Hyaluronidase impacts exposures of long-acting injectable paliperidone palmitate in rodent models.

A significant challenge in the development of long-acting injectable drug formulations, especially for anti-infective agents, is delivering an efficacious dose within a tolerable injection volume. Co-administration of the extracellular matrix-degrading enzyme hyaluronidase can increase maximum tolerable injection volumes but is untested for this benefit with long-acting injectable formulations. One concern is that hyaluronidase could potentially alter the tissue response surrounding an injection depot, a response known to be important for drug release kinetics of long-acting injectable formulations. The objective of this pilot study was to evaluate the impact of co-administration of hyaluronidase on the drug release kinetics, pharmacokinetic profiles, and injection site histopathology of the long-acting injectable paliperidone palmitate for up to four weeks following intramuscular injection in mouse and rat models. In both species, co-administration of hyaluronidase increased paliperidone plasma exposures the first week after injection but did not negate the overall long-acting release nature of the formulation. Hyaluronidase-associated modification of the injection site depot was observed in mice but not in rats. These findings suggest that further investigation of hyaluronidase with long-acting injectable agents is warranted.

Lack of antiviral activity of probenecid in vitro and in Syrian golden hamsters.

OBJECTIVES: Antiviral interventions are required to complement vaccination programmes and reduce the global burden of COVID-19. Prior to initiation of large-scale clinical trials, robust preclinical data to support candidate plausibility are required. This work sought to further investigate the putative antiviral activity of probenecid against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Vero E6 cells were preincubated with probenecid, or control media for 2 h before infection (SARS-CoV-2/Human/Liverpool/REMRQ0001/2020). Probenecid or control media was reapplied, plates reincubated and cytopathic activity quantified by spectrophotometry after 48 h. In vitro human airway epithelial cell (HAEC) assays were performed for probenecid against SARS-CoV-2-VoC-B.1.1.7 (hCoV-19/Belgium/rega-12211513/2020; EPI_ISL_791333, 2020-12-21) using an optimized cell model for antiviral testing. Syrian golden hamsters were intranasally inoculated (SARS-CoV-2 Delta B.1.617.2) 24 h prior to treatment with probenecid or vehicle for four twice-daily doses. RESULTS: No observable antiviral activity for probenecid was evident in Vero E6 or HAEC assays. No reduction in total or subgenomic RNA was observed in terminal lung samples (P > 0.05) from hamsters. Body weight of uninfected hamsters remained stable whereas both probenecid- and vehicle-treated infected hamsters lost body weight (P > 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: These data do not support probenecid as a SARS-CoV-2 antiviral drug.

Chemoprophylactic Assessment of Combined Intranasal SARS-CoV-2 Polymerase and Exonuclease Inhibition in Syrian Golden Hamsters.

Pibrentasvir (PIB) has been demonstrated to block exonuclease activity of the SARS-CoV-2 polymerase, protecting favipiravir (FVP) and remdesivir (RDV) from post-incorporation excision and eliciting antiviral synergy in vitro. The present study investigated the chemoprophylactic efficacy of PIB, FVP, RDV, FVP with PIB, or RDV with PIB dosed intranasally twice a day, using a Syrian golden hamster contact transmission model. Compared to the saline control, viral RNA levels were significantly lower in throat swabs in FVP (day 7), RDV (day 3, 5, 7), and RDV+PIB (day 3, 5) treatment groups. Similarly, findings were evident for nasal turbinate after PIB and RDV treatment, and lungs after PIB, FVP, and FVP+PIB treatment at day 7. Lung viral RNA levels after RDV and RDV+PIB treatment were only detectable in two animals per group, but the overall difference was not statistically significant. In situ examination of the lungs confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in all animals, except for one in each of the RDV and RDV+PIB treatment groups, which tested negative in all virus detection approaches. Overall, prevention of transmission was observed in most animals treated with RDV, while other agents reduced the viral load following contact transmission. No benefit of combining FVP or RDV with PIB was observed.

Evaluation of Nafamostat as Chemoprophylaxis for SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Hamsters.

The successful development of a chemoprophylaxis against SARS-CoV-2 could provide a tool for infection prevention that is implementable alongside vaccination programmes. Nafamostat is a serine protease inhibitor that inhibits SARS-CoV-2 entry in vitro, but it has not been characterised for chemoprophylaxis in animal models. Clinically, nafamostat is limited to intravenous delivery and has an extremely short plasma half-life. This study sought to determine whether intranasal dosing of nafamostat at 5 mg/kg twice daily was able to prevent the airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from infected to uninfected Syrian Golden hamsters. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detectable in the throat swabs of the water-treated control group 4 days after cohabitation with a SARS-CoV-2 inoculated hamster. However, throat swabs from the intranasal nafamostat-treated hamsters remained SARS-CoV-2 RNA negative for the full 4 days of cohabitation. Significantly lower SARS-CoV-2 RNA concentrations were seen in the nasal turbinates of the nafamostat-treated group compared to the control (p = 0.001). A plaque assay quantified a significantly lower concentration of infectious SARS-CoV-2 in the lungs of the nafamostat-treated group compared to the control (p = 0.035). When taken collectively with the pathological changes observed in the lungs and nasal mucosa, these data are strongly supportive of the utility of intranasally delivered nafamostat for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Ronapreve (REGN-CoV; casirivimab and imdevimab) reduces the viral burden and alters the pulmonary response to the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant (B.1.617.2) in K18-hACE2 mice using an experimental design reflective of a treatment use case.

Background: Ronapreve demonstrated clinical application in post-exposure prophylaxis, mild/moderate disease and in the treatment of seronegative patients with severe COVID19 prior to the emergence of the Omicron variant in late 2021. Numerous reports have described loss of in vitro neutralisation activity of Ronapreve and other monoclonal antibodies for BA.1 Omicron and subsequent sub-lineages of the Omicron variant. With some exceptions, global policy makers have recommended against the use of existing monoclonal antibodies in COVID19. Gaps in knowledge regarding the mechanism of action of monoclonal antibodies are noted, and further preclinical study will help understand positioning of new monoclonal antibodies under development. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of Ronapreve on compartmental viral replication as a paradigm for a monoclonal antibody combination. The study also sought to confirm absence of in vivo activity against BA.1 Omicron (B.1.1.529) relative to the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant. Methods: Virological efficacy of Ronapreve was assessed in K18-hACE2 mice inoculated with either the SARS-CoV-2 Delta or Omicron variants. Viral replication in tissues was quantified using qRT-PCR to measure sub-genomic viral RNA to the E gene (sgE) as a proxy. A histological examination in combination with staining for viral antigen served to determine viral spread and associated damage. Results: Ronapreve reduced sub-genomic viral RNA levels in lung and nasal turbinate, 4 and 6 days post infection, for the Delta variant but not the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 at doses 2-fold higher than those shown to be active against previous variants of the virus. It also appeared to block brain infection which is seen with high frequency in K18-hACE2 mice after Delta variant infection. At day 6, the inflammatory response to lung infection with the Delta variant was altered to a mild multifocal granulomatous inflammation in which the virus appeared to be confined. A similar tendency was also observed in Omicron infected, Ronapreve-treated animals. Conclusions: The current study provides evidence of an altered tissue response to the SARS-CoV-2 after treatment with a monoclonal antibody combination that retains neutralization activity. These data also demonstrate that experimental designs that reflect the treatment use case are achievable in animal models for monoclonal antibodies deployed against susceptible variants. Extreme caution should be taken when interpreting prophylactic experimental designs when assessing plausibility of monoclonal antibodies for treatment use cases.

Lack of antiviral activity of probenecid in Vero E6 cells and Syrian golden hamsters: a need for better understanding of inter-lab differences in preclinical assays.

Antiviral interventions are urgently required to support vaccination programmes and reduce the global burden of COVID-19. Prior to initiation of large-scale clinical trials, robust preclinical data in support of candidate plausibility are required. The speed at which preclinical models have been developed during the pandemic are unprecedented but there is a vital need for standardisation and assessment of the Critical Quality Attributes. This work provides cross-validation for the recent report demonstrating potent antiviral activity of probenecid against SARS-CoV-2 in preclinical models (1). Vero E6 cells were pre-incubated with probenecid, across a 7-point concentration range, or control media for 2 hours before infection with SARS-CoV-2 (SARS-CoV-2/Human/Liverpool/REMRQ0001/2020, Pango B; MOI 0.05). Probenecid or control media was then reapplied and plates incubated for 48 hours. Cells were fixed with 4% v/v paraformaldehyde, stained with crystal violet and cytopathic activity quantified by spectrophotometry at 590 nm. Syrian golden hamsters (n=5 per group) were intranasally inoculated with virus (SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant B.1.617.2; 103 PFU/hamster) for 24 hours prior to treatment. Hamsters were treated with probenecid or vehicle for 4 doses. Hamsters were ethically euthanised before quantification of total and sub-genomic pulmonary viral RNAs. No inhibition of cytopathic activity was observed for probenecid at any concentration in Vero E6 cells. Furthermore, no reduction in either total or subgenomic RNA was observed in terminal lung samples from hamsters on day 3 (P > 0.05). Body weight of uninfected hamsters remained stable throughout the course of the experiment whereas both probenecid- (6 - 9% over 3 days) and vehicle-treated (5 - 10% over 3 days) infected hamsters lost body weight which was comparable in magnitude (P > 0.5). The presented data do not support probenecid as a SARS-CoV-2 antiviral. These data do not support use of probenecid in COVID-19 and further analysis is required prior to initiation of clinical trials to investigate the potential utility of this drug.