Search

BackgroundConvenient administration of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment in community settings is desirable. Sotrovimab is a pan-sarbecovirus dual-action monoclonal antibody formulated for intravenous (IV) or intramuscular (IM) administration for early treatment of mild/moderate COVID-19.MethodsThis phase 3, randomized, multicenter, open-label study tested non-inferiority of IM to IV administration using a 3.5% absolute non-inferiority margin. From June to August 2021, patients aged ≥12 years with COVID-19, not hospitalized or receiving supplemental oxygen, and at high risk for progression were randomized 1:1:1 to a single 500-mg IV sotrovimab infusion or 500-mg or 250-mg IM sotrovimab injection. The primary composite endpoint was progression to all-cause hospitalization for >24 hours for acute management of illness or all-cause death through day 29.ResultsSotrovimab 500 mg IM was non-inferior to 500 mg IV: 10/376 (2.7%) participants in the sotrovimab 500-mg IM group versus 5/378 (1.3%) in the sotrovimab 500-mg IV group met the primary endpoint (absolute adjusted risk difference: 1.06% [95% confidence interval [CI]: −1.15%, 3.26%]). The CI upper limit was lower than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 3.5%. 250-mg IM group enrollment was discontinued early because a greater proportion of hospitalizations was seen in that group versus the 500-mg groups. Serious adverse events occurred in ConclusionsSotrovimab 500-mg IM injection was well tolerated and non-inferior to IV administration. IM administration could expand outpatient treatment access for COVID-19.RegistrationClinicalTrials.govIdentifier:NCT04913675Key PointsSotrovimab 500-mg IM was non-inferior to sotrovimab 500-mg IV for treatment of mild/moderate COVID-19 in high-risk patients, measured by all-cause hospitalization >24h or death through day 29, and was well-tolerated. Sotrovimab IM should provide easier outpatient access to COVID-19 treatment.

Background Sotrovimab is a human monoclonal antibody targeting a conserved region of the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein. COMET-PEAK was a 3-part, phase 2 study that evaluated intravenous (500 mg) and intramuscular (500 mg and 250 mg) administration of sotrovimab in outpatients (n=353) with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. We assessed amino acid substitutions in the SARS-CoV-2 S protein and circulating variants of concern/interest (VOC/VOI) in COMET-PEAK participants (enrolled Feb–July 2021). Methods Mid-turbinate (Part A) or nasopharyngeal (Part B/C) samples were obtained from all participants at Baseline and Post-Baseline visits. Next generation sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 S gene was conducted using Illumina MiSeq with a ≥5% allelic frequency cut-off for samples with a viral load above 3.0 log10 copies/mL. Baseline, post-baseline and treatment-emergent (TE) substitutions were assessed, and prevalence of VOC/VOI was evaluated. Phenotypic analyses of epitope substitutions were conducted using a pseudotyped virus assay. Results In total, 282/353 participants had sequencing results for ≥1 visit (253 baseline, 248 post-baseline), and 219 had paired baseline and post-baseline sequences; among these, 149 (68%) had TE substitutions in the S protein (26 [12%] in the epitope). E340K was the predominant TE substitution in the epitope (15 [7%]). Across all arms 92/245 (38%) experienced virologic rebound, 8 of whom (Part A: 2; Part B: 2; Part C: 4) had TE substitutions in the epitope; none had evidence of clinical progression to severe disease. Prevalence of VOC/VOI or single amino acid substitutions of concern was 94% (266/282); the most frequent were Alpha (Part A: 8/16 [50%]; Part B: 75/128 [59%]) and Delta (Part C: 99/122 [81%]). Of 7 participants with evidence of clinical progression, none had S protein substitutions in the epitope and all had VOC/VOI (3 Alpha, 3 Delta, 1 Gamma). Sotrovimab effectively neutralized most epitope substitutions tested in vitro; P337L and E340A/K/V conferred significantly reduced susceptibility. Conclusion There was no evidence that sotrovimab epitope substitutions were associated with clinical progression or virologic rebound. These data are consistent with those from the COMET-ICE study. Funding Vir Biotechnology/GSK (NCT04779879). Disclosures Phillip J Yates, PhD, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee Jennifer Moore, MD, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee Jennifer Han, MD, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee Andrew Skingsley, MD, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee|GlaxoSmithKline: Stocks/Bonds Gretja Schnell, PhD, Vir Biotechnology: Employee|Vir Biotechnology: Stocks/Bonds Andrea L. Cathcart, PhD, Vir Biotechnology: Employee|Vir Biotechnology: Stocks/Bonds Melissa Aldinger, PharmD, Vir Biotechnology: Employee|Vir Biotechnology: Stocks/Bonds Amanda Peppercorn, MD, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee|GlaxoSmithKline: Stocks/Bonds Jill Walker, PhD, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee.

Background There is a continued need for therapeutics for the treatment of COVID-19, including intramuscular (IM) agents, which will enable broader use across a variety of healthcare delivery settings. Methods COMET-PEAK (NCT04779879) is a 3-part study evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (Part A), and viral pharmacodynamics (PD) of sotrovimab as treatment in adults ≥ 18 years with early mild/moderate COVID-19. In Parts B and C, the safety, tolerability and viral PD of sotrovimab administered as a 500 mg intravenous (IV) infusion or as a 500 mg or 250 mg IM injection, respectively, was evaluated. The primary objective for Parts B and C was to compare the virologic response of sotrovimab IM to IV, with an endpoint of mean area under the curve (AUC) of SARS-CoV-2 viral load as measured by qRT-PCR from Day 1 to Day 8 (AUCD1-8) in nasopharyngeal swabs and predefined 90% confidence interval (CI) limits of 0.5-2.0 indicating equivalence. Results A total of 167 and 157 participants were enrolled in Part B and C, respectively, from February-July 2021. The median age of participants was 47 and 42 years in Part B and C, respectively, and ∼50% had ≥ 1 risk factor for progression to severe disease. The viral load at baseline and through Day 29 of follow-up for each arm is shown in Table 1 and Figure 1. The primary objective was met for both study parts: the ratio of the least square geometric mean viral load AUC(D1-8) of sotrovimab IM vs IV was 1.04 (90% CI, 0.98, 1.09) and 1.02 (90% CI, 0.94, 1.11), for Part B and C, respectively. Through Day 29 of follow-up, the most common adverse event was injection site reactions (ISRs) in the IM arms. A total of 10 (12%) participants in the 500 mg IM group and 4 (5%) participants in the 250 mg IM group experienced an ISR, all Grade 1. Serious adverse events were uncommon, and related to COVID-19 progression, including one death in the 250 mg IM arm (Table 2). ISRs aside, there were few treatment-related AEs (2/84 IV, 1/82 IM) in Part B, none serious. Conclusion IM administration of sotrovimab 500 mg and 250 mg each demonstrated equivalence to 500 mg sotrovimab IV in viral load assessments. Overall, there were no treatment-related serious AEs and sotrovimab was well tolerated. An 500 mg IM formulation will allow for expanded treatment potential with sotrovimab. Funding Vir/GSK (NCT04779879). Disclosures Anil K. Gupta, MD, Vir Biotechnology: Advisor/Consultant|Vir Biotechnology: Grant/Research Support|Vir Biotechnology: Speaker Moti Ramgopal, MD, FACP, FIDSA, AbbVie: Grant/Research Support|Gilead Sciences Inc.: Advisor/Consultant|Gilead Sciences Inc.: Grant/Research Support|Gilead Sciences Inc.: Honoraria|Gilead Sciences Inc.: Stocks/Bonds|GlaxoSmithKline: Advisor/Consultant|GlaxoSmithKline: Grant/Research Support|GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria|GlaxoSmithKline: Stocks/Bonds|Janssen Research & Development LLC: Advisor/Consultant|Janssen Research & Development LLC: Grant/Research Support|Janssen Research & Development LLC: Honoraria|Janssen Research & Development LLC: Stocks/Bonds|Merck: Advisor/Consultant|Merck: Grant/Research Support|Merck: Honoraria|Merck: Stocks/Bonds|Shionogi: Grant/Research Support|ViiV: Advisor/Consultant|ViiV: Grant/Research Support Jennifer Han, MD, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee Jennifer Moore, MD, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee Rudrani Banerjee, PhD, GSK: Employee|GSK: Stocks/Bonds Phillip Yates, PhD, GSK: Employee during conduct of this research|GSK: Stocks/Bonds Jill Walker, PhD, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee Gretja Schnell, PhD, Vir Biotechnology: Employee|Vir Biotechnology: Stocks/Bonds Mary Beth Connolly, PharmD, GSK: Employee|GSK: Stocks/Bonds Andrea L. Cathcart, PhD, Vir Biotechnology: Employee|Vir Biotechnology: Stocks/Bonds Varsha Imber, MSc, GSK: Employee|GSK: Stocks/Bonds Rabia Anselm, n/a, GSK: Employee|GSK: Stocks/Bonds Lindsay Winograd, MSc, GSK: Employee|GSK: Stocks/Bonds Nancy Haeusser, n/a, GSK: Employee|GSK: Stocks/Bonds Scott Segal, MD, GSK: Employee|GSK: Stocks/Bonds Andrew Skingsley, MD, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee|GlaxoSmithKline: Stocks/Bonds Melissa Aldinger, PharmD, Vir Biotechnology: Employee|Vir Biotechnology: Stocks/Bonds Amanda Peppercorn, MD, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee|GlaxoSmithKline: Stocks/Bonds.

Background Sotrovimab (VIR-7831) is an engineered human monoclonal antibody targeting a conserved region of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein; it has been shown to have a favorable safety profile and be effective for early treatment of high-risk COVID-19 patients. The COMET-TAIL phase 3 study evaluated sotrovimab administered intravenously (IV) or intramuscularly (IM) for the treatment of participants with mild to moderate COVID-19 who are at high risk of disease progression. Methods Between June to August 2021, 973 participants were randomized and received sotrovimab by 500 mg IV infusion or by 500 or 250 mg IM injection. Deep sequencing of the spike gene was performed on nasopharyngeal samples. Baseline (BL; Day 1 or Day 3), post-BL (Day 5 or later), treatment-emergent (TE) substitutions at sotrovimab epitope positions, and presence of variants of concern/interest (VOC/VOI), were evaluated at a ≥5% allelic frequency. Phenotypic analyses were conducted using a pseudotyped virus assay. Results Sequences were available from 764 participants (500 mg IV: 314/393; 500 mg IM: 302/387; 250 mg IM: 148/193). Consistent with VOC circulation during enrollment, the Delta variant was detected in 88.2% (674/764) of participants. Alpha and Mu variants were also seen at >2% prevalence. Of the 764 participants, 26 met the primary endpoint for clinical progression to hospitalization >24 hours or death due to any cause through day 29 and were infected with Delta (500 mg IV: 4; 500 mg IM: 9; 250 mg IM: 11), Alpha (500 mg IM: 1), or Mu (500 mg IV: 1) variants. Substitutions at sotrovimab epitope positions were similar across arms and were detected in 82/764 (10.7%) participants at any visit (500 mg IV: 42/314; 500 mg IM: 27/302; 250 mg IM: 13/148). Of these, 2 participants experienced clinical progression: 1 participant infected with the Mu variant (500 mg IV) carried the characteristic R346K substitution at BL; 1 participant infected with the Delta variant (500 mg IM) had P337L and E340K substitutions detected at Day 3 and P337L was enriched at Day 8. The predominant TE epitope substitutions included P337L and E340A/K/V, which confer reduced susceptibility to sotrovimab in vitro. Conclusion Overall, TE epitope substitutions were not associated with clinical progression. Funding Vir & GSK (NCT04913675) Disclosures Maria L. Agostini, PhD, Vir Biotechnology, Inc: Employee|Vir Biotechnology, Inc: Stocks/Bonds Gretja Schnell, PhD, Vir Biotechnology: Employee|Vir Biotechnology: Stocks/Bonds Julia di Iulio, PharmD, PhD, MBA, Vir Biotechnology: Employee|Vir Biotechnology: Stocks/Bonds Anita Kohli, MD, GlaxoSmithKline: Third party funding to Vir|Vir Biotechnology Inc: Support as a trial site paid to my institution and non-financial support for medical writing support Adrienne E. Shapiro, MD, PhD, Vir Biotechnology: Support as a trial site paid to my institution and non-financial support for medical writing GlaxoSmithKline third party funding to Vir support Elias H. Sarkis, MD, Abbvie: Grant/Research Support|Abbvie: Speakers Bureau|Eisai: Grant/Research Support|GlaxoSmithKline: Third party funding to Vir|Ironshore: Grant/Research Support|Janssen: Speakers Bureau|Lilly: Grant/Research Support|Otsuka: Grant/Research Support|Teva: Speakers Bureau|Vir Biotechnology Inc: Support as a trial site paid to my institution and non-financial support for medical writing support Dave Inman, MSc, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee|GlaxoSmithKline: Stocks/Bonds Amanda Peppercorn, MD, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee|GlaxoSmithKline: Stocks/Bonds Andrew Skingsley, MD, GlaxoSmithKline: Employee|GlaxoSmithKline: Stocks/Bonds Leah A. Gaffney, PhD, Vir Biotechnology: Employee|Vir Biotechnology: Stocks/Bonds Melissa Aldinger, PharmD, Vir Biotechnology: Employee|Vir Biotechnology: Stocks/Bonds Christy M. Hebner, PhD, Vir Biotechnology: Employee|Vir Biotechnology: Stocks/Bonds Andrea L. Cathcart, PhD, Vir Biotechnology: Employee|Vir Biotechnology: Stocks/Bonds.

Sotrovimab is a recombinant human monoclonal antibody that has been shown to prevent progression to hospitalization or death from severe disease in non-hospitalized high-risk patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 following either intravenous (IV) or intramuscular (IM) administration. Population pharmacokinetic (popPK) and exposure-response (ER) analyses were performed to characterize sotrovimab PK and the relationship between exposure and response (probability of progression), as well as covariates that may contribute to between-participant variability in sotrovimab PK and efficacy following IV or IM administration. Sotrovimab PK was described by a two-compartment model with linear elimination; IM absorption was characterized by a sigmoid absorption model. PopPK covariate analysis led to the addition of the effect of body weight on systemic clearance and peripheral volume of distribution, sex on IM bioavailability and first-order absorption rate (KA), and body mass index on KA. However, the magnitude of covariate effect was not pronounced and was therefore not expected to be clinically relevant based on available data to date. For ER analysis, sotrovimab exposure measures were predicted using the final popPK model. An ER model was developed using the exposure measure of sotrovimab concentration at 168 hours that described the relationship between exposure and probability of progression within the ER dataset for COMET-TAIL. The number of risk factors (≤1 vs >1) was incorporated as an additive shift on the model-estimated placebo response but had no impact on overall drug response. Limitations in the ER model may prevent generalization of these results to describe the sotrovimab exposure-progression relationship across SARS-COV-2 variants.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of two neutralising monoclonal antibody therapies (sotrovimab [Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline] and BRII-196 plus BRII-198 [Brii Biosciences]) for adults admitted to hospital for COVID-19 (hereafter referred to as hospitalised) with COVID-19.METHODS: In this multinational, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, clinical trial (Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 [TICO]), adults (aged ≥18 years) hospitalised with COVID-19 at 43 hospitals in the USA, Denmark, Switzerland, and Poland were recruited. Patients were eligible if they had laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 symptoms for up to 12 days. Using a web-based application, participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:1), stratified by trial site pharmacy, to sotrovimab 500 mg, matching placebo for sotrovimab, BRII-196 1000 mg plus BRII-198 1000 mg, or matching placebo for BRII-196 plus BRII-198, in addition to standard of care. Each study product was administered as a single dose given intravenously over 60 min. The concurrent placebo groups were pooled for analyses. The primary outcome was time to sustained clinical recovery, defined as discharge from the hospital to home and remaining at home for 14 consecutive days, up to day 90 after randomisation. Interim futility analyses were based on two seven-category ordinal outcome scales on day 5 that measured pulmonary status and extrapulmonary complications of COVID-19. The safety outcome was a composite of death, serious adverse events, incident organ failure, and serious coinfection up to day 90 after randomisation. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients randomly assigned to treatment who started the study infusion. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04501978.FINDINGS: Between Dec 16, 2020, and March 1, 2021, 546 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to sotrovimab (n=184), BRII-196 plus BRII-198 (n=183), or placebo (n=179), of whom 536 received part or all of their assigned study drug (sotrovimab n=182, BRII-196 plus BRII-198 n=176, or placebo n=178; median age of 60 years [IQR 50-72], 228 [43%] patients were female and 308 [57%] were male). At this point, enrolment was halted on the basis of the interim futility analysis. At day 5, neither the sotrovimab group nor the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group had significantly higher odds of more favourable outcomes than the placebo group on either the pulmonary scale (adjusted odds ratio sotrovimab 1·07 [95% CI 0·74-1·56]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 0·98 [95% CI 0·67-1·43]) or the pulmonary-plus complications scale (sotrovimab 1·08 [0·74-1·58]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 1·00 [0·68-1·46]). By day 90, sustained clinical recovery was seen in 151 (85%) patients in the placebo group compared with 160 (88%) in the sotrovimab group (adjusted rate ratio 1·12 [95% CI 0·91-1·37]) and 155 (88%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group (1·08 [0·88-1·32]). The composite safety outcome up to day 90 was met by 48 (27%) patients in the placebo group, 42 (23%) in the sotrovimab group, and 45 (26%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group. 13 (7%) patients in the placebo group, 14 (8%) in the sotrovimab group, and 15 (9%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group died up to day 90.INTERPRETATION: Neither sotrovimab nor BRII-196 plus BRII-198 showed efficacy for improving clinical outcomes among adults hospitalised with COVID-19.FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health and Operation Warp Speed.

Zanamivir is a potent and highly selective inhibitor of influenza neuraminidase in which the inhibition of this enzyme prevents the virus from infecting other cells and specifically prevents release of the new virion from the host cell membrane. It is available as an oral powder for inhalation and intravenous formulations. The current population pharmacokinetic model based on data from eight studies of subjects treated with the intravenous formulation (125 healthy adults and 533 hospitalized adult and pediatric subjects with suspected or confirmed influenza) suggested a decreased zanamivir clearance in pediatric and renal impairment adult subjects. It also indicates that b.i.d. dosing is necessary to keep the exposure in influenza infected subjects above the 90% inhibitory concentration values of recently circulating viruses over the dosing interval. In the exposure-response analysis (phases II and III studies), no apparent relationship was found between zanamivir exposure and clinically relevant pharmacodynamic end points.

IMPORTANCE: Older patients and those with comorbidities who are infected with SARS-CoV-2 may be at increased risk of hospitalization and death. Sotrovimab is a neutralizing antibody for the treatment of high-risk patients to prevent COVID-19 progression. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of sotrovimab in preventing progression of mild to moderate COVID-19 to severe disease. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized clinical trial including 1057 nonhospitalized patients with symptomatic, mild to moderate COVID-19 and at least 1 risk factor for progression conducted at 57 sites in Brazil, Canada, Peru, Spain, and the US from August 27, 2020, through March 11, 2021; follow-up data were collected through April 8, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized (1:1) to an intravenous infusion with 500 mg of sotrovimab (n = 528) or placebo (n = 529). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with COVID-19 progression through day 29 (all-cause hospitalization lasting >24 hours for acute illness management or death); 5 secondary outcomes were tested in hierarchal order, including a composite of all-cause emergency department (ED) visit, hospitalization of any duration for acute illness management, or death through day 29 and progression to severe or critical respiratory COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen or mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: Enrollment was stopped early for efficacy at the prespecified interim analysis. Among 1057 patients randomized (median age, 53 years [IQR, 42-62], 20% were ≥65 years of age, and 65% Latinx), the median duration of follow-up was 103 days for sotrovimab and 102 days for placebo. All-cause hospitalization lasting longer than 24 hours or death was significantly reduced with sotrovimab (6/528 [1%]) vs placebo (30/529 [6%]) (adjusted relative risk [RR], 0.21 [95% CI, 0.09 to 0.50]; absolute difference, –4.53% [95% CI, –6.70% to –2.37%]; P

Understanding who is at risk of progression to severe COVID-19 is key to effective treatment. We studied correlates of disease severity in the COMET-ICE clinical trial that randomized 1:1 to placebo or to sotrovimab, a monoclonal antibody for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Several laboratory parameters identified study participants at greater risk of severe disease, including a high neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), a negative SARS-CoV-2 serologic test and whole blood transcriptome profiles. Sotrovimab treatment in these groups was associated with normalization of NLR and the transcriptomic profile, and with a decrease of viral RNA in nasopharyngeal samples. Transcriptomics provided the most sensitive detection of participants who would go on to be hospitalized or die. To facilitate timely measurement, we identified a 10-gene signature with similar predictive accuracy. In summary, we identified markers of risk for disease progression and demonstrated that normalization of these parameters occurs with antibody treatment of established infection.

ImportanceOlder patients and those with underlying comorbidities infected with SARS-CoV-2 may be at increased risk of hospitalization and death from COVID-19. Sotrovimab is a neutralizing antibody designed for treatment of high-risk patients to prevent COVID-19 progression.ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of sotrovimab in preventing progression of mild to moderate COVID-19 to severe disease.DesignRandomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study.Setting57 centers in 5 countries.ParticipantsNonhospitalized patients with symptomatic, mild to moderate COVID-19 and at least 1 risk factor for disease progression.InterventionPatients were randomized (1:1) to an intravenous infusion of sotrovimab 500 mg or placebo.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of patients with COVID-19 progression, defined as all-cause hospitalization longer than 24 hours for acute illness management or death through day 29. Key secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients with COVID-19 progression, defined as emergency room visit, hospitalization of any duration, or death, and proportion of patients developing severe/critical respiratory COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen.ResultsAmong 1057 patients randomized (sotrovimab, 528; placebo, 529), all-cause hospitalization longer than 24 hours or death was significantly reduced with sotrovimab (6/528 [1%]) vs placebo (30/529 [6%]) by 79% (95% CI, 50% to 91%; PPP=.002). No patients receiving sotrovimab required high-flow oxygen, oxygen via nonrebreather mask, or mechanical ventilation compared with 14 patients receiving placebo. The proportion of patients reporting adverse events was similar between treatment groups; sotrovimab was well tolerated, and no safety concerns were identified.Conclusions and RelevanceAmong nonhospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, a single 500-mg intravenous dose of sotrovimab prevented progression of COVID-19, with a reduction in hospitalization and need for supplemental oxygen. Sotrovimab is a well-tolerated, effective treatment option for patients at high risk for severe morbidity and mortality from COVID-19.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04545060

Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) disproportionately results in hospitalization or death in older patients and those with underlying conditions. Sotrovimab is a pan-sarbecovirus monoclonal antibody that was designed to prevent progression of Covid-19 in high-risk patients early in the course of disease.In this ongoing, multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, nonhospitalized patients with symptomatic Covid-19 (≤5 days after the onset of symptoms) and at least one risk factor for disease progression to receive a single infusion of sotrovimab at a dose of 500 mg or placebo. The primary efficacy outcome was hospitalization (for24 hours) for any cause or death within 29 days after randomization.In this prespecified interim analysis, which included an intention-to-treat population of 583 patients (291 in the sotrovimab group and 292 in the placebo group), 3 patients (1%) in the sotrovimab group, as compared with 21 patients (7%) in the placebo group, had disease progression leading to hospitalization or death (relative risk reduction, 85%; 97.24% confidence interval, 44 to 96; P = 0.002). In the placebo group, 5 patients were admitted to the intensive care unit, including 1 who died by day 29. Safety was assessed in 868 patients (430 in the sotrovimab group and 438 in the placebo group). Adverse events were reported by 17% of the patients in the sotrovimab group and 19% of those in the placebo group; serious adverse events were less common with sotrovimab than with placebo (in 2% and 6% of the patients, respectively).Among high-risk patients with mild-to-moderate Covid-19, sotrovimab reduced the risk of disease progression. No safety signals were identified. (Funded by Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline; COMET-ICE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04545060.).

Understanding who is at risk of progression to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is key to clinical decision making and effective treatment. We study correlates of disease severity in the COMET-ICE clinical trial that randomized 1:1 to placebo or to sotrovimab, a monoclonal antibody for the treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (ClinicalTrials.gov04545060). Laboratory parameters identify study participants at greater risk of severe disease, including a high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), a negative SARS-CoV-2 serologic test, and whole-blood transcriptome profiles. Sotrovimab treatment is associated with normalization of NLR and the transcriptomic profile and with a decrease of viral RNA in nasopharyngeal samples. Transcriptomics provides the most sensitive detection of participants who would go on to be hospitalized or die. To facilitate timely measurement, we identify a 10-gene signature with similar predictive accuracy. We identify markers of risk for disease progression and demonstrate that normalization of these parameters occurs with antibody treatment of established infection.

BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) disproportionately results in hospitalization and death in older patients and those with underlying comorbidities. Sotrovimab is a pan-sarbecovirus monoclonal antibody designed to treat such high-risk patients early in the course of disease, thereby preventing Covid-19 progression.MethodsIn this ongoing, multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 trial, nonhospitalized patients with symptomatic Covid-19 and at least one risk factor for disease progression were randomized (1:1) to an intravenous infusion of sotrovimab 500 mg or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with Covid-19 progression, defined as hospitalization longer than 24 hours or death, through day 29.ResultsIn this preplanned interim analysis, which included an intent-to-treat population of 583 patients (sotrovimab, 291; placebo, 292), the primary efficacy endpoint was met. The risk of Covid-19 progression was significantly reduced by 85% (97.24% confidence interval, 44% to 96%; P = 0.002) with a total of three (1%) patients progressing to the primary endpoint in the sotrovimab group versus 21 (7%) patients in the placebo group. All five patients admitted to intensive care, including one who died by day 29, received placebo. Safety was assessed in 868 patients (sotrovimab, 430; placebo, 438). Adverse events were reported by 17% and 19% of patients receiving sotrovimab and placebo, respectively; serious adverse events were less common with sotrovimab (2%) versus placebo (6%).ConclusionSotrovimab reduced progression of Covid-19 in patients with mild/moderate disease, was well tolerated, and no safety signals were identified.Funded by Vir Biotechnology, Inc. and GlaxoSmithKline; ClinicalTrials.govNCT04545060

Background COVID-19 disproportionately results in hospitalization and death in older patients and those with underlying comorbidities. Sotrovimab is a pan-sarbecovirus monoclonal antibody that binds a highly conserved epitope of the SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding domain and has an Fc modification that increases half-life. Sotrovimab retains activity against UK, S. Africa, Brazil, India, New York and California variants in vitro. Objectives To evaluate the efficacy and safety of treatment with sotrovimab in high-risk, non-hospitalized patients with mild/moderate COVID-19, as part of the COMET-ICE clinical trial. Methods Multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 trial in non-hospitalized patients with symptomatic COVID-19 and ≥1 risk factor for disease progression were randomized 1:1 to an IV infusion of sotrovimab 500 mg or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients with COVID-19 progression, defined as hospitalization > 24 hours or death, due to any cause, ≤29 days of randomization. Results The study met the pre-defined primary efficacy endpoint in a preplanned interim analysis: the risk of COVID-19 progression was significantly reduced by 85% (97.24% CI, 44% to 96%; P = 0.002) in 583 patients. In the final intention-to-treat analysis (N = 1057), the adjusted relative risk reduction was 79% (95% CI, 50% to 91%; p< 0.001) through Day 29 in recipients of sotrovimab (n=528) vs. placebo (n=529). Treatment with sotrovimab (ITT) resulted in a numerical reduction in the need for ER visits for illness management, hospitalization for acute illness management (any duration) or death (any cause) compared to placebo. No participants on sotrovimab required ICU admission, compared to 9 participants on placebo, of whom 4 participants required mechanical ventilation. No participants who received sotrovimab died, compared to 4 participants on placebo. The incidence of adverse events was similar between treatment arms and SAEs were numerically more common in the placebo arm. Conclusion Treatment with sotrovimab 500 mg IV resulted in a clinically and statistically significant reduction in progression of COVID-19 to hospitalization or death in patients with mild/moderate disease and was well-tolerated. Study funding GSK & VIR; NCT04545060 Disclosures Jaynier Moya, MD, VIR Biotechnology (Other Financial or Material Support, Jaynier Moya received non-financial support for serving as a clinical trial investigator for Vir Biotechnology) Diego Rodrigues Falci, MD, MSc, PhD, Gilead Sciences (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Speaker's Bureau)GSK (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member)MSD (Speaker's Bureau)Pfizer (Speaker's Bureau)United Medical (Speaker's Bureau, Other Financial or Material Support) Joel Solis, MD, VIR Biotechnology (Other Financial or Material Support, Joel Solis received non-financial support for serving as a clinical trial investigator for Vir Biotechnology) Hanzhe Zheng, PhD, VIR Biotechnology (Employee) Nicola Scott, MSc, GlaxoSmithKline (Employee, Shareholder) Andrea L. Cathcart, PhD, Gilead (Shareholder)VIR (Employee, Shareholder) Christy Hebner, PhD, Vir Biotechnology (Employee, Shareholder) Jennifer Sager, PhD, GSK (Other Financial or Material Support)Vir Biotechnology (Employee, Shareholder) Erik Mogalian, PharmD, PhD, Vir Biotechnology (Employee, Shareholder) Daren Austin, PhD, GlaxoSmithKline (Employee, Shareholder) Amanda Peppercorn, MD, GlaxoSmithKline (Employee) Elizabeth L. Alexander, MD, MSc, GlaxoSmithKline (Grant/Research Support, Other Financial or Material Support)VIR Biotechnology (Employee, Shareholder, GSK pharmaceuticals) Wendy W. Yeh, MD, Vir Biotechnology (Employee) Almena Free, MD, Amgen (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Astra Zeneca (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Cardurian (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Coherus (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Freenome (Scientific Research Study Investigator)GlaxoSmithKline/Vir (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Ionis (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Kowa (Scientific Research Study Investigator)New Amsterdam (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Regenacy (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Romark (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Scynexis (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Cynthia Brinson, MD, Abbvie (Scientific Research Study Investigator)BI (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker's Bureau, Personal fees)GSK (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Novo Nordisk (Scientific Research Study Investigator)ViiV Healthcare (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Speaker's Bureau) Melissa Aldinger, PharmD, VIR Biotechnology (Employee) Adrienne Shapiro, MD, PhD, Vir Biotechnology (Scientific Research Study Investigator)

This work aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and relative bioavailability of GSK2838232, an investigational HIV maturation inhibitor. GSK2838232 was administered over four dose-escalation studies in healthy subjects which assessed single oral doses (5-250 mg) and repeat doses (up to 200 mg once or twice daily) ±100 mg ritonavir (RTV) once daily. GSK2838232 administration (up to 250 mg) to 124 subjects across four studies resulted in few mild adverse events (AEs) with similar frequencies to placebo. There were no clearly identified drug-related AEs. GSK2838232 tested fasted was quickly absorbed with a tmax of 2-3 hours. With food, the absorption was delayed and more variable, with ~60% increase in AUC and Cmax. Overall, following single doses GSK2838232 AUC and Cmax generally exhibited proportional PK from 50 to 100 mg dose without RTV and from 50 to 250 mg with RTV and following repeated doses of 20-200 mg with RTV. In relative bioavailability studies, a micronized formulation was found to be suitable for development. At steady state, RTV increased GSK2838232 AUC and Cmax by 10- and 3-fold, respectively. Half-life was prolonged from ~17 hours nonboosted to ~34 hours with RTV. This boosting effect was also seen in repeat-dose GSK2838232 studies, which achieved the targeted plasma exposure with GSK2838232 as a once-daily regimen of up to 200 mg with RTV. The results of these studies demonstrated a favorable safety and PK profile for GSK2838232 and support its investigation for the treatment of HIV infection.

Background: Dolutegravir (DTG; Tivicay; ViiV Healthcare, Research Triangle Park, NC) is an HIV-1-unboosted integrase inhibitor with no cytochrome P450 or uridine 5′diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferase inhibition or induction. As DTG is administered to HIV-1–infected women receiving oral contraceptives, assessing the potential for drug interactions was warranted. Objective: To determine the impact of DTG on the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of a common oral contraceptive, norgestimate/ethinyl estradiol (NGM/EE; Ortho-Cyclen; Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Raritan, NJ). Methods: This randomized, 2-period, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted within 1 menstrual cycle at 1 clinical center in the United States; 16 women were enrolled. Participants received NGM 0.25 mg/EE 0.035 mg throughout the study. During days 1 to 10, they were randomized to receive twice-daily DTG 50 mg or matching placebo with food and switched to the other treatment during days 12 to 21. Results: Ratios of area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 until end of the dosage interval (AUC0-τ), maximum plasma concentration, and concentration at the end of the dosage interval of norelgestromin with DTG treatment to the same PK parameters with placebo treatment were 0.975, 0.890, and 0.932, respectively; for EE, ratios were 1.03, 0.99, and 1.02, respectively. No significant differences in luteinizing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone, and progesterone were detected on days 1, 10, 11, 21, and 22. DTG steady-state AUC0-τ was similar to historical data. No severe or grade 3/4 adverse events occurred. Conclusions: DTG had no effect on NGM/EE PK or PD. NGM/EE can be administered with DTG without dose adjustment.

BACKGROUND: Children with severe influenza infection may require parenteral therapy if oral or inhaled therapies are ineffective or cannot be administered. Results from a study investigating intravenous (IV) zanamivir for the treatment of hospitalized infants and children with influenza are presented. METHODS: This phase II, open-label, multicenter, single-arm study assessed the safety of investigational IV zanamivir in hospitalized children with influenza. Safety outcomes included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), clinical laboratory measurements, and vital signs. Clinical outcomes, pharmacokinetics, and virologic efficacy data were collected as key secondary outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 71 children received treatment with investigational IV zanamivir (exposure comparable to 600 mg twice daily in adults). TEAEs and serious TEAEs (STEAEs) were reported in 51 (72%) and 15 (21%) patients, respectively. The mortality rate was 7%, and median durations of hospital and ICU stays were 6 and 7.5 days, respectively. No STEAEs or deaths were considered related to IV zanamivir treatment, and no patterns of TEAEs, laboratory abnormalities, or vital signs were observed. The mean zanamivir exposures from 34 patients with normal renal function who received 12 mg/kg, 14 mg/kg, or 600 mg of IV zanamivir ranged from 64.5 to 110 hour·µg/mL. The median change from baseline in the viral load was −1.81 log10 copies per mL after 2 days of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of IV zanamivir was favorable, with no drug-related STEAEs reported. The majority of children experienced virologic response and clinical improvement during the treatment course. Systemic zanamivir exposures in children were consistent with adults.

Background Neuraminidase inhibitors are effective for the treatment of acute uncomplicated influenza. However, there is an unmet need for intravenous treatment for patients admitted to hospital with severe influenza. We studied whether intravenous zanamivir was a suitable treatment in this setting. Methods In this international, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients aged 16 years or older with severe influenza admitted to 97 hospitals from 26 countries. We randomly assigned patients (1:1:1 stratified by symptom onset

Prednisone, a corticosteroid frequently used to treat common AIDS-related illnesses and comorbidities, has been shown to induce drug metabolism. This study was performed to determine whether prednisone coadministration affected the pharmacokinetics of dolutegravir (DTG). In this open-label, repeat-dose study, 12 healthy subjects were administered DTG at 50 mg daily alone for 5 days and then with concomitant prednisone for 10 days (prednisone at 60 mg daily for 5 days, followed by a 5-day taper). Serial blood sampling and safety assessments were performed during the trial. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined using noncompartmental methods and geometric least-square mean ratios, and 90% confidence intervals were generated. Coadministration of DTG and 5-day high-dose prednisone with a 5-day taper had a modest effect on DTG exposure. The area under the DTG plasma concentration-time curve, maximum observed DTG concentration, and 24-hour postdose DTG concentration were increased by 11%, 6%, and 17%, respectively, on day 10 of the combination. Similar results were observed after 5 days of DTG and prednisone. Dolutegravir and prednisone coadministration was well tolerated. The changes in plasma exposures of DTG in healthy individuals as a result of prednisone dosing were not clinically significant. No dose adjustment is required for DTG coadministered with prednisone. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT01425099.)

This study evaluated dolutegravir pharmacokinetics (PK) in subjects with moderate hepatic impairment compared to matched, healthy controls. In this open-label, parallel-group study, eight adult subjects with moderate hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh Score 7-9) and eight healthy subjects matched for gender, age, and body mass index received a single dolutegravir 50-mg dose. Following dosing, 72-hour PK sampling was performed to determine total and unbound dolutegravir concentrations. PK parameters were calculated using non-compartmental analysis. Geometric least squares mean ratios (GMR) and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) in subjects with hepatic impairment versus healthy subjects were generated by analysis of variance. Results showed that PK parameters of total plasma dolutegravir were similar between subject groups. The unbound fraction was higher in subjects with moderate hepatic impairment than in healthy subjects with GMR (90% CI) of 2.20 (1.62, 2.99) for unbound fraction at 3 hours post-dose and 1.76 (1.23, 2.51) for unbound fraction at 24 hours post-dose; this correlated with lower serum albumin concentrations and was not considered clinically significant. Dolutegravir was well tolerated in both groups; all adverse events were reported as minor. Although free fraction was increased, no dose adjustment is required for patients treated with dolutegravir who have mild to moderate hepatic impairment.

Aim Dolutegravir (DTG; S/GSK1349572) is under clinical development as a once daily, unboosted integrase inhibitor for the treatment of HIV infection. The effect of DTG on glomerular filtration rate (GFR), effective renal plasma flow (ERPF), and creatinine clearance (CLcr) was evaluated in 34 healthy volunteers. Methods Subjects received DTG 50 mg (once daily or twice daily) or placebo for 14 days. GFR was measured by iohexol plasma clearance, ERPF was assessed by para-aminohippurate plasma clearance and CLcr was measured by 24 h urine collection. Results All treatments were generally well tolerated. A modest decrease (10–14%) in CLcr was observed, consistent with clinical study observations. DTG 50 mg once daily and twice daily had no significant effect on GFR or ERPF compared with placebo over 14 days in healthy subjects. Conclusions These findings support in vitro data that DTG increases serum creatinine by the benign inhibition of the organic cation transporter 2, which is responsible for tubular secretion of creatinine.

Background Cotreatment of tuberculosis (TB) and HIV among coinfected patients is now the standard of care. Rifampin (RIF) is a standard part of TB treatment but is a potent inducer of drug metabolizing enzymes. This study evaluated the effect of RIF or rifabutin (RBT) on the pharmacokinetics of the investigational HIV integrase inhibitor, dolutegravir (DTG). Methods Phase I pharmacokinetic drug interaction study. In arm 1, healthy subjects received 50 mg of DTG once daily for 7 days (period 1), then 50 mg of DTG twice daily for 7 days (period 2), then 50 mg of DTG twice daily together with 600 mg of RIF once daily for 14 days (period 3). In arm 2, subjects received 50 mg of DTG once daily for 7 days (period 1) then 50 mg of DTG once daily together with 300 mg of RBT once daily for 14 days (period 2). PK sampling was performed at the end of each period. Results In arm 1, comparing period 3 to period 1, the geometric mean ratio (GMR) for the 24-hour area under the time-concentration curve (AUC0-24) was 1.33 [90% confidence interval (CI): 1.14 to 1.53], and the GMR for the trough (Cτ) was 1.22 (90% CI: 1.01 to 1.48). Comparing period 2 to period 1 in arm 2, the GMR for the AUC0-24 was 0.95 (90% CI: 0.82 to 1.10), and the GMR for the Cτ was 0.70 (90% CI: 0.57 to 0.87). Conclusions Regimens including twice-daily DTG and RIF or once-daily DTG and RBT may represent a new treatment option for patients who require concomitant treatment of HIV and TB.

Background During a pandemic, the need for available anti-influenza medications increases. There has been extensive use of the approved zanamivir Rotadisk/Diskhaler but no clinical data are available for administration by an alternative Rotacap/Rotahaler presentation. Methods In this randomized three-way crossover study, each healthy adult received zanamivir 10 mg every 12 h for 5 days via Rotadisk/Diskhaler, via Rotacap/Rotahaler and placebo via Rotacap/Rotahaler, with a washout period between treatments. Safety assessments were conducted throughout the study and at follow-up. Serial blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were collected over a 12-h dose interval on day 5 of each treatment period. Pharmacokinetic parameters were compared using a mixed-effects model. Results A total of 18 healthy adults were recruited and 17 subjects completed the study. A total of 20 adverse events (AEs) were reported (all grade 1) by nine subjects, with no AE reported ≥1× in any treatment group. Nasal congestion, reported by one subject in the zanamivir Rotadisk/Diskhaler group, was the only drug-related AE. No serious AEs or withdrawals due to AEs occurred during the study. There were no significant changes in clinical laboratory values, vital signs or spirometry. Serum zanamivir exposures were similar after administration via Rotacap/Rotahaler and Rotadisk/Diskhaler. Both oral inhalation presentations are likely to deliver similar zanamivir concentrations to sites of influenza infection in the respiratory tract. Conclusions The safety and pharmacokinetic results from this study support the use of the Rotacap/Rotahaler presentation, potentially allowing an increased number of zanamivir treatment courses to be supplied in the event of an influenza pandemic.

Intravenous zanamivir (IVZ) is a neuraminidase (NA) inhibitor (NAI) under investigation for the treatment of subjects hospitalised with influenza. The study included 130 symptomatic, hospitalised adults with influenza. Subjects received IVZ for 5-10 days. Viruses were cultured and analysed for susceptibility to zanamivir. Mean IC50s (n = 50) (±SD) for influenza A/H1N1pdm09, A/H3N2 and influenza B were 0.20 ± 0.06, 0.26 ± 0.07 and 1.61 ± 0.35 nM, respectively, and are comparable to data observed for sensitive isolates. A total of 185 NA and 180 haemagglutinin (HA) sequences were obtained from 123 subjects; the majority did not contain resistance substitutions. Four influenza A/H1N1pdm09 viruses from four subjects harboured NA resistance substitutions: three, Y155H, D199G and S247N, were present at Day 1 before IVZ exposure and the fourth, E119D/E, was detected at Post Treatment +5 Days but was not present at 5 other timepoints. Five subjects harboured virus with treatment-emergent NA substitutions not associated with resistance; N63D, V83A, W190C, M269K (A/H1N1pdm09) and R210K (A/H3N2). Viruses from fifteen subjects harboured HA resistance substitutions, (A/H1N1pdm09) one emerged during treatment: S162N (Day 5). Five viruses harboured treatment-emergent HA substitutions (A/H1N1pdm09) not associated with resistance: E81K, V108L, S164D, D168N and S185N. 10/92 subjects with A/H1N1pdm09 harboured a D222 HA substitution, which has been associated with increased virulence. The emergent substitutions are not associated with resistance but may have arisen due to selection pressure during IVZ treatment or by chance. In this study, there was evidence for resistance selection in a post treatment sample but the resistant variant did not persist in later visit samples.

AIMS S/GSK1349572 is an unboosted, once daily, next generation integrase inhibitor with potent activity, low pharmacokinetic (PK) variability and a novel resistance profile. As the primary route of metabolism is via glucuronidation, the effects of atazanavir (ATV, a UGT1A1 inhibitor) and atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/RTV) on S/GSK1349572 PK were evaluated.

Objectives: To evaluate the effect of pH-altering agents on S/GSK1349572 exposure in healthy subjects. Methods: S/GSK1349572 is an unboosted, once-daily, next-generation HIV integrase inhibitor. In the first study, 16 subjects received four single-dose treatments: (i) S/GSK1349572 50 mg; (ii) S/GSK1349572 50 mg with a multivitamin (MVI; One A Day Maximum); (iii) S/GSK1349572 50 mg with a liquid antacid (Maalox Advanced Maximum Strength); and (iv) S/GSK1349572 50 mg 2 h before an antacid. In the second study, 12 subjects received a single dose of S/GSK1349572 alone and on day 5 of omeprazole. Results: All treatments were well tolerated. MVI co-administration modestly decreased S/GSK1349572 AUC by 33%. Concurrent antacid co-administration reduced S/GSK1349572 AUC by 74% and staggered antacid dosing significantly diminished this interaction, with a reduction in S/GSK1349572 AUC of 26%. Omeprazole did not significantly affect S/GSK1349572 exposure. Conclusions: S/GSK1349572 can be taken with proton pump inhibitors and MVIs without dose adjustment but should be administered 2 h before or 6 h after antacids.

Aspergillus spp. are ubiquitous environmental fungi that are increasingly recognized as a cause of severe illness and mortality in immunocompromised patients. More than 60 outbreaks of healthcare-associated invasive aspergillosis have been described in the English literature. Information gained from outbreak investigations, especially control measures, form the basis for current guidelines to prevent healthcare-associated aspergillosis. Guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) provide evidence-based recommendations for preventing healthcare-associated aspergillosis and should be adopted by healthcare facilities.

Dolutegravir (DTG) is an HIV integrase inhibitor (INI) with demonstrated activity in INI-naive and INI-resistant patients. The objective of this open-label, 2-period, single-sequence study was to evaluate the effect of fosamprenavir-ritonavir (FPV-RTV) on the steady-state plasma pharmacokinetics of DTG. Twelve healthy subjects received 50 mg DTG once daily for 5 days (period 1), followed by 10 days of 50 mg DTG once daily in combination with 700/100 mg FPV-RTV every 12 h (period 2). All doses were administered in the fasting state. Serial pharmacokinetic samples for DTG and amprenavir and safety assessments were obtained throughout the study. Noncompartmental pharmacokinetic analysis was performed, and geometric least-squares mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals were generated for within-subject treatment comparison. Fosamprenavir-ritonavir decreased the DTG area under the concentration-time curve, maximum concentration in plasma, and concentration in plasma at the end of the dosing interval by 35%, 24%, and 49%, respectively. Both DTG and DTG with FPV-RTV were well tolerated; no subject withdrew because of adverse events. The most frequently reported drug-related adverse events were rash, abnormal dreams, and nasopharyngitis. The modest decrease in DTG exposure when it was coadministered with FPV-RTV is not considered clinically significant, and DTG dose adjustment is not required with coadministration of FPV-RTV in INI-naive patient populations on the basis of established “no-effect” boundaries of DTG. In the INI-resistant population, as a cautionary measure, alternative combinations that do not include FPV-RTV should be considered. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT01209065.)

Purpose Dolutegravir (DTG) is an unboosted, integrase inhibitor for the treatment of HIV infection. Two studies evaluated the effects of efavirenz (EFV) and tipranavir/ritonavir (TPV/r) on DTG pharmacokinetics (PK) in healthy subjects. Methods The first study was an open-label crossover where 12 subjects received DTG 50 mg every 24 hours (q24h) for 5 days, followed by DTG 50 mg and EFV 600 mg q24h for 14 days. The second study was an open-label crossover where 18 subjects received DTG 50 mg q24h for 5 days followed by TPV/r 500/200 mg every 12 hours (q12h) for 7 days and then DTG 50 mg q24h and TPV/r 500/200 mg q12h for a further 5 days. Safety assessments and serial PK samples were collected. Non-compartmental PK analysis and geometric mean ratios and 90 % confidence intervals were generated. Results The combination of DTG with EFV or TPV/r was generally well tolerated. Four subjects discontinued the TPV/r study due to increases in alanine aminotransferase that were considered related to TPV/r. Co-administration with EFV resulted in decreases of 57, 39 and 75 % in DTG AUC(0–τ), Cmax and Cτ, respectively. Co-administration with TPV/r resulted in decreases of 59, 46 and 76 % in DTG AUC(0–τ), Cmax and Cτ, respectively. Conclusions Given the reductions in exposure and PK/pharmacodynamic relationships in phase II/III trials, DTG should be given at an increased dose of 50 mg twice daily when co-administered with EFV or TPV/r, and alternative regimens without inducers should be considered in integrase inhibitor-resistant patients. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00228-014-1732-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics of a granule formulation of dolutegravir developed as an alternative to tablets for use in paediatric populations. Methods A randomized, open-label study in healthy adults was carried out. Subjects received five treatments in a crossover design: a single dose of dolute-gravir 50 mg as a tablet and dolutegravir 50 mg in 10 g of granule administered directly to mouth or mixed with purified water, water containing high cation concentrations or milk-based infant formula. Study treatments were separated by 7 days. Safety evaluations and serial pharmacokinetic sampling were done during each treatment period. A non-compartmental pharmacokinetic analysis was performed; geometric least-squares mean ratios and 90% CIs were generated for treatment comparison. Palatability was assessed by questionnaire. Results Plasma dolutegravir exposures in all granule treatment arms exceeded those of tablet formulation. The mean area under the curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0–∞) and maximum concentrations were 55–83% and 62–102% higher, respectively. Pharmacokinetics were similar when dolutegravir was mixed with purified or cation-containing water. Dolutegravir was well tolerated, with no withdrawals due to adverse events. Taste was rated acceptable for all treatments. Conclusions The exposure of dolutegravir after administration of granule formulation alone, with different types of water and with milk formula, exceeded that of the tablet. The similarity of dolutegravir exposure seen with the granule formulation demonstrates that dolutegravir granule can be given without restriction on the type of liquid or can be administered directly to the mouth (for example, when potable water is not available).

Background. Intravenous zanamivir is a neuraminidase inhibitor suitable for treatment of hospitalized patients with severe influenza. Methods. Patients were treated with intravenous zanamivir 600 mg twice daily, adjusted for renal impairment, for up to 10 days. Primary outcomes included adverse events (AEs), and clinical/laboratory parameters. Pharmacokinetics, viral load, and disease course were also assessed. Results. One hundred thirty patients received intravenous zanamivir (median, 5 days; range, 1–11) a median of 4.5 days (range, 1–7) after onset of influenza; 83% required intensive care. The most common influenza type/subtype was A/H1N1pdm09 (71%). AEs and serious AEs were reported in 85% and 34% of patients, respectively; serious AEs included bacterial pulmonary infections (8%), respiratory failure (7%), sepsis or septic shock (5%), and cardiogenic shock (5%). No drug-related trends in safety parameters were identified. Protocol-defined liver events were observed in 13% of patients. The 14- and 28-day all-cause mortality rates were 13% and 17%. No fatalities were considered zanamivir related. Pharmacokinetic data showed dose adjustments for renal impairment yielded similar zanamivir exposures. Ninety-three patients, positive at baseline for influenza by quantitative polymerase chain reaction, showed a median decrease in viral load of 1.42 log10 copies/mL after 2 days of treatment. Conclusions. Safety, pharmacokinetic and clinical outcome data support further investigation of intravenous zanamivir. Clinical Trials Registration {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT01014988","term_id":"NCT01014988"}}NCT01014988.

Intravenous zanamivir is in clinical development for the treatment of influenza in hospitalized patients, many of whom have renal impairment. This open-label study evaluated zanamivir pharmacokinetics and clinical safety following a single 100-mg intravenous infusion dose in subjects with impaired renal function compared with normal renal function. Male and female subjects between 18 and 79 years of age were recruited, four subjects to each renal function group (normal function and mild, moderate, and severe impairment). Serial blood samples were collected up to 24 h after dose administration (48 h for the severe renal impairment group) to estimate zanamivir serum pharmacokinetic parameters. Urine was collected over the same 24-h (or 48-h) period for estimation of renal clearance (CL R ). Zanamivir pharmacokinetics were assessed by regression analysis of systemic clearance (CL) and CL R as a function of creatinine clearance (CL CR ). Safety evaluations included adverse-event monitoring, vital signs, electrocardiogram, and clinical laboratory assessments. Zanamivir clearance (total and renal) significantly decreased with decreasing renal function, with corresponding increases in area under the concentration-time curve and elimination half-life. Renal impairment had no apparent effects on peak concentration or volume of distribution. Regression analysis indicated that zanamivir clearance was highly correlated ( r 2 = 0.89) with creatinine clearance: CL ≅ 7.08 + 0.826 · CL CR . There were no patterns or trends in adverse events, and no new safety concerns were identified following administration of intravenous zanamivir. Results from this study support the inclusion of subjects with renal impairment, with appropriate dose adjustment, in studies to evaluate intravenous zanamivir in the treatment of influenza.

Background Dolutegravir (DTG) is an investigational integrase inhibitor for treatment of HIV infection. As intravenous drug use is a common risk factor for HIV, this study evaluated the effect of DTG on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of methadone. Methods This was an open-label, 2-period study in adult, opioid-dependent, HIV-seronegative subjects. Subjects received their current individual methadone doses once daily for 3 days (Period 1) followed by DTG 50 mg twice daily (BID) for 5 days while continuing their stable methadone therapy (Period 2). Serial PK samples for R- and S-methadone were collected after each Period. Pharmacodynamic (PD) measures and safety assessments were obtained throughout the study. Non-compartmental PK analysis was performed, and geometric least-squares mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals were generated. Results Plasma exposures of total, R-, and S-methadone were not affected by co-administration of DTG. Mean ratios for AUC were 0.98, 0.95, and 1.01 for total, R-, and S-methadone, respectively, alone compared with in combination with DTG. No statistically significant differences were noted between the 2 treatment periods in methadone PD measures. The combination of DTG and methadone was well tolerated. No deaths, serious adverse events, or grade 3/4 adverse events occurred. No clinically significant changes in laboratory values, vital signs, or electrocardiograms were observed. Conclusion Co-administration of methadone with repeat doses of DTG 50 mg BID had no effect on total, R-, and S-methadone PK or on methadone-induced PD markers. No dose adjustment in methadone is required when given in combination with DTG.

Study Objective To assess the effect of a therapeutic and supratherapeutic intravenous dose of the neuraminidase inhibitor zanamivir on QT and rate-corrected QT intervals. Design Randomized, placebo-controlled, single-dose, four-period, balanced crossover study. Setting Clinical research unit. Subjects Forty healthy adults were randomized to receive intravenous zanamivir at two dose levels, oral moxifloxacin, and placebo; 38 subjects completed all four study treatments. Intervention Subjects were randomized to receive a single intravenous dose of zanamivir 600 mg (therapeutic dose) with oral moxifloxacin placebo, a single intravenous dose of zanamivir 1200 mg (supratherapeutic dose) with oral moxifloxacin placebo, oral moxifloxacin 400 mg (positive control) with intravenous zanamivir placebo, or intravenous zanamivir placebo with oral moxifloxacin placebo. Subjects crossed over to all other treatments, with each treatment separated by a 7-day washout period. Measurements and Main Results Zanamivir pharmacokinetics were dose proportional; the pharmacokinetic exposure from zanamivir 1200 mg was 2 times higher than that from 600 mg, the maximum dose under clinical evaluation. For both 600-mg and 1200-mg doses of intravenous zanamivir, the upper limit of the 90% confidence interval (CI) for the placebo-adjusted mean change from baseline of the QT interval corrected for heart rate using Fridericia's formula (ΔΔQTcF) was less than 10 msec at all time points. The sensitivity of the study to detect modest increases in QT interval was established with the positive control, moxifloxacin. The maximum ΔΔQTcF value for zanamivir 1200 mg was 1.73 msec (90% CI –0.40 to 3.87 msec), which was observed within 30 minutes after dosing, and 11.21 msec (90% CI 8.81–13.60) for moxifloxacin, observed at 4 hours after dosing. No relationship was observed between zanamivir serum concentration and ΔΔQTcF. Zanamivir was generally well tolerated, with very few adverse events; none were serious or severe. Conclusion Intravenous zanamivir does not affect cardiac repolarization. Accordingly, treatment with intravenous zanamivir does not require additional cardiac monitoring beyond the standard of care.

Dolutegravir (DTG; S/GSK1349572) is under clinical development as a once daily, unboosted integrase inhibitor for the treatment of HIV infection. The effect of DTG on glomerular filtration rate (GFR), effective renal plasma flow (ERPF), and creatinine clearance (CLcr ) was evaluated in 34 healthy volunteers.Subjects received DTG 50 mg (once daily or twice daily) or placebo for 14 days. GFR was measured by iohexol plasma clearance, ERPF was assessed by para-aminohippurate plasma clearance and CLcr was measured by 24 h urine collection.All treatments were generally well tolerated. A modest decrease (10-14%) in CLcr was observed, consistent with clinical study observations. DTG 50 mg once daily and twice daily had no significant effect on GFR or ERPF compared with placebo over 14 days in healthy subjects.These findings support in vitro data that DTG increases serum creatinine by the benign inhibition of the organic cation transporter 2, which is responsible for tubular secretion of creatinine.

Study Objective To assess the effect of a supratherapeutic dose of the integrase inhibitor dolutegravir on the QT and corrected QT (QTc) interval. Design Randomized, partial-blind, placebo-controlled, single-dose, 3-period, balanced crossover study. Setting Clinical research unit. Subjects Forty-two healthy subjects were randomized; of these subjects, 38 completed the study, three withdrew early because of protocol violations, and one was lost to follow-up. Intervention Subjects were randomized to receive three single doses of the following treatments: dolutegravir 250-mg suspension, moxifloxacin 400-mg tablet, and placebo suspension; each treatment was separated by a 14-day washout period. Treatment with the dolutegravir and placebo suspension was blinded, whereas treatment with moxifloxacin was open label. Measurements and Main Results The pharmacokinetic exposure at a supratherapeutic dose of dolutegravir 250 mg was 2–4 times higher than the pharmacokinetic exposure at clinically relevant dosages (50 mg once or twice/day). The upper limit of the 90% confidence interval (CI) for the placebo-adjusted mean change from baseline of the QTc interval (ΔΔQTcF) using Fridericia's formula was less than 10 msec at all time points. The sensitivity of the study to detect modest increases in QT interval was established with moxifloxacin, a positive control for QT-interval prolongation. The maximum ΔΔQTcF values for dolutegravir and moxifloxacin were observed at 4 hours: 1.99 msec (90% CI −0.55–4.53 msec) and 9.58 msec (90% CI 7.05–12.11 msec), respectively. Conclusion This pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model demonstrates no relationship between dolutegravir plasma concentration and ΔΔQTcF. Furthermore, a supratherapeutic dose of dolutegravir was generally well tolerated without any serious or severe adverse events. As such, dolutegravir does not affect cardiac repolarization.

S/GSK1349572 is an unboosted, once daily, next generation integrase inhibitor with potent activity, low pharmacokinetic (PK) variability and a novel resistance profile. As the primary route of metabolism is via glucuronidation, the effects of atazanavir (ATV, a UGT1A1 inhibitor) and atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/RTV) on S/GSK1349572 PK were evaluated.A randomized, open label, two period, crossover study was conducted in healthy adult subjects. Twenty-four subjects received S/GSK1349572 30 mg every 24 h for 5 days. Subjects then were administered S/GSK1349572 30 mg every 24 h in combination with either ATV/RTV 300/100 mg every 24 h (n= 12) or ATV 400 mg every 24 h (n= 12) for 14 days. Serial PK samples and safety assessments were obtained throughout the study.The combination of S/GSK1349572 with ATV/RTV or ATV was generally well tolerated. All adverse events were mild or moderate, and no subject withdrew because of an adverse event. The AE of highest frequency was ocular icterus, observed only during combination of S/GSK1349572 and ATV or ATV/RTV. Co-administration with ATV/RTV resulted in increased plasma S/GSK1349572 area under the concentration-time curve during a dosing interval (AUC(0,τ)), observed maximal concentration (C(max) ), and concentration at the end of dosing interval at steady state (C(τ) ) by 62%, 34% and 121%, respectively. Co-administration with ATV resulted in increased plasma S/GSK1349572 AUC(0,τ), C(max) , and C(τ) by 91%, 50% and 180%, respectively.Co-administration of ATV/RTV and ATV was generally well tolerated and produced a modest, non-clinically significant increase in S/GSK1349572 exposure. No dose adjustment for S/GSK1349572 is necessary when co-administered with ATV and ATV/RTV.

Viral-mediated organ disease is an infrequent but recognized complication of severe burn injury. This occurs primarily because of herpes family viruses such as cytomegalovirus, herpes simplex virus (HSV), and Epstein-Barr virus given their ability to establish lifelong latency after primary infection and reactivate in the setting of altered immune function. In this report, we describe a severely burned patient who succumbed to fulminant HSV-2 pneumonitis and hepatitis, and summarize the existing literature on HSV infections in this unique patient population. To our knowledge, this is the first report of disseminated visceral HSV-2 infection in a burn patient in the medical literature.