Search

Background: the antiviral drug molnupiravir was licensed for treating at-risk patients with COVID-19 on the basis of data from unvaccinated adults. We aimed to evaluate the safety and virological efficacy of molnupiravir in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals with COVID-19.Methods: this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial (AGILE CST-2) was done at five National Institute for Health and Care Research sites in the UK. Eligible participants were adult (aged ≥18 years) outpatients with PCR-confirmed, mild-to-moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection who were within 5 days of symptom onset. Using permuted blocks (block size 2 or 4) and stratifying by site, participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either molnupiravir (orally; 800 mg twice daily for 5 days) plus standard of care or matching placebo plus standard of care. The primary outcome was the time from randomisation to SARS-CoV-2 PCR negativity on nasopharyngeal swabs and was analysed by use of a Bayesian Cox proportional hazards model for estimating the probability of a superior virological response (hazard ratio [HR]>1) for molnupiravir versus placebo. Our primary model used a two-point prior based on equal prior probabilities (50%) that the HR was 1·0 or 1·5. We defined a priori that if the probability of a HR of more than 1 was more than 80% molnupiravir would be recommended for further testing. The primary outcome was analysed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was analysed in the safety population, comprising participants who had received at least one dose of allocated treatment. This trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04746183, and the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN27106947, and is ongoing.Findings: between Nov 18, 2020, and March 16, 2022, 1723 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 180 were randomly assigned to receive either molnupiravir (n=90) or placebo (n=90) and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. 103 (57%) of 180 participants were female and 77 (43%) were male and 90 (50%) participants had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. SARS-CoV-2 infections with the delta (B.1.617.2; 72 [40%] of 180), alpha (B.1.1.7; 37 [21%]), omicron (B.1.1.529; 38 [21%]), and EU1 (B.1.177; 28 [16%]) variants were represented. All 180 participants received at least one dose of treatment and four participants discontinued the study (one in the molnupiravir group and three in the placebo group). Participants in the molnupiravir group had a faster median time from randomisation to negative PCR (8 days [95% CI 8-9]) than participants in the placebo group (11 days [10-11]; HR 1·30, 95% credible interval 0·92-1·71; log-rank p=0·074). The probability of molnupiravir being superior to placebo (HR>1) was 75·4%, which was less than our threshold of 80%. 73 (81%) of 90 participants in the molnupiravir group and 68 (76%) of 90 participants in the placebo group had at least one adverse event by day 29. One participant in the molnupiravir group and three participants in the placebo group had an adverse event of a Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 or higher severity. No participants died (due to any cause) during the trial.Interpretation: we found molnupiravir to be well tolerated and, although our predefined threshold was not reached, we observed some evidence that molnupiravir has antiviral activity in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals infected with a broad range of SARS-CoV-2 variants, although this evidence is not conclusive.Funding: Ridgeback Biotherapeutics, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Research, the Medical Research Council, and the Wellcome Trust.

SummaryBackgroundMolnupiravir was licensed for treating high-risk patients with COVID-19 based on data from unvaccinated adults. AGILE CST-2 (NCT04746183) Phase II reports safety and virological efficacy of molnupiravir in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.MethodsAdult out-patients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within five days of symptom onset were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive molnupiravir (800mg twice daily for five days) or placebo. The primary outcome was time to swab PCR-negativity, compared using a Bayesian model for estimating the probability of a superior virological response (Hazard Ratio>1) for molnupiravir over placebo. Secondary outcomes included change in viral titre at day 5, safety and tolerability, clinical progression and patient reported outcome measures. We analysed outcomes after the last participant reached day 29.FindingsOf 180 participants randomised (90 molnupiravir, 90 placebo), 50% were vaccinated. Infections with SARS-CoV-2 variants Delta (40%), Alpha (21%), Omicron (21%) and EU1 (16%) were represented. The median time to negative-PCR was 8 versus 11 days for molnupiravir and placebo (HR=1·30, 95% CrI 0·92-1·71, p=0·07 by Logrank and p=0·03 by Breslow-Gehan tests). Although small numbers precluded subgroup analysis, no obvious differences were observed between vaccinated and unvaccinated participants. Using a two-point prior the probability of molnupiravir being superior to placebo (HR>1) was 75·4%, which was just below our defined threshold of 80% for establishing superiority. Using an uninformative continuous prior, the probability of HR>1 was 94·7%. As an exploratory analysis, the change in viral titre on day 5 (end of treatment) was significantly greater with molnupiravir compared with placebo. A total of 4 participants reported severe adverse events (grade 3+), 3 of whom were in the placebo arm.InterpretationWe found molnupiravir to be well-tolerated, with evidence for high probability of antiviral efficacy in a population of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals infected with a broad range of viral variants.FundingFunded by Ridgeback Biotherapeutics and UK National Institute for Health and Care Research infrastructure funding. The AGILE platform infrastructure is supported by the Medical Research Council (grant number MR/V028391/1) and the Wellcome Trust (grant number 221590/Z/20/Z).

Funder: Unitaid, Repurposing approved drugs may rapidly establish effective interventions during a public health crisis. This has yielded immunomodulatory treatments for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but repurposed antivirals have not been successful to date because of redundancy of the target in vivo or suboptimal exposures at studied doses. Nitazoxanide is a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved antiparasitic medicine, that physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling has indicated may provide antiviral concentrations across the dosing interval, when repurposed at higher than approved doses. Within the AGILE trial platform (NCT04746183) an open label, adaptive, phase I trial in healthy adult participants was undertaken with high-dose nitazoxanide. Participants received 1,500 mg nitazoxanide orally twice-daily with food for 7 days. Primary outcomes were safety, tolerability, optimum dose, and schedule. Intensive pharmacokinetic (PK) sampling was undertaken day 1 and 5 with minimum concentration (Cmin ) sampling on days 3 and 7. Fourteen healthy participants were enrolled between February 18 and May 11, 2021. All 14 doses were completed by 10 of 14 participants. Nitazoxanide was safe and with no significant adverse events. Moderate gastrointestinal disturbance (loose stools or diarrhea) occurred in 8 participants (57.1%), with urine and sclera discoloration in 12 (85.7%) and 9 (64.3%) participants, respectively, without clinically significant bilirubin elevation. This was self-limiting and resolved upon drug discontinuation. PBPK predictions were confirmed on day 1 but with underprediction at day 5. Median Cmin was above the in vitro target concentration on the first dose and maintained throughout. Nitazoxanide administered at 1,500 mg b.i.d. with food was safe with acceptable tolerability a phase Ib/IIa study is now being initiated in patients with COVID-19.

Objectives AGILE is a Phase Ib/IIa platform for rapidly evaluating COVID-19 treatments. In this trial (NCT04746183) we evaluated the safety and optimal dose of molnupiravir in participants with early symptomatic infection. Methods We undertook a dose-escalating, open-label, randomized-controlled (standard-of-care) Bayesian adaptive Phase I trial at the Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen Clinical Research Facility. Participants (adult outpatients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 5 days of symptom onset) were randomized 2:1 in groups of 6 participants to 300, 600 and 800 mg doses of molnupiravir orally, twice daily for 5 days or control. A dose was judged unsafe if the probability of 30% or greater dose-limiting toxicity (the primary outcome) over controls was 25% or greater. Secondary outcomes included safety, clinical progression, pharmacokinetics and virological responses. Results Of 103 participants screened, 18 participants were enrolled between 17 July and 30 October 2020. Molnupiravir was well tolerated at 300, 600 and 800 mg doses with no serious or severe adverse events. Overall, 4 of 4 (100%), 4 of 4 (100%) and 1 of 4 (25%) of the participants receiving 300, 600 and 800 mg molnupiravir, respectively, and 5 of 6 (83%) controls, had at least one adverse event, all of which were mild (≤grade 2). The probability of ≥30% excess toxicity over controls at 800 mg was estimated at 0.9%. Conclusions Molnupiravir was safe and well tolerated; a dose of 800 mg twice daily for 5 days was recommended for Phase II evaluation.

BackgroundAGILE is a phase Ib/IIa platform for rapidly evaluating COVID-19 treatments. In this trial (NCT04746183) we evaluated the safety and optimal dose of molnupiravir in participants with early symptomatic infection.MethodsWe undertook a dose-escalating, open-label, randomised-controlled (standard-of-care) Bayesian adaptive phase I trial at the Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen Clinical Research Facility. Participants (adult outpatients with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 5 days of symptom onset) were randomised 2:1 in groups of 6 participants to 300mg, 600mg and 800mg doses of molnupiravir orally, twice daily for 5 days or control. A dose was judged unsafe if the probability of 30% or greater dose-limiting toxicity (the primary outcome) over controls was higher than 25%. Secondary outcomes included safety, clinical progression, pharmacokinetics and virologic responses.ResultsOf 103 volunteers screened, 18 participants were enrolled between 17 July and 30 October 2020. Molnupiravir was well tolerated at 400, 600 or 800mg doses with no serious or severe adverse events. Overall, 4 of 4 (100%), 4 of 4 (100%) and 1 of 4 (25%) of the participants receiving 300, 600 and 800mg molnupiravir respectively, and 5 of 6 (83%) controls, had at least one adverse event, all of which were mild (≤grade 2). The probability of ≥30% excess toxicity over controls at 800mg was estimated at 0.9%.ConclusionMolnupiravir was safe and well tolerated; a dose of 800mg twice-daily for 5 days was recommended for Phase II evaluation.

In two previous papers dealing with the colouring matters of red flowers, the author has shown that the anthocyanin pigments contained in the petals of the red rose (“ George Dickson ”)* and the scarlet pelargonium (“ James Kelway ”) are di-glucosides of cyanidin and pelargonidin respectively, and the reason for these flowers being red in colour is due to the fact that these glucosides occur in the petals, in combination with plant acids, in the form of oxonium salts. Following on these results, it was decided next to examine the petals of blue flowers and endeavour to obtain an insight into ( a ) the nature of the blue pigment, ( b ) the state in which the blue pigment is present in the petals, and ( c ) the nature of any yellow sap pigments which might also be present in the same flowers. For this investigation a variety of bedding pansy (“ Emperor William ”) was chosen, the petals of which possess a magnificent azure blue colour, with a darker centre. The blue pigment (anthocyanin pigment) was isolated in the form of its chloride, for which purpose the whole petals—including the darker central portions—were used, as preliminary experiments showed that extracts of the darker portions at the centre of the petals had the same properties as those of the bright blue outer parts. The plants from which the flowers were gathered were grown by the author, from seedlings purchased from Messrs. Arthur Yates & Co., Sydney.

As examination of the petals of the red rose “George Dickson,” has shown that the anthocyen pigment contained therein is the cyanidin glucoside, cyanin. It is present to the extent of about 9—10 per cent. by weight of the dried petals, and exists in the petals as an oxonium salt ( i. e ., in combination with a plant acid). A yellow glucoside sap-pigment also occurs in the same flowers, but beyond the fact that it has been shown to be capable of producing an anthocyan, by reduction, and that it is not a glucoside of the flavonol myricetin, it has not been further identified, on account of the small quantity present. Further work may show it to be a glucoside of quercetin, and corroborate the work of Dr. Everest, on the purple-black viola, in which it was shown that an anthocyan (“violanin”) and the flavonol glucoside from which it could be produced, by reduction (a glucoside of myricetin), are present, side by side, in the same flowers. This would be additional evidence in favour of the hypothesis that “anthocyans are produced, in nature, by the reduction of the flavonols.” It is interesting to note that this rose, grown in Australia, contains the same colouring matter as was isolated by Willstätter and Nolan from the rose known as “Rosa Gallica,” grown in Europe, and shows how widely these colouring matters are distributed in nature. The rose “George Dickson” was chosen for this investigation on account of its deep red colour, which would indicate a fairly large percentage of the anthocyan pigment. The flowers from which the petals were gathered were grown by Mr. G. Knight, at his nursery, Parramatta Road, Homebush, and his generosity in supplying me with sufficient material enabled the work to be successfully accomplished.

n/a