Post-acute COVID-19 outcomes including participant-reported long COVID: amubarvimab/romlusevimab versus placebo in the ACTIV-2 trial.

Background: It is unknown if early COVID-19 monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy can reduce risk of Long COVID. The mAbs amubarvimab/romlusevimab were previously demonstrated to reduce risk of hospitalization/death by 79%. This study assessed the impact of amubarvimab/romlusevimab on late outcomes, including Long COVID. Methods: Non-hospitalized high-risk adults within 10 days of COVID-19 symptom onset enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trial of amubarvimab/romlusevimab for COVID-19 treatment. Late symptoms, assessed using a participant-completed symptom diary, were a pre-specified exploratory endpoint. The primary outcome for this analysis was the composite of Long COVID by participant self-report (presence of COVID-19 symptoms as recorded in the diary at week 36) or hospitalization or death by week 36. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to address incomplete outcome ascertainment, giving weighted risk ratios (wRR) comparing amubarvimab/romlusevimab to placebo. Findings: Participants received amubarvimab/romlusevimab (n = 390) or placebo (n = 390) between January and July 2021. Median age was 49 years, 52% were female, 18% Black/African American, 49% Hispanic/Latino, and 9% COVID-19-vaccinated at entry. At week 36, 103 (13%) had incomplete outcome ascertainment, and 66 (17%) on amubarvimab/romlusevimab and 92 (24%) on placebo met the primary outcome (wRR = 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53-0.93). The difference was driven by fewer hospitalizations/deaths with amubarvimab/romlusevimab (4%) than placebo (13%). Among 652 participants with available diary responses, 53 (16%) on amubarvimab/romlusevimab and 44 (14%) on placebo reported presence of Long COVID. Interpretation: Amubarvimab/romlusevimab treatment, while highly effective in preventing hospitalizations/deaths, did not reduce risk of Long COVID. Additional interventions are needed to prevent Long COVID. Funding: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health. Amubarvimab and romlusevimab supplied by Brii Biosciences.

Safety and Efficacy of SAB-185 for Non-hospitalized Adults with COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: To address the need for novel COVID-19 therapies, we evaluated the fully-human polyclonal antibody product SAB-185 in a phase 3 clinical trial. METHODS: Non-hospitalized high-risk adults within 7 days of COVID-19 symptom onset were randomized 1:1 to open-label SAB-185 3,840 units/kg or casirivimab/imdevimab 1200 mg. Non-inferiority comparison was undertaken for the pre-Omicron population (casirivimab/imdevimab expected to be fully active) and superiority comparison for the Omicron population (casirivimab/imdevimab not expected to be active). Primary outcomes were the composite of all-cause hospitalizations/deaths and grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) through day 28. Secondary outcomes included time to sustained symptom improvement and resolution. RESULTS: Enrollment was terminated early due to low hospitalization/death rates upon Omicron emergence. 733 adults were randomized, 255 included in pre-Omicron and 392 in Omicron analysis populations. Hospitalizations/deaths occurred in 6 (5.0%) and 3 (2.2%) of pre-Omicron SAB-185 and casirivimab/imdevimab arms, respectively (absolute difference [95% CI] 2.7% [-2.3%, 8.6%]), inconclusive for non-inferiority; and 5 (2.5%) versus 3 (1.5%) (absolute difference 1.0% [-2.3%, 4.5%]) for Omicron. Risk ratios for grade ≥3 TEAEs were 0.94 [0.52, 1.71] (pre-Omicron) and 1.71 [0.96, 3.07] (Omicron). Time to symptom improvement and resolution were shorter for SAB-185, median 11 vs 14 (pre-Omicron) and 11 vs 13 days (Omicron) (symptom improvement), and 16 vs 24 days and 18 vs >25 days (symptom resolution), p<0.05 for symptom resolution for Omicron only. CONCLUSIONS: SAB-185 had an acceptable safety profile with faster symptom resolution in the Omicron population. Additional studies are needed to characterize its efficacy for COVID-19.

SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody treatment followed by vaccination shifts human memory B cell epitope recognition suggesting antibody feedback.

Therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been studied in humans, but the impact on immune memory of mAb treatment during an ongoing infection has remained unclear. We evaluated the effect of infusion of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor binding domain (RBD) mAb bamlanivimab on memory B cells (MBCs) in SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals. Bamlanivimab treatment skewed the repertoire of memory B cells targeting Spike towards non-RBD epitopes. Furthermore, the relative affinity of RBD memory B cells was weaker in mAb-treated individuals compared to placebo-treated individuals over time. Subsequently, after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, memory B cell differences persisted and mapped to a specific reduction in recognition of the class II RBD site, the same RBD epitope recognized by bamlanivimab. These findings indicate a substantial role of antibody feedback in regulating memory B cell responses to infection, and single mAb administration can continue to impact memory B cell responses to additional antigen exposures months later.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Plasma Antibody and Nucleocapsid Antigen Status Predict Outcomes in Outpatients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Reliable biomarkers of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes are critically needed. We evaluated associations of spike antibody (Ab) and plasma nucleocapsid antigen (N Ag) with clinical outcomes in nonhospitalized persons with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. METHODS: Participants were nonhospitalized adults with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 enrolled in ACTIV-2 between January and July 2021 and randomized to placebo. We used quantitative assays for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 spike Ab and N Ag in blood and determined numbers of hospitalization/death events within 28 days and time to symptom improvement. RESULTS: Of 209 participants, 77 (37%) had quantifiable spike Ab and 139 (67%) quantifiable N Ag. Median age was 50 years; 111 (53%) were female, 182 (87%) White, and 105 (50%) Hispanic/Latino. Higher risk of hospitalization/death was seen with unquantifiable (22/132 [16.7%]) versus quantifiable (1/77 [1.3%]) spike Ab (risk ratio [RR], 12.83 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.76-93.34]) and quantifiable (22/139 [15.8%]) vs unquantifiable (1/70 [1.4%]) N Ag (RR, 11.08 [95% CI, 1.52-80.51]). Increasing risk of hospitalizations/deaths was seen with increasing N Ag levels. Time to symptom improvement was longer with unquantifiable versus quantifiable spike Ab (median, 14 [interquartile range {IQR}, 8 to >27] vs 8 [IQR, 4-22] days; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.66 [95% CI, .45-.96]) and with quantifiable versus unquantifiable N Ag (median, 12 [7 to >27] vs 10 [5-22] days; aHR, 0.79 [95% CI, .52-1.21]). CONCLUSIONS: Absence of spike Ab and presence of plasma N Ag predicted hospitalization/death and delayed symptom improvement in COVID-19 outpatients.

Characterization of Treatment Resistance and Viral Kinetics in the Setting of Single-Active Versus Dual-Active Monoclonal Antibodies Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) represent a crucial antiviral strategy for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, but it is unclear whether combination mAbs offer a benefit over single-active mAb treatment. Amubarvimab and romlusevimab significantly reduced the risk of hospitalizations or death in the ACTIV-2/A5401 trial. Certain SARS-CoV-2 variants are intrinsically resistant against romlusevimab, leading to only single-active mAb therapy with amubarvimab in these variants. We evaluated virologic outcomes in individuals treated with single- versus dual-active mAbs. METHODS: Participants were nonhospitalized adults at higher risk of clinical progression randomized to amubarvimab plus romlusevimab or placebo. Quantitative SARS-CoV-2 RNA levels and targeted S-gene next-generation sequencing was performed on anterior nasal samples. We compared viral load kinetics and resistance emergence between individuals treated with effective single- versus dual-active mAbs depending on the infecting variant. RESULTS: Study participants receiving single- or dual-active mAbs had similar demographics, baseline nasal viral load, symptom score, and symptom duration. Compared with single-active mAb treatment, treatment with dual-active mAbs led to faster viral load decline at study days 3 (P < .001) and 7 (P < .01). Treatment-emergent resistance mutations were more likely to be detected after amubarvimab plus romlusevimab treatment than with placebo (2.6% vs 0%; P < .001) and were more frequently detected in the setting of single-active compared with dual-active mAb treatment (7.3% vs 1.1%; P < .01). Single-active and dual-active mAb treatment resulted in similar decrease in rates of hospitalizations or death. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with single-active mAb therapy, dual-active mAbs led to similar clinical outcomes but significantly faster viral load decline and a lower risk of emergent resistance.

Safety, Efficacy, and Pharmacokinetics of Combination SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibodies BMS-986414 (C135-LS) and BMS-986413 (C144-LS) Administered Subcutaneously in Non-Hospitalized Persons with COVID-19 in a Phase 2 Trial.

Background: Outpatient COVID-19 monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatment via subcutaneous delivery, if effective, overcomes the logistical burdens of intravenous administration. Methods: ACTIV-2/A5401 was a randomized, masked placebo-controlled platform trial where participants with COVID-19 at low risk for progression were randomized 1:1 to subcutaneously administered BMS-986414 (C135-LS) 200 mg, plus BMS-986413 (C144-LS) 200 mg, (BMS mAbs), or placebo. Coprimary outcomes were time to symptom improvement through 28 days; nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RNA below the lower limit of quantification (LLoQ) on days 3, 7, or 14; and treatment-emergent grade 3 or higher adverse events (TEAEs) through 28 days. Results: A total of 211 participants (105 BMS mAbs and 106 placebo) initiated study product. Time to symptom improvement favored the active therapy but was not significant (median 8 vs 10 days, P=0.19). There was no significant difference in the proportion with SARS-CoV-2 RNA

Impact of antiretroviral therapy during acute or early HIV infection on virologic and immunologic outcomes: results from a multinational clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess how antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation during acute or early HIV infection (AEHI) affects the viral reservoir and host immune responses. DESIGN: Single-arm trial of ART initiation during AEHI at 30 sites in the Americas, Africa, and Asia. METHODS: HIV DNA was measured at week 48 of ART in 5 million CD4 + T cells by sensitive qPCR assays targeting HIV gag and pol . Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were stimulated with potential HIV T cell epitope peptide pools consisting of env , gag , nef, and pol peptides and stained for expression of CD3, CD4, CD8, and intracellular cytokines/chemokines. RESULTS: From 2017 to 2019, 188 participants initiated ART during Fiebig stages I ( n  = 6), II ( n  = 43), III ( n  = 56), IV ( n  = 23), and V ( n  = 60). Median age was 27 years (interquartile range 23-38), 27 (14%) participants were female, and 180 (97%) cisgender. Among 154 virally suppressed participants at week 48, 100% had detectable HIV gag or pol DNA. Participants treated during Fiebig I had the lowest HIV DNA levels ( P  < 0.001). Week 48 HIV DNA mostly did not correlate with concurrent CD4 + or CD8 + T cell HIV-specific immune responses (rho range -0.11 to +0.19, all P  > 0.025). At week 48, the magnitude, but not polyfunctionality, of HIV-specific T cell responses was moderately reduced among participants who initiated ART earliest. CONCLUSION: Earlier ART initiation during AEHI reduced but did not eliminate the persistence of HIV-infected cells in blood. These findings explain the rapid viral rebound observed after ART cessation in early-treated individuals with undetectable HIV DNA by less sensitive methods.

Discontinuation of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate from initial ART regimens because of renal adverse events: An analysis of data from four multi-country clinical trials.

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), a potent and commonly used antiretroviral drug, is associated with renal tubular dysfunction and renal adverse events. We evaluated the frequency of, time to, and baseline risk factors for discontinuing TDF from initial antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens because of renal adverse events from presumed tenofovir renal toxicity. We conducted an observational cohort study as a secondary analysis of data from four clinical trials conducted mainly in low- and middle-income countries. We included ART naïve participants living with HIV who started TDF-containing ART regimens in the trials. Participants had to have estimated creatinine clearance (eCrCl) equal to or greater than 60ml/min before starting ART. The primary outcome was the first instance of discontinuing TDF because of renal adverse events attributed to tenofovir renal toxicity during the first 48 weeks after starting ART. We evaluated the cumulative incidence of discontinuing TDF and associated risk factors using Fine and Gray competing risk regression models with a backward elimination variable selection strategy. There were 2802 ART-naïve participants who started TDF-containing ART from the four clinical trials were included in the analysis. Fifty-eight percent were female, the median age was 34 years, and 87% had CD4 cell counts less than 200 cells/µl. Sixty-four participants (2.4%, 95% CI 1.7%-2.8%) discontinued TDF due to renal adverse events. Among the 64 participants, the median time to discontinue TDF was 9.4 weeks (IQR: 3.4-20.7 weeks). From multivariable Fine and Gray regression models, risk factors for discontinuing TDF were older age, CD4 cell count <200 cells/µl, presence and severity of anemia, and eCrCl <90 ml/min. The risk of discontinuing TDF because of renal adverse events was low in participants initiating TDF-containing ART with advanced HIV and normal renal function, attesting to the tolerability of TDF in ART in low- and middle-income countries.

SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody treatment followed by vaccination shifts human memory B cell epitope recognition suggesting antibody feedback.

Therapeutic anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been extensively studied in humans, but the impact on immune memory of mAb treatment during an ongoing immune response has remained unclear. Here, we evaluated the effect of infusion of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor binding domain (RBD) mAb bamlanivimab on memory B cells (MBCs) in SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals. Bamlanivimab treatment skewed the repertoire of memory B cells targeting Spike towards non-RBD epitopes. Furthermore, the relative affinity of RBD memory B cells was weaker in mAb-treated individuals compared to placebo-treated individuals over time. Subsequently, after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, memory B cell differences persisted and mapped to a specific defect in recognition of the class II RBD site, the same RBD epitope recognized by bamlanivimab. These findings indicate a substantial role of antibody feedback in regulating human memory B cell responses, both to infection and vaccination. These data indicate that mAb administration can promote alterations in the epitopes recognized by the B cell repertoire, and the single administration of mAb can continue to determine the fate of B cells in response to additional antigen exposures months later.

Early antiviral CD4 and CD8 T cell responses are associated with upper respiratory tract clearance of SARS-CoV-2.

T cells are involved in protective immunity against numerous viral infections. Limited data have been available regarding roles of human T cell responses controlling SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance in primary COVID-19. Here, we examined longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 upper respiratory tract viral RNA levels and early adaptive immune responses from 95 unvaccinated individuals with acute COVID-19. Acute SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4 and CD8 T cell responses were evaluated in addition to antibody responses. Most individuals with acute COVID-19 developed rapid SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses during infection, and both early CD4 T cell and CD8 T cell responses correlated with reduced upper respiratory tract SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA, independent of neutralizing antibody titers. Overall, our findings indicate a distinct protective role for SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells during acute COVID-19.

Variant-Specific Viral Kinetics in Acute COVID-19.

Understanding variant-specific differences in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral kinetics may explain differences in transmission efficiency and provide insights on pathogenesis and prevention. We evaluated SARS-CoV-2 kinetics from nasal swabs across multiple variants (Alpha, Delta, Epsilon, Gamma) in placebo recipients of the ACTIV-2/A5401 trial. Delta variant infection led to the highest maximum viral load and shortest time from symptom onset to viral load peak. There were no significant differences in time to viral clearance across the variants. Viral decline was biphasic with first- and second-phase decays having half-lives of 11 hours and 2.5 days, respectively, with differences among variants, especially in the second phase. These results suggest that while variant-specific differences in viral kinetics exist, post-peak viral load all variants appeared to be efficiently cleared by the host. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04518410.

Immune Status and SARS-CoV-2 Viral Dynamics.

Immunocompromised individuals are disproportionately affected by severe coronavirus disease 2019, but immune compromise is heterogenous, and viral dynamics may vary by the degree of immunosuppression. In this study, we categorized ACTIV-2/A5401 participants based on the extent of immunocompromise into none, mild, moderate, and severe immunocompromise. Moderate/severe immunocompromise was associated with higher nasal viral load at enrollment (adjusted difference in means: 0.47 95% confidence interval, .12-.83 log10 copies/mL) and showed a trend toward higher cumulative nasal RNA levels and plasma viremia compared to nonimmunocompromised individuals. Immunosuppression leads to greater viral shedding and altered severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 viral decay kinetics. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04518410.

Pooling Different Placebos as a Control Group in a Randomized Platform Trial: Benefits and Challenges From Experience in the ACTIV-2 COVID-19 Trial.

Adaptive platform trials were implemented during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic to rapidly evaluate therapeutics, including the placebo-controlled phase 2/3 ACTIV-2 trial, which studied 7 investigational agents with diverse routes of administration. For each agent, safety and efficacy outcomes were compared to a pooled placebo control group, which included participants who received a placebo for that agent or for other agents in concurrent evaluation. A 2-step randomization framework was implemented to facilitate this. Over the study duration, the pooled placebo design achieved a reduction in sample size of 6% versus a trial involving distinct placebo control groups for evaluating each agent. However, a 26% reduction was achieved during the period when multiple agents were in parallel phase 2 evaluation. We discuss some of the complexities implementing the pooled placebo design versus a design involving nonoverlapping control groups, with the aim of informing the design of future platform trials. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04518410.

Validity and Characterization of Time to Symptom Resolution Outcome Measures in the ACTIV-2/A5401 Outpatient COVID-19 Treatment Trial.

BACKGROUND: Time to symptom resolution measures were used in outpatient coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment trials without prior validation. METHODS: ACTIV-2/A5401 trial participants completed a COVID-19 diary assessing 13 targeted symptoms and global experience (overall COVID-19 symptoms, return to pre-COVID-19 health) daily for 29 days. We evaluated concordance of time to sustained (2 days) resolution of all targeted symptoms (TSR) with resolution of overall symptoms and return to health in participants receiving placebo. RESULTS: The analysis included 77 high-risk and 81 standard-risk participants with overall median 6 days of symptoms at entry and median age 47 years, 50% female, 82% white, and 31% Hispanic/Latino. Correlation between TSR and resolution of overall symptoms was 0.80 and 0.68, and TSR and return to health, 0.66 and 0.57 for high- and standard-risk groups, respectively. Of the high- and standard-risk participants, 61% and 79%, respectively, achieved targeted symptom resolution, of which 47% and 43%, respectively, reported symptom recurrence. Requiring >2 days to define sustained resolution reduced the frequency of recurrences. CONCLUSIONS: There was good internal consistency between TSR and COVID-19-specific global outcomes, supporting TSR as a trial end point. Requiring >2 days of symptom resolution better addresses natural symptom fluctuations but must be balanced against the potential influence of non-COVID-19 symptoms. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04518410.

Statistical Challenges When Analyzing SARS-CoV-2 RNA Measurements Below the Assay Limit of Quantification in COVID-19 Clinical Trials.

Most clinical trials evaluating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) therapeutics include assessments of antiviral activity. In recently completed outpatient trials, changes in nasal severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA levels from baseline were commonly assessed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) or mixed models for repeated measures (MMRM) with single imputation for results below assay lower limits of quantification (LLoQ). Analyzing changes in viral RNA levels with singly imputed values can lead to biased estimates of treatment effects. In this article, using an illustrative example from the ACTIV-2 trial, we highlight potential pitfalls of imputation when using ANCOVA or MMRM methods, and illustrate how these methods can be used when considering values

Safety and Efficacy of Combination SARS-CoV-2 Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibodies Amubarvimab Plus Romlusevimab in Nonhospitalized Patients With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Development of safe and effective SARS-CoV-2 therapeutics is a high priority. Amubarvimab and romlusevimab are noncompeting anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies with an extended half-life. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of amubarvimab plus romlusevimab. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 2 and 3 platform trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04518410). SETTING: Nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the United States, Brazil, South Africa, Mexico, Argentina, and the Philippines. PATIENTS: Adults within 10 days onset of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection who are at high risk for clinical progression. INTERVENTION: Combination of monoclonal antibodies amubarvimab plus romlusevimab or placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Nasopharyngeal and anterior nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 symptoms, safety, and progression to hospitalization or death. RESULTS: Eight-hundred and seven participants who initiated the study intervention were included in the phase 3 analysis. Median age was 49 years (quartiles, 39 to 58); 51% were female, 18% were Black, and 50% were Hispanic or Latino. Median time from symptom onset at study entry was 6 days (quartiles, 4 to 7). Hospitalizations and/or death occurred in 9 (2.3%) participants in the amubarvimab plus romlusevimab group compared with 44 (10.7%) in the placebo group, with an estimated 79% reduction in events (P < 0.001). This reduction was similar between participants with 5 or less and more than 5 days of symptoms at study entry. Grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events through day 28 were seen less frequently among participants randomly assigned to amubarvimab plus romlusevimab (7.3%) than placebo (16.1%) (P < 0.001), with no severe infusion reactions or drug-related serious adverse events. LIMITATION: The study population was mostly unvaccinated against COVID-19 and enrolled before the spread of Omicron variants and subvariants. CONCLUSION: Amubarvimab plus romlusevimab was safe and significantly reduced the risk for hospitalization and/or death among nonhospitalized adults with mild to moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection at high risk for progression to severe disease. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health.

Statistical Challenges when Analyzing SARS-CoV-2 RNA Measurements Below the Assay Limit of Quantification in COVID-19 Clinical Trials.

Most clinical trials evaluating COVID-19 therapeutics include assessments of antiviral activity. In recently completed outpatient trials, changes in nasal SARS-CoV-2 RNA levels from baseline were commonly assessed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) or mixed models for repeated measures (MMRM) with single-imputation for results below assay lower limits of quantification (LLoQ). Analyzing changes in viral RNA levels with singly-imputed values can lead to biased estimates of treatment effects. In this paper, using an illustrative example from the ACTIV-2 trial, we highlight potential pitfalls of imputation when using ANCOVA or MMRM methods, and illustrate how these methods can be used when considering values

Symptom and Viral Rebound in Untreated SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Although symptom and viral rebound have been reported after nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment, the trajectories of symptoms and viral load during the natural course of COVID-19 have not been well described. OBJECTIVE: To characterize symptom and viral rebound in untreated outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of participants in a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04518410). SETTING: Multicenter trial. PATIENTS: 563 participants receiving placebo in the ACTIV-2/A5401 (Adaptive Platform Treatment Trial for Outpatients With COVID-19) platform trial. MEASUREMENTS: Participants recorded the severity of 13 symptoms daily between days 0 and 28. Nasal swabs were collected for SARS-CoV-2 RNA testing on days 0 to 14, 21, and 28. Symptom rebound was defined as a 4-point increase in total symptom score after improvement any time after study entry. Viral rebound was defined as an increase of at least 0.5 log10 RNA copies/mL from the immediately preceding time point to a viral load of 3.0 log10 copies/mL or higher. High-level viral rebound was defined as an increase of at least 0.5 log10 RNA copies/mL to a viral load of 5.0 log10 copies/mL or higher. RESULTS: Symptom rebound was identified in 26% of participants at a median of 11 days after initial symptom onset. Viral rebound was detected in 31% and high-level viral rebound in 13% of participants. Most symptom and viral rebound events were transient, because 89% of symptom rebound and 95% of viral rebound events occurred at only a single time point before improving. The combination of symptom and high-level viral rebound was observed in 3% of participants. LIMITATION: A largely unvaccinated population infected with pre-Omicron variants was evaluated. CONCLUSION: Symptom or viral relapse in the absence of antiviral treatment is common, but the combination of symptom and viral rebound is rare. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Predictors of virologic outcome among people living with HIV who continue a protease inhibitor-based antiretroviral regimen following virologic failure with no or limited resistance.

BACKGROUND: Treatment management after repeated failure of antiretroviral therapy (ART) is difficult due to resistance and adherence challenges. For people who have failed non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor-(NNRTI-) and protease inhibitor-(PI-) based regimens with no or limited resistance, remaining on PI-based ART is an option. Using data from an ART strategy trial (A5288) in low/middle-income countries which included this option, we explored whether predictors can be identified distinguishing those who experienced further virologic failure from those who achieved and maintained virologic suppression. METHODS: A5288 enrolled people with confirmed HIV-1 RNA ≥ 1000 copies/mL after ≥ 24 weeks of PI-based ART and prior failure on NNRTI-based ART. This analysis focused on the 278 participants with no resistance to the PI being taken and no or limited nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) resistance, who continued their PI with flexibility to change NRTIs. Proportional hazards models were used to evaluate predictors of virologic failure during follow-up (VF: confirmed HIV-1 RNA ≥ 1000 copies/mL at ≥ 24 weeks of follow-up). RESULTS: 56% of participants were female. At study entry, median age was 40 years, time on ART 7.8 years, CD4 count 169 cells/mm3, HIV-1 RNA 20,444 copies/mL; and 37% had NRTI resistance. The estimated proportion experiencing VF increased from 39% at week 24 to 60% at week 96. In multivariable analysis, significant predictors at study entry of VF were higher HIV-1 RNA (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.20 for ≥ 10,000 versus < 10,000 copies/mL), lower age (1.96 for < 30 versus ≥ 30 years), NRTI resistance (1.74 for present versus absent), lower CD4 count (1.73 for < 200 versus ≥ 200 cells/mm3), and shorter ART duration (1.62 for < 10 versus ≥ 10 years). There was a strong trend in proportion with VF at week 96 with the number of these five risk factors that a participant had, varying from 8% for zero, to 31%, 40%, 73%, and 100% for one, two, three, and four/five. Only 13% of participants developed new NRTI or PI resistance mutations. CONCLUSION: A simple count of five predictors might have value for identifying risk of continued VF. Novel antiretroviral and adherence support interventions are needed to improve virologic outcomes for higher risk individuals.