Safety and efficacy of onradivir in adults with acute uncomplicated influenza A infection: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Onradivir (ZSP1273) is a novel anti-influenza A virus inhibitor. Preclinical studies show that onradivir can inhibit influenza A H1N1 and H3N2 replication and increase the survival rate of infected animals. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of three onradivir dosing regimens versus placebo in outpatients with acute uncomplicated influenza A virus infection. METHODS: We did a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial at 20 clinical sites in China. Eligible participants were adults (18-65 years) with an influenza-like illness screened by rapid antigen testing at the first clinical visit, had the presence of a fever (axillary temperature ≥38·0°C), and had the presence of at least one moderate systemic and one respiratory symptom within 48 h of symptom onset. Patients were excluded if they were pregnant, allergic to onradivir, or had received any influenza antiviral medication within 7 days before enrolment. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) into four groups by an interactive web response system: onradivir 200 mg twice per day group, onradivir 400 mg twice per day group, onradivir 600 mg once per day group, and a matching placebo group. A 5-day oral treatment course was initiated within 48 h after symptoms onset. The primary outcome was the time to alleviate influenza symptoms in the modified intention-to-treat population. Safety was a secondary outcome. We evaluated the patients' self-assessed severity of seven influenza symptoms on a 4-point ordinal scale, and the treatment-emergent adverse events in all patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04024137. FINDINGS: Between Dec 7, 2019, and May 18, 2020, a total of 205 patients were screened; of whom, 172 (84%) were randomly assigned to receive onradivir (n=43 in the 200 mg twice per day group; n=43 in the 400 mg twice per day group; and n=43 in the 600 mg once per day group), or placebo (n=42). Median age was 22 years (IQR 20-26). All three onradivir groups showed decreased median time to alleviate influenza symptoms (46·92 h [IQR 24·00-81·38] in the 200 mg twice per day group, 54·87 h [23·67-110·62] in the 400 mg twice per day group, and 40·05 h [17·70-65·82] in the 600 mg once per day) compared with the placebo group (62·87 h [36·40-113·25]). The median difference between the onradivir 600 mg once per day group and the placebo group was -22·82 h (p=0·0330). The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse event was diarrhoea (71 [42%] of 171), ranging from 33-65% of the patients in onradivir-treated groups compared with 10% in the placebo group; no serious adverse events were observed. INTERPRETATION: Onradivir showed a safety profile comparable to placebo, as well as higher efficacy than placebo in ameliorating influenza symptoms and lowering the viral load in adult patients with uncomplicated influenza infection, especially the onradivir 600 mg once per day regimen. FUNDING: National Multidisciplinary Innovation Team Project of Traditional Chinese Medicine, National Natural Science Foundation of China, Guangdong Science and Technology Foundation, Guangzhou Science and Technology Planning Project, Emergency Key Program of Guangzhou Laboratory, Macao Science and Technology Development Fund, and Guangdong Raynovent Biotech.

Leritrelvir for the treatment of mild or moderate COVID-19 without co-administered ritonavir: a multicentre randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

Background: Leritrelvir is a novel α-ketoamide based peptidomimetic inhibitor of SARS-CoV-2 main protease. A preclinical study has demonstrated leritrelvir poses similar antiviral activities towards different SARS-CoV-2 variants compared with nirmatrelvir. A phase 2 clinical trial has shown a comparable antiviral efficacy and safety between leritrelvir with and without ritonavir co-administration. This trial aims to test efficacy and safety of leritrelvir monotherapy in adults with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. Methods: This was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trial at 29 clinical sites in China. Enrolled patients were from 18 to 75 years old, diagnosed with mild or moderate COVID-19 and not requiring hospitalization. Patients had a positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test (NAT) and at least one of the COVID-19 symptoms within 48 h before randomization, and the interval between the first positive SARS-CoV-2 NAT and randomization was ≤120 h (5 days). Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a 5-day course of either oral leritrelvir 400 mg TID or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the time from the first dose to sustained clinical recovery of all 11 symptoms (stuffy or runny nose, sore throat, shortness of breath or dyspnea, cough, muscle or body aches, headache, chills, fever ≥37 °C, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea). The safety endpoint was the incidence of adverse events (AE). Primary and safety analyses were performed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05620160. Findings: Between Nov 12 and Dec 30, 2022 when the zero COVID policy was abolished nationwide, a total of 1359 patients underwent randomization, 680 were assigned to leritrelvir group and 679 to placebo group. The median time to sustained clinical recovery in leritrelvir group was significantly shorter (251.02 h [IQR 188.95-428.68 h]) than that of Placebo (271.33 h [IQR 219.00-529.63 h], P = 0.0022, hazard ratio [HR] 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.35). Further analysis of subgroups for the median time to sustained clinical recovery revealed that (1) subgroup with positive viral nucleic acid tested ≤72 h had a 33.9 h difference in leritrelvir group than that of placebo; (2) the subgroup with baseline viral load >8 log 10 Copies/mL in leritrelvir group had 51.3 h difference than that of placebo. Leritrelvir reduced viral load by 0.82 log10 on day 4 compared to placebo. No participants in either group progressed to severe COVID-19 by day 29. Adverse events were reported in two groups: leritrelvir 315 (46.46%) compared with placebo 292 (43.52%). Treatment-relevant AEs were similar 218 (32.15%) in the leritrelvir group and 186 (27.72%) in placebo. Two cases of COVID-19 pneumonia were reported in placebo group, and one case in leritrelvir group, none of them were considered by the investigators to be leritrelvir related. The most frequently reported AEs (occurring in ≥5% of participants in at least one group) were laboratory finding: hypertriglyceridemia (leritrelvir 79 [11.7%] vs. placebo 70 [10.4%]) and hyperlipidemia (60 [8.8%] vs. 52 [7.7%]); all of them were nonserious. Interpretation: Leritrelvir monotherapy has good efficacy for mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and without serious safety concerns. Funding: This study was funded by the National Multidisciplinary Innovation Team Project of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guangdong Science and Technology Foundation, Guangzhou Science and Technology Planning Project and R&D Program of Guangzhou Laboratory.

POM121 promotes the proliferation and metastasis of gastric cancer via PI3K/AKT/MYC pathway.

Nuclear pore membrane protein 121 (POM121) is a part of the nuclear pore complex, which regulates intracellular signaling and maintains normal cellular functions. However, the role of POM121 in gastric cancer (GC) remains unclear. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction was performed to detect POM121 mRNA in 36 pairs of GC and adjacent non-tumor tissues. POM121 protein expression was determined by immunohistochemistry in 648 GC tissues and 121 normal gastric tissues. Connections between POM121 levels, clinicopathological parameters, and the prognosis of GC patients were explored. The influence of POM121 on proliferation, migration, and invasion was detected in vitro and vivo. The mechanism underlying the involvement of POM121 in GC progression was demonstrated via bioinformatics analysis and Western blot. Both the mRNA and protein levels of POM121 in GC tissues were higher than those in normal gastric tissues. High POM121 expression in GC was associated with deep invasion, advanced distant metastases and TNM stage, and positive HER2 expression. A negative connection was found between POM121 expression and the overall survival (OS) of GC patients. Downregulation of POM121 inhibited the proliferation, clone formation, migration, and invasion of GC cells, and overexpression of POM121 showed the opposite trend. POM121 promoted the phosphorylation of PI3K/AKT pathway and increased the expression of MYC. In conclusion, this study suggested that POM121 has the potential to act as an independent prognostic factor for GC patients.

Landscape of costimulatory molecule signature in breast cancer and its prognostic significance.

Background: Breast cancer (BRCA) is the most common malignant tumor in the world. Because of its substantial heterogeneity, its clinical treatment is faced with various problems. Only a small number of patients can benefit from the treatment of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI). Costimulatory molecule signature (CMS) plays an essential role in T cell activation and antitumor immune response. Previous studies found that CMS is associated with prognosis-related immune response markers, suggesting that CMS may be a potential therapeutic target. However, the research on their function in BRCA subtype is still inadequate. Our study aims to analyze CMS in BRCA and establish an effective prognostic model. Methods: We extracted 1,222 messenger RNA (mRNA) samples of 1,110 patients registered in the BRCA cohort of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), including 1,109 tumor tissue mRNA samples and 113 standard tissue samples for model construction and verification. The prognostic significance was determined by least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO)-Cox proportional hazard regression, which showed that the overall survival (OS) of the high-risk group was shorter than that of the low group (P<0.01). Results: Although the CMS prognostic model can predict the prognosis well, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) prediction results were unsatisfactory. The reason for this may be the heteromorphism of BRCA, so we divided the cases into four subtypes according to the PAM50 (PAM50Call_RNAseq) in clinical information. The same method was used to construct the model in the four subtypes and verify the effect of each subtype prognostic model. Conclusions: The results showed that the submodels constructed in this study can be used to evaluate the prognosis of each subtype.