Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 252
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
Eur J Med Res ; 27(1): 6, 2022 Jan 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1635980

ABSTRACT

SARS-CoV-2, a novel coronavirus, is the agent responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic and is a major public health concern nowadays. The rapid and global spread of this coronavirus leads to an increase in hospitalizations and thousands of deaths in many countries. To date, great efforts have been made worldwide for the efficient management of this crisis, but there is still no effective and specific treatment for COVID-19. The primary therapies to treat the disease are antivirals, anti-inflammatories and respiratory therapy. In addition, antibody therapies currently have been a many active and essential part of SARS-CoV-2 infection treatment. Ongoing trials are proposed different therapeutic options including various drugs, convalescent plasma therapy, monoclonal antibodies, immunoglobulin therapy, and cell therapy. The present study summarized current evidence of these therapeutic approaches to assess their efficacy and safety for COVID-19 treatment. We tried to provide comprehensive information about the available potential therapeutic approaches against COVID-19 to support researchers and physicians in any current and future progress in treating COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/therapy , Immunization, Passive , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Clinical Trials as Topic , Dietary Supplements , Humans , Immunization, Passive/methods , Immunoglobulins, Intravenous/therapeutic use , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
2.
Ital J Pediatr ; 48(1): 7, 2022 Jan 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1634416

ABSTRACT

The fast diffusion of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic have called for an equally rapid evolution of the therapeutic options.The Human recombinant monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have recently been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and by the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) in subjects aged ≥12 with SARS-CoV-2 infection and specific risk factors.Currently the indications are specific for the use of two different mAbs combination: Bamlanivimab+Etesevimab (produced by Eli Lilly) and Casirivimab+Imdevimab (produced by Regeneron).These drugs have shown favorable effects in adult patients in the initial phase of infection, whereas to date few data are available on their use in children.AIFA criteria derived from the existing literature which reports an increased risk of severe COVID-19 in children with comorbidities. However, the studies analyzing the determinants for progression to severe disease are mainly monocentric, with limited numbers and reporting mostly generic risk categories.Thus, the Italian Society of Pediatrics invited its affiliated Scientific Societies to produce a Consensus document based on the revision of the criteria proposed by AIFA in light of the most recent literature and experts' agreement.This Consensus tries to detail which patients actually have the risk to develop severe disease, analyzing the most common comorbidities in children, in order to detail the indications for mAbs administration and to guide the clinicians in identifying eligible patients.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Patient Selection , Adolescent , Age Factors , COVID-19/complications , Child , Consensus , Drug Combinations , Humans , Italy , Risk Factors , Societies, Medical
3.
MAbs ; 14(1): 2014296, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1624515

ABSTRACT

In this 13th annual installment of the annual 'Antibodies to Watch' article series, we discuss key events in commercial antibody therapeutics development that occurred in 2021 and forecast events that might occur in 2022. Regulatory review of antibody therapeutics that target the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus proceeded at an unprecedented pace in 2021, resulting in both emergency use authorizations and full approvals for sotrovimab, regdanvimab, REGEN-COV2, as well as others, in numerous countries. As of November 1, a total of 11 antibody therapeutics had been granted first approvals in either the United States or European Union in 2021 (evinacumab, dostarlimab loncastuximab tesirine, amivantamab, aducanumab, tralokinumab, anifrolumab, bimekizumab, tisotumab vedotin, regdanvimab, REGEN-COV2). The first global approvals of seven products, however, were granted elsewhere, including Japan (pabinafusp alfa), China (disitamab vedotin, penpulimab, zimberelimab), Australia (sotrovimab, REGEN-COV2), or the Republic of Korea (regdanvimab). Globally, at least 27 novel antibody therapeutics are undergoing review by regulatory agencies. First actions by the Food and Drug Administration on the biologics license applications for faricimab, sutimlimab, tebentafusp, relatlimab, sintilimab, ublituximab and tezepelumab are expected in the first quarter of 2022. Finally, our data show that, with antibodies for COVID-19 excluded, the late-stage commercial clinical pipeline of antibody therapeutics grew by over 30% in the past year. Of those in late-stage development, marketing applications for at least 22 may occur by the end of 2022.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal , Antibodies, Monoclonal/immunology , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/therapeutic use , Antibody Specificity , Antigens, Viral/immunology , Asia , Australia , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/therapy , Clinical Trials as Topic , Compassionate Use Trials , Drug Approval , European Union , Forecasting , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration
5.
J Biomed Sci ; 29(1): 1, 2022 Jan 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1605455

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is an exceptional public health crisis that demands the timely creation of new therapeutics and viral detection. Owing to their high specificity and reliability, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have emerged as powerful tools to treat and detect numerous diseases. Hence, many researchers have begun to urgently develop Ab-based kits for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and Ab drugs for use as COVID-19 therapeutic agents. The detailed structure of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is known, and since this protein is key for viral infection, its receptor-binding domain (RBD) has become a major target for therapeutic Ab development. Because SARS-CoV-2 is an RNA virus with a high mutation rate, especially under the selective pressure of aggressively deployed prophylactic vaccines and neutralizing Abs, the use of Ab cocktails is expected to be an important strategy for effective COVID-19 treatment. Moreover, SARS-CoV-2 infection may stimulate an overactive immune response, resulting in a cytokine storm that drives severe disease progression. Abs to combat cytokine storms have also been under intense development as treatments for COVID-19. In addition to their use as drugs, Abs are currently being utilized in SARS-CoV-2 detection tests, including antigen and immunoglobulin tests. Such Ab-based detection tests are crucial surveillance tools that can be used to prevent the spread of COVID-19. Herein, we highlight some key points regarding mAb-based detection tests and treatments for the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/drug therapy , Humans , Pandemics , Reproducibility of Results , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/genetics
6.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(52): e28470, 2021 Dec 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1592821

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The outbreak of novel coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2), which causes the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is the most important current health problem. The number of patients is increasing worldwide. Pneumonia is the most life-threatening complication of the disease. Prolonged viral shedding in hematological patients with COVID-19 has been demonstrated; however, data on COVID-19 patients receiving anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapy are limited. Accordingly, focusing on humoral immunity, herein, we present 4 COVID-19 patients who were on anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody treatment and had prolonged pneumonia. PATIENT CONCERNS: Two of 4 patients were on rituximab and the other 2 were on obinutuzumab therapy. DIAGNOSIS: The polymerase chain reaction test results for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 were positive for all 4 patients and their COVID pneumonia lasted for >50 days. INTERVENTIONS: Although all patients were treated with an adequate amount of convalescent plasma, prolonged polymerase chain reaction positivity and prolonged pneumonia were possibly due to the lack of ability of the immune system to initiate its antibody response. OUTCOMES: Despite the administration of standard therapies, recurrent pneumonia observed in the present case series of non-neutropenic patients, in whom primary malignancies were under control. CONCLUSIONS: It is suggested that further investigations should be performed to understand the underlying pathophysiology.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Pneumonia/epidemiology , Rituximab/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing , Female , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Middle Aged , Polymerase Chain Reaction , Recurrence , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
7.
Int J Mol Sci ; 22(24)2021 Dec 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1599176

ABSTRACT

To determine whether mitigating the harmful effects of circulating microvesicle-associated inducible nitric oxide (MV-A iNOS) in vivo increases the survival of challenged mice in three different mouse models of sepsis, the ability of anti-MV-A iNOS monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) to rescue challenged mice was assessed using three different mouse models of sepsis. The vivarium of a research laboratory Balb/c mice were challenged with an LD80 dose of either lipopolysaccharide (LPS/endotoxin), TNFα, or MV-A iNOS and then treated at various times after the challenge with saline as control or with an anti-MV-A iNOS mAb as a potential immunotherapeutic to treat sepsis. Each group of mice was checked daily for survivors, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed. Five different murine anti-MV-A iNOS mAbs from our panel of 24 murine anti-MV-A iNOS mAbs were found to rescue some of the challenged mice. All five murine mAbs were used to genetically engineer humanized anti-MV-A iNOS mAbs by inserting the murine complementarity-determining regions (CDRs) into a human IgG1,kappa scaffold and expressing the humanized mAbs in CHO cells. Three humanized anti-MV-A iNOS mAbs were effective at rescuing mice from sepsis in three different animal models of sepsis. The effectiveness of the treatment was both time- and dose-dependent. Humanized anti-MV-A iNOS rHJ mAb could rescue up to 80% of the challenged animals if administered early and at a high dose. Our conclusions are that MV-A iNOS is a novel therapeutic target to treat sepsis; anti-MV-A iNOS mAbs can mitigate the harmful effects of MV-A iNOS; the neutralizing mAb's efficacy is both time- and dose-dependent; and a specifically targeted immunotherapeutic for MV-A iNOS could potentially save tens of thousands of lives annually and could result in improved antibiotic stewardship.


Subject(s)
Cell-Derived Microparticles/metabolism , Nitric Oxide Synthase Type II/metabolism , Sepsis/therapy , Animals , Antibodies, Monoclonal/immunology , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/immunology , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/pharmacology , Cell-Derived Microparticles/immunology , Disease Models, Animal , Humans , Lipopolysaccharides/pharmacology , Mice , Mice, Inbred BALB C , Nitric Oxide/metabolism , Nitric Oxide Synthase Type II/antagonists & inhibitors , Nitric Oxide Synthase Type II/immunology , Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha/pharmacology
8.
Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob ; 20(1): 85, 2021 Dec 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1598520

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that antibody responses play a role in the resolution of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with primary or secondary antibody deficiency are at increased risk of persistent infection. This challenging clinical scenario is associated with adverse patient outcome and potentially creates an ecological niche for the evolution of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants with immune evasion capacity. Case reports and/or series have implied a therapeutic role for convalescent plasma (CP) to secure virological clearance, although concerns have been raised about the effectiveness of CP and its potential to drive viral evolution, and it has largely been withdrawn from clinical use in the UK. CASE PRESENTATION: We report two cases in which persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection was cleared following administration of the monoclonal antibody combination casirivimab and imdevimab (REGN-COV2, Ronapreve). A 55-year-old male with follicular lymphoma, treated with B cell depleting therapy, developed SARS-CoV-2 infection in September 2020 which then persisted for over 200 days. He was hospitalised on four occasions with COVID-19 and suffered debilitating fatigue and malaise throughout. There was no clinical response to antiviral therapy with remdesivir or CP, and SARS-CoV-2 was consistently detected in nasopharyngeal swabs. Intrahost evolution of several spike variants of uncertain significance was identified by viral sequence analysis. Delivery of REGN-COV2, in combination with remdesivir, was associated with clinical improvement and viral clearance within 6 days, which was sustained for over 150 days despite immunotherapy for relapsed follicular lymphoma. The second case, a 68-year-old female with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia on ibrutinib, also developed persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection. Despite a lack of response to remdesivir, infection promptly cleared following REGN-COV2 in combination with remdesivir, accompanied by resolution of inflammation and full clinical recovery that has been maintained for over 290 days. CONCLUSIONS: These cases highlight the potential benefit of REGN-COV2 as therapy for persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection in antibody deficient individuals, including after failure of CP treatment. Formal clinical studies are warranted to assess the effectiveness of REGN-COV2 in antibody-deficient patients, especially in light of the emergence of variants of concern, such as Omicron, that appear to evade REGN-COV2 neutralisation.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , /virology , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing , COVID-19/therapy , Drug Combinations , Female , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Lymphoma, Follicular , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
9.
Med Sci Monit ; 28: e935952, 2022 Jan 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1596813

ABSTRACT

On 4th November 2021, the first oral antiviral drug for COVID-19, molnupiravir (Lagevrio®), received full regulatory approval from the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) in the UK. Molnupiravir is an orally bioavailable antiviral drug for use at home when a SARS-CoV-2 test is positive. On 22nd December 2022, the FDA granted emergency use authorization (EUA) for the oral antiviral drug, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid®) for adults and children with mild and moderate COVID-19 at increased risk of progression to severe COVID-19. These regulatory drug approvals come at a crucial time when new variants of concern of the SARS-CoV-2 virus are spreading rapidly. Although the FDA approved remdesivir (Veklury®) on 22nd October 2020 for use in adults and children for the treatment of COVID-19 requiring hospitalization, its use has been limited by the requirement for intravenous administration in a healthcare facility. The four FDA-approved therapeutic neutralizing monoclonal antibodies, imdevimab, bamlanivimab, etesevimab, and casirivimab are costly and also require medically-supervised intravenous administration. The availability of effective, low-cost oral antiviral drugs available in a community setting that can be used at an early stage of SARS-CoV-2 infection is now a priority in controlling COVID-19. An increasing number of repurposed antiviral drugs are currently under investigation or in the early stages of regulatory approval. This Editorial aims to present an update on the current status of orally bioavailable antiviral drug treatments for SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Cytidine/analogs & derivatives , Hydroxylamines/therapeutic use , Administration, Oral , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Cytidine/therapeutic use , Drug Approval , Drug Repositioning/trends , Humans , Lactams/therapeutic use , Leucine/therapeutic use , Nitriles/therapeutic use , Proline/therapeutic use , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration
11.
MAbs ; 14(1): 2005507, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1585297

ABSTRACT

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has triggered a serious public health crisis worldwide, and considering the novelty of the disease, preventative and therapeutic measures alike are urgently needed. To accelerate such efforts, the development of JS016, a neutralizing monoclonal antibody directed against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, was expedited from a typical 12- to 18-month period to a 4-month period. During this process, transient Chinese hamster ovary cell lines are used to support preclinical, investigational new drug-enabling toxicology research, and early Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls development; mini-pool materials to supply Phase 1 clinical trials; and a single-clone working cell bank for late-stage and pivotal clinical trials were successively adopted. Moreover, key process performance and product quality investigations using a series of orthogonal and state-of-the-art techniques were conducted to demonstrate the comparability of products manufactured using these three processes, and the results indicated that, despite observed variations in process performance, the primary and high-order structures, purity and impurity profiles, biological and immunological functions, and degradation behaviors under stress conditions were largely comparable. The study suggests that, in particular situations, this strategy can be adopted to accelerate the development of therapeutic biopharmaceuticals and their access to patients.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/immunology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Animals , Antibodies, Monoclonal/chemistry , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibody Affinity/immunology , Antibody Specificity/immunology , CHO Cells , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/virology , Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid/methods , Circular Dichroism , Clone Cells , Cricetinae , Cricetulus , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/chemistry , Immunoglobulin G/immunology , Immunoglobulin G/therapeutic use , Isoelectric Point , SARS-CoV-2/metabolism , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/metabolism
12.
Front Immunol ; 12: 790469, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1581320

ABSTRACT

Background: Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) to SARS-CoV-2 are clinically efficacious when administered early, decreasing hospitalization and mortality in patients with mild or moderate COVID-19. We investigated the effects of receiving mAbs (bamlanivimab alone and bamlanivimab and etesevimab together) after SARS-CoV-2 infection on the endogenous immune response. Methods: Longitudinal serum samples were collected from patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 in the BLAZE-1 trial who received placebo (n=153), bamlanivimab alone [700 mg (n=100), 2800 mg (n=106), or 7000 mg (n=98)], or bamlanivimab (2800 mg) and etesevimab (2800 mg) together (n=111). A multiplex Luminex serology assay measured antibody titers against SARS-CoV-2 antigens, including SARS-CoV-2 protein variants that evade bamlanivimab or etesevimab binding, and SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus neutralization assays were performed. Results: The antibody response in patients who received placebo or mAbs had a broad specificity. Titer change from baseline against a receptor-binding domain mutant (Spike-RBD E484Q), as well as N-terminal domain (Spike-NTD) and nucleocapsid protein (NCP) epitopes were 1.4 to 4.1 fold lower at day 15-85 in mAb recipients compared with placebo. Neutralizing activity of day 29 sera from bamlanivimab monotherapy cohorts against both spike E484Q and beta variant (B.1.351) were slightly reduced compared with placebo (by a factor of 3.1, p=0.001, and 2.9, p=0.002, respectively). Early viral load correlated with the subsequent antibody titers of the native, unmodified humoral response (p<0.0001 at Day 15, 29, 60 and 85 for full-length spike). Conclusions: Patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 treated with mAbs develop a wide breadth of antigenic responses to SARS-CoV-2. Small reductions in titers and neutralizing activity, potentially due to a decrease in viral load following mAb treatment, suggest minimal impact of mAb treatment on the endogenous immune response.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/immunology , Adult , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Drug Combinations , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2
13.
Rev Med Virol ; 31(6): e2231, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1574317

ABSTRACT

The Spike protein is the target of both antibody-based therapeutics (convalescent plasma, polyclonal serum, monoclonal antibodies) and vaccines. Mutations in Spike could affect efficacy of those treatments. Hence, monitoring of mutations is necessary to forecast and readapt the inventory of therapeutics. Different phylogenetic nomenclatures have been used for the currently circulating SARS-CoV-2 clades. The Spike protein has different hotspots of mutation and deletion, the most dangerous for immune escape being the ones within the receptor binding domain (RBD), such as K417N/T, N439K, L452R, Y453F, S477N, E484K, and N501Y. Convergent evolution has led to different combinations of mutations among different clades. In this review we focus on the main variants of concern, that is, the so-called UK (B.1.1.7), South African (B.1.351) and Brazilian (P.1) strains.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing/therapeutic use , COVID-19/therapy , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/genetics , Antibodies, Monoclonal/chemistry , Antibodies, Monoclonal/metabolism , Antibodies, Neutralizing/chemistry , Antibodies, Neutralizing/metabolism , Antibodies, Viral/chemistry , Antibodies, Viral/metabolism , Antibodies, Viral/therapeutic use , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Gene Expression , Humans , Immune Evasion , Immunization, Passive/methods , Mutation , Phylogeny , Protein Binding , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/classification , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , South Africa/epidemiology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , United Kingdom/epidemiology
15.
Biosci Trends ; 15(5): 345-349, 2021 Nov 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1528987

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) continues to rage as a global pandemic. A number of potential therapeutic agents have been explored over the past year or two. However, numerous drugs that were expected to prove highly effective, such as lopinavir/ritonavir and remdesivir, have been found to have little benefit in large clinical trials. Interleukin-6 receptor antagonists, glucocorticoids, Janus kinase inhibitors, and some antivirals have been found to provide significant benefits in terms of reducing viral load, reducing the time of nucleic acid conversion, or improving survival. For example, bamlanivimab and etesevimab, which are newly designed monoclonal antibodies against the surface spike protein S1 subunit receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2, have a significant effect on reducing the viral load and the hospitalization rate of patients with mild COVID-19. Several vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have been widely administered worldwide and have provided good protection. Nevertheless, the increasingly hardy variants of the virus have raised the requirements for vaccine design. Perhaps RBD-based vaccines are a viable way to defend against variants, but this still needs to be verified in a large sample. Therefore, this paper provides an update on the treatment options for COVID-19 based on three previously proposed dimensions of drug screening: standard assays of existing broad-spectrum antivirals, screening of chemical libraries, and redevelopment of new, specific drugs.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Drug Repositioning , Animals , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
16.
Front Immunol ; 12: 744242, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1528819

ABSTRACT

The global pandemic of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), places a heavy burden on global public health. Four SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern including B.1.1.7, B.1.351, B.1.617.2, and P.1, and two variants of interest including C.37 and B.1.621 have been reported to have potential immune escape, and one or more mutations endow them with worrisome epidemiologic, immunologic, or pathogenic characteristics. This review introduces the latest research progress on SARS-CoV-2 variants of interest and concern, key mutation sites, and their effects on virus infectivity, mortality, and immune escape. Moreover, we compared the effects of various clinical SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and convalescent sera on epidemic variants, and evaluated the neutralizing capability of several antibodies on epidemic variants. In the end, SARS-CoV-2 evolution strategies in different transmission stages, the impact of different vaccination strategies on SARS-CoV-2 immune escape, antibody therapy strategies and COVID-19 epidemic control prospects are discussed. This review will provide a systematic and comprehensive understanding of the secret of SARS-CoV-2 variants of interest/concern and immune escape.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Immune Evasion , SARS-CoV-2 , Animals , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Viral/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity
17.
J Int AIDS Soc ; 24 Suppl 7: e25829, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1525467

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The last 12 years have seen remarkable progress in the isolation and characterization of at least five different epitope classes of HIV-specific broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs). Detailed analyses of these bnAb lineages, maturation pathways and epitopes have created new opportunities for vaccine development. In addition, interest exists in passive administration of monoclonal antibodies as a viable option for HIV prevention. DISCUSSION: Recently, two antibody-mediated prevention (AMP) trials of a passively administered monoclonal antibody targeting the HIV envelope CD4 binding site, called VRC01, provided proof-of-concept that monoclonal antibody infusion could offer protection against HIV acquisition. While the trials failed to show overall protection against HIV acquisition, sub-analyses revealed that VRC01 infusion provided a 75% prevention efficacy against HIV strains that were susceptible to the antibody. The study also demonstrated that in vitro neutralizing activity, measured by the TZM-bl/pseudovirus assay, was able to predict HIV prevention efficacy in humans. In addition, the AMP trials defined a threshold protective concentration, or neutralization titer, for the VRC01 class of bnAbs, explaining the observed low overall efficacy and serving as a benchmark for the clinical testing of new bnAbs, bnAb cocktails and neutralizing antibody-inducing vaccines. Newer bnAbs that exhibit greater potency and breadth of neutralization in vitro than VRC01 are available for clinical testing. Combinations of best-in-class bnAbs with complementary magnitude, breadth and extent of complete neutralization are predicted to far exceed the prevention efficacy of VRC01. Some engineered bi- and trispecific mAbs exhibit similar desirable neutralizing activity and afford advantages for manufacturing and delivery. Modifications that prolong the serum half-life and improve genital tissue persistence offer additional advantages. CONCLUSIONS: Iterative phase 1 trials are acquiring safety and pharmacokinetic data on dual and triple bnAbs and bi- and trispecific antibodies in preparation for future AMP studies that seek to translate findings from the VRC01 efficacy trials and achieve acceptable levels of overall prevention efficacy.


Subject(s)
HIV Infections , HIV-1 , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Broadly Neutralizing Antibodies , HIV Antibodies , HIV Infections/drug therapy , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Humans
18.
Microbiol Spectr ; 9(2): e0135221, 2021 10 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526454

ABSTRACT

The emerging new lineages of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) have marked a new phase of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Understanding the recognition mechanisms of potent neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (NAbs) against the spike protein is pivotal for developing new vaccines and antibody drugs. Here, we isolated several monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor-binding domain (S-RBD) from the B cell receptor repertoires of a SARS-CoV-2 convalescent. Among these MAbs, the antibody nCoV617 demonstrates the most potent neutralizing activity against authentic SARS-CoV-2 infection, as well as prophylactic and therapeutic efficacies against the human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) transgenic mouse model in vivo. The crystal structure of S-RBD in complex with nCoV617 reveals that nCoV617 mainly binds to the back of the "ridge" of RBD and shares limited binding residues with ACE2. Under the background of the S-trimer model, it potentially binds to both "up" and "down" conformations of S-RBD. In vitro mutagenesis assays show that mutant residues found in the emerging new lineage B.1.1.7 of SARS-CoV-2 do not affect nCoV617 binding to the S-RBD. These results provide a new human-sourced neutralizing antibody against the S-RBD and assist vaccine development. IMPORTANCE COVID-19 is a respiratory disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a serious threat to global health and the economy, so it is necessary to find safe and effective antibody drugs and treatments. The receptor-binding domain (RBD) in the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is responsible for binding to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor. It contains a variety of dominant neutralizing epitopes and is an important antigen for the development of new coronavirus antibodies. The significance of our research lies in the determination of new epitopes, the discovery of antibodies against RBD, and the evaluation of the antibodies' neutralizing effect. The identified antibodies here may be drug candidates for the development of clinical interventions for SARS-CoV-2.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Viral/therapeutic use , COVID-19/therapy , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/antagonists & inhibitors , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/genetics , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/immunology , Animals , Antibodies, Monoclonal/immunology , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Neutralizing/metabolism , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/metabolism , Binding Sites/immunology , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Crystallography, X-Ray , Disease Models, Animal , Female , Humans , Immunization, Passive/methods , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Mice , Mice, Inbred C57BL , Mice, Transgenic , Protein Interaction Domains and Motifs/immunology , Viral Load/drug effects
19.
Int J Mol Sci ; 22(21)2021 Nov 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1502440

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) contains spike proteins that assist the virus in entering host cells. In the absence of a specific intervention, efforts are afoot throughout the world to find an effective treatment for SARS-CoV-2. Through innovative techniques, monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) are being designed and developed to block a particular pathway of SARS-CoV-2 infection. More than 100 patent applications describing the development of MAbs and their application against SARS-CoV-2 have been registered. Most of them target the receptor binding protein so that the interaction between virus and host cell can be prevented. A few monoclonal antibodies are also being patented for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2. Some of them, like Regeneron® have already received emergency use authorization. These protein molecules are currently preferred for high-risk patients such as those over 65 years old with compromised immunity and those with metabolic disorders such as obesity. Being highly specific in action, monoclonal antibodies offer one of the most appropriate interventions for both the prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2. Technological advancement has helped in producing highly efficacious MAbs. However, these agents are known to induce immunogenic and non-immunogenic reactions. More research and testing are required to establish the suitability of administering MAbs to all patients at risk of developing a severe illness. This patent study is focused on MAbs as a therapeutic option for treating COVID-19, as well as their invention, patenting information, and key characteristics.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2/immunology , Animals , Antibodies, Monoclonal/immunology , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/virology , Coronavirus M Proteins/immunology , Humans , Patents as Topic , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , SARS-CoV-2/metabolism , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology
20.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 9: CD013825, 2021 09 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1490675

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are laboratory-produced molecules derived from the B cells of an infected host. They are being investigated as a potential therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of SARS-CoV-2-neutralising mAbs for treating patients with COVID-19, compared to an active comparator, placebo, or no intervention. To maintain the currency of the evidence, we will use a living systematic review approach. A secondary objective is to track newly developed SARS-CoV-2-targeting mAbs from first tests in humans onwards.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, and three other databases on 17 June 2021. We also checked references, searched citations, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. Between submission and publication, we conducted a shortened randomised controlled trial (RCT)-only search on 30 July 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that evaluated SARS-CoV-2-neutralising mAbs, alone or combined, compared to an active comparator, placebo, or no intervention, to treat people with COVID-19. We excluded studies on prophylactic use of SARS-CoV-2-neutralising mAbs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed search results, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB2). Prioritised outcomes were all-cause mortality by days 30 and 60, clinical progression, quality of life, admission to hospital, adverse events (AEs), and serious adverse events (SAEs). We rated the certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We identified six RCTs that provided results from 17,495 participants with planned completion dates between July 2021 and December 2031. Target sample sizes varied from 1020 to 10,000 participants. Average age was 42 to 53 years across four studies of non-hospitalised participants, and 61 years in two studies of hospitalised participants. Non-hospitalised individuals with COVID-19 Four studies evaluated single agents bamlanivimab (N = 465), sotrovimab (N = 868), regdanvimab (N = 307), and combinations of bamlanivimab/etesevimab (N = 1035), and casirivimab/imdevimab (N = 799). We did not identify data for mortality at 60 days or quality of life. Our certainty of the evidence is low for all outcomes due to too few events (very serious imprecision).  Bamlanivimab compared to placebo No deaths occurred in the study by day 29. There were nine people admitted to hospital by day 29 out of 156 in the placebo group compared with one out of 101 in the group treated with 0.7 g bamlanivimab (risk ratio (RR) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 1.33), 2 from 107 in the group treated with 2.8 g (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.47) and 2 from 101 in the group treated with 7.0 g (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.56). Treatment with 0.7 g, 2.8 g and 7.0 g bamlanivimab may have similar rates of AEs as placebo (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.50; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.38; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.27). The effect on SAEs is uncertain. Clinical progression/improvement of symptoms or development of severe symptoms were not reported. Bamlanivimab/etesevimab compared to placebo There were 10 deaths in the placebo group and none in bamlanivimab/etesevimab group by day 30 (RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.81). Bamlanivimab/etesevimab may decrease hospital admission by day 29 (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.59), may result in a slight increase in any grade AEs (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.59) and may increase SAEs (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.45 to 4.37). Clinical progression/improvement of symptoms or development of severe symptoms were not reported. Casirivimab/imdevimab compared to placebo Casirivimab/imdevimab may reduce hospital admissions or death (2.4 g: RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.08 to 2.19; 8.0 g: RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.79). We are uncertain of the effect on grades 3-4 AEs (2.4 g: RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.17 to 3.37; 8.0 g: RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.73) and SAEs (2.4 g: RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.19 to 2.37; 8.0 g: RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.65). Mortality by day 30 and clinical progression/improvement of symptoms or development of severe symptoms were not reported. Sotrovimab compared to placebo We are uncertain whether sotrovimab has an effect on mortality (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.18) and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) requirement or death (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.76). Treatment with sotrovimab may reduce the number of participants with oxygen requirement (RR 0.11, 95 % CI 0.02 to 0.45), hospital admission or death by day 30 (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.48), grades 3-4 AEs (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.60), SAEs (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.63) and may have little or no effect on any grade AEs (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.16).  Regdanvimab compared to placebo Treatment with either dose (40 or 80 mg/kg) compared with placebo may decrease hospital admissions or death (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.42; RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.60, 206 participants), but may increase grades 3-4 AEs (RR 2.62, 95% CI 0.52 to 13.12; RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.37 to 10.70). 80 mg/kg may reduce any grade AEs (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.22) but 40 mg/kg may have little to no effect (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.43). There were too few events to allow meaningful judgment for the outcomes mortality by 30 days, IMV requirement, and SAEs.  Hospitalised individuals with COVID-19 Two studies evaluating bamlanivimab as a single agent (N = 314) and casirivimab/imdevimab as a combination therapy (N = 9785) were included.   Bamlanivimab compared to placebo  We are uncertain whether bamlanivimab has an effect on mortality by day 30 (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.40 to 4.83) and SAEs by day 28 (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.14). Bamlanivimab may have little to no effect on time to hospital discharge (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.20) and mortality by day 90 (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.43). The effect of bamlanivimab on the development of severe symptoms at day 5 (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.85) is uncertain. Bamlanivimab may increase grades 3-4 AEs at day 28 (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.98). We assessed the evidence as low certainty for all outcomes due to serious imprecision, and very low certainty for severe symptoms because of additional concerns about indirectness. Casirivimab/imdevimab with usual care compared to usual care alone Treatment with casirivimab/imdevimab compared to usual care probably has little or no effect on mortality by day 30 (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.02), IMV requirement or death (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.04), nor alive at hospital discharge by day 30 (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.04). We assessed the evidence as moderate certainty due to study limitations (lack of blinding). AEs and SAEs were not reported.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for each comparison is based on single studies. None of these measured quality of life. Our certainty in the evidence for all non-hospitalised individuals is low, and for hospitalised individuals is very low to moderate. We consider the current evidence insufficient to draw meaningful conclusions regarding treatment with SARS-CoV-2-neutralising mAbs. Further studies and long-term data from the existing studies are needed to confirm or refute these initial findings, and to understand how the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants may impact the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2-neutralising mAbs. Publication of the 36 ongoing studies may resolve uncertainties about the effectiveness and safety of SARS-CoV-2-neutralising mAbs for the treatment of COVID-19 and possible subgroup differences.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Cause of Death , Humans , Middle Aged , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...