Public interest trends for Covid-19 and alignment with the disease trajectory: A time-series analysis of national-level data.

Data from web search engines have become a valuable adjunct in epidemiology and public health, specifically during epidemics. We aimed to explore the concordance of web search popularity for Covid-19 across 6 Western nations (United Kingdom, United States, France, Italy, Spain and Germany) and how timeline changes align with the pandemic waves, Covid-19 mortality, and incident case trajectories. We used the Google Trends tool for web-search popularity, and "Our World in Data" on Covid-19 reported cases, deaths, and administrative responses (measured by stringency index) to analyze country-level data. The Google Trends tool provides spatiotemporal data, scaled to a range of <1 (lowest relative popularity) to 100 (highest relative popularity), for the selected search terms, timeframe, and region. We used "coronavirus" and "covid" as search terms and set the timeframe up to November 12, 2022. We obtained multiple consecutive samples using the same terms to validate against sampling bias. We consolidated national-level incident cases and deaths weekly and transformed them to a range between 0 to 100 through the min-max normalization algorithm. We calculated the concordance of relative popularity rankings between regions, using the non-parametric Kendall's W, which maps concordance between 0 (lack of agreement) to 1 (perfect match). We used a dynamic time-warping algorithm to explore the similarity between Covid-19 relative popularity, mortality, and incident case trajectories. This methodology can recognize the similarity of shapes between time-series through a distance optimization process. The peak popularity was recorded on March 2020, to be followed by a decline below 20% in the subsequent three months and a long-standing period of variation around that level. At the end of 2021, public interest spiked shortly to fade away to a low level of around 10%. This pattern was highly concordant across the six regions (Kendal's W 0.88, p< .001). In dynamic time warping analysis, national-level public interest yielded a high similarity with the Covid-19 mortality trajectory (Similarity indices range 0.60-0.79). Instead, public interest was less similar with incident cases (0.50-0.76) and stringency index trajectories (0.33-0.64). We demonstrated that public interest is better intertwined with population mortality, rather than incident case trajectory and administrative responses. As the public interest in Covid-19 gradually subsides, these observations could help predict future public interest in pandemic events.

Effectiveness of Casirivimab and Imdevimab Antibody Combination in Immunocompromised Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Post Hoc Analysis in a Phase 1/2/3 Double-Blind Trial.

Background: Individuals who are immunocompromised (IC) are at high risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: Post hoc analyses of a double-blind trial conducted prior to Omicron (June 2020-April 2021), in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 assessed viral load, clinical outcomes, and safety of casirivimab plus imdevimab (CAS + IMD) versus placebo in IC versus overall study patients. Results: Ninety-nine of 1940 (5.1%) patients were IC. IC versus overall patients were more frequently seronegative for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies (68.7% vs 41.2%) and had higher median baseline viral loads (7.21 vs 6.32 log10 copies/mL). On placebo, IC versus overall patients had slower viral load declines. CAS + IMD reduced viral load in IC and overall patients; least-squares mean difference versus placebo in time-weighted average change from baseline viral load at day 7 was -0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.25 to -.14) log10 copies/mL for IC patients and -0.31 (95% CI, -.42 to -.20) log10 copies/mL for overall patients. For IC patients, the cumulative incidence of death or mechanical ventilation at day 29 was lower with CAS + IMD (11.0%) versus placebo (17.2%), consistent with overall patients (15.7% CAS + IMD vs 18.3% placebo). IC and overall patients receiving CAS + IMD exhibited similar rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (30.4% and 26.6%, respectively), grade ≥2 hypersensitivity or infusion-related reactions (1.4% and 2.5%), and deaths (8.7% and 12.2%). Conclusions: IC patients were more likely to exhibit high viral loads and be seronegative at baseline. For susceptible SARS-CoV-2 variants, CAS + IMD reduced viral load and resulted in fewer death or mechanical ventilation events in IC and overall study patients. There were no new safety findings among IC patients. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04426695.

New-Onset Diabetes after COVID-19.

There is evidence suggesting that infection with SARS-CoV-2 can lead to several long-term sequelae including diabetes. This mini-review examines the rapidly evolving and conflicting literature on new-onset diabetes after COVID-19, which we term NODAC. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, and medRxiv from inception until December 1, 2022 using both MeSH terms and free text words including "COVID-19," "SARS-CoV-2," "diabetes," "hyperglycemia," "insulin resistance," and "pancreatic ß-cell." We also supplemented searches by examining reference lists from retrieved articles. Current evidence suggests that COVID-19 increases the risk of developing diabetes, but the attributable risk is uncertain due to limitations of study designs and the evolving nature of the pandemic, including new variants, widespread population exposure to the virus, diagnostic options for COVID-19 and vaccination status. The etiology of diabetes after COVID-19 is likely multifactorial and includes factors associated with host characteristics (e.g., age), social determinants of health (e.g., deprivation index), and pandemic-related effects both at the personal (e.g., psychosocial stress) and the societal-community level (e.g., containment measures). COVID-19 may have direct and indirect effects on pancreatic ß-cell function and insulin sensitivity related to: the acute infection and its treatment (e.g., glucocorticoids); autoimmunity; persistent viral residency in multiple organs including adipose tissue; endothelial dysfunction; and hyperinflammatory state. While our understanding of NODAC continues to evolve, consideration should be given for diabetes to be classified as a post-COVID syndrome, in addition to traditional classifications of diabetes (e.g., type 1 or type 2), so that the pathophysiology, natural history and optimal management can be studied.

Factors Associated With Enrollment into Inpatient Coronavirus Disease 2019 Randomized Controlled Trials: A Cross-sectional Analysis.

Background: Clinical trials for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have struggled to achieve diverse patient enrollment, despite underrepresented groups bearing the largest burden of the disease and, presumably, being most in need of the treatments under investigation. Methods: To assess the willingness of patients to enroll into inpatient COVID-19 clinical trials when invited, we conducted a cross-sectional analysis of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 who were approached regarding enrollment. Associations between patient and temporal factors and enrollment were assessed by multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results: A total of 926 patients were included in this analysis. Overall, Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity was associated with a nearly half-fold decrease in the likelihood to enroll (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.60 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .41-.88]). Greater baseline disease severity (aOR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.17]), age 40-64 years (aOR, 1.83 [95% CI, 1.03-3.25]), and age ≥65 years (aOR, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.08-3.42]) were each independently associated with higher likelihood to enroll. Over the course of the pandemic, patients were less likely to enroll during the summer 2021 wave in COVID-19-related hospitalizations (aOR, 0.14 [95% CI, .10-.19]) compared with patients from the first wave in winter 2020. Conclusions: The decision to enroll into clinical trials is multifactorial. Amid a pandemic disproportionately affecting vulnerable groups, Hispanic/Latinx patients were less likely to participate when invited, whereas older adults were more likely. Future recruitment strategies must consider the nuanced perceptions and needs of diverse patient populations to ensure equitable trial participation that advances the quality of healthcare for all.

Second monovalent SARS-CoV-2 mRNA booster restores Omicron-specific neutralizing activity in both nursing home residents and health care workers

We examined whether the second monovalent SARS-CoV-2 mRNA booster increased antibody levels and their neutralizing activity to Omicron variants in nursing home residents (NH) residents and healthcare workers (HCW). We sampled 376 NH residents and 63 HCW after primary mRNA vaccination, first and second boosters, for antibody response and pseudovirus neutralization assay against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type (WT) (Wuhan-Hu-1) strain, Omicron BA.1 and BA.5 variants. Antibody levels and neutralizing activity progressively increased with each booster but subsequently waned over 3-6 months. NH residents, both those without and with prior infection, had a robust geometric mean fold rise (GMFR) of 8.1 (95% CI 4.4, 14.8) and 7.8 (95% CI 4.8, 12.9) respectively in Omicron-BA.1 subvariant specific neutralizing antibody levels following the second booster vaccination (p<0.001). These results support the ongoing efforts to ensure that both NH residents and HCW are up-to-date on recommended SARS-CoV-2 vaccine booster doses.

Vaccines for the Prevention of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Older Adults.

Institutionalized and community-dwelling older adults have been greatly impacted by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic with increased morbidity and mortality. The advent of vaccines and their widespread use in this population has brought about a dramatic turnaround in COVID-19 outcomes. The immunogenicity and effectiveness of the various vaccine options worldwide are discussed. Optimization of vaccine usage will still be important to maximize protection due to reduced initial immunity, development of variant strains, and fading of immunity over time. There are also lessons learned specific to older populations for future pandemics of novel pathogens.

Incidence and potential risk factors for remdesivir-associated bradycardia in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study.

Background: Remdesivir is widely used for the management of COVID-19 and several studies have reported bradycardia as a potential side effect associated with this agent. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the incidence rate, severity, and potential risk factors of remdesivir-associated bradycardia. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study among hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 who were treated with remdesivir from March 2020 to October 2021. Our primary outcome of interest was the incidence rate and severity of bradycardia after remdesivir administration. We defined mild bradycardia as a heart rate of 51-59 beats per minute, moderate bradycardia as a heart rate of 41-50 beats per minute, and severe bradycardia as a heart rate of ≤40 beats per minute. We also performed univariable and multivariable regression analyses to determine potential bradycardia risk factors. Baseline characteristics were reported as means with standard deviations or medians with interquartile ranges (IQRs). All the statistical tests are shown as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: In total, 1,635 patients were included in this study. The median age with IQR was 68 (57-79) years and 51.7% of the patients were male. In total, 606 (37.1%) patients developed bradycardia. Among them, 437 patients (26.7%) developed mild bradycardia, 158 patients (9.7%) moderate bradycardia, while 11 patients (0.7%) experienced severe bradycardia. In our adjusted multivariate logistic regression, the odds of bradycardia development after remdesivir administration were higher among patients with age ≥65 years (OR 1.76, 95% CI: 1.04-2.99, p = 0.04), those with hypertension (OR 1.37, 95% CI: 1.07-1.75, p = 0.01), and obesity (OR 1.32, 95% CI: 1.02-1.68, p = 0.03). Conclusion: More than 1 out of 3 patients (37%) who received remdesivir for COVID-19 developed bradycardia with the majority of these patients developing mild or moderate bradycardia that is usually a benign manifestation not needing treatment in most cases. Age ≥65 years, hypertension, and obesity were potential risk factors for remdesivir-associated bradycardia among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Clinicians should be aware of this adverse event and consider close clinical monitoring for patients at high risk for this adverse event.

Clinical Outcomes Associated with SARS-CoV-2 Co-Infection with Rhinovirus and Adenovirus in Adults-A Retrospective Matched Cohort Study.

(1) Background: Respiratory co-infections with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and other viruses are common, but data on clinical outcomes and laboratory biomarkers indicative of disease severity are limited. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes and laboratory biomarkers of patients with SARS-CoV-2 alone to those of patients with SARS-CoV-2 and either rhinovirus or adenovirus. (2) Methods: Hospitalized patients co-infected with SARS-CoV-2 and rhinovirus and patients co-infected with SARS-CoV-2 and adenovirus were matched to patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 alone. Outcomes of interest were the cumulative incidences of mechanical ventilation use, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, 30-day all-cause mortality, and 30-day all-cause readmission from the day of discharge. We also assessed differences in laboratory biomarkers from the day of specimen collection. (3) Results: Patients co-infected with SARS-CoV-2 and rhinovirus, compared with patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, had significantly greater 30-day all-cause mortality (8/23 (34.8%) vs. 8/69 (11.6%), p = 0.02). Additionally, median alanine transaminase (13 IU/L vs. 24 IU/L, p = 0.03), aspartate transaminase (25 IU/L vs. 36 IU/L, p = 0.04), and C-reactive protein (34.86 mg/L vs. 94.68 mg/L, p = 0.02) on day of specimen collection were significantly lower in patients co-infected with SARS-CoV-2 and rhinovirus in comparison to patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 alone. Clinical outcomes and laboratory markers did not differ significantly between patients with SARS-CoV-2 and adenovirus co-infection and patients with SARS-CoV-2 mono-infection. (4) Conclusion: SARS-CoV-2 and rhinovirus co-infection, compared with SARS-CoV-2 mono-infection alone, is positively associated with 30-day all-cause mortality among hospitalized patients. However, our lack of significant findings in our analysis of patients with SARS-CoV-2 and adenovirus co-infection may suggest that SARS-CoV-2 co-infections have variable significance, and further study is warranted.

Casirivimab and Imdevimab for the Treatment of Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The open-label RECOVERY study reported improved survival in hospitalized, SARS-CoV-2 seronegative patients treated with casirivimab and imdevimab (CAS + IMD). METHODS: In this phase I/II/III, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted prior to widespread circulation of Delta and Omicron, hospitalized COVID-19 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to 2.4 g or 8.0 g CAS + IMD or placebo, and characterized at baseline for viral load and SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. RESULTS: 1336 patients on low-flow or no supplemental (low-flow/no) oxygen were treated. The primary endpoint was met: in seronegative patients, the least-squares mean difference (CAS + IMD versus placebo) for time-weighted average change from baseline in viral load through day 7 was -0.28 log10 copies/mL (95% CI, -0.51 to -0.05; P = .0172). The primary clinical analysis of death or mechanical ventilation (death/MV) from day 6-29 in patients with high viral load had a strong positive trend but did not reach significance. CAS + IMD numerically reduced all-cause mortality in seronegative patients through day 29 (relative risk reduction, 55.6%; 95% CI, 24.2-74.0). No safety concerns were noted. CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized COVID-19 patients on low-flow/no oxygen, CAS + IMD reduced viral load and likely improves clinical outcomes in the overall population, with the benefit driven by seronegative patients, and no harm observed in seropositive patients.

Effect of Thymalfasin (Thymosin-α-1) on Reversing Lymphocytopenia among Patients with COVID-19

Introduction Thymosin-α-1 (Tα1) elevates lymphocyte counts among patients with COVID-19, but its effect on reversing lymphocytopenia is unknown. Methods 24 patients treated with Tα1 and 100 patients in the control arm were included in this analysis. The incidence rate of reversing lymphocytopenia, overall and stratified by baseline oxygen support, above the threshold for classification of lymphocytopenia (i.e., Total Lymphocyte Count (TLC) < 1.5 x 109/L) and severe lymphocytopenia (i.e., TLC < 1.0 x 109/L) within 3, 5, and 7 days of treatment initiation was calculated, along with incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Compared with the standard of care, the rate of reversing lymphocytopenia (IRR: 2.38, 95% CI: 0.92 – 5.81) and severe lymphocytopenia (IRR: 1.57, 95% CI: 0.59 – 3.72), especially among patients with severe lymphocytopenia on high flow oxygen support (IRR: 3.64, 95% CI: 0.71 – 23.44), was greater for patients treated with Tα1 within 3 days of treatment initiation, although analyses were not significant. Conclusion Among patients with hypoxemia and lymphocytopenia, Tα1 may reverse lymphocytopenia and severe lymphocytopenia, particularly within 3 days of treatment initiation, faster than the standard of care.

A Pilot Trial of Thymalfasin (Tα1) to Treat Hospitalized Patients with Hypoxemia and Lymphocytopenia due to COVID-19 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Thymosin-α-1 (Tα1) may be a treatment option for COVID-19, but efficacy and safety data remain limited. METHODS: Prospective, open-label, randomized trial assessing preliminary efficacy and safety of thymalfasin (synthetic form of Tα1), compared with standard of care, among hospitalized patients with hypoxemia and lymphocytopenia due to COVID-19. RESULTS: 49 patients were included in this analysis. Compared with control patients, the incidence of clinical recovery was higher for treated patients with either baseline low flow oxygen (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR]: 1.48; 95% CI: 0.68-3.25) or baseline high flow oxygen (SHR: 1.28; 95% CI: 0.35-4.63), although neither were significant. Among patients with baseline low flow oxygen, treated patients, compared with control patients, had an average difference of 3.84 times more CD4+ T cells on Day 5 than on Day 1 (p = 0.0113). Nine serious adverse events among treated patients were deemed not related to Tα1. CONCLUSION: Tα1 increases CD4+ T cell count among patients with baseline low flow oxygen support faster than standard of care and may have a role in the management of hospitalized patients with hypoxemia and lymphocytopenia due to COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Responses to the Ancestral SARS-CoV-2 Strain and Omicron BA.1 and BA.4/BA.5 Variants in Nursing Home Residents After Receipt of Bivalent COVID-19 Vaccine - Ohio and Rhode Island, September-November 2022.

Introduction of monovalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in late 2020 helped to mitigate disproportionate COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality in U.S. nursing homes (1); however, reduced effectiveness of monovalent vaccines during the period of Omicron variant predominance led to recommendations for booster doses with bivalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccines that include an Omicron BA.4/BA.5 spike protein component to broaden immune response and improve vaccine effectiveness against circulating Omicron variants (2). Recent studies suggest that bivalent booster doses provide substantial additional protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19-associated disease among immunocompetent adults who previously received only monovalent vaccines (3).* The immunologic response after receipt of bivalent boosters among nursing home residents, who often mount poor immunologic responses to vaccines, remains unknown. Serial testing of anti-spike protein antibody binding and neutralizing antibody titers in serum collected from 233 long-stay nursing home residents from the time of their primary vaccination series and including any subsequent booster doses, including the bivalent vaccine, was performed. The bivalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccine substantially increased anti-spike and neutralizing antibody titers against Omicron sublineages, including BA.1 and BA.4/BA.5, irrespective of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or previous receipt of 1 or 2 booster doses. These data, in combination with evidence of low uptake of bivalent booster vaccination among residents and staff members in nursing homes (4), support the recommendation that nursing home residents and staff members receive a bivalent COVID-19 booster dose to reduce associated morbidity and mortality (2).

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.

Casirivimab and Imdevimab Treatment Reduces Viral Load and Improves Clinical Outcomes in Seropositive Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients with Nonneutralizing or Borderline Neutralizing Antibodies.

We conducted a post hoc analysis in seropositive patients who were negative or borderline for functional neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) at baseline from a phase 1, 2, and 3 trial of casirivimab and imdevimab (CAS+IMD) treatment in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients on low-flow or no supplemental oxygen prior to the emergence of Omicron-lineage variants. Patients were randomized to a single dose of 2.4 g CAS+IMD, 8.0 g CAS+IMD, or placebo. Patients seropositive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at baseline were analyzed by their baseline neutralizing antibody status. At baseline, 20.6% (178/864) of seropositive patients were negative or borderline for neutralizing antibodies, indicating negative or very low functionally neutralizing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. CAS+IMD reduced viral load in patients who were negative or borderline for neutralizing antibodies versus placebo, but not in patients who were positive for neutralizing antibodies. In patients who were negative or borderline for neutralizing antibodies, we observed a trend in reduction of the proportion of patients who died or required mechanical ventilation, as well as in all-cause mortality, by day 29 with CAS+IMD versus placebo. The proportions of patients who died or required mechanical ventilation from days 1 to 29 were 19.1% in the placebo group and 10.9% in the CAS+IMD combined-dose group, and the proportions of patients who died (all-cause mortality) from days 1 to 29 were 16.2% in the placebo group and 9.1% in the CAS+IMD combined-dose group. In patients who were positive for neutralizing antibodies, no measurable harm or benefit was observed in either the proportion of patients who died or required mechanical ventilation or the proportion of patients who died (all-cause mortality). In hospitalized COVID-19 patients on low-flow or no supplemental oxygen, CAS+IMD reduced viral load, the risk of death or mechanical ventilation, and all-cause mortality in seropositive patients who were negative or borderline for neutralizing antibodies. IMPORTANCE The clinical benefit of CAS+IMD in hospitalized seronegative patients with COVID-19 has previously been demonstrated, although these studies observed no clinical benefit in seropositive patients. As the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2-seropositive individuals rises due to both vaccination and previous infection, it is important to understand whether there is a subset of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 with antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 who could benefit from anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody treatment. This post hoc analysis demonstrates that there is a subset of hospitalized seropositive patients with inadequate SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing antibodies (i.e., those who were negative or borderline for neutralizing antibodies) who may still benefit from CAS+IMD treatment if infected with a susceptible SARS-CoV-2 variant. Therefore, utilizing serostatus alone to guide treatment decisions for patients with COVID-19 may fail to identify those seropositive patients who could benefit from anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody therapies known to be effective against circulating strains, dependent upon how effectively their endogenous antibodies neutralize SARS-CoV-2.

Efficacy and Safety of Ensovibep for Adults Hospitalized With COVID-19 : A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Ensovibep (MP0420) is a designed ankyrin repeat protein, a novel class of engineered proteins, under investigation as a treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. OBJECTIVE: To investigate if ensovibep, in addition to remdesivir and other standard care, improves clinical outcomes among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with standard care alone. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04501978). SETTING: Multinational, multicenter trial. PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized with COVID-19. INTERVENTION: Intravenous ensovibep, 600 mg, or placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Ensovibep was assessed for early futility on the basis of pulmonary ordinal scores at day 5. The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery through day 90, defined as 14 consecutive days at home or place of usual residence after hospital discharge. A composite safety outcome that included death, serious adverse events, end-organ disease, and serious infections was assessed through day 90. RESULTS: An independent data and safety monitoring board recommended that enrollment be halted for early futility after 485 patients were randomly assigned and received an infusion of ensovibep (n = 247) or placebo (n = 238). The odds ratio (OR) for a more favorable pulmonary outcome in the ensovibep (vs. placebo) group at day 5 was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.67 to 1.30; P = 0.68; OR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The 90-day cumulative incidence of sustained recovery was 82% for ensovibep and 80% for placebo (subhazard ratio [sHR], 1.06 [CI, 0.88 to 1.28]; sHR > 1 would favor ensovibep). The primary composite safety outcome at day 90 occurred in 78 ensovibep participants (32%) and 70 placebo participants (29%) (HR, 1.07 [CI, 0.77 to 1.47]; HR < 1 would favor ensovibep). LIMITATION: The trial was prematurely stopped because of futility, limiting power for the primary outcome. CONCLUSION: Compared with placebo, ensovibep did not improve clinical outcomes for hospitalized participants with COVID-19 receiving standard care, including remdesivir; no safety concerns were identified. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

Lessons from an international trial evaluating vaccination strategies for recovered inpatients with COVID-19 (VATICO).

The protection provided by natural versus hybrid immunity from COVID-19 is unclear. We reflect on the challenges from trying to conduct a randomized post-SARS-CoV-2 infection vaccination trial study with rapidly evolving scientific data, vaccination guidelines, varying international policies, difficulties with vaccine availability, vaccine hesitancy, and a constantly evolving virus.

In patients with COVID-19 at risk for severe disease, nirmatrelvir + ritonavir reduced hospitalization or death.

SOURCE CITATION: Hammond J, Leister-Tebbe H, Gardner A, et al. Oral nirmatrelvir for high-risk, nonhospitalized adults with Covid-19. N Engl J Med. 2022;386:1397-408. 35172054.