RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, several clinical trials have evaluated postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) among close contacts of an index individual with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Because index individuals do not directly inform the efficacy of prevention interventions, they are seldom enrolled in COVID-19 PEP studies. However, adjusting for prognostic covariates such as an index individual's COVID-19 illness and risk behaviors can increase precision in PEP efficacy estimates, so approaches to accurately collecting this information about the index individual are needed. This analysis aimed to assess whether surveying household contacts captures the same information as surveying the index individual directly. METHODS: REGN 2069/CoVPN 3502, a randomized controlled trial of COVID-19 PEP, enrolled household contacts of SARS-CoV-2 index individuals. CoVPN 3502-01 retrospectively enrolled and surveyed the index individuals. We compared responses to seven similar questions about the index individuals' transmission cofactors that were asked in both studies. We estimated the percent concordance between index individuals and their household contacts on each question, with 50% concordance considered equivalent to random chance. RESULTS: Concordance between index individuals and contacts was high on the most objective questions, approximately 97% (95% CI: 90-99%) for index individual age group and 96% (88-98%) for hospitalization. Concordance was moderate for symptoms, approximately 85% (75-91%). Concordance on questions related to the index individual's behavior was only slightly better or no better than random: approximately 62% (51-72%) for whether they received COVID-19 treatment, 68% (57-77%) for sharing a bedroom, 70% (59-79%) for sharing a common room, and 49% (39-60%) for mask wearing at home. However, while contacts were surveyed within 96 h of the index individual testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, the median time to enrollment in CoVPN 3502-01 was 240 days, which may have caused recall bias in our results. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a need to survey index individuals directly in order to accurately capture their transmission cofactors, rather than relying on their household contacts to report on their behavior. The lag in enrolling participants into CoVPN 3502-01 also highlights the importance of timely enrollment to minimize recall bias.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , AutorrelatoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Nasal epithelial cells are important regulators of barrier function and immune signaling; however, in allergic rhinitis (AR) these functions can be disrupted by inflammatory mediators. We aimed to better discern AR disease mechanisms using transcriptome data from nasal brushing samples from individuals with and without AR. METHODS: Data were drawn from a feasibility study of individuals with and without AR to Timothy grass and from a clinical trial evaluating 16 weeks of treatment with the following: dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds interleukin (IL)-4Rα and inhibits type 2 inflammation by blocking signaling of both IL-4/IL-13; subcutaneous immunotherapy with Timothy grass (SCIT), which inhibits allergic responses through pleiotropic effects; SCIT + dupilumab; or placebo. Using nasal brushing samples from these studies, we defined distinct gene signatures in nasal tissue of AR disease and after nasal allergen challenge (NAC) and assessed how these signatures were modulated by study drug(s). RESULTS: Treatment with dupilumab (normalized enrichment score [NES] = -1.73, p = .002) or SCIT + dupilumab (NES = -2.55, p < .001), but not SCIT alone (NES = +1.16, p = .107), significantly repressed the AR disease signature. Dupilumab (NES = -2.55, p < .001), SCIT (NES = -2.99, p < .001), and SCIT + dupilumab (NES = -3.15, p < .001) all repressed the NAC gene signature. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate type 2 inflammation is an important contributor to the pathophysiology of AR disease and that inhibition of the type 2 pathway with dupilumab may normalize nasal tissue gene expression.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , Rinite Alérgica , Transcriptoma , Humanos , Rinite Alérgica/genética , Rinite Alérgica/terapia , Alérgenos , Inflamação , Phleum , Interleucina-13/metabolismo , ImunoterapiaRESUMO
Background: Virologic determinants of seroconversion to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection were defined in a post hoc analysis of prospectively studied vaccine- and infection-naïve individuals at high risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: This phase 3 COVID-19 prevention trial (NCT04452318) with casirivimab and imdevimab was conducted in July 2020-February 2021, before widespread vaccine availability. Placebo-treated participants who were uninfected (SARS-CoV-2 quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction [RT-qPCR] negative) and seronegative were assessed weekly for 28 days (efficacy assessment period [EAP]) for COVID-19 symptoms and SARS-CoV-2 infection by RT-qPCR of nasopharyngeal swab samples and for serostatus by antinucleocapsid immunoglobulin (Ig) G. Regression-based modeling, including causal mediation analysis, estimated the effects of viral load on seroconversion. Results: Of 157/1069 (14.7%) uninfected and seronegative (for antispike IgG, antispike IgA, and antinucleocapsid IgG) participants who became infected during the EAP, 105 (65%) seroconverted. The mean (SD) maximum viral load of seroconverters was 7.23 (1.68) log10 copies/mL vs 4.8 (2.2) log10 copies/mL in those who remained seronegative; viral loads of â¼6.0â log10 copies/mL better predicted seroconversion. The mean of the maximum viral load was 7.11 log10â copies/mL in symptomatic participants vs 5.58 log10â copies/mL in asymptomatic participants. The mean duration of detectable viral load was longer in seroconverted vs seronegative participants: 3.24 vs 1.63 weeks. Conclusions: Maximum SARS-CoV-2 viral load is a major driver of seroconversion and symptomatic COVID-19, with high viral loads (â¼6.0 log10â copies/mL) better predicting seroconversion. Serology underestimates infection rates, incidence, and prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection.
RESUMO
Background: Randomized controlled trials evaluated monoclonal antibodies for the treatment (Study 2067) and prevention (Study 2069) of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Household contacts of the infected index case in Study 2067 were enrolled in Study 2069 and prospectively followed; these cohorts provided a unique opportunity to evaluate correlates of transmission, specifically viral load. Methods: This post hoc analysis was designed to identify and evaluate correlates of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission, adjusting for potential confounding factors related to source SARS-CoV-2 viral load and risk of SARS-CoV-2 acquisition in this population. Correlates of transmission were evaluated in potential transmission pairs (any infected household member plus susceptible household contact). Results: In total, 943 participants were included. In multivariable regression, 2 potential correlates were determined to have a statistically significant (P < .05) association with transmission risk. A 10-fold increase in viral load was associated with a 40% increase in odds of transmission; sharing a bedroom with the index participant was associated with a 199% increase in odds of transmission. Conclusions: In this prospective, post hoc analysis that controlled for confounders, the 2 key correlates for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 within a household are sharing a bedroom and increased viral load, consistent with increased exposure to the infected individual.
RESUMO
While new vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 are authorized based on neutralizing antibody (nAb) titer against emerging variants of concern, an analogous pathway does not exist for preventative monoclonal antibodies. In this work, nAb titers were assessed as correlates of protection against COVID-19 in the casirivimab + imdevimab monoclonal antibody (mAb) prevention trial (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT4452318) and in the mRNA-1273 vaccine trial (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT04470427). In the mAb trial, protective efficacy of 92% (95% confidence interval (CI): 84%, 98%) is associated with a nAb titer of 1000 IU50/ml, with lower efficacy at lower nAb titers. In the vaccine trial, protective efficacies of 93% [95% CI: 91%, 95%] and 97% (95% CI: 95%, 98%) are associated with nAb titers of 100 and 1000 IU50/ml, respectively. These data quantitate a nAb titer correlate of protection for mAbs benchmarked alongside vaccine induced nAb titers and support nAb titer as a surrogate endpoint for authorizing new mAbs.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais , COVID-19 , Humanos , Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV , Anticorpos Neutralizantes , Anticorpos Antivirais , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , VacinaçãoRESUMO
Background: Individuals who are immunocompromised (IC) are at high risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods: Post hoc analyses of a double-blind trial conducted prior to Omicron (June 2020-April 2021), in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 assessed viral load, clinical outcomes, and safety of casirivimab plus imdevimab (CAS + IMD) versus placebo in IC versus overall study patients. Results: Ninety-nine of 1940 (5.1%) patients were IC. IC versus overall patients were more frequently seronegative for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies (68.7% vs 41.2%) and had higher median baseline viral loads (7.21 vs 6.32 log10 copies/mL). On placebo, IC versus overall patients had slower viral load declines. CAS + IMD reduced viral load in IC and overall patients; least-squares mean difference versus placebo in time-weighted average change from baseline viral load at day 7 was -0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.25 to -.14) log10 copies/mL for IC patients and -0.31 (95% CI, -.42 to -.20) log10 copies/mL for overall patients. For IC patients, the cumulative incidence of death or mechanical ventilation at day 29 was lower with CAS + IMD (11.0%) versus placebo (17.2%), consistent with overall patients (15.7% CAS + IMD vs 18.3% placebo). IC and overall patients receiving CAS + IMD exhibited similar rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (30.4% and 26.6%, respectively), grade ≥2 hypersensitivity or infusion-related reactions (1.4% and 2.5%), and deaths (8.7% and 12.2%). Conclusions: IC patients were more likely to exhibit high viral loads and be seronegative at baseline. For susceptible SARS-CoV-2 variants, CAS + IMD reduced viral load and resulted in fewer death or mechanical ventilation events in IC and overall study patients. There were no new safety findings among IC patients. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04426695.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Persons with HIV (PWH) have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared to HIV-seronegative individuals (SN). Inflammation contributes to this risk but the role of lipid mediators, with central roles in inflammation, in HIV infection remain to be established; further aspirin reduces CVD risk in the general population through production of some of these anti-inflammatory lipid mediators, but they have not been studied in PWH. METHODS: We evaluated the relationship between plasma lipid mediators (i.e. 50 lipid mediators including classic eicosanoids and specialized pro-resolving mediators (SPMs)) and HIV status; and the impact of aspirin in PWH on regulating these autacoids. Plasma samples were obtained from 110 PWH receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) from a randomized trial of aspirin (ACTG-A5331) and 107 matched SN samples (MACS-WIHS Combined Cohort). FINDINGS: PWH had lower levels of arachidonic acid-derived pro-inflammatory prostaglandins (PGs: PGE2 and PGD2) and thromboxanes (Tx: TxB2), and higher levels of select pro-resolving lipid mediators (e.g. RvD4 and MaR2n-3 DPA) compared to SN. At the interval tested, aspirin intervention was observed to reduced PGs and Tx, and while we did not observe an increase in aspirin triggered mediators, we observed the upregulation of other SPM in aspirin treated PWH, namely MaR2n-3 DPA. INTERPRETATION: Together these observations demonstrate that plasma lipid mediators profiles, some with links to systemic inflammation and CVD risk, become altered in PWH. Furthermore, aspirin intervention did not increase levels of aspirin-triggered pro-resolving lipid mediators, consistent with other reports of an impaired aspirin response in PWH. FUNDING: NIH.
Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares , Infecções por HIV , Humanos , Aspirina , Eicosanoides , Inflamação , Mediadores da InflamaçãoRESUMO
IgA plays an important early neutralizing role after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Systemically administered vaccines typically produce an IgM/IgG predominant response. We evaluated the serum anti-spike (anti-S) IgG, anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) IgG and anti-S IgA response following vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in a cohort of first-responders. Among the 378 completely vaccinated participants, 98% were positive for anti-S IgG and 96% were positive for anti-S IgA. Nine percent were positive for anti-N IgG suggesting prior exposure to SARS-CoV-2. No statistically significant difference was seen in IgA response based on prior evidence infection (p = 0.18). Ninety-eight of those receiving the Moderna vaccine (98%) were positive for anti-S IgA as compared to 91% of those who received the Pfizer vaccine (p = 0.0009). The high proportion of participants observed to have a positive anti-S IgA response after vaccination suggests that the vaccines elicit a systemic response characterized by elevated levels of both IgG and IgA.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Socorristas , Anticorpos Antivirais , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Imunoglobulina A , Imunoglobulina G , SARS-CoV-2 , VacinaçãoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The dominant allergen in cat dander, Felis domesticus allergen 1 (Fel d 1), is a persistent trigger for allergic rhinitis and asthma symptoms. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the efficacy of Fel d 1 monoclonal antibodies (REGN1908/1909) in preventing cat allergen-induced early asthmatic responses (EARs) in cat-allergic patients with mild asthma. METHODS: Patients were randomized to single-dose REGN1908/1909 600 mg (n = 29) or placebo (n = 27). The FEV1 was measured for up to 4 hours in a cat allergen environmental exposure unit up to 85 days after dosing. Assessments included between-group differences in change from baseline in FEV1 area under the curve (AUC; 0-2 hours) and incidence of EAR (FEV1 reduction ≥20%). TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03838731. RESULTS: Single-dose REGN1908/1909 significantly prevented reductions in FEV1 on days 8, 29, 57, and 85. Most REGN1908/1909 patients did not have an EAR by 4 hours (the last time point tested). In contrast, placebo-treated patients experienced a ≥20% mean FEV1 reduction on days 8, 29, 57, and 85 after dosing, with most experiencing an EAR within 1 hour. REGN1908/1909-treated patients tolerated 3-fold higher allergen quantities (P < .05 at all time points) versus placebo. REGN1908/1909 substantially reduced skin test reactivity to cat allergen versus placebo at all time points tested (nominal P < .001). REGN1908/1909 was generally well tolerated; no serious adverse events or deaths were reported. CONCLUSION: Single-dose REGN1908/1909 significantly prevented reductions in FEV1 in cat-allergic patients with mild asthma on cat allergen environmental exposure unit exposure at 8 days and up to 85 days after dose.
Assuntos
Alérgenos , Nível de Saúde , Exposição Ambiental/efeitos adversosRESUMO
To assess the combined role of anti-viral monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and vaccines in reducing severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission and mortality in the United States, an agent-based model was developed that accounted for social contacts, movement/travel, disease progression, and viral shedding. The model was calibrated to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mortality between October 2020 and April 2021 (aggressive pandemic phase), and projected an extended outlook to estimate mortality during a less aggressive phase (April-August 2021). Simulated scenarios evaluated mAbs for averting infections and deaths in addition to vaccines and aggregated non-pharmaceutical interventions. Scenarios included mAbs as a treatment of COVID-19 and for passive immunity for postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) during a period when variants were susceptible to the mAbs. Rapid diagnostic testing paired with mAbs was evaluated as an early treatment-as-prevention strategy. Sensitivity analyses included increasing mAb supply and vaccine rollout. Allocation of mAbs for use only as PEP averted up to 14% more infections than vaccine alone, and targeting individuals ≥ 65 years averted up to 37% more deaths. Rapid testing for earlier diagnosis and mAb use amplified these benefits. Doubling the mAb supply further reduced infections and mortality. mAbs provided benefits even as proportion of the immunized population increased. Model projections estimated that ~ 42% of expected deaths between April and August 2021 could be averted. Assuming sensitivity to mAbs, their use as early treatment and PEP in addition to vaccines would substantially reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission and mortality even as vaccination increases and mortality decreases. These results provide a template for informing public health policy for future pandemic preparedness.
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos Imunológicos , COVID-19 , Farmácia , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Saúde Pública , Anticorpos Monoclonais/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: A phase 1, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and exploratory efficacy of repeat monthly doses of subcutaneous (SC) casirivimab and imdevimab (CAS+IMD) in uninfected adult volunteers. METHODS: Participants were randomized (3:1) to SC CAS+IMD 1200 mg or placebo every 4 weeks for up to six doses. Primary and secondary end points evaluated safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. Exploratory efficacy was evaluated by the incidence of COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion. RESULTS: In total, 969 participants received CAS+IMD. Repeat monthly dosing of SC CAS+IMD led to a 92.4% relative risk reduction in clinically defined COVID-19 compared with placebo (3/729 [0.4%] vs 13/240 [5.4%]; odds ratio 0.07 [95% CI 0.01-0.27]), and a 100% reduction in laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (0/729 vs 10/240 [4.2%]; odds ratio 0.00). Development of anti-drug antibodies occurred in a small proportion of participants (<5%). No grade ≥3 injection-site reactions (ISRs) or hypersensitivity reactions were reported. Slightly more participants reported treatment-emergent adverse events with CAS+IMD (54.9%) than with placebo (48.3%), a finding that was due to grade 1-2 ISRs. Serious adverse events were rare. No deaths were reported in the 6-month treatment period. CONCLUSION: Repeat monthly administration of 1200 mg SC CAS+IMD was well-tolerated, demonstrated low immunogenicity, and showed a substantial risk reduction in COVID-19 occurrence.
Assuntos
Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Método Duplo-Cego , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is an unmet need for COVID-19 prevention in patient populations who have not mounted or are not expected to mount an adequate immune response to complete COVID-19 vaccination. We previously reported that a single subcutaneous 1200 mg dose of the monoclonal antibody combination casirivimab and imdevimab (CAS + IMD) prevented symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections by 81·4% in generally healthy household contacts of SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals over a 1-month efficacy assessment period. Here we present additional results, including the 7-month follow-up period (months 2-8), providing additional insights about the potential for efficacy in pre-exposure prophylaxis settings. METHODS: This was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial done in the USA, Romania, and Moldova in 2020-2021, before the emergence of omicron (B.1.1.529) and omicron-lineage variants. Uninfected and unvaccinated household contacts of infected individuals, judged by the investigator to be in good health, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 1200 mg CAS + IMD or placebo by subcutaneous injection according to a central randomisation scheme provided by an interactive web response system; randomisation was stratified per site by the test results of a local diagnostic assay for SARS-CoV-2 and age group at baseline. COVID-19 vaccines were prohibited before randomisation, but participants were allowed to receive COVID-19 vaccination during the follow-up period. Participants who developed COVID-19 symptoms during the follow-up period underwent RT-PCR testing. Prespecified endpoints included the proportion of previously uninfected and baseline-seronegative participants (seronegative-modified full analysis set) who had RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 in the follow-up period (post-hoc for the timepoints of months 2-5 and 6-8 only) and underwent seroconversion (ie, became seropositive, considered a proxy for any SARS-CoV-2 infections [symptomatic and asymptomatic]; prespecified up to day 57, post-hoc for all timepoints thereafter). We also assessed the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04452318. FINDINGS: From July 13, 2020, to Oct 4, 2021, 2317 participants who were RT-PCR-negative for SARS-CoV-2 were randomly assigned, of whom 1683 (841 assigned to CAS + IMD and 842 assigned to placebo) were seronegative at baseline. During the entirety of the 8-month study, CAS + IMD reduced the risk of COVID-19 by 81·2% (nominal p<0·0001) versus placebo (prespecified analysis). During the 7-month follow-up period, protection was greatest during months 2-5, with a 100% relative risk reduction in COVID-19 (nominal p<0·0001; post-hoc analysis). Efficacy waned during months 6-8 (post-hoc analysis). Seroconversion occurred in 38 (4·5%) of 841 participants in the CAS + IMD group and in 181 (21·5%) of 842 in the placebo group during the 8-month study (79·0% relative risk reduction vs placebo; nominal p<0·0001). Six participants in the placebo group were hospitalised due to COVID-19 versus none who received CAS + IMD. Serious treatment-emergent adverse events (including COVID-19) were reported in 24 (1·7%) of 1439 participants receiving CAS + IMD and in 23 (1·6%) of 1428 receiving placebo. Five deaths were reported, none of which were due to COVID-19 or related to the study drugs. INTERPRETATION: CAS + IMD is not authorised in any US region as of Jan 24, 2022, because data show that CAS + IMD is not active against omicron-lineage variants. In this study, done before the emergence of omicron-lineage variants, a single subcutaneous 1200 mg dose of CAS + IMD protected against COVID-19 for up to 5 months of community exposure to susceptible strains of SARS-CoV-2 in the pre-exposure prophylaxis setting, in addition to the post-exposure prophylaxis setting that was previously shown. FUNDING: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, F Hoffmann-La Roche, US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, US National Institutes of Health.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Método Duplo-Cego , Humanos , Preparações Farmacêuticas , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Open-label platform trials and a prospective meta-analysis suggest efficacy of anti-interleukin (IL)-6R therapies in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) receiving corticosteroids. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of sarilumab, an anti-IL-6R monoclonal antibody, in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In this adaptive, phase 2/3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults hospitalized with COVID-19 received intravenous sarilumab 400 mg or placebo. The phase 3 primary analysis population included patients with critical COVID-19 receiving mechanical ventilation (MV). The primary outcome was proportion of patients with ≥1-point improvement in clinical status from baseline to day 22. RESULTS: There were 457 and 1365 patients randomized and treated in phases 2 and 3, respectively. In phase 3, patients with critical COVID-19 receiving MV (nâ =â 298; 28.2% on corticosteroids), the proportion with ≥1-point improvement in clinical status (alive, not receiving MV) at day 22 was 43.2% for sarilumab and 35.5% for placebo (risk difference, +7.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -7.4 to 21.3; P =.3261), a relative risk improvement of 21.7%. In post hoc analyses pooling phase 2 and 3 critical patients receiving MV, the hazard ratio for death for sarilumab vs placebo was 0.76 (95% CI, .51 to 1.13) overall and 0.49 (95% CI, .25 to .94) in patients receiving corticosteroids at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not establish the efficacy of sarilumab in hospitalized patients with severe/critical COVID-19. Post hoc analyses were consistent with other studies that found a benefit of sarilumab in patients receiving corticosteroids. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04315298.
Assuntos
Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Adulto , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , Humanos , Estudos Prospectivos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Importance: Easy-to-administer anti-SARS-CoV-2 treatments may be used to prevent progression from asymptomatic infection to symptomatic disease and to reduce viral carriage. Objective: To evaluate the effect of combination subcutaneous casirivimab and imdevimab on progression from early asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection to symptomatic COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial of close household contacts of a SARS-CoV-2-infected index case at 112 sites in the US, Romania, and Moldova enrolled July 13, 2020-January 28, 2021; follow-up ended March 11, 2021. Asymptomatic individuals (aged ≥12 years) were eligible if identified within 96 hours of index case positive test collection. Results from 314 individuals positive on SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) testing are reported. Interventions: Individuals were randomized 1:1 to receive 1 dose of subcutaneous casirivimab and imdevimab, 1200 mg (600 mg of each; n = 158), or placebo (n = 156). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the proportion of seronegative participants who developed symptomatic COVID-19 during the 28-day efficacy assessment period. The key secondary efficacy end points were the number of weeks of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and the number of weeks of high viral load (>4 log10 copies/mL). Results: Among 314 randomized participants (mean age, 41.0 years; 51.6% women), 310 (99.7%) completed the efficacy assessment period; 204 were asymptomatic and seronegative at baseline and included in the primary efficacy analysis. Subcutaneous casirivimab and imdevimab, 1200 mg, significantly prevented progression to symptomatic disease (29/100 [29.0%] vs 44/104 [42.3%] with placebo; odds ratio, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.30-0.97]; P = .04; absolute risk difference, -13.3% [95% CI, -26.3% to -0.3%]). Casirivimab and imdevimab reduced the number of symptomatic weeks per 1000 participants (895.7 weeks vs 1637.4 weeks with placebo; P = .03), an approximately 5.6-day reduction in symptom duration per symptomatic participant. Treatment with casirivimab and imdevimab also reduced the number of high viral load weeks per 1000 participants (489.8 weeks vs 811.9 weeks with placebo; P = .001). The proportion of participants receiving casirivimab and imdevimab who had 1 or more treatment-emergent adverse event was 33.5% vs 48.1% for placebo, including events related (25.8% vs 39.7%) or not related (11.0% vs 16.0%) to COVID-19. Conclusions and Relevance: Among asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR-positive individuals living with an infected household contact, treatment with subcutaneous casirivimab and imdevimab antibody combination vs placebo significantly reduced the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19 over 28 days. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04452318.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/administração & dosagem , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/efeitos adversos , Infecções Assintomáticas , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/virologia , Teste de Ácido Nucleico para COVID-19 , Criança , Progressão da Doença , Método Duplo-Cego , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Humanos , Incidência , Injeções Subcutâneas , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fatores de Risco , Carga ViralRESUMO
Patients with moderate to severe allergic rhinitis may benefit from subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), despite the risk of systemic allergic reaction. Dupilumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, key drivers of the type 2 inflammation seen in allergic rhinitis, thereby inhibiting their signaling. In the LIBERTY Grass AID trial (NCT03558997), 16 weeks of treatment with 300 mg of dupilumab every 2 weeks plus timothy grass (TG) SCIT did not reduce TG allergen challenge nasal symptom scores compared with SCIT only but did improve tolerability of SCIT up-titration in patients with a history of grass pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinitis. Here, we present the pharmacokinetics of functional serum dupilumab and concentration-response relationships in 52 patients enrolled in this trial. Functional dupilumab concentrations and concentrations of TG-specific IgE and IgG4 were assessed in blood samples collected from dupilumab-only and SCIT + dupilumab-treated groups. Mean functional dupilumab concentrations were similar in both groups and reached a steady state of ≈70-80 mg/L at week 5. One week after the end of treatment, TG-specific IgG4 concentrations were increased in the SCIT + dupilumab group, but not in the dupilumab-only group, over the range of dupilumab concentrations evaluated, whereas no changes were seen for TG-specific IgE concentrations. This study demonstrates that SCIT does not alter functional concentrations of serum dupilumab, and the impact of SCIT on TG-specific immunoglobulins is not affected by functional dupilumab concentrations over the range studied, indicating that maximum response was achieved in all patients.
Assuntos
Rinite Alérgica Sazonal , Rinite Alérgica , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados/uso terapêutico , Dessensibilização Imunológica , Humanos , Imunoglobulina E/uso terapêutico , Imunoglobulina G , Injeções Subcutâneas , Phleum , Rinite Alérgica/tratamento farmacológico , Rinite Alérgica Sazonal/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: To determine the proportion and reproducibility of cat-allergic mild asthmatics with early asthmatic response (EAR) during cat allergen exposure in a naturalistic exposure chamber (NEC). METHODS: This was a prospective, observational study in 30 cat-allergic mild asthmatics who received two 180-min cat-allergen (Felis domesticus allergen 1 [Fel d 1]) challenges 27 days apart in an NEC. RESULTS: An EAR (≥20% reduction from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1]) was observed in 67% and 52% of subjects at first and second NEC exposure, respectively, with similar median time to EAR; 44% of subjects had an EAR on days 1 and 28. Late asthmatic response (≥15% reduction in FEV1 within 24 h of NEC exit) was observed in 33% of subjects following either exposure. Average FEV1 and total nasal symptom score during NEC exposure were highly correlated within subjects between NEC exposures (r = 0.91, p < 0.0001; r = 0.73, p < 0.001), but total ocular symptom score was not. Time to EAR, but not average FEV1, was significantly associated with NEC Fel d 1 concentration, which was variable. There were no serious adverse events; 12/30 subjects experienced 20 adverse events (including asthma, 10%; headache, 10%). CONCLUSIONS: The NEC model demonstrates that average FEV1 change is highly reproducible and has a low correlation with cat allergen levels. However, time to EAR and incidence of EAR are less reproducible and are highly correlated with NEC allergen levels. Average FEV1, rather than incidence of EAR or time to EAR, could be considered as an endpoint for interventional trials testing cat-specific anti-allergy therapies using an NEC.
Assuntos
Asma , Hipersensibilidade , Alérgenos , Testes de Provocação Brônquica , Volume Expiratório Forçado , Humanos , Hipersensibilidade/complicações , Estudos Prospectivos , Reprodutibilidade dos TestesRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Immunoglobulin A (IgA) is an important component of the early immune response to SARS-CoV-2. Prior serosurveys in high-risk groups employing IgG testing alone have provided discordant estimates. The potential added benefit of IgA in serosurveys has not been established. METHODS: Longitudinal serosurvey of first responders (police, emergency medical service providers, fire fighters, and other staff) employing 3 serologic tests (anti-spike IgA, anti-spike IgG, and anti-nucleocapsid IgG) correlated with surveys assessing occupational and nonoccupational risk, exposure to COVID-19, and illnesses consistent with COVID-19. RESULTS: Twelve percent of first responders in Colorado at baseline and 22% at follow-up were assessed as having SARS-CoV-2 infection. Five percent at baseline and 6% at follow-up were seropositive only for IgA. Among those IgA positive only at baseline, the majority (69%) had a positive antibody at follow-up; 45% of those infected at baseline and 33% at follow-up were asymptomatic. At all time points, the estimated cumulative incidence in our study was higher than that in the general population. CONCLUSIONS: First responders are at high risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2. IgA testing identified a significant portion of cases missed by IgG testing and its use as part of serologic surveys may improve retrospective identification of asymptomatic infection.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Antivirais/análise , Infecções Assintomáticas , COVID-19 , Socorristas , Imunoglobulina A/análise , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/imunologia , Humanos , Imunoglobulina G/análise , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of an allergen-specific IgG cocktail to treat cat allergy suggests that allergen-specific IgG may be a major protective mechanism elicited by allergen immunotherapy. OBJECTIVES: Extending these findings, we tested a Bet v 1-specific antibody cocktail in birch-allergic subjects. METHODS: This was a phase 1, randomized, double-blind, study with 2 parts. Part A administered ascending doses of the Bet v 1-specific antibody cocktail REGN5713/14/15 (150-900 mg) in 32 healthy adults. Part B administered a single subcutaneous 900-mg dose or placebo in 64 birch-allergic subjects. Total nasal symptom score response to titrated birch extract nasal allergen challenge and skin prick test (SPT) with birch and alder allergen were assessed at screening and days 8, 29, 57, and 113 (SPT only); basophil activation tests (n = 26) were conducted. RESULTS: Single-dose REGN5713/14/15 significantly reduced total nasal symptom score following birch nasal allergen challenge relative to baseline. Differences in total nasal symptom score areas under the curve (0-1 hour) for subjects treated with REGN5713/14/15 versus those given placebo (day 8: -1.17, P = .001; day 29: -1.18, P = .001; day 57: -0.85, P = .024) and titration SPT with birch difference in area under the curve of mean wheal diameters for subjects treated with REGN5713/14/15 versus placebo (all P < .001) were sustained for ≥2 months; similar results were observed with alder SPT. REGN5713/14/15 was well tolerated. Basophil responsiveness to birch-related allergens was significantly decreased in subjects treated with REGN5713/14/15 versus those given placebo on days 8, 57, and 113 (all P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Single-dose REGN5713/14/15 was well tolerated and provided a rapid (1 week) and durable (2 months) reduction in allergic symptoms after birch allergen nasal allergen challenge, potentially offering a new paradigm for the treatment of birch allergy symptoms.
Assuntos
Alérgenos/imunologia , Anticorpos Monoclonais/uso terapêutico , Antígenos de Plantas/imunologia , Imunoglobulina G/uso terapêutico , Rinite Alérgica Sazonal/terapia , Adulto , Basófilos/imunologia , Betula/imunologia , Dessensibilização Imunológica , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Rinite Alérgica Sazonal/imunologia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) has been proven as an effective therapy against some allergens for seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) patients unresponsive to intranasal corticosteroids and/or antihistamines but carries risk of systemic allergic reactions. Dupilumab blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation in multiple diseases. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of SCIT+dupilumab vs SCIT alone. METHODS: This phase 2a, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel-group study conducted in 103 adults with grass pollen-induced SAR (NCT03558997) randomized patients 1:1:1:1 to SCIT, dupilumab (300 mg every 2 weeks), SCIT+dupilumab, or placebo. SCIT was administered using an 8-week cluster protocol followed by 8 weeks of maintenance injections. Primary endpoint was change from pre-treatment baseline in area under the curve (AUC) in total nasal symptom score (TNSS) 0-1 h following nasal allergen challenge (NAC) with timothy grass extract at Week 17. RESULTS: Although 16 weeks of treatment with SCIT+dupilumab did not significantly improve TNSS AUC (0-1 h) following NAC at Week 17 vs SCIT (least squares mean -56.76% vs -52.03%), a higher proportion of SCIT+dupilumab-treated patients (61.5%) achieved SCIT maintenance dose vs SCIT (46.2%). A lower proportion of SCIT+dupilumab-treated patients (7.7%) required epinephrine rescue treatment vs SCIT (19.2%). There were significantly fewer withdrawals in the SCIT+dupilumab group than in the SCIT group (n = 2 [7.7%] vs n = 8 [30.8%]; P = 0.0216); the majority of SCIT group withdrawals were due to SCIT-related intolerability, compared with no discontinuations from the SCIT+dupilumab group. CONCLUSION: In SAR patients, 16 weeks of SCIT+dupilumab may improve SCIT tolerability but did not incrementally reduce post-allergen challenge nasal symptoms compared with SCIT alone. CLINICAL STUDY NUMBER: NCT03558997.