Search

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has significantly impacted lung transplant recipients (LTR), who remain vulnerable to severe COVID-19 despite vaccination, prompting the use of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) as a treatment option. This systematic review summarizes the clinical efficacy of mAbs against COVID-19 in adult LTR and provides a perspective on the role of mAbs for infectious diseases in the future. A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane was conducted for studies reporting clinical outcomes of adult LTR or solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR) including LTR with drug-specific outcomes. Twelve studies were included. Pre-exposure prophylaxis with mAbs reduced COVID-19 breakthrough infection in LTR. Early treatment of COVID-19 with mAbs correlated with a reduced incidence of severe COVID-19 outcomes, although statistical significance varied among studies. Overall, observational studies have demonstrated a potential benefit of mAbs in the treatment of COVID-19 in LTR, both in prophylaxis and early treatment, as well as the importance of early administration. Moreover, mAb therapy appeared safe and could be a viable option against other pathogens, a route that warrants further investigation. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display%5frecord.php?RecordID=382133, identifier CRD42022382133. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background We evaluated the fully human polyclonal antibody product SAB-185 in a phase 3 trial for COVID-19. Methods Nonhospitalized high-risk adults within 7 days of symptom onset were randomized 1:1 to open-label SAB-185 3840 units/kg or casirivimab/imdevimab 1200 mg. Noninferiority comparison was undertaken for pre-Omicron population (casirivimab/imdevimab expected to be fully active) and superiority comparison for the Omicron population (casirivimab/imdevimab not expected to be active). Primary outcomes were the composite of all-cause hospitalizations/deaths and grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) through day 28. A secondary outcome was time to sustained symptom resolution. Results Enrollment ended early due to low hospitalization/death rates upon Omicron emergence; 255 adults were in pre-Omicron and 392 in Omicron populations. Hospitalizations/deaths occurred in 6 (5.0%) and 3 (2.2%) of pre-Omicron SAB-185 and casirivimab/imdevimab arms (absolute difference 2.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], −2.3%-8.6%); and 5 (2.5%) versus 3 (1.5%) (absolute difference 1.0%; 95% CI, −2.3%-4.5%) for Omicron. All risk ratios for grade ≥3 TEAEs were not significant. Time to symptom resolution was significantly shorter for SAB-185 for Omicron only: 18 versus >25 days; P =.006. Conclusions SAB-185 had an acceptable safety profile with faster symptom resolution in the Omicron population. Clinical Trials Registration NCT04518410. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lung transplant recipients (LTRs) are at increased risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19)‐associated complications. Methods: We aimed to describe the outcomes of polymerase chain reaction‐documented severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) infection in LTRs followed at our institution from March 2020 to July 2022. The primary outcome investigated was hospitalization or death from COVID‐19‐related symptoms within 28 days from diagnosis. Results: Overall, 60 cases were included, of which 18 (30%) reached the primary outcome. Only one patient (2%) died. Anti‐spike monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) were administered as early treatment in 36 patients (casirivimab/imdevimab = 2, sotrovimab = 31, and tixagevimab/cilgavimab = 3). Multivariate analysis revealed that age >60 years (p =.003; odds ratio [OR] 9.41; confidence interval [CI] 2.52–41.05) was associated with a higher risk for the primary outcome, while administration of mAbs as early treatment (p =.030; OR 0.23; CI 0.06–0.87) was associated with a lower risk. No effect of vaccination and SARS‐CoV‐2 variant was observed. Forced expiratory volume in 1 s and forced vital capacity values did not decrease among 37 patients who had spirometry performed 1 month after COVID‐19. Conclusions: We observed a relatively low morbidity and mortality of COVID‐19 in LTR. mAb administration was associated with a better outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Pregnant and postpartum women are at increased risk of developing severe COVID-19. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are now widely used in high-income countries to treat mild to moderate COVID-19 outpatients at risk for developing severe disease. Very few data are available on the use of mAbs in special populations, including pregnant and postpartum women. Here we present our early experience with mAbs in these two populations. Methods: Electronic records of pregnant and postpartum women treated with mAbs at Careggi University Hospital, Florence, were retrieved. Relevant data were extracted (age, presence of risk factors for COVID-19, oxygen support, mAb type, gestational age, and pregnancy status). When available, outcomes at 28 days after administration were also included. Results: From March 1st to September 30th 2021, eight pregnant and two postpartum women have been treated with mAbs at our center. The median age was 31 years (IQR 30–33.5, range 29–38), median gestational age was 24 weeks. Seven patients had additional risk factors. According to the Italian disposition, all patients received casirivimab/imdevimab, with five receiving a 2.4 mg dose and five receiving a 8 g dose. Eight patients improved. One developed myocarditis, considered a COVID-19 complication. Another required a transient increase of low flow oxygen support before improving and being discharged. At a 28 days follow-up, all patients were clinically recovered. We did not observe mAbs related adverse events. Conclusion: Although preliminary data should be interpreted with caution, it is remarkable how mAbs were well tolerated by pregnant women with COVID-19. Further data on mAbs in this special population should be collected but the use of mAbs in pregnant and postpartum patients should be considered. Even thus oral antivirals are becoming available, they are not recommended in pregnant and postpartum women. This population may specifically benefit from treatment with last generation mAbs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We aimed to provide in vitro data on the neutralization capacity of different monoclonal antibody (mAb) preparations against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) delta and omicron variant, respectively, and describe the in vivo RNA kinetics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) patients treated with the respective mAbs. Virus neutralization assays were performed to assess the neutralizing effect of the mAb formulations casirivimab/imdevimab and sotrovimab on the SARS‐CoV‐2 delta and omicron variant. Additionally, respiratory tract SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA kinetics are provided for 25 COVID‐19 patients infected with either delta variant (n = 18) or omicron variant (n = 7) treated with the respective mAb formulations during their hospital stay. In the virus neutralization assay, sotrovimab exhibits neutralizing capacity at therapeutically achievable concentrations against the SARS‐CoV‐2 delta and omicron variant. In contrast, casivirimab/imdevimab had neutralizing capacity against the delta variant but failed neutralization against the omicron variant except for a very high concentration above the currently recommended therapeutic dosage. In patients with delta variant infections treated with casivirimab/imdevimab, we observed a rapid decrease of respiratory viral RNA at day 3 after mAb therapy. In contrast, no such prompt decline was observed in patients with delta variant or omicron variant infections receiving sotrovimab. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Post-coronavirus disease 2019 (post-COVID-19) condition, previously referred to as long COVID, includes a post-acute syndrome defined by the presence of nonspecific symptoms occurring usually 3 months from the onset of the acute phase and lasting at least 2 months. Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) represent a high-risk population for COVID-19. Moreover, the response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is often absent or inadequate. The introduction of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in the treatment landscape of COVID-19 allowed to reduce hospitalization and mortality in mild-moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection, but limited data are available in hematological patients. We here report the effective use of casirivimab/imdevimab (CI) in the treatment of two CLL patients with persistent infection and post-COVID-19 condition. Full genome sequencing of viral RNA from nasopharyngeal swabs was performed at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis and before the administration of CI. Both patients experienced persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection with no seroconversion for 8 and 7 months, respectively, associated with COVID symptoms. In both cases after the infusion of CI, we observed a rapid negativization of the nasal swabs, the resolution of post-COVID-19 condition, and the development of both the IgG against the trimeric spike protein and the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein. The analysis of the viralgenomein the periode lapsed from the time of COVID-19 diagnosis and the administration of mAbs showed the development of new mutations, especially in the S gene. The genome variations observed during the time suggest a role of persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection as a possible source for the development of viral variants. The effects observed in these two patients appeared strongly related to passive immunity conferred by CI treatment permitting SARS-CoV-2 clearance and resolution of post-COVID-19 condition. On these grounds, passive anti-SARSCoV-2 antibody treatment may represent as a possible therapeutic option in some patients with persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Monoclonal antibodies (mAb) prevent COVID-19 progression when administered early. We compared mAb treatment outcomes among vaccinated and unvaccinated patients during Delta wave and assessed the feasibility of implementing stricter eligibility criteria in the event of mAb scarcity.Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study of casirivimab/imdevimab recipients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 infection in an emergency department or outpatient infusion center (July 1-August 20, 2021). Primary outcome was all-cause hospital admission within 30 days post-treatment between vaccinated vs. unvaccinated patients during Delta surge in the Bronx, NY.Results: A total of 250 patients received casirivimab/imdevimab (162 unvaccinated vs. 88 vaccinated). The median age was 39 years for unvaccinated patients, and 52 years for vaccinated patients (p < 0.0001). The median number of EUA criteria met was 1 for unvaccinated and 2 for vaccinated patients (p < 0.0001). Overall, 6% (15/250) of patients were admitted within 30 days post-treatment. Eleven unvaccinated patients (7%) were admitted within 30-days compared to 4 (5%) vaccinated patients (p = 0.48).Conclusions: All-cause 30-day admission was not statistically different between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. When federal allocation of therapies is limited, programs must prioritize patients at highest risk of hospitalization and death regardless of vaccination status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Casirivimab/imdevimab (REGN-COV), a cocktail of neutralizing antibodies against the receptor-binding domain of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein, was shown to be an effective treatment and post-exposure prophylaxis measure for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We assessed the antibody titers among patients who received REGN-COV with the purpose of evaluating this therapeutic and prophylactic option from the serological point of view. Methods: We collected serological data of patients with COVID-19 who were treated with REGN-COV 1200 mg (casirivimab 600 mg/imdevimab 600 mg). Antibody titers were assessed within 24 h before and within 48 h after the administration of REGN-COV using ARCHITECT SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin (Ig)G (IgGNC), which is against nucleocapsid protein, and ARCHITECT SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant (IgGSP), which is against spike protein. Results: A total of nine patients were evaluated. IgGSP was elevated after REGN-COV administration with a median of 208,370 Arbitrary Units/mL while simultaneous IgGNC remained low. With the simple linear regression model, the IgGSP after the REGN-COV administration was correlated with the reciprocal of ideal body weight. Conclusion: The high titer of IgGSP supports the clinical benefit of therapeutic and prophylactic use of REGN-COV from the serological point of view. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Comparative analysis between different monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against SARS-CoV-2 are lacking. We present an emulation trial from observational data to compare effectiveness of Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab (BAM/ETE) and Casirivimab/Imdevimab (CAS/IMD) in outpatients with early mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in a real-world scenario of variants of concern (VoCs) from Alpha to Delta. Methods: Allocation to treatment was subject to mAbs availability, and the measured factors were not used to determine which combination to use. Patients were followed through day 30. Viral load was measured by cycle threshold (CT) on D1 (baseline) and D7. Primary outcome was time to COVID-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause over days 0-30. Weighted pooled logistic regression and marginal structural Cox model by inverse probability weights were used to compare BAM/ETE vs. CAS/IMD. ANCOVA was used to compare mean D7 CT values by intervention. Models were adjusted for calendar month, MASS score and VoCs. We evaluated effect measure modification by VoCs, vaccination, D1 CT levels and enrolment period. Results: COVID19-related hospitalization or death from any cause occurred in 15 of 237 patients in the BAM/ETE group (6.3%) and in 4 of 196 patients in the CAS/IMD group (2.0%) (relative risk reduction [1 minus the relative risk] 72%; p=0.024). Subset analysis carried no evidence that the effect of the intervention was different across stratification factors. There was no evidence in viral load reduction from baseline through day 7 across the two groups (+0.17, 95% -1.41;+1.74, p=0.83). Among patients who experienced primary outcome, none showed a negative RT-PCR test in nasopharyngeal swab (p=0.009) and 82.4% showed still high viral load (p<0.001) on D7. Conclusions: In a pre-Omicron epidemiologic scenario, CAS/IMD reduced risk of clinical progression of COVID-19 compared to BAM/ETE. This effect was not associated with a concomitant difference in virological response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a growing interest in using monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in the early stages of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection to prevent disease progression. Little is known about the efficacy of mAbs against the delta variant of concern and its clinical presentations. We evaluated the effect of casirivimab/imdevimab treatment among five delta vaccine breakthrough patients. Symptomatic non-hospitalized vaccinated patients were submitted to nasopharyngeal swabs for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 and Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS). Blood analysis and chest Computed Tomography were also performed. A cocktail of casirivimab/imdevimab was administrated, and patients were monitored weekly. Clinical evolution was evaluated by the regression of the symptoms, negative results by real-time RT-PCR, and by the need of hospitalization: these aspects were considered as significant outcomes. In four cases, symptom reversion and viral load reduction were observed within 2 days and 7 days after mAbs treatment, respectively. Only one case, suffering from thymoma, was hospitalized 2 days later because of respiratory failure, which reverted within 18 days. mAbs treatment seems to be safe and effective against the delta variant and its clinical manifestations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk of hospitalization or death in patients infected by SARS-CoV2 variants of concern (VOCs) receiving combinations of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), bamlanivimab/etesevimab or casirivimab/imdevimab. Methods: Observational prospective study conducted in two Italian hospitals (University Hospital of Pisa and San Donato Hospital, Arezzo) including consecutive outpatients with COVID-19 who received bamlanivimab/etesevimab or casirivimab/imdevimab from March 20th to May 10th 2021. All patients were at high risk of COVID-19 progression according to FDA/AIFA recommendations. Patients were divided into two study groups according to the infecting viral strain (VOCs): Alpha and Gamma group. The primary endpoint was a composite of hospitalization or death within 30 days from mAbs infusion. A Cox regression multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with the primary outcome in the overall population. Results: The study included 165 patients: 105 were infected by the VOC Alpha and 43 by the VOC Gamma. In the Alpha group, no differences in the primary endpoint were observed between patients treated with bamlanivimab/etesevimab or casirivimab/imdevimab. Conversely, in the Gamma group, a higher proportion of patients treated with bamlanivimab/etesevimab met the primary endpoint compared to those receiving casirivimab/imdevimab (55% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.013). On multivariate Cox-regression analysis, the Gamma variant and days from symptoms onset to mAbs infusion were factors independently associated with higher risk of hospitalization or death, while casirivimab/imdevimab was protective (HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.13–0.83, p = 0.019). Conclusions: In patients infected by the SARS-CoV-2 Gamma variant, bamlanivimab/etesevimab should be used with caution because of the high risk of disease progression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to stress the health care system. Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) were effective in reducing COVID-19–related hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits in their respective clinical trials. However, these results have yet to be reproduced in a practical setting following implementation of current US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance. Methods This retrospective cohort study included outpatients with confirmed COVID-19 infection, who had mild/moderate symptoms for 10 days or less, and who were deemed high-risk for severe COVID-19 under FDA's Emergency Use Authorization for mAbs. Patients who received either bamlanivimab or casirivimab/imdevimab from 18 November 2020 through 5 January 2021 were included (n = 200). This was compared against a control cohort of randomly selected high-risk COVID-19 outpatients who declined or were not referred for mAb treatment during the same period (n = 200). The primary outcome was a composite of 29-day COVID-19–related hospitalizations and/or ED visits. Prespecified secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary endpoint, 29-day all-cause mortality, and serious adverse drug events. Results Patients treated with mAbs were significantly less likely to be hospitalized or visit the ED compared with patients not treated with mAb (13.5% vs 40.5%; odds ratio, 0.23 [95% confidence interval,.14–.38]; P  < .001). The mortality rate was 0% in the mAb group compared with 3.5% in the control group (P  = .02). Only 2 patients receiving mAb experienced a serious adverse event requiring treatment. Conclusions Among high-risk COVID-19 outpatients with mild/moderate symptoms, early administration of mAbs can potentially reduce the strain on the health care system during the current pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Klinická Mikrobiologie a Infekční Lékařství is the property of TRIOS, spol. sr.o. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Since the outbreak and subsequent declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic in March 2020, concerted efforts have been applied by the scientific community to curtail the spread of the disease and find a cure. While vaccines constitute a vital part of the public health strategy to reduce the burden of COVID-19, the management of this disease will continue to rely heavily on pharmacotherapy. This study aims to provide an updated review of pharmacological agents that have been developed and/or repurposed for the treatment of COVID-19. To this end, a comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Google Scholar, and LitCovid databases. Relevant clinical studies on drugs used in the management of COVID-19 were identified and evaluated in terms of evidence of efficacy and safety. To date, the FDA has approved three therapies for the treatment of COVID-19 Emergency Use Authorization: convalescent plasma, remdesivir, and casirivimab/imdevimab (REGN-COV2). Drugs such as lopinavir/ritonavir, umifenovir, favipiravir, anakinra, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, tocilizumab, interferons, tissue plasminogen activator, intravenous immunoglobulins, and nafamosat have been used off-label with mixed therapeutic results. Adjunctive administration of corticosteroids is also very common. The clinical experience with these approved and repurposed drugs is limited, and data on efficacy for the new indication are not strong. Overall, the response of the global scientific community to the COVID-19 pandemic has been impressive, as evident from the volume of scientific literature elucidating the molecular biology and pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2 and the approval of three new drugs for clinical management. Reviewed studies have shown mixed data on efficacy and safety of the currently utilized drugs. The lack of standard treatment for COVID-19 has made it difficult to interpret results from most of the published studies due to the risk of attribution error. The long-term effects of drugs can only be assessed after several years of clinical experience; therefore, the efficacy and safety of current COVID-19 therapeutics should continue to be rigorously monitored as part of post-marketing studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]