ABSTRACT
The efficacy on the Omicron variant of the approved early coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) therapies, especially monoclonal antibodies, has been challenged by in vitro neutralization data, while data on in vivo antiviral activity are lacking. We assessed potential decrease from Day 1 to Day 7 viral load (VL) in nasopharyngeal swabs of outpatients receiving Sotrovimab, Molnupiravir, Remdesivir, or Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for mild-to-moderate COVID-19 due to sublineages BA.1 or BA.2, and average treatment effect by weighted marginal linear regression models. A total of 521 patients (378 BA.1 [73%], 143 [27%] BA.2) received treatments (Sotrovimab 202, Molnupiravir 117, Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir 84, and Remdesivir 118): median age 66 years, 90% vaccinated, median time from symptoms onset 3 days. Day 1 mean VL was 4.12 log2 (4.16 for BA.1 and 4.01 for BA.2). The adjusted analysis showed that Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir significantly reduced VL compared to all the other drugs, except versus Molnupiravir in BA.2. Molnupiravir was superior to Remdesivir in both BA.1 and BA.2, and to Sotrovimab in BA.2. Sotrovimab had better activity than Remdesivir only against BA.1. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir showed the greatest antiviral activity against Omicron variant, comparable to Molnupiravir only in the BA.2 subgroup. VL decrease could be a valuable surrogate of drug activity in the context of the high prevalence of vaccinated people and low probability of hospital admission.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 has evolved, leading to the emergence of new Variants Of Concern (VOCs) with significant impact on transmissibility. Although the transmission process is complex, higher nasopharyngeal viral load (NP-VL) can be considered as a proxy for greater transmissibility. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this analysis was to compare NP-VL across a set of representative VOCs observed in mildly symptomatic patients. STUDY DESIGN: Observational single-center comparative analysis of patients with early mild-to-moderate COVID-19, enrolled within the early treatment access program of Lazzaro Spallanzani Institute (March 2021-March 2022). NP-VL before drug administration was estimated through RT-PCR, based on cycle threshold values (CTs); VOCs were identified by Sanger sequencing. VOCs' average treatment effect (ATE) was estimated on the CTs fitted in the log2 scale, controlling for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 707 patients were included. VOCs were: 10% Alpha, 3% Gamma, 34% Delta, 34% BA.1, 19% BA.2. Mean CTs for BA.1 and BA.2 were lower than Delta and BA.1, respectively. After adjusting for calendar time, age, immunodeficiency and vaccination, CTs for Gamma were lower than those seen for Alpha and higher than Delta, for Delta were similar to BA.1, for BA.2 were lower than Delta and BA.1. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis shows higher NP-VL of BA.2 compared to previously circulating VOCs, even after controlling for factors potentially contributing to the amount of nasopharyngeal viral RNA, included vaccination, supporting the increased transmissibility of BA.2. Further studies are necessary to clarify this mechanism and to provide guidance for public health measures.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Viral Load , Nasopharynx , RNA, Viral/genetics , RNA, Viral/analysisABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is conflicting evidence for how HIV influences COVID-19 infection. The aim of this study was to compare characteristics at presentation and the clinical outcomes of people living with HIV (PLWH) versus HIV-negative patients (non-PLWH) hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS: Primary endpoint: time until invasive ventilation/death. Secondary endpoints: time until ventilation/death, time until symptoms resolution. RESULTS: A total of 1647 hospitalized patients were included (43 (2.6%) PLWH, 1604 non-PLWH). PLWH were younger (55 vs. 61 years) and less likely to be with PaO2/FiO2 < 300 mmHg compared with non-PLWH. Among PLWH, nadir of CD4 was 185 (75-322) cells/µL; CD4 at COVID-19 diagnosis was 272 cells/µL (127-468) and 77% of these were virologically suppressed. The cumulative probability of invasive mechanical ventilation/death at day 15 was 4.7% (95%CI 1.2-17.3) in PLWH versus 18.9% (16.9-21.1) in non-PLWH (p = 0.023). The cumulative probability of non-invasive/invasive ventilation/death at day 15 was 20.9% (11.5-36.4) in PLWH versus 37.6% (35.1-40.2) in non-PLWH (p = 0.044). The adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of invasive mechanical ventilation/death of PLWH was 0.49 (95% CI 0.12-1.96, p = 0.310) versus non-PLWH; similarly, aHR of non-invasive/invasive ventilation/death of PLWH was 1.03 (95% CI 0.53-2.00, p = 0.926). CONCLUSION: A less-severe presentation of COVID-19 at hospitalization was observed in PLWH compared to non-PLWH; no difference in clinical outcomes could be detected.