Search

Background: There is a dearth of research on the factors linked with adverse events (AEs) associated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMVr) and molnupiravir (MOL), particularly in the elderly. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate self-reported AEs and identify factors associated with the occurrence of AEs following NMVr or MOL treatment among survey participants aged 60 years or older in South Korea., Methods: This nationwide survey was conducted through in-person interviews using structured questionnaires, from July 24 to August 31, 2023. Eligible participants included individuals aged 60 years or older who had been diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and received NMVr or MOL. The study outcomes included self-reported demographic, lifestyle, and health characteristics associated with the occurrence of AEs. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of each characteristic in participants with and without AEs., Results: Of the 520 participants, 123 (23.7%) experienced at least one AE with oral COVID-19 treatment: 21.0% (96/458) for NMVr and 43.5% (27/62) for MOL. None of the participants reported any serious AEs. Increased odds of AE occurrence were observed in participants treated with MOL compared to those treated with NMVr (aOR, 3.05; 95% CI, 1.67-5.57), a history of two or more compared to one COVID-19 diagnosis (1.93; 1.03-3.62), and self-reported health status as "Unhealthy" compared to "Healthy" (2.65; 1.31-5.36)., Conclusion: No AEs required further evaluation to change treatment strategies in elderly patients on NMVr or MOL. Several factors, including the use of MOL, history of COVID-19, and reported health status, were associated with an increased incidence of AEs. Both treatments may still be useful choices for patients with non-severe COVID-19 aged 60 years or older. However, close monitoring of unidentified potential harm and further investigation of the factors associated with the occurrence of AEs are needed., Competing Interests: Ju-Young Shin received grants from the Korea Institute of Drug Safety and Risk Management. Other authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose., (© 2024 The Korean Academy of Medical Sciences.)

Objectives: Evidence on the effectiveness of remdesivir when used in real-life clinical practice is controversial. This study aims to analyse its effectiveness and the factors associated with increased mortality in non-critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who require supplemental low-flow oxygen and received remdesivir., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at Ramón y Cajal University Hospital (Madrid, Spain) which included all patients treated with remdesivir in our institution during the second pandemic breakout in Spain, from August to November 2020. Treatment with remdesivir was limited to non-critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring low-flow supplemental oxygen, with a treatment duration of 5 days., Results: A total of 1757 patients were admitted with COVID-19 pneumonia during the study period, of which 281 non-critically ill patients were treated with remdesivir and included in the analysis. Mortality at 28 days after initiation of treatment was 17.1%. The median (IQR) time to recovery was 9 days (6-15). 104 (37.0%) patients had complications during hospitalisation, with renal failure being the most frequent (31 patients; 36.5%). After adjustment for confounding factors, high-flow oxygen therapy was associated with increased 28-day mortality (HR 2.77; 95% CI 1.39 to 5.53; p=0.004) and decreased 28-day clinical improvement (HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.35 to 0.85; p=0.008). A significant difference in survival and clinical improvement was identified between patients treated with high and low-flow oxygen., Conclusion: The 28-day mortality rate in patients treated with remdesivir needing low-flow oxygen therapy was higher than that published in clinical trials. Age and increased oxygen therapy needed after the beginning of treatment were the main risk factors associated with mortality., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© European Association of Hospital Pharmacists 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Pregnant people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experience higher risk for severe disease and adverse pregnancy outcomes, but no pharmacokinetic (PK) data exist to support dosing of COVID-19 therapeutics during pregnancy. We report PK and safety data for intravenous remdesivir in pregnancy., Methods: IMPAACT 2032 was a phase 4 prospective, open-label, nonrandomized opportunistic study of hospitalized pregnant and nonpregnant women receiving intravenous remdesivir as part of clinical care. Intensive PK sampling was performed on infusion days 3, 4, or 5 with collection of plasma and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). Safety data were recorded from first infusion through 4 weeks after last infusion and at delivery. Geometric mean ratios (GMR) (90% confidence intervals [CI]) of PK parameters between pregnant and nonpregnant women were calculated., Results: Fifty-three participants initiated remdesivir (25 pregnant; median gestational age, 27.6 weeks; interquartile range, 24.9-31.0 weeks). Plasma exposures of remdesivir, its 2 major metabolites (GS-704277 and GS-441524), and the free remdesivir fraction were similar between pregnant and nonpregnant participants. Concentrations of the active triphosphate (GS-443902) in PBMCs increased 2.04-fold (90% CI, 1.35-3.03) with each additional infusion in nonpregnant versus pregnant participants. Three adverse events in nonpregnant participants were related to treatment (1 grade 3; 2 grade 2 resulting in treatment discontinuation). There were no treatment-related adverse pregnancy outcomes or congenital anomalies detected., Conclusions: Plasma remdesivir PK parameters were comparable between pregnant and nonpregnant women, and no safety concerns were identified based on our limited data. These findings suggest no dose adjustments are indicated for intravenous remdesivir during pregnancy., Clinical Trials Registration: NCT04582266., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. K. M. B. has received consulting fees from ViiV Healthcare. K. B. has received research support from Gilead Sciences, Inc and ViiV Healthcare paid to her institution. D. S. has received research support from Gilead Sciences, Inc, Merck, and ViiV Healthcare paid to his institution. A. A. serves on scientific advisory boards for Gilead Sciences, Inc and ViiV Healthcare; is a site principal investigator for a multisite and investigator-initiated studies with Gilead Sciences, Inc; and is a consultant for Merck. E. V. C. is serving on a data and safety monitoring board for Melinta Pharmaceuticals. D. E. Y. was previously an unpaid technical advisor for the nonprofit Cover the Globe and Maipelo Trust. M. M. has received research support from Gilead Sciences, Inc, Merck, and ViiV Healthcare paid to his institution. R. H. and K. K. are employees of Gilead Sciences, Inc and hold stock in the company. J. D. M. has received research support from Gilead Sciences, Inc paid to his institution. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Plitidepsin has shown potent preclinical activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and was generally well tolerated in a phase I trial of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). NEPTUNO, a phase III, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of plitidepsin in the management of moderate COVID-19 in hospitalized adult patients., Methods: Included patients had documented severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, required oxygen therapy, and had adequate organ function. The planned sample size was 609 patients. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to at least 3 days of dexamethasone plus either plitidepsin (1.5 mg/day or 2.5 mg/day, for 3 days) or standard of care (control). The primary endpoint was the time to sustained withdrawal of supplemental oxygen. Secondary endpoints included time to sustained hospital discharge, clinical status, duration of oxygen support, percentage of patients requiring admission to the intensive care unit, and safety., Results: After randomizing 205 patients, NEPTUNO was discontinued due to a notable drop in COVID-19-related hospitalizations. Available data suggest a 2-day improvement in the median time to sustained oxygen therapy discontinuation (5 vs 7 days) favoring both plitidepsin arms (hazard ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, .96-1.96; P = .08 for plitidepsin 1.5 mg vs control; hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, .73-1.53; P = .78 for plitidepsin 2.5 mg vs control). Plitidepsin was generally well tolerated., Conclusions: Despite the trial limitations, these results suggest that plitidepsin may have a positive benefit-risk ratio in the management of patients requiring oxygen therapy. Further studies with plitidepsin, including those in immunosuppressed patients, are warranted.Results from this phase III trial suggest that plitidepsin, a first-in-class antiviral, may have a positive benefit-risk ratio in the management of hospitalized patients requiring oxygen therapy for moderate COVID-19., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. V. E. has received economic support for educational talks and advisory boards from Gilead Sciences and PharmaMar SA. M. M-M. has received grants and fees for scientific advice not related with this work; received in the past 36 months from Boehringer Ing, Roche, Ferrer, Chiesi. P. V. has received provision of study materials, travel support travel from PharmaMar SA, and payments from PharmaMar SA and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). P. G-V. received speaker fees from FLS Science, PharmaMar SA (Madrid, Spain), Pfizer (Spain), and GSK (Spain); consulting fees from Angelini Pharma and PharmaMar SA; served as an advisory board member for Berlin Cures GmbH and PharmaMar SA; and received meeting grants from GSK and PharmaMar SA. A. L. has received occasional training fees from Gilead, is a member of a Data Monitoring Committee for a randomized controlled trial for Biophytis Biopharma. R. P. has received grants or contracts from MSD, ViiV Healthcare; consulting fees Pfizer, Gilead, AstraZeneca, PharmaMar SA, GSK, Atea. G. P. has received fees, as member advisory panels and consultancy, from Pfizer, MSD, Menarini, and Gilead. M. M. has received fees from Boehringer as scientific advisor and payments for lectures and educational events from GSK. J. F. has received grants and payments from Gilead, Pfizer, Shionogy, Astellas, and MSD, as well as travel support. P. R. has received fees and travel support from Gilead, Merck, VIV, and Gesida. D. L-M., E-M. S-L, F. M., J. G., and N. T. are a full-time employees of PharmaMar. J. J. holds stocks of Pangaea Oncology, has a nonremunerated role in the Scientific Advisory Board, and holds stocks of Promontory Therapeutics; is a full-time employee and shareholder of PharmaMar, S.A. (Madrid, Spain), and a co-inventor of 2 patents for Plitidepsin (WO99-42125). J. A. L.-M. is a full-time employee and shareholder of PharmaMar, S.A (Madrid, Spain), and a co-inventor of a patent for plitidepsin (WO2008135793A1). All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

The study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of azvudine versus nirmatrelvir-ritonavir against omicron strains of coronavirus disease 2019 infections and determine their comparative effectiveness. This retrospective study included 716 patients who received nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (NR group) or azvudine (FNC group) at Peking Union Medical College Hospital between 1 November 2022 and 27 February 2023. Patients in the FNC group (n = 304) were younger, exhibited less severe symptoms, started antiviral therapy later, received corticosteroids more frequently, and used tocilizumab less frequently than patients in the NR group (n = 412). Within 28 d of therapy, 40 (9.7%) and 20 (6.6%) deaths were in the NR and FNC groups, respectively. No differences were observed between drugs and mortality rates (odds ratio [OR] 0.78, 95% CI 0.40-1.5, P = 0.45), clinical improvement (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.79-1.3, P = 0.38), and clinical progression (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.58-1.8, P = 0.96). More patients in the NR group experienced platelet decline than those in the FNC group (17.6% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.034). This study indicated that the effectiveness and safety of azvudine were comparable to those of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: Pregnant women with COVID-19 are at elevated risk for severe outcomes, but clinical data on management of these patients are limited. Monoclonal antibodies, such as casirivimab plus imdevimab (CAS+IMD), have proven effective in treating non-pregnant adults with COVID-19, prompting further evaluation in pregnant women., Methods: A phase 3 portion of an adaptive, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated the safety, clinical outcomes, pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of CAS+IMD (1200 mg or 2400 mg) in the treatment of pregnant outpatients with COVID-19 (NCT04425629). Participants were enrolled between December 2020 and November 2021, prior to the emergence of Omicron-lineage variants against which CAS+IMD is not active. Safety was evaluated in randomised participants who received study drug (n=80); clinical outcomes were evaluated in all randomised participants (n=82). Only two pregnant participants received placebo, limiting conclusions regarding treatment effect. Infants born to pregnant participants were followed for developmental outcomes ≤1 year of age., Results: In pregnant participants, CAS+IMD was well tolerated, with no grade ≥2 hypersensitivity or infusion-related reactions reported. There were no participant deaths, and only one COVID-19-related medically attended visit. Although two pregnancies (3%) reported issues in the fetus/neonate, they were confounded by maternal history or considered to be due to an alternate aetiology. No adverse developmental outcomes in infants ≤1 year of age were considered related to in utero exposure to the study drug. CAS+IMD 1200 mg and 2400 mg rapidly and similarly reduced viral loads, with a dose-proportional increase in concentrations of CAS+IMD in serum. Pharmacokinetics were consistent with that reported in the general population. Immunogenicity incidence was low., Conclusion: CAS+IMD treatment of pregnant outpatients with COVID-19 showed similar safety, clinical outcomes and pharmacokinetic profiles to that observed in non-pregnant adults. There was no evidence of an impact on developmental outcomes in infants ≤1 year of age., Trial Registration Number: NCT04425629., Competing Interests: Competing interests: TDN, MT, SG, SA, JC, AW, JX, JDD, SCI, CP, DA, DS, BK, ATD, RB, GPG, EC, NB and PD are employees and stockholders at Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ATH is a Regeneron employee/stockholder and former Pfizer employee and current stockholder. KCT, JDH and GAH are Regeneron employees and stockholders, and have a patent pending, which has been licensed and receiving royalties, with Regeneron. JAB is a site PI for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. multicentred clinical trials, Enanta multicentred clinical trials and Pfizer multicentred clinical trials; a sub-investigator for Novavax multicentred clinical trials; and an advisory board/panel member for Avalere, Pfizer, Moderna, Sobi and Valneva., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Antiviral therapy such as oseltamivir has been recommended for hospitalized children with suspected and confirmed influenza for almost 20 years. The therapy is officially authorized for newborns two weeks of age or older, however, questions about its safety and effectiveness still surround it. Our goals were to assess the epidemiological features of two consecutive seasonal influenza cases in children following the COVID-19 pandemic; to observe the clinical effectiveness and tolerability of oseltamivir in hospitalized children who were not vaccinated against influenza and had different influenza subtypes, including A(H1N1), A(H3N2), and B; and to identify specific comorbidities associated with influenza in children. We performed an observational study on 1300 children, enrolled between 1 October 2022 and 30 May 2023 and between 1 October 2023 and 4 May 2024, to the IX Pediatric Infectious Diseases Clinical Section of the National Institute of Infectious Diseases "Prof. Dr. Matei Balș". During the 2022-2023 influenza season, 791 pediatric patients tested positive for influenza and received oseltamivir. Of these, 89% (704/791) had influenza A, with 86.4% having subtype A(H1N1) and 13.6% of cases having A(H3N2), and for influenza B, 11% (87/791) of the pediatric patients. Of the total group, 59% were male, and the median age was 2.4 years (1.02-9.28). For the 2023-2024 influenza season, 509 pediatric patients tested positive for influenza, with 56.9% being of the male gender and who were treated with oseltamivir. Of these patients, 81.6% had influenza A and 18.4% had influenza B. Treatment with neuraminidase inhibitors, specifically oseltamivir, 2 mg/kg/dose administered twice daily for 5 days, was well tolerated by the children, and we recorded no deaths. The duration of hospitalization for patients with a fever after the oseltamivir administration was significantly longer for patients with A(H1N1) infection than A(H3N2), during both seasons. We identified more complications in the 2022-2023 season and a decreasing number of influenza B for the 2023-2024 season. Among children with comorbidities, the most common were asthma, gastrointestinal diseases, and metabolic and endocrine diseases. In terms of effectiveness, oseltamivir significantly reduced the intensity of influenza symptoms, thus reducing the number of days of hospitalization ( p = 0.001) as well as post-infection complications ( p = 0.005) in both groups. In this study, we evaluated the clinical effectiveness of oseltamivir therapy for all influenza types/subtypes in children, and the length of hospitalization. We identified comorbidities associated with the prolonged duration of hospitalization. Influenza vaccination should be the main tool in the prevention of influenza and its complications in children, especially those with comorbidities.

Background: Direct high-quality evidence remains absent on the benefits of HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B patients (CHB) with normal alanine transaminase (ALT) and positive HBV DNA after nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) treatment., Methods: This is a single-center, open-label, randomized parallel controlled trial with a follow-up duration of 96 weeks. An estimated 300 patients will be recruited at West China Hospital of Sichuan University, China. After stratified by serum HBV DNA (< 2000 vs. ≥ 2000 IU/ml), eligible patients will be randomized (allocation ratio 1:1) to receive either antiviral therapy (the treatment group) or regular examination alone (the control group). The primary outcomes are rates of virological response and changes in the levels of serum HBV pregenomic RNA (pgRNA) and scores of health-related qualities of life., Discussion: This randomized controlled trial focuses on HBeAg-negative patients with normal ALT, including those of the inactive carrier phase and the grey zone, whose antiviral treatment remains controversial. Additionally, a health-related quality of life scale is introduced to comprehensively estimate the benefit of antiviral treatment apart from virological response and adverse liver events. Meaningfully, the study findings will provide high-quality and direct evidence for optimal clinical management in such populations., Trial Registration: This trial was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2300069391) on 15 March 2023., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Source Citation: Geng LN, Bonilla H, Hedlin H, et al. Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and symptoms in adults with postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection: the STOP-PASC randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2024;184:1024-1034. 38848477., Competing Interests: Disclosures: Disclosure form is available with the article online.

Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have revolutionized hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment through their high cure rates and improved safety profiles. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety, and identify the optimal combination, of DAAs for the treatment of chronic HCV. A retrospective study was conducted of 613 patients with chronic HCV who were treated with DAAs. Demographic, HCV genotype, treatment regimen, virological response, and adverse drug event (ADE) data were collected at the initial visit and 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks later. The rapid virologic response (RVR) and sustained virologic response (SVR) rates were 90.4% and 97.8% for HCV genotype 1, 89.2% and 98.7% for genotype 6, 92.8% and 99% for genotype 2, and 90.9% and 100% for mixed genotype 2/6 or unspecified genotypes, respectively. There were no significant differences in the RVR and SVR rates for the various DAA regimens. The mean ALT, AST, and GGT activities decreased, and the PLT count increased during the treatments. ADEs occurred in 8% of the patients. The commonest ADEs were itching (3.1%), fatigue (1.8%), and dizziness (1.1%). None of the patients discontinued treatment because of an ADE. Posttreatment disease progression occurred in 7.7% of the patients, including liver fibrosis (3.6%), cirrhosis (1.1%), hepatocellular carcinoma (1.1%), and high alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) (1%). The factors associated with the achievement of RVR were low viral load, the use of sofosbuvir/ledipasvir or sofosbuvir/daclatasvir regimens, and a treatment duration of 12 weeks. No specific factors were found to be associated with the achievement of SVR. Posttreatment disease progression was associated with a high AFP and the use of sofosbuvir/ledipasvir. Thus, DAAs are highly effective and well-tolerated means of treating chronic HCV, and significantly improve patient outcomes. Their high efficacy and favorable safety profiles highlight the importance of early diagnosis and the use of personalized treatment strategies., (© 2024 The Author(s). Pharmacology Research & Perspectives published by British Pharmacological Society and American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Bepirovirsen is a developmental antisense oligonucleotide (ASO) for treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus infection. No pharmacokinetic (PK) studies comparing participants with hepatic impairment (HI) and healthy participants (HPs) have been conducted with ASOs. Given the target patient population, characterization of bepirovirsen PK in HI was imperative. This phase 1, nonrandomized, open-label study (NCT04971928) evaluated the PKs of a single 300-mg dose of bepirovirsen in participants with HI and matched HPs, enrolled in 2 parts (Part 1: moderate HI; Part 2: mild HI). If no predefined difference in the area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 (predose) to infinite time (AUC 0-∞ ) and maximum observed concentration (C max ; geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0.5-1.5) was identified in Part 1, findings were applied to mild HI, eliminating Part 2. Participants were monitored for 50 days post-treatment and noncompartmental analysis estimated PK parameters. Twenty-four participants (moderate HI, n = 12; HP, n = 12) received bepirovirsen and completed Part 1. AUC 0-∞ and C max were lower in participants with moderate HI (GMR 0.69 and 0.67, respectively) than in HPs, while apparent clearance (CL/F) and apparent terminal phase volume of distribution (Vz/F) were higher (GMR 1.44 and 1.64, respectively), but fell within the predefined thresholds of difference for this study. Part 2 was omitted. Adverse events were mild. Moderate HI did not have a clinically relevant impact on bepirovirsen PK or safety., (© 2024 Glaxo Group Limited. Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Background: During the ongoing outbreak of clade II monkeypox virus (MPXV), many U.S. patients were prescribed tecovirimat, an antiviral drug that was made available under an expanded access Investigational New Drug (EA-IND) program. We evaluated EA-IND data to summarize characteristics of treated patients, outcomes, and serious adverse events (SAEs)., Methods: We evaluated data from patients prescribed tecovirimat from May 29, 2022, through July 10, 2023. Baseline patient characteristics, clinical courses, and outcomes were evaluated via intake forms, outcome forms, and patient diaries. Data were summarized in aggregate by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status and by comorbidities of special interest. Reported SAEs were also compiled., Results: Tecovirimat was prescribed for over 7100 patients in the United States, most often for lesions in sensitive anatomical areas, such as certain anogenital lesions (83.5%; 5135 out of 6148 patients), and pain (52.5%; 3227 out of 6148 patients). The demographic and clinical characteristics mirrored those of patients worldwide. Among the 7181 patients with returned intake forms, 1626 also had returned outcome forms (22.6%). Many patients with severe immunocompromise (e.g., HIV with CD4 counts <200 cells/μl) received multiple courses of tecovirimat (43.1%; 22 out of 51 patients), including intravenously, and often experienced poor outcomes (35.3%; 18 out of 51 patients). Overall, 223 SAEs and 40 deaths were reported. Most SAEs were among patients who were severely immunocompromised, one of whom experienced hallucinations after tecovirimat was administered at twice the standard dose., Conclusions: Tecovirimat was used extensively. The returned EA-IND data suggest that life-threatening or protracted infections occurred in persons who were severely immunocompromised. SAEs were not commonly reported. The EA-IND data are not definitive; controlled clinical trial data are essential to elucidating if and how tecovirimat should be used.

Background/aim: Tenofovir amibufenamide (TMF) employs innovative ProTide technology and a methylation strategy to enhance the lipid solubility and plasma stability of the amide bond, providing advantages over tenofovir alafenamide (TAF). Despite promising Phase III clinical trial results demonstrating its antiviral efficacy, real-world data on TMF remains scarce. This study evaluates the antiviral efficacy and safety of TMF compared to TAF as the initial treatment in patients with high viral loads of chronic hepatitis B (CHB)., Methods: We retrospectively collected clinical data from March 1 2022 to June 30 2022 for highly viremic CHB patients who received either TMF ( n = 58) or TAF ( n = 32) as their initial monotherapy at Beijing YouAn Hospital. To understand the efficacy and safety of TMF over 48 weeks, we compared the virological response rates and HBeAg/HBsAg serological clearance rates between TMF and TAF groups. Also, the changes in serum creatinine, eGFR and serum lipid levels were assessed., Results: Baseline median HBV DNA levels were 7.85 (6.89, 8.36) IgIU/ml for TMF and 7.44 (6.89, 8.03) IgIU/ml for TAF. Median ALT levels were 102.0 (56.0, 210.0) U/L for TMF and 195.0 (73.5, 371.0) U/L for TAF, with HBeAg positivity rates of 70.7% and 75.0%, respectively. At 48 weeks, virological response rates (HBV DNA <10 IU/ml) were 43.5% (20/46) for TMF and 42.9% (12/28) for TAF ( p = 1.000). ALT normalization rates were 87.9% for TMF and 90.6% for TAF ( p = .969), and HBeAg serological clearance rates were 21.1% and 18.2%, respectively ( p = 1.000). No patients achieved HBsAg clearance. Compared with the baseline, LDL-C levels increased, while eGFR decreased, with no significant differences in serum creatinine, triglycerides and total cholesterol levels noted at week 48 for both TMF and TAF groups., Conclusion: TMF demonstrates comparable antiviral efficacy to TAF when used as initial therapy in highly viremic CHB patients, with similar impacts on renal function and lipid profiles., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background and Objectives: Immunocompromised children may have increased risk for severe respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI), potentially leading to prolonged hospitalization, intensive care, and death. The open-label phase II MUSIC trial evaluated the safety and pharmacokinetics of nirsevimab, an extended half-life monoclonal antibody against RSV, in immunocompromised children aged ≤24 months., Methods: Participants received a single intramuscular injection of nirsevimab (first RSV season: 50 mg if <5 kg/100 mg if ≥5 kg; second season: 200 mg). Safety, antidrug antibodies, and pharmacokinetics were evaluated to day 361., Results: Participants (n = 100) had ≥1 immunocompromising conditions: primary immunodeficiency (n = 33), previous transplantation (n = 16), HIV infection (n = 8) or treatment with high-dose systemic corticosteroids (n = 29), immunosuppressive chemotherapy (n = 20), or other immunosuppressive therapies (n = 15). Six children experienced eight treatment-related adverse events (none categorized as serious). Three deaths occurred, all were unrelated to treatment. Eleven children, developed antidrug antibodies, with minimal effects on pharmacokinetics and no apparent impact on safety. Nirsevimab serum concentrations at day 151 were similar to those effective in preventing medically attended RSV LRTI in healthy infants. Fourteen children had increased nirsevimab clearance. No protocol-defined medically attended RSV LRTIs occured through day 151., Conclusions: Among immunocompromised children aged ≤24 months, nirsevimab was well tolerated with no safety concerns and serum concentrations were supportive of efficacy. A subset of children with increased nirsevimab clearance, had conditions potentially associated with protein loss; however, the impact on efficacy is unknown.

Background: Studies have established the short-term efficacy of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in managing COVID-19, yet its effect on post-COVID-19 condition, especially in patients admitted to hospital, remains understudied. This study aimed to examine the effect of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir on post-COVID-19 condition among patients admitted to hospital in Hong Kong., Methods: This retrospective cohort study used real-world, territory-wide inpatient records, vaccination records, and confirmed COVID-19 case data from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority and Department of Health, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Patients aged 18 years and older who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between March 11, 2022, and Oct 10, 2023, and who were admitted to hospital with COVID-19 were included. The treatment group included patients prescribed nirmatrelvir-ritonavir within 5 days of symptom onset, excluding those prescribed molnupiravir within 21 days, and the control group had no exposure to either nirmatrelvir-ritonavir or molnupiravir. The outcomes were post-acute inpatient death and 13 sequelae (congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, deep vein thrombosis, chronic pulmonary disease, acute respiratory distress syndrome, interstitial lung disease, seizure, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, end-stage renal disease, acute kidney injury, and pancreatitis). These outcomes were evaluated starting at 21 days after the positive RT-PCR date in each respective cohort constructed for the outcome. Standardised mortality ratio weights were applied to balance covariates, and Cox proportional hazards regression was used to investigate the relationship between nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and outcomes., Findings: 136 973 patients were screened for inclusion, among whom 50 055 were eligible and included in the analysis (24 873 [49·7%] were female and 25 182 [50·3%] were male). 15 242 patients were prescribed nirmatrelvir-ritonavir during acute COVID-19 and 23 756 patients were included in the control group; 11 057 patients did not meet our definition for the exposed and unexposed groups. Patients were followed up for a median of 393 days (IQR 317-489). In the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group compared with the control group, there was a significantly lower hazard of post-acute inpatient death (hazard ratio 0·62 [95% CI 0·57-0·68]; p<0·0001), congestive heart failure (0·70 [0·58-0·85]; p=0·0002), atrial fibrillation (0·63 [0·52-0·76]; p<0·0001), coronary artery disease (0·71 [0·59-0·85]; p=0·0002), chronic pulmonary disease (0·68 [0·54-0·86]; p=0·0011), acute respiratory distress syndrome (0·71 [0·58-0·86]; p=0·0007), interstitial lung disease (0·17 [0·04-0·75]; p=0·020), and end-stage renal disease (0·37 [0·18-0·74]; p=0·0049). There was no evidence indicating difference between the groups in deep vein thrombosis, seizure, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, acute kidney injury, and pancreatitis., Interpretation: This study showed extended benefits of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for reducing the risk of post-acute inpatient death as well as cardiovascular and respiratory complications among patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Further research is essential to uncover the underlying mechanisms responsible for these observed negative associations and to devise effective strategies for preventing the onset of post-acute sequelae., Funding: Health and Medical Research Fund, Research Grants Council theme-based research schemes, and Research Grants Council Collaborative Research Fund., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Amenamevir is an oral once-daily antiherpesvirus drug that can be administered without dose adjustment in patients with impaired renal function. There are currently no clinical data on immunocompromised patients with herpes zoster treated with amenamevir. Therefore, an exploratory study of the efficacy and safety of amenamevir against herpes zoster in patients with immunosuppression was conducted. Inclusion criteria included patients with acute herpes zoster receiving immunosuppressive drugs or those with malignant tumors or autoimmune diseases. Twenty-four patients were included and received amenamevir (400 mg once daily after meals) for up to 14 days. The primary end point of overall improvement in skin symptoms 7 days after treatment initiation (day 7) was 58.3% for "markedly improved" and 20.8% for "improved." The combined improvement rate was 79.2% (95% confidence interval, 57.8-92.9), and 20.8% of patients experienced "worsened" symptoms. The secondary end points of overall improvement in skin symptoms on day 14 and day 28 were 95.7% and 100%, respectively. The skin symptoms progressed during treatment, peaking on day 7, and then began to heal. By Kaplan-Meier estimation, the median periods to complete crusting and healing were both day 14. There were five adverse events with a possible causal relationship to amenamevir (bacterial skin infection, anemia, hyponatremia, headache, and abnormal liver function) in one of the 24 patients. Although the bacterial skin infection was severe, all events in this patient were reported to be either recovered or recovering. These findings indicate that amenamevir can be effective and safe in immunocompromised patients with herpes zoster. However, as worsening can happen around day 7, it is necessary to carefully monitor such patients and switch to other therapies such as intravenous acyclovir if necessary. Clinical trial identifier: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials jRCTs031190208., (© 2024 The Author(s). The Journal of Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Dermatological Association.)

Introduction: Insurance coverage for oral valganciclovir (VGCV) began in Japan in April 2023 on the basis of results, including our clinical trials for symptomatic congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease. The VGCV treatment is available throughout Japan, so clinicians must consider the likelihood of hearing improvement and the possibility of neutropenia before dosing., Materials and Methods: We performed a substudy of an investigator-initiated, single-arm, prospective, multicenter, clinical trial in which 24 infants with symptomatic congenital CMV disease were orally administered 16 mg/kg VGCV twice daily for 6 months as an intervention. We examined the infants' baseline characteristics associated with improved hearing impairment or a severely reduced neutrophil count., Results: Of the 24 patients, 4 had normal hearing on assessment of their ear with the best hearing. Hearing impairment improved in 14 patients and did not respond to VGCV treatment in 6 patients at the 6-month hearing assessment. CMV DNA levels in plasma at baseline were higher in patients in whom hearing did not respond to treatment. A neutrophil count <500/mm 3 occurred in 5 (21%) patients for the first 6 weeks and in 8 (33%) patients for the first 6 months. A neutrophil count at screening and the lowest neutrophil count over the 6 months showed the highest correlation (r = 0.477, p = 0.019)., Conclusions: Infants with a low plasma viral load at screening tend to have an improvement in hearing impairment. Clinicians should be aware of neutropenia during VGCV treatment particularly in patients with a low neutrophil count during screening., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharm Corp. provided Valixa™ dry syrup during the study period for treatment, but this company had no role in this clinical trial. None of the authors have any conflict of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2024 Japanese Society of Chemotherapy, Japanese Association for Infectious Diseases, and Japanese Society for Infection Prevention and Control. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Previous research reported inconsistent results on the efficacy of molnupiravir in treating COVID-19. Moreover, efficacy was not assessed in the intended-use population (IUP), as defined by the FDA. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of molnupiravir for the treatment of COVID-19 in the IUP., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study on all IUP in Israel's Clalit Health Services from January 16, 2022, to February 16, 2023. The effectiveness outcome was the incidence of hospitalization or death due to COVID-19, and the safety outcome was the incidence of all-cause mortality within 35 days of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Cox-proportional hazard models were used to analyse the data after 1:5 propensity-score matching., Results: A total of 49 515 patients met the eligibility criteria. Of them, 3957 molnupiravir-treated patients were matched to 19 785 untreated patients. In molnupiravir-treated patients, 70 out of 3957 (5.1 per 10 000 person per day) experienced COVID-19-related hospitalization or death, compared with 699 out of 19 785 untreated patients (10.4 per 10 000 person per day); RR: 0.50 (95% CI, 0.39-0.64). All-cause mortality was also lower in the treated group, with 41 out of 3957 (3.0 per 10 000 person per day) experiencing mortality compared with 414 out of 19 785 untreated patients (6.1 per 10 000 person per day); RR: 0.50 (0.36-0.68)., Discussion: In a real-world cohort of IUP, molnupiravir therapy was associated with a significant reduction in hospitalizations or deaths due to COVID-19 and all-cause mortality., (Copyright © 2024 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection affects 50 million people worldwide with around 242,000 deaths annually, mainly due to complications such as cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Portal hypertension (PH) caused by cirrhosis leads to severe consequences, including esophageal varices (EV). This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment in patients with and without EV., Methods: This retrospective analysis involved consecutive HCV-infected adults undergoing DAA therapy at 22 Polish hepatology centers from July 1, 2015, to December 31, 2022. Patients with cirrhosis were categorized based on the presence of EV diagnosed by gastroscopy. Treatment effectiveness was measured by sustained virologic response (SVR), with safety outcomes monitored for 12 weeks post-treatment., Results: A population of 3393 HCV-infected patients with cirrhosis was divided into groups with (A, n = 976) and without (B, n = 2417) EV. Group A showed a significantly higher prevalence of comorbidities and concomitant medications. Genotype (GT)1b infections predominated in both groups, and GT3 infections were more common in the EV group. Group A exhibited more severe liver disease, and higher rates of decompensation, HCC, and HBV co-infection. SVR was significantly higher in group B (91.5% vs. 96.3%, p < 0.0001). Male gender, GT3, EV presence, and Child-Pugh grade B were identified as independent negative SVR predictors. Group A had a worse safety profile, with notably higher adverse event incidence and mortality., Conclusions: DAA therapies are highly effective and well tolerated in patients with cirrhosis, but EV presence predicts poorer virologic responses., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The treatment of congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is usually administered to neonates after birth; however, it can be anticipated during the prenatal period by treating pregnant women in order to reduce the severity of the congenital disease. The most commonly used treatment for CMV during pregnancy is valaciclovir; however, valganciclovir has a higher potency against CMV and is the first choice for neonates with congenital CMV disease., Objectives: We investigated neonatal and maternal safety of tertiary prevention in infected fetuses showing ultrasound features of infection using valganciclovir., Methods: Retrospective cohort study of pregnant women and their symptomatic infected fetuses taking valganciclovir, 3 × 450 mg per day. All fetuses presented at least one prenatal feature on ultrasound. We assessed fetal/neonatal and maternal safety, as well as neonatal efficacy of treatment. The main outcome was neutropenia. Secondary outcomes included other haematological side effects, symptoms at birth and neonatal CMV-PCR was positive., Results: Seventeen women with singleton pregnancies received valganciclovir from a median (IQR) of 27.1 (26.0-30.3) to 11.6 (6.5-12.9) weeks of gestation. No neonatal neutropenia was reported. One pregnancy was terminated for severe features. Three newborns (18%) were asymptomatic at birth, including one with negative CMV-PCR from blood and saliva. CMV-PCR was positive for 12/13 symptomatic newborns, with a median (IQR) log10 viral load of 3.36 (3.30-4.20), 4.03 (1.75-4.27) and 3.04 (0.00-3.40) log10 copies/mL in blood, urine and saliva, respectively., Conclusions: Tertiary prevention by valganciclovir appears to be well tolerated for both fetus and mother. However, more extensive trials accompanied by long-term follow-up are needed., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

This study was conducted as a single-site, open-label, randomized, replicated crossover trial with 4 treatment periods. The aim was to evaluate the bioequivalence of a generic test drug containing velpatasvir and sofosbuvir compared to an established brand-name medication in healthy White subjects under fasting conditions. Blood samples were collected at specified intervals up to 72 hours after dosing to measure the concentrations of velpatasvir and sofosbuvir using a certified high-performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry method. The bioequivalence of the 2 formulations was confirmed when statistical analysis showed that confidence intervals for the log-transformed peak concentration and area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last quantifiable sample were within an acceptable range from 80% to 125%. Criteria for bioequivalence were met for both area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 until the last quantifiable sample and peak concentration parameters. No adverse effects were reported during this trial in both groups., (© 2024, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Background & Aims: Bulevirtide (BLV), a first-in-class entry inhibitor, is approved in Europe for the treatment of chronic hepatitis delta (CHD). BLV monotherapy was superior to delayed treatment at week (W) 48, the primary efficacy endpoint, in the MYR301 study (NCT03852719). Here, we assessed if continued BLV therapy until W96 would improve virologic and biochemical response rates, particularly among patients who did not achieve virologic response at W24., Methods: In this ongoing, open-label, randomized phase III study, patients with CHD (N = 150) were randomized (1:1:1) to treatment with BLV 2 mg/day (n = 49) or 10 mg/day (n = 50), each for 144 weeks, or to delayed treatment for 48 weeks followed by BLV 10 mg/day for 96 weeks (n = 51). Combined response was defined as undetectable hepatitis delta virus (HDV) RNA or a decrease in HDV RNA by ≥2 log 10 IU/ml from baseline and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) normalization. Other endpoints included virologic response, ALT normalization, and change in HDV RNA., Results: Of 150 patients, 143 (95%) completed 96 weeks of the study. Efficacy responses were maintained and/or improved between W48 and W96, with similar combined, virologic, and biochemical response rates between BLV 2 and 10 mg. Of the patients with a suboptimal early virologic response at W24, 43% of non-responders and 82% of partial responders achieved virologic response at W96. Biochemical improvement often occurred independently of virologic response. Adverse events were mostly mild, with no serious adverse events related to BLV., Conclusions: Virologic and biochemical responses were maintained and/or increased with longer term BLV therapy, including in those with suboptimal early virologic response. BLV monotherapy for CHD was safe and well tolerated through W96., Impact and Implications: In July 2023, bulevirtide was fully approved for the treatment of chronic hepatitis delta (CHD) in Europe based on clinical study results from up to 48 weeks of treatment. Understanding the efficacy and safety of bulevirtide over the longer term is important for healthcare providers. In this analysis, we demonstrate that bulevirtide monotherapy for 96 weeks in patients with CHD was associated with continued improvements in combined, virologic, and biochemical responses as well as liver stiffness from week 48 at both the 2 mg and 10 mg doses. Patients with suboptimal virologic responses to bulevirtide at week 24 also benefited from continued therapy, with the majority achieving virologic response or biochemical improvement by week 96., Gov Identifier: NCT03852719., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The emergence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak, which causes COVID-19, had a devastating impact on both people's lives and the global economy. During the course of the pandemic, the lack of specific drugs or treatments tailored for COVID-19 led to extensive repurposing of existing drugs in the pursuit of effective treatments. Some drug molecules demonstrated efficacy, while others proved ineffective. In this context, the approach of drug repurposing emerged as a novel strategy for combating COVID-19. Repurposed drugs and biologics have shown effectiveness, leading to improved clinical outcomes among patients with COVID-19. Similarly, It is equally important to assess the risk-benefit ratio associated with drugs and biologics adapted for COVID-19 treatment. Herein, we primarily focus on evaluating adverse drug events linked to repurposed COVID-19 medications, repurposed biologics, and COVID-specific drug molecules., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Immunocompromised individuals are at high risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and subsequent severe or fatal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), yet they have suboptimal responses to mRNA and inactivated COVID-19 vaccines. The efficacy of tixagevimab-cilgavimab in reducing symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was demonstrated in phase III clinical trials. Nevertheless, real-world data on the effectiveness and safety of tixagevimab-cilgavimab remain limited., Objective: The aim was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of tixagevimab-cilgavimab among immunocompromised individuals., Methods: Adults who were immunocompromised or receiving immunosuppressive therapies were included in this target trial emulation using territory-wide electronic health records in Hong Kong. A sequential trial emulation approach was adopted to compare effectiveness and safety outcomes between individuals who received tixagevimab-cilgavimab and individuals who did not., Results: A total of 746 tixagevimab-cilgavimab recipients and 2980 controls were included from 1 May 2022 to 30 November 2022. Tixagevimab-cilgavimab significantly reduced the risk of COVID-19 infection (hazard ratio [HR] 0.708, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.527-0.951) during a median follow-up of 60 days. No significant difference was observed in the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalisation. Zero versus eight COVID-19 mortality cases and zero versus two severe COVID-19 cases were observed in tixagevimab-cilgavimab recipients and controls, respectively. Notably, significant risk reduction in COVID-19 infection was also observed among immunocompromised individuals who had been previously vaccinated with three or more doses of COVID-19 vaccine, or had no prior COVID-19 infection history., Conclusions: Tixagevimab-cilgavimab was effective in reducing COVID-19 infection among immunocompromised patients during the Omicron wave. Findings were consistent among individuals who previously received three or more doses of COVID-19 vaccine, or had no previous history of COVID-19 infection., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a contagious condition posing a major public health risk in various nations, including Vietnam. In 2019, the Ministry of Health introduced tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) to treat patients with chronic HBV infection and reduce the long-term toxicity of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of these 2 medications in individuals with hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive chronic HBV., Methods: This retrospective cohort study included data collected from the medical records of patients with chronic HBV who visited the Liver Clinic at University Medical Center Ho Chi Minh City between 2018 and 2020., Results: After 2 years of treatment, the proportion of HBeAg loss in the TAF group was twice that of the TDF group (22.4% vs 11.2%), indicating a statistically significant difference in the probability of HBeAg loss (adjusted hazard ratio = 2.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.43-3.42; P < 0.01). In addition, there was a statistically significant difference in the rate and ability of antiviral response between patients treated with TAF and TDF (65% vs 54.5%, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio = 1.34; 95% CI 1.08-1.69; P < 0.01). A total of 93.9% of patients achieved the goal of restoring alanine aminotransferase to normal, a higher percentage compared with the 81.2% in the TDF group, and the likelihood of achieving normal alanine aminotransferase levels with TAF was greater compared with those on TDF (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.67; 95% CI 1.38-2.01; P < 0.01). Moreover, there was a statistically significant difference in the variation in renal function between the TAF and TDF groups. Serum creatinine levels in the TAF group increased less than those in the TDF group by 0.03 mg/dL every 6 months (95% CI -0.04 to -0.01, P < 0.01), and the estimated glomerular filtration rate in the TAF group was higher than that in the TDF group every 6 months by 2.78 mL/min/1.73 m 2 (95% CI 0.98-4.57, P < 0.01). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the likelihood of HBeAg seroconversion between patients with chronic hepatitis B treated with TAF or TDF (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.79; 95% CI 0.91-3.53; P = 0.09), nor in the risk of adverse events between the 2 groups (adjusted odds ratio = 1.34; 95% CI 0.88-2.05; P = 0.17). In addition, although the HBsAg concentration in the TAF group was lower than in the TDF group by an average of 0.05 log 10 IU/mL every 6 months (95% CI -0.15 to 0.05), this difference also did not reach statistical significance ( P = 0.35)., Discussion: TAF has been demonstrated to achieve some therapeutic efficacy goals and reduce nephrotoxicity better than TDF. However, no differences were found in seroconversion or adverse events between the patient groups., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American College of Gastroenterology.)

Competing Interests: Intérêts concurrents :: Justin Chia déclare avoir reçu des honoraires de consultation d’AbbVie, d’Arcutis, de Celgene, de Bausch Health, de Bristol Myers Squibb, d’Eli Lilly, de Galderma, de Janssen, du Groupe L’Oréal, de LEO Pharma, de Novartis, de Pfizer, de Sanofi Genzyme, de Sun Pharma, et de l’Union Chimique Belge. Elaine Dupuis déclare avoir reçu des honoraires d’AbbVie, d’Amgen, de Celgene, de Bausch Health, de Sanofi Genzyme, d’Eli Lilly, d’Arcutis, de Galderma, de LEO Pharma, de Novartis, de Sun Pharma, d’UCB Canada, de Pfizer, de Beiersdorf Canada et du Groupe L’Oréal, ou avoir occupé un rôle-conseil auprès de ces sociétés, et avoir reçu du financement pour ses déplacements lors d’une réunion de Galderma, sans lien avec les travaux soumis. La Dre Dupuis participe aussi à titre de sous-investigatrice à des études de recherche pour Eli Lilly et AbbVie, sans lien avec les travaux soumis. Aucun autre intérêt concurrent n’a été déclaré.

Background: Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) show high cure rates in treating chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV). However, the effect of DAAs on patients infected with genotype 2 (GT2) is difficult to determine despite the availability of several DAA regimens., Methods: A systematic search of six databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, and Clinicaltrial.gov) was conducted through April 20, 2022. We considered the sustained virological response 12 weeks after treatment (SVR12) as the efficacy outcome, and adverse events (AEs) as the safety outcome. By calculating the mean SVR12 and the proportion of AEs among patients, we considered the intervention effect for each DAA regimen. The random effect model was then used in all meta-analyses. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the evidence on efficacy and safety of DAAs in patients infected with HCV GT2. The Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) network metanalysis was used to indirectly compare regimen in GT2 patients., Results: Among 31 articles included (2,968 participants), consisting of 1,387 treatment-naive patients and 354 patients with cirrhosis. The overall pooled SVR12 rate was 94.62% (95% CI: 92.43-96.52%) among the participants who received all doses of treatment. Meta-analysis results of AEs revealed that fatigue was the most common AE (14.0%, 95% CI: 6.4-21.6%), followed by headache (13.1%, 95% CI: 9.2-17.1%), whereas death and serious adverse events were uncommon., Conclusions: We compared DAA-based treatments indirectly using meta-analysis and found the combination of Sofosbuvir plus Velpatasvir and Glecaprevir plus Pibrentasvir, each administered over a 12-week period, were identified as the most effective and relatively safe in managing chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 2 (HCV GT2) infection. Both treatments achieved a SVR12 of 100% (95% CI 99-100%)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading cause of severe illness in infants, with no effective treatment. Results of a phase 2 trial suggested that ziresovir may have efficacy in the treatment of infants hospitalized with RSV infection., Methods: In a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted in China, we enrolled participants 1 to 24 months of age who were hospitalized with RSV infection. Participants were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive ziresovir (at a dose of 10 to 40 mg, according to body weight) or placebo, administered twice daily, for 5 days. The primary end point was the change from baseline to day 3 (defined as 48 hours after the first administration) in the Wang bronchiolitis clinical score (total scores range from 0 to 12, with higher scores indicating greater severity of signs and symptoms). The intention-to-treat population included all the participants with RSV-confirmed infection who received at least one dose of ziresovir or placebo; the safety population included all the participants who received at least one dose of ziresovir or placebo., Results: The intention-to-treat population included 244 participants, and the safety population included 302. The reduction from baseline in the Wang bronchiolitis clinical score at day 3 was significantly greater with ziresovir than with placebo (-3.4 points [95% confidence interval {CI}, -3.7 to -3.1] vs. -2.7 points [95% CI, -3.1 to -2.2]; difference, -0.8 points [95% CI, -1.3 to -0.3]; P = 0.002). The reduction in the RSV viral load at day 5 was greater in the ziresovir group than in the placebo group (-2.5 vs. -1.9 log 10 copies per milliliter; difference, -0.6 log 10 copies per milliliter [95% CI, -1.1 to -0.2]). Improvements were observed in prespecified subgroups, including in participants with a baseline bronchiolitis score of at least 8 and in those 6 months of age or younger. The incidence of adverse events related to the drug or placebo was 16% with ziresovir and 13% with placebo. The most common adverse events that were assessed by the investigator as being related to the drug or placebo were diarrhea (in 4% and 2% of the participants, respectively), an elevated liver-enzyme level (in 3% and 3%, respectively), and rash (in 2% and 1%). Resistance-associated mutations were identified in 15 participants (9%) in the ziresovir group., Conclusions: Ziresovir treatment reduced signs and symptoms of bronchiolitis in infants and young children hospitalized with RSV infection. No safety concerns were identified. (Funded by Shanghai Ark Biopharmaceutical; AIRFLO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04231968.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Introduction: In May 2022, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention disseminated an alert advising that "a few" persons with Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NM/R)-associated rebound of COVID-19 infection had been identified. Three case reports appearing as pre-print postings described the first cases. Analyses in March 2023 by NM/R's manufacturer and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reported no association between NM/R and COVID-19 rebound in a large phase 3 randomized clinical trial. Our study evaluated if social media databases or electronically disseminated new articles might provide insights related to the putative new toxicity, NM/R-associated COVID-19 rebound., Methods: Information on NM/R-associated COVID-19 rebound cases was abstracted from preprint postings of non-peer-reviewed manuscripts, social media websites, electronically disseminated print and television media reports, a new FDA adverse event database for drugs that received Emergency Use Approval, and news articles in scientific journals., Results: Thirty-five persons experienced presumed or documented NM/R-associated COVID-19 rebound, based on information described in preprint services (n = 27), Twitter postings and related news articles (n = 7), and news articles without related Twitter reports (n = 1). These reports included information on dates of initial COVID-19 illness and rebound onset, COVID-19 testing, vaccine status, presentation, and outcome. A new FDA safety database identified 12,500 possible cases of this toxicity, but the quality of these data was poor. Preprint postings preceded peer-reviewed publications describing the same cases by four months. Social media websites including Instagram, Reddit, YouTube, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) Health Alert Network, CDC Twitter, and Facebook did not provide clinically meaningful information on individual cases., Conclusion: Preprint services and Twitter facilitated identification of the largest case series of NM/R-associated COVID-19 rebound. The cases were reported in non-peer-reviewed media several weeks prior to the first peer-reviewed electronically disseminated publication of one person with this diagnosis., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Bennett et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Transaminase and creatinine elevations have been well described in adults treated with remdesivir for COVID-19. It is hypothesized that a similar safety profile exists in children with COVID-19 treated with remdesivir, but available data are limited, especially in children < 12 months. The primary aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and timing of elevations in transaminases and creatinine in children with COVID-19 who were treated with remdesivir., Methods: This was a retrospective, observational cohort study including all pediatric patients admitted to a single, freestanding children's hospital who were positive for COVID-19 and received at least 1 dose of remdesivir between 1/1/2020 and 5/31/2022. Available baseline and peak transaminase and creatinine concentrations were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for transaminase elevation., Results: A total of 180 patients met inclusion criteria. Creatinine elevation of any grade was noted in 16% and remained elevated only in those with underlying chronic kidney disease. Transaminase elevation of any grade was noted in 58% of patients and remained elevated in only 1%. Older age and critical respiratory disease were associated with higher risk of significant transaminase elevation, whereas non-Hispanic ethnicity was strongly associated with protection against significant transaminase elevation., Conclusions: In our cohort of hospitalized children with COVID-19 who were treated with remdesivir, most patients experienced only mild transaminitis and normal creatinine concentrations. A limited number of patients experienced laboratory abnormalities which were transient, suggesting a favorable safety profile for remdesivir use in pediatrics., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has proved ineffective in treating patients hospitalised with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), but uncertainty remains over its safety and efficacy in chemoprevention. Previous chemoprevention randomised controlled trials (RCTs) did not individually show benefit of HCQ against COVID-19 and, although meta-analysis did suggest clinical benefit, guidelines recommend against its use., Methods and Findings: Healthy adult participants from the healthcare setting, and later from the community, were enrolled in 26 centres in 11 countries to a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial of COVID-19 chemoprevention. HCQ was evaluated in Europe and Africa, and chloroquine (CQ) was evaluated in Asia, (both base equivalent of 155 mg once daily). The primary endpoint was symptomatic COVID-19, confirmed by PCR or seroconversion during the 3-month follow-up period. The secondary and tertiary endpoints were: asymptomatic laboratory-confirmed Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection; severity of COVID-19 symptoms; all-cause PCR-confirmed symptomatic acute respiratory illness (including SARS-CoV-2 infection); participant reported number of workdays lost; genetic and baseline biochemical markers associated with symptomatic COVID-19, respiratory illness and disease severity (not reported here); and health economic analyses of HCQ and CQ prophylaxis on costs and quality of life measures (not reported here). The primary and safety analyses were conducted in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Recruitment of 40,000 (20,000 HCQ arm, 20,000 CQ arm) participants was planned but was not possible because of protracted delays resulting from controversies over efficacy and adverse events with HCQ use, vaccine rollout in some countries, and other factors. Between 29 April 2020 and 10 March 2022, 4,652 participants (46% females) were enrolled (HCQ/CQ n = 2,320; placebo n = 2,332). The median (IQR) age was 29 (23 to 39) years. SARS-CoV-2 infections (symptomatic and asymptomatic) occurred in 1,071 (23%) participants. For the primary endpoint the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19 was 240/2,320 in the HCQ/CQ versus 284/2,332 in the placebo arms (risk ratio (RR) 0.85 [95% confidence interval, 0.72 to 1.00; p = 0.05]). For the secondary and tertiary outcomes asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred in 11.5% of HCQ/CQ recipients and 12.0% of placebo recipients: RR: 0.96 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.12; p = 0.6). There were no differences in the severity of symptoms between the groups and no severe illnesses. HCQ/CQ chemoprevention was associated with fewer PCR-confirmed all-cause respiratory infections (predominantly SARS-CoV-2): RR 0.61 (95% CI, 0.42 to 0.88; p = 0.009) and fewer days lost to work because of illness: 104 days per 1,000 participants over 90 days (95% CI, 12 to 199 days; p < 0.001). The prespecified meta-analysis of all published pre-exposure RCTs indicates that HCQ/CQ prophylaxis provided a moderate protective benefit against symptomatic COVID-19: RR 0.80 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.91). Both drugs were well tolerated with no drug-related serious adverse events (SAEs). Study limitations include the smaller than planned study size, the relatively low number of PCR-confirmed infections, and the lower comparative accuracy of serology endpoints (in particular, the adapted dried blood spot method) compared to the PCR endpoint. The COPCOV trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov; number NCT04303507., Interpretation: In this large placebo-controlled, double-blind randomised trial, HCQ and CQ were safe and well tolerated in COVID-19 chemoprevention, and there was evidence of moderate protective benefit in a meta-analysis including this trial and similar RCTs., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04303507; ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN10207947., Competing Interests: NJW and LvS are members of the PLOS Medicine Editorial Board. The rest of the authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Schilling et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is arguably the most important infectious complication that negatively affects the outcome of solid organ transplantation. For decades, CMV management after transplantation has relied on antiviral drugs that inhibit viral DNA polymerase (ganciclovir, foscarnet, and cidofovir). However, their use has been complicated by myelosuppression, nephrotoxicity, and selection of drug-resistant viruses. During the past few years, the therapeutic armamentarium for the management of CMV in solid organ transplant recipients has expanded with the approval of letermovir for CMV prophylaxis in high-risk CMV D+/R- kidney recipients, and maribavir for the treatment of refractory and resistant CMV infection. Both drugs offer significant improvement when compared to standard anti-CMV therapies; letermovir was as efficacious for CMV prevention, whereas maribavir was more effective in treating refractory and resistant CMV infections. Both letermovir and maribavir have favorable safety profiles compared to CMV DNA polymerase inhibitors, without the risk of neutropenia and leukopenia associated with ganciclovir and renal toxicities associated with foscarnet and cidofovir. Moreover, letermovir and maribavir are orally bioavailable, which allows convenient outpatient treatment. However, letermovir and maribavir have a significant drug interaction potential in solid organ transplant recipients, resulting in higher levels of calcineurin inhibitors (cyclosporine and tacrolimus) and mTOR inhibitors (sirolimus and everolimus). Both letermovir and maribavir are CMV-specific and do not have clinical efficacy against other herpes viruses. Thus, there is a need for additional antiviral drugs to prevent herpes simplex and other herpes viruses when clinically indicated. This article provides a comprehensive review of the clinical data supporting the use of letermovir and maribavir in clinical practice. The author provides perspectives on the role of these newly approved drugs in the current management landscape of CMV infection in solid organ transplantation., Competing Interests: Dr Raymund Razonable reports grants from Gilead, grants from Roche, grants from Regeneron, personal fees from Allovir, personal fees from Novartis, outside the submitted work. The author reports no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2024 Razonable.)

Objectives: To describe the management of haematological patients experiencing prolonged SARS-CoV-2 viral shedding, as the optimal management strategy for this condition remains undetermined., Methods: We conducted a retrospective evaluation of our prospectively followed cohort of haematological patients treated with remdesivir for more than 10 days. Starting January 2023, upon COVID-19 diagnosis, the treatment strategy was based on symptoms and PCR cycle threshold (Ct) as follows: (i) when Ct was 25 or less or if the patient had symptoms, a course of remdesivir for at least 10 days, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir for 5 days (whenever possible) and convalescent plasma was administered; and (ii) when the patient was asymptomatic and had a PCR Ct of more than 25, when possible, a course of 5 days of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir was administered. The patient was considered to have achieved viral clearance and, thus, remdesivir was stopped, in either of these cases: (i) PCR negativity, or (ii) subgenomic RNA negativity., Results: From January to November 2023, 18 patients benefited from a safe extended remdesivir administration, resulting in detection of SARS-CoV-2 viral clearance in a median time of 3.5 weeks (IQR 2.6-3.9) (min-max 1.6-8.0). No clinical or biological side effects were detected. No patient died or needed further treatment for their COVID-19 episode., Conclusions: The extended course of remdesivir, combined with other active therapies for COVID-19 infection, was well tolerated. Cure and virus negativity were obtained in all these high-risk patients., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading cause of acute respiratory infection amongst all ages, causing a significant global health burden. Preventative and therapeutic options for RSV infection have long been under development, and recently, several widely-publicised vaccines targeting older adult and maternal populations have become available. Promising monoclonal antibody (mAb) and antiviral (AV) therapies are also progressing in clinical trials, with the prophylactic mAb nirsevimab recently approved for clinical use in infant populations. A systematic review on current progress in this area is lacking. We performed a systematic literature search (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, EudraCT, ANZCTR-searched Nov 29th, 2023) to identify studies on all RSV-specific mAbs and AV therapies that has undergone human clinical trials since year 2000. Data extraction focused on outcomes related to the therapeutic efficacy and safety of the intervention on trial, and all studies were graded against the OCEBM Levels of Evidence Table. Results from 59 studies were extracted, covering efficacy and safety data on six mAbs (motavizumab, motavizumab-YTE, nirsevimab, ALX-0171, suptavumab, clesrovimab) and 12 AV therapies (ALN-RSV01, RSV604, presatovir, MDT-637, lumicitabine, IFN-α1b, rilematovir, enzaplatovir, AK0529, sisunatovir, PC786, EDP-938). Of the mAbs reviewed, nirsevimab and clesrovimab hold considerable promise. The timeline for RSV-specific AV availability is less advanced, although EDP-938 and AK0529 have reported promising phase 2 efficacy and safety data. Moving forward, passive immunisation and treatment options for RSV infection will play a significant role in reducing the health burden of RSV, complementing recent advancements in vaccine development. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration: CRD42022376633., (© 2024 The Author(s). Reviews in Medical Virology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The efficacy of different nucleos(t)ide analogs in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus (CHB) with severe acute exacerbation (SAE) remained unclear. Thus, this study aimed to compare the short-term efficacy of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and entecavir (ETV) in patients having CHB with SAE., Methods: We analyzed consecutive patients with treatment-naive CHB receiving TDF (n = 36) or ETV (n = 65) for SAE. The primary endpoint was overall mortality or receipt of liver transplantation (LT) by 24 weeks. The secondary endpoints are the comparison of ETV vs. TDF influences on renal function and virological and biochemical responses at 4, 12, 24, and 48 weeks., Results: The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. By 24 weeks, 8 (22%) patients in the TDF group and 10 (15%) patients in the ETV group had either died (n = 15) or received LT (n = 3) ( P  = 0.367). Cox-regression multivariate analysis revealed age ( P  = 0.003), baseline international normalized ratio of prothrombin time ( P  = 0.024), and early presence of hepatic encephalopathy ( P  = 0.003) as independent factors associated with mortality or LT. The two groups of patients achieved comparable biochemical and virological responses at 48 weeks. No significant difference was found in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between the TDF and the ETV groups. However, a significant reduction in the eGFR at 48 weeks, as compared with the baseline, was found in each group., Conclusion: TDF and ETV achieved similar short-term clinical outcomes and treatment responses in CHB patients with SAE., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectves: Among immunosuppressants, rituximab is most strongly associated with the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in chronic HBV individuals. Current guidelines recommending antiviral prophylaxis for these patients on rituximab are predominantly based on studies in oncology. However, limited data existed for the precise risk of HBV flares, effectiveness and optimal duration of antiviral prophylaxis in rituximab-treated rheumatic patients, whose immune status and treatment regimen differ significantly from those of oncology patients. Therefore, we aimed to assess the incidence and clinical outcome of HBV reactivation in HBsAg-positive patients receiving rituximab for various autoimmune diseases who discontinue the antiviral agents., Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 95 hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive patients treated with rituximab for autoimmune diseases in a single centre in Taiwan. HBV related hepatitis, defined as alanine aminotransferase (ALT) more than 3 times of baseline level and concurrent HBV reactivation, after anti-viral discontinuation, was the primary endpoint. Factors associated with HBV hepatitis flare and off-antiviral hepatitis flare were also analysed., Results: With nucleos(t)ide analogues (NA) prophylaxis, no hepatitis flares occurred. However, without prophylaxis, 59% had flare (24.5 per 100 person-years) and 8% experienced liver decompensation. Concurrent steroid use was a dose-dependent risk factor for flare. After NA discontinuation, rituximab "retreatment" led to flares in 75% of cases and liver decompensation in 63% of patients. Stopping NAs within one-year post-rituximab, even without further rituximab treatment, resulted in a 38% flare rate., Conclusions: This study offers the direct evidence for the necessity of universal antiviral prophylaxis in rheumatic patients with chronic HBV receiving rituximab. After NA discontinuation, rituximab "retreatment" led to even higher flare rate and worse outcome. Patients who completed rituximab treatment should also keep antiviral agents for at least one more year to prevent hepatitis flare.

Introduction: Available data regarding the safety and efficacy of sotrovimab in pregnant patients remain limited due to their exclusion from clinical trials., Methods: The COVID-19 International Drug Pregnancy Registry (COVID-PR) was established to gather comprehensive safety data from pregnant women who have received monoclonal antibody (mAb) or antiviral treatments for mild, moderate, or severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during pregnancy. Participants actively contributed self-reported data concerning their COVID-19 symptoms, in addition to sociodemographic and health-related characteristics. Obstetric, neonatal, and infant outcomes were also documented, with follow-up extending up to 12 months after childbirth., Results: As of 30 November 2023, sotrovimab was administered to 39 participants enrolled in the COVID-PR. At the time of this report, 26 participants had given birth, with nine deliveries performed via cesarean section. The infants' birthweight ranged from 2381 g to 4762 g, with a mean of 3439.91 g. Twenty-five infants were born at ≥37 weeks. A total of 31 adverse events (AEs) were reported by 12 participants. The most frequently reported AE was gestational hypertension, observed in three participants. COVID-19 re-infection, fatigue, gestational diabetes, headache, and morning sickness were each reported by two participants. Of the reported AEs, eight (in five participants) were classified as serious, including four AEs (prolonged labor, pre-eclampsia, polyhydramnios, premature labor) that affected pregnancy. Seven of these eight serious AEs (SAEs) were found to be unrelated to sotrovimab, with one event (urinary retention) not assessable. A total of 44 AEs were reported in 19 delivered infants or in utero fetuses. The most common were COVID-19 (n = 6 events), ear infection (n = 5 events), neonatal dyspnea (n = 3 events), and respiratory syncytial virus infection (n = 3 events). Sixteen AEs (in 11 infants/fetuses) were classified as serious, including one report each of fetal cardiac disorder, congenital ankyloglossia, persistent right umbilical vein, and congenital hydronephrosis; the latter was considered a major congenital malformation. For all assessable SAEs, causality of sotrovimab treatment was ruled out based on lack of a temporal relationship alone or in combination with absence of a plausible mechanism., Conclusion: A sizable proportion of sotrovimab-treated participants in the COVID-PR had underlying medical conditions associated with an increased risk of severe COVID-19. None of the assessable SAEs were considered to be related to sotrovimab treatment., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background and Aims: Chronic hepatitis D is the most debilitating form of viral hepatitis frequently progressing to cirrhosis and subsequent decompensation. However, the HDV entry inhibitor bulevirtide is only approved for antiviral treatment of patients with compensated disease. We aimed for the analysis of real-world data on the off-label use of bulevirtide in the setting of decompensated liver cirrhosis., Approach and Results: We conducted a retrospective study in patients with HDV with decompensated liver disease at German, Austrian, and Italian centers. We included 19 patients (47% male, mean age: 51 years) with liver cirrhosis Child-Pugh B. The median MELD score was 12 (range 9-17) at treatment initiation. The median observation period was 41 weeks. Virologic response was achieved in 74% and normal alanine aminotransferase was observed in 74%. The combined response was achieved by 42%. The most relevant adverse events included self-limited alanine aminotransferase flares, an asymptomatic increase in bile acids, and the need for liver transplantation. Despite bile acid increases, adverse events were considered unrelated. Clinical and laboratory improvement from Child-Pugh B to A occurred in 47% (n = 9/19). Improvements in the amount of ascites were observed in 58% of the patients initially presenting with ascites (n = 7/12)., Conclusions: This report on off-label bulevirtide treatment in patients with decompensated HDV cirrhosis shows similar virologic and biochemical response rates as observed in compensated liver disease. Significant improvements were observed in surrogates of hepatic function and portal hypertension. However, this improvement was not seen in all patients. Controlled trials are needed to confirm the safety and efficacy of bulevirtide in decompensated HDV cirrhosis., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Objective: Long-term antiviral treatment is necessary for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients, and treatment safety is imperative for these patients. Previous studies showed tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) has shown efficacy non-inferior to that of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) with improved renal and bone safety. However, there is still a lack of a rapid and convenient method to identify CHB patients at high risk of osteoporosis before initiating antiviral treatment. The International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) recommended a one-minute osteoporosis risk test to identify early high-risk patients. Our aim was to evaluate the feasibility of the one-minute osteoporosis risk test, along with evaluating the effectiveness and safety for virologically suppressed CHB patients switching to TAF., Methods: In this multicenter, prospective study, patients with chronic HBV infection who had been receiving TDF or Entecavir (ETV) for 48 weeks or more with HBV DNA less than 20 IU/mL for longer than 6 months were screened by one-minute osteoporosis risk test. Patients with a high risk of osteoporosis and then diagnosed with osteopenia or osteoporosis by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) were enrolled. Safety in bone and bone turnover markers and antiviral efficacy of TAF were assessed respectively at 24 and 48 weeks., Results: 84.95% (175/206) CHB patients screened by one-minute osteoporosis risk test were at risk of osteoporosis.85.71% (150/175) were diagnosed with osteopenia by DEXA. The analysis included a total of 138 patients, of whom 92(62.3%) were male and 46 (37.7%) were female, with a mean age of 45 years old. HBV DNA was suppressed at 48 weeks at 88% (35/40) in the prior ETV group and 90% (88/98) at 48 weeks group in the prior TDF group. Bone mineral density (BMD) of the lumbar spine (L1-L4) from TDF switching to TAF was improved at 24 weeks (1.03±0.11 vs. 0.97±0.12, P = .001) than baseline. Propeptides of type I procollagen (PINP) and beta-C-terminal telopeptides of type 1 collagen (CTX) in serum at 24 weeks after switching from TDF to TAF declined compared with baseline (50.35±18.90 vs. 63.65±19.17, P = .016 and 0.21±0.13 vs. 0.32±0.10, P = .017). BMD, PINP, and CTX in ETV to TAF group remained stable during treatment., Conclusion: Attention should be paid to osteoporosis risk during lone-term nucleot(s)ide analogue treatment. One minute test of osteoporosis risk could rapidly identify most CHB patients at risk of osteoporosis. Given its convenience, we recommend using this test for early screening in CHB patients prior to initiating antiviral treatment. Our results further demonstrated that an improvement in bone safety after switching to TAF in virologically suppressed CHB patients with osteoporosis.

Importance: There is an urgent need to identify treatments for postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC)., Objective: To assess the efficacy of a 15-day course of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in reducing the severity of select PASC symptoms., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a 15-week blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial conducted from November 2022 to September 2023 at Stanford University (California). The participants were adults with moderate to severe PASC symptoms of 3 months or longer duration., Interventions: Participants were randomized 2:1 to treatment with oral nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (NMV/r, 300 mg and 100 mg) or with placebo-ritonavir (PBO/r) twice daily for 15 days., Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was a pooled severity of 6 PASC symptoms (fatigue, brain fog, shortness of breath, body aches, gastrointestinal symptoms, and cardiovascular symptoms) based on a Likert scale score at 10 weeks. Secondary outcomes included symptom severity at different time points, symptom burden and relief, patient global measures, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures, orthostatic vital signs, and sit-to-stand test change from baseline., Results: Of the 155 participants (median [IQR] age, 43 [34-54] years; 92 [59%] females), 102 were randomized to the NMV/r group and 53 to the PBO/r group. Nearly all participants (n = 153) had received the primary series for COVID-19 vaccination. Mean (SD) time between index SARS-CoV-2 infection and randomization was 17.5 (9.1) months. There was no statistically significant difference in the model-derived severity outcome pooled across the 6 core symptoms at 10 weeks between the NMV/r and PBO/r groups. No statistically significant between-group differences were found at 10 weeks in the Patient Global Impression of Severity or Patient Global Impression of Change scores, summative symptom scores, and change from baseline to 10 weeks in PROMIS fatigue, dyspnea, cognitive function, and physical function measures. Adverse event rates were similar in NMV/r and PBO/r groups and mostly of low grade., Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this randomized clinical trial showed that a 15-day course of NMV/r in a population of patients with PASC was generally safe but did not demonstrate a significant benefit for improving select PASC symptoms in a mostly vaccinated cohort with protracted symptom duration. Further studies are needed to determine the role of antivirals in the treatment of PASC., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05576662.

Objective: This proof-of-principle pharmacovigilance study used Electronic Health Record (EHR) data to examine the safety of sotrovimab, paxlovid and molnupiravir in prehospital treatment of Covid-19., Method: With NHS England approval, we conducted an observational cohort study using OpenSAFELY-TPP, a secure software-platform which executes analyses across EHRs for 24 million people in England. High-risk individuals with Covid-19 eligible for prehospital treatment were included. Adverse events (AEs) were categorised into events in the drug's Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC), drug-reactions and immune-mediated. Cox models compared risk across treatments. A pre-pandemic record analysis was performed for comparative purposes., Results: Between 2021-2023, 37,449 patients received sotrovimab, paxlovid or molnupiravir whilst 109,647 patients made up an eligible-but-untreated population. The 28-day rates of AEs were low: SmPC 0.34 per 1000 patient-years (95% CI 0.32-0.36); drug-reactions 0.01 (95% CI 0.01-0.02) and immune-mediated 0.03 (95% CI 0.03-0.04), and similar or lower than the pre-pandemic period. Compared with the eligible but untreated population, sotrovimab and paxlovid associated with a risk of SmPC AE [adjHR 1.36 (95% CI 1.15-1.62) and 1.28 (95% CI 1.05-1.55), respectively], whilst sotrovimab associated with a risk of drug-reactions [adjHR 2.95 (95% CI 1.56-5.55)] and immune-mediated events [adjHR 3.22 (95% CI 1.86-5.57)]., Conclusion: Sotrovimab, paxlovid and molnupiravir demonstrate acceptable safety profiles. Although the risk of AEs was greatest with sotrovimab, event rates were lower than comparative pre-pandemic period., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: AG, BMK, BZ, RMS, SB, SN and ZY have no known competing financial interests. The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: AM is a senior clinical researcher at the University of Oxford in the Bennett Institute, which is funded by contracts and grants obtained from the Bennett Foundation, Wellcome Trust, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Oxford and Thames Valley, Mohn-Westlake Foundation, and NHS England. AMe received 3 days of consultancy for https://inductionhealthcare.com/ (last date feb 2022) - paid direct to me. Member of RCGP health informatics group and the NHS Digital GP data Professional Advisory Group that advises on access to GP Data for Pandemic Planning and Research (GDPPR); payment direct to me for the GDPPR role. Last invoiced Dec 2022. BG has received research funding from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, NIHR, NIHR School of Primary Care Research, NHS England, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, the Mohn-Westlake Foundation, NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Oxford and Thames Valley, the Wellcome Trust, the Good Thinking Foundation, Health Data Research UK, the Health Foundation, the World Health Organisation, UKRI MRC, Asthma UK, the British Lung Foundation, and the Longitudinal Health and Wellbeing strand of the National Core Studies programme; he is a Non-Executive Director at NHS Digital; he also receives personal income from speaking and writing for lay audiences on the misuse of science. JBG has received honoraria from Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, Chugai, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sobi, and UCB, and has research funding from Amgen, Aztra-Zeneca, Gilead, Janssen, Medicago, Novovax and Pfizer. KB has received honoraria from Galapagos, UCB and Viforpharma. MDR has received honoraria from AbbVie, Biogen, Lilly, Galapagos, Menarini, UCB, and Viforpharma., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To identify possible drug-drug interactions in patients taking medications for other comorbidities while on antiviral therapy for chronic hepatitis B., Methods: The study enrolled patients with chronic hepatitis B aged ≥60 years who were treated with antiviral therapy in five hospitals in Turkey between January 1 and March 1, 2023. The Lexicomp® Drug Interactions program was used to identify possible drug-drug interactions., Results: The study included 213 patients (119 [55.9%] men). The mean age was 68.5 years. A potential drug-drug interaction was identified in 112 patients (52.6%). The most common type of interaction was type C ("follow the treatment") (71.54%). The number of potential drug-drug interactions increased with an increase in the number of drugs used by the patients. A robust and affirmative correlation was observed between the number of medications used and the number of possible drug-drug interactions (r=0.791, P<0.001). Adverse interactions (interactions of types C and D, 3.7% of cases) were limited to patients receiving tenofovir disoproxil fumarate., Conclusion: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications should be used cautiously in elderly patients with chronic hepatitis B treated with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate due to the increased risk of renal toxicity.

Acute generalised exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP) is a rare cutaneous disorder that presents with numerous non-follicular, pinpoint sterile pustules on a background of oedematous erythema that can coalesce, leading to desquamation. 90% of cases are triggered by medications, most often with antibiotics as the culprit. However, other triggers including viral infection have also been reported. Herpes simplex virus (HSV) as a viral trigger has not been previously explored. Here, we present a case of AGEP caused by bupropion, followed by a second presentation of assumed acute limited exanthematous pustulosis in the setting of disseminated HSV. This case may represent the first report of AGEP and HSV overlap. It also presents the interesting dilemma of differentiating AGEP and disseminated HSV (which can present similarly) as well as determining appropriate treatment and the utility versus risk of systemic steroid administration., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© BMJ Publishing Group Limited 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The optimal antiviral drug for treatment of severe influenza remains unclear. To support updated WHO influenza clinical guidelines, this systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluated antivirals for treatment of patients with severe influenza., Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Global Health, Epistemonikos, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials published up to Sept 20, 2023, that enrolled hospitalised patients with suspected or laboratory-confirmed influenza and compared direct-acting influenza antivirals against placebo, standard care, or another antiviral. Pairs of coauthors independently extracted data on study characteristics, patient characteristics, antiviral characteristics, and outcomes, with discrepancies resolved by discussion or by a third coauthor. Key outcomes of interest were time to alleviation of symptoms, duration of hospitalisation, admission to intensive care unit, progression to invasive mechanical ventilation, duration of mechanical ventilation, mortality, hospital discharge destination, emergence of antiviral resistance, adverse events, adverse events related to treatments, and serious adverse events. We conducted frequentist network meta-analyses to summarise the evidence and evaluated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023456650., Findings: Of 11 878 records identified by our search, eight trials with 1424 participants (mean age 36-60 years for trials that reported mean or median age; 43-78% male patients) were included in this systematic review, of which six were included in the network meta-analysis. The effects of oseltamivir, peramivir, or zanamivir on mortality compared with placebo or standard care without placebo for seasonal and zoonotic influenza were of very low certainty. Compared with placebo or standard care, we found low certainty evidence that duration of hospitalisation for seasonal influenza was reduced with oseltamivir (mean difference -1·63 days, 95% CI -2·81 to -0·45) and peramivir (-1·73 days, -3·33 to -0·13). Compared with standard care, there was little or no difference in time to alleviation of symptoms with oseltamivir (0·34 days, -0·86 to 1·54; low certainty evidence) or peramivir (-0·05 days, -0·69 to 0·59; low certainty evidence). There were no differences in adverse events or serious adverse events with oseltamivir, peramivir, and zanamivir (very low certainty evidence). Uncertainty remains about the effects of antivirals on other outcomes for patients with severe influenza. Due to the small number of eligible trials, we could not test for publication bias., Interpretation: In hospitalised patients with severe influenza, oseltamivir and peramivir might reduce duration of hospitalisation compared with standard care or placebo, although the certainty of evidence is low. The effects of all antivirals on mortality and other important patient outcomes are very uncertain due to scarce data from randomised controlled trials., Funding: World Health Organization., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)