FDA approved drugs with antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2: From structure-based repurposing to host-specific mechanisms.

The continuing heavy toll of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitates development of therapeutic options. We adopted structure-based drug repurposing to screen FDA-approved drugs for inhibitory effects against main protease enzyme (Mpro) substrate-binding pocket of SARS-CoV-2 for non-covalent and covalent binding. Top candidates were screened against infectious SARS-CoV-2 in a cell-based viral replication assay. Promising candidates included atovaquone, mebendazole, ouabain, dronedarone, and entacapone, although atovaquone and mebendazole were the only two candidates with IC50s that fall within their therapeutic plasma concentration. Additionally, we performed Mpro assays on the top hits, which demonstrated inhibition of Mpro by dronedarone (IC50 18 µM), mebendazole (IC50 19 µM) and entacapone (IC50 9 µM). Atovaquone showed only modest Mpro inhibition, and thus we explored other potential mechanisms. Although atovaquone is Dihydroorotate dehydrogenase (DHODH) inhibitor, we did not observe inhibition of DHODH at the respective SARS-CoV-2 IC50. Metabolomic profiling of atovaquone treated cells showed dysregulation of purine metabolism pathway metabolite, where ecto-5'-nucleotidase (NT5E) was downregulated by atovaquone at concentrations equivalent to its antiviral IC50. Atovaquone and mebendazole are promising candidates with SARS-CoV-2 antiviral activity. While mebendazole does appear to target Mpro, atovaquone may inhibit SARS-CoV-2 viral replication by targeting host purine metabolism.

Identification of FDA Approved Drugs with Antiviral Activity against SARS-CoV-2: A Tale from structure-based drug repurposing to host-cell mechanistic investigation

The continuing heavy toll of the COVID-19 pandemic necessitates development of therapeutic options. We adopted structure-based drug repurposing to screen FDA-approved drugs for inhibitory effects against main protease enzyme (Mpro) substrate-binding pocket of SARS-CoV-2 for non-covalent and covalent binding. Top candidates were screened against infectious SARS-CoV-2 in a cell-based viral replication assay. Promising candidates included atovaquone, mebendazole, ouabain, dronedarone, and entacapone, although atovaquone and mebendazole were the only two candidates with IC50s that fall within their therapeutic plasma concentration. Additionally, we performed Mpro assays on the top hits, which demonstrated inhibition of Mpro by dronedarone (IC50 18 µM), mebendazole (IC50 19 µM) and entacapone (IC50 9 µM). Atovaquone showed only modest Mpro inhibition, and thus we explored other potential mechanisms. Although atovaquone is Dihydroorotate dehydrogenase (DHODH) inhibitor, we did not observe inhibition of DHODH at the respective SARS-CoV-2 IC50. Metabolomic profiling of atovaquone treated cells showed dysregulation of purine metabolism pathway metabolite, showing that ecto-5′-nucleotidase (NT5E) is downregulated by atovaquone at concentrations equivalent to its antiviral IC50. Atovaquone and mebendazole are promising candidates targeting SARS-CoV-2, however atovaquone did not significantly inhibit Mpro at therapeutically meaningful concentrations but may inhibit SARS-CoV-2 viral replication by targeting host purine metabolism. Graphical

Atovaquone for treatment of COVID-19: A prospective randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

Background: An in silico screen was performed to identify FDA approved drugs that inhibit SARS-CoV-2 main protease (Mpro), followed by in vitro viral replication assays, and in vivo pharmacokinetic studies in mice. These studies identified atovaquone as a promising candidate for inhibiting viral replication. Methods: A 2-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was performed among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection. Enrolled patients were randomized 2:1 to atovaquone 1500 mg BID versus matched placebo. Patients received standard of care treatment including remdesivir, dexamethasone, or convalescent plasma as deemed necessary by the treating team. Saliva was collected at baseline and twice per day for up to 10 days for RNA extraction for SARS-CoV-2 viral load measurement by quantitative reverse-transcriptase PCR. The primary outcome was the between group difference in log-transformed viral load (copies/mL) using a generalized linear mixed-effect models of repeated measures from all samples. Results: Of the 61 patients enrolled; 41 received atovaquone and 19 received placebo. Overall, the population was predominately male (63%) and Hispanic (70%), with a mean age of 51 years, enrolled a mean of 5 days from symptom onset. The log10 viral load was 5.25 copies/mL vs. 4.79 copies/mL at baseline in the atovaquone vs. placebo group. Change in viral load did not differ over time between the atovaquone plus standard of care arm versus the placebo plus standard of care arm. Pharmacokinetic (PK) studies of atovaquone plasma concentration demonstrated a wide variation in atovaquone levels, with an inverse correlation between BMI and atovaquone levels, (Rho -0.45, p = 0.02). In post hoc analysis, an inverse correlation was observed between atovaquone levels and viral load (Rho -0.54, p = 0.005). Conclusion: In this prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, atovaquone did not demonstrate evidence of enhanced SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance compared with placebo. However, based on the observed inverse correlation between atovaquone levels and viral load, additional PK-guided studies may be warranted to examine the antiviral effect of atovaquone in COVID-19 patients.