ABSTRACT
BackgroundThere is no valid and reliable patient self-reported measure assessing symptomology among outpatients with COVID-19. The Symptoms Evolution of COVID-19 (SE-C19) is a self-administered new instrument that includes 23 symptoms, each rated for severity at their worst moment within the last 24 hours. We studied the psychometric properties of SE-C19. MethodsReliability, validity, and sensitivity to change of the SE-C19 were assessed in 657 outpatients with confirmed COVID-19 enrolled in NCT04425629. SE-C19 and Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGIS) were administered daily from baseline (predose at Day 1) to end of study (Day 29). FindingsMost patients (70{middle dot}0%) were aged [≤]50 years and white (85{middle dot}5%). At baseline, patients reported an average (SD) of 6{middle dot}6 (3{middle dot}9) symptoms (ie, rated as at least Mild) with 3{middle dot}8 (3{middle dot}3) of these symptoms being rated as Moderate or Severe. By Day 29, most symptoms had resolved; 74{middle dot}4% of patients reported no symptoms and on average, only 0{middle dot}6 (SD 1{middle dot}5) symptoms were reported as at least Mild. Stable patients according to the PGIS showed scores with intraclass correlation values indicating moderate-to-good test-retest reliability (ie, 0{middle dot}50-0{middle dot}90). At baseline, 20 item scores (87%) varied significantly across PGIS defined groups supporting the validity of SE-C19. A symptom-resolution endpoint was defined after excluding the item "Sneezing", due to its low ability to discriminate severity levels, and "Confusion", "Rash", and "Vomiting", due to their low prevalence in this population. Symptoms resolution required complete absence of all remaining items, except "Cough", "Fatigue", and "Headache", which could be Mild or Moderate in severity. InterpretationWe identified 19 items that are valid and reliable to measure disease-related symptoms in COVID-19 outpatients and propose a definition of symptom resolution that could be used in future clinical trials and potentially, also in clinical practice. FundingThis research was funded by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSThe majority of COVID-19-infected patients (>80%) have mild-to-moderate symptoms and are managed at an outpatient setting. Although clinical research has primarily focused on prevention of the disease and the treatment of hospitalised patients, close monitoring of the COVID-19 symptoms and their severity in outpatients is equally important and needed to prevent community transmission. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments are a key method to assess COVID-19 related symptoms and associated burden as these symptoms are best known by the patient and are best measured from the patient perspective. However, a valid and reliable instrument to assess symptom severity and progression among outpatients with COVID-19 is not yet available. This study focuses on the psychometric properties (reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change) of a new recently developed self-administered PRO symptom measure (SE-C19) for COVID-19-positive outpatients. Added value of this studyThis is the first study to systematically examine the psychometric properties of a PRO symptom measure designed for COVID-19 outpatients and it provides a method for identifying symptom resolution among outpatients, which may be useful in clinical research and clinical practice contexts. The SE-C19 instrument is a self-administered questionnaire that assesses the severity of 23 COVID-19-related symptoms. The recall period is 24 hours and the response options include None, Mild, Moderate and Severe. The analyses reported here demonstrate that the SE-C19 is a valid and reliable measure to capture daily COVID-19 symptom severity from the outpatients perspective. These psychometric analyses also provide empirical evidence for a method to determine symptoms resolution based on the score of 19 of the SE-19 items; this may be useful not only in clinical trials but also in real-world studies and clinical practice. The 4 items not included in the symptoms resolution endpoint may be useful to clinicians to monitor severe disease. The SE-C19 instrument is relevant for the clinical management of outpatients, as it measures a large number of symptoms that are relevant in the outpatient setting and reflect the heterogeneity of symptom experience, and it is sensitive to the longitudinal changes in the severity of these symptoms. Implications of all the available evidenceThe SE-C19 can be used to monitor COVID-19-related symptoms over time in outpatients. The definition of symptoms resolution established here can be used to inform clinical trial endpoints and may also be useful in clinical practice to aid discussions between healthcare professionals and patients, and inform treatment decisions. Symptoms resolution is based on 19 of the 23 items included in the SE-C19 instrument.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundHospitalized patients with COVID-19 experience high mortality rates, ranging from 10% to 30%. Combined casirivimab and imdevimab (CAS+IMD) is authorized for use in outpatients with COVID-19 and in post-exposure prophylaxis. The UK-based platform RECOVERY study reported improved survival in hospitalized seronegative patients treated with CAS+IMD; however, in most of the world, anti-spike monoclonal antibody therapy is currently not approved for hospitalized patients. MethodsIn this phase I/II/III double-blind placebo-controlled trial, patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were randomized (1:1:1) to 2.4 g or 8.0 g of CAS+IMD or placebo, and characterized at baseline for viral load and SARS-CoV-2 endogenous immune response. Results1336 patients on low-flow or no supplemental oxygen were treated. The primary endpoint was met: in seronegative patients, the least squares mean difference (CAS+IMD vs placebo) for time-weighted average change from baseline viral load was -0.28 log10 copies/mL (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.51 to -0.05; P = .0172). The primary clinical analysis of death or mechanical ventilation from day 6 to 29 in patients with high viral load had a strong positive trend but did not reach significance. CAS+IMD numerically reduced all-cause mortality in seronegative patients through day 29 (relative risk reduction, 55.6%; 95% CI 24.2-74.0; nominal P = .0032). No safety concerns were noted. ConclusionsIn hospitalized patients with COVID-19 on low-flow or no oxygen, CAS+IMD treatment reduced viral load and the risk of death or mechanical ventilation as well as all-cause mortality in the overall population, with the benefit driven by seronegative patients and no harm observed in seropositive patients.
ABSTRACT
ImportanceAt the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was limited understanding of symptom experience and disease progression. ObjectiveWe developed and validated a fit-for-purpose, disease-specific instrument to assess symptoms in patients with COVID-19 to inform endpoints in an interventional trial for non-hospitalized patients. DesignThe initial drafting of the 23-item Symptoms Evolution of COVID-19 (SE-C19) Instrument was developed based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention symptom list and available published literature specific to patients with COVID-19 as of Spring 2020. The measurement principles in the Food and Drug Administration patient-reported outcomes guidance and the four methodological Patient-Focused Drug Development Guidances were also considered. SettingInterviews were conducted virtually with patients recruited through a healthcare research firm. ParticipantsSemi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 30 non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19 InterventionInterviews involved two stages: (1) concept elicitation, to obtain information about the symptoms experienced as a result of COVID-19 in patients own words, and (2) cognitive debriefing, for patients to describe their understanding of the SE-C19 instructions, specific symptoms, response options, and recall period to ensure the content of the SE-C19 is relevant and comprehensive. Five clinicians treating COVID-19 outpatients were interviewed to obtain their insights on symptoms experienced by patients and provide input on the SE-C19. Main Outcome and MeasurePatients reported no issues regarding the relevance or appropriateness of the SE-C19 instructions, including the recall period. The comprehensiveness of the SE-C19 was confirmed against the conceptual model developed in the qualitative research. Minor conceptual gaps were revealed to capture nuances in the experience of nasal and gustatory symptoms, and systemic manifestations of sickness. Almost all items were endorsed by patients as being appropriate and well understood. The clinicians largely approved all items, response options, and recall period. Conclusions and RelevanceThe qualitative research provided supportive evidence of the content validity of the SE-C19 instrument to assess the symptoms of outpatients with COVID-19 and its use in clinical trials to evaluate the benefit of treatment. Minor changes may be considered to improve conceptual clarity and ease of responding. Trial RegistrationR10933-10987-COV-2067 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04425629)
ABSTRACT
BackgroundContinued SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19-related hospitalizations highlight the need for effective anti-viral treatments in the outpatient setting. In a descriptive interim analysis of the phase 1/2 portion of a double-blind phase 1/2/3 trial in COVID-19 outpatients conducted between June 16, 2020 and September 4, 2020, REGEN-COV(R) (casirivimab plus imdevimab) antibody combination reduced SARS-CoV-2 viral load versus placebo. MethodsThis final phase 1/2 analysis comprises 799 outpatients, including 275 from the previous descriptive analysis (group-1) and 524 from phase 2 (group-2). Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to placebo, REGEN-COV 2400mg, or REGEN-COV 8000mg. Prespecified hierarchical analyses of virologic endpoints were performed in group-2. The proportion of patients with [≥]1 COVID-19-related medically attended visit (MAV) through day 29 was assessed in group-1+2. Efficacy was assessed in patients confirmed SARS-CoV-2-positive by baseline nasopharyngeal RT-qPCR. Safety was assessed in all treated patients. ResultsData from 799 outpatients enrolled from June 16, 2020 to September 23, 2020 are reported. Time-weighted average daily reduction in viral load through day 7 was significantly greater in the REGEN-COV combined 2400mg+8000mg group versus placebo in patients with baseline viral load >107 copies/mL (prespecified primary endpoint): -0.68 log10 copies/ml (95% CI, -0.94 to -0.41; P<.0001). This reduction was - 0.73 (P<.0001) and -0.36 (P=.0003) log10 copies/mL in serum antibody-negative patients and in the overall population, respectively. REGEN-COV reduced the proportion of patients with [≥]1 COVID-19-related MAV versus placebo (2.8% [12/434] REGEN-COV combined dose group versus 6.5% [15/231] placebo; P=.024; relative risk reduction [RRR]=57%); in patients with [≥]1 risk factor for hospitalization, the treatment effect was more pronounced (RRR=71%). Adverse events were similar across groups. ConclusionsIn COVID-19 outpatients enrolled prior to the widespread circulation of delta and omicron variants, treatment with REGEN-COV significantly reduced viral load and COVID-19-related MAVs.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an acute respiratory illness characterised by a range of symptoms. Severe cases of COVID-19 could lead to hospitalisation and intensive care unit admission. However, little is known about the symptomatic experience of outpatients with COVID-19, or its daily life impact; the objective of this qualitative research was to document this experience. MethodsThirty US adult patients with COVID-19 were interviewed within 21 days of diagnosis. To be included, patients had to self-report one of the following: fever, cough, shortness of breath/difficulty breathing, change/loss of taste/smell, vomiting/diarrhoea or body/muscle aches. Patients were asked open-ended questions to elicit their symptoms and the impacts COVID-19 had on their daily lives. Interviews were transcribed and inductively coded to perform thematic analysis and propose a conceptual model. The adequacy of the sample size was assessed by conceptual saturation analysis. Five independent clinicians were also interviewed about their experience treating outpatients with COVID-19. FindingsPatient-reported concepts were organised into six symptom themes (upper respiratory, lower respiratory, systemic, gastrointestinal, smell and taste, and other) and seven impact themes (activities of daily living, broad daily activities, leisure/social activities, physical impacts, emotional impacts, professional impacts and quarantine-specific impacts). Symptom type, severity, duration and time of onset varied greatly by patient. Clinicians endorsed all symptoms reported by patients. InterpretationThe manifestation of symptoms in outpatient COVID-19 is heterogeneous and affects all aspects of daily life. While reported symptoms were in line with previously published reports, patients offered new detailed insights into their symptomatic experiences and the impacts that symptoms had on their daily lives. Future studies should explore the symptoms and impacts of COVID-19 longitudinally, to better understand their early onset, their progression/resolution and the possible long-term implications of COVID-19. FundingThis research was sponsored and paid for by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSDatabases used: PubMed. Criteria for inclusion: qualitative study of the outpatient experience of COVID-19 (December 2019 - March 2021). Search terms included "qualitative" OR "interviews" AND "COVID-19" or "coronavirus". The quality of the evidence was deemed not relevant to the current study, as the work was related to other contexts (eg, hospitalized patients or treatment of COVID-19), or data was collected quantitively (ie, questionnaire/survey) and did not include an in-depth perspective of the outpatient experience. Added value of this studyThis research fills important gaps in the literature, as the outpatient experience (ie, symptoms and daily life impacts) of COVID-19 has not been documented qualitatively. Implications of all the available evidenceFindings of this research may be used to supplement existing knowledge of the outpatient experience of mild-to-moderate COVID-19, to further inform treatment guidelines. This work also provides an evidence base for identifying the symptoms and impacts important for evaluating potential treatment benefit in outpatients.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundREGEN-COV antibody cocktail (casirivimab with imdevimab) rapidly reduced viral load and decreased medically-attended visits in the phase 1/2 portion of this trial; REGEN-COV, retains activity in vitro against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. MethodsThe phase 3 portion of this adaptive, randomized, master protocol, included 4,057 Covid-19 outpatients with one or more risk factors for severe disease. Patients were randomized to a single treatment of intravenous placebo, or various doses of REGEN-COV, and followed for 28 days. The prespecified hierarchical analysis first compared REGEN-COV 2400mg dose vs concurrent placebo, then compared the 1200mg dose vs concurrent placebo, for endpoints assessing risk of hospitalization or death, and time to symptom resolution. Safety was evaluated in all treated patients. ResultsBoth REGEN-COV 2400mg and 1200mg significantly reduced Covid-19-related hospitalization or all-cause death compared to placebo (71.3% reduction [1.3% vs 4.6%; p<0.0001] and 70.4% reduction [1.0% vs 3.2%; p=0.0024], respectively). The median time to resolution of Covid-19 symptoms was 4 days shorter in both dose arms vs placebo (10 vs 14 days; p<0.0001). Efficacy of REGEN-COV was consistent across subgroups, including patients who were SARS-CoV-2 serum antibody-positive at baseline. REGEN-COV more rapidly reduced viral load than placebo. Serious adverse events occurred more frequently in the placebo group (4.0%) than in the 1200mg (1.1%) and 2400mg (1.3%) groups and grade [≥]2 infusion-related reactions were infrequent (<0.3% in all groups). ConclusionsTreatment with REGEN-COV was well-tolerated and significantly reduced Covid-19-related hospitalization or all-cause death, rapidly resolved symptoms, and reduced viral load. (Funded by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and the Biomedical and Advanced Research and Development Authority of the Department of Health and Human Services; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04425629.)
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUNDSarilumab (anti-interleukin-6 receptor- monoclonal antibody) may attenuate the inflammatory response in Covid-19. METHODSWe performed an adaptive, phase 2/3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous sarilumab 200 mg or 400 mg in adults hospitalized with Covid-19. The phase 3 primary analysis population (cohort 1) was patients with critical Covid-19 receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) randomized to sarilumab 400 mg or placebo. The primary end point for phase 3 was the proportion of patients with [≥]1-point improvement in clinical status from baseline to day 22. RESULTSFour-hundred fifty-seven (457) and 1365 patients were randomized and treated in phases 2 and 3, respectively. Among phase 3 critical patients receiving MV (n=289; 34.3% on corticosteroids), the proportion with [≥]1-point improvement in clinical status (alive not receiving MV) at day 22 was 43.2% in sarilumab 400 mg and 35.5% in placebo (risk difference [RD] +7.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -7.4 to 21.3; P=0.3261), representing a relative risk improvement of 21.7%. Day 29 all-cause mortality was 36.4% in sarilumab 400 mg versus 41.9% in placebo (RD -5.5%; 95% CI, -20.2 to 8.7; relative risk reduction 13.3%). In post hoc analyses pooling phase 2 and 3 critical patients receiving MV, the hazard ratio (HR) for death in sarilumab 400 mg compared with placebo was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.51 to 1.13) overall, improving to 0.49 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.94) in patients receiving corticosteroids at baseline. CONCLUSIONIn hospitalized patients with Covid-19 receiving MV, numerical benefits with sarilumab did not achieve statistical significance, but benefit may be greater in patients receiving corticosteroids. A larger study is required to confirm this observed numerical benefit. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04315298)
ABSTRACT
Monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 are a clinically validated therapeutic option against COVID-19. As rapidly emerging virus mutants are becoming the next major concern in the fight against the global pandemic, it is imperative that these therapeutic treatments provide coverage against circulating variants and do not contribute to development of treatment emergent resistance. To this end, we investigated the sequence diversity of the spike protein and monitored emergence of minor virus variants in SARS-COV-2 isolates found in COVID-19 patients or identified from preclinical in vitro and in vivo studies. This study demonstrates that a combination of non-competing antibodies, REGEN-COV, not only provides full coverage against current variants of concern/interest but also protects against emergence of new such variants and their potential seeding into the population in a clinical setting.
