Monoclonal antibody levels and protection from COVID-19.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Stadler E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10382502 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Monoclonal antibody levels and protection from COVID-19.
Stadler Eva E Burgess Martin T MT Schlub Timothy E TE Khan Shanchita R SR Chai Khai Li KL McQuilten Zoe K ZK Wood Erica M EM Polizzotto Mark N MN Kent Stephen J SJ Cromer Deborah D Davenport Miles P MP Khoury David S DS
Nature communications 20230728 1
Multiple monoclonal antibodies have been shown to be effective for both prophylaxis and therapy for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here we aggregate data from randomized controlled trials assessing the use of monoclonal antibodies (mAb) in preventing symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. We use data on the in vivo concentration of mAb and the associated protection from COVID-19 over time to model the dose-response relationship of mAb for prophylaxis. We estimate that 50% protection from COVID-19 is achieved ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ImportanceEvidence on the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 therapies across a diverse population with varied risk factors is needed to inform clinical practice.ObjectiveTo assess the safety of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (nMAbs) for the treatment of COVID-19 and their association with adverse outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study included 167 183 patients from a consortium of 4 health care systems based in California, Minnesota, Texas, and Utah. The study included nonhospitalized patients 12 years and older with a positive COVID-19 laboratory test collected between November 9, 2020, and January 31, 2022, who met at least 1 emergency use authorization criterion for risk of a poor outcome.ExposureFour nMAb products (bamlanivimab, bamlanivimab-etesevimab, casirivimab-imdevimab, and sotrovimab) administered in the outpatient setting.Main outcomes and measuresClinical and SARS-CoV-2 genomic sequence data and propensity-adjusted marginal structural models were used to assess the association between treatment with nMAbs and 4 outcomes: all-cause emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalization, death, and a composite of hospitalization or death within 14 days and 30 days of the index date (defined as the date of the first positive COVID-19 test or the date of referral). Patient index dates were categorized into 4 variant epochs: pre-Delta (November 9, 2020, to June 30, 2021), Delta (July 1 to November 30, 2021), Delta and Omicron BA.1 (December 1 to 31, 2021), and Omicron BA.1 (January 1 to 31, 2022).ResultsAmong 167 183 patients, the mean (SD) age was 47.0 (18.5) years; 95 669 patients (57.2%) were female at birth, 139 379 (83.4%) were White, and 138 900 (83.1%) were non-Hispanic. A total of 25 241 patients received treatment with nMAbs. Treatment with nMAbs was associated with lower odds of ED visits within 14 days (odds ratio [OR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68-0.85), hospitalization within 14 days (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.45-0.59), and death within 30 days (OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.10-0.20). The association between nMAbs and reduced risk of hospitalization was stronger in unvaccinated patients (14-day hospitalization: OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.44-0.59), and the associations with hospitalization and death were stronger in immunocompromised patients (hospitalization within 14 days: OR, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.24-0.41]; death within 30 days: OR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.06-0.27]). The strength of associations of nMAbs increased incrementally among patients with a greater probability of poor outcomes; for example, the ORs for hospitalization within 14 days were 0.58 (95% CI, 0.48-0.72) among those in the third (moderate) risk stratum and 0.41 (95% CI, 0.32-0.53) among those in the fifth (highest) risk stratum. The association of nMAb treatment with reduced risk of hospitalizations within 14 days was strongest during the Delta variant epoch (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.31-0.43) but not during the Omicron BA.1 epoch (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.68-2.47). These findings were corroborated in the subset of patients with viral genomic data. Treatment with nMAbs was associated with a significant mortality benefit in all variant epochs (pre-Delta: OR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.08-0.33]; Delta: OR, 0.14 [95% CI, 0.09-0.22]; Delta and Omicron BA.1: OR, 0.10 [95% CI, 0.03-0.35]; and Omicron BA.1: OR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.02-0.93]). Potential adverse drug events were identified in 38 treated patients (0.2%).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, nMAb treatment for COVID-19 was safe and associated with reductions in ED visits, hospitalization, and death, although it was not associated with reduced risk of hospitalization during the Omicron BA.1 epoch. These findings suggest that targeted risk stratification strategies may help optimize future nMAb treatment decisions.
| S-EPMC10126875 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLY-CoV555, a neutralizing monoclonal antibody, has been associated with a decrease in viral load and the frequency of hospitalizations or emergency department visits among outpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Data are needed on the effect of this antibody in patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19.MethodsIn this platform trial of therapeutic agents, we randomly assigned hospitalized patients who had Covid-19 without end-organ failure in a 1:1 ratio to receive either LY-CoV555 or matching placebo. In addition, all the patients received high-quality supportive care as background therapy, including the antiviral drug remdesivir and, when indicated, supplemental oxygen and glucocorticoids. LY-CoV555 (at a dose of 7000 mg) or placebo was administered as a single intravenous infusion over a 1-hour period. The primary outcome was a sustained recovery during a 90-day period, as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. An interim futility assessment was performed on the basis of a seven-category ordinal scale for pulmonary function on day 5.ResultsOn October 26, 2020, the data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping enrollment for futility after 314 patients (163 in the LY-CoV555 group and 151 in the placebo group) had undergone randomization and infusion. The median interval since the onset of symptoms was 7 days (interquartile range, 5 to 9). At day 5, a total of 81 patients (50%) in the LY-CoV555 group and 81 (54%) in the placebo group were in one of the two most favorable categories of the pulmonary outcome. Across the seven categories, the odds ratio of being in a more favorable category in the LY-CoV555 group than in the placebo group was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 1.29; P = 0.45). The percentage of patients with the primary safety outcome (a composite of death, serious adverse events, or clinical grade 3 or 4 adverse events through day 5) was similar in the LY-CoV555 group and the placebo group (19% and 14%, respectively; odds ratio, 1.56; 95% CI, 0.78 to 3.10; P = 0.20). The rate ratio for a sustained recovery was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.77 to 1.47).ConclusionsMonoclonal antibody LY-CoV555, when coadministered with remdesivir, did not demonstrate efficacy among hospitalized patients who had Covid-19 without end-organ failure. (Funded by Operation Warp Speed and others; TICO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04501978.).
| S-EPMC7781100 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn a randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial, bamlanivimab, a SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing monoclonal antibody, given in combination with remdesivir, did not improve outcomes among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 based on an early futility assessment.ObjectiveTo evaluate the a priori hypothesis that bamlanivimab has greater benefit in patients without detectable levels of endogenous neutralizing antibody (nAb) at study entry than in those with antibodies, especially if viral levels are high.DesignRandomized, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04501978).SettingMulticenter trial.PatientsHospitalized patients with COVID-19 without end-organ failure.InterventionBamlanivimab (7000 mg) or placebo.MeasurementsAntibody, antigen, and viral RNA levels were centrally measured on stored specimens collected at baseline. Patients were followed for 90 days for sustained recovery (defined as discharge to home and remaining home for 14 consecutive days) and a composite safety outcome (death, serious adverse events, organ failure, or serious infections).ResultsAmong 314 participants (163 receiving bamlanivimab and 151 placebo), the median time to sustained recovery was 19 days and did not differ between the bamlanivimab and placebo groups (subhazard ratio [sHR], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.79 to 1.22]; sHR > 1 favors bamlanivimab). At entry, 50% evidenced production of anti-spike nAbs; 50% had SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid plasma antigen levels of at least 1000 ng/L. Among those without and with nAbs at study entry, the sHRs were 1.24 (CI, 0.90 to 1.70) and 0.74 (CI, 0.54 to 1.00), respectively (nominal P for interaction = 0.018). The sHR (bamlanivimab vs. placebo) was also more than 1 for those with plasma antigen or nasal viral RNA levels above median level at entry and was greatest for those without antibodies and with elevated levels of antigen (sHR, 1.48 [CI, 0.99 to 2.23]) or viral RNA (sHR, 1.89 [CI, 1.23 to 2.91]). Hazard ratios for the composite safety outcome (<1 favors bamlanivimab) also differed by serostatus at entry: 0.67 (CI, 0.37 to 1.20) for those without and 1.79 (CI, 0.92 to 3.48) for those with nAbs.LimitationSubgroup analysis of a trial prematurely stopped because of futility; small sample size; multiple subgroups analyzed.ConclusionEfficacy and safety of bamlanivimab may differ depending on whether an endogenous nAb response has been mounted. The limited sample size of the study does not allow firm conclusions based on these findings, and further independent trials are required that assess other types of passive immune therapies in the same patient setting.Primary funding sourceU.S. government Operation Warp Speed and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
| S-EPMC9334931 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11687646 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDisparities in access to anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies have not been well characterized.ObjectiveWe sought to explore the impact of race/ethnicity as a social construct on monoclonal antibody delivery.Design/patientsFollowing implementation of a centralized infusion program at a large academic healthcare system, we reviewed a random sample of high-risk ambulatory adult patients with COVID-19 referred for monoclonal antibody therapy.Main measuresWe examined the relationship between treatment delivery, race/ethnicity, and other demographics using descriptive statistics, binary logistic regression, and spatial analysis.Key resultsThere was no significant difference in racial composition between patients who did (n = 25) and patients who did not (n = 378) decline treatment (p = 0.638). Of patients who did not decline treatment, 64.8% identified as White, 14.8% as Hispanic/Latinx, and 11.1% as Black. Only 44.6% of Hispanic/Latinx and 31.0% of Black patients received treatment compared to 64.1% of White patients (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25-0.81, p = 0.008, and OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.12-0.50, p < 0.001, respectively). In multivariable analysis including age, race, insurance status, non-English primary language, county Social Vulnerability Index, illness severity, and total number of comorbidities, associations between receiving treatment and Hispanic/Latinx or Black race were no longer statistically significant (AOR 1.32, 95% CI 0.69-2.53, p = 0.400, and AOR 1.34, 95% CI 0.64-2.80, p = 0.439, respectively). However, patients who were uninsured or whose primary language was not English were less likely to receive treatment (AOR 0.16, 95% CI 0.03-0.88, p = 0.035, and AOR 0.37, 95% CI 0.15-0.90, p = 0.028, respectively). Spatial analysis suggested decreased monoclonal antibody delivery to Cook County patients residing in socially vulnerable communities.ConclusionsHigh-risk ambulatory patients with COVID-19 who identified as Hispanic/Latinx or Black were less likely to receive monoclonal antibody therapy in univariate analysis, a finding not explained by patient refusal. Multivariable and spatial analyses suggested insurance status, language, and social vulnerability contributed to racial disparities.
| S-EPMC9037582 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8386136 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at high risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Studies suggest that early intervention with monoclonal antibody (MAB) treatment directed against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein may reduce the risk of emergency department visits or hospitalization for COVID-19, especially in high-risk patients. Herein, we describe our single-center experience of 93 SOT (50 kidney, 17 liver, 11 lung, nine heart, and six dual-organ) recipients with mild to moderate COVID-19 who were treated with bamlanivimab or casirivimab-imdevimab per emergency use authorization guidelines. Median age of recipients was 55 [(Interquartile range) 44-63] years, and 41% were diabetic. Median time from transplant to MAB was 64 (IQR 24-122) months and median time from the onset of COVID-19 symptoms to the infusion was 6 (IQR 4-7) days. All patients had a minimum 30 days of study follow-up. The 30-day hospitalization rate for COVID-19-directed therapy was 8.7%. Infusion-related adverse events were rare and generally mild. Biopsy-proven organ rejection occurred in two patients, and there were no graft losses or deaths. A comparator group of 72 SOT recipients diagnosed with COVID-19 who were eligible but did not receive MAB treatment had a higher 30-day hospitalization rate for COVID-19-directed therapy (15.3%), although this difference was not statistically significant, after adjustment for age (Odds Ratio 0.49 [95% Confidence Interval 0.18-1.32], p = 0.16). Our experience suggests that MAB treatment, with respect to the available MAB formulations and circulating viral variants present during our study period, may provide favorable outcomes for mild to moderate COVID-19 in SOT recipients.
| S-EPMC8646855 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With the number of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases soaring worldwide and limited vaccine availability for the general population in most countries, the monoclonal antibody (mAb) remains a viable therapeutic option to treat COVID-19 disease and its complications, especially in the elderly individuals. More than 50 monoclonal antibody-related clinical trials are being conducted in different countries around the world, with few of them nearing the completion of the third and fourth phase clinical trial. In view of recent emergency use authorization (EUA) from the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) of casirivimab and imdevimab, it is of importance that mAbs, already used to treat diseases such as Ebola and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection, are discussed in scientific communities. This brief review discusses the mechanism of action and updates to clinical trials of different monoclonal antibodies used to treat COVID-19, with special attention paid to SARS-CoV-2 immune response in host cells, target viral structures, and justification of developing mAbs following the approval and administration of potential effective vaccine among vulnerable populations in different countries.
| S-EPMC7872849 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Currently clinicians all around the world are experiencing a pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The clinical presentation of this pathology includes fever, dry cough, fatigue and acute respiratory distress syndrome that can lead to death infected patients. Current studies on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continue to highlight the urgent need for an effective therapy. Numerous therapeutic strategies have been used until now but, to date, there is no specific effective treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Elevated inflammatory cytokines have been reported in patients with COVID-19. Evidence suggests that elevated cytokine levels, reflecting a hyperinflammatory response secondary to SARS-CoV-2 infection, are responsible for multi-organ damage in patients with COVID-19. For these reason, numerous randomized clinical trials are currently underway to explore the effectiveness of biopharmaceutical drugs, such as, interleukin-1 blockers, interleukin-6 inhibitors, Janus kinase inhibitors, in COVID-19. The aim of the present paper is to briefly summarize the pathogenetic rationale and the state of the art of therapeutic strategy blocking hyperinflammation.
| S-EPMC7559676 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBamlanivimab and casirivimab-imdevimab are authorized for emergency use treatment of mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients at high risk for developing severe disease or hospitalization. Their safety and efficacy have not been specifically evaluated in solid organ transplant recipients.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed solid organ transplant recipients who received monoclonal antibody infusion for COVID-19 at Mayo Clinic sites through January 23, 2021. Outcomes included emergency department visit, hospitalization, mortality, and allograft rejection.ResultsSeventy-three patients were treated, most commonly with bamlanivimab (75.3%). The median age was 59 years, 63% were male, and the median Charlson comorbidity index was 5. Transplant type included 41 kidney (56.2%), 13 liver (17.8%), 11 heart (15.1%), 4 kidney-pancreas (5.5%), 2 lung (2.7%), 1 heart-liver, and 1 pancreas. Eleven (15.1%) patients had an emergency department visit within 28 days of infusion, including 9 (12.3%) who were hospitalized for a median of 4 days. One patient required intensive care unit admission for a nonrespiratory complication. No patients required mechanical ventilation, died, or experienced rejection. Ten adverse events occurred, with 1 seeking medical evaluation. Hypertension was associated with hospital admission (P < .05), while other baseline characteristics were similar. The median time from symptom onset to antibody administration was 4 days in nonhospitalized patients compared with 6 days among hospitalized patients (P < .05).ConclusionsMonoclonal antibody treatment has favorable outcomes with minimal adverse effects in solid organ transplant recipients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Earlier administration of monoclonal antibody therapy appears to be more efficacious.
| S-EPMC8494079 | biostudies-literature