Abstract
Background Evidence evaluating real-world effectiveness of oral antivirals against Omicron variants is lacking.
Methods An unselected, territory-wide cohort of all initially non-hospitalized patients with an officially registered diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection between 26th February and 3rd May 2022 during the Omicron BA.2.2 wave in Hong Kong, was identified. We undertook a retrospective cohort design as primary analysis, and case-control design as sensitivity analysis. Outpatient oral antiviral users were matched with controls using 1:10 propensity-score matching. Study outcomes were mortality, COVID-19-related hospitalization, composite outcome of in-hospital disease progression (in-hospital mortality, invasive mechanical ventilation, or intensive care unit admission) and its individual outcomes. Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated by Cox regression, and odds ratios in oral antiviral users compared with non-users by logistic regression. Subgroup analyses evaluated the associations by vaccination status and age.
Findings Among 1,072,004 non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients, 5,257 and 5,663 were initiated molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in the community setting with a median follow-up of 42 and 38 days, respectively. Molnupiravir use was associated with lower risks of mortality (HR=0·61, 95%CI=0·46-0·82, p<0·001) and in-hospital composite outcome (HR=0·64, 95%CI=0·50-0·83, p<0·001) than non-use, while that of hospitalization was comparable to controls (HR=1·06, 95%CI=0·97-1·16, p=0·191). Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir use was associated with lower risks of mortality (HR=0·25, 95%CI=0·13-0·47, p<0·001), hospitalization (HR=0·69, 95%CI=0·60-0·79, p<0·001), and in-hospital outcome (HR=0·47, 95%CI=0·31-0·71, p<0·001) than non-use. Similar protective effects of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir were observed across vaccination status (fully vaccinated versus otherwise) and age (dichotomized at 65 years), whereas those for molnupiravir were less consistent. Findings from case-control analysis broadly confirmed those of primary analysis.
Interpretation Amid the Omicron BA.2.2 wave, early initiation of oral antivirals among non-institutionalised COVID-19 patients was associated with reduced risks of mortality and in-hospital outcomes. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir use was associated with greater and more consistent protection than molnupiravir.
Funding Health and Medical Research Fund, Food and Health Bureau
Evidence before this study Oral antivirals have been initiating in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients to lower their risks of hospitalization and death, and hence to reduce the burden on healthcare systems. We searched Scopus and PubMed for studies until 25 May 2022 using the search terms “SARS-CoV-2 OR COVID-19” AND “molnupiravir OR Lagevrio OR EIDD-2801” OR “nirmatrelvir OR Paxlovid OR PF-07321332”. Major studies examining the outpatient use of molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir are MOVe-OUT and EPIC-HR trials, respectively. Both have been conducted among unvaccinated, non-hospitalized patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 who are at risk of progression to severe disease, during a pandemic wave of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant. Early initiation of molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir/ritonavir within five days of symptom onset has been associated with relative risk reduction of hospitalization or death by 30% and 88%, respectively. Considering the real-world evaluation of the two oral antivirals against the currently circulating Omicron variant, only one single-center, retrospective review of solid organ transplant recipients with COVID-19 has been conducted; yet their results are unlikely generalizable to other populations given its specific patient group and small sample size. Real-world effectiveness of oral antivirals is urgently needed to inform their clinical use in COVID-19 patients, considering their vaccination status and the variant of concern.
Added value of this study To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the first real-world studies exploring the clinical use of oral antivirals during a pandemic wave dominated by SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. A territory-wide, retrospective cohort study was conducted to examine the effectiveness of molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in community-dwelling COVID-19 patients. Early initiation of molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir/ritonavir within five days of symptom onset was associated with significant reduction of all-cause mortality risk by 39% and 75%, respectively, compared to not using any oral antivirals. Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir use was also associated with a reduced risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization by 31%, which was consistently observed across age and vaccination status. In terms of disease progression, both oral antivirals were effective in lowering the risk of in-hospital death, which was again more substantial with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir than molnupiravir. Intriguingly, the need for invasive ventilation might be reduced among molnupiravir users compared to matched controls.
Implications of all the available evidence Based on relative efficacy, our findings give support to current guidelines prioritizing nirmatrelvir/ritonavir use over molnupiravir in community-dwelling COVID-19 patients who are at high risk of hospitalization or progression to severe disease, should the former be accessible and clinically appropriate. Amid a pandemic wave of the Omicron variant, real-world effectiveness of oral antivirals in reducing the mortality risk of community-dwelling COVID-19 patients has been demonstrated in this study consisting mostly of the elderly and those who had not been fully vaccinated, extending beyond the evidence demonstrated in clinical trials among those of the Delta variant and who were at risk of severe COVID-19 from being overweight/obese. Several clinical trials (namely RECOVERY and PANORAMIC) and observational studies of the two oral antivirals are ongoing, and further research is needed to confirm our results in other patient populations and healthcare settings.
Competing Interest Statement
BJC reports honoraria from AstraZeneca, Fosun Pharma, GlaxoSmithKline, Moderna, Pfizer, Roche and Sanofi Pasteur. The authors report no other potential conflicts of interest.
Funding Statement
This study was supported by the Health and Medical Research Fund (reference number: COVID190210), Food and Health Bureau.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the institutional review board of the University of Hong Kong / Hospital Authority Hong Kong West Cluster (reference no. UW 20-493). Given the extraordinary nature of the COVID-19 pandemic, individual patient-informed consent was not required for this retrospective cohort study using anonymized data.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* Full professors
Data Availability
The clinical outcome data were extracted from the Hospital Authority database in Hong Kong and vaccination records were extracted from the eSARS data provided by the Centre for Health Protection. Restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for this study.