Characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 at high risk of disease progression receiving sotrovimab, oral antivirals, or no treatment: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The clinical benefit of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatments against new circulating variants remains unclear. We sought to describe characteristics and clinical outcomes of highest risk patients with COVID-19 receiving early COVID-19 treatments in Scotland. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of non-hospitalized patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from December 1, 2021-October 25, 2022, using Scottish administrative health data. We included adult patients who met ≥ 1 of the National Health Service highest risk criteria for early COVID-19 treatment and received outpatient treatment with sotrovimab, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir, or no early COVID-19 treatment. Index date was defined as the earliest of COVID-19 diagnosis or early COVID-19 treatment. Baseline characteristics and acute clinical outcomes in the 28 days following index were reported. Values of ≤ 5 were suppressed. RESULTS: In total, 2548 patients were included (492: sotrovimab, 276: nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, 71: molnupiravir, and 1709: eligible highest risk untreated). Patients aged ≥ 75 years accounted for 6.9% (n = 34/492), 21.0% (n = 58/276), 16.9% (n = 12/71) and 13.2% (n = 225/1709) of the cohorts, respectively. Advanced renal disease was reported in 6.7% (n = 33/492) of sotrovimab-treated and 4.7% (n = 81/1709) of untreated patients, and ≤ 5 nirmatrelvir/ritonavir-treated and molnupiravir-treated patients. All-cause hospitalizations were experienced by 5.3% (n = 25/476) of sotrovimab-treated patients, 6.9% (n = 12/175) of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir-treated patients, ≤ 5 (suppressed number) molnupiravir-treated patients and 13.3% (n = 216/1622) of untreated patients. There were no deaths in the treated cohorts; mortality was 4.3% (n = 70/1622) among untreated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Sotrovimab was often used by patients who were aged < 75 years. Among patients receiving early COVID-19 treatment, proportions of 28-day all-cause hospitalization and death were low.

Oral antivirals for COVID-19 among patients with cancer.

PURPOSE: Immunocompromised individuals, such as those diagnosed with cancer, are at a significantly higher risk for severe illness and mortality when infected with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) than the general population. Two oral antiviral treatments are approved for COVID-19: Paxlovid® (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) and Lagevrio® (molnupiravir). There is a paucity of data regarding the benefit from these antivirals among immunocompromised patients with cancer, and recent studies have questioned their efficacy among vaccinated patients, even those with risk factors for severe COVID-19. METHODS: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir in preventing severe illness and death using our database of 457 patients with cancer and COVID-19 from Brown University-affiliated hospitals. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir and were compared to 45 concurrent controls who received no antiviral treatment despite being eligible to receive it. Administration of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir was associated with improved survival and lower 90-day all-cause and COVID-19-attributed mortality (p < 0.05) and with lower peak O2 requirements (ordinal odds ratio [OR] 1.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-2.56). CONCLUSION: Acknowledging the small size of our sample as a limitation, we concluded that early antiviral treatment might be beneficial to immunocompromised individuals, particularly those with cancer, when infected with SARS-CoV-2. Larger-scale, well-stratified studies are needed in this patient population.

Oral Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir as Postexposure Prophylaxis for Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have not shown a significant benefit of postexposure prophylaxis. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2-3 double-blind trial to assess the efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in asymptomatic, rapid antigen test-negative adults who had been exposed to a household contact with Covid-19 within 96 hours before randomization. The participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (300 mg of nirmatrelvir and 100 mg of ritonavir) every 12 hours for 5 days or for 10 days or matching placebo for 5 or 10 days. The primary end point was the development of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) infection, confirmed on reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) or rapid antigen testing, through 14 days in participants who had a negative RT-PCR test at baseline. RESULTS: A total of 2736 participants were randomly assigned to a trial group - 921 to the 5-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, 917 to the 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, and 898 to the placebo group. Symptomatic, confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection developed by day 14 in 2.6% of the participants in the 5-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, 2.4% of those in the 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, and 3.9% of those in the placebo group. In each nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, the percentage of participants in whom symptomatic, confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection developed did not differ significantly from that in the placebo group, with risk reductions relative to placebo of 29.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], -16.7 to 57.8; P = 0.17) in the 5-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group and 35.5% (95% CI, -11.5 to 62.7; P = 0.12) in the 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group. The incidence of adverse events was similar across the trial groups, with dysgeusia being the most frequently reported adverse event (in 5.9% and 6.8% of the participants in the 5-day and 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir groups, respectively, and in 0.7% of those in the placebo group). CONCLUSIONS: In this placebo-controlled trial, postexposure prophylaxis with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for 5 or 10 days did not significantly reduce the risk of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. (Funded by Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05047601.).

Antiviral Use in Mild-to-Moderate SARS-CoV-2 Infections during the Omicron Wave in Geriatric Patients.

(1) Background: Geriatric patients are at high risk of complications of Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) and are good candidates for antiviral drugs. (2) Methods: A retrospective study of electronic health records (EHRs) aiming to describe antiviral (nirmatrelvir and ritonavir (nirmatrelvir/r) or remdesivir) use, drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in elderly patients (75 and over), hospitalized with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 between July 2022 and June 2023. (3) Results: Out of 491 patients (mean age: 86.9 years), 180 (36.7%) received nirmatrelvir/r, 78 (15.9%) received remdesivir, and 233 (47.4%) received no antiviral therapy. No association was found between the choice of antiviral and the demographic or medical data. No serious ADR was observed. Nirmatrelvir/r dosage adjustment was inadequate in 65% of patients with renal impairment. In total, 128 patients (71%) on nirmatrelvir/r had potential pharmacokinetic DDIs, with 43 resulting in a possibly related ADR. In the remdesivir group, pharmacodynamic DDIs were more frequent, with QTc prolongation risk in 56 patients (72%). Only 20 patients underwent follow-up ECG, revealing QTc prolongation in 4. (4) Conclusions: There is an underutilization of antivirals despite their justified indications. Nirmatrelvir/r dosage was rarely adjusted to renal function. Dose adjustments and closer monitoring are needed due to the high risk of drug interactions.

Association of Antiviral Drugs for the Treatment of COVID-19 With Acute Renal Failure.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Reports regarding the association of remdesivir use for the treatment of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with the development of acute kidney injury (AKI) are inconsistent, and the associations between the use of other antivirals and AKI remain unclear. Therefore, this study investigated whether the use of antiviral drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 is a risk factor for the development of AKI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study analyzed 176,197 reports submitted to the Japanese Adverse Event Reporting Database between 2020 and 2022. Reporting odds ratios (RORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) for AKI that were associated with the use of antiviral drugs in patients with COVID-19 were calculated after adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: Overall, 5,879 of the reports analyzed were associated with AKI. Signs of AKI were detected with the use of remdesivir [crude ROR (cROR)=2.45; 95%CI=1.91-3.14] and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (cROR=6.07; 95%CI=4.06-9.06). These results were maintained even after adjusting for potential confounders [remdesivir: adjusted ROR (aROR)=2.18; 95%CI=1.69-2.80, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir: aROR=5.24; 95%CI=3.48-7.90]. However, when analyzing data stratified by reporting year, the association between remdesivir and AKI appeared to diminish over time and was not sustained. CONCLUSION: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir use may be associated with developing AKI. This knowledge may be useful in helping patients with COVID-19 avoid AKI complications.

A unifying model to explain frequent SARS-CoV-2 rebound after nirmatrelvir treatment and limited prophylactic efficacy.

In a pivotal trial (EPIC-HR), a 5-day course of oral ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir, given early during symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (within three days of symptoms onset), decreased hospitalization and death by 89.1% and nasal viral load by 0.87 log relative to placebo in high-risk individuals. Yet, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir failed as post-exposure prophylaxis in a trial, and frequent viral rebound has been observed in subsequent cohorts. We develop a mathematical model capturing viral-immune dynamics and nirmatrelvir pharmacokinetics that recapitulates viral loads from this and another clinical trial (PLATCOV). Our results suggest that nirmatrelvir's in vivo potency is significantly lower than in vitro assays predict. According to our model, a maximally potent agent would reduce the viral load by approximately 3.5 logs relative to placebo at 5 days. The model identifies that earlier initiation and shorter treatment duration are key predictors of post-treatment rebound. Extension of treatment to 10 days for Omicron variant infection in vaccinated individuals, rather than increasing dose or dosing frequency, is predicted to lower the incidence of viral rebound significantly.

Evaluation of Sources of Drug Interaction Information for Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir.

The Japanese package insert (J-PI) for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (N/r) (specially approved pharmaceutical) includes numerous warnings about drug interactions. However, discrepancies in the information on drug interaction are reported between J-PI and foreign databases. This study aimed to evaluate various information sources on N/r drug interactions. We categorized and compared information on N/r drug interactions from the J-PI, prescribing information from foreign regulatory agencies, guidance from the National Institutes of Health and University Health Network, the Ontario coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Science Advisory Table, University of Liverpool, Lexicomp, and the Japanese Society of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences (JSPHCS). We assessed information quantity, missing data in J-PI, predicted change of the area under the blood concentration-time curve (AUC) for nirmatrelvir or co-administered drugs, and the information source consistency. From these information sources, we compiled a dataset with 115 contraindications and 203 precautions for N/r co-administration, and 51 contraindications are missing in J-PI. Among them, at least 12 drugs have large predicted AUC changes with N/r (AUC ≥5-fold or <1/5 of the baseline value). Nine of these 12 drugs are included as contraindications in Lexicomp and the JSPHCS. The consistency among the information sources is low. Information in the J-PI alone may be insufficient and Lexicomp or the JSPHCS guidelines should be useful because of their large amounts of information and wide coverage of drugs with large AUC changes. Due to low source consistency, multiple sources are needed for clinical management.

Influence of Solvent Selection on the Crystallizability and Polymorphic Selectivity Associated with the Formation of the "Disappeared" Form I Polymorph of Ritonavir.

The comparative crystallizability and polymorphic selectivity of ritonavir, a novel protease inhibitor for the treatment of acquired immune-deficiency syndrome, as a function of solvent selection are examined through an integrated and self-consistent experimental and computational molecular modeling study. Recrystallization at high supersaturation by rapid cooling at 283.15 K is found to produce the metastable "disappeared" polymorphic form I from acetone, ethyl acetate, acetonitrile, and toluene solutions in contrast to ethanol which produces the stable form II. Concomitant crystallization of the other known solid forms is not found under these conditions. Isothermal crystallization studies using turbidometric detection based upon classical nucleation theory reveal that, for an equal induction time, the required driving force needed to initiate solution nucleation decreases with solubility in the order of ethanol, acetone, acetonitrile, ethyl acetate, and toluene consistent with the expected desolvation behavior predicted from the calculated solute solvation free energies. Molecular dynamics simulations of the molecular and intermolecular chemistry reveal the presence of conformational interplay between intramolecular and intermolecular interactions within the solution phase. These encompass the solvent-dependent formation of intramolecular O-H...O hydrogen bonding between the hydroxyl and carbamate groups coupled with differing conformations of the hydroxyl's shielding phenyl groups. These conformational preferences and their relative interaction propensities, as a function of solvent selection, may play a rate-limiting role in the crystallization behavior by not only inhibiting to different degrees the nucleation process but also restricting the assembly of the optimal intermolecular hydrogen bonding network needed for the formation of the stable form II polymorph.

Interaction of CYP3A4 with the inhibitor cobicistat: Structural and mechanistic insights and comparison with ritonavir.

Cobicistat is a derivative of ritonavir marketed as a pharmacoenhancer for anti-HIV therapy. This study investigated the interaction of cobicistat with the target protein, drug-metabolizing cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4), at the molecular level using spectral, kinetic, functional, and structural approaches. It was found that, similar to ritonavir, cobicistat directly coordinates to the heme via the thiazole nitrogen but its affinity and the binding rate are 2-fold lower: 0.030 µM and 0.72 s-1, respectively. The newly determined 2.5 Å crystal structure of cobicistat-bound CYP3A4 suggests that these changes arise from the inability of cobicistat to H-bond to the active site S119 and establish multiple stabilizing contacts with the F-F' connecting fragment, which becomes disordered upon steric clashing with the bulky morpholine moiety. Nonetheless, cobicistat inhibits recombinant CYP3A4 as potently as ritonavir (IC50 of 0.24 µM vs 0.22 µM, respectively) due to strong ligation to the heme and formation of extensive hydrophobic/aromatic interactions via the phenyl side-groups. To get insights into the inhibitory mechanism, the K257 residue, known to be solely and irreversibly modified by the reactive ritonavir metabolite, was substituted with alanine. Neither this nor control K266A mutation changed the extent of time-dependent inhibition of CYP3A4 by cobicistat and ritonavir, suggesting the existence of alternative inactivation mechanism(s). More importantly, K257 was found to be functionally important and contributed to CYP3A4 allosterism, possibly by modulating protein-ligand interactions through conformational dynamics.

Effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in children and adolescents aged 12-17 years following SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection: A target trial emulation.

Currently there is a lack of randomized trial data examining the use of the antiviral nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in paediatric patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. This target trial emulation study aims to address this gap by evaluating the use of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in non-hospitalized paediatric patients aged 12-17 years with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection. Among paediatric patients diagnosed between 16th March 2022 and 5th February 2023, exposure was defined as outpatient nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment within 5 days of symptom onset or COVID-19 diagnosis. Primary outcome was 28 day all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization, while secondary outcomes were 28 day in-hospital disease progression, 28 day COVID-19-specific hospitalization, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), acute liver injury, acute renal failure, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Overall, 49,378 eligible paediatric patients were included. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment was associated with reduced 28 day all-cause hospitalization (absolute risk reduction = 0.23%, 95%CI = 0.19%-0.31%; relative risk = 0.66, 95%CI = 0.56-0.71). No events of mortality, in-hospital disease progression, or adverse clinical outcomes were observed among nirmatrelvir/ritonavir users. The findings confirmed the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in reducing all-cause hospitalization risk among non-hospitalized pediatric patients with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection.

Nirmatrelvir and ritonavir for inpatients with severe or critical COVID-19 beyond five days of symptom onset: a propensity score-matched, multicenter, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need for therapeutic strategies for inpatients with severe or critical COVID-19. The evaluation of the clinical benefits of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir (Nmr/r) for these patients beyond five days of symptom onset is insufficient. METHODS: A new propensity score-matched cohort was constructed by using multicenter data from 6695 adult inpatients with COVID-19 from December 2022 to February 2023 in China after the epidemic control measures were lifted across the country. The severity of disease of the inpatients was based on the tenth trial edition of the Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of COVID-19 in China. The symptom onset of 1870 enrolled severe or critical inpatients was beyond five days, and they received either Nmr/r plus standard treatment or only standard care. The ratio of patients whose SOFA score improved more than 2 points, crucial respiratory endpoints, changes in inflammatory markers, safety on the seventh day following the initiation of Nmr/r treatment, and length of hospital stay were evaluated. RESULTS: In the Nmr/r group, on Day 7, the number of patients with an improvement in SOFA score ≥ 2 was much greater than that in the standard treatment group (P = 0.024) without a significant decrease in glomerular filtration rate (P = 0.815). Additionally, the rate of new intubation was lower (P = 0.004) and the no intubation days were higher (P = 0.003) in the first 7 days in the Nmr/r group. Other clinical benefits were limited. CONCLUSIONS: Our study may provide new insight that inpatients with severe or critical COVID-19 beyond five days of symptom onset benefit from Nmr/r. Future studies, particularly randomized controlled trials, are necessary to verify the above findings.

Azvudine versus Paxlovid in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of azvudine versus nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) in treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The researchers conducted searches on PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and Google Scholar until January 2024. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was utilised to evaluate the quality of the included studies, and data analysis was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. Thirteen studies, including 4949 patients, were analysed. The meta-analysis results showed no significant difference between the azvudine and Paxlovid groups in terms of mortality rate (odds rate [OR] = 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-1.21), negative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) conversion time (standard mean difference [SMD] = 1.52, 95% CI: -1.07-4.11), and hospital stay (SMD = -0.39, 95% CI: -1.12-0.33). However, a significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of intensive care unit admission (OR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.23-0.75) and the need for mechanical ventilation (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.44-0.86) in favour of azvudine. The incidence of adverse events in the azvudine group was significantly lower (OR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.43-0.99). The certainty of evidence was rated as low and moderate. Azvudine and Paxlovid demonstrated similar effectiveness in reducing mortality rates, negative PCR conversion time and hospital stay. However, azvudine showed better effectiveness in improving other outcomes. Regarding the level of certainty of evidence, further research is needed to validate or challenge these results.

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or Molnupiravir for treatment of non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19 at risk of disease progression.

BACKGROUND: In randomized controlled trials, Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMV/r) and Molnupiravir (MPV) reduced the risk of severe/fatal COVID-19 disease. Real-world data are limited, particularly studies directly comparing the two agents. METHODS: Using the VA National COVID-19 database, we identified previously uninfected, non-hospitalized individuals with COVID-19 with ≥1 risk factor for disease progression who were prescribed either NMV/r or MPV within 3 days of a positive test. We used inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTW) to account for providers' preferences for a specific treatment. Absolute risk difference (ARD) with 95% confidence intervals were determined for those treated with NMV/r vs. MPV. The primary outcome was hospitalization or death within 30 days of treatment prescription using the IPTW approach. Analyses were repeated using propensity-score matched groups. RESULTS: Between January 1 and November 30, 2022, 9,180 individuals were eligible for inclusion (6,592 prescribed NMV/r; 2,454 prescribed MPV). The ARD for hospitalization/death for NMV/r vs MPV was -0.25 (95% CI -0.79 to 0.28). There was no statistically significant difference in ARD among strata by age, race, comorbidities, or symptoms at baseline. Kaplan-Meier curves did not demonstrate a difference between the two groups (p-value = 0.6). Analysis of the propensity-score matched cohort yielded similar results (ARD for NMV/r vs. MPV -0.9, 95% CI -2.02 to 0.23). Additional analyses showed no difference for development of severe/critical/fatal disease by treatment group. CONCLUSION: We found no significant difference in short term risk of hospitalization or death among at-risk individuals with COVID-19 treated with either NMV/r or MPV.

Early use of oral antiviral drugs and the risk of post COVID-19 syndrome: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the association of early use of oral antiviral drugs (including nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir) with the risk of post COVID-19 condition (PCC) and compare the possible efficacy of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, MedRxiv, and Psycinfo were searched from inception until November 1, 2023. We included studies that assessed the effect of oral antiviral drugs on the incidence of PCC. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model. Risk ratios (RRs) for oral antiviral drugs were calculated with a confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Nine observational studies containing 866,066 patients were included. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir were evaluated in eight and two studies respectively, with both drugs evaluated in one study. Pair-wise meta-analysis showed that early oral antiviral drugs reduced PCC risk (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.68-0.88). Network meta-analysis showed that nirmatrelvir-ritonavir may perform better than molnupiravir (surface under the cumulative ranking curve: 95.5% vs. 31.6%) at reducing PCC risk. CONCLUSIONS: Early use of oral antiviral drugs may potentially protect against developing PCC in non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19. These findings support the standardized administration of oral antiviral drugs in patients during the acute phase of COVID-19 according to the guidelines.

Pharmacokinetics of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and the drug-drug interaction with calcineurin inhibitor in renal transplant recipients.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the pharmacokinetic (PK) characteristics of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in renal transplant recipients and explore the potential factors that related to the PK variance of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and its interaction with calcineurin inhibitor (CNI). METHODS: Renal transplant recipients treated with CNI and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were prospectively enrolled. Steady-state plasma concentrations of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, and the PK parameters were calculated using non-compartmental analysis. Spearman correlation analysis was used for exploring influencing factors. RESULTS: A total of eight recipients were enrolled; for nirmatrelvir and ritonavir, AUC/dose was 0.24179 ± 0.14495 and 0.06196 ± 0.03767 µg·h·mL-1·mg-1. Red blood cell (RBC), hematocrit (Ht), hemoglobins (Hb), and creatinine clearance (Ccr) were negatively correlated with AUC/dose of nirmatrelvir, while Ccr, CYP3A5 genotype, and CYP3A4 genotype were related to the AUC/dose of ritonavir. Ccr was negatively correlated with the C0/dose of tacrolimus (TAC) after termination of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (rs = -0.943, p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: The PK characteristics of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir vary greatly among renal transplant recipients. Factors including Ccr and CYP3A5 genotype were related to the in vivo exposure of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. During the whole process before and after nirmatrelvir/ritonavir therapy, it is recommended to adjust the CNI basing on renal function to avoid CNI toxicity exposure.

Dolutegravir plus boosted darunavir versus recommended standard-of-care antiretroviral regimens in people with HIV-1 for whom recommended first-line non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor therapy has failed (D2EFT): an open-label, randomised, phase 3b/4 trial.

BACKGROUND: Randomised comparative data on efficacy and safety of second-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) after failure of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) across diverse geographical settings are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate optimal second-line ART for people with HIV. METHODS: D2EFT is a completed international, randomised, open-label, phase 3b/4 trial evaluating three second-line ART strategies in adults (aged ≥18 years) with HIV-1 for whom first-line NNRTI therapy has failed. The study was done at 28 sites across 14 countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. It was originally designed to compare recommended standard of care (ritonavir-boosted darunavir [800 mg darunavir plus 100 mg ritonavir once daily] plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors [NRTIs; dosed once or twice daily]) with a novel nucleoside sparing regimen of dolutegravir (50 mg once daily) with ritonavir-boosted darunavir. The study was adapted during the first year to add a third arm of dolutegravir (50 mg once daily) with fixed tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (300 mg once daily) plus either lamivudine (300 mg once daily) or emtricitabine (200 mg once daily). Participants were randomly assigned with a computer-generated, blocked randomisation scheme (block size of two) stratified by site, previous tenofovir disoproxil fumarate use, and HIV viral load. The trial was designed to evaluate non-inferiority of either interventional arm against standard of care for the primary outcome of virological suppression, as determined by HIV RNA load of less than 50 copies per mL at 48 weeks. The prespecified non-inferiority margin was 12%. Comparisons were made with a modified intention-to-treat population, including all participants randomly assigned but excluding administrative withdrawals. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03017872. FINDINGS: 1190 individuals were screened; 828 participants were enrolled between Nov 1, 2017, and Dec 31, 2021. Two participants were unable to receive their assigned regimen for administrative reasons; and 826 participants were included in analyses. Median age was 39 years (IQR 33-46), and 450 (54%) participants were female. Baseline median CD4 count was 206 cells per µL (23-354) and median HIV RNA was 15 400 copies per mL (3600-65 986). The proportion of participants with HIV RNA of less than 50 copies per mL at 48 weeks was 194 (75%) of 257 in the ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus two NRTIs group, 222 (84%) of 264 in the ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus dolutegravir group, and 227 (78%) of 291 in the dolutegravir with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus either lamivudine or emtricitabine group. Compared with ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus two NRTIs, the difference in virological suppression was 8·6% (95% CI 1·7 to 15·5; p=0·016) for dolutegravir plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir and 6·7% (-1·2 to 14·4; p=0·093) for dolutegravir with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus either lamivudine or emtricitabine. Six deaths occurred, none of which were related to treatment. 19 pregnancies (11 livebirths) occurred with no congenital defects. INTERPRETATION: In individuals experiencing failure of an NNRTI-based first-line ART, a switch to either dolutegravir plus ritonavir-boosted darunavir or dolutegravir with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus either lamivudine or emtricitabine, without universal access to genotyping, was non-inferior in achieving viral suppression compared with ritonavir-boosted darunavir plus two NRTIs. These global data support the most recent WHO treatment guidelines. FUNDING: UNITAID; National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, USA; National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia; ViiV Healthcare; and Janssen.

Effects of individual drug and combination antiretroviral therapy on trophoblast proliferation.

BACKGROUND: Combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) has been reported to reduce perinatal transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and improve maternal survival outcomes. Recent studies have associated in-utero exposure to cART drugs with adverse outcomes such as pre-eclampsia, preterm delivery, low birth weight and small-for-gestational-age births. However, the exact molecular mechanisms underlying cART-induced adverse pregnancy outcomes remain poorly defined. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of cART drugs on trophoblast proliferation in the HTR-8/SVneo cell line. STUDY DESIGN: HTR-8/SVneo cells were exposed to tenofovir (0.983-9.83 µM), emtricitabine (0.809-8.09 µM) and efavirenz (0.19-1.09 µM), the individual drugs of the first-line single tablet cART regimen termed 'Atripla', and zidovudine (1.12-1.12 µM), lamivudine (0.65-6.5 µM), lopinavir (0.32-3.2 µM) and ritonavir (0.69-6.9 µM), the individual drugs of the second-line single tablet cART regimen termed 'Aluvia'. The cells were treated for 24, 48, 72 and 96 h, and trophoblast proliferation was assessed using a colorimetric 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltretrazolium bromide assay. RESULTS: Two-way analysis of variance showed a significant dose-dependent decrease (p < 0.05) in trophoblast proliferation in response to individual and combined drug components of first- and second-line antiretroviral therapy. CONCLUSIONS: First- and second-line cART drugs inhibit trophoblast proliferation, and may contribute to placenta-mediated adverse pregnancy outcomes in patients with HIV.

Effectiveness and safety of Sanhan Huashi granules versus nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in adult patients with COVID-19: A randomized, open-label, multicenter trial.

Sanhan Huashi granules (SHG) demonstrated therapeutic effects against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in observational studies. In order to compare the effectiveness and safety of SHG and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in treating adults with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, we conducted a randomized, active-controlled, open-label, multi-center trial conducted between February and July in 2023. The patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to the SHG group and the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group. A total of 400 participants were randomized, among which 200 participants ultimately received SHG and 198 received nirmatrelvir-ritonavir. The primary outcome was time to sustained clinical recovery through day 28. SHG significantly shortened the median time to sustained clinical recovery compared to nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (6.0 (95% CI, 5.0 to 6.0) vs. 8.0 (95% CI, 6.0 to 9.0) d; P = 0.001), particularly for individual symptoms including fever, sore throat, cough and fatigue. No participants in either group died and incidence of severe COVID-19 showed no difference between two groups. Participants who received nirmatrelvir-ritonavir demonstrated a higher rate of virus clearance on day 5 compared to those received SHG (46.4% (95% CI, 39.1 to 53.7) vs. 65.6% (95% CI, 58.3 to 72.4); P < 0.001). Most adverse events were mild in both groups. In summary, SHG was superior to nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in shortening the time to sustained clinical recovery in participants with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, despite a lower virus clearance rate observed after 5 d of treatment (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Identifier: ChiCTR2300067872).