Azvudine versus Paxlovid in COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of azvudine versus nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) in treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The researchers conducted searches on PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, medRxiv, and Google Scholar until January 2024. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was utilised to evaluate the quality of the included studies, and data analysis was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. Thirteen studies, including 4949 patients, were analysed. The meta-analysis results showed no significant difference between the azvudine and Paxlovid groups in terms of mortality rate (odds rate [OR] = 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-1.21), negative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) conversion time (standard mean difference [SMD] = 1.52, 95% CI: -1.07-4.11), and hospital stay (SMD = -0.39, 95% CI: -1.12-0.33). However, a significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of intensive care unit admission (OR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.23-0.75) and the need for mechanical ventilation (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.44-0.86) in favour of azvudine. The incidence of adverse events in the azvudine group was significantly lower (OR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.43-0.99). The certainty of evidence was rated as low and moderate. Azvudine and Paxlovid demonstrated similar effectiveness in reducing mortality rates, negative PCR conversion time and hospital stay. However, azvudine showed better effectiveness in improving other outcomes. Regarding the level of certainty of evidence, further research is needed to validate or challenge these results.

Identifying Veterans Who Benefit From Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir: A Target Trial Emulation.

BACKGROUND: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is recommended for persons at risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but remains underutilized. Information on which eligible groups are likely to benefit from treatment is needed. METHODS: We conducted a target trial emulation study in the Veterans Health Administration comparing nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treated versus matched untreated veterans at risk for severe COVID-19 who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) from April 2022 through March 2023. We measured incidence of any hospitalization or all-cause mortality at 30 days. Outcomes were measured for the entire cohort, as well as among subgroups defined by 30-day risk of death or hospitalization, estimated using an ensemble risk prediction model. RESULTS: Participants were 87% male with median age 66 years and 16% unvaccinated. Compared with matched untreated participants, those treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (n = 24 205) had a lower 30-day risk for hospitalization (1.80% vs 2.30%; risk difference [RD], -0.50% points [95% confidence interval {CI}: -.69 to -.35]) and death (0.11% vs 0.30%; RD, -0.20 [95% CI: -.24 to -.13]). The greatest reductions in combined hospitalization or death were observed in the highest risk quartile (RD -2.85 [95% CI: -3.94 to -1.76]), immunocompromised persons (RD -1.91 [95% CI: -3.09 to -.74]), and persons aged ≥75 years (RD -1.16 [95% CI: -1.73 to -.59]). No reductions were observed in the 2 lowest risk quartiles or persons younger than 65 years. CONCLUSIONS: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was effective in reducing 30-day hospitalization and death in older veterans, those at highest predicted risk for severe outcomes, and immunocompromised groups. Benefit was not observed in younger veterans or groups at lower predicted risk for hospitalization and death.

Clinical Outcome and 7-Day Virological Clearance in High-Risk Patients with Mild-Moderate COVID-19 Treated with Molnupiravir, Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir, or Remdesivir.

INTRODUCTION: We compared the effectiveness and virological clearance (VC) at day 7 (T7) post-treatment with molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and remdesivir in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients at high risk (HR) for clinical progression. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study enrolling HR patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 (Jan-Oct 2022) treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir or 3 days of remdesivir. We investigated clinical recovery at T7 (resolution of symptoms for ≥ 72 h or all-cause death), VC at T7 (PCR/antigenic negative nasopharyngeal swab), and median time to VC (days from symptom onset to the first negative swab). Factors associated with VC were investigated by logistic regression. RESULTS: In the study, 92/376 (43.8%) patients received molnupiravir, 150/376 (24.7%) nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and 134/376 (31.5%) remdesivir. Forty-nine (13%) patients were unvaccinated or incompletely vaccinated. Patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were younger and presented immunodeficiencies more frequently; remdesivir was used more commonly in patients hospitalized for other diseases. A high proportion of patients obtained clinical recovery without differences among the therapies (97.5% for molnupiravir, 98.3% for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, and 93.6% for remdesivir); 12 (3.7%) patients died. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was associated with a higher proportion of T7 VC and a shorter time to VC compared to molnupiravir/remdesivir, also after adjustment for age and immunodeficiency (AOR 0.445 RDV vs. NMV-r, 95% CI 0.240-0.826, p = 0.010; AOR 0.222 MNP vs. NMV-r, 95% CI 0.105-0.472, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: SARS-COV-2 antiviral treatments are an excellent therapeutic strategy in HR patients. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir showed a higher proportion of VC as early as 7 days after treatment, confirming its likely superiority in indirect comparisons.

Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir, molnupiravir, and a 3-day course of remdesivir are antiviral therapies recommended in patients with a mild-to-moderate COVID-19 disease at high risk of clinical progression. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies have shown their efficacy in reducing all-cause mortality and clinical progression. Few data are available about a direct comparison among the three drugs; furthermore, the possible role of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in increasing viral clearance and in reducing the duration of viral shedding needs to be further elucidated. We thus investigated the effectiveness, safety, and virological clearance 7 days after treatment with these three antivirals in our retrospective cohort. We included in the analysis patients that have received these treatments from January 2022 and October 2022; we observed that patients receiving nirmatrelvir-ritonavir displayed a shorter median time from symptoms' onset to virological clearance and a higher proportion of virological clearance at day 7, also after adjustment for possible confounders, compared to molnupiravir and remdesivir. Our data might help in understanding which COVID-19 patients may benefit mostly from antiviral therapies and in the choice of antiviral therapy.

Simultaneous measurement of COVID-19 treatment drugs (nirmatrelvir and ritonavir) in rat plasma by UPLC-MS/MS and its application to a pharmacokinetic study.

PAXLOVID™ (Co-packaging of Nirmatrelvir with Ritonavir) has been approved for the treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). The goal of the experiment was to create an accurate and straightforward analytical method using ultra performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) to simultaneously quantify nirmatrelvir and ritonavir in rat plasma, and to investigate the pharmacokinetic profiles of these drugs in rats. After protein precipitation using acetonitrile, nirmatrelvir, ritonavir, and the internal standard (IS) lopinavir were separated using ultra performance liquid chromatography (UPLC). This separation was achieved with a mobile phase composed of acetonitrile and an aqueous solution of 0.1% formic acid, using a reversed-phase column with a binary gradient elution. Using multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) technology, the analytes were detected in the positive electrospray ionization mode. Favorable linearity was observed in the calibration range of 2.0-10000 ng/mL for nirmatrelvir and 1.0-5000 ng/mL for ritonavir, respectively, within plasma samples. The lower limits of quantification (LLOQ) attained were 2.0 ng/mL for nirmatrelvir and 1.0 ng/mL for ritonavir, respectively. Both drugs demonstrated inter-day and intra-day precision below 15%, with accuracies ranging from -7.6% to 13.2%. Analytes were extracted with recoveries higher than 90.7% and without significant matrix effects. Likewise, the stability was found to meet the requirements of the analytical method under different conditions. This UPLC-MS/MS method, characterized by enabling accurate and precise quantification of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir in plasma, was effectively utilized for in vivo pharmacokinetic studies in rats.

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.

Antiviral combination regimens as rescue therapy in immunocompromised hosts with persistent COVID-19.

The management of severe/prolonged SARS-CoV-2 infections in immunocompromised hosts is still challenging. We describe nine patients with hematologic malignancies with a history of unsuccessful SARS-CoV-2 treatment receiving antiviral combination treatment for persistent infection at a tertiary hospital in central Italy (University Hospital of Careggi, Florence). Combination treatments consisted of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus molnupiravir (n = 4), nirmatrelvir/ritonavir plus remdesivir (n = 4) or remdesivir plus molnupiravir (n = 1) for 10 days, in some cases associated with sotrovimab. Combinations were generally well tolerated. One patient obtained viral clearance but died due to the underlying disease. In eight cases, clinical and virological success was confirmed by radiological follow-up. Antivirals combination is likely to become a mainstay in the future management of COVID-19 among immunocompromised patients, but knowledge in this field is still very limited and prospective studies on larger cohorts are urgently warranted.

Comparison of safety and efficacy between Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir in the treatment of COVID-19 infection in patients with advanced kidney disease: a retrospective observational study.

Background: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is used in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with normal or mild renal impairment (eGFR ≥30 ml/min per 1.73 m2). There is limited data regarding its use in advanced kidney disease (eGFR <30 ml/min per 1.73 m2). We performed a retrospective territory-wide observational study evaluating the safety and efficacy of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir when compared with molnupiravir in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 with advanced kidney disease. Methods: We adopted target trial emulation using data from a territory-wide electronic health record database on eligible patients aged ≥18 years with advanced kidney disease (history of eGFR <30 ml/min per 1.73 m2) who were infected with COVID-19 and were prescribed with either molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir within five days of infection during the period from 16 March 2022 to 31 December 2022. A sequence trial approach and 1:4 propensity score matching was applied based on the baseline covariates including age, sex, number of COVID-19 vaccine doses received, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), hospitalisation, eGFR, renal replacement therapy, comorbidities (cancer, respiratory disease, myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, diabetes, hypertension), and drug use (renin-angiotensin-system agents, beta blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics, nitrates, lipid lowering agents, insulins, oral antidiabetic drugs, antiplatelets, immuno-suppressants, corticosteroids, proton pump inhibitors, histamine H2 receptor antagonists, monoclonal antibody infusion) within past 90 days. Individuals were followed up from the index date until the earliest outcome occurrence, death, 90 days from index date or the end of data availability. Stratified Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted with baseline covariates was used to compare the risk of outcomes between nirmatrelvir-ritonavir recipients and molnupiravir recipients which include (i) all-cause mortality, (ii) intensive care unit (ICU) admission, (iii) ventilatory support, (iv) hospitalisation, (v) hepatic impairment, (vi) ischaemic stroke, and (vii) myocardial infarction. Subgroup analyses included age (<70; ≥70 years); sex, Charlson comorbidity index (≤5; >5), and number of COVID-19 vaccine doses received (0-1; ≥2 doses). Findings: A total of 4886 patients were included (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 1462; molnupiravir: 3424). There were 347 events of all-cause mortality (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 74, 5.06%; molnupiravir: 273, 7.97%), 10 events of ICU admission (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 4, 0.27%; molnupiravir: 6, 0.18%), 48 events of ventilatory support (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 13, 0.89%; molnupiravir: 35, 1.02%), 836 events of hospitalisation (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 218, 23.98%; molnupiravir: 618, 28.14%), 1 event of hepatic impairment (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 0, 0%; molnupiravir: 1, 0.03%), 8 events of ischaemic stroke (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 3, 0.22%; molnupiravir: 5, 0.16%) and 9 events of myocardial infarction (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 2, 0.15%; molnupiravir: 7, 0.22%). Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir users had lower rates of all-cause mortality (absolute risk reduction (ARR) at 90 days 2.91%, 95% CI: 1.47-4.36%) and hospitalisation (ARR at 90 days 4.16%, 95% CI: 0.81-7.51%) as compared with molnupiravir users. Similar rates of ICU admission (ARR at 90 days -0.09%, 95% CI: -0.4 to 0.2%), ventilatory support (ARR at 90 days 0.13%, 95% CI: -0.45 to 0.72%), hepatic impairment (ARR at 90 days 0.03%, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.09%), ischaemic stroke (ARR at 90 days -0.06%, 95% CI: -0.35 to 0.22%), and myocardial infarction (ARR at 90 days 0.07%, 95% CI: -0.19 to 0.33%) were found between nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and molnupiravir users. Consistent results were observed in relative risk adjusted with baseline characteristics. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was associated with significantly reduced risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 0.624, 95% CI: 0.455-0.857) and hospitalisation (HR: 0.782, 95% CI: 0.64-0.954). Interpretation: Patients with COVID-19 with advanced kidney disease receiving nirmatrelvir-ritonavir had a lower rate of all-cause mortality and hospital admission when compared with molnupiravir. Other adverse clinical outcomes were similar in both treatment groups. Funding: Health and Medical Research Fund (COVID1903010), Health Bureau, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.

Evaluating Drug Interactions between Ritonavir and Opioid Analgesics: Implications from Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Simulation.

Several commonly used opioid analgesics, such as fentanyl, sufentanil, alfentanil, and hydrocodone, are by report primarily metabolized by the CYP3A4 enzyme. The concurrent use of ritonavir, a potent CYP3A4 inhibitor, can lead to significant drug interactions. Using physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling and simulation, this study examines the effects of different dosing regimens of ritonavir on the pharmacokinetics of these opioids. The findings reveal that co-administration of ritonavir significantly increases the exposure of fentanyl analogs, with over a 10-fold increase in the exposure of alfentanil and sufentanil when given with ritonavir. Conversely, the effect of ritonavir on fentanyl exposure is modest, likely due to additional metabolism pathways. Additionally, the study demonstrates that the steady-state exposure of hydrocodone and its active metabolite hydromorphone can be increased by up to 87% and 95%, respectively, with concurrent use of ritonavir. The extended-release formulation of hydrocodone is particularly affected. These insights from PBPK modeling provide valuable guidance for optimizing opioid dosing and minimizing the risk of toxicity when used in combination with ritonavir-containing prescriptions.

Supratherapeutic INR During Treatment With Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir and Warfarin and Acute Illness With COVID-19: A Case Report.

Background: Several studies have examined INR fluctuations using pharmacokinetic (PK) models or post-hoc INR values after completing nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, but further study of the effects of the drug interaction with warfarin during treatment is necessary. Case Summary: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir is largely utilized in the outpatient setting so data regarding INR trends in hospitalized patients on warfarin is limited. However, many who receive nirmatrelvir/ritonavir outpatient experience difficulty with presenting to clinic for INR checks due to feeling acutely ill along with isolation precautions. We present the case of a patient receiving warfarin and utilizing home INR testing for monitoring. After diagnosis of coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19), she was started on nirmatrelvir/ritonavir on day five after testing positive. Most recent INR prior to the start of therapy was 2.7 and had been stable on the same dose for months prior to infection. On day two of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, her INR rose to 4.0 on home point of care INR testing. Despite reducing her dose of warfarin by 15%, her INR remained supratherapeutic the day after completing nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (4.0) and for several checks after. One month after completion of therapy, her INR returned to therapeutic levels. Practice Implications: While PK models and case series have hypothesized both potential increases or decreases in INR with the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and warfarin interaction, COVID-19 infection itself can cause several pharmacodynamic changes which can increase INR, including decreased appetite and, in severe cases, organ dysfunction. This case provides real-world insight into the drug interaction between nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and the drug-disease state interaction between warfarin and COVID-19.

Paxlovid™ reduces the incidence of pneumonia, hospitalization, and death in a cohort of COVID-19 patients from northeast Mexico.

BACKGROUND: Information on Paxlovid™ effectiveness must be monitored and updated in real world scenarios. Our research question was what is the effectiveness of Paxlovid™ in adult patients with COVID-19? Therefore, we investigated the effectiveness of Paxlovid™ on reducing the incidence of pneumonia, hospitalization, and mortality in a cohort of COVID-19 positive adult patients from northeast Mexico. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 positive adult patients from Nuevo Leon, Mexico from December 2020 to May 2023 (after Omicron BA-5 circulation) was performed. Paxlovid™ use was authorized in September 2022. Therefore, we analyzed effectiveness in patients with confirmed diagnosis who met selection criteria between September 2022 and May 2023 (n = 20,799; 5,673 with and 15,126 without Paxlovid™). RESULTS: The pneumonia (0.1% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.0001), hospitalization (0.1% vs. 1.2%, p < 0.0001), and death rates (0.04% vs. 0.2%, p < 0.0001) were lower in patients with Paxlovid™ treatment independently of age, sex, comorbidity, and COVID-19 and pneumococcal vaccination history. Effectiveness was 88.2%, 95.9% y 91.9% for pneumonia, hospitalization, and death, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Paxlovid™ reduces the presentation of pneumonia, hospitalization, and death secondary to COVID-19. It is recommended to continue monitoring Paxlovid™ effectiveness, as other SARS-CoV-2 variants continue to emerge.

Antiviral treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection in the current situation: a position paper of the Spanish Society of Emergency Medicine (SEMES). / Posicionamiento de la Sociedad Española de Medicina de Urgencias y Emergencias (SEMES) ante el tratamiento antiviral frente al SARS-CoV-2 en la situación epidemiológica actual.

SUMMARY: COVID-19 continues to pose a significant threat: mortality stands at nearly twice that of influenza, and the incidence rate is growing as the population's vaccination rate decreases, particularly in Spain and other areas of Europe. Given this situation, it is vitally important know whether medical protocols are consistent and appropriately implemented by health care staff in the interest of preventing possible inefficiency or inequity. Physicians from hospital emergency departments met to study their hospitals' usual clinical practices for managing SARS-CoV-2 infection and to determine their expert opinions on the use of antiviral agents. The participating physicians then reached consensus on evidencebased recommendations for strategies that would optimize emergency treatment.

RESUMEN: Actualmente, la COVID-19 sigue representando una amenaza significativa, con una mortalidad cercana al doble de la ocasionada por la gripe y con una incidencia variable debido a una disminución en la tasa de vacunación de la población, especialmente en el contexto europeo y español. Ante este panorama, es de vital importancia comprobar que los protocolos médicos están consolidados y son debidamente implementados por los profesionales sanitarios, con la finalidad de evitar posibles ineficiencias o inequidades. A través de reuniones con profesionales de urgencias se han observado las prácticas clínicas habituales en los servicios de urgencias hospitalarios para pacientes con infección por SARS-CoV-2, con la finalidad de comprender la perspectiva de estos profesionales acerca del uso de antivirales y, tras un consenso de expertos basados en la evidencia actual, se han generado estas de recomendaciones para poder enfocar estrategias que optimicen el tratamiento de los pacientes en estos servicios.

Pharmacokinetics of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and the drug-drug interaction with calcineurin inhibitor in renal transplant recipients.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the pharmacokinetic (PK) characteristics of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in renal transplant recipients and explore the potential factors that related to the PK variance of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and its interaction with calcineurin inhibitor (CNI). METHODS: Renal transplant recipients treated with CNI and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were prospectively enrolled. Steady-state plasma concentrations of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, and the PK parameters were calculated using non-compartmental analysis. Spearman correlation analysis was used for exploring influencing factors. RESULTS: A total of eight recipients were enrolled; for nirmatrelvir and ritonavir, AUC/dose was 0.24179 ± 0.14495 and 0.06196 ± 0.03767 µg·h·mL-1·mg-1. Red blood cell (RBC), hematocrit (Ht), hemoglobins (Hb), and creatinine clearance (Ccr) were negatively correlated with AUC/dose of nirmatrelvir, while Ccr, CYP3A5 genotype, and CYP3A4 genotype were related to the AUC/dose of ritonavir. Ccr was negatively correlated with the C0/dose of tacrolimus (TAC) after termination of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (rs = -0.943, p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: The PK characteristics of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir vary greatly among renal transplant recipients. Factors including Ccr and CYP3A5 genotype were related to the in vivo exposure of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. During the whole process before and after nirmatrelvir/ritonavir therapy, it is recommended to adjust the CNI basing on renal function to avoid CNI toxicity exposure.

Safety of RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase Inhibitors, Molnupiravir and VV116, for Oral Treatment of COVID-19: A Meta-Analysis.

Background: The RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) inhibitors, molnupiravir and VV116, have the potential to maximize clinical benefits in the oral treatment of COVID-19. Subjects who consume these drugs may experience an increased incidence of adverse events. This study aimed to evaluate the safety profile of molnupiravir and VV116. Methods: A comprehensive search of scientific and medical databases, such as PubMed Central/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, was conducted to find relevant articles in English from January 2020 to June 2023. Any kind of adverse events reported in the study were pooled and analyzed in the drug group versus the control group. Estimates of risk effects were summarized through the random effects model using Review Manager version 5.2, and sensitivity analysis was performed by Stata 17.0 software. Results: Fifteen studies involving 32,796 subjects were included. Eleven studies were placebo-controlled, and four were Paxlovid-controlled. Twelve studies reported adverse events for molnupiravir, and three studies described adverse events for VV116. The total odds ratio (OR) for adverse events in the RdRp inhibitor versus the placebo-controlled group was 1.01 (95% CI=0.84-1.22; I2=26%), P=0.88. The total OR for adverse events in the RdRp inhibitor versus the Paxlovid-controlled group was 0.32 (95% CI=0.16-0.65; I2=87%), P=0.002. Individual drug subgroup analysis in the placebo-controlled study showed that compared with the placebo group, a total OR for adverse events was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.85-1.10; I2=0%) in the molnupiravir group and 3.77 (95% CI=0.08-175.77; I2=85%) in the VV116 group. Conclusion: The RdRp inhibitors molnupiravir and VV116 are safe for oral treatment of COVID-19. Further evidence is necessary that RdRp inhibitors have a higher safety profile than Paxlovid.

Effectiveness of recently-approved oral antiviral medications on the outcome of patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and pre-existing chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases.

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the effectiveness of the oral antiviral agents nirmatrelvir - ritonavir (NMV-r) and molnupiravir (MOV) for treating mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with COPD. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study extracted data from the TriNetX platform and examined 94,984 COVID-19 patients with preexisting COPD from 1 January 2022, to 1 October 2023. Patients receiving NMV-r or MOV (study group) were compared with those not receiving oral antiviral agents (control group) after propensity score matching (PSM). RESULTS: After PSM, 7,944 patients were classified into the study and control groups. The primary composite outcome of all-cause hospitalization, or death in 30 days was reported in 458 (5.7%) patients in the study group and 566 (7.1%) patients in the control cohort, yielding a hazard ratio [HR] of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-0.89; Table 2). Compared with the control group, the study group had a significantly lower risk of all-cause hospitalization (HR, 0.87; 95% CI: 0.76-0.99) and death (HR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.13-0.35). CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that oral antivirals - NMV-r or MOV might improve clinical outcomes in patients with preexisting COPD and COVID-19. However, only a small proportion of preexisting COPD patients with COVID-19 received oral antiviral treatment.

Clinical effectiveness of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir for patients with COVID-19 and preexisting psychiatric disorders.

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the clinical effectiveness of the combination of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir (NMV-r) in treating nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19 who have preexisting psychiatric disorders. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and psychiatric disorders between 1 March 2020, and 1 December 2022, were included using the TriNetX network. The primary outcome was the composite outcome of all-cause emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalization, or death within 30 days. RESULTS: Propensity score matching yielded two cohorts of 20,633 patients each. The composite outcome of all-cause ED visits, hospitalization, or death within 30 days was 3.57% (737 patients) in the NMV-r cohort and 5.69% (1176) in the control cohort, resulting in a reduced risk in the NMV-r cohort (HR: 0.657; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.599-0.720). The NMV-r cohort exhibited a lower risk of all-cause hospitalization (HR: 0.385; 95% CI: 0.328-0.451) and all-cause death (HR: 0.110; 95% CI: 0.053-0.228) compared with the control group. CONCLUSION: NMV-r could mitigate the risk of adverse outcomes in nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19 and preexisting psychiatric disorders. However, only a limited number of patients in this population received adequate treatment, thus emphasizing the importance of promoting its appropriate use.

The PAX LC Trial: A Decentralized, Phase 2, Randomized, Double-blind Study of Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Compared with Placebo/Ritonavir for Long COVID.

INTRODUCTION: Individuals with long COVID lack evidence-based treatments and have difficulty participating in traditional site-based trials. Our digital, decentralized trial investigates the efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, targeting viral persistence as a potential cause of long COVID. METHODS: The PAX LC trial (NCT05668091) is a Phase 2, 1:1 randomized, double-blind, superiority, placebo-controlled trial in 100 community-dwelling, highly symptomatic adult participants with long COVID residing in the 48 contiguous US states to determine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of 15 days of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir compared with placebo/ritonavir. Participants are recruited via patient groups, cultural ambassadors, and social media platforms. Medical records are reviewed through a platform facilitating participant-mediated data acquisition from electronic health records nationwide. During the drug treatment, participants complete daily digital diaries using a web-based application. Blood draws for eligibility and safety assessments are conducted at or near participants' homes. The study drug is shipped directly to participants' homes. The primary endpoint is the PROMIS-29 Physical Health Summary Score difference between baseline and Day 28, evaluated by a mixed model repeated measure analysis. Secondary endpoints include PROMIS-29 (Mental Health Summary Score and all items), Modified GSQ-30 with supplemental symptoms questionnaire, COVID Core Outcome Measures for Recovery, EQ-5D-5L (Utility Score and all items), PGIS 1 and 2, PGIC 1 and 2, and healthcare utilization. The trial incorporates immunophenotyping to identify long COVID biomarkers and treatment responders. CONCLUSION: The PAX LC trial uses a novel decentralized design and a participant-centric approach to test a 15-day regimen of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for long COVID.

Effectiveness and safety of Sanhan Huashi granules versus nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in adult patients with COVID-19: A randomized, open-label, multicenter trial.

Sanhan Huashi granules (SHG) demonstrated therapeutic effects against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in observational studies. In order to compare the effectiveness and safety of SHG and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in treating adults with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, we conducted a randomized, active-controlled, open-label, multi-center trial conducted between February and July in 2023. The patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to the SHG group and the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group. A total of 400 participants were randomized, among which 200 participants ultimately received SHG and 198 received nirmatrelvir-ritonavir. The primary outcome was time to sustained clinical recovery through day 28. SHG significantly shortened the median time to sustained clinical recovery compared to nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (6.0 (95% CI, 5.0 to 6.0) vs. 8.0 (95% CI, 6.0 to 9.0) d; P = 0.001), particularly for individual symptoms including fever, sore throat, cough and fatigue. No participants in either group died and incidence of severe COVID-19 showed no difference between two groups. Participants who received nirmatrelvir-ritonavir demonstrated a higher rate of virus clearance on day 5 compared to those received SHG (46.4% (95% CI, 39.1 to 53.7) vs. 65.6% (95% CI, 58.3 to 72.4); P < 0.001). Most adverse events were mild in both groups. In summary, SHG was superior to nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in shortening the time to sustained clinical recovery in participants with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, despite a lower virus clearance rate observed after 5 d of treatment (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry Identifier: ChiCTR2300067872).

In-vitro and in-vivo assessment of nirmatrelvir penetration into CSF, central nervous system cells, tissues, and peripheral blood mononuclear cells.

Three years after SARS-CoV-2 emerged as a global infectious threat, the virus has become endemic. The neurological complications such as depression, anxiety, and other CNS complications after COVID-19 disease are increasing. The brain, and CSF have been shown as viral reservoirs for SARS-CoV-2, yielding a potential hypothesis for CNS effects. Thus, we investigated the CNS pharmacology of orally dosed nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMR/RTV). Using both an in vitro and an in vivo rodent model, we investigated CNS penetration and potential pharmacodynamic activity of NMR. Through pharmacokinetic modeling, we estimated the median CSF penetration of NMR to be low at 18.11% of plasma with very low accumulation in rodent brain tissue. Based on the multiples of the 90% maximal effective concentration (EC90) for SARS-CoV-2, NMR concentrations in the CSF and brain do not achieve an exposure level similar to that of plasma. A median of only 16% of all the predicted CSF concentrations in rats were > 3xEC90 (unadjusted for protein binding). This may have implications for viral persistence and neurologic post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 if increased NMR penetration in the CNS leads to decreased CNS viral loads and decreased CNS inflammation.

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment of patients with COVID-19 taking tacrolimus: case series describing the results of drug-drug interactions.

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir is a novel drug combination that is authorized by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Ritonavir is a cytochrome P450 3A inhibitor and a P-glycoprotein inhibitor that increases the plasma concentration of tacrolimus and other medications. We describe the cases of two patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir: a patient who had undergone kidney transplantation and another with a history of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Toxic concentrations of tacrolimus were induced in both. This case series highlights the risk associated with the concomitant administration of tacrolimus and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir.

Clinical effectiveness of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir on the short- and long-term outcome in high-risk children with COVID-19.

This study investigated the clinical effectiveness of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir (NMV-r) on short-term outcome and the risk of postacute sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (PASC) among pediatric patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This retrospective cohort study used the TriNetX research network to identify pediatric patients between 12 and 18 years with COVID-19 between January 1, 2022 and August 31, 2023. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to match patients receiving NMV-r (NMV-r group) with those who did not receive NMV-r (control group). Two cohorts comprising 633 patients each (NMV-r and control groups), with balanced baseline characteristics, were identified using the PSM method. During the initial 30 days, the NMV-r group showed a lower incidence of all-cause hospitalization, mortality, or ED visits (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.546, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.372-0.799, p = 0.002). Additionally, the NMV-r group had a significantly lower risk of all-cause hospitalization compared with the control group (HR = 0.463, 95% CI: 0.269-0.798), with no deaths occurring in either group. In the 30-180-day follow-up period, the NMV-r group exhibited a non-significantly lower incidence of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC), encompassing symptoms such as fatigue, cardiopulmonary symptoms, pain, cognitive impairments, headache, dizziness, sleep disorders, anxiety, and depression, compared to the control group. This study underscores the potential effectiveness of NMV-r in treating high-risk pediatric patients with COVID-19, demonstrating significant reductions in short-term adverse outcomes such as emergency department visits, hospitalization, or mortality within the initial 30-day period. Additionally, NMV-r shows promise in potentially preventing the development of PASC.