Search

Background We examined the effectiveness of molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in reducing hospitalization and deaths in a real-world cohort of nonhospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods This was a territory-wide retrospective cohort study in Hong Kong. Nonhospitalized COVID-19 patients who attended designated outpatient clinics between 16 February and 31 March 2022 were identified. Patients hospitalized on the day of the first clinic appointment or used both oral antivirals were excluded. The primary endpoint was hospitalization. The secondary endpoint was a composite of intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation use, and/or death. Results Of 93 883 patients, 83 154 (88.6%), 5808 (6.2%), and 4921 (5.2%) were oral antiviral nonusers, molnupiravir users, and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir users, respectively. Compared with nonusers, oral antiviral users were older and had more comorbidities, lower complete vaccination rate, and more hospitalizations in the previous year. Molnupiravir users were older and had more comorbidities, lower complete vaccination rate, and more hospitalizations in the previous year than nirmatrelvir/ritonavir users. At a median follow-up of 30 days, 1931 (2.1%) patients were hospitalized and 225 (0.2%) patients developed the secondary endpoint. After propensity score weighting, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir use (weighted hazard ratio 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65–0.95; P =.011) but not molnupiravir use (weighted hazard ratio 1.17; 95% CI, 0.99–1.39; P =.062) was associated with a reduced risk of hospitalization than nonusers. The use of molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was not associated with a lower risk of the secondary endpoint as compared with nonusers. Conclusion Use of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir but not molnupiravir was associated with a reduced risk of hospitalization in real-world nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The case-fatality ratios (CFR) of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) appeared to differ substantially. We aimed to compare the CFR and its predictors of COVID-19 and SARS patients using a territory-wide cohort in Hong Kong. Methods This was a territory-wide retrospective cohort study using data captured from all public hospitals in Hong Kong. Laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and SARS patients were identified. The primary endpoint was a composite endpoint of intensive care unit admission, use of mechanical ventilation, and/or death. Results We identified 1013 COVID-19 patients (mean age, 38.4 years; 53.9% male) diagnosed from 23 January to 14 April 2020 and 1670 SARS patients (mean age, 44.4 years; 44.0% male) from March to June 2003. Fifty-five (5.4%) COVID-19 patients and 432 (25.9%) SARS patients had reached the primary endpoint in 30 days. By 30 June 2003, 286 SARS patients had died (CFR, 17.1%). By 7 June 2020, 4 COVID-19 patients had died (CFR, 0.4%). After adjusting for demographic and clinical parameters, COVID-19 was associated with a 71% lower risk of primary endpoint compared with SARS (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% confidence interval,.21–.40; P <.0001). Age, diabetes mellitus, and laboratory parameters (high lactate dehydrogenase, high C-reactive protein, and low platelet count) were independent predictors of the primary endpoint in COVID-19 patients, whereas use of antiviral treatments was not associated with primary endpoint. Conclusions The CFR of COVID-19 was 0.4%. Age and diabetes were associated with worse outcomes, whereas antiviral treatments were not. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]