Efficacy of late-onset antiviral treatment in immunocompromised hosts with persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Immunocompromised people are at high risk of prolonged severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and progression to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the efficacy of late-onset direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy with therapeutics in clinical use and experimental drugs to mitigate persistent viral replication is unclear. In this study, we employed an immunocompromised mouse model, which supports prolonged replication of SARS-CoV-2 to explore late-onset treatment options. Tandem immuno-depletion of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in C57BL/6 mice followed by infection with SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern (VOC) beta B.1.351 resulted in prolonged infection with virus replication for 5 weeks after inoculation. Early-onset treatment with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (paxlovid) or molnupiravir was only moderately efficacious, whereas the experimental therapeutic 4'-fluorouridine (4'-FlU, EIDD-2749) significantly reduced virus load in the upper and lower respiratory compartments 4 days postinfection (dpi). All antivirals significantly lowered virus burden in a 7-day treatment regimen initiated 14 dpi, but paxlovid-treated animals experienced rebound virus replication in the upper respiratory tract 7 days after treatment end. Viral RNA was detectable 28 dpi in paxlovid-treated animals, albeit not in the molnupiravir or 4'-FlU groups, when treatment was initiated 14 dpi and continued for 14 days. Low-level virus replication continued 35 dpi in animals receiving vehicle but had ceased in all treatment groups. These data indicate that late-onset DAA therapy significantly shortens the duration of persistent virus replication in an immunocompromised host, which may have implications for clinical use of antiviral therapeutics to alleviate the risk of progression to severe disease in highly vulnerable patients. IMPORTANCE: Four years after the onset of the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the immunocompromised are at greatest risk of developing life-threatening severe disease. However, specific treatment plans for this most vulnerable patient group have not yet been developed. Employing a CD4+ and CD8+ T cell-depleted immunocompromised mouse model of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, we explored therapeutic options of persistent infections with standard-of-care paxlovid, molnupiravir, and the experimental therapeutic 4'-fluorouridine (4'-FlU). Late-onset treatment initiated 14 days after infection was efficacious, but only 4'-FlU was rapidly sterilizing. No treatment-experienced viral variants with reduced susceptibility to the drugs emerged, albeit virus replication rebounded in animals of the paxlovid group after treatment end. This study supports the use of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for late-onset management of persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection in immunocompromised hosts. However, treatment courses likely require to be extended for maximal therapeutic benefit, calling for appropriately powered clinical trials to meet the specific needs of this patient group.

ß-d-N4-hydroxycytidine, a metabolite of molnupiravir, exhibits in vitro antiviral activity against rabies virus.

Rabies is a fatal neurological disorder caused by rabies virus (RABV) infection. Approximately 60,000 patients die from rabies annually, and there are no effective treatments for this disease. Nucleoside analogs are employed as antiviral drugs based on their broad antiviral spectrum, and certain nucleoside analogs have been reported to exhibit anti-RABV activity. The nucleoside analog ß-d-N4-hydroxycytidine (NHC) has antiviral effects against a range of RNA viruses. Molnupiravir (MPV), a prodrug of NHC, is clinically used as an oral antiviral drug for coronavirus infections. Despite its broad-spectrum activity, the antiviral activity of NHC against RABV remains unclear. In this study, we reveal that NHC exhibits comparable in vitro anti-RABV activity as ribavirin and favipiravir (also known as T-705) with a 90% effective concentration of 6 µM in mouse neuroblastoma cells. NHC reduced viral loads in neuronal and nonneuronal cells in a dose-dependent manner. Both laboratory and field RABVs (fixed and street strains, respectively) were susceptible to NHC. However, no increase in survival or reduction in viral titers in the brain was observed in RABV-infected mice treated prophylactically with MPV. These findings highlight the potential and challenges of NHC in the treatment of RABV infection.

Comparing the effectiveness of molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in non-hospitalized and hospitalized COVID-19 patients with type 2 diabetes: A target trial emulation study.

AIMS: To compare the effectiveness of molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for non-hospitalized and hospitalized COVID-19 patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Territory-wide electronic health records in Hong Kong were used to perform target trial emulation using a sequential trial approach. Patients (1) aged ≥18 years, (2) with T2DM, (3) with COVID-19 infection, and (4) who received molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir within 5 days of infection between 16 March 2022 and 31 December 2022 in non-hospital and hospital settings were included. Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir initiators were matched using one-to-one propensity-score matching and followed for 28 days. Risk of outcomes was compared between groups by Cox regression adjusted for baseline characteristics. Subgroup analyses were performed on age (<70 years, ≥70 years), sex, Charlson comorbidity index (<4, ≥4), and number of COVID-19 vaccine doses (<2 doses, ≥2 doses). RESULTS: Totals of 17 974 non-hospitalized (8987 in each group) and 3678 hospitalized (1839 in each group) patients were identified. Non-hospitalized nirmatrelvir-ritonavir initiators had lower risk of all-cause mortality (absolute risk reduction [ARR] at 28 days 0.80%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-1.04; hazard ratio [HR] 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.73) and hospitalization (ARR at 28 days 4.01%, 95% CI 3.19-4.83; HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.66-0.82) as compared with molnupiravir initiators. Hospitalized nirmatrelvir-ritonavir initiators had reduced risk of all-cause mortality (ARR at 28 days 2.94%, 95% CI 1.65-4.23; HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40-0.80) as compared with molnupiravir initiators. Consistent findings were found across all subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir may be preferred to molnupiravir for COVID-19 patients with T2DM and without contraindication to either treatment.

Efficacy of COVID-19 Oral antivirals in hospitalised oldest-old with high morbidity burden: a target trial emulation study.

BACKGROUND: Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir are orally administered pharmacotherapies for mild to moderate COVID-19. However, the effectiveness of these drugs among very old (≥80 years), hospitalised patients remains unclear, limiting the risk-benefit assessment of these antivirals in this specific group. This study investigates the effectiveness of these antivirals in reducing mortality among this group of hospitalised patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Using a territory-wide public healthcare database in Hong Kong, a target trial emulation study was conducted with data from 13 642 eligible participants for the molnupiravir trial and 9553 for the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir trial. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Immortal time and confounding bias was minimised using cloning-censoring-weighting approach. Mortality odds ratios were estimated by pooled logistic regression after adjusting confounding biases by stabilised inverse probability weights. RESULTS: Both molnupiravir (HR: 0.895, 95% CI: 0.826-0.970) and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (HR: 0.804, 95% CI: 0.678-0.955) demonstrated moderate mortality risk reduction among oldest-old hospitalised patients. No significant interaction was observed between oral antiviral treatment and vaccination status. The 28-day risk of mortality was lower in initiators than non-initiators for both molnupiravir (risk difference: -1.09%, 95% CI: -2.29, 0.11) and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (risk difference: -1.71%, 95% CI: -3.30, -0.16) trials. The effectiveness of these medications was observed regardless of the patients' prior vaccination status. CONCLUSIONS: Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir are moderately effective in reducing mortality risk among hospitalised oldest-old patients with COVID-19, regardless of their vaccination status.

An ultrasensitive green synchronous factorized spectrofluorimetric approach for the simultaneous determination of Favipiravir and Molnupiravir: Application to pharmaceutical, environmental, and biological matrices.

During the pandemic, Favipiravir (FVP) and Molnupiravir (MPV) have been widely used for COVID-19 treatment, leading to their presence in the environment. A green synchronous spectrofluorimetric method was developed to simultaneously detect them in environmental water, human plasma, and binary mixtures. Maximum fluorescence intensity was achieved at pH 8, with MPV exhibiting two peaks at 300 and 430 nm, and FVP showing one peak at 430 nm. A fluorescence subtraction method effectively removed interference, enabling direct determination of MPV at 300 nm and FVP at 430 nm. The method showed linearity within 2-13 ng/mL for FVP and 50-600 ng/mL for MPV, with recoveries of 100.35% and 100.12%, respectively. Limits of detection and quantification were 0.19 and 0.57 ng/mL for FVP and 10.52 and 31.88 ng/mL for MPV. Validation according to ICH and FDA guidelines yielded acceptable results. The method demonstrated good recoveries of FVP and MPV in pharmaceuticals, tap water and Nile water (99.62% ± 0.96% and 99.69% ± 0.64%) as per ICH guidelines and spiked human plasma (94.87% ± 2.111% and 94.79% ± 1.605%) following FDA guidelines, respectively. Its environmental friendliness was assessed using Green Analytical Procedure Index (GAPI) and the Analytical Greenness Metric (AGREE) tools.

Efficacy of molnupiravir and interferon for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 in golden Syrian hamster.

The mortality and hospitalization rate by COVID-19 dropped significantly currently, but its seasonal outbreaks make antiviral treatment still vital. The mortality and hospitazation rate by COVID-19 dropped significantly currently, but its seasonal ourbreaks make antiviral treatment still vital. In our study, syrian golden hamsters were treated with molnupiravir and interferons (IFNs) after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Their weight changes, pathological changes, virus replication and inflammation levels were evaluated. In the IFNs single treatment, only IFN-α group reduced viral load (p < 0.05) and virus titer in hamster lungs. The TNF-α expression decreased significantly in both IFNs treatment at 2dpi. Histological and immunofluorescence results showed lung damage in the IFNs groups were milder at 4dpi. In the molnupiravir/IFN-α combination treatment, weight loss and virus replication in lung were significantly decreased in the mono-molnupiravir group and combination group (p < 0.05), the expression of IL-6, TNF-α, IL-1ß and MIP-1α also decreased significantly (p < 0.05), but the combination treatment was not more effective than the mono-molnupiravir treatment. Histological and immunofluorescence results showed the lung damage and inflammation in mono-molnupiravir and combination groups were milder. In summary, IFNs treatment had anti-inflammatory effect against SARS-CoV-2, only IFN-α showed a weak antiviral effect. Molnupiravir/IFN-α combination treatment was effective against SARS-CoV-2 but was not superior to mono-molnupiravir treatment. IFN-α could be considered for immunocompromised patients to stimulate and activate early immune responses.

Nirmatrelvir and molnupiravir maintain potent in vitro and in vivo antiviral activity against circulating SARS-CoV-2 omicron subvariants.

Variants of SARS-CoV-2 pose significant challenges in public health due to their increased transmissibility and ability to evade natural immunity, vaccine protection, and monoclonal antibody therapeutics. The emergence of the highly transmissible Omicron variant and subsequent subvariants, characterized by an extensive array of over 32 mutations within the spike protein, intensifies concerns regarding vaccine evasion. In response, multiple antiviral therapeutics have received FDA emergency use approval, targeting the SARS-CoV-2 RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) and main protease (Mpro) regions, known to have relatively fewer mutations across novel variants. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of nirmatrelvir (PF-07321332) and other clinically significant SARS-CoV-2 antivirals against a diverse panel of SARS-CoV-2 variants, encompassing the newly identified Omicron subvariants XBB1.5 and JN.1, using live-virus antiviral assays. Our findings demonstrate that while the last Omicron subvariants exhibited heightened pathogenicity in our animal model, nirmatrelvir and other clinically relevant antivirals consistently maintained their efficacy against all tested variants, including the XBB1.5 subvariant.

Supply of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir for patients with COVID-19 in the first eight months since listing on the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme: A retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the supply of molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in relation to patient characteristics and other co-prescribed medicines and to estimate the number of patients without contraindications to nirmatrelvir/ritonavir who were treated with molnupiravir. STUDY DESIGN, SETTING: Retrospective observational study of patients identified in the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) 10 % sample dataset who were supplied with either molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir/ritonavir between May and December 2022. We supplemented the PBS dataset with aggregated counts from published literature to determine prevalence of clinical contraindications to nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We used multivariable Poisson regression to estimate risk ratios (RR) of receiving nirmatrelvir/ritonavir over molnupiravir. RESULTS: We identified 54,550 patients who received either nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (26.8 %) or molnupiravir (73.2 %). Their average age was 71.6 (SD = 13.4) years and 57.1 % were female. Patients were less likely to receive nirmatrelvir/ritonavir with increasing age (RR = 0.50; 95 % CI: 0.48-0.53; for ages 85 + compared to < 65 years) or who had received medicines contraindicated for use with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (RR = 0.66; 95 % CI: 0.64-0.68). During the study period, we estimated that between 28.4 % and 45.4 % of patients aged ≥ 65 years had received molnupiravir in the absence of pharmacological and clinical contraindications to nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. CONCLUSION: Many prescriptions were written for molnupiravir where there were no contraindications to nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. The benefits that followed from prompt government action in approving and obtaining nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were therefore likely to be less than they could potentially have been. Governments should consider investing in quality improvement systems to ensure the best outcomes in terms of efficacy and safety.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 at high risk of disease progression receiving sotrovimab, oral antivirals, or no treatment: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The clinical benefit of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatments against new circulating variants remains unclear. We sought to describe characteristics and clinical outcomes of highest risk patients with COVID-19 receiving early COVID-19 treatments in Scotland. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of non-hospitalized patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from December 1, 2021-October 25, 2022, using Scottish administrative health data. We included adult patients who met ≥ 1 of the National Health Service highest risk criteria for early COVID-19 treatment and received outpatient treatment with sotrovimab, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir, or no early COVID-19 treatment. Index date was defined as the earliest of COVID-19 diagnosis or early COVID-19 treatment. Baseline characteristics and acute clinical outcomes in the 28 days following index were reported. Values of ≤ 5 were suppressed. RESULTS: In total, 2548 patients were included (492: sotrovimab, 276: nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, 71: molnupiravir, and 1709: eligible highest risk untreated). Patients aged ≥ 75 years accounted for 6.9% (n = 34/492), 21.0% (n = 58/276), 16.9% (n = 12/71) and 13.2% (n = 225/1709) of the cohorts, respectively. Advanced renal disease was reported in 6.7% (n = 33/492) of sotrovimab-treated and 4.7% (n = 81/1709) of untreated patients, and ≤ 5 nirmatrelvir/ritonavir-treated and molnupiravir-treated patients. All-cause hospitalizations were experienced by 5.3% (n = 25/476) of sotrovimab-treated patients, 6.9% (n = 12/175) of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir-treated patients, ≤ 5 (suppressed number) molnupiravir-treated patients and 13.3% (n = 216/1622) of untreated patients. There were no deaths in the treated cohorts; mortality was 4.3% (n = 70/1622) among untreated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Sotrovimab was often used by patients who were aged < 75 years. Among patients receiving early COVID-19 treatment, proportions of 28-day all-cause hospitalization and death were low.

The safety of antivirals and neutralising monoclonal antibodies used in prehospital treatment of Covid-19.

OBJECTIVE: This proof-of-principle pharmacovigilance study used Electronic Health Record (EHR) data to examine the safety of sotrovimab, paxlovid and molnupiravir in prehospital treatment of Covid-19. METHOD: With NHS England approval, we conducted an observational cohort study using OpenSAFELY-TPP, a secure software-platform which executes analyses across EHRs for 24 million people in England. High-risk individuals with Covid-19 eligible for prehospital treatment were included. Adverse events (AEs) were categorised into events in the drug's Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC), drug-reactions and immune-mediated. Cox models compared risk across treatments. A pre-pandemic record analysis was performed for comparative purposes. RESULTS: Between 2021-2023, 37,449 patients received sotrovimab, paxlovid or molnupiravir whilst 109,647 patients made up an eligible-but-untreated population. The 28-day rates of AEs were low: SmPC 0.34 per 1000 patient-years (95% CI 0.32-0.36); drug-reactions 0.01 (95% CI 0.01-0.02) and immune-mediated 0.03 (95% CI 0.03-0.04), and similar or lower than the pre-pandemic period. Compared with the eligible but untreated population, sotrovimab and paxlovid associated with a risk of SmPC AE [adjHR 1.36 (95% CI 1.15-1.62) and 1.28 (95% CI 1.05-1.55), respectively], whilst sotrovimab associated with a risk of drug-reactions [adjHR 2.95 (95% CI 1.56-5.55)] and immune-mediated events [adjHR 3.22 (95% CI 1.86-5.57)]. CONCLUSION: Sotrovimab, paxlovid and molnupiravir demonstrate acceptable safety profiles. Although the risk of AEs was greatest with sotrovimab, event rates were lower than comparative pre-pandemic period.

Oral antivirals for COVID-19 among patients with cancer.

PURPOSE: Immunocompromised individuals, such as those diagnosed with cancer, are at a significantly higher risk for severe illness and mortality when infected with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) than the general population. Two oral antiviral treatments are approved for COVID-19: Paxlovid® (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) and Lagevrio® (molnupiravir). There is a paucity of data regarding the benefit from these antivirals among immunocompromised patients with cancer, and recent studies have questioned their efficacy among vaccinated patients, even those with risk factors for severe COVID-19. METHODS: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and molnupiravir in preventing severe illness and death using our database of 457 patients with cancer and COVID-19 from Brown University-affiliated hospitals. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir and were compared to 45 concurrent controls who received no antiviral treatment despite being eligible to receive it. Administration of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir was associated with improved survival and lower 90-day all-cause and COVID-19-attributed mortality (p < 0.05) and with lower peak O2 requirements (ordinal odds ratio [OR] 1.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-2.56). CONCLUSION: Acknowledging the small size of our sample as a limitation, we concluded that early antiviral treatment might be beneficial to immunocompromised individuals, particularly those with cancer, when infected with SARS-CoV-2. Larger-scale, well-stratified studies are needed in this patient population.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 at high risk of disease progression receiving sotrovimab, oral antivirals or no treatment in England: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe characteristics and acute clinical outcomes for patients with COVID-19 treated with sotrovimab, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir, or untreated patients at highest risk per National Health Service (NHS) criteria. METHODS: Retrospective study of non-hospitalized patients between 1 December 2021 and 31 May 2022, using data from the Discover-NOW dataset (North-West London). Included patients were aged ≥12 years and treated with sotrovimab, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir, or untreated but expected to be eligible for early treatment per NHS highest-risk criteria. COVID-19-related and all-cause hospitalizations were reported for 28 days from COVID-19 diagnosis (index). Subgroup analyses were conducted in patients with advanced renal disease, those aged 18-64 and ≥65 years, and by period of Omicron BA.1, BA.2 and BA.5 (post-hoc exploratory) predominance. RESULTS: Overall, 1503 treated and 4044 eligible high-risk untreated patients were included. A high proportion of patients on sotrovimab had advanced renal disease (29.3%), ≥3 high-risk comorbidities (47.6%) and were aged ≥65 years (36.9%). Five of 696 (0.7%) patients on sotrovimab, <5/337 (0.3-1.2%) on nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, 10/470 (2.1%) on molnupiravir and 114/4044 (2.8%) untreated patients were hospitalized with COVID-19. Similar results were observed across all subgroups. The proportion of patients dying within 28 days of the index period was similarly low across all cohorts (<2%). CONCLUSION: Patients receiving sotrovimab appeared to show evidence of multiple high-risk comorbidities. Low hospitalization rates were observed for all treated cohorts across subgroups and periods of predominant variants of concern. These results require confirmation with comparative effectiveness analyses adjusting for differences in underlying patient characteristics.

Evaluating the Base Excision Repair Inhibitor TRC102 and Temozolomide for Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma in the Phase 2 Adult Brain Tumor Consortium Trial BERT.

PURPOSE: Patients with glioblastoma (GBM) have a dismal prognosis. Although the DNA alkylating agent temozolomide (TMZ) is the mainstay of chemotherapy, therapeutic resistance rapidly develops in patients. Base excision repair inhibitor TRC102 (methoxyamine) reverses TMZ resistance in preclinical glioma models. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of oral TRC102+TMZ in recurrent GBM (rGBM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A preregistered (NCT02395692), nonrandomized, multicenter, phase 2 clinical trial (BERT) was planned and conducted through the Adult Brain Tumor Consortium (ABTC-1402). Arm 1 included patients with bevacizumab-naïve GBM at the first recurrence, with the primary endpoint of response rates. If sufficient activity was identified, a second arm was planned for the bevacizumab-refractory patients. The secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), PFS at 6 months (PFS6), and toxicity. RESULTS: Arm 1 enrolled 19 patients with a median of two treatment cycles. Objective responses were not observed; hence, arm 2 did not open. The median OS was 11.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 8.2-17.9]. The median PFS was 1.9 months (95% CI, 1.8-3.7). The PFS6 was 10.5% (95% CI, 1.3%-33.1%). Most toxicities were grades 1 and 2, with two grade 3 lymphopenias and one grade 4 thrombocytopenia. Two patients with PFS ≥ 17 months and OS > 32 months were deemed "extended survivors." RNA sequencing of tumor tissue, obtained at diagnosis, demonstrated significantly enriched signatures of DNA damage response (DDR), chromosomal instability (CIN70, CIN25), and cellular proliferation (PCNA25) in "extended survivors." CONCLUSIONS: These findings confirm the safety and feasibility of TRC102+TMZ in patients with rGBM. They also warrant further evaluation of combination therapy in biomarker-enriched trials enrolling GBM patients with baseline hyperactivated DDR pathways.

Effectiveness and safety of molnupiravir in the intended-use population: an observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Previous research reported inconsistent results on the efficacy of molnupiravir in treating COVID-19. Moreover, efficacy was not assessed in the intended-use population (IUP), as defined by the FDA. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of molnupiravir for the treatment of COVID-19 in the IUP. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study on all IUP in Israel's Clalit Health Services from January 16, 2022, to February 16, 2023. The effectiveness outcome was the incidence of hospitalization or death due to COVID-19, and the safety outcome was the incidence of all-cause mortality within 35 days of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Cox-proportional hazard models were used to analyse the data after 1:5 propensity-score matching. RESULTS: A total of 49 515 patients met the eligibility criteria. Of them, 3957 molnupiravir-treated patients were matched to 19 785 untreated patients. In molnupiravir-treated patients, 70 out of 3957 (5.1 per 10 000 person per day) experienced COVID-19-related hospitalization or death, compared with 699 out of 19 785 untreated patients (10.4 per 10 000 person per day); RR: 0.50 (95% CI, 0.39-0.64). All-cause mortality was also lower in the treated group, with 41 out of 3957 (3.0 per 10 000 person per day) experiencing mortality compared with 414 out of 19 785 untreated patients (6.1 per 10 000 person per day); RR: 0.50 (0.36-0.68). DISCUSSION: In a real-world cohort of IUP, molnupiravir therapy was associated with a significant reduction in hospitalizations or deaths due to COVID-19 and all-cause mortality.

Molnupiravir's real-world effectiveness in COVID-19 outpatients at high risk of severe disease: a single-center study.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic started in March 2020. Since then, there has been an urgent need for effective therapeutic methods to manage the disease. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of molnupiravir in reducing the need for hospitalization in at-risk, non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODOLOGY: This was a single-center, non-randomized, observational retrospective study of non-hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19, treated at the Clinic for Infectious and Tropical Diseases, University Clinical Center in Belgrade, Serbia. RESULTS: The study was conducted between 15 December 2021 and 15 February 2022 and included 320 patients. Of these, 165 (51.6%) received treatment with molnupiravir. The study and control groups were similar in gender and age distribution. The study group had a higher proportion of vaccination (75.2% vs. 51%, p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in presence of comorbidity within the groups. Majority of the patients who received molnupiravir did not require hospitalization; and this was statistically significant in comparison to control group (92.7 vs. 24.5%, p < 0.001). Oxygen supplementation was less frequently required in the study group compared to the control group (0.6% vs. 31%, p < 0.001). During the follow-up period of 12.12 ± 3.5 days, significantly less patients from the study group were admitted to the intensive care unit (p < 0.001). Molnupiravir significantly reduced the risk of hospitalization by 97.9% (HR 0.021; 95% CI 0.005-0.089; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Molnupiravir is an effective therapy in preventing the development of severe forms of COVID-19 and hospitalization.

Early use of oral antiviral drugs and the risk of post COVID-19 syndrome: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the association of early use of oral antiviral drugs (including nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir) with the risk of post COVID-19 condition (PCC) and compare the possible efficacy of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, MedRxiv, and Psycinfo were searched from inception until November 1, 2023. We included studies that assessed the effect of oral antiviral drugs on the incidence of PCC. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model. Risk ratios (RRs) for oral antiviral drugs were calculated with a confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Nine observational studies containing 866,066 patients were included. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir were evaluated in eight and two studies respectively, with both drugs evaluated in one study. Pair-wise meta-analysis showed that early oral antiviral drugs reduced PCC risk (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.68-0.88). Network meta-analysis showed that nirmatrelvir-ritonavir may perform better than molnupiravir (surface under the cumulative ranking curve: 95.5% vs. 31.6%) at reducing PCC risk. CONCLUSIONS: Early use of oral antiviral drugs may potentially protect against developing PCC in non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19. These findings support the standardized administration of oral antiviral drugs in patients during the acute phase of COVID-19 according to the guidelines.

The effect of oral antiviral therapy for COVID-19 in managing non-hospitalized patients with lung cancer.

BACKGROUNDS: The effectiveness of oral antiviral therapy including nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir and molnupiravir in managing COVID-19 among individuals with pre-existing lung cancer was unclear. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the usefulness of antiviral agents in the management of COVID-19 among patients with lung cancer. METHODS: Utilizing data from the TriNetX - a global health research network, a retrospective cohort study was conducted involving 2484 patients diagnosed with both lung cancer and COVID-19. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to create well-balanced cohorts. The study assessed the primary outcome of all-cause hospitalization or mortality within a 30-day follow-up. RESULTS: After PSM, the oral antiviral group exhibited a significantly lower risk of the primary composite outcome compared to the control group (6.1 % vs. 9.9 %; HR: 0.60; 95 % CI: 0.45-0.80). This association was consistent across various subgroups according to age, sex, vaccine status, type of oral antiviral agent, and lung cancer characteristics. Additionally, the oral antiviral group showed a lower risk of all-cause hospitalization (HR: 0.73; 95 % CI: 0.54-0.99) and a significantly lower risk of mortality (HR: 0.16; 95 % CI: 0.06-0.41). CONCLUSION: The study suggests a favorable impact of oral antiviral therapy on the outcomes of COVID-19 in individuals with lung cancer and support the potential utility of oral antiviral agents in improving outcomes in this vulnerable population.

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or Molnupiravir for treatment of non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19 at risk of disease progression.

BACKGROUND: In randomized controlled trials, Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMV/r) and Molnupiravir (MPV) reduced the risk of severe/fatal COVID-19 disease. Real-world data are limited, particularly studies directly comparing the two agents. METHODS: Using the VA National COVID-19 database, we identified previously uninfected, non-hospitalized individuals with COVID-19 with ≥1 risk factor for disease progression who were prescribed either NMV/r or MPV within 3 days of a positive test. We used inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTW) to account for providers' preferences for a specific treatment. Absolute risk difference (ARD) with 95% confidence intervals were determined for those treated with NMV/r vs. MPV. The primary outcome was hospitalization or death within 30 days of treatment prescription using the IPTW approach. Analyses were repeated using propensity-score matched groups. RESULTS: Between January 1 and November 30, 2022, 9,180 individuals were eligible for inclusion (6,592 prescribed NMV/r; 2,454 prescribed MPV). The ARD for hospitalization/death for NMV/r vs MPV was -0.25 (95% CI -0.79 to 0.28). There was no statistically significant difference in ARD among strata by age, race, comorbidities, or symptoms at baseline. Kaplan-Meier curves did not demonstrate a difference between the two groups (p-value = 0.6). Analysis of the propensity-score matched cohort yielded similar results (ARD for NMV/r vs. MPV -0.9, 95% CI -2.02 to 0.23). Additional analyses showed no difference for development of severe/critical/fatal disease by treatment group. CONCLUSION: We found no significant difference in short term risk of hospitalization or death among at-risk individuals with COVID-19 treated with either NMV/r or MPV.