Search

H3Africa is developing capacity for health-related genomics research in Africa

Background Viral SARS-CoV-2 rebound (viral RNA rebound) is challenging to characterize in large cohorts due to the logistics of collecting frequent and regular diagnostic test results. Pharmacy-based testing data provide an opportunity to study the phenomenon in a large population, also enabling subgroup analyses. The current real-world evidence approach complements approaches focused on smaller, prospective study designs. Methods We linked real-time reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction test data from national pharmacy-based testing to health care claims data via tokenization to calculate the cumulative incidence of viral RNA rebound within 28 days following positive test results in nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMV-r)–treated and untreated individuals during the Omicron era (December 2021–November 2022) and prior to the Omicron era (October 2020–November 2021). Results Among 30 646 patients, the rate of viral RNA rebound was 3.5% (95% CI, 2.0%–5.7%) in NMV-r–treated infections as compared with 1.5% (95% CI, 1.3%–1.7%) in untreated infections during the Omicron era and 1.9% (95% CI, 1.7%–2.1%) prior to the Omicron era. Viral RNA rebound in patients who were vaccinated (n = 8151), high risk (n = 4411), or older (≥65 years, n = 4411) occurred at comparable rates to the overall cohort (range, 1.1%–4.8%). Viral rebounds to high RNA levels in NMV-r–treated infections occurred in 8% of viral rebounds as compared with 5% to 11% in untreated infections. Rates of hospitalization were comparable between patients with NMV-r–treated infections with viral RNA rebound (0%) and untreated patients with viral RNA rebound (0%–1.2%). Conclusions Our findings suggest viral RNA rebound is rare (< 5%), with rates that were consistent with those from the EPIC-HR trial (Evaluation of Protease Inhibition for COVID-19 in High-Risk Patients). Most occurrences of viral RNA rebound were associated with low viral RNA levels, and viral RNA rebound progression to severe disease was not observed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background An urgent need remains for antiviral therapies to treat patients hospitalized with COVID-19. PF-07304814—the prodrug (lufotrelvir) and its active moiety (PF-00835231)—is a potent inhibitor of the SARS-CoV-2 3CL protease. Method Eligible participants were 18 to 79 years old and hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19. This first-in-human phase 1b study was designed with 2 groups: single ascending dose (SAD) and multiple ascending dose (MAD). Participants could receive local standard-of-care therapy. In SAD, participants were randomized to receive a 24-hour infusion of lufotrelvir/placebo. In MAD, participants were randomized to receive a 120-hour infusion of lufotrelvir/placebo. The primary endpoint was to assess the safety and tolerability of lufotrelvir. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of lufotrelvir and PF-00835231. Results In SAD, participants were randomized to receive 250 mg lufotrelvir (n = 2), 500 mg lufotrelvir (n = 2), or placebo (n = 4) by continuous 24-hour infusion. In MAD, participants were randomized to receive 250 mg lufotrelvir (n = 7), 500 mg lufotrelvir (n = 6), or placebo (n = 4) by continuous 120-hour infusion. No adverse events or serious adverse events were considered related to lufotrelvir. At doses of 250 and 500 mg, concentrations for the prodrug lufotrelvir and active moiety PF-00835231 increased in a dose-related manner. Unbound concentrations of the lufotrelvir active metabolite reached steady state approximately 2- and 4-fold that of in vitro EC90 following 250- and 500-mg doses, respectively. Conclusions These safety and pharmacokinetic findings support the continued evaluation of lufotrelvir in clinical studies. Clinical Trials Registration. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04535167. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Author(s): Hayden C. Metsky [1, 2]; Christian B. Matranga [1]; Shirlee Wohl [1, 3]; Stephen F. Schaffner [1, 3, 4]; Catherine A. Freije [1, 3]; Sarah M. Winnicki [1]; Kendra [...]

Author(s): Nathan D. Grubaugh [1]; Jason T. Ladner [2]; Moritz U. G. Kraemer [3, 4, 5]; Gytis Dudas [6]; Amanda L. Tan [7]; Karthik Gangavarapu [1]; Michael R. Wiley [2, [...]

Results show that optimal activity of the human adenovirus proteinase requires the participation of a C-terminal peptide from the virus precursor protein pVI and the viral DNA. DNA binding is not sequence specific with a binding stoichiometry that is proportional to the length of the DNA.

Research has been conducted on the human adenovirus proteinase (AVP). The interaction of AVP and AVP-DNA complexes with the amino acid cofactor has been characterized and described.

To facilitate the detection and management of potential clinical antiviral resistance, in vitro selection of drug-resistant severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) against the virus Mpro inhibitor nirmatrelvir (PAXLOVID) active component) was conducted. Six Mpro mutation patterns containing T304I alone or in combination with T21I, L50F, T135I, S144A, or A173V emerged, with A173V+T304I and T21I+S144A+T304I mutations showing >20-fold resistance each. Biochemical analyses indicated inhibition constant shifts aligned to antiviral results, with S144A and A173V each markedly reducing nirmatrelvir inhibition and Mpro activity. SARS-CoV-2 surveillance revealed that in vitro resistance-associated mutations from our studies and those reported in the literature were rarely detected in the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data database. In the Paxlovid Evaluation of Protease Inhibition for COVID-19 in High-Risk Patients trial, E166V was the only emergent resistance mutation, observed in three Paxlovid-treated patients, none of whom experienced COVID-19-related hospitalization or death. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Clinical trials of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have not shown a significant benefit of postexposure prophylaxis. METHODS We conducted a phase 2-3 double-blind trial to assess the efficacy and safety of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in asymptomatic, rapid antigen test-negative adults who had been exposed to a household contact with Covid-19 within 96 hours before randomization. The participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (300 mg of nirmatrelvir and 100 mg of ritonavir) every 12 hours for 5 days or for 10 days or matching placebo for 5 or 10 days. The primary end point was the development of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) infection, confirmed on reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) or rapid antigen testing, through 14 days in participants who had a negative RT-PCR test at baseline. RESULTS A total of 2736 participants were randomly assigned to a trial group -- 921 to the 5-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, 917 to the 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, and 898 to the placebo group. Symptomatic, confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection developed by day 14 in 2.6% of the participants in the 5-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, 2.4% of those in the 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, and 3.9% of those in the placebo group. In each nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group, the percentage of participants in whom symptomatic, confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection developed did not differ significantly from that in the placebo group, with risk reductions relative to placebo of 29.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], -16.7 to 57.8; P=0.17) in the 5-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group and 35.5% (95% CI, -11.5 to 62.7; P=0.12) in the 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir group. The incidence of adverse events was similar across the trial groups, with dysgeusia being the most frequently reported adverse event (in 5.9% and 6.8% of the participants in the 5-day and 10-day nirmatrelvir-ritonavir groups, respectively, and in 0.7% of those in the placebo group). CONCLUSIONS In this placebo-controlled trial, postexposure prophylaxis with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for 5 or 10 days did not significantly reduce the risk of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Nirmatrelvir is an orally administered severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 main protease (Mpro) inhibitor with potent pan–human-coronavirus activity in vitro. METHODS We conducted a phase 2–3 double-blind, randomized, controlled trial in which symptomatic, unvaccinated, nonhospitalized adults at high risk for progression to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 300 mg of nirmatrelvir plus 100 mg of ritonavir (a pharmacokinetic enhancer) or placebo every 12 hours for 5 days. Covid-19–related hospitalization or death from any cause through day 28, viral load, and safety were evaluated. RESULTS A total of 2246 patients underwent randomization; 1120 patients received nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir (nirmatrelvir group) and 1126 received placebo (placebo group). In the planned interim analysis of patients treated within 3 days after symptom onset (modified intention-to treat population, comprising 774 of the 1361 patients in the full analysis population), the incidence of Covid-19–related hospitalization or death by day 28 was lower in the nirmatrelvir group than in the placebo group by 6.32 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], −9.04 to −3.59; P<0.001; relative risk reduction, 89.1%); the incidence was 0.77% (3 of 389 patients) in the nirmatrelvir group, with 0 deaths, as compared with 7.01% (27 of 385 patients) in the placebo group, with 7 deaths. Efficacy was maintained in the final analysis involving the 1379 patients in the modified intention-to-treat population, with a difference of −5.81 percentage points (95% CI, −7.78 to −3.84; P<0.001; relative risk reduction, 88.9%). All 13 deaths occurred in the placebo group. The viral load was lower with nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir than with placebo at day 5 of treatment, with an adjusted mean difference of −0.868 log10 copies per milliliter when treatment was initiated within 3 days after the onset of symptoms. The incidence of adverse events that emerged during the treatment period was similar in the two groups (any adverse event, 22.6% with nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir vs. 23.9% with placebo; serious adverse events, 1.6% vs. 6.6%; and adverse events leading to discontinuation of the drugs or placebo, 2.1% vs. 4.2%). Dysgeusia (5.6% vs. 0.3%) and diarrhea (3.1% vs. 1.6%) occurred more frequently with nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir than with placebo. CONCLUSIONS Treatment of symptomatic Covid-19 with nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir resulted in a risk of progression to severe Covid-19 that was 89% lower than the risk with placebo, without evident safety concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite effective vaccines and treatments for COVID-19, clinical burden persists. An unmet need exists for additional effective agents with safety profiles allowing use across a broad population. Ibuzatrelvir is an orally bioavailable SARS-CoV-2 Mpro inhibitor that has demonstrated in vitro antiviral activity and low potential for safety concerns, including drug-drug interactions., Methods: This phase 2b, double-blind, randomized clinical trial enrolled US adults aged 18‒<65 years with symptomatic COVID-19 and no risk factors for severe disease. Participants were randomized 1:1:2:2 to receive 100, 300, or 600 mg ibuzatrelvir or placebo orally twice daily for 5 days. Nasopharyngeal specimens were collected on Days 1 (baseline), 3, 5, 10, 14, and 21; adverse events (AEs) were recorded through Day 33. The primary endpoint was change in SARS-CoV-2 RNA level (viral load [VL]) from baseline to Day 5 among participants with baseline VL ≥4 log10 copies/mL., Results: Of 240 enrollees, 237 received ≥1 dose and 199 were included in the primary analysis. Placebo-adjusted least squares mean (80% CI) change from baseline in VL at Day 5 was significant across all doses: 100 mg, ‒0.7 (‒1.1, ‒0.3) log10 copies/mL, P=0.02; 300 mg, ‒0.8 (‒1.3, ‒0.3) log10 copies/mL, P=0.01; and 600 mg, ‒1.2 (‒1.5, ‒0.8) log10 copies/mL, P<0.0001. AEs occurred in similar percentages of participants across groups. No deaths from any cause or treatment-related serious AEs occurred through Day 33, and no participants reported dysgeusia., Conclusions: All 3 ibuzatrelvir doses were associated with robust antiviral activity and an acceptable safety profile, supporting continued clinical development., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05799495., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

To facilitate the detection and management of potential clinical antiviral resistance, in vitro selection of drug-resistant severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) against the virus M pro inhibitor nirmatrelvir (Paxlovid active component) was conducted. Six M pro mutation patterns containing T304I alone or in combination with T21I, L50F, T135I, S144A, or A173V emerged, with A173V+T304I and T21I+S144A+T304I mutations showing >20-fold resistance each. Biochemical analyses indicated inhibition constant shifts aligned to antiviral results, with S144A and A173V each markedly reducing nirmatrelvir inhibition and M pro activity. SARS-CoV-2 surveillance revealed that in vitro resistance-associated mutations from our studies and those reported in the literature were rarely detected in the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data database. In the Paxlovid Evaluation of Protease Inhibition for COVID-19 in High-Risk Patients trial, E166V was the only emergent resistance mutation, observed in three Paxlovid-treated patients, none of whom experienced COVID-19-related hospitalization or death.