Search

ABSTRACT With some exceptions, global policymakers have recommended against the use of existing monoclonal antibodies in COVID-19 due to loss of neutralization of newer variants. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of Ronapreve on compartmental viral replication using paradigms for susceptible and insusceptible variants. Virological efficacy and impact on pathogenicity was assessed in K18-hACE2 mice inoculated with either the Delta or BA.1 Omicron variants. Ronapreve reduced sub-genomic viral RNA levels in lung and nasal turbinate, 4 and 6 days post-infection, for the Delta variant but not the Omicron variant. It also blocked brain infection, which is seen with high frequency in K18-hACE2 mice after Delta variant infection. At day 6, the inflammatory response to lung infection with the Delta variant was altered to a multifocal granulomatous inflammation in which the virus appeared to be confined. The current study provides evidence of an altered tissue response to SARS-CoV-2 after treatment with a monoclonal antibody combination that retains neutralization activity. These data demonstrate that experimental designs that reflect treatment use cases are achievable in animal models for monoclonal antibodies. Extreme caution should be taken when interpreting prophylactic experimental designs that may not be representative of treatment.IMPORTANCEFollowing the emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, the WHO recommended against the use of Ronapreve in its COVID-19 treatment guidelines due to a lack of efficacy based on current pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic understanding. However, the continued use of Ronapreve, specifically in vulnerable patients, was advocated by some based on in vitro neutralization data. Here, the virological efficacy of Ronapreve was demonstrated in both the lung and brain compartments using Delta as a paradigm for a susceptible variant. Conversely, a lack of virological efficacy was demonstrated for the Omicron variant. Comparable concentrations of both monoclonal antibodies were observed in the plasma of Delta- and Omicron-infected mice. This study made use of a reliable murine model for SARS-CoV-2 infection, an experimental design reflective of treatment, and demonstrated the utility of this approach when assessing the effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies.

Favipiravir (FVP) and remdesivir (RDV) have demonstrable antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2. Here, the efficacy of FVP, RDV, and FVP with RDV (FVP + RDV) in combination was assessed in Syrian golden hamsters challenged with SARS-CoV- 2 (B.1.1.7) following intraperitoneal administration. At day 4 post infection, viral RNA and viral antigen expression were significantly lower in lungs for all three treatment groups compared to the sham treatment. Similarly, viral titres in the lungs were lower in all treatment groups compared to the sham treatment. The FVP + RDV combination was the only treatment group where viral RNA in nasal turbinate and lung, virus titres in lung, and viral antigen expression (lung) were all lower than those for the sham treatment group. Moreover, lower viral titre values were observed in the FVP + RDV group compared to other treatment groups, albeit only significantly lower in comparison to those in the RDV-only-treated group. Further assessment of the potential utility of FVP in combination with RDV may be warranted. Future studies should also consider whether the combination of these two drugs may reduce the speed at which drug resistance mutations are selected.

Pibrentasvir (PIB) has been demonstrated to block exonuclease activity of the SARS-CoV-2 polymerase, protecting favipiravir (FVP) and remdesivir (RDV) from post-incorporation excision and eliciting antiviral synergy in vitro. The present study investigated the chemoprophylactic efficacy of PIB, FVP, RDV, FVP with PIB, or RDV with PIB dosed intranasally twice a day, using a Syrian golden hamster contact transmission model. Compared to the saline control, viral RNA levels were significantly lower in throat swabs in FVP (day 7), RDV (day 3, 5, 7), and RDV+PIB (day 3, 5) treatment groups. Similarly, findings were evident for nasal turbinate after PIB and RDV treatment, and lungs after PIB, FVP, and FVP+PIB treatment at day 7. Lung viral RNA levels after RDV and RDV+PIB treatment were only detectable in two animals per group, but the overall difference was not statistically significant. In situ examination of the lungs confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in all animals, except for one in each of the RDV and RDV+PIB treatment groups, which tested negative in all virus detection approaches. Overall, prevention of transmission was observed in most animals treated with RDV, while other agents reduced the viral load following contact transmission. No benefit of combining FVP or RDV with PIB was observed.

The successful development of a chemoprophylaxis against SARS-CoV-2 could provide a tool for infection prevention that is implementable alongside vaccination programmes. Nafamostat is a serine protease inhibitor that inhibits SARS-CoV-2 entry in vitro, but it has not been characterised for chemoprophylaxis in animal models. Clinically, nafamostat is limited to intravenous delivery and has an extremely short plasma half-life. This study sought to determine whether intranasal dosing of nafamostat at 5 mg/kg twice daily was able to prevent the airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from infected to uninfected Syrian Golden hamsters. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detectable in the throat swabs of the water-treated control group 4 days after cohabitation with a SARS-CoV-2 inoculated hamster. However, throat swabs from the intranasal nafamostat-treated hamsters remained SARS-CoV-2 RNA negative for the full 4 days of cohabitation. Significantly lower SARS-CoV-2 RNA concentrations were seen in the nasal turbinates of the nafamostat-treated group compared to the control (p = 0.001). A plaque assay quantified a significantly lower concentration of infectious SARS-CoV-2 in the lungs of the nafamostat-treated group compared to the control (p = 0.035). When taken collectively with the pathological changes observed in the lungs and nasal mucosa, these data are strongly supportive of the utility of intranasally delivered nafamostat for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection.