A Risk Profile Using Simple Hematologic Parameters to Assess Benefits From Baricitinib in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial-2.

BACKGROUND: The ACTT risk profile, which was developed from ACTT-1 (Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial-1), demonstrated that hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the high-risk quartile (characterized by low absolute lymphocyte count [ALC], high absolute neutrophil count [ANC], and low platelet count at baseline) benefited most from treatment with the antiviral remdesivir. It is unknown which patient characteristics are associated with benefit from treatment with the immunomodulator baricitinib. OBJECTIVE: To apply the ACTT risk profile to the ACTT-2 cohort to investigate potential baricitinib-related treatment effects by risk quartile. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of ACTT-2, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04401579). SETTING: Sixty-seven trial sites in 8 countries. PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized with COVID-19 (n = 999; 85% U.S. participants). INTERVENTION: Baricitinib+remdesivir versus placebo+remdesivir. MEASUREMENTS: Mortality, progression to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death, and recovery, all within 28 days; ALC, ANC, and platelet count trajectories. RESULTS: In the high-risk quartile, baricitinib+remdesivir was associated with reduced risk for death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.38 [95% CI, 0.16 to 0.86]; P = 0.020), decreased progression to IMV or death (HR, 0.57 [CI, 0.35 to 0.93]; P = 0.024), and improved recovery rate (HR, 1.53 [CI, 1.16 to 2.02]; P = 0.002) compared with placebo+remdesivir. After 5 days, participants receiving baricitinib+remdesivir had significantly larger increases in ALC and significantly larger decreases in ANC compared with control participants, with the largest effects observed in the high-risk quartile. LIMITATION: Secondary analysis of data collected before circulation of current SARS-CoV-2 variants. CONCLUSION: The ACTT risk profile identifies a subgroup of hospitalized patients who benefit most from baricitinib treatment and captures a patient phenotype of treatment response to an immunomodulator and an antiviral. Changes in ALC and ANC trajectory suggest a mechanism whereby an immunomodulator limits severe COVID-19. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Baricitinib plus Remdesivir for Hospitalized Adults with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with dysregulated inflammation. The effects of combination treatment with baricitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor, plus remdesivir are not known. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating baricitinib plus remdesivir in hospitalized adults with Covid-19. All the patients received remdesivir (≤10 days) and either baricitinib (≤14 days) or placebo (control). The primary outcome was the time to recovery. The key secondary outcome was clinical status at day 15. RESULTS: A total of 1033 patients underwent randomization (with 515 assigned to combination treatment and 518 to control). Patients receiving baricitinib had a median time to recovery of 7 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 6 to 8), as compared with 8 days (95% CI, 7 to 9) with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.32; P = 0.03), and a 30% higher odds of improvement in clinical status at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0 to 1.6). Patients receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation at enrollment had a time to recovery of 10 days with combination treatment and 18 days with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.10 to 2.08). The 28-day mortality was 5.1% in the combination group and 7.8% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.09). Serious adverse events were less frequent in the combination group than in the control group (16.0% vs. 21.0%; difference, -5.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -9.8 to -0.3; P = 0.03), as were new infections (5.9% vs. 11.2%; difference, -5.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.7 to -1.9; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib plus remdesivir was superior to remdesivir alone in reducing recovery time and accelerating improvement in clinical status among patients with Covid-19, notably among those receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation. The combination was associated with fewer serious adverse events. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04401579.).

A Single Case Observation: Is the Ebola Virus Soluble Glycoprotein an Indicator of Viral Recrudescence?

This case study investigated the long-term expression dynamics of Ebola virus (EBOV) soluble glycoprotein (sGP) in the serum of a patient who was infected with EBOV in West Africa and recovered from acute Ebola virus disease (EVD) at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center in Bethesda, Maryland. Samples from this patient were collected during acute EVD and during convalescence up to day 361 following illness onset. Although blood samples were negative by reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction after recovery from acute EVD, we detected small amounts of EBOV sGP in the serum of the patient long after recovery, potentially indicating viral recrudescence. As this was only observed in a single patient, additional longitudinal patient samples are needed to confirm our hypothesis that EBOV sGP may be an indicator of viral recrudescence long after recovery from acute EVD.

High-throughput, single-copy sequencing reveals SARS-CoV-2 spike variants coincident with mounting humoral immunity during acute COVID-19.

Tracking evolution of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) within infected individuals will help elucidate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pathogenesis and inform use of antiviral interventions. In this study, we developed an approach for sequencing the region encoding the SARS-CoV-2 virion surface proteins from large numbers of individual virus RNA genomes per sample. We applied this approach to the WA-1 reference clinical isolate of SARS-CoV-2 passaged in vitro and to upper respiratory samples from 7 study participants with COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 genomes from cell culture were diverse, including 18 haplotypes with non-synonymous mutations clustered in the spike NH2-terminal domain (NTD) and furin cleavage site regions. By contrast, cross-sectional analysis of samples from participants with COVID-19 showed fewer virus variants, without structural clustering of mutations. However, longitudinal analysis in one individual revealed 4 virus haplotypes bearing 3 independent mutations in a spike NTD epitope targeted by autologous antibodies. These mutations arose coincident with a 6.2-fold rise in serum binding to spike and a transient increase in virus burden. We conclude that SARS-CoV-2 exhibits a capacity for rapid genetic adaptation that becomes detectable in vivo with the onset of humoral immunity, with the potential to contribute to delayed virologic clearance in the acute setting.

Temporal Improvements in COVID-19 Outcomes for Hospitalized Adults: A Post Hoc Observational Study of Remdesivir Group Participants in the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 standard of care (SOC) evolved rapidly during 2020 and 2021, but its cumulative effect over time is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether recovery and mortality improved as SOC evolved, using data from ACTT (Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial). DESIGN: ACTT is a series of phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials that evaluated COVID-19 therapeutics from February 2020 through May 2021. ACTT-1 compared remdesivir plus SOC to placebo plus SOC, and in ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, remdesivir plus SOC was the control group. This post hoc analysis compared recovery and mortality between these comparable sequential cohorts of patients who received remdesivir plus SOC, adjusting for baseline characteristics with propensity score weighting. The analysis was repeated for participants in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4 who received remdesivir plus dexamethasone plus SOC. Trends in SOC that could explain outcome improvements were analyzed. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04280705 [ACTT-1], NCT04401579 [ACTT-2], NCT04492475 [ACTT-3], and NCT04640168 [ACTT-4]). SETTING: 94 hospitals in 10 countries (86% U.S. participants). PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized with COVID-19. INTERVENTION: SOC. MEASUREMENTS: 28-day mortality and recovery. RESULTS: Although outcomes were better in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were close to 1 (HR for recovery, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.17]; HR for mortality, 0.90 [CI, 0.56 to 1.40]). Comparable patients were less likely to be intubated in ACTT-2 than in ACTT-1 (odds ratio, 0.75 [CI, 0.53 to 0.97]), and hydroxychloroquine use decreased. Outcomes improved from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3 (HR for recovery, 1.43 [CI, 1.24 to 1.64]; HR for mortality, 0.45 [CI, 0.21 to 0.97]). Potential explanatory factors (SOC trends, case surges, and variant trends) were similar between ACTT-2 and ACTT-3, except for increased dexamethasone use (11% to 77%). Outcomes were similar in ACTT-3 and ACTT-4. Antibiotic use decreased gradually across all stages. LIMITATION: Unmeasured confounding. CONCLUSION: Changes in patient composition explained improved outcomes from ACTT-1 to ACTT-2 but not from ACTT-2 to ACTT-3, suggesting improved SOC. These results support excluding nonconcurrent controls from analysis of platform trials in rapidly changing therapeutic areas. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Remdesivir for the Prevention of Invasive Mechanical Ventilation or Death in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Post Hoc Analysis of the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial-1 Cohort Data.

This post hoc analysis of the Adaptive Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Treatment Trial-1 (ACTT-1) shows a treatment effect of remdesivir (RDV) on progression to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death. Additionally, we create a risk profile that better predicts progression than baseline oxygen requirement alone. The highest risk group derives the greatest treatment effect from RDV.

Fostamatinib for the Treatment of Hospitalized Adults With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) requiring hospitalization is characterized by robust antibody production, dysregulated immune response, and immunothrombosis. Fostamatinib is a novel spleen tyrosine kinase inhibitor that we hypothesize will ameliorate Fc activation and attenuate harmful effects of the anti-COVID-19 immune response. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in hospitalized adults requiring oxygen with COVID-19 where patients receiving standard of care were randomized to receive fostamatinib or placebo. The primary outcome was serious adverse events by day 29. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients underwent randomization (30 to fostamatinib and 29 to placebo). Serious adverse events occurred in 10.5% of patients in the fostamatinib group compared with 22% in placebo (P = .2). Three deaths occurred by day 29, all receiving placebo. The mean change in ordinal score at day 15 was greater in the fostamatinib group (-3.6 ±â€…0.3 vs -2.6 ±â€…0.4, P = .035) and the median length in the intensive care unit was 3 days in the fostamatinib group vs 7 days in placebo (P = .07). Differences in clinical improvement were most evident in patients with severe or critical disease (median days on oxygen, 10 vs 28, P = .027). There were trends toward more rapid reductions in C-reactive protein, D-dimer, fibrinogen, and ferritin levels in the fostamatinib group. CONCLUSION: For COVID-19 requiring hospitalization, the addition of fostamatinib to standard of care was safe and patients were observed to have improved clinical outcomes compared with placebo. These results warrant further validation in larger confirmatory trials. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04579393.

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Ebola Virus Disease Therapeutics.

BACKGROUND: Although several experimental therapeutics for Ebola virus disease (EVD) have been developed, the safety and efficacy of the most promising therapies need to be assessed in the context of a randomized, controlled trial. METHODS: We conducted a trial of four investigational therapies for EVD in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where an outbreak began in August 2018. Patients of any age who had a positive result for Ebola virus RNA on reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction assay were enrolled. All patients received standard care and were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to intravenous administration of the triple monoclonal antibody ZMapp (the control group), the antiviral agent remdesivir, the single monoclonal antibody MAb114, or the triple monoclonal antibody REGN-EB3. The REGN-EB3 group was added in a later version of the protocol, so data from these patients were compared with those of patients in the ZMapp group who were enrolled at or after the time the REGN-EB3 group was added (the ZMapp subgroup). The primary end point was death at 28 days. RESULTS: A total of 681 patients were enrolled from November 20, 2018, to August 9, 2019, at which time the data and safety monitoring board recommended that patients be assigned only to the MAb114 and REGN-EB3 groups for the remainder of the trial; the recommendation was based on the results of an interim analysis that showed superiority of these groups to ZMapp and remdesivir with respect to mortality. At 28 days, death had occurred in 61 of 174 patients (35.1%) in the MAb114 group, as compared with 84 of 169 (49.7%) in the ZMapp group (P = 0.007), and in 52 of 155 (33.5%) in the REGN-EB3 group, as compared with 79 of 154 (51.3%) in the ZMapp subgroup (P = 0.002). A shorter duration of symptoms before admission and lower baseline values for viral load and for serum creatinine and aminotransferase levels each correlated with improved survival. Four serious adverse events were judged to be potentially related to the trial drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Both MAb114 and REGN-EB3 were superior to ZMapp in reducing mortality from EVD. Scientifically and ethically sound clinical research can be conducted during disease outbreaks and can help inform the outbreak response. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; PALM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03719586.).

Use of Ebola Vaccine: Expansion of Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices To Include Two Additional Populations - United States, 2021.

On December 19, 2019, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP Ebola vaccine (ERVEBO, Merck) for the prevention of Ebola virus disease (EVD) caused by infection with Ebola virus, species Zaire ebolavirus, in adults aged ≥18 years. In February 2020, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended preexposure vaccination with ERVEBO for adults aged ≥18 years in the United States who are at highest risk for potential occupational exposure to Ebola virus because they are responding to an outbreak of EVD, work as health care personnel at federally designated Ebola treatment centers in the United States, or work as laboratorians or other staff members at biosafety level 4 facilities in the United States (1).

Fostamatinib Inhibits Neutrophils Extracellular Traps Induced by COVID-19 Patient Plasma: A Potential Therapeutic.

Neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) contribute to immunothrombosis and have been associated with mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We stimulated donor neutrophils with plasma from patients with COVID-19 and demonstrated that R406 can abrogate the release of NETs. These data provide evidence for how fostamatinib may mitigate neutrophil-associated mechanisms contributing to COVID-19 immunopathogenesis.

Sensitivity in Detection of Antibodies to Nucleocapsid and Spike Proteins of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is associated with respiratory-related disease and death. Assays to detect virus-specific antibodies are important to understand the prevalence of infection and the course of the immune response. METHODS: Quantitative measurements of plasma or serum antibodies to the nucleocapsid and spike proteins were analyzed using luciferase immunoprecipitation system assays in 100 cross-sectional or longitudinal samples from patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. A subset of samples was tested both with and without heat inactivation. RESULTS: At >14 days after symptom onset, antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein showed 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity, whereas antibodies to spike protein were detected with 91% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Neither antibody levels nor the rate of seropositivity were significantly reduced by heat inactivation of samples. Analysis of daily samples from 6 patients with COVID-19 showed anti-nucleocapsid and spike protein antibodies appearing between days 8 and 14 after initial symptoms. Immunocompromised patients generally had a delayed antibody response to SARS-CoV-2, compared with immunocompetent patients. CONCLUSIONS: Antibody to the nucleocapsid protein of SARS-CoV-2 is more sensitive than spike protein antibody for detecting early infection. Analyzing heat-inactivated samples with a luciferase immunoprecipitation system assay is a safe and sensitive method for detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

Effect of Oral Oseltamivir on Virological Outcomes in Low-risk Adults With Influenza: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Duration of viral shedding is a determinant of infectivity and transmissibility, but few data exist about oseltamivir's ability to alter viral shedding. METHODS: From January 2012 through October 2017, a randomized, double-blinded multicenter clinical trial was conducted in adults aged 18-64 years at 42 sites in Thailand, the United States, and Argentina. Participants with influenza A or B and without risk factors for complications of influenza were screened for the study. Eligible participants were randomized to receive oseltamivir 75 mg or placebo twice daily for 5 days. The primary endpoint was the percentage of participants with virus detectable by polymerase chain reaction in nasopharyngeal swab at day 3. RESULTS: Of 716 adults screened for the study, 558 were randomized, and 501 were confirmed to have influenza. Forty-six participants in the pilot study were excluded, and 449 of the 455 participants in the population for the primary analysis had day 3 viral shedding results. Ninety-nine (45.0%) of 220 participants in the oseltamivir arm had virus detected at day 3 compared with 131 (57.2%) of 229 participants in the placebo arm (absolute difference of -12.2% [-21.4%, -3.0%], P =; .010). The median time to alleviation of symptoms was 79.0 hours for the oseltamivir arm and 84.0 hours for the placebo arm (P =; .34) in those with confirmed influenza infection. CONCLUSIONS: Oseltamivir decreased viral shedding in this low-risk population. However, in the population enrolled in this study, it did not significantly decrease the time to resolution of clinical symptoms. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01314911.

A Recombinant Vesicular Stomatitis Virus Ebola Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: The worst Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak in history has resulted in more than 28,000 cases and 11,000 deaths. We present the final results of two phase 1 trials of an attenuated, replication-competent, recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus (rVSV)-based vaccine candidate designed to prevent EVD. METHODS: We conducted two phase 1, placebo-controlled, double-blind, dose-escalation trials of an rVSV-based vaccine candidate expressing the glycoprotein of a Zaire strain of Ebola virus (ZEBOV). A total of 39 adults at each site (78 participants in all) were consecutively enrolled into groups of 13. At each site, volunteers received one of three doses of the rVSV-ZEBOV vaccine (3 million plaque-forming units [PFU], 20 million PFU, or 100 million PFU) or placebo. Volunteers at one of the sites received a second dose at day 28. Safety and immunogenicity were assessed. RESULTS: The most common adverse events were injection-site pain, fatigue, myalgia, and headache. Transient rVSV viremia was noted in all the vaccine recipients after dose 1. The rates of adverse events and viremia were lower after the second dose than after the first dose. By day 28, all the vaccine recipients had seroconversion as assessed by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) against the glycoprotein of the ZEBOV-Kikwit strain. At day 28, geometric mean titers of antibodies against ZEBOV glycoprotein were higher in the groups that received 20 million PFU or 100 million PFU than in the group that received 3 million PFU, as assessed by ELISA and by pseudovirion neutralization assay. A second dose at 28 days after dose 1 significantly increased antibody titers at day 56, but the effect was diminished at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: This Ebola vaccine candidate elicited anti-Ebola antibody responses. After vaccination, rVSV viremia occurred frequently but was transient. These results support further evaluation of the vaccine dose of 20 million PFU for preexposure prophylaxis and suggest that a second dose may boost antibody responses. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; rVSV∆G-ZEBOV-GP ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02269423 and NCT02280408 .).

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of ZMapp for Ebola Virus Infection.

BACKGROUND: Data from studies in nonhuman primates suggest that the triple monoclonal antibody cocktail ZMapp is a promising immune-based treatment for Ebola virus disease (EVD). METHODS: Beginning in March 2015, we conducted a randomized, controlled trial of ZMapp plus the current standard of care as compared with the current standard of care alone in patients with EVD that was diagnosed in West Africa by polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) assay. Eligible patients of any age were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either the current standard of care or the current standard of care plus three intravenous infusions of ZMapp (50 mg per kilogram of body weight, administered every third day). Patients were stratified according to baseline PCR cycle-threshold value for the virus (≤22 vs. >22) and country of enrollment. Oral favipiravir was part of the current standard of care in Guinea. The primary end point was mortality at 28 days. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients were enrolled at sites in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Guinea, and the United States. Of the 71 patients who could be evaluated, 21 died, representing an overall case fatality rate of 30%. Death occurred in 13 of 35 patients (37%) who received the current standard of care alone and in 8 of 36 patients (22%) who received the current standard of care plus ZMapp. The observed posterior probability that ZMapp plus the current standard of care was superior to the current standard of care alone was 91.2%, falling short of the prespecified threshold of 97.5%. Frequentist analyses yielded similar results (absolute difference in mortality with ZMapp, -15 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -36 to 7). Baseline viral load was strongly predictive of both mortality and duration of hospitalization in all age groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized, controlled trial of a putative therapeutic agent for EVD, although the estimated effect of ZMapp appeared to be beneficial, the result did not meet the prespecified statistical threshold for efficacy. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; PREVAIL II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02363322 .).

Clinical Management of Ebola Virus Disease in the United States and Europe.

BACKGROUND: Available data on the characteristics of patients with Ebola virus disease (EVD) and clinical management of EVD in settings outside West Africa, as well as the complications observed in those patients, are limited. METHODS: We reviewed available clinical, laboratory, and virologic data from all patients with laboratory-confirmed Ebola virus infection who received care in U.S. and European hospitals from August 2014 through December 2015. RESULTS: A total of 27 patients (median age, 36 years [range, 25 to 75]) with EVD received care; 19 patients (70%) were male, 9 of 26 patients (35%) had coexisting conditions, and 22 (81%) were health care personnel. Of the 27 patients, 24 (89%) were medically evacuated from West Africa or were exposed to and infected with Ebola virus in West Africa and had onset of illness and laboratory confirmation of Ebola virus infection in Europe or the United States, and 3 (11%) acquired EVD in the United States or Europe. At the onset of illness, the most common signs and symptoms were fatigue (20 patients [80%]) and fever or feverishness (17 patients [68%]). During the clinical course, the predominant findings included diarrhea, hypoalbuminemia, hyponatremia, hypokalemia, hypocalcemia, and hypomagnesemia; 14 patients (52%) had hypoxemia, and 9 (33%) had oliguria, of whom 5 had anuria. Aminotransferase levels peaked at a median of 9 days after the onset of illness. Nearly all the patients received intravenous fluids and electrolyte supplementation; 9 (33%) received noninvasive or invasive mechanical ventilation; 5 (19%) received continuous renal-replacement therapy; 22 (81%) received empirical antibiotics; and 23 (85%) received investigational therapies (19 [70%] received at least two experimental interventions). Ebola viral RNA levels in blood peaked at a median of 7 days after the onset of illness, and the median time from the onset of symptoms to clearance of viremia was 17.5 days. A total of 5 patients died, including 3 who had respiratory and renal failure, for a mortality of 18.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Among the patients with EVD who were cared for in the United States or Europe, close monitoring and aggressive supportive care that included intravenous fluid hydration, correction of electrolyte abnormalities, nutritional support, and critical care management for respiratory and renal failure were needed; 81.5% of these patients who received this care survived.

The Past Need Not Be Prologue: Recommendations for Testing and Positioning the Most-Promising Medical Countermeasures for the Next Outbreak of Ebola Virus Infection.

Background: The 2013-2016 outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD) in West Africa led to unprecedented morbidity and mortality. Although different classes of putative antiviral agents with supportive preclinical data were available for testing, and although several attempts to perform meaningful evaluation of these agents were undertaken during the epidemic, different research methods, a lack of appropriate controls in most studies, and formidable logistical challenges to completion of studies under field conditions hampered the success of these efforts. Ultimately only 1 randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial (PREVAIL II) was performed in this setting, and, owing to a decrease in the number of new cases available for study, it, too, ended prior to reaching definitive results. Retrospective review of the lessons learned from this outbreak argues strongly for the need for much better preparedness in terms of selecting the trial design and drug(s) for use during the next outbreak. Methods: Using recent data provided by representatives from the pharmaceutical industry, clinical and laboratory subject matter experts from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, other US government agencies, and academic partners were consulted regarding the current state of knowledge about several lead compounds with putative activity against EVD. Consensus was sought on recommendations concerning the most promising treatment strategies against EVD that should be studied in the context of a randomized clinical trial during the next outbreak. Results: Four compounds from 2 different classes (monoclonal antibody [mAb] cocktails and direct-acting antiviral agents [DAAs]) were highlighted as lead candidates, limitations in the current knowledge base about these drug classes were reviewed, and recommendations about the optimal clinical research design for studying combinations of these different agents were made. Conclusions: Although achieving the desired sample size could be challenging, a randomized, controlled clinical trial based on a combination strategy of a mAb with a DAA was recommended as the most appropriate clinical trial design to be undertaken during the next outbreak of EVD.

Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of radavirsen (AVI-7100), an antisense oligonucleotide targeting influenza a M1/M2 translation.

AIMS: The aims of the present study were to assess the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of radavirsen following single ascending doses and multiple doses given as intravenous infusions in healthy adults. METHODS: A phase I safety and pharmacokinetic study of radavirsen was performed in healthy volunteers. The study was divided into two parts. The first was a single-ascending-dose study of five cohorts of eight subjects each, randomized 6:2 to receive single intravenous doses of radavirsen ranging from 0.5 mg kg-1 to 8 mg kg-1 or placebo. The second was a multiple-dose study of 16 subjects randomized 12:4 to receive 8 mg kg-1 or placebo once daily for 5 days. RESULTS: A total of 66 subjects were screened, and 56 subjects were dosed between 2013 and 2015. At least one adverse event occurred in 31/42 (74%) who received radavirsen, and 13/14 (93%) receiving placebo. The most common adverse events were headache and proteinuria, and were similar in incidence and severity among those receiving radavirsen or placebo. Single-dose pharmacokinetics demonstrated relatively linear and dose-proportional increases in maximal concentration and in area under the concentration-time curve from zero to 24 h (AUC0-24 ). At 8 mg kg-1 in the multiple-dose cohort, the day 4 geometric mean AUC0-24 was 57.9 µg*h ml-1 . CONCLUSION: Single infusions of radavirsen up to 8 mg kg-1 , and multi-dosing at 8 mg kg-1 once daily for 5 days, appear to be safe and well tolerated in healthy subjects. The multi-dose day 4 AUC0-24 in the present study was comparable with that associated with protection from viral infection in a preclinical ferret influenza model. Further evaluation of radavirsen for the treatment of influenza infections is warranted.

Evidence of Ebola Virus Replication and High Concentration in Semen of a Patient During Recovery.

In one patient over time, we found that concentration of Ebola virus RNA in semen during recovery is remarkably higher than blood at peak illness. Virus in semen is replication-competent with no change in viral genome over time. Presence of sense RNA suggests replication in cells present in semen.

Design of a Randomized Controlled Trial for Ebola Virus Disease Medical Countermeasures: PREVAIL II, the Ebola MCM Study.

BACKGROUND: Unique challenges posed by emerging infectious diseases often expose inadequacies in the conventional phased investigational therapeutic development paradigm. The recent Ebola outbreak in West Africa presents a critical case-study highlighting barriers to faster development. During the outbreak, clinical trials were implemented with unprecedented speed. Yet, in most cases, this fast-tracked approach proved too slow for the rapidly evolving epidemic. Controversy abounded as to the most appropriate study designs to yield safety and efficacy data, potentially causing delays in pivotal studies. Preparation for research during future outbreaks may require acceptance of a paradigm that circumvents, accelerates, or reorders traditional phases, without losing sight of the traditional benchmarks by which drug candidates must be assessed for activity, safety and efficacy. METHODS: We present the design of an adaptive, parent protocol, ongoing in West Africa until January 2016. The exigent circumstances of the outbreak and limited prior clinical experience with experimental treatments, led to more direct bridging from preclinical studies to human trials than the conventional paradigm would typically have sanctioned, and required considerable design flexibility. RESULTS: Preliminary evaluation of the "barely Bayesian" design was provided through computer simulation studies. The understanding and public discussion of the study design will help its future implementation.