Nirmatrelvir for Vaccinated or Unvaccinated Adult Outpatients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Nirmatrelvir in combination with ritonavir is an antiviral treatment for mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). The efficacy of this treatment in patients who are at standard risk for severe Covid-19 or who are fully vaccinated and have at least one risk factor for severe Covid-19 has not been established. METHODS: In this phase 2-3 trial, we randomly assigned adults who had confirmed Covid-19 with symptom onset within the past 5 days in a 1:1 ratio to receive nirmatrelvir-ritonavir or placebo every 12 hours for 5 days. Patients who were fully vaccinated against Covid-19 and who had at least one risk factor for severe disease, as well as patients without such risk factors who had never been vaccinated against Covid-19 or had not been vaccinated within the previous year, were eligible for participation. Participants logged the presence and severity of prespecified Covid-19 signs and symptoms daily from day 1 through day 28. The primary end point was the time to sustained alleviation of all targeted Covid-19 signs and symptoms. Covid-19-related hospitalization and death from any cause were also assessed through day 28. RESULTS: Among the 1296 participants who underwent randomization and were included in the full analysis population, 1288 received at least one dose of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (654 participants) or placebo (634 participants) and had at least one postbaseline visit. The median time to sustained alleviation of all targeted signs and symptoms of Covid-19 was 12 days in the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group and 13 days in the placebo group (P = 0.60). Five participants (0.8%) in the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group and 10 (1.6%) in the placebo group were hospitalized for Covid-19 or died from any cause (difference, -0.8 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -2.0 to 0.4). The percentages of participants with adverse events were similar in the two groups (25.8% with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and 24.1% with placebo). In the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, the most commonly reported treatment-related adverse events were dysgeusia (in 5.8% of the participants) and diarrhea (in 2.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The time to sustained alleviation of all signs and symptoms of Covid-19 did not differ significantly between participants who received nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and those who received placebo. (Supported by Pfizer; EPIC-SR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05011513.).

Oral Nirmatrelvir for High-Risk, Nonhospitalized Adults with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Nirmatrelvir is an orally administered severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 main protease (Mpro) inhibitor with potent pan-human-coronavirus activity in vitro. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2-3 double-blind, randomized, controlled trial in which symptomatic, unvaccinated, nonhospitalized adults at high risk for progression to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 300 mg of nirmatrelvir plus 100 mg of ritonavir (a pharmacokinetic enhancer) or placebo every 12 hours for 5 days. Covid-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause through day 28, viral load, and safety were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 2246 patients underwent randomization; 1120 patients received nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir (nirmatrelvir group) and 1126 received placebo (placebo group). In the planned interim analysis of patients treated within 3 days after symptom onset (modified intention-to treat population, comprising 774 of the 1361 patients in the full analysis population), the incidence of Covid-19-related hospitalization or death by day 28 was lower in the nirmatrelvir group than in the placebo group by 6.32 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -9.04 to -3.59; P<0.001; relative risk reduction, 89.1%); the incidence was 0.77% (3 of 389 patients) in the nirmatrelvir group, with 0 deaths, as compared with 7.01% (27 of 385 patients) in the placebo group, with 7 deaths. Efficacy was maintained in the final analysis involving the 1379 patients in the modified intention-to-treat population, with a difference of -5.81 percentage points (95% CI, -7.78 to -3.84; P<0.001; relative risk reduction, 88.9%). All 13 deaths occurred in the placebo group. The viral load was lower with nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir than with placebo at day 5 of treatment, with an adjusted mean difference of -0.868 log10 copies per milliliter when treatment was initiated within 3 days after the onset of symptoms. The incidence of adverse events that emerged during the treatment period was similar in the two groups (any adverse event, 22.6% with nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir vs. 23.9% with placebo; serious adverse events, 1.6% vs. 6.6%; and adverse events leading to discontinuation of the drugs or placebo, 2.1% vs. 4.2%). Dysgeusia (5.6% vs. 0.3%) and diarrhea (3.1% vs. 1.6%) occurred more frequently with nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir than with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of symptomatic Covid-19 with nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir resulted in a risk of progression to severe Covid-19 that was 89% lower than the risk with placebo, without evident safety concerns. (Supported by Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04960202.).

The use of extrapolation based on modeling and simulation to support high-dose regimens of ceftaroline fosamil in pediatric patients with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections.

A model-informed drug development approach was used to select ceftaroline fosamil high-dose regimens for pediatric patients with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus with a ceftaroline minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of 2 or 4 mg/L. Steady-state ceftaroline concentrations were simulated using a population pharmacokinetics (PK) model for ceftaroline fosamil and ceftaroline including data from 304 pediatric subjects and 944 adults. Probability of target attainment (PTA) for various simulated pediatric high-dose regimens and renal function categories were calculated based on patients achieving 35% fT>MIC (S. aureus PK/pharmacodynamic target for 2-log10 bacterial killing). For extrapolation of efficacy, simulated exposures and PTA were compared to adults with normal renal function receiving high-dose ceftaroline fosamil (600 mg 2-h infusions every 8 h). For safety, predicted ceftaroline exposures were compared with observed pediatric and adult data. Predicted ceftaroline exposures for the approved pediatric high-dose regimens (12, 10, or 8 mg/kg by 2-h infusions every 8 h for patients aged >2 to <18 years with normal/mild, moderate, or severe renal impairment, respectively; 10 mg/kg by 2-h infusions every 8 h for patients aged ≥2 months to <2 years with normal renal function/mild impairment) were well matched to adults with normal renal function. Median predicted maximum concentration at steady state (Cmax,ss ) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve over 24 h at steady state pediatric to adult ratios were 0.907-1.33 and 0.940-1.41, respectively. PTAs (>99% and ≥81% for MICs of 2 and 4 mg/L, respectively) matched or exceeded the adult predictions. Simulated Cmax,ss values were below the maximum observed data in other indications, including a high-dose pediatric pneumonia trial, which reported no adverse events related to high exposure.

Phase 2 Study of the Safety, Pharmacokinetics and Efficacy of Ceftaroline Fosamil in Neonates and Very Young Infants With Late-onset Sepsis.

BACKGROUND: With increasing antimicrobial resistance, antibiotic treatment options for neonatal late-onset sepsis (LOS) are becoming limited. Primary objective of this study was assessment of the safety of ceftaroline fosamil in LOS. METHODS: Eligible neonates and very young infants 7 to <60 days of age with LOS were enrolled in this phase 2, open-label, multicenter study (NCT02424734) and received ceftaroline fosamil 4 or 6 mg/kg every 8 hours by 1-hour intravenous infusion plus intravenous ampicillin and optional aminoglycoside for 48 hours-14 days. Safety was assessed through the final study visit (21-35 days after the last study therapy dose). Efficacy, assessed as clinical and microbiologic response, was evaluated at end-of-treatment and test-of-cure. Pharmacokinetic samples were collected via sparse-sampling protocol. RESULTS: Eleven patients [54.5% male, median (range) age 24 (12-53) days] were enrolled and received ceftaroline fosamil for a median (range) duration of 8 (3-15) days. Ten adverse events (AEs) occurred in 5 (45.5%) patients (safety population); most frequent AE was diarrhea (n = 2). All except 1 AE (diarrhea) were nontreatment-related. Predominant baseline pathogen was Escherichia coli. No patients were clinical failures at end-of-treatment/test-of-cure. Observed sparse steady-state pharmacokinetics data (19 samples) were comparable to previous pediatric data and generally within 90% model prediction intervals; neonatal probability of target attainment was >95% based on established pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic targets. CONCLUSIONS: Safety in neonates and very young infants was consistent with the known ceftaroline fosamil safety profile. These results support the use of ceftaroline fosamil (6 mg/kg every 8 hours) as a potential treatment option for LOS.