Antiviral efficacy of molnupiravir versus ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir in patients with early symptomatic COVID-19 (PLATCOV): an open-label, phase 2, randomised, controlled, adaptive trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Schilling WHK
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7615401 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Antiviral efficacy of molnupiravir versus ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir in patients with early symptomatic COVID-19 (PLATCOV): an open-label, phase 2, randomised, controlled, adaptive trial.
Schilling William H K WHK Jittamala Podjanee P Watson James A JA Boyd Simon S Luvira Viravarn V Siripoon Tanaya T Ngamprasertchai Thundon T Batty Elizabeth M EM Cruz Cintia C Callery James J JJ Singh Shivani S Saroj Manisaree M Kruabkontho Varaporn V Ngernseng Thatsanun T Tanglakmankhong Nuttakan N Tubprasert Jaruwan J Abdad Mohammad Yazid MY Madmanee Wanassanan W Kouhathong Jindarat J Suwannasin Kanokon K Pagornrat Watcharee W Piaraksa Nattaporn N Hanboonkunupakarn Pongtorn P Hanboonkunupakarn Borimas B Poovorawan Kittiyod K Potaporn Manus M Srisubat Attasit A Loharjun Bootsakorn B Taylor Walter R J WRJ Chotivanich Vasin V Chotivanich Kesinee K Imwong Mallika M Pukrittayakamee Sasithon S Dondorp Arjen M AM Day Nicholas P J NPJ Teixeira Mauro M MM Piyaphanee Watcharapong W Phumratanaprapin Weerapong W White Nicholas J NJ
The Lancet. Infectious diseases 20230928 1
<h4>Background</h4>Molnupiravir and ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir are the two leading oral COVID-19 antiviral treatments, but their antiviral activities in patients have not been compared directly. The aim of this ongoing platform trial is to compare different antiviral treatments using the rate of viral clearance as the measure of antiviral effect.<h4>Methods</h4>PLATCOV is an open-label, multicentre, phase 2, randomised, controlled, adaptive pharmacometric platform trial running in Thailand, ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) fluoxetine and fluvoxamine were repurposed for the treatment of early COVID-19 based on their antiviral activity in vitro, and observational and clinical trial evidence suggesting they prevented progression to severe disease. However, these SSRIs have not been recommended in therapeutic guidelines and their antiviral activity in vivo has not been characterised.MethodsPLATCOV is an open-label, multicentre, phase 2, randomised, controlled, adaptive pharmacometric platform trial running in Thailand, Brazil, Pakistan, and Laos. We recruited low-risk adult outpatients aged 18-50 with early symptomatic COVID-19 (symptoms <4 days) between 5 April 2022 and 8 May 2023. Patients were assigned using block randomisation to one of eleven treatment arms including oral fluoxetine (40 mg/day for 7 days), or no study drug. Uniform randomisation ratios were applied across the active treatment groups while the no study drug group comprised ≥20% of patients at all times. The primary endpoint was the rate of oropharyngeal viral clearance assessed until day 7. Measurements were taken daily between days 0 and 7 and analysed in a modified intention-to-treat population (>2 days follow-up).The viral clearance rate was estimated under a Bayesian hierarchical linear model fitted to the log10 viral densities measured in standardised duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates taken daily over one week (18 measurements per patient). Secondary endpoints were all-cause hospital admission at 28 days, and time to resolution of fever and symptoms. This ongoing trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05041907).Findings271 patients were concurrently randomised to either fluoxetine (n = 120) or no study drug (n = 151). All patients had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose and 67% were female (182/271). In the primary analysis, viral clearance rates following fluoxetine were compatible with a small or no increase relative to the no study drug arm (15% increase; 95% credible interval (CrI): -2 to 34%). There were no deaths or hospitalisations in either arm. There were no significant differences in times to symptom resolution or fever clearance between the fluoxetine and the no study drug arms (although only a quarter of patients were febrile at baseline). Fluoxetine was well tolerated, there were no serious adverse events and only one grade 3 adverse event in the intervention arm.InterpretationOverall, the evidence from this study is compatible with fluoxetine having a weak in vivo antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2, although the primary endpoint is also compatible with no effect. This level of antiviral efficacy is substantially less than with other currently available antiviral drugs.FundingWellcome Trust Grant ref: 223195/Z/21/Z through the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator.
| S-EPMC11787712 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In early symptomatic COVID-19 treatment, high dose oral favipiravir did not accelerate viral clearance.BackgroundFavipiravir, an anti-influenza drug, has in vitro antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2. Clinical trial evidence to date is inconclusive. Favipiravir has been recommended for the treatment of COVID-19 in some countries.MethodsIn a multicentre open-label, randomised, controlled, adaptive platform trial, low-risk adult patients with early symptomatic COVID-19 were randomised to one of ten treatment arms including high dose oral favipiravir (3.6g on day 0 followed by 1.6g daily to complete 7 days treatment) or no study drug. The primary outcome was the rate of viral clearance (derived under a linear mixed-effects model from the daily log10 viral densities in standardised duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates taken daily over 8 days [18 swabs per patient]), assessed in a modified intention-to-treat population (mITT). The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of the allocated intervention. This ongoing adaptive platform trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05041907) on 13/09/2021.ResultsIn the final analysis, the mITT population contained data from 114 patients randomised to favipiravir and 126 patients randomised concurrently to no study drug. Under the linear mixed-effects model fitted to all oropharyngeal viral density estimates in the first 8 days from randomisation (4,318 swabs), there was no difference in the rate of viral clearance between patients given favipiravir and patients receiving no study drug; a -1% (95% credible interval: -14 to 14%) difference. High dose favipiravir was well-tolerated.InterpretationFavipiravir does not accelerate viral clearance in early symptomatic COVID-19. The viral clearance rate estimated from quantitative measurements of oropharyngeal eluate viral densities assesses the antiviral efficacy of drugs in vivo with comparatively few studied patients.
| S-EPMC10789040 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUncertainty over the therapeutic benefit of parenteral remdesivir in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in varying treatment guidelines.MethodsIn a multicenter open-label, controlled, adaptive, pharmacometric platform trial, low-risk adult patients with early symptomatic COVID-19 were randomized to 1 of 8 treatment arms including intravenous remdesivir (200 mg followed by 100 mg daily for 5 days) or no study drug. The primary outcome was the rate of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) clearance (estimated under a linear model fit to the daily log10 viral densities, days 0-7) in standardized duplicate oropharyngeal swab eluates, in a modified intention-to-treat population. This ongoing adaptive trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05041907).ResultsThe 2 study arms enrolled 131 patients (remdesivir n = 67, no study drug n = 64) and estimated viral clearance rates from a median of 18 swab samples per patient (a total of 2356 quantitative polymerase chain reactions). Under the linear model, compared with the contemporaneous control arm (no study drug), remdesivir accelerated mean estimated viral clearance by 42% (95% credible interval, 18%-73%).ConclusionsParenteral remdesivir accelerates viral clearance in early symptomatic COVID-19. Pharmacometric assessment of therapeutics using the method described can determine in vivo clinical antiviral efficacy rapidly and efficiently.
| S-EPMC10640773 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir is an oral treatment for mild to moderate COVID-19 cases with a high risk for a severe course of the disease. For this paper, a comprehensive literature review was performed, leading to a summary of currently available data on Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir's ability to reduce the risk of progressing to a severe disease state. Herein, the focus lies on publications that include comparisons between patients receiving Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir and a control group. The findings can be summarized as follows: Data from the time when the Delta-variant was dominant show that Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir reduced the risk of hospitalization or death by 88.9% for unvaccinated, non-hospitalized high-risk individuals. Data from the time when the Omicron variant was dominant found decreased relative risk reductions for various vaccination statuses: between 26% and 65% for hospitalization. The presented papers that differentiate between unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals agree that unvaccinated patients benefit more from treatment with Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir. However, when it comes to the dependency of potential on age and comorbidities, further studies are necessary. From the available data, one can conclude that Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir cannot substitute vaccinations; however, its low manufacturing cost and easy administration make it a valuable tool in fighting COVID-19, especially for countries with low vaccination rates.
| S-EPMC10801539 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceSome patients treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir have experienced rebound of COVID-19 infections and symptoms; however, data are scarce on whether viral rebound also occurs in patients with COVID-19 receiving or not receiving molnupiravir.ObjectiveTo examine the incidence of viral rebound in patients with COVID-19 who were treated with the oral antiviral agents nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study identified 41 255 patients with COVID-19 who were hospitalized from January 1, 2022, to March 31, 2022, in Hong Kong and assessed 12 629 patients with serial cycle threshold (Ct) values measured. Patients were followed up until the occurrence of the clinical end point of interest, death, date of data retrieval (July 31, 2022), or up to 30 days of follow-up, whichever came first.ExposuresMolnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment.Main outcomes and measuresViral rebound, defined as a Ct value greater than 40 that decreased to 40 or less.ResultsOf 12 629 patients (mean [SD] age, 65.4 [20.9] years; 6624 [52.5%] male), 11 688 (92.5%) were oral antiviral nonusers, 746 (5.9%) were molnupiravir users, and 195 (1.5%) were nirmatrelvir-ritonavir users. Compared with nonusers, oral antiviral users were older, had more comorbidities, and had lower complete vaccination rates. The mean (SD) baseline Ct value was slightly higher in nirmatrelvir-ritonavir users (22.2 [6.0]) than nonusers (21.0 [5.4]) and molnupiravir users (20.9 [5.4]) (P = .04). Viral rebound occurred in 68 nonusers (0.6%), 2 nirmatrelvir-ritonavir users (1.0%), and 6 molnupiravir users (0.8%). Among 76 patients with viral rebound, 12 of 68 nonusers, 1 of 6 molnupiravir users, and neither of the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir users died of COVID-19.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, viral rebound was uncommon in patients taking molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and was not associated with increased risk of mortality. Given these findings, novel oral antivirals should be considered as a treatment for more patients with COVID-19 in the early phase of the infection.
| S-EPMC9856258 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background. Molnupiravir (MOL) and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NIR) were recently approved for the early treatment of COVID-19, but real-life data on tolerability, safety, and adverse events (AEs) are still scarce. Methods. We conducted a retrospective cohort study including all patients who were prescribed MOL and NIR at the Infectious Diseases Unit of Padua University Hospital, between January and May 2022. Demographic, clinical, and safety variables were recorded. Results. We included 909 patients, 48.3% males and 95.2% vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. The median age was 73 (IQR: 62–82) years. MOL and NIR were prescribed in 407 (44.8%) and 502 (55.2%) patients, respectively. Overall, 124/909 (13.6%) patients experienced any AEs following antivirals intake: 98/124 (79%) patients reporting adverse events presented grade 1 AEs, 23/124 (18.5%) grade 2 AEs and 3 (2.5%) grade 3 AEs. Treatment discontinuation was recorded in 4.8% of patients. AEs were significantly higher in women, in patients treated with NIR compared to MOL and in people who were not vaccinated. Conclusions. In our real-life setting, AEs were higher than those reported by clinical trials, and were particularly associated with NIR use and with not being vaccinated. Further analyses are needed to better assess safety of oral antivirals and to define which patient’s profile may benefit most from MOL and NIR.
| S-EPMC9962206 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9943556 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Feline infectious peritonitis (FIP), caused by feline coronavirus (FcoV), is considered one of the most enigmatic diseases in cats. Developing effective drugs for FIP is crucial due to its global prevalence and severity. In this study, six antiviral drugs were tested for their cytotoxicity, cell viability, and antiviral efficacies in Crandell-Reese feline kidney cells. A cytotoxicity assay demonstrated that these drugs were safe to be used with essentially no cytotoxicity with concentrations as high as 250 µM for ruxolitinib; 125 µM for GS441524; 63 µM for teriflunomide, molnupiravir, and nirmatrelvir; and 16 µM for ritonavir. GS441524 and nirmatrelvir exhibited the least detrimental effects on the CRFK cells, with 50% cytotoxic concentration (CC50) values of 260.0 µM and 279.1 µM, respectively, while ritonavir showed high toxicity (CC50 = 39.9 µM). In the dose-response analysis, GS441524, nirmatrelvir, and molnupiravir demonstrated promising results with selectivity index values of 165.54, 113.67, and 29.27, respectively, against FIPV. Our study suggests that nirmatrelvir and molnupiravir hold potential for FIPV treatment and could serve as alternatives to GS441524. Continued research and development of antiviral drugs are essential to ensure the well-being of companion animals and improve our preparedness for future outbreaks of coronaviruses affecting animals and humans alike.
| S-EPMC10459838 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10644264 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged to cause pandemic respiratory disease in the past 2 years, leading to significant worldwide morbidity and mortality. At the beginning of the pandemic, only nonspecific treatments were available, but recently two oral antivirals have received emergency use authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of mild to moderate coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Molnupiravir targets the viral polymerase and causes lethal mutations within the virus during replication. Nirmatrelvir targets SARS-CoV-2's main protease, and it is combined with ritonavir to delay its metabolism and allow nirmatrelvir to inhibit proteolytic cleavage of viral polyproteins during replication, preventing efficient virus production. Both drugs inhibit in vitro viral replication of all variants tested to date. Each is taken orally twice daily for 5 days. When started in the first 5 days of illness in persons at risk for complications due to COVID-19, molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir significantly decreased severe outcomes (hospitalizations and death) with adjusted relative risk reductions of 30% and 88%, respectively, for the two treatments. Molnupiravir should not be used in children or pregnant persons due to concerns about potential toxicity, and reliable contraception should be used in persons of childbearing potential. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir may cause significant drug-to-drug interactions that limit its use in persons taking certain medications metabolized by certain cytochrome P450 enzymes. Both treatment regimens are important additions to the management of early COVID-19 in at-risk patients in the outpatient setting.
| S-EPMC9380556 | biostudies-literature