Evolving Real-World Effectiveness of Monoclonal Antibodies for Treatment of COVID-19 : A Cohort Study

Impact analysis of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients treated with monoclonal antibodies: A monocentric experience

BACKGROUND

Since the discovery of SARS-CoV-2, no treatment has been able to completely eradicate the virus. The study aimed to evaluate the virological and clinical impact of the vaccination in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients treated with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs).

METHODS

This single-centre, observational, retrospective, real-life study was performed on SARS-CoV-2 symptomatic outpatients and inpatients treated with mAbs from March 2021 to November 2022 includes 726 patients. Each patient received available mAbs (bamlanivimab-etesevimab or casirivimab-indevimab or sotrovimab or tixagevimab-cilgavimab) according to the circulating virus strains. Age, comorbidities, vaccination status, death rates, duration of virological clearance, average length of stay, risk factors, and hospitalization or ICU admission were recorded.

RESULTS

Of 726 patients with complete data analyzed (median age 64), 516 outpatients and 210 inpatients were included. Vaccination status was known for all participants: 74.4 % and 51.7 % were vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 among inpatients and outpatients, respectively. A shorter duration of virological clearance was observed in the vaccinated group, with a median of 16 days (IQR 15-17), compared to 19 days (IQR 18-21) in the unvaccinated group [HR 1.21; p < 0.032]. Multivariate analysis of virological clearance also showed statistical significance with tixagevimab cilgavimab 300 mg/300 mg (HR 2.73, p value < 0.001). No significant difference was found in worsening [OR 1,29; p = 0.57] and mortality [OR 0.65; p = 0.81] rates between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients treated with mAbs.

CONCLUSIONS

Key findings include a shorter duration of virological clearance in vaccinated outpatients but no significant differences in worsening or mortality rates between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients treated with mAbs. The study suggests a potential synergistic role of mAbs in accelerating virological clearance in vaccinated patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, with differing effects in hospitalized patients. Therefore, it is essential to implement health surveillance in high-risk patients with comorbidities in order to identify early any variants that might otherwise escape neutralizing antibodies.

Monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 to prevent COVID-19 worsening in a large multicenter cohort

Objective

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reduced Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalizations in people at risk of clinical worsening. Real-world descriptions are limited.

Methods

CONDIVIDIAMO, a two-year multicenter observational study, consecutively enrolled SARS-CoV-2 outpatients with ≥1 risk factor for COVID-19 progression receiving mAbs. Demographic data, underlying medical condition, type of mAbs combination received, duration of symptoms before mAbs administration, COVID-19 vaccination history, were collected upon enrolment and centrally recorded. Data on outcomes (hospitalizations, reasons of hospitalization, deaths) were prospectively collected. The primary endpoint was the rate of hospitalization or death in a 28-day follow-up, whichever occurred first; subjects were censored at the day of last follow-up or up to 28 days. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the incidence rate curve in time. The Cox regression model was used to assess potential risk factors for unfavorable outcome. Results were shown as hazard ratio (HR) along with the corresponding 95 % Confidence Interval (95%CI).

Results

Among 1534 subjects (median [interquartile range, IQR] age 66.5 [52.4-74.9] years, 693 [45.2 %] women), 632 (41.2 %) received bamlanivimab ± etesevimab, 209 (13.6 %) casirivimab/imdevimab, 586 (38.2 %) sotrovimab, 107 (7.0 %) tixagevimab/cilgavimab. After 28-day follow-up, 87/1534 (5.6 %, 95%CI: 4.4%-6.8 %) met the primary outcome (85 hospitalizations, 2 deaths). Hospitalizations for COVID-19 (52, 3.4 %) occurred earlier than for other reasons (33, 2.1 %), after a median (IQR) of 3.5 (1-7) versus 8 (3-15) days (p = 0.006) from mAbs administration.In a multivariable Cox regression model, factors independently associated with increased hospitalization risk were age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.02, 95%CI 1.00-1.03, p = 0.021), immunodeficiency (HR 1.78, 95%CI 1.11-2.85, p = 0.017), pre-Omicron calendar period (HR 1.66, 95%CI 1.02-2.69, p = 0.041).

Conclusions

MAbs real-world data over a 2-year changing pandemic landscape showed the feasibility of the intervention, although the hospitalization rate was not negligible. Immunosuppressed subjects remain more at risk of clinical worsening.

Vitamin D supplementation and calcium: Many-faced gods or nobody in fighting against Corona Virus Disease 2019

In December 2019, Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first identified and designated as a pandemic in March 2020 due to rapid spread of the virus globally. At the beginning of the pandemic, only a few treatment options, mainly focused on supportive care and repurposing medications, were available. Due to its effects on immune system, vitamin D was a topic of interest during the pandemic, and researchers investigated its potential impact on COVID-19 outcomes. However, the results of studies about the impact of vitamin D on the disease are inconclusive. In the present narrative review, different roles of vitamin D regarding the COVID-19 have been discussed to show that vitamin D supplementation should be recommended carefully.

Comparative analysis of the safety and effectiveness of Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir and Azvudine in older patients with COVID-19: a retrospective study from a tertiary hospital in China

Introduction: Numerous studies have explored the treatment outcomes of Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir and Azvudine in older patients with COVID-19. However, direct comparisons between these two drugs are still relatively limited. This study aims to compare the safety and effectiveness of these two drugs in Chinese older patients with early infection to provide strategies for clinical treatment. Methods: Older COVID-19 patients (age ≥65) hospitalized during the winter 2022 epidemic in China were included and divided into Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir and Azvudine. Demographics, medication information, laboratory parameters, and treatment outcomes were collected. All-cause 28-day mortality, delta cycle threshold (ΔCt), nucleic acid negative conversion time, and incidence of adverse events were defined as outcomes. Propensity score matching (PSM), Kaplan-Meier, Cox proportional hazards model, subgroup analysis, and nomograms were selected to evaluate the outcomes. Results: A total of 1,508 older COVID-19 patients were screened. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 1,075 patients were eligible for the study. After PSM, the final number of older COVID-19 patients included in the study was 375, and there were no significant differences in demographic characteristics between the two groups (p > 0.05). Compared to the Azvudine group, the Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir group showed a higher incidence of multiple adverse events (12.8% vs 5.2%, p = 0.009). The incidence of adverse events related to abnormal renal function was higher in the Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir group compared to the Azvudine group (13.6% vs 7.2%, p = 0.045). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of all-cause 28-day mortality (HR = 1.020, 95% CI: 0.542 - 1.921, p = 0.951), whereas there were significant differences in nucleic acid negative conversion time (HR = 1.659, 95% CI: 1.166 - 2.360, p = 0.005) and ΔCt values (HR = 1.442, 95% CI: 1.084 - 1.918, p = 0.012). Conclusion: Azvudine and Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir have comparable effectiveness in reducing mortality risk. Azvudine may perform better in nucleic acid negative conversion time and virus clearance and shows slightly better safety in older patients. Further studies with a larger sample size were needed to validate the result.

Project NextGen: Developing the Next Generation of COVID-19 Vaccines and Therapeutics to Respond to the Present and Prepare for the Future

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemiology and product landscapes have changed considerably since onset of the pandemic. Safe and effective vaccines and therapeutics are available, but the continual emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variants introduce limitations in our ability to prevent and treat disease. Project NextGen is a collaboration between the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, part of the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response, and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, part of the National Institutes of Health, that is leveraging public-private partnerships to address gaps in the nation's COVID-19 vaccine and therapeutic capabilities. Targeted investments will advance promising next-generation candidates through the most difficult phases of clinical development to encourage further private sector interest for later stage development and commercial availability. New commercial vaccines and therapeutics that are more durable and effective across variants will improve our fight against COVID-19 and transform our response to future threats.

Real-world effectiveness of sotrovimab in preventing hospitalization and mortality in high-risk patients with COVID-19 in the United States: A cohort study from the Mayo Clinic electronic health records

BACKGROUND

To describe outcomes of high-risk patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treated with sotrovimab, other monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), or antivirals, and patients who did not receive early COVID-19 treatment. We also evaluate the comparative effectiveness of sotrovimab versus no treatment in preventing severe clinical outcomes.

METHODS

This observational retrospective cohort study analyzed Mayo Clinic electronic health records. Non-hospitalized adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from May 26, 2021 and April 23, 2022 and at high risk of COVID-19 progression were eligible. The primary outcome was 29-day all-cause hospitalization and/or death. Outcomes were described for patients treated with sotrovimab, other mAbs, or antivirals, and eligible but untreated patients, and compared between sotrovimab-treated and propensity score (PS)-matched untreated cohorts.

RESULTS

We included 35,485 patients (sotrovimab, 1369; other mAbs, 6488; antivirals, 133; high-risk untreated, 27,495). A low proportion of patients treated with sotrovimab (n = 33/1369, 2.4%), other mAbs (n = 147/6488, 2.3%), or antivirals (n = 2/133, 1.5%) experienced all-cause hospitalization or death. Among high-risk untreated patients, the percentage of all-cause hospitalization or death was 3.3% (n = 910/27,495). In the PS-matched analysis, 2.5% (n = 21/854) of sotrovimab-treated patients experienced all-cause hospitalization and/or death versus 2.8% (n = 48/1708) of untreated patients (difference, -0.4%; p = 0.66). Significantly fewer sotrovimab-treated patients required intensive care unit admission (0.5% vs 1.8%; difference, -1.3%; p = 0.002) or respiratory support (3.5% vs 8.7%; difference, -5.2%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in the proportion of sotrovimab-treated and PS-matched untreated patients experiencing 29-day all-cause hospitalization or mortality, although significantly fewer sotrovimab-treated patients required intensive care unit admission or respiratory support.

Antibody drugs targeting SARS-CoV-2: Time for a rethink?

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) heavily burdens human health. Multiple neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) have been issued for emergency use or tested for treating infected patients in the clinic. However, SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC) carrying mutations reduce the effectiveness of nAbs by preventing neutralization. Uncoding the mutation profile and immune evasion mechanism of SARS-CoV-2 can improve the outcome of Ab-mediated therapies. In this review, we first outline the development status of anti-SARS-CoV-2 Ab drugs and provide an overview of SARS-CoV-2 variants and their prevalence. We next focus on the failure causes of anti-SARS-CoV-2 Ab drugs and rethink the design strategy for developing new Ab drugs against COVID-19. This review provides updated information for the development of therapeutic Ab drugs against SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Is LDL cholesterol associated with long-term mortality among primary prevention adults? A retrospective cohort study from a large healthcare system

OBJECTIVES

Among primary prevention-type adults not on lipid-lowering therapy, conflicting results exist on the relationship between low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and long-term mortality. We evaluated this relationship in a real-world evidence population of adults.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Electronic medical record data for adults, from 4 January 2000 through 31 December 2022, were extracted from the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center healthcare system.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults without diabetes aged 50-89 years not on statin therapy at baseline or within 1 year and classified as primary prevention-type patients. To mitigate potential reverse causation, patients who died within 1 year or had baseline total cholesterol (T-C) ≤120 mg/dL or LDL-C <30 mg/dL were excluded.

MAIN EXPOSURE MEASURE

Baseline LDL-C categories of 30-79, 80-99, 100-129, 130-159, 160-189 or ≥190 mg/dL.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

All-cause mortality with follow-up starting 365 days after baseline cholesterol measurement.

RESULTS

177 860 patients with a mean (SD) age of 61.1 (8.8) years and mean (SD) LDL-C of 119 (31) mg/dL were evaluated over a mean of 6.1 years of follow-up. A U-shaped relationship was observed between the six LDL-C categories and mortality with crude 10-year mortality rates of 19.8%, 14.7%, 11.7%, 10.7%, 10.1% and 14.0%, respectively. Adjusted mortality HRs as compared with the referent group of LDL-C 80-99 mg/dL were: 30-79 mg/dL (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.30), 100-129 mg/dL (0.87, 0.83-0.91), 130-159 mg/dL (0.88, 0.84-0.93), 160-189 mg/dL (0.91, 0.84-0.98) and ≥190 mg/dL (1.19, 1.06-1.34), respectively. Unlike LDL-C, both T-C/HDL cholesterol (high-density lipoprotein cholesterol) and triglycerides/HDL cholesterol ratios were independently associated with long-term mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Among primary prevention-type patients aged 50-89 years without diabetes and not on statin therapy, the lowest risk for long-term mortality appears to exist in the wide LDL-C range of 100-189 mg/dL, which is much higher than current recommendations. For counselling these patients, minimal consideration should be given to LDL-C concentration.

A Short Update on the Use of Monoclonal Antibodies in COVID-19

Monoclonal antibodies in the prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19 have been crucial in reducing severe infections when vaccines were unavailable. However, as the virus and its variants have changed over time, the effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies has been questioned. This technical note highlights the need to assess the antiviral activity of these antibodies against new variants and adapt treatment strategies accordingly. On the one hand, in vitro studies have suggested reduced susceptibility of the latest variants to monoclonal antibodies, whereas clinical data still show benefits in reducing severe illness and mortality, indicating that laboratory results do not always mirror real-world outcomes. As a result, although resistance to monoclonal antibodies can develop over time, they could still have an important role in COVID-19 treatment, especially when used in combination, and ongoing research aims to identify effective antibodies against new variants.

Real-World Effectiveness of Sotrovimab for the Early Treatment of COVID-19: Evidence from the US National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been an unprecedented healthcare crisis, one that threatened to overwhelm health systems and prompted an urgent need for early treatment options for patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at high risk for progression to severe disease. Randomised clinical trials established the safety and efficacy of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) early in the pandemic; in vitro data subsequently led to use of the mAbs being discontinued, without clear evidence on how these data were linked to outcomes. In this study, we describe and compare real-world outcomes for patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19 treated with sotrovimab versus untreated patients.

METHODS

Electronic health records from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) were used to identify US patients (aged ≥ 12 years) diagnosed with COVID-19 (positive test or ICD-10: U07.1) in an ambulatory setting (27 September 2021-30 April 2022) who met Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) high-risk criteria. Patients receiving the mAb sotrovimab within 10 days of diagnosis were assigned to the sotrovimab cohort, with the day of infusion as the index date. Untreated patients (no evidence of early mAb treatment, prophylactic mAb or oral antiviral treatment) were assigned to the untreated cohort, with an imputed index date based on the time distribution between diagnosis and sotrovimab infusion in the sotrovimab cohort. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation or death (both all-cause) within 29 days of index, reported as descriptive rate and adjusted [via inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)] odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Of nearly 2.9 million patients diagnosed with COVID-19 during the analysis period, 4992 met the criteria for the sotrovimab cohort, and 541,325 were included in the untreated cohort. Before weighting, significant differences were noted between the cohorts; for example, patients in the sotrovimab cohort were older (60 years versus 54 years), were more likely to be white (85% versus 75%) and met more EUA criteria (mean 3.1 versus 2.2) versus the untreated cohort. The proportions of patients with 29-day hospitalisation or death were 3.5% (176/4992) and 4.5% (24,163/541,325) in the sotrovimab and untreated cohorts, respectively (unadjusted OR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.67, 0.91; p = 0.001). In adjusted analysis, sotrovimab was associated with a 25% reduction in the odds of hospitalisation or death compared with the untreated cohort (IPTW-adjusted OR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.61, 0.92; p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Sotrovimab demonstrated clinical effectiveness in preventing severe outcomes (hospitalisation, mortality) in the period 27 September 2021-30 April 2022, which included Delta and Omicron BA.1 variants and an early surge of Omicron BA.2 variant.

Microfluidic-assisted single-cell RNA sequencing facilitates the development of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2

As a class of antibodies that specifically bind to a virus and block its entry, neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (neutralizing mAbs) have been recognized as a top choice for combating COVID-19 due to their high specificity and efficacy in treating serious infections. Although conventional approaches for neutralizing mAb development have been optimized for decades, there is an urgent need for workflows with higher efficiency due to time-sensitive concerns, including the high mutation rate of SARS-CoV-2. One promising approach is the identification of neutralizing mAb candidates via single-cell RNA sequencing (RNA-seq), as each B cell has a unique transcript sequence corresponding to its secreted antibody. The state-of-the-art high-throughput single-cell sequencing technologies, which have been greatly facilitated by advances in microfluidics, have greatly accelerated the process of neutralizing mAb development. Here, we provide an overview of the general procedures for high-throughput single-cell RNA-seq enabled by breakthroughs in droplet microfluidics, introduce revolutionary approaches that combine single-cell RNA-seq to facilitate the development of neutralizing mAbs against SARS-CoV-2, and outline future steps that need to be taken to further improve development strategies for effective treatments against infectious diseases.

mRNA vaccine boosters and impaired immune system response in immune compromised individuals: a narrative review

Over the last 24 months, there has been growing evidence of a correlation between mRNA COVID-19 vaccine boosters and increased prevalence of COVID-19 infection and other pathologies. Recent works have added possible causation to correlation. mRNA vaccine boosters may impair immune system response in immune compromised individuals. Multiple doses of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines may result in much higher levels of IgG 4 antibodies, or also impaired activation of CD4 + and CD8 + T cells. The opportunity for mRNA vaccine boosters to impair the immune system response needs careful consideration, as this impacts the cost-to-benefit ratio of the boosters' practice.

Leveraging SARS-CoV-2 Main Protease (Mpro) for COVID-19 Mitigation with Selenium-Based Inhibitors

The implementation of innovative approaches is crucial in an ongoing endeavor to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic. The present study examines the strategic application of the SARS-CoV-2 Main Protease (Mpro) as a prospective instrument in the repertoire to combat the virus. The cloning, expression, and purification of Mpro, which plays a critical role in the viral life cycle, through heterologous expression in Escherichia coli in a completely soluble form produced an active enzyme. The hydrolysis of a specific substrate peptide comprising a six-amino-acid sequence (TSAVLQ) linked to a p-nitroaniline (pNA) fragment together with the use of a fluorogenic substrate allowed us to determine effective inhibitors incorporating selenium moieties, such as benzoselenoates and carbamoselenoates. The new inhibitors revealed their potential to proficiently inhibit Mpro with IC50-s in the low micromolar range. Our study contributes to the development of a new class of protease inhibitors targeting Mpro, ultimately strengthening the antiviral arsenal against COVID-19 and possibly, related coronaviruses.

Utilizing targeted integration CHO pools to potentially accelerate the GMP manufacturing of monoclonal and bispecific antibodies

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are effective therapeutic agents against many acute infectious diseases including COVID-19, Ebola, RSV, Clostridium difficile, and Anthrax. mAbs can therefore help combat a future pandemic. Unfortunately, mAb development typically takes years, limiting its potential to save lives during a pandemic. Therefore "pandemic mAb" timelines need to be shortened. One acceleration tool is "deferred cloning" and leverages new Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) technology based on targeted gene integration (TI). CHO pools, instead of CHO clones, can be used for Phase I/II clinical material production. A final CHO clone (producing the mAb with a similar product quality profile and preferably with a higher titer) can then be used for Phase III trials and commercial manufacturing. This substitution reduces timelines by ~3 months. We evaluated our novel CHO TI platform to enable deferred cloning. We created four unique CHO pools expressing three unique mAbs (mAb1, mAb2, and mAb3), and a bispecific mAb (BsAb1). We then performed single-cell cloning for mAb1 and mAb2, identifying three high-expressing clones from each pool. CHO pools and clones were inoculated side-by-side in ambr15 bioreactors. CHO pools yielded mAb titers as high as 10.4 g/L (mAb3) and 7.1 g/L (BsAb1). Subcloning yielded CHO clones expressing higher titers relative to the CHO pools while yielding similar product quality profiles. Finally, we showed that CHO TI pools were stable by performing a 3-month cell aging study. In summary, our CHO TI platform can increase the speed to clinic for a future "pandemic mAb."

Safety and efficacy of inhaled IBIO123 for mild-to-moderate COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, dose-ascending, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2 trial

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 severity is associated with its respiratory manifestations. Neutralising antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 administered systemically have shown clinical efficacy. However, immediate and direct delivery of neutralising antibodies via inhalation might provide additional respiratory clinical benefits. IBIO123 is a cocktail of three, fully human, neutralising monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of inhaled IBIO123 in individuals with mild-to-moderate COVID-19.

METHODS

This double-blind, dose-ascending, placebo-controlled, first-in-human, phase 1/2 trial recruited symptomatic and non-hospitalised participants with COVID-19 in South Africa and Brazil across 11 centres. Eligible participants were adult outpatients (aged ≥18 years; men and non-pregnant women) infected with COVID-19 (first PCR-confirmed within 72 h) and with mild-to-moderate symptoms, the onset of which had to be within 10 days of randomisation. Using permuted blocks of four, stratified by site, we randomly assigned participants (1:3) to receive single-dose placebo or IBIO123 (1 mg, 5 mg, or 10 mg) in phase 1, and single-dose placebo or IBIO123 (10 mg) in phase 2, in addition to local standard of care. Participants underwent serological testing to identify antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Participants, investigators, and the study team were masked to treatment assignment. In phase 1, the primary outcome was the safety assessment in the safety population (ie, all participants who received an intervention). In phase 2, the primary outcome was the mean absolute change from baseline to day 5 in SARS-CoV-2 viral load measured by nasopharyngeal swabs analysed using a mixed model for repeated measures in the full analysis set (FAS; ie, participants with one analysable viral load value at baseline and at least one analysable viral load value at day 3 or day 5). Secondary clinical outcomes included safety from baseline to day 29, assessed by evaluating adverse events; the effect of IBIO123 on baseline COVID-19 symptoms resolution until day 6, with symptoms systemically evaluated by the investigators; and disease progression as measured by the COVID-19 WHO Clinical Progression Scale. For clinical endpoints in phase 2, we used a modified FAS (ie, participants who had at least one analysable viral load value over the course of the study, confirming that they were infected with SARS-CoV-2). This trial is now completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05298813.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 4, 2021, and May 23, 2022, 24 participants were enrolled in phase 1. Between July 20, 2022, and Jan 4, 2023, 138 participants were enrolled in phase 2 and five were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. Participants were randomly assigned to receive IBIO123 (n=18) or placebo (n=6) in phase 1, and randomly assigned to receive IBIO123 (n=104) or placebo (n=34) in phase 2. In phase 2, the study was stopped before reaching the planned accrual because of a decline in COVID-19 incidence. In phase 1, no safety issues were observed. In phase 2, the difference in mean absolute change from baseline viral load to day 5 between participants in the IBIO123 group and participants in the placebo group was -0·29 log10 copies per mL (95% CI -1·32 to 0·75; p=0·45) in the FAS population and -0·49 log10 copies per mL (-1·56 to 0·58; p=0·20) in seropositive participants. In the modified FAS, 81 (69%) of 118 participants were at high risk of severe disease progression. The number of participants with resolution of respiratory symptoms at day 6 was 34 (42%) of 81 in the IBIO123 group versus five (17%) of 29 in the placebo group (p=0·017) in the modified FAS population and 19 (35%) of 55 versus three (14%) of 21 among participants at high risk (p=0·083). One participant died and one participant was hospitalised in the placebo group, whereas no deaths or hospitalisations were reported in the IBIO123 group. 39 (38%) of 104 participants in the IBIO123 group had adverse events, compared with 13 (38%) of 34 in the placebo group.

INTERPRETATION

Inhalation of IBIO123 was safe. Despite the lack of significant reduction of viral load at day 5, treatment with IBIO123 resulted in a higher proportion of participants with complete resolution of respiratory symptoms at day 6. This study supports further clinical research on inhaled monoclonal antibodies in COVID-19 and respiratory diseases in general.

FUNDING

Canadian Strategic Innovation Fund and Immune Biosolutions.

Safety and Effectiveness of Regdanvimab for COVID-19 Treatment: A Phase 4 Post-marketing Surveillance Study Conducted in South Korea

INTRODUCTION

Regdanvimab, a neutralising monoclonal antibody (mAb) against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), received approval for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in South Korea in 2021. The Ministry of Food and Drug Safety in South Korea mandate that new medications be re-examined for safety and effectiveness post-approval in at least 3000 individuals. This post-marketing surveillance (PMS) study was used to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of regdanvimab in real-world clinical care.

METHODS

This prospective, multicentre, phase 4 PMS study was conducted between February 2021 and March 2022 in South Korea. Eligible patients were aged ≥ 18 years with confirmed mild COVID-19 at high risk of disease progression or moderate COVID-19. Patients were hospitalised and treated with regdanvimab (40 mg/kg, day 1) and then monitored until discharge, with a follow-up call on day 28. Adverse events (AEs) were documented, and the COVID-19 disease progression rate was used to measure effectiveness.

RESULTS

Of the 3123 patients with COVID-19 infection identified, 3036 were eligible for inclusion. Approximately 80% and 5% of the eligible patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 during the delta- and omicron-dominant periods, respectively. Median (range) age was 57 (18-95) years, and 50.6% of patients were male. COVID-19 severity was assessed before treatment, and high-risk mild and moderate COVID-19 was diagnosed in 1030 (33.9%) and 2006 (66.1%) patients, respectively. AEs and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were experienced by 684 (22.5%) and 363 (12.0%) patients, respectively. The most common ADR was increased liver function test (n = 62, 2.0%). Nine (0.3%) patients discontinued regdanvimab due to ADRs. Overall, 378 (12.5%) patients experienced disease progression after regdanvimab infusion, with extended hospitalisation/re-admission (n = 300, 9.9%) as the most common reason. Supplemental oxygen was required by 282 (9.3%) patients. Ten (0.3%) patients required intensive care monitoring and 3 (0.1%) died due to COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

This large-scale PMS study demonstrated that regdanvimab was effective against COVID-19 progression and had an acceptable safety profile when used in real-world clinical practice.

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.

Monoclonal Antibody and Oral Antiviral Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in US Nursing Homes

This study examines the use of COVID-19 antiviral treatments in US nursing homes and the facility characteristics associated with use of oral antivirals and monoclonal antibodies.

Comparative Analysis of a Human Neutralizing mAb Specific for SARS-CoV-2 Spike-RBD with Cilgavimab and Tixagevimab for the Efficacy on the Omicron Variant in Neutralizing and Detection Assays

The recent pandemic years have prompted the scientific community to increasingly search for and adopt new and more efficient therapeutic and diagnostic approaches to deal with a new infection. In addition to the development of vaccines, which has played a leading role in fighting the pandemic, the development of monoclonal antibodies has also represented a valid approach in the prevention and treatment of many cases of CoronaVirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Recently, we reported the development of a human antibody, named D3, showing neutralizing activity against different SARS-CoV-2 variants, wild-type, UK, Delta and Gamma variants. Here, we have further characterized with different methods D3's ability to bind the Omicron-derived recombinant RBD by comparing it with the antibodies Cilgavimab and Tixagevimab, recently approved for prophylactic use of COVID-19. We demonstrate here that D3 binds to a distinct epitope from that recognized by Cilgavimab and shows a different binding kinetic behavior. Furthermore, we report that the ability of D3 to bind the recombinant Omicron RBD domain in vitro results in a good ability to also neutralize Omicron-pseudotyped virus infection in ACE2-expressing cell cultures. We point out here that D3 mAb maintains a good ability to recognize both the wild-type and Omicron Spike proteins, either when used as recombinant purified proteins or when expressed on pseudoviral particles despite the different variants, making it particularly useful both from a therapeutic and diagnostic point of view. On the basis of these results, we propose to exploit this mAb for combinatorial treatments with other neutralizing mAbs to increase their therapeutic efficacy and for diagnostic use to measure the viral load in biological samples in the current and future pandemic waves of coronaviruses.

Phase II study of bemnifosbuvir in high-risk participants in a hospital setting with moderate COVID-19

Background

Bemnifosbuvir, a novel, oral, nonmutagenic, nonteratogenic nucleotide analogue inhibits SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro.

Materials & methods

Adults in hospital settings with moderate COVID-19 were randomized 1:1 bemnifosbuvir/placebo. Study amended to two parts after interim analysis; part B enrollment limited owing to evolving standard of care.

Results

Although the study ended early and did not meet the primary efficacy end point, bemnifosbuvir was well tolerated and did not contribute to all-cause mortality. Compared with placebo, bemnifosbuvir treatment resulted in 0.61 log10 greater viral load mean change on day 2; trend sustained through day 8. Treatment-emergent adverse events were similar in both groups; most were mild/moderate, unrelated to study drug.

Conclusion

Our results suggest a potential role for bemnifosbuvir in blunting COVID-19 progression.

Clinical Trial Registration

NCT04396106 (ClinicalTrials.gov).