Dataset Information

Short-Term Effectiveness of Oral Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant and Culture-Positive Viral Shedding.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Information on the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir against the omicron is limited. The clinical response and viral kinetics to therapy in the real world need to be evaluated.

Methods

Mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with risk factors for severe illness were prospectively enrolled as a treatment group with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir therapy versus a control group with supportive care. Serial viral load and culture from the upper respiratory tract were evaluated for seven days, and clinical responses and adverse reactions were evaluated for 28 days.

Results

A total of 51 patients were analyzed including 40 in the treatment group and 11 in the control group. Faster symptom resolution during hospitalization (P = 0.048) was observed in the treatment group. Only minor adverse reactions were reported in 27.5% of patients. The viral load on Day 7 was lower in the treatment group (P = 0.002). The viral culture showed a positivity of 67.6% (25/37) vs. 100% (6/6) on Day 1, 0% (0/37) vs. 16.7 (1/6) on Day 5, and 0% (0/16) vs. 50.0% (2/4) on Day 7 in the treatment and control groups, respectively.

Conclusions

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir against the omicron was safe and resulted in negative viral culture conversion after Day 5 of treatment with better symptomatic resolution.

SUBMITTER: Lee E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9970787 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Short-Term Effectiveness of Oral Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant and Culture-Positive Viral Shedding.

Lee Eunyoung E Park Sehee S Choi Jae-Phil JP Kim Min-Kyung MK Yang Eunmi E Ham Sin Young SY Lee Seungjae S Lee Bora B Yang Jeong-Sun JS Park Byoung Kwon BK Kim Da Sol DS Lee So-Young SY Lee Joo-Yeon JY Jang Hee-Chang HC Jeon Jaehyun J Park Sang-Won SW

Journal of Korean medical science 20230227 8

<h4>Background</h4>Information on the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir against the omicron is limited. The clinical response and viral kinetics to therapy in the real world need to be evaluated.<h4>Methods</h4>Mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with risk factors for severe illness were prospectively enrolled as a treatment group with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir therapy versus a control group with supportive care. Serial viral load and culture from the upper respirato ...[more]

PMID: 36852855

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundClinical trials of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have not shown a significant benefit of postexposure prophylaxis.MethodsWe 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.ResultsA 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).ConclusionsIn 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.).

Project description:BackgroundNirmatrelvir-ritonavir has been authorized for emergency use by many countries for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). However, the supply falls short of the global demand, which creates a need for more options. VV116 is an oral antiviral agent with potent activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).MethodsWe conducted a phase 3, noninferiority, observer-blinded, randomized trial during the outbreak caused by the B.1.1.529 (omicron) variant of SARS-CoV-2. Symptomatic adults with mild-to-moderate Covid-19 with a high risk of progression were assigned to receive a 5-day course of either VV116 or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir. The primary end point was the time to sustained clinical recovery through day 28. Sustained clinical recovery was defined as the alleviation of all Covid-19-related target symptoms to a total score of 0 or 1 for the sum of each symptom (on a scale from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating greater severity; total scores on the 11-item scale range from 0 to 33) for 2 consecutive days. A lower boundary of the two-sided 95% confidence interval for the hazard ratio of more than 0.8 was considered to indicate noninferiority (with a hazard ratio of >1 indicating a shorter time to sustained clinical recovery with VV116 than with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir).ResultsA total of 822 participants underwent randomization, and 771 received VV116 (384 participants) or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (387 participants). The noninferiority of VV116 to nirmatrelvir-ritonavir with respect to the time to sustained clinical recovery was established in the primary analysis (hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.35) and was maintained in the final analysis (median, 4 days with VV116 and 5 days with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir; hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.36). In the final analysis, the time to sustained symptom resolution (score of 0 for each of the 11 Covid-19-related target symptoms for 2 consecutive days) and to a first negative SARS-CoV-2 test did not differ substantially between the two groups. No participants in either group had died or had had progression to severe Covid-19 by day 28. The incidence of adverse events was lower in the VV116 group than in the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group (67.4% vs. 77.3%).ConclusionsAmong adults with mild-to-moderate Covid-19 who were at risk for progression, VV116 was noninferior to nirmatrelvir-ritonavir with respect to the time to sustained clinical recovery, with fewer safety concerns. (Funded by Vigonvita Life Sciences and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05341609; Chinese Clinical Trial Registry number, ChiCTR2200057856.).

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.

Dataset Information

Short-Term Effectiveness of Oral Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant and Culture-Positive Viral Shedding.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Short-Term Effectiveness of Oral Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant and Culture-Positive Viral Shedding.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets