been associated with lower mortality rates. Therefore, molnupiravir can be a beneficial drug to treat patients suffering from SARS-CoV-2, and further studies can provide more information about its safety and efficacy.

Animal efficacy study of a plant extract complex (BEN815) as a potential treatment for COVID-19

In a short time, several types of injectable and oral therapeutics have been developed and used to effectively manage patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). BEN815 is an improved mixture of three extracts (Psidium guajava, Camellia sinensis, and Rosa hybrida) recognized by the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety of Korea as a health food ingredient that alleviates allergic rhinitis. The current animal efficacy study was performed to assess its probability of improving COVID-19 symptoms. BEN815 treatment significantly increased the survival of K18-hACE2 transgenic mice and reduced viral titers in the lungs at 5 days post infection (DPI). Furthermore, the lungs of the treated mice showed mild tissue damage at 5 DPI and nearly complete recovery from COVID-19 at 14 DPI. BEN815 appears to be an effective and minimally toxic anti-SARS-CoV-2 agent in mice and has potential for clinical applications.

Molnupiravir for the treatment of non-severe COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 randomized trials with 34 570 patients

BACKGROUND

Molnupiravir has been considered a promising candidate for COVID-19. Its efficacy and safety in non-severe COVID-19 patients and the differences between patients with different risk factors need further evaluation.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that allocated adult patients with non-severe COVID-19 to molnupiravir or a control. We used random-effects models, and conducted subgroup analyses and meta-regression for COVID-19 patients with high-risk factors. The GRADE approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Fourteen trials with 34 570 patients were included. Moderate- to low-certainty evidence showed that molnupiravir was associated with a reduction in the risk of hospitalization (relative risk [RR] = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.47-0.85), risk of mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.19-0.72) and time to symptom resolution (mean differences [MD] = -2.91 days, 95% CI: -3.66 to -2.16). However, no significant differences were found in adverse events, all-cause mortality, rate of and time to viral clearance, or duration of hospitalization. For the rate of viral clearance, subgroup effects were found between trials with low and high risk of bias (P = 0.001) and between trials with male or female majority (P < 0.001). For admission to hospital, subgroup effects were also found between trials with ≥50% and <50% of the participants being female (P = 0.04). Meta-regression showed a significant association between higher trial mean age and elevated risk of hospitalization (P = 0.011), and female majority and elevated risk of hospitalization (P = 0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

Molnupiravir was found to be effective in non-severe COVID-19, but the efficacy varied with age and sex.

Efficacy and safety of SIM0417 (SSD8432) plus ritonavir for COVID-19 treatment: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1b trial

Background

SIM0417 (SSD8432) is an orally administered coronavirus main proteinase (3CL^pro) inhibitor with potential anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SIM0417 plus ritonavir (a pharmacokinetic enhancer) in adults with COVID-19.

Methods

This was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1b study in China. Adults with asymptomatic infection, mild or moderate COVID-19 were randomly assigned (3:3:2) to receive either 750 mg SIM0417 plus 100 mg ritonavir, 300 mg SIM0417 plus 100 mg ritonavir or placebo every 12 h for 10 doses. The main efficacy endpoints included SARS-CoV-2 viral load, proportion of participants with positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test and time to alleviation of COVID-19 symptoms. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05369676.

Findings

Between May 12 and August 29, 2022, 32 participants were enrolled and randomised to high dose group (n = 12), low dose group (n = 12) or placebo (n = 8). The viral load change from baseline in high dose group was statistically lower compared with placebo, with a maximum mean difference of -2.16 ± 0.761 log₁₀ copies/mL (p = 0.0124) on Day 4. The proportion of positive SARS-CoV-2 in both active groups were lower than the placebo. The median time to sustained alleviation of COVID-19 symptoms was 2.0 days in high dose group versus 6.0 days in the placebo group (HR = 3.08, 95% CI 0.968-9.818). SIM0417 plus ritonavir were well tolerated with all adverse events in grade 1.

Interpretation

SIM0417 plus ritonavir was generally well tolerated. The efficacy of SIM0417 showed a monotonic dose-response relationship, and the 750 mg SIM0417 plus 100 mg ritonavir was selected as the recommended clinical dose.

Funding

The study was funded by Jiangsu Simcere Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.

Aprotinin-Drug against Respiratory Diseases

Aprotinin (APR) was discovered in 1930. APR is an effective pan-protease inhibitor, a typical "magic shotgun". Until 2007, APR was widely used as an antithrombotic and anti-inflammatory drug in cardiac and noncardiac surgeries for reduction of bleeding and thus limiting the need for blood transfusion. The ability of APR to inhibit proteolytic activation of some viruses leads to its use as an antiviral drug for the prevention and treatment of acute respiratory virus infections. However, due to incompetent interpretation of several clinical trials followed by incredible controversy in the literature, the usage of APR was nearly stopped for a decade worldwide. In 2015-2020, after re-analysis of these clinical trials' data the restrictions in APR usage were lifted worldwide. This review discusses antiviral mechanisms of APR action and summarizes current knowledge and prospective regarding the use of APR treatment for diseases caused by RNA-containing viruses, including influenza and SARS-CoV-2 viruses, or as a part of combination antiviral treatment.

Antiviral Treatment of Coronavirus Disease-2019 Pneumonia

Direct acting antivirals and monoclonal antibodies reduce morbidity and mortality associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. Persons at higher risk for disease progression and hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) benefit most from available therapies. Following an emphasis on inpatient treatment of COVID-19 during the early pandemic, several therapeutic options were developed for outpatients with COVID-19. Additional clinical trials and real-world studies are needed to keep pace with the evolving pandemic.

Combination Therapy with UV-4B and Molnupiravir Enhances SARS-CoV-2 Suppression

The host targeting antiviral, UV-4B, and the RNA polymerase inhibitor, molnupiravir, are two orally available, broad-spectrum antivirals that have demonstrated potent activity against SARS-CoV-2 as monotherapy. In this work, we evaluated the effectiveness of UV-4B and EIDD-1931 (molnupiravir's main circulating metabolite) combination regimens against the SARS-CoV-2 beta, delta, and omicron BA.2 variants in a human lung cell line. Infected ACE2 transfected A549 (ACE2-A549) cells were treated with UV-4B and EIDD-1931 both as monotherapy and in combination. Viral supernatant was sampled on day three when viral titers peaked in the no-treatment control arm, and levels of infectious virus were measured by plaque assay. The drug-drug effect interaction between UV-4B and EIDD-1931 was also defined using the Greco Universal Response Surface Approach (URSA) model. Antiviral evaluations demonstrated that treatment with UV-4B plus EIDD-1931 enhanced antiviral activity against all three variants relative to monotherapy. These results were in accordance with those obtained from the Greco model, as these identified the interaction between UV-4B and EIDD-1931 as additive against the beta and omicron variants and synergistic against the delta variant. Our findings highlight the anti-SARS-CoV-2 potential of UV-4B and EIDD-1931 combination regimens, and present combination therapy as a promising therapeutic strategy against SARS-CoV-2.

Drug treatment of COVID-19 infection

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

COVID-19 pandemic has caused more than 6.6 million deaths globally. Tremendous efforts have been committed for the development of new and repurposed drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. Although different international and national guidelines share consensus in the management of COVID-19 disease with different levels of severity, new challenges have emerged, steering the need for ongoing research in advancing the clinical management of COVID-19.

RECENT FINDINGS

This review focuses on recent data from randomized trials and postmarketing real-world evidence for the treatment of mild to moderate disease in the outpatient setting and patients hospitalized for COVID-19 with varying level of severity. Relevant data for treatment of the latest omicron sub-variants in people who received vaccination are presented. Challenges in special populations, including immunocompromised hosts, patients with renal failure and pregnant women, are also discussed.

SUMMARY

Treatment of COVID-19 should be personalized according to host characteristics, degree of severity and available treatment options.

Efficacy of Molnupiravir for the Treatment of Mild or Moderate COVID-19 in Adults: A Meta-Analysis

The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy of molnupiravir among mild or moderate COVID-19 patients. This meta-analysis was reported according to the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Two authors independently performed a comprehensive search for relevant studies in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The keywords used to search for relevant records were "Molnupiravir," "COVID-19," and "efficacy." This meta-analysis included studies that compared the effectiveness of molnupiravir with a placebo for COVID-19 treatment. The primary outcome assessed in this meta-analysis was the composite of hospitalization and all-cause mortality (30 days). In addition, we assessed all-cause mortality and hospitalization separately and the number of patients who tested negative for viral RNA on day five. A total of 10 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Among the 10 studies, five were randomized controlled trials and five were observational studies. Based on the results presented in the meta-analysis, it can be concluded that molnupiravir has a significant impact on reducing all-cause mortality and improving the proportion of patients who test negative for viral RNA on day five. The risk of hospitalization and composite outcome was also lower in molnupiravir-treated patients, although the difference was statistically insignificant. The subgroup analysis showed consistent results across all subgroups, indicating that the effect of molnupiravir is consistent regardless of patient characteristics.

Drug Repurposing and Observational Studies: The Case of Antivirals for the Treatment of COVID-19

Remdesivir and molnupiravir were the only 2 repurposed antivirals that were approved for emergency use during the COVID-19 pandemic. Both drugs received their emergency use authorization on the basis of a single industry-funded phase 3 trial, which was launched after evidence of in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2. In contrast, for tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), little in vitro evidence was generated, no randomized trials for early treatment were done, and the drug was not considered for authorization. Yet, by the summer of 2020, observational evidence suggested a substantially lower risk for severe COVID-19 in TDF users compared with nonusers. The decision-making process for the launching of randomized trials for these 3 drugs is reviewed. Observational data in favor of TDF was systematically dismissed, even though no viable alternative explanations were proposed for the lower risk for severe COVID-19 among TDF users. Lessons learned from the TDF example during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic are described, and the use of observational clinical data to guide decisions about the launch of randomized trials during the next public health emergency is proposed. The goal is that gatekeepers of randomized trials make better use of the available observational evidence for the repurposing of drugs without commercial value.

Effectiveness of Molnupiravir and Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 : A Target Trial Emulation Study

BACKGROUND

Whether hospitalized patients benefit from COVID-19 oral antivirals is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the real-world effectiveness of molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 during the Omicron outbreak.

DESIGN

Target trial emulation study.

SETTING

Electronic health databases in Hong Kong.

PARTICIPANTS

The molnupiravir emulated trial included hospitalized patients with COVID-19 aged 18 years or older between 26 February and 18 July 2022 (n = 16 495). The nirmatrelvir-ritonavir emulated trial included hospitalized patients with COVID-19 aged 18 years or older between 16 March and 18 July 2022 (n = 7119).

INTERVENTION

Initiation of molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir within 5 days of hospitalization with COVID-19 versus no initiation of molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir.

MEASUREMENTS

Effectiveness against all-cause mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or use of ventilatory support within 28 days.

RESULTS

The use of oral antivirals in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was associated with a lower risk for all-cause mortality (molnupiravir: hazard ratio [HR], 0.87 [95% CI, 0.81 to 0.93]; nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: HR, 0.77 [CI, 0.66 to 0.90]) but no significant risk reduction in terms of ICU admission (molnupiravir: HR, 1.02 [CI, 0.76 to 1.36]; nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: HR, 1.08 [CI, 0.58 to 2.02]) or the need for ventilatory support (molnupiravir: HR, 1.07 [CI, 0.89 to 1.30]; nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: HR, 1.03 [CI, 0.70 to 1.52]). There was no significant interaction between drug treatment and the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses received, thereby supporting the effectiveness of oral antivirals regardless of vaccination status. No significant interaction between nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment and age, sex, or Charlson Comorbidity Index was observed, whereas molnupiravir tended to be more effective in older people.

LIMITATION

The outcome of ICU admission or need for ventilatory support may not capture all severe COVID-19 cases; unmeasured confounders, such as obesity and health behaviors, may exist.

CONCLUSION

Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir reduced all-cause mortality in both vaccinated and unvaccinated hospitalized patients. No significant reduction in ICU admission or the need for ventilatory support was observed.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Health and Medical Research Fund Research on COVID-19, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region; Research Grants Council, Collaborative Research Fund; and Health Bureau, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Molnupiravir: A Versatile Prodrug against SARS-CoV-2 Variants

The nucleoside analog β-D-N4-hydroxycytidine is the active metabolite of the prodrug molnupiravir and is accepted as an efficient drug against COVID-19. Molnupiravir targets the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) enzyme, which is responsible for replicating the viral genome during the replication process of certain types of viruses. It works by disrupting the normal function of the RdRp enzyme, causing it to make mistakes during the replication of the viral genome. These mistakes can prevent the viral RNA from being transcribed, converted into a complementary DNA template, translated, or converted into a functional protein. By disrupting these crucial steps in the viral replication process, molnupiravir can effectively inhibit the replication of the virus and reduce its ability to cause disease. This review article sheds light on the impact of molnupiravir and its metabolite on SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, such as delta, omicron, and hybrid/recombinant variants. The detailed mechanism and molecular interactions using molecular docking and dynamics have also been covered. The safety and tolerability of molnupiravir in patients with comorbidities have also been emphasized.

Real-World Clinical Outcomes of Molnupiravir for the Treatment of Mild to Moderate COVID-19 in Adult Patients during the Dominance of the Omicron Variant: A Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The therapeutic impact of molnupiravir in the Omicron variant phase is unknown. The goal of the current meta-analysis was to compare the real-world clinical outcomes of molnupiravir for the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 during the dominance of the Omicron variant in adult patients to that of a placebo.

METHODS

To be included, studies had to directly compare the clinical effectiveness of molnupiravir in treating adult COVID-19 patients to that of a placebo. Studies were included based on the following outcomes: all-cause mortality, composite outcome of disease progression, hospitalization rate, and viral load.

RESULTS

The current meta-analysis included six studies that indicated that the risk of mortality was reduced by 34%, and the risk of composite outcome of disease progression was reduced by 37% among patients who received molnupiravir. Molnupiravir was associated with faster reduction in viral loads than the placebo. There was no clinical benefit of reducing all-cause mortality in mild to moderate COVID-19 patients with high COVID-19 vaccination coverage.

CONCLUSION

The clinical effectiveness of molnupiravir was associated with COVID-19 vaccination coverage in COVID-19 patients. There is a lack of detailed data on its effectiveness in vaccinated patients, especially those with low COVID-19 vaccination coverage.

Why Molnupiravir Fails in Hospitalized Patients

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has radically altered daily life. Effective antiviral therapies to combat COVID-19, especially severe disease, remain scarce. Molnupiravir is an antiviral that has shown clinical efficacy against mild-to-moderate COVID-19 but failed to provide benefit to hospitalized patients with severe disease. Here, we explained the mechanism behind the failure of molnupiravir in hospitalized patients and identified alternative dosing strategies that would improve therapeutic outcomes in all patients with COVID-19. We showed that delaying therapy initiation markedly decreased the antiviral effect of molnupiravir, and these results were directly related to intracellular drug triphosphate pools and intracellular viral burden at the start of therapy. The adverse influence of therapeutic delay could be overcome by increasing drug exposure, which increased intracellular molnupiravir triphosphate concentrations that inhibited viral replication. These findings illustrated that molnupiravir must be administered as early as possible following COVID-19 symptom onset to maximize therapeutic efficacy. Higher doses may be effective in patients hospitalized with severe disease, but the safety of high-dose molnupiravir regimens is unknown. Our findings could be extended to design effective regimens with nucleoside analogs for other RNA viruses, especially those with pandemic potential. IMPORTANCE In this study, we showed that early intervention with molnupiravir resulted in a greater antiviral effect, and we explained the mechanism behind this phenomenon. Our results predicted and explained the failure of molnupiravir in hospitalized patients and highlighted the utility of preclinical pharmacodynamic studies to design optimal antiviral regimens for the treatment of viral diseases. This contrasts with the procedure that was implemented early in the pandemic in which clinical studies were conducted in the absence of preclinical experimentation. These findings are significant and demonstrated the importance of experimental approaches in antiviral development for treatments against COVID-19 as well as other viral diseases.

Real-world effectiveness of early molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 without supplemental oxygen requirement on admission during Hong Kong's omicron BA.2 wave: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Data on the effectiveness of oral antivirals in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 are urgently needed. This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the clinical and virological outcomes associated with molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir use in hospitalised patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 during a pandemic wave dominated by the omicron BA.2 subvariant.

METHODS

We analysed data from a territory-wide retrospective cohort of patients in Hong Kong who were hospitalised with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection between Feb 26 and April 26, 2022. Data were extracted from the Hospital Authority, the Department of Health, and the Hong Kong Death Registry. Patients were eligible for inclusion if their admission date was within 3 days before or after confirmation of their COVID-19 diagnosis. Those who were admitted to hospital more than 5 days after symptom onset, were younger than 18 years, had a history of oral antiviral use before admission, required supplemental oxygen on admission, had drug-related contraindications to nirmatrelvir-ritonavir use, or had severe renal or severe liver impairment were excluded. Patients who received the oral antivirals molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir were matched with controls using propensity-score matching in a ratio of 1:1. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality and secondary outcomes included a composite outcome of disease progression (all-cause mortality, initiation of invasive mechanical ventilation [IMV], intensive care unit [ICU] admission, or the need for oxygen therapy) and each of these individual disease progression outcomes, and time to reaching a low viral burden (RT-PCR cycle threshold value ≥30). For each event outcome, crude incidence rates were calculated and hazard ratios (HRs) estimated using Cox regression models.

FINDINGS

We identified 40 776 patients hospitalised with SARS-CoV-2 infection during the study period, with a mean follow-up of 41·3 days (total 925 713 person-days). After exclusions and propensity-score matching, we included 1856 molnupiravir recipients and 1856 matched controls, and 890 nirmatrelvir-ritonavir recipients and 890 matched controls. A lower risk of all-cause mortality was observed in molnupiravir recipients (crude incidence rate per 10 000 person-days 19·98 events [95% CI 16·91-23·45]) versus matched controls (38·07 events [33·85-42·67]; HR 0·48 [95% CI 0·40-0·59], p<0·0001) and in nirmatrelvir-ritonavir recipients (10·28 events [7·03-14·51]) versus matched controls (26·47 events [21·34-32·46]; HR 0·34 [0·23-0·50], p<0·0001). Oral antiviral recipients also had lower risks of the composite disease progression outcome (molnupiravir HR 0·60 [95% CI 0·52-0·69], p<0·0001; nirmatrelvir-ritonavir 0·57 [0·45-0·72], p<0·0001) and need for oxygen therapy (molnupiravir 0·69 [0·57-0·83], p=0·0001; nirmatrelvir-ritonavir 0·73 [0·54-0·97], p=0·032) compared with controls. Time to achieving a low viral burden was significantly shorter among oral antiviral recipients than matched controls (molnupiravir HR 1·38 [95% CI 1·15-1·64], p=0·0005; nirmatrelvir-ritonavir 1·38 [1·07-1·79], p=0·013). Significant differences in initiation of IMV and ICU admission were not found.

INTERPRETATION

During a wave of SARS-CoV-2 omicron BA.2, initiation of novel oral antiviral treatments in hospitalised patients not requiring oxygen therapy on admission showed substantial clinical benefit. Our findings support the early use of oral antivirals in this population of patients.

FUNDING

Health and Medical Research Fund (Health Bureau, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region).

TRANSLATION

For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Nucleoside analogs for management of respiratory virus infections: mechanism of action and clinical efficacy

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the development of nucleoside analogs to treat respiratory virus infections, with remdesivir being the first compound to receive worldwide authorization and three other nucleoside analogs (i.e. favipiravir, molnupiravir, and bemnifosbuvir) in the pipeline. Here, we summarize the current knowledge concerning their clinical efficacy in suppressing the virus and reducing the need for hospitalization or respiratory support. We also mention trials of favipiravir and lumicitabine, for influenza and respiratory syncytial virus, respectively. Besides, we outline how nucleoside analogs interact with the polymerases of respiratory viruses, to cause lethal virus mutagenesis or disturbance of viral RNA synthesis. In this way, we aim to convey the key findings on this rapidly evolving class of respiratory virus medication.

Real-world Evidence of the Effects of Novel Treatments for COVID-19 on Mortality: A Nationwide Comparative Cohort Study of Hospitalized Patients in the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Waves in the Netherlands

Background

Large clinical trials on drugs for hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients have shown significant effects on mortality. There may be a discrepancy with the observed real-world effect. We describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands during 4 pandemic waves and analyze the association of the newly introduced treatments with mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and discharge alive.

Methods

We conducted a nationwide retrospective analysis of hospitalized COVID-19 patients between February 27, 2020, and December 31, 2021. Patients were categorized into waves and into treatment groups (hydroxychloroquine, remdesivir, neutralizing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 monoclonal antibodies, corticosteroids, and interleukin [IL]-6 antagonists). Four types of Cox regression analyses were used: unadjusted, adjusted, propensity matched, and propensity weighted.

Results

Among 5643 patients from 11 hospitals, we observed a changing epidemiology during 4 pandemic waves, with a decrease in median age (67-64 years; P < .001), in in-hospital mortality on the ward (21%-15%; P < .001), and a trend in the ICU (24%-16%; P = .148). In ward patients, hydroxychloroquine was associated with increased mortality (1.54; 95% CI, 1.22-1.96), and remdesivir was associated with a higher rate of discharge alive within 29 days (1.16; 95% CI, 1.03-1.31). Corticosteroids were associated with a decrease in mortality (0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.96); the results of IL-6 antagonists were inconclusive. In patients directly admitted to the ICU, hydroxychloroquine, corticosteroids, and IL-6 antagonists were not associated with decreased mortality.

Conclusions

Both remdesivir and corticosteroids were associated with better outcomes in ward patients with COVID-19. Continuous evaluation of real-world treatment effects is needed.

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 in people with HIV infection

BACKGROUND

Effective, safe, and affordable antivirals are needed for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Several lines of research suggest that tenofovir may be effective against COVID-19, but no large-scale human studies with appropriate adjustment for comorbidities have been conducted.

METHODS

We studied HIV-positive individuals on antiretroviral therapy (ART) in 2020 at 69 HIV clinics in Spain. We collected data on sociodemographics, ART, CD4+ cell count, HIV-RNA viral-load, comorbidities and the following outcomes: laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, COVID-19 hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death. We compared the 48-week risks for individuals receiving tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)/emtricitabine (FTC), tenofovir alafenamide (TAF)/FTC, abacavir (ABC)/lamivudine (3TC), and other regimes. All estimates were adjusted for clinical and sociodemographic characteristics via inverse probability weighting.

RESULTS

Of 51 558 eligible individuals, 39.6% were on TAF/FTC, 11.9% on TDF/FTC, 26.6% on ABC/3TC, 21.8% on other regimes. There were 2402 documented SARS-CoV-2 infections (425 hospitalizations, 45 ICU admissions, 37 deaths). Compared with TAF/FTC, the estimated risk ratios (RR) (95% confidence interval) of hospitalization were 0.66 (0.43, 0.91) for TDF/FTC and 1.29 (1.02, 1.58) for ABC/3TC, the RRs of ICU admission were 0.28 (0.11, 0.90) for TDF/FTC and 1.39 (0.70, 2.80) for ABC/3TC, and the RRs of death were 0.37 (0.23, 1.90) for TDF/FTC and 2.02 (0.88-6.12) for ABC/3TC. The corresponding RRs of hospitalization for TDF/FTC were 0.49 (0.24, 0.81) in individuals ≥50 years and 1.15 (0.59, 1.93) in younger individuals.

DISCUSSION

Compared with other antiretrovirals, TDF/FTC lowers COVID-19 severity among HIV-positive individuals with virological control. This protective effect may be restricted to individuals aged 50 years and older.

Real-world experience with molnupiravir during the period of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant dominance

BACKGROUND

The real-world effectiveness of molnupiravir (MOL) during the dominance of Omicron SARS-CoV-2 lineage is urgently needed since the available data relate to the period of circulation of other viral variants. Therefore, this study assessed the efficacy of MOL in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in a real-world clinical practice during the wave of Omicron infections.

METHODS

Among 11,822 patients hospitalized after 1 March 2020 and included in the SARSTer national database, 590 were treated between 1 January and 30 April 2022, a period of dominance of the Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant. MOL was administered to 203 patients, whereas 387 did not receive any antiviral regimen. Both groups were similar in terms of sex, BMI and age allowing for direct comparisons.

RESULTS

Patients who did not receive antiviral therapy significantly more often required the use of Dexamethasone and Baricitinib. Treatment with MOL resulted in a statistically significant reduction in mortality during the 28-day follow-up (9.9 vs. 16.3%), which was particularly evident in the population of patients over 80 years of age treated in the first 5 days of the disease (14.6 vs. 35.2%). MOL therapy did not affect the frequency of the need for mechanical ventilation, but patients treated with MOL required oxygen supplementation less frequently than those without antivirals (31.7 vs. 49.2%). The time of hospitalization did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of molnupiravir in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 during the dominance of Omicron variant reduced mortality. This effect is particularly evident in patients over 80 years of age.

Real-Life Experience of Molnupiravir in Hospitalized Patients Who Developed SARS-CoV2-Infection: Preliminary Results from CORACLE Registry

Real-life experience of molnupiravir treatment is lacking, especially in people hospitalized for underlying diseases not related to COVID-19. We conducted a retrospective analysis regarding molnupiravir therapy in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted for underlying diseases not associated with COVID-19. Forty-four patients were included. The median age was 79 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 51-93 years), and most males were 57,4%. The median Charlson Comorbidity Index and 4C score were, respectively, 5 (IQR: 3-10) and 9.9 (IQR: 4-12). Moreover, 77.5% of the patients had at least two doses of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, although 10.6% had not received any SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Frequent comorbidities were cardiovascular diseases (68.1%), and diabetes (31.9%), and most admissions were for the acute chronic heart (20.4%) or liver (8.5%) failure. After molnupiravir started, 8 (18.1%) patients developed acute respiratory failure, and five (11.4%) patients died during hospitalisation. Moreover, molnupiravir treatment does not result in a statistically significant change in laboratory markers except for an increase in the monocyte count (p = 0.048, Z = 1.978). Molnupiravir treatment in our analysis was safe and well tolerated. In addition, no patients' characteristics were found significantly related to hospital mortality or an increase in oxygen support. The efficacy of the molecule remains controversial in large clinical studies, and further studies, including larger populations, are required to fill the gap in this issue.

Molnupiravir Outpatient Treatment for Adults with COVID-19 in a Real-World Setting-A Single Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Molnupiravir is approved for the treatment of adult patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. The main goal of the treatment is to reduce hospitalization and mortality rate. This study aimed at the all-cause hospitalization and all-cause death assessment in patients at high risk of severe COVID-19 treated with molnupiravir.

METHODS

This was a prospective, observational single center study. Non-hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 symptoms with the onset of up to 5 days, and at high risk of severe COVID-19 illness received molnupiravir based on attending physician decisions.

RESULTS

In total, 107 patients were enrolled. Adverse events were reported in 28.0% of patients, with nausea and abdominal pain being the most commonly observed. No treatment-emergent AEs resulted in therapy discontinuation. Overall, 15 patients required hospitalization. During the observation, 2.8% (n = 3) of patients subsequently died. All deaths were considered to be related to COVID-19 complications. Age over 65 years, heart failure, and ischemic heart disease showed a significant correlation with the severe course of COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Molnupiravir may be perceived as an alternative treatment for patients with immunosuppression and advanced chronic kidney disease. Nevertheless, further studies are required to conclusively establish a role for molnupiravir in future COVID-19 treatment recommendations.

Neuro-Immune Interactions in Severe COVID-19 Infection

SARS-CoV-2 is a new coronavirus that has affected the world since 2019. Interstitial pneumonia is the most common clinical presentation, but additional symptoms have been reported, including neurological manifestations. Severe forms of infection, especially in elderly patients, present as an excessive inflammatory response called "cytokine storm", which can lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), multiorgan failure and death. Little is known about the relationship between symptoms and clinical outcomes or the characteristics of virus-host interactions. The aim of this narrative review is to highlight possible links between neurological involvement and respiratory damage mediated by pathological inflammatory pathways in SARS-CoV-2 infection. We will focus on neuro-immune interactions and age-related immunity decline and discuss some pathological mechanisms that contribute to negative outcomes in COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, we will describe available therapeutic strategies and their effects on COVID-19 neurological symptoms.

Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir and Molnupiravir in the Treatment of Mild/Moderate COVID-19: Results of a Real-Life Study

Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir were the first available oral antivirals (OAs) active against SARS-CoV-2. Trials evaluating the efficacy of OAs involved patients unvaccinated and infected with variants different from those currently circulating. We conducted a retrospective study on patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection treated with OAs during the omicron surge in Italy in order to provide real-life data on the efficacy and safety of OAs during the omicron surge of the COVID-19 pandemic. Among 257 patients, 56.8% received molnupiravir, while 43.2% received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Patients in the molnupiravir group were older, had a lower body mass index, and had a higher rate of chronic heart disease than those treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Three hospitalizations were recorded in the molnupiravir (2.1%) group and one in the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (0.9%) group. One patient treated with molnupiravir died. The median time to negativity was 8 days in the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir group vs. 10 days in the molnupiravir group, p < 0.01. We recorded 37 ADRs (mainly dysgeusia, diarrhea, and nausea) in 31 individuals (12.1%). Only two patients (0.8%) treated with molnupiravir terminated treatment due to ADRs. In conclusion, in a population of mostly vaccinated patients treated with OAs, we observed a low rate of hospitalization, death, and adverse drug reactions. These rates were lower than those reported in pivotal trials.