Efficacy of ultra-short, response-guided sofosbuvir and daclatasvir therapy for Hepatitis C: a single arm mechanistic pilot study (preprint)

ABSTRACT Background WHO has called for research into predictive factors for selecting persons who could be successfully treated with shorter durations of direct acting antiviral (DAA) therapy for Hepatitis C. We evaluated early virological response as a means of shortening treatment and explored host, viral and pharmacokinetic contributors to treatment outcome. Methods Duration of sofosbuvir and daclatasvir (SOF/DCV) was determined according to day 2 (D2) virologic response for HCV genotype (gt) 1- or 6-infected adults in Vietnam with mild liver disease. Participants received 4 or 8 weeks treatment according to whether D2 HCV RNA was above or below 500 IU/ml (standard duration is 12 weeks). Primary endpoint was sustained virological response (SVR12). Those failing therapy were retreated with 12 weeks SOF/DCV. Host IFNL4 genotype and viral sequencing was performed at baseline, with repeat viral sequencing if virological rebound was observed. Levels of SOF, its inactive metabolite GS-331007 and DCV were measured on day 0 and 28. Results Of 52 adults enrolled, 34 received 4 weeks SOF/DCV, 17 got 8 weeks and one withdrew. SVR12 was achieved in 21/34 (62%) treated for 4 weeks, and 17/17 (100%) treated for 8 weeks. Overall 38/51 (75%) were cured with first-line treatment (mean duration 37 days). Despite a high prevalence of putative NS5A-inhibitor resistance associated substitutions (RAS), all first-line treatment failures cured after retreatment (13/13). We found no evidence treatment failure was associated with host IFNL4 genotype, viral subtype, baseline RAS or DCV levels. SOF metabolite levels were higher in those failing 4-week therapy. Conclusions Shortened SOF/DCV therapy, with retreatment if needed, reduces DAA use while maintaining high cure rates. D2 virologic response alone does not adequately predict SVR12 with 4 weeks treatment. Funding Funded by the Medical Research Council (grant MR/P025064/1) and The Global Challenges Research Fund (Wellcome Trust Grant 206/296/Z/17/Z).) Clinical trial number ISRCTN17100273

Pharmacometric assessment of the in-vivo antiviral activity of ivermectin in early symptomatic COVID-19 (preprint)

Background: There is no generally accepted methodology for in vivo assessment of antiviral activity in SARS-CoV-2 infection. Ivermectin has been recommended widely as a treatment of COVID-19, but whether it has significant antiviral activity in vivo is uncertain. Methods: In a multicentre open label, randomized, controlled adaptive platform trial, adult patients with early symptomatic COVID-19 were randomized to one of six treatment arms including high dose ivermectin (600micrograms/kg daily for seven days), the monoclonal antibodies casirivimab and imdevimab (600mg/600mg), and no study drug. Viral clearance rates were derived from daily duplicate oropharyngeal quantitative PCR measurements. This ongoing trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05041907). Results: Randomization to the ivermectin arm was stopped after enrolling 205 patients into all arms, as the prespecified futility threshold was reached. Compared with the no study drug arm, the mean estimated SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance following ivermectin was 9.1% slower [95%CI -27.2% to +11.8%; n=45 versus n=41], whereas in a preliminary analysis of the casirivimab/imdevimab arm it was 52.3% faster [95%CI +7.0% to +115.1%; n=10 (Delta variant) versus n=41]. Conclusions: High dose ivermectin did not have measurable antiviral activity in early symptomatic COVID-19. Measured in this way viral clearance rate is a valuable

Pre-clinical evaluation of antiviral activity of nitazoxanide against Sars-CoV-2 (preprint)

To address the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, multiple clinical trials in humans were rapidly started, including those involving an oral treatment by nitazoxanide, despite no or limited pre-clinical evidence of antiviral efficacy. In this work, we present a complete pre-clinical evaluation of the antiviral activity of nitazoxanide against SARS-CoV-2. First, we confirmed the in vitro efficacy of nitazoxanide and tizoxanide (its active metabolite) against SARS-CoV-2. Then, we demonstrated nitazoxanide activity in a reconstructed bronchial human airway epithelium model. In a SARS-CoV-2 virus challenge model in hamsters, oral and intranasal treatment with nitazoxanide failed to impair viral replication in commonly affected organs. We hypothesized that this could be due to insufficient diffusion of the drug into organs of interest. Indeed, our pharmacokinetic study confirmed that concentrations of tizoxanide in organs of interest were always below the in vitro EC50. These preclinical results suggest, if directly applicable to humans, that the standard formulation and dosage of nitazoxanide is not effective in providing antiviral therapy for Covid-19.

The oral protease inhibitor (PF-07321332) protects Syrian hamsters against infection with SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (preprint)

There is an urgent need for potent and selective antivirals against SARS-CoV-2. Pfizer developed PF-07321332 (PF-332), a potent inhibitor of the main viral protease (Mpro, 3CLpro) that can be dosed orally; the compound is in clinical development. We demonstrate that PF-332 exerts equipotent in vitro activity against the four SARS-CoV-2 variants of concerns (VoC) and can completely arrest replication of the alpha variant in primary human airway epithelial cells grown at the air-liquid interface. Treatment of Syrian hamsters with PF-332 (250 mg/kg, twice daily) completely protected the animals against intranasal infection with the beta (B.1.351) and delta (B.1.617.2) SARS-CoV-2 variants. Moreover, treatment of SARS-CoV-2 (B.1.617.2) infected animals with PF-332 completely prevented transmission to untreated co-housed sentinels. The trough drug concentration at this efficacious dose were above the in vitro efficacious concentrations.

Effect of Hydroxychloroquine in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: Preliminary results from a multi-centre, randomized, controlled trial. (preprint)

Background: Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have been proposed as treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the basis of in vitro activity, uncontrolled data, and small randomized studies. Methods: The Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 therapy (RECOVERY) trial is a randomized, controlled, open-label, platform trial comparing a range of possible treatments with usual care in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. We report the preliminary results for the comparison of hydroxychloroquine vs. usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Results: 1561 patients randomly allocated to receive hydroxychloroquine were compared with 3155 patients concurrently allocated to usual care. Overall, 418 (26.8%) patients allocated hydroxychloroquine and 788 (25.0%) patients allocated usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.96 to 1.23; P=0.18). Consistent results were seen in all pre-specified subgroups of patients. Patients allocated to hydroxychloroquine were less likely to be discharged from hospital alive within 28 days (60.3% vs. 62.8%; rate ratio 0.92; 95% CI 0.85-0.99) and those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline were more likely to reach the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (29.8% vs. 26.5%; risk ratio 1.12; 95% CI 1.01-1.25). There was no excess of new major cardiac arrhythmia. Conclusions: In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, hydroxychloroquine was not associated with reductions in 28-day mortality but was associated with an increased length of hospital stay and increased risk of progressing to invasive mechanical ventilation or death.

Concentration-dependent mortality of chloroquine in overdose (preprint)

Background: Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have been used extensively in malaria and rheumatological conditions. Although generally safe and well tolerated they are potentially lethal in overdose. These two drugs are now candidates for the prevention and treatment of COVID19. In vitro data suggest that high concentrations and thus high doses will be needed if they are to be of benefit, but as yet there is no convincing evidence they are clinically effective. Nevertheless they are already being used very widely and fatal accidental overdoses have been reported. Methods: Individual data from prospectively studied French patients who had taken intentional chloroquine overdoses and were managed in the national toxicology intensive care unit in Paris were pooled. Bayesian logistic regression was used to estimate a concentration-fatality curve. The probabilities of fatal iatrogenic toxicity with the chloroquine regimens currently being trialled for the treatment of COVID19 were estimated from a combined pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model. Findings: In total, 258 patients were studied of whom 26 died (10%). There was a steep sigmoid relationship between admission whole blood chloroquine concentrations and death. Concentrations above 13umol/L (95% credible interval (C.I.), 10 to 16) were associated with greater than 1% mortality. Based on peak concentrations, absolute fatality ratios in the high dose arm (chloroquine base equivalent adult dose of 600mg given twice daily for ten days) of a recently terminated trial were estimated between 0.06% (90kg adult, 95%C.I. 0 to 0.3%) and 4.8% (40kg adult, 95% C.I. 1.9 to 9.7%). This regimen results in peak concentrations above 10umol/L in more than 60% of adults weighing 70kg. The other high dose regimens trialled currently for COVID19 result in peak concentrations above 10umol/L in only 0.2% of adults weighting 70kg. Interpretation:} High-dose chloroquine treatment regimens which result in whole blood chloroquine concentrations below 10umol/L for the majority of patients should not result in life-threatening cardiovascular toxicity.