Dataset Information

Incidence of Viral Rebound After Treatment With Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir and Molnupiravir.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Some 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.

Objective

To 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 participants

This 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.

Exposures

Molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment.

Main outcomes and measures

Viral rebound, defined as a Ct value greater than 40 that decreased to 40 or less.

Results

Of 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 relevance

In 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.

SUBMITTER: Wong GL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9856258 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Incidence of Viral Rebound After Treatment With Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir and Molnupiravir.

Wong Grace Lai-Hung GL Yip Terry Cheuk-Fung TC Lai Mandy Sze-Man MS Wong Vincent Wai-Sun VW Hui David Shu-Cheong DS Lui Grace Chung-Yan GC

JAMA network open 20221201 12

<h4>Importance</h4>Some 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.<h4>Objective</h4>To examine the incidence of viral rebound in patients with COVID-19 who were treated with the oral antiviral agents nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>This cohort study identif ...[more]

PMID: 36472873

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNirmatrelvir/ritonavir, the first severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) protease inhibitor, reduces the risk of hospitalization and death by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but has been associated with symptomatic rebound after therapy completion.MethodsSix individuals with relapse of COVID-19 symptoms after treatment with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, 2 individuals with rebound symptoms without prior antiviral therapy and 7 patients with acute Omicron infection (controls) were studied. Soluble biomarkers and serum SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein were measured. Nasal swabs positive for SARS-CoV-2 underwent viral isolation and targeted viral sequencing. SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike, anti-receptor-binding domain, and anti-nucleocapsid antibodies were measured. Surrogate viral neutralization tests against wild-type and Omicron spike protein, as well as T-cell stimulation assays, were performed.ResultsHigh levels of SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies were found in all participants. Anti-nucleocapsid IgG and Omicron-specific neutralizing antibodies increased in patients with rebound. Robust SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses were observed, higher in rebound compared with early acute COVID-19 patients. Inflammatory markers mostly decreased during rebound. Two patients sampled longitudinally demonstrated an increase in activated cytokine-producing CD4+ T cells against viral proteins. No characteristic resistance mutations were identified. SARS-CoV-2 was isolated by culture from 1 of 8 rebound patients; Polybrene addition increased this to 5 of 8.ConclusionsNirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment does not impede adaptive immune responses to SARS-CoV-2. Clinical rebound corresponds to development of a robust antibody and T-cell immune response, arguing against a high risk of disease progression. The presence of infectious virus supports the need for isolation and assessment of longer treatment courses.Clinical trials registrationNCT04401436.

Project description:BackgroundData are conflicting regarding an association between treatment of acute COVID-19 with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (N-R) and virologic rebound (VR).ObjectiveTo compare the frequency of VR in patients with and without N-R treatment for acute COVID-19.DesignObservational cohort study.SettingMulticenter health care system in Boston, Massachusetts.ParticipantsAmbulatory adults with acute COVID-19 with and without use of N-R.InterventionReceipt of 5 days of N-R treatment versus no COVID-19 therapy.MeasurementsThe primary outcome was VR, defined as either a positive SARS-CoV-2 viral culture result after a prior negative result or 2 consecutive viral loads above 4.0 log10 copies/mL that were also at least 1.0 log10 copies/mL higher than a prior viral load below 4.0 log10 copies/mL.ResultsCompared with untreated persons (n = 55), those taking N-R (n = 72) were older, received more COVID-19 vaccinations, and more commonly had immunosuppression. Fifteen participants (20.8%) taking N-R had VR versus 1 (1.8%) who was untreated (absolute difference, 19.0 percentage points [95% CI, 9.0 to 29.0 percentage points]; P = 0.001). All persons with VR had a positive viral culture result after a prior negative result. In multivariable models, only N-R use was associated with VR (adjusted odds ratio, 10.02 [CI, 1.13 to 88.74]; P = 0.038). Virologic rebound was more common among those who started therapy within 2 days of symptom onset (26.3%) than among those who started 2 or more days after symptom onset (0%) (P = 0.030). Among participants receiving N-R, those who had VR had prolonged shedding of replication-competent virus compared with those who did not have VR (median, 14 vs. 3 days). Eight of 16 participants (50% [CI, 25% to 75%]) with VR also reported symptom rebound; 2 were completely asymptomatic. No post-VR resistance mutations were detected.LimitationsObservational study design with differences between the treated and untreated groups; positive viral culture result was used as a surrogate marker for risk for ongoing viral transmission.ConclusionVirologic rebound occurred in approximately 1 in 5 people taking N-R, often without symptom rebound, and was associated with shedding of replication-competent virus.Primary funding sourceNational Institutes of Health.

Dataset Information

Incidence of Viral Rebound After Treatment With Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir and Molnupiravir.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Exposures

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Incidence of Viral Rebound After Treatment With Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir and Molnupiravir.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets