One Week of Oral Camostat Versus Placebo in Non-Hospitalized Adults with Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19: A Randomized Controlled Phase 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Camostat inhibits SARS-CoV-2 infection in vitro. We studied the safety and efficacy of camostat in ACTIV-2/A5401, a phase 2/3 platform trial of therapeutics for COVID-19 in non-hospitalized adults. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2 study in adults with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 randomized to oral camostat for 7 days or a pooled placebo arm. Primary outcomes were time to improvement in COVID-19 symptoms through day 28, proportion of participants with SARS-CoV-2 RNA below the lower limit of quantification (LLoQ) from nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs through day 14, and grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) through day 28. RESULTS: Of 216 participants (109 randomized to camostat, 107 to placebo) who initiated study intervention, 45% reported ≤5 days of symptoms at study entry and 26% met the protocol definition of higher risk of progression to severe COVID-19. Median age was 37 years. Median time to symptom improvement was 9 days in both arms (p=0.99). There were no significant differences in the proportion of participants with SARS-CoV-2 RNA

Immune resilience despite inflammatory stress promotes longevity and favorable health outcomes including resistance to infection.

Some people remain healthier throughout life than others but the underlying reasons are poorly understood. Here we hypothesize this advantage is attributable in part to optimal immune resilience (IR), defined as the capacity to preserve and/or rapidly restore immune functions that promote disease resistance (immunocompetence) and control inflammation in infectious diseases as well as other causes of inflammatory stress. We gauge IR levels with two distinct peripheral blood metrics that quantify the balance between (i) CD8+ and CD4+ T-cell levels and (ii) gene expression signatures tracking longevity-associated immunocompetence and mortality-associated inflammation. Profiles of IR metrics in ~48,500 individuals collectively indicate that some persons resist degradation of IR both during aging and when challenged with varied inflammatory stressors. With this resistance, preservation of optimal IR tracked (i) a lower risk of HIV acquisition, AIDS development, symptomatic influenza infection, and recurrent skin cancer; (ii) survival during COVID-19 and sepsis; and (iii) longevity. IR degradation is potentially reversible by decreasing inflammatory stress. Overall, we show that optimal IR is a trait observed across the age spectrum, more common in females, and aligned with a specific immunocompetence-inflammation balance linked to favorable immunity-dependent health outcomes. IR metrics and mechanisms have utility both as biomarkers for measuring immune health and for improving health outcomes.

Natural killer cells for antiviral therapy.

Natural killer (NK) cell-based immunotherapy is being explored for treating infectious diseases, including viral infections. Here, we discuss evidence of NK cell responses to different viruses, ongoing clinical efforts to treat such infections with NK cell products, and review platforms to generate NK cell products.

The importance of appropriate selection of clinical endpoints in outpatient COVID-19 clinical trials.

Clinical trial endpoints must be carefully and intentionally selected so that the results of the trial can be used to inform policy- and decision-making. The relative importance of potential endpoints often depends on the stakeholder, with patients having different preferences to policymakers and regulators. The set up of clinical trials for COVID-19 was problematic, as endpoints that could be reasonably measured did not always match the efficacy endpoints usually required by guideline panels. Thus, different endpoints were used, which made the timely comparison and evaluation of interventions difficult. Here we discuss the evolution of the COVID-19 landscape and the effect this is having on the selection of consistent and measurable clinical trial endpoints. Using appropriate endpoints is crucial for researchers to offer the most reliable, valid, and interpretable results possible.

Safety and Efficacy of Combination SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibodies Amubarvimab Plus Romlusevimab in Nonhospitalized Patients With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Development of safe and effective SARS-CoV-2 therapeutics is a high priority. Amubarvimab and romlusevimab are noncompeting anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies with an extended half-life. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of amubarvimab plus romlusevimab. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 2 and 3 platform trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04518410). SETTING: Nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the United States, Brazil, South Africa, Mexico, Argentina, and the Philippines. PATIENTS: Adults within 10 days onset of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection who are at high risk for clinical progression. INTERVENTION: Combination of monoclonal antibodies amubarvimab plus romlusevimab or placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Nasopharyngeal and anterior nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 symptoms, safety, and progression to hospitalization or death. RESULTS: Eight-hundred and seven participants who initiated the study intervention were included in the phase 3 analysis. Median age was 49 years (quartiles, 39 to 58); 51% were female, 18% were Black, and 50% were Hispanic or Latino. Median time from symptom onset at study entry was 6 days (quartiles, 4 to 7). Hospitalizations and/or death occurred in 9 (2.3%) participants in the amubarvimab plus romlusevimab group compared with 44 (10.7%) in the placebo group, with an estimated 79% reduction in events (P < 0.001). This reduction was similar between participants with 5 or less and more than 5 days of symptoms at study entry. Grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events through day 28 were seen less frequently among participants randomly assigned to amubarvimab plus romlusevimab (7.3%) than placebo (16.1%) (P < 0.001), with no severe infusion reactions or drug-related serious adverse events. LIMITATION: The study population was mostly unvaccinated against COVID-19 and enrolled before the spread of Omicron variants and subvariants. CONCLUSION: Amubarvimab plus romlusevimab was safe and significantly reduced the risk for hospitalization and/or death among nonhospitalized adults with mild to moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection at high risk for progression to severe disease. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health.

Neutralizing Antibody Responses After Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 BA.2 and BA.2.12.1 Infection Do Not Neutralize BA.4 and BA.5 and Can Be Blunted by Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Treatment.

The factors contributing to the rapid emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) BA.4 and BA.5 subvariants in populations that experienced recent surges of BA.2 and BA.2.12.1 infections are not understood. Neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) are likely to protect against severe disease if present in sufficient quantity. We found that after BA.2 or BA.2.12.1 infection, NAb responses were largely cross-neutralizing but were much less effective against BA.5. In addition, individuals who were infected and treated early with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) had lower NAb levels than untreated individuals.

Safety and Efficacy of Combined Tixagevimab and Cilgavimab Administered Intramuscularly or Intravenously in Nonhospitalized Patients With COVID-19: 2 Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: Development of effective, scalable therapeutics for SARS-CoV-2 is a priority. Objective: To test the efficacy of combined tixagevimab and cilgavimab monoclonal antibodies for early COVID-19 treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two phase 2 randomized blinded placebo-controlled clinical trials within the Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV)-2/A5401 platform were performed at US ambulatory sites. Nonhospitalized adults 18 years or older within 10 days of positive SARS-CoV-2 test and symptom onset were eligible and were enrolled from February 1 to May 31, 2021. Interventions: Tixagevimab-cilgavimab, 300 mg (150 mg of each component) given intravenously (IV) or 600 mg (300 mg of each component) given intramuscularly (IM) in the lateral thigh, or pooled placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: Coprimary outcomes were time to symptom improvement through 28 days; nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RNA below the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) on days 3, 7, or 14; and treatment-emergent grade 3 or higher adverse events through 28 days. Results: A total of 229 participants were randomized for the IM study and 119 were randomized for the IV study. The primary modified intention-to-treat population included 223 participants who initiated IM tixagevimab-cilgavimab (n = 106) or placebo treatment (n = 117) (median age, 39 [IQR, 30-48] years; 113 [50.7%] were men) and 114 who initiated IV tixagevimab-cilgavimab (n = 58) or placebo treatment (n = 56) (median age, 44 [IQR, 35-54] years; 67 [58.8%] were women). Enrollment in the IV study was stopped early based on a decision to focus on IM product development. Participants were enrolled at a median of 6 (IQR, 4-7) days from COVID-19 symptom onset. Significant differences in time to symptom improvement were not observed for IM tixagevimab-cilgavimab vs placebo or IV tixagevimab-cilgavimab vs placebo. A greater proportion in the IM tixagevimab-cilgavimab arm (69 of 86 [80.2%]) than placebo (62 of 96 [64.6%]) had nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RNA below LLOQ at day 7 (adjusted risk ratio, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.12-1.57]) but not days 3 and 14; the joint test across time points favored treatment (P = .003). Differences in the proportion below LLOQ were not observed for IV tixagevimab-cilgavimab vs placebo at any of the specified time points. There were no safety signals with either administration route. Conclusions: In these 2 phase 2 randomized clinical trials, IM or IV tixagevimab-cilgavimab was safe but did not change time to symptom improvement. Antiviral activity was more evident in the larger IM trial. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04518410.

Lessons learned from the Last Gift study: ethical and practical challenges faced while conducting HIV cure-related research at the end of life.

The Last Gift is an observational HIV cure-related research study conducted with people with HIV at the end of life (EOL) at the University of California San Diego. Participants agree to voluntarily donate blood and other biospecimens while living and their bodies for a rapid research autopsy postmortem to better understand HIV reservoir dynamics throughout the entire body. The Last Gift study was initiated in 2017. Since then, 30 volunteers were enrolled who are either (1) terminally ill with a concomitant condition and have a prognosis of 6 months or less or (2) chronically ill with multiple comorbidities and nearing the EOL.Multiple ethical and logistical challenges have been revealed during this time; here, we share our lessons learnt and ethical analysis. Issues relevant to healthcare research include surrogate informed consent, personal and professional boundaries, challenges posed conducting research in a pandemic, and clinician burnout and emotional support. Issues more specific to EOL and postmortem research include dual roles of clinical care and research teams, communication between research personnel and clinical teams, legally required versus rapid research autopsy, identification of next of kin/loved ones and issues of inclusion. Issues specific to the Last Gift include logistics of body donation and rapid research autopsy, and disposition of the body as a study benefit.We recommend EOL research teams to have clear provisions around surrogate informed consent, rotate personnel to maintain boundaries, limit direct contact with staff associated with clinical care and have a clear plan for legally required versus research autopsies, among other recommendations.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 variants on the total CD4+ and CD8+ T cell reactivity in infected or vaccinated individuals.

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants with evidence of antibody escape highlight the importance of addressing whether the total CD4+ and CD8+ T cell recognition is also affected. Here, we compare SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells against the B.1.1.7, B.1.351, P.1, and CAL.20C lineages in COVID-19 convalescents and in recipients of the Moderna (mRNA-1273) or Pfizer/BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccines. The total reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 variants is similar in terms of magnitude and frequency of response, with decreases in the 10%-22% range observed in some assay/VOC combinations. A total of 7% and 3% of previously identified CD4+ and CD8+ T cell epitopes, respectively, are affected by mutations in the various VOCs. Thus, the SARS-CoV-2 variants analyzed here do not significantly disrupt the total SARS-CoV-2 T cell reactivity; however, the decreases observed highlight the importance for active monitoring of T cell reactivity in the context of SARS-CoV-2 evolution.

Symptom and Viral Rebound in Untreated SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Although symptom and viral rebound have been reported after nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment, the trajectories of symptoms and viral load during the natural course of COVID-19 have not been well described. OBJECTIVE: To characterize symptom and viral rebound in untreated outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of participants in a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04518410). SETTING: Multicenter trial. PATIENTS: 563 participants receiving placebo in the ACTIV-2/A5401 (Adaptive Platform Treatment Trial for Outpatients With COVID-19) platform trial. MEASUREMENTS: Participants recorded the severity of 13 symptoms daily between days 0 and 28. Nasal swabs were collected for SARS-CoV-2 RNA testing on days 0 to 14, 21, and 28. Symptom rebound was defined as a 4-point increase in total symptom score after improvement any time after study entry. Viral rebound was defined as an increase of at least 0.5 log10 RNA copies/mL from the immediately preceding time point to a viral load of 3.0 log10 copies/mL or higher. High-level viral rebound was defined as an increase of at least 0.5 log10 RNA copies/mL to a viral load of 5.0 log10 copies/mL or higher. RESULTS: Symptom rebound was identified in 26% of participants at a median of 11 days after initial symptom onset. Viral rebound was detected in 31% and high-level viral rebound in 13% of participants. Most symptom and viral rebound events were transient, because 89% of symptom rebound and 95% of viral rebound events occurred at only a single time point before improving. The combination of symptom and high-level viral rebound was observed in 3% of participants. LIMITATION: A largely unvaccinated population infected with pre-Omicron variants was evaluated. CONCLUSION: Symptom or viral relapse in the absence of antiviral treatment is common, but the combination of symptom and viral rebound is rare. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Nasal and Plasma SARS-CoV-2 RNA Levels are Associated with Timing of Symptom Resolution in the ACTIV-2 Trial of Non-hospitalized Adults with COVID-19.

Acute COVID-19 symptoms limit daily activities, but little is known about its association with SARS-CoV-2 viral burden. In this exploratory analysis of placebo recipients in the ACTIV-2/A5401 platform trial, we showed that high anterior nasal (AN) RNA levels and detectable plasma RNA were associated with delayed symptom improvement.

Broadly neutralizing anti-S2 antibodies protect against all three human betacoronaviruses that cause deadly disease.

Pan-betacoronavirus neutralizing antibodies may hold the key to developing broadly protective vaccines against novel pandemic coronaviruses and to more effectively respond to SARS-CoV-2 variants. The emergence of Omicron and subvariants of SARS-CoV-2 illustrates the limitations of solely targeting the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike (S) protein. Here, we isolated a large panel of broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs) from SARS-CoV-2 recovered-vaccinated donors, which targets a conserved S2 region in the betacoronavirus spike fusion machinery. Select bnAbs showed broad in vivo protection against all three deadly betacoronaviruses, SARS-CoV-1, SARS-CoV-2, and MERS-CoV, which have spilled over into humans in the past two decades. Structural studies of these bnAbs delineated the molecular basis for their broad reactivity and revealed common antibody features targetable by broad vaccination strategies. These bnAbs provide new insights and opportunities for antibody-based interventions and for developing pan-betacoronavirus vaccines.

Antiretroviral Drugs for Treatment and Prevention of HIV Infection in Adults: 2022 Recommendations of the International Antiviral Society-USA Panel.

Importance: Recent advances in treatment and prevention of HIV warrant updated recommendations to guide optimal practice. Objective: Based on a critical evaluation of new data, to provide clinicians with recommendations on use of antiretroviral drugs for the treatment and prevention of HIV, laboratory monitoring, care of people aging with HIV, substance use disorder and HIV, and new challenges in people with HIV, including COVID-19 and monkeypox virus infection. Evidence Review: A panel of volunteer expert physician scientists were appointed to update the 2020 consensus recommendations. Relevant evidence in the literature (PubMed and Embase searches, which initially yielded 7891 unique citations, of which 834 were considered relevant) and studies presented at peer-reviewed scientific conferences between January 2020 and October 2022 were considered. Findings: Initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) is recommended as soon as possible after diagnosis of HIV. Barriers to care should be addressed, including ensuring access to ART and adherence support. Integrase strand transfer inhibitor-containing regimens remain the mainstay of initial therapy. For people who have achieved viral suppression with a daily oral regimen, long-acting injectable therapy with cabotegravir plus rilpivirine given as infrequently as every 2 months is now an option. Weight gain and metabolic complications have been linked to certain antiretroviral medications; novel strategies to ameliorate these complications are needed. Management of comorbidities throughout the life span is increasingly important, because people with HIV are living longer and confronting the health challenges of aging. In addition, management of substance use disorder in people with HIV requires an evidence-based, integrated approach. Options for preexposure prophylaxis include oral medications (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine) and, for the first time, a long-acting injectable agent, cabotegravir. Recent global health emergencies, like the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and monkeypox virus outbreak, continue to have a major effect on people with HIV and the delivery of services. To address these and other challenges, an equity-based approach is essential. Conclusions and Relevance: Advances in treatment and prevention of HIV continue to improve outcomes, but challenges and opportunities remain.

Virologic and Immunologic Characterization of COVID-19 Recrudescence after Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Treatment.

We isolated a SARS-CoV-2 BA.2 variant from a person with COVID-19 recrudescence after nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment. Antiviral sensitivity and neutralizing antibody testing were performed with both parental SARS-CoV-2 and multiple variants of concern. We found that neither NM resistance nor absence of neutralizing immunity were likely causes of the recrudescence.

Qualitative interviews to evaluate content validity of the ACTIV-2 COVID-19 Symptom Diary (ACSD).

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures are needed to assess the impact of treatments for COVID-19 on symptoms. The ACTIV-2 COVID-19 Symptom Diary (ACSD) is being used in the ongoing Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines-2 (ACTIV-2) platform clinical trial. The purpose of the current study was to conduct qualitative interviews to assess content validity of the ACSD. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with adults who had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The ACSD begins with global items, followed by a symptom checklist. Each interview began with concept elicitation focusing on participant experiences with COVID-19. Then, participants completed the ACSD, and cognitive interviews were conducted to evaluate the questionnaire. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded following a qualitative content analysis. For the qualitative analysis, a coding dictionary was developed with a list of all potential codes and instructions for how the codes should be applied and combined. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 30 participants (mean age = 39 years; 57% female; 17% Latinx; 17% Black/African American; 40% meeting at least one criterion for classification as high risk of progression to severe COVID-19). Commonly reported symptoms included fatigue (reported by 100% of the sample), body pain/muscle pain/aches (87%), headaches (87%), cough (83%), loss of smell (73%), shortness of breath/difficulty breathing (70%), and chills (70%). The 13 symptoms most commonly reported in this study are included in the ACSD. After completing the ACSD, participants consistently reported that it was clear and easy to complete, and all items were generally interpreted as intended. Based on participants' input, the ACSD was edited slightly after the first 13 interviews, and the revised version was used for the final 17 interviews. Two additional items assessing "brain fog" and dizziness were recommended for addition to the ACSD in future research. CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study supports the content validity of the ACSD for assessment of COVID-19 symptoms. Quantitative research with larger samples will be needed to examine the questionnaire's measurement properties.

This study focused on the ACTIV-2 COVID-19 Symptom Diary (ACSD), a questionnaire that assesses symptom severity of COVID-19. The ACSD begins with global items assessing overall symptom severity, followed by a symptom checklist focusing on individual symptoms. Interviews were conducted with 30 adults who had tested positive for COVID-19. The patients reported their experiences with COVID-19, completed the ACSD, and provided their opinions about the ACSD. Based on input from these patients, the ACSD appears to be clear and easy to complete, and it includes the most common and important symptoms of COVID-19. The ACSD was edited for clarity, and "brain fog" and dizziness were recommended additions for future research. This study suggests that the ACSD is a useful questionnaire for assessment of COVID-19 symptoms in clinical studies. Studies like this are important for ensuring that symptoms are measured appropriately and accurately in clinical trials. Future research with larger samples will be needed to further examine the questionnaire.

Cocirculation and replacement of SARS-CoV-2 variants in crowded settings and marginalized populations along the US-Mexico border.

OBJECTIVE: To interrogate the circulating SARS-CoV-2 lin-eages and recombinant variants in persons living in migrant shelters and persons who inject drugs (PWID). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We combined data from two studies with marginalized populations (migrants in shelters and persons who inject drugs) in Tijuana, Mexico. SARS-CoV-2 variants were identified on nasal swabs specimens and compared to publicly available genomes sampled in Mexico and California. RESULTS: All but 2 of the 10 lineages identified were predomi-nantly detected in North and Central America. Discrepan-cies between migrants and PWID can be explained by the temporal emergence and short time span of most of these lineages in the region. CONCLUSION: The results illustrate the temporo-spatial structure for SARS-CoV-2 lineage dispersal and the potential co-circulation of multiple lineages in high-risk populations with close social contacts. These conditions create the potential for recombination to take place in the California-Baja California border.

Phase 2 Safety and Antiviral Activity of SAB-185, a Novel Polyclonal Antibody Therapy for Nonhospitalized Adults With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: SAB-185, a novel fully human IgG polyclonal immunoglobulin product, underwent phase 2 evaluation for nonhospitalized adults with mild-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: Participants received intravenous SAB-185 3840 units/kg (low-dose) or placebo, or 10 240 units/kg (high-dose) or placebo. Primary outcome measures were nasopharyngeal severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA < lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) at study days 3, 7, and 14, time to symptomatic improvement, and safety through day 28. RESULTS: Two-hundred thirteen participants received low-dose SAB-185/placebo (n = 107/106) and 215 high-dose SAB-185/placebo (n = 110/105). The proportions with SARS-CoV-2 RNA < LLOQ were higher for SAB-185 versus placebo at days 3 and 7 and similar at day 14, and significantly higher at day 7 for high-dose SAB-185 versus placebo only, relative risk 1.23 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.49). At day 3, SARS-CoV-2 RNA levels were lower with low-dose and high-dose SAB-185 versus placebo: differences in medians of -0.78 log10 copies/mL (P = .08) and -0.71 log10 copies/mL (P = .10), respectively. No difference was observed in time to symptom improvement: median 11/10 days (P = .24) for low-dose SAB-185/placebo and 8/10 days (P = .50) for high-dose SAB-185/placebo. Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 5%/13% of low-dose SAB-185/placebo and 9%/12% of high-dose SAB-185/placebo. CONCLUSIONS: SAB-185 was safe and generally well tolerated and demonstrated modest antiviral activity in predominantly low-risk nonhospitalized adults with COVID-19. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04518410.

Predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people who inject drugs.

INTRODUCTION: We studied characteristics of COVID-19 vaccination uptake among people who inject drugs (PWID). METHODS: Participants aged ≥18 years who injected drugs ≤1 month ago were recruited into a community-based cohort from October 2020 to September 2021 in San Diego, California Poisson regression identified correlates of having had ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose based on semi-annual follow-up interviews through March 15, 2022. RESULTS: Of 360 participants, 74.7% were male, mean age was 42 years; 63.1% were Hispanic/Mexican/Latinx. More than one-third had ≥1 co-morbidity. HIV and HCV seroprevalence were 4.2% and 50.6% respectively; 41.1% lacked health insurance. Only 37.8% reported having ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose. None received ≥3 doses. However, of those vaccinated, 37.5% were previously unwilling/unsure about COVID-19 vaccines. Believing COVID-19 vaccines include tracking devices (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR]: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.42,0.92) and lacking health insurance (aIRR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.40,0.91) were associated with approximately 40% lower COVID-19 vaccination rates). Ever receiving influenza vaccines (aIRR: 2.16; 95%CI: 1.46, 3.20) and testing HIV-seropositive (aIRR: 2.51; 95% CI: 1.03, 6.10) or SARS-CoV-2 RNA-positive (aIRR: 1.82; 95% CI: 1.05, 3.16) independently predicted higher COVID-19 vaccination rates. Older age, knowing more vaccinated people, and recent incarceration were also independently associated with higher COVID-19 vaccination rates. CONCLUSIONS: One year after COVID-19 vaccines became available to U.S. adults, only one third of PWID had received ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose. Multi-faceted approaches that dispel disinformation, integrate public health and social services and increase access to free, community-based COVID-19 vaccines are urgently needed.

Hydroxychloroquine for treatment of non-hospitalized adults with COVID-19: A meta-analysis of individual participant data of randomized trials.

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was initially promoted as an oral therapy for early treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Conventional meta-analyses cannot fully address the heterogeneity of different designs and outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of HCQ in outpatients with mild COVID-19. We conducted a pooled analysis of individual participant data from RCTs that evaluated the effect of HCQ on hospitalization and viral load reduction in outpatients with confirmed COVID-19. We evaluated the overall treatment group effect by log-likelihood ratio test (-2LL) from a generalized linear mixed model to accommodate correlated longitudinal binary data. The analysis included data from 11 RCTs. The outcome of virological effect, assessed in 1560 participants (N = 795 HCQ, N = 765 control), did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups (-2LL = 7.66; p = 0.18) when adjusting for cohort, duration of symptoms, and comorbidities. The decline in polymerase chain reaction positive tests from day 1 to 7 was 42.0 and 41.6 percentage points in the HCQ and control groups, respectively. Among the 2037 participants evaluable for hospitalization (N = 1058 HCQ, N = 979 control), we found no significant differences in hospitalization rate between participants receiving HCQ and controls (odds ratio 0.995; 95% confidence interval 0.614-1.610; -2LL = 0.0; p = 0.98) when adjusting for cohort, duration of symptoms, and comorbidities. This individual participant data meta-analysis of 11 HCQ trials that evaluated severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 viral clearance and COVID-19 hospitalization did not show a clinical benefit of HCQ. Our meta-analysis provides evidence to support the interruption in the use of HCQ in mild COVID-19 outpatients to reduce progression to severe disease.