Search

Abstract Effective antiviral treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) are needed to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome‐coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) infection, particularly in patients with risk factors for severe disease. Molnupiravir (MK‐4482, EIDD‐2801) is an orally administered, ribonucleoside prodrug of β‐D‐N4‐hydroxycytidine (NHC) with submicromolar potency against SARS‐CoV‐2. A population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) analysis for molnupiravir exposure was conducted using 4202 NHC plasma concentrations collected in 1207 individuals from a phase I trial in healthy participants, a phase IIa trial in non‐hospitalized participants with COVID‐19, a phase II trial in hospitalized participants with COVID‐19, and a phase II/III trial in non‐hospitalized participants with COVID‐19. Molnupiravir pharmacokinetics (PK) was best described by a two‐compartment model with a transit‐compartment absorption model and linear elimination. Molnupiravir apparent elimination clearance increased with body weight less‐than‐proportionally (power 0.412) and was estimated as 70.6 L/h in 80‐kg individuals with a moderate interindividual variability (43.4% coefficient of variation). Additionally, effects of sex and body mass index on apparent central volume and food status and formulation on the absorption mean transit time were identified as statistically significant descriptors of variability in these PK parameters. However, none of the identified covariate effects caused clinically relevant changes in the area under the NHC concentration versus time curve between doses, the exposure metric most closely related to clinical response. Overall, the PopPK model indicates that molnupiravir can be administered in adults without dose adjustment based on age, sex, body size, food, and mild‐to‐moderate renal or mild hepatic impairment.

ABSTRACTThis exploratory post hoc analysis assessed the incidence of respiratory viral coinfections and their impact on clinical outcomes in non-hospitalized adults with mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) treated with molnupiravir versus placebo for 5 days in the Phase 2/3 MOVe-OUT trial (NCT04575597), which took place in October 2020 to January 2021 (Phase 2, n = 302) and May 2021 to October 2021 (Phase 3, n = 1,433). Among 1,735 total randomized participants, 1,674 had a baseline respiratory pathogen panel (NxTAG Respiratory Pathogen Panel for the Luminex MAGPIX instrument) performed and 69 (4.1%) were coinfected with at least one additional respiratory viral pathogen. Human rhinovirus/enterovirus (39/69, 56.5%) was the most common coinfection detected at baseline. In the modified intention-to-treat population, two participants with coinfecting respiratory RNA viruses were hospitalized and received respiratory interventions through Day 29, and none died; one participant in the molnupiravir group was coinfected with human rhinovirus/enterovirus, and one participant in the placebo group was coinfected with human metapneumovirus. Hospitalization or death occurred in 6.2% and 9.0% of non-coinfected participants in the molnupiravir versus placebo group, respectively, and over 90% did not require respiratory interventions. Most coinfecting respiratory RNA viruses detected at baseline were not detected at the end of therapy in both the molnupiravir and placebo groups. In summary, participants coinfected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and another respiratory RNA virus were not more likely to be hospitalized or die, or require respiratory interventions, compared to participants who were not coinfected with another respiratory RNA virus at baseline in both groups.IMPORTANCERespiratory viral coinfections are known to occur with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). In a cohort of non-hospitalized adults with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 treated with molnupiravir versus placebo in the MOVe-OUT trial during October 2020 to October 2021, 4.1% of participants had a documented viral coinfection; human rhinovirus/enterovirus was the most common pathogen detected with the NxTAG Respiratory Pathogen Panel assay. Participants who had a coinfection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and another respiratory RNA virus were not more likely to have worse clinical outcomes compared to those participants without a viral coinfection, and many coinfecting respiratory RNA viruses were no longer detected at the end of the 5-day treatment period in both groups.

Abstract Introduction The randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind MOVe-OUT trial demonstrated molnupiravir (800 mg every 12 h for 5 days) as safe and effective for outpatient treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19, significantly reducing the risk of hospitalization/death in high-risk adults. At the time of that report, virologic assessments from the trial were partially incomplete as a result of their time-intensive nature. Here we present final results from all prespecified virology endpoints in MOVe-OUT based on the full trial dataset. Methods Nasopharyngeal swabs were collected at baseline (day 1, prior to first dose) and days 3, 5 (end-of-treatment visit), 10, 15, and 29. From these samples, change from baseline in SARS-CoV-2 RNA titers (determined by quantitative PCR), detection of infectious SARS-CoV-2 (by plaque assay), and SARS-CoV-2 viral error induction (determined by whole genome next-generation sequencing) were assessed as exploratory endpoints. Results Molnupiravir was associated with greater mean reductions from baseline in SARS-CoV-2 RNA than placebo (including 50% relative reduction at end-of-treatment) through day 10. Among participants with infectious virus detected at baseline (n = 96 molnupiravir, n = 97 placebo) and evaluable post-baseline samples, no molnupiravir-treated participant had infectious SARS-CoV-2 by day 3, whereas infectious virus was recovered from 21% of placebo-arm participants on day 3 and 2% at end-of-treatment. Consistent with molnupiravir’s mechanism of action, sequence analysis demonstrated that molnupiravir was associated with an increased number of low-frequency transition errors randomly distributed across the SARS-CoV-2 RNA genome compared with placebo (median 143.5 molnupiravir, 15 placebo), while transversion errors were infrequent overall (median 2 in both arms). Outcomes were consistent regardless of baseline SARS-CoV-2 clade, presence of SARS-CoV-2-specific immune response, or viral load. Conclusions A 5-day course of orally administered molnupiravir demonstrated a consistently greater virologic effect than placebo, including rapidly eliminating infectious SARS-CoV-2, in high-risk outpatients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04575597.

Abstract Molnupiravir is an oral prodrug of the broadly active, antiviral ribonucleoside analog N‐hydroxycytidine (NHC). The primary circulating metabolite NHC is taken up into cells and phosphorylated to NHC‐triphosphate (NHC‐TP). NHC‐TP serves as a competitive substrate for viral RNA‐dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp), which results in an accumulation of errors in the viral genome, rendering virus replication incompetent. Molnupiravir has demonstrated activity against SARS‐CoV‐2 both clinically and preclinically and has a high barrier to development of viral resistance. Little to no molnupiravir is observed in plasma due to rapid hydrolysis to NHC. Maximum concentrations of NHC are reached at 1.5 h following administration in a fasted state. The effective half‐life of NHC is 3.3 h, reflecting minimal accumulation in the plasma following twice‐daily (Q12H) dosing. The terminal half‐life of NHC is 20.6 h. NHC‐TP exhibits a flatter profile with a lower peak‐to‐trough ratio compared with NHC, which supports Q12H dosing. Renal and hepatic pathways are not major routes of elimination, as NHC is primarily cleared by metabolism to uridine and cytidine, which then mix with the endogenous nucleotide pools. In a phase III study of nonhospitalized patients with COVID‐19 (MOVe‐OUT), 5 days of treatment with 800 mg molnupiravir Q12H significantly reduced the incidence of hospitalization or death compared with placebo. Patients treated with molnupiravir also had a greater reduction in SARS‐CoV‐2 viral load and improved clinical outcomes, compared with those receiving placebo. The clinical effectiveness of molnupiravir has been further demonstrated in several real‐world evidence studies. Molnupiravir is currently authorized or approved in more than 25 countries.

Abstract Background The randomized, double-blind, phase 3 ASPECT-NP trial evaluated the efficacy of 3 g of ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) versus 1 g of meropenem infused every 8 h for 8 to 14 days for treatment of adults with hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia (HABP) or ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (VABP). We assessed the probability of target attainment and compared efficacy outcomes from ASPECT-NP in participants with augmented renal clearance (ARC) versus those with normal renal function. Methods Baseline renal function was categorized as normal renal function (creatinine clearance 80–130 mL/min) or ARC (creatinine clearance > 130 mL/min). Population pharmacokinetic models informed Monte Carlo simulations to assess probability of target attainment in plasma and pulmonary epithelial lining fluid. Outcomes included 28-day all-cause mortality and clinical cure and per-participant microbiologic cure rates at the test-of-cure visit. Results A > 99% and > 80% probability of target attainment was demonstrated for ceftolozane and tazobactam, respectively, in simulated plasma and epithelial lining fluid. Within treatment arms, 28-day all-cause mortality rates in participants with normal renal function (C/T, n = 131; meropenem, n = 123) and ARC (C/T, n = 96; meropenem, n = 113) were comparable (data comparisons presented as rate; treatment difference [95% CI]) (C/T: normal renal function, 17.6%; ARC, 17.7%; 0.2 [− 9.6 to 10.6]; meropenem: normal renal function, 20.3%; ARC, 17.7%; − 2.6 [− 12.6 to 7.5]). Clinical cure rates at test-of-cure were also comparable across renal function groups within treatment arms (C/T: normal renal function, 57.3%; ARC, 59.4%; − 2.1 [− 14.8 to 10.8]; meropenem: normal renal function, 59.3%; ARC, 57.5%; 1.8 [− 10.6 to 14.2]). Per-participant microbiologic cure rates at test-of-cure were consistent across renal function groups within treatment arms (C/T: normal renal function, 72.2% [n/N = 70/97]; ARC, 71.4% [n/N = 55/77]; 0.7 [− 12.4 to 14.2]; meropenem: normal renal function, 75.0% [n/N = 66/88]; ARC, 70.0% [n/N = 49/70]; 5.0 [− 8.7 to 19.0]). Conclusions C/T and meropenem resulted in 28-day all-cause mortality, clinical cure, and microbiologic cure rates that were comparable between participants with ARC or normal renal function. In conjunction with high probability of target attainment, these results confirm that C/T (3 g) every 8 h is appropriate in patients with HABP/VABP and ARC. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02070757, registered February 25, 2014; EudraCT: 2012-002862-11.

Abstract Background Past respiratory viral epidemics suggest that bacterial infections impact clinical outcomes. There is minimal information on potential co-pathogens in patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) in the US. We analyzed pathogens, antimicrobial use, and healthcare utilization in hospitalized US patients with and without severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Methods This multicenter retrospective study included patients with > 1 day of inpatient admission and discharge/death between March 1 and May 31, 2020 at 241 US acute care hospitals in the BD Insights Research Database. We assessed microbiological testing data, antimicrobial utilization in admitted patients with ≥24 h of antimicrobial therapy, and length of stay (LOS). Results A total of 141,621 patients were tested for SARS-CoV-2 (17,003 [12.0%] positive) and 449,339 patients were not tested. Most (> 90%) patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 had additional microbiologic testing performed compared with 41.9% of SARS-CoV-2-untested patients. Non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogen rates were 20.9% for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients compared with 21.3 and 27.9% for SARS-CoV-2-negative and −untested patients, respectively. Gram-negative bacteria were the most common pathogens (45.5, 44.1, and 43.5% for SARS-CoV-2-positive, −negative, and −untested patients). SARS-CoV-2-positive patients had higher rates of hospital-onset (versus admission-onset) non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogens compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative or −untested patients (42.4, 22.2, and 19.5%, respectively), more antimicrobial usage (68.0, 45.2, and 25.1% of patients), and longer hospital LOS (mean [standard deviation (SD)] of 8.6 [11.4], 5.1 [8.9], and 4.2 [8.0] days) and intensive care unit (ICU) LOS (mean [SD] of 7.8 [8.5], 3.6 [6.2], and 3.6 [5.9] days). For all groups, the presence of a non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogen was associated with increased hospital LOS (mean [SD] days for patients with versus without a non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogen: 13.7 [15.7] vs 7.3 [9.6] days for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, 8.2 [11.5] vs 4.3 [7.9] days for SARS-CoV-2-negative patients, and 7.1 [11.0] vs 3.9 [7.4] days for SARS-CoV-2-untested patients). Conclusions Despite similar rates of non-SARS-CoV-2 pathogens in SARS-CoV-2-positive, −negative, and −untested patients, SARS-CoV-2 was associated with higher rates of hospital-onset infections, greater antimicrobial usage, and extended hospital and ICU LOS. This finding highlights the heavy burden of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare systems and suggests possible opportunities for diagnostic and antimicrobial stewardship.

Abstract Introduction Injection drug users (IDUs) often develop acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) and use emergency departments as their primary source for medical care. Methods A post hoc subgroup analysis of two randomized trials examined the efficacy and safety of tedizolid in the treatment of ABSSSI in IDUs. IDUs (n = 389) were identified from two pooled phase 3 trials (NCT01170221, NCT01421511) in patients with ABSSSI (n = 1333). Patients were randomly assigned to tedizolid phosphate (200 mg once daily, 6 days) or linezolid (600 mg twice daily, 10 days). Primary endpoint was ≥ 20% reduction in lesion area from baseline at 48 –72 h. Secondary endpoints included investigator-assessed clinical and microbiological response at the post-therapy evaluation (PTE). Results Wound infection was more common in IDUs (52.2%), while cellulitis/erysipelas was more common in non-IDUs (55.9%). Most infections were due to Staphylococcus aureus (IDUs, 75.2%; non-IDUs, 85.6%), while oral pathogens were more prevalent in IDUs. Early clinical success rates for tedizolid and linezolid were 82.5% and 79.6% in IDUs and 81.3% and 79.3% for non-IDUs, respectively; responses at PTE were similar. Microbiological response per pathogen was similar between treatment groups. Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) in IDUs were comparable between tedizolid (46.2%) and linezolid (47.8%) arms, while lower incidence of gastrointestinal AEs was observed with tedizolid (20.3%) than with linezolid (25.1%). Conclusion Efficacy and safety of tedizolid and linezolid in the treatment of ABSSSI was similar in IDUs and non-IDUs, supporting the use of oxazolidinones in treating ABSSSIs in IDUs. Funding Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.