A Randomized Clinical Trial of Regdanvimab in High-Risk Patients with Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19

Background We evaluated clinical effectiveness of regdanvimab (CT-P59), a SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing monoclonal antibody, in reducing disease progression and clinical recovery time in patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, primarily alpha variant. Methods This was phase 3 of a phase 2/3 parallel-group, double-blind, randomized clinical trial. Outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, were randomized to single dose regdanvimab 40 mg/kg (n = 656) or placebo (n = 659), alongside standard-of-care. Primary endpoint: COVID-19 disease progression (clinical symptoms requiring hospitalization or oxygen therapy, or mortality) up to day 28 among “high risk” patients. Key secondary endpoints: disease progression (all randomized patients) and time to recovery (high-risk and all randomized patients). Results Of 1315 patients randomized to regdanvimab or placebo, 880 were high risk (regdanvimab, n = 446;placebo, n = 434);the majority (regdanvimab, n = 371;placebo n = 381) were infected with alpha variant. The proportion with disease progression was lower (14/446 [3.1%;95% CI, 1.9–5.2] vs. 48/434 [11.1%;95% CI, 8.4–14.4];P < 0.001) and time to recovery was shorter (median, 9.27 days [95% CI, 8.27–11.05] vs. not reached [95% CI, 12.35–not calculable];P < 0.001) with regdanvimab than placebo. Consistent improvements were seen in all randomized and non–high-risk patients who received regdanvimab. Viral load reductions were more rapid with regdanvimab. Infusion-related reactions occurred in 11/1302 patients (4/652 [0.6%] regdanvimab, 7/650 [1.1%] placebo). Treatment-emergent serious adverse events were reported in 5/1302 patients (4 [0.6%] regdanvimab, 1 [0.2%] placebo). Conclusions Regdanvimab was an effective treatment for patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, significantly reducing disease progression and clinical recovery time without notable safety concerns prior to the emergence of the omicron variant. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04602000;EudraCT number, 2020-003369-20

An international observational study to assess the impact of the Omicron variant emergence on the clinical epidemiology of COVID-19 in hospitalised patients (preprint)

BackgroundWhilst timely clinical characterisation of infections caused by novel SARS-CoV-2 variants is necessary for evidence-based policy response, individual-level data on infecting variants are typically only available for a minority of patients and settings. MethodsHere, we propose an innovative approach to study changes in COVID-19 hospital presentation and outcomes after the Omicron variant emergence using publicly available population-level data on variant relative frequency to infer SARS-CoV-2 variants likely responsible for clinical cases. We apply this method to data collected by a large international clinical consortium before and after the emergence of the Omicron variant in different countries. ResultsOur analysis, that includes more than 100,000 patients from 28 countries, suggests that in many settings patients hospitalised with Omicron variant infection less often presented with commonly reported symptoms compared to patients infected with pre-Omicron variants. Patients with COVID-19 admitted to hospital after Omicron variant emergence had lower mortality compared to patients admitted during the period when Omicron variant was responsible for only a minority of infections (odds ratio in a mixed-effects logistic regression adjusted for likely confounders, 0.67 [95% confidence interval 0.61 - 0.75]). Qualitatively similar findings were observed in sensitivity analyses with different assumptions on population-level Omicron variant relative frequencies, and in analyses using available individual-level data on infecting variant for a subset of the study population. ConclusionsAlthough clinical studies with matching viral genomic information should remain a priority, our approach combining publicly available data on variant frequency and a multi-country clinical characterisation dataset with more than 100,000 records allowed analysis of data from a wide range of settings and novel insights on real-world heterogeneity of COVID-19 presentation and clinical outcome.

Comparative Analysis of Clinical and Epidemiological Characteristics in Patients with SARI Confirmed as Influenza or COVID-19 Admitted in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Bucharest, Romania

The COVID-19 pandemic has influenced the epidemiology of other respiratory pathogens, and this was most evident in the 2020–2021 season, which was characterized by a low circulation of influenza viruses. We aim to present a comparative analysis of clinical and epidemiological characteristics of 2018–2019 influenza cases and 2020–2021 COVID-19 cases, hospitalized at a tertiary infectious diseases hospital in Bucharest. We used data collected from patients admitted for severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) and subsequently confirmed with either influenza or COVID-19. During the 2018–2019 season, 208 patients over 18 years of age were confirmed with influenza (median age = 53 years, 59.6% were female) and 6.7% had been vaccinated against influenza. The most frequent symptoms were fever (97.1%) and cough (94.7%), and 77.4% had at least one chronic condition. 90.4% received influenza antiviral therapy. During the 2020–2021 season, 191 patients were confirmed with COVID-19 (median age = 56 years, 67% were male). The most frequent symptoms were cough (85.9%) and fever (80.6%), and 75.9% had at least one chronic condition. This analysis highlights the main similarities and differences between influenza and COVID-19 and could help to optimize the management of cases.

Efficacy and safety of CT-P59 plus standard of care: a phase 2/3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in outpatients with mild-to-moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection (preprint)

CT-P59, a monoclonal antibody with potent neutralizing activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, may ameliorate symptoms and prevent hospitalization in outpatients with mild-to-moderate disease. We report findings from part one of a two-part randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study (NCT04602000; EudraCT: 2020-003369-20). Outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 received a single dose of CT-P59 40 mg/kg (n=101), CT-P59 80 mg/kg (n=103), or placebo (n=103). Median (95% confidence interval [CI]) time to conversion to negative RT-qPCR result (coprimary endpoint) was 12.8 days (9.00–12.84) with CT-P59 40 mg/kg, 11.9 days (8.94–12.91) with CT-P59 80 mg/kg, and 12.9 days (12.75–13.99) with placebo. Median (95% CI) time to clinical recovery (coprimary endpoint) was 5.4 days (3.97–6.78) with CT-P59 40 mg/kg, 6.2 days (5.53–7.85) with CT-P59 80 mg/kg, and 8.8 days (6.72–11.73) with placebo. The proportion (95% CI) of patients requiring hospitalization or oxygen therapy was lower with CT-P59 40 mg/kg (4.0% [1.6–9.7%]) and CT-P59 80 mg/kg (4.9% [2.1–10.9%]) versus placebo (8.7% [4.7–15.8%). CT-P59 was well tolerated and no serious treatment-emergent adverse events or deaths occurred. In summary, CT-P59 accelerated viral and clinical recovery from COVID-19 and was well tolerated in patients with mild-to-moderate infection.