Characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients presumed to be treated with sotrovimab in NHS hospitals in England.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the constantly evolving severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 on the effectiveness of early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatments is unclear. Here, we report characteristics and acute clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 treated with a monoclonal antibody (mAb; presumed to be sotrovimab) across six distinct periods covering the emergence and predominance of Omicron subvariants (BA.1, BA.2, and BA.5) in England. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using data from the Hospital Episode Statistics database from January 1-July 31, 2022. Included patients received a mAb delivered by a National Health Service (NHS) hospital as a day-case, for which the primary diagnosis was COVID-19. Patients were presumed to have received sotrovimab based on NHS data showing that 99.98% of COVID-19-mAb-treated individuals received sotrovimab during the study period. COVID-19-attributable hospitalizations were reported overall and across six distinct periods of Omicron subvariant prevalence. Subgroup analyses were conducted in patients with severe renal disease and active cancer. RESULTS: Among a total of 10,096 patients, 1.0% (n = 96) had a COVID-19-attributable hospitalization, 4.6% (n = 465) had a hospital visit due to any cause, and 0.3% (n = 27) died due to any cause during the acute period. COVID-19-attributable hospitalization rates were consistent among subgroups, and no significant differences were observed across periods of Omicron subvariant predominance. CONCLUSIONS: Levels of COVID-19-attributable hospitalizations and deaths were low in mAb-treated patients and among subgroups. Similar hospitalization rates were observed whilst Omicron BA.1, BA.2, and BA.5 were predominant, despite reported reductions in in vitro neutralization activity of sotrovimab against BA.2 and BA.5.

Real-world effectiveness of sotrovimab for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection during Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 subvariant predominance: a systematic literature review.

PURPOSE: To evaluate clinical outcomes associated with sotrovimab use during Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 predominance. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for observational studies published in peer-reviewed journals, preprint articles and conference abstracts from January 1, 2022 to February 27, 2023. RESULTS: The 14 studies identified were heterogeneous in terms of study design, population, endpoints and definitions. They included > 1.7 million high-risk patients with COVID-19, of whom approximately 41,000 received sotrovimab (range n = 20-5979 during BA.2 and n = 76-1383 during BA.5 predominance). Four studies compared the effectiveness of sotrovimab with untreated or no monoclonal antibody treatment controls, two compared sotrovimab with other treatments, and three single-arm studies compared outcomes during BA.2 and/or BA.5 versus BA.1. Five studies descriptively reported rates of clinical outcomes in patients treated with sotrovimab. Rates of COVID-19-related hospitalization or mortality (0.95-4.0% during BA.2; 0.5-2.0% during BA.5) and all-cause mortality (1.7-2.0% during BA.2; 3.4% during combined BA.2 and BA.5 periods) among sotrovimab-treated patients were consistently low. During BA.2, a lower risk of all-cause hospitalization or mortality was reported across studies with sotrovimab versus untreated cohorts. Compared with other treatments, sotrovimab was associated with a lower (molnupiravir) or similar (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization or mortality during BA.2 and BA.5. There was no significant difference in outcomes between the BA.1, BA.2 and BA.5 periods. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic literature review suggests continued effectiveness of sotrovimab in preventing severe clinical outcomes during BA.2 and BA.5 predominance, both against active/untreated comparators and compared with BA.1 predominance.

Comparative effectiveness of sotrovimab versus no treatment in non-hospitalised high-risk COVID-19 patients in north west London: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the effectiveness of sotrovimab vs no early COVID-19 treatment in highest-risk COVID-19 patients during Omicron predominance. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using the Discover dataset in North West London. Included patients were non-hospitalised, aged ≥12 years and met ≥1 National Health Service highest-risk criterion for sotrovimab treatment. We used Cox proportional hazards models to compare HRs of 28-day COVID-19-related hospitalisation/death between highest-risk sotrovimab-treated and untreated patients. Age, renal disease and Omicron subvariant subgroup analyses were performed. RESULTS: We included 599 sotrovimab-treated patients and 5191 untreated patients. Compared with untreated patients, the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation/death (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.24, 1.06; p=0.07) and the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.18, 1.00; p=0.051) were both lower in the sotrovimab-treated group; however, statistical significance was not reached. In the ≥65 years and renal disease subgroups, sotrovimab was associated with a significantly reduced risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation, by 89% (HR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02, 0.82; p=0.03) and 82% (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.05, 0.62; p=0.007), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation in sotrovimab-treated patients aged ≥65 years and with renal disease was significantly lower compared with untreated patients. Overall, risk of hospitalisation was also lower for sotrovimab-treated patients, but statistical significance was not reached.

Real-World Effectiveness of Sotrovimab for the Early Treatment of COVID-19: Evidence from the US National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been an unprecedented healthcare crisis, one that threatened to overwhelm health systems and prompted an urgent need for early treatment options for patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at high risk for progression to severe disease. Randomised clinical trials established the safety and efficacy of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) early in the pandemic; in vitro data subsequently led to use of the mAbs being discontinued, without clear evidence on how these data were linked to outcomes. In this study, we describe and compare real-world outcomes for patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19 treated with sotrovimab versus untreated patients. METHODS: Electronic health records from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) were used to identify US patients (aged ≥ 12 years) diagnosed with COVID-19 (positive test or ICD-10: U07.1) in an ambulatory setting (27 September 2021-30 April 2022) who met Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) high-risk criteria. Patients receiving the mAb sotrovimab within 10 days of diagnosis were assigned to the sotrovimab cohort, with the day of infusion as the index date. Untreated patients (no evidence of early mAb treatment, prophylactic mAb or oral antiviral treatment) were assigned to the untreated cohort, with an imputed index date based on the time distribution between diagnosis and sotrovimab infusion in the sotrovimab cohort. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation or death (both all-cause) within 29 days of index, reported as descriptive rate and adjusted [via inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)] odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Of nearly 2.9 million patients diagnosed with COVID-19 during the analysis period, 4992 met the criteria for the sotrovimab cohort, and 541,325 were included in the untreated cohort. Before weighting, significant differences were noted between the cohorts; for example, patients in the sotrovimab cohort were older (60 years versus 54 years), were more likely to be white (85% versus 75%) and met more EUA criteria (mean 3.1 versus 2.2) versus the untreated cohort. The proportions of patients with 29-day hospitalisation or death were 3.5% (176/4992) and 4.5% (24,163/541,325) in the sotrovimab and untreated cohorts, respectively (unadjusted OR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.67, 0.91; p = 0.001). In adjusted analysis, sotrovimab was associated with a 25% reduction in the odds of hospitalisation or death compared with the untreated cohort (IPTW-adjusted OR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.61, 0.92; p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Sotrovimab demonstrated clinical effectiveness in preventing severe outcomes (hospitalisation, mortality) in the period 27 September 2021-30 April 2022, which included Delta and Omicron BA.1 variants and an early surge of Omicron BA.2 variant.

Validity of Routine Health Data To Identify Safety Outcomes of Interest For Covid-19 Vaccines and Therapeutics in the Context of the Emerging Pandemic: A Comprehensive Literature Review.

Introduction: Regulatory guidance encourages transparent reporting of information on the quality and validity of electronic health record data being used to generate real-world benefit-risk evidence for vaccines and therapeutics. We aimed to provide an overview of the availability of validated diagnostic algorithms for selected safety endpoints for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and therapeutics in the context of the emerging pandemic prior to December 2020. Methods: We reviewed the literature up to December 2020 to identify validation studies for various safety events of interest, including myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, myocarditis, acute cardiac injury, vasculitis/vasculopathy, venous thromboembolism, stroke, respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), pneumonitis, cytokine release syndrome (CRS), multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and renal failure. We included studies published between 2015 and 2020 that were considered high quality assessed with QUADAS and that reported positive predictive values (PPVs). Results: Out of 43 identified studies, we found that diagnostic algorithms for cardiovascular outcomes were supported by the highest number of validation studies (n=17). Accurate algorithms are available for myocardial infarction (median PPV 80%; IQR 22%), arrhythmia (PPV range >70%), venous thromboembolism (median PPV: 73%) and ischaemic stroke (PPV range ≥85%). We found a lack of validation studies for less common respiratory and cardiac safety outcomes of interest (eg, pneumonitis and myocarditis), as well as for COVID-specific complications (CRS, RDS). Conclusion: There is a need for better understanding of barriers to conducting validation studies, including data governance restrictions. Regulatory guidance should promote embedding validation within real-world EHR research used for decision-making.

Real-world effectiveness of sotrovimab for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection during Omicron BA.2 subvariant predominance: a systematic literature review.

PURPOSE: Emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants have impacted the in vitro activity of sotrovimab, with variable fold changes in neutralization potency for the Omicron BA.2 sublineage and onward. The correlation between reduced in vitro activity and clinical efficacy outcomes is unknown. A systematic literature review (SLR) evaluated the effectiveness of sotrovimab on severe clinical outcomes during Omicron BA.2 predominance. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for peer-reviewed journals, preprint articles, and conference abstracts published from January 1-November 3, 2022. RESULTS: Five studies were included, which displayed heterogeneity in study design and population. Two UK studies had large samples of patients during BA.2 predominance: one demonstrated clinical effectiveness vs molnupiravir during BA.1 (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.54, 95% CI 0.33-0.88; p = 0.014) and BA.2 (aHR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27-0.71; p = 0.001); the other reported no difference in the clinical outcomes of sotrovimab-treated patients when directly comparing sequencing-confirmed BA.1 and BA.2 cases (HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.74-1.86). One US study showed a lower risk of 30-day all-cause hospitalization/mortality for sotrovimab compared with no treatment during the BA.2 surge in March (adjusted relative risk [aRR] 0.41, 95% CI 0.27-0.62) and April 2022 (aRR 0.54, 95% CI 0.08-3.54). Two studies from Italy and Qatar reported low progression rates but were either single-arm descriptive or not sufficiently powered to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of sotrovimab. CONCLUSION: This SLR showed that the effectiveness of sotrovimab was maintained against Omicron BA.2 in both ecological and sequencing-confirmed studies, by demonstrating low/comparable clinical outcomes between BA.1 and BA.2 periods or comparing against an active/untreated comparator.

Effectiveness of Sotrovimab in Preventing COVID-19-Related Hospitalizations or Deaths Among US Veterans During Omicron BA.1.

Background: The real-world clinical effectiveness of sotrovimab in preventing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related hospitalization or mortality among high-risk patients diagnosed with COVID-19, particularly after the emergence of the Omicron variant, needs further research. Method: Using data from the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system, we adopted a target trial emulation design in our study. Veterans aged ≥18 years, diagnosed with COVID-19 between December 1, 2021, and April 4, 2022, were included. Patients treated with sotrovimab (n = 2816) as part of routine clinical care were compared with all eligible but untreated patients (n = 11,250). Cox proportional hazards modeling estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for the association between receipt of sotrovimab and outcomes. Results: Most (90%) sotrovimab recipients were ≥50 years old, and 64% had ≥2 mRNA vaccine doses or ≥1 dose of Ad26.COV2. During the period that BA.1 was dominant, compared with patients not treated, sotrovimab-treated patients had a 70% lower risk of hospitalization or mortality within 30 days (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.23-0.40). During BA.2 dominance, sotrovimab-treated patients had a 71% (HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.08-0.98) lower risk of 30-day COVID-19-related hospitalization, emergency room visits, or urgent care visits (defined as severe COVID-19) compared with patients not treated. Conclusions: Using national real-world data from high-risk and predominantly vaccinated veterans, administration of sotrovimab, compared with contemporary standard treatment regimens, was associated with reduced risk of 30-day COVID-19-related hospitalization or all-cause mortality during the Omicron BA.1 period.

Nontuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) infections in bronchiectasis patients: A retrospective US registry cohort study.

RATIONALE: Longitudinal epidemiological and clinical data are needed to improve the management of patients with bronchiectasis developing nontuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) pulmonary disease. OBJECTIVES: To describe the epidemiology, patient management, and treatment outcomes of NTM infections in patients with bronchiectasis enrolled in the United States Bronchiectasis and NTM Research Registry (US BRR). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with bronchiectasis and NTM infections enrolled with follow-up in the US BRR in 2008-2019. The study included patients with ≥1 positive NTM respiratory culture in the 24-month baseline period (baseline NTM cohort) and/or during the annual follow-up visits (incident NTM cohort). Incidence, prevalence, baseline patient characteristics, treatment exposure, treatment outcomes, and respiratory clinical outcomes were described in the baseline NTM cohort, incident NTM cohort, and both cohorts combined (prevalent NTM cohort). RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2019, 37.9% (1457/3840) of patients with bronchiectasis in the US BRR met the inclusion criteria for this study and were reported to have Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) and/or Mycobacterium abscessus complex (MABSC) infections. MAC prevalence increased steadily in the US BRR during 2009-2019; incidence was relatively stable, except for a peak in 2011 followed by a slow decrease. MABSC and mixed MAC/MABSC infections were rare. Most patients with bronchiectasis and NTM infections in the registry were female, White, and aged >65 years. The antibiotics administered most commonly reflected current guidelines. In the prevalent cohort, 44.9% of MAC infections and 37.1% of MABSC infections remained untreated during follow-up, and MAC treatment was initiated with delay (>90 days after positive NTM respiratory culture) twice as frequently as promptly (≤90 days after positive NTM respiratory culture) (68.6% vs 31.4%, respectively). The median time from diagnosis to treatment was shorter for MABSC versus MAC infections (194.0 days [interquartile range (IQR) 8.0, 380.0] vs 296.0 days [IQR 35.0, 705.0], respectively). Among patients with MAC infections who completed treatment, 27.6% were classified as cured and 29.6% as treatment failure during the annual follow-up visit window. For MABSC, these proportions were 25.0% and 28.0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable proportion of MAC and MABSC infections were untreated or treated after initial delay/observation. MABSC infections were more likely to be treated and start treatment sooner than MAC infections. Further longitudinal studies are warranted to evaluate the monitor-with-delay approach and inform clinical guidelines.

Real-World Effectiveness of Sotrovimab for the Early Treatment of COVID-19 During SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron Waves in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: Sotrovimab, a recombinant human monoclonal antibody (mAb) against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) had US Food and Drug Administration Emergency Use Authorization for the treatment of high-risk outpatients with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from 26 May 2021 to 5 April 2022. Real-world clinical effectiveness of sotrovimab in reducing the risk of 30-day all-cause hospitalization and/or mortality was evaluated for the period when the prevalence of circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants changed between Delta and Omicron in the USA. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of de-identified patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between 1 September 2021 to 30 April 2022 in the FAIR Health National Private Insurance Claims database. Patients meeting high-risk criteria were divided into two cohorts: sotrovimab and not treated with a mAb ("no mAb"). All-cause hospitalizations and facility-reported mortality ≤ 30 days of diagnosis ("30-day hospitalization or mortality") were identified. Multivariable and propensity score-matched Poisson and logistic regressions were conducted to estimate the adjusted relative risk (RR) and odds of 30-day hospitalization or mortality in each cohort. RESULTS: Compared with the no mAb cohort (n = 1,514,868), the sotrovimab cohort (n = 15,633) was older and had a higher proportion of patients with high-risk conditions. In the no mAb cohort, 84,307 (5.57%) patients were hospitalized and 8167 (0.54%) deaths were identified, while in the sotrovimab cohort, 418 (2.67%) patients were hospitalized and 13 (0.08%) deaths were identified. After adjusting for potential confounders, the sotrovimab cohort had a 55% lower risk of 30-day hospitalization or mortality (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.41-0.49) and an 85% lower risk of 30-day mortality (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.08-0.29). Monthly, from September 2021 to April 2022, the RR reduction for 30-day hospitalization or mortality in the sotrovimab cohort was maintained, ranging from 46% to 71% compared with the no mAb cohort; the RR estimate in April 2022 was uncertain, with wide confidence intervals due to the small sample size. CONCLUSION: Sotrovimab was associated with reduced risk of 30-day all-cause hospitalization and mortality versus no mAb treatment. Clinical effectiveness persisted during Delta and early Omicron variant waves and among all high-risk subgroups assessed.

Plasmodium vivax in Children: Hidden Burden and Conspicuous Challenges, a Narrative Review.

There has been progress towards decreasing malaria prevalence globally; however, Plasmodium vivax has been less responsive to elimination efforts compared with Plasmodium falciparum. P. vivax malaria remains a serious public health concern in regions where it is the dominant species (South and South-East Asia, the Eastern Mediterranean region, and South America) and is increasingly recognized for its contribution to overall morbidity and mortality worldwide. The incidence of P. vivax decreases with increasing age owing to rapidly acquired clinical immunity and there is a disproportionate burden of P. vivax in infants and children, who remain highly vulnerable to severe disease, recurrence, and anemia with associated developmental impacts. Diagnosis is sometimes difficult owing to the sensitivity of diagnostic tests to detect low levels of parasitemia. Additionally, the propensity of P. vivax to relapse following reactivation of dormant hypnozoites in the liver contributes to disease recurrence in infants and children, and potentiates morbidity and transmission. The 8-aminoquinolines, primaquine and tafenoquine, provide radical cure (relapse prevention). However, the risk of hemolysis in patients with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency necessitates testing prior to administration of 8-aminoquinolines, which has limited their uptake. Additional challenges include lack of availability of pediatric dose formulations and problems with adherence to primaquine owing to the length of treatment recommended. A paucity of data and studies specific to pediatric P. vivax malaria impacts the ability to deliver targeted interventions. It is imperative that P. vivax in infants and children be the focus of future research, control initiatives, and anti-malarial drug development.

Plasmodium vivax malaria is the most common type of malaria in South and South-East Asia, the Eastern Mediterranean region, and South America. Following a mosquito bite, the P. vivax parasite enters the blood and travels to the liver. It may cause malaria immediately or lie dormant and reactivate to cause relapses, weeks, months, or even years later. In P. vivax endemic regions, population immunity develops over time with repeated exposure to the parasite. Children bear the burden of disease since they have not acquired clinical immunity. Repeated relapses can cause anemia and affect growth and development. Radical cure refers to treatment of parasites in the blood and dormant parasites in the liver to prevent relapse. Until recently, primaquine was the only medicine approved for radical cure. When a primaquine regimen (7­14 days, depending on dose) is not completed, it is less effective. Additionally, there is no pediatric formulation currently available. Recently, tafenoquine, prescribed as a single dose, was approved for radical cure in children. Before radical cure, testing patients for deficiency of the enzyme glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) is necessary since patients with this deficiency may have rupturing or destruction of red blood cells. However, access to G6PD deficiency testing is limited, creating barriers to treatment. Eradication of P. vivax is challenging due to its ability to relapse, and the treatment challenges described above. It is imperative that future elimination efforts focus on improving access to curative treatments for infants and children who bear the burden of disease.