A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of VIR-2482 in Healthy Adults for Prevention of Influenza A Illness (PENINSULA).

BACKGROUND: Influenza A results in significant morbidity and mortality. VIR-2482, an engineered human monoclonal antibody with extended half-life, targets a highly conserved epitope on the stem region of influenza A hemagglutinin and may protect against seasonal and pandemic influenza. METHODS: This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study examined the safety and efficacy of VIR-2482 for seasonal influenza A illness prevention in unvaccinated healthy adults. Participants (N = 2977) were randomized 1:1:1 to receive VIR-2482 450 mg, VIR-2482 1200 mg, or placebo via intramuscular injection. Primary and secondary efficacy endpoints were the proportions of participants with reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed influenza A infection and either protocol-defined influenza-like illness (ILI) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-defined ILI or World Health Organization-defined ILI, respectively. RESULTS: VIR-2482 450 mg and 1200 mg prophylaxis did not reduce the risk of protocol-defined ILI with reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed influenza A versus placebo (relative risk reduction, 3.8% [95% confidence interval (CI), -67.3 to 44.6] and 15.9% [95% CI, -49.3 to 52.3], respectively). At the 1200-mg dose, the relative risk reductions in influenza A illness were 57.2% (95% CI: -2.5 to 82.2) using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ILI and 44.1% (95% CI: -50.5 to 79.3) using World Health Organization ILI definitions, respectively. Serum VIR-2482 levels were similar regardless of influenza status; variants with reduced VIR-2482 susceptibility were not detected. Local injection site reactions were mild and similar across groups. CONCLUSIONS: VIR-2482 1200 mg intramuscular was well tolerated but did not significantly prevent protocol-defined ILI. Secondary endpoint analyses suggest this dose may have reduced influenza A illness. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT05567783.

Oral Favipiravir Exposure and Pharmacodynamic Effects in Outpatient Adults with Acute Influenza.

BACKGROUND: The pharmacokinetics of oral favipiravir and the relationships of plasma concentrations to antiviral effects are incompletely studied in influenza. METHODS: Serial plasma samples were collected from adults with uncomplicated influenza who were randomized to favipiravir (1800 mg BID on day 1, 800 mg BID on days 2 to 5)(N = 827) or placebo (N = 419) in two phase 3 trials. Post hoc analyses assessed the frequency of reaching an average Cmin ≥20ug/ml, its association with antiviral efficacy, and factors associated with reduced favipiravir exposure. RESULTS: Wide inter-individual variability existed in favipiravir concentrations, and this regimen failed to reach an average Cmin >20ug/ml in 41-43% of participants. Those attaining this threshold showed greater reductions in nasopharyngeal infectious virus titers on treatment days 2 and 3 (approximately 0.3-0.4 log10TCID50/ml) and lower viral titer AUCs compared to those who did not. Those with average Cmin <20ug/ml had over 2-fold higher mean ratios of the metabolite T-705-M1 to favipiravir, consistent with greater metabolism, and were more likely to weigh >80 kg (61.5-64%). CONCLUSIONS: Higher favipiravir levels with average Cmin >20ug/ml were associated with larger antiviral effects and more rapid illness alleviation compared to placebo and to favipiravir recipients with lower average Cmin values in uncomplicated influenza.

Baloxavir Marboxil for Prophylaxis against Influenza in Household Contacts.

BACKGROUND: Baloxavir marboxil (baloxavir) is a polymerase acidic protein (PA) endonuclease inhibitor with clinical efficacy in the treatment of uncomplicated influenza, including in outpatients at increased risk for complications. The postexposure prophylactic efficacy of baloxavir in the household setting is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the postexposure prophylactic efficacy of baloxavir in household contacts of index patients with confirmed influenza during the 2018-2019 season in Japan. The participants were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either a single dose of baloxavir or placebo. The primary end point was clinical influenza, as confirmed by reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction testing, over a period of 10 days. The occurrence of baloxavir-selected PA substitutions associated with reduced susceptibility was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 752 household contacts of 545 index patients were randomly assigned to receive baloxavir or placebo. Among the index patients, 95.6% had influenza A virus infection, 73.6% were younger than 12 years of age, and 52.7% received baloxavir. Among the participants who could be evaluated (374 in the baloxavir group and 375 in the placebo group), the percentage in whom clinical influenza developed was significantly lower in the baloxavir group than in the placebo group (1.9% vs. 13.6%) (adjusted risk ratio, 0.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06 to 0.30; P<0.001). Baloxavir was effective in high-risk, pediatric, and unvaccinated subgroups of participants. The risk of influenza infection, regardless of symptoms, was lower with baloxavir than with placebo (adjusted risk ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.58). The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups (22.2% in the baloxavir group and 20.5% in the placebo group). In the baloxavir group, the viral PA substitutions I38T/M or E23K were detected in 10 (2.7%) and 5 (1.3%) participants, respectively. No transmission of these variants from baloxavir-treated index patients to participants in the placebo group was detected; however, several instances of transmission to participants in the baloxavir group could not be ruled out. CONCLUSIONS: Single-dose baloxavir showed significant postexposure prophylactic efficacy in preventing influenza in household contacts of patients with influenza. (Funded by Shionogi; Japan Primary Registries Network number, JapicCTI-184180.).

Interferon Beta-1b and Lopinavir-Ritonavir for Middle East Respiratory Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Whether combined treatment with recombinant interferon beta-1b and lopinavir-ritonavir reduces mortality among patients hospitalized with Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, adaptive, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that enrolled patients at nine sites in Saudi Arabia. Hospitalized adults with laboratory-confirmed MERS were randomly assigned to receive recombinant interferon beta-1b plus lopinavir-ritonavir (intervention) or placebo for 14 days. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality, with a one-sided P-value threshold of 0.025. Prespecified subgroup analyses and safety analyses were conducted. Because of the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019, the data and safety monitoring board requested an unplanned interim analysis and subsequently recommended the termination of enrollment and the reporting of the results. RESULTS: A total of 95 patients were enrolled; 43 patients were assigned to the intervention group and 52 to the placebo group. A total of 12 patients (28%) in the intervention group and 23 (44%) in the placebo group died by day 90. The analysis of the primary outcome, with accounting for the adaptive design, yielded a risk difference of -19 percentage points (upper boundary of the 97.5% confidence interval [CI], -3; one-sided P = 0.024). In a prespecified subgroup analysis, treatment within 7 days after symptom onset led to lower 90-day mortality than use of placebo (relative risk, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.75), whereas later treatment did not. Serious adverse events occurred in 4 patients (9%) in the intervention group and in 10 (19%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of recombinant interferon beta-1b and lopinavir-ritonavir led to lower mortality than placebo among patients who had been hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed MERS. The effect was greatest when treatment was started within 7 days after symptom onset. (Funded by the King Abdullah International Medical Research Center; MIRACLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02845843.).

Favipiravir Treatment of Uncomplicated Influenza in Adults: Results of Two Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: We conducted double-blind, placebo-controlled trials assessing the efficacy and tolerability of favipiravir in acute influenza. METHODS: Otherwise healthy adults with influenza-like symptoms and fever of ≤48 hours were randomized to favipiravir (1800 mg twice daily [BID] on day 1, 800 mg BID on days 2-5) or placebo tablets (1:1 in US316; 3:1 in US317). The primary efficacy endpoint was the time to illness alleviation when 6 influenza symptoms were self-rated as absent or mild and fever was absent in the intention-to-treat, influenza-infected participants. RESULTS: In US316 (301 favipiravir, 322 placebo), favipiravir was associated with a 14.4-hour reduction (median, 84.2 vs 98.6 hours; P = .004) in time to illness alleviation vs placebo. In US317 (526 favipiravir, 169 placebo), favipiravir did not significantly reduce time to alleviation (median, 77.8 vs 83.9 hours). In both trials favipiravir was associated with reduced viral titers, RNA load area under the curve over days 1-5, and median times to cessation of virus detection (P < .001). Aside from asymptomatic hyperuricemia, no important differences in adverse events were found. CONCLUSIONS: This favipiravir dosing regimen demonstrated significant antiviral efficacy but inconsistent illness alleviation in uncomplicated influenza. Studies of higher doses and antiviral combinations for treating serious influenza and other RNA viral infections are warranted. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT02026349; NCT02008344.

Reducing Influenza Virus Transmission: The Potential Value of Antiviral Treatment.

Prompt antiviral treatment has the potential to reduce influenza virus transmission to close contacts, but rigorous data on the magnitude of treatment effects on transmission are limited. Animal model data indicate that rapid reductions in viral replication after antiviral treatment reduce the risk of transmission. Observational and clinical trial data with oseltamivir and other neuraminidase inhibitors indicate that prompt treatment of household index patients seems to reduce the risk of illness in contacts, although the magnitude of the reported effects has varied widely across studies. In addition, the potential risk of transmitting drug-resistant variants exists with all approved classes of influenza antivirals. A controlled trial examining baloxavir treatment efficacy to reduce transmission, including the risk of transmitting virus with reduced baloxavir susceptibility, is currently in progress. If reduced transmission risk is confirmed, modeling studies indicate that early treatment could have major epidemiologic benefits in seasonal and pandemic influenza.

Clinical and Economic Impact of COVID-19 on Agricultural Workers, Guatemala1.

We evaluated clinical and socioeconomic burdens of respiratory disease in banana farm workers in Guatemala. We offered all eligible workers enrollment during June 15-December 30, 2020, and annually, then tracked them for influenza-like illnesses (ILI) through self-reporting to study nurses, sentinel surveillance at health posts, and absenteeism. Workers who had ILI submitted nasopharyngeal swab specimens for testing for influenza virus, respiratory syncytial virus, and SARS-CoV-2, then completed surveys at days 0, 7, and 28. Through October 10, 2021, a total of 1,833 workers reported 169 ILIs (12.0 cases/100 person-years), and 43 (25.4%) were laboratory-confirmed infections with SARS-CoV-2 (3.1 cases/100 person-years). Workers who had SARS-CoV-2‒positive ILIs reported more frequent anosmia, dysgeusia, difficulty concentrating, and irritability and worse clinical and well-being severity scores than workers who had test result‒negative ILIs. Workers who had positive results also had greater absenteeism and lost income. These results support prioritization of farm workers in Guatemala for COVID-19 vaccination.

Report of the National Institutes of Health SARS-CoV-2 Antiviral Therapeutics Summit.

The NIH Virtual SARS-CoV-2 Antiviral Summit, held on 6 November 2020, was organized to provide an overview on the status and challenges in developing antiviral therapeutics for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including combinations of antivirals. Scientific experts from the public and private sectors convened virtually during a live videocast to discuss severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) targets for drug discovery as well as the preclinical tools needed to develop and evaluate effective small-molecule antivirals. The goals of the Summit were to review the current state of the science, identify unmet research needs, share insights and lessons learned from treating other infectious diseases, identify opportunities for public-private partnerships, and assist the research community in designing and developing antiviral therapeutics. This report includes an overview of therapeutic approaches, individual panel summaries, and a summary of the discussions and perspectives on the challenges ahead for antiviral development.

Remdesivir in adults with severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: No specific antiviral drug has been proven effective for treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue prodrug, has inhibitory effects on pathogenic animal and human coronaviruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro, and inhibits Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, SARS-CoV-1, and SARS-CoV-2 replication in animal models. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial at ten hospitals in Hubei, China. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, with an interval from symptom onset to enrolment of 12 days or less, oxygen saturation of 94% or less on room air or a ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less, and radiologically confirmed pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg on days 2-10 in single daily infusions) or the same volume of placebo infusions for 10 days. Patients were permitted concomitant use of lopinavir-ritonavir, interferons, and corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement up to day 28, defined as the time (in days) from randomisation to the point of a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status (from 1=discharged to 6=death) or discharged alive from hospital, whichever came first. Primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety analysis was done in all patients who started their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04257656. FINDINGS: Between Feb 6, 2020, and March 12, 2020, 237 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (158 to remdesivir and 79 to placebo); one patient in the placebo group who withdrew after randomisation was not included in the ITT population. Remdesivir use was not associated with a difference in time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio 1·23 [95% CI 0·87-1·75]). Although not statistically significant, patients receiving remdesivir had a numerically faster time to clinical improvement than those receiving placebo among patients with symptom duration of 10 days or less (hazard ratio 1·52 [0·95-2·43]). Adverse events were reported in 102 (66%) of 155 remdesivir recipients versus 50 (64%) of 78 placebo recipients. Remdesivir was stopped early because of adverse events in 18 (12%) patients versus four (5%) patients who stopped placebo early. INTERPRETATION: In this study of adult patients admitted to hospital for severe COVID-19, remdesivir was not associated with statistically significant clinical benefits. However, the numerical reduction in time to clinical improvement in those treated earlier requires confirmation in larger studies. FUNDING: Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Emergency Project of COVID-19, National Key Research and Development Program of China, the Beijing Science and Technology Project.

Baloxavir Marboxil for Uncomplicated Influenza in Adults and Adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Baloxavir marboxil is a selective inhibitor of influenza cap-dependent endonuclease. It has shown therapeutic activity in preclinical models of influenza A and B virus infections, including strains resistant to current antiviral agents. METHODS: We conducted two randomized, double-blind, controlled trials involving otherwise healthy outpatients with acute uncomplicated influenza. After a dose-ranging (10 to 40 mg) placebo-controlled trial, we undertook a placebo- and oseltamivir-controlled trial of single, weight-based doses of baloxavir (40 or 80 mg) in patients 12 to 64 years of age during the 2016-2017 season. The dose of oseltamivir was 75 mg twice daily for 5 days. The primary efficacy end point was the time to alleviation of influenza symptoms in the intention-to-treat infected population. RESULTS: In the phase 2 trial, the median time to alleviation of influenza symptoms was 23.4 to 28.2 hours shorter in the baloxavir groups than in the placebo group (P<0.05). In the phase 3 trial, the intention-to-treat infected population included 1064 patients; 84.8 to 88.1% of patients in each group had influenza A(H3N2) infection. The median time to alleviation of symptoms was 53.7 hours (95% confidence interval [CI], 49.5 to 58.5) with baloxavir, as compared with 80.2 hours (95% CI, 72.6 to 87.1) with placebo (P<0.001). The time to alleviation of symptoms was similar with baloxavir and oseltamivir. Baloxavir was associated with greater reductions in viral load 1 day after initiation of the regimen than placebo or oseltamivir. Adverse events were reported in 20.7% of baloxavir recipients, 24.6% of placebo recipients, and 24.8% of oseltamivir recipients. The emergence of polymerase acidic protein variants with I38T/M/F substitutions conferring reduced susceptibility to baloxavir occurred in 2.2% and 9.7% of baloxavir recipients in the phase 2 trial and phase 3 trial, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Single-dose baloxavir was without evident safety concerns, was superior to placebo in alleviating influenza symptoms, and was superior to both oseltamivir and placebo in reducing the viral load 1 day after initiation of the trial regimen in patients with uncomplicated influenza. Evidence for the development of decreased susceptibility to baloxavir after treatment was also observed. (Funded by Shionogi; JapicCTI number, 153090, and CAPSTONE-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02954354 .).

Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines on the Management of Adults With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the ICU: First Update.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic continues to affect millions worldwide. Given the rapidly growing evidence base, we implemented a living guideline model to provide guidance on the management of patients with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 in the ICU. METHODS: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Disease 2019 panel has expanded to include 43 experts from 14 countries; all panel members completed an electronic conflict-of-interest disclosure form. In this update, the panel addressed nine questions relevant to managing severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 in the ICU. We used the World Health Organization's definition of severe and critical coronavirus disease 2019. The systematic reviews team searched the literature for relevant evidence, aiming to identify systematic reviews and clinical trials. When appropriate, we performed a random-effects meta-analysis to summarize treatment effects. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach, then used the evidence-to-decision framework to generate recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. RESULTS: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Diease 2019 panel issued nine statements (three new and six updated) related to ICU patients with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019. For severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019, the panel strongly recommends using systemic corticosteroids and venous thromboprophylaxis but strongly recommends against using hydroxychloroquine. In addition, the panel suggests using dexamethasone (compared with other corticosteroids) and suggests against using convalescent plasma and therapeutic anticoagulation outside clinical trials. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Diease 2019 panel suggests using remdesivir in nonventilated patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 and suggests against starting remdesivir in patients with critical coronavirus disease 2019 outside clinical trials. Because of insufficient evidence, the panel did not issue a recommendation on the use of awake prone positioning. CONCLUSION: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Diease 2019 panel issued several recommendations to guide healthcare professionals caring for adults with critical or severe coronavirus disease 2019 in the ICU. Based on a living guideline model the recommendations will be updated as new evidence becomes available.

Comparative Effectiveness of Combined Favipiravir and Oseltamivir Therapy Versus Oseltamivir Monotherapy in Critically Ill Patients With Influenza Virus Infection.

BACKGROUND: A synergistic effect of combination therapy with favipiravir and oseltamivir has been reported in preclinical models of influenza. However, no data are available on the clinical effectiveness of combination therapy in severe influenza. METHODS: Data from 2 separate prospective studies of influenza adults were used to compare outcomes between combination and oseltamivir monotherapy. Outcomes included rate of clinical improvement (defined as a decrease of 2 categories on a 7-category ordinal scale) and viral RNA detectability over time. Subhazard ratios (sHRs) were estimated by the Fine and Gray model for competing risks. RESULTS: In total, 40 patients were treated with combination therapy and 128 with oseltamivir alone. Clinical improvement on day 14 in the combination group was higher than in the monotherapy group (62.5% vs 42.2%; P = .0247). The adjusted sHR for combination therapy was 2.06 (95% confidence interval, 1.30-3.26). The proportion of undetectable viral RNA at day 10 was higher in the combination group than the oseltamivir group (67.5% vs 21.9%; P < .01). No significant differences were observed in mortality or other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Favipiravir and oseltamivir combination therapy may accelerate clinical recovery compared to oseltamivir monotherapy in severe influenza, and this strategy should be formally evaluated in a randomized controlled trial.

Treatment-Emergent Influenza Variant Viruses With Reduced Baloxavir Susceptibility: Impact on Clinical and Virologic Outcomes in Uncomplicated Influenza.

BACKGROUND: Single-dose baloxavir rapidly reduces influenza virus titers and symptoms in patients with uncomplicated influenza, but viruses with reduced in vitro susceptibility due to amino acid substitutions at position 38 of polymerase acidic protein (PA/I38X) sometimes emerge. METHODS: We evaluated the kinetics, risk factors, and effects on clinical and virologic outcomes of emergence of PA/I38X-substituted viruses. RESULTS: Viruses containing PA/I38X substitutions were identified 3-9 days after baloxavir treatment in 9.7% (36/370) of patients, of whom 85.3% had transient virus titer rises. Median time to sustained cessation of infectious virus detection was 192, 48, and 96 hours in the baloxavir recipients with PA/I38X-substituted viruses, without PA/I38X-substituted viruses, and placebo recipients, respectively. The corresponding median times to alleviation of symptoms were 63.1, 51.0, and 80.2 hours, respectively. After day 5, symptom increases occurred in 11.5%, 8.0%, and 13.0%, respectively, and in 8.9% of oseltamivir recipients. Variant virus emergence was associated with lower baseline neutralizing antibody titers. CONCLUSIONS: The emergence of viruses with PA/I38X substitutions following baloxavir treatment was associated with transient rises in infectious virus titers, prolongation of virus detectability, initial delay in symptom alleviation, and uncommonly with symptom rebound. The potential transmissibility of PA/I38X-substituted viruses requires careful study. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02954354.

Baloxavir Marboxil in Japanese Pediatric Patients With Influenza: Safety and Clinical and Virologic Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the safety and effectiveness of baloxavir marboxil administration in Japanese children with influenza. METHODS: This open-label study administered 1 weight-adjusted dose of baloxavir to 107 children aged 1-11 years with laboratory-confirmed, febrile influenza virus infection of ≤48 hours duration. RESULTS: Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 34.6% of patients, most commonly vomiting (7.5%); no serious AEs or AEs causing discontinuation occurred. The median time to alleviation of influenza illness was 44.6 hours (95% confidence interval, 38.9-62.5 hours), to resolution of fever was 21.4 hours, and to sustained cessation of infectious viral shedding was 24.0 hours. However, viruses with amino acid substitutions in the viral polymerase acidic protein at position I38 (PA/I38T/M) emerged in 18 of 77 (23.4%) patients. Emergence was associated with longer infectious virus detectability (median time, 180.0 hours) and time to illness alleviation (median, 79.6 vs 42.8 hours in patients without PA/I38T/M-substituted viruses). Among patients with PA/I38T/M-substituted virus emergence, those with baseline hemagglutinin inhibition (HAI) antibody titer <40 experienced delay in time to illness alleviation (median, 85.4 vs 56.0 hours in patients with higher baseline HAI antibody titer). CONCLUSIONS: A single, oral dose of baloxavir marboxil was well tolerated and rapidly reduced viral titers, but the common emergence of PA/I38T/M-substituted viruses warrants consideration of alternative dosing regimens in young children. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center Clinical Trials Information (Japic CTI-163417).

Ribavirin and Interferon Therapy for Critically Ill Patients With Middle East Respiratory Syndrome: A Multicenter Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of ribavirin and recombinant interferon (RBV/rIFN) therapy on the outcomes of critically ill patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), accounting for time-varying confounders. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS from 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia diagnosed between September 2012 and January 2018. We evaluated the association of RBV/rIFN with 90-day mortality and MERS coronavirus (MERS-CoV) RNA clearance using marginal structural modeling to account for baseline and time-varying confounders. RESULTS: Of 349 MERS patients, 144 (41.3%) patients received RBV/rIFN (RBV and/or rIFN-α2a, rIFN-α2b, or rIFN-ß1a; none received rIFN-ß1b). RBV/rIFN was initiated at a median of 2 days (Q1, Q3: 1, 3 days) from intensive care unit admission. Crude 90-day mortality was higher in patients with RBV/rIFN compared to no RBV/rIFN (106/144 [73.6%] vs 126/205 [61.5%]; P = .02]. After adjusting for baseline and time-varying confounders using a marginal structural model, RBV/rIFN was not associated with changes in 90-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.03 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .73-1.44]; P = .87) or with more rapid MERS-CoV RNA clearance (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.65 [95% CI, .30-1.44]; P = .29). CONCLUSIONS: In this observational study, RBV/rIFN (RBV and/or rIFN-α2a, rIFN-α2b, or rIFN-ß1a) therapy was commonly used in critically ill MERS patients but was not associated with reduction in 90-day mortality or in faster MERS-CoV RNA clearance.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Guidelines on the Management of Critically Ill Adults with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).

BACKGROUND: The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting thousands of people around the world. Urgent guidance for clinicians caring for the sickest of these patients is needed. METHODS: We formed a panel of 36 experts from 12 countries. All panel members completed the World Health Organization conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel proposed 53 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 in the ICU. We searched the literature for direct and indirect evidence on the management of COVID-19 in critically ill patients in the ICU. We identified relevant and recent systematic reviews on most questions relating to supportive care. We assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then generated recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice recommendations. RESULTS: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued 54 statements, of which four are best practice statements, nine are strong recommendations, and 35 are weak recommendations. No recommendation was provided for six questions. The topics were: 1) infection control, 2) laboratory diagnosis and specimens, 3) hemodynamic support, 4) ventilatory support, and 5) COVID-19 therapy. CONCLUSION: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued several recommendations to help support healthcare workers caring for critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. When available, we will provide new evidence in further releases of these guidelines.

Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America: 2018 Update on Diagnosis, Treatment, Chemoprophylaxis, and Institutional Outbreak Management of Seasonal Influenzaa.

These clinical practice guidelines are an update of the guidelines published by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) in 2009, prior to the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. This document addresses new information regarding diagnostic testing, treatment and chemoprophylaxis with antiviral medications, and issues related to institutional outbreak management for seasonal influenza. It is intended for use by primary care clinicians, obstetricians, emergency medicine providers, hospitalists, laboratorians, and infectious disease specialists, as well as other clinicians managing patients with suspected or laboratory-confirmed influenza. The guidelines consider the care of children and adults, including special populations such as pregnant and postpartum women and immunocompromised patients.

Influenza virus polymerase inhibitors in clinical development.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We review antivirals inhibiting subunits of the influenza polymerase complex that are advancing in clinical development. RECENT FINDINGS: Favipiravir, pimodivir, and baloxavir are inhibitory in preclinical models for influenza A viruses, including pandemic threat viruses and those resistant to currently approved antivirals, and two (favipiravir and baloxavir) also inhibit influenza B viruses. All are orally administered, although the dosing regimens vary. The polymerase basic protein 1 transcriptase inhibitor favipiravir has shown inconsistent clinical effects in uncomplicated influenza, and is teratogenic effects in multiple species, contraindicating its use in pregnancy. The polymerase basic protein 2 cap-binding inhibitor pimodivir displays antiviral effects alone and in combination with oseltamivir in uncomplicated influenza, although variants with reduced susceptibility emerge frequently during monotherapy. Single doses of the polymerase acidic protein cap-dependent endonuclease inhibitor baloxavir are effective in alleviating symptoms and rapidly inhibiting viral replication in otherwise healthy and higher risk patients with acute influenza, although variants with reduced susceptibility emerge frequently during monotherapy. Combinations of newer polymerase inhibitors with neuraminidase inhibitors show synergy in preclinical models and are currently undergoing clinical testing in hospitalized patients. SUMMARY: These new polymerase inhibitors promise to add to the clinical management options and overall control strategies for influenza virus infections.

Corticosteroid Therapy for Critically Ill Patients with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome.

RATIONALE: Corticosteroid therapy is commonly used among critically ill patients with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), but its impact on outcomes is uncertain. Analyses of observational studies often do not account for patients' clinical condition at the time of corticosteroid therapy initiation. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association of corticosteroid therapy on mortality and on MERS coronavirus RNA clearance in critically ill patients with MERS. METHODS: ICU patients with MERs were included from 14 Saudi Arabian centers between September 2012 and October 2015. We performed marginal structural modeling to account for baseline and time-varying confounders. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 309 patients, 151 received corticosteroids. Corticosteroids were initiated at a median of 3.0 days (quartile 1 [Q1]-Q3, 1.0-7.0) from ICU admission. Patients who received corticosteroids were more likely to receive invasive ventilation (141 of 151 [93.4%] vs. 121 of 158 [76.6%]; P < 0.0001) and had higher 90-day crude mortality (112 of 151 [74.2%] vs. 91 of 158 [57.6%]; P = 0.002). Using marginal structural modeling, corticosteroid therapy was not significantly associated with 90-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-1.07; P = 0.12) but was associated with delay in MERS coronavirus RNA clearance (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.17-0.72; P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Corticosteroid therapy in patients with MERS was not associated with a difference in mortality after adjustment for time-varying confounders but was associated with delayed MERS coronavirus RNA clearance. These findings highlight the challenges and importance of adjusting for baseline and time-varying confounders when estimating clinical effects of treatments using observational studies.

Critically Ill Patients With the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe patient characteristics, clinical manifestations, disease course including viral replication patterns, and outcomes of critically ill patients with severe acute respiratory infection from the Middle East respiratory syndrome and to compare these features with patients with severe acute respiratory infection due to other etiologies. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Patients admitted to ICUs in 14 Saudi Arabian hospitals. PATIENTS: Critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection (n = 330) admitted between September 2012 and October 2015 were compared to consecutive critically ill patients with community-acquired severe acute respiratory infection of non-Middle East respiratory syndrome etiology (non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection) (n = 222). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Although Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection patients were younger than those with non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection (median [quartile 1, quartile 3] 58 yr [44, 69] vs 70 [52, 78]; p < 0.001), clinical presentations and comorbidities overlapped substantially. Patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection had more severe hypoxemic respiratory failure (PaO2/FIO2: 106 [66, 160] vs 176 [104, 252]; p < 0.001) and more frequent nonrespiratory organ failure (nonrespiratory Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score: 6 [4, 9] vs 5 [3, 7]; p = 0.002), thus required more frequently invasive mechanical ventilation (85.2% vs 73.0%; p < 0.001), oxygen rescue therapies (extracorporeal membrane oxygenation 5.8% vs 0.9%; p = 0.003), vasopressor support (79.4% vs 55.0%; p < 0.001), and renal replacement therapy (48.8% vs 22.1%; p < 0.001). After adjustment for potential confounding factors, Middle East respiratory syndrome was independently associated with death compared to non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection (adjusted odds ratio, 5.87; 95% CI, 4.02-8.56; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial overlap exists in the clinical presentation and comorbidities among patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection from other etiologies; therefore, a high index of suspicion combined with diagnostic testing is essential component of severe acute respiratory infection investigation for at-risk patients. The lack of distinguishing clinical features, the need to rely on real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction from respiratory samples, variability in viral shedding duration, lack of effective therapy, and high mortality represent substantial clinical challenges and help guide ongoing clinical research efforts.