The Association of Baseline Plasma SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid Antigen Level and Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Levels of plasma SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) antigen may be an important biomarker in patients with COVID-19 and enhance our understanding of the pathogenesis of COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether levels of plasma antigen can predict short-term clinical outcomes and identify clinical and viral factors associated with plasma antigen levels in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of baseline plasma antigen level from 2540 participants enrolled in the TICO (Therapeutics for Inpatients With COVID-19) platform trial from August 2020 to November 2021, with additional data on day 5 outcome and time to discharge. SETTING: 114 centers in 10 countries. PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection with 12 days or less of symptoms. MEASUREMENTS: Baseline plasma viral N antigen level was measured at a central laboratory. Delta variant status was determined from baseline nasal swabs using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Associations between baseline patient characteristics and viral factors and baseline plasma antigen levels were assessed using both unadjusted and multivariable modeling. Association between elevated baseline antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater and outcomes, including worsening of ordinal pulmonary scale at day 5 and time to hospital discharge, were evaluated using logistic regression and Fine-Gray regression models, respectively. RESULTS: Plasma antigen was below the level of quantification in 5% of participants at enrollment, and 1000 ng/L or greater in 57%. Baseline pulmonary severity of illness was strongly associated with plasma antigen level, with mean plasma antigen level 3.10-fold higher among those requiring noninvasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula compared with room air (95% CI, 2.22 to 4.34). Plasma antigen level was higher in those who lacked antispike antibodies (6.42 fold; CI, 5.37 to 7.66) and in those with the Delta variant (1.73 fold; CI, 1.41 to 2.13). Additional factors associated with higher baseline antigen level included male sex, shorter time since hospital admission, decreased days of remdesivir, and renal impairment. In contrast, race, ethnicity, body mass index, and immunocompromising conditions were not associated with plasma antigen levels. Plasma antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater was associated with a markedly higher odds of worsened pulmonary status at day 5 (odds ratio, 5.06 [CI, 3.41 to 7.50]) and longer time to hospital discharge (median, 7 vs. 4 days; subhazard ratio, 0.51 [CI, 0.45 to 0.57]), with subhazard ratios similar across all levels of baseline pulmonary severity. LIMITATIONS: Plasma samples were drawn at enrollment, not hospital presentation. No point-of-care test to measure plasma antigen is currently available. CONCLUSION: Elevated plasma antigen is highly associated with both severity of pulmonary illness and clinically important patient outcomes. Multiple clinical and viral factors are associated with plasma antigen level at presentation. These data support a potential role of ongoing viral replication in the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 in hospitalized patients. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. government Operation Warp Speed and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Real-world effectiveness of early remdesivir and sotrovimab in the highest-risk COVID-19 outpatients during the Omicron surge.

BACKGROUND: Remdesivir and sotrovimab both have clinical trial data in the outpatient setting demonstrating reduction in the risk of hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits related to COVID-19. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of remdesivir in comparison with sotrovimab and matched high-risk control patients in preventing COVID-19-related hospitalizations and ED visits during the Omicron B.1.1.529 surge. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included outpatients positive for SARS-CoV-2, with non-severe symptoms for ≤7 days and deemed high-risk for severe COVID-19 by an internal scoring matrix. Patients who received remdesivir or sotrovimab from 27/12/2021 to 04/02/2022 were included (n = 82 and n = 88, respectively). These were compared with a control cohort of high-risk COVID-19 outpatients who did not receive therapy (n = 90). The primary outcome was a composite of 29 day COVID-19-related hospitalizations and/or ED visits. Pre-specified secondary outcomes included components of the primary endpoint, 29 day all-cause mortality and serious adverse drug events. RESULTS: Patients treated with remdesivir were significantly less likely to be hospitalized or visit the ED within 29 days from symptom onset (11% versus 23.3%; OR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.17-0.95). Patients receiving sotrovimab were also less likely to be hospitalized or visit the ED (8% versus 23.3%; OR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.11-0.71). There was no difference in the incidence of hospitalizations/ED visits between sotrovimab and remdesivir. CONCLUSIONS: Our highest-risk outpatients with Omicron-related COVID-19 who received early sotrovimab or remdesivir had significantly lower likelihoods of a hospitalization and/or ED visit.

3-Dimensional Printed Alternative to the Standard Synthetic Flocked Nasopharyngeal Swabs Used for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Testing.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), can be detected in respiratory samples by real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or other molecular methods. Accessibility of diagnostic testing for COVID-19 has been limited by intermittent shortages of supplies required for testing, including flocked nasopharyngeal (FLNP) swabs. METHODS: We developed a 3-dimensional printed nasopharyngeal (3DP) swab as a replacement of the FLNP swab. The performance of 3DP and FLNP swabs were compared in a clinical trial of symptomatic patients at 3 clinical sites (n = 291) using 3 SARS-CoV-2 emergency use authorization tests: a modified version of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel and 2 commercial automated formats, Roche Cobas and NeuMoDx. RESULTS: The cycle threshold-C(t)-values from the gene targets and the RNase P gene control in the CDC assay showed no significant differences between swabs for both gene targets (P = .152 and P = .092), with the RNase P target performing significantly better in the 3DP swabs (P < .001). The C(t) values showed no significant differences between swabs for both viral gene targets in the Roche cobas assay (P = .05 and P = .05) as well as the NeuMoDx assay (P = .401 and P = .484). The overall clinical correlation of COVID-19 diagnosis between all methods was 95.88% (Kappa 0.901). CONCLUSIONS: The 3DP swabs were equivalent to standard FLNP in 3 testing platforms for SARS-CoV-2. Given the need for widespread testing, 3DP swabs printed onsite are an alternate to FLNP that can rapidly scale in response to acute needs when supply chain disruptions affect availability of collection kits.

Effectiveness of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Monoclonal Antibody Infusions in High-Risk Outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to stress the health care system. Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) were effective in reducing COVID-19-related hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits in their respective clinical trials. However, these results have yet to be reproduced in a practical setting following implementation of current US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included outpatients with confirmed COVID-19 infection, who had mild/moderate symptoms for 10 days or less, and who were deemed high-risk for severe COVID-19 under FDA's Emergency Use Authorization for mAbs. Patients who received either bamlanivimab or casirivimab/imdevimab from 18 November 2020 through 5 January 2021 were included (n = 200). This was compared against a control cohort of randomly selected high-risk COVID-19 outpatients who declined or were not referred for mAb treatment during the same period (n = 200). The primary outcome was a composite of 29-day COVID-19-related hospitalizations and/or ED visits. Prespecified secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary endpoint, 29-day all-cause mortality, and serious adverse drug events. RESULTS: Patients treated with mAbs were significantly less likely to be hospitalized or visit the ED compared with patients not treated with mAb (13.5% vs 40.5%; odds ratio, 0.23 [95% confidence interval, .14-.38]; P < .001). The mortality rate was 0% in the mAb group compared with 3.5% in the control group (P = .02). Only 2 patients receiving mAb experienced a serious adverse event requiring treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk COVID-19 outpatients with mild/moderate symptoms, early administration of mAbs can potentially reduce the strain on the health care system during the current pandemic.