Saliva Is a Sensitive and Accessible Sample Both for SARS-CoV-2 Detection and for the Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness in Follow-Up Studies.

Despite emerging evidence indicating that molecular SARS-CoV-2 tests performed on saliva have diagnostic sensitivity and specificity comparable to those observed with nasopharyngeal swabs (NPSs), most in vivo follow-up studies on the efficacy of drugs against SARS-CoV-2 have been performed on NPSs, not considering saliva as a possible alternative matrix. For this reason, in this study, we used, in parallel, saliva and NPS samples for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 by real-time RT-PCR in patients receiving Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab, Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir, or Sotrovimab as a treatment against SARS-CoV-2. Our results showed a good correlation between the NPS and saliva samples for each drug; moreover, comparable changes in the cycle threshold (Ct) levels in saliva and NPSs were observed both 7 days and 30 days after treatment, thus confirming that the saliva represents a good matrix for in vivo follow-up studies verifying the effectiveness of treatments against SARS-CoV-2.

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.

Oral Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir as Postexposure Prophylaxis for Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have not shown a significant benefit of postexposure prophylaxis. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2-3 double-blind trial to assess the efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in asymptomatic, rapid antigen test-negative adults who had been exposed to a household contact with Covid-19 within 96 hours before randomization. The participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (300 mg of nirmatrelvir and 100 mg of ritonavir) every 12 hours for 5 days or for 10 days or matching placebo for 5 or 10 days. The primary end point was the development of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) infection, confirmed on reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) or rapid antigen testing, through 14 days in participants who had a negative RT-PCR test at baseline. RESULTS: A total of 2736 participants were randomly assigned to a trial group - 921 to the 5-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, 917 to the 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, and 898 to the placebo group. Symptomatic, confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection developed by day 14 in 2.6% of the participants in the 5-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, 2.4% of those in the 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, and 3.9% of those in the placebo group. In each nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, the percentage of participants in whom symptomatic, confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection developed did not differ significantly from that in the placebo group, with risk reductions relative to placebo of 29.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], -16.7 to 57.8; P = 0.17) in the 5-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group and 35.5% (95% CI, -11.5 to 62.7; P = 0.12) in the 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group. The incidence of adverse events was similar across the trial groups, with dysgeusia being the most frequently reported adverse event (in 5.9% and 6.8% of the participants in the 5-day and 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir groups, respectively, and in 0.7% of those in the placebo group). CONCLUSIONS: In this placebo-controlled trial, postexposure prophylaxis with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for 5 or 10 days did not significantly reduce the risk of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. (Funded by Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05047601.).

Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir Regimen for Mild/Moderately Severe COVID-19: A Rapid Review With Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of the approved nirmatrelvir/ritonavir regimen for treatment of laboratory-confirmed mild/moderately severe COVID-19 remains unclear. METHODS: We systematically identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world studies (RWS; observational studies) of the efficacy/effectiveness and/or safety of the approved nirmatrelvir/ritonavir regimen for COVID-19. We pooled appropriate data (adjusted estimates for RWS) using an inverse variance, random-effects model. We calculated statistical heterogeneity using the I 2 statistic. Results are presented as relative risk (RR) with associated 95% CI. We further assessed risk of bias/study quality and conducted trial sequential analysis of the evidence from RCTs. RESULTS: We included 4 RCTs (4,070 persons) and 16 RWS (1,925,047 persons) of adults (aged ≥18 years). One and 3 RCTs were of low and unclear risk of bias, respectively. The RWS were of good quality. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir significantly decreased COVID-19 hospitalization compared with placebo/no treatment (RR = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.10-0.31; I 2 = 77.2%; 2 RCTs, 3,542 persons), but there was no significant difference for decrease of worsening severity (RR = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.66-1.01; I 2 = 47.5%; 3 RCTs, 1,824 persons), viral clearance (RR = 1.19; 95% CI, 0.93-1.51; I 2 = 82%; 2 RCTs, 528 persons), adverse events (RR = 1.41; 95% CI, 0.92-2.14; I 2 = 70.6%; 4 RCTs, 4,070 persons), serious adverse events (RR = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.41-1.62; I 2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, 3,806 persons), and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.27; 95% CI, 0.04-1.70; I 2 = 49.9%; 3 RCTs, 3,806 persons), although trial sequential analysis suggested that the current total sample sizes for these outcomes were not large enough for conclusions to be drawn. Real-world studies also showed significantly decreased COVID-19 hospitalization (RR = 0.48; 95% CI, 0.37-0.60; I 2 = 95.0%; 11 RWS, 1,421,398 persons) and all-cause mortality (RR = 0.24; 95% CI, 0.14-0.34; I 2 = 65%; 7 RWS, 286,131 persons) for nirmatrelvir/ritonavir compared with no treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir appears to be promising for preventing hospitalization and potentially decreasing all-cause mortality for persons with mild/moderately severe COVID-19, but the evidence is weak. More studies are needed.

Fixing the Achilles Heel of Pfizer's Paxlovid for COVID-19 Treatment.

Nirmatrelvir (PF-07321332), a first-in-class inhibitor of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) main protease (Mpro), was developed by Pfizer under intense pressure during the pandemic to treat COVID-19. A weakness of nirmatrelvir is its limited metabolic stability, which led to the development of a combination therapy (paxlovid), involving coadministration of nirmatrelvir with the cytochrome P450 inhibitor ritonavir. However, limitations in tolerability of the ritonavir component reduce the scope of paxlovid. In response to these limitations, researchers at Pfizer have now developed the second-generation Mpro inhibitor PF-07817883 (ibuzatrelvir). Structurally related to nirmatrelvir, including with the presence of a trifluoromethyl group, albeit located differently, ibuzatrelvir manifests enhanced oral bioavailability, so it does not require coadministration with ritonavir. The development of ibuzatrelvir is an important milestone, because it is expected to enhance the treatment of COVID-19 without the drawbacks associated with ritonavir. Given the success of paxlovid in treating COVID-19, it is likely that ibuzatrelvir will be granted approval as an improved drug for treatment of COVID-19 infections, so complementing vaccination efforts and improving pandemic preparedness. The development of nirmatrelvir and ibuzatrelvir dramatically highlights the power of appropriately resourced modern medicinal chemistry to very rapidly enable the development of breakthrough medicines. Consideration of how analogous approaches can be used to develop similarly breakthrough medicines for infectious diseases such as tuberculosis and malaria is worthwhile.

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.

Association of Antiviral Drugs for the Treatment of COVID-19 With Acute Renal Failure.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Reports regarding the association of remdesivir use for the treatment of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with the development of acute kidney injury (AKI) are inconsistent, and the associations between the use of other antivirals and AKI remain unclear. Therefore, this study investigated whether the use of antiviral drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 is a risk factor for the development of AKI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study analyzed 176,197 reports submitted to the Japanese Adverse Event Reporting Database between 2020 and 2022. Reporting odds ratios (RORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) for AKI that were associated with the use of antiviral drugs in patients with COVID-19 were calculated after adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: Overall, 5,879 of the reports analyzed were associated with AKI. Signs of AKI were detected with the use of remdesivir [crude ROR (cROR)=2.45; 95%CI=1.91-3.14] and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (cROR=6.07; 95%CI=4.06-9.06). These results were maintained even after adjusting for potential confounders [remdesivir: adjusted ROR (aROR)=2.18; 95%CI=1.69-2.80, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir: aROR=5.24; 95%CI=3.48-7.90]. However, when analyzing data stratified by reporting year, the association between remdesivir and AKI appeared to diminish over time and was not sustained. CONCLUSION: Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir use may be associated with developing AKI. This knowledge may be useful in helping patients with COVID-19 avoid AKI complications.

Effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in children and adolescents aged 12-17 years following SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection: A target trial emulation.

Currently there is a lack of randomized trial data examining the use of the antiviral nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in paediatric patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. This target trial emulation study aims to address this gap by evaluating the use of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in non-hospitalized paediatric patients aged 12-17 years with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection. Among paediatric patients diagnosed between 16th March 2022 and 5th February 2023, exposure was defined as outpatient nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment within 5 days of symptom onset or COVID-19 diagnosis. Primary outcome was 28 day all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization, while secondary outcomes were 28 day in-hospital disease progression, 28 day COVID-19-specific hospitalization, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), acute liver injury, acute renal failure, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Overall, 49,378 eligible paediatric patients were included. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment was associated with reduced 28 day all-cause hospitalization (absolute risk reduction = 0.23%, 95%CI = 0.19%-0.31%; relative risk = 0.66, 95%CI = 0.56-0.71). No events of mortality, in-hospital disease progression, or adverse clinical outcomes were observed among nirmatrelvir/ritonavir users. The findings confirmed the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in reducing all-cause hospitalization risk among non-hospitalized pediatric patients with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection.

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.

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.

Antiviral Use in Mild-to-Moderate SARS-CoV-2 Infections during the Omicron Wave in Geriatric Patients.

(1) Background: Geriatric patients are at high risk of complications of Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) and are good candidates for antiviral drugs. (2) Methods: A retrospective study of electronic health records (EHRs) aiming to describe antiviral (nirmatrelvir and ritonavir (nirmatrelvir/r) or remdesivir) use, drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in elderly patients (75 and over), hospitalized with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 between July 2022 and June 2023. (3) Results: Out of 491 patients (mean age: 86.9 years), 180 (36.7%) received nirmatrelvir/r, 78 (15.9%) received remdesivir, and 233 (47.4%) received no antiviral therapy. No association was found between the choice of antiviral and the demographic or medical data. No serious ADR was observed. Nirmatrelvir/r dosage adjustment was inadequate in 65% of patients with renal impairment. In total, 128 patients (71%) on nirmatrelvir/r had potential pharmacokinetic DDIs, with 43 resulting in a possibly related ADR. In the remdesivir group, pharmacodynamic DDIs were more frequent, with QTc prolongation risk in 56 patients (72%). Only 20 patients underwent follow-up ECG, revealing QTc prolongation in 4. (4) Conclusions: There is an underutilization of antivirals despite their justified indications. Nirmatrelvir/r dosage was rarely adjusted to renal function. Dose adjustments and closer monitoring are needed due to the high risk of drug interactions.

Nirmatrelvir and ritonavir for inpatients with severe or critical COVID-19 beyond five days of symptom onset: a propensity score-matched, multicenter, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need for therapeutic strategies for inpatients with severe or critical COVID-19. The evaluation of the clinical benefits of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir (Nmr/r) for these patients beyond five days of symptom onset is insufficient. METHODS: A new propensity score-matched cohort was constructed by using multicenter data from 6695 adult inpatients with COVID-19 from December 2022 to February 2023 in China after the epidemic control measures were lifted across the country. The severity of disease of the inpatients was based on the tenth trial edition of the Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of COVID-19 in China. The symptom onset of 1870 enrolled severe or critical inpatients was beyond five days, and they received either Nmr/r plus standard treatment or only standard care. The ratio of patients whose SOFA score improved more than 2 points, crucial respiratory endpoints, changes in inflammatory markers, safety on the seventh day following the initiation of Nmr/r treatment, and length of hospital stay were evaluated. RESULTS: In the Nmr/r group, on Day 7, the number of patients with an improvement in SOFA score ≥ 2 was much greater than that in the standard treatment group (P = 0.024) without a significant decrease in glomerular filtration rate (P = 0.815). Additionally, the rate of new intubation was lower (P = 0.004) and the no intubation days were higher (P = 0.003) in the first 7 days in the Nmr/r group. Other clinical benefits were limited. CONCLUSIONS: Our study may provide new insight that inpatients with severe or critical COVID-19 beyond five days of symptom onset benefit from Nmr/r. Future studies, particularly randomized controlled trials, are necessary to verify the above findings.

A unifying model to explain frequent SARS-CoV-2 rebound after nirmatrelvir treatment and limited prophylactic efficacy.

In a pivotal trial (EPIC-HR), a 5-day course of oral ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir, given early during symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (within three days of symptoms onset), decreased hospitalization and death by 89.1% and nasal viral load by 0.87 log relative to placebo in high-risk individuals. Yet, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir failed as post-exposure prophylaxis in a trial, and frequent viral rebound has been observed in subsequent cohorts. We develop a mathematical model capturing viral-immune dynamics and nirmatrelvir pharmacokinetics that recapitulates viral loads from this and another clinical trial (PLATCOV). Our results suggest that nirmatrelvir's in vivo potency is significantly lower than in vitro assays predict. According to our model, a maximally potent agent would reduce the viral load by approximately 3.5 logs relative to placebo at 5 days. The model identifies that earlier initiation and shorter treatment duration are key predictors of post-treatment rebound. Extension of treatment to 10 days for Omicron variant infection in vaccinated individuals, rather than increasing dose or dosing frequency, is predicted to lower the incidence of viral rebound significantly.

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.

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.

Effect of Carbamazepine on Darunavir Trough Concentrations: When the Dose Can Make the Difference-A Case Study.

BACKGROUND: Carbamazepine (CBZ) is an antiseizure medication known to induce the expression of cytochrome P4503A metabolic enzymes. Here, we describe a man living with HIV who underwent several changes in the daily dose of CBZ, which resulted in different induction effects on darunavir trough concentrations. METHODS: A 59-year-old man with HIV, successfully undergoing maintenance antiretroviral treatment with darunavir/cobicistat once daily (combined with raltegravir), was prescribed CBZ for recurrent trigeminal neuralgia. Over subsequent months, the patient underwent various changes in the doses (from 200 to 800 mg/d) and trough concentrations (from 3.6 to 18.0 mg/L) of CBZ, guided by clinical response to trigeminal neuralgia. RESULTS: A highly significant inverse association was observed between darunavir trough concentration and both CBZ dose or trough concentration (coefficient of determination >0.75, P < 0.0001). Ultimately, the darunavir dose was increased to 600 mg twice daily with ritonavir and dolutegravir to ensure optimal antiretroviral coverage, anticipating potential further uptitration of CBZ doses. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of CBZ on boosted darunavir exposure seemed to be dose- and concentration-dependent. The management of such drug-drug interactions in daily practice was facilitated through therapeutic drug monitoring. This case underscores the importance of a multidisciplinary approach that incorporates both antiretroviral and nonantiretroviral comedications contributing to the optimal management of polypharmacy in individuals living with HIV.

Quality assessment of oral antimalarial and antiretroviral medicines used by public health systems in Sahel countries.

Malaria and Human Immunodeficiency Virus infections are among the top 10 causes of death in low income countries. Furthermore, many medicines used in these treatment areas are substandard, which contributes to the high death rate. Using a monitoring system to identify substandard and falsified medicines, the study aims to evaluate the quality of antimalarial and antiretroviral medicines in Sahel countries, assessing site conditions, compliance of medicines with pharmacopoeia tests, formulation equivalence with a reference medicine, and the influence of climate on quality attributes. Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography methods for eight active pharmaceutical ingredients were validated following the International Conference for Harmonization guideline for its detection and quantification. Quality control consists of visual inspections to detect any misinformation or imperfections and pharmacopeial testing to determine the quality of pharmaceutical products. Medicines which complied with uniformity dosage units and dissolution tests were stored under accelerated conditions for 6 months. Artemether/Lumefantrine and Lopinavir/Ritonavir formulations failed uniformity dosage units and disintegration tests respectively, detecting a total of 28.6% substandard medicines. After 6 months stored under accelerated conditions (40 °C // 75% relative humidity) simulating climatic conditions in Sahel countries, some medicines failed pharmacopeia tests. It demonstrated the influence of these two factors in their quality attributes. This study emphasizes the need of certified quality control laboratories as well as the need for regulatory systems to maintain standards in pharmaceutical manufacturing and distribution in these countries, especially when medicines are transported to rural areas where these climatic conditions are harsher.

Programmed cell death-1 is involved with peripheral blood immune cell profiles in patients with hepatitis C virus antiviral therapy.

Mutations in the non-structural protein regions of hepatitis C virus (HCV) are a cause of a non-sustained virological response (SVR) to treatment with direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for chronic hepatitis; however, there are non-SVR cases without these mutations. In this study, we examined immune cell profiles in peripheral blood before and after ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir treatment and screened for genes that could be used to predict the therapeutic effects of DAAs. Fluorescence-activated cell sorting analysis indicated that the median frequencies of programmed cell death-1-positive (PD-1+) effector regulatory T cells (eTregs), PD-1+CD8+ T cells, and PD-1+Helper T cells were decreased significantly in SVR cases, but without significant changes in non-SVR cases. The frequency of PD-1+ naïve Tregs was significantly higher in the SVR group than in the non-SVR group before and after treatment. Similar results were found in patients treated with other DAAs (e.g., daclatasvir plus asunaprevir) and supported an immune response after HCV therapy. RNA-sequencing analysis indicated a significant increase in the expression of genes associated with the immune response in the SVR group, while genes related to intracellular and extracellular signal transduction were highly expressed in the non-SVR group. Therefore, we searched for genes associated with PD-1+ eTregs and CD8+ T cells that were significantly different between the SVR and non-SVR groups and found that T-box transcription factor 21 was associated with the non-SVR state. These results indicate that PD-1-related signaling pathways are associated with a non-SVR mechanism after DAAs treatment separate from mutation-related drug resistance.