Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Final Report.

BACKGROUND: Although several therapeutic agents have been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), no antiviral agents have yet been shown to be efficacious. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous remdesivir in adults who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and had evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remdesivir (200 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for up to 9 additional days) or placebo for up to 10 days. The primary outcome was the time to recovery, defined by either discharge from the hospital or hospitalization for infection-control purposes only. RESULTS: A total of 1062 patients underwent randomization (with 541 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo). Those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 10 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 11), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 18) among those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.49; P<0.001, by a log-rank test). In an analysis that used a proportional-odds model with an eight-category ordinal scale, the patients who received remdesivir were found to be more likely than those who received placebo to have clinical improvement at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.9, after adjustment for actual disease severity). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality were 6.7% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo by day 15 and 11.4% with remdesivir and 15.2% with placebo by day 29 (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.03). Serious adverse events were reported in 131 of the 532 patients who received remdesivir (24.6%) and in 163 of the 516 patients who received placebo (31.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery in adults who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and had evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ACTT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04280705.).

Predictors of Poor Outcomes in Young Non-Comorbid Patients with COVID-19.

Background: Prognostic factors in previously healthy young patients with COVID-19 remained understudied. Objectives: The objective of the study was to identify factors associated with in-hospital death or need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in young (aged ≤ 65 years) and previously healthy patients with COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study that included patients admitted with COVID-19. The primary outcome was in-hospital death/need for IMV. Secondary outcomes included need for IMV during follow-up, days on IMV, length of stay (LOS), hospital-acquired pneumonia/ventilator-associated pneumonia (HAP/VAP), and pulmonary embolism (PE). Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results: Among 92 patients, primary outcome occurred in 16 (17%), death in 12 (13%), need for IMV in 16 (17%), HAP/VAP in 7 (8%), and PE in 2 (2%). Median LOS and IMV duration were 7 and 12 days, respectively. Independent associations were found between the primary outcome and male sex (Adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 7.1, 95%CI 1.1-46.0, p < 0.05), D-dimer levels > 1000ng/mL (aOR 9.0, 95%CI 1.6-49.1, p < 0.05), and RT-PCR Ct-value ≤ 24 on initial swab samples (aOR 14.3, 95%CI 2.0-101.5, p < 0.01). Conclusions: In young and non-comorbid COVID-19 patients, male sex, higher levels of D-dimer, and low SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Ct-value on an initial nasopharyngeal swab were independently associated with increased in-hospital mortality or need for IMV. (Rev Invest Clin. 2022;74(5):268-75).

Early Outpatient Treatment With Remdesivir in Patients at High Risk for Severe COVID-19: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Background: Early treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with remdesivir in high-risk patients, including those with immunosuppression of different causes, has not been evaluated. The objective of this study was to assess the clinical effectiveness of early remdesivir treatment among patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 at high risk of progression. Methods: This prospective cohort comparative study was conducted in a tertiary referral center in Mexico City. Patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 at high risk for progression were treated with an ambulatory 3-day course of remdesivir. The primary efficacy composite outcome was hospitalization or death at 28 days after symptom onset. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to identify associations with the primary outcome. Results: From December 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022, a total of 196 high-risk patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, of whom 126 were included in this study (43%, 54/126, received remdesivir; 57%, 72/126, did not receive remdesivir). Baseline clinical characteristics were similar between groups; autoimmune diseases (39/126), solid organ transplant (31/126), and malignant neoplasms (24/126) were the most common immunocompromising conditions. Diabetes mellitus was strongly associated with the primary outcome in both groups. Prior severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection or vaccination was not independently associated with COVID-19 progression. Treatment with remdesivir significantly reduced the odds of hospitalization or death (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.44; P < .01). Conclusions: Early outpatient treatment with remdesivir significantly reduces hospitalization or death by 84% in high-risk, majority immunosuppressed patients with Omicron variant COVID-19.

Design of an observational multi-country cohort study to assess immunogenicity of multiple vaccine platforms (InVITE).

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 vaccines have been developed, and the World Health Oraganization (WHO) has granted emergency use listing to multiple vaccines. Studies of vaccine immunogenicity data from implementing COVID-19 vaccines by national immunization programs in single studies spanning multiple countries and continents are limited but critically needed to answer public health questions on vaccines, such as comparing immune responses to different vaccines and among different populations.

Final efficacy analysis, interim safety analysis, and immunogenicity of a single dose of recombinant novel coronavirus vaccine (adenovirus type 5 vector) in adults 18 years and older: an international, multicentre, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The Ad5-nCoV vaccine is a single-dose adenovirus type 5 (Ad5) vectored vaccine expressing the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that was well-tolerated and immunogenic in phase 1 and 2 studies. In this study, we report results on the final efficacy and interim safety analyses of the phase 3 trial. METHODS: This double-blind, randomised, international, placebo-controlled, endpoint-case driven, phase 3, clinical trial enrolled adults aged 18 years older at study centres in Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Pakistan, and Russia. Participants were eligible for the study if they had no unstable or severe underlying medical or psychiatric conditions; had no history of a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection; were not pregnant or breastfeeding; and had no previous receipt of an adenovirus-vectored, coronavirus, or SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. After informed consent was obtained, 25 mL of whole blood was withdrawn from all eligible participants who were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive a single intramuscular dose of 0·5 mL placebo or a 0·5 mL dose of 5 × 1010 viral particle (vp)/mL Ad5-nCoV vaccine; study staff and participants were blinded to treatment allocation. All participants were contacted weekly by email, telephone, or text message to self-report any symptoms of COVID-19 illness, and laboratory testing for SARS-CoV-2 was done for all participants with any symptoms. The primary efficacy objective evaluated Ad5-nCoV in preventing symptomatic, PCR-confirmed COVID-19 infection occurring at least 28 days after vaccination in all participants who were at least 28 days postvaccination on Jan 15, 2021. The primary safety objective evaluated the incidence of any serious adverse events or medically attended adverse events postvaccination in all participants who received a study injection. This trial is closed for enrolment and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04526990). FINDINGS: Study enrolment began on Sept 22, 2020, in Pakistan, Nov 6, 2020, in Mexico, Dec 2, 2020, in Russia and Chile, and Dec 17, 2020, in Argentina; 150 endpoint cases were reached on Jan 15, 2021, triggering the final primary efficacy analysis. One dose of Ad5-nCoV showed a 57·5% (95% CI 39·7-70·0, p=0·0026) efficacy against symptomatic, PCR-confirmed, COVID-19 infection at 28 days or more postvaccination (21 250 participants; 45 days median duration of follow-up [IQR 36-58]). In the primary safety analysis undertaken at the time of the efficacy analysis (36 717 participants), there was no significant difference in the incidence of serious adverse events (14 [0·1%] of 18 363 Ad5-nCoV recipients and 10 [0·1%] of 18 354 placebo recipients, p=0·54) or medically attended adverse events (442 [2·4%] of 18 363 Ad5-nCoV recipients and 411 [2·2%] of 18 354 placebo recipients, p=0·30) between the Ad5-nCoV or placebo groups, or any serious adverse events considered related to the study product (none in both Ad5-nCoV and placebo recipients). In the extended safety cohort, 1004 (63·5%) of 1582 of Ad5-nCoV recipients and 729 (46·4%) of 1572 placebo recipients reported a solicited systemic adverse event (p<0·0001), of which headache was the most common (699 [44%] of Ad5-nCoV recipients and 481 [30·6%] of placebo recipients; p<0·0001). 971 (61·3%) of 1584 Ad5-nCoV recipients and 314 (20·0%) of 1573 placebo recipients reported an injection-site adverse event (p<0·0001), of which pain at the injection site was the most frequent; reported by 939 (59%) Ad5-nCoV recipients and 303 (19%) placebo recipients. INTERPRETATION: One dose of Ad5-nCoV is efficacious and safe in healthy adults aged 18 years and older. FUNDING: CanSino Biologics and the Beijing Institute of Biotechnology.

Efficacy and Safety of NVX-CoV2373 in Adults in the United States and Mexico.

BACKGROUND: NVX-CoV2373 is an adjuvanted, recombinant spike protein nanoparticle vaccine that was shown to have clinical efficacy for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) in phase 2b-3 trials in the United Kingdom and South Africa, but its efficacy had not yet been tested in North America. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, randomized, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled trial in the United States and Mexico during the first half of 2021 to evaluate the efficacy and safety of NVX-CoV2373 in adults (≥18 years of age) who had not had severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive two doses of NVX-CoV2373 or placebo 21 days apart. The primary objective was to determine vaccine efficacy against reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction-confirmed Covid-19 occurring at least 7 days after the second dose. Vaccine efficacy against moderate-to-severe disease and against different variants was also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 29,949 participants who underwent randomization between December 27, 2020, and February 18, 2021, a total of 29,582 (median age, 47 years; 12.6% ≥65 years of age) received at least one dose: 19,714 received vaccine and 9868 placebo. Over a period of 3 months, 77 cases of Covid-19 were noted - 14 among vaccine recipients and 63 among placebo recipients (vaccine efficacy, 90.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 82.9 to 94.6; P<0.001). Ten moderate and 4 severe cases occurred, all in placebo recipients, yielding vaccine efficacy against moderate-to-severe disease of 100% (95% CI, 87.0 to 100). Most sequenced viral genomes (48 of 61, 79%) were variants of concern or interest - largely B.1.1.7 (alpha) (31 of the 35 genomes for variants of concern, 89%). Vaccine efficacy against any variant of concern or interest was 92.6% (95% CI, 83.6 to 96.7). Reactogenicity was mostly mild to moderate and transient but was more frequent among NVX-CoV2373 recipients than among placebo recipients and was more frequent after the second dose than after the first dose. CONCLUSIONS: NVX-CoV2373 was safe and effective for the prevention of Covid-19. Most breakthrough cases were caused by contemporary variant strains. (Funded by Novavax and others; PREVENT-19 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04611802.).

Efficacy of interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir compared with remdesivir alone in hospitalised adults with COVID-19: a double-bind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Functional impairment of interferon, a natural antiviral component of the immune system, is associated with the pathogenesis and severity of COVID-19. We aimed to compare the efficacy of interferon beta-1a in combination with remdesivir compared with remdesivir alone in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial at 63 hospitals across five countries (Japan, Mexico, Singapore, South Korea, and the USA). Eligible patients were hospitalised adults (aged ≥18 years) with SARS-CoV-2 infection, as confirmed by a positive RT-PCR test, and who met one of the following criteria suggestive of lower respiratory tract infection: the presence of radiographic infiltrates on imaging, a peripheral oxygen saturation on room air of 94% or less, or requiring supplemental oxygen. Patients were excluded if they had either an alanine aminotransferase or an aspartate aminotransferase concentration more than five times the upper limit of normal; had impaired renal function; were allergic to the study product; were pregnant or breast feeding; were already on mechanical ventilation; or were anticipating discharge from the hospital or transfer to another hospital within 72 h of enrolment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous remdesivir as a 200 mg loading dose on day 1 followed by a 100 mg maintenance dose administered daily for up to 9 days and up to four doses of either 44 µg interferon beta-1a (interferon beta-1a group plus remdesivir group) or placebo (placebo plus remdesivir group) administered subcutaneously every other day. Randomisation was stratified by study site and disease severity at enrolment. Patients, investigators, and site staff were masked to interferon beta-1a and placebo treatment; remdesivir treatment was given to all patients without masking. The primary outcome was time to recovery, defined as the first day that a patient attained a category 1, 2, or 3 score on the eight-category ordinal scale within 28 days, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all randomised patients who were classified according to actual clinical severity. Safety was assessed in the as-treated population, defined as all patients who received at least one dose of the assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04492475. FINDINGS: Between Aug 5, 2020, and Nov 11, 2020, 969 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group (n=487) or to the placebo plus remdesivir group (n=482). The mean duration of symptoms before enrolment was 8·7 days (SD 4·4) in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group and 8·5 days (SD 4·3) days in the placebo plus remdesivir group. Patients in both groups had a time to recovery of 5 days (95% CI not estimable) (rate ratio of interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group vs placebo plus remdesivir 0·99 [95% CI 0·87-1·13]; p=0·88). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of mortality at 28 days was 5% (95% CI 3-7%) in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group and 3% (2-6%) in the placebo plus remdesivir group (hazard ratio 1·33 [95% CI 0·69-2·55]; p=0·39). Patients who did not require high-flow oxygen at baseline were more likely to have at least one related adverse event in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group (33 [7%] of 442 patients) than in the placebo plus remdesivir group (15 [3%] of 435). In patients who required high-flow oxygen at baseline, 24 (69%) of 35 had an adverse event and 21 (60%) had a serious adverse event in the interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir group compared with 13 (39%) of 33 who had an adverse event and eight (24%) who had a serious adverse event in the placebo plus remdesivir group. INTERPRETATION: Interferon beta-1a plus remdesivir was not superior to remdesivir alone in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients who required high-flow oxygen at baseline had worse outcomes after treatment with interferon beta-1a compared with those given placebo. FUNDING: The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (USA).

Large-scale screening for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among healthcare workers: Prevalence and risk factors for asymptomatic and pauci-symptomatic carriers, with emphasis on the use of personal protective equipment (PPE).

Healthcare workers (HCWs) not fulfilling the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case definition underwent severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) screening. Risk of exposure, adherence to personal protective equipment (PPE), and symptoms were assessed. In total, 2,000 HCWs were screened: 5.5% were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). There were no differences in PPE use between SARS-CoV-2-positive and -negative HCWs (adherence, >90%). Nursing and kitchen staff were independently associated with positive SARS-CoV-2 results.

Baricitinib plus Remdesivir for Hospitalized Adults with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with dysregulated inflammation. The effects of combination treatment with baricitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor, plus remdesivir are not known. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating baricitinib plus remdesivir in hospitalized adults with Covid-19. All the patients received remdesivir (≤10 days) and either baricitinib (≤14 days) or placebo (control). The primary outcome was the time to recovery. The key secondary outcome was clinical status at day 15. RESULTS: A total of 1033 patients underwent randomization (with 515 assigned to combination treatment and 518 to control). Patients receiving baricitinib had a median time to recovery of 7 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 6 to 8), as compared with 8 days (95% CI, 7 to 9) with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.32; P = 0.03), and a 30% higher odds of improvement in clinical status at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0 to 1.6). Patients receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation at enrollment had a time to recovery of 10 days with combination treatment and 18 days with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.10 to 2.08). The 28-day mortality was 5.1% in the combination group and 7.8% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.09). Serious adverse events were less frequent in the combination group than in the control group (16.0% vs. 21.0%; difference, -5.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -9.8 to -0.3; P = 0.03), as were new infections (5.9% vs. 11.2%; difference, -5.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.7 to -1.9; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib plus remdesivir was superior to remdesivir alone in reducing recovery time and accelerating improvement in clinical status among patients with Covid-19, notably among those receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation. The combination was associated with fewer serious adverse events. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04401579.).

CLINICAL AND EPIDEMIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PATIENTS DIAGNOSED WITH COVID-19 IN A TERTIARY CARE CENTER IN MEXICO CITY: A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY.

BACKGROUND: Regional information regarding the characteristics of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 is needed for a better understanding of the pandemic. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study to describe the clinical features of COVID-19 patients diagnosed in a tertiary-care center in Mexico City and to assess differences according to the treatment setting (ambulatory vs. hospital) and to the need of intensive care (IC). METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort, including consecutive patients with COVID-19 from February 26, 2020 to April 11, 2020. RESULTS: We identified 309 patients (140 inpatients and 169 outpatients). The median age was 43 years (interquartile range, 33-54), 59.2% men, and 18.6% healthcare workers (12.3% from our center). The median body mass index (BMI) was 29.00 kg/m2 and 39.6% had obesity. Compared to outpatients, inpatients were older, had comorbidities, cough, and dyspnea more frequently. Twenty-nine (20.7%) inpatients required treatment in the IC unit (ICU). History of diabetes (type 1 or 2) and abdominal pain were more common in ICU patients compared to non-ICU patients. ICU patients had higher BMIs, higher respiratory rates, and lower room-air capillary oxygen saturations. ICU patients showed a more severe inflammatory response as assessed by white blood cell count, neutrophil and platelet count, C-reactive protein, ferritin, procalcitonin, and albumin levels. By the end of the study period, 65 inpatients had been discharged because of improvement, 70 continued hospitalized, and five had died. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with comorbidities, either middle-age obese or elderly complaining of fever, cough, or dyspnea, were more likely to be admitted. At admission, patients with diabetes, high BMI, and clinical or laboratory findings consistent with a severe inflammatory state were more likely to require IC.